Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
www.elsevier.com/locate/jaa
Signs of sedentism and mobility in an agro-pastoral
community during the Levantine Middle Bronze Age:
Interpreting site function and occupation strategy
at Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 in Jordan
Ilya Berelov
Department of Anthropology, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85281, USA
Received 7 June 2005; revision received 12 September 2005
Available online 1 December 2005
Abstract
Successfully interpreting levels of permanence at archaeological sites is frequently hampered by the difficulty of correlating sedentary or mobile behavior with specific material culture traits. Owing to the diversity of occupation strategies,
which can combine varying levels of permanence with any number of economic subsistence strategies and behavioral characteristics, archaeologists have remained divided over which methodological approaches are the most suitable. In the
southern Levant, sedentary and mobile groups enjoyed a close and persistent relationship, which stimulated a flexible
approach to occupation strategies, and allowed for fluctuations in levels of permanence among the same social groups
through time. Such fluctuations have generated a problematic material record that can contain signs of both sedentary
and mobile behaviors. Examination of the agriculturally marginal Middle Bronze II settlement of Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1,
located on the Dead Sea Plain of Jordan, illustrates the difficulties associated with interpreting occupation strategies for
southern Levantine sites. The material culture record from the site, comprising evidence for economic subsistence, trade,
settlement and behavior, provides at times conflicting signals for a sedentary, semi-sedentary (transhumant), or possibly
non-sedentary occupation. Due to a lack of clearly prescribed indices for interpreting the permanence levels of sites, interpretations must rely on a flexible, inductive approach, which seeks to balance suites of evidence in preference to a rigid
correlation with ethnographically derived models.
2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Sedentism; Mobility; Subsistence economies; Southern Levant
The recognition of ancient mobile peoples among
agrarian societies represents a substantial challenge
facing many archaeologists (Khazanov, 1984;
Panja, 2003; Varien, 1999). Attempts to define the
E-mail address: [email protected]
archaeological signature of mobility and distinguish
it from the occupational traces of sedentism have
resulted in numerous methodological approaches
(i.e., Cribb, 1991; Kent, 1991; Kelly, 1983; Rafferty,
1985), and frequent disagreements (see Edwards,
1989; Finkelstein and Perevolotsky, 1990; Rosen,
2003, 1990). In the southern Levant, where
0278-4165/$ - see front matter 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jaa.2005.09.001
118
I. Berelov / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
sedentary and mobile groups not only lived in close
proximity to one another, but frequently formed
part of the same social group or tribe (Rowton,
1974), the footprints of mobile groups have not
always been clearly discernable from their sedentary
cousins (Bar-Yosef and Belfer-Cohen, 1991; Berelov, 2000; Rocek and Bar-Yosef, 1998).
The probable advent of semi-sedentary farming
communities in the southern Levant by as early as
the Natufian period (Edwards, 1989; Valla, 1998)
has meant that the coexistence, competition and
interaction between sedentary and mobile communities took a variety of forms throughout the prehistory and protohistory of the region (Table 1). The
diversity of site types and occupation strategies
has been matched by the great variety of economic
subsistence strategies. Combinations of occupation
strategies and subsistence economies have coalesced
into social regimes ranging from incipient forms of
pastoral nomadism (Rosen, 2003) to semi-sedentary
pastoralism (Cohen, 1999; Dever, 1992), transhumance (Levy, 1992; Prag, 1985) and fully sedentary
agricultural villages (Edelstein et al., 1998; Horwitz,
1989; Maeir, 1997). But as a result of the difficulties
associated with characterizing the material remains
of mobile or semi-mobile groups, investigators have
often been tempted to simply equate economic strategies such as pastoralism with non-sedentary peoples, and agriculture with sedentary peoples
(Cohen, 1999; Dever, 1980, 1992; Dothan, 1959;
Kenyon, 1979; Perrot, 1984; Rowton, 1977). These
associations however, have not only proved misleading because of their failure to admit the complex
interplay of sedentary and mobile elements within
the same social group, but they have also been plagued by the uncertainty surrounding accurate
reconstructions of ancient economic strategies (Finkelstein, 1992). A recent re-inspection of material
culture traits at small marginal sites has indicated
Table 1
Chronological periods of the southern Levant (after Fall et al.,
2002)
Cultural period
Duration (years BCE.)
Natufian
Neolithic
Chalcolithic
EB I-III
EB IV
MB IIA
MB IIB
MB IIC
108000–8500
8500–4500
4500–3600
3600–2300
2300–2000
1950–1800
1800–1650
1650–1500
occasionally conflicting sets of evidence for subsistence economies, site functions and occupation
strategies (Berelov n. d. c), pointing to either the
simultaneous presence of mobile and sedentary populations, or alternately, fluctuations in the degree of
mobility at sites through time (for example Panja,
2003; Varien, 1999).
This paper reports on the results of investigations
into the occupation strategy of a marginal community from the early second millennium of the southern Levant. Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1, an isolated Middle
Bronze Age (MB II) village located beside the Dead
Sea in Jordan, exemplifies the equivocality surrounding interpretations of sedentism and mobility
because of the conflicting nature of the siteÕs material culture. Evidence for interpreting occupation
strategy at the site, employing a host of variables,
including economic subsistence, daily behavior and
the use of space, suggests that Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1,
like many south Levantine sites, may need to be
viewed as a unique synthesis of sedentary and
non-sedentary traits to fully appreciate the great
diversity of site types previously unsuspected in
the archaeological record.
Settlement and society in the Middle Bronze Age of
the southern Levant
The Middle Bronze Age of the southern Levant
represents a return to town life and sedentary agriculture (Broshi and Gophna, 1986; Gophna and
Portugali, 1988; Palumbo, 2001), which had been
established during Early Bronze I-III (Table 1; Falconer, 2001; Mazar, 1990). The EB IV period witnessed the region-wide abandonment towns and
many villages (Finkelstein, 1998; Palumbo, 2001;
but cf. Falconer and Magness-Gardiner, 1984;
Richard, 1987) prior to the Middle Bronze Age,
which is often described as the high point of
Canaanite urbanism (Dever, 1987; Ilan, 1998). This
paper follows most common MB terminology in
which MB IIA denotes the establishment of towns,
and MB IIB/C mark their florescence; MB II and
MB IIC often conflated because of generally common material culture. With the onset of the second
millennium, small-scale, village-based agro-pastoralism, largely operated by mobile traders and herders in the EB IV period, shifted to a proliferation of
villages to serve the market towns of MB II (Fall
et al., 2002; Finkelstein, 1998). These towns, with
populations up to several thousand, exploited their
substantial agricultural hinterlands to exchange
I. Berelov / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
imported luxury items and agricultural surpluses,
stimulating intense economic activity and competition (Cohen, 2000, 2002; Falconer, 1994, 2001; Ilan,
1998; Kochavi et al., 2000; Maeir, 1997; Marchetti
and Nigro, 2000; Marcus, 1998; McLaren, 2003;
Stager, 2002).
Although the Canaanite culture reached its
zenith through the commercial machinations of
large urban centres such as Hazor, Megiddo, and
Dan (Fig. 1; Ilan, 1998), the economic backbone
of the regionÕs agriculture, livestock management,
manufacture and trade lay in its villages and small
encampments (Falconer, 1987, 1994, 2001; cf.
Maeir, 2003). But, while many of these villages were
linked with the large towns in the north and on the
coast (Marchetti and Nigro, 2000; Marcus, 2003;
Mazar, 1990), the desertic southern portions of the
southern Levant were poorly integrated. The Dead
Sea Plain and the Arabah seem to have been populated by mobile herders, who were marginalized by
the greater economic, social and cultural activities
to the north (Finkelstein, 1991, 1998). MBA evidence from the deserts of the southern Levant has
been ephemeral until recently (MacDonald, 1992;
Miller, 1991), fostering theoretical disagreements
over the archaeological visibility of mobile groups
(see Berelov, 2000; Finkelstein and Perevolotsky,
1990; Rosen, 1992). The discovery of Zahrat adhDhraÔ 1 (Edwards et al., 1998), an isolated MBA village on the Dead Sea Plain of Jordan (Berelov,
2001; Berelov and Falconer, 2001) illuminated the
diverse and multifaceted character of Canaanite
complex society (Finkelstein, 1989; Lemche, 1985;
Marfoe, 1979; Martin, 1999), especially regarding
the economic functions and social roles of such
communities.
The Middle Bronze II site of Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1
and the Dead Sea Plain of Jordan
Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 is situated on the Dead Sea
Plain, 1.5 km northeast of the Early Bronze Age site
of Bab edh-DhraÔ, and east of modern Ghor alMazraÕa village (Fig. 2). The site lies approximately
180 m below sea level and receives between 50 and
100 mm of mean annual rainfall. Zahrat adh-DhraÔ
1, which may have covered 12 ha originally, has
been truncated by Wadi adh-DhraÔ; leaving the
best-preserved portion of the site over an area of
approximately 6 ha (Fig. 3).
The discovery of this site in 1993 (Edwards et al.,
1998) raised immediate questions since no other MB
119
II settlement sites had ever been recorded in the
vicinity during the course of more than seventy
years of fieldwork and surveys (Albright, 1924;
Amr et al., 1996; Glueck, 1934, 1935, 1939, 1951;
Ibrahim et al., 1976; Kaliff and Holmgren, 1995;
MacDonald, 1992; Miller, 1979; Rast and Schaub,
1974; Worschech, 1985). It was widely held that
the region experienced a significant depopulation
at the conclusion of the EB IV period due to worsening environmental conditions (Donahue, 1985;
Frumkin et al., 1994; Rast and Schaub, 1978). The
closest MB II sites to Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 lay
60 km to the west (Fritz and Kempinski, 1983),
55 km to the north (Flanagan and McCreery,
1990; Kenyon, 1960) and a similar distance to possible MB II remains on the Kerak Plateau to the
east (Miller, 1979, 1991), providing a theoretical
challenge to formulate a social network for this substantial community. Did the inhabitants interact
with mobile populations in the area who had up till
now been archaeologically invisible? Was the site
used during certain months of the year, and seasonally abandoned? Or did some community members
travel long distances, perhaps practicing a mode of
village based transhumance? Such issues were foremost in the minds of the Arcaheology and Environment of the Dead Sea Plain Project team when
fieldwork commenced in the winter of 1999
(Edwards et al., 2001).
Excavations of Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 from December 1999 to January 2000 (Edwards et al., 2001;
Fig. 4) completed 23 U (A–T, Y–Z), ranging from
1 · 8 m to 4 · 4 m in size, which sampled the rectilinear, stone architectural features clearly visible
on the surface. Nine structures (25% of the total)
were completely excavated and several test trenches
were placed across the site to investigate possible
midden deposits. All excavated sediments were
sieved through a 1-cm mesh.
The Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 pottery chronology
indicates that the site was inhabited either from
the beginning of, or somewhere within the MB
IIA (ca. 1950 BCE), until the middle of the MB
IIB (ca. 1725 BCE), for a period of up to 225
years (Berelov n. d. a). The distribution of chronologically sensitive types across the site (Figs.
4, 5) also raised the possibility that the abandonment of the western and central parts of the site
comprising Structures 38–44, preceded the abandonment of the eastern part of Zahrat adh-DhraÔ
1 comprising Structures 36–37. Structure 33, located on the ÔcitadelÕ south of Wadi adh-DhraÔ also
120
I. Berelov / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
Fig. 1. Map of sites during the Middle Bronze II Period.
represents the latest period of occupation during
MB IIB (Berelov n. d. b). The earlier abandonment of the western part of the site also is sup-
ported by a geological model for the west to
east erosion of the Wadi adh-DhraÔ during the
Bronze Age (see Day in Edwards et al., 2002).
I. Berelov / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
121
Fig. 2. The location of Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 on the Dead Sea Plain.
Although the ceramics and architecture from
Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 bear similarities to many southern Levantine sites dating to the first half of the MB
II period (see Figs. 4 and 6, and Berelov n. d. a. for a
full discussion), the site lacked clear evidence for
trade (Berelov, 2001), and contained a number of
122
I. Berelov / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
Fig. 3. View of Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 looking west, with Wadi adh-DhraÔ dissecting the south side of the site.
Fig. 4. Location of MBIIA and MBIIB ceramic material and Storage at Zahrat.
archaizing features, suggesting a distinctly local
cultural tradition (Berelov n. d. c). These unique
features include rectilinear, stone long-room
architecture, perforated jar bases, squat handless
jars with folded rims and vessel decoration consist-
ing exclusively of combing and incision (Fig. 5).
The latter elements parallel earlier regional EBA
assemblages such as Bab edh-DhraÔ (Rast and
Schaub, 2003) and the EB IV Negev sites (Cohen,
1999).
I. Berelov / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
123
Fig. 5. Pottery types linked to the MB IIA and MB IIB occupations.
Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 ceramics also show strong
typological with Jericho and Tell Nimrin to the
north, and Dayr ÔAyn-ÕAbata to the south (Fig. 1).
These sites all contained examples of the everted
flat-bottomed cookpot, handless jars with folded
rims, and in the case of Dayr ÔAyn-ÕAbata, at least
six examples of jars with perforated bases (Collins
et al., 2002). The latter feature had otherwise only
been reported from distant Cyprus (D. Frankel
pers. Comm. 2002) and Syria (Curvers and Schwartz, 1997; Dornemann, 1981).
The strong presence of local features, originating
in preceding periods, coupled with a lack of trade
items indicated that the cultural relationship of Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 to the greater MB II world was
probably distant. The relative isolation of this site
underscores the importance of understanding its
social, economic and regional roles. Reconstruction
the subsistence economy and behavioral dynamics
of the site can be employed to interpret levels of
permanence, seasonality, site function and occupational strategies through time, presenting an opportunity to enlarge our understanding of subsistence
and occupation strategies among south Levantine
groups during the third–second millennium transition. But these analyses depend on an appropriate
understanding of site function, occupation strategies and abandonment. And given that issues surrounding the study of sedentism and mobility in
archaeology are far from being resolved, negotiating
this methodological component represents a significant undertaking.
Interpreting site function and occupation strategies:
archaeological indices of ‘‘permanence’’ and the
effects of anticipated mobility
The archaeological interpretation of site function
and occupation strategy has relied substantially on
indices of occupation, including economic subsis-
124
I. Berelov / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
Fig. 6. Example of a stone pit-house at Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1.
tence, settlement size, village plan, house shape,
building materials (i.e., permanence), storage, public architecture, material culture repertoire (i.e.,
diversity), site maintenance behavior and ritual
activity (see Ames, 1991; Edwards, 1989; Kent,
1984, 1991; Panja, 2003; Rafferty, 1985; Saidel,
1993). Although these indices employ a very simplified view of both migratory and perennially settled
peoples, correlations of individual indices with levels of permanence (sensu Ames, 1991) are provided
below (Table 2).
Problems arising from the correlation of individual indices with levels of permanence or mobility
revolve around a few basic factors (see Edwards,
1989; Rafferty, 1985). First, sedentary and mobile
groups are rarely characterized by their extreme
forms, with many intermediate expressions (Finkelstein, 1992). Second, occupation strategies may
change significantly over time (Finkelstein, 1998;
Panja, 2003). Finally, and perhaps most importantly, individual indices infrequently account for levels
of permanence or mobility in isolation (for example
Murray, 1980), and in fact may reflect other factors
connected to levels of affluence, environmental constraints and central control. Consequently, the
interpretation of occupation strategies at sites
should rely on a combination of indices, with correspondingly greater explanatory power (Kent, 1992,
1991; Varien, 1999). In particular, an inductive
approach to individual sites, which evaluates suites
of variables, represents a particularly effective strategy for instances in which archaeologists are confronted by conflicting evidence for both mobile
and sedentary occupations at a given site. Such
cases may reflect the coexistence of groups with
varying levels of permanence, or a discrepancy
Table 2
Indices of sedentism and mobility and their general correlation with the archaeological record
Indices
Sedentary
Mobile
Economic subsistence
Settlement size
Village plan
House shape
Building materials (i.e., permanence)
Storage
Public architecture (monumentality)
Material culture repertoire (i.e., diversity)
Site maintenance behavior
Ritual activity
Agriculture and village-based pastoralism
Large (>0.5 ha)
Agglomerated
Rectilinear
Stone, mud brick
Formal, private and occasionally centralized
Common, particularly at large sites
Highly varied including imports
Formal dumps or middens
Intramural and extramural
Herding,hunting, and gathering
Small (<0.5 ha)
Dispersed
Curvilinear
Wood, brush, and thatch
Frequently absent, occasionally communal
Limited to ritual pilgrimage sites
Low diversity
Casual cleaning
Extramural
I. Berelov / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
between Ôplanning depthÕ (sensu Binford, 1981) and
duration. This dissonance has been explored elsewhere through the study of Ôanticipated mobilityÕ
(Kent, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1999).
Ethnographic studies of sedentary and mobile
groups indicate that anticipated mobility accounts
for more variability in the material record than
any other factor, including actual mobility, economic subsistence, permanence of built features
and diversity (Kent, 1991, 1993). While the effects
of anticipated mobility are difficult to quantify in
archaeological settings, the heuristic value of this
concept may hold some potential for the southern
Levant where contradictory variables frequently
impede our efforts to reconstruct the function of
sites and the activities of the groups that occupied
them (for example Cohen and Dever, 1981;
Dever, 1980). Such difficulties are particularly
evident in the persistent employment of economic
subsistence as the pre-eminent variable for interpreting site function and occupation strategy,
despite its often murky and ambiguous relationship to levels of permanence (see Esse, 1991 for
a fine elucidation of this tendency and its associated problems).
Economic subsistence certainly represents one of
the more useful indices of site permanence because
of the scheduling and general time investment inherent in economic tasks (Khazanov, 1984). On the
basis of such reasoning, farming activities often
are associated with sedentary occupations in the
southern Levant while pastoralism has been associated with non-sedentary occupations (for example
Cohen, 1999; Dever, 1980, 1992; Dothan, 1959;
Kenyon, 1979; Perrot, 1984; Rowton, 1977). However, mobile groups commonly practice farming,
and most sedentary groups practice some form of
pastoralism (Finkelstein, 1991; Lees and Bates,
1974; Martin, 1999; Saidel, 2002; Rosen, 2003).
Indeed, many faunal and archaeobotanic assemblages across different types of Bronze Age sites in
the southern Levant attest to this overlap (Falconer,
1995; Fall et al., 2002; Horwitz, 1989), reflecting a
combination of variables including the environment, availability of resources, inter-group competition, as well as socio-political conditions (Levy,
1992). Accordingly, archaeological inference of relative proportions of pastoralism and agriculture
along the pastoral nomadic—sedentary agricultural
continuum represents more than a simple undertaking (Finkelstein, 1992), particularly in light of ongoing disagreements about the nature of pastoralism
125
in antiquity and its development through time
(Bar-Yosef and Khazanov, 1992).
While pastoralism may be defined as a ‘‘dependence on domestic herd animals held as property’’
(Chang and Koster, 1986, p. 99), this subsumes
everything from pure nomadic pastoralism, involving a total dependence on herd animals, to villagebased transhumance, comprising a more limited
pastoral component. And to complicate matters,
specialized pure nomadic pastoralism, which technically requires the use of mounted animals, may
not have developed until comparatively recently
(Bar-Yosef and Khazanov, 1992; Khazanov, 1984;
cf. Rosen, 2003). Therefore, in contrast to specialized economies from the ethnographic present
(Lancaster and Lancaster, 1991), mixed economies
tended to characterize Bronze Age Levantine communities, both mobile and sedentary (Bentley,
1991; Esse, 1991; Finkelstein, 1991; Lemche, 1985;
Prag, 1992). A linkage of seasonally specific agricultural tasks with seasonal site avoids simplistic
correlations of farming with sedentism or pastoralism with mobility, and allows clearer determinations of site function and the effects of anticipated
mobility.
The combined use of several variables, including
subsistence and seasonality, settlement and housing,
as well as measures of diversity and behavior, holds
further advantages for overcoming difficulties with
ethnographic analogy. The employment of a suite
of variables to reconstruct the site function and
occupation strategy (as suggested Chang and Koster, 1986) at Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1, including archaeobotanical, faunal, ceramic, lithic, architectural
and ethnographic data, incorporates ethnoarchaeology for its power of suggestion rather than direct
explanation. The following section adopts a multivariable approach to understanding sedentism and
mobility at Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 in Jordan.
Defining the occupational strategy at Zahrat
adh-DhraÔ 1: economy, settlement, housing, behavior,
and the ethnographic record
Single-period sites like Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1
provide perfect settings to study site function, occupation and abandonment. Whereas large multicomponent sites may embody an enormous number
of depositional episodes and complex stratigraphication (Dever, 1996) the less complex evidence from
small single-period sites may contain traces of relatively undisturbed abandonment assemblages, thus
126
I. Berelov / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
the basis of settlement type, size and architectural
design, as well as behavioral attributes linked to
storage, artifact diversity, portability, and refuse
management.
facilitating inferences of site type and occupation
strategy.
Site type (see Chang, 1972) is defined here as the
set of economic and social activities undertaken by
its inhabitants. One crucial component of site type
is the nature of settlement permanence, which may
manifest itself at any point along the sedentary-mobile continuum, ranging from sedentary to seasonal/
semi-sedentary (including transhumance) to nonsedentary (i.e., highly mobile) occupations, with
hyper-sedenstism and extreme nomadism representing only the extreme poles (see Khazanov, 1984).
Hyper-sedentary occupation is generally defined
by the continued presence of a group of people at
a settlement throughout the year for several years
(Edwards, 1989, p. 9; Rafferty, 1985). Seasonal
occupation may reflect the repeated abandonment
and reoccupation of a settlement by a group of people over a number of years, which some refer to as
semi-sedentism. It is worth noting however, that
the latter is sometimes not distinguished from
sedentism proper. Rowton (1973a,b, 1974), who
identified the characteristic dimorphic sedentary
and nomadic elements of West Asian society,
termed the co-existence of these groups Ôenclosed
nomadism.Õ
Analyses of occupation strategy at Zahrat adhDhraÔ 1 begin with an appraisal of the subsistence
economy at the site, initially inferred from a combination of the types of crops harvested, the animals herded and the seasonal tasks associated
with these agricultural undertakings. Further interpretations of occupational strategy, including associated abandonment schedules, are attempted on
The subsistence economy at Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1:
scheduled tasks linked to farming and herding on the
Dead Sea Plain
Farming activities at Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 are
inferred from plant remains retrieved from hearth
deposits, while the presence of certain species of animals indicate possible herding practices.
Farming practices and seasonality
Analysis of archaeobotanical remains from six
structures provided evidence for the probable farming of cultigens, including grape, fig, barley, bread
wheat and legumes (Table 3; Edwards et al., 2001;
Meegan, 2005).
For the purposes of reconstructing seasonality
and occupation strategies, cultigens may be considered as either annual or perennial varieties (for
example see Fall et al., 1998). Annual cultigens
require attention during sowing and harvesting seasons, but may not be planted every year. Perennial
varieties, on the other hand, require attention during certain seasons in an ongoing yearly basis
(Lines, 1995; Stager, 1985). Successful cultivation
of grapes takes several years to produce quality fruit
(Walsh, 2000), and requires some of the population
to remain for specific periods during each year (i.e.,
for harvest), for several years, to tend these crops.
The annual harvest, an essential activity in the
Table 3
Macrobotanical remains (raw counts) from ZAD 1 by structure (adapted from Meegan, 2005)
Plant
Structure 36
Structure 37
Structure 40
Structure 41
Structure 42
Structure 44
Barley
Wheat
Bread wheat
Fig
Grape
Olive
Cultivated legumes
Wild legumes
Field weeds
Wild taxa
Rachis/internodes
Total assemblage
4
3
3
3
0
0
0
0
10
5
1
32
8
1
0
42
27
0
16
319
449
9
5
554
74
11
6
4
28
0
0
3
24
0
38
192
9
4
0
12
2
0
16
3
11
0
1
42
31
3
2
74
1
0
4
15
67
13
27
208
6
6
0
17
1
0
7
33
178
9
8
227
Total annual
Total perennial
Total cultigens
14
3
17
27
69
96
91
32
123
29
14
43
40
75
115
19
18
37
I. Berelov / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
autumn (Lines, 1995), would fix the site occupation
somewhere between September and November, providing the seeds found at Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 in fact
represent grapes and not transported raisins (see
Cartright, 2002). Assuming that the seeds reflect
on-site activities, and given the high average temperatures and negligible rainfall around the Dead Sea
Basin (Angelfire, 2005), harvesting at Zahrat adhDhraÔ 1 probably took place in the early autumn
around September.
The Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 cultivation schedule may
be extended into further seasons when the sowing
and harvesting schedules of annual varieties also
are considered. Barley and wheat are sown following the winter frosts when daylight hours are sufficiently long to enable maturation (Renfrew, 1973).
On the Dead Sea Plain, these conditions would
occur as early as March, while the harvesting of
all three cereals could have occurred in the late
spring between April and June (Arnon, 1972).
Legumes are more resistant to cold and take longer
to mature, meaning that sowing normally takes
place in the late autumn or over the winter (Charles,
1990). On this basis, the full cultivation schedule at
Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 entails habitation in winter
(December), spring (March) and even early summer
(June). The harvesting of grapes in September (and
the possible sowing of lentils in October) extends
occupation into three farming seasons. Meanwhile,
activities linked to herd management augments
occupation length further.
Herd management and seasonality
Herd management practices at Zahrat adh-DhraÔ
1 were interpreted from faunal remains excavated
from six structures (Table 4). The faunal evidence
from Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 is dominated by the remains
of domestic sheep/ goat (Edwards et al., 2001) in
127
keeping with arid land settlement (Horwitz, 1989).
The consumption of domesticated pig was unanticipated given this taxonÕs association with hyper-sedentary groups with access to substantial water
resources (see for example Falconer, 1995; Flannery,
1983; Grigson, 1987; Levy, 1992). For this reason, the
evidence, in conjunction with crop cultivation, suggests that the inhabitants were not exclusively
engaged in a seasonal form of pastoralism.
Although the Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 assemblage
may be diminished by poor preservation (a factor
also worth considering in any interpretation of the
site given the paucity of faunal remains), and reflect
consumption patterns rather than economics (see
Meadows, 1996), the complete absence of hunted
species and commensal animals such as rodents
and small birds, is illuminating. Hunting appears
to represent a supplementary component of the diet
even at sedentary sites like nearby EBA Bab edhDhraÔ (Finnegan, 1978; Rast and Schaub, 2003).
The absence of hunted species, also suggested by
the lack of points in the lithic assemblage, combined
with the dominance of sheep/goat in the Zahrat
adh-DhraÔ 1 fauna, suggests that herded animals
were either available for consumption during seasons of occupation, or that meat did not constitute
a large part of the diet. An alternative explanation,
which includes the foddering of animals on-site
throughout the year represents an unlikely proposition based on the very small sample and the lack of
commensal species associated with hyper-sedentary
occupations (see Dean, 2005; Tchernov, 1984; cf.
Edwards, 1989).
The availability of winter pasture around the
Dead Sea Basin (Meadows, 2001; Noy-Meir and
Seligman, 1979) combined with the susceptibility
of young sheep/goats to the winter cold in the highlands (Simms, 1988) qualifies Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 as
Table 4
Faunal distribution across units at ZAD 1 by structure and unit (after Metzger in Edwards et al., 2001, p. 154)
Structure
Unit
No. of identifiable bone
fragments Ovis/Capra
No. of identifiable bone
fragments (Sus)
Total No. of bone
fragments
36
37
37
37
40
41
42
44
A
D
E
M
I
J
K
L
2
0
0
18
0
1
10
3
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
6
9
8
154
1
45
65
4
34
1
292
All contexts
128
I. Berelov / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
optimal for ovicaprid husbandry between December
and March. Winter occupation by a pastoralist
component may even be extended into the late
spring or early summer when harvested barley and
wheat fields provide grazing opportunities (see
Levy, 1992). The availability of grazing indicates
an occupation from winter to the beginning of summer by pastoral or herding elements of the
population.
Occupation scenarios derived from the subsistence
economy and ethnographic correlates
The subsistence base of Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 is
comprised of spring-fed agriculture focused on both
perennial and seasonal crops, and the herding of
ovicaprids (see above). The presence of perennial
species such as grapes, which bear fruit in the
autumn (Stager, 1985; Walsh, 2000), along with seasonal crops such as wheat and barley, which are
sown in March and harvested in the late spring
and early summer (Arnon, 1972; Renfrew, 1973),
fixes the occupation of the site for at least these
two periods of time. Meanwhile, the sowing of
legumes and the likely grazing of herds on the warm
slopes facing the Dead Sea Plain in the winter
months extended the occupation span to a possible
total of nine months of the year from the beginning
of September to the end of May.
The occupation of the site for nine months of the
year by some portion of the population indicates
the occupational strategy as semi-sedentary or possibly even sedentary (Rafferty, 1985; Rice, 1975). The
contention that the site was only occupied from September to May and abandoned for the summer
months of June to August represents a model encompassing either transhumance or a seasonally circulating mobility (Walker, 1983; Yakar, 2000).
Ethnographic correlates for the seasonal abandonment of sites by transhumant agro-pastoralists and
other semi-sedentary agricultural groups are plentiful
and can be found in Kurdistan (Leach, 1940; Yakar,
2000), the Taurus Mountains (Ramsay, 1916; Yakar,
2000) and southwest Asia (Lewis, 1987; Prag, 1985).
However, one also needs to note that many other ethnographic cases have shown some types of seasonal
abandonment to be archaeologically indistinguishable from perennial sedentary occupations on the
basis of agricultural data alone (Edwards, 1989).
From this perspective it is necessary to consider further evidence pertaining to levels of permanence at
Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1, including settlement, housing
and behavioral dynamics.
Settlement and housing
Settlement type and size, house construction and
shape help infer occupation strategies and levels of
permanence at the site.
Settlement type and size
Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 (Fig. 4) contains approximately 28 architectural units, 12 wall alignments
and 2 boulder fields extending over an area of
12 ha (Edwards et al., 2001). A series of truncated
structures presently collapsing southwards into
Wadi adh-DhraÔ (Fig. 3) suggest that the site was
somewhat larger during the MB II period when
the incision of the wadi into the Dead Sea Plain
probably was only minimal (Day in Edwards
et al., 2002). The abandonment and partial destruction of the site may indeed be linked to the erosive
activities of Wadi adh-DhraÔ, which followed massive tectonic displacement along the DhraÔ fault,
most likely during MB II (House, 2003).
Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 north (ZAD 1 north henceforth), which lies to the north of Wadi adh-DhraÔ,
contains the most extensive and complete portion
of the architecture. This area can be divided into
four zones on the basis of four architectural clusters,
segregated from one another by substantial areas of
open space (Fig. 4). By comparison, architecture at
ZAD 1 south is less substantial, but tends to follow
the same clustered pattern of structure distribution.
The entire site is therefore characterized by a lowdensity plan composed of domestic architecture
(see below).
While the large size and unagglomerated plan are
unusual for the Levantine Bronze Age (see Falconer
and Savage, 1995), these traits certainly find parallels among modern-day communities in the Black
Sea region of Anatolia (Yakar, 2000) and the Dead
Sea Plain (personal observation). This type of village plan is often described as a dispersed settlement
system, which has been linked to non-sedentary
populations (Fletcher, 1986), but may just as likely
reflect elements of social structure and geography.
House construction and shape
The Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 structures are characterized by stone, rectilinear pithouse semi-subterranean construction (Fig. 6). Variations of this
architectural tradition are common among desertic
sites in the southern Levant, particularly in the Early Bronze Age (Beit-Arieh, 1981, 1992; Wright,
1985). The Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 structures are
I. Berelov / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
defined by an interior floor, substantially sunken
below the exterior surface level and the founding
level of the walls (Fig. 6), with the doorway in one
of the short walls (Edwards et al., 2001). Houses
were built by excavating a square or rectangular
trench, followed by the erection of four walls on
ground level at the edge of the trench (Beit-Arieh,
1981). Substantial wall collapse within small rooms
in Structures 37 and 42, as well as the presence of
large flat stone slabs in Structure 36, suggests that
some structures may have been roofed (Edwards
et al., 2001). Three main rectilinear types of structure were recorded at the site: (1) one-room, threewall, (2) one-room, four-wall, and (3) two-room
(Fig. 7). These categories sometimes are modified
by additional cross-walls, oblique adjoining walls,
corrals, and small, internal stone alignments.
House construction at Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1
entailed substantial labor in the excavation of a
large volume of sediment and the collection of
stones ranging from 30 · 40 to 100 · 100 cm. While
the best-preserved structure (i.e., 42) stood 4 courses
high, stone tumble suggests that several more courses formed the original height of the walls (Edwards
et al., 2001).
Three of the nine excavated structures show evidence of renovation, rebuilding or reoccupation.
Renovation activities may reflect changes in the
social structure and economy through time (for
example Banning and Byrd, 1987), or varying levels
of permanence (Cameron, 1991; Schiffer, 1976).
Structure 37 contained at least two rebuilding phases, both of which included a corral enclosure
(Fig. 7). Structure 41 contained three distinct hearth
areas: two non-contemporary hearths in the Western Room and one in the Eastern Room. Structure
40 showed evidence for reuse above the foundational floor, in traces of a cooking fire in the upper fill.
The renovations suggest reoccupation over an
extended period of time, which may be linked to
the size and composition of household groups.
Remodeling and reoccupation of substantial, stone
architecture is suggestive of a sedentary occupation
(Rafferty, 1985). Interestingly, differences evident
between structure plans, which could indicate varying levels of permanence, correlate the most substantial architecture with herd management
activities.
Pastoralist activities may be inferred by linking
animal management to structure access. While the
small room in each excavated two-room structure
(i.e., 36, 41, and 42) may have been roofed for
129
human habitation, the larger rooms contained shallow deposits and little wall fall (Edwards et al.,
2001). The latter may have functioned as corrals,
sealed off with bushes, as has been reported from
ethnographic observations of shallow stone pens
(Saidel, 2002b). In the case of Structure 37, a large
curvilinear enclosure (Fig. 7) was attached to the
main two-room structure, which may also represent
an animal corral. By contrast, all one-room structures contained substantial occupation deposits
linked to domestic activities. The above evidence
indicates that if substantial architecture is to be
linked with sedentary occupation of Zahrat adhDhraÔ 1, then animal management, either husbandry
or herding should be included in the domestic activities of this community.
Occupation strategy in light of settlement type and
size, and house construction
Evidence for long-term occupation at Zahrat
adh-DhraÔ 1, in the form of either multiple construction phases or occupation phases, both hallmarks of
most MB II sites (Ben-Dov, 1992; Mazar, 1990;
Wright, 1985), was limited to just two, two-phase
structures (i.e., Structures 37 and 40). Both the
pit-house construction and dispersed settlement systems generally are associated with pre-MB II cultures, but their relationship to levels of
permanence are equivocal (Flannery, 1972; Fletcher, 1986; Rocek, 1996). However, despite the fact
that absolute correlation of agglomerated, rectilinear, multi-phased architecture with sedentary occupations and curvilinear architecture with mobile
groups (Whiting and Ayres, 1968) has been shown
to be untenable (Edwards, 1989; Panja, 2003;
Watanabe, 1986), the general application of this
typology to occupational strategies has been useful
(Dhavalikar, 1989; Flannery, 1972; Saidel, 1993).
Curvilinear, unagglomerated architecture occurs in
the Central Negev Highlands during the EB IV
period (Dever, 1985) and it is significant that the
inhabitants of the Central Negev Highlands have
been linked to non-sedentary occupational strategies (Cohen and Dever, 1981; Cohen, 1999, 1992;
Dever, 1992; Finkelstein, 1989). The settlement at
Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 is similarly dispersed, perhaps
accounting for its large size, but the occasionally
multi-phased rectilinear stone buildings conform
to a sedentary tradition of architecture, suggesting
long term usage or the anticipated reuse of houses.
The architectural and settlement data from Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 reflects a sedentary occupational
130
I. Berelov / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
N
Structure 42
Structure 43
Unit K
Wall Q003
A
- -
B
- -
Putative
Animal
Enclosure
Living Area
Only
Unit Q
Unit P
Unit R
Scale: 1: 100
Two-room Structure
One-room Structure
Living Area Only
Wall
D001
-J
-
Unit V
Putative
Corral/Enclosure
-I
Unit D
-
Wall
D006
Structure 37
Unit E
- -
Wall E006
Wall E001
-B-
E
-
Wall M004
C
Unit F
-
-G
-
Unit N
Unit M
Wall
F018
Wall
F001
-L-
-KWall M002
Wall
N008
-H-
Wall
F019
Wall F002
- -
Probable Courtyard
Area
Wall
F003
-A
Wall
N016
Living Area Only
D
Wall
N004
Scale 1: 100
- F
Fig. 7. Plans of one-room and two-room structures at Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1.
strategy which is certainly complimentary to the evidence gathered from crop cultivation and livestock
management. Occurring perhaps through a number
of frequent, short occupational episodes or indeed a
perennial year-round occupation, the area surrounding Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 was farmed and
grazed by people along a seasonally determined
schedule. The permanence of, and modifications to
I. Berelov / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
the dwellings support a sedentary model of occupation, which is examined further by behavioral
considerations.
Behavioral considerations: Refuse management,
storage, and diversity
Refuse management, storage, artifact diversity,
and functionality help indicate behaviors associated
with sedentary versus mobile groups (see Kent,
1999).
Refuse management and discard
The archaeobotanical, faunal and ceramic refuse
patterns from Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 all demonstrate a
strong tendency towards deposition in structure
interiors (see Berelov n. d. b; Edwards et al., 2001;
Meegan, 2005). Ceramic discard provides the bulk
of the evidence for studying the location of trash
disposal. General refuse patterns show low densities
of ceramic refuse in upper room fills (i.e., overburden) and exterior contexts (Tables 5 and 6). This
pattern is reversed in lower room fills associated
Table 5
Distribution of sherds (%) according to context type at ZAD 1
Structure
Room fill (%)
Floor (%)
Exterior (%)
N
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
47
26
81
4
22
11
7
16
3
33
65
0
96
76
87
77
43
57
20
9
19
0
2
2
16
41
40
173
2454
57
283
461
232
515
44
416
Site mean
20
67
13
4635
131
with occupational debris on floors, where the quantities of pottery are high, while lithic material quantities are low. Floors feature ashy soil and flat-lying
sherds; especially restorable cooking vessels discovered in clusters (Fig. 8), often associated with ash
pits or hearths. Jar material is more fragmented
by comparison, and small vessels are uncommon.
The high density of ceramic discard on floor surfaces relates to primary and in some cases de facto
refuse. Together with a very low sherd frequency
linked to secondary refuse in upper fills (see Montgomery, 1993), this evidence perhaps reflects little
emphasis on regular cleaning (see Berelov n. d. b
for a full discussion). The lack of house maintenance is attested by the relative absence of secondary refuse areas, formal dumps, or evidence for
size sorting of larger artifacts and casual sweepings
(see Hayden and Cannon, 1983; Stevenson, 1991).
Only Structure 40 and 44 contained evidence of specialized refuse receptacles. While the two pits in
Structure 40 (loci 1013 and 1014) probably functioned as interior hearth dumps, the function of
the bin adjoining Structure 44 remains equivocal.
The deposits at Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 clearly represent
a palimpsest of de facto, abandonment and primary
refuse deposits that can be linked to occupation
strategy and intensity (see Schiffer, 1987, 1976).
Although the general lack of house maintenance
and sustained redeposition of trash into formal
dumping areas, has occasionally been linked to the
behavior of mobile groups, who do not habitually
maintain pristine conditions in living quarters
(Cribb, 1991; Joyce and Johannessen, 1993; Murray, 1980; Schiffer, 1976; Watkins, 1990), most
migratory societies are nonetheless characterized
by the regular practice of sweeping large objects
from tent interiors as has been noted in ethnographic observations (Banning and Kohler-Rollefson,
Table 6
Distribution of sherds (density/m3) by context type at ZAD 1
Structure
Room fill
Floor
Exterior
Bin
Corral
Total
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
7.61
23.18
7.52
5.71
22.3
1.68
2.59
1.69
2.02
11.88
137.71
N/A
52.52
125.71
115.3
63.17
56.55
102.6
3.95
28.78
13.75
N/A
3.48
0.89
10.00
11.46
39.74
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
33.33
0
21.91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
23.44
211.58
21.27
58.23
151.49
117.87
75.76
69.70
177.69
8.26
83.18
14.01
33.33
21.91
160.69
Site mean
132
I. Berelov / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
Fig. 8. Restorable cooking vessels at Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1.
1992; Murray, 1980; OÕConnell, 1987; Simms, 1988;
Yellen, 1977). The relatively messy state of the Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 houses appears to be linked with
pre-abandonment behavior, but not in a conventional sense (see Stevenson, 1982). Since poor site
maintenance seems to reflect an ongoing practice
at Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 (Berelov n. d. b), refuse management patterns may be linked to short but frequent episodes of occupation rather than a
relaxation of camp maintenance behavior in anticipation of abandonment. The Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1
inhabitants reflect a behavior linked to the specialized and seasonal occupation of a site over an
extended period of time resulting in the build-up
of trash on the interior of structures.
Storage facilities
While the extent of storage facilities and their
archaeological visibility may refer to factors including socio-political organization and centrality,
robust evidence for long-term storage has generally
been linked to permanent, sedentary occupations
(see Byrd, 1994; Reid, 1989; Schroder, 1997), a fact
supported by the numerical superiority of storage
vessels to other classes of vessels at sedentary sites
across the southern Levant (see Daviau, 1993 for
an example). The latest occupation of Zahrat adhDhraÔ 1 is coupled with an increased demand for
storage facilities, as suggested by late (MB IIB)
chronologically diagnostic types in Structures 33
and 37, the largest structures on the site (see
Fig. 4, and note that Structure 33 appears off the
map). Surface survey of Structure 33 showed a high
frequency of storage jar sherds, suggesting that
Structure 33 may have functioned as a specialized,
perhaps public building (Edwards et al., 2002). If
Structure 33 functioned as a storage area for the
entire site, it could be linked to a permanent or sedentary phase of occupation at Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1.
The Eastern Room of Structure 37 also may have
provided specialized storage, as suggested by
smashed storage vessels on the floor of its upper
phase (Berelov n. d. a).
Increased storage areas normally reflect intensified food production (Reid, 1989; Schiffer, 1976;
Schroder, 1997; cf. Edwards, 1989; Hole, 1978;
Kent, 1999, 1992; Prag, 2004) and are therefore
linked with long term sedentary occupations. The
transition of communities from mobile to sedentary
occupations often is marked by the segregation of
public and private space and restricted access to private houses (Watkins, 1990). Private houses demonstrate a reduction of food-processing activities,
which are subsequently carried out in public or
shared areas (Byrd, 1994). At Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1,
evidence for storage is certainly equivocal in that
storage is not well attested in all structures and during all phases of occupation. The concentration of
storage jars around Structure 33 and the restricted
access of Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 residential structures
conforms to an interpretation of Zahrat adh-DhraÔ
1 as a sedentary village, perhaps in its latest period
of occupation. However, the overall paucity of storage vessels during the initial settlement period of the
site, particularly compared to cooking vessels (see
section below), is not consistent with an intense
hyper-sedentary occupation. The high sampling rate
(25% of all structures) at Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1, which
yielded good chronological resolution with respect
to horizontal stratigraphy, may indicate that storing
I. Berelov / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
activities changed over time perhaps in concert with
occupation strategy.
Artifact diversity: repertoire and size
Artifact diversity provides a useful measure of
permanence, often preferable to basic measures of
assemblage composition, which are subject to enormous difficulties connected to calculation (see
Orton, 1993) and sampling (Cannon, 1983). Zahrat
adh-DhraÔ 1 is characterized by abundant lithic scatters and, to a lesser extent, ceramic sherd concentrations on structure floors. Stone tools occurred
exclusively as informal, retouched blades. There
were no sickle blades or projectile points recovered
and most of this material was excavated from overburden deposits (Staples, 2005). No evidence of copper ore or bronze tools and weapons was observed
at the site. Similarly there was a complete absence
of small luxury items such as jewellery, scarabs
and other personal adornments. The lack of any
items connected to trade suggests that Zahrat adhDhraÔ 1 was a poorly integrated community of the
MB II period. The great majority of artifacts recovered at the site were the ceramic remains of cooking
pots and storage jars.
Standard vessel frequency calculations shows that
the flat-bottomed (cf.) cooking vessel (Fig. 8) dominates the ceramic assemblage at Zahrat adh-DhraÔ
1. Plain storage jars with a restricted orifice of less
than 20 cm represent the second most abundant
form, while small items such as bowls and juglets
are poorly represented (Fig. 9). The bulk of excavated
ceramics was recovered from interior floors (Tables 5
and 6), and to a lesser extent within enclosed courtyards. The poor vessel type diversity is accompanied
by a narrow range of vessel sizes, which provides a
further measure of artifact diversity.
Vessel size was inferred on the basis of orifice
diameter, measured from suitable rim sherds over
four vessel classes (cooking vessels, storage vessels,
bowls and juglets) across the site. Some vessel size
variability is apparent among cooking vessels and
to a lesser degree, storage jars, with greatest variability occurring in the larger structures (i.e., 33,
37, and 42). Cooking vessels at Zahrat adh-DhraÔ
1 occurred in a relatively broad range of sizes (Table
7), whereas storage vessels revealed a comparatively
narrow range of sizes (Table 8). Not surprisingly,
size variability appears affected by sample and structure size. Large samples, such as those found in
large Structures 33 and 37, contained the greatest
variability of vessel sizes.
133
Juglet
4%
Bowl
2%
Storage Jar
37%
Cookpot
57%
Fig. 9. Vessel Type Frequencies at Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1.
Table 7
Cooking vessel orifice diameter size data for ZAD 1 structures
Structure/unit
Diameter mean (cm)
Diameter range (cm)
36
37
39
40
41
42
43
44
b
31.38
37.41
38.67
32.60
31.74
31.00
36.00
32.17
32.00
18–38
24–60
32–44
18–38
26–40
26–38
36–36
26–40
28–36
All contexts
34.13
18–60
Table 8
Storage vessel orifice diameter size data for ZAD 1 structures
Structure/unit
Diameter mean (cm)
Diameter range (cm)
2
32
33
36
37
39
41
42
44
b
0
13.00
15.00
15.43
14.00
13.41
16.00
14.00
16.67
14.00
10.00
12.00
12–14
14–16
12–20
13–15
10–20
10–28
14–14
16–18
10–18
10–10
12–12
All contexts
14.52
10–28
The two vessel types may reflect different levels
of portability, leading to less handling of cooking
vessels, which functioned as site furniture, while
storage vessels were curated and possibly removed
upon abandonments (see below). Cooking vessels
were encountered frequently as de facto refuse,
occurring as pot smashes in Structures 37, 41,
134
I. Berelov / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
42, and 44 (Fig. 10). Storage jars occurred rarely
as pot smashes (only in Structure 37) and seem
to have been highly curated, judging by the frequent mend holes observed on all parts of vessels
(Edwards et al., 2002). The relative paucity of
smaller vessels, the curation of jars and the abundance of usable cooking vessels, may indicate that
the Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 assemblage was subjected
to selective depletion through the removal of small
items and usable jars during episodes of abandonment (for a discussion of depletion see Baker,
1975; Schiffer, 1976; Stevenson, 1982; Webb,
1995). In contrast, locally hand-built cooking vessels may have been stored on floors for possible
reuse during seasonal reoccupations of the site.
The removal of small items by mobile groups
has been suggested for similar archaeological cases
(for example Prag, 1991b; Saidel, 2004, 2002a;
Sebanne et al., 1993) and observed in ethnographic
cases (Cribb, 1991; Yakar, 2000).
Generally speaking, broad artifact repertoire
and high functional diversity have been linked
with increasing levels of permanence (Bar-Yosef
and Belfer-Cohen, 1991; Kent, 1992; Saidel, 2004;
Schiffer, 1976). At Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1, there is a
narrow range of artifacts coupled with low diversity of function. The restricted nature of the ceramic
assemblage (see Amiran, 1969 and Daviau, 1993
for a discussion of usual utilitarian repertoires)
underlines a preference for very basic and essential
items, which in some cases also are characterized
by their small size and portability. This type of
assemblage may arise from three possible causes,
presented in order of probability: (1) a response
to seasonal mobility; (2) the repertoire of an isolated and economically unintegrated population; or
(3) the replacement of ceramics with other perishable containers not surviving in the archaeological
record.
Occupation strategy at Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 in light
of behavioral considerations
The behavioral evidence, including refuse management, storage facilities and artifact diversity suggests that the inhabitants of Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1
were not sedentary. The general lack of cleaning,
specialized activity areas, low artifact diversity,
and the caching of large cooking vessels on house
floors all find correlates in ethnographic and historical examples of non-sedentary communities (BarYosef and Belfer-Cohen, 1991; Binford, 1983,
1978; Cribb, 1991; Kent, 1993, 1991; Murray,
1980; OÕConnell, 1987; Rafferty, 1985; Stevenson,
1982). Meanwhile, a comparison of these behavioral
considerations with contemporary Bronze Age sites
in the southern Levant, finds few parallels among
sedentary villages (for example Bahat, 1975; Eisenberg, 1993; Edelstein et al., 1998; Falconer, 1995),
instead holding a greater resemblance to marginal
semi-sedentary communities (Cohen, 1999; Cohen
and Dever, 1981; Dever, 1985; Saidel, 2002a,b;
Rosen, 2003). The dissonance between the apparent
Fig. 10. De Facto refuse founds as Cooking Vessel pot smashes at Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1.
I. Berelov / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
non-sedentary material repertoire of this community and the sedentary characteristics of the economy
and housing forces a close inspection of the whole
suite of features, and necessitates a flexible
approach to interpreting the level of permanence
at the site.
Discussion: reconciling signs of sedentism and
mobility at Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 and the effects
of anticipated mobility
The combined evidence gathered from economic
subsistence, settlement type, size and architectural
design, as well as behavioral indicators linked to
artifact diversity and refuse discard, presents a complex material pattern that does not correlate simply
with any strictly defined paradigms of sedentism or
mobility (see Table 2). While the evidence from economic subsistence as well as house shape, construction and settlement size, argue for a sedentary
occupation, behavioral indicators argue for a greater degree of mobility. It is difficult to explain away
the behavioral evidence as a reflection of low levels
of integration, poverty, or previously unreported
social structures within a sedentary community
since such ambiguities are not witnessed at other
sedentary sites in the south Levantine Middle
Bronze Age (Falconer, 2001). The interpretation
of such a conflicting suite of indices depends therefore in part on an ability to adapt existing ethnographic examples to ancient case studies, bearing
in mind the uniquely different qualities of the two.
We begin by considering a number of ethnographic
parallels to furnish some clues for reconciling the
sedentary and mobile traits of the material culture
at Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1.
Farming communities in the New World represent both semi-sedentary villages, such as those
belonging to Bolivian transhumanists (Tomka,
1993), as well as sedentary Central American agricultural villages (Arnold, 1985; Deal, 1998; Hayden
and Cannon, 1983). In addition, some communities
found commonly throughout Mexico, activate
farmsteads seasonally for agricultural purposes,
and subsequently abandon these residences until a
later reuse (Graham, 1993; Joyce and Johannessen,
1993). While occupational dynamics may be a little
different in the Old World, both the perennial occupation and seasonal abandonment of farming communities are certainly common, and occur
throughout Africa (Stone, 1996) and the Near East
from Anatolia (Yakar, 2000) to Iran (Horne, 1994;
135
Kramer, 1982). Here, the enormous diversity of
occupation types that diverge from strictly hypersedentary communities is combined by similar levels
of economic variation. In Anatolia, Yakar (2000)
has documented mobile farming groups that occupy
seasonally activated farmsteads (mezraas), tranhumant agro-pastoralists with winter villages (kislaks)
and summer grazing camps (yaylas). In northeastern Iran, the seasonal abandonment of villages
tends to occur within a narrow altitudinal band
and be focused on specialized activities connected
to grazing and milking (Horne, 1994; Kramer,
1982; Watson, 1979). The abandonment of such villages on a seasonal basis demonstrates the specialized use of agricultural sites during planting and
harvesting seasons, and includes evidence for the
caching of artefacts, which are reused on subsequent
visits.
These ethnographic examples certainly testify to a
world-wide phenomenon, which includes the adoption of any number of occupation strategies as parts
of economic strategies based on farming and grazing. Occupational strategies may range from a type
of hyper-sedentism, to a from of multi-season sedentism, comprising seasonal occupations for short
periods of time. In some cases, seasonal occupations
can be specifically linked to the practice of transhumance, when agricultural groups relocate their residences seasonally between low and high ground
during cold and warm periods (Levy, 1992; Prag,
1991a; Prag, 1985; Walker, 1983). In other cases,
farming villages may be abandoned after the summer harvests so that the rest of the year is taken up
with mobile free-grazing (Yakar, 2000).
The seasonal occupation and abandonment of
modern farming villages may therefore be taken as
a common phenomenon, perhaps analogous to the
use of Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 in the Middle Bronze
Age. The material culture signatures of seasonally
abandoned communities generally conform to a
number of standard features. These include the
presence of relatively permanent housing (Cameron,
1991); the abandonment of site furniture, such as
immovable built features, and heavy gear such as
large vessels and mortars on house floors (Deal,
1998; Graham, 1993; Tomka, 1993); the existence
of secondary refuse dumps (Deal, 1998; Horne,
1994, 1993; Kent, 1991; Murray, 1980; Schiffer,
1976); poor artifact diversity and the relative
absence of smaller, portable or expensive items
(Graham, 1993), resulting from the depletion of
abandoned assemblages (Baker, 1975).
136
I. Berelov / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
While the existence of a semi-sedentary, seasonally occupied agro-pastoral community at Zahrat
adh-DhraÔ 1 was supported by the presence of agriculture, livestock management, rectilinear stone
architecture, the abandonment of site furniture on
house floors and a poor artifact repertoire, secondary refuse deposits such as middens or dumps,
which occur regularly at sedentary and semi-sedentary villages, were lacking. The deposition of trash
exclusively on interior floors is very rare in the ethnographic literature for sedentary and semi-sedentary farming villages (see Murray, 1980). Instead
this is a common feature of mobile or semi-sedentary hunter-gatherer communities (Binford, 1983;
Hardy-Smith and Edwards, 2004; Kent, 1991; Murray, 1980).
The association of sedentary or semi-sedentary
communities with the build-up of trash on house
floors generally reflects a planned, gradual abandonment (Stevenson, 1982). This relaxation of site
maintenance behavior in response to the anticipation of abandonment is often coupled with the presence of de facto materials when sites are used
seasonally (for example Graham, 1993; Joyce and
Johannessen, 1993; Tomka, 1993). In the case of
Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1, however, the build-up of trash
does not reflect a relaxation of site maintenance
behavior because regular cleaning was never a feature of the site (see above). The relatively messy
state of the interiors cannot therefore be linked to
the type of pre-abandonment behavior characterizing most sites. Instead, this poor site maintenance
behavior must be understood in terms of a broader
view of sedentism that incorporates the anticipation
of regular mobility.
Since the removal of garbage from house interiors and its relocation to secondary areas is a standard practice in sedentary and even semi-sedentary
communities (Deal, 1998, 1985; Graham, 1993;
Hayden and Cannon, 1983; Horne, 1994, 1993),
but less common among highly mobile groups
(Murray, 1980), the build-up of trash at Zahrat
adh-DhraÔ 1 must reflect some element of mobility
obscured by the attributes representing sedentism.
The association of anticipated mobility (in contrast
to actual mobility) with site structure and material
culture frequencies, is a further consideration (Kent,
1993, 1991) providing an important conceptual
framework for discussions of discard behaviour differences between mobile farming communities. The
relaxation of camp maintenance reported by Stevenson (1991, 1982) and Kent (1993, 1991) prior to
abandonment, is linked by Kent (1993) to the concept of anticipated mobility. Differences between
anticipated mobility and the actual length of occupation at a site are said to greatly influence the spatial distribution of material culture frequencies.
Accordingly, communities with different levels of
anticipated mobility may reflect different quantities
and spatial distributions of material culture irrespective of their economic strategies. In this respect
it is possible to link the high primary refuse frequencies in the Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 structures with the
anticipation of imminent mobility, possibly reflecting frequent but short periods of occupation.
Anticipated mobility can be used to reconcile the
conflicting evidence for occupation at Zahrat adhDhraÔ 1 by suggesting that farming activities were
undertaken over multiple seasons that were short
in duration. These short occupations, otherwise factored as occupations with a high level of anticipated
mobility, were characterized by a low regard for site
maintenance. Hence, instead of viewing Zahrat adhDhraÔ 1 as a semi-sedentary village where occupations were seasonal but long, we may now view
the occupations as frequent but short, which also
explains the low artifact diversity and poor levels
of integration within the greater MB II world. Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 may in fact represent a classic
instance of what Kent (1992) has described as a discrepancy between actual mobility and anticipated
mobility. For although the high levels of energy
expended on the construction of housing and maintenance of crops at the site indicates a long-term
occupation, this does not preclude the possibility
that the inhabitants planned to use Zahrat adhDhraÔ 1 for many years but for only short periods
at a time. Accordingly, the site should be seen to
be analogous to the seasonally activated farmsteads
ethnographically observed by Yakar (2000) in Anatolia. It is interesting to note that such sites are
locally called Mezraas, an Arabic word for farm
(Wortabet, 1995; This term also conforms to both
the current and historical name for the village lying
to the south of Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1, Ghor al-MazraÕa [valley of the farmer]).
The interpretation of Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 as a
seasonally activated farmstead therefore holds significant consequences for its cultural and social
roles in greater MB II society in the southern
Levant. Specifically, the seasonal, short-term nature
of the site leads to a possible attenuation of its level
of isolation from other MB II communities. The
reliability of the perennial water source at Zahrat
I. Berelov / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
adh-DhraÔ 1 meant that reasonable harvests may
have been expected during most years. As a result,
the use of the site by either a mobile, transhumant
or perhaps even sedentary population on a seasonal
basis may suggest that the inhabitants were not necessarily cut off from the rest of the MB II world, and
that their level of integration was not expressed
here. The possibility of the existence of other MB
II communities in south Jordan, perhaps on the
Kerak Plateau, showing evidence for trade contacts
and socially connected to Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 must
not be dismissed and requires further consideration
and research.
Conclusions
In seeking to explore the difficulties associated
with archaeological interpretations of sedentism
and mobility, this paper has demonstrated the fundamentally messy nature of the conceptual terrain, and
by default any archaeological record equivocal for its
reflection of permanence. Because sedentism may
occur on many levels of intensity, which can include
seasonal occupations of different durations, the
material culture repertoire of sites may often conflate
attributes normally associated with sedentary
groups, with those normally associated with migratory groups. But if this were the only problem facing
archaeologists, we might have been left with the task
of simply delineating the various ethnographically
derived types of occupation, and defining them
archaeologically. Unfortunately, however, the difficulties born out of interpreting levels of permanence
do not just concern how we think about mobility or
sedentism, in the present, but also how we employ
constantly varied suites of individual correlates and
indices, to understand the mosaics that our ancient
material records present.
At the Middle Bronze Age site of Zahrat adhDhraÔ 1, Jordan, indices of permanence were characterized by the following set of conflicting variables: permanent stone architecture, a subsistence
economy based on farming, poor artifact diversity
and low levels of site maintenance behavior. Additionally, several indices such as storage, settlement
plan and size, house construction and evidence for
trade, provided ambiguous signals, which neither
correlated with sedentism nor mobility, and were
consequently removed from any final synthesis.
And while these latter attributes presented obstacles
for interpreting levels of permanence on the grounds
of ambiguity, other attributes, particularly those
137
tied to behavior, touched on problems connected
to alternative explanations of the evidence. For
while behavioral indices may often convey information on occupation type, they may also just as likely
reflect environmental constraints, social structure
and in rare cases, even poverty.
In the case of Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1, these conflicting features were reconciled by considering the
anticipated mobility of the community. Cognitive
considerations, principally including the perceived
length of time that people planned to spend at the
site, must have played an important role in structuring the material culture repertoire at the site. The
role of anticipated mobility was therefore crucial
to the proper understanding of the siteÕs cultural
and social significance. But the interpretative value
of Ôanticipated mobilityÕ is controversial and relies
on a data set that provides a reasonable fit with
the paradigm. In the absence of a data set such as
the one at Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1, our expectations of
making concrete interpretations on the basis of
anticipated mobility may need to be tempered.
As in the modern world, ancient site occupation
strategies, subsistence economies and behavioral
tendencies were highly varied and occurred in different combinations. Sites like Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 represent a specific, but probably common social
phenomenon characterized by the scheduled occupation of villages for specialized agricultural tasks.
Such sites may have been occupied over many years
for short seasons, emphasizing another important
distinction brought out by these investigations; this
time between the concepts of duration and permanence. While sites may be occupied permanently
because they were used and reused for many years
by the same social groups, the duration of each
occupation may have been short. When inferring
the diversity of occupation strategies in antiquity,
archaeologists must be attuned to the insight that
duration does not simply equal permanence. But
in doing so, they are also forced to accept the possibility that not all analyses will yield concrete
outcomes.
Fortunately, to admit to these uncertainties is
not necessarily an end to such endeavors. For even
an alternate interpretation of the site used in this
paper would still be forced to accept the occupational uniqueness of the community. The Middle
Bronze Age of the southern Levant is not well
know for its rural communities, and still less so
for its semi-sedentary, transhumant and non sedentary ones. Frontier farming communities like
138
I. Berelov / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1 represent examples of hitherto
unrecorded social regimes which are materially
expressed in ambiguous ways. The fact that one
may be forced to weigh up and then settle on
one of several possible interpretations only
improves our ability to detect the nuances inherent
in occupational dynamics, resulting in a clearer
perspective of the variability and richness of
ancient societies.
Ancient societies are generally well known for
their economies, subsistence strategies, and material typologies. However, such knowledge may
be insufficient for accurately reflecting the occupational dynamics of these societies; a situation
reinforced strikingly by the questionable of association of sedentism with farming at Zahrat adhDhraÔ 1. Daily behavior, expressed by refuse
management, residential mobility, the use of
space, and measures of diversity provide vital
counterpoints to the more readily employed indices of site types, and should be used more widely
for investigations into occupation type. In concert
with formation studies, encompassing the crucial
realm of abandonment behavior, careful ethnographic correlates, as well as cognitive approaches
such as anticipated mobility where relevant, investigations into new cultural spheres such as Middle
Bronze Age south Jordan, must strive to understand the full significance of settlement functions,
even at the risk of producing more questions than
answers. Archaeologists working in the southern
Levant have until now relied heavily on tried
and tested indices of occupation strategies and
site types. Hopefully the approach advocated here
will encourage similar studies, yielding a richer
understanding of the variability of our ancient
societies.
Acknowledgments
I thank the Jordanian Department of Antiquities
for their generosity and cooperation during the
Archaeology and Environment of the Dead Sea Plain
Project; La Trobe and Arizona State Universities
for their academic support; Cathryn Meegan and
Angie Staples for permitting me to consult their
unpublished M.A. Theses; Steven Falconer, Greg
Schachner and two anonymous reviewers, who
immeasurably improved this paper by providing
constructive criticisms and insightful comments on
earlier drafts; and finally my family for their constant encouragement and support.
References
Albright, W.F., 1924. The archaeological results of an expedition
to Moab and the dead sea. Bulletin of the American Schools
of Oriental Research 14, 2–12.
Ames, K., 1991. Sedenstism: a temporal shift or a transitional
change in Hunter-Gatherer mobility patterns. In: Gregg, S.A.
(Ed.), Between Bands and States. Centre for Archaeological
Investigations, Carbondale. Southern Illinois University of
Carbondale, Occasional Paper No. 9, pp. 108–134.
Amiran, R., 1969. Ancient Pottery of the Holy Land: From its
Beginnings in the Neolithic Period to the Iron Age. Massada,
Ramat Gan, Israel.
Amr, K.H., Hamdan, K., Helms, S., Mohamadieh, L., 1996.
Archaeological survey of the East Coast of the Dead Sea
Phase 1: Suwayma, az-Zara, and Umm Sidra. Annual of the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan 40, 429–449.
Angelfire, 2005. <http://www.angelfire.com/mb/batzdir/MAXTNOVJULY.html.> Accessed 04/15/2005.
Arnold, D.E., 1985. Ceramic Theory and Cultural Process.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Arnon, I., 1972. Crop Production in Dry Regions. Leonard Hill,
London.
Bahat, D., 1975. Excavations at GivÕat Sharett near Beth
Shemesh. Qadmoniot 8 (2–3), 64–67.
Baker, G., 1975. Site abandonment and the archaeological
record: an empirical case for anticipated return. Arkansas
Academy of Science Proceedings 23, 10–11.
Banning, E.B., Byrd, B.F., 1987. Houses and the changing
residential unit: domestic architecture at PPNB ÔAin Ghazal,
Jordan. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 53, 309–325.
Banning, E.B., Kohler-Rollefson, I., 1992. Ethnographic lessons
for the pastoral past: camp locations and material remains
near Beidha, Southern Jordan. In: Bar-Yosef, O., Khazanov,
A. (Eds.), Pastoralism in the Levant: Archaeological Materials in Anthropological Perspectives. Prehistory Press, Madison, Wisconsin, pp. 181–204.
Bar-Yosef, O., Belfer-Cohen, A., 1991. From sedentary huntergatherers to territorial farmers in the levant. In: Gregg, S.A.
(Ed.), Between Bands and States. Centre for Archaeological
Investigations, Carbondale. Southern Illinois University of
Carbondale, Occasional Paper No. 9, pp. 181–202.
Bar-Yosef, O., Khazanov, A., 1992. Introduction. In: Bar-Yosef,
O., Khazanov, A. (Eds.), Pastoralism in the Levant; Archaeological Materials in Anthropological Perspectives. Prehistory
Press, Madison, Wisconsin, pp. 1–11.
Beit-Arieh, I., 1992. Buildings and settlements patterns at
early Bronze Age II sites in Southern Israel and Southern
Sinai. In: Kempinski, A., Reich, R. (Eds.), The Architecture of Ancient Israel. Israel Exploration Society, Jerusalem, pp. 81–84.
Beit-Arieh, I., 1981. An Early Bronze II Site near Sheikh ÔAwad
in Southern Sinai. Tel Aviv 8, 95-127.
Ben-Dov, M., 1992. Middle and Late Bronze Age Dwellings. In:
Kempinski, A., Reich, R. (Eds.), The Architecture of Ancient
Israel. Israel Exploration Society, Jerusalem, pp. 99–104.
Bentley, G.R., 1991. A Bioarchaeological reconstruction of the
social and kinship systems at early Bronze Age Bab edhDhraÔ, Jordan. In: Gregg, S.A. (Ed.), Between Bands and
States. Centre for Archaeological Investigations, Carbondale.
Southern Illinois University of Carbondale, Occasional Paper
no. 9, pp. 5–34.
I. Berelov / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
Berelov, I., n. d. a. A Behavioural Analysis of the Ceramic
Assemblage from the Middle Bronze Age site of Zahrat
adh-DhraÔ 1 in Jordan. BAR International, Oxford (in
preparation).
Berelov, I., n. d. b. ‘‘Where the garbage stays’’: understanding the
role of refuse disposal in abandonment behavior from ceramic
discard; a view from the south Levantine Middle Bronze Age.
Manuscript in possession of the author.
Berelov, I., n. d. c. The Antelope Jar from Zahrat adh-Dhra Ô 1 in
Jordan: cultural and chronological implications of a rare
zoomorphic incised decoration from the MB II period.
Palestine Exploration Quarterly (in preparation).
Berelov, I., 2001. Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1: stranded on the Dead Sea
Plain in the Middle Bronze Age. In: Walmsley, A. (Ed.),
Australians Uncovering Jordan; Fifty Years of Middle
Eastern Archaeology. The Research Institute for Humanities
and Social Sciences, The University of Sydney, The Department of Antiquities of Jordan, Sydney, pp. 165–172.
Berelov, I., 2000. Problems of identifying social regimes in the
Dead Sea Basin—when sites become ‘‘visible’’. Bulletin of the
Anglo-Israel Archaeological Society 18, 37–50.
Berelov, I., Falconer, S.E., 2001. ZAD1. In: Negev, A., Gibson,
S. (Eds.), Archaeological Encyclopedia of the Holy Land. The
Continuum Publishing Group, The Jerusalem Publishing
House LTD, New York, Jerusalem, p. 551.
Binford, L., 1983. In Pursuit of the Past. Thames and Hudson,
London.
Binford, L., 1981. Behavioural archaeology and the ‘‘Pompeii
Premise. Journal of Archaeological Research 37, 195–208.
Binford, L., 1978. Dimensional analysis of behaviour and site
structure: learning from an Eskimo hunting stand. American
Antiquity 43, 330–361.
Broshi, M., Gophna, R., 1986. Middle Bronze Age II Palestine:
its settlements and population. Bulletin of the American
Schools of Oriental Research 261, 73–90.
Byrd, B.F., 1994. Public and private, domestic and corporate: the
emergence of the Southwest Asian village. American Antiquity 59 (4), 639–666.
Cameron, C.M., 1991. Structure abandonment in villages. In:
Schiffer, M.B. (Ed.) Advances in Archaeological Method
and Theory 3. University of Arizona Press, Tuscon, pp.
155–194.
Cannon, A., 1983. The quantification of artefactual assemblages:
some implications for behavioral inferences. American Antiquity 48 (4), 785–792.
Cartright, C.R., 2002. Grape and Grain: dietary evidence from an
Early Bronze Age store at tell es-SaÕidiyeh, Jordan. Plaestine
Exploration Quarterly 134 (2), 98–117.
Chang, K.C., 1972. Settlement patterns in archaeology. Current
Topics in Anthropology 5 (24), 1–26.
Chang, C., Koster, H.A., 1986. Beyond bones: towards an
archaeology of pastoralism. In: Schiffer, M.B. (Ed.), Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 9. Academic Press,
Orlando, pp. 97–148.
Charles, M.P., 1990. Traditional crop husbandry in Southern
Iraq 1900–1960 AD. Irrigation and cultivation in Mesopotamia part II. Bulletin on Sumerian Agriculture 5, 47–64.
Cohen, R., 1992. The Nomadic or Semi-Nomadic Middle Bronze
Age I Settlements in the Central Negev. In: Bar-Yosef, O.,
Khazanov, A. (Eds.), Pastoralism in the Levant; Archaeological materials in Anthropological Perspectives. Prehistory
Press, Madison, Wisconsin, pp. 105–132.
139
Cohen, R., 1999. Ancient settlement of the Central Negev, vol. I:
the Chalcolithic period, the Early Bronze Age and the Middle
Bronze I. IAA Reports, No. 6. The Israel Antiquities
Authority, Jerusalem.
Cohen, R., Dever, W.G., 1981. Preliminary report of the third
and final season of the Central Negev Highlands Project.
Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 243,
57–77.
Cohen, S., 2002. Middle Bronze Age IIA Ceramic Typology and
Settlement in the Southern Levant. In: M. Bietak (Ed.) The
Middle Bronze Age in the Levant; Proceedings of an
International Conference on MB IIA Ceramic Material,
Vienna, 24th–26th of January 2001. Verlag der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien, pp. 113–131.
Cohen, S., 2000. Canaanites, Chronology and Connections: the
Relationship of Middle Bronze Age IIA Canaan to Middle
Kingdom Egypt. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation.
Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
Collins, S., Joyner, L., Politis, K.D., 2002. Pottery from Middle
Bronze Age II Cairn Tombs, Deir ÔAin ÔAbata, Jordan. The
Old PotterÕs Almanack 10 (3), 1–5.
Cribb, R., 1991. Nomads in Archaeology. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge.
Curvers, H.H., Schwartz, G.M., 1997. Umm el-Marra, a Bronze
Age Urban Centre in the Jabbul Plain, Western Syria.
American Journal of Archaeology 101, 201–239.
Daviau, P.M.M., 1993. Houses and their Furnishings in Bronze
Age Palestine; Domestic Activity Areas and Artefact Distribution in the Middle and Late Bronze Ages. JSOT/ASOR
Monograph Series No. 8. Sheffield Academic Press, Sheffield.
Deal, M., 1998. Pottery Ethnoarchaeology in the Maya Highlands: Foundations of Archaeological Inquiry. University of
Utah Press, Salt Lake City.
Deal, M., 1985. Household pottery disposal in the maya
highlands: an ethnoarchaeological interpretation. Journal of
Anthropological Archaeology 4, 243–291.
Dean, R.M., 2005. Site-use intensity, cultural modification of the
environment, and the development of agricultural communities in Southern Arizona. American Antiquity 70 (3).
Dever, G.W., 1996. The tell: microcosm of the cultural process.
In: Seger, J.D. (Ed.), Retrieving the Past: Essays on Archaeological Research and Methodology in Honour of Gus W.
Van Beek. Eisenbrauns Winona Lake, Indiana, pp. 37–45.
Dever, G.W., 1992. Pastoralism at the end of the early Bronze
Age in Palestine. In: Bar-Yosef, O., Khazanov, A. (Eds.),
Pastoralism in the Levant; Archaeological Materials in
Anthropological Perspectives. Prehistory Press, Madison,
Wisconsin, pp. 83–92.
Dever, G.W., 1987. The Middle Bronze Age: The Zenith of the
Urban Canaanite Era. Biblical Archaeologist 50, 73–90.
Dever, G.W., 1985. Village Planning at BeÔer Resisim, and Socioeconomic Structure in Early Bronze IV Palestine. Eretz Israel
18, 18–28.
Dever, G.W., 1980. New Vistas on the EB IV (MBI) Horizon in
Syria-Palestine. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental
Research 232, 35–64.
Dhavalikar, M.K., 1989. Farming to pastoralism: effects of
climatic change in the deccan. In: Clutton-Brock, J. (Ed.), The
Walking Larder: Patterns of Domestication, Pastoralism, and
Predation. Unwin Hyman, London, pp. 156–168.
Donahue, J., 1985. Hydrologic and topographic change during
and after Early Bronze Occupation at Bab edh-DhraÕ and
140
I. Berelov / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
Numeira. Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan
2, 131–140.
Dornemann, R.H., 1981. The Late Bronze Age Pottery Tradition
at Tell Hadidi, Syria. Bulletin of the American Schools of
Oriental Research 241, 29–47.
Dothan, M., 1959. Excavations of Horvat Beter (Beersheba).
Atiqot 2, 1–42.
Edelstein, G., Milevski, I., Aurant, S., 1998. The Rephaim Valley
Project: Villages, Terraces, and Stone Mounds. Excavations
at Manahat, Jerusalem, 1987–1989. IAA Reports, No. 3.
Israel Antiquities Authority, Jerusalem.
Edwards, P.C., 1989. Problems of recognising earliest Sedentism:
the Natufian example. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology
2 (1), 5–48.
Edwards, P.C., Falconer, S.E., Fall, P., Berelov, I., Czarzasty, J.,
Day, C., Meadows, J., Meegan, C., Sayej, G., Swoveland,
T.K., Westaway, M., 2002. Archaeology and Environment of
the Dead Sea Plain Project: preliminary results of the second
season of investigations by the joint La Trobe/Arizona State
Universities project. Annual of the Department of Antiquities
of Jordan 46, pp. 51–92.
Edwards, P.C., Falconer, S.E., Fall, P., Berelov, I., Meadows, J.,
Meegan, C., Metzger, M., Sayej, G., 2001. Archaeology
and Environment of the Dead Sea Plain: preliminary
results of the first season of investigations by the joint
La Trobe University/Arizona State University project.
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 45, pp.
135–157.
Edwards, P.C., Macumber, P.G., Green, M.K., 1998. Investigations into the Early Prehistory of the East Jordan Valley:
Results of the 1993/4 La Trobe University Survey and
Excavation Season. Annual of the Department of Antiquities
of Jordan 42, pp. 15–39.
Eisenberg, E., 1993. Rephaim, Nahal. In: Stern, E. (Ed.), New
Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy
Land. Israel Exploration Society, Jerusalem, pp. 1277–1280.
Esse, D.L., 1991. Subsistence, trade, and social change in Early
Bronze Age Palestine. studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization
No. 50. The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago,
Chicago.
Falconer, S.E., 2001. The Middle Bronze Age. In: Macdonald, B.,
Adams, R., Bienkowski, P. (Eds.), The Archaeology of
Jordan. Sheffield Academic Press, Sheffield, pp. 271–290.
Falconer, S.E., 1995. Rural responses to early urbanism: Bronze
Age Household and Village Economy at Tell el-Hayyat,
Jordan. Journal of Field Archaeology 22, 399–419.
Falconer, S.E., 1994. Village Economy and Society in the Jordan
Valley: A Study of Bronze Age Rural Complexity. In:
Schwartz, G.M., Falconer, S.E. (Eds.), Archaeological Views
from the Countryside: village communities in early complex
societies. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, pp.
121–142.
Falconer, S.E., 1987. Heartland of Villages: Reconsidering Early
Urbanism in the Southern Levant. Unpublished PhD Dissertation, University of Arizona, Tuscon.
Falconer, S.E., Magness-Gardiner, B., 1984. Preliminary report
of the first season of the Tell el-Hayyat Project. Bulletin of the
American Schools of Oriental Research 255, 49–74.
Falconer, S.E., Savage, S.H., 1995. Heartlands and Hinterlands: alternative trajectories of early urbanization in
Mesopotamia and the Southern Levant. American Antiquity 60, 37–58.
Fall, P.L., Falconer, S.E., Lines, L., 2002. Agricultural intensification and the secondary products revolution in the Southern Levant. Human Ecology 30 (4), 445–482.
Fall, P.L., Lines, L., Falconer, S.E., 1998. Seeds of civilization:
Bronze Age Rural Economy and Ecology in the Southern
Levant. Annals of the Association of American Geographers
88 (1), 107–125.
Finkelstein, I., 1998. The Great Transformation: the ‘‘conquest’’
of the highlands frontiers and the rise of the territorial
states. In: Levy, T.E. (Ed.), The Archaeology of Society
in the Holy Land. Leicester University Press, London, pp.
349–365.
Finkelstein, I., 1992. Pastoralism in the highlands of canaan in
the third and second Millennia B.C.E.. In: Bar-Yosef, O.,
Khazanov, A. (Eds.), Pastoralism in the Levant; Archaeological Materials in Anthropological Perspectives. Prehistory
Press, Madison, Wisconsin, pp. 133–142.
Finkelstein, I., 1991. Early Arad: urbanism of the Nomads.
Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palastina-Vareins 106, 34–50.
Finkelstein, I., 1989. Further observations on the socio-demographic structure of the Intermediate Bronze Age. Levant 21,
129–140.
Finkelstein, I., Perevolotsky, A., 1990. Processes of sedentarization and nomadization in the history of the Sinai and Negev.
Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 279,
67–88.
Finnegan, M., 1978. Faunal Remains from Bab edh-DhraÔ. In:
Rast, W.E., Schaub, R.T. (Eds.), A Preliminary Report of
Excavations at Bab edh-DhraÕ, 1975. In: Freedman, D.N.
(Ed.), Preliminary Excavation Reports: Bab edh-Dhra, Sardis, Meiron, Tell el-Hesi, Carthage (Punic). Annual of the
American Schools of Oriental Research 43, 51–54.
Flanagan, J.W., McCreery, D.W., 1990. First Preliminary Report
of the 1989 Tell Nimrin Project. Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 34, 131–152.
Flannery, K.V., 1983. Early Pig Domestication in the Fertile
Crescent. A Retrospective Look. In: Young, T.C., Smith,
P.L.E., Mortensen, P. (Eds.), The Hilly Flanks, Essays on the
Prehistory of Southwestern Asia. The Oriental Institute,
Chicago, pp. 163–188.
Flannery, K.V., 1972. The Origins of the Village as a Settlement
Type in Mesoamerican and the Near East: A Comparative
Study. In: Ucko, P.J., Tringham, R., Dimbleby, G.W. (Eds.),
Man, Settlement and Urbanism. Duckworth, London, pp.
23–53.
Fletcher, R., 1986. Settlement archaeology: world-wide comparisons. World Archaeology 18, 59–83.
Fritz, V., Kempinski, A., 1983. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen auf
der Hirbet el-Msas (Tel Masos) 1972–1975. Abhandlungen
des Deutschen Palastinavereins 1–3, Wiesbaden.
Frumkin, A., Carmi, I., Magaritz, M., 1994. Middle holocene
environmental change determined from the Salt Caves of
Mount Sedom Israel. In: Bar-Yosef, O., Kra, R.S. (Eds.),
Late Quaternary Chronology and Paleoclimates of the
Eastern Mediterranean. American School of Prehistoric
Research, Tucson, Arizona, pp. 315–332.
Glueck, N., 1951. Explorations in Eastern Palestine, IV. Annual
of the American Schools of Oriental Research 25–28. American Schools of Oriental Research, New Haven.
Glueck, N., 1939. Explorations in Eastern Palestine III. Annual
of the American Schools of Oriental Research 18–19, 1–3.
American Schools of Oriental Research, New Haven.
I. Berelov / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
Glueck, N., 1935. Explorations in Eastern Palestine, II. Annual
of the American Schools of Oriental Research 15. American
Schools of Oriental Research, New Haven.
Glueck, N., 1934. Explorations in Eastern Palestine, I. Annual of
the American Schools of Oriental Research 14. American
Schools of Oriental Research, New Haven.
Gophna, R., Portugali, J., 1988. Settlement and demographic
processes in IsraelÕs Coastal Plain from the Chalcolithic to the
Middle Bronze Age. Bulletin of the American Schools of
Oriental Research 269, 11–28.
Graham, M., 1993. Settlement Organization and Residential
Variability among the Raramuri. In: Cameron, C.M.,
Tomka, S.A. (Eds.), Abandonment of Settlements and
Regions:
Ethnoarchaeological
and
Archaeological
Approaches. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp.
25–42.
Grigson, C., 1987. Different Herding Strategies for Sheep and
Goats in the Chalcolihtic of Beersheva. Archaeozoologia 1,
115–126.
Hardy-Smith, T., Edwards, P.C., 2004. The garbage crisis in
prehistory: artefact discard patterns at the early Natufian site
of Wadi Hammeh 27 and the origins of household refuse
disposal strategies. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology
23, 253–289.
Hayden, B., Cannon, A., 1983. Where the garbage goes: refuse
disposal in the Maya highlands. Journal of Anthropological
Archaeology 2, 117–163.
Hole, F., 1978. Pastoralism in Western Iran. In: Gould, R.A.
(Ed.), Explorations in Ethnoarchaeology. University of New
Mexico Press, Albuquerque, pp. 127–167.
Horne, L., 1994. Village Spaces: Settlement and Society in
Northeastern
Iran.
Smithsonian
Institution
Press,
Washington.
Horne, L., 1993. Occupational and Locational Instability in Arid
Land Settlement. In: Cameron, C.M., Tomka, S.A. (Eds.),
Abandonment of Settlements and Regions: Ethnoarchaeological and Archaeological Approaches. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 43–53.
Horwitz, L.K., 1989. Sedentism in the Early Bronze IV: a Faunal
Perspective. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental
Research 275, 15–25.
House, E., 2003. The Geology and Geomorphology of Zahrat
adh-DhraÔ, Dead Sea Plain, Jordan. Unpublished Honours
Thesis. La Trobe University, Melbourne.
Ibrahim, M., Sauer, J.A., Yassine, K., 1976. The East Jordan
Valley Survey, 1975. Bulletin of the American Schools of
Oriental Research 222, 41–66.
Ilan, D., 1998. The Dawn of Internationalism: The Middle Bronze
Age. In: Levy, T.E. (Ed.), The Archaeology of Society in the
Holy Land. Leicester University Press, London, pp. 297–320.
Joyce, A.A., Johannessen, S., 1993. Abandonment and the
production of archaeological variability at domestic sites.
In: Cameron, C.M., Tomka, S.A. (Eds.), Abandonment of
Settlements and Regions: Ethnoarchaeological and Archaeological Approaches. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
pp. 165–177.
Kaliff, A., Holmgren, R., 1995. Archaeological Survey from
MazraÕa to Al Zara al-Djenubie. Unpublished Report Deposited at the Department of Antiquities Registration Centre,
Amman.
Kelly, R.L., 1983. Hunter-Gatherer mobility strategies. Journal
of Archaeological Research 39, 277–306.
141
Kent, S., 1999. The archaeological visibility of storage: delineating storage from trash areas. American Antiquity 64 (1),
79–94.
Kent, S., 1993. Models of Abandonment and Material Culture
Frequencies. In: Cameron, C.M., Tomka, S.A. (Eds.), Abandonment of Settlements and Regions: Ethnoarchaeological
and Archaeological Approaches. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, pp. 54–73.
Kent, S., 1992. Studying Variability in the Archaeological
Record: an ethnoarchaeological model for distinguishing
mobility patterns. American Antiquity 57 (4), 635–660.
Kent, S., 1991. The relationship between mobility strategies and
site structure. In: Kroll, E.M., Price, T.D. (Eds.), The
Interpretation of Archaeological Spatial Patterning. Plenum
Press, New York, pp. 33–60.
Kent, S., 1984. Analyzing Activity Areas: an Ethnoarchaeological
Study of the use of Space. University of New Mexico Press,
Albuquerque.
Kenyon, K.M., 1979. Archaeology in the Holy Land, Fourth ed.
Ernest Benn, London.
Kenyon, K.M., 1960. Excavations at Jericho, Volume I. British
School of Archaeology in Jerusalem, London.
Khazanov, A., 1984. Nomads and the Outside World. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
Kochavi, M., Beck, P., Yadin, E., 2000. Aphek-Antipatris I;
Excavation of Areas A and B, the 1972–1976 Seasons: 239–
254. Emery and Claire Yass Publications in Archaeology of
the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv.
Kramer, C., 1982. Village Ethnoarchaeology: Rural Iran in
Archaeological Perspective. Academic Press, New York.
Lancaster, W., Lancaster, F., 1991. Limitations on sheep and
goat herding in the Eastern Badia of Jordan: an ethnoarchaeological inquiry. Levant 23, 125–138.
Lees, S., Bates, D., 1974. The origins of specialized nomadic
pastoralism: a systemic model. American Antiquity 39, 187–
193.
Leach, E.R., 1940. Social and Economic Organization of the
Rowanduz Kurds. Percy Lund Humphries, London.
Lemche, N.P., 1985. Early Israel. Anthropological and Historical
Studies on the Israelite Society before the Monarchy. E.J.
Brill, Leiden.
Levy, T.E., 1992. Transhumance, subsistence, and social evolution in the Northern Negev Desert. In: Bar-Yosef, O.,
Khazanov, A. (Eds.), Pastoralism in the Levant; Archaeological Materials in Anthropological Perspectives. Prehistory
Press, Madison, Wisconsin, pp. 65–82.
Lewis, N.N., 1987. Nomads and Settlers in Syria and Jordan,
1800–1980. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Lines, L., 1995. Bronze Age Orchard Cultivation and Urbanization in the Jordan River Valley. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation. Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona.
MacDonald, B., 1992. The Southern Ghors and North East
Arabah Archaeological Survey. Sheffield Archaeological
Monograph 5. J.R. Collis, Sheffield.
Maeir, A., 2003. Does size count? Urban and cultic perspectives
on the rural landscape during the Middle Bronze II. In:
Maeir, A., Dar, S., Safrai, Z. (Eds.), The Rural Landscape of
Ancient Israel. BAR International, Oxford, pp. 61–70.
Maeir, A., 1997. The Material Culture of the Central and
Northern Jordan Valley in the Middle Bronze Age II: Pottery
and settlement pattern. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation,
Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
142
I. Berelov / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
Marchetti, N., Nigro, L., 2000. Quaderni di Gerico, Volume 2.
Excavations at Jericho, 1998: Preliminary Report on the
Second Session of Archaeological Excavations and Surveys at
Tell es-Sultan, Palestine. Universita di Roma ‘‘La Sapienza,
Rome.
Marcus, E.S., 2003. Dating the Early Middle Bronze Age in the
southern Levant: a preliminary comparison of radiocarbon
and archaeo-historical synchronizations. In: Bietak, M. (Ed.),
The Synchronization of Civilizations in the Eastern Mediterranean in the Second Millennium B.C. II. Verlag der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien, pp. 95–110.
Marcus, E.S., 1998. Maritime Trade in the Southern Levant from
Earliest Times through the MB IIA period. Unpublished
Doctoral Dissertation, Oxford University, Oxford.
Marfoe, L., 1979. The integrative transformation: patterns of
sociopolitical organisation in Southern Syria. Bulletin of the
American Schools of Oriental Research 324, 1–42.
Martin, L., 1999. Mammal remains from the Eastern Jordanian
Neolithic, and the Nature of Caprine Herding in the Steppe.
Paleorient 25 (2), 87–104.
Mazar, A., 1990. Archaeology of the Land of the 10,000–10,586
BCE. Doubleday, New York.
McLaren, P.B., 2003. The Military Architecture of Jordan during
the Middle Bronze Age: New Evidence from Pella and
Rukeis. BAR Series S1202, Oxford.
Meadows, J., 2001. Arid-Zone farming in the fourth millennium
BC: the plant remains from Wadi Fidan 4. In: Walmsley, A.
(Ed.), Australians Uncovering Jordan; Fifty Years of Middle
Eastern Archaeology. The Research Institute for Humanities
and Social Sciences, The University of Sydney, The Department of Antiquities of Jordan, Sydney, pp. 153–164.
Meadows, J., 1996. The Final Straw: an Archaeobotanical
Investigation of the Economy of a Fourth Millennium B.C.
site in the Wadi Fidan, Southern Jordan. Unpublished M.Sc.
Thesis. University of Sheffield, Sheffield.
Meegan, C., 2005 . Agrarian Ecology in the Bronze Age of the
Southern Levant; an Archaeobotanical Study of Zahrat adh
DhraÕ 1. Pre-publication manuscript, in possession of author,
Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona.
Miller, J.M., 1991. Archaeological Survey of the Kerak Plateau,
Conducted during 1978–1982 under the Direction of J.
Maxwell Miller and Jack M. Pinkerton. ASOR Archaeological Reports 1. Scholars Press, Atlanta.
Miller, J.M., 1979. Archaeological Survey of Central Moab:
1978. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research
234, 43–52.
Montgomery, B.K., 1993. Ceramic analysis as a tool for
discovering processes of Pueblo abandonment. In: Cameron,
C.M., Tomka, S.A. (Eds.), Abandonment of Settlements and
Regions: Ethnoarchaeological and Archaeological Approaches. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 157–164.
Murray, P., 1980. Discard location: the ethnographic data.
American Antiquity 45 (3), 490–502.
Noy-Meir, I., Seligman, N.G., 1979. Management of semi-arid
ecosystems in Israel. In: Walker, B.H. (Ed.), Management of
Semi-Arid Ecosystems. Elsevier Publishing Company,
Amsterdam, pp. 113–160.
OÕConnell, J.F., 1987. Alyawara site structure and its archaeological implications. American Antiquity 52, 74–108.
Orton, C., 1993. How many pots make five?—An historical
review of pottery quantification. Archaeometry 35 (2),
169–184.
Palumbo, G., 2001. The Early Bronze Age IV. In: Macdonald, B.,
Adams, R., Bienkowski, P. (Eds.), The Archaeology of
Jordan. Sheffield Academic Press, Sheffield, pp. 233–270.
Panja, S., 2003. Mobility strategies and site structure at
Inamgaon. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 22,
105–125.
Perrot, J., 1984. Structure dÕhabitat, mode de la vie et environment des villages souterrains des patures de Beersheva dans le
sud dÕIsrael, au IVe millenaire avant lÕere chretienne. Paleorient 10, 75–92.
Prag, K., 2004. Food storage, sustainability and land use at
Iktanu in the third millennium. Studies in the History and
Archaeology of Jordan 8, 445–448.
Prag, K., 1992. Bronze age settlement patterns in the South
Jordan valley: archaeology, environment, and ethnology.
Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan 4, 155–
160.
Prag, K., 1991a. A Walk in the Wadi Hesban. Palestine
Exploration Quarterly, 48–61.
Prag, K., 1991b. Preliminary report on the excavations at Tell
Iktanu and Tell al-Hammam, Jordan, 1990. Levant 23, 55–66.
Prag, K., 1985. Ancient and Modern Pastoral Migration in the
Levant. Levant 17, 81–88.
Rafferty, J.E., 1985. The archaeological record on sedentariness:
recognition, development, and implications. In: Schiffer, M.B.
(Ed.), Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 8.
Academic Press, New York, pp. 113–156.
Ramsay, W.M., 1916. The Intermixture of Races in Asia Minor.
Some of its Causes and Effects. PBA 7, London.
Rast, W.E., Schaub, R.T., 2003. Bab edh-DhraÔ: Excavations at
the Town Site (1975–1981). Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake,
Indiana.
Rast, W.E., Schaub, R.T., 1978 . A Preliminary Report of
Excavations at Bab edh-DhraÔ, 1975. In: Freedman, D.N.
(Ed.), Preliminary Excavation Reports: Bab edh-Dhra, Sardis, Meiron, Tell el-Hesi, Carthage (Punic). Annual of the
American Schools of Oriental Research 43, pp. 1–32.
Rast, W.E., Schaub, R.T., 1974. Survey of the Southeastern Plain
of the Dead Sea, 1973. Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 19, 5–54.
Reid, J.J., 1989. A Grasshopper Perspective on the Mogollon of
the Arizona Mountains. In: Cordell, L.S., Gumerman, G.J.
(Eds.), Dynamics of Southwest Prehistory. Smithsonian
Institute Press, Washington DC, pp. 65–97.
Renfrew, J.M., 1973. Paleoethnobotany: the Prehistoric food
plants of the Near East and Europe. Columbia University
Press, New York.
Rice, G.E., 1975. A Systemic Explanation of Change in Mogollon Settlement Patterns. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of
Anthropology, University of Washington. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Richard, S., 1987. The Early Bronze Age: The Rise and Collapse
of Urbanism. Biblical Archaeologist 50, 22–43.
Rocek, T.R., 1996. Sedentism and Mobility in the Southwest. In:
Fish, P.R., Reid, J.J. (Eds.), Interpreting Southwestern
Diversity: Underlying Principles and Overarching Patterns.
Anthropological Research Papers 48, Arizona State University, Tempe, pp. 199–216.
Rocek, T.R., Bar-Yosef, O., 1998. Seasonality and Sedentism:
archaeological perspectives from old and new sites. Peabody
Museum Bulletin 6. Peabody Museum of Archaeology and
Ethnology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
I. Berelov / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25 (2006) 117–143
Rosen, S.A., 2003. Early multi-resource Nomadism: excavations
at the camel site in the Central Negev. Antiquity 77 (298),
749–760.
Rosen, S.A., 1992. Nomads in archaeology: a response to
Finkelstein and PerevolotskyÕ. Bulletin of the American
Schools of Oriental Research 287, 75–86.
Rowton, M., 1977. Dimorphic structure and the Parasocial
element. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 37, 181–198.
Rowton, M., 1974. Enclosed Nomadism. Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 17, 1–30.
Rowton, M., 1973a. Autonomy and Nomadism in Western Asia.
Orientalia, 247–258.
Rowton, M., 1973b. Urban Autonomy in a Nomadic Environment. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 33, 201–215.
Saidel, B.A., 2004. Vessel functions in agricultural and Pastoral
societies of Byzantine and Early Islamic Israel. Journal of
Field Archaeology 29, 437–445.
Saidel, B.A., 2002a. Pot Luck? Variation and Function in the
ceramic assemblages. Mitekufat Haeven 32, 175–196.
Saidel, B.A., 2002b. The excavations at Rekhes Nafha 396 in the
Negev Highlands. Bulletin of the American Schools of
Oriental Research 325, 37–63.
Saidel, B.A., 1993. Round House or Square? Architectural form
and socioeconomic organization in the PPNB. Journal of
Mediterranean Archaeology 6 (1), 65–108.
Schiffer, M.B., 1987. Formation Processes of the Archaeological
Record. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
Schiffer, M.B., 1976. Behavioral Archaeology.
Schroder, M., 1997. The Ceramics From the Wadi Al-ÔAjib,
Jordan. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Sydney, Sydney.
Sebanne, M., Ilan, O., Avner, U., Ilan, D., 1993. The dating of
Early Bronze Age Settlements in the Negev and Sinai. Tel
Aviv 20, 41–54.
Simms, S.R., 1988. The archaeological structure of a Bedouin
Camp. Journal of Archaeological Science 15, 197–211.
Stager, L.E., 2002. The MB IIA Ceramic Sequence at Tel
Ashkelon and its Implications for the ‘‘Port Power’’ Model of
Trade. In: M. Bietak (Ed.) The Middle Bronze Age in the
Levant; Proceedings of an International Conference on MB
IIA Ceramic Material, Vienna, 24th–26th of January 2001.
Verlag der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften,
Wien, pp. 353–362.
Stager, L.E., 1985. The first fruits of civilization. In: Tubb, J.N.
(Ed.), Palestine in the Bronze and Iron Ages: Papers in
Honour of Olga Tufnell. Institute of Archaeology, London,
pp. 172–188.
Staples, A., 2005. Mobility, Sedenstism and Middle Bronze
Society: Lithic Technology and Zahrat adh-DhraÔ 1, Jordan.
Pre-publication manuscript in lieu of Thesis, in possession of
author, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona.
Stevenson, M.G., 1991. Beyond the formation of hearth-associated artifact assemblages. In: Kroll, E.M., Price, T.D. (Eds.),
The Interpretation of Archaeological Spatial Patterning.
Plenum Press, New York, pp. 269–299.
143
Stevenson, M.G., 1982. Toward an understanding of site abandonment behaviour: evidence from historic mining camps in
the Southwest Yukon. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 1, 237–265.
Stone, G.D., 1996. Settlement Ecology: The Social Organization
of Kofyar Agriculture. The University of Arizona Press,
Tucson.
Tchernov E., 1984. Commensal animals and human sedentism in
the Middle East. In: Clutton-Brock J, Grigson G, (Eds.),
Animals and archaeology: 3. Early herders and their flocks.
British Archaeological Reports, International Series 202,
Oxford, pp. 91–115.
Tomka, S.A., 1993. Site abandonment behaviour among transhumant agro-pastoralists: the effects of delayed curation on
assemblage composition. In: Cameron, C.M., Tomka, S.A.
(Eds.), Abandonment of Settlements and Regions: Ethnoarchaeological and Archaeological Approaches. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, pp. 11–24.
Valla, F., 1998. Natufian Seasonality: a guess. Peabody
Museum Bulletin 6. In: Rocek, T.R., Bar-Yosef, O. (Eds.),
Seasonality and Sedentism: Archaeological Perspectives
from Old and New Sites. Peabody Museum of Archaeology
and Ethnology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, pp.
93–108.
Varien, M.D., 1999. Sedentism and Mobility in a Social
Landscape: the Mesa Verde and Beyond. The University of
Arizona Press, Tuscon.
Walker, M.J., 1983. Laying a Mega-Myth: Dolmens and Drovers
in Prehistoric Spain. World Archaeology 15, 37–50.
Walsh, C.E., 2000. The Fruit of the Vine: Viticulture in Ancient
Israel. Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake, Indiana.
Watanabe, H., 1986. Systematic Classification of Hunter-Gatherer Settlement Plans: a Socioecological Evolutionary Study.
Bulletin of the National Museum of Ethnology 11, 489–541,
Osaka.
Watkins, T., 1990. The origins of house and home? World
Archaeology 21 (3), 336–346.
Watson, P., 1979. Archaeological Ethnography in Western Iran.
University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
Webb, J.M., 1995. Abandonment processes and curate/discard
strategies at Marki-Alonia, Cyprus. The Artefact 18, 64–70.
Whiting, J.W.M., Ayres, B., 1968. Inferences from the Shape of
Dwellings. In: Chang, K.C. (Ed.), Settlement Archaeology.
National Press Books, Palo Alto, pp. 79–116.
Worschech, U.F., 1985. North-West Ard el-Kerak 1983 and
1984. A Preliminary Report. Manfred Gorg, Munchen.
Wortabet, J., 1995. Arabic-English. Hippocrene, New York.
Wright, G.R.H., 1985. Ancient Building in South Syria and
Palestine. E.J. Brill, Leiden.
Yakar, J., 2000. Ethnoarchaeology of Anatolia: Rural SocioEconomy in the Bronze and Iron Ages. Emery and Claire
Yass Publications in Archaeology, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Yellen, J., 1977. Intracamp patterning: a quantitative approach.
In: Yellen, J. (Ed.), Archaeological Approaches to the
Present. Academic Press, New York.