Excavations at Arjourne, Syria 9781841715070, 9781407325347

This study looks at the settlement site of Arjourne, situated on a low rise overlooking the Orontes River just South of

155 9 78MB

English Pages [299] Year 2003

Report DMCA / Copyright

DOWNLOAD FILE

Polecaj historie

Excavations at Arjourne, Syria
 9781841715070, 9781407325347

Table of contents :
Front Cover
Title Page
Copyright
Dedication and Epigraph
The Contributors
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
A NOTE ON DATING AND TERMINOLOGY
A NOTE ON THE STORAGE OF MATERIAL AND RECORDS
CHAPTER I: SYNOPSIS
CHAPTER II: THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
CHAPTER III: THE SITE AND ITS EXCAVATION
CHAPTER IV: THE RESISTIVITY SURVEY
CHAPTER V: THE AMS RADIOCARBON DATES: AN ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
CHAPTER VI: THE PREHISTORIC POTTERY FROM TRENCHES V, VI AND VII
CHAPTER VII: THE LITHIC INDUSTRIES
CHAPTER VIII: THE GROUNDSTONE OBJECTS
CHAPTER IX: OTHER PREHISTORIC ARTEFACTS
CHAPTER X: THE PREHISTORIC BURIAL
CHAPTER XI: ANIMAL HUSBANDRY IN THE LATE NEOLITHIC AND CHALCOLITHIC AT ARJOUNE: THE SECONDARY PRODUCTS REVOLUTION REVISITED
CHAPTER XII: WILD AND CULTIVATED FOOD PLANTS AND THE EVIDENCE FOR CROP PROCESSING ACTIVITIES AT ARJOUNE
CHAPTER XIII: THE PERSIAN-HELLENISTIC OCCUPATION
CHAPTER XIV: CONCLUDING REMARKS
REFERENCES

Citation preview

BAR S1134 2003

Excavations at Arjoune, Syria Edited by

Peter J. Parr PARR (Ed): EXCAVATIONS AT ARJOUNE, SYRIA

with contributions by

L. Barnetson, S. Campbell, L. Copeland, † P. G. Dorrell, J. A. J. Gowlett, C. Grigson, J. Hackman, L. Marfoe, V. T. Mathias, A. R. Millard, L. Moffett, P. J. Parr and C. S. Phillips

BAR International Series 1134 2003 B A R red cover template.indd 1

26/04/2010 11:55:47

Published in 2016 by BAR Publishing, Oxford BAR International Series 1134 Excavations at Arjourne, Syria © The editor and contributors severally and the Publisher 2003 The authors' moral rights under the 1988 UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act are hereby expressly asserted. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be copied, reproduced, stored, sold, distributed, scanned, saved in any form of digital format or transmitted in any form digitally, without the written permission of the Publisher.

ISBN 9781841715070 paperback ISBN 9781407325347 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781841715070 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library BAR Publishing is the trading name of British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd. British Archaeological Reports was first incorporated in 1974 to publish the BAR Series, International and British. In 1992 Hadrian Books Ltd became part of the BAR group. This volume was originally published by Archaeopress in conjunction with British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd / Hadrian Books Ltd, the Series principal publisher, in 2003. This present volume is published by BAR Publishing, 2016.

BAR

PUBLISHING BAR titles are available from:

E MAIL P HONE F AX

BAR Publishing 122 Banbury Rd, Oxford, OX2 7BP, UK [email protected] +44 (0)1865 310431 +44 (0)1865 316916 www.barpublishing.com

To my colleagues at Tell Nebi Mend Ah! well a-day! what evil looks Had I from old and young! Instead of the cross, the Albatross About my neck was hung.

The Rime of the Ancient Mariner Samuel Taylor Coleridge

THE CONTRIBUTORS

Dr. Stuart Campbell, Department of Archaeology, University of Liverpool Lorraine Copeland, Château de Marouatte, Grand Brassac, 24340 Tocane St. Apre, France †Peter G. Dorrell, Institute of Archaeology, University College London Dr. John Gowlett, Department of Archaeology, University of Liverpool Dr. Caroline Grigson, Institute of Archaeology, University College London Virginia T. Mathias, Institute of Archaeology, University College London Professor Alan R. Millard, Department of Archaeology, University of Liverpool Lisa Moffett, Department of Archaeology, University of Birmingham and English Heritage Peter J. Parr, Institute of Archaeology, University College London Carl S. Phillips, CNRS UMR 7041, Maison René-Ginouvès, 21 allé de l’Université, Nanterre

iv

CONTENTS

Introduction and acknowledgements (P. J. Parr)

vii

A note on dating and terminology

viii

A note on the storage of material and records

viii

Chapter I

Synopsis (P. J. Parr)

1

Chapter II

The environmental setting (P. G. Dorrell)

5

Chapter III

The site and its excavation (L. Marfoe, P. J. Parr, and C. S. Phillips)

11

Chapter IV

The resistivity survey (J. T. Hackman)

23

Chapter V

The AMS radiocarbon dates: an analysis and interpretation (J. A. J. Gowlett)

27

The prehistoric pottery (S. Campbell, V. T. Mathias and C. S. Phillips)

31

Chapter VII

The lithic industries (L. Copeland)

71

Chapter VIII

The groundstone objects (P. G. Dorrell)

153

Chapter IX

Other prehistoric artefacts (V. T. Mathias)

167

Chapter X

The prehistoric burial (L. Barnetson)

185

Chapter XI

Animal husbandry in the Late Neolithic and Chalcolithic at Arjoune: the secondary products revolution revisited (C. Grigson)

187

Wild and cultivated food plants and the evidence for crop processing activities (L. Moffett)

241

The Persian-Hellenistic occupation (P. J. Parr, with a note by A. R. Millard)

251

Concluding remarks (P. J. Parr)

277

References

283

Chapter VI

Chapter XII

Chapter XIII

Chapter XIV

v

INTRODUCTION AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The name Arjoune (ÅËUi§ in Arabic) is currently applied to three localities in the vicinity Tell Nebi Mend (the site of ancient Qadesh-on-the-Orontes), 25 km south-west of the city of Homs in central Syria (figs. 1 and 2): first to a small site with Roman remains (possibly a farmstead) half a kilometre north-east of the tell; secondly to a site with both prehistoric and Persian-Hellenistic remains a further half kilometre in the same direction; and thirdly to a modern village some 2 km east-north-east of the tell. It is the second of these places which is the subject of this report. It was discovered in 1975 during the first season of the London Institute of Archaeology’s Tell Nebi Mend project, and was again visited in 1977, when a preliminary archaeological survey of a restricted area around the tell was carried out by Peter Dorrell and Jonathan Tubb. (This survey was continued in 1980, when soundings were also dug at the Roman site. A report on the work will appear elsewhere.) The surface material from the site included examples of Halaf pottery, and since the Halaf and Ubaid phases seemed to be missing from Tell Nebi Mend itself, and since one of the primary aims of the project was to investigate cultural links between this strategic part of the central Orontes Valley and the surrounding regions during all periods (Parr 1983, 103-4), it was decided to excavate the site. Work commenced in 1978 and continued in 1979, 1981 and 1982, under the field direction first of Leon Marfoe (1978-79) and then of Carl Phillips (1981-82). A resistivity survey of part of the site was carried out in 1978, by John Hackman. Other members of the Arjoune excavation team were Adam Chadwick, Carol Meyer, Robert Miller and Taqui Stephens. Members of the Tell Nebi Mend expedition also directly involved with the work at Arjoune were: Willene Hull, Robert Payton, Risë Taylor and Kathryn Tubb (conservators); Eve French, Ellen McAdam, and Julia St.John-Aubin (draughtswomen); John Bruce and Christopher Davey (surveyors); Maryann Bowen and Romana Unger-Hamilton (photographers). To these names must be added those of the specialists who have, both during and since the excavations, given unstintingly of their time and expertise in order to produce the reports which appear under their names in this volume. Grateful acknowledgement is made of the help provided by all of these people in pursuance of the archaeological investigation of Arjoune. The Tell Nebi Mend project is sponsored by the University of London Institute of Archaeology (since 1986 part of University College London), and I am grateful to successive Directors of the Institute, Professors J. D. Evans, D. R. Harris and P. J. Ucko, for their encouragement and help.

The work was made possible by the financial support of the British Academy, the British Institute at Amman for Archaeology and History and the British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem (now combined as the Council for British Research in the Levant), the British Museum, the Institute of Archaeology, the Palestine Exploration Fund, the University of London Central Research Fund, and the Institute of Archaeology Gordon Childe Fund. During the seasons when Arjoune was being excavated funds were also received from Birmingham City Museum and the Universities of Liverpool, Mississippi and Pennsylvania, as well as from several private donors. To all of these, and to those who have helped with the raising of funds, I express my thanks. Our work in Syria would not have been possible without the permission, encouragement, and assistance of the authorities in Damascus and Homs. We therefore owe an enormous debt of gratitude to successive Directors-General of Antiquities and Museums, Dr Afif Bahnassi, Dr Ali Abou Assaf, and Professor Dr Sultan Muhesen, as well as to their colleagues, especially Dr Adnan Bounni, Mr Kassem Toueir, and the late Mr Nassib Salibi. In Homs we were fortunate in finding in Mr Maged Moussli, the regional Director of Antiquities at the time of the Arjoune excavations, both a lively and stimulating colleague and a generous and charming friend, whether on or off the site. To him, and to those members of his staff who participated to a greater or lesser extent in the work, we proffer our thanks, as we do also to the villagers of Arjoune and of Tell Nebi Mend who helped make our sojourn there as enjoyable as it has been productive. A preliminary report on the 1978 season of excavations at Arjoune was published three years later (Marfoe, Copeland and Parr 1981) and a microwear analysis of the prehistoric sickle blades and other stone tools, by Romana Unger-Hamilton in 1988, formed the first of the final specialist reports on material from the site. The greater part of the text of the present volume was also ready for publication then, and the fact that it has been delayed such an inordinately long time until now is due to circumstances outside the control, if within the reponsibility, of the editor, who accordingly offers his apologies. Most of the text has been revised up to 1996, and some sections to 2000. I am greatly indebted to Professor E. J. Peltenburg of the University of Edinburgh and to Dr. Katherine Wright of the Institute of Archaeology for reading the manuscript prior to its submission for publication, as well as to other, anonymous, referees who have read it and made valuable comments and suggested improvements. Peter J. Parr vii

A NOTE ON DATING AND TERMINOLOGY radiocarbon dates from other sites quoted in their reports. The implications of this must be borne in mind when the following chapters are read. However, it is hoped that ambiguity in the text has been avoided, either by stating explicitly whether calibrated or uncalibrated dates are referred to, or by using the convention ‘bc’ or ‘BC’ for, respectively, uncalibrated and calibrated dates. The terminology in use for the cultural phases of this time range is confused. That most commonly adopted in the Levant assigns cultures of the 5th millennium (uncalibrated) to the Late Pottery Neolithic and those of the 4th to the Chalcolithic, but it must be remembered that some authorities designate the whole period represented by the Halaf and Ubaid cultures (to which Arjoune belongs) as Chalcolithic (e.g. Moore 1982; Gilead 1988). The authors of the following specialist reports have followed their own preferences

The increasing use of calibrated radiocarbon dates for Western Asiatic prehistoric assemblages and sites gives rise to obvious problems when comparative studies and syntheses are attempted. The specialist reports in the present volume – mostly originally written fifteen years or more ago – were prepared in the light of the then conventional chronology and on the basis of the uncalibrated radiocarbon determinations for Arjoune published by Gowlett et al. in 1987. The assumption then was that the material from Trenches V and VII belonged to the mid-5th millennium BC in calendar years and that from Trench VI to the mid-4th. The calibrated determinations now available and published in this volume (Chapter V) indicate that these dates are several centuries – perhaps even a millennium – too low, but it has not been possible for all of the individual authors to revise their contributions in this light, even had they so wished, since this would have necessitated the calibration of all relevant

A NOTE ON THE STORAGE OF MATERIAL AND RECORDS the pottery which was not discarded on site after study, all of the chipped stone artefacts, and the archaeobotanical samples, are now stored at the Institute of Archaeology, University College London. The animal bones are stored in the Mammal Section of the Museum of Natural History, London. All of the field records, photographs, drawings, etc. are also kept at the Institute of Archaeology.

All of the registered objects from the Arjoune excavations were deposited at the close of each season at the Homs museum, with the exception of those assigned by the Syrian authorities to the expedition. A collection of the finer pottery, including nearly all of the painted sherds, was also left in Homs. The expedition’s share of the registered objects (which were given registration numbers in the 5000 series),

viii

CHAPTER I SYNOPSIS Peter J. Parr

roamed, and where the fig, prunus, pistacia and vine, for which there is also evidence, would have grown wild. The alluvial soils of the flood plain itself would have supported a denser riverine vegetation of tamarisk and the like, less immediately attractive to the settlers but perhaps valued as a source of wild game and fish (although, strangely, there is no archaeological evidence for either of these). Here would also be found the lush conditions necessary for the successful raising of cattle and pigs which excavation has shown were two of the major activities of the settlers. We are justified in assuming that the settlers at Arjoune were newcomers to the region, but whether from close at hand or further afield is hard to say. The presence of a small proportion of distinctive painted pottery amongst their material equipment indicates they had some contact with, and were perhaps ultimately related to, those groups of people who formed the ‘Halaf culture’ of Mesopotamia and northern Syria. But the bulk of the pottery and stone artefacts from the earliest occupation at Arjoune (from Trenches I, V and VII of the excavation) is most closely comparable with that from other, so-called ‘peripheral Halaf’, sites in the Orontes valley, at Qalcat al-Mudiq and Hama, respectively about 100 and 60 km north of Arjoune, and at Ard Tlaili 70 km south, in the Beqac, where a comparable mixture of well established local Levantine traditions and more northerly Mesopotamian features is found. The initial Arjoune settlers need not have been immigrants from the north therefore; it is just as likely that they came from an already established settlement closer at hand, perhaps even in the Homs region itself, where recent exploration has shown that a few sites more-or-less contemporary with Arjoune do exist. Whether any of them could have provided a former home for the Arjoune settlers cannot at present be said. Judging from the (sparse) archaeobotanical and (much more extensive) archaeozoological remains from the earliest period of occupation of the site, the first settlers practised animal husbandry and, almost certainly, agriculture.They were familiar with einkorn, emmer, possibly a free-threshing wheat, barley, horsebean, grass pea and probably lentils, all of which they presumably grew in the fields surrounding their settlement. Less certainly they supplemented these with the collection of various fruits and nuts: figs, haws, plums or cherries, pistacia, almonds and grapes. Judging from the proportions of bones recovered, sheep and goat represented

Sometime around the middle of the 6th millennium BC, judging from the calibrated radiocarbon dates, a group of people settled on a low rise overlooking the Orontes river just south of the Lake of Homs in Syria, at the northern end of the Lebanese Beqac (figs. 1 and 2). The locality is close to the present-day village of Arjoune. They were not the first settlers in the region: a millennium or so earlier a small community of farmers had lived about a kilometre away at a similar location, on a site now covered by the imposing mound of Tell Nebi Mend, famed in much later times as the city of Qadesh. However, it seems unlikely (judging again from radiocarbon data) that this earlier hamlet still existed when Arjoune was settled, and if the region was inhabited at that time it must have been only by people of whom no trace has yet been found in the archaeological record. At Arjoune the Orontes meanders erratically through its flood plain and it is not certain just where it flowed at the time of the initial settlement, which may have been sited on both sides of the stream and not just on the east, as it is today. What is clear is that it was a place of some strategic value. The flood plain is constricted here, between marshes upstream and what were probably estuarine swamps to the north, where the river joins the lake. It was in all likelihood a favoured crossing place of this stretch of the river, where routes leading from the interior steppes through the coastal mountains to the Mediterranean are joined by those following the Orontes northwards to Anatolia and northern Mesopotamia and southwards to Palestine. In the absence of any evidence for significant climatic changes in the northern Levant since the site was first occupied it may be assumed that Arjoune enjoyed then the relatively favourable natural conditions which prevail today. A comparatively stable annual rainfall of about 450 mm is assured by the westerly winds blowing through the Homs Tripoli Gap, and these same winds temper the effects of both the winter and the summer extremes of temperature. Such a climatic regime would, before human interference, have promoted the growth of open deciduous forest on the clayey red-brown soils of the country away from the flood plain, suitable for the grazing of animals and easily cleared for the cultivation of cereals and other crops. It is here, and on the lower slopes of the Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon Mountains beyond, that gazelle and red deer (for which there is osteological evidence from the excavations) would have 1

I. Synopsis be from several centuries to a millennium in length. The question that thus arises is whether there was a total abandonment of the site followed by a later resettlement, or whether occupation, even if never more that seasonal, was continuous, in a part or parts of the site which have not been excavated or which have been destroyed leaving no trace. No conclusive answer to this question is possible on current evidence. Whether they represented a new, unrelated, group of settlers or were the descendants of the original ones, the inhabitants of Arjoune in the 5th millennium led a life little different from those in the 6th. The pits in Trench VI are no different, if rather better preserved, from the earlier ones in Trenches V and VII, and it thus seems that the settlement at Arjoune changed little in physical appearance over the course of a considerable period of time. Although the pottery and flint industries from this later Trench do show certain differences from those of the earlier ones (including the presence of a few Ubaid-type decorated sherds), the strong survival in Trench VI of styles of burnished and incised pottery rooted in the distant past but already going out of fashion in northern Syria, testifies to the essential conservatism of the late Arjoune community This traditionalism is also evident in the economy, where the agricultural and pastoral activities of the later inhabitants were very much as they had been a millennium before; the rearing of pigs, in particular, remained a speciality. However, time had moved on, and the priorities of animal husbandry throughout the Near East had changed. What has been termed the ‘secondary products revolution’ had taken place, and is illustrated at Arjoune by the decline in the number of goats from about a third to less than a tenth of the total stock, and a concomitant increase in the proportion of sheep and cattle, implying that wool production had assumed a greater role in the activities of the inhabitants. Equids now also figure more prominently on the scene than they had previously, and, although the evidence is tenuous and ambiguous, domesticated donkeys may have been used for transport. The prehistoric occupation of Arjoune came to an end in the 5th millennium BC, for reasons which are not known. Arjoune was to be abandoned for several millennia, though from the 4th millennium onwards the site probably formed part of the farming and grazing lands of Tell Nebi Mend, and there is some evidence that it was used as a burial ground during the 3rd millennium also. In the late 2nd millennium the site must have been close to where the Hittite army camped and then crossed the Orontes prior to the battle of Qadesh. But it was not until the late 4th or early 3rd century BC that permanent occupation was resumed, and then only on a minor scale. Either at about the same time that the Seleucid town of Laodiceia-ad-Libanum was founded on the remains of ancient Qadesh, or possibly somewhat earlier, in the Persian period, when Qadesh might still have been inhabited, a small farmstead was built over part of the prehistoric site. Its remains are fragmentary and eroded and tell us little, but it seems clear that it was not occupied for more than a generation or two at the most. Why it was abandoned is not known, but when it was the site of Arjoune was once again deserted. Centuries later a Muslim cemetery was located on

well over half of the animals herded, apparently being kept mainly for meat but with some milk production. However, cattle and pigs were also important, conditions on the flood plain being particularly well suited to their rearing. These farming activities – especially the raising of pigs – and the evidence that the hunting of wild animals, though practised, played a very minor part in the life of the community, suggest that the inhabitants of Arjoune were sedentary, if only on a seasonal basis, from the beginning, while the considerable number of heavy stone tools, for pounding and similar ‘industrial’ activities, would tend to confirm this. It is, however, rather surprising that, apart from a few stone and clay objects which could be net-sinkers, there is no evidence that fishing was important, and avian resources also seem to have been neglected. Unfortunately the physical nature of the Arjoune settlement, the size of the community that lived there, and its degree of permanence, are matters difficult to ascertain. The excavated areas have revealed nothing more than a number of depressions, the surviving extent of the largest being c.12 x 10 m and the depth of the deepest c.1.5 m. In view of the clear evidence for the subsequent erosion and deflation of the site, however, these figures are probably an unreliable guide to the original appearance of the depressions, or indeed to their original number. They were filled with occupation detritus, and are therefore in one sense ‘rubbish pits’; but in so far as any stratification was observable within the filling it was horizontal and seemingly not indicative of material that had been thrown in haphazardly from the edges of the pits. Rather, it suggested a gradual accumulation of material in situ, such as might be expected on the floors of living areas. Yet there was no unambiguous evidence for such floors, except of the most ephemeral nature, and neither was there certain evidence of building material, though scattered stone rubble could be explained as such. In the absence of clearer indications, the interpretation of the depressions as the lower parts of permanent semi-subterranean habitations, analogous to the typical Halafian tholoi, is perhaps doubtful. Perhaps the most likely interpretation of the pits is that they were the emplacements of insubstantial shelters serving the periodic needs of those visiting the neighbourhood in order to carry out their seasonal farming tasks. In view of these uncertainties the number of inhabitants at Arjoune at any one time must remain in doubt; but we are surely correct in thinking in terms of tens at the most. The radiocarbon dates obtained from reliable short-life samples – bone and carbonised grain – from the pits indicate that each could have been in use for a considerable period of time, at least 200 or 250 years, although in view of the nature of the surviving remains such figures are perhaps unlikely. As regards the settlement as a whole, the dates indicate a life span at least seven hundred years and possibly longer, which again seems surprisingly long. The earliest dates come from the pits in Trenches V and VII, and cluster around the middle of the 6th millennium BC, while the latest dates (excluding one obvious outlier) come from Trench VI and fall within the first half of the 5th millennium BC. There are no dates between these limits, and no archaeological material to fill the gap, which, depending upon which dates are used, could 2

I. Synopsis The evidence on which this Synopsis is based can be found in the following pages, while further consideration of some of its uncertainties is postponed until Chapter XIV.

the highest part of the site, but today even this has been abandoned in favour of one nearer the modern village of the same name, whose inhabitants are rapidly destroying all signs of earlier activity with their tractors, irrigation ditches and wells.

3

CHAPTER II THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING †

Peter G. Dorrell

Basalt flows from a centre at Jebel Helou, about 30 km north and west of the site, continued through the Pliocene, interfingering with the lacustrine sediments and finally covering them in the western part of the Homs Depression. The western edge of the lake and the river north of the lake skirt this basalt dome, extensions of which occur as strata in well-borings at no great depth in the basin. The lacustrine sediments in the area have a clay-like consistency in situ and at depth, with occasional patches of consolidated gravels. On exposure the marl hardens and sets, giving an indurated crust some 0.50 m - 1.00 m thick. In the few exposures where relatively fresh faces can be seen, this surface crust passes without any definite break into the softer marl below. The upper few tens of centimeters of the material are often penetrated by a close pattern of solution holes, cracks and root-channels filled with red-brown soil material. This in-filling becomes incorporated when the rock hardens and is itself often partially indurated. For further comments on locally available raw materials, see Chapter VIII.

SITUATION AND GEOLOGY The archaeological site of Arjoune is located on the eastern side of the Orontes flood-plain, overlooking the river, and occupying a position in many ways comparable to that of Tell Nebi Mend itself, a kilometre away on the western side of the plain (fig. 2 and plate I). Both sites lie just north of the Beqac valley, in the funnel-shaped divergence of the Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon ranges which, to the south, run parallel with one another, about 25 km apart, for some 100 km in a SW-NE alignment (fig. 1). The Lebanon range is interrupted a little north of the sites by the Homs-Tripoli Gap, a low east-west saddle providing one of the few corridors through the coastal mountains. At about the same latitude the Anti-Lebanon falls away in height and changes direction, to follow a more easterly trend as a series of blocks and ridges terminating at Jebel Bishri on the western edge of the Euphrates valley. North of Tell Nebi Mend and Arjoune the Beqac widens and becomes the Homs Depression, a sediment-filled structural basin containing the Lake of Homs and continuing northwards as the Ghab, a graben valley flanked on the west by the Ansariya Range. To the east and north-east the country merges with the North Syrian Plateau. The rocks exposed on the upper slopes of the Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon are mainly Cretaceous limestones and dolomites, and the slope debris and river sediments are largely from this source. (The most comprehensive account of the geology of the area is by Ponikarov 1967.) At some time in the Upper Miocene the drainage of the Orontes was blocked in its middle course, approximately 40 km north of Arjoune, by a basalt flow from the south-west. The whole of the Homs depression was flooded, forming a lake some 60 km north to south; this rapidly became filled with lacustrine marls and conglomerates, and down-warped in consequence. The upper, Pliocene, levels of these sediments now form the surface of the country around Arjoune. When the river cut through the basalt barrier, the main part of the lake drained and the river eroded deeply through the lacustrine deposits leaving high, butte-like, terraces (the so-called ‘Glacis of Hama’), a process aided by the continued down-warping of the Ghab (Van Liere 1960, 29). It seems likely, however, that a subsidiary barrier remained, ponding back a residual lake, the Lake of Homs, which has been enlarged by artificial damming from at least Roman times onward (Calvet and Geyer 1992, 27-39).

SOILS The country surface carries a veneer of clayey, red-brown soil over the encrusted marl horizon. Where it is undisturbed by agriculture it is compact and waxy, with a few etched pebbles of bed-rock in its lower levels, but without other noticeable stratification. It is continuous with, and similar to, the bed-rock in-filling already mentioned. Such rubified soils are notoriously difficult to date, but are usually regarded as relics of hotter and more humid conditions than those of the present day. Certainly the way in which the soil material has penetrated and become fossilized in the bed-rock suggests considerable antiquity. However, the possibility cannot be ruled out that, in part at least, it might have derived by colluviation from the mountain slopes during some cold wet period of pre-Holocene times. Agriculture, and especially recent deep ploughing, have mixed this soil with fragments of hardened bed-rock and marl, giving patches of a more yellowish colour and a lighter and more stony texture. Soil colour change across the countryside are therefore quite deceptive and may reflect no more than the intensity of recent cultivation. On the active flood-plain, parts of which are periodically flooded by seasonal flow, irrigation drainage, and the 5

II. The Environmental Setting

over-topping of sluices, there are fine-grained alluvial soils, patches of peat, and water-meadows with dark organic soils. There are also some small patches of gleyed soils suggesting perennial waterlogging. It is noticeable, indeed remarkable, that the water-meadows at present support a close cover of grasses and herbs in spite of intensive grazing.

BC, probably due to large-scale clearance (Van Zeist and

Bottema 1982, 282-283). The period of aridity postulated for the southern Levant in the 6th millennium BC – the so-called Palestinian Hiatus – does not seem to have been so apparent this far north. It has been suggested (Butzer 1978, 8-10) that there was little climatic alteration of ecological significance north of about 32o of latitude. The natural vegetation to be expected in such an environment would be open deciduous forest, thinning out to forest-steppe eastward. However, the nature of the sediments might have modified this pattern. At present the encrusted surface of the marl obstructs penetration by deep-rooted shrubs or trees but, as mentioned above, rootholes are found in the hard upper layer. Presumably these were made when the material was softer, perhaps before clearance and ploughing encouraged surface run-off and higher soil temperatures.

CLIMATE The area lies within the present-day 400-600 mm annual rainfall zone, with a relative inter-annual variability of 30% (Brichambaut and Wallen 1963). Homs itself, the nearest station, has an average of 460 mm, compared with 365 mm at Aleppo, 345 mm at Hama, and 210 mm at Damascus (Wirth 1971, 92). This relatively high and relatively stable rainfall regime is a consequence of the proximity of the Homs-Tripoli Gap, which allows a greater eastward penetration by Mediterranean depressions, which elsewhere along the coast are blocked off by the mountain ranges. The isohyets which run north and south inland of the mountains bulge eastward at the latitude of the Gap, the difference in the vegetation being very noticeable when travelling from Damascus to Hama on the south-north highway. This effect is the more marked at Tell Nebi Mend and Arjoune since the Beqac to the south and, to a lesser extent, the Ghab to the north, are both within the rain-shadow of the mountains. The climatic regime is of the Dry Mediterranean type; rainfall is confined to the period from November to mid-April, with the maximum in December-January, and rain-days are relatively few, about 50 per annum. The summer drought is almost total, although the summer westerlies give rise to morning mist and dew. As is the case elsewhere in the Levant, temperature ranges are more variable and, as far as cultivation is concerned, less important than rainfall. Mean monthly maxima range from 20o C in January to 38o C in August, but both extremes are tempered by the effect of westerly winds. In summer the daily on-shore breeze from the Levant coast is funnelled through the Gap, and although it is no longer cool by the time it reaches the region of the site, it lowers surface temperatures to some extent; just the disturbance of the air makes midday conditions in July and August more bearable. Hot, dry south-westerlies, the Schlouk winds, may affect the area in spring and autumn but without the intensity found in the desert interiors to the east.

THE RIVER REGIME The Orontes rises on the eastern flank of the Lebanon, some 65 km south of the site; a good general account of its regime is given by Weulersse 1940. Few tributaries join the river upstream of the site, and the springs of the source tap the main aquifers of the mountains, extensive enough to iron out, to a large extent, the seasonal differences of rainfall. Consequently the variation in flow, winter to summer, is small compared with most rivers of the Levant. The figures given in the Admiralty Handbook (1943) are particularly useful since they were measured before the advent of the large-scale extraction of water which occurs at present. Minimum summer flow at El Muh, immediately upstream of Arjoune, was 10.3 cubic metres per second in 1930/31, and maximum winter flow 15.8 cubic metres per second, a ratio of 1:1.53. For comparison, similar measurements taken at Hama, after several tributaries have joined the river, were minimum 11.0 and maximum 95.0, a ration of 1:8.76 (Admiralty Handbook: Syria 1943, 47). The Orontes in this stretch shows an active meander pattern within its flood-plain, cut-offs and abandoned loops of the channel being seen on the ground and in aerial photographs. The flood-plain deposits have been many times re-sorted by migrations of the river, and certainly cultivated extensively since antiquity. Traces of ancient settlement are therefore rare on the plain itself and are now largely confined to the edges of the main stream banks. Heightening of the dam at the outlet of the Lake of Homs has greatly enlarged the size of the lake, isolating a number of large tells as islands and flooding wide areas marked on early maps as esturine swamp. This rise in lake level has ponded back the river, probably as far south as Arjoune, and, together with changes in river level due to mill sluices and water extraction, must have affected the river regime.

PALAEOCLIMATE There is no present consensus of opinion about the dating and extent of climatic change in late prehistory in the region. It seems unlikely, however, that there would have been a climatic shift large enough to have greatly altered the natural vegetation or the agricultural capacity from about 6000 BC onward. The nearest site at which a core has been taken for pollen determination is in the western Ghab (Niklewski and Van Zeist 1970). Analysis of this core and parallel evidence suggest that forest cover reached its greatest extent in the period from about 8000 to 6000 BC, declining slowly thereafter, with a sharp decrease from about 2500 to 1500

TERRACES AND THE FLOOD PLAIN LEVEL There is only one low terrace within the Orontes flood-plain, a discontinuous bench about 1 m above summer river level, cut across existing deposits in some places and built up in 6

II. The Environmental Setting

Figure 1. The Levant, showing the position of Arjoune and some other relevant sites

7

II. The Environmental Setting

Figure 2. The location of Arjoune there are wadis closer to the site with similar exposures of flint that were not discovered, or which have become

others. This seems to be a recent feature connected with the regular holding back of water at water-mills along the river.The edges of the flood-plain on both sides of the Orontes are cut below the general country surface, forming an erosional bench for much of their length. In many places this has been swept bare of sediments, leaving a surface of hardened marl up to 50 m wide. Where the river has recently been running hard against the valley edge small vertical cliffs have been formed. Along one such exposure, on the east bank of the Orontes and immediately south of Arjoune, there are short stretches of conglomerated flint gravel, presumably the relics of old shingle bars. These seem to be the only source of flint in the immediate area. (Some 10 - 15 km to the east, however, a series of deep seasonal wadis drain the western flanks of the Anti-Lebanon, and these wadis are at present cutting down through extensive beds of rounded cobbles, mostly of flint but including other hard stone. It may be that

alluviated and therefore hidden.) Along the east bank of the Orontes there are considerable traces of a higher terrace which at one time overtopped the bank. The terrace is not everywhere present, nor is it always easy to recognise. In many places it has been planed off by lateral erosion, or recent deep ploughing has mixed it with the soil of the country surface. However, in one quarry site, just south of Arjoune and on the edge of the flood-plain, it was found in an exposure about 4.00 m deep, the lowest metre of which runs below the present level of the flood-plain and the top of which runs back over the country surface for about 100 m. The site of Arjoune lies upon this terrace, the pits which constitute the main archaeological feature of the site having been cut through it and, in some places, into the underlying fossil soil and indurated marl. The material of the 8

II. The Environmental Setting

Plate I. View north from Tell Nebi Mend, showing the countryside surrounding Arjoune, which is in the middle distance to the east (right) of the Orontes river. of the Lake of Homs and across the shoulder of the basalt country. Before roads were built this must have been a difficult route in summer; water would have been scarce or non-existent, grazing poor, and the basalt shelf hard to negotiate. So seasonally at least a route south of the lake and the basalt might have been preferred. Arjoune stands at a point where the flood-plain is constricted, south of what were probably esturine swamps where the river joined the lake, and north of the marshes upstream. Presumably the surface of the country around Arjoune was forest-steppe when the first settlement was established there in the mid-fifth millennium bc, and easily cleared for cultivation. The vegetation of the flood-plain is more problematic, but unless the river was in a strongly erosive phase and the water-table well below the flood-plain surface, there would probably have been dense riverine vegetation and gallery forest. This might not have been at all attractive for settlement while open land was available on the country surface, but it would certainly have been valued for game, fish, and wild tree-crops. It would be hazardous to guess whether, at this stage, the flood-plain and the river would have been crossable in the wet season. No settlement of this period has yet been found on the west bank of the Orontes.

terrace is a yellow-brown (7.5 YR 6/6), finely stratified clay/silt, virtually stoneless, and pierced by vertical cracks and filled root-holes. The fine recurrent bedding-planes strongly suggest still or almost still water conditions, with cyclic if not annual deposition. The terrace deposits may represent the outermost positions achieved by a meander curve in an aggrading river under conditions of annual flood, although in that case it is surprising to find such uniform and fine sediments. Alternatively, this part of the basin might have been permanently flooded and the sediments represent the edges of a lake changing its extent and silt-load with the Lebanon snow-melt. Presumably in this latter case the damming agent would have been one of the Jebel Helou lava-flows. SETTLEMENT On a regional scale the attractions of the area for settlement are obvious enough. Routeways up the Beqac are likely always to have followed the east bank of the Orontes before turning north-east towards the open plateau or east to skirt the lower slopes of the Anti-Lebanon. The present-day east-to-west route through the Homs-Tripoli Gap runs north

9

CHAPTER III THE SITE AND ITS EXCAVATION Peter J. Parr, Leon Marfoe, and Carl S. Phillips

THE SITE

AIMS

When first discovered the site of Arjoune (figs. 3 and 4) gave the impression of comprising three low artificial mounds rising almost imperceptibly above the Orontes flood-plain: a western one, Mound A, with a modern cemetery on its summit, overlooking a meander of the river, and two others, B and C, further to the east (Marfoe et al. 1981, 1). Further investigation however showed this surface configuration to be deceptive. The three ‘mounds’ (to which should be added a fourth, D, further east still) are now known to be essentially natural rises, representing areas where the river terrace and the underlying natural marl have escaped substantial erosion apart from a certain amount of surface deflation. Their summits all lie at approximately the same elevation (between c.4.00 m and 4.50 m above summer river level) and they are separated from each other by depressions formed by surface run-off and, possibly, by earlier river channels (see the cross-section, fig. 4). Some support for this latter possibility is provided by the evidence from one of the soundings (Trench IX) dug in the depression between Mounds B/C and D, where a hard clay layer beneath the terrace soil, not found elsewhere, may be an ancient fluvial deposit (see p. 20, below). Only Mound A is to some extent artificial, being formed by a slight accumulation of archaeological deposits overlying the natural soil above the rock. For this reason, and to avoid confusion, it is proposed to use hereafter in this report the term ‘Area’ rather than ‘Mound’ to designate the various parts of the site. The entire site (fig. 3) extends at least 400 m from north-west to south-east, and 200 m from south-west to north-east, this area of approximately 8 hectares being the extent of the observed artefact scatter. Within this scatter there are heavier concentrations of material on the summits of Areas A, B and D, where excavation has confirmed the presence of occupation, and also in Area C where, however, a 10 m2 trench (Trench VIII) revealed no in situ occupation. A series of five other soundings (Trenches IX-XIII) in the depressions between Areas B, C and D, likewise produced no evidence of occupation, apart from a fragmentary burial in Trench XII.

The primary aim of the Tell Nebi Mend Project is the investigation of the history of the human occupation of a specific locality, comprising a site of recognised historical importance (ancient Qadesh-on-the-Orontes) and its immediate vicinity, in a part of the Levant which is still archaeologically very poorly known. (For a fuller statement of these aims see Parr 1983, 103-4.) This has entailed, first and foremost, selective excavation of the tell itself; but since it is axiomatic that the fortunes of a major centre can only properly be understood in relation to those of its close neighbours, it has also necessitated an archaeological and environmental survey of these, extending over a radius of approximately three kilometres from the main site. As has been mentioned in the Introduction above, it was during the course of this survey that the site of Arjoune was discovered. It was the only prehistoric site located, and it was partly this apparent uniqueness which made it attractive for further investigation. More specifically, however, it was the presence of Halaf painted pottery on the surface of Arjoune which led to its excavation. According to current evidence we are here close to the southern limit of distribution of this ware (see the distribution map and discussion by Mellaart in Matthers 1981, chapter 1). It is known from Qalacat al- Mudiq (Apamaea) and Hama in the central Orontes Valley, and it reached Ard Tlaili some 70 km up-stream of Arjoune in the Lebanese Beqac, but it has not been reliably reported further south, although reflections of its style are apparent in various assemblages from Palestine (see, for example, the discussion in Gophna and Sadeh 1989, 18-31). At this stage in the Tell Nebi Mend Project it was not known what prehistoric periods were represented at the base of the tell itself (it is now known that the earliest occupation in the parts excavated belong to the Pottery Neolithic of the 7th millennium BC (calibrated), and that there appears to be a gap between then and the Early Bronze Age; see Mathias and Parr 1989, 29), and Arjoune presented an easy opportunity to investigate this aspect of the prehistory of the region. The purpose of the excavations at Arjoune was thus to discover what had brought the users of Halaf pottery so far from the epicentre of its distribution, what other aspects of Halaf ‘culture’ they exhibited, and what life style they pursued in the environment afforded by the Orontes valley. 11

III. The Site and its Excavation

Figure 3. Plan of site

Figure 4. Surface profile across site, NW to SE. (Vertical scale 10 times horizontal) 12

III. The Site and its Excavation sherds within an area of c.50-60 m diameter. One small trench (I) and three minor soundings (II-IV) were opened in August 1978 and excavated over a period of sixteen days.

RECORDING AND SAMPLING PROCEDURES Although varying in detail from excavated area (here termed Trench) to excavated area, the basic recording method adopted (except in the case of the small soundings) was the same, and entailed the horizontal sub-division of the Trench into smaller ‘loci’. In Trench I these were arbitrary, determined largely by such features as were uncovered, but a more systematic approach was adopted for Trenches V, VI and VII. Trench V was initially divided into four quarters, designated 100, 200, 300 and 400, which were then sub-divided into 2 x 2 m loci (101, 102, etc.). This 2 m grid was obviously too coarse to reveal precise spatial patterns of artefact distribution, but was judged adequate to establish at least a measure of horizontal control in circumstances which required fast and economical removal of earth over a broad area. In Trenches VI and VII a closer 1 x 1 m grid was adopted. It should be noted that nowhere on the site was it deemed necessary or feasible to employ three-dimentional plotting of artefacts and other cultural material. Within each grid square (locus) discrete deposits of soil (‘layers’) were numbered serially as dug, retrieved material being recorded appropriately. Thus, for example, pottery from Layer 4 of Locus 101 in Trench V was recorded as from Arj.V.101.4. In this report these combined provenance designations are conventionally termed ‘layer numbers’. In Trench I, the only excavated area with a clear sequence of occupation, the deposits (or layers) were eventually grouped into five chronological phases, as described below. In none of the other trenches was there evidence for more than one period of occupation or utilization (apart from later re-use for burials) and here the deposits in the individual loci were, after stratigraphic analysis, grouped into ‘general layers’ applicable to the trench in question as a whole. It is to these ‘general layers’ that reference is made in the accounts of Trenches V, VI and VII below. It goes without saying that all recognised potsherds, lithics, bones, etc., were collected, although only the lithics, animal bones and miscellaneous small objects were kept in toto for specialist study. The sherd material was sorted either on the spot or at the excavation house, and only a representative sample was kept for later study. Sampling procedures for the recovery of botanical and other micro-remains became more refined and consistent during the course of the excavation. No dry-sieving or flotation was adopted for Trenches I-IV (1978), while in Trench V (1979), wherever deposits seemed uncontaminated by ploughing or other disturbances and were sufficiently abundant, large samples of up to 50 kg were dry-sieved through an approximately 5 mm mesh. In Trenches VI (1980) and VII (1982) all deposits below plough soil were dry-sieved through the same mesh. As for flotation, the samples – usually not of standardized size – were taken where considered appropriate; details of procedures are given in Chapter XII below.

TRENCH I (plan, fig. 5; sections, figs. 6 and 7). This was a 4 x 10 m exposure on the northern side of the summit of the rise, the intention being to extend it later should the results warrant it. In the event the stratigraphy of Trench I was found to be so disturbed by pits and burials that this extension was not made. The five stratigraphic phases, arranged chronologically from earliest to latest, may be characterized as follows. (It should be noted that the numbering of these phases, and the attribution to them of excavated loci, does not correspond exactly to what was published in the interim report, Marfoe et al. 1981.) Phase 1 The earliest evidence for occupation consists of a number of separate deposits of mixed ashy, silty, clayey material (I.101.16; I.102.9 and 10; I.103.10; I.105.1 and 4, and probably I.102.3), all except one (I.101.16) lying in shallow irregular depressions cut into the natural red-brown soil above the marl. These deposits (two of which are seen in the east section of the trench, fig. 6) vary, as found, between about 0.20 m and 0.50 m in depth, but they have clearly been disturbed by later pits and other disturbances, and probably also by natural erosion, so that their original appearance and size cannot be established with certainty. However, since they contained a homogenous assemblage of prehistoric pottery and stone tools, they are presumably to be interpreted as remnants of the same kind of ‘activity areas’ as are found in other parts of the site, as will be discussed below. They provide no evidence as to the precise function of these activity areas, however. Phase 2 This phase comprises four pits (Pits 8, 9, 10 and 10A) cut into the natural terrace soil and marl to depths varying from c.0.20 m to c.1.60 m They are partially sealed by the patchy surfaces going with the mud-brick structure of Phase 3 (see below). Although the building of this structure seems to have disturbed the stratigraphy originally associated with these pits, it is clear from the plan that they are not all strictly contemporary: Pits 10 and 10A (I.102.8) are earlier than Pit 8 (I.104.5, 6, 7), which cuts into them (see plan, fig. 5). It is not possible to relate Pit 9 to this sequence, however. These pits were quite different in appearance from the depressions of Phase 1, and were filled with mixed deposits of hard red or brown soil and ashy material. They all contained a mixture of prehistoric and Persian/Hellenistic artefacts, including a late 4th-early 3rd century lamp (fig. 88: 1; see Chapter XIII, below), and are best interpreted as rubbish or quarry pits dug and re-filled prior to the construction of the building of Phase 3. Phases 3a, b and c In Phase 3a a mud-brick building was erected over the pits of Phase 2, the associated pottery indicating that it was to be dated to the Late Persian or Early Hellenistic period (see Chapter XIII). Owing to later disturbances only a 4.50 m stretch of one wall (I.101.10;

AREA A Surface examination of that part of Area A not occupied by the modern cemetery yielded a dense scatter of lithics and 13

III. The Site and its Excavation

Figure 5. Trench I, plans. west section, fig. 6), perhaps indicating several minor sub-phases of use. Nowhere, however, was there any indication that the building to which the wall belonged had more than one main period of occupation. Associated with one ash patch close to the south-eastern side of the wall was a small circular clay oven (I.101.11), about 50 cm in diameter, sunk a few centimeters into the fill of Pit 9 of Phase 2 and into the natural soil beneath. On the opposite side of the wall and about 60 cm away from it, the lower part of a large storage jar with a short Aramaic graffito (Reg. No. 343; cf. Chapter XIII, below) was found, set into the natural soil. A later disturbance had destroyed its upper portion (sherds of which were found in the filling of the disturbance) and had also removed all the associated stratigraphy, but it seems fair to assume that the jar had originally been set into a floor contemporary with the wall. Nearby, and almost certainly on the same floor, lay a fragment of a clay figurine (Reg. No. 306; fig. 94: 3 and plate XIV:4). (For a fuller discussion of the material from Phase 3a and its interpretation, see Chapter

I.103.6; I.102.4) of the building was preserved within the area excavated (see plan, fig. 5), running diagonally across the trench from south-west to north-east and unfortunately not appearing in the main sections. Nonetheless its stratigraphic position is certain; the wall itself runs over Pit 9 of Phase 2 while its floors seal Pit 8. The wall was constructed of unbaked bricks, 35 cm square and 20 cm thick, laid horizontally, though somewhat irregularly, in mud mortar. The wall averaged c. 75 cm in width, comprising either two whole bricks or one whole brick and two halves. As preserved, the wall was nowhere more than three courses (c. 65 cm) in height. It had no foundations, and its floors were at the level of the bottom of the lowest course of brick. These floors were, indeed, difficult to trace, consisting as they did of little more than thin and sporadic patches of ash which, nevertheless, were found across the entire trench except where destroyed by later disturbances. On the western side of the trench several of these ashy patches were superimposed, interspersed with silty bricky material (see 14

III. The Site and its Excavation

Figure 6. Trench I, west section.

Figure 7. Trench I, east section 11 (I.103.9) and Pit 2 (I.101.4) by Pit 1 (I.101.3). The size and configuration of the pits varied considerably, though all were originally probably more or less circular in plan, their present irregular shapes most likely being the result of erosion while they were open. They ranged from about 0.80 to 2.00 m in depth, and from 1.00 m to 3.00 m in diameter, and all were filled with soft, loosely packed grey and brown soil, with much pottery and stone tools derived from earlier phases. Parts of two terracotta figurines (Reg. Nos. 304 and 305; see fig. 94: 1, 4 and plate XIV: 1, 3), a broken bone spoon (Reg. No. 307; fig. 94: 7 and plate XV: 6), and the base of a small calcite bottle (Reg. No. 308; fig. 94: 6), all clearly of the Persian-Hellenistic period (and discussed further in Chapter XIII below), were found in these pits. Whether they were originally dug as rubbish pits or for the

XIII, below.) The patchy floors associated with the wall were everywhere covered by a deposit of bricky debris, 15 to 60 cm in depth and clearly representing the material derived from the destruction of the building (Phase 3b). There was nothing to indicate whether this destruction had been deliberate or was the result of the structure having been abandoned and allowed to fall into ruin; the latter alternative is the more likely. A series of silty layers (I.101.7), especially noticeable in the southern part of the trench, indicate the subsequent gradual erosion of the debris (Phase 3c). Phase 4 After an unknown interval of time, the ruins of the Phase 3a structure were disturbed by the digging of yet more pits. At least two sub-phases of these are indicated, since Pit 5 (I.103.7) had been cut by 6 (I.103.8), Pit 3 (I.101.9) by Pit 15

III. The Site and its Excavation AREA B

quarrying of material for bricks for another building elsewhere remains unknown.

TRENCH V (plan, fig. 8, sections, fig. 9; and plate II) Phase 5 The latest use of that part of Area A excavated as Trench I is represented by twenty graves, all cut from a level just beneath the present surface. A few flattish stones over Graves V and XII may be the remains of their original superstructures. The facts that one grave (IX) was cut into an earlier one (XVIII), while in other parts of the Trench some of the graves (III/IV, VI/XIX/XX and XI/XIII, for example) were so close as to be touching, suggest that the cemetery was in use over a considerable period of time, during which the location of some of the earlier interments had been forgotten. That the burials are Muslim seems clear both from their consistent east-west orientation with the head towards the west and facing south (except in the case of Grave I, that of an infant) and from the lack of grave goods, apart from a few personal ornaments in two of them: two glass bracelets (Reg. Nos. 283 and 284: fig. 95: 7, 8; plate XV:4, 5) in Grave II and a copper/bronze bracelet and finger ring (Reg. Nos. 301 and 300; fig. 95: 5, 6; plate XV: 7, 8) in Grave XVI. Yet a fairly recent date within the last century or so seems doubtful, since there is no sign of the graves above ground and their presence was, at the time of excavation, entirely unknown to the present-day villagers, despite the fact that the southern part of Area A is still the modern cemetery. No anatomical study was made of the burials, all of which were re-interred. A large irregular shallow disturbance (I.102.2 and I.104.2) running across the central and northern portions of the trench, beneath some of the graves of Phase 5, is perhaps best interpreted as an animal burrow. Three iron knives (Reg. Nos. 286-8; fig. 95: 1-3 and plate XV: 1-3) probably come from this disturbance, though they were recorded in the field as possibly from Grave VIII.

During the 1978 season a resistivity survey was carried out in Areas B and C in order to investigate the dense surface concentrations of artefacts encountered in localised parts of these rises. Two 20 m x 10 m grids (Grids 1 and 2) were placed on the north-western slope of Area B, where ploughing had revealed a substantial patch of grey soil amidst the brown topsoil, and a single 20 m x 5 m grid (Grid 3) was located on Area C (see the report in Chapter IV below). Clear anomalies in the resistivity readings, suggestive (wrongly, as it turned out) of sub-surface structures, appeared only in Area B, and consequently in 1979 an area of approximately 18 x 18 m, designated Trench V, was laid out here, almost precisely coinciding with Grid 1. The excavation of Trench V in 1979 revealed a number of irregular shallow pits and depressions cut into the terrace soil and, in their deeper parts, into the underlying indurated marl. These pits contained exclusively prehistoric sherds and other artefacts, and can be taken to represent the original occupation of the site. They were certainly artificial in origin, but their present highly irregular configurations are probably largely the result of use and of natural erosion and may not necessarily bear much relationship to their original shapes. Where they had reached the marl, their bases were greatly pitted by solution holes, though elsewhere a thin layer of natural soil resulted in a more regular floor. Because of the many irregularities, the exact outlines of the pits were not always easy to determine, and the plan (fig. 8) is thus to some extent subjective. Nevertheless, a definite arrangement of one large and four smaller depressions seems evident. The large pit (1) has a maximum length from east to west of c.11.70 m, and a maximum width from north to south of c.10.50 m. At its deepest point it reaches approximately 60 cm below the average undisturbed level of the natural terrace and 80 cm below the modern field surface. The present maximum depths of the smaller pits vary from about 40 cm (Pit 2) to 20 cm (Pit 3). Since there is no way of telling how much of the terrace has been removed by subsequent erosion or ploughing, the original depths of the pits beneath the surface from which they were cut is impossible to estimate; they may well have been considerably deeper than they now appear. In Pit 1 especially, but also in Pits 2 and 4, irregular stumps of the natural soil and rock remained to form what seem to be low partitions between separate ‘compartments’ within the pits (marked A, B, C, etc. on the plan, fig. 7). Whether these partitions are original and intentional features of the pits or are the result of subsequent use and erosion cannot be said. The stratification within the pits and depressions was relatively straightforward. Extending over the bottom of the deepest parts of Pit 1 was a thin layer (Layer 4) of hard compact clayey soil, grey-brown in colour, with a fairly regular surface. Cultural material from this layer was sparse, but the field records indicate that some sherds and stone tools were flat-lying, which suggests that the surface of Layer 4 might represent an actual floor. It was covered with a thicker

TRENCHES II-IV These were small soundings placed at the edges of the surface sherd scatter in Area A in order to investigate further the prehistoric and later occupation of this part of the site. The results were disappointing. In Trench II (2 m x 2 m in size) there were no archaeological features, the undisturbed terrace soil being reached immediately below about 30 cm of topsoil. Trench III was L-shaped, 8 m2 in area. Beneath about 15-20 cm of topsoil there was discovered part of a rubbish pit cut into the natural soil and encrusted marl beneath, and containing a few late sherds and some amorphous pieces of iron. The pit was sealed by a thin ashy layer which may have represented the denuded remains of a surface contemporary with the Phase 3a building in Trench I. Finally, Trench IV (also 2 m x 2 m) revealed a featureless layer of bricky wash with late sherds, below about 40 cm of disturbed topsoil from which came the clay loom-weight illustrated on fig. 94:5. Since the archaeological results from these three soundings were so meagre and it seemed clear that there was little more to be learned from Area A, work was abandoned and attention directed to Area B.

16

III. The Site and its Excavation

Figure 8. Trench V plan.

Figure 9. Trench V, sections 17

III. The Site and its Excavation

Plate II. Trench V looking south, with Tell Nebi Mend on the right horizon. this is in fact unlikely; there was no evidence in the stratigraphy for secondary cutting, and the arrangement of the small pits around Pit 1 strongly suggests that the entire complex was more or less contemporary. It has to be remembered, however, that (as has been noted above) the present irregular shapes of the pits are likely to be wholly or in part the result of erosion subsequent to their original excavation, and thus provide no very good guide to their initial appearance. A discussion concerning their purpose is best left until comparable evidence from other parts of the site has been presented (see Chapter XIV). Three later inhumation burials were also discovered in Trench V, in simple pit-graves immediately beneath the plough soil. Grave 1 contained the skeleton of a child and Graves 2 and 3 each the skeleton of an adult. All these graves were orientated approximately NW-SE; the heads of the burials in Graves 1 and 3 were at the NW end, but the position of the head in Grave 2 was unfortunately not recorded. The Grave 1 child burial was devoid of grave goods but Graves 2 and 3 each contained a broken, but partially restorable, juglet (Reg. Nos. 473 and 470 respectively; Catalogue Nos. 83 and 84 in Chapter XIII

deposit of yellowish-grey silty soil (Layer 3), fairly compact and homogenous but with occasional lumps of the natural red-brown clayey terrace soil. Within this deposit also thin silty surfaces could be detected and sometimes traced over several metres, but never across the entire pit, and the presence of some flat-lying artefacts and bones was again noted in the field records. (The interpretation of these phenomena, and the function of the pits in this and the other Trenches, will be discussed later, in Chapter XIV.). In Pit 1, Layer 3 was in turn completely sealed by a similar but softer layer of grey soil (Layer 2), the upper part of which had been disturbed by deep ploughing and merged into the topsoil. Where not so disturbed Layer 2 was of homogenous consistency and contained numerous sherds and lithics; no surfaces could be distinguished within it. In most places it rose above the level of the edges of the pit and either lensed out over the surrounding natural terrace soil or spilled over into the adjacent pits and depressions (Pits 2-5), where it formed the lowest level of filling. The fact that Layers 4 and 3 did not occur in the shallower smaller pits might be taken to indicate that Pit 1 had already been partly filled up before Pits 2-5 were cut. But 18

III. The Site and its Excavation below). The discovery of four more intact vessels (Reg. Nos. 465, 466, 467 and 468 = Catalogue Nos. 81, 82, 83 and 79) and a fragmentary iron knife blade (Reg. No. 472; fig. 95: 4) within the topsoil in the area around Grave 3 suggests that originally there were other graves, since destroyed by ploughing or deflation, in the vicinity. Some of these vessels are clearly of Persian/Hellenistic date, but it is possible that the juglets from Graves 2 and 3 are considerably earlier, dating to the 3rd millennium BC. This matter will be discussed further in Chapter XIII, below. TRENCH VII In 1982 another, smaller (4 m x 4 m), sounding was dug in Area B, where a spread of grey-brown soil and a particularly dense scatter of surface objects were visible some 60 m south-east of Trench V. This sounding was designated Trench VII. After the thin layer of plough soil (Layer 1) had been removed, the edges of a segment of a pit were revealed, the southern edge being almost vertical while that on the north had a more gradual slope (plate III). Time and resources did not allow the uncovering of more than this segment, and the extent of the pit thus remains unknown. In that part excavated, measuring c.3.0 m x 1.50 m, the base of the pit was relatively flat and even and c.1.0 m below the present surface. The lowest layer of filling (Layer 4) was a thin deposit of grey clayey soil, and above this Layer 3 was a more silty grey fill. At the level of the upper surface of Layer 3 was an undisturbed flexed inhumation burial of a young adult, probably male (fig. 10 and plate VIII). The body lay on its right side, orientated north-south, with the head towards the south and facing east. The legs were tightly folded back at the knees, with the feet tucked under the pelvis. (A full anatomical report on the skeleton appears below, Chapter X). Strangely, there was no clear indication in the stratigraphy of

Figure 10. Trench VII burial a grave for this burial, and Layer 2, a grey deposit similar to Layer 3 but of somewhat coarser material, was recorded as running uninterruptedly over it. That the burial is not a late intrusion is confirmed by the radiocarbon dating of the bone to the mid-5th millennium bc (see Chapter V, date no. OxA-577). The body must, it seems, have been placed in the pit after this had been partially filled in, and must have been covered over more or less immediately with the material forming Layer 2, since otherwise it would surely have been disturbed by animals. It remains to be noted that the pit filling of Trench VII contained large amounts of potsherds, stone implements and animal bones, but no indication of proper floor surfaces, postholes, hearths or other structural features.

Plate III. Cross section of pit in Trench VII, looking west. 19

III. The Site and its Excavation AREA C AREA D TRENCH VIII TRENCH VI (plan, fig. 10, sections, fig. 12) In 1982 it was decided to investigate the dense spread of artefacts on the surface of the slight rise of Area C, which topographically resembled Areas B and D, despite the fact that the resistivity survey of 1978 had given no indication of sub-surface irregularities. A 5 m x 2 m trench (VIII) was dug in the area of highest surface artefact density, but this produced no evidence of underlying occupation, thus confirming the resistivity results. Beneath 20 cm of plough-soil the natural red-brown terrace material was undisturbed (except by root and rodent holes), and a small sounding at the southern side of the trench revealed bed-rock at a depth of a further 50 cm The presence of considerable quantities of artefacts on the surface of Area C requires explanation, therefore. It must be assumed either that the material is in a secondary position, having been spread by ploughing, for example, from another location or, alternatively, that it derives from occupation levels (and possible structures) on Area C of which all other evidence has been removed by deflation and erosion.

In 1980 the digging by villagers of a well in Area D revealed in section a grey occupational deposit similar to that observed in the pits of Trench V. Artefacts retrieved from this deposit and from a surrounding surface scatter indicated another potentially important area for excavation, and a brief season of sixteen days was carried out in 1981. Trench VI covered an area of about 40 m2, of which c.26 m2 revealed evidence for occupation. In the area excavated portions of two adjacant pits were discovered. The edges of both were fairly regular and showed up clearly in the terrace soil into which they had been cut. Their bottoms were also quite even, except at the southern, deepest, part of Pit 1, where the indurated marl had been penetrated and formed a very irregular surface. To judge from the portions excavated both pits were roughly oval in shape, Pit 1 being approximately 8 m x 5 m and Pit 2 less certainly about 5.50 m x 2.50 m. The maximum depth of Pit 1 was 1.70 m while that of Pit 2 was 1.50 m below the present surface. However, as in the case of the pits in the other trenches, the disturbance of the site by erosion and ploughing and the possible deflation of archaeological layers, make it impossible to judge the level of the original land surface and hence the original depths of the pits. Four general layers were distinguished in the filling of these pits. The lowest, Layer 4, was confined to the deepest part of Pit 1, and comprised about 40 cm of yellowish clay mixed with lumps of natural soil and some few patches of grey deposit. It was thus similar to the lowest layer (4) in Trench V, Pit 1, and probably represents a similar primary silting of the pit. It contained very few artefacts, but on or just above its surface a number of heavy stone artefacts were found, including the basalt axe, Reg. No. 584 (fig. 56:3), perhaps indicating a floor . This layer was sealed by a silty grey deposit (Layer 3), representing the main pit filling, which also ran across the low divide between Pits 1 and 2 and formed the lowest deposit in the latter. It varied in depth from c.50 cm to 80 cm and contained substantial quantities of sherds, stone tools and animal bones, though none of these appeared to form distinct in situ clusters or to be lying upon any definite horizontal surface. The fact that Pits 1 and 2 were connected stratigraphically by Layer 3 proves the contemporaneity of their usage. Running across Layer 3 and over the soil into which the pits were cut was the topsoil, arbitrarily divided into two layers, 2 and 1, on the basis of the recent ploughing which had disturbed its upper 20 cm or so.

TRENCHES IX -XIII In view of the absence of pits and other features in Trench VIII, it was decided to dig a series of five small soundings (IX - XIII) between areas B, C and D (see plan, fig. 3), to illuminate further the nature of the site. Of these, only Trench XII (2 m x 2 m) produced archaeological features, in the form of a grave, 2.6 m x 0.8 m in size, cut into the terrace soil to a depth of 65 cm and orientated E-W. The grave contained a few skull fragments at the east end together with a small perfume bottle of Persian/Hellenistic date (Reg. No. 617; Catalogue No. 85 in Chapter XIII). Large pottery sherds found in the upper filling of the grave suggested that a number of broken storage jars had been originally placed across the grave as a covering, or else possibly that a jar or jars had been placed upright nearby and had since been disturbed by ploughing. Despite the lack of archaeological features, other than the burial, these five soundings were not devoid of interest on account of the information they gave concerning the geomorphology of the site. All the soundings except one showed the red-brown terrace soil lying directly on the surface of the underlying marl – a similar sequence to that found in all the other excavated areas. The exception was Trench IX, situated at approximately the lowest point in the saddle between Areas B and D. Here a particularly thick terrace deposit (c. 1.35 m) rested not on bed-rock but on a hard clay deposit. The thickness of this is not known, but its presence suggests that there was at some stage a river course – probably an earlier meander of the Orontes – at this point.

20

III. The Site and its Excavation

Figure 11. Trench VI plan.

Figure 12. Trench VI, sections 21

CHAPTER IV THE RESISTIVITY SURVEY John T. Hackman

suggested another locality of possible interest, and Grid 3 (approximately 20 x 5 m) was set up here, at a point where the surface dipped slightly to the north. For the position of these grids, see the site plan, fig. 3.

INTRODUCTION Conduction of electric current below the surface of the ground is largely made possible by the presence of moisture in the soil. In general the higher the moisture content the lower the resistivity, and vice versa; for example, clay and soft shale would be of low reistivity whereas stone and dry sand would exhibit high resistivity. The method is best suited to the detection of dense material such as stone walling, where there is a marked resistivity contrast with the surrounding area, but it can also be successfully applied to the detection of pits and ditches. In practice probes are driven into the ground through which an alternating current is passed, and the resulting voltage gradients then measured. Four elements were used at Arjoune: two current electrodes and two potential electrodes. Various probe configurations exist, each with its own specific properties and associate problems of interpretation. Both the Wenner and the Double Dipole configurations were used in the Arjoune survey. The Wenner configuration is the more sensitive and its results tend to be more pronounced. When passing an anomaly corresponding in width to the combined probe spacing, double peaking occurs, as each current-potential probe pair will detect the same anomaly. Depth response approximates probe separation. The Double Dipole configuration is slightly less sensitive, though it has a greater depth response, approximately one-and-a-half times the probe spacing. When travesing an anomaly this configuration will provide a single peak in between the two Wenner peaks. Its results are therefore more simple to interpret. With both configurations increased probe spacing enables greater depth penetration, with a corresponding decrease in resolution. Both a Martin-Clark Series 4 resistivity meter (with the power supply increased to 12 V.) and a Bradphys resistivity meter (200 V. AC output) were used. The field work was carried out in the summer of 1978, and owing to the extreme hardness of the soil each probe had to be driven into the ground with a hammer. All computer work was done at the University of Surrey on a Data General Nova 800 computer. A restricted but dense scatter of pottery on Area B indicated a locality of archaeological interest, and two approximately 10 x 20 m grids were laid out in the north-western part of the Area, Grid 1 being 10 m north-west of Grid 2. A lighter scatter of surface pottery on Area C

ANALYSIS AREA B: GRID 1. Plot 1 (fig. 13a) This is an unfiltered Double Dipole plot of Grid 1, in which the density of the dots is proportional to the value of the reading. The range is from the mean (x4) minus ¼ standard deviation (✤) to the mean plus 1½ standard deviatiuon, thus emphasising the higher readings. Areas of higher resistivity appear towards the edges of the plot with zones of low resistivity in the centre. There is no clear evidence of structural features. Plot 2 (fig, 13b). The filtered Double Dipole readings of Grid 1 (filter radius 2), the filter emphasising small features. The plotting range is identical to that of Plot 1. A number of possible features are discernible. Plot 3 (fig. 15a). This is a negative plot of the filtered Double Dipole readings of Grid 1 (filter radius 2). Values range from x4 to x4 - 1½ , thus placing emphasis on very low readings. These appear as concentrations of dots. No clearly defined low anomalies appear. The geometric arrangement of the area of low resistivity tends to accentuate the high resistivity zones in between. This places emphasis on the possibility of walled structures. AREA B: GRID 2 Plot 4 (fig. 14a) The unfiltered Double Dipole values for Grid 2 show concentrations of high resistivity readings on two sides of the plot, but there is no clear evidence for structured features. Plot 5 (fig. 14b). The filtered Double Dipole values for Grid 2 (filter radius 2). Values range from x4 - ¼ ✤ to x4 + 1½ ✤. Rectangular features, possibly walls, were noted. Plot 6 (fig. 15b). A negative plot of filtered Double Dipole values for Grid 2 (filter radius 2). The plotting range is from x4 to x4 - 1½ ✤ , the emphasis thus being on very low values. The sharp cut-off and geometrical arrangement of the plotted symbols lends support to the possibility of walled structures, as suggested by Plot 5.

23

IV. The Resisitivity Survey 2) Soil thickness varies considerably with lithology and geomorphology, and can cause spurious anomalies through aliasing. Regular and long-repeated plough patterns in the underlying bedrock seem especially liable to cause this type of interference. This can be a great difficulty when using sophisticated filtering techniques. Overall the data are too noisy to work in the space domain (use of 2nd derivative). Frequency filtering is advisable. Furthermore, anomalies at shallow depths can exhibit pseudo-focussing effects to a considerable degree. This may lead to a conducting sphere being interpreted as a high resistive anomaly. Future work should concentrate on getting the electrode spacing down to one tenth of the current version. The effect of station density on the confidence limits of the data can then be investigated. A greater appreciation can hopefully be obtained of the principal sources of noise in the data. Electrode resistence should be carefully monitored.

AREA C: GRID 3 Unfortunately the amount of work here had to be limited owing to the extreme dryness and hardness of the soil, which resulted in the shearing of one of the tempered steel probes. Electrode and traverse spacing were kept at 1 m. A contour diagram of the Wenner results clearly showed the dip in the soil surface as a high anomaly zone, presumably caused by a response to the underlying bedrock due to decrease in soil cover, but no other anomalies appeared, and there was no evidence of structures. CONCLUSIONS Although the anomalies plotted in Grids 1 and 2 were initially thought to reflect sub-surface structures, excavation of Trench V, more-or-less coinciding with Grid 1, proved this not to be the case. Presumably they do relate to the pits and other disturbances which Trench V revealed, but only in a manner too imprecise to be use in planning and interpreting those features. At the same time, the excavation of Trench VIII in Area C did substantiate the negative findings from Grid 3, and to this extent it may be said that the results of the resistivity survey, though certainly disappointing, were not entirely a failure. Perhaps most usefully it has drawn attention to some of the problems inherent in the adoption of this technique in arid regions. These may be summarised as follows: 1) A highly conductive saline alluvium leads to extremely low resistivity values (q = 4.4 Wm). Depth penetration can be very much limited with increased soil salinity in cultivated areas.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Thanks are due to Mr. A. Aspinall of the Physics Department, University of Bradford, for the loan of the Bradphys meter. The Martin-Clark meter was kindly loaned by Mr. A.J. Clark of the Geophysics Section of the Department of the Environment in London, while Mr. A. Bartlett of the same department provided the computer results. This help was much appreciated.

Figure 13. Grid 1

(a) Plot 1. Unfiltered Double Dipole

(b) Plot 2. Filtered Double Dipole

24

IV. The Resisitivity Survey

Figure 14. Grid 2

(a) Plot 4. Unfiltered Double Dipole

(b) Plot 5. Filtered Double Dipole

Figure 15. Grids 1 & 2: Negative Plots

(a) Plot 3 (Grid 1)

(b) Plot 6 (Grid 2)

25

CHAPTER V THE AMS RADIOCARBON DATES: AN ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION John A. J. Gowlett

Bailey et al. 1986) show good comparability of the sample materials used here at the greater age of c. 12,000 years.

The radiocarbon dates for Arjoune in Table 1 were obtained on the AMS system at Oxford and originally briefly reported in an Archaeometry datelist (Gowlett et al. 1987, 134-35). Points affecting the interpretation in archaeological terms are discussed here more fully than in the original note. In particular the dates can be calibrated much more satisfactorily, following the recent publication of Stuiver and Pearson (1993), who have provided a high precision curve for the period 2500-6000 BC.

CONSISTENCY OF RESULTS Apart from one outlier (OxA-572) the dates from each Trench form a coherent group. The dates are consistent where multiple dates have been taken from a single context (OxA-517, 617; OxA-817, 818; OxA-574, 576). In each of these pairs there is no significant difference between the two dates, following the test of Ward and Wilson (1978).

DATING PROCEDURES The dating procedures and reporting of results were standard for the Oxford system at the time (Gowlett et al. 1987). The dates are expressed in radiocarbon years before AD 1950, using the 5568 half-life. Calibrations are provided below.

COMBINING OF DATES Although the dates for each group are consistent, dates should be combined only where it is known, or can be argued strongly, that the samples involved are of the same real age (Ward and Wilson 1978). Otherwise, even if the dates appear compatible, an average is being taken, before calibration, of dates which represent different events, and which may have different age ranges after calibration. In the case of Arjoune it can be argued that each Trench probably represents a short occupation (see Chapters III and XIV), and thus the dates from each site might all be of the same real age. As one test of this hypothesis the dates from each Trench can be tested for their compatibility. This shows that all the dates from each Trench do indeed form a compatible group, with the exception of the outlier OxA-572. This does not amount to proof that the dates from each Trench truly represent contemporaneous material. It certainly seems reasonable that samples from the same numbered context may be treated as contemporaneous, but even this assumption is not borne out on some sites, e.g. Sheri Khan Tarakai (Hedges et al. 1987, 299). Here we take a pragmatic approach, seeing whether the different treatments make a substantial difference. Thus each group is treated in two ways: (i) each individual date in a group is calibrated to give its calendrical ranqe at 95% confidence. Then the oldest range of the oldest date and the youngest range of the youngest date define the overall range for a site.

SAMPLE MATERIALS Materials can vary in their reliability for radiocarbon dating. The Arjoune results are likely to be basically sound because three different materials were used and have given comparable results in these and other contexts, e.g. Abu Hureyra (Moore et al. 1986) and Klithi (Bailey et al. 1986). (a) Charred grain. This is treated as charcoal, and is a reliable material when well preserved. In a short-term occupation the sample would reflect the actual age of the settlement since it is produced within a single year's growth. (b) Amino acids from bones. A highly reliable material, provided that bone collagen is well preserved. Good preservation is in fact very rare in arid zones of the Middle East and Africa. The adequate preservation at Arjoune probably indicates that the bones became buried rapidly, and were fairly well sealed. (c) Charred bone. The procedure for dating charred bone is described in Batten et al. 1986. In general the results have been good, though limitations are discussed in that paper, where comparisons are made with humic acid extractions from the same samples. The dates reported here are for the charred residue, which generally provides the best results. Dates from Abu Hureyra and Klithi (Moore et al. 1986;

27

V. The AMS Radiocarbon Dates hand we assume short-term occupations, these can be pinpointed to much narrower ranges of about 200-250 calendar years. The choice between these two hypotheses must be essentially archaeological, since the dating evidence is not conclusive. Following the approach of Saville et al. 1987, however, where a simulation was made, it can be surmised that if the occupations actually ranged through 500 years, there would possibly be more outlying or marginal values in the dates.

(ii) the dates from each site are combined (omitting the outlier OxA-572) and the combined result is calibrated. The different consequences of these two treatments are summarised in Table 4. CALIBRATION The dates have been calibrated using the CALIB 3.0 program of Stuiver and Reimer (1993). Following their recommendation the bidecadal curve of datset A was selected. This is based on the curve of Stuiver and Pearson (1993). This calibration is far superior to any previously available, but, as luck would have it, the Arjoune results fall in the one period of 500 years where there is a minor discrepancy in the results of the Seattle and Belfast laboratories (5180-5500 BC). The difference, however, is of only 54 years, and the adopted curve takes a midline, so that the maximum error is 27 years. This is trivial in comparison with the standard errors on the dates, but serves at least as a reminder against seeking spurious precision from the results. Calibrated ranges for the individual dates are given in Table 2. Values have been rounded to the nearest 10 years. Some dates allow multiple ranges of values; ranges of less than 5 years have been `rounded out' and omitted. All dates for Arjoune V and VII are in the sixth millennium BC; all those for Arjoune VI are in the fifth millennium BC, except for OxA572, which is 300-500 years younger than any other date. Table 3 shows the results of the combined dates for each site. The combined determinations have reduced standard deviations in the range of 46-65 years. These have not been rounded, but again the calibrated dates have been rounded to the nearest ten years If we assume that multiple events of different ages may be represented on each site, then an age range of about 500 years results for Arjoune V and VII, and of 900 years for Arjoune VI (and this is omitting OxA-572). If on the other

SUMMARY 1. Arjoune V and VII belong to the 6th millennium BC. 2. Arjoune VI belongs to the 5th millennium BC, but there may have been further activity (OxA-572) in the 4th millennium. 3. The maximum range of occupation for each Trench is about 500 years for Arjoune V and VII, and 900 or more for Arjoune VI. 4. If the archaeological evidence implies short occupations, these may lie in the narrow ranges of 5600-5400 BC for Arjoune V and VII, and 4710-4460 BC for Arjoune VI (with the re-occupation falling in the mid-4th millennium BC). ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The dates were obtained when JAJG was a member of the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit, in the post now held by Rupert Housley. Grateful acknowledgment is made to the work of R. E. M. Hedges, I. A. Law, A. D. Bowles, J. F. Foreman, M. J. Humm, E. Hendy and A. R. T. Stoker. Thanks are due to SERC which funded the dating through its National Facility programme.

Table 1 Date No.

Provenance

Description

OxA-571 OxA-617 OxA-650

V.403.2 V.403.2/3 V.102/3

Burnt bone fragment Pig atlas Burnt bone fragment

6510 ± 100 6670 ± 140 6700 ± 110

OxA-572 OxA-573 OxA-816 OxA-817 OxA-818

VI.700/800.3 VI.804.3 VI.701.3A VI.702.3B VI.702.3

Burnt bone fragment Burnt bone fragment Carbonised grain Carbonised grain Pig ulna

4730 ± 100 5650 ± 100 5810 ± 80 5850 ± 80 5450 ± 110

OxA-574 OxA-575 OxA-576 OxA-577

VII.1002.3 VII.1010.2 VII.1002.3 VII.1007.3

Burnt bone fragment Pig tibia Pig tibia Human bone

6440 ± 90 6600 ± 100 6760 ± 100 6480 ± 130

28

Age BP

V. The AMS Radiocarbon Dates Table 2 Calibrations of individual dates calculated using the Calib 3.0 program of Stuiver and Reimer (1993), and the curve of Stuiver and Pearson (1993). Cal AD/BC age ranges obtained from intercepts (Method A), and expressed at two Sigma (95% confidence). Date

Age BP

Calibrated range

OxA-571 OxA-617 OxA-650

6510 ± 100 6670 ± 140 6700 ± 110

cal BC 5590 - 5260 cal BC 5770 - 5310 cal BC 5730 - 5430

OxA-572

4730 ± 100

cal BC 3700 - 3330 3220 - 3200 3160 - 3140

OxA-573

5650 ± 100

OxA-816

5810 ± 80

OxA-817 OxA-818

5850 ± 80 5450 ± 110

cal BC 4760 - 4740 4720 - 4330 cal BC 4900 - 4880 4840 - 4470 cal BC 4910 - 4510 cal BC 4500 - 4030 4020 - 4000

OxA-574

6440 ± 90

OxA-575 OxA-576 OxA-577

6600 ± 100 6760 ± 100 6480 ± 130

cal BC 5560 - 5550 5520 - 5220 cal BC 5630 - 5320 cal BC 5770 - 5440 cal BC 5600 - 5210 5160 - 5140

Table 3 .

Combined (averaged) dates for the Arjoune Trenches These are based on all dates for each Trench, except VI, where the outlier OxA-572 has been omitted. Dates are rounded to the nearest 10 years. Arjoune V Arjoune VI Arjoune VII

6612 ± 65 5729 ± 46 6572 ± 52

cal BC 5600 - 5430 cal BC 4710 - 4460 cal BC 5580 - 5540 cal BC 5530 - 5430 cal BC 5400 - 5380

Table 4 Combined date ranges for the Arjoune Trenches. The lefthand column shows the ranges of combined dates, the righthand column shows the ranges which would apply if the dates were not combined. The overall ranges are then defined by the limiting values of the oldest and youngest dates.

Arjoune V Arjoune VI Arjoune VII

Minimum Range (combined dates)

Maximum Range (individual dates)

cal BC 5600 - 5430 cal BC 4710 - 4460 cal BC 5580 - 5390

cal BC 5770 - 5260 cal BC 4900 - 4000 cal BC 5770 - 5140

29

CHAPTER VI THE PREHISTORIC POTTERY FROM TRENCHES V, VI AND VII Part 1: A Commentary on the Earlier Prehistoric Pottery (Trenches V and VII) Stuart Campbell and Carl S. Phillips Part 2: The Later Prehistoric Pottery (Trench VI) Virginia T. Mathias

work on this corpus (particularly to Carl Philips) and very aware that my analysis is based on a less intimate, hands-on knowledge of the material which may lead to errors or distortions. While I hope that these are not too serious, such errors are my responsibility entirely and arise from the limitations of my study rather of the original recording. The analysis in this section is based on the drawn ceramics published here and in previous reports on the site (especially Marfoe et al. 1981) and on a relatively limited examination of the small study collection of pottery in the Institute of Archaeology at University College London. This introduces an immediate distortion since much of the decorated pottery is illustrated but only a sample of the much more common undecorated pottery. This does not mean, however, that important conclusions cannot be reached concerning the undecorated pottery, but only that the study of this portion of the assemblage is more qualitative than quantitative. The date of the Arjoune material in Trenches V and VII is relatively well defined, with averaged combined dates of 4662 ± 65 bc (calibrated 5600-5430 BC) and 4622 ± 52 bc (calibrated 5580-5390 BC) respectively. Although there is no direct dating evidence, it will be assumed here that the stylistically similar material from Trenches I-IV (published in Marfoe et al. 1981) is broadly contemporary. This absolute date makes the occupation contemporary with the later Halaf (the conventional Middle-to-Late Halaf) in northern Mesopotamia, including sites in north and north-western Syria such as Ras Shamra (Contenson 1992), Shams ed-Din (Gustavson-Gaube 1981) and surveyed sites in the Qoueiq area (Mellaart 1981), and in south east Turkey such as Domuztepe (Campbell et al. 1999), Turlu (Brenquet 1991) and the Amuq sites (Braidwood and Braidwood 1960). To the south the chronological contemporaries lie within the Wadi Rabah tradition. Particularly important, although still poorly known, is Ard Tlaili in the Beqac (Kirkbride 1969) which represents the most southerly known Halaf material

Editor's Note. A few words of explanation are required by way of preface to the following account of the prehistoric pottery from Trenches V, VI and VII. All of the material saved from these Trenches - essentially all rims, bases, handles and decorated pieces - were described, categorized and drawn in the field by one of the above authors, CSP, this work forming the basis of the catalogue, illustrations and discussion published here. A representative selection of the material (particularly the painted sherds) was then deposited with the antiquities’ authorities in Homs, and most of the rest discarded on site, only a very small sample being brought back to England. The records pertaining to the later material, from Trench VI, were then studied further by VTM, who is responsible for Part 2 of this chapter. However, for reasons beyond the control of the editor, a more profound study of the Trenches V/VII pottery was delayed for many years, and has only now been achieved through the generous assistance of the third co-author, SC, to whom the editor is greatly indebted for the commentary which forms Part 1 of this chapter. It should be noted that the prehistoric pottery from the excavations in Area A (Trenches I-IV) reported in Marfoe et al. 1981, which belongs to the same ‘Halafian’ horizon as that from Trenches V and VII, is not treated in detail here, although reference is made in Part 1 to individual pieces of special interest. The other small areas of excavation at Arjoune produced hardly any prehistoric pottery at all. [PJP] PART 1: THE POTTERY OF TRENCHES V AND VII S. Campbell I was given the opportunity to provide a discussion of the earlier prehistoric pottery from Arjoune in 2000. I am both very grateful for the permission of those who did the initial 31

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery they are not especially common. At Shams ed-Din, for example, the closest general parallel is with basin type 1b, which is undecorated, but in at least three cases it is burnished (Gustavson-Gaube 1981, 167 and figs. 587 and 599 on page 171).

and which should be contemporary with Arjoune (the basal level of the 4 m deep sequence has an average radiocarbon date of 4887 ± 75 bc). Although this period has received considerable attention in northern Mesopotamia (e.g. Davidson 1977; Breniquet 1996; Akkermans 1993; Campbell 1992), it has been relatively neglected in the central and southern Levant. That is part of the reason for there being particular interest in Arjoune, but it also means that comparisons may be rather uneven and tend to emphasise links with the better publicised areas to the north.

Burnished Pottery The burnished pottery occurs with surface colour ranging from red through brown to black and, in some cases at least, is of high quality (e.g. fig 16: 1, 12 and 15). From the catalogued sherds, black or black-brown is most common but red and brown surfaces both occur very frequently. Fabrics are generally brown or red-brown with varying amounts of grit temper. Broad parallels to this category occur widely, including Dark Faced Burnished Ware in both the north and south Levant. It probably also fits into the spectrum of Red Wash wares, which are generally burnished, within the north Syrian Halaf (Leenders 1989). The range of shapes is wider than the unburnished vessels and some forms seem largely or entirely restricted to this category. The three examples of shallow, thick-walled bowls with rounded rims (fig. 16: 2 and 3; possibly fig. 22: 4) are all burnished. Specific parallels to the north may be found in the Dark Faced Burnish Ware assemblage from Amuq C (Braidwood and Braidwood 1960, fig. 105: 1). Shallow straight-sided bowls occur three times with a black burnish (fig. 16: 1; fig. 22: 1 and 2). All three bowls with slightly in-turned rims (fig. 22: 6 and 7; possibly fig. 16: 9) are burnished, two red and one brown. Three further examples were published from the 1978 season at Arjoune, again all burnished (Marfoe et al. 1981, fig. 7: 43, 54 and 56). These have close parallels both to the north and the south. At Shams ed-Din, this form is categorised under the common bowl types 2d and 2e which are mainly painted rather than burnished, although the paint is usually restricted to simple bands (Gustavson-Gaube 1981, figs. 275-284 on p.135). The form, however, is also the most common in the 1% of the assemblage that is red slipped and burnished (Gustavson-Gaube 1981, 72-73). At Domuztepe in south eastern Turkey, the same bowl form occurs, and is only rarely painted. Most often it is red burnished, although brown and rarely, black also occur (Campbell et al.. 1999, fig. 11: 3 and 5-6). It equally occurs in the Qoueiq where it is seems typically red burnished (Mellaart 1981, fig. 108: 430-433). Amuq C also offers parallels (Braidwood and Braidwood 1960, fig. 105: 11-13, 25) and this type is even more common in Amuq D (Braidwood and Braidwood 1960, 3-9). One of the only two profiles illustrated from Ard Tlaili is of this vessel form (Kirkbride 1969, fig. 4). It is also a well-attested form in related burnished fabrics in the Wadi Rabah tradition. In Garfinkel’s terminology this is form B1, and occurs in both red and black burnish (Garfinkel 1999, 115 and fig. 66). Bowls with a S-curve profile, usually with a slightly flared rim are largely confined to burnished sherds. Six burnished examples (fig. 16: 14-18; fig. 22: 5) are illustrated with only a single painted example (fig. 24: 7). The only illustrated example from the 1978 season is a red burnished example (Marfoe et al.. 1981, fig. 5: 11). There are plentiful

Sherd Counts, Trenches V and VII No.

%

TRENCH V Unburnished ware Burnished ware Fine painted ware Local painted ware Total

7256 5427 331 120 13134

55.0 41.0 3.0 1.0 100.0

TRENCH VII Unburnished ware Burnished ware Fine painted ware Total

1685 547 101 2333

72.2 23.5 4.3 100.0

UNPAINTED POTTERY Unpainted pottery was divided in the original analysis into unburnished and burnished varieties. The former is more common, making up 58% of the total ceramics across Trenches V and VII while the burnished accounts for some 39%. In both cases, further quantification is not possible, although a clear impression of the range of vessels is provided by the illustrations and catalogue in this volume and by the illustrations from the 1978 season (Marfoe et al. 1981). Unburnished Pottery The fabric descriptions for the unburnished pottery in the catalogue suggest two possible colour groupings, one brown or red-brown the other being more markedly grey. The temper is predominantly grit – almost exclusively so in the catalogue of sherds from Trenches V and VII – but the descriptions from Trenches I-IV (Marfoe et al. 1981) may suggest some vegetable temper as well. From the illustrated sherds, this group seems, in general, coarser and rather thicker-walled than the burnished pottery. The range of unburnished vessel shapes is rather limited, mainly consisting of rounded bowls (fig. 17: 25; fig. 18: 37-43; fig. 23: 17-23) and hole mouth pots (fig. 17: 31-32; fig. 18: 44-45; fig. 22: 14-15). Often these shapes occur with characteristically thickened rims (e.g. fig. 23: 21 and 23), something that seems restricted to unburnished pottery at Arjoune. Thickened rims do occur at comparable sites but 32

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery PAINTED POTTERY

Halaf parallels for this shape, particularly in Syria rather than Iraq. These parallels, however, are almost entirely painted. Shams ed-Din is typical: S-curved bowls are the most common variety of painted pottery but unpainted examples are rare. The evidence from the Qoueiq suggests a much larger number of unpainted, burnished examples (Mellaart 1981, figs. 95: 111-115). Burnished examples also occur in Amuq C but they may have been outnumbered by painted ones (Braidwood and Braidwood 1960, 139). The shape also occurs in small but regular numbers in Wadi Rabah contexts but there it is undecorated (Garfinkel’s type A4, Garfinkel 1999, fig. 69). This is one of the vessel types which has been taken as most strongly pointing to Halaf influence on the Wadi Rabah tradition. At Arjoune, though, it seems to be the undecorated Wadi Rabah type that predominates. Jars with short vertical or, more commonly, inward-sloping straight necks seem to be either burnished (fig. 17: 33, 35 and 36; fig. 22: 10) or relatively fine but unburnished (fig. 17: 32 and 34) and not painted. From the 1978 season there are again no painted examples but instead illustrated sherds are burnished (Marfoe et al. 1981, fig. 7: 41) or with a red wash or slip (Marfoe et al. 1981, fig. 5: 2, 5 and 12). Short, vertical necked jars are common in Halaf painted and unpainted traditions and in the Wadi Rabah. Inward-sloping necks, however, are much less common. Although bow rim jars are not present at Arjoune, this type may be related or may one of the forms that develops later into bow rims (cf. Tel Dan; Gopher and Greenburg 1987, fig. 4: 8). A rare specific parallel for the shape, which, however, is painted, occurs at Tell Berne in the Qoueiq survey (Mellaart 1981, fig. 124: 505). Deep carinated bowls seem to be one of the more common shapes, with the upper wall either vertical or slightly inward-sloping. There are examples with red, black and brown burnish (fig. 16: 4-8 and 10-12). Hole mouth bowls are also common and, in some examples, the division between this category and the deep carinated bowls is difficult to draw. Once again, examples are distributed amongst the different surface colours (e.g. fig. 16: 13; fig. 17: 30-31; fig. 22: 11-13). A variety of simple, straight-sided and rounded bowls also occurs, along with a smaller range of simple jars. Much of this range is equally typical of the Wadi Rabah tradition, with particular parallels in deep, carinated bowls (Garfinkel’s type A1 and A2; Garfinkel 1999, 115, fig. 67). The shapes are certainly also paralleled in the Halaf but most particularly amongst painted pottery rather than unpainted or burnishedThere is a series of vertically pierced lugs, all on small sherds that give little indication of the shape of the vessel from which they originate, although they are very likely to have been jars. The fabric descriptions are unfortunately not available for three examples (fig. 18: 52-54) and it is unclear whether they come from undecorated vessels, perhaps burnished, or from undecorated portions of painted vessels. The two examples from 1978 come from relatively coarse vessels that are unlikely to have been decorated (Marfoe et al.. 1981, fig. 8: 82-83).

Only 3.6% of the pottery is painted, a total of 552 sherds. The 93 illustrated sherds represent the majority of well preserved examples and can be used for cautious quantification. The fabrics are generally much finer than the other groups of pottery. The fabric colours are most commonly white with significant numbers described as pale brown, pink or red-brown. Inclusions are typically either not visible or are sparse grit. The paint colour is predominantly black or black-brown (n=51), with brown (n=13) and red or orange (n=9) much less common. On 57% of the sherds where paint colour is described, the paint is lustrous, although this seems rather less common with the red and orange paint. From the descriptions and from an examination of a sample of sherds, it is clear that, technologically, this painted material falls fully within the Halaf tradition. There are a few sherds that are thicker, have coarser temper, are less well fired and have poorer paint (e.g. fig. 21: 115) but this is typical of any Halaf assemblage. There seems little reason to make a distinction between local painted and fine painted types, with the implications of imports and imitations, and the painted pottery will the treated as a unitary group here. Where the general shape of the vessel can be deduced from the illustration, the number of bowls (n=29) is approximately the same as the number of jars (n=26), with pots rather fewer in number (n=10). The range of vessel shapes that were decorated is, however, not particularly varied. Round sided (n=15) and straight sided (n=6) bowls are relatively common, as are wide mouthed jars (n=7). Although the latter category may be related to S-curved bowls, there is only a single illustrated example of a painted S-curve bowl (fig. 24: 27). Painted hole mouth pots occur four times (fig. 19: 69 and 70; fig. 21: 119; fig. 24: 28). Further painted examples occur from the 1978 season (Marfoe et al. 1981, fig. 6: 23, 30, 33 and 36). Deep carinated bowls seem rarer with one certain (fig. 19: 83) and two possible occurrences (fig. 19: 84 and 87 are more conjectural). There is a single pierced lug from a painted jar (fig. 21: 130). The only shape of vessel which seems distinctive to the painted assemblage at Arjoune is a type of whole mouth pot with a carination (e.g. fig. 19: 71-74). All these shapes find ready parallels within Halaf assemblages and detailed parallels will not be given here. Because many painted sherds are illustrated, it is possible to do some quantification of the motif usage. The sample is small, however, and the sherds are rarely large, so the motifs are fragmentary. It therefore seems best to keep to a basic qualification rather than adopt more sophisticated methods (e.g. Campbell 1992; Irving 2002). A method which proved to be successful with Halaf pottery in north Syria and Iraq is to analyse the broad categories that motifs fall into: lozenge based, cross-hatched, zig-zag etc. (cf. Campbell 1992). Sometimes a motif can fall into more than one category; a row of lozenges can be filled with cross-hatching, for example. This method is robust with fairly small semi-random samples and provides a useful way of profiling the assemblages at different sites. 33

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery sites to the north and using them in a generally similar way. This is unsurprising if the ceramics were being imported from there but, if they were of more local manufacture, it suggests both contact with the north and shared concepts of decoration and symbolism. In other words, the potters producing the Arjoune pottery were not simply imitating Halaf pottery but were acting within a regional tradition of the Halaf.

The results for interior motifs are very simple indeed. Slightly less than half the rim sherds have internal decoration and that always consists merely of a motif along the rim. In only two cases, with rows of lozenges, is the motif anything other than a simple rim band. This is fairly typical of comparable sites within the Halaf. The only missing motif is the row of loops or swags along the interior rim which is very common at some sites (e.g. Arpachiyah). It is present on between 5 and 7% of rims at both Turlu and Tell Kurdu and rather more common at Shams ed-Din where it occurs on 24% of rims. In fact, the range of interior motifs used on the Arjoune pottery does not differ very much from some sites in north Iraq – at Kharabeh Shattani (Watkins and Campbell 1986; Baird et al. 1995) it is, again, only the presence of swags on about 10% of the rims that contrasts strongly with Arjoune.

Incised pottery small and poorly attested portion of the assemblage – only seven sherds are illustrated. It is interesting, however, given the prominence of incised decoration at Ard Tlaili (Kirkbride 1969, Pls IV and V) and Byblos (Dunand 1973) that it is so rare at Arjoune. This may be a regional or, less likely, a chronological trend. Three types of incision are attested at Arjoune. Simple incised parallel bands occur four times (fig. 18: 48-51), twice

Frequency (as percentage) of different types of motif components. Lozenges

Interior

4.3

Exterior

12.6

Crosshatch

Zigzag

Lines

-

-

38.3

14.1

11.6

46.0

Dots

5.6

Exterior motifs are rather more varied. The areas of decoration are much more extensive and usually seem to consist of most of the exterior surface of the vessel, sometimes ceasing about two thirds of the way down. The motifs used tend to cover rather wide areas, however, and, where enough is visible to give a reasonable impression, the decoration often consists of horizontal lines bounding a single large motif. In two cases (fig. 21: 125 and 130) different types of motif are combined on the exterior (lozenges or triangles and crosshatching in one case, a zigzag and reversed lozenges in the other) in a way which would, subjectively at least, be rather unusual in north Iraq or north-eastern Syria but is not uncommon at Domuztepe. The range of motifs used is rather small. Not surprisingly, lines are the most common but only lozenges, cross-hatching and zig-zags occur on more than 10% of sherds; only dots and motifs made up of multiple lines appear on between 5 and 10%. This distribution of motifs is, again, typical of northern Syria and south-eastern Turkey, although there are minor variations at every site. Both Shams ed-Din and Turlu, for example, have very comparable quantities of lozenges, crosshatching and zigzags, although rather more use of dotted motifs. Tell Kurdu has lower quantities of these motifs but more use of wavy lines. This contrasts in detail with sites in north-eastern Syria and northern Iraq. If Kharabeh Shattani is used for comparison, zigzags are markedly less common (0.5%), multi-line motifs are absent, lozenges are rarer (4.4%) and loops much more common (8.3%). This suggests that, although there were undoubtedly local stylistic variations, Arjoune was drawing on a set of motifs that is very comparable with those in use at broadly contemporary

Bukrania

Multiline

-

-

0.5

7.1

Loops

-

Stars

None

0.5

57.4 2.0

-

running just below the rim of open rounded bowls. There are two examples of incised bands with added vertical incisions (fig. 18: 55-56). This may be related to examples which seem to be imitating basketry, e.g. at Ras Shamra IVB (Contenson 1992, pl. CL: 2) and several examples from Domuztepe in south eastern Turkey. There is a single example, unfortunately a surface find, of rows of dots filling the space between wavy parallel lines (Marfoe et al. 1981, fig. 8: 85). There are several parallels for this type to the north. It occurs at Ras Shamra in level IVC (Contenson 1992, pl. CXXXI: 1-2; CXXXII: 1) and is also a rare but consistent feature of the late and Post-Halaf levels at Domuztepe (Campbell et al. 1999, fig. 12: 2-3). THIN SECTION AND SEM ANALYSIS Thin-section and SEM analysis of some of the ceramics from Arjoune does not particularly indicate that significant quantities of painted ceramics were being imported, although it also does not conclusively prove local manufacture. A study by Bettles concludes that ‘the differences seen in the fabric and the paint analysis are not distinctive enough to suggest that this ceramic [the painted pottery] might not have made by potters living at Arjoune cognisant of the relevant techniques for making this specialist ware . . . There are no instances of inclusion-types appearing in the E group sherds [painted Halaf] which do not also appear in the other groups studied - just mainly small pieces of quartz, chert, grog and the odd tiny red crystal, presumably olivine. It seems from present knowledge that it is purely the processing technique 34

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery painted Halaf pottery. The shapes in burnished pottery have stronger parallels further south. Similarly the relative lack of incised decoration contrasts not only with Ard Tlaili and Byblos to the south and west but even with site far to the north, such as Domuztepe, where incised decoration on burnished pottery is a regular feature (e.g. Campbell et al. 1999, fig. 12: 4). Even when we do examine the painted portion of the assemblage, it is important not to consider the site as simply an outlier on the edge of a widespread cultural entity. It is possible to question the basis of our identification of the Halaf as a unitary phenomenon (Campbell 1999), but it is difficult to argue that Arjoune is at the centre of the tradition. More pertinently, the inhabitants of Arjoune possibly manufactured, possibly imported, but undoubtedly used their ceramics as a response to local conditions and needs. Although the influence from the north may have been important and may reflect active movement of people or ideas, the reality at Arjoune may well be that the assemblage reflects local patterns of manufacture and use that had been in place for several generations and would have been perceived as traditional rather than innovative. It certainly seems true that Arjoune is not an isolated example of some elements of Halaf ceramics being adopted in the central Levant. The presence of sites like Ard Tlaili to the south and Hama to the north makes it clear that a component of painted Halaf ceramics is a consistent feature, rather than an exception. Thus, Halaf pottery need not be an intrusive element and certainly had its local context for use, whether this was as a prestige item or for particular functions. The decision to paint a small quantity of vessels may have been consciously imitative or it may have followed distinctly local rules, perhaps concerning symbolism and identity. The decoration may have been adopted and adapted as a technology entirely to serve local needs, but it may also have offered new forms of stylistic or symbolic differentiation and, if the meanings accompanied the symbolism, there may also have been elements of a belief system transferred. If we assume local manufacture rather than import as our starting position (and there is support from the thin section analysis), then the close parallels to sites such as Tell Kurdu, Shams ed-Din and Turlu in the types of decoration being used become increasingly interesting. It is argued above that similar motifs were being used in similar ways – as it were using the same vocabulary and following the same grammar. While this would only parallel the north-south spread of the burnished ceramics, it reinforces the potential for repeated interaction with settlements to the north acting as a route for the interchange of ideas, the spread of new social practices, or, indeed people. Although the assemblage is small, it may be useful to speculate further on the way in which the painted pottery was used. While the use of motifs fits the practices further north, the range of shapes is rather restricted. It consists almost entirely of small jars and deep bowls, most straight-sided and some hole-mouthed. Further north, in sites with larger Halaf components, there is a wider range of painted vessels – S-curved bowls and larger jars, for example. This concentration may mean that painted pottery was only used

which causes the differences in petrology between this group and [the other types of pottery]’ (Bettles 1994, 51). DISCUSSION The parallels made for the ceramics from Trenches V and VII substantially support the radiocarbon dates. The parallels to the north are with sites that fall in the latter half of the Halaf. Although traditional chronologies assign the labels Middle and Late Halaf to this period, I have argued elsewhere that it is difficult to differentiate the two phases on anything other than very minor, and possibly regional, grounds (Watkins and Campbell 1987; Campbell 1992). The term Halaf II was proposed to cover this broad chronological phase (Campbell 1992). Although dates remain difficult to pin down, this should cover the period of at least 4800-4500 bc. The absence of bow rim jars at Arjoune is a particularly strong argument that the occupation was prior to the Halaf-Ubaid Transitional further north. This may also make it earlier than much of the Wadi Rabah tradition in the southern Levant but it is clear that it is in this phase that many of the parallels lie and the date of about 4650 bc suggested by radiocarbon dating would fit reasonably with the early part of the Wadi Rabah sequence. The absence of any bichrome pottery from Arjoune would also fit with the radiocarbon date, since this is a consistent, although minority, ceramic style occurring slightly later in the Domuztepe Post-Halaf, in the Amuq, Ras Shamra and as far south as Tel Tsaf (Gophna and Sadeh 1989). Rather more interesting are the cultural implications of the parallels. Although the painted Halaf pottery of the Arjoune assemblage immediately stands out, it should not overshadow the rest of the assemblage. The burnished group of ceramics, in particular, has significant parallels running both to the north and the south. Indeed, it is possible to suggest that this is a tradition which is essentially Levantine, rather than being polarised by being either Halaf or Wadi Rabah. It is present in Halaf sites on the Euphrates, such as Shams ed-Din, to a minimal extent and, also in small quantities, appears at sites to the east of the river (Leenders 1989). This burnished tradition is much more common at sites to the west, such as Domuztepe (where it makes up c.20% of the ceramics), in the Qoueiq, in the Amuq and at Ras Shamra. Many of the characteristic burnished shapes, such as bowls with in-turned rims, are the same as those that occur at Arjoune and continue further south in the Wadi Rabah. In contrast, to Garfinkel’s recent comment that ‘it would seem appropriate to designate the Wadi Rabah culture as “Levantine Halafian”’ (Garfinkel 1999, 152), it would seem more appropriate to argue that there is a Levantine phenomenon that cuts across both the western Halaf and the Wadi Rabah traditions. If this is the case, then Arjoune, rather than being on the edge of cultural phenomena, is actually closer to the centre! This is certainly an oversimplification. There are undoubtedly also more local and regional trends. Two interesting examples are the S-curved bowls and deep carinated bowls. At Arjoune, both typically (but not exclusively) occur in burnished pottery. To the north, these are shapes that are probably more typical of 35

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery restricted to near the rim in shallower bowls or, in the deeper ones, to curving into a possibly rounded base, (e.g. fig. 25: 6), sometimes with a slight bulge (fig. 25: 2). This distinctive flattening of the sides, perhaps the result of increasing use of a tournette or slow wheel, gives a conical or basin-shaped profile (fig. 25: 1, 3-5; fig. 26: 19, 20, 24, 25; fig. 27: 38). There is a further group of bowls with upright sides (fig. 25: 8-11). The rim is slightly outswept, giving a faint S-shape to the profile. Although all are incomplete, some appear to be fairly shallow, others probably of a deep beaker shape. The slight resemblance to the neck of a Ghassulian churn is not backed up by any identifiable body sherds, and the presence of such vessels must be discounted. The only type of larger bowl, 20-30 cm in diameter and usually of coarser ware, is a deep basin (fig. 26: 25; fig. 27: 38). Bowl rims are rounded, tapered in the smaller and finer examples, but not in the larger and heavier ones (fig. 26: 24-25; fig. 27: 38). There is no thickening with squaring-off or bevelling of the rims of bowls and holemouth jars as in the earlier Arjoune material of Trenches V/VII. Jars with everted rims are more or less confined to the heavier and coarser vessels (fig. 27: 35-37). The thinner walled and generally smaller jars very often have a short, essentially upright neck (fig. 25: 13-15, 17: fig. 26: 26-27), which joins the steeply sloped shoulder without any carination, giving a baggy shape. A rather more bulbous shape can be inferred from a longer, inverted neck and slightly outswept shoulder (fig. 25: 16; fig. 27: 39), and from the rather steep-sided holemouth jars (fig. 23: 12; fig. 26: 28-29). The wide-shouldered, spherical type of holemouth jar is not found in Trench VI. As with the bowls, the jar rims are rounded and may be tapered, and there is no thickening even with the holemouth jars. These shapes merge into one another, from bulging bowl to beaker to baggy pot, and from inverted neck to holemouth. Sharp carinations, flaring necks and bulging shoulders are avoided, suggesting the simplest methods of forming the sides of the vessel, i.e. coil-building. Judging from the very few clearly flat bases recorded, it is probable that round bases, often difficult to distinguish from body sherds, were the most common, especially in the finer ware small bowls (fig. 25: 2-6). Handles are very rare and are apparently restricted to small lugs on bowls (fig.25: 4-5; fig. 26: 23). They consist of roughly oval knobs applied below the rim or towards the middle of the profile, and pierced with a narrow hole, either horizontally or vertically.

for very specific functions. The small number of painted sherds further suggests rather restricted usage – or at least breakage, which is a subtly different thing. It may be that either everyone in the settlement used painted pottery for specific functions on very special occasions or a smaller group of people used the decorated pottery for a similarly specific range of functions but on a more frequent basis. The nature of the site makes it difficult to distinguish between the scenarios at Arjoune. Either case, however, would fit well with the use of painted pottery as a marker of identity being used in a specific social context (for example, the consumption of a particular type of food or drink). PART 2: THE POTTERY OF TRENCH VI (V. T. Mathias) GENERAL DESCRIPTION The pottery of Trench VI forms a corpus distinct from and later than that of Trenches V and VII, the averaged combined radiocarbon dates for this Trench of 3779 ± 46 (calibrated 4710-4460 BC) confirming this (see Chapter V). It can therefore be expected to fall within the Late Chalcolithic period, equating roughly with the ‘Syrian Ubaid’ of Amuq E, Ras Shamra III C/B, and Hama L, and contemporary with Mesopotamian Late Ubaid and the Early Ghassulian of the southern Levant. However, the very few painted sherds (five certain and one possible, all illustrated here on fig. 27: 40-45) form only a tiny proportion (0.15%) of the total of nearly 4,000 sherds collected, and their usefulness in setting the Trench VI material in a wider context is limited. It is all the more important to consider the whole pottery assemblage in order to draw any valid conclusions. Sherd Counts, Trench VI No. Unburnished ware 1721 Burnished ware 1993 Red wash ware 223 Painted ware 6 Total 3943

% 44 50 6 100

Shapes The repertory of shapes is restricted, as befits a small, perhaps only seasonally occupied, settlement of farmer-pastoralists. Open bowls account for the majority of identifiable rim sherds. Typically the diameter ranges from 10-20 cm or a little more, and the depth is on average apparently about half that, though unfortunately no whole profile has been recovered. Shapes are simple, and the carinations and the flaring or incurving rims of the Halaf-related material from Trenches V and VII are unknown. Gently curved outlines (fig. 26: 18, 21) do occur, but more characteristic are straighter sides, with curvature

Fabric This is mostly light in colour, varying from pink through pale brown to grey with some darker red and red-brown. In all the smaller vessels it is fairly fine and thin, tempered with carbonate and gabbro inclusions only, in varying amounts. The larger, thicker-walled vessels are apparently of essentially the same fabric, with more abundant and coarser inclusions. There is no vegetable temper though there is a little shell (including marine), which was almost certainly already present in the clay. The fabric of the fine painted ware is described separately below. 36

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery unique, a small jar or bottle with a high narrow neck, slightly everted. The painted motifs consist of rather irregular broad horizontal bands (nos. 42 and presumably 44, though this could be part of a more complex pattern), including the inside rim (nos. 41 and 42); a shallow oblique band or swag depending from the rim (no. 41); a tree or branch (no. 43), with irregularly spaced narrow diagonal strokes attached to a broader central stem; and a large zigzag pattern round the narrow part of the neck of jar (no. 45) made by painting the whole of the outside but leaving a narrow line in reserve to show the contrasting body of the pot, with this line further decorated by regularly spaced fine cross-lines. The four finer sherds, nos. 40-42 and 45, can be classified as late Syrian Ubaid from the fine highly fired fabric, and the motifs, as far as can be discerned, would also not be out of place in the Ubaid repertoire, especially that of no. 45. Nos. 43 and 44 are a coarser version of the rest, and are perhaps local imitations of imported vessels, though no. 43 is possibly related to the immediately post-Ubaid ‘sprig ware’.1

Surface treatment There is no particular surface treatment of the coarser ware but the finer ware is almost invariably burnished, the bowls usually inside as well as out, the jars outside and over the rim and sometimes further down inside as well. The burnish gives a much darker surface to the the fabric, i.e. red or red-brown from a pink or light brown fabric, and black from grey. Mottling of colour occurs and there was possibly some deliberate reduction or oxidization treatment to produce a contrasting surface colour. There is no obvious application of a slip, but a self-slip – that is, one derived from the same clay as the fabric – was probably necessary in order to achieve a satisfactory burnish. The overall proportion of burnished sherds is 50%, but of rims c. 67%, presumably indicating either that burnishing did not always cover the whole body of the vessel, or that the unburnished vessels tended to be large jars and deep bowls and thus yielded more body sherds. Although only about 6% of the total sherds had a red wash, 10% of the rims had this type of treatment, indicating that this is more likely the true proportion of vessels of this class. Presumably the wash did not always extend as far as the base.

COMMENTARY

Decoration Decoration, of simple incised, impressed or punctate designs, is of rare occurrence and the 17 sherds of this type recovered (c. 0.4% of total) are all illustrated (fig. 26: 18-34). The decoration is probably confined to the upper parts of bowls and the necks and shoulders of jars, and occurs on the same shapes and fabrics as the undecorated pieces, but only on burnished sherds. The designs are in one or two horizontal bands of incised or impressed oblique strokes (fig. 26: 18, 27, 31, 34), chevrons (fig. 26: 21, 26, 32, 33), or thumbnail impressions (fig. 26: 28). The punctate decoration was presumably made with a cut stem or reed (fig. 26: 32-33). Fig. 26: 25 has in addition an incised horizontal line above the row of punctate marks. In one shallow bowl (fig. 26: 23) the punctate band decoration is associated with a vertically pierced lug. The designs resemble stitching around the necks of leather vessels, especially in the case of baggy pots and holemouths. Decoration on heavier vessels is confined to the rare horizontal ‘rope-pattern’ of oblique impressions on an applied band (fig. 27: 37). The six painted sherds (fig. 27: 40-45) are the only ones recovered from Trench VI, and form only about 0.15% of the total. The fabric of nos. 40-42 and 45 is white with a greenish tinge and very thin, the paint black or brownish-black; no. 43 is medium, pink-white, and no. 44 pink, quite thick and crumbly, the paint respectively brown and red-brown. As regards shapes, nos. 40 and 42 could be considered as a finer version of the burnished ware deep bowls (compare fig. 25:2 or 3 with fig. 23: 8), though both are very simple shapes. No. 41, however, has no parallels in the unpainted ware, being a graceful deep cup with upright sides curving in and thickening towards the base, and a beaded rim. No. 45 is also

As suggested earlier, the limited repertory of shapes in the Trench VI material is probably due to the nature of the occupation. Large storage jars and other heavy vessels are absent. The prevalence of open bowls and medium-sized jars indicates that the bulk of the pottery was for everyday use rather than for longer-term storage or specialist applications. All the pottery is hand-made (unless, as suggested above, the flattening of the sides of some of the bowls is indicative of the use of the tournette), grit-tempered, and reasonably well made and fired, but the technology used in shaping and finishing is simple and would not necessitate craft specialization. The very few fine painted sherds reflect a sparsity of luxury ware, and were perhaps not made locally. The most striking feature is the very common use of burnish. Virtually all the small and medium sized vessels, both open bowls and jars, are burnished on the outside, and the great majority on the inside as well, though some around the rim only. This is long after the very ancient tradition of Dark Faced Burnished Ware had ceased to be current in other parts of the northern Levant. Burnished plain wares are also associated with the Halaf period and area, and this might explain why it is common in the earlier, Halaf-related, material from Trenches V and VII at Arjoune. Here, as in Trench VI, it is confined to the small and medium sized vessels and does not occur on the heavier coarse wares. This resemblance looks more like a continuing regional tradition; and it may be noted that DFBW is found also in the early Pottery Neolithic levels of nearby Tell Nebi Mend (Mathias and Parr 1989, 20). It is becoming rare in this later period farther north, e.g. at Hammam et-Turkman on the Balikh, period IVA (Akkermans 1988, 195); in the Qoueiq area (Tell Bahouerte and Tell Berne), where burnish does not occur in period E, though it is found in D (later Halaf) and recurs in F

1

I am indebted to Dr Joan Oates for this suggestion. 37

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery continue throughout period IV (‘Ubaid’) into the earlier part of V (‘Late Chalcolithic’), and indeed are even present in the Halaf phase (period III) at nearby Tell Damashliyah. Some of the plain ware bowls look closer to Arjoune Trenches V and VII types, but there are some very general similarities with heavier plain ware jars, i.e. with inverted, upright or slightly everted rim and baggy shape (Akkermans 1988, pls. 73: 75-76, 83; fig. 74: 92-3; cf. Arjoune Trench VI, fig. 25: 16; fig. 27: 35-36, 39); the rare small sloping holemouth (Akkermans 1988, pl. 75: 99; cf. Arjoune VI, fig. 25: 12); or the larger examples with beaded rim (e.g. Akkermans 1988, pl. 73: 76, cf. Arjoune VI, fig. 27: 39). Small fine-ware painted bowls with beaded rim (Akkermans 1988, pl. 77: 126) provide a loose parallel for the one example, of a deep shape, from Arjoune Trench VI (fig. 27: 41). As in Trench VI, rounded and flat bases both occur, but also a few ring bases. Painted pottery is given as 17.6% for Hammam et-Turkman IVA, diminishing thereafter. Rim bands, irregular horizontal bands and swags are represented, though not the tree/branch motif of Arjoune Trench VI (fig. 27: 43), nor the reserve motif of the jar-neck (fig. 27: 45), though possibly related designs on wider necked vessels and bowls are shown in period IV of Hammam et-Turkman. Burnish is very rare. The situation is similar in the Qoueiq area, period E. Survey sherds, mostly from Tell Bahouerte and Tell Berne, include, among the painted ware, conical bowls, sinuous-profiled upright bowls, baggy jars with short upright neck, and longer necked jars with slightly outswept rim, though holemouth jars of any kind are rare (Mellaart 1981, figs. 134-143). Here the plain ware has similar types (Mellaart 1981, fig. 133) without burnish, incised/impressed or rope-pattern decoration, or lug handles. The extensive repertoire of black-on-white painted designs includes at least one tree/branch motif (sherd 625). Closely related to the Balikh and Qoueiq material is that of the Amuq E period at Tell Kurdu. Here, among the painted ware (Ubaid-like monochrome) which reaches over 70% of the total, conical bowls are quite common among the range of more curved, flaring, carinated and inverted-rim bowls, as are the sinuous upright bowls or beakers, and short-necked baggy jars (Braidwood and Braidwood 1960, figs 146-153). As diameters are not shown in the publication it is not always possible to distinguish holemouth jars from bowls with inverted rim, but genuine holemouth jars with steep shoulders probably are present in plain ware (Braidwood and Braidwood 1960, figs. 139, 142), as are conical bowls and baggy jars with short upright necks, or longer and slightly outswept ones (ibid., fig. 142). Among the small proportion (5-9%) of DFBW there seem to be examples of steep holemouths and rather baggy pots; also of deep basins similar to Arjoune Trench VI (fig. 26: 24, 25) which are burnished and the heavier type (fig. 27: 38) which is not. There are a few beaded rims in Amuq E, and both flat and rounded bases (but also rings and pedestals). Small vertically and horizontally pierced lugs are found on both plain and painted wares. Among the mass of Amuq E painted motifs are rim bands, swags and several examples of the tree/branch type.

(EB1) (Mellaart 1981, 151); in Amuq E at Tell Kurdu, with under 10% of DFBW (Braidwood and Braidwood 1960, 177); at Ras Shamra (Contenson 1992, tableaux 24 and 27), where the period of Arjoune VI may be missing between periods IIIC and IIIB; at T. Sukas, where the sequence also looks incomplete, but where there is slip and burnish in period M2 (Oldenburg 1991, 49); and at Qalcat al-Mudiq where burnish is common but where the stratigraphy of the sounding is unfortunately confused (Collon 1975). At Hama, in period L3-1, designated Halaf/Ubaid, burnish is absent altogether (Thuesson 1988), and at Byblos (Dunand 1973), where burnishing is common throughout the Neolithic, it disappears from the whole of the Chalcolithic. However, burnished ware is known from the Wadi Rabah culture in the south, which is probably a little earlier than Arjoune Trench VI. The red slipped and burnished ware of the southern Levant which extends into the Early Bronze Age appears to belong to a separate tradition. Red-wash ware, equated with the Halaf-Ubaid transition and Amuq D, is found in Arjoune Trench VI, but forms only 6% of all sherds (though a somewhat higher proportion, around 10%, of rims). It is not found at all in the Trench V and VII Halaf period material. No bow-rim jars, often linked with this ware, occur. If, as has been suggested, red-wash ware forms a distinct assemblage with a distribution that can be traced from a northwestern core area into the Beqac valley, to Byblos, to the Damascus basin and into Palestine (Leenders 1989), then its scarcity at Arjoune may be explained partly by the chronological gap between the Trenches V/VII and the Trench VI material which the radiocarbon dates indicate. However it looks more likely that Arjoune preserves a separate tradition. The red washed and burnished ware further northeast, e.g. Qoueiq D, has parallels with Arjoune Trench VI among only the simplest shapes and does not present a convincing ancestral tradition for the prevalent burnished wares of Arjoune VI. Distinctive of the pottery shapes is the shallowness of any curvature and the absence of carination, giving a tendency to conical and straight-sided bowls (figs.25: 1-6; fig. 26: 19-20, 23-25); slightly sinuous profile upright bowls/beakers (fig. 25: 9-11); sloping-shouldered holemouth jars (figs.25: 12; fig. 26: 28-29); and ‘baggy’ sloping-shouldered jars with upright and inverted rim (fig. 25: 13-16; fig. 26: 17, 27; fig. 27: 39). REGIONAL COMPARISONS Parallels for the main types distinguished in Arjoune Trench VI can be found over a very wide geographical area, and indeed in some cases over a considerable span of time, but invariably in company with a variety of other shapes not known at Arjoune. Northern Syria and Cilicia. The two most characteristic Arjoune bowl shapes are found as part of the assemblage at Hammam et-Turkman in the Balikh area in period IVA, equated with Amuq E, but in the finer painted ware rather than the plain (Akkermans 1988, pl. 68-71). Conical bowls are apparently quite common, and 38

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery and a few baggy pots with sloping shoulder and barely everted rim, mostly among the painted pottery. The motifs include the common rim band and shallow swags, as well as the practice of leaving narrow bands in relief, rather in the manner of Arjoune Trench VI sherd no.45 (see especially Contenson 1992, figs 222: 7 and 223: 6; also Courtois 1962, 356, figs. 23: K, 26: K, 27: H, L). There is a small number of burnished sherds reported (Contenson 1992, 181), red, grey or brown, sometimes on a slip; some were impressed/incised, but quite differently from at Arjoune, apart perhaps from incised grooves. Other examples of incision occur with painted patterns. Again, there is not very much correspondence with Arjoune Trench VI. A few examples of relief or finger indentations on the shoulder or neck carination of large jars are found in IIIC (Contenson 1992, 176), and rare relief bands on red-wash ware (Contenson 1992, 179). Still on the coastal plain but further south, at Tell Sukas, the Chalcolithic is represented by periods M1 and M2 in one deep sounding (Oldenburg 1991, fig. 3 and pls. 1-4). The deposit is shallow and it seems likely there are gaps in the sequence. Period M2 has DFBW, possibly intrusive from underlying Neolithic deposits. Slipped and burnished ware occurs in both M2 and M1. Painted pottery has only very simple designs, including the ubiquitous rim band, and apparently forms only a small proportion of the whole. Some conical and upright-sided bowls are reported from both M2 and M1, also upright-neck jars and sloping holemouth jars, expecially from M2. There are large jar handles as at Ras Shamra, rather than the pierced lugs of Arjoune Trench VI, and incised and applied or relief decoration is so rare as to be negligible. Period M1 may equate rather with Amuq F/G (Early Bronze Age) than with the period of Trench VI at Arjoune. Inland, a sounding at Qalcat al-Mudiq revealed, inter alia, painted pottery of Late Northern (Syrian) Ubaid type, but unfortunately the stratigraphy consisted of episodes of collapse or erosion of the side of the tell rather than a true sequence. The shapes of the painted Ubaid material, from layers V, IV and III(b-c), have some striking parallels with the burnished bowls of Arjoune Trench VI in conical bowls (Collon 1975, pls. X: 8; XII: 49-50), even with the slightly bulging base of Arjoune VI, here fig. 25: 2 and 9 (Collon 1975, pls. X: 13; XI: 21, 32), including deeper bowls. However, bowls with low carination are also featured, as are everted-neck jars, while the Arjoune Trench VI types of holemouth and baggy jars are not present in the painted Ubaid pottery. There are two kinds of burnished pottery at Qalcat al-Mudiq, but it is not clear which, if either, is contemporary with the painted Ubaid. One is common especially in layers Va and IV and is relatively fine and greyish; the other is coarser, chaff-faced and lightly burnished, and comes from layers IV, III and II. The former has a few deep, heavy holemouth jars but no inverted-neck jars; both groups have some baggy pots, some with upright necks. It seems probable that the first group is Neolithic (perhaps Amuq B), the second much later, Amuq F (EB1). On the other hand, some plain ware presumably accompanies the Ubaid painted. There is a

Further north-west in Cilicia, the ‘Ubaid’ Levels XV-XIII at Mersin have, amongst other things, deep bowls, sloping holemouth and upright-neck jars; also painted irregular horizontal bands and the ‘tree’ motif (Garstang 1953, fig. 103). Similarly, the Tarsus ‘Ubaid'’phase has conical, deep basin-shaped and sinuous upright-sided bowls, and upright-necked baggy jars among a much larger repertoire (Goldman 1956, figs. 340-341). Central Syria. Moving south and closer to Arjoune, the coastal sites of Ras Shamra and Tell Sukas and the inland sites of Qalcat al-Mudiq and Hama, while still within the sphere of the ‘Syrian Ubaid’, show some different characteristics from the Amuq and northeast. Unfortunately all of these four sites present chronological and stratigraphic difficulties of one kind or another, and especially in their relation to Arjoune. The prehistoric levels at Ras Shamra were reached by deep soundings, which are linked in the publications only by the classification of the artefacts. Period IV is equated with the Halaf sequence, IVC with Amuq C and IVB and A with Amuq D. Period IIIC (III.1 in earlier reports) belongs to the Halaf-Ubaid transition in terms of painted pottery and is equated by the excavators with Amuq E; it has a radiocarbon date of 4148 ± 173 bc (Contenson 1992, 195), calibrated to c.4900 BC, which places it around the older limit of possible dating for Arjoune Trench VI. This period at Ras Shamra, like the preceding period IV, is dominated by red-wash ware (couverte rouge), accompanied by painted pottery of a degenerate Halaf style. The red-wash ware continues into the lower layers of phase IIIB (III.2), characterised by painted pottery of Syrian Ubaid style, though the presence of large numbers of Ubaid sherds in pits cut into IIIC layers (Contenson 1992, 75, 178; tableaux 24A and B, and 27) must cast some doubt on the relationship of red-wash ware to Ubaid here. If red-wash ware is considered as a distinct assemblage associated with late Halaf and the transitition to Ubaid (Leenders 1989, where it is equated with Amuq D), it may fall chronologically between Arjoune Trenches V/VII and VI. Some red washed or red slipped sherds were reported from Arjoune Trench I (Marfoe et al. 1981, fig. 5: 2, 5, 1112) from small shallow ‘pans’ cut into virgin soil, and the shapes of these sherds would relate as well to V/VII types as to those from VI, for example inverted or upright rim jars and everted rim bowls. While in Ras Shamra IIIC there are some parallels with Arjoune Trench VI shapes such as inverted-neck jars, sloping holemouths (jar or deep bowl), and upright-sided bowls, and a few pierced lugs, the overall impression is of a rather different repertoire, with curved and carinated bowls, shallow dishes or platters, large true handles, and above all the bow-rim jars, none of which are found at Arjoune (de Contenson 1992, figs. 216-219). The same can be said in comparison with Ras Shamra IIIB (de Contenson 1992., figs. 220-233), where inverted-neck jars are no longer found and sharply everted-neck jars and tall narrow-necked jars are added to the common types. There are, however, some rather more conical or straight-sided bowls, upright-sided bowls, 39

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery Southern Syria. Once south of Arjoune, in the broad area between the province of the Syrian Ubaid in the north and the Ghassulian in the south (i.e. the Lebanese coast, the Beqac and the Damascus basin) the evidence becomes uneven. The important site of Byblos on the coast, occupied from early ceramic Neolithic times, is strategically placed for contacts with north and south both along the coast and inland, and has a richness of forms reflecting a variety of influences. The Énéolithique Ancien, dated to the early 4th millennium (uncalibrated) and believed to be of short duration, corresponds ceramically probably most nearly to the period of Arjoune Trench VI. The very straight-sided conical bowls (jattes) (Dunand 1973, fig. 119: 33789; fig. 120: 27247, 23906, 32162; pl. CXLVII) are obviously similar to Arjoune examples (here figs. 25: 1; 26: 24-5). They have antecedents at least as far back as the preceding Néolithique Récent (Dunand 1973, fig. 85, top row) where they occur also as large basins, with horizontally pierced lugs or small handles (Dunand 1973, fig. 89: 28176, pl. LXXXVIII). However there are various other types of bowl found in the Énéolithique Ancien unfamiliar to Arjoune (see e.g. Dunand 1973, fig. 119), and the Arjoune VI upright beaker/bowl does not appear among them. Wide holemouth jars with steeply sloping shoulders (pots, cratères, jarres à large embouchure) are a strong feature at Byblos (Dunand 1973, figs. 123, 124), and are among the types used for funerary jars (Dunand 1973, pl. CXLI-CXLV). They go back well into the preceding Neolithic period (Dunand 1973, figs. 85, 86, 90), where the inverted neck still found on Arjoune Trench VI jars also occurs (Dunand 1973, pls. LXXXIX: 31902; XC: 29187), and other types of jar necks (Dunand 1973, fig. 90; pls. XC: 26435 and XCI: 28221) are closer to Arjoune VI jars (e.g. fig. 27: 35, 36 and possibly fig. 25: 8) than are those of the Byblos Énéolithique Ancien. The smaller baggy jar with short upright neck from Arjoune Trench VI (fig. 25: 13-15; fig. 26: 17,27) is hardly to be found. Handles are strongly represented from early in the Neolithic at Byblos, but tend to be on larger vessels, and not the small pierced lugs on bowls of Arjoune VI. Bases at Byblos are both round and flat, as at Arjoune. Fabric is coarse, grit-tempered and low-fired, brick-red or light coloured in the Énéolithique Ancien (compared with red-brown to black in the preceding period). Burnish (lustrage) was quite common in the Néolithique Récent, as was a dark or red slip (engobe), and a red wash (barbouillage) on holemouths and large vessels (Dunand 1973, 141), but in the Énéolithique Ancien, while a red or brown slip is frequent, the use of wash decreases and burnish is limited to very rare examples of finely polished exterior slip, and painted pottery (rare in the Néolithique Récent) is unknown. Incised or impressed decoration, on the other hand, has a long history, and simple bands of punctate impressions, single oblique incisions and chevrons are present, among many other and more complex patterns, from the early Neolithic. This decoration became much less prolific by the Néolithique Récent, and in the Énéolithique Ancien very rare and confined to simple designs, as at Arjoune Trench VI (Dunand 1973, 190 and fig. 119), though chevrons were no longer found. Relief bands in rope-pattern

radiocarbon date of 3000 ± 210 bc (uncal.) from layer IV and another of 2455 ± 245 bc from a bone from a tomb in layer III(b). Further elucidation of the earlier sequence at Qalcat al-Mudiq would be most interesting. Further south at Hama the material from Period L is designated Halaf/Ubaid and the continuity of the two phases emphasised; the deposits are equated with the end of Ras Shamra IIIC and IIIB, and dated to the early 4th millennium bc in uncalibrated terms (Thuesson 1988, 90-91). Continuous development into Period K, i.e. the Late Chalcolithic-EB transition, is posited. At Hama there is an abundance of painted pottery, but its overall proportion to unpainted sherds is not known, the published tables referring to registered sherds only. Undecorated coarse wares have vegetable as well as mineral temper, medium wares have mineral only, and both can have a slip or a reddish wash, the latter thought to relate to the common red-wash ware of Ras Shamra. Painted decoration, including bichrome, occurs on the same coarse and medium ware, and also on a finer ware. Overall, the shapes of Hama L seem to be close to those of Arjoune Trench VI, as might be expected from its location. There is a preponderance of bowls over jars in the ratio of 3:2. Straight-sided and conical bowls are well represented throughout: in the lowest phase of the deep sounding G11x (Thuesson 1988, pls. IV: 3-4; V: 8), in the lowest phase of square I.11 (pl. VIII: 1-5, 7); in L3b (pl. XI: 1); in L3a ( pl. XV: 1-3, 6, 8, 11); in L2 (pl. XX: 1-5, 7, 9; XXI: 1); and in the latest phase L1 (pls. XXIV: 1; XXV: 7). Deeper, slightly heavier, basin shapes, e.g. pl. XXIV: 6, 9, 12 of L1, show similarities with Arjoune Trench VI, as do the slightly flared bowls of pl. X: 1 and 2 from L3b and XVI: 5 from L3a. Besides some bowls of more rounded profile there are, however, also bowls with low carination, or with slightly in-turned rims, or out-turned and beaded or squared-off rims, which are not present in Arjoune Trench VI, and parallels for the upright, slightly S-shaped beaker/bowl of Arjoune Trench VI are hard to find at Hama. Upright and inverted-neck jars and steep-sided holemouths do occur, e.g. Thuesson 1988, pls. IV: 1, 10 from the lowest levels; XIII: 8, 12 from L3b; XVII: 2, 9, 10 (L3a); XXII: 1, 2, 7 (L2); and XXVI: 1-2 (L1), often with the low-shouldered baggy shapes noted from Arjoune Trench VI, along with a variety of flared, rolled, squared-off and grooved rims unknown at Arjoune. Many rims are, however, rounded and tapered on both bowls and jars. Most of the comparisons above are with painted ware, partly because of the bias in recording but also of its apparent preponderance. There does not seems to be a clear distinction of fabric between unpainted and painted ware at Hama. Horizontal bands painted outside and inside rims occur throughout the painted pottery, as do shallow swags, sometimes so broad as to leave narrow reserve zigzags reminiscent of Arjoune Trench VI (fig.28: 45), and occasional irregular bands. Burnish does not occur at all. As a general reservation, it should be noted that some broad parallels for the common shapes of Arjoune Trench VI can be found in both the much earlier Neolithic phase of Hama M and in the succeeding phase of Hama K. 40

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery Ghassulian, may be contemporary with the Beersheba sites in the south (dated by a radiocarbon sequence at Safadi to roughly 3500-3200 bc) and later than classic Ghassul (and Arjoune VI); this is based on a date from Rasm Harbush in the Golan of 3292 ± 150 bc uncalibrated (Epstein 1979). This northern Chalcolithic overlies (and perhaps overlaps) incised and burnished ware related to the Wadi Rabah culture at Tell Turmus in the Huleh basin (Epstein 1978, 39), while in periods VII and VI at Tell Teo, southwest of Galilee, the same incised and burnished ware occurs together with a few Golan-type storage jars and Ghassulian churns (Eisenberg 1989, 32 note 2 and fig.4). The Wadi Rabah culture and related variants is seen in a recent study as covering a broad area from the coast inland to the middle Jordan and Huleh valleys (and even to the Beqac at Ard Tlaili), and tentatively assigned a span of some 500 years within the 5th millennium bc (Gopher and Gophna 1993, 327-8). Its later limits are ill-defined. It occurs below Ghassulian material at a few more sites (including Wadi Rabah itself), but if the northern Ghassulian is indeed later there may be some chronological overlap with the classical Ghassulian at the type-site. A radiocarbon date of 3740 ± 140 bc for normative Wadi Rabah at Ein el-Jarba on the plain of Esdraelon seems rather low (a second date of around 3000 bc must be discounted), but may indicate that this cultural assemblage extended into the early 4th millennium in uncalibrated terms, close to the period under consideration for Arjoune Trench VI. It is of interest because of the prevalence of burnished and incised pottery. It shares a number of other salient features with the northern Levant coastal sphere, notably Ras Shamra IV A-B and Amuq D, such as bow-rim jars, very shallow bowls or platters of various shapes, deeper bowls with carination and flaring rim, and perhaps a fondness for red slip, wash, and rim bands, or red fabric. These characteristics would fit well with the similar chronological horizon, rather earlier than Arjoune Trench VI. Comparing the southern pottery groups with the Arjoune Trench VI assemblage, the occurrence of burnish in Wadi Rabah pottery has already been noted. It is common in the western sites, e.g. Wadi Rabah (Kaplan 1958) and Ein el-Jarba (Kaplan 1969), and inland, e.g. Tell Turmus, espcially phases 5-6 (Dayan 1969) and Tell Teo VII and VI (Eisenberg 1989, 35), very often on a slip, usually black but also red or brown on a lighter fabric (grit-tempered except the coarsest wares). Among the extensive repertoire of incised, impressed and combed designs the simple horizontal bands of oblique slashes, herringbone, grooves, punctate rows and fingernail impressions are included (e.g. Eisenberg 1989, fig. 4: 3-4), and, as in the simpler Arjoune Trench VI examples, occur on burnished ware. Bands of applied rope-pattern, incised or thumb-impressed, are present though apparently not common. Painted designs occurred at some sites only, e.g. Ein el-Jarba: simple rim bands as in the few Arjoune Trench VI examples, as well as semicircles and cross-hatched lozenges, which are perhaps parallelled by painted fine wares reported from Jordan valley sites, together with coarse wares of Ghassulian (Kataret es-Samra: Leonard

were already known in the Néolithique, especially on large jars (e.g. Dunand 1973, figs. 90; 91: 27027); plain raised bands became common in the Énéolithique. Further down the coast Dakerman, on the southern side of Sidon, is reported (Contenson 1982, 79-80) to have a small deposit equated with Byblos Néolithique Récent, including burnished pottery, and further levels with pottery technically close to Byblos Énéolithique Récent, but not illustrated. Inland the evidence is thin. In the Beqac survey no material was identified which corresponded to Byblos Énéolithique. A few sites had, in addition to pottery of Byblos Néolithique Moyen and Récent type, other sherds which it was suggested might belong to a different Chalcolithic assemblage of the Beqac (Copeland and Wescombe 1966, 10-11). Some large straight sided bowls (with slip, and some burnished) are illustrated from Tell Ain Nfaikh (ibid., fig. XXXIX: 10-12), along with earlier Byblos Néolithique Moyen/Récent sherds, while Tell Saoudi yielded two sherds of burnished late Neolithic. In the Damascus basin, the sketchy remains of Tell Ramad III (the final phase) with burnished pottery apparently belong to the early pottery Neolithic. The site of Tell Khazzemi, destroyed by airport construction, was only briefly reported with a few photographs of pottery and no drawings (Contenson 1968). It was judged to be pre-Ghassulian, from the end of the 5th millennium bc and the beginning of the 4th. Decoration of indented cordons, impressed lunules and incised lines is the nearest point of approach to the Arjoune VI Trench assemblage, and also possibly the presence of many small lugs (but some are unperforated), in addition to round handles and other attachments. However, all the pottery was red-slipped, and burnish is not mentioned, while apart from deep bowls and basins the repertory of everted-rim bowls, rounded- thickened- or flat-rim holemouth jars, and jars with pronounced shoulder, cylindrical neck and everted rim, seems quite unrelated to, as well as possibly being earlier than, the assemblage from Arjoune Trench VI. The Jordan Valley There is a great deal more evidence for the relevant period from the region extending from the Golan and the Huleh basin in the north to the Dead Sea in the south, with the coastal areas and the far south as peripheral. Despite some confusion in nomenclature and a scarcity of continuously occupied sites, the increase in published material and radiocarbon dates is beginning to clarify the complex picture. Teleilat Ghassul is one of the few sites with a considerable depth of deposit, continuity of development and a series of radiocarbon dates (Hennessy 1982; Radiocarbon 26 (1984), 335). The early phase (though not the site's earliest levels) produced dates of the mid-5th millennium (uncalibrated), and pottery which might be termed pre-Ghassulian (Hennessy 1969, figs. 9a and b). It follows, therefore, that it is the upper levels, the classical Ghassulian of the type site (with an uncalibrated date of 3700 bc for the last use of one of the sanctuaries), which are contemporary with Arjoune Trench VI. The Chalcolithic of the Golan and the Huleh area in the north, apparently related to the 41

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery (Gophna and Sadeh 1988-9), Tell Ali (Sussman 1990), and possibly Jericho VIII (Garstang's Chalcolithic: Garstang 1935 and 1936) and Kataret es-Samra (Leonard 1979). But they also have elements of the classic Ghassul – cornets, possible churns and impressed lug-handles at Jiftlik (Leonard 1992, pl.1) and pointed bowls at Tell Abu Habil (Leonard 1992, pl.20: 1-2) – and of the northern Chalcolithic of the Golan and Huleh – impressed lug handles and applied rope decoration on pithoi at Abu Hamid (Dolfus et al. 1988)) and even to the Proto-Urban/EB1 period (Tell esh-Shuneh, with an unbroken development of pottery into the EBA: Gustavson-Gaube 1986). Radiocarbon dates are lacking for this group of sites (although Abu Hamid has been dated to the early 4th millennium bc on geomorphological grounds), but in view of the early determinations for the end of Teleilat Ghassul they may well post-date it, or perhaps belong to an underlying Jordan valley assemblage lacking the distinctive Wadi Rabah and Ghassulian features. Some recurring shapes and features throughout these sites include many of those characteristic of Arjoune Trench VI: straight-sided and conical bowls; sloping holemouth jars; inverted-neck and upright-rim jars (e.g. at Abu Habil: Leonard 1992, pl. 22: 6); baggy-shaped jars, though often smaller than at Arjoune (e.g. Abu Habil: Leonard 1992, pl. 21: 11, 22; pl.22: 5, and Tell el-Mafjar: pl. 3: 15); small beaker/cups or bowls (Tell el-Mafjar: Leonard 1992, pl. 2: 16-22); pierced lug handles, some on cups or bowls (Tell el-Mafjar: Leonard 1992, pl. 2: 23; pl. 5: 5); single applied rope-pattern bands, mostly on holemouth jars, but also on footed vessels and even bowls (Tell el-Mafjar and Abu Habil: Leonard 1992, pl: 5: 1, 3, 4; pl:20: 21; Tell Hamid: Dollfus et al. 1988, fig. 8: 6, 8); simple incised, impressed and punctate band decoration (Tell Hamid: Dollfus et al. 1988, fig. 10; Abu Habil: Leonard 1992, pl. 21: 10, 16); rare painted decoration, including rim bands, irregular bands (Jiftlik: Leonard 1992, pl. 1: 1, 4; Tell Hamid: Dollfus et al. 1988, fig. 8: 4), and the tree-motif (Tell Hamid: Dollfus et al. 1988, fig.10: 13). Almost all of these features were known also in the Ghassulian (see above).

1989) or pre-Ghassulian (Tell Tsaf: Gophna and Sadeh 1988-9) type. Overall, the Wadi Rabah pottery shapes do not have a great deal in common with those of Arjoune Trench VI, though some straight-sided basins and conical bowls (even with lug handles) do occur, and upright and inverted-neck jars and sloping holemouths, e.g. at Tell Teo and Tell Turmus, as well as some rather small beaker shapes, e.g. at Ein el-Jarba. Various kinds of pierced lugs also occur together with larger handles, all of which have a long history in the south. However the most characteristic shape (at least in the western sites) of the bow-rim jars, as well as the sharply everted rims on both jars and bowls, the hemispherical bowls and bowls with low carination, the shallow platters, and the storage jars with heavy flattened rims, are all totally absent from Trench VI at Arjoune. Returning to the Ghassulian pottery assemblage, specifically the middle and upper phases at the type-site (Hennessy's phases E or D to A, and Ghassul IV in the earlier excavations), here bowls are very abundant (Koeppel 1940, part 2) and straight-sided bowls in particular show some close parallels with the Arjoune Trench VI range (Hennessy 1969, figs.6-8), including some with horizontally and vertically pierced lugs (Hennessy 1969, pl.77: 3; Mallon and Koeppel 1934, fig.43: 5; North 1961, fig.16-17 (Trench B), level 5c, no. 8574). Pierced lugs are a well known feature of the Ghassulian assemblage. Some jars with fairly upright rim and sloping shoulder (‘baggy’ shaped) do occur (Koeppel 1940, pl. 82: 12-13); Mallon and Koeppel 1934, figs. 59: 1; 50: 1), and occasionally larger jars with inverted neck (Mallon and Koeppel 1934, fig.50; Koeppel 1940, pl.79: 11), though certainly neither is characteristic here as in Arjoune Trench VI. Sloping holemouths are also known (e.g. Hennessy 1969, figs 5: 7; fig. 6: 5; fig. 8a: 6, fig. 8b: 8), although some are low-carinated bowls rather than holemouth jars. Bases are predominantly flat, though round bases are occasionally found. Some of these shapes were already present in the early (‘pre-Ghassulian’) phases at Ghassul (Hennessy 1969, figs. 9a-b). Simple incised, punctate and fingernail-impressed bands close to Arjoune Trench VI examples are also a fairly common Ghassulian feature (Mallon and Koeppel 1934, figs. 60, 62; Koeppel 1940, pl. 86; Hennessy 1969, fig. 8b: 3), as are raised bands with impressed (or incised) rope-pattern, including bowls (North 1961, figs. 16-17, levels 8 (second row) and 30). Painted decoration includes common rim bands, also irregular horizontal bands (Hennessy 1969, figs. 6: 8; 7b: 8) and swags (Hennessy 1969, fig. 6: 1, 6; fig. 7b:6). The distinctive type-fossils of the classic Ghassulian, such as churns, cornets and jars with multiple handles, are of course absent from Arjoune. They are also absent or rare at a number of sites in the Jordan valley – Jiftlik, Tell el-Mafjar, Tell Abu Habil, Abu Hamid, Tell es-Shuneh I – which are mostly termed Late Chalcolithic but evidently pre-date the Late Chalcolithic/Proto-Urban period at, for example, Jericho, later Tell esh-Shuneh, and Umm Hammad. The pottery from these five sites has some links with pre-Ghassulian and Wadi Rabah material, for example at Teleilat Ghassul itself (Hennessy 1969, figs. 9a-b), Tell Tsaf

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Somewhat surprisingly, no entire assemblages closely parallel to that of Arjoune Trench VI have come to light. Individual comparisons have been found over a wide range, but they have been mostly rather general and always accompanied by other, unrelated, material. It should be noted that these comparisons have had to be drawn from differing bodies of material: sherds from surveys, from small probes and major excavations, from large and small sites, from one-period deposits and from deep soundings. Some have an abundance of whole vessel shapes, many have few or none. Publication varies from the extensive and well illustrated to the preliminary and sketchy, and there is a bias towards painted pottery where present, especially in older reports. While bearing in mind these and other common difficulties, it is worth while drawing together a few connecting threads as they appear from the above survey of the Arjoune Trench VI pottery in its context. 42

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery Small pierced lugs also appear widely in space and time, though they seem to be absent from the Qoueiq valley in Period E, contemporary with Trench VI. However, they are found most frequently on jars, and nowhere are lugs on bowls the norm as they are in Trench VI. Applied rope-pattern decoration also occurs early, though it is rare or absent in the northern Levant. At Byblos and the related area it ceased to be a feature in the Énéolithique. In the Wadi Rabah culture it is infrequent, but in the Ghassulian and non-Ghassulian chalcolithic of the Jordan valley it is common, and in the Golan it becomes a strong feature. In Arjoune Trench VI it is rare, like the small lug handles, but unlike these it was not present in the Halaf period assemblage of Trenches V and VII. The incised/impressed decoration of Trench VI is also basic and occurs in a very similar manner from the earliest pottery neolithic onwards, though it has become rare or absent in the northern Levant by the 4th. millennium bc. At Byblos, after a long floruit in the neolithic, it declined and became rare and even more simplified than at Arjoune. It is certainly present in simple forms in the Ghassulian and other Jordan valley sites; in the Wadi Rabah culture it is common in more complex forms, and in the upper Jordan valley (Tell Turmus, Tell Teo) it occurs notably on burnished straight-sided bowls. The painted sherds of Trench VI are too few for any meaningful analysis of parallels. Interior and exterior rim bands, shallow swags and irregular bands are common throughout the whole of the Levant and the Syrian Ubaid. The tree/branch motif is similarly widespread, though rare. Only the reserve motif of Arjoune Trench VI (fig. 27: 45), the shapes of this and of fig. 27: 41, and perhaps the fine and highly fired fabric of four of the pieces, justify attribution to the Syrian Ubaid. Burnishing, the distinctive and common surface treatment of the Arjoune pottery, is surprising at a time when the long northern tradition of dark-faced burnished ware and Halaf burnished ware had been superseded or become very rare in surrounding areas – the Qoueiq and Amuq valleys, and the coastal area (Ras Shamra, Byblos). Where burnish is found it is often on a contrasting dark or red slip; this is also true of the Wadi Rabah culture in the south, which, in spite of general parallels with Arjoune Trench VI, does not seem to have any definite connection. Nor does the rare occurrence of burnish, again usually on a red slip, in the more contemporary Ghassulian culture provide a convincing link. There is, of course, a strong tradition of burnished self-coloured pottery in Anatolia from the Chalcolithic through to the Early Bronze Age; however, in the absence of any distinctive and specific pointers to contact with such a distant region it is more likely that the Trench VI burnished pottery was the preserve of a small local or tribal group. The geographical location of Arjoune clearly leaves it open to influences from all directions – the northeast, the northwest, the coast, and the south through the Jordan rift valley and the Beqac. As might be expected, the closest parallels, at least for shapes, come from the sites of Qalcat al-Mudiq and Hama in the inland area to the north, the nearest excavated sites to Arjoune. These parallels are mostly

The radiocarbon dating at Arjoune presents an internally consistent sequence, and in conjunction with the occurrence of Halaf and Ubaid pottery can be accepted as accurate. Although the amount of Ubaid pottery from Trench VI is very small, it is enough to justify the comparison of the entire assemblage of that Trench with the pottery of the ‘Syrian Ubaid’ period in the northern Levant and inland. In the area around and to the south of Arjoune there are problems with chronology, stratigraphy, and the patchiness of evidence, and in the southern Levant there is an unfortunate prevalence of one-period sites or short occupations. Neverthless there is ample evidence of forerunners as well as contemporary examples of the Trench VI forms. Some of the common shapes of Trench VI, such as straight-sided bowls, steep holemouth jars, inverted-neck jars, baggy jars with fairly upright necks, and small horizontally and vertically pierced lug handles, have a long history, especially in the southern Levant, and indeed continue or recur in later periods. In the 4th. millennium bc the already ancient shape of the holemouth jar is still found over the whole region. The sloping-shouldered type of Arjoune Trench VI is found, among other variants, in the south; on the coast at Byblos it occurs as a large storage jar, and in the north as a shallower closed bowl more often than as a taller jar. Inverted-neck jars, also a common type in earlier periods, persist at Arjoune after they had virtually disappeared in the north and along the coast. They also still occur at most sites in the Jordan valley. Baggy jars with upright or slightly everted shortish necks on steeply sloped shoulders, common in Trench VI, occur rarely but over a wide area, from the Amuq and the Qoueiq and Balikh valleys in the north to the Ghassulian sites in the south (though in some cases only in a much smaller version of the shape). However, they hardly appear ever on the coast, for example at Ras Shamra. Beakers or bowls with upright sinuous profile, which are rather difficult to define at Arjoune in the absence of complete vessels, are also almost lacking parallels elsewhere. Everted-neck jars, usually coarse, heavy vessels in Arjoune Trench VI, are again an early-appearing and widespread type, though usually the neck is more sharply angled on globular shoulders than appears to be the case with Arjoune examples. Curved-profile bowls, shallow or hemispherical, are another simple shape too common in different periods to be of use for comparison. Straight-sided bowls, often fairly deep and both small and large, are the most common type in Trench VI, and conical (V-shaped) bowls also occur. These are widespread at this period, especially the conical version, which is to be found from Cilicia, the Amuq and the Qoueiq valley in the north, inland at Qalcat al-Mudiq and Hama, and down the coast from Ras Shamra, Sukas and to Byblos. They include large and small examples, with flat bases as well as flat sides. They occur in the Jordan valley in both the Wadi Rabah culture (again with flat base, and here with both burnish and incision) and in the Ghassulian and other Chalcolithic groups, and they are sometimes noted as a common type where found. 43

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery (fig. 24, sherds 27-43) confirms that these Trenches belong to the Halaf period and cultural sphere. The range of shapes from Trenches V and VII is on the whole very different from that from VI, but neverthless there is some overlap. The common straight-sided and conical bowls of VI are unknown in the plain ware of V and VII, the straight-sided shallow bowls of V (fig. 16: 1) and VII (fig. 22: 1-2) being rather more like small platters. The only parallels are a few among the painted fine wares: V (fig. 19: 80-81, 85) and VII (fig. 24: 32). Other bowls of Trench VI, e.g. shallow (figs. 26: 23; fig. 25: 7) or slightly curved (fig. 26: 18, 20) compare with VII (fig. 22: 3 and 4 respectively), but both are very simple shapes. In place of the typical Arjoune Trench VI bowls, Trench V (though not VII) has a range of small curved and carinated shapes (fig. 16: 2-13) with variously bulging or thickened, out-turned, upright or inverted sides. The large shallow bowls with upright/incurved rims of Trench VII (fig. 22: 6, 7) do not occur in VI (nor in V either). The small bowls with inverted shoulder and long or short flaring rim of Trenches V (fig. 16: 14-18) and VII (fig. 22: 5, 8-9) are quite foreign to Trench VI. One bowl with less sharply angled profile from Trench V (fig. 16: 16) bears some resemblance to the `beaker' of VI (fig. 23: 9), or even to a straight-sided bowl with slightly bulging base (fig. 25: 2), but these are evidently the extreme ends of different spectra. The sinuous profiles of small beaker/bowls of Trench VI (fig. 25: 10, 11) are not far removed from that from V (fig. 17: 29), but the latter seems part of a range of jars or closed bowls with slightly pinched-back rim from both V (fig. 17: 29-31) and VII (fig. 22: 10-11), which are related to steep-sided holemouth jars (VII: fig. 22: 12-13) closely paralleling those of Trench VI (figs. 25: 12 and 26: 28-29). Jars with a short upright or slightly out-turned neck, missing from Trench VII, are represented in V by fig. 16: 19-21, but they do not have the steeply sloping shoulder curved into the neck which gives the typical baggy shape to the Trench VI equivalent (fig. 25: 13-15, and fig. 26: 26, 27). Trench VI has the pinched-back rim (fig. 25: 13) found in the Trenches V and VII jars mentioned above, but because of the steeper shoulder the resemblance to a holemouth is not there. The jars with inverted neck in Arjoune VI (figs. 25: 16; 26: 17) are of a type well represented in V (fig. 17: 32-36), though the heavier version from VI (fig. 27: 39) is less close. The type is not found in Trench VII. Conversely, the jar with high vertical neck found in Trench VII (fig. 22: 14-16), which does not occur in V, cannot really be compared with the vertical necked jar of Trench VI (fig. 25:8), since there is no clue to the overall shape of the respective vessels. The same uncertainty exists in respect of the high flared necks (fig. 27: 35) and heavier necks (fig. 27: 36-38; the latter could be of a bowl) of Trench VI when compared with those of Trench V (fig. 16: 22; fig. 17: 23-24 – the latter's resemblance to a conical bowl is probably fortuitous, as jars with such prominent flaring necks are known from other Halaf contexts – and fig. 18: 46-47) and Trench VII (fig. 22: 8). Among larger bowls or basins, fig. 26: 24-25 and perhaps fig. 27: 38, from Trench VI, look similar to fig. 17:

with shapes of the painted ware, which may be of interest when considering mechanisms for the spread of painted pottery cultures. It might be argued that the paucity of painted pottery at Arjoune Trench VI was due less to diminished contact with the north and northeast than to an impoverishment of the site at this time compared with its Halaf period predecessor, represented by Trenches V and VII, but it must be admitted that there is no supporting evidence for this in the other categories of material; and it should in any case be recalled that the proportion of painted Halaf ware in Trenches V and VII is itself little more than 3%. The fertility of the surrounding countryside was presumably the primary reason for the existence of the site in both periods, and differences in economic activity - which are distinguishable in the archaeozoological data - perhaps by a group with different contacts and alliances, might account for the decline in the incidence of painted ware. The lack of any of the salient and long-lived features of the Ras Shamra assemblages of both periods IIIC and IIIB, such as bow-rim jars, platters, true handles, and the scarcity of red-wash, seems to indicate that Arjoune was little affected by this influential coastal centre to the northwest. That there are no demonstrable contacts with the nearer coastal area through the Homs-Tripoli gap, on the other hand, is more likely to be the result of insufficient evidence, as is also the case with the Damascus area to the south. The lack of correspondence with the Beqac valley and the tendency to diverge from the trends at Byblos are more surprising. The absence of characteristic Ghassulian types is less so, considering the distance involved. In view of the anomalies in the central Levant, the features which the Trench VI pottery has in common with the material from the Jordan valley sites, and more problematically with the Wadi Rabah culture, need to be treated with caution until the intervening areas are better explored and the chronology and relationship of the southern cultures further defined. At the end of this review of the Trench VI pottery the inference can be drawn that developments in technology and techniques, represented by shapes and to some extent by surface treatment such as burnish, appliqué and incision, continued to filter along coastal and inland routes between the northern and southern Levant during the period of Arjoune Trench VI as it had always done. The innovative concepts and contacts coming from the northeast, represented by painted pottery in the Chalcolithic, were maintained, though less strongly than in the preceding period at Arjoune. However, the unfortunately limited repertoire of the Trench VI material allows only general comparisons with surrounding areas, and the impression of links at least as strong with the southern Levant as with the north may reflect only an imbalance in available evidence. COMPARISON OF THE TRENCH VI POTTERY WITH THAT FROM TRENCHES V AND VII Judging from their radiocarbon dates the deposits of Trenches V and VII are contemporary, and some centuries earlier than those of Trench VI (see Chapter V). The fine painted pottery from V (figs. 19-20, sherds 57-114) and VII 44

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery cross-strokes. The two well defined shapes of Trench VI (fig. 27: 41 and 45) have no precursors in V or VII. It is worth mentioning that the apparent dichotomy between fine painted ware shapes and those of common plain/burnished wares apparent in Trench VI is less pronounced in the Halaf period material, where some at least of the distinctive shapes have finer versions in painted ware, i.e. bowls or jars with flared neck (e.g. fig. 19: 59-66 from Trench V; fig. 24: 27 from Trench VII), sloping holemouth jars or bowls, some with pinched-back rim (fig. 16, and fig. 21: 119 from Trench V; fig. 24: 28-29 from Trench VII), and shallow platter/bowls (fig. 24: 30 from Trench VII), even to the drilled hole as in the plain-ware example (fig. 22: 2 from Trench VII). The coarser ‘local painted wares’ of Trench V (fig. 21, especially 115-118), not found in VII, parallel the plain unburnished jars of the same Trench (fig. 17: 32, 34; fig. 18: 46-47). To summarise: the parallels between the pottery of Arjoune Trench VI and that of Trenches V and VII are mostly rather general or concern basic and ill-defined shapes such as shallow and round bowls and upright- or flared-neck jars. The closest parallels, sloping holemouth and inverted-neck jars, are rather archaic and long-lived shapes. The really typical and definitive shapes of both periods – the carinated and flared-neck bowls and flattened-rim plain heavier vessels of Trenches V and VII, and the straight-sided and conical bowls and baggy jars of Trench VI – are rare or entirely absent in both directions. It will be recalled that a similar conclusion was reached above in connection with regional comparisons for the Trench VI pottery: most of the parallels between Trench VI and other more-or-less contemporay sites involve the common and/or long-lasting types, and not those which are really distinctive of Trench VI. The long survival of some archaic forms, the recurrence of burnishing (common also in the early Pottery Neolithic at neighbouring Tell Nebi Mend) and simple incised decoration, the extreme scarcity of fine painted ware, and even the dichotomy between this and the plain wares (unless this is simply the result of the scarcity of the evidence), suggest greater conservatism and regionalisation, though not necessarily isolation, at Arjoune in the 4th millennium bc than in the 5th.

26 from Trench V. However, the typical deep vessel of Trenches V (fig. 18: 37-45) and VII (fig. 23: 17-25) with a flattened and (sometimes massively) thickened rim, whether deep bowl, upright-sided basin or steep holemouth jar, unburnished and often large and heavy, is totally absent from Arjoune VI, though found elsewhere in both periods. As in Trench VI, both rounded and flat bases were found in the earlier Trenches. Small pierced lugs were equally uncommon in both periods (figs. 18: 52-54; and fig. 21: 130 are from Trench V), but there is nothing to suggest that in the earlier phase they were found only on bowls, as they were in Trench VI, or even on bowls at all; the lugs from V and VII could be from jars. Applied rope-patterns were also rare in the earlier deposits; the examples shown from Trench V (fig. 18: 55-56) are multiple bands on the shoulder or body of fairly fine-ware vessels, with the technique of application different from that found in Trench VI. As regards incised decoration, multiple horizontal grooves on the rims of bowls and the sides of jars are found in Trench V (fig. 18: 48-51), though not in VII, but are less regular than the solitary example of a single-line incision from Trench VI (fig. 26: 25). Burnishing of the plain wares was almost as common in the Halaf period deposits of Trenches V and VII as later, and as in VI was applied to the outside of smaller and finer bowls and jars, sometimes over the rim, more rarely to the inside of open bowls and to larger vessels, though not at all to the flat-rim types. Fabrics of the plain wares were different in the two periods, but similar treatment to produce a contrasting surface colour, especially under burnish, can be observed. The (presumably unintentional) mottling is also found in both periods. Comparisons between the Halaf painted ware of Trenches V and VII and the few painted sherds from Trench VI are not very meaningful. A horizontal band of paint on the inside rim, and the outside, is quite common in the Halaf ware, and irregular bands and shapes occasionally occur (figs. 19: 67, 75 from Trench V). The ‘tree’ motif of Trench VI does not appear (but compare, perhaps, fig. 20: 112-113, from Trench V), nor does the zigzag (fig. 27: 45), although examples from V (figs. 19: 74 and 20: 90-91) have a similar design of narrow horizontal reserve bands with fine

45

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery FIGURE 16 Arjoune V: Burnished Ware No.

Provenance

1

V.211.2

2 3

V.115.3 V.201.2

4

V.202.2

5

V.102.2

6

V.102.2

7

V.221/2.4

8

V.220/201

9 10

V.102.2 V.103.2

11

V.201.2

12

V.301/310

13

V.102.2

14

V.201.2

15

V.103.2

16 17

V.221.2 V.102.3

18

V.113.3

19

V.111.3

20

V.201.2

21

V.102.2

22

V.201.2

Description Light brown fabric with grit temper. Highly burnished black exterior and interior. Brown fabric with grit temper. Burnished red exterior. Light red-brown fabric with abundant grit temper, including large inclusions over 3 mm. Burnished red exterior. Red-brown fabric with some grit temper. Burnished dark brown exterior. Red fabric with some grit temper. Inner surfaces black. Burnished red and black mottled exterior and interior rim. Light red-brown fabric with grit temper. Burnished red-brown exterior. Light red-brown fabric with grit temper. Burnished black exterior and interior rim. Light red fabric with grit temper, including some large inclusions. Burnished red exterior. Red-brown fabric with some grit temper. Burnished red exterior. Soft, pink fabric with sparse grit temper. Burnished red, orange and black exterior. Pink-grey fabric with abundant grit temper. Burnished black exterior and interior rim. Red-brown fabric with grit temper. Highly burnished black exterior and interior rim. Grey fabric with abundant grit temper, including large inclusions. Burnished dark brown exterior. Light brown fabric with small amount of grit temper. Burnished black and brown exterior and interior rim. Light brown fabric with grit temper. Highly burnished red-brown exerior and interior rim. Light brown fabric with grit temper. Burnished brown exterior Light red-brown fabric with small amount of grit temper. Burnished black and brown exterior and interior. Red-brown fabric with abundant grit temper. Burnished black and brownexterior and interior rim. Light red-brown fabric with abundant grit temper. Burnished black and brown exterior and interior rim. Light red-brown fabric with grit temper. Burnished brown exterior and interior rim. Red fabric with abundant grit temper. Burnished black exterior and interior rim. Light brown fabric with grit temper. Burnished brown exterior.

46

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery

47

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery FIGURE 17 No.

Provenance

Description

Arjoune V. Burnished Ware (continued) 23 24

V.201.2 V.201.2

Light brown fabric with grit temper. Burnished brown exterior. Red-brown fabric with abundant grit temper, including some large inclusions. Burnished black andbrown exterior.

Arjoune V. Burnished and Unburnished Ware 25

V.102.2

26

V.212.2

27

V.212.2

28

V.203.2

29

V.211.3

30

V.221.2

31

V.404.2

32

V.201.2

33 34

V.115.2 V.116.2

35

V.211.2

36

V.112.2

Red-brown fabric with abundant grit temper. Dark brown surfaces, not burnished. Red-brown fabric with abundant grit temper. Burnished dark brown exterior. Grey fabric with grit temper. Black burnished exterior and interior rim. Light red-brown fabric with abundant grit temper. Burnished black exterior and interior. Red-brown fabric with sparse grit temper. Highly burnished black exterior and interior rim. Soft, light brown fabric with abundant grit temper. Burnished red exterior and interior rim. Light red-brown fabric with some grit temper. Smoothed brown exterior, not burnished. Light red-brown fabric with grit temper. Smoothed grey exterior and interior, not burnished. Red fabric with abundant grit temper. Burnished black exterior. Red-brown fabric with abundant grit temper. Smoothed brown exterior and interior, not burnished. Grey fabric with sparse grit temper. Burnished grey and black exterior and interior rim. Red fabric with abundant grit temper. Burnished black exterior.

48

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery

49

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery FIGURE 18 No.

Provenance

Description

Arjoune V. Unburnished Ware 37

V.104.2

38 39

V.103.2 V.113.3

40

V.221.2

41

V.110.4

42

V.102.3

43

V.102.2

44

V.104.3

45 46

V.113.1 V.201.2

47

V.113.1

Dark red-brown fabric with grit temper. Brown exterior and interior with chaff on exterior surface. Red-grey fabric with grit temper. Red-brown fabric with abundant grit temper. Smoothed black exterior. Light red-brown fabric with grit temper. Brown exterior. Predominantly black interior. Light brown fabric with grit and sand temper. Abrasive texture. Smoothed brown exterior and interior. Dark grey-brown fabric with abundant grit temper. Smoothed brown exterior and black interior. Light red-brown fabric with abundant grit temper, including many large inclusions. Smoothed brown exterior. Light grey-brown fabric with abundant grit temper. Smoothed brown exterior. Red-brown fabric with abundant grit temper. Red-brown fabric with abundant sand and grit temper, including large inclusions. Abrasive texture. Dark red-brown fabric with grit temper. Smoothed exterior.

Arjoune V. Miscellaneous forms. 48-56

(Provenances and descriptions not available)

50

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery

51

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery FIGURE 19 No.

Provenance

Description

Arjoune V. Fine Painted Ware 57 58

V.102.4 V.102.4

59 60

V.101/202 V.102.3

61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68

V.203.2 V.111.3 V.113.3 V.101/401 V.103.3 V.221.2 V.201.2 V.201.2

69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77

V.103.2 V.313.2 V.110.4 V.104.3 V.303.3 V.104.2 V.403.2 V.403.2 V.200/300

78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89

V.210.1 V.104.2 V.102.4 V.102.2 V.301/310 V.403.2 V.103.2 V.404.2 V.311.2 V.121.3 V.121.3 V.104.2

White fabric. Lustrous black paint. (Cf. plate IV: 1) Very pale brown fabric with sparse grit temper. Lustrous black-brown paint. White fabric with occasional grit. Lustrous black paint. White fabric with occasional grit. Lustrous brown and matt orange paint. White fabric. Lustrous black paint. (Cf. plate IV: 5) White fabric. Thick red-brown paint. (Cf. plate IV: 2) White fabric with occasional grit. Lustrous black paint. Pink-white fabric. Lustrous black-brown paint. White fabric. Lustrous black paint. White fabric with occasional grit. Lustrous black paint. White fabric. Black-brown paint. Very pale brown fabric with occasional grit. Lustrous black-brown paint. White fabric with occasional grit. Lustrous black-brown paint. White fabric. Lustrous black paint. (Cf. plate IV: 3) White fabric. Lustrous black paint. Very pale brown fabric with occasional grit. Light brown paint. White fabric. Black paint. Very pale brown fabric. Lustrous black paint. Red-pink fabric with occasional grit. Lustrous red-brown paint. White fabric. Black-brown paint. White fabric with occasional grit. Lustrous brown paint on rim. Orange-brown hatching. Very pale brown fabric with occasional grit. Light brown paint. White fabric. Lustrous black-brown paint. White fabric. Lustrous black paint. White fabric with grit. Lustrous black paint. Light red fabric with occasional grit. Red paint. White fabric with occasional grit. Lustrous black paint. Very pale brown fabric with grit. Lustrous black paint. Soft white fabric with sparse grit. Black paint. (Cf. plate IV: 11) Very pale brown fabric with grit. Lustrous light brown paint. Very pale brown fabric with grit. Red-brown paint. Light grey fabric. Lustrous black paint. White fabric. Lustrous black paint.

52

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery

53

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery FIGURE 20 No.

Provenance

Description

Arjoune V. Fine Painted Ware (continued) 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114

V.104.2 V.211.3 V.201.2 V.202.1 V.301/310 V.Surface V.404.2 V.303.2 V.111.3 V.404.2 V.313.2 V.220.1 V.202.3 V.112.2 V.115.3 V.221.1 V.203.3 V.411.3 V.102.3 V.410.1 V.102.3 V.313.2 V.101/401 V.404.2 V.115.3

White fabric with occasional grit. Black paint. White fabric with sparse grit. Lustrous red-brown paint. White fabric. Lustrous black paint. White fabric with grit. Lustrous black paint. White fabric with sparse grit. (Cf. plate IV: 6) No description available. White fabric with occasional grit. Lustrous black paint. Very pale browm fabric with grit. Lustrous black paint. (Cf. plate IV: 4) White fabric with grit. Lustrous black paint. Very pale brown fabric with grit. Black paint. (Cf. plate IV: 10) White fabric with occasional grit. Lustrous black paint. White fabric. Black paint. Light grey fabric. Lustrous brown paint. Very pale brown fabric. Lustrous black-brown paint. (Cf. plate IV: 9) Very pale brown fabric. Black paint. (Cf. plate IV: 12) White fabric with grit. Black paint. White fabric with occasional grit. Light brown paint. (Cf. plate IV: 7) Pink-white fabric with grit. Lustrous brown paint. Very pale brown fabric with occasional grit.Lustrous black paint. White fabric with grit. Black paint. White fabric with grit. Black paint. (Cf. plate IV: 8) White fabric with occasional grit. Black paint. White fabric with grit. Lustrous black paint. White fabric with grit. Lustrous black paint. Pink fabric with occasional grit. Lustrous light brown paint.

54

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery

55

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery FIGURE 21 No.

Provenance

Description

Arjoune V. Local Painted Ware (All these vessels are of a pink fabric, mostly with grti temper, though thicker pieces often contain vegetal temper also and have a grey core,. The paint is red to dark brown.) 115 117 118 119 120 121 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133

V.103.3 V.104.2 V.200/300 V.202.3 V.112.2 V.313.2 V.201.2 V.302.2 V.201.2 V.314.2 V.102.3 V.310.1 V.313.2 V.313.2 V.311.2 V.313.2 V.313.2

56

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery

57

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery FIGURE 22 No.

Provenance

Description

Arjoune VII. Burnished Ware 1

VII.1008.3

2

VII.1000.1

3

VII.1010.2

4 5

VII.1000.1 VII.1002.3

6

VII.1007.3

7

VII.1006.3

8

VII.1007.2

9

VII.1007.2

10

VII.1001.3

11

VII.1006.3

12

VII.1006.3

13

VII.1001.3

14

VII.1011.3

15 16

VII.1011.3 VII.1005.3

Brown fabric with grit temper. Burnished black exterior and interior. Grey-brown fabric with occasional grit temper. Burnished black exterior and interior. Pink-red fabric with occasional grit temper. Burnished red exterior. Brown fabric with grit temper. Burnished black exterior. Grey-brown fabric with sparse grit temper. Burnished grey-black exterior. Brown fabric with some grit temper. Burnished brown exterior and interior rim. Red fabric with sparse grit temper. Burnished red exterior and interior. Brown fabric with sparse grit temper. Burnished brown-black exterior and inner rim. Grey fabric with occasional grit temper. Highly burnished brown exterior and interior rim. Pink-grey fabric with grit temper. Burnished red-brown exterior and interior. Light brown fabric with occasional grit temper. Burnished brown-black exterior and interior rim. Grey fabric with sparse grit temper. Highly burnished black exterior. Red fabric with sparse grit temper. Highly burnished red exterior and interior. Light brown fabric. Abundant grit temper including some large inclusions. Description as above. Pink fabric with sparse grit temper. Burnished red exterior and interior.

58

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery

59

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery FIGURE 23 No.

Provenance

Description

Arjoune VII. Unburnished Ware 17 18 19 20

VII.1002.3 VII.1001.2 VII.1007.3 VII.1007.3

21

VII.1001.2

22

VII.1000.1

23 24 25 26

VII.1000.1 VII.1000.1 VII.1007.2 VII.1010.2

Light brown fabric with grit temper. Brown fabric with grit temper. Smoothed exterior surfaces. Brown fabric with large amount of grit temper. Smoothed exterior. Grey-brown fabric with grit temper. Smoothed exterior and interior surfaces. Grey fabric with occasional grit temper. Smoothed brown exterior and grey interior. Dark grey fabric with large amount of grit temper. Smoothed exterior and interior surfaces. Brown fabric with abundant grit temper. Abrasive texture. Brown fabric with abundant grit temper. Description as above. Description as above.

60

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery

61

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery FIGURE 24 No.

Provenance

Description

Arjoune VII. Fine Painted Ware. 27

VII.1008.3

28 29

VII.1000.1 VII.1007.3

30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43

VII.1006.3 VII.1005.2 VII.1002.3 VII.1002.3 VII.1003.3 VII.1002.2 VII.1002.3 VII.1000.1 VII.1008.2 VII.1005.3 VII.1005.3 VII.1007.2 VII.1007.3 VII.1007.3

Pink fabric with occasional grit temper. Red-brown and black paint. Pink fabric. Red-black paint.. Pink-white fabric with occasional grit temper. Lustrous black paint. White fabric. Black paint. Pink fabric with occasional grit temper. Lustrous brown paint. White fabric with grit temper. Orange paint. White fabric. Brown-red paint. White fabric with occasional grit temper. Black paint. White fabric. Black paint. White fabric with occasional grit temper. Lustrous black paint. White fabric. Red-brown paint. White fabric with occasional grit temper. Black-brown paint. White fabric. Black paint. Pink-white fabric. Brown paint. White fabric with occasional grit temper. Black paint. White fabric. Lustrous brown paint. White fabric with occasional grit temper. Black paint.

62

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery

63

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery FIGURE 25 No.

Provenance

Description

Arjoune VI: Burnished Ware 1

VI.701.3A

2

VI.702.3A

3

VI.702.3B

4

VI.801.3

5

VI.801.3

6

VI.801.3

7

VI.703.3B

8

VI.700/800.3

9

VI.700/800.3

10

VI.700/800.3

11

VI.701.3A

12

VI.703.3B

13

VI.701.3A

14

VI.702.3A

15

VI.706.3B

16

VI.803.3

Red-brown fabric with fine grit temper. Burnished black exterior and interior. Light brown fabric with abundant small grits. Black core. Burnished black exterior and interior. Pale brown fabric with occasional grit temper. Burnished grey-brown exterior and interior. Dark grey fabric with abundant small grit temper. Black burnished exterior and interior. Vertically pierced lug. Red fabric with grit temper. Burnished black-brown exterior and interior. Horizontally pierced lug. Light red-brown fabric with fine grit temper. Burnished red exterior and interior rim. Pink fabric with small grit temper. Grey core. Burnished red-brown exterior and interior. Pink-grey fabric with abundant grit temper,including large white grits over 1mm. Crumbly texture with slightly grey core. Burnished red exterior and interior. Grey fabric with grit temper. Burnished black exterior and interior. Grey fabric with grit temper. Burnished grey-black exterior and black interior. Red-grey fabric with occasional grit temper. Burnished grey-black exterior and interior. Light grey fabric with occasional grit temper. Burnished black exterior and interior. Pink fabric with grit temper, including large grits over 1mm. Grey core. Burnished red and black exterior and interior rim. Light brown fabric with grit temper, including occasional grits over 1mm. Burnished red, yellow and black exterior and black interior. Light brown fabric with grit temper. Grey core. Burnished red exterior and interior. Light red-brown fabric with abundant grit temper. Abundant large grits over 1mm. Crumbly texture. Burnished red exterior and interior.

64

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery

65

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery FIGURE 26 No.

Provenance

Description

Arjoune VI: Burnished Ware (continued). 17

VI.500.1

18

VI.600/700.3

19 20

VI.701.3A VI.700.2

21

VI.801.3

22

VI.800.1

23

VI.700.2

24

VI.701.3A

25

VI.704.3A

26

VI.702.3A

27

VI.701.3A

28

VI.801.3

29

VI.705.3B

30

VI.700.2

31

VI.700.1

32

VI.701.3A

33 34

VI.701.3A VI.600/700B

Pink-grey fabric with occasional grit temper. Grey core. Burnished brown exterior and interior. Very pale brown fabric. Simple incised decoration below rim. Burnished black, brown and red exterior and interior. Description as above. Pink fabric with grit temper, including occasional grits over 1mm. Punctate decoration below rim. Burnished red exterior and interior. Light brown fabric with grit temper. Incised chevron decoration below rim. Burnished black-brown exterior and interior. Pink fabric with grit temper, including occasional grits over 1mm. Punctate decoration below rim. Burnished red exterior and interior. Light red-brown fabric with grit temper. Slightly grey core. Punctate decoration below rim. Highly burnished black exterior, brown around the rim. Vertically pierced lug. Light brown-grey fabric with occasional grit temper. Grey core. Punctate decoration below rim. Burnished black exterior, brown interior. Red-brown fabric with grit temper, including grits over 1mm. Grey core. Incised line below rim and punctate decoration below the line. Burnished black exterior and interior. Light brown fabric with abundant grit temper. Grey core. Punctate decoration below rim. Burnished light brown exterior and interior. Light brown fabric with occasional grit temper. Two lines of impressed decoration below rim. Burnished brown and orange exterior, black interior. Light grey fabric with grit temper. Line of thumb-nail impressions below rim. Black burnished exterior and interior. Very pale brown fabric with grit temper. Incised chevron decoration below rim. Burnished orange and black exterior and interior. Light red-brown fabric with grit temper. Incised chevron decoration. Burnished orange and black exterior and interior. Red-brown fabric with abundant small grit temper. Burnished black exterior. Incised decoration. Light brown fabric with abundant grit temper, including some large inclusions. Burnished black exterior and brown interior. Incised decoration. Description as above. Very pale brown fabric with fine grit temper. Burnished red, brown and black exterior and interior. Incised decoration.

66

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery

67

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery FIGURE 27 No.

Provenance

Description

Arjoune VI: Unburnished Ware 35 36

VI.801.3 VI.702.3A

37

VI.705.3B

38

VI.703.3A

39

VI.801.3

Pink fabric with some grit temper. Light brown-grey fabric with abundant grit temper and some large inclusions. Black-brown exterior and interior. Brown fabric with abundant large grit temper. Black exterior and interior. Applied and impressed band below rim. Light red fabric with abundant large grit temper. Black and red exterior, red interior. Red fabric with abundant grit temper and many large inclusions.

Arjoune VI. Painted ware. 40

VI.802.3

41 42 43

VI.802.3 VI.705.3B VI.701.3A

44

VI.702.3B

45

VI.700.1

White fabric with greenish tinge, with sparse grit temper. Possible traces of black paint on exterior surface. Description as above, but with clear traces of black-brown paint. Description as above. Pink-white fabric with some grit temper. Thin brown painted decoration over roughly smoothed white exterior. Pink fabric with abundant grit temper and crumbly texture. Thin red-brown paint over smoothed white exterior. White fabric with strong green tinge. Some grit temper. Transparent black painted decoration. Sherd is distorted owing to high firing temperature.

68

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery

69

VI. The Prehistoric Pottery

Plate IV. Selection of painted pottery from Trench V. (1) Cat. No. 57; (2) Cat. No. 62; (3) Cat. No. 70; (4) Cat. No. 97; (5) Cat. No. 61; (6) Cat. No.94; (7) Cat. No. 106; (8) Cat. No. 110 (upside down); (9) Cat. No. 103; (10) Cat. No. 99; (11) Cat. No. 85; (12) Cat. No. 104 (upside down).

70

CHAPTER VII THE LITHIC INDUSTRIES Lorraine Copeland

(NOTE: revised July 1998) METHOD OF STUDY INTRODUCTION Each of the sacks brought to London at the end of each season contained finds from each discrete deposit or layer of each Trench, and each was dealt with separately as follows. The contents of a sack were washed in hot soapy water, some of the dirtier pieces being further cleaned with a soft nail-brush; no sulphuric acid was used to remove concretions, but a few pieces reserved for drawing, if concreted, were left overnight in vinegar. The finds were sorted into four categories: tools, cores, various unretouched flakes and fragments etc., and non-artefactual debris. Each category was further broken down into sub-types. The tools were marked, classified, and many were drawn. Although not always marked, the debitage was also carefully examined and representative pieces drawn. A number of stone objects in each layer appeared not to be man-made but to have been naturally-fractured and weathered; these are excluded from the artefact totals (for comments on the origin of this component, see Chapter VIII). The results were tabulated in three forms: 1) in a detailed, or ‘long list’ of types and sub-types of artefacts (see further below), listed exactly as excavated, in the numerical order of the various layers in each of the excavation units (trenches and loci); 2) in a ‘short list’, with sub-types amalgamated, but listed as before by trench, locus and layer; 3) in an ‘amalgamated list’, wherein the artefacts from all of the loci and layers were added together to form one assemblage per trench. This procedure was adopted for the following reasons: although during excavation minor differences of soil colour and texture were observed, the fillings of the pits were found to be essentially homogeneous and lacking any unambiguous evidence, in the shape of clear and continuous surfaces, which might have suggested successive stages of occupation; rather, the indications were that the fillings consisted of domestic rubbish which had accumulated, or been thrown in, over a relatively short period of time (for a discussion of this, see Chapters III and XIV). In addition, although more might have been expected to emerge from a study of the spatial distributions of the artefacts (at least in the case of Trench V), the artefact samples from individual loci were often small and, when larger, were often without diagnostic tool-types.

A total of 13,874 flint and stone artefacts was recovered from Arjoune during the four seasons of excavation, as follows: 1) In 1978, 541 artefacts were found, coming mainly fromdisturbed contexts in Trenches I-IV on Area A; 455 of these were published in the preliminary report (Marfoe et al. 1981), and are also reviewed below. 2) In 1979 a total of 9,773 artefacts and 2,465 natural stones was excavated from Trench V and two pieces were Trench VII was excavated and produced 1,812 collected from the surfaces of Areas B and C. 3) In 1981, 1,477 artefacts and 383 natural stones were recovered from Trench VI. These seemed somewhat different typologically from those of Trench V, suggesting a later date. 4) In 1982 artefacts and 157 natural stones, while Trenches IX - XIII produced another 271 pieces. They appeared similar to those found in Trench V. At the end of each season most of the excavated stone objects (containers and registered milling-tools excluded) were brought from Syria to London, where they were successively studied by the present writer, classified by conventional methods, representative pieces drawn, and a report prepared. Each of the four reports thus represented material from different, unconnected excavation exposures. In 1987 uncalibrated radiocarbon determinations were published (Gowlett et al. 1987; see Chapter V above) which confirmed the similarities seen in the material of Trenches V and VII, being similar in date: 4662 ± 65 bc and 4622 ± 52 bc respectively. In contrast, the Trench VI dates are in the range 3779 ± 46 bc. As we shall see, although it is accepted that two different cultural phases are present, the length of the time between the two was unexpected, given the artefact typology. (The calibrated determinations now available and published here in Chapter V suggest that these dates may in all cases be as much as a millennium too low, but this has not been taken into account in the present discussion.) In view of the above procedures it has been decided in this final report, first to present separately the descriptions of the artefacts from each Trench, and then, at the end, to discuss the material as a whole. 71

VII. The Lithic Industries walk away there is a gravel terrace on the Wadi Rabiyah, an Orontes tributary, which contains flint pebbles. On the east bank of the Orontes flood-plain there is an exposure of fluviatile conglomerate, mainly consisting of water-rolled flint and chert pebbles and cobbles in a lacustrine marl matrix. This may represent a gravel bar in an earlier Homs lake, and could be the origin of many flint and chert artefacts or natural stones found in the excavation. It appears that the local bedrock consists of an indurated lacustrine marl which, when eroded, forms angular slabs and flattish pebbles; these may well be the source of the numerous heavy-duty tools of soft stone to be described below. Limestone and basalt, both available in the area, were also used for heavy-duty artefacts. Obsidian, probably imported from more than one Turkish region, forms a small component of less than 1% of the stone materials used at Arjoune.

So far as could be detected, even when some of the larger samples from different loci were compared, the flint typology appeared to be similar throughout. As a result, patterning in any one Trench, even if it existed, was not easy to discern, either between stratigraphic or spatial units. It is, however, worth pointing out that in Trench V the radiocarbon dates do occur in the correct order as to depth. Because of these factors it is the amalgamated list which will be used in this report. CLASSIFICATION The type-list used here is designed to fit the peculiarities of the Trench V, VI and VII assemblages, and differs slightly from that used in the first report on the Trench I-IV material (Marfoe et al. 1981). The names used are the conventional ones employed among prehistorians as a formal means of summarising data. Although some terms imply function (e.g. borer, end-scraper), it is probable that, as the results of microwear analyses show (Unger-Hamilton 1983 and 1988) such tools could have been used for other tasks. Similarly, the microwear traces show that many of the unretouched blades, not counted as tools, were in fact utilised, for example to cut soft materials, as was found also at Meer (Cahen, Keeley and Van Noten 1979). The tool-names used, therefore, are not to be regarded as necessarily indicating their function, but rather as a part of the attempt to identify, in the conventional way, certain stylistic and technological characteristics pertaining to the assemblages of each trench. The type-lists will be used to determine the developmental stage reached by the Arjoune knappers of each phase, and to compare these stages with those reached by their contemporaries, both Halafian and Levantine ‘Middle Neolithic’ of the 5th-4th millennia. Certain non-flint artefacts are included in the study because artefacts of limestone, basalt and indurated marl were clearly part of the industry, associated with knapping procedures (hammers, anvils), replacing some more common flint tools (scrapers, choppers), or being used for multiple tasks including milling and the like (grinders, pestles). The number dealt with here may represent a minimum total of such tools, where use was visible to the naked eye. Excluded from this group are the larger, more clearly classifiable or intact non-flint pieces which were registered in the field; these are studied by Dorrell (Chapter VIII). To sum up: the classification of the stone artefacts forms a necessary initial step, forming part of the multipronged approach which will help to lead to an understanding not only of the way of life of the Arjoune people but also of their cultural relationships. To this end, each tool class has been discussed in turn in a ‘comments’ section, relating it to its regional and chronological context, the latter made easier by the results of the radiocarbon determinations.

THE LITHIC INDUSTRY OF TRENCH V (Tables 1a-b) The sample of flint and other stone artefacts recovered from Trench V was much larger than that available for Trenches I-IV, discussed in the first preliminary report (Marfoe et al. 1981). The Trench V material discussed here consists of 12,238 pieces of flint or stone, of which 1,004 are tools, 8,769 are debitage (unretouched flakes or cores) and 2,465 are non-artefactual. The tool total includes a number of non-flint fragments of artefacts presumed to have been used for milling or flint-knapping; the registered large or intact stone tools, such as mortars, are not included (for these see Chapter VIII). TOOLS Axes, picks and chisels (7) Figs 28: 1, 4, 9; 29: 1; 41: 4. A possible axe rough-out came from the surface of Locus 200, and a fragment from Locus 202.1. One pick of flint came from the 101-401 baulk (fig. 28: 9); it is, alternatively, a pointed chopper, but resembles a pick from Qalcat al-Mudiq Va (Otte 1976, pl. III: 18). There are four chisels, one of limestone. They are unusual in being retouched only at the bit (fig. 28:4; fig. 41:4). They are made on pebbles (originally, no doubt, slabs) with rectangular section. They grade into the group of pestles, which are distinguished by having cylindrical or square sections as in fig. 41: 1-3, and also into the group of narrow-bitted choppers such as fig. 30: 3. [Note: Also found in 1979 were two axes, one from the surface of Area B, the other on Area C. Since they are typologically contemporary with Trench V material, they are described here for convenience. Fig. 28:1 shows a white limestone axe, polished at the working end; it resembles the smaller one found in the first season (Marfoe et al. 1981, fig. 10: 3). It is similar to stone axes found in 6th-4th millennium sites in the Beqac, e.g. Ard Tlaili. The other is regarded as an axe rough-out (fig. 29: 1); it is of celtoid shape with trapezoidal section.] Comment. Heavy-duty tools are regarded by workers at other sites as woodworking equipment (Cauvin 1968;

RAW MATERIAL According to the studies of Dorrell (Chapter II) no flint was immediately available to the Arjoune knappers, except for such pebbles as were incorporated into the low alluvial terrace on which the site lies. However, about one hour's 72

VII. The Lithic Industries The total is given as approximate because of the frequency of borderline cases; the choppers grade into cores, scrapers, or even pestles. Whatever the activities carried out in the vicinity of the Trench V pits were, they clearly involved chopping, pounding or some kind of percussive task and in this they complement the anvils, palettes etc., i.e. the presumed supports of whatever was being struck or crushed. These two classes of processing equipment are referred to as outils percutantes and outils repercutantes by Nierlé (1982, 178ff). At Ras Shamra the only chopping-tool came from the late Halaf level Niveau IVB (Contenson 1962).

Kirkbride 1969) and some of the axes at Arjoune were apparently used to cut wood (Unger-Hamilton 1983); axes and chisels seem to form a negligible part of the Arjoune V industry. The same was found at Qalc at al-Mudiq and is in contrast to the abundance of these tools at coastal or mountain sites such as Byblos, Mouchtara or Ras Shamra (Cauvin 1968; Contenson 1962). An exception is the Late Chalcolithic coastal village of Dakerman near Sidon (Saidah 1979; Hours 1979) where only one axe was found, perhaps because the village was abandoned. If axes are solely woodworking tools, their absence at Arjoune may reflect the more steppic environment east of the mountain chain. Axes were relatively scarce also at Tell Khazzameh in a similar environment (the Damascus basin: Contenson 1968).

Sickle elements (125) Figs. 32-33. These are assumed to have been hafted to form parts of composite tools. Sixty pieces have sickle sheen, a lustre presumed to have resulted from the cutting of organic material. Another 65 have no lustre, but their general shapes, retouch and/or edge damage, follow closely those of the lustred pieces; they are here regarded as sickles. In the case of many specimens this view has been supported by microscopy (see Unger-Hamilton 1983 and 1988). Almost all the sickle elements are made on blades of moderate width, mainly of triangular section (fig. 32: 2, 7). The broad, Canaanean type of blades with trapezoidal section are rare (fig. 32: 5). The dimensions are shown in the illustrations. The sub-types are: 1) Unretouched or nibbled blade segments with visible lustre (18 pieces: fig. 32: 13). 2) Abruptly-backed, with each end truncated by direct retouch (30 specimens: fig. 32: 1-5). 3) Abruptly-backed with one retouched and one snapped truncation, or both snapped (44 pieces: fig. 33: 1; fig. 32: 14). 4) Unbacked but bi-truncated (29 specimens: fig. 33: 9-11). 5) Crescentic-backed, the back and truncations forming a continuous curve (4 pieces: fig 32: 11, 12; fig. 32: 3). Although most pieces are broadly oblong, some have obliquely-truncated ends (fig. 32: 8, 9); at Tell Assouad they are the distal or proximal components of the sickle as a whole (Cauvin 1973) and most of the Arjoune pieces have also been inserted end-to-end, mainly in straight handles, a few in curved handles (Unger-Hamilton 1983 and 1988). The latter also notes that lustre cannot be seen when the piece is made in coarse flint or chert. Specimens with pronounced teeth were not present, but several had fine or irregular denticulations (fig. 32: 1, 2, 8; fig. 33: 1). The working-edge was often very worn. The backing was almost always abrupt, but some irregular (fig. 32:6), semi-abrupt (fig. 32: 2) bipolar (fig. 33: 6, 9) or cortex backs (fig. 33: 1) were observed. Comment. The sickle elements (when unlustred pieces are included) form an important class in all trenches at Arjoune. Their characteristics place them somewhat later than the early Pottery Neolithic (no large-toothed pieces) and before the Late Chalcolithic (no ‘standardised’ long and broad Canaanean blade types) of the Levant, e.g. Dakerman (Hours 1979). Fine-toothed and backed sickle elements with one or two truncations are characteristic of Byblos, where they

Arrowhead fragments (3) Fig. 28: 5-6; fig. 44: 12 Two of the three broken arrowheads are burned. Unger-Hamilton suggests that such burning occurs when the owner attempts to melt whatever had been used as adhesive after removing the tool from the haft. The best preserved (fig. 28: 5) is of pressure-flaked black flint and has a lentoid section. Fig. 28:6 is also partly pressure-flaked and resembles a similarly rough piece from Byblos (Cauvin 1968, fig. 10). The third piece, fig. 44: 12, seems to be a tip fragment with the typical inverse distal retouch (as in figs. 5: 1 and 7: 2 etc. of Cauvin 1968). It is probable that these are the remains of Byblos or Amuq Point fragments (see similar piece in fig. 1: 1 of Marfoe et al. 1981). Comment. Their poor condition and the absence of other leaf-shaped projectile points at Arjoune V shows that, just as at equivalent Middle Neolithic/Halaf sites, this kind of arrowhead was no longer being used; none occurred at Shams ed-Din (Azoury and Bergman 1980), few at Sabi Abyad and Qalcat al-Mudiq and fewer at Ard Tlaili. Choppers (55 approximately) Figs. 29-31; fig. 40: 1 Curiously, none appeared in the loci of the first season. There are two types, the flint pebble-tool (22 specimens) and the chopper made on non-flint stones - usually limestone or indurated marl slabs, e.g. fig. 40: 1 (30 pieces); there is also a harder limestone piece and one of calcite. Most of the flint pieces are made on rounded river pebbles and both distal (fig. 29: 2, 3, 5) and lateral (fig. 29: 4) chopping-edges occur. All but three are of moderate or small size. The stone pieces are of varied form, ranging from narrow bitted (fig. 30: 3) to broad bitted (fig. 31: 1) types; distal, lateral and discoidal (fig. 31:3) edges occur. The chopping-edge often presents a battered appearance, due either to the lack of resistance to hard use of the raw material, or to its more rapid weathering rate. A characteristic of this group is that many seem to have had multiple uses. It was tempting to class these as composites or even as general purpose tools, but it was not clear whether they have been so used, or used successively, as one feature was worn out or broken, as in fig. 31: 3. A similar problem was noted at Mureybit (Nierlé 1982).

73

VII. The Lithic Industries steep-scrapers (fig.34: 8). Here, too, retouch on the corner seems popular, as in no. 6. There are four possible fan-scraper fragments (no. 12); these are scrapers on cortex flakes or slabs where the regular, continuous retouch is made directly through the cortex, usually all around the flake (some excellent and intact pieces were found in Arjoune Trench VI; see fig. 46: 1 and further discussion of fan-scrapers in the Trench VI analysis and discussion sections, below). A minimum of four limestone or indurated marl scrapers have also been included in the total even though not clearly made on flakes.

amount to 32% in the Néolithique Moyen phase (Cauvin 1968, 100) and these continue into the Néolithique Récent (Cauvin 1968, 128). Our sickles compare well with those from Ard Tlaili and the Late Neolithic Beqac sites. However, few of the Qalcat al-Mudiq Va sickles have backing or truncations – they are mainly slightly retouched, lustred blades; later, in IVb (where sickles form 35% of the tools), a few are backed and/or truncated. As in this report, Otte does not hesitate to include non-lustred pieces of similar typology as sickle elements (Otte 1976, pl. 1). At Shams ed-Din, where microscopy was not carried out, only lustred pieces are counted as sickle elements (Azoury and Bergman 1980); these occur in a percentage comparable with that at Arjoune.

Steep- and core-scrapers (29) Fig. 34: 8, 11, 13. These appear more distinctive than the other scrapers; they are defined as having steep and substantial retouch. The largest are two rabots or planes (a type known in the heavy Neolithic industries of Lebanon: Copeland and Wescombe 1966, 12) and the smallest are six made on pebble cores (fig. 34: 11). Only 3 are made on flakes (fig. 34: 8), the rest on pebble fragments (no. 13) or cores. Two are of limestone. The retouch on all is abrupt, slightly denticulated in 4 cases, or less abrupt but high, as in no. 13.

Microliths; retouched bladelets (16) Fig. 28: 2, 3, 7, 8. Eight of the 16 classed here as microliths (the total excludes obsidian and lustred bladelets) are small blades which were truncated for some unknown purpose (fig. 28: 7). One was abruptly backed, the rest had discontinuous retouch, either distal (fig. 28: 2), inverse (fig. 28: 8) or notched (fig. 28: 3). Retouched bladelets seem to have been unimportant at Arjoune V, but 184 unretouched bladelets and small blades, as well as 103 small bladelet cores and even more numerous prismatic cores for small blades were present; it was most probably from the latter that the retouched bladelets were struck. A similar ‘microlithic’ group was singled out for comment by Cauvin in the Néolithique Récent of Byblos (Cauvin 1968, 171); none is mentioned from the Néolithique Moyen phase. At Shams ed-Din although most of the bladelets were of obsidian, 7.3% of the flint blanks were bladelets.

Racloirs (side-scrapers) (33) Fig. 40: 2; fig. 42: 3 A rather poorly defined class, this group comprises pieces with a lateral scraping-edge. Some limestone pieces, with an edge lateral to the axis, are included (fig. 40: 2 and fig. 42: 3). The most distinct of the flint specimens are composite racloir/end-scrapers as in fig. 36: 1, where the retouch is continuous, or fig. 36: 2, where it is discontinuous. In the Short List the racloirs and raclettes are included with the other scrapers. Raclettes (19) Fig. 38: 2 These are small scrapers on thin blanks, usually flakes, with areas of neat abrupt continuous retouch.

End Scrapers (24) Fig. 34: 2, 3, 5, 10. This is a rather atypical group. Two of the better pieces are shown on fig. 34: 2 and 3. Nine are made on blades, 7 on the distal part of flakes (including cortex flakes and blades) and one on a bladelet, the rest being fragmentary. One is double (fig. 34: 10). Abrupt retouch seems frequent and may be due to the working down and refreshing of the scraping-edge. Retouch is often confined to one corner of the working end (e.g. fig. 34: 2 and 5). A similar scarcity of well-made end-scrapers was observed at Qalcat al-Mudiq V, and only 2.1% were noted at Shams ed-Din.

Burins (42) Fig. 35. Only three are made on truncations (fig. 35: 5, 6, 9), the rest being dihedral burins. They are predominantly straight (fig. 35: 1, 2) or bec-de-flute (7, 8) dihedrals, very often made on natural fracture planes, on a break (2, 3) or on the butt of the flake (10, 11). Three are made on core-like pieces (12). One is double (2). The blanks are usually irregular flakes, cortex flakes or even pebbles. Other burins occurred as composites (see below). A very similar group occurred at Qalcat al-Mudiq, where the most numerous types were those made on a break, on a notch, or natural fracture plane (Otte 1976). The same types in similar percentages occurred at Shams ed-Din (Azoury and Bergman 1980).

Straight-ended scrapers (11) Fig. 34: 1, 9 These are end-scrapers and flake-scrapers with a straight and abrupt working-end (fig. 34: 1, 9) and are hard to distinguish from truncations (presumed to be sickle elements). As with other scraper forms, those with steep angles (e.g. fig. 34: 2, 3) were apparently often used on wood or stone while those with an overhang often made good hide-scrapers, e.g. fig. 34: 1 (Unger-Hamilton 1988).

Borers (44) Fig. 36. Our classification follows that of Cauvin at Byblos and consists of four sub-types, which grade into each other: 1) the fine point or épine type, often virtually unretouched (5 specimens as in fig. 36: 4, 6); 2) the more common perçoir or borer with fine retouched point (30 pieces as in fig. 36: 5,7);

Flake-scrapers (37) Fig. 34: 4, 6, 7, 12 These are made on short, thick flakes and are often somewhat arbitrarily distinguished from racloirs (e.g. fig. 34: 7) and 74

VII. The Lithic Industries the piece was discarded. The totals are therefore tentative. One limestone piece is included (fig. 38: 1). About 12 notches are ma.de on the inverse surface. Two might be described as Clactonian. Several are composites, eg. with a truncation (fig. 38: 4), a racloir (no. 5) or a naturally backed knife (no. 6). The uses to which notched pieces were put is discussed by Cauvin (1968, 170); the traditional function cited is that of removing bark from poles, rods, shafts, etc.

3) the blunt-nosed bec type where the point is degaged by two notches (4 pieces as in fig. 36: 12, 14); 4) the drill-bit or mêche de forêt, a narrow, often rod-like piece with two or three surfaces of abrupt retouch, presumed to have formed the bit of a drill (5 pieces, none intact). Of the latter type, no.8 is broken at both ends and is quite thick, resembling pieces from Byblos Néolithique Récent (Cauvin 1968, 157). No. 9 is similarly broken and thinner; no. 11 may have been of this type before breakage: cf. Cauvin's no. 10 (1968, 159 and fig. 65). At Byblos all these are included as instruments perçantes; see Cauvin's interesting discussion and definitions (1968, 154-163). If drilling and hole-boring had been an important activity at Arjoune, one might have expected to find more drills and even perforated pieces. Unger-Hamilon has, nevertheless, identified several pieces which may have been used to bore wood or pierce hide, as well as true drill bits, one used to drill wood, the other to drill stone. Boring tools form a substantial component of most Chalcolithic industries in the Levant; beside Byblos Néolithique Récent (where they form 17% of the tools), they are characteristic in Ras Shamra IV (e.g. Cauvin 1968, 280, no. 11), and form an important tool group at Shams ed-Din. They are rare or absent at earlier sites (Qalcat al-Mudiq; Byblos Néolithique Ancien). Evidence for use of the bow-drill might have been gained from a study of the marks on the anvils, but for reasons given in discussion of the latter, below, such a study was not considered profitable. The bow-drill was ‘pratiquement prouvée au Néolithique Récent [of Byblos] elle pourrait remonter à Byblos Néolithique Moyen, époque où les mêches apparaissent’ (Cauvin 1968, 163). The question of sleeves or mounts for drills is also awaiting an answer – perhaps this time from the bone industry.

Backed knives (3) Blades with abrupt backing, but which seem unsuitable for use as sickles are rare; this may be due to mistaken classification of some as unlustred sickle elements. In the Énéolithique Ancien (Amuq E) at Byblos and Minet ed-Dalia, a well made knife-like tool appears, having a curved back (Cauvin 1968, 199 and fig. 157); it is not mentioned earlier. The linear scratches on some of the anvils mentioned below may have been caused by the use of cutting-tools such as these knives. Composites (32) Figs. 35 and 36. It was tempting to class many more tools as composites, but many pieces appeared to have had a new tool made on the end of a worn-out one, indicating re-use. The present count, therefore, represents the minimum number of tools with multiple uses, or of tools where one ‘type’ grades into another. The following combinations may be seen: 1) borers with scrapers or with denticulates (10 pieces: fig. 36: 13); 2) scrapers with types other than borers or burins (e.g. racloirs, denticulates) (13 pieces: fig. 36: 1-3); 3) burins with scrapers or denticulates (8 pieces: fig. 35: 6). There are three triple tools, one a notch/borer/denticulate (fig. 35: 12), another a racloir/borer/notch. Composites similar to these occur in all the other trenches.

Denticulates (108) Fig. 37. Numerically important at Arjoune V (c.12% of the flint artefacts), these are very scarce at Arjoune VI and VII. They are a distinctive group, but grade into racloirs or scrapers when the denticulations are less pronounced (fig. 37: 11) or into notched pieces when the denticulates are very large (fig. 37: 8, 10). Two kinds may be seen, a fine-toothed type with semi-abrupt retouch (fig. 37: 11), and a type with larger teeth, usually with higher or more abrupt retouch; however, there are many intermediate pieces and others having both kinds of retouch. The blanks are usually large flakes (fig. 37: 8) or small cortex flakes (nos. 3, 4). At Byblos, denticulates form 7.1% of the tools - a figure somewhat lower than at Arjoune V; the Byblos pieces (Cauvin 1968, 169-170, fig. 74) closely resemble ours. They form 5.2% of the tools at Shams ed-Din.

Abruptly-retouched pieces (29) Although these pieces have areas of abrupt retouch, it is not distinct enough to warrant their classification as scrapers. Most are fragments, often burned. Pieces with nibbled retouch (89) Fig. 38: 3, 8. These are problematic pieces where there are discontinuous areas of semi-abrupt retouch, or marginal (nibbled) retouch. Many are fragmentary and are divided equally among blades, flakes and waste. Exactly how these pieces were used is unclear, but it is likely that they were knives. Bifacially-retouched pieces (5) Fig. 44: 11. We have mentioned one of these pieces - a flake struck from a possible axe (fig. 44: 11). One of the others may be an incomplete tool such as a drill. The rest are fragments.

Notches (102) Fig. 38. As Azoury and Bergman have noted at Shams ed-Din, where notches were frequent, it is not always certain which of the notches in this class were deliberately made and which represent accidental damage in a domestic situation or after

Inversely- or alternately-retouched pieces (9) Fig. 44: 7. In this group, roughly equal numbers of blades and flakes have areas of discontinuous inverse, or inverse and obverse retouch.

75

VII. The Lithic Industries eastern Anatolian origin, and, as we shall see in the discussion section, below, the brown kind could have come from central Anatolia.

Hammerstones (36) Figs. 40: 2; 41: 4; 42: 2. Only the smaller pieces were drawn, but the sizes run from that of an orange to that of a pigeon's egg. All seem to have been used to strike another object, the latter assumed to have been flint or stone – i.e. they were used in flint-knapping or stone-working; this is indicated by the characteristic ‘pock-marks’ and other traces of battering or damage, which occur on the corners or tips of angular pieces (fig. 41: 4), or anywhere on the surface of rounded pieces (fig. 42: 2). Alternatively, some may have been used for the pounding or crushing of minerals such as ochre or lime. The materials noted were: 9 of flint, 18 of limestone or marl, 4 of basalt and one of quartz. There are three common shapes: round balls, egg-shaped pebbles (as in fig. 40: 2), and fragments of slabs with weathered, rounded-off edges (fig. 42: 2). Older tools such as choppers, cores, anvils, etc., were often used. Many of the artefacts at Arjoune were detached by use of a hard stone hammer; the soft (bone or wood) hammers which must have been used for detaching some of the blades and bladelets have, of course, disappeared. Few authors mention hammerstones, but at Byblos in the Néolithique Moyen they were noted as being particularly numerous, about 6 being found per square (Dunand 1973, 120). Another increase was observed in the next phase, the Néolithique Récent, more being of basalt (Dunand 1973, 159). A hammerstone from Shams ed-Din is illustrated by Azoury and Bergman (1980, pl. 2: 1). See also the detailed study of Çayönü non-flint artefacts (Davis 1982).

Other non-flint stone artefacts (approx. 78) Figs. 39-42. (Note: once again it must be stressed that the larger, registered pieces are not included in the following study.) On evidence visible to the naked eye, these fragments of basalt, limestone or marl implements seem to have been used by man. The signs include striations or scratches on the surface and surfaces rendered flat, curved or concave by rubbing, polishing or grinding (unless found to have come about naturally). As with the anvil and hammerstone groups, multiple or successive use seems common (fig. 40: 3), implying a variety of tasks or work stages in which a piece was needed. Similarly, a broad division between hand-held strikers and struck pieces may be suggested, the former to include pestles, polishers, grinders, etc., and the latter the mortars, palettes and containers or dishes. Tentatively, the following forms seem to be present, the terms used differing slightly from those employed by Davis (1982) at Çayönü or by Nierlé (1982) at Mureybet.: 1) Three pieces, square or cylindrical in section, could have been used at one or both ends as pestles, punches, ‘retouchers’ etc. (fig. 41: 1, 4, 5); some could be re-used choppers of the type shown in fig. 1: 4 or re-used narrow chisels (fig. 41: 2). 2) About 17 pieces may be hand-stones, grinders etc. (figs. 39: 3 and 41: 3). They are pebbles or cobbles, usually incomplete, in coarse or fine grained stone (at least 6 in basalt), having areas of smoothing or other wear on the flat, convex or curved surfaces. Some have red colouration on the surfaces, possibly from exposure to heat (see discussion by Dorrell, Chapter VIII). 3) About 13 pieces may have been used as polishers or re-used as such (fig. 42: 2). Most are small, smooth pebbles, but 3 are larger, in basalt. 4) About 33 thick and heavy fragments, seemingly parts of larger objects such as are described by Dorrell (Chapter VIII), 22 of which are in basalt and 8 of other stone, might be parts of mortars or querns, each having what seems to be rough under surface and a modified upper surface – flattened or made concave. 5) Ten pieces may be palette fragments (figs. 40: 3; 42: 4), being thin, with slightly concave or smoothed upper surfaces. One is of basalt. 6) Five fragments with marked curve, or rim-like profile, could represent broken stone vessels. One piece from Locus 123.2 is apparently part of a thin basalt platter with concave upper surface. Another has a smoothed outside surface (fig. 42: 1). The above listed pieces are only a fraction of the number of stones recovered from Trench V having ‘bowl-rims’, and they form the most problematic group, since the natural shape of the local pebbles, when weathered from tabular slabs, is often identical, as can be seen by the profiles of pieces classed as choppers or other tools (Figs. 39: 3; 42: 3). According to Dorrell (Chapter VIII) the raw material is readily available, deriving from the indurated marl forming

Anvils (24) Fig. 39: 1, 2 These are limestone or marl objects, defined as pieces with centrally-placed pock-marks, striations and scratches, as if used either as cutting boards or as platforms to support stone objects as they were being struck (i.e. the class of reperçutantes of Nierlé 1982) or drilled. In practice, it is hard to tell whether a piece was used as a hammer (striker) or an anvil (the piece struck). It is possible, as already suggested, that some were used during bow-drilling, as suggested by the holes in a basalt cobble fragment (fig. 39: 1), unless these are considered natural - these holes seem to be in a fresher patina than the surface, but they could be due to the work of lithophages, or to the dissolution of material filling vesicles in the original lava. The impression is gained that anvils were used inter-changeably, as billets, punches, strikers or supports, and that broken pieces were often thus re-used, as in fig. 39: 2. Obsidian pieces (7) Fig. 38: 9-14. The obsidian fragments are, except for two segments, all the butts of bladelets or small blades. Considering that 9 were found at Arjoune in a total of only 455 artefacts published from the first season, they seem remarkably scarce in Trench V. On the other hand, none at all were found in Trenches VI or VII. All are very thin, and two are slightly retouched or utilised. As to origin, there are four brown, one grey, one black and one green piece. As discussed in the first report, the brown and green obsidians were thought to have an 76

VII. The Lithic Industries bladelet cores (fig. 43). These often have renewed striking platforms (fig. 43: 4). No really good blade cores were present. The 46 discoidal cores are mainly flat and Levallois-like (fig. 43: 8), in which feature they resemble similar neo-Levallois cores from Late Neolithic sites in Lebanon (see one illustrated from Byblos Néolithique Récent: Cauvin 1968, 173 and fig. 76). Broad flakes seem to have been the desired products. Flake cores were the most numerous type at Shams ed-Din. The other cores (62 polyhedric or amorphous, 36 rough-outs and 51 fragments) are more irregular and atypical. The impression gained from the present state of the cores is that flakes or small blades were the main products; however, plenty of blades are present, from which it can be inferred either that cores continued to be worked down at Arjoune (fig. 43: 2) or that true blades were made elsewhere. A similar situation was noted by Cauvin in the Néolithique Récent at Byblos: as excavated, the only core-type was that for bladelets or small blades (Cauvin 1968, 172, fig. 75). A few bladelet cores were also present at Shams ed-Din.

the bedrock in this area, and is to be found in the Orontes tributary valleys as pebbles. Meanwhile, it is interesting to find that at contemporary sites such as Tell Khazzameh, Byblos and Ras Shamra non-flint implements are specifically mentioned by the authors as forming an industrial component. At the latter, in Niveau IVB, Contenson notes an area containing polished axes and ‘pierres utilisées comme masses, pesons ou enclumes, groupées dans une pièce qui semble avoir servi d'atelier’ (1962, 494-5); IVB is said to represent the apogee of the Halaf phase. At Byblos in the Néolithique Moyen Dunand describes and illustrates polishers (1973, 120 and pl. XCV), waisted stones, weights, mortars, etc. In the Néolithique Récent many more stone tool types appear; these are often made on ‘calcaire tendre à grain fin’ just as at Arjoune. Polishers, palettes, sockets, pestles (some for mixing colouring matter) as well as notched or striated pebbles, are mentioned (1973, 159-161 and pls. XCVI-XCVIII); the simple hand-held stone, used for plaster spreading in the Néolithique Ancien, has disappeared, and more sophisticated (often perforated) implements were being produced, but the Byblos folk often re-used worn or discarded pieces (see, for example, a pestle used to make an idol: Dunand 1973, 165). Curiously enough, the next phase at Byblos, the Énéolithique Ancien (Amuq E) saw the disappearance of stone implements (perhaps because the excavation was mainly in a cemetery ?), but in any case, according to the radiocarbon dates, the non-flint stone industry at Arjoune V as a whole can be referred to an Amuq C/D date, just as can the flint industry.

Knapping products (233) Fig. 44. These are of interest because indicative of the technical methods in use at Arjoune. They consist of flint artefacts which, although retouched, were not made for their own sake; some were struck off the core during its preparation for the production of blades (102 crested flakes: fig. 44: 10), others were the result of refreshing the sides of the core (75 core-refreshment flakes: fig. 44: 9), and 40 are tablets or core-platform flakes. Only about 16 burin spalls were noted.

Truncations No pieces which could not be classified as sickles occurred, but a possible candidate is no.7 on fig. 28.

Unretouched flakes, blades and bladelets (4,892) Six categories were noted, as set out in Table 1a. The cortex flakes (542 pieces), and part-cortex flakes (1,269 pieces), represent the initial stages of peeling and preparation of the core; in a sense this type is also a knapping-product, but many were used as blanks for tools (not included in this total). Many of the 607 unretouched flakes, 134 blades and 184 bladelets show traces of utilisation on their edges. They are of moderate size and have plain butts with moderate bulbs; they were probably detached with hard hammers, while the bladelets with punctiform butts were detached with soft hammers. As is often the case when retrieval methods are good, the most numerous ‘waste’ category is that of preparation-flakes (2,084 pieces). These are the flakes produced during the final fashioning and are usually very small; they, too, could be seen as knapping products, but their dimensions (arbitrarily set at about 2cm diameter and under) form a continuous curve with those of the other flakes.

DEBITAGE (89.65% of the total artefacts recovered from Trench V). Cores (671) Figs. 43 and 44. Although some fairly large cores occur (the largest measured c. 9.5 x 7.4 x 6.8 cm) the average size is between 4 and 5cm. However, the cores of Trench V are distinguished by a group of 105 minute specimens (prismatic, pyramidal or discoid: fig. 44: 1-70) which vary in size from that of a hazel-nut to that of a walnut. As with the larger cores, they are made on flint pebbles. The striking platform is sometimes faceted (fig. 44: 7). Similar minute cores are found on Amuq C/D sites in the northern Beqac (Tell Uyun: Azoury 1976), Tell Neba Litani and Tell Nahariya (Copeland and Westcombe 1966). However such cores are characteristic at Tell Khazzameh in the Damascus basin, dated to the Ras Shamra IV phase by Contenson (1968, 196) on other typological grounds. In fact, he illustrates them placed on a ruler, to emphasize their small size. Of course it is possible, as he suggests, that these were tools for a special purpose. The minute cores form the second largest core category (15.4%) and are miniature versions of the main core type the 300 prismatic single-ended or 71 double-ended blade or

Debris and fragments (2,997) This class consists of man-made (but incomplete through breakage or burning etc.) flint products, where the shape of the whole piece (flake, blade or core) cannot be determined. Roughly half might have been flakes or blades, the rest cores.

77

VII. The Lithic Industries cores and unretouched flakes and 353 fragments. As before, these are listed first in a detailed ‘long list’, secondly in a more concise ‘short list’, and finally in an ‘amalgamated list’. The artefacts are classified in the same way as in the previous analysis of Trench V.

Non-artefactual debris (2,465 approx) Every piece of flint or stone was, quite rightly, collected by the excavators, and only after washing could it be seen which of the chunks and pebbles had been knapped and which were not artefacts. The latter consist of rolled stones and other formless weathered pieces, many of them of basalt Since this latter material occurs very rarely, if at all, in the occasional patches of gravel found in the soil on which the settlement was built, most of it must have been deliberately brought to the site, to be used and perhaps modified by man, as suggested by Dorrell (Chapter VIII). For this reason some of this material was retained.

Axe (1) Fig. 48: 5. This piece, unlike the small ground limestone axes of Trenches I and V (fig. 10: 3 in Marfoe et al. 1981 and Trench V, above), corresponds to the chipped, unpolished or only slightly polished ‘hache longue (herminette) à section biconvex’ of Cauvin (1968, figs. 55ff), a type which is characteristic of the Néolithique Récent and Chalcolithic levels at Byblos. Its bit is damaged, with a possible trace of polish near the damaged edge; similar pieces at Byblos can have straight or slightly rounded bits. The butt end is almost pointed. Comment. Very similar chipped flint axes were at found contemporary Tell Khazzameh (Damascus Ghouta) where they were scarce, only one being slightly polished (Contenson 1968, pl. 1B). Chipped flint axes are not found in North Syrian sites, where polished stone ones prevail.

TRENCH V: CONCLUSIONS To summarise what has been said in the various ‘comments’ above, the Trench V lithic material can best be correlated with that of the Levantine inland sites of the 5th millenium bc, such as Ard Tlaili, Qalcat al-Mudiq and Shams ed-Din Tanira. What distinguishes Arjoune Trench V is the non-flint tool component, which deserves to be studied far more fully than was possible here. Among the flint tool types, sickles predominate (125 pieces) with choppers, notches and denticulates also abundant; the nibbled pieces may yet turn out to be tools for a specific task. There is a strong correlation with Tell Khazzameh in the group of minute cores which occur at both sites, linked by similar cores found on contemporary sites in the Beqac. With regard to spatial and temporal distribution of the stone material in Trench V, the layer richest in finds was Layer 2, where over half the sample occurred (5,439 artefacts). Layer 2 also had the larger quantity per Locus and, not surprisingly, the greatest variety of types. Layer 1 had 948 artefacts, Layer 3 had 1,775 and Layer 4 had 417 artefacts respectively, the remaining c.1,000 pieces coming from unclear or combined contexts or from the surface. The artefact types seemed to have been evenly distributed throughout the deposits, but absolute numbers per Locus did vary slightly. Further discussion is postponed until the other assemblages have been analysed.

Arrowheads (4) Fig. 45: 1-4. There are four transverse arrowheads, three with a distinct, if short, pressure-flaked tang and a fourth more in the shape of a trapeze with little retouch at the tang end. On this type of projectile, there is no point for piercing but instead a transverse, or tranchet cutting-edge. The specimen on fig. 45: 2 is more elongated than the others and, as with some of the leaf-shaped points of the other Trenches, two show signs of burning. Fig. 45: 2 and 3 were found in the same layer, 701.3B. These four arrowheads contrast strongly with the Byblos Point types from Trenches I and V. Comment. Transverse arrowheads are always rare in the Middle East and, when stratified, are well dated to the 5th millennium bc and later. An early instance would be Level 24 at Mersin, datable to about 5000 bc. A cache of 53 specimens was found in Level 5 at Tell Sabi Abyad I dating to c. 5125-4980 (uncalibrated bc) in a Late Neolithic/Early Halaf context (Akkermans 1996). Later, around 4500 bc, they are known from the Néolithique Récent layer at Byblos which refers broadly to Amuq D.1 They are commonly found on Palestinian coastal sites datable between 5000-4000 bc and on sites in Sinai of the 4th millennium. An earlier instance is a Central Negev Highlands site, Kvish Harith (Rosen 1984) with ‘Terminal Pottery Neolithic’ material, dated to c. 5269 bc, where 37 specimens were recovered. We will return to the subject of transverse arrowheads later.

THE LITHIC INDUSTRY OF TRENCH VI (Tables 2a-b) A good sample of 1,477 artefacts of flint or chert was recovered from Trench VI and will form the subject of the following analysis; discussion will be confined to considerations of typology and technology. The method of study was the same as that used on Trench V material, except that non-flint artefacts are not discussed because the few pieces found in Trench VI were not brought to England. The total number of artefacts consists of 241 retouched tools, 883

Choppers (1) Fig 48: 1. Rather surprisingly there was only one chopper, made on a flint pebble, from Trench VI, in contrast to the prevalence of

Intrusive, earlier material is most unlikely to have been included in the Récent assemblage at Byblos, since it occurs on virgin sand to the east of the Ancien and Moyen installations, with a markedly different architectural and ceramic repertoire (See Dunand 1973, 127 and Planche Hb:‘Cette installation ne se superpose pas non plus aux précédents... nous n'avons pas recontré de céramique du néolithique ancien, et le néolithique moyen n'y est attesté que dans... une sorte de poche....’)

1

78

VII. The Lithic Industries typical (fig. 46: 1) is made on a cortex flake with butt thinned, while another is a fragment similar to the pieces seen in Trench V; the third (fig. 46: 3) has a dihedral butt. No.1 on fig. 46 is almost identical to one illustrated by Cauvin from the Énéolithique of Byblos (Cauvin 1968, 197 and fig. 90: 1). This type is characteristic of Late Neolithic and Chalcolithic sites in the Levant; it appears to be common in southern and eastern areas. No fan-scrapers occurred in Trench VII. See `Discussion' below for further comments. The other flake-scrapers are less typical and two are made on older tools.

these tools (55 or 6.35%) in Trench V, and to their presence in Trench VII (see below) in a percentage of 3.92. In this respect, Trench VI resembles more the first season's Trenches, where only one was found. Sickle elements (60) Fig. 45: 5, 6. Of the 60 pieces considered to be sickle elements, 38 have lustre, 20 are unlustred and 2 are possibly lustred; as before, any unlustred pieces which are of a typology similar to those with lustre are counted here as elements, based on the findings of Unger-Hamilton already referred to above. This is the second largest of the tool groups; at 25.10%, it is only exceeded by the ‘miscellaneous retouched pieces’ (36.82%). There are 6 unretouched lustred pieces (e.g. fig. 45:14), the remainder being backed (44 pieces) or unbacked but truncated (10 pieces: fig. 45: 11). Fourteen of the backed pieces had double truncations (fig. 45: 5), the rest had one truncation, two semi-truncations as in no.7, or a snap. The backing retouch is often irregular or incomplete (fig. 45: 10). The blanks occur mainly as blade segments, in a variety of sizes and shapes from narrow and elongated (fig. 45: 5, 7, 8) to short and broad (9, 13). Distinctive teeth occurred on 3 specimens (11, 12) but the cutting edge on most specimens showed irregular ‘nibbling’ use retouch, occasionally on both surfaces (12, 14). One unlustred piece, possibly a sickle element, has a kind of hook at one end (15). Another piece is pointed with an inverse truncation (8). Several specimens have been burned. no.16 seems to have been used as a scraper. Comment: Although the percentages have been affected by the scarcity of non-flint tools, we see that almost twice as many sickle elements occurred in Trench VI (25.10%) as against 14.87% in Trench V. A similar proportion (22.54%) occurred in Trench VII. However, there are few differences in the shapes and types of the sickle elements from the different Trenches. Slightly more lustred pieces occurred in Trench VI, and more obliquely truncated pieces occurred in Trench V. No crescentic-backed elements occurred in Trench VI, while three were present in Trench VII and four in Trench V; they also occurred in the Trenches of the first season (see fig. 10: 10, 12 in Marfoe et al. 1981).

Steep-scrapers (2) Both are apparently made on worn down cores. Racloirs (4) These are very atypical, two being made on the butt of their blanks. Two are double and two are single racloirs. Raclettes (5) Fig. 47: 9. The one illustrated has inverse bilateral abrupt retouch. The others have small areas of abrupt retouch and are made on irregular flakes. Burins (7) Fig. 48: 2, 6. There are three small dihedral/straight burins (fig. 48: 2) and one dihedral on a notch (fig. 48: 6). One rough piece is a truncation burin, and the other two are dihedrals on natural surfaces; on one of these the burin facet is struck on the butt. This group closely resembles the specimens from Trench V. Borers (16) Fig. 47: 1-4; fig. 48: 3. The same four types as seen in Trench V occur in Trench VI and the same comments apply. In this group there are five of the épine type (fig. 47:4), two becs (fig. 47: 2), two drill bits (Figs.48: 3 and 47: 1) and six ordinary borers (fig. 47: 3). Denticulates (7) and Notches (15) Fig. 47: 5, 6; fig. 48: 6. These types were far more numerous in Trench V (24.33%) than in Trench VI, where they amount to only 9.62%. The denticulates (fig. 47: 5-6) are scarce and atypical, one being made on the distal end of a flake, one on the inverse edge of a core-tablet and one on a re-worked core; the rest are fragmentary or are made on older pieces. The notched pieces (fig. 48: 6) are similarly varied as to blank, position of retouch etc. Only one could be called ‘Clactonian’.

Microliths (4) Fig. 47: 10. All are bladelet fragments, one with bilateral retouch (fig. 47: 10), one with a truncation and two with irregular retouch. One is burned. End-scrapers (2) One is made on the fragment of a sickle and one on the distal end of a large flake. Although few, end-scrapers occur in Trench VI in a proportion similar to that in Trench V.

Knives with retouched back (3) or natural back (6) Fig. 47: 7,8. Backed knives are just as rare in Trench VI as in Trenches V and VII. The piece shown in fig. 47: 8 has a distal notch also. In one instance a crested blade seems to have been used as a knife. A curious piece (fig. 47: 7) seems to have a back formed of debitage fractures, with a possible burin on the butt (reworking?).

Straight-ended Scrapers (1) Made on a heavy cortex flake with butt removed. Flake-scrapers (6) and Fan-scrapers (3) Fig. 46: 1, 3. There are three well-made sub-circular scrapers similar to the classical ‘fan-scrapers’ of Palestine (Mallon 1929); the most 79

VII. The Lithic Industries Non-artefactual pieces (383) Most of these are naturally-fractured pieces of flint similar to those in Trench V. Almost all have been discarded.

Composites (10) Fig. 46: 2, 4, 5; fig. 48: 4 This group is similar in types and combinations present to those in Trench V. There are three examples of burins combined with scrapers (fig. 48: 4), two examples of scrapers combined with notches (fig. 46: 5) or denticulates (2 pieces). Denticulates also combine with borers (2 pieces), racloirs (2 pieces: fig. 46: 4) or truncations (1 piece: fig. 46: 2).

TRENCH VI: DISCUSSION A full discussion of the Trench VI assemblages will be postponed until the Trench VII artefacts have been analysed (see below), at which time the material of all three Trenches can be considered together and compared. Meanwhile, it can be noted that, although the flint assemblages from Trench VI are very similar in their broad lines to those of Trenches V and VII, there are certain differences in the typology as well as in the proportions of some tool-types. The arrowhead types are quite different from those of Trench V and (on analogies with other sites) indicate a date much later in the 5th millennium bc for Trench VI, as is confirmed by the radiocarbon dates. The sickles are considerably more numerous in VI than in V, and the percentages for the notches and denticulates, and the miscellaneous retouched pieces, seem to be reversed. The absence of certain artefact types may also be significant, for instance the non-flint (limestone and basalt) component so characteristic of Trench V is small in Trench VI. It should also be noted that the two ground stone implements discussed by Dorrell (Chapter VIII) are from Trench VI. Most of the Trench VI artefacts came from Layer 2. Layer 3 had a good number of artefacts in Loci 701-703, and another concentration in 801-803, but no pattern in the distribution of artefact types was visible and the same can be said for Layers 1 and 3.

Miscellaneous retouch (79) Fig. 48: 7. There are many more of these tools in Trench VI (33.05%) than in Trench V (19.03%, a value affected by the large number of non-flint tools), and in this respect Trench VI resembles Trench VII where 35.2% of these types occurred. Three of the same four sub-divisions apply. There are: 7 pieces with areas of abrupt continuous retouch, all but two on blades; 13 pieces with inverse retouch, one having alternate retouch as well; a large number (57 or 23.84%) of ‘nibbled’ retouch as in fig. 48: 7; some ‘utilised’ pieces are included. The last group closely resembles that from Trench V (see comment on these from the Trench V analysis) except that a far larger number are made on blades or blade segments. One piece has a polished area at the tip. Truncatations (2) These are not readily distinguishable from the unlustred sickle elements. The two noted here are on blade segments, one with inverse retouch. Hammers (1) A split pebble with striations and use traces. Obsidian Unlike Trench V, Trench VI produced no obsidian pieces.

THE LITHIC INDUSTRY OF TRENCH VII (Tables 3a-b)

Non-flint tools Two possible bowl fragments are somewhat problematic; see comments on ‘bowl rims’ in the Trench V analysis of non-flint tools, above. For other stone artefacts from Trench VI, including a ground basalt axe and a limestone chisel (?), see Dorrell, Chapter VIII.

The 1982 season at Arjoune produced 1,812 flint and stone artefacts from Trench VII. The material was studied in the same way as was that from Trenches I-VI (see above and Marfoe et al. 1981); for example, although inventoried separately in excavation units, the totals for each tool-type are amalgamated here and will be described together (see Tables 3a, and 3b).

Cores (88) Fig. 49: 1-5. The cores are of the same types as seen in Trench V, the prevailing type being prismatic (27 specimens or 30.68%); one is shown in fig. 49:5. It is interesting that, although more abundant (35%) in Trench VII, there is a comparable proportion (12.5% in VI as against 15.44% in V) of the minute pyramidal bladelet cores, discussed above (fig. 49: 2, 3). As well as the usual group of fragmentary, unfinished and amorphous cores, there are nine discoid cores (fig. 49: 1) and five double-ended cores (fig. 49: 4).

TOOLS (102 pieces) Axe rough-out (1) Fig. 51: 9. A flint nodule which has been roughed out into a celtoid shape. It resembles the piece from Trench V shown on fig. 46: 1. Stone tool (1) Fig. 51: 1. This re-used tool seems to be a scraper made on a subcircular flake struck from a rounded silicious limestone pebble; it has traces of retouch around the edge, very similar to that seen on many similar non-flint tools from Trench V. The upper surface has striations and traces of use, not all shown on the drawing. Other (registered) stone items are described by Dorrell in Chapter VIII.

Unretouched flakes (883) The various types of unretouched flakes and blades are listed in the ‘long list’ inventory. Only 195 are unretouched blades or bladelets; apart from 353 debris and fragments, the prevailing form is a tiny preparation-flake (280 specimens).

80

VII. The Lithic Industries Borers (5) Fig. 50: 13. All are made on small flakes or fragments. Only one is an ordinary piercing tool (fig. 50: 13), the others being of the épine type described in the Trench V analysis; the corner of the distal end of the flake seems to be a popular place for the point.

Choppers (4) Fig. 50: 16-17. Two are made of limestone, one a thin flat pebble, the other an irregular nodule (fig. 50: 17). Two are of flint, on pebbles with roughly convex working edges (fig. 50: 16). Hammerstones (2) One is a split pebble of flint, the other a rounded lump of partly decorticated flint. The latter has not been certainly used as a hammer and may, alternatively, have been used as a core; however it resembles the hammers from Trench V.

Composites (2) Fig. 50: 11 and fig. 51: 3. One is an épine borer with a denticulate (fig. 51: 3), the other a borer also of the épine type with a scraper (fig. 50: 11).

Sickle elements (23) Fig. 50: 1-5, 9-10. The prevailing form is a thin, backed blade with two truncations (7 pieces: fig. 50: 1, 4, 5), or with one truncation, the other end being snapped (5 pieces: fig. 50: 4). The majority have lustre on both surfaces of the working edge; the lustre does not encroach far onto the width. There are two pieces with two truncations and no backing (fig. 50: 2, 9). The backing retouch is variable as to quality and extent, often being incomplete. The same could be said for some of the truncations, e.g. those on fig. 50: 4. Some short, trapezoidal forms occur, often quite small (fig. 50: 10) and these tend to be without teeth, in contrast to the small teeth seen on some of the larger pieces (fig. 50: 1, 2, 4). There are three crescentic pieces (present in a relatively high number, given the smallness of the sample, when compared to the rarer occurrences of this form in the other Trenches). The one in fig. 50: 3 is unusual in having scalar retouch along the working edge (perhaps from secondary use as a racloir?). In sum, exactly the same types came from Trenches I-V, as can be seen by comparing the illustrations above and in Marfoe et al. 1981.

Denticulates (3) Fig. 50: 7. These are rather rough; one is fairly steep, on a cortex flake (fig. 50: 7), another is made on a crested blade, and the third is a denticulated fragment. Notches (4) A rough and indeterminate group, but similar in all respects to the pieces from Trench V. Backed Knife (1) Fig. 50: 6. This is an unusual piece, semi-crescentic in shape, made on a thick tablet-like blade segment. It could, alternatively, have been a sickle element, but it is not lustred. Abrupt, nibbled, inverse or bifacially-retouched pieces (35) These resemble similar types in Trench V, most being fragments with traces of discontinuous working. On eight this is abrupt, on six it is alternative, and one has traces of bifacial retouch. The most prevalent type is ‘nibbled’ or semi-abrupt retouch (14 pieces); some seemingly ‘utilised’ pieces have been included here.

Microliths (4) Fig. 51: 2. Two bladelets have semi-abrupt lateral retouch, in one case bilateral (fig. 51: 2). Another has inverse retouch on one edge and is inversely truncated. The fourth is a truncated bladelet.

Truncations (6) This group consists of pieces which have been truncated but perhaps not for use as sickle elements; some are small flakes, others fragments. On one blade one of the truncations is oblique. No.9 on fig. 50 is not classed as a truncation but is included above as a sickle element (see similar, lustred piece on fig. 10: 9 in Marfoe et al. 1981.)

Flake-scrapers (6) Fig. 50: 12 . These are not typical and the majority are made on thick flakes or fragments. One is ‘nosed’, and these is one minute (thumb-nail sized) specimen (fig. 50: 12).

DEBITAGE Straight-ended scraper (1) Fig. 50: 8. A short, stubby flake has a straight, slightly denticulated, edge (fig. 50: 8).

Cores (98) Fig. 51. The cores resemble those from the other Trenches but none is large. The best made are the double-ended (fig. 51: 4) and prismatic (fig. 51: 5) types for small blades. Over a third of the cores (37%) consist of the `minute' types described in the Trench V analysis (fig. 51: 6).

Steep-scraper (1) Fig. 50: 15 This is made on a fragment, and has been refreshed (fig. 50: 15).

Knapping products (31) These also resemble Trench V specimens and consist of 10 crested blades or flakes, 7 core-tablets, 2 spalls and 12 refreshment flakes.

Racloirs (5) Two have convex lateral retouch, two have straight and one has concave retouch; most are made on cortex flakes. Burins (4) Fig. 50: 14. All are dihedral burins, one being double (fig. 50: 14). In one case the burin spall was removed from the butt, in another case the blank is a core-tablet.

Unretouched flakes, blades and bladelets (1,079) The same categories were noted here as were seen in the other Trenches, in broadly the same proportions. The most 81

VII. The Lithic Industries TRENCH XI This sounding produced a sizeable sample of 85 artefacts, 14 of which are tools. As usual, the main forms are the sickle elements, all of which are lustred (fig. 51: 12), and the nibbled retouch group. The burin is a dihedral made on a break. The scraper is a racloir. A minute core is present. On the whole, the assemblage resembles the material of the other Tenches although some types are absent.

abundant form is the very small preparation-flake. Bladelets outnumber blades and form 5% of the flake types. Debris and fragments (502) Most of these are fragments of small, thick flakes, and many are burned. There are also 157 unworked flint lumps and fragments, similar to the same types seen in Trenches V and VI.

TRENCH XII This is a small assemblage of 13 artefacts, without retouched tools.

TRENCH VII: DISCUSSION The 102 tools excavated from Trench VII closely resemble in typology and morphology those of both Trenches V and VI. Since there are no diagnostic types such as arrowheads or axes, without the radiocarbon dates it would have been difficult to relate the Trench VII material to either Trench V or Trench VI; the dates suggest that it belongs more to the time of Trench V. Nevertheless there are some ambiguities. The higher percentage of sickle elements, the percentage of denticulates, notches, and the miscellaneous retouched group, relate Trench VII assemblages more to VI than to V, but at the same time, the percentages of scrapers, burins and choppers in VII, as well as the presence of stone tools and cresentic sickle elements, suggests more similarity with the Trench V assemblages. The observed differences, therefore, may have to do with the ways in which the site was used in the two periods concerned, which should have been closer together in time than the radiocarbon dates suggest. The debitage types of Trench VII are no different from those in the other trenches, again suggesting no large time difference between the period of Trenches V and VII and that of Trench VI. No patterning could be observed in the spatial or stratigraphic distribution of artefact types; tools were scarce, several Loci having only debitage. The topsoil level was, however, rich in tools. Almost all the artefacts came from levels 2 (655) and 3 (879 pieces) with 221 in level 1 and 47 in level 4.

TRENCH XIII (AREA C) Of the 88 artifacts found here, 15 are tools. Among these is a typical end-scraper (fig. 51: 8), a type not seen except in Trench V, and there is a second, very small end-scraper in addition. The burin (fig. 51: 10) is made on a single-blow truncation. The other artefacts resemble those of the other trenches, one example being the backed knife (fig. 51: 7) which resembles a piece from Trench VII (fig. 50: 6). There is one minute core. It will be recalled that in the 1979 season an axe was found on the surface of Area C (fig. 28: 1); it was described with the Trench V material. THE LITHIC MATERIAL OF TRENCHES I-IV: A REVIEW (Tables 4a-b) As mentioned in the Introduction, 541 flint and stone artefacts were recovered from Trench I and the three smaller soundings (Trenches II-IV) in Area A during the 1978 season (Marfoe et al. 1981). Trench I was divided into five stratigraphic phases: Phase 1 was prehistoric and produced 87 artefacts; Phases 2-4 contained mixed prehistoric and Persian-Hellenistic material, including 262 (almost certainly prehistoric) flint and stone artefacts; Phase 5 comprised the Islamic graves. There were also 191 pieces from the surfaces of Trenches I and III and (four pieces) from the surface of Areas B and C. Nine non-flint artefacts are added to the original totals (Table 4b).

THE LITHIC INDUSTRIES OF TRENCHES IX - XIII (Table 3c) TRENCH IX The assemblage of 37 flint artefacts contained only ten tools; one being a small chopper or axe rough-out (fig. 51: 9). None differs greatly from those found in the other exposures, except for one bladelet which has inverse bilateral retouch (fig. 51: 11). Among the cores there is one minute specimen, the type which seems to distinguish all the core groups from Arjoune. The inventory is given in Table 3c, as are the inventories for the other soundings.

Phase 1 Of the 87 artefacts found, only three are tools. They consist of a notched piece made on a blade segment (fig. 53: 4), a scraper/denticulate made on a core, and an anvil (presumed to be of flint) made on a pebble of angular shape with white, chalky cortex, which is marked by striations and pockmarks (fig. 54: 11); see Table 4a. The debitage consists of flakes and cores in fresh, often mint-fresh, condition, although several have been heated or burned. The four cores are all small, very worked down and of conical type (fig. 54: 8). The 18 flakes all have plain or cortex butts except for one with a faced butt. Six have irregular, nibbling ‘utilisation’ retouch, and there are some secondary flint-working types – crested flakes or core-refreshment flakes or minute preparation-flakes.

TRENCH X The 16 artefacts included two tools, a truncated flake fragment and a flake with nibbled retouch.

82

VII. The Lithic Industries part would be played in the Arjoune assemblages by percussive artefacts, but this component was certainly present from the very beginning. Comment Even though from disturbed contexts, the typology of the lithic artefacts of the Phase 2-4 assemblages consistently points to a broadly Middle Neolithic context with Halaf influence, as this is known in other parts of the Levant; this is discussed more fully below. It would seem that Trench I, Phase 1 was broadly contemporary with the occupation in Trench V and Trench VII, but the sample was too small to go into further detail.

Comment In overview it can now be seen that the material of Phase 1 of Trench I recovered in the first investigations at Arjoune are perfectly consistent with what was found in better stratified contexts during later seasons. Even with a small sample, the predominant traits appear: very small cores, numerous minute preparation-flakes, presence of percussion instruments, ‘utilised’ pieces, etc. Phases 2-4 and Surface Table 4b shows the types present in Phases 2-4 (combined, since the phasing has no meaning in this connection), or their provenance outside Trench I. Of the tools, an arrowhead fragment (fig. 52: 1) with pressure-flaking can be reconstructed as an Amuq Point (e.g. from Byblos: Cauvin 1968, 257:4). There is a short, narrow axe made on a flint pebble which has areas of polishing and flaking on both surfaces; as the bit is fairly battered it is not clear if it was originally rounded or straight. Similar axes are known from Beqac Middle or Late Neolithic sites (e.g.Tell Ain Sauda: Copeland 1969, fig. 4b:3, or Tell Jisr: Copeland and Wescombe 1966, 128:3). There are 16 sickle-blade elements, nine with sheen, the others typologically similar, most having truncations and backing retouch (fig. 52: 4-12). Certain of these are slightly denticulated (6, 8, 11), some have convex backs, marked in no.12, and only one has inverse retouch (no.10). As mentioned in the reports on Trenches V-VII, backed and truncated sickle-blade elements are a common type at Middle or Late Neolithic/Chalcolithic sites in the Near East, such as Ard Tlaili, other Beqac sites, and Tell Assouad on the Balikh (Cauvin 1973, 102-3). One element - an almost square segment of a Canaanean blade - may be of Bronze Age date (fig. 54: 12). Scrapers are usually made on flakes (fig. 53: 14) although end-scrapers on blades occur (fig. 53: 5, 6); some are denticulated (nos. 8, 9) or are retouched laterally (no. 6). Borers and drills are extremely scarce; one possible drill-bit is shown on fig. 53: 1 (see Cauvin 1968: 192:7) and two borers on fig. 53: 2, 3. Burins are equally scarce (fig. 53: 10, 11) and are right-angle burins or single-blow burins. Knives (with abrupt lateral retouch) and notches are still more scarce (fig. 53: 15, 13). Finally, 10 pieces are classed as either truncations (fig. 53: 16) or diverse retouched pieces (no. 7). Nine obsidian artefacts were recovered, five of which were of pale grey or clear, rather impure obsidian; one had a greenish tinge and three were of a very shiny, amber-brown obsidian, one with bands of impurities. Four were blade or bladelet butts (fig. 54: 3), another four are segments (fig. 54: 1, 2) and the last is a curious piece used on both surfaces as a core (no. 4), but to which no bladelets could be refitted. The probable provenance of these will be discussed later. As to non-flint tools and tools related to percussive tasks, these were not mentioned in the preliminary report (except for the anvil/striker in Phase 1). Five other objects were present among the flint artefacts: a fresh, unused flake from a basalt implement; two pebbles, smeared apparently with red ochre; a fragment of a limestone pounder, also smeared with red; and a burned fragment of stone, with signs of use in the form of striations. In 1978 it was not appreciated how large a

GENERAL DISCUSSION The stone tools described above form only one component of the industries of Arjoune. A discussion focusing, as here, only on them must appear biased, and this section should be read while taking into account the results of the other studies published in this volume. Meanwhile it now seems clear that, as the flint typology initially indicated, we are dealing with at least two periods of prehistoric occupation: the uncalibrated radiocarbon dates dates suggest that the earlier is represented by the material of Trenches V and VII and took place around 4500 bc, while the later phase is represented by Trench VI and took place around 3750 bc. It is noteworthy that the periods pertain to whole Trenches rather than to vertical stratigraphy, and this must indicate that the occupied areas shifted over the years, as occurred at many other sites (and as can be seen to happen in Syrian villages today). What is surprising is the length of the time gap between the two phases of occupation, something the flint typology did not reveal. In any case, the radiocarbon dates are consistent, and with them to hand we are able to assess, at least as concerns the flint and stone industries, the two groups of Arjoune people (separated, if the dates are to be believed, by between five hundred and a thousand years) in their Levantine context. It will have emerged from the analyses given above that certain tool-types are relied upon to give either regional or chronological information and the presence of these ‘markers’ or type-fossils can complement the results of, for instance, the pottery analyses. Some of these are: axes and cores (regional), arrowheads and scrapers (chronological). In contrast, other artefact groups such as sickle elements and heavy-duty tools (choppers, hammerstones) occur more universally in the Levant, but their frequencies in the Arjoune Trenches serve to show up internal industrial differences at this site. We will discuss these various aspects in turn. INTRA-TRENCH DIFFERENCES Perhaps the most striking characteristic of the Arjoune assemblages is the high number of heavy-duty tools, especially in Trench V where they form 20% of the tools and where the majority are of stone other than flint. That this component also exists in Trenches VI and VII as well is confirmed by the study of the registered items by Dorrell in Chapter VIII, but these exposures did not produce such a quantity of fragments, re-used and hard-to-classify material 83

VII. The Lithic Industries but the amount generally increases towards the north. It is quite abundant at sites just south of Aleppo, e.g. at Tell Berne (Copeland, in Matthers et al. 1981), a site with abundant Halafian pottery (Mellaart, in Matthers et al. 1981); however, the total here may have been affected by selective collecting. In the Jazirah, particularly at Halaf sites on the River Balikh, cores and tools of obsidian were present to the amount of c.14-19% (Copeland 1979 and 1989). These were much more abundant further north and east, in the Turkish sites found by Çambel and Braidwood (1980) such as Ayngerm and Girikhaciyan. Closer to Arjoune, at Shams ed-Din on the Euphrates (Azoury and Bergman 1980), the excavated obsidian formed 11.2% of the c.4,000 pieces of flaked stone, and this might represent an average for the area. The question of the original provenance of Near Eastern obsidians was discussed in Marfoe et al. 1981, 25. Our samples have not been analysed, but it appears that sources of brown obsidian (of which several examples occur at Arjoune) have now been located in Central Anatolia (Benedict et al. in Çambel and Braidwood 1980). The brown pieces from Arjoune may, therefore, have come from the Cappadocian source after all. One the other hand, more recent studies in the Bingol region (Cauvin et al. 1986) have shown that various obsidian types, as well as many variations of colour, can come from a single obsidian source; earlier studies and especially their interpretations may, therefore, have to be reconsidered in this light. Concerning the main tool-type at Arjoune, the sickle blade elements, we see that these are more abundant in Trench VI (25.1%) and Trench VII (22.5%) than in Trench V where, even when the non-flint tool component of 168 pieces is omitted from the tool total, sickle elements only amount to 14.9% of the other tools. This calls for an explanation, and again points up the clear indications of special activities which were carried on in the vicinity of Trench V and which differed, if only in degree, from those occurring in the other Trenches. Otherwise, the style, variations and general shape of the sickle elements are the same in all the Trenches, even though some proportions may be slightly different as between types. Typologically they compare well with contemporary sickle elements, except perhaps with those at Qalcat al-Mudiq, where unretouched, lustred elements were the norm (Otte 1976). Turning to the debitage, the large quantity of unretouched artefacts, cores and fragments recovered from Trench V (8,708 pieces, i.e. eight times more than the number of tools or 89% of the total artefacts) shows that the excavators' recovery procedures were very effective. The number of cores also suggests that the flint was knapped on the spot by the inhabitants; river pebbles seem to have been the main source of supply, probably obtained from the Orontes terraces or those of its tributaries.

as did Trench V. The presence of so many and varied non-flint stone tools, from choppers, pounders, scrapers etc., to anvils, palettes and hammers, presents an intriguing problem: why were they apparently concentrated in the area of Trench V, and what were the activities which necessitated their use? For the moment we do not know even if they were involved in the processing of vegetable, mineral or animal matter, or if they represent ‘tools to make tools’. Moreover, we do not know to what extent discarded stone items were incorporated into building materials (for which, however, there was no other evidence), as happened at many other sites and as occurs in the Near East to this day; if so, some of the marks and scratches on them could have come about in this way. According to Unger-Hamilton, the coarseness of the raw material prevents any weak micro-wear polishes from being visible, even if they are present. One possibility is that certain of the non-flint tools were used to pound the grains of the glume wheats (emmer and einkorn) discussed in the report on plant remains (Chapter XII); indeed, several of the other food plants present at Arjoune, whether cultivated or collected, would also need processing in some way before they could be consumed. Even today in Syria many fruits and nuts such as apricots and pistachios are pounded to a mush, then dried in thin sheets and then stored. As mentioned previously, there are two categories of stone equipment which are not dealt with here: the milling-tools such as querns, mortars and basins (the ‘matériel de mouture’ of French authors, e.g. Nierlé 1982), and the more ‘recognisable’ stone artefacts such as pierced, grooved, polished or otherwise shaped stones. Many, but certainly not all, sites in the Near East had substantial non-flint stone tool industries; these began in the pre-pottery Neolithic, and have been studied in detail at Çayönü (Davis 1982), Mureybet (Nierlé 1982) and Zawi Chemi (Solecki 1981). These sites seem to be exceptions, in general only moderate amounts of stone tools being found in many other early sites. They seem to increase in number and variety in the Late Neolithic and Chalcolithic phases; we have already noted Ras Shamra, Byblos and Tell Khazzameh as examples, in the Trench V analysis. Going further afield, we may recall the extraordinary quantity of stone implements found at Tell es-Sawwan, Iraq, in the Early Samarran level, 3B, where the T-shaped houses had dozens of tools in each room: querns, pestles, polishers, grinders, pounders, whetstones, hammers, palettes, etc. (see articles by A. al-Soof and his colleagues in Sumer 1968 and 1970). Surely, the detailed study of the non-flint stone components of early industries should provide an inkling (not available from other sources) as to the way of life of their makers, especially if the materials upon which they were used could be established. Turning to obsidian, its absence in Trenches VI and VII, and its relative rarity in Trench V is another puzzling fact, given that much more occurred in the small Trench I-IV samples of the first season: 9 pieces (11.8% of the tools) in 444 artefacts, as compared with only 7 pieces (0.9% of the tools) for a total of 9,713 artefacts in Trench V. Obsidian is fairly scarce in most other Late Neolithic/Early Chalcolithic sites in south and central Syria,

CHRONOLOGICAL SIMILARITIES BETWEEN THE TRENCHES The Earlier Phase. If Trenches V and VII refer to an earlier occupation (and the same occupation) this is characterised in the flint industry by 84

VII. The Lithic Industries As mentioned in the Trench VI analysis, this arrowhead type occurs in Late Neolithic/Early Chalcolithic sites in the Near East, and is distributed from Mersin in the north, already cited, to the Jordanian desert (Betts 1986) and south to the Negev. Specifically, the transverse arrowheads found in the ‘Proto-Chalcolithic’ level 24 at Mersin (Garstang 1953, fig. 29: 19, 24) overlay the Neolithic layers containing Byblos and Amuq Point arrowhead types; level 24 also marks the start of the painted pottery sequence at Mersin. Transverse arrowheads occur in the Néolithique Récent (Amuq D) level at Byblos, also without the Byblos Point types so common in the underlying levels (Cauvin 1969, 127 and fig. 49: 2, 3); under the heading armatures tranchantes, the specimens most like those at Arjoune are described as petites flèches tranchantes, pédonculées (Cauvin l968, 128). This type does not occur in the other Neolithic phases at Byblos. Transverse arrowheads seem to occur more frequently in the southern Levant, for example at Herzliya, where they are attributed by Noy (n.d.) to the late 5th millennium bc (i.e. the late Pottery Neolithic in the Palestine chronology); the two pieces she illustrates (Plate G: 11, 12) are a little broader in the tip than ours. In the same publication, Burian and Freidman (n.d.) suggest that this type of arrowhead was used with poison, and was designed only to wound the target. Similarly we find in a recent synthesis of tool-type evolution in the southern Levant, that transverse arrowheads occurred from c. 5000 to c. 4000 bc; they were especially frequent in Sinai 4th millennium sites (Bar Yosef 1981, fig. 4). The unusually late date (3779 ± 46 bc) for the Arjoune Trench VI transverse arrowheads reinforces the idea that these dates may be too low, or that the ‘gap’ between Trenches V/VII and VI is too great. In sum, transverse arrowheads seemed to appear, albeit in only a few sites, just as Byblos Points were dying out, i.e. in the Amuq D or Halaf/Ubaid Transitional period which began around 4500 bc (Davidson 1977, and others). It is worth noting that the ceramics accompanying the transverse arrowheads at cited contemporary sites consist of burnished and unburnished pottery, dark or red-slipped, incised or plain, coarse and fine, as well as a smaller proportion of imported painted wares (and local copies). As to the ‘fan-scrapers’, although ours are not made on transverse flakes as are the classic racloirs en eventail of Palestine (Mallon 1929), they resemble a similar group of flake-scrapers well dated to the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze ages in the Levant. At Arjoune they occurred as fragments in Trench V and two good specimens came from Trench VI; they are almost circular, and resemble a similar piece from Ras Shamra IVB (called a ‘large grattoir tabulaire en eventail’ in an Amuq D context, and from the earlier level IVC (Contenson 1962, 495 and 498). Early examples were found from Late Neolithic sites in the Beqac at Tell Ain Nfaikh and Tell Ain Saouda (Copeland and Wescombe 1966, figs. XXXVIII and XLI). At Byblos, a specimen almost identical to our no. 1 on fig. 46 was found in the Énéolithiqe; it had been pierced, perhaps for attachment to the person of the owner (Cauvin 1968, 197 and fn. 1). Another very similar example came from the Late Chalcolithic village of Dakerman near Sidon (Saidah 1979);

the presence of certain arrowhead types and scrapers, as well as by frequency differences in the denticulate and notch group. Of the two types of arrowhead present at Arjoune, the earlier (tanged, pressure-flaked, leaf-shaped) Byblos or Amuq Point types occur as fragments in Trenches V and VII. Another fragment came from the surface of Area B in the first season (fig. 52: 1). As a number of radiocarbon dates show, this type (which first appeared in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic and became more elaborate in the succeeding early Pottery Neolithic) became more rare at the end of the 6th millennium bc at inland Middle Neolithic sites (Ard Tlaili, Qalcat al-Mudiq, Tell Khazzameh), though this was not the case on the coast, where they continued at Ras Shamra, Sukas and Byblos. In neither region did they continue to be made much after about 5000 bc. It is at this time that traces of the eastern Chalcolithic industries (e.g. the Halaf) appear in the Levant at Late Neolithic sites, for example at Ard Tlaili and at Hama (Levels M3-M1). We do not know why Byblos Point types of flint arrowheads virtually disappeared with the advent of the Chalcolithic. Some authors have suggested that the hunting of game declined with the increase of agricultural practices, thought this was certainly not the case at the Halaf site of Umm Qseir in the Jazirah (Hole and Johnson 1986/87), where 60% of the faunal remains consisted of wild species (gazelle, onager, aurochs, cervids, carnivores, birds, turtles and fish). Others have suggested either that wood-tipped arrows were used (Azoury and Bergman 1980), or that different methods (such as use of bolas or sling bullets) replaced use of the bow and arrow. However that may be, the meagre arrowhead component of Trenches I-V and VII suggests that arrowheads of Byblos and Amuq Point types had more or less ceased to form part of the weaponry used at Arjoune, so that it is difficult to regard this site as a typical Middle Neolithic occupation as these are known on the coast; however, it is consistent with the situation at other inland sites, where (as mentioned earlier), arrowheads are rare at Ard Tlaili, Qalcat al-Mudiq and Tell Khazzameh, and where there are only traces at the more fully Halafian site of Shams ed-Din (for the dating of these sites see below). There are noticeable differences in the proportions of denticulates and notches, as well as the miscellaneous retouched groups, which occur in the various Trenches. For the latter groups, Trenches V and VII have virtually the same percentages (c.16%), while Trench VI has 36% (yet another instance of a difference between VI and the other exposures). As to the denticulates and notches, they amount to 20.9% in V, but only 9.6% in VI and 6.8% in VII; this may be an indication of the already noted difference in the kinds of activities which must have been carried out in Trench V, perhaps involving this group of flint tools as well as the non-flint types. The Later Phase. The industry of Trench VI contains tool-types characteristic of other sites of the same or a little earlier date. In contrast to the other Trenches, the arrowheads are of the distinctive transverse type, are intact and form 1.67% of the assemblage. 85

VII. The Lithic Industries Trench VI refer it also to Amuq D/mid-4th millennium, but since flint industries changed very little during the Amuq D and E periods, it is not possible from the lithics alone to argue that the date is too low. (It is true, as Watson (1983) has commented that there are some differences among the industries as between contemporary Halaf sites in inland Syria and south-eastern Turkey; however the variations would seem to reside in the relative proportions of flint versus obsidian, or blades versus flakes, rather than in the presence of different tool-types.)

it is here called a racloir en eventail, although it is circular, like ours, and also has a similarly thinned butt (Hours 1979, fig. 2; see also Contenson 1982). REGIONAL DIFFERENCES Two aspects of regional characteristics must be mentioned: those occurring from north to south (i.e. in parallel, perhaps climatically differing, zones) and those occurring from west to east, again in parallel bands determined by the topography (coast; mountains divided by the rift valley; hinterland). It would seem that, at Arjoune, both aspects have had an influence on the tool-types in use but that in general the tools refer to inland and northern industries; a good example is provided by the axes. Not only are they of northern type (polished rather than knapped) but they are scarce, reflecting the lack of forest in the interior. This scarcity of axes in all the Arjoune assemblages is duplicated at other inland Neolithic sites from the Beqac to North Syria (see Trench V analysis). In contrast, coastal sites near the forested mountains, such as Ras Shamra or Byblos, always have considerable numbers of axe types, lending support to the idea that they represent woodworking tools (Cauvin 1968; Kirkbride 1969 and 1983). The assumption is that axes were not needed in the drier and less wooded interior areas such as the Beqac, Homs Basin and Jazirah. Such axes as occur in Trenches I-V and VII resemble hard stone types known from Ard Tlaili and northward to the Amuq. The one from Trench VI is different – a chipped flint adze, a type especially characteristic of the Chalcolithic at southern sites. We have mentioned the groups of minute pyramidal and prismatic cores for bladelets which were so notable a component in the Trench V core group. As we shall see, they could be regarded as a ‘regional indicator’, this time of the eastern and northern interior areas of the Levant. Such pieces occur in all the other exposures, even if sometimes rarely. They seem to be worked down cores, but one must ask, what was their purpose? They produced minute bladelets and flakes, for which it is hard to guess a use. Comparisons with the same group at contemporary Beqac sites and at Tell Khazzameh, Damascus, have been discussed in the Trench V analysis, in which de Contenson's suggestion (1968, 196) that these are tools for a special purpose, was mentioned. A recent publication (Çambel and Braidwood 1980) contains indications that minute (‘microlithic’) core groups occur at other Halaf sites in north Syria and Turkey, for example at Girikhaciyan, near Diyarbakir (a substantial stone tool component is also mentioned at this site), and at Ayngerm, further to the east, where many minute cores, core-scrapers and steep-scrapers were found, as well as ‘thumbnail scrapers’ (cf. our fig. 50: 12); these sites are referred to the Halaf/Ubaid Transitional (Amuq D) period; in other words, they are broadly contemporary with Arjoune Trenches V and VII. As to the later phase in Trench VI, the date of c. 3750 bc should refer to the Northern Ubaid period (Amuq E), the Period 9 of Aurenche et al. (1981; Hours et al. 1994), a date which was lower than had been initially expected. Certainly no ‘type-fossils’ of this period were recognised in the lithic material of Arjoune, and in fact the transverse arrowheads in

ARJOUNE IN ITS REGION The flint industries at Arjoune were not fashioned by a people living in isolation. Provided that malaria was not a problem, the Homs Lake basin, with the River Orontes running through it, must have formed an area attractive to early farmers. We know from excavations at the base of Tell Nebi Mend that Neolithic occupation there began at least as early as 6000 bc, and that it had links with Labwe and Tabbat el-Hammam as evidenced by the pottery (Parr 1983a; Mathias and Parr 1989). A site near Arjoune has recently been reported: Tell Wawiyeh, on what is now an island in the Lake of Homs, and said to have late West Syrian Neolithic industries like those of Arjoune (Mousli 1981-82). It would be interesting to know if this site also contained marl tools, and if painted ceramics were present. Many similar sites may have either been destroyed since the 4th millennium or are buried, awaiting discovery. Unfortunately the stone material from the contemporary layers at Hama, M4-M3 (transitional Late Neolithic to Half) and L6-L4 (Amuq D, Halaf/Ubaid) have not been adequately published, and it is not known if similar marl tools occurred there. We have mentioned, either in the preliminary report or in the above account, some of the other sites in the region with contemporary occupations, for example Qalcat al-Mudiq to the north and Ard Tlaili to the south. At Ard Tlaili, the lower layers (equated with Byblos Middle Neolithic) are dated to c.4890 bc while those near the top (Late Neolithic, just under layers with bow rims) to c. 4710 bc. Rare Halaf sherds occur throughout, the main pottery types being similar to the burnished or red slipped, incised or plain, coarse and fine, wares of the Byblos Middle and Late Neolithic. Kirkbride (1969) describes the flint industries as ‘poor’, consisting of rare Byblos Point arrowheads and rare ground stone axes, with numerous sickle elements and blade debitage. Being only c.70 km distant from Arjoune to the south along the central Rift Valley, Ard Tlaili surely had trade or other links with our site, and their contemporaneity must have been close, at least in the earlier Arjoune phase. Although the coastal sites, for instance Byblos and Ras Shamra, are more distant and in a different ecological situation, there are cultural links, and the Ras Shamra dates serve to complement those from Arjoune; while Ras Shamra was probably at the western limit of Halaf influence, its date of c.4600 bc comes between the Early Chalcolithic levels IVB and IVA, where Halaf pottery imports occurred. The top of a later level, IIIC (which contained fan-scrapers, bow-rims, and no Halaf sherds) was dated to c.4184 bc; this

86

VII. The Lithic Industries Taking the above data into account, it would seem that there is a close correlation between the flint material of Arjoune Trenches V and VII and its analogues in inland Syria (which, although dubbed ‘Middle and Late Neolithic’, were importing or copying Late Halaf styles of pottery) and the industries of their contemporaries, the ‘true’ Halaf sites further north and northeast. Essentially the same stone-tool repertoire was common to both groups, with a few exceptions, and the ‘true’ Halaf sites often also contained a component of non-painted ceramics. The evidence from the Umm Qseir excavations has suggested to Hole that the Syrian steppe of the 5th-4th millennium bc consisted of a ‘game-park’ landscape of grassland and open forest, supporting small Halaf villages and camps. If the former were tied by agricultural needs to water sources in stream valleys, hunters from the latter could roam further afield (Hole and Johnson 1986-87). A similar environment could well have existed at Arjoune at the same period.

is just before the Ubaid phase of IIIB h-e (Contenson 1962). Such an assemblage may well refer to the late Arjoune phase. As to the northern links which, as we have suggested, are the most ‘visible’ in the Arjoune flint industries, we can now follow the continuous chain of sites, from the most southerly ‘true Halaf’ one, regarded by Mellaart (in Matthers et al. 1981) as being Tell Berne, northwards into the ‘Halaf heartlands’ in the Jezirah. In the latter area the Early Halaf layers of Tell Sabi Abyad in the Balikh Valley have radiocarbon dates which are much earlier than those of Arjoune Trench V (Akkermans 1990) while the earliest Ubaid phases at Hammam el-Turkman so far excavated date to slightly later than Arjoune V (Phase IVA of Akkermans 1988: 4400-4200 bc). Arjoune Trenches V/VII seem rather to refer to the Late Halaf, as known at Khirbet esh-Sheref on the Balikh, dating to c.4800 bc (with bow-rim bowls: Akkermans and Wittmann 1993). The end of Hammam Ubaid Phase IVB is dated to 3700-3600 bc, i.e. broadly Amuq E and so slightly later than Arjoune Trench VI. (The following phase at Hammam, V, saw the appearance of Coba bowls, a type characteristic at Sakçe Gözü of Amuq F).

87

VII. The Lithic Industries Table 1a Stone Artefacts from Trench V: Long List 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Tools Axes*, chisels, picks Arrowhead fragments Choppers Sickle elements: lustred unretouched Sickle elements: backed and truncated Sickle elements: truncated Sickle elements: crescentic Retouched bladelets, microliths End-scrapers Straight-ended end-scrapers Flake-scrapers Core-scrapers, steep-scrapers Racloirs Raclettes Burins Borers, piercers, drills Denticulates Notched pieces Backed blades, knives Composites of above types 9-19 Naturally-backed Abruptly-retouched pieces Pieces with nibbled retouch Bifacially retouched pieces Pieces with inverse/alternate retouch Hammerstones Anvils Obsidian pieces Other non-flint artefact fragments Truncations

Number 7 3 55 18 74 29 4 16 24 11 38 31 33 19 42 45 108 103 3 32 27 29 90 5 9 36 24 7 78 __-_ 1000

Percentage 0.60 0.29 5.47 1.79 7.36 2.88 0.39 1.59 2.38 1.09 3.78 3.08 3.28 1.89 4.17 4.47 10.74 10.24 0.29 3.18 2.68 2.88 8.95 0.49 0.89 3.58 2.38 0.69 7.76 ____-__ 99.45

Total tools:

1000

Debitage Cores: Prismatic Discoid Polyhedric/amorphous Double-ended Minute Rough-outs Knapping products Tablets and spalls Crested blades/flakes Core refreshment pieces Unretouched flakes Blades Bladelet Cortex-flakes Part-cortex flakes Preparation flakes Fragments, debris

300 46 60 71 105 38

620

56 102 75

233

607 134 184 552 1269 2122 2997

7865

Debitage: Artefacts:

9718

Non-artefacts:

2465

Total examined:

88

8718

12183

VII. The Lithic Industries

Table 1b Stone Aretfacts rom Trench V: Short List Tools

Number

Axes, picks, chisels Arrowhead fragments Choppers All sickle elements (types 4-7) Microliths All Scrapers (types 9-14) Burins Borers Denticulates & Notched (18 & 19) Misc retouched & knives (19, 21-25) Composites Anvils Hammers Obsidian Other non-flint stone tools Truncations

7 3 55 125 16 136 42 44 211 165 31 24 36 7 78 ______ 1000

Percentage 0.69 0.29 5.47 12.83 1.59 13.53 4.17 4.47 20.99 16.41 3.18 2.38 3.58 0.69 7.61 Tools:

1000

Debitage Cores Knapping products Unretouched flakes etc & fragments

620 233 7865

Debitage: 8718 Artefacts

9718

Non-artefacts

2465

Total examined

89

12183

VII. The Lithic Industries Table 2a Stone Artefacts from Trench VI: Long List Tools Axe Arrowheads Choppers Sickle elements: lustred, unretouched backed, 2 truncations backed, 1 or no truncations truncated crescentic backed Retouched bladelets, microliths End-scrapers Straight-ended scrapers Flake-scrapers, fan-scrapers Core-scrapers, steep-scrapers Racloirs Raclettes Burins Borers, piercers, drills Denticluates Notched pieces Backed blades, knives Composites of above (scrapers to knives) Naturally-backed knives Miscellaneous retouched pieces: abruptly retouched 23 nibbled retouch; ‘utilised’ 24 bifacial retouch 25 inverse/alternative retouch 26-7 Hammers, anvils 28 Obsidian 29 Other non-flint artefacts 30 Truncated (not sickles) 1 2 3 4 5a 5b 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

Debitage Cores: prismatic discoid/flat polyhedric/amorphous double-ended minute fragmentary rough-outs Knapping products: tablets and spalls crested blades and flakes core-refreshment flakes Unretouched: Flakes Blades Bladelets Cortex-flakes part-cortex flakes preparation flakes fragments, debris

Number 1 4 1 6 14 30 10 4 2 1 9 2 4 5 7 16 7 15 3 10 6 8 57 1 13 1 2 2 ____ 241

Percentage 0.41 1.65 0.41 2.48 5.80 12.44 4.14 1.65 0.82 0.41 3.73 0.82 1.65 2.07 12.90 6.63 2.90 6.22 1.24 4.14 2.48 3.31 23.65 0.41 5.39 0.41 0.82 0.82 _____ 99.80

Tools:

241

Debitage:

1236

27 9 8 5 11 23 5 3 6 15 117 174 21 70 109 280 353

Total artefacts: Total non-artefacts:

90

1477 383

VII. The Lithic Industries

Table 2b Stone Aretfacts from Trench VI: Short List Tools

Number

Axes Arrowheads Choppers All sickle elements Microliths All scrapers Burins All borers Denticulates and notched Miscellaneous retouched and knives Composites Truncations

1 4 1 60 4 23 7 16 22 88 10 2

0.41 1.67 0.41 25.10 1.67 9.62 2.92 6.69 9.62 36.82 4.18 0.83

238 Anvils, hammers Obsidian Non-flint stone tools

99.53 %

1 ___2 241

Debitage Cores Unretouched flakes Knapping products Debris, fragments

Percentage (of 238 artefacts)*

88 771 24 _353

Tools:

241

Debitage:

1236

Total artefacts:

* excluding one hammer and two non-flint tools

91

1477

VII. The Lithic Industries Table 3a Stone Artefacts fromeTrench VII: Long List 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23. 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Tools Axes, chisels, picks Arrowheads Choppers Sickle elements: lustred, unretouched backed and truncated truncated crescentic backed Retouched bladelets, microliths End scrapers Straight-ended scrapers Flake scrapers Core scrapers, steep scrapers Racloirs Raclettes Burins Borers, piercers, drills Denticulates Notched pieces Backed knives Composites of above types, 9-19 and 21 Naturally backed knives Abruptly returched pieces Pieces with nibbled retouch Pieces with befacial retouch Pieces with inverse/alternate retouch Hammerstones Anvils Obsidian pieces Other non-flint artefact fragments Truncations

Number 1 4 2 15 2 4 4 1 6 1 5 4 5 3 4 1 2 8 14 1 6 2 1 ____6

Percentage 0.98 3.92 1.96 14.70 1.96 3.92 3.92 0.98 5.88 0.98 4.90 3.92 4.90 2.94 3.92 0.98 1.96 7.84 13.72 0.98 5.88 1.96 0.98 _5.88

102 Debitage Cores: prismatic discoid polyhedric/amorphous double-ended minute fragmentary rough-outs

99.96 %

Tool total:

14 6 11 11 35 19 ___2

Core total:

98

Knapping products: tablets, spalls crested blades/flakes core refreshment

9 10 __12

Product total:

31

Unretouched flakes Blades Bladelets Cortex flakes Part cortex flakes Preparation flakes

105 44 56 71 209 _594

Flake total:

1079

Fragments, debris and non-artefacts

_502

Debris total:

502 Debitage total:

102

1710

Artefact total: Non-artefact total:

92

1812 157

VII. The Lithic Industries

Table 3b Stone Artefacts from Trench VII: Short List Tools Axes Arrowheads Choppers All sickle elements (4-7) Microliths All scrapers (9-14) Burins Borers Denticulates and notched Miscellaneous retouched and knives (19, 21-25) Composites Anvils Hammers Obsidian Other non-flint tools Truncations

Number 1 4 23 4 13 4 5 7 30 2 2 1 ___6 102

Percentage 0.98 3.92 22.54 3.92 12.74 3.92 4.90 6.86 29.41 1.96 1.96 0.98 _5.88 98.99 %

Total tools:

102

Debitage Cores Knapping products Unretouched flakes etc. and fragments

98 31 1581

93

Total debitage:

1710

Total Artefacts:

1812

VII. The Lithic Industries Table 3c Stone Artefacts from Trenches IX - XIII IX Tools Axes Arrowheads Choppers All sickle elements Microliths All scrapers Burins Borers Denticulate & notched Misc. ret. & knives Composites Anvils Hammers Obsidian Other non-flint Truncations Total Tools

Debitage Cores Knapping products Unretouched flakes etc Debris & fragments Total Debitage Total Artefacts

X

XI

XII

XIII

1 4 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 2 1 6 1 5 7 1 1 _____________________________________________________ 10 2 14 15 _____________________________________________________

5 1 9 2 1 4 3 15 9 66 13 45 5 4 16 ______________________________________________________ 27 14 71 13 73 ______________________________________________________ 37

16

85

94

13

88

VII. The Lithic Industries Table 4a Stone Artefacts from Trench I, Phase 1 Locus

101.4 102 102.3 102.9-10 103:10 105.1 Totals

Tools

Scraper Notch Anvil/striker 3

‘Utilised’ flakes

Cores

Flakes

Cortex flakes

Debris & Fragments

Totals

2 2 1 1 -

1 1 1 1

1 3 7 4 3

4 8 5 4 -

3 14 13 5

9 11 12 27 18 10

6

4

18

21

35

87

95

VII. The Lithic Industries Table 4b Stone artefacts from Trench I (Phases 2-4) and Trenches I-III and Areas B and C (Surface)

Trench I

Trenches I+III and

Phases 2-4

Areas B-C Surface

Total

TOOLS Arrowheads

-

1

1

Axes, picks, chisels

-

1

1

Sickle elements

9

7

16

End-scrapers

2

-

2

Flake-scrapers

8

5

13

Side-scrapers

2

1

3

Burins

3

-

3

Borers, drills

-

4

4

Denticulates, notches

1

-

1

Backed knives

1

1

2

Divers retouched pieces

1

8

9

`Utilised flakes'

13

11

24

Non-flint tools

7

2

9

Obsidian pieces

5

4

9

Truncations

1

-

1

53

45

98

Cores: prismatic

3

-

3

discoid

4

3

7

double

-

1

1

other

3

2

5

Knapping products

14

2

16

Unretouched flakes & blades

78

84

162

Unretouched cortex flakes

30

-

30

Unretouched fragments & debris

77

54

131

Debitages totals

209

146

355

Artefact totals

262

191

453

Tool totals

DEBITAGE

96

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 28 No.

Provenance

1 2 3 4 5

Arj Area B, surface Arj V 202/310 Baulk Arj V 117.3 Arj V 200.2 Arj V 101.2

6 7 8 9

Arj V 113.2 Arj V 202.2a Arj V 102.4 Arj V 101/401 Baulk

Description White limestone axe with polished bit. Retouched bladelet. Retouched notched bladelet. Chisel or chopper on cylindrical pebble. Burned arrowhead fragment, reconstructed as a Byblos Point. Arrowhead fragment, reconstructed as an Amuq Point. Truncated bladelet, possibly a sickle element. Bladelet with inverse retouch. Flint pick or pointed chopper.

98

VII. The Lithic Industries

99

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 29 No. 1 2 3 4 5

Provenance Arj Area C, surface Arj V 113.1 Arj V 104.2 Arj V 222.2 Arj V 212.2

Description Axe rough-out or flint chopper. Flint chopper on pebble. Small flint chopper. Lateral chopper on older flint core. Flint slab made into a distal chopper

100

VII. The Lithic Industries

101

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 30 No.

Provenance

1 2 3 4

Arj V (unstratified) Arj V 116.3 Arj V 113.1 Arj V 221/222.4

5

Arj V 201.2

Description Chopper fragment on a flat pebble of indurated marl. Chopper on smooth yellow limestone slab. Chopper with narrow on coarse-grain limestone pebble. Double chopper on smooth white limestone pebble, with marks and scratches from other use. Chopper on coarse-grain limestone; marked and scratched

102

VII. The Lithic Industries

103

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 31 No.

Provenance

1 2 3

Arj V 403.2 Arj V 401.1 Arj V 221.2

4

Arj V 202.3

Description Chopper on marl pebble, with marks and scratches. Oblique-edged chopper on chert pebble. Chopper/hammer/pounder on a thin limestone pebble, with battering on left lower corner. Chopper/pounder on coarse-grain limestone slab, with holes, marks and scratches etc.

104

VII. The Lithic Industries

105

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 32 No.

Provenance

1

Arj V 221.2

2

Arj V 105.2

3 4 5

Arj V 311.2 Arj V 221.2 Arj V

6 7 8 9

Arj V 201.2a Arj V 115.2 Arj V 102.4 Arj V 101.1

10 11

Arj V 101.1 Arj V 113.1

12 13 14

Arj V 412.3 Arj V 403.2 Arj V 114.2

Description Backed and bi-truncated sickle element with teeth and lustre on both surfaces of toothed edge. Curved back bitruncated sickle element with teeth and lustre. Sickle element (?), backed and bi-truncated, no teeth. Sickle element, as no. 1 but without teeth. Sickle element on Canaanean blade, backed and bi-truncated. Trapezoidal backed and bi-truncated sickle element. Short, crescentic sickle element (?). Trapezoidal sickle element, incompletely backed. Sickle element, incompletely backed, with bipolar truncation. Sickle element (?) with one truncation and no backing. Crescentic backed sickle element ?one truncation and a snap. Small crescentic backed sickle element. Sickle element without backing, and nibbling at tip. Truncated sickle element with lustre on each edge.

106

VII. The Lithic Industries

107

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 33 No.

Provenance

1 2 3 4 5

Arj V 313.2 Arj V 112.2 Arj V 204.8 Arj V 212.3 Arj V 101.1

6

Arj V 111.3

7 8 9 10 11 12

Arj V 113.2 Arj V 301.1 Arj V 403.2 Arj V 122.2 Arj V 311.2 Arj V 203.3

Description Cortex backed sickle element with teeth. Sickle element (?) with semi-abrupt backing. Sickle element (?) backed and partly truncated at one end. Sickle element (?); truncated blade with alternate retouch. Sickle element (?); asymmetrically truncated blade with used edge. Sickle element (?); backed bladelet with concave truncation. Sickle element (?); crescentic backed with bipolar retouch. Sickle element (?); bitruncated blade. Sickle element on bitruncated blade. Sickle element (?) on bitruncated Canaanean blade. Sickle element (?) on bitruncated, partly backed blade. Sickle element (?) with partly retouched, crescentic back.

108

VII. The Lithic Industries

109

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 34 No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Provenance Arj V 111.3 Arj V 204.3 Arj V 104.3 Arj V 404.2 Arj V 221.2 Arj V 101.1 Arj V 412.3 Arj V 404.2 Arj V 104.2 Arj V 101.1 Arj V 101.1 Arj V 111.2 Arj V 313.2

Description Straight-ended scraper. End-scraper, with left corner retouch. End-scraper. Flake-scraper on cortex flake. End-scraper with right corner retouch. Flake-scraper with left corner retouch. Flake-scraper or racloir. Steep-scraper on thick flake. Straight ended flake-scraper or denticulate. Double end-scraper. Minute steep-scraper on a flake. Possible fan-scraper fragment. Steep-scraper on a pebble fragment.

110

VII. The Lithic Industries

111

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 35 No.

Provenance

1 2 3 4 5 6

Arj V 221.2 Arj V 115.3 Arj V 117.3 Arj V 212.3 Arj V 101.1 Arj V 101.1

7 8 9 10 11 12

Arj V 205.2 Arj V 311.2 Arj V 401.1 Arj V 123.1 Arj V 313.2 Arj V 311.2

Description Dihedral, single-blow burin. Double dihedral burin on a break. Single dihedral burin on a break. Single blow dihedral burin on a cortex flake. Atypical truncation burin on the axis of a flake fragment. Composite ‘truncation burin’ apparently made on a broken drill bit, with a scraper. Small bec de flute dihedral burin. Large bec de flute burin. Rough truncation burin on the butt of a flake. Composite dihedral burin on a flake scraper. Dihedral burin on the butt of a flake. Dihedral burin on a pebble fragment or on a core.

112

VII. The Lithic Industries

113

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 36 No.

Provenance

1 2 3 4 5

Arj V 202.3 Arj V 102.3 Arj V 212.3 Arj V 104.2 Arj V 110.1

6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Arj V 117.3 Arj V 311.2 Arj V 402.2 Arj V 222.1/4 Arj V 221.2 Arj V 115.3 Arj V 102.2

13

Arj V 113.1

Description Composite racloir and end scraper. Composite flake-scraper and inverse racloir. Composite steep-scraper and racloir. Borer, épine type, on a truncated flake. Borer, bec type, with bilateral abrupt retouch, perhaps a re-used drill bit. Borer, épine type , on a small flake. Borer, piercer type. Drill bit fragment. Large drill bit fragment of mèche. Borer, piercer type. Broken drill bit or piercer. Composite bec, denticulate and racloir on a truncated flake. Composite borer, bec type, with notch.

114

VII. The Lithic Industries

115

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 37 No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Provenance Arj V 101.1 Arj V 104.3 Arj V 211.2 Arj V 204.3 Arj V 116.3 Arj V 104.2 Arj V 221.2 Arj V 214.2 Arj V 205.2 Arj V 104.3 Arj V 101.1

Description Bilateral denticulate on a transverse flake. Lateral denticulate on a cortex flake. Convex denticulate with very fresh edges. Denticulated steep-scraper. Bilateral denticulate on a core-edge flake. Bifacially-retouched denticulate. Lateral and distal denticulate. Fine-toothed denticulate with two distal notches. Semi-abruptly retouched denticulate. Sub-circular denticulate with ‘Clactonian’ notches. Fine-toothed denticulate, distal and lateral.

116

VII. The Lithic Industries

117

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 38 No.

Provenance

1

Arj V 213.3

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Arj V 221/222.4 Arj V 104.3 Arj V 123.1 Arj V 221/222.4 Arj V 202.1 Arj V 111.3 Arj V 211.3 Arj V 110/120.2 (baulk) Arj V 111.3 Arj V 202.3 Arj V 203.3 Arj V 111.3 Arj V 112.2

Description Steep-scraper or notch on a limestone pebble with polished area. Raclette. Naturally-backed knife with nibbled retouch. Notched flake. Composite denticulate and notch. Notch on naturally-backed knife. Inverse retouch on naturally-backed blade. Nibbled blade. Grey, streaky obsidian bladelet. Brown, streaky obsidian bladelet. Green obsidian bladelet. Dense black obsidian bladelet with sligh retouch. Brown obsidian bladelet segment with used edges. Pale brown obsidian bladelet with inverse retouch.

118

VII. The Lithic Industries

119

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 39 No.

Provenance

1 2

Arj V 202.1 Arj V 221.2

3

Arj V 114.1

4

Arj V 202.3

Description Basalt pebble, possibly an anvil, with (?) drill holes. Limestone pebble, probably an anvil broken and re-used, much pockmarked. Fragment of a pebble, possibly used as a grinding stone and hammer, with ‘bowl rim’ profile. Limestone pebble fragment, scratched and marked, probably a palette.

120

.

VII. The Lithic Industries

121

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 40 No.

Provenance

1

Arj V 201.2

2 3

Arj V 114.2 Arj V 301.1

4

Arj V 200.0

Description Fine-grain white limestone pebble with chopper on one corner. Hammerstone on a coarse chert pebble. Broken (?) palette, re-used as a hammerstone, made on a red marl pebble. (Note slight depression on one side). Racloir or denticulate on a red marl pebble.

122

VII. The Lithic Industries

123

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 41 No.

Provenance

1

Arj V 201/210 (baulk)

2 3

Arj V 102.3 Arj V 111.3

4

Arj V 213.3

5

Arj V 202.1

Description Pestle with square section, used also as an anvil, on a coarse-textured lime-stone pebble; scratched, punctuated on both surfaces. Small chisel on a limestone slab (note rectangular section). Possible grinding-stone fragment, of basalt, showing flattened surfaces on each side. Broken flint pestle with cylindrical section, re-used as a hammerstone; scratched and battered at tip, striated one side. Broken limestone pestle with cylindrical section, battered tip, signs of ‘shaving’ down two sides (perhaps used as a polisher).

124

VII. The Lithic Industries

125

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 42 No.

Provenance

1

Arj V 202.3

2

Arj V 102.3

3

Arj V 221.2

4

Arj V 117.3

Description Profile of a grey marl fragment, perhaps a vessel. The outer surface is polished (dotted line). Composite tool, probably a hammerstone used also as a chopper, polisher etc., scratched, battered, pockmarked. Racloir on a smooth white limestone fragment with ‘bowl rim’ profile; the surface seems polished. Palette fragment on a reddish-grey marl slab, also used as an anvil (pockmarks and scratches) and a chopper.

126

VII. The Lithic Industries

127

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 43 No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Provenance Arj V 111.2 Arj V 104.3 Arj V 201.1 Arj V 303.3 Arj V 403.2 Arj V 301.9 Arj V 102.4 Arj V 202.3

Description Large prismatic core. Prismatic core. Single-platform prismatic core. Double-ended core. Narrow prismatic core. Small ‘naviform’ double-ended core. Discoid core. Levallois-like discoid core.

128

VII. The Lithic Industries

129

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 44 No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Provenance Arj V 222.3 Arj V 102.3 Arj V 214.2 Arj V 403.3 Arj V 102.2 Arj V 303.2 Arj V 202.3 Arj V 201.1 Arj V 222.2 Arj V 112.2 Arj V 216.1 Arj V 102.4

Description Minute core, nosed shape. Minute core, prismatic. Minute core, pyramidal. Minute core, double-ended. Minute core, prismatic. Minute core, prismatic. Minute core, pyramidal. Minute core, prismatic. Core-refreshment flake. Crested blade. Bifacially-retouched piece. Arrowhead fragment.

130

VII. The Lithic Industries

131

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 45 No.

Provenance

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Arj VI 700.2 Arj VI 701.3B Arj VI 701.3B Arj VI 803.3 Arj VI 701.3A Arj VI 700.1 Arj VI 803.3 Arj VI 705.3B Arj VI 802.2 Arj VI 804.3 Arj VI 900.1 Arj VI 700.2 Arj VI 802.1 Arj VI 801.3 Arj VI 700/800.3 Arj VI 900.1

Description Transverse arrowhead. Transverse arrowhead. Transverse arrowhead. Atypical transverse arrowhead. Backed and truncated sickle element. Backed and truncated sickle element. Backed and semi-truncated sickle element. Pointed, partly-backed sickle element. Backed and truncated trapezoidal sickle element. Sickle element with one truncation and snap. Sickle element with one truncation and a snap. Sickle element with one truncation and a snap. Backed and truncated trapezoidal sickle element. Lustred ‘utilised’ sickle element. Backed, truncated blade segment with ‘hook’. Lustred fragment, possibly a reused end-scraper.

132

VII. The Lithic Industries

133

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 46 No. 1 2 3 4 5

Provenance Arj VI 500.1 Arj VI 701.3A Arj VI 500.1 Arj VI 801.3 Arj VI 500.1

Description Circular flake-scraper with butt thinned; cf. fan-scraper. Composite truncation with denticulate. Circular flake-scraper or fan-scraper. Composite denticulate with racloir. Composite, notch with scraper.

134

VII. The Lithic Industries

135

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 47 No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Provenance Arj VI 700.1 Arj VI 500.1 Arj VI 700.2 Arj VI 800.1 Arj VI 703.3B Arj VI 700.1 Arj VI 702.3A Arj VI 803.3 Arj VI 702.3A Arj VI 700.2

Description Borer, drill bit type. Borer, bec type, on retouched flake. Borer, piercer type. Borer, épine type. Denticulate. Denticulate. Naturally-backed knife with possible burin on butt. Backed knife. Raclette with two areas or abrupt retouch on the inverse. Bilaterally-retouched bladelet segment.

136

VII. The Lithic Industries

137

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 48 No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Provenance Arj VI 500.1 Arj VI 701.3A Arj VI 701.3B Arj VI 700.1 Arj VI Surface Arj VI 700.2 Arj VI 703.3B

Description Chopper on flint pebble. Dihedral burin. Borer, drill bit type. Composite burin with scraper. Chipped axe or adze with damaged bit. Burin on a notch. Blade fragment with nibbled retouch.

138

VII. The Lithic Industries

139

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 49 No. 1 2 3 4 5

Provenance Arj VI 700.2 Arj VI 800.2 Arj VI 706.3B Arj VI surface Arj VI 702.3B

Description Discoid core. Minute prismatic core. Minute prismatic core. Prismatic core, multidirectional platform. Prismatic core, single platform.

140

VII. The Lithic Industries

141

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 50 No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Provenance Arj VII 1002.3 Arj VII 1005.2 Arj VII 1007.3 Arj VII 1000.1 Arj VII 1003.3 Arj VII 1001.3 Arj VII 1002.3 Arj VII 1005.3 Arj VII 1001.1 Arj VII 1005.3 Arj VII 1000.1 Arj VII 1000.1 Arj VII 1000.1 Arj VII 1009.2 Arj VII 1000.1 Arj VII 1011.2 Arj VII 1011.2

Description Backed and truncated sickle element. Bi-truncated sickle element. Crescentic-backed sickle element, without lustre. Backed and truncated sickle element with teeth. Backed and truncated sickle element with teeth. Backed knife. Denticulate on a cortex flake. Straight-ended end-scraper. Small bi-truncated sickle element, without lustre. Trapezoidal sickle element. Composite scraper and épine borer. Thumbnail scraper. Borer, piercer type. Double dihedral burin. Steep-scraper. Chopper on flint pebble. Chopper on limestone pebble.

142

VII. The Lithic Industries

143

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 51 No.

Provenance

1

Arj VII 1003.2

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Arj VII 1013.2 Arj VII 1002.3 Arj VII 1001.2 Arj VII 1010.2 Arj VII 1001.2 Arj Area C, Sounding Arj Area C, Sounding Arj Sounding 1 Arj Area C, Sounding Arj Sounding 1 Arj Sounding 4

Description Non-flint stone tool: a limestone flake scraper with retouched edge and striations on the upper surface. Retouched bladelet. Composite borer, bec type, with denticulate. Double-edged core. Prismatic bladelet core. Minute prismatic core. Backed knife on a tablet-like blade. End-scraper. Small chopper or axe-roughout, on flint pebble. Dihedral burin. Inversely-retouched bladelet segment. Partly-backed sickle element, with small teeth.

144

VII. The Lithic Industries

145

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 52 No.

Provenance

1

Surface

2 3

Arj I 103.3 Surface

4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Arj I 203.3 Arj I 103.4 Arj I 102.2 Arj I 104.6 Arj I 101.9/13 Arj I 104.4 Surface

11 12

Arj I 104.4 Surface

Description Fragment of pressure-flaked arrowhead (drawn inside the outline of an Amuq Point from Janoudiye). Core-preparation flake. Axe (with polish on upper part left white in drawing) made on a chert pebble Backed and truncated ?sickle-blade element (no sheen). Sickle-blade element, undenticulated. Sickle-blade element, fine denticulation. Sickle-blade element, fine denticulation. Sickle-blade elements, fine denticulation. Truncated sickle-blade element with no lateral retouch. ?Sickle-blade (no sheen); the only piece with inverse retouch. The back is curved. Sickle-blade element with bipolar backing retouch. Crescent-shaped, backed ?sickle-blade (no sheen).

146

VII. The Lithic Industries

147

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 53 No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Provenance Surface Surface Surface Arj I 103.10 Arj I 102.2 Arj I 102.11 Surface Arj I 102.11 Surface Arj I 101.11 Surface Arj I 102.2 Surface Arj I 101.9 Arj I 103.4 Surface

Description Drill bit in mauve flint. Borer. Borer with off-axis bit. Notched blade. End-scraper. End-scraper; lateral retouch is in newer patina.. ‘Strangled’ blade. Denticulated scraper. Denticulated scraper. Dihedral burin. Single-blow burin. Blade truncated by side-blow technique. Blade section with concave truncation or notch.. Flake-scraper on a cortex-flake. Side scraper. Truncated blade-section (or scraper?).

148

VII. The Lithic Industries

149

VII. The Lithic Industries FIGURE 54 No.

Provenance

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Arj I 102.8 Surface Surface Arj I 101.8 Arj I 103.4 Surface Arj I 104.4 Arj I 101.14 Surface Arj I 101.9 Arj I 105.1

12

Surface

Description Obsidian bladelet section. Obsidian segment (grey) and blade-butt (brown), utilized. Obsidian segment (grey) and blade-butt (brown), utilized. Obsidian ‘double core’, treacle-brown colour. Prismatic core. Discoid core. Prismatic core. Prismatic core. Double core. Fragment of stone vessel. Anvil with pockmarks and striations on a ?flint pebble with chalky-white cortex. Possible Bronze Age sickle-blade element.

150

VII. The Lithic Industries

151

CHAPTER VIII THE GROUNDSTONE OBJECTS †

Peter G. Dorrell

present Lake of Homs, having flowed from a centre at Jebel Helou c. 30 km NW of the site, and it also occurs as thin flows interfingering with the lacustrine deposits of the river valley. Although it is not found on or near the surface in the immediate vicinity of the site, it is present in the form of scattered boulders in the bed of the Orontes a kilometre or so upstream of Arjoune. Some 10 kms to the west it forms a more-or-less solid shield with tor-like eminences, but around the Lake it is usually found as boulder-fields of rounded cobbles of up to 50 cm or so in length. Some may be the products of erosion from sills or dykes, but some have the appearance of pillow-lava, perhaps formed in an earlier lake. In one form or another the material would thus have been available within easy walking distance. A recent X-ray fluorescence and petrological analysis of four unstratified basalt quern and quern-rubber fragments from Arjoune, by Williams-Thorpe and Thorpe (1993, 310) has confirmed that they are from the authors’ North Levant source, which, however, includes outcrops in northern Syria as well as those around the Lake of Homs. Many naturally occurring unbroken basalt cobbles show a thin rusty-brown weathering cortex, but in Trench VII the majority of fragments (very few of the tools and vessels from this Trench being unbroken) have a brighter, orange-red surface, possibly through prolonged exposure to heat (e.g. fig. 57: 1; fig. 58: 2). It is noticeable that this reddening covers only the unbroken parts of the artefacts, though this may include worked faces. It seems likely therefore that the artefacts were complete, or more complete than they now are, when the heating occurred, and that it took place after they were modified as tools. Perhaps they formed the lining of fire-pits or ovens, or possibly served as parching trays, and that the heat broke them in situ. They might, presumably, have continued in use after being fractured since, if undisturbed, the broken surfaces would still have been protected from heat. At some period, however, the pits or ovens were destroyed and the fragments of rock scattered.

INTRODUCTION With one exception all of the ground stone objects come from Trenches V, VI and VII, the exception being a fragment of a limestone bowl from Trench I. In addition to these objects, which are obviously artefacts, there were also a considerable number of rounded or worn basalt cobbles, and with many of these it is not possible to determine whether they had been modified as tools, used unmodified – perhaps as pot-boilers or fire-pit liners – or not used at all. Since basalt is not found in the immediate environs it seems likely that they were deliberately brought to the site, for whatever purpose. In size most fall within a range from 10 to 20 cm in their longest dimension, well within the size range of detached cobbles found in the basalt boulder-fields to the west of the river (see below). There was also a quantity of rubble of smaller size, down to the dimensions of gravel, which may have resulted from the comminution of the larger fragments. It is not easy to account for the presence of this unworked material. One possible explanation might lie in the nature of the site: the surface of the marl and the soils upon it are slippery and unstable in wet weather, and the rubble may have been brought in to serve as a flooring material. Alternatively, it may have been used (as similar cobbles are still used today) for the foundation courses of mud-brick or pisé walls; though it should be stressed that no other evidence for such walls was found associated with the prehistoric occupation of the site. A third possibility is that the larger pieces of rubble could have been used to weigh down tents or other forms of temporary shelters (a suggestion which the author owes to Dr. Harriet Crawford). Some of the smaller pieces were quite regular in shape, generally oval in section, and smooth, though with no obvious signs of working, and it has been suggested that these may have been used as slingstones (see below). However, there is no positive evidence for this. A number of basalt fragments were collected with the flint material, and those which on closer examination appeared to be artefacts have been dealt with by Copeland in Chapter VII.

Flint is scattered in the wadi-beds some kilometres to the east of the site, and small nodules are also found in the cemented gravels which outcrop in patches on the hardened lacustrine marl surface forming the east bank of the Orontes flood plain. This deposit is also, presumably, the source of the conglomerate debris found in the site.

RAW MATERIALS Basalt is by far the commonest material found on the site. An extensive outcrop of the rock forms the western edge of the 153

VIII. The Groundstone Objects and one from Trench I, are described and illustrated by Copeland (above, pp. 85 and 102 and figs. 42: 1 and 54: 10 respectively), but are included in the tables here. Reg. No. 456 (fig. 56: 1) is part of a small, irregular, trough-shaped vessel which might have been a small palette.

Limestone forms much of the Anti-Lebanon to the east, and detached blocks and cobbles are common in the wadis running down from these hills. Exotic stones. Only two objects of non-local stone were found at the site. The first is a smooth, roughly spherical pebble of hematite, just over 2 cm in diameter (Reg. No. 451: not illustrated). Although the material is exotic to the site, iron ore deposits are found in the Lebanon and Ansariya mountains, and the piece could conceivably have come from a derived gravel. There is in fact nothing to show that it is indeed an artefact, although if it were of later date than the prehistoric occupation it might be considered a weight. The second object is a small pendant of green schist (Reg. No. 455) discussed in Chapter IX below. It is unlikely that the raw material from which this is made was found at or near Arjoune, even from derived material, and it is much more probable that the object itself was imported.

Querns. Two hundred and twelve basalt querns or quern fragments were recovered: 186 from Trench VII, 25 from Trench VI, only one from Trench V, and none from Trench I. Their absence from the last is probably a result of the exiguous and disturbed nature of the prehistoric remains, but the striking differences in numbers between Trenches V, VI and VII call for an explanation. Even if the virtual absence of querns from Trench V is partly to be attributed to excavation and recording procedures, it is unlikely that any obvious fragments would have been discarded, and there would thus seem to be a real discrepancy between the quantities present in Trenches V (1) and VII (186), particularly in view of the fact that the former is over ten times larger in area than the latter. If pure chance is excluded, the only explanation would appear to be that pits in these two Trenches were the scenes of different activities or - if the pits are interpreted simply as rubbish pits - received their contents from scenes of different activities. The difference in numbers of querns between Trenches VII (186), on the one hand, and Trench VI (25) on the other may perhaps be explained in the same way, although in this case the chronological difference between these Trenches may also be a factor. It seems that a division can be made between thick and thin querns: the former range from 7 to 10 cm in top-to-bottom thickness and the latter from 3.5 to 6 cm The thick querns have bases rounded in profile, curving up to flat or slightly convex working surfaces, whereas the thin querns have flatter bases, parallel with their upper surfaces. Examples of both types are shown in fig. 57: 1 (thick) and 2-3 (thin); the quern described and illustrated by Copeland (above, p. 85 and fig. 41: 3), and which is the sole example from Trench V, also belongs to the thin class. Since the great majority of the querns were broken or fragmentary, however, it is not possible to assign all the examples to one class or the other with any degree of certainty. It is also quite possible that a number of the fragments are the remains of quern-riders rather than of querns themselves.

ARTEFACT TYPES Nearly all the ground stone artefacts can be grouped as shown in the table on page 155, where the numbers given refer only to objects or fragments which could be more-or-less securely identified and which were accordingly included, in most cases, in the artefact register. Other large stone artefacts, including a few which may well be fragments of types similar to those considered here, are published in Chapter VII of this volume, while some smaller artefacts of stone are dealt with in Chapter IX. The statistics should thus be treated with caution, indicating as they do only a rough order of magnitude at best. Bowls and platters. Eleven fragments of bowls or similar vessels were recorded, seven of basalt and four of limestone. One (limestone) came from Trench I; six (three limestone and three basalt) from Trench V; one basalt from Trench VI and three basalt from Trench VII. In view of the small size of the sample these differences in numbers cannot be thought significant. Of the basalt vessels two, Reg. Nos. 452 (fig. 55: 1) and 488 (from V.310.1: not illustrated), appear to be parts of small, fairly deep, rounded bowls, tapering only slightly in thickness from base to rim. The slight change of angle at the basal break of 452 suggests that the base was flat. Another (Reg. No. 463; fig. 55: 2) is of similar external profile but with walls much thicker at the base and altogether more solid. This appears to be a mortar rather than a bowl. Reg. No. 518 (fig. 55: 3) is a rim sherd from a bowl with straight, splayed sides; not enough remains to judge the shape of its base. Fig. 55:4 (unregistered) appears to be part of a large elongated shallow platter; it is just possible that it is a fragment of a thin quern, very much worn down, but the shape of the base, curved in both directions, makes this unlikely. Fig. 56: 2 is a fragment from a finely ground thin-walled limestone vessel with an incised line parallel with the rim on the exterior. It is too small for any reliable estimate to be made of its original diameter, nor can the angle of the wall as shown in the drawing be completely relied upon. Fragments of two much heavier limestone bowls, one from Trench V

Quern riders. One complete quern rider was found (Reg. No. 464; fig. 58: 1), but there were a number of fragments of similar objects which were not individually recorded (e.g. fig. 58:2), and for this reason they are not listed in the table. The complete specimen has a lower, working, surface almost flat along its length and only slightly convex across the width. Grinding marks run across the width of the implement, which is long enough (26.2 cm) to have overlapped the edges of most of the querns. The upper surface is humped in both directions. Grinding or polishing stones. Seventeen grinding or polishing stones were recorded, two from Trench V, four from Trench VI, and eleven from Trench VII. Most (13) appear to be formed on natural pebbles of basalt or, more 154

VIII. The Groundstone Objects

Distribution of Ground Stone Objects by Trench Trench

I

V

VI

VII

Total

limestone basalt Querns Quern riders Grinders/polishers limestone basalt Axes

1 ?

3 3 1 1

1 25 ?

3 186 ?

4 7 212 1

-

2 -

3 1 2

1 10 -

4 13 2

Totals

1

10

32

Bowls/platters

200

243

definitely been used for hammering. It should be noted that some of the stone implements discussed and listed by Copeland (Chapter VII, above) also most likely served similar purposes to those recorded here.

rarely (4), of limestone, with humped upper and flat lower faces, presumably chosen for convenience of shape and size. The lower, working, faces are ground smooth but not necessarily flat. Of the few that were complete enough to be measured, the maximum remaining diameters are from 6 to 14 cm, but most are nearer the lower end of this range. Typical examples are Reg. Nos. 5022, 462, and 567 (fig. 59: 1-3). A number of both basalt and limestone pieces of similar size and shape but without a smoothed surface (e.g. fig. 59: 5) were perhaps used as hammers. Reg. Nos. 453 and 461 (fig. 56: 5 and 6) are examples of the smaller (typically c. 5 x 2.5 cm) basalt pebbles which, at the time of discovery, were recorded as possible slingstones, but there is no supporting evidence for this. Reg. No. 450 (fig. 59: 4) is a natural limestone pebble which, judging from the marks at its pointed end, has

Axes. Two axe-like implements were recovered, both from Trench VI. One is of basalt, rather squared-off in plan, but with a humped and irregular section. The cutting edge, which is worn and battered, is curved in plan, ground from both faces, and asymmetrical in section, giving an adze-like profile (Reg. No. 584; fig. 56: 3). The other tool (Reg. No. 588; fig. 56: 4) is so thin in section, a maximum of 0.8 cm, that it might better be classified as a ground chisel than as an axe. The material is hard cream-coloured limestone, ground and polished overall to a smooth finish. The cutting edge, which is asymmetrical, is hardly worn.

155

VIII. The Groundstone Objects

FIGURE 55 No.

Reg. No.

Provenance

Description

1 2 3 4

252 463 518 -

V.103.2 V.201.2 V.311.2 VII.1002.3

Bowl. Basalt Bowl Basalt Bowl. Basalt Platter.Basalt

156

VIII. The Groundstone Objects

157

VIII. The Groundstone Objects

FIGURE 56 No.

Reg. No.

Provenance

1 2 3 4 5 6

456 584 588 453 461

V.303.2 VI.702.3B VI.700.4 VI.803.3 V.201.2 V.411.3

158

Description Palette (?). Soft limestone. Bowl. Limestone. Axe. Basalt. Axe/chisel. Hard limestone. Slindgstone (?). Basalt. Slingstone (?). Basalt.

VIII. The Groundstone Objects

159

VIII. The Groundstone Objects

FIGURE 57 No. 1 2 3

Reg. No.

Provenance

Description

-

VII.1003.4 VII.1005.2 VII.1001.2

Thick quern, reddened surface. Basalt. Thin quern. Basalt. Thin quern. Basalt.

160

VIII. The Groundstone Objects

161

VIII. The Groundstone Objects

FIGURE 58 No.

Reg. No.

Provenance

Description

1 2

464 -

V.113.1 VII.1011.3

Quern rider. Basalt. Rubber/grinder, reddened surfaces. Basalt.

162

VIII. The Groundstone Objects

163

VIII. The Groundstone Objects

FIGURE 59 No.

Reg. No.

Provenance

Description

1 2 3 4 5

5022 462 567 450 -

VI.501.1 V.102.3 VI.801.3 V.221.2 VI.701/2.4

Grinder. Basalt. Grinder. Basalt. Grinder/hammerstone. Limestone. Hammerstone. Limestone. Hammerstone. Basalt.

164

VIII. The Groundstone Objects

165

CHAPTER IX OTHER PREHISTORIC ARTEFACTS Virginia T. Mathias

for even a narrow loom, it might be expected that more examples would have been found in the excavations. Five roughly spherical or conical objects of baked clay, Reg. Nos. 274, 310, 311, 326 and 327 (fig. 60: 7, 6, 4, 5 and 3 respectively; cf. pl. V: 2 for No. 326) are all from Trench I and are probably prehistoric. They are more likely to be loom weights than spindle whorls, since their central holes (made before firing) are too small and uneven to accommodate a spindle. They are all roughly made, No. 274 in particular being quite asymmetric. No. 541 (pl. V: 3) is from Trench V and unlike the above is of stone; but despite the difference of material it is remarkably similar in size and shape to those, though it has a much wider drilled hole. However, this group could also be net sinkers, used for tying round the edge of fishing nets for casting in still water such as a lake. Little effort would be expended on making such objects that might be lost in use. (However, it should be noted that fish bones are not present amongst the faunal remains recovered at the site). The five pierced stones from Trench VI, Reg. Nos. 572, 5019, 5020. 5016, 5018 (fig. 60: 8-12) testify to rather more effort in both piercing and shaping, and even polishing, though No. 5016 (fig. 60: 11), in soft limestone, is only roughly chipped from an already flattish pebble. It is thought that these are therefore more likely to be spindle whorls. Comparisons are: Byblos Néolithique Moyen and Récent (Dunand 1973, pls. XCV and CIX); Ras Shamra Palace Garden Sounding and VA Sounding (Kuschke 1962, pls. IX. 15 and XI. 19); Sukas N7 (Riis 1974, fig. 108); Umm Dabaghiyah (‘large beads’, 3-5 cm long, of limestone: Kirkbride 1973, pl. IX). None are exactly circular, and were probably carefully chosen for their original shape so as to require the least working. Reg. No. 5018 (fig. 60: 12) has considerable polish on both surfaces but less on the edges, which were battered prior to polishing, and it may have been first used as a hammerstone. It is interesting that the polishing on this piece was done first, before the unfinished drilling from either face which appears to have broken the object. There are pierced clay disks from Trenches I, V, VI, VII, the majority from V (6 out of 10). Seven of them – Reg. Nos. 318 (fig. 61: 1; pl. V: 8), 460 (fig. 61: 6; pl. V: 4), 469 (fig. 61: 5; pl. V: 5), 477 (fig. 61: 3; pl. V: 7), 517 (not illustrated) and 5069 (fig. 61: 4), and one unregistered – are made on

SHAPED STONE AND CLAY OBJECTS The majority of the prehistoric small artefacts (other than the chipped stone implements) at Arjoune belong to this general category. Many of them are pierced and probably functioned as spindle whorls, but they include objects which may have been maceheads, loom weights or net sinkers, and others of which the function is unclear. They vary from carefully worked and purposely made objects to roughly shaped or re-worked pieces. Since in the majority of cases the material – stone or clay – from which they were made seems to have had little or no bearing on their function, they are discussed together here. Reg. No. 5023 (fig. 60: 1) from Trench VI, of a hard dense stone, has the typical shape for a macehead, flattened at one end and slightly tapering at the other. Comparisons may be found in the Amuq First Mixed Range (Braidwood and Braidwood 1960, fig. 98); Byblos Néolithique Ancien (Dunand 1973, 68, figs. 100 and 181, pls. XCII, XCVI, CLII and CLV); Ras Shamra Palace Garden Sounding (Kuschke 1962, pl. IX. 3); and Umm Dabaghiyah (Kirkbride 1973, pl. IX). The unevenly drilled hole, wider and sloping inwards at the tapered end and narrower and cylindrical for two thirds of its length from the flattened end, would enable a haft to be wedged at the upper end. This method of securing the haft would be important for use as a weapon (practical or symbolic), but also if the object had a more prosaic function as a hammer or mallet, especially in operations needing controlled weighted tapping rather than battering with a hand-held hammerstone. However, there are no definite marks of percussion on the outside; a visible rough area is probably a patch of original surface left unpolished. Another possible use for such heavier pierced objects might be as a weight for a digging stick or dibber, though again traces of such use might have been expected. The pierced pendant-type stone Reg. No. 454 ( fig. 60: 2; pl. V: 1) from Trench V may be a loom weight, or possibly a weight for a suspended fishing net (for river fishing), or some other practical purpose where careful shaping and working were not needed. The hole seems small in relation to the size of the object if it were to be used as a weight in an upright loom, as it would only admit one or two warp threads easily. Moreover, as several such weights would have been needed

167

IX. Other Prehistoric Artefacts from village to village. Weaving traditions also vary, and the warp threads of upright looms can be weighted by any heavy objects, especially in groups of several threads. Where threads are weighted individually the weights would be similar in size to spindle whorls. However, primitive horizontal looms requiring no weights are more likely to have been in use by nomadic or semi-sedentary peoples. The roughly made or shaped pierced objects from Arjoune are thus perhaps as likely to have been used for some other purpose such as fishing-net weights and sinkers. Unpierced discs may sometimes have been discarded before piercing, but could also have been used as weights without piercing. In an unpublished lecture on gaming boards, Dr Irving Finkel of the British Museum showed a slide of similar roughly shaped potsherds which may have been used as counters in an ancient game of chance – herdsman and people scaring birds and wild animals from ripening crops would have had plenty of time to while away.

potsherds. Nos. 477, 517, 318, 5069 are all thick sherds; Nos. 318 and 5069 are carefully shaped and smoothed at the edges, but the other three are only very roughly made and the drilling of the holes of Nos. 477 and 517 was not completed. Nos. 460 and 469 are made from thin sherds and have been finely ground; No. 469 is chamfered at the edges while No. 460 has traces of paint. In contrast to these seven disks, Nos. 489 (fig. 61: 8), 523 (not illustrated) and 5068 (fig. 61: 7) seem to have been purpose-made, No. 5068 rather roughly, with a protruding lip left round one edge of the hole, but the other two more carefully finished. These three are closely similar in size and weight to the two disks made from finer potsherds. Nine shaped potsherds which are unpierced were also recorded, though it is very probable that they were much more common than this figure suggests, since, being only roughly shaped, they can easily be overlooked in excavation. Eight of the recorded nine are from Trench V (fig. 62: 1-8) and one from Trench VI (fig. 62: 9). The latter is a sherd of grey fabric burnished on the outside, smoothed at the edges into a roughly triangular shape. All of those from Trench V are roughly circular, though they vary considerably in diameter. Five are made from sherds of burnished ware and three from unburnished ware, shaped by chipping the edges. Another, quite different, re-used sherd from Trench V (Reg. No. 524) is illustrated on plate V:6. It has been rubbed smooth to a roughly rectangular shape, and has a design of three narrow parallel bands in red. paint, although it is unclear whether these were added after the sherd was shaped or were part of the decoration of the original vessel. The design is unlike anything found amongst the rest of the prehistoric pottery from the site, and it is not impossible that this sherd is a later intrusion, although it was found in the lower levels of the Trench. Pierced stone discs and pierced and unpierced potsherds similar to the Arjoune examples are commonly found on contempoary or near-contemporary sites in the region. A far from comprehensive list of parallels would include: Byblos Néolithique Ancien to Énéolithique Récent (Dunand 1973, pls. XCIV, CVII, CIX, CLII, CLXI); Ras Shamra (Halaf) (Schaeffer 1962, figs. 8, 4, 17); Ras Shamra Niveau III (Ubaid) (Courtois in Schaeffer 1962, 389 and fig. 48); Amuq First Mixed Range (Braidwood and Braidwood 1960, figs. 92 and 132); Yarim Tepe III (Ubaid) (Bader et al. 1981, pls. XXXIV-XXXVI). Most pierced discs of clay or stone in this general category are likely to have been used as spindle whorls, especially those more carefully shaped and worked. Historical records, such as ancient Egyptian depictions of spinning and weaving and Mesopotamian written sources, indicate different shapes and materials employed and various methods of use, for example to weight either the top or bottom of the spindle. The terms for spindle whorl in Mesopotamia were preceded by the determinative for wood, and modern ethnographic studies confirm that many different materials, as well as shapes (flat, domed, conical) are used for producing different weights of thread, or when spinning different raw materials (wool, flax, cotton). Methods of spinning also vary according to different traditions, even

‘ASTRAGALI’ Four objects were recorded, all from Trench V, of which Reg. No. 5047 (Fig. 64:9 ) is typical. They were recorded because of their marked resemblance to astragali, and it was at first thought that they might have been artificially ground to this shape. Closer examination, however, shows that they are naturally formed fragments of conglomerate, consisting of two more-or-less tabular pebbles, possibly of rhyolite, connected by a neck of softer matrix. It seems unlikely that four such fragments would have occurred on the site by chance, and it must therefore be supposed that they were deliberately collected because of their shape. BONE AWLS OR POINTS These form the second most common category of small worked objects at Arjoune, including all but one or two of the worked bone items. Out of a total of seventeen, one is from Trench VI (fig. 63: 15), three are from Trench VII (fig. 63: 14, and two small tips of points not illustrated), and the remaining thirteen from Trench V (fig. 63: 1-13; pl. VI: 7-9) In five cases where the tools are complete the shank ends at the joint, and the bone has been identified as sheep/goat radius, tibia or metapodial. In all cases except one the bone has been split longitudinally and the point then shaped on the thickness of the shaft; the exception is Reg. No. 487 (fig. 63: 1; pl. VI: 7), which was shaped by diagonal slicing across the whole shaft. In some cases the tip of the point is worn down or broken off, but generally the points seem to be either short and abruptly tapering or fairly long and gradually tapering. In most of the awls of Trench V the taper is more or less straight, but No. 457 (fig. 63: 3; pl. VI: 9) shows two angles, or concave taper, apparently ground in two stages to achieve a fine narrow point. Reg. Nos. 5021 (fig. 63: 15) and 5268 (fig. 63: 14) from Trenches VI and VII respectively are slightly differently shaped, with one side of the point more or less in line with the original split edge of the bone, and the other side more heavily worked to produce an offset point. 168

IX. Other Prehistoric Artefacts The other two tips from Trench VII may also belong to this method of shaping. Reg. No. 5268 (fig. 63: 14) has some small scraped grooves across the base of the point, perhaps to hold a fine binding for a haft to strengthen the tool in use. Bone awls are quite common on prehistoric sites of most regions and periods. They were probably used chiefly for piercing holes in leather for sewing or binding, and different sizes of tool and types of point presumably relate to different kinds and thicknesses of skin. In addition there were several fragments of polished bone, although only one of these, rounded at one end, showed any sign of being shaped. None is considered worth illustrating. They may have been used for burnishing pottery. Another fragment, again not obviously part of a tool, had a hole drilled from one side. The only other bone object is Reg.No. 5015 (fig. 64: 12), which has been cut or carved and polished. It is broken at the bottom, and there was probably at least one more section. It may be the decorated end of a pin, perhaps for fastening clothing. A few roughly similar shaped bone items from Byblos Énéolithique Récent (Dunand 1973, pl. CLXII, 35739bis), are drilled longtitudinally and considered to be beads, either whole or intended to be cut through at the grooves to form several smaller ones.

458. The use of a pebble with a natural orange patination for the Arjoune figurines may reflect the practice at Shacar ha-Golan of giving a red slip to some of the stone figurines and to all of those of clay. The less deeply incised lines on No. 458, and on the smaller figurines or pendants, are ambiguous. The vertical lines above and below the eyes appear to be eyelashes, but could also be the kind of paint or tattoo marks on the eyelid commonly shown on Samarran face-pots and figurines. The vertical lines at the upper back could be hair or a headdress, while the lower ones crossed with horizontal lines suggest a skirt or some other kind of garment. The lines on the back of No. 526 could likewise be either a garment or hair. They compare with the painted lines on Halaf figurines, or the rarer incised lines on Hassuna figurines, usually horizontal. It is perhaps surprising that nothing has been found at Arjoune in any way resembling the typical Halaf seated female figurine, developing out of an earlier tradition in the core Halaf area. Reg. No. 526 (fig. 64: 3) is made on a flat stone like the others, and, although triangular from the front, lacks the roughly tetrahedral shape which results from schematising the seated figure. The horizontal line at the base with vertical lines below, apparently a skirt, is similar to the representation of toes on some seated figurines, and the two small nicks near the apex which may be the eyes do continue faintly round the sides, and could conceivably represent the arms with hands placed on the stomach. The double horizontal lines on the two small figurines Nos. 487 and 504 are most probably eyes, and are paralleled in rare examples from the Byblos and Shacar ha-Golan material (Dunand 1973, pl. CXI: 31205; pl. CXII: 33410; Stekelis 1972, pl.53: 2). They could be an abbreviated version of the outlined eyes of No. 485, or intended as a reverse form of the ‘coffee-bean’ eyes so prominent in many clay figurines, or simply as eyebrow and eye. The horizontal double line on the fragment No. 520, presumably a belt, is parallelled on one much larger Shacar ha-Golan pebble (Stekelis 1972, pl. 70: 9 and also possibly 7), though without the two additional oblique lines of the Arjoune example. In view of the extreme schematisation of these small figurines, for example No. 504 where only the eyes and the division of the legs are shown, the lines on No. 520 could even represent folded arms; a much more fully carved Samarran alabaster figurine from the Tell es-Sawwan cemetery has crossed arms depicted in much the same way (El-Wailly and Abu es-Soof 1965, pl. XXVII, second row, third from right). So many of the features of the human figurines from Arjoune are ambiguous as to meaning that it could be argued that the ambiguity was even deliberate, i.e. that in the process of schematisation a single line or group of lines could be made to portray more than one feature, a horizontal line as chin, waist or ankles at will. The simplification of the features is in part dictated by the hardness of the material, and some of the more elaborately incised pebble figurines at other sites do seem to have the essentials of the contemporay clay Yarmoukian figurines. Unfortunately at Arjoune there are no human clay figurines for comparison. The selection of a stone for working into a figurine because its natural shape

HUMAN FIGURINES All six of these came from Trench V, but whether their absence from the other Trenches is an accident of discovery or reflects a real difference in function, utilisation or chronology of different parts of the site is impossible to say, in view of the small total number involved. They are all of stone. The most interesting are Reg. Nos. 458 (fig. 64: 1; pl. VII: 1), 459 (fig. 64: 2; pl.. VII: 2) and 526 (fig. 64: 3; pl. VI: 1). Reg. Nos. 504 (fig. 64: 6; pl. VI: 2) and 487 (fig. 64: 4; pl. VI: 3) are miniature figurines of pendant shape, and No. 520 (fig. 64: 5; pl. VI: 4) is the lower end of either a pendant or of a third miniature similar in size to No. 487. Reg. Nos. 458 (fig. 64: 1; pl. VII: 1) and 526 (fig. 64: 3; pl. VI: 1) both utilise the natural shape of a flat pebble to portray a schematic human figure without further shaping, but with some features shown by roughly incised lines. They invite comparison with the pebble figurines of Byblos Néolithique Ancien and Moyen, Shacar ha-Golan and Munhata 2B2 (Perrot 1964, pl. XXIII: 16 and 20). However neither of the Arjoune figurines is particularly close to the pebble figurines from any of these sites, which seem to represent a coherent tradition. Reg. No. 458, though within the same size range, is somewhat different in the representation of the features, only one from Byblos (Dunand 1973, pl. CX: 23083) having similarly outlined eyes. Another, from Shacar ha-Golan (Stekelis 1972, pl. 47: 1) has an incised rectangular nose. The same example from Byblos also has vertical scratches below the face and the line probably representing the waist, which are somewhat similar to those of Reg. Nos. 458, 459 and 526. None of the Arjoune figurines has the drilled hole for mouth and/or nose seen on some Byblos and Shacar ha-Golan figurines, though there are roughly drilled smaller holes for eyes and in the pubis of No. 169

IX. Other Prehistoric Artefacts Distribution of Prehistoric Small Objects by Trench Trench

I

V

VI

VII

Total

Macehead (?) Loomweights/sinkers Stone spindle whorls Clay disks, pierced Clay disks, unpierced Sling stones ‘Astragali’ Bone points/awls Bone pin Human figurines (pebble) Animal figurines (clay) Pendant, stone Pendant, shell

5 1 2 -

2 6 8 4 13 6 1 -

1 5 1 1 1 1 -

2 3 2 1

1 7 5 10 9 2 4 17 1 6 2 1 1

Totals

8

40

10

8

66

CONCLUSIONS

suggests a human form, as in No. 485, is a practice in keeping with the collecting of natural stone ‘astragali’ (see above), or of flat round pebbles to drill for spindle whorls.

In view of the small total number of objects discussed in this Chapter, and of the variation in the sizes of the excavated areas, it would be unwise to draw any far-reaching conclusions from the pattern of their distribution between the Trenches, as shown in the table above. Perhaps the only point worth drawing attention to is the concentration in Trench VI of all the objects most convincingly interpreted as spindle whorls, since this Trench is of the 4th millennium (uncalibrated) when, it is argued in Chapter XI below, the evidence of the animal bones suggests that the rearing of sheep and the production of wool had assumed greater importance in the Arjoune economy than it had previously. It is also worth noting that most of the parallels from other sites suggested for these small objects from Arjoune are probably of somewhat earlier date. In particular, the stone figurines of Byblos and Shacar ha-Golan are associated with the pottery traditions of the Amuq B period in the north and the Pottery Neolithic B and Yarmoukian in the south, broadly therefore of the second half of the 6th millennium bc. In contrast, both the uncalibrated radiocarbon determinations and the pottery evidence from Arjoune Trench V, from where the figurines come, indicate a date contemporary with Amuq C, i.e. the early 5th millennium. The use of these highly schematised human figurines on pebbles or ground stone pendants at Arjoune in the 5th millennium well illustrates the retention here of earlier traditions from the coastal area and the inland south, despite the fact that, as the pottery evidence shows, contact with the north-east was also well established.

ANIMAL FIGURINES The two clay animal figurines Reg. Nos. 616 (fig. 64: 10; pl. VI: 5) and 5270 (fig. 64: 11), found both close to each other in Trench VII, are similar to many commonly found on sites throughout the Near East from the aceramic Neolithic onwards. As is often the case, it is not clear what animal is represented, even in the case of the more complete, Reg. No. 616. The horns (or ears?) are broken off, but the triangular shape of the head might suggest a bovine. However, there is no heavy modelling of the shoulders to suggest a bull. The hindquarters fragment, No. 5270, is closely similar to No. 616 so far as it is preserved. PENDANTS The small green schist pendant from Trench V, Reg. No. 455 (fig. 64: 8; pl. VI: 6), can be compared with numerous pendant ‘seals’ incised with geometric patterns from Halaf sites, e.g. Yarim Tepe II (Merpert et al. 1977, 95 and pl. XXV). As noted in Chapter VIII above, this kind of stone is unlikely to have been found near Arjoune, and it is probable that this is an imported object. A broken shell pendant from Trench VII, Reg. No. 5269 (fig. 64: 7), looks similar to the pierced bone lamelles from Byblos Néolithique Récent (Dunand 1973, 162 and fig.104).

170

IX. Other Prehistoric Artefacts FIGURE 60 Weights, spindle whorls, etc No.

Reg. No.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

5023 454 327 311 326 310 274 572 5019 5020 5016 5018

Provenance

Material

VI.B700/800.3 V.102.2 I.101.4 I.104.2 I.102.3 I.104.2 I.101.4 VI.701.3B VI.802.2 VI.700.1 VI.802.3 VI.704.4B

Stone. Stone. (Cf. Plate V: 1) Baked clay. Baked clay. Baked clay. (Cf. Plate V: 2) Baked clay. Baked clay. Hard limestone. Basalt. Quartzite. Limestone. Basalt.

172

IX. Other Prehistoric Artefacts

173

IX. Other Prehistoric Artefacts

FIGURE 61 Pierced pottery disks No.

Reg. No.

Provenance

Material

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

318 477 5069 469 460 5068 489

I.103.9 VI.701.3B V.201.2A VII.1003.2 V.101/120.2 V.110/112.2 VII.1002.2 V.112.2/201.2

Re-used sherd. (Cf. Plate V: 8) Re-used sherd. Re-used sherd. (Cf. Plate V: 7) Re-used sherd. Re-used sherd. (Cf. Plate V:5) Re-used sherd, paint traces. (Cf. Plate V: 4) Baked clay, purpose-made. Baked clay, purpose-made (2 joined pieces).

174

IX. Other Prehistoric Artefacts

175

IX. Other Prehistoric Artefacts

FIGURE 62 Unpierced Pottery Disks No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Reg. No. -

Provenance

Material

V.220/210.2 V.113.3 V.313.2 V.311.2 V.221.2 V.115.3 V.214.2 V.220/201.2 VI.804.3

Burnished ware Unburnished ware Burnished ware Burnished ware Burnished ware Burnished ware Unburnished ware Burnished ware Burnished one side only

176

IX. Other Prehistoric Artefacts

177

IX. Other Prehistoric Artefacts

FIGURE 63 Bone awls No.

Reg. No.

Provenance

Remarks

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

478 482 457 486 474 480 475 476 479 485 484 483 481 5268 5021

V.102.2 V.103.2 V.221.3 V.220/221.2/3 V.221.3 V.114.1 V.211.3 V.310.1 V.102.2 V.301/310.2 V.103.3 V.212.3 V.112.2 VII.1002.2 VI.705.3B

Identified. (Cf. Plate VI: 7) Identified. Unidentified. (Cf. Plate VI: 9) Identified. Identified. Identified. (Cf. Plate VI: 8)

178

IX. Other Prehistoric Artefacts

179

IX. Other Prehistoric Artefacts

FIGURE 64 Figurienes, pendants, etc. No.

Reg. No.

Provenance

Material and Remarks

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

458 459 526 487 520 504 5269 455 5047 616 5270 5015

V.221.3 V.112.2 V.201.2 V.310.1 V.115.3 V.101/110.3 VII.1008.3 V.104.2 V.202.2 VII.1005.3 VII.1005.3 VI.702.3B

Stone. (Cf. Plate VII: 1) Stone. (Cf. Plate VII: 2) Stone. (Cf. Plate VI: 1) Stone. (Cf. Plate VI: 3) Stone. (Cf. Plate VI: 4) Stone. (Cf. Plate VI: 2) Shell Green schist. (Cf. Plate VI: 6). Pebble ‘astragalus’ Clay animal figurine (damaged). (Cf. Plate VI: 5) Clay animal figurine (broken). Carved bone - head of pin?

180

IX. Other Prehistoric Artefacts

181

IX. Other Prehistoric Artefacts

Plate V: (1) Reg. No. 454; (2) Reg. No. 326; (3) Reg. No. 541; (4) Reg. No. 460; (5) Reg. No. 469; (6) Reg. No. 524; (7) Reg. No. 477; (8) Reg. No. 318.

182

IX. Other Prehistoric Artefacts

Plate VI: (1) Reg. No. 526; (2) Reg. No. 504; (3) Reg. No. 487; (4) Reg. No. 520; (5) Reg. No. 616; (6) Reg. No. 455; (7) Reg. No. 478; (8) Reg. No. 480; (9) Reg. No. 457.

183

IX. Other Prehistoric Artefacts

Plate VII: (1) Reg. No. 458, front and back; (2) Reg. No. 459.

184

CHAPTER X THE PREHISTORIC BURIAL Lin Barnetson

a third root is usual. One fragment of the third root is visible in the socket.

As noted in Chapter III, a single prehistoric human burial was found in Trench VII, clearly contemporary with the filling of the pit in which it lay. An uncalibrated radiocarbon determination of one of the bones places it in the mid-5th millennium bc (see Chapter V). The skeleton (fig. 10 and plate VIII) was decayed but undisturbed. The body had been placed on the surface of Layer 3 of the fill, on its right side and orientated north-south, the head towards the south and facing east. The legs were flexed at right angles to the body and folded back at the knees, so that the feet were beneath the pelvis.

DESCRIPTION OF BONES IDENTIFIED. Cranium. Calvarium crushed medio-latterally, forcing apart the parietal bones along the sagittal suture. Facial bones (ethmoid, lacrimal, zygomatic, maxilla) fragmented. Largest fragment is right maxilla with teeth in situ. Mandible reasonably complete though broken in two (post-mortem compression fracture). Slight periodontal disease particularly at position 6, left and right. Slight calculus on molars and premolars. Dental formula

OSTEOLOGICAL REPORT Condition. Well preserved for the period. The cranium, though crushed (medio-laterally) in situ, was in good condition and the calvarium was reconstructed in the laboratory. The more fragile facial bones had not survived and only the right half of the maxilla was intact. The post-cranial skeleton was less well preserved, and few epiphyseal bones had survived. The compact bones of the hands and feet were light and porous, and the long bones brittle. Sex. Male (?) Age. Skeletal: 17-23 years. Dental: 17-25 years. Stature. As some of the epiphyses were unfused and as there were no complete long bones, estimation of stature is not possible. For the record, two very rough approximations of minimum height were derived from the radius and ulna, which were sufficiently intact for measurement. However, it should be noted that these two upper limb bones are known to give the greatest errors in stature derivation. Stature (derived from radius): 1.87 m (5' 6") Stature (derived from ulna): 1.90 m (5' 7") Measurement of the femur and tibia diaphyses indicated that these bones were eurymeric and mesocnemic respectively, i.e. no marked platymeria or platycnemia - flattening of the shaft - noted in some early populations. Pathology and anomalies. Apart from slight periodontal disease (affecting the alveolar bone on the mandibles) there is no other sign of disease or injury. Although the left lower second molar (tooth 7) is missing, it is clear from the open socket that this tooth had three roots instead of the two characteristic of European populations; in Asian populations

- 7 6 5 4 8 7 6 5 4

3 -

-

1 1

- 2 - - 2* 3* -

-

- - 6 7* -

(Key: * = root fragments only 1 = tooth present but socket missing 8 = tooth erupting) Scapula. A few fragments. Left: fragment of vertebral border and piece of acromion. Right: glenoid cavity and detached acromion. Clavicle. Diaphysis fragment (conoid tubercle). Humerus: Left and right diaphyses, proximal and distal ends missing. Radius. Left: broken mid-shaft; proximal epiphysis fused, distal unfused. Right: distal unfused, detached distal epiphysis. Ulna. Left: broken in two; proximal epiphysis fused, distal unfused. Right (in 3 pieces): proximal fused, distal end missing. Innominate. Left: fragment of ilium (auricular surface). Right: ilium and pubis fragments, acetabulum fused. Sciatic notch incomplete but could indicate male. Femur. Left: in four pieces; fragment of caput epiphysis, distal epiphysis unfused. Right: in three pieces; proximal epiphysis fusing. Tibia. Left: in three pieces: distal epiphysis, diaphysis and fragment of distal end. Right: diaphysis fragment. Fibula. Left and right diaphysis fragments. 185

X. The Prehistoric Burial MEASUREMENTS

Talus. Left and right complete. Calcaneum. Left complete, right complete but slightly eroded. Vertebrae. Complete axis, three fragments of cervical transverse processes and two fragments of lumbar vertebrae. Sacrum. A small fragment. Costae. Four fragments from left side. Carpals. Left scaphoid, lunate and capitate. Metacarpals. 2nd and 5th proximal, ends only. 3rd complete, proximal fused, distal unfused. Tarsals. Left 1st, 2nd and 3rd cuneiform, cuboid, navicular. Metatarsals. 2nd and 3rd proximal ends. Phalanges. (Carpal) Three proximal phalange fragments (of which one has proximal epiphysis fusing) and two middle phalanges.

Owing to the general condition of the long bones and state of epiphyseal fusion these measurements must be regarded as approximations only. Maximum lengths: Radius (L) 211.0 mm Ulna (L) 227.0 mm Calcaneum (L) 59.0 mm Calcaneum (R) 60.0 mm

Plate VIII. Burial in Trench VII

186

CHAPTER XI ANIMAL HUSBANDRY IN THE LATE NEOLITHIC AND CHALCOLITHIC AT ARJOUNE: THE SECONDARY PRODUCTS REVOLUTION REVISITED Caroline Grigson University College London chance that any one bone found belonged to the same individual as another bone is minute, particularly on sites which were occupied for several hundred years. Therefore I have only used (MNI) counts in the bone element analyses, as a basis for estimating which elements are under-represented in the assemblage. I have not used them to quantify the relative contributions of the various taxa. All measurements are in millimetres and are based on those defined by von den Driesch (1976). The measurements of the bones and teeth of each taxon are listed in the Appendices.

(Note: this chapter was completed in 1989, with minor revisions in 1993 and 1995-1996. A short discussion of the results of the ageing patterns of sheep and goats was published in Grigson 2000) INTRODUCTION The animal bones from the `habitation pits’ at Arjoune (on the interpretation of which see Chapter XIV below) are important because so few detailed faunal analyses of Late Neolithic and Chalcolithic sites in the Middle East have been published. It has been postulated by Sherratt (1981, 1983), largely on the basis of pictorial evidence, that the period saw the initiation of the use of animals for their secondary products (milk, wool and traction), and it would be interesting to know whether this hypothesis gains support from the results of faunal analyses from archaeological sites of the relevant millennia such as Arjoune. In the following discussion it is assumed on the basis of the uncalibrated radiocarbon dates that Trenches V and VII belong to the mid-5th millennium bc and Trench VI to the mid-4th. However, the calibrated determinations given in Chapter V indicate that these dates may be several centuries and perhaps as much as a millennium too low.

RETRIEVAL There were 6,992 bone finds in Trench V, 1,956 in Trench VI and 1,547 in Trench VII about 10,500 altogether (see Table I). (The other Trenches produced only insignificant numbers from the prehistoric levels, and are therefore ignored in this study.) The numbers reflect the size of the Trenches (Trench V: c. 210 m2, Trench VI: c. 35 m2, and Trench VII: c. 16 m2). As the site was used as a burial ground in later times there are intrusive human burials in Trenches V and VII and the area has been deeply ploughed, so the possibility that some of the animal bones are intrusive cannot be ruled out; for this reason the bones from the topmost levels have been omitted from the present study. The human bones were light and friable, but all the well-stratified animal bones in Trenches V and VI and some in Trench VII are coated with varying amounts of calcium carbonate, so probably the only intrusive animal bones were a dog’s skeleton in Trench V (Locus 303) and some dog metapodials Locus 301/310), all of which were uncoated. The fact that about 20% of the bones in each Trench could be identified suggests that some (probably mostly smaller bones and fragments) were lost in excavation, despite the fact that much of the spoil from Trench V and all of that from Trenches VI and VII was dry-sieved through an approximately 5 mm mesh, and some samples were wet-sieved. That retrieval was not 100% efficient is also emphasized by the fact that parts of some bones were broken off in excavation and are missing from the collection. Notwithstanding these problems the collection is far better

METHODS The quantification of the various taxa has been made on the basis of the number of bone finds. That is the number of identified specimens (NISP in the American literature), modified when it is clear that any one bone came from the same individual animal as another, as, for example when bones of the same ankle were found together, or when, as was common with pig skull fragments from the same locus, the fragments clearly came from the same skull. Numbers were used rather than weight because of the varying amount of calcium carbonate coating. Although calculations of the minimum number of individuals (MNI) may be useful in small closed features, such as pits, both Gautier (1984) and Ducos (1983) have shown that on an open archaeological site the statistical 187

XI. Animal Husbandry

Table 1: Numbers of identified and unidentified faunal remains at Arjoune. The numbers are of ‘bone finds’, i.e. paired elements and fragments of the same skull, limb, foot or bone count as one. Millennium Trench

5th

4th

V

VII

VI

1979

1982

1981

Domestic goat Capra hircus

60

12

3

75

Domestic sheep Ovis aries

37

9

14

60

527

166

145

838

68

0

3

71

Domestic pig Sus scrofa

255

53

88

396

Domestic ox Bos taurus

247

14

90

351

10

0

0

10

Uncertain canid

1

0

0

1

Hare Lepus capensis

3

0

0

3

Cat Felis sp.

1

0

0

1

Gazelle Gazelle sp.

9

0

9

18

Red deer Cervus elaphus

1

0

*1

*2

? Red deer Cervus elaphus

0

0

4

4

Equid Equus asinus/hemionus

7

1

18

26

? Equid Equus asinus/hemionus

1

0

2

3

Bird (unidentified species)

0

0

2

2

Tortoise Testudo graeca

1

0

9

10

Land crab Potamon potamias

2

0

0

2

Total no. of bones identified

1230

255

*388

1873

Total no. unidentified frags.

5762

1292

1568

8622

TOTAL NO. OF BONES

6992

1547

*1946

10495

Year of excavation

Sheep/goat Sheep/goat/gazelle

Domestic dog Canis familiaris

* plus 3 unattached antler fragments

188

Totals

XI. Animal Husbandry statistically significant and it seems that goats outnumber sheep by about 60% to 40% in the 5th millennium at Arjoune. However the percentage of sheep rises to about 82% in Trench VI suggesting a much greater reliance on sheep in the 4th millennium.

than most of those made to date from Middle Eastern excavations, on many of which sieving was not carried out at all and fragments thought to be unimportant or unidentifiable were discarded on site.

Goats: domestic status and size

DOMESTIC ANIMALS SHEEP (Ovis aries) and GOATS (Capra hircus)

Despite the fact that a reduction in size is known to be one of the main effects of domestication in goats, sheep and other artiodactyls (see for example Zeuner 1963; Grigson 1969, 1978, 1989; Davis 1982; Uerpmann 1979, 1982; Clutton-Brock 1981), there are extraordinarily few published data on sheep and goat size in Middle Eastern archaeological sites. Statistical parameters such as the mean and standard deviation are sometimes given; although these are much better than nothing they are not really adequate, because it is necessary to know the pattern of the distribution of individual measurements within each size range. The main factors which are known to affect size in sheep and goats, apart from geographical isolation and domestication, are sexual dimorphism and species. Thus the distribution of size within a range will vary if there is a preponderance of females or if the sheep and goats at that site differ in size. A complicating factor is the suspicion that at least in some periods goats had a wider sexual dimorphism than sheep (Boessneck & von den Driesch 1979; Hesse 1978). Obviously sheep and goat bones have to be considered separately. Uerpmann (1979) used various dimensions of the bones of a male and female wild goat as a standard for comparison with the size of goats of various periods (Table 3). Using uncalibrated dates he showed that there was a major size change between the goats of what he calls the Proto-neolithic (8th millennium bc) and the Early Neolithic (about 7000 bc). The diminution is really quite small, although it is definite enough to show that the goats in the Early Neolithic sites had already undergone morphological changes associated with domestication. Uerpmann also found that this was followed by a further reduction in the size of goats in the Pottery Neolithic of the 6th and 5th millennia. Figure 65 shows the size of the goats from Arjoune compared with his histograms. Although the size range of the Arjoune goats is slightly narrower, presumably because of the smaller sample size, the mean is almost identical to that of his Pottery Neolithic range (from the sites of Sarab, Hajji Firuz, Belt Cave and Jericho Pottery Neolithic). Thus it would seem that the Arjoune goats are of the normal size for domestic goats of the Pottery Neolithic in the Middle East. Uerpmann does not give any figures for the Chalcolithic. The goat bones from the 4th millennium bc at Arjoune (Trench VI) seem to be of much the same size as those from the 5th millennium (Trenches V and VII). This may be due to small sample size, but as Uerpmann found that there was no further diminution in the subsequent 3rd. millennium at Bronze Age Jericho, it may be that the size of domestic goat size had already ‘bottomed out’ in the 5th millennium.

The numbers of sheep and goats The difficulties inherent in the separation of goat from sheep bones are well known, and are further compounded at Arjoune, as on most Middle Eastern sites, by the presence of gazelle. The majority of the small ruminant bones at Arjoune belong in the sheep/goat category, and, whilst others could be identified only as sheep/goat/gazelle, about 14% could be identified to species. The bones in the two wider categories have been allocated to the different species on the basis of the relative numbers of specifically identified bones (Table 2). The resulting figures have to be regarded as tentative however; complicating factors include difficulties over the separation of sheep and goat, as some of the criteria used are not always as obvious as they seem to be in the standard works (Boessneck 1969; Lawrence 1980), and the fact that goat and gazelle horncores seem to survive better than sheep horncores. It is possible that there were hornless female sheep at Arjoune and if so the absence of their horncores would bias the counts against them. The differences between the initial counts of sheep and goat bones in Trenches V and VII (Table 2) are not

Table 2: Small ruminant numbers at Arjoune Initial Count

Adjusted Domestic Wild Count

TRENCHES V + VII Sheep/goat/gazelle Sheep/goat Goat Sheep Gazelle Total

68 693 72 46 9 888

0 0 486 393 9 888

0 0 486 393 0 879

0 0 0 0 9 9

3 145 3 14 9 174

0 0 29 136 9 174`

0 0 29 136 0 165

0 0 0 0 9 9

TRENCH VI Sheep/goat/gazelle Sheep/goat Goat Sheep Gazelle Total

189

XI. Animal Husbandry

Figure 65: The size of goats at Arjoune and other Holocene sites, compared with a ‘standard animal’ (50 on the X-axis). (A) Protoneolithic; (B) Early Neolithic; (C) Pottery Neolithic; (D) Arjoune, Trenches V and VII (5th millennium) and VI (4th millennium). Data for A-C, ‘standard animal’, and method, from Uerpmann 1979. Note the similarity between Arjoune, with a mean value of 31.9, and the Pottery Neolithic.

190

XI. Animal Husbandry Goats: domestic status and horncore size and shape Table 3: Uerpmann Standard Wild Goat

Measurements of the goat horncores had to be treated rather differently from the other dimensions because they show extreme sexual dimorphism and are anyway not recorded for the ‘standard animal’. The measurements of the Arjoune horncores are compared with those from some other Middle Eastern sites (Jericho, Pre-pottery Neolithic B levels, 7th millennium, and Fikirtepe, c. 5000 bc) in figure 66. This shows that female horncores, unlike the rest of the body, do not seem to change in size, either with post-Pleistocene dwarfing, or with domestication, even though one would expect a direct allometric relationship between horncore size and skull size. It may be that very small horns are unfeasible for mechanical reasons; usually very small goats persist in having horns whereas other small ungulates (such as sheep) may lose them with reduction in size. However this is not true of the male horncores, which are distinctly smaller than those from earlier sites, and there is no doubt that this indicates domestication. The effect of age is particularly great on male horncores: they grow in length from next to nothing at birth to several hundred millimetres, and this leads to a high degree of variability. The increase in diameter is less dramatic: from about 20 mm to up to 86 mm, but even here the variation is wide, and young male horncores overlap in size with those of adult females. This can be seen clearly in the Arjoune sample (fig. 66b). Apart from size the only valid osteological differences between different types of goat that are relevant to this study are in the morphology of the horncores. Zeuner (1955) was the first archaeozoologist to describe the horns of modern goats (Capra aegagrus – wild and C. hircus – domestic) in detail. Their horns are of two main types: in the first they are scimitar-shaped and are either directed straight backwards and curved only in one plane or slightly twisted; in the second type the horns are markedly twisted or screw-shaped, i.e. the left horn turns clock-wise when viewed from above (heteronymous). Wild goats have scimitar horns, but domestic goats have either scimitar or screw-shaped horns. Horns are much larger in males than in females and usually have much more strongly developed anterior keels. If the cross-section of the male horncore is drawn at about one third of the length of the core above its base, in scimitar horncores it may be quadrate (i.e. quadrangular or quadrilateral), or almond-shaped (either bilaterally symmetrical or externally convex and medially flattened) and pointed anteriorly. In screw horncores it is almond-shaped (Zeuner 1955; but see below). Both Zeuner (1955) and Reed (1959) considered that the quadrate shape typified wild goats and that the almond shape, whether symmetrical or medially flattened, characterised domestic animals. For this reason Zeuner described the very large male horncore from the Pre-pottery Neolithic at Jericho (now known to be PPNB) as domestic (fig. 67), and Reed thought the same of the early goats at Jarmo. There are many problems with this distinction, some of which are discussed by Reed (1983). The first is that modern wild goats are quite

Means of recent female goat (BMNH 653M) and male goat (BMNH 353L) from the Taurus Mountains, taken from Uerpmann (1979). Those used in present study are: Humerus, breadth of trochlea (Bt)

34.2

Radius, proximal breadth (Bp)

35.5

Radius, distal breadth (Bd)

33.2

Metacarpal, proximal breadth (Bp

27.3

Metacarpal, distal breadth (Bd)

30.5

Astragalus, greatest length (GLl)

32.0

Calcaneum, greatest length (GL)

65.5

Metatarsal, proximal breadth (Bp

23.0

Metatarsal, distal breadth (Bd)

28.5

small, much smaller than the wild goats of the early Holocene (Stampfli 1983; Bökönyi 1977), and horncore shape may well be influenced by size (Clutton-Brock 1979; Grigson 1975). Late Pleistocene and early Holocene goat horncores are few and are often not described in much detail, so we do not know whether the degree of variation was the same as that of modern wild goats. Most important of all, Hole, Flannery and Neely (1969) showed that the almond cross-section, as well as the quadrate, is present in some modern ‘wild’ goat populations. The two modern wild goat horncores illustrated by Davis (1974) have almond-shaped cross-sections. Now that the Jarmo (? late 7th millennium) material has been published in more detail (Stampfli 1983) and more very early material, from the 9th millennium to about 6000 bc, has been described (Hesse 1978; Hole, Flannery & Neely 1969; Bökönyi 1977; Hecker 1975; Meadow 1983; Davis 1978; and my own unpublished observations on the goat horncores of the PPNB at Jericho), it is clear that male scimitar horncores of both quadrate and almond-shaped cross-section, as well as intermediate forms, were present in almost all sites and should be considered as two extremes of a natural range of variation, regardless of their presumed wild or domestic status. Neither Zeuner (1955) nor Reed (1959; 1983) discussed female horncores as they considered them to be much less variable than those of males. However, close examination of 28 female horncores from Ganj Dareh (illustrated in Hesse 1978) and of 10 from Jericho (PPNB) shows that the female cross-section can be of any of the same types as the male, although the anterior keel is less prominent. In female as well as male horncores both quadrate and almond shaped cross-sections are found in all sites that span the critical periods, so cross-sections cannot be used as indicators of either wildness or domesticity.

191

XI. Animal Husbandry

Figure 66: Goat horncores, maximum basal diameter (no. 42 in von den Driesch 1976). (A) 7th millennium, Jericho PPNB (n = 11); (B) Late 6th and 5th millennium, Arjoune Trenches V and VII and Shams ed-Din (n = 16); (C) 4th millennium and c. 5000bc, Arjoune Trench VI (very young male) and Fikirtepe (n = 6). The size of the female horncores has not diminished with time, whereas diminution in males is marked. Shams ed-Din data from Uerpmann 1982, Fikirtepe data from Boessneck and von den Driesch 1979.

192

XI. Animal Husbandry to be confined to females (Hesse 1978). Two medially flat horncores are illustrated at Jarmo (Stampfli 1983, figure 176) and there are also two in the PPNB at Jericho. In the light of the information so far published, the really flat medial face occurs frequently in female goat horncores, and it appears in the earliest as well as the later sites of the critical period, so it is doubtful whether this character can be used to indicate domestication. The flat male horncore in the Pottery Neolithic of Jericho (6th or 5th millennium) is accompanied by one medially flat and one almond-shaped female horncore, but until more male cross-sections are published one cannot be certain that this is a true domestication character in males any more than it is in females. In sum, in scimitar-horned goats there seems to be a wide, continuous range of variation in the shape of the cross-section, from quadrate to medially flat, and there is no one character that reliably indicates domestication. Whilst both wild and domestic scimitar-horned goats persist into modern times, at some stage, which Zeuner (1955) considered to be the Early Bronze Age, domestic goats with screw horns made their appearance. The screw horncores that Zeuner illustrates have cross-sections which vary from almond-shaped to oval to medially flat. In one, a dwarf goat from the Neolithic (sic) of Esh-Shaheinab in the

There is however a variant of the almond-shaped cross-section, the medially flattened horncore, which Reed (1959) considered to be a domestication character at Jarmo. There is a problem here with descriptive terminology: in the horncores that Hole, Flannery and Neely (1969 – see below) described as medially flattened, the medial face is straight, but in the medially flattened Jarmo horncores described by Stampfli (1983) and Reed (1959) the medial face is always curved, although less so than the external face, producing an asymmetrical almond shape. In fact this asymmetrical almond shape, like the symmetrical, is found in both sexes in virtually all sites of the critical period, and is not indicative of domestication. In considering the medially flat horncores in the Deh Luran Plain sites Hole, Flannery and Neely (1969) showed that they were absent from the Bus Mordeh phase at Ali Kosh (8th-7th millennia) and appeared first in the late 7th millennium Ali Kosh phase (together with quadrate and almond-shaped horncores), and they considered this to be a sign of domestication. The horncores that they illustrate (their figure 117) as having flat medial faces all seem to be of females, and it is not clear from their report whether this condition occurred in males as well. In Ganj Dareh (9th- 8th millennia) seven of the twenty-eight female horncores are medially flattened, and on this site this character does appear

Figure 67: Goat horncore cross-sections at Arjoune. All the cross-sections are almond-shaped with varying degrees of medial flattening, which is marked only in one male (V-b3) and in the twisted female horncores. The development of the anterior keel is variable in both sexes. All cross-sections taken at a position estimated to be onethird of the length of the horncore above the base, unless otherwise indicated. Anterior face towards top of page. M= medial face (where known); Y = young animal. Each section is marked with the Trench and bone find number.

193

XI. Animal Husbandry

Figure 68: Goat and sheep horncores from Arjoune. (A) Goat (males above; females below); (B) Sheep (male, ?young, left; female right)

194

XI. Animal Husbandry

Figure 69: The size of sheep at Arjoune, compared with a ‘standard animal’ (50 on the X-axis). (A) Protoneolithic; (B) Early Neolithic; (C) Pottery Neolithic; (D) ‘Chalcolithic’ of the Amuq (levels D-G, 5th millennium); (E) Arjoune, Trenches V & VII (5th millennium) and VI (4th millennium). Data for A-D, ‘standard animal’, and method from Uerpmann 1979. Note the similarity between Arjoune and the ‘Chalcolithic’ of the Amuq in the 5th millennium.

195

XI. Animal Husbandry described above, it seems likely that early domestic and wild scimitar-horned goats had the same wide range of variation in cross-section so this is not diagnostic. The size of the male horncores (see above) does however show that the goats at Arjoune were domesticated and their shape suggests that they were of the same general type as the scimitar-horned goats of other Middle Eastern sites, particularly those of the Neolithic. The presence of a twisted horncore in Trench VI (4th millennium bc) is not at all unexpected, nor is the high proportion of scimitar horncores in Trenches V and VII (5th millennium bc), but the one strongly twisted horncore in Trench VII is intriguing and, in view of the chronological

Sudan, the medial surface is slightly concave. At Hajji Firuz (5th millennium) one horncore was moderately twisted (Meadow 1983) and at Ali Kosh a horncore which ‘shows some tendency towards twisting’ first appears in the Mohammed Jaffar phase (early 6th millennium, Pottery Neolithic: Hole, Flannery and Neely 1969, 277), but it is only in the succeeding Sabz phase (late 6th millennium) that distinctly screwed horncores appear, and they do not become common until the Bayat phase (4th millennium, Ubaid/Early Uruk). Most of these horncores are medially concave in cross-section although one retains the almond shape. Zeuner (1955) illustrates the cross-section of a screw horncore from the Bronze Age of Jericho. It has a slight medial concavity. Clutton-Brock (1979, fig. 4) has plotted the frequency of screw horncores in different periods at Jericho. They are present in quantity in the Early Bronze Age (late 3rd millennium) with a few scimitar cores, but isolated examples occur among the numerous scimitar cores in the Pottery and Pre-Pottery Neolithic levels. Screw horncores are absent from all the other Middle Eastern sites that pre-date 6000 bc. In the Kermanshah Valley they are absent from Sarab (early 6th millennium), but appear at Siahbid (late 5th millennium) (Bökönyi 1977). Both scimitar and screw horncores were present at Demicihüyük (end of 4th - 3rd millennium: Rauh 1981), but only scimitar horncores were present at Fikirtepe (c. 5000 bc) (Boessneck & von den Driesch 1979), and apparently the same was true at Banahilk (Laffer 1983) and Girikihaciyan (McArdle 1974), both of the early 5th millennium. Screw horncores predominate in the Late Ubaid site of Tal-i-Iblis at about 4000 bc (Bökönyi 1967), in the 4th millennium Chalcolithic sites of Bir es-Safadi, Tel Aviv and elsewhere in the southern Levant (Ducos 1968), and in most Bronze Age sites (Clutton-Brock 1979; Boessneck and Wiedemann 1977; Zeuner 1955; Hilzheimer 1941). One wonders whether their presence in small numbers in the early context at Jericho might be explained by contamination from the later levels of the site. Thus while true screw-horned goats may have appeared for the first time in the 6th millennium, it seems that they did not become common until the Chalcolithic in the late 5th or early 4th millennium bc. This lengthy preamble is a necessary background to a consideration of the morphology of the goat horncores at Arjoune. There were 29 horncores in Trench V, six in Trench VII, and two in Trench VI; all were of the scimitar type, except for one with a moderate twist from Trench VI and one fragment of a horncore tip from Trench VII which was strongly twisted. The more complete goat horncores from Arjoune are illustrated in fig. 68a. Cross-sections of all the horncores that were well enough preserved are shown in fig. 67. Those of males are all almond-shaped, some are symmetrical and some have the medial surface flatter than the external. The female cores are all almond-shaped in cross-section and three (including the two that are twisted) have distinct medial flattening. Thus if one accepts that medial flattening indicates domestication, there are at least some undoubted domestic goats at Arjoune, but in view of the variability of the cross-section of scimitar horncores

Table 4: Uerpmann Standard Wild Sheep Dimensions of recent female sheep (Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, No. 57951) from western Iran, from Uerpmann (1979). Those used in the present study are: Scapula, least length of neck (SLC)

19.5

Humerus, breadth of trochlea (Bt)

29.5

Radius, proximal breadth (Bd)

33.5

Radius, distal breadth (Bd)

31.0

Metacarpal, proximal breadth (Bp

25.0

Metacarpal, distal breadth (Bd)

26.5

Astragalus, greatest length (GL)

31.3

Calcaneum, greatest length (GL)

64.0

Metatarsal, proximal breadth (Bp)

22.5

Metatarsal, distal breadth (Bd)

26.0

distribution of screw horncores outlined above, suggests a later, rather than an early, 5th millennium date for this bone or, perhaps, an intrusion. Sheep: domestic status and size Uerpmann (1979) used a wild female sheep as a standard for comparison of the size of sheep of various periods (Table 4). He showed that there was a major size change between the sheep of what he calls the Proto-neolithic (8th millennium bc) and the Early Neolithic (about 7000 bc). Although the change in size is really quite small, it is definite enough to show that the sheep in the Early Neolithic sites had already undergone morphological changes associated with domestication. Uerpmann found that this was followed by a further reduction in the size of sheep in the Pottery Neolithic in the 6th and 5th millennia. In the subsequent Chalcolithic, or Late Pottery Neolithic of Amuq D-G (5th millennium), there was a slight recovery in size. Fig. 69 shows the size of the sheep from Arjoune compared with some of Uerpmann’s histograms. The mean size of the Arjoune sheep, from both Trenches V and VII and 196

XI. Animal Husbandry

Figure 70: Sheep horncores, maximum basal diameter (no. 42 in von den Driesch 1976). (A) ? late 7th millennium, Jarmo (n = 14); (B) ; (B) c. 5000 bc, Fikirtepe (n = 13); (C) 5th millennium, Arjoune Trench V (n = 3). As with goats, the size of the female horncores has not diminished with time, whereas diminution in males is quite sharp. Jarmo data from Stampfli 1983; Fikirtepe data from Boessneck and von den Driesch 1979.

197

XI. Animal Husbandry

Figure 71: Sheep horncore cross-sections at Arjoune. The cross-section on the left (VI-b83) was taken in the central part of the length of the horncore, the remaining two at the base. Anterior face towards top of page. M = medial face (where known); Y = young animal. Each cross-section is marked with its sex as well as its Trench and bone find number.

sometimes occur today in the wild and, according to Boessneck and von den Driesch (1979), are usual in the wild sheep of western Iran. While it is possible that these Iranian sheep are at least partially feral, isolated examples of hornlessness cannot be said definitely to indicate domestication. For example Hesse (1978) found what was probably a hornless sheep frontal as early as the 9th/8th millennia at Ganj Dareh. In the Kermanshah Valley at Sarab (early 6th millennium) one third of the sheep were hornless, and about one half in the later sites (Bökönyi 1977); such high proportions argue in favour of domestication. At Fikirtepe, Boessneck and von den Driesch (1979) found the remains of both horned and hornless female sheep, the hornless ewes having been identified from the appropriate part of the frontal bone. A variant appears in Chalcolithic and later sites in which male horns are horizontal at their base and are tightly spiralled. Both Ducos (1968) and Angress (1959) noticed horncores of this type in the Chalcolithic sites of Beersheva and referred them to ‘Ovis longipes palaeoaegypticus’. Hilzheimer (1941) found them in the Early Dynastic Bronze Age at Tell Asmar, and he reproduces several contemporary depictions of these corkscrew-horned sheep. Another variant, perhaps found only in historical times in the Middle East, is when the ewe’s horns have a goat-like scimitar shape. The basal cross-section in quite variable. In males it is usually triangular (Hesse 1978; Bökönyi 1977; Stampfli 1983) with a flattened medial face and a rather blunt anterior angle, but it can be oval (Hole, Flannery and Neely 1969, 283; Bökönyi 1977), with or without slight medial flattening. In females it is usually oval, sometimes with slight medial flattening. Only a few sheep horncores survive at Arjoune (in

trench VI, is a little larger than that of Uerpmann’s

Chalcolithic (= Late Pottery Neolithic, plus Chalcolithic) range from the Amuq. The differences are probably not significant, so it would seem that the Arjoune sheep are of the normal size for domestic sheep of the Late Pottery Neolithic/Chalcolithic in the northern Levant. Although the sample is far too small for certainty the mean size of the sheep bones from the 4th millennium at Arjoune (Trench VI: 48.8) seem to be a little larger than those from the 5th millennium (Trenches V and VII: 47.5); possibly there was a higher proportion of males. Sheep: domestic status and horncore size and shape Only a few measurable sheep horncores survive at Arjoune (all in Trench V). Fig. 70 shows that the horncore of a male sheep at Arjoune and those at Fikirtepe are smaller than those at Jarmo (? late 7th millennium). Whether or not one considers the sheep at Jarmo to have been domesticated, those at Arjoune and Fikirtepe are so much smaller that there is little doubt about their domestic status. As with goats there seems to be no diminution of the horncores of females. Much less has been written about the effects of domestication on the horncores of sheep than on those of goats. Both sexes of wild and domestic sheep (Ovis orientalis and O. aries) have the same wide, regular curvature which, as in goats, is clockwise in the left horn (heteronymous). Female horns are much smaller than those of males and sometimes ewes may lack horns altogether. Hole, Flannery and Neely (1969), on finding a crushed hornless skull, took this as unequivocal osteological evidence of sheep domestication in the Bus Mordeh phase (late 8th millennium/early 7th millennium) at Ali Kosh. However, hornless ewes do 198

XI. Animal Husbandry

Figure 72: The size of the Arjoune sheep and goats compared with one another and with that of the ‘standerd sheep’. (A) the size of the Arjoune goats; (B) the size of the Arjoune sheep; (C) the size of the Arjoune sheep and goats. The adult sheep and goats at Arjoune seem to be of much the same size, and the skew to the left in each graph suggests a concentration of females.

199

XI. Animal Husbandry

Table 5: Arjoune sheep and goat fusion data TRENCHES V VII

V + VII

VI

Total

Fusing within 1 year m4 unworn

1

0

1

6

7

37

8

45

21

66

2

0

2

0

2

13

0

13

2

15

2

2

4

0

4

fused

20

14

34

6

40

Innominate unfused

13

3

16

1

17

16

2

18

1

19

0

0

0

0

0

6

0

6

0

6

6

0

6

1

7

10

0

10

0

10

3

1

4

0

4

13

1

14

5

19

6

0

6

1

7

20

0

20

5

25

0

0

0

1

1

1

0

1

0

1

1

0

1

0

1

2

3

5

2

7

2

0

2

0

2

1

0

1

3

4

1

0

1

0

1

1

0

1

0

1

177

34

211

55

266

m4 worn or P4 Prox. radius unfused fused Dist. humerus unfused

fused Fusing c.1½ years Middle phalanx unfused fused Prox. phalanx unfused fused Fusing 2 years Dist. tibia unfused fused Fusing 2½ years Dist. mpodial unfused fused Fusing c. 3-3½ years Prox. femur unfused fused Dist. femur unfused fused Dist. radius unfused fused Prox. tibia unfused fused

Total

200

XI. Animal Husbandry

Figure 73: Survivorship curves of sheep and goats at Arjoune Trenches V and VII (5th millennium), compared with those from earlier sites. The earlier samples have been chosen for their large size. There is an upward shift over time. Although the Arjoune sample is rather small it seems nearer to the 6th millennium Chaga Sefid curve than to the earlier ones. Data from Ganj Dareh (n = 10372) from Hesse 1975; Ali Kosh phase at Ali Kosh (n = 1465) from Hole et al. 1969; and Chaga Sefid (n = 1614) from Wheeler-Pires-Ferreira 1975/6/7.

201

XI. Animal Husbandry Trenches V and VI); they are illustrated in fig. 68b. All are broken, but the bases of the horncores of both males and females seem to have the beginning of the wide curvature usual in wild and domestic sheep. There are no hornless frontal fragments, so it seems unlikely that any of the sheep at Arjoune were hornless. Cross-sections could only be made on three sheep horncores (fig. 71). Of the two male cores one is triangular and one is roughly oval; the female(?) core is medially flattened.

this basis there was one male axis and three female axes of sheep/goat. In addition there was one male (?) and one female sheep astragalus. These results suggest that in Trenches V and VII females outnumber males. In Trench VI the results are less clear, probably because of the smaller sample size; but all the bones that can be sexed on the basis of size, morphology or both, are of sheep: one female astragalus, two male metacarpals and two female metatarsals.

Sheep and goat: withers height

b) Metrical characters. Plots of sheep and goat measurements from sites of the 6th and 5th millennia, such as Fikirtepe (Boessneck and von den Driesch 1979), tend to be concentrated at the smaller end of the size range with just a few larger animals represented on the right. This skewedness is true of sheep/goat bones in general and of both sheep and goat bones where these can be separated. The obvious explanation, confirmed by the results of sexing the pelvic bones at this site, is that the majority of the bones were from adult females. Comparisons of the sizes of sheep, goat and sheep/goat bones at Arjoune with that of the standard sheep are shown in fig. 72. The pattern of distribution of the combined samples from all the Arjoune Trenches is so similar to that from Fikirtepe that it is safe to say that females probably outnumbered males at Arjoune as well. This is a very common pattern in prehistoric samples of domestic animal bones, and suggests that males were mostly slaughtered when young. This is discussed further below in the section on ageing.

There are only two sheep limb bones at Arjoune (both in Trench VI) which are complete enough for the length to be measured. These are a radius (GL 182, Bp 32, Bd 32.1) and a metacarpal (GL c150, SD 12.1). The narrowness of both suggests that they are from ewes. Use of the multiplication factors used by Boessneck and von den Driesch (1979) at Fikirtepe (4.02 for the radius and 4.54 for the metatarsal) gives withers heights of 73.2 and 68.1 cm for female sheep at Arjoune. The Arjoune sheep seem to be slightly taller than those at Fikirtepe which ranged from 54.8 to 66.5 cm. There are no complete long bones of goats at Arjoune so the withers height cannot be calculated. Sheep and goats relative size Boessneck and von den Driesch (1979) compared the sizes of the sheep with the goats at Fikirtepe and came to the conclusion that while male goats were larger than the male sheep, the females of the two species were of the same size. The similarity in body height in females was confirmed by their calculations of withers heights which gave averages which are very similar. However, while this seems to be true for the length of the bones, in breadth the Fikirtepe female goats exceeded the female sheep. There are no complete long bones of goats at Arjoune so comparisons of height cannot be made, but in breadth the sheep and goats seem to be the same size (see fig. 72).

Sheep and goats: age distribution a) Post-cranial bones. Survivorship curves, based largely or entirely on the state of fusion of long bones, have attracted attention because it is claimed that people would have killed hunted and domesticated animals at different ages, the theory being that in domestic populations more young animals would be killed, but that wild animals would be hunted randomly so that their kill-off patterns would reflect the natural age structure of the population in the wild (Hole, Flannery and Neely 1969; Hesse 1978, 1982; Hecker 1975). There are some difficulties here, one of which is that it has not been convincingly demonstrated that hunters do kill randomly; indeed some hunters are definitely selective (Binford 1978). Other difficulties more relevant to us here are that the criteria used for ageing are still not universally agreed upon, particularly the degree of variation in times of epiphysial fusion (see for example Bullock and Rackham 1982), and theoretically survivorship curves should fall with age, whereas sometimes they rise at two years (data based on the fusion of the distal tibia). Other difficulties include the facts that the less dense, younger bone may have been differentially destroyed, and most survivorship curves based on longbones only span the ages from birth to about 3½ years. Despite all these difficulties, comparisons of survivorship curves for sheep and goats from different sites do yield some very interesting information, in particular the contrast in the

Sheep and goats: sexual attributes. a) Non-metrical characters. It is quite easy to determine both species and sex from complete pelves of adult sheep and goats. Damage can make specific identification difficult or impossible, but provided that the acetabulum is complete, sexing is usually possible (Lemppenau 1964). On this basis Boessneck and von den Driesch (1979) were able to show that at Fikirtepe the majority of both adult sheep and goats were female. As they point out horncores are unsuitable for the quantification of sex because the heavier male horncores survive better than those of females and, in sheep, the females sometimes lack horncores altogether. In Trenches V and VII there was one pelvis of an adult male goat, one of an adult male (? sheep), and of the 10 others which can only be classified as adult sheep/goat, 9 are of females. The atlas and axis are strongly dimorphic in size and their sex is usually obvious even when they are unmeasurable; on 202

XI. Animal Husbandry

Figure 74: Sheep/goat ageing at Arjoune: histograms showing the numbers of mandibles in each age group. (A) Trenches V and VII (5th millennium); (B) Trench VI (4th millennium). Note the concentration of animals aged between 1 and 6 years in the 5th millennium and on both younger and older animals in the 4th.

and, of course, on many sites neo-natal bones may not survive at all. A notable exception in this respect is the Fikirtepe report (c. 5000 bc: Boessneck and von den Driesch 1979). If a survivorship curve is calculated from all their data (including the neo-natals), the values for the distal metapodial and distal radius are close to those from Ganj Dareh, but if neo-natals are excluded, the curve reverts to the typical 6th millennium pattern. There were too few ageable bones of sheep and goats from Trench VI to allow the construction of a survivorship curve, but the curve from Trenches V and VII , where there were scarcely any neo-natal sheep/goat bones, seems to belong with those of later sites (Table 5 and fig. 73). The obvious interpretation is that in the earlier sites most sheep and goats were being killed when young, that is raised for meat, with a few older animals for reproduction. In the later sites more animals were kept to an older age in order to

Deh Luran Plain sites (Hole, Flannery and Neely 1969) between the 8th/7th millennia Bus Mordeh phase at Ali Kosh and the 6th millennium phases (Mohammed Jaffar at Ali Kosh and Sabz at Tepe Sabz). Hesse (1978) has shown that the curve at the very early site of Ganj Dareh is very close to that at Bus Mordeh. Other 6th millennium sites (Tepe Tulai and Chagha Sefid: Wheeler-Pieres-Ferreira 1975-77) are close to Mohammed Jaffar and Sabz; that is, the individual animals in these later sites were living to a greater age than those in the earlier sites. Data from the sites with the largest samples are plotted in fig. 73. A note of caution is needed here because the proportions of fused to unfused bones will depend on the degree to which the neo-natal bones are included in the counts. Obviously this should be done, but many workers are either hesitant to identify to taxon shafts that lack epiphyses, or do not say whether or not these bones have been included in the counts; 203

XI. Animal Husbandry

Table 6 Sheep/goat element analysis. A comparison of the number of each element found in Trenches V and VII with the number expected, based on a minimum number of 57 unpaird mandibular toothrows. There is a positive correlation between the percentage of each element surviving and its density at 90 months of age (r = 0.64). Element Horncore

No. in skeleton 2

No. expected 114

No. found 40

Max. % survival 35.1

Density at 90 m. Cf text

Mandibular toothrows

2

114

57

50.0

1.76

Atlas

1

57

8

14.0

1.50

Axis

1

57

4

7.0

1.39

Cervical verterbrae

5

285

15

5.3

1.29

Dorsal verterbrae

13

741

19

2.6

1.37

Lumbar verterbrae

6

342

15

4.4

1.44

Scapula

2

114

48

42.1

1.69

Humerus, proximal

2

114

1

0.9

0.87

Humerus, distal & distal shaft

2

114

49

43.0

1.72

Radius, proximal

2

114

18

15.8

1.65

Radius, distal & distal shaft

2

114

12

10.5

1.52

Metapodial, proximal

4

228

20

8.8

* 1.30

8.8

† 1.36

Metapodial, distal

4

228

25

11.0

* 1.35

11.0

† 1.31

Pelvis

2

114

52

45.6

1.71

Femur, proximal

2

114

2

1.8

1.52

Femur, distal

2

114

8

7.0

1.21

Tibia, proximal

2

114

2

1.8

1.54

Tibia, distal & distal shaft

2

114

23

20.2

1.69

Calcaneum

2

114

8

7.0

1.55

Astragalus

2

114

8

7.0

1.53

26

1,482

16

1.1

1.15

Proximal phalanx

8

456

25

5.5

0.80

Middle phalanx

8

456

9

2.0

0.80

Distal phalanx

8

456

3

0.7

0.70

Ribs

* = metacarpal density † = metatarsal density Note: the metapodials have been counted together because of the difficulty sometimes encountered of distinguishing metacarpal from metatarsal fragments.

204

XI. Animal Husbandry followed, and similarly in strategy (B) the killed animals would still be eaten. I suspect therefore that in crude terms the age expectancy in a purely meat strategy would have a slightly younger emphasis than that illustrated by Payne’s model (A). This view gains some support from the limb bone survivorship curves, however crudely they express it (see fig. 73). I also believe that in a specialized milk economy there would be slightly higher proportion of animals aged three years or more (mostly females of course). Thus in unspecialized economies one can postulate three stages, each involving an increase in life expectancy, from meat production (which would still allow the use of other animal products such as skins), to meat + milk, to meat + milk + wool. The adjusted Arjoune Trenches V/VII curve (fig. 75c) is closest to Payne’s model (A), which as I have suggested above probably implies a meat and milk strategy in which meat production predominates. However, the shape of the entire curve before three years of age depends largely on the degree of perinatal mortality. If, for the sake of argument, 50% of the lambs and kids had died or had been killed soon after birth, the resulting curve would be the same as Payne’s specialized milk production curve (B). There are no mandibles of this age group in Arjoune Trenches V and VII; they could all have been destroyed in situ, or lambing and kidding could have taken place elsewhere. The conclusion of the sexing analysis was that there was a high proportion of females amongst the adult animals at Arjoune Trenches V and VII. When combined with the ageing data from mandibles and long bones this suggests that sheep and goats at Arjoune V and VII were kept mostly for meat with some milking. One certain conclusion of the ageing and sexing study is that the Arjoune V and VII strategy bears no resemblance to Payne’s model for wool production. Turning next to the curve from Trench VI, this is markedly different from that from Trenches V/VII (fig. 75b-c), and the difference between them is statistically significant. Because of the small size of the samples it was necessary to lump the two sets of data into four categories for a ✪2 test, but the differences between them are highly significant (p = < 0.005). Fig. 75c shows that the main difference is the higher number of mandibles in Trenches V and VII in the D, E and F age groups; this makes the curve at Trench VI resemble Payne’s B curve, which suggests a greater reliance on milk than on meat. However, Trench VI also has a higher number of mandibles in age groups F and G (4-8 years), suggesting a strategy in which some animals were kept into old age, as in Payne’s C category (specialized wool production), though much less marked. The analysis of the age structure of the sheep and goat herds at Arjoune and other sites suggests a gradual shift in emphasis, from the utilization of meat in the earlier sites, to meat and some milk at Arjoune in the 5th millennium bc, with the addition of wool at Arjoune in the 4th millennium. None of these strategies could be described as specialized. Davis (1983, 1987) found a similar change in ageing patterns, which he interpreted as reflecting an increase in the use of secondary products, in his study of the faunal remains

obtain their secondary products (milk, wool and hair). However it should be remembered that the curves only go up to the age of about three years and differences after this age may be more critical for determining the use made of the animals. b) Mandibles and lower teeth. Fifty-one sheep/goat mandibles, or tooth sets containing two or more lower teeth in Trenches V and VII could be aged according to the criteria of Payne (1973) and Deniz and Payne (1982). Of these, 31 could be assigned to a single age group in the following numbers: A-0, B-0, C-0, D-6, E-9, F-11, G-4, H-0, and I-1. Twelve more could be assigned to a pair of age groups: C&D-1, E&F-2, F&G-5, and G&H-4. Five spanned three age groups: B&C&D-4, and F&G&H-1; three spanned four groups: E&F&G&H-3. In order to incorporate these less securely aged mandibles, they were assigned to individual age groups proportionately on the basis of the distribution of the more accurately aged mandibles. This was done in sequence, first pairs were added, then those spanning three age groups and then those spanning four. The same was done for the 24 mandibles from Trench VI and the resultant age distributions are plotted in the form of histograms in fig. 74a-b and as survivorship curves in fig. 75b-c. Theoretical curves for survivorship under different production regimes have been modelled by Payne (1973) and these have been added to the graph (fig. 75a). At first sight the top end of the Arjoune Trenches V and VII curve (fig. 75b) bears little resemblance to any of the modelled curves. However the bone element analysis (see below) suggests that there has been a great deal of destruction of the less dense bone at Arjoune. According to Binford and Bertram (1977) sheeps’ mandibles have a relative density of 1.4 at the age of 6 months and 1.51 at 1 year 7 months. When these figures are compared on the bone element survival graph (fig. 76) they imply a rate of destruction of the mandibles aged 6 months of about 85%, and of about 80% at the age of l year 7 months, compared with the mandibles of adults aged 90 months. When the survivorship curves from Arjoune are adjusted to allow for these differences, and if like Payne one assumes a 15% perinatal mortality, they come to resemble two of Payne’s curves quite closely (fig. 75c). The implications of this are discussed further below. Sheep and goat management at Arjoune. Payne’s (1973) three models (shown in fig. 75a) are (A) meat production, in which there is a high mortality of males at 2-3 years and only a few males reach adult life; (B) specialized milk production, in which there is a high mortality of males at 6-9 months, and only a few males reach adult life; from three years onwards these two curves are identical; and (C) specialized wool production, in which emphasis is on older animals of both sexes and most males are castrated and kept in a separate flock from the females and their young. Payne, however, points out that flocks in subsistence economies are unlikely to be kept for milk or wool alone. When both milk and meat are required (but when meat is relatively more important) his strategy (A) might be 205

XI. Animal Husbandry

Figure 75: Ageing in sheep and goats. (A) Theoretical kill-off patterns for sheep and goats devised by Payne (1973) for maximizing different products – meat, milk and wool. (B) The raw mandiblular ageing data from Arjoune arranged in the same way. (C) The mandibular ageing data from Arjoune adjusted to allow for 15% perinatal mortality and for in situ destruction of the bones of young animals (see text). Note that in (B) the curve for Trenches V and VII (5th millennium) is closest to Payne’s meat curve, whereas that for trench VI (4th millennium) is close to the milk curve.

206

XI. Animal Husbandry

Figure 76: The survival of sheep and goat bones at Arjoune Trenches V and VII. There is a correlation between the number of each element surviving and its density, as calculated by Binford and Bertram 1977. The coefficient of correlation (r) = 0.64, which is significant at 1% level.

fragments but only two proximal femurs and one proximal humerus. It is tempting to consider cultural reasons for this, such as butchery patterns and differential transport, but there are two simpler explanations. The first is that despite sieving there has been differential recovery, with the smaller bones under-represented – for example, only 8 astragali compared with 23 distal tibiae and 9 middle phalanges compared with 25 proximal phalanges. The second is that there is quite a close correlation between the numbers of each element surviving and the density of that element as calculated by Binford and Bertram (1977) for bones of sheep aged 90 months (r = 0.64, which is significant at the 1% level), and this suggests in situ destruction of the less dense elements. The numbers surviving are plotted against density in fig. 76. Various factors can be surmised to favour the destruction of less dense bone: chewing by carnivores, especially dogs (Binford 1981), trampling by people, destruction by humic acids, crushing by overburden, alternate drying and wetting, alternate heating and cooling. All these factors probably contributed to the destruction of bone at Arjoune. Dogs were certainly present: several dog bones were found and a few ruminant bones had gnawing marks on them. Humic acid has etched marks on the surface of some of the bones, though to some extent it must have been neutralized by the strongly calcareous nature of the substrate which has coated many of the bones with calcium carbonate. Horncores are considered separately because although goat horncores are obviously much more dense than those of sheep, which have a density of 1.23 (Binford and Bertram

from Neolithic and Chalcolithic sites in the Kermanshar Valley in Iran. Another significant difference is the much higher proportion of sheep in Trench VI. In Trenches V and VII sheep comprised 39% of the bones identified as definitely sheep and goat, but in Trench VI this had risen to 82% (Table 2). This provides some confirmation of the idea that the wool was being utilized to a greater degree in the 4th than in the 5th millennium at Arjoune. Davis (1983, 1987) found similar, though not identical, contrasts in the faunal spectra from Neolithic and Chalcolithic sites in the Kermanshah Valley, which he attributed to the introduction of woolly sheep. This does not mean that both hair and wool fibres were not used prior to the Chalcolithic, merely that there was no herding strategy designed to maximize fibre production. In the Chalcolithic site of Bir es-Safadi, where it was possible to analyse the age and sex patterns of the sheep and goats separately, it was found that although most of the males of both species were killed when young, more female sheep than female goats survived into old age, suggesting a strategy angled towards wool production (Grigson 1987b). Small ruminant bone element analysis Because of the small sample size in Trench VI the bone element analysis has only been carried out on material from Trenches V and VII. Table 6 shows that there is a wide discrepancy in the numbers of the different elements surviving. For example, there are 57 mandibular toothrow 207

XI. Animal Husbandry

Table 8. Bull and Payne Standard Wild Boar

Table 7. Numbers of sheep and goat horncores actually found in Arjoune Trenches V and VII, compared with numbers expected on the basis of 57 unpaird mandibles and 55:45 goats:sheep. Sheep/ goat

Goat

Means of recent modern wild boar from Kizilcahaman, Turkey, taken from Payne and Bull 1989. Those used in the present study are: m4 up L M1 up L M2 up L M3 up L m4 low L M1 low L M2 low L M3 low L Scapula SLC Humerus Bd Humerus Bt Radius Bp Radius Bd Pelvis LAR Tibia Bd Calcaneum GL Astragalus GL

Sheep

No. of sheep/goat mandibles

57

-

-

Expected no. of horncores

57

e32

e25

Actual no. of horncores

40

35

5

1977), no density figures are available for them. When horncores and associated skull fragments were excluded the estimated numbers of sheep and goat bones were 41 and 37 respectively (or 52% and 48%). One would expect equal numbers of horncores and mandibles, but as Table 7 shows there is a discrepancy between the numbers of horncores actually found, compared with the expected numbers, and these differences are significant (p = < 0.005 in a ✪2 test). The number of goat horncores is roughly what one would expect, and a comparison of their adjusted frequency (17.5) with density data in fig. 76 suggests a density of approximately 1.74. However, with an estimated density of 1.23 only about four (twice the adjusted count) of the sheep horncores would be expected to survive. This is so close to the actual number found (five), that differential density does seem to be an adequate explanation for the discrepancy between the numbers of horncores of sheep and goats, and it is not necessary to invoke hornlessness in females nor any cultural reason (such as horn-working) as explanations.

17.2 20.3 25.2 38.8 22.7 20.4 25.4 41.5 29.8 50.0 35.0 34.2 41.3 36.3 34.6 95.2 48.7

greater value. Sample sizes of pig bones and teeth tend to be small, and in some cases ranges and other statistical parameters have been published but not individual measurements. One point which is clear is that, at least in tooth size, modern wild pigs of the area (see Flannery 1983) are smaller than early Holocene wild pigs, at, for example, Asiab (Bökönyi 1977), Mureybet (Ducos 1978), Jericho (original data), Hajji Firuz (Meadow 1983) and Fikirtepe (Boessneck and von den Driesch 1979), even though the ranges overlap; this difference is significant (p = 0.01-0.001). This needs to be borne in mind when using them as a basis for the comparison of the actual size of prehistoric wild and domestic pigs. As Flannery points out, tooth dimensions are very useful in that they show no sexual dimorphism in length. Fig. 77a is a plot of the length of the lower third molar and shows the size difference between Flannery’s sample and early Holocene wild pigs; it also shows that Nurkin’s (pers. comm.) wild pigs from the Negev are considerably smaller than those from Iran, Iraq and the Levant listed by Flannery. I suspect that this is due to their geographical isolation in a very hot area; this effect is very similar to that produced by domestication, which may well be at least partly due to genetic isolation. The length of the upper third molar is plotted in fig. 77b; both plots show that the Arjoune pigs are like those of other 5th millennium sites in size and are smaller than those of the early 7th millennium and earlier; this confirms their domestic status. The largest lower third molar at Arjoune could be from a wild pig, but its great size is probably due to the fact that it was unerupted and so completely lacks interdental abrasion which normally begins to reduce the length of the tooth as soon as it comes into wear. Otherwise all the pigs seem to be domestic. The second method of making size comparisons is the use of a standard animal, as done with goats and sheep, above.

PIGS (Sus scrofa) The numbers of pigs There were 405 pig bones in Trenches V and VII. However, many of the cranial fragments were paired and spatially associated, suggesting that they came from rather a small number of skulls. When allowance is made for this the total has to be reduced to 307. There were 88 pig bones in Trench VI. Pigs: domestic status It is particularly important to decide on the domestic status of the pigs at Arjoune, as it is thought that it was during the 6th and 5th millennia that pigs were first domesticated in the Middle East. Criteria for the separation of wild and domestic pigs on the basis of size have been much discussed (Flannery 1983, and pers. comm.; Stampfli 1983; McArdle 1974). The sharp size division used by these authors is not very satisfactory, as there is a real possibility that pigs were in the course of domestication in the Neolithic sites discussed by these authors. A comparison of size distributions would be of 208

XI. Animal Husbandry Payne and Bull (1988) have produced a standard derived, not from on an individual animal, but from a group of modern wild boar in Turkey (Table 8). Log ratio plots of the pig measurements from Arjoune Trench V and VII (5th millennium bc) and from Arjoune Trench VI (4th millennium bc) compared with this standard are shown in figs. 78a and b. These confirm that the Arjoune pigs were domestic and of much the same size in both periods.

Pigs: age distribution An unusually high number of ageable pigs’ jaws survives at Arjoune Trenches V and VII and so it is possible to analyze them in some detail. Bull and Payne (1982) have produced extremely useful illustrated descriptions of the eruption and wear of wild pigs’ teeth in present-day Turkey. In their age group 1 (7-11 months) the first permanent molar has erupted, wear is usually advanced enough to show the dentine, and the second molar is visible in its crypt. In group 2 (19-23 months) the second molar has erupted and is usually worn to the dentine, and the third molar is either visible in its crypt or is beginning to erupt. In group 3 (31-35 months) the third molar has erupted and may be slightly worn or worn through to the dentine. In older animals tooth wear becomes increasingly severe. The Arjoune Trenches V/VII jaws also fall into three main groups (see fig. 79 and Table 10). In the first the first molar is either erupting, or has just erupted and shows slight wear. Eleven of the jaws in this age group are from animals aged about 5-6 months, one is a little younger and one a little older. All seem to be younger than those in Bull and Payne’s group 1. In the second group from Arjoune Trench V the second molar is erupting or has erupted and shows slight wear. In the comparison of the entire dentition with Bull and Payne’s illustrations sixteen of the Arjoune jaws are between their groups 1 and 2, three overlap with group 2 and one was probably from group 2, but could be slightly younger. The remaining five jaws all overlap with age group 3 but could equally be intermediate between groups (2) and (3). Thus there is a definite clustering of the ageable pigs’ jaws at 5-6 months, 14-18 months, and, less definitely, at 28-33 months. If one assumes that early domestic pigs, like the wild pigs of the Middle East today, gave birth to one litter a year, in March (Harrison 1968; Hatt 1959), the ageing data suggest that most of the pigs at Arjoune Trenches V and VII were killed between May and October. A similar pattern is shown by the seventeen pigs’ jaws in Trench VI. Again, the ageing of the third age group is less definite.

Table 9. Sexually dimorphic adult pig bones at Arjoune.

Millennium Bone

Mandible & maxilla. Canine erupted.

Pelvis, acetabulum. Fused.

Sex

5th

4th

Trench

Trench

V

VII

V+VII

VI

M

0

0

0

0

F

12

3

15

1

M

0

1

1

1?

F

6

1

7

1 (+2?)

Pigs: sexual attributes Pigs’ jaws are easy to sex, provided that the sexually dimorphic canine is present, and so are pelves. In the male pelvis at Arjoune the blade of the ilium and ischium above the acetabulum is much higher, and has much more marked vertical ridges, than in the females. Table 9 shows that there were more adult female than male pigs at Arjoune.

Pig management at Arjoune Table10. Age at death of pigs at Arjoune. 1st Year

2nd Year

3rd Year

Older

Total

5th Millennium Trench V Trench VII Trenches V + VII

13

20

5

0

38

3

3

3

2

11

16

23

8

2

49

6

6

4

0

16

4th Millennium Trench VI

209

In both the 5th millennium and the 4th millennium bc about one third of the animals were killed in their first year and about one third to one half in their second (Table 10). The pig bones that could be sexed were all from animals aged one year or more and most of them were female. Probably the animals killed in the first year were mostly males, while most of the females were kept until their second year for breeding, and some animals, probably of both sexes survived a year or two longer. The pigs seem to have been killed in the

XI. Animal Husbandry

Table 11: Pig element analysis. A comparison of the number of each element found in Trenches V and VII with the number expected, based on a minimum number of 26 unpaired squamosals.

Element

No. in skeleton

No. expected

No.found

Max. % survival

Squamosal

2

52

28

53.8

Maxilla

2

52

47

90.4

Mandible

2

52

46

88.5

Atlas

1

26

6

23.1

Axis

1

26

3

11.5

Cervical verterbrae

5

130

6

4.6

Dorsal verterbrae

14

364

2

0.5

Lumbar verterbrae

6

156

11

7.1

Scapula

2

52

13

25.0

Humerus, proximal

2

52

0

0.0

Humerus, shaft

2

52

20

38.5

Humerus, distal

2

52

15

28.8

Radius, proximal

2

52

5

9.6

Radius, shaft

2

52

6

11.5

Radius, distal

2

52

0

0.0

Ulna

2

52

10

1.9

Metapodials

16

416

18

4.3

Pelvis

2

52

21

40.4

Femur, proximal

2

52

0

0.0

Femur, shaft

2

52

2

3.8

Femur, distal

2

52

2

3.8

Tibia, proximal

2

52

0

0.0

Tibia, shaft

2

52

7

13.5

Tibia, distal

2

52

3

5.8

Fibula

2

52

0

0.0

Calcaneum

2

52

8

15.4

Astragalus

2

52

3

5.8

Ribs

28

728

1

0.1

Proximal phalanx

16

456

5

1.1

Middle phalanx

16

456

7

1.5

Pig bone element analysis Because of the small sample size this has not been undertaken for Trench VI, but Table 11 shows that in Trenches V and VII there was a very great predominance of skull fragments compared with the rest of the skeleton. Originally I thought that this indicated that the pigs were slaughtered at the site and that the heads were discarded there, while the remainder of each carcass was transported away. This is still a possible explanation, but, as there is such a distinct relationship in the small ruminant bones between

summer. This may represent a deliberate culling policy, or a deliberate culling policy combined with seasonal occupation of the site. The most probable explanation is that herds of sows, piglets and one or two boars were kept close to Arjoune where they could feed and wallow on the flood plain of the Orontes. In winter they were probably driven elsewhere for mating, and to avoid the winter or spring floods of the river, returning with their young early in the following summer.

210

XI. Animal Husbandry

Figure 77: The size of pigs at Arjoune. (A) The length of the lower third molar. The teeth from Hajji Firuz (6th millennium) and from Girikihciyan, Fikirtepe and Arjoune (5th-4th millennia) are smaller than the wild pigs of the 9th-early 7th millennia and later sites. They are also smaller than Flannery’s modern wild boar from the Middle East. There is no doubt that they are from domestic animals. Nurkin’s modern wild pigs from Sedom are also much smaller than modern wild pigs from the area as a whole, probably due to their geographical isolation. (B) The length of the upper third molar. The teeth from the 5th and 4th millennium sites, including Arjoune, are smaller than those of the wild pigs of the 9th-early 7th millennia and Flannery’s modern wild boar from the Middle East. There is no doubt that they are from domestic animals. Sources: 9th-early 7th millennia: Mallaha (Ducos 1968), Jericho PPNA (original), Mureybet (Ducos 1978), Asiab (Bökönyi 1977), Karim Shahir (Stampfli 1983). Wild pigs from later sites: Jericho PPNB (original), Fikirtepe (Boessneck and von den Driesch 1979), Hajji Firuz (Meadow 1983). Pottery Neolithic and Chalcolithic sites: Girikihaciyan (McArdle 1969), Bayat (Hole, Flannery and Neely 1969), Banahilk (Laffer 1983), Arjoune V and VII, Siahbid (Bökönyi 1977 and Flannery pers. comm.), Fikirtepe (Boessneck and von den Driesch 1979).

211

XI. Animal Husbandry

Figure 78: The size of pigs at Arjoune, compared with a ‘standard animal’ (0 on the X-axis). (A) Trenches V and VII (5th millennium); (B) Trench VI (4th millennium). The Arjoune pigs in both millennia are similar and are considerably smaller than the standard wild mean of Bull and Payne 1988.

frequent surviving skeletal element. This was done only for the calculation of expected numbers of bone elements for the calculations in Table 11.

the numbers of particular elements present and their density, this is likely to be true of pigs as well. The relative density of the various parts of the pig’s skeleton has not been established; however, skull bones of young pigs in particular seem to be denser than the rest of the skeleton. The dental data suggest that most of the pigs were killed before the age of about 19 months. At this age all post-cranial epiphyses would still be unfused, except for the acetabulum of the pelvis, the tubercle of the scapula, the distal humerus, the proximal radius and the proximal epiphysis of the middle phalanx; of these bones the distal scapula, distal humerus and pelvis seem to be relatively dense and this is reflected in their relatively high frequency at Arjoune. Unfused articular ends, unfused vertebrae and ribs seem to be particularly soft and this explains their low representation. The high degree of destruction implied by this pattern is emphasized by the total lack of proximal humeri, proximal femori and distal radii. The minimum number of individual pigs represented at Arjoune Trenches V and VII can be calculated from the number of unpaired squamosals, which were the most

CATTLE (Bos taurus) Numbers of cattle There were 247 cattle bones and teeth in Arjoune Trench V (including 5 bones identified as large ungulate which on the basis of probability are likely to have been from cattle) and 28 in Trench VII, but as 15 of these are skull fragments probably derived from the same individual the number of cattle bone finds for Trench VII is only 14, giving a total for the 5th millennium of 261. In Trench VI (4th millennium) there were 90.

212

XI. Animal Husbandry

Figure 79: The age of pigs at Arjoune Trenches V and VII (5th millennium). The ages at death are based on tooth wear and eruption in the upper and lower jaws. Each horizontal line represents the estimated age span of each ageable jaw (excluding pairs). Most of them are at stages in between those observed by Bull and Payne (1982) for modern wild boar killed in Turkey in the winter months. This suggests a pattern of summer slaughter at Arjoune.

Cattle: domestic status and size

Flannery and Cornwall 1969; Flannery pers. comm.). From the breadth measurements one can deduce that all three are from cows. The withers height can be calculated from these lengths, using the indices given by von den Driesch and Boessneck (1974) and Boessneck and von den Driesch (1979). For female metatarsals the index is 5.3, giving withers heights of 116.6 cm for Arjoune, 128.9 cm for Fikirtepe and 130.9 cm for Ras al-Amiya. A female metatarsal from Ras al-Amiya gave a withers height of 122 cm. The length measurements and withers heights are all less than one would expect for wild cattle in the Middle East and are within the range of domestic cattle of the British Neolithic (Grigson 1982a; 1983). It is sometimes argued that the bucranium motif so common on Halaf pottery indicates an interest at that time in cattle, perhaps even an obsession with the process of domestication, so it is important to compare the sizes of cattle bones from Arjoune Trenches V/VII with those of other Halaf sites; only those from Shams ed-Din (Uerpmann 1982) and some from Banahilk (Laffer 1983) have been published and set out individually. Nevertheless it is clear that they are of much the same size as those from Arjoune (fig. 80) and are smaller than those of previous periods, confirming the view of Uerpmann and Laffer that they represent domesticated animals. Thus, as almost all the cattle bones of the period

Buitenhuis (1985) used the complete skeleton of an aurochs cow as the standard animal for the comparison of sizes of cattle in the Middle East (see Table 12). Grigson (1989) used the same standard animal for the comparison of sizes of wild and domestic cattle in the area, concluding that cattle were domesticated in the western half of the area during the 6th millennium. Fig. 80c is a plot of the sizes of the Arjoune cattle bones compared with Grigson’s results from earlier millennia (fig. 80a-b) and shows clearly that they were smaller than both the wild and domestic cattle of the preceding millennia and therefore were of domesticated cattle. The size distributions in figs. 81a-b, and the fact that the mean log ratios are identical (0.089), suggest that there was no size change in cattle at Arjoune between the 5th millennium bc and the 4th, though this could be due to the small sample size. There was only one complete cattle long bone from Arjoune: a metatarsal from Trench V, with a greatest length (GL) of 220 mm (fig. 81b). Other complete metatarsals from the Middle East whose dimensions have been published, include one from Fikirtepe (GL 242.5: Boessneck and von den Driesch 1979) and one from Ras al-Amiya (GL 247: 213

XI. Animal Husbandry

Figure 80: The size of cattle at Arjoune, compared with that of other cattle remains in the Levant, using a ‘standard animal’ (0 on the X-axis). (A) wild cattle, 10th-6th millennia; (B) early domestic cattle, 6th millennium; (C) Arjoune Trenches V, VII and VI, 5th and 4th millennia. The cattle remains from Arjoune and from 6th millennium sites are smaller than the standard, and are undoubtedly from domestic animals. Data for (A) and (B) and method from Grigson 1989; ‘standard animal’ from Buitenhuis 1985.

214

XI. Animal Husbandry

Figure 81: The size of cattle from Arjoune Trenches V and VII (5th millennium) and those from Arjoune Trench VI (4th millennium), compared with one another and using a ‘standard animal’ (0 on the X-axis). (A) Arjoune Trenches V and VII (5th millennium); (B) Arjoune Trench VI (4th millennium). Method from Grigson 1989; ‘standard animal’ from Buitenhuis 1985. The cattle remains from the two periods are much the same size and the mean log ratios are identical (0.089). The skew to the left in both graphs suggests a predominance of females.

Figure 82: The one complete metatarsal of Bos taurus from Arjoune Trench V (V-2532, 5th millennium bc).

215

XI. Animal Husbandry Cattle: age distribution Table 12. Buitenhuis Standard Wild Cow

The two methods of ageing animal remains that can be used here are the eruption and wear of the teeth and the state of fusion of the limb bones. In Trenches V and VII there were 35 loose teeth, or sets of teeth, which could be roughly aged. In most cases only ‘less than’ or ‘more than’ ages could be established; however using Ellenburger and Baum’s figures for late-maturing cattle and Higham’s for wear (see Grigson 1982b) it is clear that about 7 of these teeth were from animals younger than 2¼ years and 23 were from older animals. That is, about a quarter of the cattle were killed before maturity. The fusion data for the cattle from Arjoune are set out in Table 13. The combined data for Trenches V and VII (5th millennium bc) are too few to yield any definite information, but suggest that about a third had been killed by the age of 24-30 months. This estimate is higher than that provided by the teeth. However the fusion dates indicate that at least four animals survived beyond three years, two of these were older than 3½. Although not agreeing in detail, both estimates of age at Arjoune do suggest the survival of a high proportion of the cattle into maturity.

Measurements of early postglacial wild aurochs cow from Ullerslev in Denmark, taken from Degerbøl 1970; see also Grigson 1989. Those used in present study are: Lower M3 length

48.8

Humerus Bt

89

Humerus Bd

97

Radius Bp

100

Metacarpal Bp

74

Metacarpal Bd

73

Tibia Bd

78

Astragalus GL

83

Calcaneum

165

Navicular GB

67

Metatarsal Bp

62

Metatarsal Bd

68

Anterior proximal phalanx Bp

39

Posterior proximal phalanx Bp

35.5

Anterior middle phalanx Bp

36

Posterior middle phalanx Bp

34

Cattle management at Arjoune Although the data are too few for certainty it seems that between two thirds and three quarters of the cattle in Trenches V and VII (5th millennium bc) were kept into maturity and that most of these were cows. As a third or a quarter of the animals were killed when young, presumably for meat, before they were old enough for breeding or milking, these figures do not imply a specialized dairying strategy, but do suggest a generalized policy allowing for meat and breeding, probably with some milk production. Whether any of the surviving adult males were castrates, and therefore likely to have been used for ploughing, is unknown. Although in most parts of the Middle East cattle do not yield enough milk to make dairying feasible, this is not true of the area around Arjoune; to this day the cattle graze in the lush water meadows bordering the Orontes and the cows are milked in the fields every morning and evening.

show the morphological effects of domestication and as there is no indication of animals of intermediate size, it seems that, apart from the occasional hunted wild ox, Halaf cattle were fully domesticated. Cattle: sexual attributes In Trenches V and VII the only bones that could be sexed on non-metrical grounds were a male and a female pelvis (using the method of Grigson 1982b). However the log ratio diagram (fig.81a), which uses almost only sexually dimorphic measurements, has a strong skew to the left, indicating reliance on smaller animals, probably cows. Trench VI also contained a male and a female pelvis, and again the log ratio diagram (fig. 81b) is skewed to the left. Table 13. Cattle fusion data, Arjoune Trenches V and VII Age in months

No. % fused

7-10

12-18

c.18

24-30

c.30

c.36

42-48

un

f

un

f

un

f

un

f

un

f

un

f

un

f

2

8

4

12

0

22

2

4

6

5

0

2

3

2

80

75

100

67

216

45

-

40

Total

72

XI. Animal Husbandry E. hemionus, or E. africanus or E. asinus, but not E. caballus. There are few data for wild asses (E. africanus), but it is generally accepted that the metapodials and phalanges of asses, both wild and domestic, are more robust than those of onagers. One bone which has been used in the distinction on the basis of its shape, that is the relationship between the least breadth of shaft and the total length (the ‘slenderness index’), is the proximal phalanx. Compagnoni’s (1978a) scattergram of its dimensions in modern E. hemionus and E. asinus shows a clear distinction between the two species, though with an area of overlap. The Mureybet measurements fall within both ranges, even in the part of the E. hemionus range which does not overlap with E. asinus. If the Mureybet equids really were E. africanus it seems that the overlap was greater in the past than it is today. The Shams ed-Din phalanges have a similar distribution to those from Mureybet (Uerpmann 1986, fig. 3); when added to Compagnoni’s graph four are within the E. hemionus range, two being within the area of overlap with E. asinus, and the fifth is in the E. asinus range. Two anterior proximal phalanges survive from Arjoune (fig. 83b). Their dimensions fall within the same range as the

Cattle: bone element analysis A detailed analysis of the cattle bone elements will not be attempted as the sample is so small, and small ruminants and pigs have furnished more detail. In general all parts of the body are represented, so it is unlikely that there was any differential transport. The proximal humerus and the femur are completely absent and there was only one proximal tibia (a loose epiphysis in Trench VI), suggesting that there has been differential destruction of the less dense bone elements of cattle as well as of small ruminants and pigs. DOG (Canis familiaris) In addition to the intrusive dog bones already mentioned, there were ten dog bones, all fragmentary, in Trench V, but none in Trenches VI and VII. The bones were: the back of a skull, a maxilla with the upper third premolar and alveoli for the first and second premolars, a scapula, a humerus, the shaft of a humerus of a young puppy, three ulnae, a metapodial shaft and a proximal phalanx. Some were grouped together spatially and it seems likely that they come from complete skeletons, that is, it is probable that dogs were neither butchered nor eaten at Arjoune. There were only two measureable bones: the posterior skull fragment and the P3 with a length of 20.4 mm. I cannot find any comparable measurements in the literature, but from their general appearance the Arjoune dog bones represent medium-sized animals and were certainly neither wolves, nor jackals.

Table 14. Uerpmann Standard Wild Equid. Means and standard deviations of equids from Mureybet (mostly 9th millennium) taken by Uerpmann 1982, 1986 from Ducos 1978. − X

ANIMALS OF UNCERTAIN DOMESTIC STATUS

s

Scapula LG

44.1

1.98

Humerus Bt

60.0

1.77

The numbers of equids

Radius Bd

57.6

1.86

There were seven certain and one less certain finds of equid bones in Trench V, one certain in Trench VII, and eighteen certain and two less certain in Trench VI.

Metacarpal Bp

39.9

2.21

Tibia Bd

55.3

1.84

Astragalus GLm

47.1

2.06

Equids: identification

Metapodial Bd

37.1

1.50

On the basis of size and dental morphology it is clear that the Arjoune equids are not from horses (Equus caballus), and so must be from the other equid species known in the Holocene in the Middle East – onagers (E. hemionus), or wild or domestic asses (E. africanus or E. asinus). The difficulties of the separation of these species on bones and teeth are well-known and have received much discussion in the various papers edited by Meadow and Uerpmann (1986, 1991). Ducos’ (1975, 1978, 1986) assertion that the equids from Mureybet in northern Syria in the 8th millennium were E. africanus seems to be generally accepted, but by about 5000 bc, at least at Shams ed-Din Tannira, a Halaf site also in northern Syria, most if not all the local wild equids were E. hemionus (Uerpmann 1982, 1986). Some cheek-teeth from Arjoune are illustrated in fig. 83a; the occlusal patterns indicate that they could be from either

Proximal phalanx Bp

39.1

1.89

Middle phalanx Bp

38.4

1.90

EQUIDS (Equus hemionus/africanus/asinus)

anterior proximal phalanges from Shams ed-Din (Uerpmann 1986, fig 3). On Compagnoni’s (1978a) graph they are within the modern E. hemionus range, outside its area of overlap with E. asinus, but the problems encountered with the Mureybet and Shams ed-Din measurements mean that this cannot be taken as a definite identification of the Arjoune equids as onagers. It is worth noting that there is a record that the pharaoh Amenophis II hunted wild asses, rather than onagers, at Qadesh in the 15th century BC (Keimer 1949), a deduction which seems to Groves (1986) to be perfectly acceptable. Qadesh is the ancient name of Tell Nebi Mend, 1 km. from Arjoune. 217

XI. Animal Husbandry

Figure 83: Equid remains from Arjoune. (A) The occlusal patterns of the cheekteeth. The only diagnostic feature is the shape of the protocone of the upper left second molar (LM2), which indicates Equus hemionus, E. asinus or E. africanus. (B) Two anterior proximal phalanges (VI-1 and V-2521). Their shape indicates Equus hemionus, E. asinus or E. africanus.

218

XI. Animal Husbandry

Figure 84: The size of equids at Arjoune (5th and 4th millennia bc) and Shams ed-Din (c5000 bc), compared with a ‘standard animal’ (0 on the X-axis). The line is the cumulative frequency of various indices of the equid bones from Shams ed-Din compared with the mean measurements from Mureybet (Ducos 1978), where the equids were undoubtedly wild. The stars represent the size indices calculated from the four suitable measurements from Arjoune, as there are too few measurements to allow calculation of the cumulative frequencies. The distribution of the individual measurements suggests that, as at Shams ed-Din, the equids at Arjoune were at least as large as those at Mureybet, if not slightly larger. Thus size is of no help in resolving the questuions of the domestic status of the Arjoune equids. Shams ed-Din data and method from Uerpmann 1982, 1986.

The method utilized for size comparisons of the equids from Arjoune is that devized by Uerpmann (1982, 1986). He used the cumulative frequency of various indices to compare the sizes of the equid bones from Sham ed-Din with those from Mureybet (Ducos 1978), where the equids were undoubtedly wild. This method takes advantage of the fact that as the Mureybet equid sample was large, the variability of the various dimensions can be utilized. The standard measurements (means and standard deviations) are listed in Table 14. The formula used for calculating the size index of any particular dimension in an assemblage is: ( ) SI = a4s−% x 100 where a is the dimension of a particular element, x is the mean of that dimension at Mureybet, and s is the standard deviation of that dimension at Mureybet. The indices are set out in ascending order of magnitude and plotted on the X axis

The question of the identification of the Arjoune equids cannot be resolved on the basis of the criteria presently utilized, so if they were wild animals we have to be content with E. hemionus/africanus. However, if we were to find any criteria associated with domestication it would be more likely that the equids were E. asinus, as it is unlikely that onagers were truly domestic (various papers in Uerpmann and Meadow 1986). This is investigated below. Equids: domestic status Although it is not certain that the size of donkeys did initially diminish with domestication, their small size in the 3rd millennium in the Middle East shows that this did eventualy happen. So if the equids at Arjoune were smaller than those considered to be wild, it would be likely that they were domesticated. On the other hand, absence of a size change would not prove anything. 219

XI. Animal Husbandry Middle East, one would expect them to have spread rapidly throughout the entire area.

against the percentages of their cumulative frequency on the Y axis. In such plots the mean of the standard is at 0 on the index scale, the standard deviation s is 25 and its theoretical range (x ! 2s) is -50 to +50. The mean of each sample being compared with the standard can be read off from where the line connecting its points crosses the 50% level, s will be 25 and the range (x ! 2s). If the dimensions of the sample are larger than those of the standard the mean will be to the right of the standard (i.e. +) and if smaller to the left (i.e. - ). Using this method Uerpmann showed that the mean size of the equids in his sample was slightly, but not significantly, larger (+5.5) than that from Mureybet; his results are set out in fig. 84. Fig. 84 also contains the size indices calculated from the four suitable measurements from Arjoune. There are too few measurements to allow calculation of the cumulative frequencies, but the distribution of the individual measurements suggests that, as at Shams ed-Din, the equids at Arjoune were at least as large as those from Mureybet, if not slightly larger. Thus size is no help in resolving the question of the domestic status of the Arjoune equids. There are no other really reliable anatomical criteria for the distinction of wild and domestic equids, and as far as I know there is no pictorial or figurative evidence for the use of donkeys in the Middle East before the late 4th millennium (Grigson 1987a; Epstein 1985). In sites of the 3rd. millennium and later (such as Tell Nebi Mend, the Bronze Age/Iron Age site near to Arjoune) the limb bones of equids are quite often entire and articulated with one another, suggesting that the carcasses had not been dismembered as they would have been if the meat was eaten, and might be the remains of animals used for some other purpose, such as riding or traction, and would thus have been domestic. At Arjoune most of the equid bones were broken and dispersed in the same way as those of the other ungulates which were definitely eaten, so it is likely that the equids too were eaten. One exception was the pelvis in Trench VI which could be articulated with a proximal femur. In fact this may be significant, as it is more likely that equids had been domesticated in the 4th millennium than in the 5th. Another point which might tentatively suggest the same is that the proportion of equids in the total fauna rose from 0.6% in Trenches V and VII (5th millennium) to 5.1% in Trench VI (4th millennium). Increases of this kind have been used to infer domestication by several authors (Davis 1982, 1987; Clutton-Brock 1981). There is no difference in size between the equids of the 5th and 4th millennia at Arjoune: the largest and the smallest come from Trench VI. Equids are present in very small numbers in most sites of the late-6th, 5th and 4th millennia. The small numbers probably explain their apparent absence from a few sites which have only a small number of identifiable bones. The one site that is an exception is Shams ed-Din at about 5000 bc (Uerpmann 1982, 1986), where they formed 42% of the fauna and were probably wild. It may be significant that equids were totally absent from large sample (5996 bones) at Fikirtepe in western Turkey (Boessneck and von den Driesch 1979) at about the same period; there were no wild equids in the area, but if donkeys had been domesticated by then in the

WILD ANIMALS GAZELLE (Gazella gazella or G. subgutturosa) The nine gazelle bone finds in Trench V were two nearly complete horncores, three horncore bases, a mandible fragment with the fourth deciduous molar and the first permanent molar erupting, and (less certainly gazelle) a mandible fragment with the first and second permanent molars, small fragmentary loose teeth found together and a loose lower first molar. There were no gazelle bones in Trench VII. There were also nine gazelle bones in Trench VI: a horncore base, five mandibular fragments of which two have complete tooothrows, a middle phalanx and (less certainly gazelle) a distal scapula and an ulna fragment. Gazelles: identification There are three main species in the Middle East today, Gazella gazella in the Levant, G. dorcas in the southern Levant and G. subgutturosa in the rest of the area, including the Syrian desert (Uerpmann 1987). Although G. subgutturosa has not been definitely identified in the Levant it might well have been present at Arjoune, which lies at the western edge of the Syrian steppe. The main criteria for the distinction between the gazelle species are the size and morphology of the male horncores and the fact that the females of G. subgutturosa are sometimes hornless (Groves and Harrison 1967; Tchernov, Dayan and Yom-Tov 1986/7). According to Ducos (1968) and Tchernov, Dayan and Yom-Tov (1986/7) G. gazella horncores have one wide longitudinal groove starting just above the base, a second groove on the anterior surface beginning at about the middle and another groove running for the length of the posterior surface, whereas G.dorcas has no grooves on the anterior surface of the horncore, but has two on the posterior surface. Tchernov, Dayan and Yom-Tov (1986/7) also found that the cross-section at 1 cm above the base was elliptical in G. gazella and egg-shaped in G.dorcas with a wider posterior edge. Groves and Harrison (1967) state that in G.dorcas the horns of both sexes are long, slender and nearly straight and the width of the gap between the bases of the horncores is less than in G. gazella. G.dorcas is usually smaller than G. gazella. Uerpmann (1982) found that the horncores of G.dorcas may have impressions of horizontal banding of the horns, in the form of rings. I have found these characters to be very variable in gazelles in the Levant, in both archaeological and recent material. Although based on only two G. dorcas and fourteen G. gazella horncores the differences in cross-section shape found by Tchernov, Dayan and Yom-Tov (1986/7) seem reliable. When the dimensions of the three measureable horncores from Arjoune are added to their graph (fig. 85) all are in the G. gazella range, though one is quite close to G. 220

XI. Animal Husbandry

Figure 85: The shape of the gazelle horncores from Arjoune, compared with modern Gazella gazella and G. dorcas. The fourteen G. gazella horncores are more oval in cross-section than the two horncores of G. dorcas. The dimensions of the three measureable horncores from Arjoune are in the G. gazella range. Modern data and method from Tchernov, Dayan and Yom-Tov 1986/7.

horncores curve posteriorly in a regular way; one has very slight, and the other slight, heteronymous twisting, which would seem to indicate G. gazella rather than G. subgutturosa. G. subgutturosa is the species most frequently identified in all non-Levantine archaeological sites in the Middle East, usually on zoogeographical grounds. However the male horncores at Shahr-i Sokhta in Iran identified as G. subgutturosa and figured by Compagnoni (1978b) are widely spaced at the base and the horncores are only slightly twisted. One wonders whether the published criteria for the distinction of the horns of present-day G. gazella and G. subgutturosa are in fact distinct enough to allow the horncores to be distinguished with certainty. In the case of Arjoune the safest identification based on the morphology of the horncores is Gazella sp. In size the Arjoune horncores are well within the range of the those identified as G. subgutturosa from Jarmo (Stampfli 1983). The lengths of the mandibular toothrows of the Arjoune gazelles are similar to that from Hesban (Weiler 1981), but here there are thought to be two species of gazelle, probably G. dorcas and G. gazella, so this is not very helpful. The middle phalanx is very small, smaller than the smallest G.

dorcas, but as both its measurements were estimated this is questionable and certainly should not be taken as evidence for the presence of G. dorcas at Arjoune. Although I am not convinced that the horns of G. dorcas are straighter and more slender than those of G. gazella, it must be said that those from Arjoune are both stout and curved and, if this criterion is correct, are more likely to be from G. gazella. On zoogeographical grounds it is highly unlikely that they come from G.dorcas. Criteria for the distinction between G. gazella and G. subgutturosa have been listed by Groves and Harrison (1967). In males of G. subgutturosa the horns originate close to the mid-line, forming a V-shape, and are well-developed and lyrate. In G. gazella, the horncores are short and thick and straight or semi-lyrate at their base. Hornlessness in females of G. subgutturosa increases east of the Zagros. In G. gazella females the horns are short and stubby. All the Arjoune gazelle horncores are of males. Two of the bases have enough of the frontal bone attached to them to see that the horns arose quite close together, the pedicle in each being only about 7 mm from the interfrontal suture, and these cores diverge at quite a wide angle from the sagittal plane (fig. 86a), as one would expect in G. subgutturosa. However figure 86b shows that the two most complete 221

XI. Animal Husbandry

Figure 86: Gazelle horncores from Arjoune Trench V. (A) Anterior view. The positions of the longitudinal grooves are very variable, and the gap between the bases of the horncores and the frontal suture is narrow. (B) Medial view of the same horncores. The posterior curvature is regular. Bone nos.: left V-587; centre V-487; right V-9.

222

XI. Animal Husbandry

Figure 87: The red deer bones and antlers from Arjoune Trenches V and VI. (A) antler fragments (VI-81 and VI-10); (B) navicular (VI-13); (C) middle phalanx (V-3043).

probably red deer. As antler can be collected when shed, the number of deer bones derived from slaughtered animals in Trench VI is five. The red deer bones antler fragments are illustrated in fig. 87 Red deer bones in the Middle East tend to be very large and are sometimes confused with those of domestic cattle. However, the navicular and middle phalanx are unmistakeable. The middle phalanx with a proximal breadth (Bp) of 27 mm and a greatest peripheral length (GLpe) of 50 mm is very large – larger than that at Jarmo (Stampfli 1983) and close to the top of the range recorded by Pietschmann (1977) for prehistoric red deer in Turkey. The navicular, with a maximum breadth of 46.3 mm, falls just below the mean of prehistoric red deer from Turkey (Pietschmann 1977) and is smaller than that at Hajji Firuz, which Meadow (1983) quaintly and accurately refers to as the ‘central and fourth tarsal’.

dorcas as Hesban, but it was burnt, which may have caused it to shrink. Remains of gazelles are found on most Middle Eastern sites of the late 6th to 4th millennia, sometimes in quite high numbers, for example in the Sabz phase at Tepe Sabz (Hole, Flannery and Neely 1969). Both G. gazella and G. subgutturosa are to this day surprisingly common in many areas. They are well-known crop robbers and may have been hunted at Arjoune for this reason rather than for sport. RED DEER (Cervus elaphus) There was a single middle phalanx which can definitely be identified as red deer in Trench V. There were no deer bones in Trench VII. In Trench VI there was an antler crown, two other antler fragments and a navicular, which were definitely from red deer, and also two calcaneum fragments, a damaged ulna and the proximal part of a proximal phalanx which were 223

XI. Animal Husbandry BONE MODIFICATION

Red deer are found in small numbers in most of the sites of the late-6th to 5th millennia, except for those on the arid steppe or on dry plains, like Deh Luran (Hole, Flannery and Neely 1969). One would expect them to have been present in woodland near the Orontes and on the slopes of the nearby mountains.

Horncores All the small ruminant horncores had been detached (?chopped off) near the base; this was clear from both the horncores themselves and the relevant frontal fragments, and suggests that some unknown use was made of the horns. Three goat horncores had also been broken vertically, possibly having been split accidentally when the heads were de-horned.

CAT (Felis sp.) There was one cat bone, a proximal ulna, in Trench V. Several species of wild cat occur in the Middle East, so this can only be certainly identified as Felis sp., but it is of about the same size as Felis silvestris.

Antlers

HARE (Lepus capensis)

A red deer antler crown seems to have been deliberately chopped off the beam, possibly as waste when the rest of the antler was utilized.

There were three hare bones, all in Trench V: a humerus, a tibia and a metapodial. Hares are found in both woodland and open country and one would expect them to have been common in the area. They are found in small numbers in most sites of the 5th and 4th millennia.

Verterbrae A Bos axis was cut in half transversely, though whether in slaughter or in butchery is uncertain. However this was not universal, since another Bos axis, as well as three atlases and one dorsal and one cervical vertebra, had been split sagitally, while one dorsal and one cervical vertebra had been split both sagitally and transversally, suggesting the preparation of neck and back chops.

BIRDS (Class Aves) Only two, unidentified, bird bones were found, both in Trench VI. TORTOISE (Testudo cf. graeca)

Long bones Two scutes of the common tortoise were found together in Trench V and there were nine groups of scutes in Trench VI.

Almost all the long bones had been broken. Although in most cases it is impossible to tell from the type of fracture whether this was deliberate, the very high frequency suggests breakage for the extraction of marrow. Human activity is unequivocally suggested by the long bones which had been broken vertically through the epiphyses, including a Bos distal humerus, a sheep/goat distal femur and a sheep/goat metacarpal.

CRAB (Potamon (potamon) potomias) One finger of a moveable claw and one fixed finger of a crab were found in Trench V. These are land crabs, still common in the area of Arjoune and Tell Nebi Mend, as the excavators of these sites know only too well! According to Hole, Flannery and Neely (1969) Potamon remains were quite common in the early phases of the Deh Luran Plain sites, at Tepe Guran and at Jarmo.

SURFACE MARKINGS As the surfaces of most of the bones, particularly those from Trenches V and VII, are obscured by varying amounts of

Table 15. Total numbers of burnt and unburnt identified mammal tooth and bone fragments at Arjoune. 5th millennium

4th millennium

Trench

Trench

V

VII

V and VII

No.

%

No.

%

No.

25

2.0

5

2.0

Unburnt

1205

98.0

250

98.0

Total

1230

Burnt

255

%

No.

%

30

2.0

13

3.3

1455

98.0

375

96.7

1485

224

VI

388

XI. Animal Husbandry

Table 16: Sheep/goat, burnt and unburnt elements at Arjoune, Trenches V + VII.

Element

Unburnt

Burnt

Total

Horncore

40

0

40

Mandibular tooth rows

57

0

57

Atlas

8

0

8

Axis

4

0

4

Cervical vertebrae

15

0

15

Dorsal vertebrae

19

0

19

Lumba vertebrae

15

0

15

Scapula

48

0

48

1

0

1

Humerus, distal & distal shaft

49

0

49

Radius, proximal

18

0

18

Radius, distal & distal shaft

12

0

12

Metapodial, proximal

17

3

20

Metapodial, distal

21

4

25

Pelvis

51

1

52

Femur, proximal

1

1

2

Femur, distal

8

0

8

Tibia, proximal

2

0

2

23

0

23

Calcaneum

7

1

8

Astragalus

5

3

8

Ribs

16

0

16

Proximal phalanx

20

5

25

Middle phalanx

6

3

9

Distal phalanx

3

0

3

466

21

487

Humerus, proximal

Tibia, distal & distal shaft

Totals % elements burnt:

4.31%

225

XI. Animal Husbandry

Table 17: Pig, burnt and unburnt elements at Arjoune, Trenches V & VII Element

Unburnt

Burnt

Total

Squmosal

28

0

28

Maxilla

47

0

47

Mandible

46

0

46

Atlas

6

0

6

Axis

3

0

3

Cervical vertebrae III-VII

6

0

6

Dorsal vertebrae

2

0

2

Lumba vertebrae

11

0

11

Scapula

13

0

13

0

0

0

Humerus, shaft

18

2

20

Humerus, distal

14

1

15

Radius, proximal

5

0

5

Radius, shaft

6

0

6

Radius, distal

0

0

0

Ulna

10

0

10

Metapodials

18

0

18

5

0

5

Humerus, proximal

Proximal phalanx Middle phalanx

6

1

7

20

1

21

Femur, proximal

0

0

0

Femur, shaft

2

0

2

Femur, distal

2

0

2

Tibia, proximal

0

0

0

Tibia, shaft

7

0

7

Tibia, distal

3

0

3

Fibula

0

0

0

Calcaneum

8

0

8

Astragalus

3

0

3

Ribs

1

0

1

290

5

295

Pelvis

TOTALS

% elements burnt:

1.69%

226

XI. Animal Husbandry also had a deposit of coronary calculus with a bright metallic sheen. Only one bone showed any pathological lesions. This was the pig’s rib in Trench VI, which had a curious swelling of unknown cause. Obviously the majority of animal diseases have no osteological manifestations. Nevertheless the almost total lack of pathological changes in the bones suggests a good level of nutrition and management at Arjoune. The infections of the teeth that are marked in some elderly sheep or goats and in one ox might perhaps indicate the re-use, or over-use, of infected pasture.

calcium carbonate, it is not usually possible to see surface markings on them. Nevertheless a few bones show root marks, suggesting that the sites were overgrown after abandonment. The humic conditions so produced may have helped to destroy the softer bone. For the same reason cutmarks could be seen on only a few bones, including two pigs’ pelves, where they suggest de-fleshing. Chop marks were definitely present on one sheep/goat scapula and on some of the horncores mentioned above, but it is likely that many more bones were chopped open for marrow. Only nine bones had tooth marks made by carnivores, probably dogs as their bones are present in all three trenches, and one by a rodent. However the bone element analysis, which indicated that much of the softer bone is missing, suggests that the whole assemblage owes much of its character to depredations by dogs. This conclusion is supported by the fact that a few long bones survive in the form of cylinders; only one shows signs of gnawing, but they were probably all produced by dogs gnawing off the softer parts, that is the epiphyses (Binford 1981).

THE ANIMAL ECONOMY AT ARJOUNE The role of individual species in the economy has been outlined under each species heading, and it is now necessary to discuss them in relation to one another and in terms of changes between the 5th and the 4th millennia. The percentages of the various taxa represented are set out in Table 18. A ✪2 test shows that the differences in numbers between the two millennia are highly significant.

BURNING The role of hunting Table 15 shows that very few of the identified bones had been burnt. The unidentified burnt fragments have not been quantified, but there is no reason to think that the proportion would have been different. When it did happen burning was complete; there were no partially burnt bones. The analysis of burning by element has only been attempted for sheep/goats and pigs (Tables 16 and 17). No clear pattern emerged for the pig bones (Table 17), but in the sheep and goats (Table 16) most of the burnt bones were those of the ankles and feet – the sort of bones that might have been tossed on to the fire in the course of carcass dismemberment because they carry little meat and are too small to break for marrow extraction.

Table 18 shows a definite reliance on domestic ungulates. In the 5th millennium this is quite overwhelming, with wild animals forming under 2% of the fauna (whether or not the equids are considered to be domestic), whereas in the 4th millennium the wild proportion has risen to 11% if the equids are counted as wild, and 6% if they are counted as domestic. Diversity: wild and domestic animals Another way of assessing the significance of differences in the numbers of taxa represented in a faunal list is to look at their diversity. Although frequently used, raw counts of the number of taxa represented are not a good way of assessing this, because they tend to increase in number with increasing sample size. A better method is to use the diversity index:

BONE INDUSTRY Seventeen bone awls or points were found, as well as part of a bone pin and a few used fragments. These are described and discussed in Chapter IX.

d =

100 (✟ b 2 )

where d is the diversity index and b is the percentage of each taxon in the total assemblage. Table 18 shows that although there are 13 taxa in Arjoune in the 5th millennium and 9 in the 4th millennium, the diversity index rises from 1.99 in the 5th millennium to 2.05 in the 4th. Thus, despite the small sample size and the smaller number of taxa, one can detect a very slight broadening of the resource base between the 5th and the 4th millennia. This seems to be due to an increased hunting of gazelles and greater reliance on equids, either wild or domestic.

PATHOLOGY Five sets of teeth of sheep or goat in Trench V and five in Trench VII had swollen roots, as did one set of Bos teeth in Trench VII. This condition is almost certainly a symptom of infection (Baker and Brothwell 1980). It is common in early domestic sheep, goats and cattle, but probably not in modern stock, as there seem to be no descriptions of it in the literature (Miles and Grigson 1990). A sheep/goat mandible in Trench VI had signs of an abscess and a drainage channel in the bone below the fourth deciduous molar. It was not possible to note the incidence of dental caries or calculus because so many of the teeth were coated with calcium carbonate. One of the ox teeth with swollen roots

The domestic economy Table 19 shows that there is a slight decrease in diversity in the domestic economy in the 4th millennium, due largely to a reduction in the number of goats, so that the proportion of sheep increased; it was suggested in the section on sheep and 227

XI. Animal Husbandry

Table 18. Proportions of all species.

5th millennium

4th millennium

Trenches V & VII

Trench VI

n

%

n

%

Goat

486

32.7

29

7.5

Sheep

393

26.5

136

35.1

Pig

308

20.7

88

22.7

Cattle

261

17.6

90

23.2

10

0.7

0

0

Canid

1

0.1

0

0

Hare

3

0.2

0

0

Cat

1

0.1

0

0

Gazelle

9

0.6

9

2.3

Red deer

1

0.1

5

1.3

Equid

9

0.6

20

5.2

Bird

0

0.0

2

0.5

Tortoise

1

0.1

9

2.3

Land crab

2

0.1

0

0

1485

100.0

388

100.0

Dog

Total number of bones identified

Diversity index

2.05

1.99

Table 19. Domestic Ungulate Diversity 5th millennium

4th millennium

Trenches V and VII

Trench VI

n

%

n

%

Goat

e486

e33.6

e29

e8.5

Sheep

e393

e27.1

e136

e39.6

Pig

308

21.3

88

25.7

Cattle

261

18.0

90

26.2

Total

1448

100.0

344

100.0

Domestic diversity index

1.95

228

1.83

XI. Animal Husbandry for their secondary products (milk, wool and traction) – a ‘Secondary Products Revolution’ analogous to the ‘Neolithic Revolution’ of preceding millennia. The concept of a ‘revolution’ has been strongly criticized by Chapman (1983), who points out that its innovations are dispersed over at least two millennia in both the Middle East and Europe. The types of evidence which might be relevant to testing the concept are discussed in detail by Grigson (1987a). Comparison of the ageing patterns of the sheep and goats in the 5th and 4th millennia bc at Arjoune with each other, and with patterns established at earlier sites in the Middle East, shows an increasing dependence on older animals. I have argued above that this indicates a gradual shift in emphasis from a meat strategy to one maximizing milk and meat in the 5th millennium and to another aimed at wool, milk and meat in the 4th millennium. Additional evidence is the increase in the proportion of sheep kept in the 4th millennium. There is no osteological evidence at Arjoune to indicate whether or not cattle were used for draught, though there is a suggestion that the equid remains found there in the 4th millennium came from domestic donkeys. The evidence from Arjoune does therefore support Sherratt’s notion of the introduction of the utilization of secondary products, but it also suggests that, as Chapman argued, the process of their introduction was a gradual shift in emphasis and not a sudden revolution. Nevertheless it was a change that was to revolutionize the economic system of the 5th and 4th millennia, paving the way to greater productivity and heralding the establishment of the earliest towns at the beginning of the Bronze Age – the so-called ‘Urban Revolution’.

Table 20: Ungulate proportions 5th millennium

4th millennium

Trenches V & VII

Trench VI

n

%

n

Sheep/goat

879

60.70

165

48.10

Pig

308

21.30

88

25.70

Cattle

261

18.00

90

26.20

1448

100.00

344

100.00

Total

%

goats that this may indicate a domestic strategy increasingly angled at obtaining wool as well as milk and meat. The proportion of cattle also increased over time, a possible explanation being that cattle now provided meat previously supplied by goats. However, examination of the ungulate proportions (Table 20) shows that taken together the proportion of sheep and goats decreased over time from 61% to 48%. The continuing presence of a high proportion of pigs suggests a lush environment in the vicinity of Arjoune, as indeed there is today along the banks of the Orontes. Although there seems to have been a seasonal pattern to the slaughter of pigs, perhaps implying a degree of seasonal movement, pigs are not a component of pastoral nomadism. This, together with the evidence for the cultivation of many plant crops, suggests that the inhabitants of Arjoune were sedentary, or virtually sedentary, farmers. As already mentioned, the almost total lack of pathological conditions in the bones suggests a good level of nutrition and management at Arjoune, probably indicating that the animals were not kept in confined or over-crowded conditions, although the occasional infections of the teeth might perhaps indicate over-use of infected pasture.

ACKNOWLEGEMENTS I thank Peter Parr for giving me the opportunity to work on the Arjoune material, and for many happy days in the field; the late (and greatly missed) Peter Dorrell, Geoff Summers, Carl Phillips, Julia St John Aubin, Lisa Moffat and Graham Philip, for much interesting discussion; the many members of the Tell Nebi Mend teams for help in processing the material; Don Brothwell and David Harris for providing facilities for identification at the Institute of Archaeology; Nick Arnold for identifying the reptile bones; and Sebastian Payne for meticulously checking the manuscript. The faults that remain are entirely my own.

CONCLUSIONS In the introduction to this chapter I mentioned the postulation by Sherratt (1981, 1983) that the Late Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods saw the initiation of the use of animals

229

XI. Animal Husbandry APPENDICES BONE MEASUREMENTS Measurements and abbreviations after von den Driesch (1976) bnt = burnt; F = female; M = male; e = estimated to nearest mm; c = approximate estimate; low = lower; up = upper; y = young; vy = very young; ad = adult; art = articulate. Appendix 1 Sheep and Goat Measurements Trench Bone No. VI VII VII V V V V V V V V VI VI V V V V V VI VII V V V V V V V VII VII V V V V V V V V V V V V V V

179 255 256 375 401 751 752 411 451 962 963 90 91 451 0 3044 917 450 85 176 1 2 3 7 8 16 I85 176 178 352 372 426 450 781 921 1082 1 2 3 4 7 8 16

Dimension astragalus GL astragalus GL astragalus GL astragalus GL astragalus GL astragalus GL astragalus GL atlas b ant art surf atlas b ant art surf atlas b ant art surf atlas b ant art surf axis b ant art surf axis b ant art surf axis b ant art surf calcaneum GL calcaneum GL femur Bd hcore circum hcore L hcoreL hcore mn diam hcore mn diam hcore mn diam hcore mn diam hcore mn diam hcore mn diam hcore mn diam hcore mn diam hcore mn diam hcore mn diam hcore mn diam hcore mn diam hcore mn diam hcore mn diam hcore mn diam hcore mn diam hcore mx diam hcore mx diam hcore mx diam hcore mx diam hcore mx diam hcore mx diam hcore mx diam

Size (mm) 30.4 c26.5 26.7 31.4 27.9 27 32 c76 e56 e49.5 48.1 46.3 45.3 c45 e54 58 35.9 135 e76 e128 27.5 27.6 26.8 13.6 27.7 21.2 16.3 22.2 19.7 15.8 17.4 17.6 34 20.4 26.8 17.8 47.8 44.2 45.9 e49.3 23.2 44 32.1

230

Comments

Species

bnt F? bnt M? F?

sheep sheep sheep goat shpgt goat shpgt sheep? shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt goat shpgt sheep goat goat goat goat goat goat goat goat/gaz sheep goat goat goat sheep goat goat goat goat sheep goat goat goat goat goat goat goat/gaz sheep

bnt M? F? M F

ad M vy M M M M y ad M F M y ad F? vy M M F? y F? F? F ad M F? M F ad M y ad M M y ad M F y ad M ?F

XI. Animal Husbandry

Trench VI VII VII V V V V V V V VII VII VII VII VII VII VII VII VII V V VI VI VI VI VII VII VII VII VII VII VII VII VII V V V V V V V V V V V V V V VII V VII VII VII VII VI

Bone No. 85 176 178 352 372 426 450 781 921 1082 209 210 211 212 215 221 222 223 224 362 637 47 49 151 152 209 210 211 212 215 221 222 223 224 547 637 747 851 852 853 855 857 858 859 860 861 34 54 77 97 125 141 142 150 282

Dimension hcore mx diam hcore mx diam hcore mx diam hcore mx diam hcore mx diam hcore mx diam hcore mx diam hcore mx diam hcore mx diam hcore mx diam humerus Bdc humerus Bd humerus Bd humerus Bd humerus Bd humerus Bd humerus Bd humerus Bdc humerus Bd humerus Bd humerus Bd humerus Bt humerus Bt humerus Bt humerus Bt humerus Bt humerus Bt humerus Bt humerus Bt humerus Bt humerus Bt humerus Bt humerus Bt humerus Bt humerus Bt humerus Bt humerus Bt humerus Bt humerus Bt humerus Bt humerus Bt humerus Bt humerus Bt humerus Bt humerus Bt humerus Bt M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L

Size (mm) 31.2 36.2 30.8 24 29.6 28 55.5 29.6 49.2 e30.9 33 31.8 c30.5 30.6 c30.2 31.4 c30 32 32 28.6 27.5 31 358 28.5 30 c32.7 31 c28.5 29.2 c30 29.4 c28.5 29.9 e29.7 31.1 27.9 e30 32.7 28.2 31.4 28.4 31.8 c33 29.1 29.4 c26 23.2 25.2 23 23.9 24.1 23.4 21.9 24.3 26.3 231

Comments

Species

vy M M F? y F? F? F? ad M F? M F

goat goat goat sheep goat goat goat goat sheep goat goat? shpgt shpgt goat sheep? shpgt shpgt sheep goat shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt sheep? goat? goat? shpgt shpgt goat sheep? shpgt shpgt sheep goat sheep shpgt shpgt sheep sheep goat goat sheep sheep shpgt sheep shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt

XI. Animal Husbandry Trench VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V VI VI VI VI V V V VI VI VII V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V

Bone No. 301 304 314 316 317 320 326 333 343 348 351 352 359 429 467 804 805 824 824 1046 1053 1054 1066 3023 3042 3052 186 187 188 189 703 813 947 181 185 259 474 497 819 938 941 942 322 358 542 575 754 2228 2650 322 358 542 575 2228 2650

Dimension

Size (mm)

M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L M3 L mcarpal Bd mcarpal Bd mcarpal Bd mcarpal Bd mcarpal Bd mcarpal Bd mcarpal Bd mcarpal Bp mcarpal Bp mcarpal Bp mcarpal Bp mcarpal Bp mcarpal Bp mcarpal Bpe mcarpal Bp mcarpal Bp mid phalanx Bp mid phalanx Bp mid phalanx Bp mid phalanx Bp mid phalanx Bp mid phalanx Bp mid phalanx Bp mid phalanx Glpe mid phalanx Glpe mid phalanx Glpe mid phalanx Glpe mid phalanx Glpe mid phalanx Glpe

25.7 27.2 23.7 23.7 23.9 26.5 26.9 26 25.9 25.8 24.2 22.1 24 26.8 26.8 23.3 22.3 21 21 23.7 29.3 23.1 25.6 23.7 24.1 25.2 32.3 30.7 c26 25.1 27 25.7 24.2 27.4 24.5 22.3 24.1 23 22.7 23.5 22.8 21.7 12.4 11.5 14.8 18.1 13 11 10.8 19.7 23 25.6 24.9 22.5 23.5

232

Comments

M M ?mtarsal M?

y

Species shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt sheep sheep sheep sheep sheep goat sheep shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt goat goat shpgt sheep sheep goat goat shpgt goat shpgt sheep sheep goat? shpgt goat

XI. Animal Husbandry Trench VII V V V V VI V V V V V V VI V VI VI V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V VI V VI VI V V V V V VI V V V V V V V V V V

Bone No. 150 359 429 804 805 193 203 414 438 829 946 949 192 496 192 192 481 481 481 66 359 805 823 0 409 410 616 708 821 822 0 409 616 708 453 370 153 154 369 412 428 709 2618 153 428 364 887 475 701 727 786 808 889 1042

Dimension

Size (mm)

molar row L molar row L molar row L molar row L molar row L mtarsal Bd mtarsal Bd mtarsal Bd mtarsal Bd mtarsal Bd mtarsal Bd mtarsal Bd mtarsal Bp mtarsal Bp mtarsal GL mtarsal SD pelvis l acetab pelvis mn b ilium pelvis mn b ischium premolar row L premolar row L premolar row L premolar row L prox phalanx Bp prox phalanx Bp prox phalanx Bp1 prox phalanx Bp prox phalanx Bp prox phalanx Bp prox phalanx Bp prox phalanx Glpe prox phalanx Glpe prox phalanx Glpe prox phalanx Glpe radius Bd radius Bd radius Bp radius Bp radius Bp radius Bp radius Bp radius Bp radius Bp radius GL radius SD scapula SLC scapula SLC scapula SLC scapula SLC scapula SLC scapula SLC scapula SLC scapula SLC scapula SLC

54.3 52.5 53.5 41 45 24 26.1 25.2 24 22.9 26.8 25.1 e21.5 19 c150 12.1 31.5 19.6 24.6 23.5 23.2 27 23 12.2 12 4.2 12.6 1.4 12 17 32.5 33.8 33.9 32 32.1 23.1 32 31.5 36.4 28.5 30.7 27.8 29.6 182 17.5 20.7 19.9 18.6 17 17.9 18.3 18.5 19.5 19.9

233

Comments

y

posterior posterior posterior

posterior posterior posterior

y

Species shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt sheep shpgt goat sheep goat goat? sheep sheep shpgt sheep sheep goat goat goat shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt goat shpgt goat goat sheep goat shpgt goat goat goat sheep shpgt sheep sheep shpgt shpgt goat shpgt sheep sheep goat shpgt shpgt shpgt goat shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt sheep

XI. Animal Husbandry

Trench VI VI VI VI VI VII V V V V V V V V V VII VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI V V

Bone No.

Dimension

174 175 176 177 178 249 319 442 443 506 901 902 903 904 899 150 282 301 304 314 315 316 317 320 326 343 348 359 805

tibia Bd tibia Bd tibia Bd tibia Bd tibia Bd tibia Bd tibia Bd tibia Bd tibia Bd tibia Bd tibia Bd tibia Bd tibia Bd tibia Bd tibia Bp toothrow L toothrow L toothrow L toothrow L toothrow L toothrow L toothrow L toothrow L toothrow L toothrow L toothrow L toothrow L toothrow L toothrow L

Size (mm)

Comments

23.7 24.8 26.9 24.6 27.8 27.6 30.7 26.7 23.7 25 25.7 25.6 24.5 22.2 39 78.4 76 64.2 77.6 69.3 e72.6 73.4 c70 76.8 87.3 81.6 76.2 75.5 72

y

Appendix 2. Pig Measurements Trench Bone No. V V V VI V V V V V V V V V V V V V

923 924 301 258 325 563 124 101 201 922 202 873 228 597 229 324 228

Dimension astragalus GL astragalus GL astragalus GL astragalus GL C low L C low L C low L C up L C up L calcaneum GL cuboid GB humerus Bd humerus Bd humerus Bd humerus Bd humerus Bt humerus Bt

Size (mm) 39.2 39.5 40 41.4 12.9 e13.2 14.5 13.7 15 70.9 26.8 38 39 42.2 43.5 31.3 34.8 234

Comments 922 & 923 art

F F F F 922 & 923 art 873 & 875 art

Species shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt sheep shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt shpgt

XI. Animal Husbandry Trench Bone No. V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V VII VI V V V V VII V V V V V V VII V V V V V V

229 119 251 128 122 223 126 235 121 325 230 104 103 299 248 246 102 110 101 I276 117 107 105 1083 312 305 I264 I263 126 I273 253 I275 299 246 332 1 278 104 247 103 102 4 105 207 1083 I280 3047 264 5 312 115 110 101 305 I262

Dimension humerus Bt M1 low L M1 low L M1 low L M1 low L M1 low L M1 low L M1 low L M1 low L M1 low L M1 low L M1 up L M1 up L M1 up L M1 up L M1 up L M1 up L M1 up L M1 up L M1 up L M1 up L M1 up L M1 up L M1 up L M1 up L M1 up L M2 low L M2 low L M2 low L M2 low L M2 low L M2 up L M2 up L M2 up L M2 up L M2 up L M2 up L M2 up L M2 up L M2 up L M2 up L M2 up L M2 up L M2 up L M2 up L M2 up L M2 up L M2 up L M2 up L M2 up L M2 up L M2 up L M2 up L M2 up L M3 low L

Size (mm) 35.5 16.2 e16.5 17.5 17.5 17.7 17.8 18.2 18.3 18.5 19 14 14.2 14.5 14.8 15 15.4 15.6 15.9 16.9 e17.2 17.5 17.7 18 18.2 19 21.7 21.7 22.2 22.5 22.8 17.9 18 18 18.2 18.7 19.5 e19.8 20 e20.2 20.3 20.6 21 21.5 e21.5 21.5 21.7 22 22.3 22.4 22.4 22.5 22.6 25.1 30.6

235

Comments F

F

F F

F

F

XI. Animal Husbandry Trench Bone No. V V V V VII VII V V V V V VII V V V VI V V VI V V V VI V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V

I263 120 I278 115 3 1 114 110 104 101 103 8 102 247 503 267 238 235 268 123 121 129 269 223 246 118 117 107 108 333 329 225 224 217 224 225 217 930 927 209 572 928 927 929 249 235 249 106 101 235 327 102 249 312 106 1096

Dimension M3 low L M3 low L M3 up L M3 up L M3 up L M3 up L M3 up L M3 up L M3 up L M3 up L M3 up L M3 up L M3 up L M3 up L m4 low L m4 low L m4 low L m4 low L m4 low L m4 low L m4 low L m4 low L m4 low L m4 low L m4 up L m4 up L m4 up L m4 up L m4 up L m4 up L mcarpal III Bp mid phalanx Bp mid phalanx Bp mid phalanx Bp mid phalanx Glpe mid phalanx Glpe mid phalanx Glpe mtarsal III Bp mtarsal III Bp mtarsal III Bp mtarsal III Bp mtarsal III GL mtarsal III GL mtarsal IV Bp P1 up L P2 low L P2 up L P2 up L P2 up L P3 low L P3 low L P3 up L P3 up L P3 up L P3 up L P3 up L

Size (mm) e31 e42 c25 c28 29.4 30 c30 30 30.3 e30.5 31 c31 e31.2 32.4 20 20 20 20.1 20.2 20.5 20.5 20.8 20.8 21.2 14.3 14.7 14.9 15 15.5 e16 17 15.3 16 16.7 17.5 21.4 23.2 14.5 14.5 14.6 16.8 e74 78.2 15.5 9.2 8 11.1 13.4 13.5 10.4 12 12.7 13.1 13.6 14 14.3 236

Comments unworn

F F

225 & 224 art? 224 & 225 art? 224 & 225 art? 225 & 224 art?

F F F F

XI. Animal Husbandry

Trench Bone No. V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V VII V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V

101 325 248 104 103 102 312 110 106 101 119 500 210 321 954 321 954 210 875 33 909 876 880 222 323 879 102 101 101 104 102 101 102 134 137 135 895 897

Dimension

Size (mm)

P3 up L P4 low L P4 up L P4 up L P4 up L P4 up L P4 up L P4 up L P4 up L P4 up L premolars low L premolars low L prox phalanx Bp prox phalanx Bp prox phalanx Bp prox phalanx Glpe prox phalanx Glpe prox phalanx Glpe radius Bp radius Bp radius Bp scapula SLC scapula SLC scapula SLC scapula SLC scapula SLC skull 25 skull 25 skull 28 skull 28 skull 28 skull 29 skull 29 skull 41 skull b nuchal crest skull b nuchal crest tibia Bd tibia Bd

14.5 14.9 11.8 11.9 12 12.7 12.9 13.2 13.8 14 53.5 55 14.4 15.1 15.1 13.2 31.7 38.8 27.5 29.6 31.5 19.5 21 21 24 24.1 118.6 125 e53 62.8 66 48.2 58.2 96.5 52 e54 28.1 30.5

Comments F F

F F F F F

873 & 875 art y

F F F

e y

Appendix 3. Cattle Measurements Trench Bone No. VI VI VI V V V V V VI

69 67 68 2204 2578 1200 1207 1201 63

Dimension astragalus GL astragalus GL astragalus GL astragalus GL axis b ant art surf axis b ant art surf axis b ant art surf axis b ant art surf calcaneum GL

Size (mm) 64.5 65.3 66.8 68 89.7 95 95 103 123.2 237

Comments

y y

XI. Animal Husbandry Trench Bone No. V V V V V V VI VI V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V VII V V V V V V VII V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V

2198 2516 I64 2541 2541 2510 44 43 2510 2171 I42 2569 1026 2139 2530 2221 I73 2221 2534 2534 2524 1035 555 2215 554 74 2220 2207 2196 2211 2209 2524 74 2526 2207 1035 2215 555 2220 2209 2196 2202 2535 2532 2535 2532 2202 2533 2155 2532 2532 2532 2206 2200 2223 3049

Dimension calcaneum GL calcaneum GL calcaneum GL horncore mn diam horncore mx diam humerus Bd humerus Bt humerus Bt humerus Bt humerus Bt humerus Bt M3 L M3 L M3 L magnum Gbc mcarpal b dist shft mcarpal Bd mcarpal Bd mcarpal Bpc mcarpal SD mid phalanx Bp mid phalanx Bp mid phalanx Bp mid phalanx Bp mid phalanx Bp mid phalanx Bp mid phalanx Bp mid phalanx Bp mid phalanx Bp mid phalanx Bp mid phalanx Bp mid phalanx Glpe mid phalanx Glpe mid phalanx Glpe mid phalanx Glpe mid phalanx Glpe mid phalanx Glpe mid phalanx Glpe mid phalanx Glpe mid phalanx Glpe mid phalanx Glpe mtarsal b dist shft mtarsal B end shft mtarsal B end shft mtarsal Bdc mtarsal Bd mtarsal Bd mtarsal Bp mtarsal Bp mtarsal Bp mtarsal GL mtarsal SD navicular GB prox phalanx Bp prox phalanx Bp prox phalanx Bp

Size (mm) 124.6 133 142.2 51.8 61.2 83 66.3 72.1 73 76.2 85.4 36.8 38.4 39 39 61.6 57.5 67 51 c23.7 26.3 27.4 27.8 28.5 29.1 30.8 32.6 32.9 33.8 33.9 36 36.2 38.8 38.9 39.1 40 40 40.6 41.3 42.7 43.2 58.4 52.8 55.1 58 61.4 63.9 45.9 c48 52 220 29.6 53.3 28 e28 c28 238

Comments

vy vy posterior anterior outer anterior inner

posterior anterior outer

anterior outer

XI. Animal Husbandry Trench Bone No. VI V V VI V V VI V VI V V VI V V VI V V VI VI VI V V V VII V V V VI V V V V V V VI V V

79 2222 2218 76 2208 2199 77 625 75 2523 2522 78 2523 2522 79 2199 2223 75 77 76 2218 2208 2611 71 1033 2149 2154 46 2184 2543 2542 2219 2224 2513 60 2519 2515

Dimension prox phalanx Bp prox phalanx Bp prox phalanx Bp prox phalanx Bp prox phalanx Bp prox phalanx Bp prox phalanx Bp prox phalanx Bp prox phalanx Bp prox phalanx Bp prox phalanx Bp prox phalanx Glpe prox phalanx Glpe prox phalanx Glpe prox phalanx Glpe prox phalanx Glpe prox phalanx Glpe prox phalanx Glpe prox phalanx Glpe prox phalanx Glpe prox phalanx Glpe prox phalanx Glpe radius Bpc radius Bp radius Bp radius Bp radius Bp scapula SLC scapula SLC skull b condyles skull b condyles term phalanx L term phalanx L tibia Bd tibia Bd tibia Bd tibia Bd

Size (mm) 28.7 29.1 29.5 30.1 e30.5 31 31.1 31.5 33.3 33.5 33.7 53.7 55.5 55.6 56.1 56.7 e60 60.2 61.3 61.3 61.5 62.2 55 e77 79 81.8 84.2 49.2 49.7 e96 113 70.7 72.2 58 61.9 64 c67

Comments posterior posterior posterior anterior inner anterior anterior inner anterior outer posterior anterior inner anterior outer posterior anterior posterior posterior y

Appendix 4 Dog Measurements Trench Bone No. V V V V

1100 23 23 23

Dimension P3 up L skull 25 skull 27 skull 28

Size (mm) 20.4 33.2 18.1 17.7

239

Comments

XI. Animal Husbandry

Appendix 5 Equid Measurements Trench Bone No. VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI V V V V V VI VI V VI VI VI VI VI VI V V V V V

7 15 14 14 14 5 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 2521 2521 2521 2521 2521 2 2 85 86 86 196 196 285 306 487 487 487 801 801

Dimension

Size (mm)

humerus Bt M2 up crown ht P2 low crown ht P2 low occ b P2 low occ l pelvis LA pelvis LA prox phalanx 1 prox phalanx 2 prox phalanx 3 prox phalanx 4 prox phalanx 5 prox phalanx 6 prox phalanx Bd prox phalanx Bfd prox phalanx Bp prox phalanx GL prox phalanx SD tibia Bd ibia Dd M3 L horncore mn diam horncore mx diam mid phalanx Bp mid phalanx Glpe toothrow low L toothrow low L horncore L horncore mn diam horncore mx diam M1 low L m4 low L

59.8 31.5 42.3 14.4 29.9 57.1 54.7 77.9 39.8 30.1 25.2 34 19.6 36.3 34.5 40 78.4 24.2 58 41 18.1 22.9 33 7.8 20.8 59.9 66.5 e140 e20 e27 12 19.1

Comments

anterior anterior anterior anterior anterior gazelle M M bnt bnt

Appendix 6 Deer Measurements Trench Bone No. V V VI VI

3043 3043 13 78

Dimension

Size (mm)

mid phalanx Bp mid phalanx Glpe navicular GB prox phalanx post Bp

27 c50 46.3 25.1

240

Comments

Speciea

anterior anterior

red deer red deer deer large bovid ?

CHAPTER XII WILD AND CULTIVATED FOOD PLANTS AND THE EVIDENCE FOR CROP PROCESSING ACTIVITIES AT ARJOUNE Lisa Moffett

The resulting flot consisted mostly of modern root material with a relatively small amount of charred material, some modern (uncharred) seeds, and in some cases, large numbers of snail shells. The presence of modern root material and seeds was due to the shallowness of the deposits, but does not necessarily affect the results of the samples, since the modern uncharred plant material was easily distinguished from the archaeological charred plant material. It is possible that root disturbance and other factors may have caused some mixing between layers, but as far as can be judged from the distribution of the other artefacts, this is probably not too significant. Only the flot from the 1 mm sieve was actually analysed. A portion of the fine fraction in the 350 micron sieve was checked from each sample, but as no seeds were found in any of the fine fraction sub-samples they were not further investigated. Most samples from Trenches V and VII contained only a few charred remains probably representing residual material. Two of the samples from Trench V, however, stand out as containing significantly more material than the others. These were samples V.115.3 and V.202.3, both from Pit 1, which are discussed below. The three samples from Trench VI were also richer in remains than the majority of samples from the other Trenches, possibly because the areas chosen for sampling from this Trench were those which appeared to contain the greatest amount of occupation material. The composition of these five samples with abundant material is given in Tables 2 and 3. The results from the other samples are presented in Tables 1a and 1b. Taxonomy follows Zohary (1966, 1972, and 1977), except for the cereals, which follow Schiemann (1948).

INTRODUCTION A programme of sampling for charred botanical remains was carried out at Arjoune, chiefly on Trench V, though there were a few samples from Trenches VI and VII. Few sites of this period from the Levant have as yet been sampled for plant remains, and it was hoped that material from Arjoune would provide comparative data for future work as well as serving the immediate object of gaining an idea of some of the plants being used by the prehistoric Arjoune inhabitants for food and other purposes. METHODS Twelve samples were taken from Trench V, three from Trench VI, and two from Trench VII. The samples were taken from selected deposits (layers) at each stratigraphic level, a method reflecting the archaeology, which produced stratigraphic layers rather than features. Efforts were made to sample from areas undisturbed by later ploughing or burials. The sample sizes varied from approximately 24 to 50 litres in Trench V, 12 to 24 litres in Trench VI, and was about 24 litres in Trench VII. The first samples to be processed were done using a ‘froth’ flotation machine. Later it was observed that some of the heavier seeds and fragments were sinking in the machine and being washed away in the residue. A change was made to ‘bucket’ flotation, consisting of gently stirring the soil in a bucket of water, allowing a moment for the mineral fraction to settle and then decanting the water with its floating and suspended elements through a sieve. This method, although somewhat laborious, was found to be more effective, as it caught the heavier suspended fraction, which, despite paraffin, frothing agent and bubbler, tended to sink in the froth flotation machine, possibly due to persistently adhering clay particles. Not all the samples, therefore, received the same treatment. More than half the samples were bucket floated; those that were machine floated are marked on Tables 1-3 with an asterisk. From the tables it can be seen that despite some losses using the machine some of the denser, heavier items were recovered in machine floated samples. The sieve sizes were the same for all samples. A 1 mm mesh was used with a 350 micron sieve underneath to catch the small seeds.

CULTIVATED CROPS Glume wheats (Triticum monococcum L. and Triticum dicoccum Schübl.) Einkorn and emmer are found on Neolithic sites throughout the Near East. At Arjoune these cereals were represented mainly by their chaff remains and were fully domesticated, showing considerable tearing at the rachis incision indicative of a semi-tough rachis. Owing partly to poor preservation and partly to the morphological overlap between the two species, 241

XII. Wild and Cultivated Food Plants found on a house floor at the PPNB site at Yiftahel in association with a probable weed of cultivation, thus suggesting that these lentils were cultivated despite little increase in size over the wild ancestor (Garfinkel et al. 1988).

it was found to be impossible to distinguish einkorn from emmer by their glume bases. Spikelet forks were distinguished by width of rachis incision relative to total width of spikelet fork (after Hillman in prep. a) but only a few relatively well-preserved spikelet forks of extreme morphological type could be identified in this way. The rest were identified only as T. monococcum/dicoccum, or in some cases as indeterminate glume wheat to allow for the possibility of wild emmer, although there was no evidence of any wild wheat on the site.

Horsebean (Vicia faba agg.) A single horsebean was found in Trench V in sample V.115.3. Horsebean is also a legume crop that has probably been in cultivation for a long time. A deposit of horsebeans similar to the one of lentils were also found in late PPNB levels at Yiftahel (Kislev 1985).

Free-threshing wheats (Triticum durum type and Triticum aestivum s.l.) Free-threshing wheat was found in very small amounts in Trench V. Samples from V.115.3 and V.202.3 produced a few rachis nodes, two of a possibly T. aestivum type, and one short round grain of a possible free-threshing hexaploid type. Four rachis nodes were tentatively assigned to T. durum type, a designation intended to include all free-threshing tetraploid wheats apart from T. cartlicum Nevski. These had part of the rachis above the internode still attached, indicating a completely tough rachis, and the glumes on two of the specimens had broken at the base of the glume in a manner characteristic of free-threshing wheats. The tetraploid character is indicated by the lumps or bulges on the rachis just under the glume attachments (Hillman 2001; in prep. b). These identifications have to be regarded as tentative owing both to the poor state of preservation of the material and to the inherent difficulties of distinguishing between tetraploid and hexaploid free-threshing wheat. Free-threshing wheat grains are often impossible to identify to species, and sometimes even the rachises are too intermediate in form to identify, as they were at Ramad (van Zeist and Bakker-Heeres 1985). As a consequence, the distribution of free-threshing wheat species in the Near East is poorly understood.

Grass pea (Lathyrus sativus/cicera) Grass pea is a minor food and fodder crop that also grows as a weed in arable fields (Townsend 1974). There is little evidence at present for grass pea from Neolithic sites in this region although it was found at Neolithic Erbaba in Turkey (van Zeist and Buitenhuis 1983) and Helbaek reported Lathyrus sativus from Lachish (Helbaek 1958). POSSIBLE COLLECTED FOOD PLANTS Most of the possible collected food plants are fruits from trees or shrubs which could have grown on the mountain slopes. Some of these species may have been cultivated. Orchard management requires a long-term commitment, however, and in the absence of clear evidence for permanent habitation structures at Arjoune it seems safest to assume that these foods were either collected or acquired by trade. Fig (Ficus carica L.) Ficus carica, the cultivated fig, is part of a large group of closely related figs which inhabit wet gorges, rock crevices and springs around the Mediterranean region and southwestern Asia, and which are classified together as series carica (Zohary and Spiegel-Roy 1975). These various carica-type figs are not distinguishable by their seeds. Most wild carica-type figs are inedible, but it seems reasonable to assume that the single fig seed from Trench V (V.115.2) was an edible carica-type. Figs are cultivated today at Tell Nebi Mend, a kilometre from Arjoune. They do not appear to have been important in the prehistoric period at Arjoune, however, since only a single seed was found and one fig can produce large numbers of seeds.

Barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) Most of the samples contained some barley. Where the preservation was good enough to make the determination possible, the barley seemed to be all of the hulled variety. The grains were usually broken or distorted so it was not possible to see if any were twisted in the way characteristic of the lateral grains of six-row barley. The identifiable rachis remains were all of the two-row type, however, and it seems probable that two-row barley was the main, if not the only type present.

Hawthorn (Crataegus sp.) A single pyrene of hawthorn was found in Trench V (V.115.3). It was flattened on two sides, indicating that it was one of the multi-pyrene species of hawthorn and not Crataegus monogyna. Haws have been grown recently in Iraq for their fruit (Meikle 1966) and are likely to have been collected as food in the past.

Lentils (Lens cf. culinaris) Lentils are a useful protein complement in a cereal diet, although their importance in this regard would depend on the amount of animal protein consumed. The lentils from Arjoune are probably the cultivated species Lens culinaris Medic., but they are too badly abraded to be measured accurately. Since size remains the chief criterion for distinguishing cultivated lentil from its wild relative, Lens orientalis (Boiss.) Hand.- Mazz., the possibility that these lentils were collected rather than cultivated cannot be entirely ruled out. A large deposit of similarly small lentils were

Plum/cherry type (cf. Prunus sp.) Two possible fragments of plum or cherry stone were found, one fragment in Trench V (V.202.3) and the other from Trench VI (VI.701.3A).

242

XII. Wild and Cultivated Food Plants the processing stages is derived from Hillman's ethnographic work in Turkey (Hillman 1984a). The full description of glume wheat processing stages and their relation to archaeological remains will be found in Hillman (1981a, 1984a and 1984b). After harvesting the crop is threshed, which breaks the cereal ears into spikelets, and then winnowed, which removes the long straw, weed stems and some of the lighter weed seeds. The winnowed crop is then sieved on a coarse riddle to separate the spikelets from remaining pieces of straw, large seed heads and other large contaminents. The spikelets are then parched (usually) to make the glumes brittle and then pounded to break the glumes and release the grain. More rarely, the spikelets are loosely milled to remove the glumes. A further stage of winnowing removes the light floral chaff fragments. The grain is then sieved on a fine sieve with holes just small enough to retain the grains while allowing most of the small dense chaff fragments (glume bases, spikelet forks and rachises) and weed seeds smaller than the grains to pass through. A final stage of hand-sorting is needed to remove any remaining contaminents such as weed seeds similar in size to grains, pieces of grit, remaining chaff fragments etc. Glume wheats can be stored as cleaned grain, or they can be put into storage prior to the final stages of processing as spikelets, in which state the grain is less vulnerable to spoilage by pests and damp. If spikelets are stored, further processing is generally on a small scale as needed, and the fine-sieving by-product generated may be simply thrown on the fire to dispose of it, or it may be used as tinder or fuel (Hillman 1984b). Because unprocessed crops are heavy and bulky to tranport, threshing, winnowing and coarse sieving are generally done at the site of production. This means that the by-products of these processes would be found on sites where the crops were grown (‘producer’ sites) but not at nomadic encampments or other sites where cereals may be consumed but are not grown (‘consumer’ sites, not including urban sites) (Hillman in prep. c). If grain is sold or traded as whole spikelets then the fine-sieving by-product would be found on both ‘producer’ and ‘consumer’ sites. In practice the by-products of the early stages of processing are rarely found even on sites where arable husbandry must have been practiced. Possibly this is due to fact that straw is a valuable product in its own right and would probably seldom be burned. The relative percentages of chaff fragments, weed seeds, cereal grains, and fruit/nuts are shown in Table 4 for the five samples noted above which produced the most abundant remains. It is clear that the dominent component in the assemblages is chaff (chiefly glume bases – one spikelet fork is counted as being equal to two glume bases). The Arjoune VI assemblages in particular are almost pure glume wheat chaff. The material recovered from all three samples from Trench VI and sample V.202.3 from Trench V all correspond very closely with the above description of the fine sieving by-product, though with a remarkably small weed component, especially from Trench VI. Sample V.115.3 from Trench V also appears to be mostly fine sievings, although with a significant amount of material from other sources, especially grape pips.

Almond (Amygdalus communis L.) A fragment of almond shell came from Trench VI and another from Trench VII. Most wild almonds are bitter, and poisonous when eaten in quantity. It seems unlikely that bitter almonds would have been collected for food, although the pressed oil might have had some uses. The sweet forms which were later taken into cultivation, however, would have occurred as occasional mutants among the wild populations. Almonds appear to have been an important collected food item by the early Neolithic (van Zeist 1988). Pistacia (Pistacia sp.) Pistacia fragments were found at both Trench V and Trench VI. The fragments were small and species identification was impossible. Pistacia species are common constituents of maquis vegetation. Pistacia atlantica, like almond, has been frequently recoved from early Neolithic sites, collected for its oil-rich seeds (van Zeist 1988). Grape (Vitis sylvestris/vinifera) Grape pips, mostly of the wild type (Vitis sylvestris) are present in large numbers in sample V.115.3 from Trench V. A few pips were more similar to Vitis vinifera in morphology but it is possible that these could have occurred in a population of V. sylvestris. Although primarily of a morphologically wild type it is possible that these grapes could have been cultivated. It is also very possible that they were simply collected from vines growing wild along the Orontes valley, or on the mountain slopes, just as wild grapes are still collected by children of farmers in parts of Turkey today (Hillman, pers. comm). Several of the pips still have fragments of fruit skin attached and other fragments of fruit skin were found. Helbaek suggested that the grape pips found at Bronze Age and Iron Age Lachish were the remains of raisins eaten as an accompaniment to the cereal diet. The presence of the charred fruit skins lends colour to the possibility that this may have been the case at Arjoune. Another possibility is that the grapes were pressed for their juice, the residue being thrown on the fire. This need not imply wine-making – the unfermented juice could have been put to a number culinary uses. WEEDS Most of the other plants which could be identified to species level are plants characteristic of arable and disturbed ground, such as nettle-leaved goosefoot (Chenopodium murale L.), knotgrass (Polygonum aviculare agg.), sheep's sorrel (Rumex acetosella agg.) and corn gromwell (Buglossoides arvensis (L.) I.M. Johnston). Most of the other taxa recognised also include species of arable or disturbed ground. DISCUSSION The glume wheats such as emmer and einkorn do not thresh free from their enclosing chaff parts (the glumes) and must undergo several stages of processing to separate the grains from the chaff. The following, much simplified, synopsis of 243

XII. Wild and Cultivated Food Plants small number of samples but it is interesting to note a similar scarcity of weed seeds among the spikelet samples and in the probable fine sieving by-product at Tell Sabi Abyad (van Zeist and Waterbolk-van Rooijen 1989). Although potentially the types of crop products found on a site can be related to subsistence base, i.e. whether the site was a ‘producer’ or strictly a ‘consumer’ of cultivated cereals, taphonomic factors may make this distinction impossible. There is no evidence at Arjoune, such as the presence of the by-products of the early stages of crop processing, to indicate that crops were grown at the site. However, as noted above, these by-products are seldom found and their absence cannot be taken to show that the site was a ‘consumer’. The plant remains, therefore, give no indication as to whether the settlements at Arjoune were ‘consumer’ or ‘producer’, and therefore possibly by implication, temporarily or permanently occupied. It should be noted, however, that specialist types of ‘consumer’ sites may be permanently occupied and crops can still be grown at seasonally occupied sites, where the inhabitants return later in the year to harvest the crop. There are only a few Halafian sites for which there have been studies carried out on the plant remains and even fewer for the Ubaid period (Miller 1991). The nearest Halaf site for which there is evidence is Ras Shamra, on the Syrian coast. Most of the crops found at Arjoune were also found at Ras Shamra which in addition had flax, pea and olive, the latter considered by the authors as probably wild (van Zeist and Bakker-Heeres 1986)). There seems little point at present in attempting much comparison with other Halaf or Ubaid sites since the area involved is so large and geographically varied, and the number of sites studied is so few. Much work has understandably been focussed on early Neolithic and pre-agricultural sites in an attempt to study the origins of agriculture. Systematic work on later sites is much needed, however, if the developments of agriculture are to be understood.

Possible evidence of crop processing from other sites in Syria is sketchy. At Ramad in the Damascus basin it was concluded that the charred material represented a mixture of crop processing waste, prime grains and other refuse (van Zeist and Bakker-Heeres 1985). A large amount of emmer chaff, with possibly some einkorn, was found along with grain and large numbers of grass seeds at Tell Sukas on the Syrian coast (Helbaek 1961/62). Unfortunately these remains are not quantified in the the report and it is therefore impossible to determine the proportions of the various crop components. At Tell Sabi Abyad, however, there was evidence for fine sieving remains and for whole spikelets which had been cleaned of weeds and coarse chaff but not yet pounded and processed to release the grain (van Zeist and Waterbook-van Rooijen 1989). Although Trenches V and VI at Arjoune may differ in date (according to the radiocarbon determinations) by perhaps as much as a thousand years, the cereal assemblages appear to be essentially similar, perhaps because they resulted from similar activities being carried out which did not change with time. These activities undoubtedly included the processing of einkorn and emmer spikelets to produce grain for consumption, though it is not possible to tell if the fine sieving by-product became charred as a result of purposeful use, perhaps to start fires, or whether it was merely being disposed of. It is the earlier and larger Trench V which seems to have the greater range of food plants present, but this could well be linked to a range of possible factors such as the number of site occupants, length of site use, and the activities being carried out, not to mention the factor of chance in preserving the evidence. The low numbers of weed seeds, which is particularly marked at Trench VI, may be related to husbandry methods. The crops may have been very thoroughly weeded in the field. Alternatively the crops were harvested by reaping only the ears which would tend to eliminate most weeds. The few weeds likely to be reaped with the crop in this method of harvesting are those of the same height as the crop, especially grasses, which tend to look like similar cereals, and twining weeds, which are difficult to avoid. Grasses are the most common weed seeds present in all the samples, but the other weeds are mostly shorter than the cereal crops and not twining. It is not possible to draw conclusions from such a

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am grateful to Gordon Hillman for help with some of the more difficult identifications, for access to his reference collection, and for his comments and advice.

244

XII. Wild and Cultivated Food Plants

Table 1a Samples with Small Amounts of Material Trench V (* = machine floated) TRENCH V Provenance Sample size (litres) Items per litre Food plants Triticum monococcum L spikelet forks T. Monococcum/dicoccum spikelet forks T. monococcum/dicoccum glume bases Triticum sp(p) grains free-threshing type Triticum sp(p) grains H. vulgare L hulled grains H. vulgare L indeterminate grains Cereal indeterminate grains Ficus carica L Lens cf culinaris Large Leguminosae indeterminate Other plants Adonis flammea/dentata Medicago/Melilotus/Trifolium/ Astragalus/Trigonella Small Leguminosae indeterminate Umbelliferae indeterminate Haplophyllum sp Rumex acetosella agg Rumex sp Scirpus sp Carex sp Cyperaceae indeterminate Phalaris sp Gramineae indeterminate Unidentified Rubiaceae indeterminate Unidentified

102.2

102.3

103.3

103.4

111.3*

24