NEO-LITHICS 2/10 - ex oriente eV

Editorial

Special Topic Contributions Gebel and Fujii Introduction Gebel CommodificationofWater Fujii DomesticationofRunoffSurfaceWater Wilkinson EarlyHydraulicSystems Garfinkel SocialAspectsofWaterTechnology Edwards EarlyAgricultureandDitchIrrigation Galili and Rosen SubmergedNeolithicSettlements,WaterMining Nieuwenhuyse and Nilhamn WaterintheVillage Coşkun, Benz, Erdal, Koruyucu, Deckers, Riehl, Siebert, Alt and Özkaya KörtikTepe

Klimscha EarlyWaterExploitation

Other Contributions Dietrich and Schmidt ARadiocarbonDateGöbekliTepe

NEO-LITHICS2/10The Newsletter of Southwest Asian Neolithic ResearchSpecial Topic on The Domestication of Water

2Neo-Lithics2/10

Content

Editorial 2Special Topic Contributions Hans Georg K. Gebel and Sumio Fujii TheDomesticationofWater.AShortIntroduction 3 Hans Georg K. Gebel TheCommodificationofWater 4 Sumio Fujii DomesticationofRunoffSurfaceWater:CurrentEvidence andNewPerspectivesfromtheJafrPastoralNeolithic 14 Tony J. Wilkinson TheDomesticationofWater:EarlyHydraulicSystems 33 Yosef Garfinkel SocialAspectsofWaterTechnologyintheProtohistoricNearEast 39 Phillip C. Edwards EarlyAgricultureandDitchIrrigation 43 Ehud Galili and Baruch Rosen SubmergedNeolithicSettlementsoftheMediterraneanCarmelCoast andWaterMiningintheSouthernLevant 47 Olivier Niewenhuyse and Bonnie Nilham WaterintheVillage 53 Marion Benz LivingbytheWater–BoonandBaneforthePeopleofKörtikTepe 60

Florian Klimscha EarlyWaterExploitationanditsPost-NeolithicAftermath 72

Other Contribution Oliver Dietrich and Klaus Schmidt ARadiocarbonDatefromtheWallPlasterofEnclosureDofGöbekliTepe 82Masthead 84

Editorial

HowrapidNeolithicresearchproceeds.Twotrendscanbeobservedinrecenttimes:Astrugglefornewinterpretativeframeworksgeneratingnewtopics(oroldtopicsinnewperspectives),andboomingstudiescontributedbyfreshlyappliedtechnologiesofscience(allsortsofisotopeanalysis,forinstance)ornewinterpretationsfromdisciplinespreviouslyrarelyinvolvedinNeolithicresearch(e.g.evolutionarybiology).Inthegoodoldtimes,allnewquestionsandresearchgeneratedbyspecialist studiesandnewframeworkswerefiltered, testedandcoordinatedwith theproject’sarchaeological,bio-andgeoarchaeologicalresults.Isthisstillthecasethesetimes?Onlypartially,andnottothesameextent.Thereseemstobeatendencyforsome“isolated”ifnot“separatistic”Neolithicspecialistresearch,also resultingfroma lackof (alerted)competencybyprehistoric research tounderstand,evaluateandintegratetheseresultsproperly.Inparticular,informationproducedbythenew„auxiliary“disciplines(aswetendtounderstandthem)andnewinterpretativeframeworksoftenremainneglected,ortheiruseisdelayed,becausewetraditionalresearchersoftheNeolithichavelittlecapacityandawarenesstounderstandtheirnewpotentials,restrictions,terminologies,etc.,andthusarenotrealresearchpartnersexceptonaverygenerallevel.However,wefeelthatmuchofourunderstandinghasalreadyorwillbecomeoutdatedandshouldbereconsideredbythesenewapproaches.Oftenthenewresultsornewdirectionsofresearchrenderourbelovedtraditionsandstereotypicalunderstandingobsolete,oratleastdoquestionthem,andapsychologicalbarrierarisesthathinderscooperationandadoptionoftheirutilityandexplanatorypower.

Wherewillthisalllead?Certainly,the“cacophonyindex”ofourresearchwillrise,andtherewillbepressuretouniteincirclestoapplyandpromotecertaininterpretations,andthenumberofdifferentresearchframeworkswillincrease.Howgoodorbadisthisdiversityforourresearch?

ThisspecialtopicissueofNeo-Lithicsismuchdelayed.Weapologizetotheguesteditorofthisissue,SumioFujii,fortardypublishing.Thedomestication-of-waterconceptreceivedanimmensemomentumbySumio’soutstandingresultsfromhisworknearMa‘an,leadingustoextendourinvitationtohimtocoordinateaNeo-Lithicsspecialissueonwaterdomestication.Theoriginalconcepttohavekeynotesonwaterdomesticationthatwediscussedwithhimfailedforvariousreasons,thusthisissuehastobeunderstoodasasampleronthetopic.WewarmlythankSumioFujiiforallhissteady,patientandfriendlyeffortstohaveNeo-Lithics2/10materialize.

HansGeorgK.Gebel&GaryRollefon

Introduction

Neo-Lithics2/103

TheDomesticationofWater

This issue of Neo-Lithics, compiled by one ofus as the guest editor (S.F.), assembles a number ofpapers onwhatwedecided to call the domesticationofwater,understandingthatthereisagreatbehavioraldifferencebetween“foraged”waterandwaterneededto maintain more than a basic need, the drinking:Remainingabasic requirement forphysical survival,ofcourse,waterinNeolithictimestookonanumberof key functions in the establishment andflourishingofproducingsocieties,theireconomies,andinnovativeandsymbolicenvironments.Butitalsobecamesubjectofmoldingtheearlycultural landscapes,alteringandmostlikelyalsoattackingtheintegrityofland-,animal-and plantscapes and their biodiversity; domesticatedwatersurelybecamealsoamediumofimpactonnature,as water deficits became a medium of technologicalinnovationandacceleratingdevelopments.

Watermeansalltolife,butsettledlifemeansalottothewaterhouseholdsofnature.Thedifferentkindsof water, starting from the seawaters bringing earlyPPNB-peopletoCyprus,viathecookingwaterintheNeolithicpottery,orthefreshwaterterritorieswithitsfish habitats claimed by Neolithic property regimes,to the water in the landslides endangering Neolithichouses, all these should become the water subjectsofNeolithic research ifwe ifwewant tounderstandNeolithization.

The recent outstanding findings of early watermanagement, some of which are represented in thisvolume, provide a glance into the array of topicsinvolved,andtheneedtoexplorethemeaningofwaterforussedentarypeople.

The Near Eastern Neolithic social, economic,innovative, and symbolic developments need tobe linked with the conditions of their hydrologicalbackground, by which they expanded and retreated,altered, and changed in processes taking place overfive millennia in regions highly diversified in theirhydrology.

This issue of Neo-Lithics is far from an attempttomerge the isolatedNearEastern evidenceof earlydomestic water installations and management fromthevariousperiods intoageneralpotential trajectoryofwaterdomestication.Rather,itassembleshighlightsofevidence toexplain theextensivecharacterof thisnoveltopic.

The Domestication of Water. A Short IntroductionHans Georg Gebel and Sumio Fujii

TheCommodificationofWater

Neo-Lithics2/104


Water and the Neolithic Ethos1

Two basic behavioral dispositions in human waterconsumption should be distinguished: passive onesthat could show a variety of adaptive behavior toforage or routinely access available surface water forimmediateconsumption,andmoreactiveandpreventivedispositions that are in additiongovernedby theneedtosecureandmanagewaterfordrinkinganditsuseinproductivemilieus.Thelatterrepresentsthenewsectorsofcomplexhumanwatermanagementthatincreasinglyspreadwithsedentarylifeanditssocioeconomies,basedon the need for stable conditions for their territories,climate and hydrology, agriculture, flocks, crafts,and social systems. More than ever before, water inthe Neolithic became an agent of vulnerability. Bothdispositionsmightalreadyappearlinkedtosomeextentinhunter-gatherergroups(forexample,inareasorcasesofpotentialwaterpollutionorindeficitlocations),butbasicallythecharacterofwaterbehaviorinthesegroupsremainedadaptiveandexploitative.Thetwodispositionscannot be seen as opposed behavioral patterns; theyremainedlinkedinNeolithictimes,withtheproductivewater behavior involving increasingly complex risk-buffering strategies throughout the millennia of theNeolithicevolution.Sedentaryconditions require suchactive water strategies, or water management, sinceevenasecurenaturalconsumptionbasedonrichnearbyspringswould require a „hydrosocial“management toavoiddeficitscreatedbyotherimpacts,suchasterritorialor ideologicalclaims,hygiene,etc.ThenewNeolithichumanterritorialitymusthavecreatedanewvitalandpotentially conflict-loaded level of dependence onwater (Gebel n.d., 2010b), and human hydrologicalcompetence must have gained momentum in nature-observation,watertechnologies,andsociohydrologicalstrategies.

Among other topics, much research needs to beinvested into the ethological questions related watersubsistence in early Near Eastern villages, since theywould allow working out the assumed fundamentalchangesinwaterbehaviorcomingupwiththeNeolithic.Forexample,towhatextentwasthechoiceofaspringlocationforanearlyvillagepartofanactivedispositionor that sharedmuch of the foraging attitude (e.g. theBa‘jacase,Gebel2004b)?Or,whataretheparametersbywhichsimplewatertappingfromwadigravelscouldbeunderstoodasNeolithic„waterwork“?

Water and Productive Milieus

Water, like mineral resources, forests, grazing landetc.,wasavailableinthesites’environmentsandwas

usedbytheproductivemilieusofthenewNeolithiclifemodes.Oftenconstructionworkhadtobeinvestedtoharvest,manageandprocesswaterinthesepermanentacquisition, use and discharge frameworks: ThisnotionofNeolithicwater,stillneglectingthechangedcognitivedispositionofmantowaterandthevitalroleitplayedtosustainsedentaryterritoriality,onlystartedtochangeafter2000whendomesticwaterfindingsforcedquestionsaboutthedomesticationofwater(Peltenburget al. 2000, 2001a-b; Gebel 2004b; Garfinkel et al.2006;Gillmoreetal.2007a-b;Fujii2006,2007,2010-this issue). Since the 1190’s Neolithic research hadbecome more open to the idea that “domestication”isnotonlyasignalofbiologicalmutation,butalsoofculturalmutation,of-partlyfundamental-behavioralchanges in symbolism, technological strategies,resourceandspacemanagement,etc.SuchsightshadopenedwaystonewapproachesandunderstandingofNeolithicabioticresources,includingwater.

More than any other basic element or substance,waterand theability tomanage itsproductivitywerecrucial for the establishment and preservation ofpermanentproductive lifemodes.Beyond“foraging”water, settled life had to make water subject topermanent preventive care, as in cases of territorial,seasonal, hygienic, climatic impacts, among others.As themajoragent securing the successofNeolithicproductionandstoragemodesintheemergingculturallandscapes of the Near East (e.g. Watkins 2009),domestic water studies deserve to become integralparts of Neolithic research projects without whichevaluationsofNeolithicsocioeconomicstrategiesfailtobecomprehensiveandconclusive.

I propose to consider all human behavior andmeasures to secure water and water access anddischarge beyond its immediate consumption asNeolithic water subsistence; this definition includesthefeaturesofpermanent“waterterritoriality“aswellasmeasuresofwaterstorageandsafeguardingagainstwater. In otherwords,Neolithicwater subsistence ischaracterized by an active behavior to secure andoptimizethebioticandabioticconditionsbywhichfoodandotherwater-dependentproductsbecomeavailable.Itmeansthatproductivemilieusweremaintainedandruledbyartificialwaterconditions,andartificialwaterconditions determine productivemilieus.Developingwater techniques found their immediate reaction andexpression in the communities‘ social, technical,environmentalandsymbolicevolution.Waterstorageof its various kinds and water-based land use arethe key socio-economic sectors in which new watertechniques influenced, triggered and protected newmodes and structures of sedentary life. The specificregionalorlocalblendofwaterconditionsandrelated

The Commodification of WaterHans Georg K. Gebel FreeUniversityofBerlin [email protected]


Neo-Lithics2/105


technologicalopportunitiescreatedthespecialregionalandlocalmodesofwatermanagement.Itisespeciallythe storage aspect - from the possible harvesting ofwaterinthesedimentscaughtbywadibarrierstotheintroduction of impermeable containers - thatmakeswaterasubjectofdomestication,orcommodification(Gebel 2010a), if not to speakof the „Neolithizationofwater“.

WaterwasabasiccommodityofNeolithiclife.Itwaspartoftheearlyvillagereciprocitythatwasgeneratedand supported by the commodification processes (cf.below) of its productivemilieus, and played its vitalrole in many interacting contexts (landscape types,settlementpatterns,resources,goodsandlabor,internalsettlement/house organization, social identities,technological and ideological innovation); the needfor,anduseof,corporateandpacifyingbehaviorandstrategies to use water must have characterized theemergingNeolithicwater frameworks.TheNeolithicproductivemilieusarealsoknown for their tendencyfor prolific momenta and accelerated developments,including the implosion of such processes (e.g.the Mega-Site Phenomenon, Gebel 2004a, 2007).Progressive population dynamics and surplusproduction appear to be related to new strategies ofwatermanagement(e.g.,thedevelopmentofhydraulicandpastoralsocietiesinthe7thmillenniumBC):WateranditsmanagementinNeolithictimesappearstohave

beenamotorofinnovation,andwaterdeficitsappearto have set free the strongest innovative energy.Wehave to expect that not only did water consumptionincreaseduetotheincreasingpopulationsizes,butalsothattheindividualwaterconsumptionincreasedbythevariousnewandprolificproductionspheres,probablyintroducing “modern” problems like the depletion ofwater resources and their quality or the reduction ofbiodiversity.

Basic work has been carried out on protohistoricandhistoricproductivewatermilieus(e.g.,Wilkinson2003, Brunner n.d., and others), and studies such asthatbyArausetal.(1999)remainscarceinNeolithicresearch. Rather, prehistorians “meet” findings ofNeolithicwaterworkandsofarinterpretethemintheirconventional frameworks. However, and as a start,several models developed for later periods could betransferred with some modification to the Neolithic(suchasthe“watercube”ofUeliBrunner,Fig.1).

Amongothers,thekeyquestionsofT.J.Wilkinson(2010- this issue) are vital for research success inNeolithic water management. Especially obstaclesand limits have to be taken into account, such asthe preservation of Neolithic water installations inthe landscape (their ephemeral or non-permanentcharacter, the re-useof such structures in succeedingperiods, etc.). TheMa‘an evidence (Fujii 2010- thisissue), for instance,hasprobably survivedbecause it

cametoexistinamarginallocationthat was not later re-useable as anirrigable wadi system. Apart fromstandard methods (sedimentology/granometry, 14C/TL/OSL dating,ICP-MS,palaeoethnobotany/palaeo-palynology, traditional survey andexcavation) much pioneer researchwouldbeneededtoevaluatechancesfor data from indirect evidence ofwateruse.

Water and Commodification

This contribution to the specialtopic issue of Neo-Lithics on TheDomestication of Water (Neo-Lithics 2/10) aims to adumbratea new interpretative frameworkfor Neolithic water, leadingbeyond the limits of its segregatedunderstanding as an individualingredient of Neolithization (or asan isolated “cultural domesticate”),offering rather its holistic contextsby understanding water as partof the Neolithic commodificationprocesses(cf.Table1).2,3

The domestication of watermight be understood as any sortof a constant human manipulation

groundwater

perennial surface water

episodicalsurface water

drip

sprinklerfurrowsflooding

well / pump

qanat

lo

w walls

outle

t / w

eir

deflector d

am

massi

ve dam

w a t e r c o l l e c t i o n

wa t e r d i s t r i b u t i o n

wa

ter

so

ur c

e

Fig. 1 The “water cube” of Ueli Brunner, developed for the antiquity (Brunner n.d., reproduced with the kind permission of the author).


Neo-Lithics2/106


Environmental, Socio- Economic, and Cognitive

Subsystems of Water Commodification

Water Sources/ Aquatic Habitats

Acquisition Level

(A) Procurement and Control Management

Consumption Level:

(B) Production and Refinement

Consumption Level:

(C) Processing / Use

Local Environmental Subsystem:

(1) Local Sources and Conditions

specific local environmental conditions of water availability (topography, precipitation/ melt water/ climate, sub-surface drainage, water storage capacity of soils/ woodlands/ etc., vegetation cover, etc.) permanent, intermittend, seasonal and/ or ephemeral water sources/ aquatic habitats: surface water: seepages, pools, springs, lakes, rivers, marshes/ swamps, brackish waters/ sebkhas,seaaquifers/ groundwater rain-fed drainage systems (potentially) arable rain-fed/ irrigable land, grazing land, drainage systems stability/ instability of water sources and related habitats water-salt balance parameters

removing water from open and “opened” (e.g. tapping aquifers, alluvial fans etc.) sources for consumption, craft work, gardening etc. ?manipulating groundwater (streams?) run-off/ flood water management relocating water from source for watering/ irrigation local exploitation of fresh- and seawater habitats: (seasonal) fishing, shell-fishing, amphibians, fowling, hunting, shell collection for ornament industry/ trade local share of (potentially) arable rain-fed/ irrigable land, grazing land, drainage systems etc. in relation to non-productive habitats

establishing hydraulic landscapes/ landscapes with water installations: building and maintaining irrigations systemsgardening and farming, animal husbandrysedimentation/ salinization/ water logging impact management

direct consumption of water at natural source (humans, animals)

Regional Environmental Subsystem:

(2) Regional Sources and Conditions

specific regional environmental conditions of water availability (topography, precipitation/ melt water/ climate, water storage capacity of soils/ woodlands/ etc., vegetation cover, etc.) permanent, intermittend, seasonal and/ or ephemeral water sources/ aquatic habitats: surface water: lakes, rivers, marshes/swamps, brackish waters/ sebkhas, sea aquifers/ groundwater (potentially) arable rain-fed/ irrigable land, grazing land, drainage systems stability/ instability of water sources and related habitats

removing water from source for consumption, for craft work etc. run-off/ flood water management relocating water from source for watering/ irrigation regional exploitation of fresh- and seawater habitats: (seasonal) fishing, shell-fishing, amphibians, fowling, hunting, shell collection for ornament industry

establishing hydraulic landscapes/ landscapes with water installations: building and maintaining irrigation systems

direct consumption of water at natural source (humans, animals)

Exchange/ Network Subsystem:

(3) Long-Distance Sources

long-distance influence/ impacts on water availability (precipitation/ melt water/ climate, topographies, vegetation zones, etc.) permanent, intermittend, seasonal and/ or ephemeral water sources/ aquatic habitats: surface water: rivers, sea aquifers/ groundwater streams (potentially) arable rain-fed/ irrigable land, grazing land, drainage systems stability/ instability of water sources and related habitats

long-distance exploitation of fresh- and seawater habitats: (seasonal) fishing, shell-fishing, amphibians, fowling, hunting, shell collection for ornament industry

sea-based network transport/ migration/ trade, seafaring river-based network of transport/ migration/ trade

Technological Subsystem:

(4) Household Production

clean/ potable water procurement and hygiene measures? tapping aquifers/ groundwater by digging wells rainwater harvesting

intra-mural structural measures to protect houses from rain, moisture and surface water/ for habitational comfortwater-based health/ sanitation management building and maintaining horticultural, field and irrigation systems, animal husbandry production of organic and mineral containers for water transport and storage water-using household activities (food processing, tanning, tool production, etc.) house supplies of water field and gardening techniques (e.g. soil moisture enhancement, land use intensification by watering etc.)

water-based health/ sanitation management/ potable water treatment wastewater management fire fighting water

Table 1 Preliminary attempt by author to structure potential features, parameters and questions of the early water commodification regimes in the Near East by subsystems and context/ use levels. (for this system’s approach cf. Hermansen and Gebel 2004)


Neo-Lithics2/107



(5) Specialized Work

?impact management (water logging, salinization, sedimentation etc.) tapping aquifers/ groundwater by digging wells water collecting/ hauling techniques and equipment

?construction/ maintainance supervision in water works ?well builders and maintaining ?boat builders “industrial” water in crafts (e.g. pottery, tanning, ground stone industries) irrigation in rain-fed agriculture

?construction/ maintainance supervision in water works?impact management (water logging, salinization etc.) ?well builders and maintaining ?water guarding sea-/ river-based trade


(6) Corporate/ Community Enterprises

corporate/ communual water supplies, tapping of aquifers/ groundwater by digging wells intra-site and intra-mural structural measures to protect houses, corporate space, fields, springs etc. from rain and surface water ?impact management (water logging, salinization etc.) measures against cataclysmic water events (floods, land slides etc.): deflection walls, dikes and ditches (protecting landscape topography, fields, site fringes, houses)rainwater harvesting

built structures of corporate/ communual water (springs, wells, channels etc.) intra-site and intra-mural structural measures to protect domestic areas, corporate space, fields, springs etc. from rain, moisture and surface water storage of water by cistern-type of constructions or natural traps water-based health management relocating water to fields and gardens, maintenance: contour ditch irrigation/ contour check method, basin irrigation, submersion irrigation, ?free flooding, storage of moisture by soil retaining walls

?water-guarding water-based health/ sanitation management/ potable water treatment wastewater management fire fighting water sea-/river-based trade

Socio-Economic Subsystem:

(7) Social Means

territorial control of water sources economic organization and rights of water access and procurement at regional and distant water sources for mobile herdsman engaged also in hunting/ gathering/ fishering, or for foraging groups still in the area regional and distant water sources as places of social contact and exchange

social organization and status questions of labour in water working, ?water management hierarchies, conveyance regimes local/ regional coordination of water working corporate standards/ behaviour and (socio-political) organization of: clean/ potable water procurement and hygiene measures, water distribution/ irrigation/ deficit management, intra-site measures to protect houses and corporate space etc. from moisture, rain and surface water, measures against cataclysmic water events (floods, land slides etc.) water and gender

social organization and status questions of labour in water working, ?water management hierarchies, conveyance regimes local/ regional coordination of water workingcorporate standards/ behaviour and (socio-political) organization of: clean/ potable water procurement and hygiene measures, water distribution/ irrigation/ deficit management, intra-site measures to protect houses and corporate space etc. from moisture, rain and surface water, measures against cataclysmic water events (floods, land slides etc.) water and gender

conveyance regulations sea-/ river-based exchange and migration

Socio-Economic Subsystem:

(8) Economic Means

economic importance of water access and procurement at regional and long-distance water sources for mobile herdsman engaged also in hunting/ gathering/ fishering, or for foraging groups still in the area

economic organization of labour in water working local/ regional coordination of water working economic organization of water access and procurement including irrigation and deficit management rainwater harvesting

surplus production through water, and its reliability ?water supplies function as stored nutrition and productive means storage of water in organic and mineral containers, cistern-type constructions, natural traps storage of moisture by soil retaining walls (fields)

surplus production through water, and its reliability sea-/ river-based exchange and trade

Cognitive Subsystem: (9) Innovation

regional and distant water sources as places of exchange

social, economic and cognitive innovation related to water procurement and management ?sustainable integrated water resources management sustainability of water management (efficiency, conservation/ recycling etc.)

social, economic and cognitive innovation related to water-related production and refinement

social, economic and cognitive innovation related to water processing and usesea-/ river-based exchange of innovation

Cognitive Subsystem: (10) Tradition/

Conception/ Ritual

water territoriality, ?territorial water identities ?perception of water/ water-modified landscaperegional and distant water sources as places of social contact and ideological exchange

the local water commodication (regime) and its ideology in general ?planning in water consumption, land use cropping arrangement water territoriality, ?territorial water identities water-related conflicts and conflict management corporate/ communual and individual rights in water access and procurement culturally induced measures, values and elements of water procurement and control for ritual, hygiene, of property etc. water and gender

the local water commodication (regime) and its ideology in general ?water supplies understood as stored nutrition/ liquid food and base of wealth culturally induced measures, values and elements of water procurement and control for ritual, hygiene, of property etc. “holy water” water and gender

the local water commodication (regime) and its ideology in generalsea-/ river-based exchange of ideas, values, symbols, innovation etc. culturally induced measures, values and elements of water procurement and control for ritual, hygiene, of property etc. “holy water” water and gender


Neo-Lithics2/108


of water and water resources in productive systems;the commodification of water understands waterin the sameway, but in addition traces its value andvalue-producing importance and consequences in thecognitive,social,economic,andtechnologicalcontextsofaNeolithicsociety:Neolithicpeoplegrantedvaluestowater(asanobjectofcommodification),andwatergavevalues topeopleand theirsocial relations.Hereit is advocated that the emerging and acceleratinghuman control of biotic, abiotic, and non-materialresourcesundersedentaryconditionsduring theNearEast’s11thto6thmillenniaBCshouldbeseenaspartsof an overall Neolithic commodification process;Neolithic manipulation and control of resources hascomprehensively affected all material and mentalenvironments of emerging domestic life, includingsteeringitstechnologicalprogress,socialdevelopments,and ideological spheres. Potentially, most resourceswere subject to processes of commodification, andNeolithicwaterwasnoexception.

Whenever direct consumption of resources –including water – becomes dependent upon stocks(foragingtofoodproducing),itbecomesnecessarytoprotectthesesuppliesandtostructuretheirallocation;water was the essential element to sustain these.At the beginning these supplies were probably pre-dominantly nutritional, and included the developingidea that the food-producing landaround thegroup’ssettlement including its water is supply in the shapeof property. But the organization of supplies, andthe activities necessitated by the need to accumulatesupplies,forcedpeopletocommodifyorgivevaluetothings– includingwater–and then further to securethese values by supporting them with ideologies.However, we do not wish to make the mistake ofrestricting incipient commodification to artificial ornatural supplies. Commodification, or the attributionofvalue to things,may,butneednot, originate fromsustainingsupplysystems.

What were the Neolithic milieus in which waterbecame a material and non-material commodity?Progressive population dynamics through philopatry,the wealth of time and goods beyond subsistenceneeds, and competition through diversificationgave order to life and generated social identity.Commodification promoted security on all levels, asde-andex-commodificationcoulddo:Theinternalandexternalsecurityof the individual,his/hergroup,andhis/herkoinon(sensuJacquesCauvin)isbalancedbycommodificationregimes.Thevaluescommodificationprovides–includingthoseofcommodifiedwater–areessentialtomaintainsedentaryloyaltiesandstructures:productive types of commodification are directlyrelated to a sedentary ethos and territoriality, andwouldhardlywork innon-sedentary societies (Gebel2010a,n.d.).Thecommodificationofwateralsomeantdependence on and inflexibility through all sorts ofwater-based specialization in the early productivemilieus, triggering interrelated exclusive behaviourandacceleration/agglomerationprocesses.

As far as the definitions of commodities andcommodification are concerned I refer to (Gebel2010a) wherein the original ideas and definitionsofAppadurai (1986) and Kopytoff (1986) had beenmodifiedand„translated“totheNearEasternNeolithicconditions. According to these definitions, Neolithicwatercouldhave-inadditiontoitsbasicimportanceasdrinkingwater-thefollowingmajorcharacteristics(preliminary):

1) Itissubjecttoconsumptionandterritorial claim.

2) Itsavailablityassiststhesurvivalofsocial, economic,political,andideologicalsystems.

Itcanbeusedtoproduceprestige, commemoration,andvalues.

3) Itisendowedwithsocialpower,including symbolicpower(e.g.identitythroughjoint

waterownership).4) Itcausesandinitiatesservicesandideas helpingtoestablishbeliefsystems,innovations, socialstandards,etc.5) Itisdefinedbycertainsocialandideological settingsorarenaswhichpromptthecharacter, alteration,andevendisappearanceofits commoditystate.6) Ithelpstoproducematerialvaluesfordaily lifeandmaterialexchange/surplus.7) Itcreatesothercommoditiesorinitiates commodificationchains.Forexample, domestic(andritual?)watercansimultaneously beacommodityandcommoditizespaceand things.

Following the understanding of water as acommodity in sedentary Neolithic systems, Table 1representsapreliminaryexercisetostructureparametersandfeaturesofNeolithicwaterinsubsystemsanduse/contextlevels.

Domestic Water and Its Early Evidence

Aftertheveryearlyevidenceforwells(EarlyPPNB;Peltenburg et al. 2000, 2001a-b) in the littoralsedimentary rocks of southwest Cyprus becameknown, followed by reports on earliest PPNB basinirrigationusingdamsnearMa‘an(PPNB;Fujii2006,2007,2010-thisissue),thehydrologicalbackgroundofNeolithizationbecameanimperativetopicinNeolithicresearch.Fromtheevidencewehave itcannot reallybe stated when, how, and where water started to bea commodity (in the sense above); probably suchquestions are irrelevant. Control strategies in wateracquisitionandprocurementbymodifyinglandscapesthrough dams or locating settlements in certainfavourite hydrological settings to allowwell diggingevidently appear with the beginning of sedentarylife’s productivemilieus.The evidence assembled inthis issue ofNeo-Lithics suggests that after the long


Neo-Lithics2/109


history of directwater consumption at sources, earlyNear Eastern water commodification went throughthe following steps4, characterized by their mostprogressive feature. I am aware that this simplistictrajectory ismisleading for the actual and innovativeregional trajectories which led water technologies tomigratetoregionswithsimilarconditions,butforthesakeofclearityIdaretosimplifythepotentialoveralldevelopment:

1) Removingwaterfromnaturalsourcesfor consumption,andearlylong-distanceuseof riversortheseatospreadproductivemilieus.2) Removingwaterfrommanipulatedor constructedsourcesforconsumption,while establishingpermanentlifenearwatersources.3) Territorializingwaterbypermanentnetworks and/ortransportmeans.4) Relocatingwaterbynetworks.

Withrespecttosedentismandwater,itisnecessaryto mention that a stable and permanent occupationof the Arabian Peninsula only became possible bythe latest act inNearEasternwater commodificationduring the formation of the Early BronzeAge oasisagroeconomy in the 4th millennium BC. While thewestern Near Eastern sedentism trajectory was fullyestablishedonlybythevariousirrigationtechniquesinitsriverineandalluviallandsofthe6thmillennium,thearidlandsofArabiaapparently“needed”anadaptationfrom thepastoralwell culturesof the5thmillennium(representingperiodsofmoremoisture)intotheoasischannel/shadowhorticultureoragroecosystemofthe4thmillennium,followingtheonsetofdrierandcoolerclimate(GebelandMahasnehn.d.).Thisinawayalsoemphasizes that the Near Eastern establishment ofsedentismwas amatter of environmental technologyandadaptationratherthanarestrictedNeolithicfeature.Wells from present-day arid Chalcolithic landscapesare reported from the ‘Uvda Valley (Avner 2002),Rajajilnearal-Jawf/Skaka(Zarins1979),andQulbanBeniMurra(GebelandMahasnehn.d.).

Whileforagers’campsitesapparentlywererelatedto springs andwater courses, their locations seem tohave respected the wild games’ access to water andother factors related to water (such as insects). Thisadaptiveattitudetowaterlocationshadtobegivenupwheneversortsofpermanentlifewasestablishednearwater sources. The hitherto oldest primary evidenceof water commodification, surprisingly, does notcome from theNear Easternmainland, but from theEPPNB of Cyprus („Cypro-PPNB“). In Kissonerga-Mylouthkia(ca.8500andca.7000cal.BC;Peltenburgetal.2001,pers.comm.)inlittoralsouthwestCyprus,several water wells with foot holes were found duginto the local havara (a kind of stiff marl) bedrockto tap underground watercourses. Their depths varybetween 6 and 12meters.Eachwell has a chamber-likeextensionatthebottomofthecylindricalshaft,cutintotheimpermeablelimestonebelowthewatercourse.

When abandoned, the wells were deliberately filledwithculturaldebrisandorganicmatter,helpingtodatethe(undisturbed)fills to the later8thmillenniumBC.ContemporarywellshavebeenfoundatotherCypriotsites,suchasParekklisha-Shillourokambos.Ithink,E.Peltenburg (Peltenburg et al. 2001a: 47) is perfectlyright in assuming that „well digging expanded withthegrowthofsedentism“rather thanbeingforcedbyaPPNincreaseofsettlementsizes.However,itshouldbe questioned if well-digging really is a „westernhydrological development“: the still missing earlyevidence in the non-littoral PPN core areas of theLevantcouldhavemuchtodowiththemountainousorterracesettingsofsites.Hereundergroundwatercoursesprobably were tapped mostly outside the immediatedomestic areas by water holes and wells. Not muchtechnologicalcognitionisneededto“arrive”atashaftwell fromthesimplewaterholeexperience:only thelaborinvestmentanditsorganization,bothinbuildingandmaintainingawell,mightrequireadifferentlevelofsocialnetworks.

The introduction and establishment of farmingduringthe9thand8thmillenniaBCnotonlycounteredclimatic variability as a potential threat to a stablesubsistenceeconomy,italsocreatednewdependenciesandbalanceregimeson/withwater.Sitesettingswerechosentomeetwithseveralenvironmentalneeds,notonly water, including the distance to fields, mineralresources (buildingmaterial),etc.Natural landscapesweretransformedintoculturallandscapesandbecameproductiveterritories,resultingindemographicgrowthand the spread and aggregation of settled people.Pressuremusthavereached“fringes”suchastheMa‘anarea that certainlywitnessedamoister climate in thePPNB. The setting and palaeohydrological situationoftheLatePre-PotteryNeolithicBsiteofBa‘janorthof Wadi Musa provided strong secondary evidenceforwaterharvestingbydams,or(atleast)ofavillagesustained exclusively on tapping aquifers (Gebel2004b).Itisarguedthatthegorge’sspecialtopographyforced the torrential run-off water to seep into itsaquifers,whichmusthavebeenoneofthereasonsforthechoiceofthisextremeintra-montanelocationinanenvironmentotherwisedevoidofperenniallyflowingsurfacewater.

Apart from the Early Neolithic well evidence ofCyprus,SharHagolan(Garfinkeletal.2006)andAtlit-YamofftheCarmelCoast(GaliliandNir1993;GaliliandSharvit1998)providedprominentandclearprimaryevidenceforPPNCwellshafts.Atlitisasubmergedsiteofsome4haat8-12mb.s.l.;itswellsmusthavebeensubjecttothepreviouscoastalplaingroundwatertablethatwasaffectedby sea-level changes.MorePotteryNeolithicwellsexistedintheneighboringsubmergedsitesofKfarSamir,KfarGilam,TelHreiz,Megadim,and Neve-Yam. Two wells have also been reportedfromHacilarVI(Mellaart1970).

The Pottery Neolithic witnessed the widespreadestablishment of impermeable vessels, advantageousfor any sort of hygienic storage including water


Neo-Lithics2/1010


Fig. 2 Reconstruction of LPPNB Ba‘ja’s palaeohydrological setting and potential water harvesting. (from Gebel 2004b)


Neo-Lithics2/1011


brought from some distance. Very little primaryevidence,togetherwithsecondaryevidencebasedonvariouspalaeoecologicalarguments,canbecitedforanotherepoch-makingwater technology in theNearEastern Pottery Neolithic and the immediate post-Neolithic. The valleys of the Tigris and Euphratesdrainage were the regions that introduced andestablishedthefirstirrigationtechniques.Theadventof irrigation remains poorly known, and certainly itregionallyprevented,delayed,ormadeimpossibleanefficientdrainagethatwouldavoidwaterloggingandsalinization. While irrigation generally is expectedforthe6thmillenniumBC,Arausetal.(1999)wouldnotexcludeprimitiveirrigationatPPNATellHalula.IexpectthatcontourditchirrigationislikelytohavebeeninpracticefromtheUmmDambaghiyah/Ubaid0periods(6900BConwards),ifnotearlierincertainlocations. It must have been a minor step in thehuman experience to understand that flooding slopeareashelpstocontrolfloodingoffieldsonthevalleyfloor.Submersionirrigationandarborealshadeinthistopographywouldhaveallowedothertypesofcropsto be raised. However, it could have developed injusttheoppositeway:thatslopeirrigationdevelopedfromirrigatedbasinsinthevalleyfloor.Thealluvial(hydraulic)Hassuna,Samarra-HalafandearlyUbaidexpansions (6400-5800BC)most likelywere basedondevelopmentsinsubmersionirrigationusingsmallbasinsasfields;attheSamarransiteofChogaMamia large irrigation canal was found. Permanent farmlife entered the steppe fringes of theMesopotamianrivers and faced local salinization problems due toabsent or restricted drainage layers. In the lowlandoftheDehLuran,westernIran,substantialevidencefor agriculture and population growth is attested asthe Pottery Neolithic approached, simultaneouslywitnessing the introduction of irrigation agriculture(Hole1977,NeeleyandWright1994).AtTellPardis(in theTehranPlain,ca.5000BC)asmallchannel-like feature was exposed in a section of a brickquarry,runningatrightanglestoseveralothernaturalchannelsinthesequence,suggestingthemanagementofwaterresources(Coninghametal.2006;Fazelietal. 2007;Gillmore et al. 2007a-b).The Jeitun Sitesat the edge of the Karakum Desert, Turkmenistan,possibly also witnessed early irrigation, benefitingfrom a high water table, swamps, and seasonallyfloodedsurfaces (Harrisetal.1993;Harris,CharlesandGosden1996;Kohl1981).

As noted above, the Pottery Neolithic withits hydraulic innovations must be seen as theconfirmation of the Neolithic trajectory for thealluviallandsoftheNearEast,whilethedevelopmentofpastoralismandtranshumanceratifiedthesuccessof theNeolithic trajectory in itsmountainous zonesandsemi-aridfringes.IntheFertileCrescent’spost-Neolithicperiods,thedevelopmentofthelaterliteratecivilizations, the early state societies, appears to befueled in most respects by their sociohydrologcialcoordination,progress,andregression.

Acknowledgements:IthankSumioFujii,UeliBrunner,Jürgen Weiner, Henning Fahlbusch, and membersofResearchCluster 2 of theGermanArchaeologicalInstitute, Berlin, for inspiring and stimulatingdiscussions,helpingmetounderstandNeolithicwater.

Endnotes

1Fortheterm“Neolithicethos”,cf.Gebel2010a.

2The author’s long research on theNearEasternNeolithic hasresultedintherealizationthattheformationofNeolithiclifeandsocial identities was governed by interfering commodificationregimesthatwereconditionedbythespecificblendofproductivemilieusandtheirspecificcomplexitiesthatthespecificconditionsinthediversifiedNearEasternregionsallowed(Gebel2010a).

3ForGermanspeakingcolleaguesIshouldexplainthatthetermKommodifizierung is used here in its special Neolithic sense,meaning Wertschaffungsprozesse, Wertschöpfungsprozesse orInwertsetzungsprozesse at the advent of producing economies;Werte- und Wertbildungsprozesse would come closer to themeaningdiscussedinthiscontribution.

4Thesearepreliminary,astheevidencepresentedinthischapterisselective.

References

AppaduraiA.1986 Introduction:commoditiesandthepoliticsofvalue.In: A.Appadurai(ed.),TheSocialLifeofThings. CommoditiesinCulturalPerspective:3-63.Cambridge: CambridgeUniversityPress.

Araus L., Febrero A., Catala M., Molist M., Voltas J., andRomagosaI.1999 Cropwateravailabilityinearlyagriculture:evidence fromcarbonisotopediscriminationofseedsfroma tenthmillenniumBPsiteontheEuphrates.Global ChangeBiology5.2:201-212.

AvnerU.2002 StudiesintheMaterialandSpiritualCultureofthe NegevandSinaiPopulationsDuringthe6th–3rd MillenniaB.C.Jerusalem:HebrewUniversity,unpub. PhDthesis.

BrunnerU.n.d. IrrigationsystemsinPre-IslamicArabia.In:M.Kropp, M.MaraqtenandH.Sader(eds.),Proceedingsofthe ConferenceonEconomicandSocialHistoryofPre- IslamicArabia.Beirut,Dec.12.–15th,2005.Beiruter TexteundStudien114.(forthcoming)


Neo-Lithics2/1012


Coningham R.A.E., Fazeli H., Young R.L., Gillmore G.K.,KarimianH.,MaghsoudiM.,DonahueR.E.,andBattc.M.2006 Socio-economictransformations:Settlementsurveyin theTehranPlainandexcavationsatTepePardis.Iran 44:33-62.

Fazeli H., Coningham R.A.E., Young R.L., Gillmore G.K.,MaghsoudiM.,andRazaH.2007 Socio-economictransformationsintheTehranPlain: Finalseasonofsettlementsurveyandexcavationsat TepePardis.Iran45:267-286.

FujiiS.2006 APPNBagro-pastoraloutpostatWadiAbuTulayha, al-JafrBasin.Neo-Lithics2/06:4-14.2007 WadiAbuTulayhaandWadiRuweishidas-Sharqi: AninvestigationofPPNBBarrageSystemsintheJafr Basin.Neo-Lithics2/07:6-16.2010 Domesticationofrunoffwater.Currentevidenceand newperspectivesfromtheJafrPastoralNeolithic.Neo- Lithics2/10.

GaliliE.andNirY.1993 ThesubmergedPre-PotteryNeolithicwaterwellof Atlit-Yam,northernIsrael,anditspalaeoenvironmental implications.TheHolocene3.3:265-270.

GaliliE.andSharvitJ.1998 SubmergedNeolithicwaterwellsfromtheCarmel CoastofIsrael.In:H.Koschik/Landschaftsverband Rheinland,RheinischesAmtfürBodendenkmalpflege (ed.),BrunnenderJunsteinzeit.Internationales SymposiuminErkelenz(27.-29.10.1997).Materialien zurDenkmlapflegeimRheinland11:31-44.Köln: Rheinland-Verlag.

GarfinkelY.,VeredA.andBar-YosefO.2006 Thedomesticationofwater:theNeolithicwellatSha‘ar Hagolan,JordanValley,Israel.Antiquity80:686-696.

GebelH.G.K.2004a Centraltowhat?Remarksonthesettlementpatternsof theLPPNBmega-sitesinJordan.In:H.D.Bienert, H.G.K.GebelandR.Neef(eds.),CentralSettlements inNeolithicJordan.StudiesinEarlyNearEastern Production,Subsistence,andEnvironment5:1-20. Berlin:exoriente.2004b Thedomesticationofwater:evidencefromEarly NeolithicBa‘ja?In:H.D.BienertandJ.Häser(eds.), MenofDikesandCanals:TheArchaeologyofWaterin theMiddleEast.Orient-Archäologie10:25-36. Rahden:Leidorf.2007 ElsurgimientodesociedadessedentariasenelLevante meridionaldelCercanoOriente.In:PeterKaulicke andTomD.Dillehay(eds.),Procesosyexpresiones depoder,identidadyordentempranosenSudamérica (EarlyProcessesandExpressionsofPower,Identity andOrderinSouthAmerica).BoletíndeArqueología PUCP11.2:289-324.Lima:FondoEditorialdela PontificiaUniversidadCatólicadelPerú.

2010a CommodificationandtheformationofEarlyNeolithic socialidentity.TheissuesseenfromtheSouthern JordanianHighlands.InM.Benz(ed.),ThePrinciple ofSharing.SegregationandConstructionofSocial IdentitiesattheTransitionfromForagingtoFarming. StudiesinEarlyNearEasternProduction,Subsistence, andEnvironment14:31-80.Berlin:exoriente.2010b ConflictandconflictmitigationinEarlyNearEastern sedentism.reflections.Neo-Lithics1/10:32-35.n.d. TerritorialityinearlyNearEasternsedentism. ProceedingsoftheInternationalWorkshopon Sedentism:WorldwideResearchPerspectivesforthe ShiftofHumanSocietiesfromMobiletoSettledWays ofLife(23rd-24thOctober,2008).Clusterforschungdes DeutschenArchäologischenInstituts.Cluster1. (forthcoming)

GebelH.G.K.andMahasnehH.M.n.d. QulbanBeniMurra–UnknownMid-Holocene sepulchralgreendesertlandscapes,pastoralwell cultures,andtheoriginsofArabia’soasiseconomies. In:R.Eichmann,F.KlimschaandH.Fahlbusch(eds.), InnovativeWassernutzung.Clusterforschungdes DeutschenArchäologischenInstituts.Cluster2: Innovationen–technisch,sozial.(forthcoming)

GillmoreG.K.,ConinghamR.A.E.,YoungR.,FazeliH.,andDonahueR.2007a IrrigationontheTehranPlain,Iran:TepePardis-the siteofapossibleNeolithicirrigationfeature? DevelopingInternationalGeoarchaeology2007. UniversityofCambridge,19th-21stApril2007.

GillmoreG.K.,ConinghamR.A.E.,YoungR.,FazeliH.,andMaghsoudiM.2007b TheantiquityofartificialwatermanagementinIran:a LateNeolithicchannelfromtheTehranPlain,Iran. 9thWorkshopoftheBritishInstituteofPersianStudies. DurhamUniversity,14-15thDecember2007.

HarrisD.R.,MassonV.M.,BerezkinY.E.,CharlesM.P.,GosdenC.,HillmanG.C.,KasparoA.K.,KorobkovaG.F.,KurbansakhatovK.,LeggeA.J.,andLimbreyS.1993 InvestigatingearlyagricultureinCentralAsia:New researchatJeitun,Turkmenistan.Antiquity67:324-38.

HarrisD.R.,CharlesM.P.andGosdenc.1996 Jeitun:RecentexcavationsatanEarlyNeolithicsitein SouthernTurkmenistan.ProceedingsofthePrehistoric Society62:423-42.

HermansenB.DahlandGebelH.G.K.2004 TowardsaframeworkforstudyingtheBastaindustries. In:H.J.Nissen,M.MuheisenandH.G.K.Gebel(eds.), BastaI.TheHumanEcology:175-186.Berlin:ex oriente.


Neo-Lithics2/1013


HoleF.1977 StudiesintheArchaeologicalHistoryoftheDehLuran Plain:TheExcavationofChaghaSefid.Memoirsofthe MuseumofAnthropology9.AnnArbor.

KohlP.L.(ed.)1981 TheBronzeAgeCivilizationofCentralAsia:Recent SovietDiscoveries.NewYork.

KopytoffA.1986 Theculturalbiographyofthings:commodification asaprocess.In:A.Appadurai(ed.),TheSocialLifeof Things.CommoditiesinCulturalPerspective:64-94. Cambridge,CambridgeUniversityPress.

MellaartJ.1970 ExcavationsatHaçılar.Edinburgh:Aldine.

NeeleyJ.A.andWrightH.T.1994 EarlySettlementandIrrigationontheDehLuranPlain: VillageandEarlyStateSocietiesinSouthwesternIran. TechnicalreportoftheMuseumofAnthropology26. AnnArbor.

PeltenburgE.,ColledgeS.,CroftP.,JacksonA.,McCartneyC.,andMurrayM.A.2000 Agro-pastoralistcolonizationofCyprusinthe10th millenniumBP:Initialassessment.Antiquity74:844- 53.

PeltenburgE.,ColledgeS.,CroftP.,JacksonA.,McCartneyC.,andMurrayM.A.2001a NeolithicdispersalsfromtheLevantineCorridor:a Mediterraneanperspective.Levant33:35-64.

PeltenburgE.,CroftP.,JacksonA.,McCartneyc.,andMurrayM.A.2001b Well-establishedcolonists.MylouthkiaIandtheCypro- Pre-PotteryNeolithicB.In:S.Swiny(ed.),TheEarliest PrehistoryofCyprus.FromColonizationto Exploitation:61-93.Boston,AmericanSchoolsof PrehistoricResearch.

WatkinsT.2009 Naturalenvironmentversusculturalenvironment:The implicationsofcreatingabuiltenvironment.In:J. Córdoba,M.Molist,c.Pérez,I.Rubio,andS.Martínez (eds.),5thInternationalCongressontheArchaeologyof theAncientNearEast:428-37.Madrid:Universidad AutónomadeMadrid.

WilkinsonT.J.2003 ArchaeologicalLandscapesintheNearEast.Tucson, UniversityofArizonaPress.2010 TheDomesticationofWater:EarlyHydraulicSystems. Neo-Lithics2/10.

ZarinsJ.1979 Rajajil.AuniqueArabiansitefromthefourth millenniumB.C.Atlal3:73-77.

DomesticationofRunoffSurfaceWater

Neo-Lithics2/1014


Introduction

Asidefromthatincludedintheatmosphereandnaturallifeforms,availablewateroccurs,ingeneral,inthefol-lowingthreemodes:staticsurfacewaterofspringsandlakes,runoffsurfacewaterofriversand‘awdiya(pluralofwadi),andundergroundwatercontainedinaquifers.Thesemodes not only determine the accessibility toandthemanageabilityofwater,buttheyalsodefineadirectionforitsdomestication.Furthermore,theyalsohaveanobviouseffectonthearchaeologicalvisibility/traceabilityofthedomesticationprocessitself1.

Static surface water, for example, is easy to ap-proach and control, thereby requiring little effort fordailyuse.This, in turn,makes itsdomesticationpro-cesslessvisible/traceablefromanarchaeologicalpointofview.Asamatteroffact,nospecificevidencefortheprocesshasbeenattestedto,notwithstandingthatnu-merousNeolithicsitesareprefixedorsuffixedby‘Ain

(Arabic), En (Hebrew), Pınar (Turkish), or Çeshme(Persian). Underground water, on the other hand, isusuallydifficult toaccessandhandle, thusnecessita-tingmucheffortforfull-scaleexploitation.Itisforthisreasonthatthedomesticationprocessofthismodeofwater is relatively easy todistinguish, as representedby deep wells found at two PPNB sites in Cyprus(Peltenburgetal.2000,2001),thePPNCsiteofAtlitYam(GaliliandNir1993;Galilietal.1993;GaliliandSharvit1998),andtheearlyPNsiteofSha’arHagolan(Garfinkeletal.2006).Runoffsurfacewater is inter-mediate innature,being relativelyeasy toaccessyetoftenhardtomanipulate.Hence,itinvolvesaconside-rableamountoflaborinvestmentforconstantuse.Thisexplainsthereasonwhyitsdomesticationprocesshasacertainlevelofarchaeologicalvisibility/traceability,asillustratedbytheretainingwallsatPNDhra’(Kuijtetal.2007)andthevariousfeaturesaroundPPNBBa’ja(Gebel2004),forexample.

Domestication of Runoff Surface Water:Current Evidence and New Perspectives from the Jafr Pastoral Neolithic

Sumio Fujii KanazawaUniversity [email protected]

Fig. 1 Neolithic water catchment facilities in the Jafr Basin.

Wad

i Ara

ba

Des

ert H

ighw

ay

Wadi Fidan

Ma'an

al-Jafr

al-Hashimiyya

al-Husayniyya

Jurf ad Darwish

al-Hasa

At-Ta�la

al-Qadisiyya

Ash-Shawbak

Wadi Musa'Udruh

Fjaje

al-Muhammadiyya

Sa�

▲Beidha

▲

▲

Wadi Burma

Basta

Baja

Jabal Juhayra

▲

▲

▲

▲

al-Basit

Ghwair I

ad Daman 1

Shaqarat Musai'id

▲

1,000 m

100

m40

0 m

700 m

0 m

1,000 m

1,000 m

1,000

m

1,000 m

Qa' al-Jafr

Khirbet Hammam

⊃

⊃Wadi Ruweishid ash-Sharqi

0 200km

Amman

Aqaba

0 20 km

Wadi Abu Tulayha

⊃

Wadi Badda

▲ PPNB settlement

⊃ Basin-irrigation damSimple wadi barrierPit-type cistern∪

∪

▲

▲

el-Hammeh

Wadi Quweir 17, 106⊃

⊃ ▲

▲ PPNB outpost

▲

▲

▲


Neo-Lithics2/1015


This paper focuses on the do-mestication of runoff surfacewater,makingnodirectreferencetothatofthe other twomodes ofwater.ThisisbecauseourevidencecomesfromtheJafrBasinwhereseasonalrunoffsurfacewaterhaslongbeenthesolesourceofsurvival.Cometothinkofit, it isstrangethat theevidencefortheNeolithicwatermanagementhasbeen reported exclusively from thecore area under the Mediterraneanclimatic regime and rarely found inits arid peripheries more sensitivetowaterprocurement.TheevidencefromtheJafrBasinwilladdbalancetothebasicinformationbetweenthetwo2.This brief paper aims to shednew light on the issue ofwater do-mestication from the viewpoint oftheJafrPastoralNeolithic.

The Jafr Basin and the Investigations

TheJafrBasinisalargeinlanddepressionoccupyingthesoutheasterncornerof theTransjordanianPlateau(Fig.1).Itischaracterizedbyanextensiveflint-strewndesert(orhamadainArabic)anddottedplayas(orqa’,plural qa’at) in terms of topography, and by an aridclimateandconsequentpoorvegetationwithrespecttobioclimatology.Thus,withtheexceptionofafewtradi-tionalsettlementssuchasMa’anandal-Jafr,ithaslongbeen occupied by pastoral nomads. It is no wonder,therefore,thatthebasinhasattractedlittleattentionofarchaeologists who are liable to focus on permanentsettlementsites.

Ourcontinuousinvestigationssince1997haveshednewlightonthearchaeologicalpotentialofthebasin.Todate,severaldozenprehistoricsiteshavebeen lo-catedandadozenofthesewereexcavatedeitherpartlyorextensively(FujiiandAbe2008).Neolithic runoffsurfacewater catchment facilities, ourmain concern,wereconfirmedattwoofthese3.Theywerestone-builtstructures of various sizes and profiles, falling intobarrage-likewadibarriersandacistern-likewaterholein terms of functional morphology. The former maybe further subdivided into large-scalebasin-irrigationbarrages and reservoir-type simple barriers. Our dis-cussiondealswith these twoor three formsofwatercatchmentfacilitiesknowntodateintheNeolithicJafrBasin.Abriefreviewofthepublishedevidencefortwobarragesystemscomesfirst,followedbythedescrip-tionofacistern-likefeaturenewlyfoundinthe2007summerfieldseason.

Evidence for the Jafr Barrage System

At present, a total of ten barrage-like features havebeenfoundintheJafrBasin:twoalongWadiQusayr(Fujii2005a),threealongWadiBurma(Fujii2004,butsee also 2005a), three alongWadiAbuTulayha (seebelow), and two along Wadi Ruweishid ash-Sharqi(alsoseebelow).Thefirstfiveareyettobedatedforcertainduetothedeficiencyofrelevantevidenceandarethereforeomittedfromthepresentdiscussion.Thelatterfive, on theother hand, are dated to thePPNBon the basis of a line of evidence referred to below.Theyarecombinedtoformthefollowingtwobarragesystems.

Wadi Abu Tulayha Barrage SystemThe site ofWadiAbuTulayha is aM/LPPNB agro-pastoraloutpost lying in thenorthwesternpartof thebasin.Itwasfirstfoundduringoursurveyinthewinterseasonof2001(Fujii2002).Excavationstartedinthespringfieldseasonof2005andisstillinprogress.Ourcontinuousinvestigationshaveshownthatitconsistedofthefollowingthreedistinctstructuralcomponents:aM/LPPNBelongatedoutpostoccupyingthenorthwes-tern corner of the site, a pair of EBA (EarlyBronzeAge)burialcairnsoverlying it, andabarragesystemconstructedalongasidewadiflowingeastwardacrossthesouthernedgeofthesite(Fig.2).Availableevidencesuggests that theoutpost servedasa seasonal stationformulti-faceted transhumantswhowere engaged inhuntingandagricultureaswellasherdingofsheepandgoats(Fujii2006a,2007d).

Barrage 1 is the largest of the three features thatconstitute the barrage system, occupying the loweredgeofanupstreamplainofthesidewadi(Fig.3).Itwastestedinthefirstseason(Fujii2006a,2006b)andthen extensively excavated, togetherwithBarrages 2

Fig. 2 Wadi Abu Tulayha: site plan.

Qa'

Qa'

● ●● ●

● ●

● ● ●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

Wadi Abu Tulayha(ca. 0.4 km)

A

B

C

D

E

F

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Area B

Wadi

(BM 1)

●

G

H

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

S

T

U

V

I

J

K Area E Area D

(BM 2)

Area C

Area A

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Area F

0 10 m

WadiÊAbuÊTulayha(JF-0155)

JBPP 2007Summer

●

0 cm

- 20 cm

- 40 cm

- 40 cm

- 60 cm

- 60 cm

- 80 cm

- 100 cm

- 120 cm

- 20 cm

- 40 cm

- 60 cm

- 60 cm

- 80 cm

E-I

E-IIE-III

W-I

101102

(BM 4)

W-II

W-III

E-0

1 2 3 45 6

78 9

11

12

13

14

1516

17

18

19

20

21

22

10

CE 1

CE 2


Neo-Lithics2/1016


Wadi

Wadi

Barrage 1Barrage 2

Barrage 3

track

Wadi

track

Wadi Abu Tulayha

- 40 cm

- 80 cm

- 80 cm

- 40 cm0 cm

- 120 cm

- 120 cm

- 160 cm

- 160 cm- 200 cm

- 200 cm

- 240 cm

- 240 cm

- 280 cm

- 280 cm- 320 cm

- 320 cm

- 400

cm

- 360 cm

- 360 cm

- 400 cm

- 440 cm

- 480 cm- 520 cm

- 560 cm

- 600

cm

0 50 m

Wadi Abu Tulayha(JF-0155)

JBPP 2006Spring

Qa'Qa'

● ●● ●

● ●

● ● ●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

PPNB Outpost

A

B

C

D

E

F

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Area B

(BM 1)

●

G

H

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

S

T

U

V

I

J

K Area E Area D

(BM 2)

Area C

Area A

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Area F

●

0 cm

- 20 cm

- 60 cm

- 60 cm

- 100 cm

- 60 cm

E-I

E-IIE-III

W-I

101102

(BM 4)W-II

W-III

E-0

1 23 4

56

78 9

11

12

13

14

15

1617

18

19

20

21

22

10

- 80

cm

- 40 cm

0 20 m

（Wadi）

c c'(N) (S)

⇧

b'b

Barrage 1(N) (S)

⇧

d d'(N) (S)

⇧

e e'Barrage 2(N) (S)

⇧

f f'Barrage 3(N) (S)

⇧

g'g(NNE) (SSW)

⇧

a a'(N) (S)

⇧

BM1±0 cm

BM1±0 cm

BM1±0 cm

d'

d

e'

ef

f'

g'

g

b c

c'b'

a

a'

Barrage 3

M

N

O

23

Islamic tomb

(limestone bedrock)

Wadi

Inscription 3(from a lower �ll layer)

(washout)

Bilaterally-notched stone weight

Barrage 1, Area A

0 2 m

Barrage 1 (above) and 3 (below)

Fig. 3 Wadi Abu Tulayha: Barrage system.


Neo-Lithics2/1017


and3describedbelow,inthe2006springfieldseason(Fujii 2007b, 2007c). The excavation showed that itwasaroughlyV-shapedmasonrystructureoneortwostone-rows(orca.0.2-1.0m)wide,preserveduptoaheightofthreetofourcourses(orca.0.3-0.5m),andca.120mintotallength.Itwasequippedwithasemi-circular,protrudedreinforcementwallca.3mwideattheconvergingpoint.

ThisbarragecanbedatedtothePPNBonthebasisofalineofevidenceincludingthestratigraphiccorre-lationwithitsneighboringoutpostandtheoccurrenceof a bilaterally notched and grooved stoneweight, adistinctivefind sharedwith theoutpost (Fujii 2007b:14, figs. 7, 9).The 2007 summer field season addedanother line of evidence. That is to say, a protrudedreinforcementwalluniquetoBarrage1,albeitinanop-positedirection,wasincorporatedintoUnit38inAreaE-IIIalso(Fig.4).Thisfindinghasmadethesynchro-nismbetweenthetwoevenclearer(Fujii2008a).ThereislittledoubtthatBarrage1datesbacktothePPNB.

Thefunctionofthisbarrageiseasytounderstand,sincealineofcollateralevidence-theuniquelocationacross thewadi, thedistinctiveV-shapedprofileope-ningtowardtheuppercourse,thewalllayoutfollowingcontourlines,andtheattachmentoftheprotrudedre-inforcementwalltotheconvergingpoint-clearlyindi-catesitsuseasawatercatchmentfacility(Fujii2007b:15). It isquestionable,however,whether itwasusedas a simple reservoir, since the imperfectwaterproofpropertyofthebarragewallcastsdoubtonthisuse.Weshouldalsonotethat:first,thebarrageoccupied,ofalllocations,theflatandpermeable(thusunfavorableforlong-termwater storage) terrain; second, itwasdesi-gnedsoastoproduceashallowextensivefloodedarea,againincompatiblewithprolongedwaterstorage;and,third,asreferredtobelow,otherfacilitiesspecializinginwaterstoragecoexistedalongthesamewadi.Consi-deredinthislight,itismorereasonabletosupposethatthe barragewas used for basin-irrigation agriculture,aformofcultivationaccomplishedbymeansofinter-

ruptingtherunoffsurfacewaterandfacilitatingwaterinfiltrationintotheground.Asamatteroffact,carbonizedcerealandpulseseedsaswellasagriculturalimplementssuchasquernsandsickleelementsoccurredinsubstantialquanti-tiesfromtheneighboringcoevaloutpost(Nasuetal.2008,n.d.).GiventhattherainfallintheNeolithic JafrBasinwasnot enough tomakedryfarmingpossible,itfollowsthatthecropswerecultivatedwithin thefloodedareaof thebarrage. Incidentally, the barrage is estimatedtohaveproduceda fewhectaresofelongatedcropfieldsalongthewindingcourseofthesidewadi, a sufficient areaunder cultivation for ashort stay of a small group of transhumants(Fujii2007c:fig.32).Itshouldbeadded,how-ever,thatthefieldsmighthavechangedintoamerepastureforlivestockinadryyear(Fujii2007b:16).

Barrage2and3,ontheotherhand,arelo-cated ca. 200-250m downstream ofBarrage 1 (Fig.3). In contrast to Barrage 1, both of these occupy aslightlydissectedstonyterrainwhereimpermeableli-mestonebedrocklayersareexposedeverywhere.Theyareconstructedonsuchaslightlyraisedlimestonebe-drocklayer,whichprovidedthemwithnotonlysolidfoundationsbutalsoanaturaldepressionfavorableforwaterstorage.ThisisespeciallythecaseforBarrage2,thecross-sectionofwhichclearlyindicatesthatitwasconstructedtomakeefficientuseofanaturalpondinfrontof it (Fujii2007c). In thissense, these twobar-ragesmaybedefinedasadditionalwallstoincreasethecapacityofthenaturalponds.TheyaremuchsmallerinscaleandsimplerinstructurethanBarrage1,butthevolumeoffallenstonessuggeststhattheywereorigi-nally somewhat larger than the preserved state (Fujii2007b,2007c).

The dating of these two barrages is difficult dueto the scarcity of pertinent evidence.Nevertheless, asemi-circularreinforcementwallattached,albeitinanoppositedirection, to their centralpart andaheader-bondtechniqueappliedtotheirforefrontaresuggestiveofatechnologicalsimilarityandpossiblesynchronismwithBarrage1.The total absenceof settlement sitesaround them(with theonlyexceptionof theoutpost)isalsoinfavorofthisassumption.Ontheotherhand,theirfunctioniseasilyunderstandable.Inlightoftheirlocationonaslightlydissected,stony,impermeableter-rain,thereislittledoubtthattheyservedassimplewadibarriersspecializinginreservingdrinkingwater.Theirsimpleryet sturdier structurealso supports thisview.These two reservoir-typewadibarriersprobablysup-plieddrinkingwaterforthetranshumantsattheoutpostand their livestock, although their small dimensionsand theco-existenceofacistern-like feature referredtobelowaresuggestiveoftheirsupplementarynature.Theyareestimatedtohavereserveduptoseveraltonsofwaterrespectively.

Fig. 4 Wadi Abu Tulayha: Unit 38 of Complex 00 (from SW).


Neo-Lithics2/1018


WadiRuweishid Barrage SystemThesiteofWadiRuweishidash-Sharqi(hereafterreferredtosimplyasWadiRuweishid)issituatedca. 7-8 kmWNWofWadiAbuTulayha.Twobarrages were found at this site (Fujii 2007b:fig.11).Theyareconstructedalongasmallsidewadi,atamoderate(ca.0.4km)distancefromthemainstreamtotheeast.ThusitappearsthatthetwobarragesystemsknowntodateintheJafrBasinwereconstructedfollowingthesametopo-graphicalstandard.Nevertheless,unlikethatofWadiAbuTulayha,thebarragesystemofWadiRuweishidconsistsonlyoftwobasin-irrigationbarrages,unaccompaniedbyreservoirtypewadibarriers,tosaynothingofaneighboringoutpost.

The twobarrages eachyielded a bilaterallynotched and grooved stone weight, which issuggestiveofasynchronismwithBarrage1atWadiAbuTulayha.ThisisparticularlythecaseofBarrage2,whichproducedthedistinctivefindinthesamecontextasWadiAbuTulayhaBarrage1,na-mely,attheright-handcorneroftheprotrudedreinforce-mentwall(Fujii2007b:fig.12).Thefunctionofthetwobarrages isalsoexplicit. Inviewof their locationonaflatpermeableterrainandimperfectwaterproofproperty,thereislittledoubtthattheywereusedforbasin-irrigated

agriculture(Fig.5).Giventhesynchronismandthereci-procal accessibility, this isolatedbarrage systemmightpossiblyhaveservedasanenclavefieldorpastureforasmallgroupofPPNBagro-transhumantswhomadearoundtripbetweenaparentsettlementtothewestandtheoutpostatWadiAbuTulayha.

Fig. 5 Wadi Ruweishid ash-Sharqi: Barrage 2.

102 101 1 2

M

N

O

Structure M

(JF-0155)Wadi Abu Tulayha

JBPP 2007Summer

Area W-III

0 2 m

a'

a

buttress 1

buttress 5

buttress 4

buttress 3

buttress 2

Eastern Room

Western Room

Central Room

a a'BM1±0 cm(S) (N)

brittle limestone layerssolid limestone layer

massive limestone layer

slity sand depositsbuttress 2

buttress 5Masonry retaining walls

pillar support

Fig. 6 Wadi Abu Tulayha: plan and elevation/section of Structure M.


Neo-Lithics2/1019


New Evidence for a Cistern-like Feature

The2007summerfieldseasonnewlyconfirmedalargecistern-likefeatureonthenorthbankofthesidewadi(Fujii2008a).Thisfindingshednewlightonanotheraspectof therunoffsur-face water exploitation strategy atWadiAbuTulayha.

Structure MThe cistern-like feature or Structure M wasfoundinAreaW-III,anoperationsectornewlyopenedinanefforttodefinethesouthwesternedgeoftheelongatedoutpost(Fig.2).Itwasse-paratedca.20mfromasimplestonealignmentfoundinAreaW-IIormorethan30mfromthemainbodyoftheoutpost,therebyabuttingonthefloodedareaofthesidewadi.

Thislargecompositestructure,ca.18mintotalwidth,consistedofthreeirregularlyshapedrooms thatwereconnected inaneast-westornortheast-southwest direction (Figs. 6 and 7).Only the central room was equipped with astone-linedsteppedentrance.Unexpectedwasitsfloordepthuptoca.2m,whichwasmorethantwiceasdeepasanyotherfeaturesintheoutpost.Inaddition,itwasburiedwithhighlyconsolidatedsiltysanddeposits.Forthesetworeasons, the excavation could notmake rapidprogressandthestructureisyettobefullyex-cavatedexceptfortheeasternroom.

Thelimitedexcavationhasshownthatthislarge semi-subterranean structure was const-ructedbymeansofdiggingthrough,inatop-to-bottom order, the following three layers:1)siltysanddepositsca.1mthick,2)ahardlimestone layerca. 0.10-0.15m thick, and3)agranular,relativelybrittlelimestonelayerca.0.6-0.7m thick (Figs. 8 and 9).No traces offloor pavement were confirmed but, instead,theuppersurfaceofamassivelimestonelayerunderlyingthethirdlayerwasusedasanaturalfloor.Atotaloffiverobustbuttresswallswereattached to the peripheral masonry retainingwalls,probablyinorder tocopewithwall in-clinationandcollapseduetostronglateralsoilpressure.

What interested us most was the uniqueconstruction method of the masonry retai-ning walls encompassing the eastern room.Strangely,theywerenotfoundedonthefloor;instead, theywerebasedonprotrudedfringesofthehardlimestonelayerdugthroughduringthe construction (Fig. 10). For this reason,theycoveredonlythesiltysanddepositsintheupperhalf, leavingtheunderlyinggranularli-mestonelayersexposed.Asreferredtobelow,thisuniqueconstructionmethodholdsakeytounderstanding the functionof this remarkablestructure.

Fig. 7 Wadi Abu Tulayha: general view of Structure M (from S).

Fig. 8 Wadi Abu Tulayha: the eastern room of Structure M (from SW).

Fig. 9 Wadi Abu Tulayha: the eastern room of Structure M (from W).


Neo-Lithics2/1020


Incidentally, traces of domestic life were quitescarce. No small features were found on the floorwith the only exceptions of a few freestandingboul-dersinthemiddleofthefloorandaquestionablebinatthesoutheasterncorner.Evencharcoalremainsandashy deposits, to say nothing of hearths,were rarelyincluded. In addition, the finds were limited in bothnumberandvariety,consisting largelyofflintand li-mestoneimplementsthatseemtohavebeensweptinfromthesurroundingterraininviewoftheirarchaeo-logicalcontexts.

Date and FunctionAlthoughnoradiometricdatesareavailableyet,boththe stratigraphic correlation and the incorporation ofapillarbase into thesouthernwall (Fig.10; seealsoFujii 2007c, 2008a) are suggestive of a synchronismbetweenStructureMandthemainbodyoftheoutpost.Inaddition,thefindsfromStructureMweredominatedbynaviformcoreandbladecomponents,chronologicalindicatorsofthePPNBflintassemblage.ThefrequencyofJerichotypepointsinthetoolkitallowsustotenta-tivelydatethestructuretotheMPPNB(Fig.11).

Thequestionisthespecificfunctionofthisuniquefeature.Suggestiveinthisregardis its isolationfromthemainbodyoftheoutpost.Itisalsoimportanttonotethat it differed in both size and technology from the

other structures.Both facts suggest that the structurewasused for a non-residential purpose.Furthermore,acommunalorritualuseseemsalsoquestionable,firstbecauseunlikeStructureM,theoutpostalwaysincor-poratesalargeelaboratecommunalbuilding(e.g.Unit03 in theComplexIandStructureBin theComplexIV)withineverycomplex(Fig.2,12),andsecondbe-causedistinctiveartifactscommontosuchkeyfeatures(e.g. bilaterally notched and grooved stone weights,diagonallytruncatedstonebars,redpigment,limestonepalettes, and small clay objects; Fujii 2006a, 2007d,2008a)rarelyoccurredfromStructureM.Consideredinthislight,itishighlydoubtfulthatStructureMwasusedforacommunalorritualoccasion,tosaynothingofaresidentialpurpose.

The second key to understanding the function ofStructureM is its floor depth of up to ca. 2m. It isnoticeablethatitdugthroughthehardlimestonelayerca. 1m below the contemporaneous ground surface,seeingthatthislayerusuallyservedasanaturalfloorfor the structures belonging to themain body of theoutpost4.Offurthersignificanceisthefactthatdespiteitsgreatfloordepth,itislocatedimmediatelybesideoralmostwithinthefloodedareaofthesidewadi.Thisisallthestrangerbecausetheotherstructures,albeitlessthan1minfloordepth,remainedatagreaterdistancefromthewadibedprobablyforhumiditycontrol.Thisinexplicablephenomenoncannotreasonablybeunder-stooduntilwesupposethat thestructurewasusedasawatercatchmentfacility.Theabsenceofhearthsandashydepositsonthefloorandlowerfilllayersalsoac-cordswiththisinterpretation.

Amoretellingkeyistheuniquemasonrytechniquethatbuiltupwallsfromthemiddleofthesidesurfaceoftheroom.Thisconstructiontechniqueisunsuitablefornormaldwellings in termsofsafety,amongothermatters.Thisisevenclearer,consideringthatthewallsoftheeasternroomstillretainseverallargeholesleftbyfallenstones5.Theadditionoffiverobustbuttressesalsoillustratesthattheroomwasoftenexposedtowallinclinationandcollapse.Itisquiteimpossiblethatsuchanextra-hazardousstructurewasputtoaresidentialorcommunal use. Instead, it seemsmore reasonable toassumethatthemasonrywallcoveredonlytheupperlayersbecauseoftheirdelicateandpermeabletexture,leaving the lower layers intact because of their solidand impermeable nature. The great floor depth mayalso be understood as an earnest effort to reach animpermeablefloorratherthanensurealargepondage.Presumably,thosewhowereinvolvedintheconstruc-tionofStructureMstoppedthediggingforamomentwhen they reached the hard limestone layer ca. 1mbelow the ground surface, and soon constructed themasonryretainingwallstoprotectthesiltysandlayers.Subsequently, they resumed the digging in search ofanimpermeablefloor,leavingthenewlyexposedsidesurfaceintactbecauseofitsfavorablenatureforwaterstorage.Thisassumption, ifaccepted,wouldfirstex-plain the reason why such a hazardous constructionmethodwasappliedtoStructureMonly.

Fig. 10 Wadi Abu Tulayha: the southern wall of Structure M (from N).


Neo-Lithics2/1021


An additional key is the fact that StructureM isburiedconsistentlywithcementedsiltysanddepositsfromthe topfilldownto thefloor layer.Thispicturehasmuch in commonwith the situationofAreaF, asmalloperationsectorinsidethefloodedareaofBar-rage1(Fujii2007b,2007c).Incontrasttothemarethestructures constituting themain body of the outpost,which usually include relatively loose ashy depositsespeciallyontheirfloors.Suchamarkedcontrastalsounderscoresthenon-residentialuseofStructureM.

Theseriesofcollateralevidence–theisolatedlo-cationcompletelyseparatedfromthemainbodyoftheoutpost, the scarcity of traces of residential use, theconsiderable floor depth despite its location immedi-atelybesidethefloodedarea,thehazardousconstruc-tionmethod,andtheuniquenatureofthefilldeposits–stronglysuggeststhatthestructureservedasawatercatchmentfacilityratherthanaresidentialorcommunalbuilding.Inviewofitsdistinctiveform,thereislittledoubt that StructureM served as a cistern to collectseasonalrunoffsurfacewaterofthesidewadi.Itpro-bablysupplieddrinkingwaterfortheinhabitantsoftheneighboringoutpostandperhapstheirlivestock.

Incidentally, themaximumcapacityof theeasternroomisestimatedca.20cubicmetersifitstoredwaterup to the top level of the impermeable limestonelayers. Given that the other two rooms also had thesame floor depth, it follows that Structure M, as awhole, storedup toca. 50-60 cubicmeters ofwater.Moreover, if themortaredmasonryretainingwalls inthe upper half had a sufficient waterproof property,theestimatewouldincreasefurther.Suchavaluemaysoundexcessiveforasmallgroupoftranshumants,butweshouldnotethatalthoughtheyusedtheoutpostona seasonalbasis, itwaspossibly fora relatively longterm, as represented, for example, by the occurrenceofhalf-finishedgameboardsaswellas theirfinishedproducts(e.g.Fujii2007c:fig.31).Weshouldalsonotethattheybroughtalongacertainnumberofsheepandgoats(Hongo2008).Thus,ifafewdozentranshumantsstayedattheoutpostforaboutonemonthtogetherwiththeir livestock, themaximum capacity of the cistern(i.e., ca. 50-60 cubicmeters) seems very reasonableandnotexcessive.Thisisevenmoreacceptableiftheystayedevenlonger,orwhentheseasonalfloodingwasnotenoughtoreachthetopleveloftheimpermeablelimestonelayers.

0 5 cm

Fig. 11 Wadi Abu Tulayha: Helwan- and Jericho-type points from Complex 00 (above) and Jericho-type points from Structure M (below).


Neo-Lithics2/1022


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

A

B

C

D

E

F

A

B

CD

E

F

G

H I

J

K

14

15

16

17

1819

2021

22

23

24

25

26

27

01

02

03

11

12

13

04

1009

0705

08

06

E-I

E-IIE-III

W-I

PPNB Outpost

0 5 m

28

29

30

33

34

35

3637

3839

40

4142

31 3243

4445

46

7 8 9

A

B

Unit 28

Unit 29

Unit 30

Unit 31 Unit 32

Unit 33

Unit 34

Unit 35

Unit 36

Unit 37

Unit 40

Unit 41

Unit 43

Unit 44

Unit 45

Unit 46

Unit 24

Unit 25

Unit 26

Unit 27

Unit 38

Unit 39

Unit 42

C

6

(Western Hlaf )

(JF-0155)Wadi Abu Tulayha

JBPP 2007Summer

Area E-III

0 2 m

Unit 23

a a'

b

b'

c'

c

d'

d

e

e'

f

f'

Complex 0

Complex I

Complex VII/VIII

Complex VI

Complex V

Complex IV Complex 00 Complex III Complex II

Complex IX

Complex III

Complex 00

Fig. 12 Wadi Abu Tulayha: the outpost and Complex 00.


Neo-Lithics2/1023


Correlation between the Water Catchment Facilities and the Outpost

Beforeenteringintodiscussion,ourpreviousperspec-tiveonthisissuewillbebrieflyreviewed(Fig.12).Tobeginwith,withrespecttotheformationprocessoftheoutpost,wesuggestedthat:first,theelongatedoutpostcontainsatotalofadozenstructuralcomplexes;second,withtheonlyexceptionofComplex0,everycomplexconsistsofalargeoblongorrectangularkeystructureand several smaller round features; third, the lateralrenewalofsuchabimodalcomplex,involvinggradualtechno-typological changes, resulted in the formationoftheseeminglychaoticappearanceoftheoutpostca.

100mintotallength;and,fourth,inviewofthewall-sharingandconcavo-convexwallrelations,therenewalmostlikelytookplacefromtheeasttowardthewestorsouthwest.Theseobservationsorsuggestionsledustotheperspectivethattheoutpostbeganwithaclusteroftemporarysheds(Complex0)atAreaE-II,thenshiftedtoComplexIatAreaE-I,andwascontinuouslyrenewedwestwardskippingtheexistingComplex0(Fujii2006a:27-30;2006b:12;2007d).Onthebasisofthisperspec-tive,wealsosuggestedthatinviewofthereciprocalpro-ximity,thebarragewasprobablyconstructedatthestageofComplexI,andthattheoutpostanditsneighboringbarragesystemcanbedated,onthebasisofthree14CdatesandthepredominanceofAmuq-typepoints,totheLPPNB.

Afewminorrevisionsareneededfortheseperspec-tives. First, we should note that the three radiometricdates(uncalBP8409±41;8464±51;8443±51)cameex-clusivelyfromStructureKinAreaW-I,probablythelastcomponentof the elongatedoutpost.Also, thesedatesfallequallywithinthetimerangeofthebeginningoftheLPPNB.Bothoftheseimplythatseveralcomplexesintheeasternhalfoftheoutpostdatebacktotheverybe-ginningoftheLPPNBorthelatterhalfoftheMPPNB.Asamatteroffact,aseriesof14CdatesfromComplex00,theearliestcomponentnewlyfoundinthewestern

part ofAreaE-III, fallswithin the time range of theMPPNB (Fujii 2007d: table 1). Understandably, thesameapplies to theneighboringbarragesystem. It issuggestiveinthisregardthatparallelexamplesofthestoneweightandtheprotrudedreinforcementwall,bothakeytothedatingofthebarragesystem,focusedontheeasternhalfoftheoutpost.Thereislittledoubtthatboth the outpost and the neighboring barrage systemwereconstructedintheMPPNBandcontinuouslyuseduntiltheearlyhalfoftheLPPNB.

Asdiscussedabove,StructureMhasalsoastrongprobabilityofdatingbacktothesamehorizon.Giventhis, it follows that the outpost was founded in theMPPNB together with the cistern and the barrage

system.Thismakessenseconsideringtheires-sentialroleforthesurvivalinthearidmargin.However,thereseemstobeaminortemporalgapbetweenthetwo,sincethecisternresem-blesComplex 00 rather thanComplex I pro-bablyrelatedtotheconstructionofthebarragesystem(Fujii2009a).Noticeableisthefactthatunliketheothers,thecomplexisdevoidofanoutstanding key feature and, instead, consistsonlyofrelativelyhomogeneousminorcompo-nents (Figs. 12 and13). In addition, someofthemwereconnectedwitheachotherthroughnarrowpassages,therebyformingatripartiteorbeehive-likecluster.BothtraitsarecommontoStructureMaswellasMPPNBsettlementsinsouthernJordansuchasShkaratMsaied(Her-mansen and Jensen 2002; Hermansen et al.2006; Jensen 2004; Jensen et al. 2005), ‘AinAbu Nukhayla (Henry et al. 2003), and theearlyphasesofBeidha(Kirkbride1966;Byrd

2005). It should also be added that unlike the othercomplexes,butlikeStructureM,Complex00produceda certain percentage of Jericho-type points (Fig. 11).Takingtheseintoconsideration,wecanarguethatthecisternwasconstructedfromtheverybeginningoftheoutpost and continuously used togetherwith the bar-ragesystemaddedalittlelater.

Fromtheabove,thecorrelationbetweenthewatercatchmentfacilitiesandtheneighboringoutpostcanbetentativelyreconstructedasfollows(Fig.14):

1. A small group ofMPPNB transhumants came tothisareaandnoticeditsidealtopographicalconditions.Theyembarkedontheconstructionofaseasonalout-post,whichstartedwiththecombinationofthecistern(StructureM)and the tripartiteorbeehive-like struc-turalcomplex(Complex00).

2.With some temporalgap inbetween, for thecon-structionof thebarrage system, they relocated them-selvestoComplexIwithComplex0asatransferpoint.Inthissense,ComplexImayrepresentanepisodeofre-infiltration into the aridmargin involving the newwatermanagementtechnology.Nevertheless, it isnotimprobable that small-scale cultivation had alreadytaken place at the natural swamp, sinceComplex 00

Fig. 13 Wadi Abu Tulayha: general view of Complex 00 (from S).


Neo-Lithics2/1024


alsoyieldedcarbonizedcerealandpulseseedsaswellas a large number of agricultural implements.Giventhis,itwouldbemoreappropriatetosupposethatBar-rage 1was added to increase the productivity of theexistingnaturally-irrigatedcropfields.

3. From this stage onward, the combination of thecisternandthebarragesystemlongsupportedtheout-postuntil theearlyhalfoftheLPPNB.Meanwhile,abimodalstructuralcomplex(consistingofalargekeyfeature and several minor components) became thenormoftheoutpost.

4. It is probably at the same stage that another bar-rage system was constructed at Wadi Ruweishid. ItwaspossiblyusedasenclavefieldsorpasturesfortheinitialtranshumantswhomadearoundtripbetweentheoutpostofWadiAbuTulayhaanditsparentsettlementprobablytothewest.

Hypothetical Perspectives

CurrentevidencesuggestedthattheJafrpastoralNeo-lithicwasequippedwithavarietyofwatercatchmentfacilities.Nevertheless,opinionswillbedividedastowhetherthispictureisuniquetoaridperipheriesmore

sensitivetowaterprocurementorsharedwithsedentaryfarming communities favored by sufficient rainfall.Seemingly,theformerviewsoundslikely,sincenopa-rallelexampleshavebeenreportedfromthecorearea.However,seeingthatthesiteofWadiAbuTulayhacanbedefinedasaseasonaloutpostprobablyderivedfroma parent settlement to thewest, it seemsmore likelythatsuchsystematicwaterexploitationwascommoninbothareas.Inthissense,weshallbeallowedtoamplifyourevidence,thoughcautiously,tothewholerangeofthePPNBculturalsphere.Thefollowingarehypothe-ticalperspectives from theviewpointof theJafrpas-toralNeolithic.

To beginwith, as for the domestication of runoffsurfacewater,ourmainconcern:

We confirmed that the initial transhumants infilt-ratedintotheNeolithicJafrBasin,bringingalongthetechnologyofcisternsaswellassheepandgoats.Giventhis,thesuggestedcorrelationbetweentheWadiSirhanPPNBandnaturalpoolsseemslikely(e.g.WasseandRollefson2005,2006).Orrather,suchacombinationmayhavebeenthenormoftheNeolithicaridfrontier,aspreviouslysuggestedforaWadiJilatsite(Waechterand Seton-Williams 1938; Miller 1980). In the coreareatoo,thesamemaybetrueofthecorrelationbet-ween Ba’ja and its surrounding cistern-like features(Gebel2004).Cisterns,eithernaturaloranthropogenic,

tributary wadi

tributary wadi

Cistern (Str. M)Barrage System

Complex 00 Complex 0

Complex I

Complex IX

Complex VII-VIII

Complex VI

Complex V

Complex IV Complex II-III

Barrage 1

Barrage 2 & 3 (ca. 200/250 m downstream)

uncal. BP 8409±41

uncal. BP 8443±51uncal. BP 8464±51

Fig. 14 Wadi Abu Tulayha: correlation between the outpost and the water catchment facilities.


Neo-Lithics2/1025


deservegreaterattentioninthesensethattheyareef-fectivedevices to transform(easy toaccessyetoftenhardtomanipulate)runoffsurfacewaterto(easytoap-proachandcontrol)staticsurfacewater.ThetripartitecompositionanduniquemasonrytechniqueconfirmedatStructureMmayprovideakeytoidentifyingPPNBanthropogeniccisterns.

Similarly,thecarefullandchoiceattestedtointheJafrBasin(Fujii2007b,2007c)mayserveasaguide-line for locatingPPNBbarrage systemsespecially inthe Transjordanian Plateau. In this sense, a tributarywadi besideBeidha, for example,may beworthy ofintensive research. In addition, the two specific keyelements - a protruded reinforcement wall attachedto a converging point and a bilaterally notched andgrooved stone weight incorporated as a ritual objectintoareinforcementwall–mayalsobeusefulforiden-tifyingPPNBbasin-irrigationbarrages,althoughtheirspecificfunctionmustbedefined individually,on thebasisoftheirscale,structure,waterproofproperty,andsurrounding topography. It should alsobe added thatsuch facilitieswere not always essential toNeolithicbasin-irrigated agriculture. Available evidence from‘AynAbuNukhaylah (Henry et al.2003;Albert andHenry2004)andtheinitialphaseofWadiAbuTulayhasuggeststhatanaturalswamporseasonallyfloodedqa’sufficedpresentneeds.Inthiscase,macroscopicarcha-eologicalevidencecannotbeexpected.

PPNBreservoir-typebarragesorwadibarrierscanalsobeidentifiedfollowingthesamecriteria,asillust-ratedbyWadiAbuTulayhaBarrages2and3.Inlightoftheiruniversaluseandeasy-to-constructnature,thereisagoodpossibilitythattheyweremuchmorecommonthanbasin-irrigationbarrages.Amasonrywall foundatWadiBadda,forexample,mayfallintothistypeofwatercatchmentfacility(Fujii2007a).SeveralmasonryretainingwallsfoundatDhra’(Kuijtetal.2007)canbeunderstoodasaneclecticformbetweenthebasin-irrigationbarrage and the reservoir typewadi barrierin the sense that it resembles the former in terms offunctionbuthassomethingincommonwiththelatterastotechnology.TheexistenceofsuchawidevarietyofwatercatchmentfacilitieshighlightsthefactthattheLevantineNeolithicpopulationpossessedtheabilitytoadjusttheirwater-usetechnologytolocaltopographies,whetheronslopingfieldsaroundasedentaryfarmingcommunitytothewestoronflatterrainencompassingaremoteoutposttotheeast.

On the other hand, the domestication of under-groundwaterisyettobeevidencedintheJafrPastoralNeolithic.Thisisprobablybecauseitsexploitationde-pendsonlocalgeology,particularlythedepthofaqui-fers.HenceitmakessensethattheevidenceforearlyNeolithicwellshasbeenlimitedtothelowlandsalongtheLevantinecoasts(bothcontinentalandinsular)andthe JordanValley, although further investigationmayshednewlightontheissue.

ThedomesticationofstaticsurfacewaterisalsoyettobetracedintheJafrBasin,butthesameappliestothesedentaryfarmingsocietytothewest.Thisisprecisely

because,asnotedatthebeginning,itseasy-to-access,easy-to-handlenaturelessensnotonlytheneedforthefull-scaledomesticationbutalsothearchaeologicalvi-sibilityoftheprocessitself.Nevertheless,thepossibi-lityisworthinvestigatingatmany‘Ainsites,especiallythoseintheJordanValley.Water“semi-domestication”atPPNAsitesshouldalsobeputinperspective,ashasbeensuggestedforJericho(Sherratt1980;Miller1980;Wikander2000).

Finally, a tentative perspective should be offeredwithreferencetothecorrelationbetweenrunoffsurfacewater domestication and the pastoral nomadization intheNeolithicJafrBasin.Ourinvestigationshaveshownthat the short-distance transhumance evidenced at theM/LPPNBoutpostofWadiAbuTulayhawasfollowedby the initial pastoral nomadism suggested by a fewunique funerary sites such as Harrat al-Juhayra (Fujii2005b)andQa’AbuTulayha(Fujii2001).Itispossiblethatthepost-PPNBclimaticdeteriorationcausedagra-dualdeclineinbasin-irrigatedagricultureattheoutpost,whichinturn,takingtheopportunityofthe8200calBParidityevent(Alleyetal.1993;Weningeretal.2006),finally triggered pastoral nomadization6. If this is thecase,theinitialpastoralnomadismintheJafrBasinmaybedefinedasalatertypeoftranshumancethatwasnolongerabletomaintainbasin-irrigatedagricultureasanessentialkeyofthefixedoutpost.Itcanreadilybeima-ginedthatthereductioningroupsizeandtheincreaseingroupmobility,bothinvolvedinthepastoralnoma-dization,ledtothedependenceonlesssubstantialwatercatchmentfacilitieseithernaturaloranthropogenic.Thisexplainsthereasonwhyincontrasttothecorearea,thearchaeologicalvisibilityofwaterdomesticationinaridperipheriessuddenlydecreasedafterthePPNBandlongremained low until technological innovations such asdeep-wellsinkingwereintroducedinlatertimes.

Concluding Remarks

The investigation of the Jafr Pastoral Neolithic is asuccession of surprises. Aside from domestic goats(Henry et al. 2003), the existence of domestic sheepin theMPPNBsouthernLevantmaybecontroversialin viewof the current consensus among zooarchaeo-logists (Köhler-Rollefson1992;Ducos1993;Garrardetal.1996;Horwitzetal.1999;Martin1999;Petersetal.1999;Helmer2000). It isevenmoreso if theyreally accompanied transhumance (Rollefson 2001;RollefsonandKöhler-Rollefson1993).Whatwehavedealtwithinthispaperwereunfamiliarfeaturesfoundin such a previously unknown scenario. Understan-dably,opinionwillbedividedovertheirinterpretation.Weourselvesstillpuzzleoverthesituation.However,itisnowindisputablethattheNeolithicJafrBasinwasequippedwithavarietyofrunoffsurfacewatercatch-ment facilities. Our new perspectives from the JafrPastoralNeolithicwouldhopefullytriggeranin-depthdiscussionon the issueofwaterdomestication in theprehistoricNearEast.


Neo-Lithics2/1026


Acknowledgements: I would like to appre-ciate Dr. Hans Georg K. Gebel, Dr. Gary O.Rollefson,Dr.HenningFahlbusch,andDr.BoDahl Hermansen for their useful commentsonmyfirstdraft.Myspecial thanksgototheformer two colleagues, whose sincere adviceextendedfromtheframeworkoftheinitialdrafttothewordingofthefinaldraft.Itisneedlesstosay,however,thattheauthorisresponsibleforalldeficienciesandmisunderstandings.

Appendix I: Subsequent Investigation at Wadi Abu Tulayha

The above discussion on Structure M or thecistern-like feature atWadiAbuTulayhawasbased on the investigation result of the fifthfieldseasonwhenitwashalfexcavated.Itisforthisreasonthatthereremainedsomeambiguity.Thesixthandfinalfieldseason,conducted inthe summerof2008,gave the fullparticularsoftheuniquefeature(Figs.15,16).Asaresult,ourinitialperspectiveswerevalidatedanew.

Asforthedating,threemore14Cdatesarenow available (Fujii 2009a: fig. 46). All ofthem-8365±35uncalBP[amiddlefilllayeroftheeasternroom],8355±39uncalBP[amiddlefilllayerofthesameroom],and9144±41un-calBP[thebasallayerofthesameroom]-fallwithin the time range of the Middle to LatePPNBperiod,thuscorroboratingourtentativedatingbasedonastratigraphiccorrelationandacomparativestudyofdiagnosticartifacts.Inaddition,smallfindsfoundin thefinalseasonmade the synchronism between Structure Mandtheneighboringoutpostevenclearer(Fujii2009a:figs.44,45).Ofparticularinterestistheoccurrence of a petroglyph depicting severalherbivorous animals, which shows clear re-semblancetotheexamplesfoundattheoutpost(Fujii2008b). It shouldalsobeadded thatanearlier phase of the tripartite structural com-plexwasnewlyfoundunderneathComplex00(Fujii 2008b). This finding not only pushedback the date of the outpost further but alsobridgedaminorchronologicalgapleftbetweenthe outpost and the basal layer of the cisternradiometricallydated.

ThefunctionalidentificationofStructureMasacisternhasalsoobtainedfurtherevidence.Tobeginwith,aca.10cmthickcoatingofclaywasattestedtoatthelowerhalfofthenorthernwallofthecentralroom(Fujii2009a:fig.34).Atoughcoatingcombiningclayandlimestoneslabswasalsoconfirmedinthewesternroom(Fujii 2008b: fig. 39).There is no doubt thatbothoftheseconstructionworkswereexecutedto improve the imperfectwaterproof property

Fig. 15 Wadi Abu Tulayha: general view of fully excavated Structure M (from S).

Fig. 16 Wadi Abu Tulayha: general view of fully excavated Structure M (from E).

Fig. 17 Wadi Abu Tulayha: sludge tank (white arrow) and upright limestone boulders of Structure M (from NE).


Neo-Lithics2/1027


of the brittle limestone layer exposed at thelower half of the structure. Second, a cylind-ricalsludgetank,ca.1minbothdiameteranddepth, was found at the western edge of thefloorofthecentralroom(Fig.17).Inaddition,adividingchannelca.2mlongwasunearthedbetween the central and the western rooms(Fujii 2008b: fig. 40). Both devices highlighttheuseofthestructureasacistern.Alsoofinte-restisthefactthatthestructurewasfirstreusedfora temporaryencampmentwhenitwasbu-rieduptothetoplevelofthesemi-permeablelimestonebedrocklayer.Thisfactimpliesthatthestructurecontinuedtoimpoundsomewateruntilthenand,therefore,impedethefunctionaldiversion(Fujiin.d.).Takingtheseriesofnewevidence into consideration, it is now indispu-tablethatStructureMwasusedasacisternforsupplying drinking water to the neighboringoutpost. Incidentally,a seriesofupright limes-tone boulders encompassing the sludge tankresembles a stone-circle-like feature found atAtlitYam (Galili in this volume: figs. 2, 2a).Theuniquewater ritual that tookplaceat thesubmergedPPNCsitealongtheMediterraneancoastmighthaveitsremoteorigininthecisternritualintheM-LPPNBJafrBasin.Anyhow,wecanarguethatourchrono-functionalidentifica-tionofStructureMasaPPNBcisternhasbeenfullysubstantiated.

The subsequent investigation atWadiAbuTulayha has firmly established that the M/LPPNB agro-pastoral outpost was equippedwith the large cistern specializing in storingdrinkingwater aswell as thebarrage system.Inaddition,theoutposthasagoodpossibilityofhavingpossessedanotherbarragesystemasenclavecropfields.Presumably,suchacarefulwater exploitation strategy first enabled thefull-fledged penetration into the arid margin.Thereis littledoubtthat thePPNBJafrBasinwitnessedthefirstzenithofthedomesticationofrunoffsurfacewater(Mithen2010).

Appendix II: The Third Barrage System at Wadi Quweir 106

The2010summerfieldseasonofourresearchprojectaddressedarescueexcavationatWadiQuweir17and106bothlocatedinthenortheas-ternpartoftheJafrBasin(Fujiietal.n.d.a,n.d.b).Asaresult,theformersiteturnedouttobethesecondexampleofthePPNBagro-pastoraloutpostafterWadiAbuTulayha,andthelattersite proved to be the third example of thecontemporary barrage system afterWadiAbuTulayhaandWadiRuweishidash-Sharqi.Theinvestigationhasprovidedfurtherinsightsintotheclosecorrelationbetweenthetwoessential

Fig. 18 Wadi Quweir 106: Barrage 1 (from W).

Fig. 19 Wadi Quweir 106: Barrage 2 (from N).

Fig. 20 Wadi Quweir 106: Barrage 2 (from N).


Neo-Lithics2/1028


componentsoftheJafrpastoralNeolithic.ThebarragesiteofWadiQuweir106liesin

themiddleofaflintpavementdesertthatext-ends behind an escarpment fringing the nort-hernedgeofthebasin.ItisfarremovedfromPPNB sedentary farming communities, beinglocatedca.70kmeastevenofWadiAbuTu-layha(Fig.1).Understandably,thesurroundingnaturalenvironmentisveryharshandnoper-ennialwatersourceisavailablearoundthesite.Thisextramuralbarragesitewasfoundforthefirst time in1999byanAmerican team,whonoticed the resemblance to thePPNBbarragesystems thus farknown in the JafrBasinandrecommendedus toundertake further investi-gation(Dr.PhilipWilkepersonalcommunica-tions).Itisforthisreasonthatweembarkedontheshort-termrescueexcavationintheremotewilderness.

Topographically,thesiteoccupiedtheloweredgeofasemi-openplayasystemthatwascon-nectedbyabraidedorflatchannel.Itcontainedtwo elongated, slightly incurved, stone-builtfeatures,bothofwhichwereconstructedacrosstheloweredgeofthelowestplayaandspreadbothwingstowardtheupstream.Barrage1wassituatedupstreamandlargerinscale,beingca.72mintotallengthanduptoca.0.2-0.5minpreserved height (Fig. 18). Barrage 2, on theotherhand,waslocatedca.130mdownstreamofBarrage1,havingatotallengthofca.74mand apreservedheight ofca. 0.2-0.5m (Fig.19). Barrage 1 was equipped with a semi-circular, protruded reinforcement wall at thecentralpart,whereasBarrage2wasstructurallylessstrengthened,beingdevoidofsuchanes-sentialdevice.ThisisprobablybecauseitwaslocateddownstreamofBarrage1and,forthisreason,wasrelievedtoalargeextentofstrongsidewayswaterpressure.Thus,Barrage2maybedefinedasalateradditiontoorrenewalofBarrage1,althoughasdiscussedbelow,itstillfallswithinthetimerangeofthePPNBperiod.AswiththeotherPPNBbarragesknowntodatein the Jafr Basin, both barrages were poorlywaterproofedanddesignedtoformashallow,extensive, temporary flooded area on perme-ablefluvialdeposits.There is littledoubt thattheywereusedforbasin-irrigatedagriculture.

Thedatingofthetwobarragesisbasedonthe following twokeys:first, existenceof theprotrudedreinforcementwallatBarrage1and,second, theoccurrenceofbi-laterallynotchedand/or grooved stoneweights from both bar-rages (Figs. 20, 21). It should also be addedthatmostofthestoneweightsfromBarrage1wereincorporatedintothereinforcementwall.All of these traits are shared withWadiAbuTulayhaBarrage 1 andWadiRuweishidBar-rage2,attestingtothesynchronismwiththem.

Fig. 21 Wadi Quweir 106: stone weight incorporated into Barrage 1 (from S).

Fig. 22 Wadi Quweir 17: general view of the outpost (from SW).

Fig. 23 Wadi Quweir 17: stone weight found in situ on the floor of Structure 1 (from SW)


Neo-Lithics2/1029


Ofinterest is thefact thatasimilarstoneweightwasfoundinsituatthenearbyoutpostofWadiQuweir17(Figs. 22, 23).This small settlement, found againbytheAmericanteam(QuinteroandWilke1998a,1998b;WilkeandQuintero1998),produceddiagnosticfindssuch asAmuq and Byblos type points, flint bowlets(Fujii2009b),andgameboards,thusbeingdatedtothePPNBperiodwithcertainty7.Theconcurrenceof theunique artifact highlights a synchronismbetween thetwosites.

TheinvestigationatWadiQuweir106hasprovidedfurtherinsightsintotheconditionsforlocationoftheJafrbarragesystem.Whatattractedourattentionwerethe following threeobservations.First,any twoadja-cent features of the playa systemwere connected bya braided or flat channel, thus forming a semi-opendrainagesystem.Second,whileupperplayaswerenotaccompaniedwithbarrages,onlythelowestplayawasequippedwiththem.Third,thetwobarragesoccupiedtheloweredgeofthelowestplaya.Thereasonforthelastconditioniseasytounderstand,sincethelocationattheloweredgeofaplayafirstmakesitpossibletocreate an extensive flooded area. The reason for thefirst and second conditions requires further scrutiny,butwecanarguethatthelowestfeatureofasemi-openplayasystemiswelldrainedand,therefore,lesssubjecttosaltdamage,anunavoidableproblembesettingdrylandirrigatedagriculture.Asamatteroffact,theothertwobarragesystemsknowntodateintheJafrBasinarelocated again at the lowest feature(s) of a semi-opendrainage system. In contrast, no barrages have beenfoundatupstreamfeaturesof thesamedrainagesys-tems, tosaynothingofclosedplayascommonin thebasin.ThiscontrastindicatesthatthePPNBbasin-irri-gationbarragegavehighprioritytotheconvenienceofdrainagenolessthantheavailabilityofinfluentwater.

Taking these new perspectives into consideration,theconditionsforlocationofthePPNBbasin-irrigationbarrage systemcanbe summarizedas follows.Asidefromtheavailabilityofinfluentwater,arabledeposits,andconstructionmaterial,thefirstessentialconditionis that the supposed flooded terrain should be notonlyflatandextensivebutalsopermeableandwater-retentive. This is because basin-irrigation agriculturerequiresboththeinfiltrationofimpoundedwaterintothegroundand the retentionof infiltratedwater. It isfor this reason that a silty playa rather than a rockyorsandydepressionwaspreferredasacandidatesitefor construction.Another prerequisite is that influentwatershoulddampentheterrainand,atthesametime,washittosomeextentsoastocopewithsalinizationofsurfacesoilduetocapillarity.Thisexplainsthere-asonwhysemi-opendrainagesystemswerepreferredto closed ones, and why the lowest component of asemi-opendrainagesystemwaspreferredtoupstreamfeatures.This is not to say, however, that the PPNBbarrageconstructorsreachedsuchacomplicatedcon-clusionafteragreatdealofeffort.Seeingthatpresentvegetation also focuses on the lowest component(s)ofasemi-opendrainagesystem,thetruthmaybethat

theymerelyfollowedthedistributionofcontemporaryvegetation.

Whatever the case, it is a great surprise that thePPNB transhumants successfully copedwith the twocontradictory propositions endemic to dry land agri-culture,namely,irrigationandsoilsalinization,severalmillennia ahead of Sumerians and Akkadians. Boththeincompletewaterproofpropertyofabarragebody(evidencedateverysite)andthedownstreamrenewalofthebarragesystem8(suggestedatWadiQuweir106)canalsoreasonablybeunderstoodinthiscontext.Ne-vertheless, the downstream renewal is incompatiblewiththepreferenceforthelocationattheloweredgeofthelowestplaya.Thisdiscrepancymayexplainthereasonwhyeverybarragesystemwasshort-lived,andwhy the PPNB transhumantsmust havemoved theirremote outpost at regular intervals. In this sense,wecanarguethattheJafrPPNBtranshumanceinvolvedamomentumfornomadizationfromtheverybeginning.

ThefindingofthethirdexampleofthePPNBbar-ragesystemhassubstantiatedanewthatbasin-irrigationagriculturewasamongmajoraspectsof theJafrPas-toralNeolithic.Personalcommunicationsfromseveralcolleagues and local inhabitants suggest that similarbarragesystemsspreadfurtherinlandorevenbeyondtheSaudiArabianborder. If this is really thecase, itfollowsthattheJafrbarragesystemholdakeytotra-cing theprocessof theNeolithization in thenorthernhalf of theArabianPeninsula aswell as the pastoralnomadizationinsouthernJordan(Fujii2010a,2010b).This makes sense, however, considering that runoffsurfacewaterdomesticationisanessentialprerequisiteforthefull-fledgedpenetrationintoaridperipheries.

Endnotes

1The“domestication”ofplantsandanimalsisdefined,ingeneral,astheprocessofcommensalormutualsymbiosisthroughcons-tantinterferenceintheirlifecycleandtheirreproductionproces-sesinparticular.Thesameisroughlytrueofwaterdomestication,whichcanbedefinedastheprocessofasortofcommensalsym-biosis throughcontinuous involvement in theautonomousbeha-viorofflowing,stagnant,evaporating,orinfiltratingwater.Suchageneraldefinition,albeit far fromsatisfactory,willdo for thispaper,sinceourmainconcernconsistsinarchaeologicalevidenceoffacilitiesinvolvedinwaterdomestication,notinthetaxonomicdistinctionbetweenwildanddomesticatedwater.

2ThisisnottosaythattheNeolithicJafrBasinwasunderhyper-aridclimaticconditionsasitistoday.Inviewofthegeneralcli-maticameliorationduringthePPNB,itcanreadilybeimaginedthatthebasinwitnessedalessaridepisode.Ifthiswasthecase,itwouldbeunwisetoemphasizethe“marginality”oftheJafrBasintoomuch.Nevertheless,weusetheterm“margin”or“periphery”inthestrictsenseoftheword,that is,asatermreferringtotheedgeofthecoreoranareajustbeyond-notasanemotivewordimplyingaremotewildernessfarbeyond.Thusoureyesareuponadifferencebetweenthecoreandtheedge,notacontrastbetween“thedesertandthesown.”Incidentally, thereasonwhywedefi-


Neo-Lithics2/1030


netheNeolithicJafrBasinasanaridmarginorperipheryisthatinsteadofpermanentsettlements,itincludedseasonalstationsforshort-distancetranshumanceprobablyderivedfromthecore.Thisallowsustoregarditasapropermargincloselytiedwith,yetdif-ferentinnaturefrom,thecore.

3Our comprehensive survey conducted in the summer of 2009addedafewpossibleexamplesatWadiBaddaandJabalJuhayra(Fujii2010a).TheirlocationisshowninFigure1.

4Itismostunlikelythatnormaldiggingtoolswilldoforsuchatoughoperation.SuggestiveinthisregardisthefactthatStructureMaswellastheneighboringoutpostproducedseveraldiagonallytruncatedstonebarsca.10-20kginweight(e.g.Fujii20089a:fig.45).StructureMalsoyieldedafewrectangularchippedlimestonetoolsca.40-50cmlong,ca.25cmwide,andca.6-10cmthick(Fujii 2008a: fig. 28). These heavy-duty tools bear remarkableedgedamage,suggestingthattheywereusedfordiggingthroughthethicklimestonelayers.

5ItisevidentthattheseepisodestookplacewhenStructureMwasstillinuse,becausealargenumberoffallenstoneswerefoundinsitu(inthederivativesenseoftheword)onthefloor.

6Suggestiveinthisrespectisthefactthatafewhearthsandhea-vy-dutylimestonequernswerefoundinsituintheupperfilllayersof StructureM (Fujii 2009a:figs. 42, 43).This implies that thestructurewasfirstconvertedintoatemporaryencampmentwhenitwas buried up to the top level of the impermeable limestonelayersand,therefore,becamefullydysfunctionalasacistern.AsreferredtoinAppendixI,theseriesof14CdatasuggeststhattheepisodetookplaceimmediatelyaftertheabandonmentofStruc-tureK, the lastcomponentof theelongatedoutpost.ThosewholefttheirfootprintsontheupperfilllayersofStructureMcanbedefinedasinitialpastoralnomadsinthesensethattheyabandonedthemanagementofthefixedoutpostandtentativelyencampedatthediscardedcistern(Fujiin.d.).

7WadiQuweir 17 consists only of a single structural complex,which appears to resemble Complex I atWadi Abu Tulayha intermsofarchitecturalcomposition(Fujiietal.n.d.a).Thepossib-lecombinationofthisoutpostandthethirdbarragesystemwouldcorroborateourperspective that thestageofWadiAbuTulayhaComplexIwitnessedthere-penetrationintothearidmarginbrin-gingalongthenewtechnologyofthebarragesystem.

8Thedownstreamrenewalhypothesisisbasedontheperspecti-vethatasidefromtheWadiAbuTulayhasystem(includingtworeservoir-typebarriers),theothertwosystems(consistingonlyofbasin-irrigationbarrages)representnotagroupofcoevalbarragesbutanaccumulatedpictureofabarragereconstructedinsequenceatanabuttinglot.Ifthiswasreallythecase,itfollowsthatboththeelongatedsettlementofWadiAbuTulayhaand thecontempora-rybarragesystemsharedanunderlyingformationprinciple.Thisperspective is important to avoid thepossible overestimationoftheJafrPastoralNeolithicanddeservesfurthertesting.

References

AlbertR.M.andHenryD.O.2004 HerdingandAgriculturalActivitiesattheEarly NeolithicSiteofAynAbuNukhahyla(WadiRum, Jordan).TheResultsofPhytolithandSpherulite Analyses.Paléorient30/2:81-92.

AlleyR.B.,MayewskiP.A.,SowersT.,StuiverM.,TaylorK.C.,andClarkP.U.1997 HoloceneClimaticInstability:aProminent, WidespreadEvent8200yrAgo.Geology25/6: 483-486.

ByrdB.F.2005 EarlyVillageLifeatBeidha,Jordan:NeolithicSpatial OrganizationandVernacularArchitecture.Oxford: OxfordUniversityPress.

DucosP.1993 ProtoélevageaulevantsudauVIIemillénaireBC.Les donnéesdelaDamascène.Paléorient19/1:153-174.

FujiiS.2001 Qa’AbuTulayhaWest,2000:AnInterimReportofthe FourthSeason.ADAJ(AnnualoftheDepartmentof AntiquitiesofJordan)45:19-37.2002 ABriefNoteonthe2001-2002WinterSeasonSurvey oftheal-JafrBasininSouthernJordan.ADAJ 46:41-49.2004 Harratal-BurmaCairnLine,WadiBurmaCist Enclosures,WadiBurmaKiteSite,andHarraal- SayyiyehK-line:APreliminaryReportoftheSecond Operationoftheal-JafrBasinPrehistoricProject, Phase2(2003,Summer).ADAJ48:285-304.2005a WadiBurmaNorth,Tal’atAbyda,andWadiQusayr: APreliminaryReportoftheJafrBasinPrehistoric Project,2004.ADAJ49:17-56.2005b Harrat-al-JuhayraPseudo-Settlement:APreliminary ReportoftheSecondOperationoftheJafrBasin PrehistoricProject,Phase2(2004Summer).ADAJ 49:57-70.2006a WadiAbuTulayha:APreliminaryReportofthe2005 SpringandSummerExcavationSeasonsoftheJafr BasinPrehistoricProject,Phase2.ADAJ50:9-32.2006b APPNBAgro-pastoralOutpostatWadiAbuTulayha, al-JafrBasin.Neo-Lithics2/06:4-14.2007a WadiBadda:APPNBSettlementbelowtheFjayj EscarpmentnearShawbak.Neo-Lithics1/07:19-23.2007b WadiAbuTulayhaandWadiRuweishidas-Sharqi:An InvestigationofPPNBBarrageSystemsintheJafr Basin.Neo-Lithics2/07:6-16.2007c PPNBBarrageSystemsatWadiAbuTulayhaandWadi Ruweishidas-Sharqi:APreliminaryReportofthe 2006SpringFieldSeasonoftheJafrBasinPrehistoric Project,Phase2.ADAJ51:403-427.2007d WadiAbuTulayha:APreliminaryReportofthe2006 SummerFieldSeasonoftheJafrBasinPrehistoric Project,Phase2.ADAJ51:373-402.


Neo-Lithics2/1031


2008a WadiAbuTulayha:APreliminaryReportofthe2007 SummerFieldSeasonoftheJafrBasinPrehistoric Project,Phase2.ADAJ52:445-478.2008b TwoPetroglyphsfromWadiAbuTulayha,aPPNB Agro-pastoralOutpostintheJafrBasin. Neo-Lithics 1/08:9-15.2009a WadiAbuTulayha:APreliminaryReportofthe2008 SummerFinalFieldSeasonoftheJafrBasin PrehistoricProject,Phase2.ADAJ53:173-209.2009b FlintBowlets:AComprehensiveReviewfromWadi AbuTulayha,SouthernJordan.Neo-Lithics 2/09:20-28.2010a AComprehensiveReviewofNeolithicWater CatchmentFacilitiesintheJafrBasin,Southern Jordan:APreliminaryReportoftheJafrBasin PrehistoricProject,Phase3,2009.ADAJ54 (forthcoming).2010b WadiAbuTulayhaandNeolithicDamSurveyinthe JafrBasin.AmericanJournalofArchaeology114:552- 554.n.d. AHalf-BuriedCisternatWadiAbuTulayha:A KeytoTracingthePastoralNomadizationinthe JafrBasin,SouthernJordan.InG.RollefsonandB. Finlayson(eds.),Jordan’sPrehistory:PastandFuture Research(forthcoming).

FujiiS.andAbeM.2008 PPNBFrontierinSouthernJordan:APreliminary ReportontheArchaeologicalSurveysandSoundings intheJafrBasin,1995-2005.al-Rafidan29:63-94.

FujiiS.,AdachiT.,WilkeP.J.,andQuinteroL.A.n.d.a aWadiQuweir106:APreliminaryReportoftheJafr BasinPrehistoricProject,2010(Phase3).ADAJ55 (inpreparation).

FujiiS.,WilkeP.J.,andQuinteroL.A.n.d.b bWadiQuweir17:APreliminaryReportoftheJafr BasinPrehistoricProject,2010(Phase3).ADAJ55 (inpreparation).

GaliliE.andNirY.1993 TheSubmergedPre-PotteryNeolithicWaterWellof AtlitYam,NorthernIsrael,andItsPalaeo- envrionmentalImplications.TheHolocene3:265-270.

GaliliE.andSharvitJ.1998 SubmergedNeolithicWater-wellsfromtheCarmel CoastofIsrael.InH.Koschik(ed.),Brunnender Jungsteinzeit,InternationalesSymposiumErkelenz 27.bis29.Köln:Rheinland-Verlag.

GaliliE.,Weinstein-EvronM.,HershkovitzI.,GopherA.,KislevM.,LernauO.,Kolska-HorwitzL.,andLernauH.1993 Atlit-Yam:APrehistoricSiteontheSeaFlooroffthe IsraelCoast.JournalofFieldArchaeology 20/2:133-157.

GarfinkelY.,VeredA.,andBar-YosefO.2006 DomesticationofWater:theNeolithicWellatSha’ar Hagolan,JordanValley,Israel.Antiquity80:686-696.

GarrardA.,ColledgeS.,andMartinL.1996 TheEmergenceofCropCultivationandCaprineHer- dinginthe“MarginalZone”oftheSouthernLevant. InD.R.Harris(ed.),TheOriginsandSpreadof AgricultureandPastoralisminEurasia:204-226. London:UCLPress.

GebelH.G.K.2004 TheDomesticationofWater:EvidencefromEarly NeolithicBa’ja?InH.-D.BienertandJ.Häser(eds.), MenofDikesandCanals:TheArchaeologyofWaterin theMiddleEast(Orient-Archäologie10),25-35. Rahden:Leidorf.

HelmerD.2000 ÉtudedelaFauneMammalienned’ElKowm2.In:E. Stordeur(ed.),ElKowm2:UneIledansleDésert: 233-264.Paris:CNRSEditions.

HenryD.O.,CordovaC.,WhiteJ.J.,DeanR.M.,BeaverJ.E.,EkstromH.,KadowakiS.,McCorristonJ.,NowellA.,andScott-CummingsL.2003 EarlyNeolithicSiteofAynAbuNukhayla,Southern Jordan.BulletinofAmericanSchoolsofOriental Research330:1-30.

HermansenB.D.andJensenC.H.2002 NotesonSomeFeaturesofPossibleRitualSignificance atMPPNBShaqaratMazyad,SouthernJordan.In: H.G.K.Gebel,B.D.Hermansen,andC.H.Jensen(eds.), StudiesinEarlyNearEasternProduction,Subsistence, andEnvironment8(MagicPracticesandRitualinthe NearEasternNeolithic):91-101.Berlin:exoriente.

HermansenB.D.,ThuesenI.,JensenC.H.,KinzelM.,PetersenM.B.,JorkovM.L.,andLynnerupN.2006 ShkaratMsaied:The2005SeasonofExcavations.A ShortPreliminaryReport.Neo-Lithics1/06:3-7.

HongoH.2008 DevelopmentofPastoralismanditsInfiltrationinto AridPeripheries.IntegratedResearchintheBishri MountainsontheMiddleEuphrates,Newsletter 9:11-12(inJapanese).

HorwitzL.K.,TchernovE.,DucosP.,BeckerC.,vondenDrieschA.,MartinL.,andGarrardA.1999 AnimalDomesticationintheSouthernLevant. Paléorient25/2:63-80.

JensenC.H.2004 ProductionAreasatMPPNBShkaratMsaied,Southern Jordan.Neo-Lithics2/04:22-26.


Neo-Lithics2/1032


JensenC.H.,HermansenB.D.,PetersenM.B.,KinzelM.,HaldM.M.,BangsgaardP.,LynnerupN.,andThuesenI.2005 PreliminaryReportontheExcavationsatShakaratal- Musayid,1999-2004.ADAJ49:115-134.

KirkbrideD.1966 FiveSeasonsatthePre-PotteryNeolithicVillageof BeidhainJordan.PalestineExplorationQuarterly 98:8-72.

Köhler-RollefsonI.1992 AModelfortheDevelopmentofNomadicPastoralism ontheTransjordanianPlateau.InO.Bar-Yosefand. A.Khazanov(eds.)PastoralismintheLevant:11-18. Madison:PrehistoryPress.

KuijtI.,FinlaysonB.,andMacKayJ.2007 PotteryNeolithicLandscapeModificationatDhra’. Antiquity81:106-118.

MartinL.1999 MammalRemainsfromtheEasternJordanian Neolithic,andtheNatureofCaprineHerdinginthe Steppe.Paléorient25/2:87-104.

MillerR.1980 WaterUseinSyriaandPalestinefromtheNeolithicto theBronzeAge.WorldArchaeology11/3:313-349.

MithenS.2010 TheDomesticationofWater:WaterManagementinthe AncientWorldanditsPrehistoricOriginsintheJordan Valley.PhilosophicalTransactionsofRoyalSocietyA (2010)368:5249-5274.

NasuH.,HongoH.,andFujiiS.2008 WadiAbuTulayha:APPNBAgro-pastoralOutpostin theJafrBasin,SouthernJordan.JapaneseJournalof HistoricalBotany16/2:35-36.(inJapanese)

NasuH.,TannoK.,HongoH.,andFujiiS.n.d. WadiAbuTulayha:AnArchaeobotanicalStudyofa PPNBAgro-pastoralOutpostinSouthernJordan. VegetationHistoryandArchaeobotany.

PeltenburgE.,ColledgeS.,CroftP.,JacksonA.,McCartneyC.,andMurrayM.A.2000 Agro-pastoralistColonizationofCyprusinthe10th MillenniumBP:InitialAssessments.Antiquity 74:844-853.

PeltenburgE.,CroftP.,JacksonA.,McCartneyC.,andMurrayM.A.2001 Well-establishedColonies:Mylouthkia1andthe Cypro-Pre-PotteryNeolithicB.InS.Swiny(ed.),The EarliestPrehistoryofCyprus:FromColonizationto Exploitation:61-93.Boston:AmericanSchoolsof OrientalResearch.

PetersJ.,HelmerD.,vondenDrieschA.,andSuguiM.S.1999 EarlyAnimalHusbandryintheNorthernLevant. Paléorient25/2:27-47.

QuinteroL.A.andWilkeP.J.1998a ArchaeologicalReconnaissanceintheal-JafrBasin, 1997.ADAJ42:113-121.1998b JafrBasinArchaeologicalProject.Neo-Lithics 1/98:4-5.

RollefsonG.2001 NeolithicPeriod.InB.MacDonald,R.Adams,and P.Bienkowski(eds.),TheArchaeologyofJordan: 67-105.Sheffield:SheffieldAcademicPress.

RollefsonG.andKöhler-RollefsonI.1993 PPNCAdaptationsintheFirstHalfofthe6th MillenniumB.C.Paléorient19/1:33-42.

SherrattA.1980 Water,Soil,andSeasonalityinEarlyCereal Cultivation.WorldArchaeology11/3:313-349.

WaechterJ.andSeton-WilliamsV.M.1938 TheExcavationsatWadiDhobai,1937-1938,andthe DhobaianIndustry.JournalofthePalestineOriental Society18:172-185.

WasseA.andRollefsonG.2005 WadiSirhanProject:Reportonthe2002 ArchaeologicalReconnaissanceofWadiHudrujand JabalTharwa,Jordan.Levant37:1-20.2006 TheWadias-SirhanProject:Notesonthe2002 ArchaeologicalReconnaissanceofWadiHudrujand Jabaladh-Dharwa,Jordan.ADAJ50:69-81.

WeningerB.,Alram-SternE.,BauerE.,ClareL.,DanzeglockeU.,JörisO.,KubatzkiC.,RollefsonG.,TodorovaH.,andvanAndelT.2006 ClimateForcingDuetothe8200calyrBPevent observedatEarlyNeolithicSitesintheEastern Mediterranean.QuaternaryResearch66/3:401-420.

WikanderÖ.2000 TheNeolthicandBronzeAges.InÖ.Wikander(ed.), HandbookofAncientWaterTechnology:607-616. Leiden:Brill.

WilkeP.J.andQuinteroL.A.1998 NewLatePre-PotteryNeolithicBSitesintheJordanian Desert.Neo-Lithics1/98:2-3.

EarlyHydraulicSystems

Neo-Lithics2/1033


Introduction

Water is fundamental for human life, and during theearly Holocene when sedentary settlements wereattainingsizesofupto12ha,naturallyoccurringwatersourcesfordomesticusemusthavebecomeincreasinglyimportant and were perhaps even contested featuresin the landscape.Here a distinction ismade betweenwaterforeverydaydomesticpurposes,orforanimals,andwater for irrigation, because evenwhere there isearlyevidenceforwatersupplyitdoesnotnecessarilyindicatethatirrigationwaspracticed.Theobjectiveofthiscommentaryistoprovideacontextfortherecentimportantdiscoveriesofwhatappeartobepre-potteryNeolithicwatersupplysystemssites intheJafrbasin,southernJordan.Thisdiscussionmustnecessarilycoverawiderangeofissuessuchas:

• Towhatdegreewasirrigationnecessary duringtherelativelybenignclimateoftheearly

Holocene?• Howwillfeaturesurvivalaffecttherecovery

ofearlywatersupplyinstallations.• Problemsofdating.• HowdotheJordanianfeaturesfitintothe

emergingpictureofearlywatersupplysystems recoveredfromelsewhereintheMiddleEast?

The Nature of Water Supply

It is now well attested that Jordan was significantlymoisterduringtheearlyHolocene,andthepresenceofearlyHoloceneflowstonesintheWadiFeynanneartheNeolithic siteofBeidhademonstrate that rainfallwassignificantlyhigherduringtheearlyHolocene(Rambeau2006),so that irrigationmaynothavebeennecessaryforthegrowthofcrops.Moreover,recentinvestigationsintheWadiFeynansupporttheevidenceforaverdantearlyHoloceneenvironmentbydemonstratingthatthevegetationcoverconsistedofarelativelyrichwoodlandofoak,juniper,tamariskandothertreesincontrastwiththe steppic vegetation of today (Barker et al. 2007:405). However, although less erratic than that of thePleistocene, the climate was hardly constant and theearlymoistphasewasterminatedbytheapproximately400yearintervalofcooler,morearidconditionsknownasthe“8200BPevent”.Thiseventmighthaverequiredagriculturalcommunitiesinclimaticallymarginalareastoadapttotheincreasingariditybydevelopingsystemsofwatermanagement,orinevendrierlocations,suchastheJafrbasin,increasingariditycouldhavediscouragedsettlemententirely.

Itisfrequentlyassumedthatirrigation,asameansofsoilmoistureenhancement,wasonlyappliedwhenitwasabsolutelynecessaryforplantsurvival.Inotherwordsirrigationwasappliedinareasthatweresodrythatwithoutirrigationtherewouldbenocrops.Thisisnotthecase,andtodayitiscommontoseeirrigationbeing applied in areas where it is not absolutelynecessary,becauseitisusedtosupplysupplementarywater toenhancecropgrowth.That thiswasalso thecaseinthepastisapparentwhenweexamineancientirrigationsystemsinrelationtotheaveragerainfallofthe area being irrigated. In this case only prehistoricirrigationsystemsoccurexclusivelyinthedrierareaswhere rainfall is today less than200mmperannum.Before about 1000 BC, irrigation was used in thoseplaceswhere itwas essential for crop survival.Suchirrigation may be termed water deficit irrigationsystems. However, from about the first millenniumBC onwards, when the technological manipulationof water had become much more sophisticated, wesee irrigationsystemsbeingusedinbothclimaticallymarginal areas, as well as to provide supplementarywaterinareaswithintherain-fedfarmingzone.Inotherwordsirrigationwasdeployedtoincreasecropyieldsperhectare,thatisforlanduseintensification.Thesitesin the JafrBasin fallwell into the category ofwaterdeficit irrigation because the rainfall (< 50 mm perannum)iswellbelowthatrequiredforthecultivationofcereals,evenifallowanceismadeforthesomewhatmoisterconditionsatthetime.Elsewhere,forexampleinnorthernSyriaandIraqwhereNeolithicsettlementsarecommon,thereisnoevidence(tomyknowledge)forNeolithicgravityflowirrigation.

Another important consideration is whetherevidence for the earliestwater channelswill actuallysurvive. Processes of landscape transformation arefundamental to the interpretation of features in thelandscape, and are often rather taken for grantedby archaeologists. Nevertheless, it is clear that thefeatures in theJafrbasinoccurwellout in thedesertwhere there will have been little subsequent activityto remove or disturb any archaeological features.On the other hand if such a site had occurred in thearea of rain-fed cultivation, post-Neolithic activity,specifically agriculture or selective stone robbing forwallconstruction,wouldhaveprobablyremovedsuchfragilefeatures.Forexample,thewellknownfeaturesknown as desert kites,which arguably can be tracedback to thepre-potteryNeolithic, survivewell in thedesertordrysteppe,butneartheagriculturalmarginsthey become incorporated into later field systems,oftenofRoman-Nabataeandate,iftheysurviveatall(Kennedy1982).Moregenerallyitcanbearguedthat

The Domestication of Water: Early Hydraulic Systems

Tony J. Wilkinson DurhamUniversity [email protected]


Neo-Lithics2/1034


thesurvivalofsomanypre-potteryNeolithicsites inJordan,maybebecausemuchofthecountryconsistsof a “landscape of survival” where conditions wereidealforthedevelopmentofearlyprehistoricsites,butwheretheexpansivesettlementsystemsoftheBronzeAgeandlaterperiodswerelesswelldevelopedtherebyensuringthesurvivalofmanyoftheearliestsites.

The loss of archaeological features is particularlyacuteinthecaseofwatersystemsofallperiods.Thisis because the prime water conduction channels arefrequently located in highly erosive environments,orwhereriverinedepositioncanobscurebuiltordugfeatures. Therefore, according to the experience ofthepresentwriter,onlylimitedlengthsofchannelarediscoveredbecausemanystructures,includingthemostprotected parts, have been destroyed or masked byalluvialprocesses.ThisisrelevanttotheinterpretationofthesiteofBa‘jainJordan,whereGebel(2004)haspostulated the former existence of a Neolithic watersystem.Thecaseofthesiqgorgeispreciselythetypeoflocationwheretheevidenceofwatersupplysystemswill have been lost, although without some formof evidence of a water system the argument for theexistenceofwatersystemswillalwaysbehypothetical.

Indirect Evidence for Irrigation

Some of the earliest evidence of irrigation derivesfrom carbonized plant remainswhich takes the formofenlargedcerealgrainsorassemblagesofplantsandweeds associated with wet habitats. For example, aconvincingcasecanbemadeforirrigationatChaghaSefid,inIran,between5200and5000calBCanditispossiblethatthismightbeextendedtoasearlyas6000BC(Hole1977;HelbaekinHoleetal.1969:424).Inadditiontocarbonizedplantremains,theevidencefromenlargedplantphytolithsshouldalsoprovideevidenceforwaterenhancementtoberecognizedinpre-potteryNeolithiccontexts.

Questions of Dating

Oneoftheperennialproblemsassociatedwithlandscapearchaeology is the dating of the features themselves.Hence, it is hardly surprising that the features in theJafrbasinaredifficulttopindownchronologically.Itisveryeasytoassumeadateforevenawell-developedchannelsystem,especiallywhenitisintheproximityof othermorewell dated features.Obviously surfaceartefacts can be a verymisleading guide to the dateof a canal or water conduit, and dating by spatialassociation is hardly robust. Even if a channel hasbeen systematically excavated,many of the artefactswill be residual because theywill have beenwashedinfromearlierdeposits.Bywayofexample,amajorcanalintheBalikhvalleyofSyria,whichonthebasisofindirectevidencefromcuneiformtextswasthoughtto be Old Babylonian in date (early 2nd millennium

BC), contained pottery as early as Halaf in date.However, the excavated artefacts, when taken as anassemblage, together with a single radiocarbon dateoncarbonizedwoodfromthechanneldeposits in thebase,demonstratedthatthechannelwasinfactRoman–Byzantineindate.Eventhiscarefullyobtaineddatecannot give a history of the earlier phases of use ofthe channel, becausemany canal systems have beencleaned out over millennia. Consequently the upcastandclean-outdepositswhichusuallyoccuralongsideawaterchannelcanprovideinvaluablesupportingdates.

In addition, the excavation of diagnostic featuresthat are demonstrably an integral and functional partof thechannel (e.g.watermillsor limebakingkilns)provide reliable dates. Spatial proximity or dates byassociation are much less reliable and must remaintentative. Of course, in the case of apparently earlyremainsintheJafrbasin,suchopportunitiesfordatingareabsent,therebymakingthedatingofsuchfeaturesextremelydifficult.

The Evidence for Early Water Supply Systems beyond Jordan

Theearliestknownwatersupplysystemsintheregionare the wells at Mylouthkia, Cyprus, which haveyielded radiocarbondatesonorganicmaterials in thefillsaroundthe9thand8thmillenniumBC(Peltenburgetal.2000;Table1).Thesewereprobablyfordomesticwatersupply,aswellasperhapssomesupplementarywaterforgardens,buttheydonotconstituteevidencefor early gravity-flow irrigation systems. Such earlywellsareimportanthowever,becauseliketheceramicNeolithicwellsinnorthernIraqdatedtotheSamarranand Hassuna periods (ca. 6000 BC) these greatlyincreased the location flexibility of early settlementssothatsedentarycommunitieswerenottiedtospecificsprings or rivers. As a result, the inhabitants couldharness shallow ground water and this allowed thepossibilityforsmallsettlementstobedispersedacrossthelandscape.

In a seminal article published in 1980, AndrewSherrattstated:

“The earliest demonstrated examples of channelirrigationintheNearEastarerelatedtothebraidedstreamswhichflowdownalluvialfansonthemarginsofthesemiaridbasins.”(Sherratt1980:24)

Alluvialfans,providetheevidenceforsomeoftheearliest irrigation systems. The attraction of alluvialfanlocationsforhumanoccupationisenhancedbythefrequentpresenceofspringsthatissuefromthetoeofthefan,usuallywithinthetransitionzonewherethefanmeetstheplain.However,byharnessingsuchperennialsuppliesaswellasephemeralflows,theinhabitantsofsuchalluvialfanswerenotonlypositioningthemselvesinlocationsthatwerevulnerabletoflooding,becausesuch floodwaters carried a substantial sediment load,


Neo-Lithics2/1035


theassociatedsitesandfieldsystemsdevelopedinwhatmight be described as “self consuming” landscapes.In otherwords, the act of choosing a location on analluvial fan resulted in the settlements themselvesbeingvulnerabletosedimentmaskingbecauseoftheirlocations in areas of active sedimentation. Becausesuch locations were frequently the focus of earlyirrigation systems, it is likely that many of the bestexamplesofearlyirrigationsystemsareburiedbeneathconsiderable depths of alluvium. Good examples ofearly irrigation systems recovered from such “selfconsuminglandscapes”includethefollowing.

Qazvin and Tehran PlainsOn a broad area of coalescing alluvial fans on theIranian plateau in the region of Qazvin and Tehran,Neolithic,Chalcolithicand laterprehistoricmoundedsettlements(tellsortepes),areevidentbothassurfacefeaturesorarepartiallyburiedbyalluvium.

Specifically, on the Tehran plains to the east ofQazvin, excavation coupled with geoarchaeologicalsurveys on the Jajerud alluvial fan system haverevealedthatthesiteofTepePardisexperiencedsome3.5mofdeposition since the6thmillenniumBCandca.2mduringthelastmillennium(Coninghametal.2006: 52).The acute loss of sites by burial requiredthesurveytofocusontheexaminationofupcastfromqanatmounds to recognize the artefacts fromdeeplyburiedsites.Asaresult,sixburiedprehistoricsitesofChalcolithicdatewererecordedalongsome30kmofqanatswalked,comparedwith8sitesfrom105kmofsurfacetransects(Coninghametal.2006:51).

At Tepe Pardis, earth-lined channels wereburied below the occupation deposits of the site aswell as within the stratigraphy thereby providing asealed stratigraphic context for early irrigation. Theradiometric dates, which fall in the region of 6000-5000BC,providearelativelysecuredatefortheearlyintroductionofirrigation.Again,alluvialfanssuppliedbothawatersupplyandalocationforsettlementwiththe result that the selection of sites for inhabitationresulted in theireventual lossasa resultof sedimentmasking.

Daulatabad, IranThe earliest evidence for irrigation in eastern IrancomesfromnearDaulatabad,nearTepeYahaya.Thistakes the form of a remarkably preserved landscapeofrelictfieldsandoccasionallowprehistoricmoundsoccupied during the late 6th and 5th millennium BC(Prickett 1986). Occasional traces of possible canalswereapparentwithinthefieldarea,butmoreconvincingweretheprofilesofwhatappearedtobecanalsuptoca. 1.4mwide and 0.7m deep stratifiedwithin oneor two of the sites and buried below some 4.5m ofculturalstrata.Irrigationwaterwasapparentlyderivedfrom the annual floods of a nearby river, although itappearsthattheflowwaseventuallycutoffsothatthelandscapewasnotburied.Choga Mami, Iraq

The sixth millennium BC site of Choga Mami, islocatedwithinazoneofalluvialfansthatdebouchfromawestern ridge at the edgeof theZagrosMountainsnear Iraq – Iran border. Like the examples from theTehranplainandDaulatabad,examplesofearlycanalshave been recorded stratified within the site itself(Oates1969:122-27).However,thespringfloodsfromtheZagroswouldhavearrivedtoolatetonourishthecrops,forwhichwehavecompellingarchaeobotanicalevidence(Helbaek1972).Inthiscasetherequirementofgettingwatertothecropsduringthewintergrowingseasonappearstohavebeendealtwithbyconstructingirrigation channels along a gentle gradient roughlyparalleltothemountainfront(OatesandOates1976:fig. 4b).By decreasing the gradient to below that ofthenormaldistributaries,flowenergyalongthecanalswould have been lessened, thereby encouragingsedimentation and associated aggradation. Thesechannels derived theirwater from the nearbyGangirRiver(Helbaek1972:35),althoughitisunlikelythatthiswasfromthe“natural inundation”of thealluvialfans by the annual springfloods because these cometoo late for the germination and growth of cerealsduring thewinterandearlyspring.Rather theannualrainfallofbetween200-300mmperannum,whichfallsmainlybetweenNovemberandFebruary,wouldhavesuppliedsomeofthenecessarysoilmoisture(Hunting1968: 3), with supplementary flow perhaps derivingfromthelowerflowsoftheGangirRiverasrequired.Suchanexpedientwould,however,haveincreasedtheinstabilityofanycanals,becausetherisingspringfloodwouldthreatentoflowalongthecanalstherebycausingdamagetoirrigationstructures,canalsandfields.

Upper Khuzestan Plain (Iran)WithintheUpperKhuzestanPlainsofsouthwestIrantheabruptshiftofoneofthemainriverchannelshasresulted in an entire alluvial plain being dissectedby a complex of gullied badlands.This has revealedoccasionalChalcolithicsitesof the6th-4thmillenniumBC,someofwhichareburiedandinterleavedwithinalluvial sediments emanating from the fans of DarKhazineh,Abgenji and Naft Sefid (Lees and Falcon1952:31-34;MoghadamandMiri2007,fig.3).AtDarKhazeneh, one of the sites exposed by this phase ofdissection,thepresenceofthinarchaeologicalhorizonsinterstratifiedwithfinesiltandloamoverbankdepositsimplies that intermittent occupation occurred withina low-energyaggradingenvironment (Alizadehetal.2004: 73). That occupation may have been seasonaland temporary is supportedby thepresenceofbonesof very young or recently born sheep/goats togetherwithadominantassemblageofcharredseedsofwildgrassesandlegumes.TogetherthegeoarchaeologyandbioarchaeologysuggeststhatsuchsiteswereoccupiedintermittentlyalongsideawadisystemdrainingfromthenearbyridgesoftheZagrosmountains.Theoccasionalpresenceofburiedsites in thearea suggests that thisareahadbeendeliberatelyselectedbyprehistoricagro-pastoral communities because the aggrading alluvial


Neo-Lithics2/1036


environmentprovidedanidealenvironmentforflocksandperhapsopportunisticfloodrecessionagriculture.Ironically, however, it appears that the deliberateselectionofaggradingwadiedgelocationshasalmostinevitablyresultedintheburialofprehistoricsitesandthelossofthearchaeologicalrecord.

WhereasintheQazvinandTehranplainsthebulkofmanyprehistoricsiteslieburiedbeneaththealluviumwith the summits remaining visible, in the Mianabplains of Khuzestan some sites have been entirelyburied. They have only been revealed because thediversionofamajorchannel(theGarGar)initiatedamajorphaseofincisionthatexposedthesitestogetherwiththeirfullstratigraphicsequences(Alizadehetal.2004:80-82).

Altogether, the above evidence of water supplysystems demonstrates that wells, presumably fordomesticwater,werealreadyinuseby8000BC,andby5000-6000BCcommunitiesintheNearEastweremanipulating seasonal floods for irrigatingfields andforperhapsfortheenhancementofpasturelands.Howsuch precocious developments relate to the earliestriverineirrigationsystemsofMesopotamiaisdifficulttosay,althoughevidencefromOueliinsouthernIraqsuggests that early irrigationwasalready inplaceby6000-5500BC(Huot1989;1996).

The remarkable group of features recorded inthe Wadis Abu Tulayha and Ruweishid ash-Sharqican therefore be seen to fit between the precociousdevelopmentof earlywells inCyprus and the Israel/PalestineandtheslightlylaterevidenceforalluvialfanirrigationsystemsofIran.Althoughonfirstimpressionthe systemsof the JafrBasinmayappear to formanunusualoutlier,theydoinfactfitwithinaratherlongerperiodofadaptationstospecifictypesofwatercourse.

The Features of the Jafr Basin and Processes of Water Management

The association of agro-pastoral settlements with aseries of valley floor barrages provides compellingevidenceforpre-potteryNeolithicwatermanagementsystems. Both barrage 1 at Wadi Abu Tulayha andbarrages 1 and 2 atWadi Ruweishid ash-Sharqi arelocatedinmedium-sizetributarywadisleadingintothemainwadis (WadiAbuTulayhaandWadiRuweishidash-Sharqi; Fujii 2007: 16 and figs 3 and 11). Suchlocations are similar to those of the water diversionsystems for birkeh (i.e. water tanks) on the DarbZubeidah in SaudiArabia. In the case of these earlyIslamicwatersystems,lowwallswereusedtodeflectwater from minor wadis or enclosed depressions tothewatertankswhichsuppliedwaterforthepilgrimsand their pack animals passing along theHajj routesen route to Mecca. Significantly, many of the tanksand their deflectorwallswere located so as to avoidthemainwadi channels, because the powerful flowswouldnotonlydamageanybuiltstructures,butwouldalsorapidlyinfillandoverwhelmanystoragefacilities

as well (Wilkinson 1980). Not only are flows fromthe side wadis easier to manage, the relatively lowdischargesarelessdamagingtothecontainmentwalls.InthecaseoftheJafrbasin,iftheaimofthebarrageswas toaccumulatebothsoilandwater forencouragegrazingorforage,alocationwithinasidewadiwouldposenothreattothevegetationthatdevelopedbehindthem.

ThewatersystemsoftheJafrbasinsystemsprovidea good example of the incremental enhancement ofwell-favouredniches.Inotherwordsoverlongperiodsoftimethepresumablymobileinhabitantsoftheareaobserved howwater was shed from the raised areasof ground to gather in shallowwadis or basins (qa)therebyenhancing thegrowthofvegetation to createanidealpastureresource.Ittookonlyalimitedamountofimaginationandworktoconstructwallstoenhancethe existing natural flowpatterns and to use them tosecure abonusgrazing resource,or even to cultivatecereals.Forexample, todaythemobile inhabitantsoftheBadiahaveanintimateknowledgeofthelandscapeaswellasbothsoilmoistureandwateravailability,sothateachtypeofwatergatheringlocationhasitsownname(LancasterandLancaster1997).

Both the walls and their location are consistentwith early Islamic water-gathering features recordedbythewriterinSaudiArabia(whererainfallisintherange 50-100 mm per annum), as well as Roman-Byzantine or perhaps PPN water gathering featuresrecorded in Jordan byBetts andHelms (1989).ThissuggeststhatthesystemsoftheJafrbasinrepresentanextremelylongtraditionofwatermanagement that iswelladaptedbothtotheneedsoftheinhabitantsaswellas to thenatureof the local environment.Of course,the sceptical observer may argue for an alternativeconclusion,namelythatthebarrageswerebuiltbylatermobilepastoralistsinanareathathadpreviouslybeenintensively used by Neolithic communities, and thattheNeolithicartefacts thenbecame incorporated intothelaterstructure.Overallhowever,Ifindthecontext,associationanddatingevidencepersuasive,althoughitisnecessarytofurtherenhancethedatingframework.

The approach of incrementally managingresourcesisinlinewithotherexamplesofearlywatermanagementfoundintheNearEast.Theseincludetheuse of crevasse splays along rivers in Mesopotamiafor primitive irrigation, or of runoff and receiverareasintheNegevandArabiadesertsasapreludetorunoffagriculture.InthecaseofrunoffagricultureintheNegev, drier parts of the desert shedmorewateras runoff thanwetterareas.This isbecause theareastothenorththatreceivehigherrainfallhaveagreatercover of soil and loess,which absorbsmore rainfall.Ontheotherhand,indrierareasfurthersouth,wheretheterrainhasmoreimpermeablerockyoutcrops,therun-onorfieldareasdownslopereceiveagreaterbonusof water because of the enhanced run-off. Similarly,smallerwadicatchments shedahigherpercentageofrun-offthanthelargebasins,becausethelatterabsorbwaterflowwithinwadisedimentsandcolluvium(Yair


Neo-Lithics2/1037


2001;Wilkinson 2003: 169-170). Such variations inrun-offandwateryieldwouldhavebeenobservedandnotedbythelocal,presumablytransitory,residentsoftheregionandwouldbeadaptedby themtoproducetheearliestwatersystems.Presumablyinitialattemptsto “domesticate water” would be minimal, whereaslaterattemptswouldentailgreaterinvestmentsoftimeand effort to produce larger andmorewellmanagedsystems.ClearlytheexamplesfromtheJafrbasinfallintotheearliersimplercategoryofwatersystem.

Conclusions

The ancient water supply systems of the Jafr basinhave the potential tomake a significant contributionto the history ofwater supply. Chronologically, theyappeartofalltowardsthebeginningofa10,000yearsequence of water management, and their form andlocationfallslogicallywithinthoseusedformillenniainArabia.Thismakesitevenmoreimportantthatthey,orsimilarsystems,shouldbedatedasunambiguouslyas possible. As pointed out above, dates for watersupplysystemsarenotoriouslydifficult toobtainandcanbeambiguous,thereforeitiscrucialthatdatesaresampledfromasmanydifferentcontextsaspossible.For example, dating by association can vary in itscredibility. In interior Syria at the site ofAndarin, afunctionalrelationshipbetweenkilnsandawatertanksupplied secure dating evidence for the water tanksbecausethekilnswererequiredtofirethelimestonetomaketheplaster(Mango2002).Obviously,inthecaseofprehistoricsystems,suchrelationshipsareunlikelytoobtainbecausethesystemswerewithoutplaster,butthisexampleemphasisesthatassociationaldatingcanvaryfromstrong(ifitisaclearfunctionalrelationship)tolesssecure,whentheassociationalrelationshipislessclear. Demonstrating a clear, functional relationshipbetweentheneighbouringsitesandthewatersystemswouldthereforeenhancetheassociationaldate.

OSL dating of the accumulated sedimentsthemselveshasthepotentialtoprovideanindependentandabsolutedatefortheassociatedsediments.

Furthersurveyisnecessarytodetermineifexamplesof similar water systems can be found, or if such

examplesoccurwithina secure stratigraphiccontext.Forexample,inYemenalowvalleyfloorcheckdamwassecurelydated,notonlybecauseoftheradiocarbondateobtainedfromcharcoalwithinthesoilbuiltupagainstit,butalsobecauseitwasstratifiedwithinawell-dated10 m deep sedimentary sequence, some 6 m belowthe ground surface (Wilkinson 2003: 190). Becausewatermanagementsystemsarewellplacedtobeeithersweptawaybyfloodsorburiedbysediments, theidealwatermanagementsystemwouldincludesystemsthatpossessedaclearspatiallayout,suchasthoseintheJafrbasin,togetherwithothercomponentsthatareburiedwithin a well dated and unambiguous sedimentarysequence.Thediscoveryofsuchcontextsisofcourseatallorder,butthesystemsfromtheJafrbasinrepresentanexcellentfirststepinourunderstandingoftheinitialphasesofwatermanagementintheMiddleEast.

References

Alizadeh A., Kouchoukos N.,Wilkinson T.J., Bauer A.M., andMashkourM.2004 Human-environmentinteractionsontheUpper Khuzestanplains,SouthwestIran.RecentInvestigations. Paléorient30/1:69-88.

BarkerG.,GilbertsonD.,andMattingleyD.(eds.)2007 Archaeologyanddesertification–theWadiFaynan landscapesurvey,southernJordan.Oxford: OxbowBooks,2007.

BettsA.andHelmsS.W.1989 AwaterharvestingandstoragesystematIbnel-Ghazzi ineasternJordan:apreliminaryreport.Levant21:3-11.

Coningham R.A.E., Fazeli H., Young R.L., Gilmore G.K.,KarimianH.,MaghsoudiM.,DonahueG.K.,andBattC.M.2006 Socioeconomictransformations:settlementsurveyin theTehranPlainandexcavationsatTepePardis. IranXLIV:33-62.

Location Rainfall Date Cal.BC Comments Reference

Mylouthkia well 8740-8280 Direct dating of fill Kinnaird et al. 2007

Mylouthkia well 7450-6690 Direct dating of fill Kinnaird et al. 2007

North Jazira, (Iraq). Well/ water hole 350 mm ca. 6000 Artifacts from fill (Samarran & Hassuna) Wilkinson & Tucker 1995

Wadi Abu Tulayha (Jordan) < 50mm 7000-6000 Associational dates & artifacts Fujii 2007

Tepe Pardis (Iran) (channel) 6000-5000 Dates on fills above & below Conningham et al.

Chogha Mami (Iraq) 6000-5000 Associated cultural layers within tell Oates & Oates, 1976

Daulatabad (Iran) 5500 - 4500 Channels stratified within sites Prickett 1986

Dar Khazineh (Iran) 4800-4000 Site buried in valley fill associated with possible flood recession agriculture.

Alizadeh et al. 2004

Sedd edh-Dhra ‘ah (Yemen) 3960-3630 Radiocarbon date on soil behind check dam Wilkinson 1999

Wadi Sana (Yemen) 4000-3000 Radiocarbon dates Harrower 2008

Table 1 Early water supply


Neo-Lithics2/1038


FujiiS.2007 WadiAbuTulayhaandWadiRuweishidash-Sharqi:an investigationofPPNBbarragesystemsintheJafrBasin. Neo-Lithics2/07:6-17.

GebelH.G.K.2004 Thedomesticationofwater.EvidencefromEarly NeolithicBa‘ja?H.-D.BienertandJ.Häser(eds.), MenofDykesandCanals:25-35.Rahden:VerlagMarie Leidorf.

HelbaekH.1972 SamarranirrigationagricultureatChogaMami. Iraq34:35-48.

HoleF.(ed.)1977 StudiesintheArchaeologicalHistoryoftheDehLuran Plain.TheExcavationofChaghaSefid.AnnArbor: MemoirsoftheMuseumofAnthropology,Universityof Michigan,no.9.

HoleF.,FlanneryK.V.,andNeelyJ.A.1969 PrehistoryandHumanEcologyoftheDehLuranPlain. AnnArbor:Memoirno.1UniversityofMichigan, MuseumofAnthropology.

HuntingTechnicalServices1968 MandaliIrrigationProject.SoilSurveyandLand ClassificationReport.London:HuntingTechnical Services,UnpublishedReport.

HuotJ.-L.1989 ‘UbaidianvillagesoflowerMesopotamia.Permanence andevolutionfrom‘Ubaid0to‘Ubaid4asseenfrom Tellel’Oueili.InE.F.HenricksonandI.Thuesen(eds.), UponThisFoundation-The‘Ubaidreconsidered:19- 42.Copenhagen:CarstenNiebuhrInstitutePublications 10.

KennedyD.L.1982 ArchaeologicalexplorationsontheRomanfrontierin North-eastJordan.Oxford:BAR(InternationalSeries) 134.

KinnairdT.,SandsersonD.C.,BurbidgeC.,andPeltenburgE.2007 OSLDatingofNeolithicKissonerga-Mylouthkia, Cyprus.Neo-Lithics2/07:51-57.

LancasterW.andLancasterF.1997 IndigenousresourcemanagementsystemsintheBâdia oftheBilâdash-Sham.JournalofAridEnvironments 35:367-78.

LeesG.M.andFalconN.L.1952 ThegeographicalhistoryoftheMesopotamianPlains. GeographicalJournal118(1):24-39.

MangoM.M.2002 ExcavationsandsurveyatAndrona,SyriabytheOxford team.DumbartonOaksPapers56:303-11.

Moghaddam.A.andMiriN.2007 Archaeologicalsurveysinthe“easterncorridor”, south-westernIran.Iran45:23-55.

OatesJ.1969 ChogaMami,1967-68:apreliminaryreport. Iraq31:115-52.

OatesD.andOatesJ.1976 EarlyirrigationagricultureinMesopotamia.InG.deG. Sieveking,I.H.Longworth,andK.E.Wilson(eds.), ProblemsinEconomicandSocialArchaeology:109-35. London:Duckworth.

PeltenburgE.,ColledgeS.,CroftP., JacksonA.,McCartneyC.,andMurrayM.A.2000 Agro-pastoralcolonizationofCyprusinthe10th millenniumBP:initialassessments.Antiquity74:844-53.

PrickettM.1986 Settlementduringtheearlyperiods.InT.W.Beale(ed.), ExcavationsatTepeYahya,Iran1967-1975.TheEarly Periods:215-46.Cambridge:AmericanSocietyfor PrehistoricResearch.

RambeauC.2006 Palaeoenvironmentalstudies:amulti-proxy reconstructionofthesedimentologicalhistoryofJordan andadjacentareas(c.20,000B.C.E.-presentday). WLCreport,2006:9-10.

SherrattA.1980 Water,soilsandseasonalityinearlycerealcultivation. WorldArchaeology11(3):313-330.

WilkinsonT.J.1980 DarbZubayda-1979:thewaterresources.Atlal(Journal ofSaudiArabianArchaeology)4:51-67.2003 ArchaeologicallandscapesoftheNearEast.Tucson: UniversityofArizonaPress.

YairA.2001 Water-harvestingefficiencyinaridandsemi-aridareas. InS.W.Breckle,M.Veste,andW.Wucherer(eds.), SustainableLandUseinDeserts:289-302.Berlin:Springer.

SocialAspectsofWaterTechnologyintheProtohistoricNearEast

Neo-Lithics2/1039


In thiscontribution Iwould like todiscuss thesocialaspects involved with the domestication of water intheProtohistoricNearEast.Since theearly1990’s itbecame apparent that the Protohistoric communitiesof theNearEasthad theknowledgeofdiggingwellsforwater.Inaccordancetothegeologicalsettingthesewereeitherdugorcutinstone,fromthesitesurfaceintothewateraquifer,4-9mdeep.Thewellswerefoundintheopenareasoftheprehistoricvillages,andnotinsideclosedcourtyards.Thediggingofsuchaninstallationrequiredmuchlabor.Thus,thelocationonsiteandthetechnicaldifficultiessuggestthatthediggingofwellswas apublic, communal enterpriseof the settlement,andnottheactivityofindividualhouseholds.

Protohistoric Wells in the Near East

TheearliestNeolithicwells,datedtoca.8000BC(Pre-PotteryNeolithicB),wereuncoveredintwoCypriotesites: Kissonerga-Mylouthkia and Shillouro-cambous. InKissonerga-Mylouthkia, near theMediterranean coast of western Cyprus, twocylindricalshaftsdugintothelocalsandstonewere exposed (Peltenburg et al. 2000; 2001).Eachwell is about 2m in diameter and 7 to8mdeep.However,sinceerosionandmodernquarryinghavedestroyedtheupperpartofthewells,theexactoriginaldepthisunknown.InShillourocambous, located inland in southernCyprus,threewellswerereported(Guilaineetal.1999,Fig.1;GuilaineandBriois2001:41,Structures2,66,114).Sofarlittleinformationhasbeenpublishedonthesewells,whichwerecutinthelocalrocklikethetwowellsreportedfromKissonerga-Mylouthkia.

Threewellswerereportedfromtheunder-water Pre-PotteryNeolithic C (ca. 7000 BC)siteof‘AtlitYam,neartheMediterraneancoastofIsrael(GaliliandSharvit1998;Galilietal.2002),butonlyoneofthemhasbeendescribedindetail(GaliliandNir1993).Thesettlementof ‘Atlit Yam is characterized by elongatedwalls running through the village.Thewells,however, are not bordered within enclosures,butseemtobeopentoall.

Onewellwasdiscoveredduringmyexca-vationsatSha‘arHagolan(Figs.1-2),aPotteryNeolithic site in thecentral Jordanvalley, ra-diometricallydatedtoca.6400-6200BC(Gar-finkeletal.2006).ThesiteofSha‘arHagolanischaracterizedbylargecourtyardhousesbuiltabutting each other, on both sides of streets

conveying the impressionofawell-organizedvillage(Figs. 3-4). These courtyard houses were composedofonelargecourtyardsurroundedby8-24rooms,andreach220-700m²insize.Thesewereusedbyextendedfamilies.Thewellwasnotfoundinsidesuchastruc-ture,butinopenareaofthevillage.

AnotherwellwasfoundduringmyexcavationsatTelTsaf, aMiddleChalcolithic village in the centralJordan valley (Fig. 6). It is radiometrically dating to4700calBC(Garfinkeletal.2007).Thesettlementischaracterizedbylargebuildings;eachiscomposedofanenclosedcourtyard.Inthecourtyardvariousrectan-gular or rounded roomswere found.Thewell, how-ever,wasnot found insideofoneof thesebuildings,butinAreaB,anopenareaatthesouthernoutscartofthesettlement.

A Late Chalcolithic well was reported fromAbuHaf (Alon1988,Fig. 2), but nodetailed informationwassupplied.

Social Aspects of Water Technology in the Protohistoric Near East

Yosef Garfinkel HebrewUniversity,Jerusalem [email protected]

Fig. 1 Sha‘ar Hagolan site with the location of the excavated areas. The well was discovered in Area G.


Neo-Lithics2/1040


Fig. 2 The Neolithic well of Sha’ar Hagolan.

Fig. 3 Sha’ar Hagolan: Courtyard structures at Area E.

Fig. 4 Sha’ar Hagolan: A courtyard structure at Area H.

Fig. 5 Tel Tsaf site with the location of the excavated areas. The well was discovered in Area B.


Neo-Lithics2/1041


Discussion

Nature of Work: Theconstructionofawellrequiredvariousstagesofwork:

1.Digging,orcutinstone,intodepthof4-9m.2.Removingcubicmetersofsediment.Afewtons ofmatrixneedtobeliftedupthewellshaftand dampedaway.3.Collectingandtransportinghundredsofstones fortheliningofthewell.4.Regularmaintenanceisneededtokeepthewell workingduringtheperiodofusage.

Allthesestagesarelaborintensiveoperation,farbeyondtheindividualperson,orevenoneextendedfamily.Itrequiredtheinvolvementofalargegroupofpeople.

Location on Site: AtSha’arHagolanandinTelTsafthe locationof thewells isclearly in theopenareasof thesettlements.Theywerenotfoundin the largecourtyardbuildings,whichexistedinbothsites(Figs.3-4, 7). Technically, people could have dug private

wells in their large confirmed privetcourtyards.Insuchasituationthewellswouldnotbeaccessibletoeveryoneinthecommunity,butonlytothespecificfamily.However,wellswereneverfoundinsideclosedcourtyards,andthisseemstobethecasenotonlyinthetwositesintheJordanvalley,but toall theother sitesmentioned: Kissonerga-Mylouthkia,ShillourocambousandAtlitYam.

The combination of these two as-pectsclearly indicates that thediggingand usage of wells was done on thecommunity level, and not by the indi-vidualfamilies.Thewellswerepartofthe public activity in the early villagecommunities. Technologies like flintknapping, pottery making, beads ma-nufacturing or building houses, weredoneontheindividuallevel.Thetrans-mittingofthisknowledgewasprobablydone fromone individual to the other.In contrast, the knowledge of diggingwells is a technology practiced on thecommunity level. This situation raisesvariousquestions.Ifdiggingwellswasa “common knowledge”,whowas co-ordinating the community during theconstruction? Alternatively, if specificpeople,“wellengineers”,wererespon-sible for the activity, this was anotheraspectofspecializationintheProtohis-toricperiod.

Fig. 6 The Middle Chalcolithic well of Sha’ar Hagolan.

Fig. 7 Tel Tsaf: Courtyard structures at Area C.


Neo-Lithics2/1042


References

AlonD.1988 TheSpatialDistributionofChalcolithicSettlements intheSouthernShefelah.InE.SternandD.Urman (eds.),ManandEnvironmentintheSouthernShefelah. Givatim:Massada(Hebrew).

ButzerC.1976 EarlyHydraulicCivilizationinEgypt.Chicago: UniversityofChicago.

GaliliE.andNirY.1993 TheSubmergedPre-PotteryNeolithicWaterWell ofAtlitYam,NorthernIsrael,anditsPalaeo- environmentalImplications.TheHolocene3:265-270.

GaliliE.,RosenB.,GopherA.,andHorwitzL.K.2002 TheEmergenceandDispersionoftheEastern MediterraneanFishingVillage:Evidencefrom SubmergedNeolithicSettlementsofftheCarmelCoast, Israel,JournalofMediterraneanArchaeology 15:167-198.

GaliliE.andSharvitJ.1998 SubmergedNeolithicWater-WellsfromtheCarmel CoastofIsrael.InH.Koschik(ed.),Brunnender Jungsteinzeit,InternationalesSymposiumErkelenz, 27.bis29.Oktober1997:31-44.Köln:Rheinland- Verlag.

GarfinkelY.2004 TheGoddessofSha‘arHagolan.Excavationsata NeolithicSiteinIsrael.Jerusalem:IsraelExploration Society.

GarfinkelY.andMillerM.A.2002 Sha‘arHagolanVol1.NeolithicArtinContext.Oxford: Oxbow.

GarfinkelY.,VeredA.,andBar-YosefO.2006 TheDomesticationofWater:TheNeolithicWellof Sha‘arHagolan,JordanValley,Israel.Antiquity80: 686-696.

GarfinkelY.,BenShlomoD.,FreikemanM.,andVeredA.2007 TelTsaf:The2004-2006ExcavationSeasons.Israel ExplorationJournal57:1-33.

GuilaineJ.andBrioisF.2001 ParekklishaShillourokambos:AnEarlyNeolithicsite inCyprus.InS.Swiny(ed.),TheEarliestPrehistory ofCyprus:FromColonizationtoExploitation:37-54. Boston:AmericanSchoolsofPrehistoricResearch.

GuilaineJ.,DevèzeP.,CoularouJ.,andBrioisF.1999 TêtesculptéeenpierredansleNéolithiquePré- CéramiquedeShillourokambos(Parekklisha,Chypre). ReportofTheDepartmentofAtiquitiesCyprus:1-12.

PeltenburgE.,ColledgeS.,CroftP.,JacksonA.,McCartneyC.,andMurrayM.A.2000 Agro-PastoralistColonizationofCyprusinthe10th MillenniumBP:InitialAssessment.Antiquity 74:844-853.

PeltenburgE.,CroftP.,JacksonP.A.,McCartneyC.,andMurrayM.A.2001 Well-EstablishedColonists:Mylouthkia1andthe Cypro-Pre-PotteryNeolithicB.InS.Swiny(ed.), TheEarliestPrehistoryofCyprus:FromColonization toExploitation:61-93.Boston:AmericanSchoolsof PrehistoricResearch.

Earlyagricultureandditchirrigation

Neo-Lithics2/1043


By the sixth millennium BC, substantial watermanagement systems had developed across diverseregionsoftheMiddleEast.ThediscoveriesofsubstantialPre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) installations for thestorageanddistributionofwater in the JafrBasinofsouthernJordan(Fujii,thisvolume)augmentroughlycontemporaneousfacilitiesdiscoveredinnorthernIraq(Oates1969)andeasternIran(Prickett1986).Inturn,thesediscoveriespromptustoturnourattentiontotheearlierPre-PotteryNeolithicA(PPNA)oftheLevantasalikelyoriginpointforsimpleirrigationtechniques.IntheJordanValley,PPNAagrarianhamletsweretetheredtopermanentwatersources,positionedonalluvialfansand/or below springs.Well-known examples areTellas-Sultan at Jericho (Kenyon andHolland1981) andthesitesoftheSalibiyaBasin,includingNetivHagdud(Bar-YosefandGopher1997)andSalibiyaIX(Enoch-Shiloh and Bar-Yosef 1997). In north Syria theyemergedalsoinriversidecontexts,suchasatMureybet(Ibáñez 2008), Jerf al-Ahmar (Stordeur and Abbès2002)andSheikhHassan(Cauvin1980).

Archaeology now stands well-prepared toinvestigate simple irrigation works which left littleor no direct traces in the archaeological record. Thetheoretical consequences have been deliberatedover several decades; perhaps best articulated bySherratt (1980). Sherratt observed that the expansivecanal systemsof early urbanMesopotamia tended topromoteavisionof irrigationtechnologyascomplexand evolved with respect to early farming. On theother hand (as he countered), irrigation is likely tohavebeenapreconditionforsmall-scalehorticulture,rather than an outcome of it. Sherratt observed thatrain-fed agriculture,with its requirements for tillage,laboriouslandclearanceandraisingwatertoelevatedland,isinfactthemoredifficultproposition.Instead,lowland wetland environments - where communitiespracticed flood-recession farming or trained spring-waters onto small cultivated fields by the expedientof digging channels (which wemight better term as‘ditches’tokeepanappropriatescaleinmind)-morelikelywitnessedthebirthofagriculture.TheideawasalreadyanoldonebythetimeofSherratt’spaper,givenSpinden’s (1928: 52-53)proposition that irrigation isa “conceptionwhichaccounts for theveryoriginsofagriculture.”

We should not doubt that PPNA communitieslacked the social capital or technical wherewithal tobuildirrigationsystems.Communitiessuchastheoneat Jerichowhichcoulderecta large townwall,buildanelaboratetowerwithavaultedstaircase,largetanks-andnotleast-carveoutamassiveditchthatstandscomparison(atleastingirth),withanyirrigationcanal

fromoldSumer,couldhavemetwithnodifficultiesindivertingspringwatersontosmallgardenplots(Dorrell1978: 11-12; Miller 1980). The accomplishments ofhunter-gatherer groups, past and present, provide uswithabaselinefortheircapabilities.Inordertopromotethegrowthofwildplants,bandsofPaiuteintheOwensValleyofsouthernCaliforniawererecordedashavingirrigated two substantialfields (of5km2 and10km2respectively),bydammingacreekandthendivertingwater from it through two separate ditches (Steward1929). It tookonlyaday for a coupleofdozenmento complete the work. In the alternate hemisphere,prehistoric networks of channels lined with basaltwereconstructednearthesouth-westcoastofVictoria(Australia)forthepurposeoftrappingeelsandfish,bythediversionoffloodwaters(Couttsetal.1978).Suchdeviceshavealongantiquity.TheKukswampinthehighlandsofPapuaNewGuineawasalreadydrainedbyasubstantialchannelat9,000BP(Golson1980).

Asseveralauthorshavenoted(e.g.Wilkinson,thisvolume,Rosen1999),itisunlikelythatsmallditcheswillhavesurvivedinthearchaeologicalrecordeveniftheydidexistintheLevantineNeolithic.Fortunately,several circumstantial lines of evidence can signalthe presence of irrigation. The most convincing ofthem is the presence of high levels of multicellularcereal phytoliths, including ‘silica skeletons’, inarchaeological sediments (Rosen 1999; Rosen andWeiner1994).Ithasalsobeensuggestedthatthepresentof hydrophilic plants such as Scirpus and Cyperusin archaeobotanical assemblages indicate irrigationpractices in wetland environments (Flannery 1969;Leroi-Gourhan1974).Thismaybetrueinsomecases,but it does not automatically follow that proximitytowetlands necessitates the practice of irrigation.AtÇatalhöyük in the seventh millennium BC, RobertsandRosen(2009)haveestablishedthatwheatwasnotcultivatedasan irrigatedcrop,despite theabundanceof seasonalwetlands adjacent to themound. Instead,itwasgrownaconsiderabledistanceaway,underrain-fedconditions.

Ofcourse,weshouldnotexpecttheearlyirrigationscenario to be a fait accompli for PPNA sites.WadiFaynan16insouthernJordanhasbeeninvestigatedbythephytolithmethod,withnegativeresults.Situatedatthe confluence ofWadiGhuwayr,Wadi Shuqayr andWadiFaynan(FinlaysonandMithen2007:11),thesiteoverlooksastreamfedbyperennialwaters.Yetcerealsand pulses make only a desultory presence amongthe charredmacrobotanical remains (Kennedy 2007)and there isnoevidenceforelevatedphytolith levelsamongcerealremains(JenkinsandRosen2007).Thelocal phytogeography and topography may explain

Early Agriculture and Ditch Irrigation

Phillip C. Edwards LaTrobeUniversity,Melbourne [email protected]


Neo-Lithics2/1044


the scarcity of cereals which are more commonlyencounteredinPPNAsettlementsfurthertothenorth.WadiFaynan16sitsatopaknoll,elevatedatleasteightmetes above the adjacentwadi bed, just downstreamfrom the point whereWadi Ghuwayr broadens afteremerging from a steep gorge (Mithen and Finlayson2007:476).Thereisslopinglandabovethewadithatmighthavebeensuitableforirrigatedcrops.However,the level of entrenchment of the stream might haveprecluded the easy diversion of water to higherground. It is also unclear whether winter and springfloods would not have repeatedly scoured the wadibedsanditsbanksduringthegrowingseason(Mithenand Finlayson 2007: 476).Wadi Faynan 16 lies at aconsiderably higher altitude (~ 400 metres abovesea level;Tipping 2007: 170) than the JordanValley

PPNAsites.Thesettlementenjoyedcloseproximitytohabitatsthatsupportedmixedwoodland(Austin2007)resourcesandanunderstoryofMediterraneangrasses(Kennedy 2007: 427). Theremay not have been thesameimpetustocultivateasinthosesettlementslyingoutsidetheMediterraneanzone.

Nevertheless, ongoing phytolith analysis of samplesfrom Netiv Hagdud and Dhra‘ (another Jordan ValleyPPNA site), have not yet reported evidence of cerealirrigation (Jenkins and Rosen 2007: 435). Dhra ‘lies atthebaseoftheKerakPlateauonaperennialspring,nearthesouth-easternshoreoftheDeadSea(Finlaysonetal.2003).ThesituationofitsdownstreamPPNAneighbour,Zahratadh-Dhra‘2(ZAD2)seemsevenmorepropitiousas a likely locale for ditch irrigation (Fig. 1). Indeed, itseemsdifficulttoexplainthesettlementwithoutinvoking

Fig. 1 Zahrat adh-Dhra‘ 2: general view looking west.

Structure2

Structure1

Structure3

Structure4


Neo-Lithics2/1045


cultivationbyirrigationasarationale.At220metresbelowsealevel,ZAD2iss locatedinaregionoflowrainfallwhichwasalwaysbeyondthesupportofMediterraneangrasses(Edwardsetal.2004;EdwardsandHigham2001;EdwardsandHouse2007).Theunderlyingsedimentsarecomposedofsterileevaporiteswhicharealsounsuitablefor Mediterranean vegetation. The deeply entrenchedWadiadh-Dhranowrunspastthesiteandhasdestroyedpartofitbyerosion.HydrophilicMelanopsisshellsoccurinthearchaeologicalsediments,however;andduringtheperiodwhenthesitewasoccupiedthestreamflowedatthecurrentaltitudeoftheplain(House2003).

Located inahotand treelessplain, thesite’sonlyapparentadvantagesweretheexpansesofflatlandthatlaytothesouth,whichcouldhavebeengravity-fedbywaterdirectlyfromthewadi.ArockyalluviuminthevicinityofDhra‘villagemighthavebeen induced tosupportcrops(asitdoesnowwiththeaidofirrigatedwater).Furthermore,alarge-seededformofwildbarleywas common at the site, suggesting that it had beencultivated(Meadows2004,2005).Aplannedprogramofphytolithsamplingatthesiteshouldformadecisivetestofthetheorythat‘ditchirrigation’playedacrucialpartinthedevelopmentofearlyPPNAagriculture.Inthemeantime,wecanlookforwardtothedevelopmentof further indicators of ancient irrigation, such asEmmaJenkins’currentresearchoncarbonisotopesandirrigatedcerealsattheUniversityofReading.

References

AustinP.2007 Thewoodcharcoalmacroremains.InB.Finlaysonand S.Mithen(eds.),TheEarlyPrehistoryofWadiFaynan, southernJordan:archaeologicalsurveyofWadis Faynan,Ghuwayrandal-Bustanandevaluationofthe Pre-PotteryNeolithicAsiteofWF16:408-419. Oxford:OxbowBooks.

Bar-YosefO.andGopherA.(eds)1997 AnEarlyNeolithicVillageintheJordanValley,PartI: TheArchaeologyofNetivHagdud.Schoolof PrehistoricResearchBulletin43,PeabodyMuseum ofArchaeologyandEthnology,Cambridge,Mass: HarvardUniversity.

CauvinJ.1980 LeMoyen-EuphrateauVIIIed’aprèsMureybetet CheikhHassan.In J.Cl.Margueron(éd.),LeMoyen Euphrate:zonedecontactsetd’échanges:21-34.Actes duColloquedeStrasbourg,10-12mars1977.Leiden: E.J.Brill.

CouttsP.J.F.,FrankR.K.,andHughesP.1978 AboriginalengineersoftheWesternDistrict,Victoria. Melbourne:MinistryforConservation.

DorrellP.1978 TheuniquenessofJericho.InP.MooreyandP.Parr (eds.),ArchaeologyoftheLevant:essaysforKathleen Kenyon:11-18.Warminster:ArisandPhillips.

EdwardsP.C.andHighamT.2001 Zahratadh-Dhra‘2andtheDeadSeaPlainatthedawn oftheHolocene.InA.Walmsley(ed.),Australians uncoveringancientJordan:fiftyyearsofMiddle EasternArchaeology:139-152.Sydney:TheResearch InstituteforHumanitiesandSocialSciences, UniversityofSydney/Amman:Departmentof AntiquitiesofJordan.

EdwardsP.C.andHouseE.2007 ThethirdseasonofinvestigationsatthePre-Pottery NeolithicAsiteofZahratadh-Dhra‘2ontheDead SeaPlain,Jordan.BulletinoftheAmericanSchoolsof OrientalResearch347:1-19.

EdwardsP.C.,MeadowsJ.,SayejG.J.,andWestawayM.2004 FromthePPNAtothePPNB:newviewsfromthe southernLevantafterexcavationsatZahratadh-Dhra‘2 inJordan.Paléorient30/2:21-60.

Enoch-ShilohD.andBar-YosefO.1997 SalibiyaIX.InO.Bar-YosefandA.Gopher(eds.), AnEarlyNeolithicVillageintheJordanValleyPartI: TheArchaeologyofNetivHagdud:13-40. SchoolofPrehistoricResearchBulletin43, PeabodyMuseumofArchaeologyandEthnology, Cambridge,Mass:HarvardUniversity.

FinlaysonB.andMithenS.2007 TheDana-Faynan-GhuwayrEarlyPrehistoryProject. InB.FinlaysonandS.Mithen(eds.),TheEarly PrehistoryofWadiFaynan,southernJordan: archaeologicalsurveyofWadisFaynan,Ghuwayrand al-BustanandevaluationofthePre-PotteryNeolithic AsiteofWF16:1-12.Oxford:OxbowBooks.

FinlaysonB.,KuijtI.,ArpinT.,ChessonM.,DennisS.,GoodaleN.,KadowakiS.,MaherL.,SmithS.,SchurrM.,andMckayJ.2003 Dhra‘ExcavationProject,2002Interimreport.Levant35:1-38.

FlanneryK.V.1969 Originsandecologicaleffectsofearlydomestication inIranandtheNearEast.InP.UckoandG.Dimbleby (eds.),Thedomesticationandexploitationofplants andanimals:73-100.London:Duckworth.

FujiiS.2010 Domesticationofrunoffwater:currentevidenceand newperspectivesfromtheJafrPastoralNeolithic. Neo-Lithics2/10(thisvolume).

GolsonJ.1980 NewGuinea:agriculturalhistory:acasestudy.InD.Denoon andC.Snowden(eds.),Atimetoplantandatimetouproot: 33-42.PortMoresby:InstituteofPapuaNewGuineaStudies.


Neo-Lithics2/1046


HouseE.2003 ThegeologyandgeomorphologyofZahratadh-Dhra‘, DeadSeaPlain,Jordan.UnpublishedBachelorof EarthSciencesthesis,Melbourne:LaTrobeUniversity.

IbáñezJ.J.(ed.)2008 LesitenéolithiquedeTellMureybet(SyrieduNord): enhommageáJacquesCauvin.Oxford:Archaeopress.

JenkinsE.andRosenA.M.2007 Thephytoliths.InB.FinlaysonandS.Mithen(eds.), TheEarlyPrehistoryofWadiFaynan,southern Jordan:archaeologicalsurveyofWadisFaynan, Ghuwayrandal-BustanandevaluationofthePre- PotteryNeolithicAsiteofWF16:429-436.Oxford: OxbowBooks.

KennedyA.2007 Theplantmacrofossils.InB.FinlaysonandS.Mithen (eds.),TheEarlyPrehistoryofWadiFaynan,southern Jordan:archaeologicalsurveyofWadisFaynan, Ghuwayrandal-BustanandevaluationofthePre- PotteryNeolithicAsiteofWF16:420-428.Oxford: OxbowBooks.

KenyonK.M.andHollandT.A.1981 ExcavationsatJericho:Volume3.Architectureand stratigraphyoftheTell.London:BritishSchoolof ArchaeologyinJerusalem.

Leroi-GourhanA.1974 Etudespalynologiquesdesderniers11000ansenSyrie semi-désertique.Paléorient2/2:443-451.

MeadowsJ.2004 Theearliestfarmers?Archaeobotanicalresearchat Pre-PotteryNeolithicAsitesinJordan.InF. al-Khraysheh(ed.),StudiesintheHistoryand ArchaeologyofJordanVIII:archaeologicaland historicalperspectivesonsociety,cultureandidentity: 119-128.Amman:DepartmentofAntiquitiesofJordan.2005 EarlyfarmersandtheirEnvironment: archaeobotanicalresearchatNeolithicand ChalcolithicsitesinJordan.Unpublisheddoctoral thesis,Melbourne:LaTrobeUniversity.

MillerR.1980 WateruseinSyriaandPalestinefromtheNeolithicto theBronzeAge.WorldArchaeology11/3:331-341.

MithenS.andFinlaysonB.2007 WF16andthePre-PotteryNeolithicAofthesouthern Levant.InB.FinlaysonandS.Mithen(eds.),TheEarly PrehistoryofWadiFaynan,southernJordan: archaeologicalsurveyofWadisFaynan,Ghuwayrand al-BustanandevaluationofthePre-PotteryNeolithic AsiteofWF16:470-486.Oxford:OxbowBooks.

OatesJ.1969 ChogaMami,1967-68:apreliminaryreport. Iraq31:115-152.

PrickettM.1986 Settlementduringtheearlyperiods.InT.W.Beale(ed.), ExcavationsatTepeYahya,Iran1967-1975.TheEarly Periods:215-246.Cambridge:AmericanSocietyfor OrientalResearch.

RobertsN.andRosenA.M.2009 Diversityandcomplexityinearlyfarming communitiesofSouthwestAsia:newinsightsinto theeconomicandenvironmentalbasisofNeolithic Çatalhöyük.CurrentAnthropology50/3:393-402.

RosenA.M.1999 Phytolithsasindicatorsofprehistoricirrigation farming.InP.C.Anderson(ed.),Prehistoryof Agriculture:newexperimentalandethnographic approaches:193-198.UniversityofCalifornia: LosAngeles.

RosenA.M.andWeinerS.1994 Identifyingancientirrigation:anewmethodusing opalinephytolithsfromemmerwheat.Journalof ArchaeologicalScience21:125-132.

SherrattA.1980 Water,soilandseasonalityinearlycerealcultivation. WorldArchaeology11/3:313-330.

SpindenH.J.1928 AncientcivilizationsofMexicoandCentralAmerica. NewYork:BilloandTannen(3rdedition,1965).

StewardJ.H.1929 Irrigationwithoutagriculture.PapersoftheMichigan AcademyofScience,ArtsandLetters12:149-156.

StordeurD.andAbbèsF.2002 DuPPNAauPPNB:miseenlumièred’unephasede transitionàJerfelAhmar.BulletindelaSociété PréhistoriqueFrançaise:99/3:563-595.

TippingR.2007 Long-termlandscapeevolutionoftheWadisDana, FaynanandGhuwayr.InB.FinlaysonandS.Mithen (eds.),TheEarlyPrehistoryofWadiFaynan,southern Jordan:archaeologicalsurveyofWadisFaynan, Ghuwayrandal-BustanandevaluationofthePre- PotteryNeolithicAsiteofWF16:14-46. Oxford:OxbowBooks.

WilkinsonT.J.2010 Thedomesticationofwater:EarlyHydraulicsystems. Neo-Lithics2/10(thisvolume).

WaterMiningintheSouthernLevant

Neo-Lithics2/1047


Introduction

Fresh water is essential to human societies. Somedrinkingwater can be transported over distances butcannotfullysupportsettledcommunities.Theshorta-geofpermanentfreshwatersourcesleftcertainareasunsettled.ThePPNnovel inventionofminingunder-groundaquifersusingwellscreatedaman-madesourceoffreshwaterwhichenabledthesettlingofpreviouslyunusable territories, i.e.,coastalareas.RecentlyearlyNeolithicwellswerediscoveredinCyprus(Peltenburgetal.2001),submergedAtlit-Yam,andSha’arHagolan(Garfinkelet al. 2005;Garfinkel 2006).TheHoloce-ne sea level rise inundated the Pre-PotteryNeolithic(PPNC), PotteryNeolithic, andWadi Rabah (Fig. 1)settlementsontheCarmelcoast.Thesewerelaterun-coveredbycoastalerosion.

The PPNC Site of Atlit-Yam

Atlit-Yam(AY)PPNCsubmergedvillagethrivedsome9200-8500years ago (calibrated). It is located in thenorthbayofAtlitatadepthof8-12m,andis4hecta-resinarea.Excavationsthererevealedrectangularandround installations,megaliths (Figs.2,2a),anthropo-morphic stelae, and hearths.Artifacts of stone, boneandflintwere recoveredaswellashumanskeletons.Organicremainsincludeterrestrialanimalbones,fishbones, and plant remains suggesting a complex eco-nomybasedonhunting,incipientherding,fishingandfarming(Galilietal.1993).

The Water Wells of Atlit- Yam

Thirty round stone structureswere found in the site,and two, identified as wells, were excavated (Galilietal.2004a;GaliliandNir1993).Well66 (Fig.3)isat10.5m,depth.Asinglestonecourse,partofupperstructure,survivedabovesitesurface(ASS).Thewell,linedbyundressedstones,wasduginclay.Excavationrevealedsevenconstructioncoursesand thestructurecontinuedtoanunknowndepth.Itsinnerdiameterwas110cmandtheuppercoursewasformedof19stonesinacircle.Thefillcontainedsoftclaywithsmallandmediumkurkarandlimestones,basaltstones(whichis not found locally), bones of fish, reptiles, rodents,herbivores, carnivores and humans as well as flint,stone andbone artifacts,mostlybroken.Well 11 lies

some 10.5m below present sea level (Figs. 3, 4). Itiscylindrical,5.5mdeepand1.5mindiameter(Fig.4.). The upper section, a tower-like structure, 0.7 mASS,isbuiltofseveralstonecourses,threeuppermostsurvivedmarine erosion in situ forming a protectivewallcircumscribingtheshaft.Themiddlesectionwascut into theclaysediments,builtof22-25coursesofundressedstones, (14-24stones inacourse)down to3.60belowsitesurface(BSS).Thelowersection3.60-5.15mbelowthesitesurface,wasexcavatedintothekurkarbedrock.Thelower50cmisasymmetric,128x150cm.Thebottomiscircumscribedbyasmallnotch(Fig.4).

Thefillofwell11consistoflayersrepresentingse-veralevents.Itpresentsacomplexmultilayeredstruc-ture (at least 14 layers varying in thickness, contentand composition)divided into threemain sedimenta-tionphases,theupper(layer1)iscomposedofsmall/medium(3-15cm)undressedkurkarstonesandbrokenlimestonepebbles,mostwereexposed toheat,hence“smallandmediumstones”, itcontainedcrushedandwholemollusks(Glycimerissp.),alateintrusions?Themiddlephase(layers2-5),2mthick,extendsfromthesurfaceto2.10mBSS.Itcontainsartifactsandanimalbones,fewinpartialarticulation,embeddedinbrownclay.The sediments are soft clay, small andmedium

Submerged Neolithic Settlements of the MediterraneanCarmel Coast and Water Mining in the Southern Levant

Ehud Galili IsraelAntiquitiesAuthority [email protected] Rosen IsraelAntiquitiesAuthority

Fig. 1 Location map of the Carmel coast and submerged prehistoric sites referred to in the text.


Neo-Lithics2/1048


stones,quartzandcarbonaticsand.Lensesoffine,softclaywereattachedtothewalls,atdepthsof60-120cmand170-200 cmBSS. Large stoneswere embeddedat90-110cm(layer4)and180-200cm(layer6)res-pectivelyBSS.Gypsumatthebottomoflayer2,atca.80cmBSS,indicateshighsalinity.Atthelayerbottomnumber5ca. 180-210cmBSS,werenumerous landsnails.Themiddlephasecontainedanimalbones,plantremains,andflintindustrytoolsandwaste.Thelowerphase sediment, threemeter thick(layers6-14) (500-200cmBSS)istypicaltowells,containingmostlykur-karstonesembeddedinsandyclay,artifactsandanimalbones.ThreeC-14 dates (Table 1) from this section,ranging8210-8370calBC.Duetocontinuouscleaningthereisnosequentialorderofthedateswithinthefill(Galili2004a;Galilietal.2002).

The Floral Assemblages of Well 11

Theseedassemblageincludesabout100mediterra-neanspecies,23ofthem,typicalofMountCarmel,areabsenttodayonthecoast.Fiveareabsentthere

todaybutexistincolderhabitats.Remainsofawee-vil(Stiophilusgranarius),infestingcerealgrainsincolderregions,wereidentifiedindicatingcoldercli-mate(Kislevetal.1996;Galilietal.1997a).Pollenfrom thewell are rich in ruderal plants exhibitinglowarboreallevels.Thecommonwestwindscouldnot bring arboreal pollen from theCarmel and ru-noffwaterdidnotenterthewells(Galilietal.1993;Weinstein-Evron 1994).Macrobotanical assembla-ge isbiasedbyhuman import.Thehighhydrophi-louspollencountsindicatemarshesnearbyinpoor-lydrainedlowlands.

Thewellwas used as a refuse pit after becominguseless.Numerousanimalbonesinthecentralsectionrepresent consumption debris discarded into thewellafter it stopped functioning.Re-usingwaterwells asgarbagepitsiscommoninprehistoricLevantinesites.Stonetoolsfromtheuppersectionaremostlybroken.Inthelowersection,ornamentsanddecoratedartifactswerefoundwithfewbrokentools.

The Pottery Neolithic Wadi Rabah SitesFive Pottery Neolithic (PN) sites (Kfar Samir, KfarGalim,TelHreiz,Megadim andNeve-Yam) are at apresentwaterdepthsof1-5m(Fig.1).Stoneandwoodstructures, artifacts, ceramics installations and pits,plantremains,andanimalboneswerefoundinthemaswellasstone-builtgravescontaininghumanskeletons.

The PN Water WellsAtKfarSamirandKfarGalim (Fig.1) (presently0.5-5mbelowsealevel)waterwellsconstructedoftreebranchesandlimestonepebbleswerefound(Galilietal. 1997b; Galili and Weinstein-Evron 1985). Addi-tionally, paved floors and installations for extractingolive-oilpitscontainingbrokenolivestonesandpulpwere found together with wooden bowls, mat frag-mentsandstonebasins.Onewell,builtofalternatingcourses of wooden branches and limestone pebbles,havinga1x0.8mrectangularopeningwasexcavated

Fig. 2 The megalithic structure of Atlit-Yam; 2(a) Artist’s reconstruction of the megalithic structure; note the spring, stones with cup marks and fresh water vegetation.

2 2a

Fig. 3 Atlit-Yam Well No. 11 during excavation.


Neo-Lithics2/1049


toadepthof2m,notreachingthebottomof thewell(Figs.5,6,7).Itsfillincludedsoftclaywithsmallstones,afewbirdbonesandpots-herds,olivestones,flintflakesandmatremains.

Chronology of the Submerged Settlements

TheC-14datesfromtheAtlitYamwells (Table1)arearoundmid tolate 9th millennium BP, but theyhad probably been constructedearlier,at theendof the10thmil-lennium BP: continued cleaningexposedtracesofearlierstages.InthePNKfarGalimandKfarSamirwells, C-14 dates were obtainedfromtheconstructionmaterialsofthewells,givingtruedirectconst-ructiondates.

Fig. 4 Cross-section of Atlit-Yam Well No. 11 and schematic reconstruction of the topography and sea level at the site region during the PPNC.

Fig. 5 The Kfar Samir well constructed of tree branches and stone pebbles before excavation. PPNC.

Fig. 6 The Kfar Samir well after excavation. Fig. 7 Cross section of the Kfar Samir well.


Neo-Lithics2/1050


Discussion

Sustainable Self-contained Fresh Water Supply: a Pre-condition for a Permanent Coastal SettlementThe Neolithic period was a turning point in humansubsistence modes. Food production in the form ofanimal and plant domestication appeared. Permanentsettlementsintensifiedexploitationofresourcesinthesurroundinghabitats. Thelargepermanentsettlements(„mega-sites“)ofthePPNwereestablishednearperpe-tualwatersources.Supplyingdrinkingwaterisalimi-ting factor along theMediterranean shores, except inriverdeltasandrivervalleys.Inthenorthernandcen-tralLevantinecoastswaterisabundant,andwellsarenotneeded.InthesouthernLevant,thecoastalstreamsaremostlydryinthesummer.Inanarearichineco-nomic resources but lacking in fresh drinkingwater,excavatingwellsisrewarding.Thiswouldfacilitatetheoccupation of new territories and would significant-ly increase the carrying capacity. The appearance ofcoastalwaterwells is associatedwith aPPNattemptatoccupyingnewareas tocopewith increasedpopu-lation,shrinkingresources,andagrowingdemandforunexploitedagriculturalland.Itoccurredwherewellsbroughtnotablebenefits.TheIsraelcoastalplainover-liesahighaquiferexploitableall-year-roundusingthepropertechnology.Creatingasustainable,coastalself-containedfreshwatersourceenabledtheoccupationofthisuninhabitedarea.

The development of water mining may be asso-ciatedwith the emergence of the firstMediterraneanfishingvillage.TheAtlitYamwellsindicatethatwaterminingexistedasearlyas9thmillenniumBP.Itisyetto be investigatedwhether this practicewas only ontheCarmelcoast,duetotheavailablehighwatertable(under-groundwater),orifitoccurredinotherplacesnorthandsouthofAtlitYam.

DuringtheEarlyHolocenesettlersfromthemain-landcolonizedCyprus.ThePPNsiteofMylouthkiya,on the south-west coast, contains severalwaterwells(Peltenburgetal.2001),theearliestknownnow.TheyweredugintotheporousPleistoceneHavaraoverlay-ingtheimpermeablePliocenemarls,exploitingthelo-calcoastalaquifer,whichisalsotheoriginofspringsalongthecoastalcliffs(Galilietal.2004a;2009).Pro-

bably the ephemeralwater streamson the island andthegeologyofthecoastalcliffsencouragedearlywatermining.Coastalerosion,due topostglacial sea levelrise,createdvisiblefreshwatersourcesinthecoastalcliffs between the impermeable Pliocene marls andtheporoussedimentsabovethemarls, includingaeo-liansandstone,Havaraandbeachdeposits.Thewaterattractedtheimmigrants,settlingnearitandlaterex-cavating unlined shafts aswells.The earlyNeolithiccoastalsites(MylouthkiyaandAkanthu/Tatlisu)adja-centtosuchwatersourcesalongcoastalcliffssupportthishypothesis.

Alternative water sources in Atlit Yam

Thepost-glacialrisingseaelevatedthegroundwaterle-vel,movingtheinterfacialwaterplaineastward.Wellssuffered salination and theAtlitYam inhabitants hadtodignewwellsfurthertotheeast.Someoftheroundstructuresfoundinthesitemayrepresentsuchwells.Therisingwater tablecreatedspringsinvillagearea,and traces of onewere discovered near amegalithicritualstructure(Fig.2)whichperhapscouldrepresentasymbolicresponsetothewatercrisisendingbywaterspoutinginthevillage(GaliliandSharvit1998).

Abandonment of Atlit Yam

Ithasbeenproposed thata tsunamigeneratedby thecollapseofMountEtnaca.8,300BP1,destroyedAtlitYam(Pareschietal.2006;2007).Theproposalisnotsupportedbyfieldevidence:theC-14datescontradictthat proposal. The skeletal pathologies are not asso-ciatedwithanaturaldisaster (HershkovitzandGalili1990;Galilietal.2005a).Theanimalbonesbearmeat-consumption cuts, but not breaks, indicating disaster(Horwitz andTchernov 1987;Galili et al. 1993; Ly-man,1994).Wellinfrastructure insituabovethepre-sentseafloorcouldnothavesurvivedatsunami.

AtlitYamwasabandonedduetosealevelriseandwell salination: the wells ceased functioning due tosaltwater contamination. The layers of large stonesmayindicateanattempttoobtainwaterfromhigherle-

Sample No. Lab ref. Material Location Uncalibrated date (yrs. BP) Calibrated date (yrs. BC)

Atlit-Yam PPNC

1 RT - 2477/8 Tree branch water well (structure 11) 7605 ± 55 6458-6385

2 RT - 2479 Tree branch water well (structure 11) 7460 ± 55 6361-6216

3 RT - 2489 Tree branch water well (structure 66) 7880 ± 55 6993-6596

Kfar Samir

4 RT - 682 A Tree branch Pit (structure 3) 6670 ± 160 5716-5675

5 PTA - 3820 Tree branch Pit (structure 5) 6830 ± 80 5748-5632

6 PTA - 3821 Tree branch Water well 6830 ± 160 5780-5580

7 BETA -82850 Tree branch Pit (structure 10) 6940 ± 60 5940-5665

Table 1 Radiocarbon dates from the submerged Atlit-Yam and Kfar Samir wells (BETA = Beta Analytic Inc., Miami, Florida, U.S.A.; PTA = Pretoria Lab., South Africa; RT = Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel). Calibration was carried out according to Stuvier and Reimer (1993).


Neo-Lithics2/1051


velsoftheaquifer.GypsuminLayer5testifiestohighsalinityandsupportssuchascenario.Post-salination,itbecamearefusepit(Galilietal.1993;GaliliandNir1993).Thefewarticulatedbonesinthewellindicateadepositionwithsofttissue.Humanswouldnotpollutea fresh-water source with discarded waste. Re-usingwaterwellsasgarbagepitswascommoninprehistoricLevant,forexampleatMylouthkiainCyprus(Pelten-burgetal.2001)andSha´arHagolaninIsrael(Garfin-keletal.2005).

The Carmel Coast Wells and Sea Level Changes

Coastalwellsprovidevaluableinformationonseale-velchanges.Sealevelriseresultsinground-waterta-bleriseandwellsalination.ThebottomofWell11is15.5mbelowsealevel,hencethesealevelwas16mlower, thecoastlinewasakilometer to thewest, andthewellwasabout600to800minlandduringitscon-struction. Pottery Neolithic sea level was ca. 10 mbelowpresent sea level and thecoastlinewas600mwestward,withsomeislands1-15kmoffshore(Galiliet al. 2005b; 1988).The earlier a submergedPrehis-toricsiteintheCarmelcoastis,thefartheroffshoreitislocated.AtlitYamislocated200to400moffshoreat8to12mdepth.ThePNsitesarelocated10to180moffshoreatadepthof0.5to5m.Thereisadirectcorrelationbetweentheconstantriseinsealevel,sett-lementabandonment,andtranslocationeastward.Sealevelrosefrom9000to4000BPintwomainstages.Between9000 to7000BPsea level rose some12m(from-16mto-4m),atameanannualrateofca.5-6mm/yr.From7000to4000BPsealevelroseanadditi-onal14m(from-4mtothepresentlevel)andthemeanannualratewasca.4-1mm/yr.Fromca.4000BPsealevelremainedrelativelyconstant,withpossibleminorchangesoflessthelocaltidalrange(±0.25m).

The Emergence of the Mediterranean Fishing Village on the Southern Levant Coast

TheLevantineandCiliciancoastsaretheclosestma-rine environments to areaswhere plants and animalswerefirst domesticated.By the 9thmillenniumBP, anew subsistence system appeared on the Levantinecoasts,asdiscoveredatAtlitYam,AshkelonandRasShamra. This innovation - theMediterranean fishingvillage - evolved by combining agriculture and ani-malhusbandry,arrivingtotheLevantineshoresfrominland,with indigenouscoastal inhabitants’ abilityoftoutilizemarineresources.Thisagro-pastoral-marinesubsistence included cultivation of domesticated ce-reals, legumes, fruit trees, animal husbandry, and in-tensifieduse ofmarine resources togetherwith somehuntingandforaging.Later (during thePN)oliveoilwasaddedasindicatedbyfindsatKfarSamirandKfarGalim.Lateron, in the6thmillenniumBP,additionalfruittreesappeared.Theappearanceofgrapevines(Zo-

haryandHopf2000)andthecontinuingagro-pastoralfood procurement strategieswith exploitation ofma-rineresources,completedtheso-calledMediterraneansubsistencesystemas it isknown today (Galilietal.2002,2004b).

Endnote

1AlldatesarecalibratedyearsBP,groupsofdatesfromthesamestructurewereaveragedwith±1sigma(ElizabettaBoaretto,RadiocarbonDatingLaboratory,EnvironmentalandEnergyResearchDepartment,WeizmannInstituteofScience,Rehovot,Israel).

References

GaliliE.2004 SubmergedPrehistoricSettlementsofthe6th-7thmill. BPoffthenorthernCarmelCoast,Israel.PhD Dissertation,TelAvivUniversity,FacultyofNear- Easternstudies,Dept.ofarchaeology.(Hebrew)

GaliliE.,EshedV.,GopherA.,andHershkovitzI.2005a BurialpracticesatthesubmergedPPNCsiteofAtlit- Yam,northerncoastofIsrael:Whatdotheytellus aboutthefinalphaseofthePre-PotteryNeolithic culture.BASOR339:1-19.

GaliliE.,GopherA.,RosenB.,andHorwitzL.2004a TheemergenceoftheMediterraneanfishing villageintheLevantandtheNeolithicAnomalyof Cyprus.InE.PeltenburgandA.Wasse(Eds.),New PerspectivesonSouthwestAsia.NeolithicRevolution inLightofRecentDiscoveriesonCyprus.Council forBritishResearchintheLevantinCollaboration withtheDepartmentofAntiquitiesofCyprus,20th- 23thSeptember2001,DroushiaVillage,Cyprus.

GaliliE.,LernauO.,andZoharI.2004b FishingandmarineadaptationsatAtlit-Yam, asubmergedNeolithicvillageoftheCarmelcoast, Israel.Atiqot48:1-34.

GaliliE.andNirY.1993 TheSubmergedPre-PotteryNeolithicwaterwell ofAtlit-Yam,northernIsrael,anditspalaeo- environmentalimplications.TheHolocene3:265-270.

GaliliE.,RosenB.,GopherA.,andHorwitzL.K.2002 TheEmergenceandDispersionoftheEastern MediterraneanFishingVillage:Evidencefrom SubmergedNeolithicSettlementsofftheCarmelCoast, Israel.JournalofMediterraneanArchaeology 15:167-198.


Neo-Lithics2/1052


GaliliE.,SevketogluM.,SalamonA.,ZvielyD.,MienisH.K.,RosenB.,andMoshkovitzS.2009 Quaternarybeachdeposits,coastalmorphology, tectonicsandsea-levelchanges,onthecoastof NorthernCyprus,andtheirpossibleimplicationson Neolithiccolonization.ProceedingsoftheIsrael GeologicalSocietyAnnualMeetingKfarBloom2009.

GaliliE.,SharvitJ.,andShifroniA.1997a Nevé-Yam-underwaterSurvey.Excavationsand SurveysinIsrael18:35-36.

GaliliE.andSharvitJ.1998 SubmergedNeolithicwater-wellsfromtheCarmel coastofIsrael.LandschaftsverbandRheinland, RheinischesAmtfürBodendenkmalpflege,31-44. BrunnenderJungsteinzeit,InternationalesSymposium Erkenlenz,Oktober1997.

GaliliE.,StanleyD.J.,SharvitJ.,andWeinstein-EvronM.1997b EvidenceforEarliestOlive-OilProductionin SubmergedSettlementsofftheCarmelCoast,Israel. JournalofArchaeologicalScience 24:1141-1150.

GaliliE.andWeinstein-EvronM.1985 Prehistoryandpaleoenvironmentsofsubmergedsites alongtheCarmelcoastofIsrael.Paléorient11:37-52.

GaliliE.,Weinstein-EvronM.,HershkovitzI.,GopherA.,KislevM.,LernauO.,HorowitzL.K.,andLernauH.1993 Atlit-Yam:APrehistoricSiteontheSeaFlooroffthe IsraeliCoast.JournalofFieldArchaeology20:133.

GaliliE.,Weinstein-EvronM.,andRonenA.1988 HoloceneSea-LevelChangesBasedonSubmerged ArchaeologicalsitesofftheNorthernCarmelCoastin Israel.QuaternaryResearch9:36-42.

GaliliE.,ZvielyD.,andWeinstein-EvronM.2005b Holocenesea-levelchangesandlandscapeevolutionon thenorthernCarmelcoast(Israel).Mediterranée 1.2:1-8.

GarfinkelY.2006 HydrologicalTechnologiesintheNeolithicand ChalcolithicPeriods.ProceedingsoftheFrench- IsraeliWorkshoponTechniquesandPeople: Anthropologicalperspectivesontechnologyinthe archaeologyoftheSouthernLevant.CenterDe RechercheFrançaisdeJerusalemNovember2006, Jerusalem.

GarfinkelY.,VeredA.andBar-YosefO.2005 TheDomesticationofWater:theNeolithicwellat Sha arHagolan,JordanValley,Israel.Antiquity 80:686-696.

HershkovitzI.andGaliliE.1990 8000Year-oldhumanremainsontheseafloornear Atlit,Israel.JournalofHumanEvolution5:319-358.

HorwitzL.K.andTchernovE.1987 AnimalexploitationatthesubmergedPPNBsiteof Atlit.MitekufatHaeven,JournaloftheIsrael PrehistoricSociety20:72-78.

KislevM.,HartmanA.,andGaliliE.1996 EvidencefromAtlit-Yamforacolderclimateduring thePPNCperiod.ProceedingsofTheAnnualMeeting ofTheIsraelPrehistoricSociety14(Hebrew).

LymanL.R.1994 VertebrateTaphonomy.CambridgeUniversityPress, Cambridge.

Pareschi,M.T.,BoschiE.,andFavalliM.2006 Losttsunami,Geophys.Res.Lett.,33,L22608, doi:10.1029/2006GL027790.

Pareschi,M.T.,BoschiE.,andFavalliM.2007 HolocenetsunamisfromMountEtnaandthefateof IsraeliNeolithiccommunities,Geophys.Res.Lett.,34, L16317,doi:10.1029/2007GL030717.

PeltenburgE.,CroftP.,JacksonA.,McCartneyC.,andMurrayM.A.2001 Well-establishedcolonists:Mylouthkia1andthe Cypro-Pre-PotteryNeolithicB.In:S.Swiny(Ed.), TheEarliestPrehistoryofCyprus,FromColonization toExploitation.CyprusAmericanArchaeological ResearchInstitute,Monograph2:61-94.Boston, MA:ASOR.

StuiverM.andReimerP.J.1993 Extended14CdatabaseandrevisedCALIBradiocar- boncalibrationprogram.Radicarbon35:215-230.

Weinstein-EvronM.1994 BiasesinArchaeologicalPollenAssemblagesCase- studiesfromIsrael.AspectsofArchaeological palynology:MethodologyandApplications 29:193-205.

Zohari,D.andHopfM.2000 DomesticationofPlantsintheOldWorld.Oxford UniversityPress,Oxford(3rdedition).

Waterinthevillage

Neo-Lithics2/1053


Following the editors, we use the phrase “domesticwater”torefertowaterconsumptionwithoutmanipu-latingitssource,orwaternotconsumeddirectlyfromthe source but elsewhere.Other contributions to thissessionconcentrateonthecontroloversurfacerun-offwaterawayfromthevillageasameanstofacilitateag-riculture.Taken literally,ofcourse,“domestic”referstowaterconsumedwithinthevillage(‘domus’,house).Forprehistoricvillages in theNearEast,wemay re-construct various activities inwhichwaterwill haveplayedarole:drinking,foodprocessing,andindustrialactivities. In addition, there are important activityspheres inwhichwatermost probably played a role,suchaspersonalhygiene,andritual.Asacontributionto thewatermanagementdiscussion,weshallbrieflyreviewsomeoftheevidenceforwatermanagementintheLateNeolithic(7000-5300calBC),using thepre-historicsiteofTellSabiAbyadasacasestudy.Morespecifically, we shall focus on possiblewater-relatedusesofcontainersmadeinpotteryandgypsumplaster.

SituatedinthevalleyoftheRiverBalikh,aperen-nialtributaryoftheEuphratesinthesemi-aridnorthernSyriansteppes,TellSabiAbyadwasabusy,nucleatedvillageinanotherwiserathersparselypopulatedland-scape.ThesitewasinhabitedfromthelaterPPNBintotheHalaf period.Herewe focus on itsEarlyPotteryNeolithicphase,ca.6700-6200calBC(levelsA-10toA-2 in Operation III), roughly coinciding with finalPPNB-PPNCinthesouthernLevant.Thesurroundinglandscapewas,ofcourse,farfromempty.Therewereanumberofothervillagesnearby.Peoplecrossedthelandscape regularly for essentials such as economicexchangeandinvestinginabristlingsociallife,andaspartoftheirsemi-pastorallifestyle(Verhoeven1999).Butthefocalpointoflifewillhavebeenthevillageit-self(Akkermansetal.2006).Itremainsunclearexactlyhowmanypeoplereliedonthevillage.Estimatesvarywidelyfromasfewas50toasmanyas670people,de-pendingontheinterpretationsofthespatiallayoutandthesocialorganization(Akkermans1993;AkkermansandDuistermaat1997;Verhoeven1999).

These people must have used a fair quantity ofwateronadailybasis.Exactfiguresofcourseareim-possibletoestablish;inadditiontotheuncertaintiesinreconstructing population size and the precise rangeof water-related activities conducted, notions of hy-gieneareculturallydeterminedandfarfromuniversal(Hodder1982). Ifmodern standardswere applied, inwhichonepersonneedsatleastsome15litresonav-erage(WHO2005),villagessuchasSabiAbyadwouldhave consumed between 750-9000 litres a day. The

higher range of this estimate is certainly unrealistic.Thenumberofpeoplepresentinthevillagewillhavevariedhighlywiththeseasons(Verhoeven1999).Evenat peak timesof feasts and festivals,with everybodyengagedinexchanginggoods,spousesandgossip,themaximumnumberofpeopleaggregatingatTellSabiAbyadareunlikelytohavesurpassedseveralhundred(Akkermans1993:166).Furthermore,itisnotunrea-sonabletoexpectthatminimumwaterrequirementsintheNeolithicwerebelowthoseoftoday.

Nonetheless, it is safe to assume that no smallamountofwaterwasconsumedinthevillage.Mostofthis,ifnotpracticallyallofit,willhavebeen“domes-ticatedwater”.Therewasnosubstantialstandingbodyofwateravailableanywhereinthevillage.Theexcava-tionshavenotattestedanyevidenceofartificialpoolsorlargepitssuitableforholdingrain.Thesteepslopesof thevillage,characteristicofmanytellsites,meantthatrainfallquicklydrainedintothesurroundingfields.Sofar, theexcavationshavenotuncoveredanywells(Garfinkel et al. 2006;Wilkinson andTucker 1995).Certainly, the Balikh may have flowed closer to themoundinprehistorictimes(Akkermans1993)–todayitrunssome5kmawayfromthemound–andinspringandearlysummerlocalwadiswouldhaveofferedwater.Itiscertainlypossiblethatpeopleconstructedfacilitiesforcontrollingrun-offwateradjacenttothemound,butathickalluvialcovermakesitvirtuallyimpossibletostudytheprehistoriclandscape(Wilkinson1996).Howdidpeoplekeep,consumeandprocesswateror,forthatmatter,otherfluidsofanon-waterykind?

Ifwelookattheuseofstoragevesselsforwaterindevelopingcountriestoday,wenoticesomeuniversalfactors that influence thechoiceofcontainer.Firstofall,thevesselsneedtobeportableandeasytohandle.Thisinfluencestheirshape,size,andweight,aswellasthepresenceofhandles.Secondly, theyshouldbere-sistanttomechanicalshockandsufficientlydurabletoholdtheliquid.Thirdly,itshouldbepossibletocoveror close the vessel to avoid contamination. Finally,thepresenceofatap,spoutorothernarroworificeispreferable,thoughnotanecessity,forpouring.Cross-culturally, theoptimumvesselwouldhaveacapacitybetween10and25 litres,a rectangularorcylindricalshape,oneormorehandlesandpreferablyaflatbottomforeasystorage(Arnold1985;Mintzetal.1995;CDC2001).

Howdotheserequirementscorrelatewiththecon-tainersfoundatTellSabiAbyad?Unfortunately,sev-eralcategoriesofcontainershavebeenlost.Weknowforcertainthatpeoplekeptvariouscontainersmadeof

Water in the Village

Olivier Nieuwenhuyse LeidenUniversity [email protected] Nilhamn FreeUniversityAmsterdam [email protected]

Waterinthevillage

Neo-Lithics2/1054


perishablematerials. In thesomewhat laterPre-Halaflevels,thereisempiricalevidenceforthepresenceofleatherandtextilesatthesite,imprintedonthereversesidesofclaysealings(Duistermaat1996).IntheEarlyPotteryNeolithicpeopleusedbitumen-coatedbaskets(Akkermansetal.2006).Containersmadeofwoodandleather, ethnographically attested well into the early20thcentury(Kalteretal.1992),probablyexistedbuthavenotbeenpreserved.Suchnon-durablecontainersmaywellhavebeenthemajormeansforholdingwaterandotherliquids.Inaddition,however,LateNeolithicpeoplekeptthemselvessurroundedbycontainersofavery durable kind,made of pottery and plaster.1Theadoptionofbothpotteryandwhitewarearound7000calBCopenedupavastnewrangeofpossibilitiesformanipulatingfluidsandgoodsofallkinds(Nieuwen-huyseetal.2010;Nilhamnetal.2008;NilhamnandKoek forthcoming).Ashas recentlybecomeclear, atTellSabiAbyadbothpotteryandwhitewarebecameexceptionally abundant between 6700-6200 calBC,during the Early Pottery Neolithic (EPN) (Fig. 4:upper).Werecontainersinthesecategoriesinvolvedindomesticwatermanagement?

Thematerialformakingwhitewarecouldbeeitherlime(calcinatedcalciumcarbonate,CaCO3)orgypsum(hydrated calcium sulphate, CaSO4 • 2H2O), usuallytempered with organic or small mineral inclusions.Largerpiecesofreusedpotteryorstonesaresometimes

foundas“temper”aswell,togivethevesselmorestur-diness.Mostwhitewarevesselsweremadebyaddinglayerontolayer;theindividuallayersareoftenclearlyvisible in the material. Flaking of layers and colourdifferences between layers are common. Often theoutermostlayerisjustafewmillimetresthick,resem-blingthethinplastercoatingalsofoundonceramics.Ofcourse,whitewarecontainersalwaysneededasup-portduringshaping; insomecasesit isclear that theplasterwasfoldedaroundorinsideanothercontainer,forinstanceaceramicvesselorabasket.Thevesselscouldbebuiltupinhorizontalsegmentsaswell,whichisshownbythecharacteristicbreakagepatternsinthesectionsthatsuperficiallyresemblepottery‘coils’.

Itwillbeclear that thematerialputs limitsontherangeofcontainerspossible.It isratherheavy,andithardly allows building up freestanding objects morethana fewdecimetres tall.Mostportablewhitewareobjects are open bowls with a maximum height of20cm(Fig.1).Thesecouldhavelargediameters,someofthemreachingtrulyenormoussizes(60-70cm),andsome bins even reaching a diameter of two metres!These very large “containers” sometimeshave roughexteriorssuggestingthattheywereshapedagainsttheinteriorfaceofapit– thesewerecertainly“fixtures”(Cribb1991:68).Onaverage,however,theirestimatedvolumewas between 1 and 14 litres. From awater-management perspective these low, open containers

5cm

Fig. 1 Tell Sabi Abyad. Characteristic Early Pottery Neolithic white ware shapes.

Waterinthevillage

Neo-Lithics2/1055


wouldseemtobefarfromideal.However,thereweresomeclosedvesselsaswell,andalthoughappendagesarevirtuallyabsent(n=1),somevesselshadshallowknobs applied to the body that made them easier tohandle.Aninterestingfeatureinthisregardisthefre-quentbeadedrim.Somebeaded-rimvesselsshowcleartracesofwearandtearunderneaththerim.Thismayreflect the practice of closing off the containerswithsomeclothorhide,fixedwitharope.

It is important to realize that lime and gypsumplasterproductionrepresenttwoentirelydifferenttech-nologies,andevenifsuperficiallytheendresultsoftenlookquitesimilar,containersmadeineithercategoryhave quite different performance properties when itcomestomanagingfluidsubstances.Thesolubilityoflimeplaster(CaCO3)ismuchlessthanthatofgypsum(CaSO4),forinstance(resp.0.015g/Lagainst2-2.5g/Lat25°C,dependingonacidity)(Kingeryetal.1988:22).Limeplaster ismorewater-resistant,harder,andsurvivesmechanicalwearandtearmuchlonger.Limeislessvulnerabletofungalandbacterialgrowth,asitallowsmoisturetoevaporatemorequickly.Incontrast,whenexposed tofluctuatingmoisture levels,gypsumplastermorereadilyattractsfungalandbacterialgrowthduetoitsporesandinterstitialspaceswheremoistureaccumulates2. Its relative hygroscopicity means thatwaterismoreeasilysealedbetweenindividualplasterlayersespeciallyifthesehavedifferentcompositions,causingthemtoflakeoff.AtTellSabiAbyad,ongoing

XRF-analysesofthewhitewarecontainersshowthat86%wasmadeof gypsum.3Whenwater absorptionwastestedthisconfirmedthatgypsumplasterwasmoresusceptible towater damage than lime plaster.Thus,watermanagementwouldnotappeartohavebeentheprimaryfunctionofmostwhitewarecontainers.

Astothepottery,comparativelysimpleshapesarecharacteristic for the Early Pottery Neolithic. Theseinclude vertical straight-walled pots, oftenwith loophandlesoneitherside,hole-mouthpots,andS-shapedvessels, characterized by a low, non-distinct collar(Fig.2).The latterwouldeventuallyevolve into realjarswithtall,distinctnecksattheveryendofthepe-riod.Intermsofshapeandsizemanypotteryvesselsfittherequirementsforwatercontainers.Yet,theceramicassemblageatthisstagedidnotyetincludeany“indus-trial”shapessuchasfunnels,tubularappendages,per-foratedpedestal-basedbowls,or sieves.Thesevesseltypes,allofwhichmayhaveinvolvedthemanagementoffluids,cameintouseonlyafteraround6200calBC.(Nieuwenhuyse 2007). Morphologically, a concernwith using ceramics for closure is evidenced in thegradualdevelopmentoftheneck,whichwenthandinhandwithaprogressive increase invesselvolume.Itisalsoshowninthepresenceofso-calledcordons,ap-pliquébandsrunninghorizontallybelowthevesselrim,whichmayhavebeenusedasameanstofixapieceofclothwitharope.Butalthoughvesseltypologyclearlyindicates that bulk storage in pottery was becoming

5cm

Fig. 2 Tell Sabi Abyad. Characteristic Early Pottery Neolithic pottery vessel shapes.

Waterinthevillage

Neo-Lithics2/1056


increasingly important, it remains unclear what wasstored.Thelargervesselsweremostlikelyintendedfordrygoods.Waterandotherfluidsmayhavebeenkeptinthesmallertypesofpottery.

For protecting daily water consumption the mainconcern regardingwater containerswould be evapo-ration and pollution from dust or other wind-blownimpurities.Asapreventivemeasure,adistinctneckorothertechnologicallyadvancedcontraptionwouldnotevenbenecessary;asimplelidofunfiredclay,wood,reedorleatherwoulddo.Ofcourse,suchnon-durablesstand little chance of surviving in the archaeologicalrecord unless as imprints orwhen accidentally fired;nonehasbeenattestedsofarinthisperiod.Notasingleunequivocal“potterylid”wasfound.4Itispossiblethatalittlebitofwhatwetodaywouldcalldirtorpollutionwassimplynotanissue.

Amajorexceptionwastheextraordinaryfindofalarge,intacthole-mouthceramicpot,heavilyplasteredon the interior,which had a gypsum lid in situ (Fig.3;admittedly,notfromtheEarlyPotteryNeolithicbutfromtheearliestPre-HalaflevelA-1).Itwasfoundduginto the floor in a corner of one of the larger roomsofabuilding,closetotheentrance(Akkermans,pers.comm.December2010).Uponopening,somewhattoeveryone’s dismay, the vessel contained a very soft,loose fill of dust-size particles, which no doubt hadaccumulatedoverthemillennia.Thisvesselmayhavebeendiscardedempty,oritmayhavebeenleftstandingfilledwithsomethingfluid.

Most interestingly, although this particular vesselappearstohavebeenunique,thepracticeitrepresentsmay have been more common. The excavations in

Operation III have yielded several examples of largepotteryvesselsdugintofloors(Kanedainprep.),whileoneof thebuildings in the level8village (OperationI, Pre-Halaf period) contained a square platform thatheld an intact holemouth pot decoratedwith an ap-pliqué.Thesewerefixtures (Cribb1991); immovablecontainersintegratedintothearchitecture.Intriguingly,thesevesselswerealwaysplacedclosetotheentranceleading into one of the larger rooms of the building.Heretheymayhaveservedaswatercontainersservingguestsortheoccupantsofthebuilding.

With regard towatermanagement, the strong po-rosity of the pottery containers must have been anissueaswell.Characteristic for this erawerepotteryvesselsmadeofveryporous,plant-temperedmaterial(“CoarseWare”)firedatlowtemperatures.Thismademany vessels very poor water containers. However,thereweregoodwaystoreduceporosity,forinstancebyburnishingthevesselwall.Fig.4(centre)showsthepopularityofvarioustypesofexteriorsurfacefinishingforCoarseWareduringtheEarlyPotteryNeolithic.Atfirstsight,itmightseemthatthroughtimepottersgra-duallymoved away from applying porosity-reducingfinishing techniques, as burnishing is proportionallyreduced in the later EPN levels. However, this wasmorethansufficientlycompensatedforbytherapidlyincreasingamountsofpotteryvesselsindailycircula-tion,asshownbytheraw-sherdcounts(Fig.4:upper).Inabsoluteterms,therewasalwaysacertainamountofcarefullyburnished,lessporouspotteryavailable.

Asecondstrategyforreducingceramicporosity,orsoitwouldseem,is tocombine thetwotechnologiesof pottery and plaster,more specifically by covering

5cm

Fig. 3 Tell Sabi Abyad. Left: Renske Dooijes, conservator at the National Museum of Antiquities Leiden, cleaning and opening a completely-preserved large hole-mouth pot with its gypsum lid in situ (level A-1). Right: reconstruction of the vessel.

Waterinthevillage

Neo-Lithics2/1057


the pottery vesselwith plaster.We have already dis-cussed one voluminous plastered Coarse Ware pot(Fig.3).PlasteredCoarseWare sherds arepresent inallEPNlevelsat thesite, theirproportionfluctuatingbetweenabout0.5and1%ofthebulk(Fig.4:lower).IfwecombinethesmallnumbersofplasteredCoarseWare sherdswith thoseof the increasing amountsofpottery, it becomes clear that especially in the laterphaseoftheEPNplasteredCoarseWarevesselsmusthavebeencommoninthevillage.Coarsevesselswereabout equally often plastered on their exterior andinterior surfaces, often on both.The thickness of theplaster ranged from just amillimeteroreven less to,frequently, several centimetres. All types of vesselswere plastered, but therewas definitely a preferenceto apply this procedure to jars, followed by verticalstraight-walled pots. Most interestingly, plaster wasalso used to repair pottery containerswhen they hadbroken(NieuwenhuyseandDooijes2008).

Didthisplasterfacilitatethecontainmentoffluids,water or otherwise?Here insight in the rawmaterialbecomescrucial.Anearlieranalysisofasingle,plas-teredCoarseWare sherd from contemporaneousTellDamishliyahhadshownthistobegypsum(Rehhoffetal.1990).AspartofanMAthesisattheInstituteColl-ectionNetherlands (ICN),fifteenadditionalplasteredsherds from Tell Sabi Abyad were analysed (Koek

2009).Thisanalysiscon-firmed all samples to begypsum.On thebasisofthis sampleKoek (2009:73)hasconcludedthatthematerialsusedforplaste-ringCoarseWarepotsatTellSabiAbyadwerethesame as those generallyused for making whitewarecontainers.

Analyses show thatthegreatermajorityofthewhitewarewasmadeofgypsum,andthatpotteryvessels were plasteredwith the same material.Atfirstsight thiscontra-dicts their use as watercontainers, as gypsum isfunctionally lesssuitablethan lime for managingfluid contents. Instead,ashasbeensuggestedbyearlier studies, plasteredpotsmayhavefacilitatedthe long-term storageof dry bulk goods. Bothlimeandgypsumplastersofferedtwomajoradvan-tages over plain potteryvesselsandbaskets.Theiralkaline composition

reduced bacteria growth, while their hygroscopicityprotectedthecontentsagainstmoist.Thesepropertiesmadeplasteredpotsespeciallyusefulforthelong-termbulkstorageofdryorganicgoods(Rehhoffetal.1990;Nilhamnetal.2008).

Nonetheless, in spite of its relative disadvantagesgypsum,maystillbeavaluablewater-resistantcoating,aslongthesoftenedcontactsurfaceisnotexposedtosi-gnificantfriction,andaslongasthereissufficientven-tilationtolet thematerialdry.Furthermore, intheoryitswater-resistancemightbe improvedbyburnishingor impregnating theplasterwithoilysubstances.TheburnishingofwhitewarecontainersisattestedatSabiAbyad by a few sherds that show the characteristictraces. The additional application of sealing agentscannot be excluded either. Natural sealing materialsethnographically attested include beeswax, soap andlinseedoil.Thesealingmaterialwouldhavebeenap-pliedwithabrushorclothwhentheplasterwasper-fectlydry.Remainingvisibletracesofsuchtreatmentwouldbefinescratchesandbrushmarks.Intriguingly,manywhitewaresherdsatTellSabiAbyadshowpre-ciselythesetraces.FutureresidueanalysesareplannedtoexplorethepossibilitythatNeolithicpeoplesealedtheirwhitewarecontainers.

Wemay conclude this briefest review of ongoingworkonpotsandplasteratTellSabiAbyadbysaying

Burnished

Well -smoothed

Coarsely -finished

60005000

4000

30002000

10000

100%

60%

80%

40%

20%

1,21

0,2

0,6

0,8

0,4

0

0

LevelA-10 A-09 A-08 A-07 A-06 A-05 A-04 A-03 A-02

Fig. 4 Tell Sabi Abyad Early Pottery Neolithic levels (Operation III). Upper: raw counts of pottery (solid line) and white ware (dotted line) sherds by level. Centre: proportions of surface finishing strategies for Coarse Ware pottery (exterior surface). Lower: proportion of plastered Coarse Ware sherds.

Waterinthevillage

Neo-Lithics2/1058


that it isclear thatduring theEarlyPotteryNeolithica broad variety of containers made from differentmaterials was available. The twomost durable cate-gories,whitewareandpottery,werealmostcertainlyimplicated indomesticwatermanagement.However,we believe that thiswas not their only or even theirprimaryrole.Intermsofvesselshapeandsize,whitewarecontainerswereusuallytooheavyandtooopentohavebeenregularlyusedasdomesticwatercontainers.Potteryvessels, too,maymostlyhavehadalternativefunctions.CoarsepotteryvesselsduringtheEPNcon-stituted a broad-purpose technology less functionallyspecialized than in later stages of Syrian prehistory.Someofthesmallervessels,however,especiallythosewithburnishedsurfaces,werealmostcertainlyusedforcontainingwater or other liquids.These comprised aminorityintheceramicassemblage,butthiswillhavebeensufficienttomeetthedailyneedsofthevillageintermsofwatermanagement.Large,non-portableplas-tered pots built into buildings probably servedwatermanagementaswell.Inaddition,non-durablecatego-riesprobablyexisted,whichwillhavebeenmorecon-venienttowatermanagement.

Around6200calBCtheuseofwhitewaredeclined,whilepotteryflourished.Partof theexplanationmayhave been that white ware production was compa-ratively costly in terms of fuel (Rehhoffet al. 1990:86).Whitewarecontainers,moreover,wererelativelyclumsy,heavy,andlessportable.Significantly,theyal-waysremainedinherentlylimitedintermsoftherangeofshapesandsizespossible(Nilhamn2003;Nilhamnetal.2008).Themanufactureofportable,intricately-shapedcontainersbecamemuchmoreimportantafter6200 BC (Nieuwenhuyse 2007), while on the otherhandpottershadfinallyreachedthelevelofexpertiseneededtoconstructlarge,voluminouspotteryvessels.Thesefactorsmayhavestimulatedadvancesinpotteryproductionatthecostofwhiteware.Thelimitationsofwhitewareformanagingliquidsubstancesmayhaveconstituted yet another reason for its demise. After6200 BC, new types of pottery vessels point to theincreasingsocialimportanceofeatinganddrinkingto-gether,inamuchmoreconspicuousmannerthanbefore(Nieuwenhuyse2007).Fashionablydecoratedservingvessels, often with slipped or thoroughly-burnishedsurfaces,mayhavebeenusednotonlyfordrinkingjustwaterbutforliquidsofadifferentkindaswell.

Acknowledgements:The pottery andwhiteware dra-wingsweredigitalizedbyE.Dooijes(www.dpph.nl).

Endnotes

1Inadditiontopotteryandwhiteware,smallvesselsmadeofstonearecharacteristicfortheEPN.Althoughthesewereexceptionallywell-suited to containwater (andother liquids) theywillnotbeconsideredhere,astheirlimitedvolumeandraritymeanthattheywill not have affected domestic water management on a largescale.

2 Technically, mould does not grow on plaster as plaster isinorganic. However, the porosity may trap organic materials(grease,dirt) that incombinationwithmoistureallowmicrobialactivity.

3Interestingly, limeplasterwassomewhatmorecommonintheearliestlevels,andvirtuallyabsentinthelaterstagesoftheEarlyPotteryNeolithic.

4EPNpeoplemayhaveusedsmallbowls,placedupsidedown,asapotterylid.ThefirstunequivocalevidenceforthispracticestemsfromtheHalafperiod(Akkermans1993).

References

AkkermansP.M.M.G.1993 VillagesintheSteppe,Michigan,AnnArbor.

AkkermansP.M.M.G.andDuistermaatK.1997 Ofstorageandnomads.ThesealingsofLateNeolithic TellSabiAbyad,Syria,Paléorient22/2:17-44.

AkkermansP.M.M.G.,CappersR.,CavalloC.,NieuwenhuyseO.P.,NilhamnB.,andOtteI.2006 InvestigatingtheEarlyPotteryNeolithicofnorthern Syria:newevidencefromTellSabiAbyad,American JournalofArchaeology110-1:123-156.

ArnoldD.1985 CeramicTheoryandCulturalProcess,Cambridge, CambridgeUniversityPress. CentersforDiseaseControlandPrevention(CDC)2001 SafeWaterSystemHandbook.SafeWaterSystems fortheDevelopingWorld:AHandbookfor ImplementingHousehold-BasedWaterTreatment andSafeStorageProjects,USDepartmentofHealth &HumanServices,CentersforDiseaseControland Prevention,Atlanta,GA.

CribbR.1991 NomadsinArchaeology,Cambridge,Cambridge UniversityPress.

DuistermaatK.1996 Thesealsandsealings.InP.M.M.G.Akkermans(ed.), TellSabiAbyad.TheLateNeolithicSettlement: 339-402,Istanbul,NHAI.

Waterinthevillage

Neo-Lithics2/1059


GarfinkelY.,VeredA.andBar-YosefO.2006 TheDomesticationofWater:TheNeolithicWellof Sha’arHagolan,JordanValley,Israel,Antiquity 80:686-696.

HodderI.1982 SymbolsinAction,Cambridge,CambridgeUniversity Press.

KalterJ.,PavaloiM.,andZerrnickelM.1992 TheArtsandCraftsofSyria,London,Thamesand Hudson.

KanedaA.Inprep. SettlementandArchitectureinNorthernSyria,Ph.D. thesisFacultyofArchaeology,LeidenUniversity.

KingeryW.D.,VandiverP.andPricketM.1988 TheBeginningsofPyrotechnology,PartII:Production anduseofLimeandGypsumPlasterinthePre-Pottery NeolithicNearEast,JournalofFieldArchaeology 15/2:219-244.

KoekE.2009 ConservationofNeolithicWhitewarefromTellSabi Abyad,Syria.APreliminaryStudy,Unpublished MAthesisInstituteCollectionNetherlands(University ofAmsterdam).

MintzE.D.,ReiffF.M.,andTauxeR.1995 SafeWaterTreatmentandStorageintheHome:A Practicalnewstrategytopreventwaterbornedisease, JournaloftheAmericanMedicalAssociation 273(12):948-953.

NieuwenhuyseO.P.2007 PlainandPaintedPottery.TheRiseofRegional CeramicStylesontheSyrianandNorthern MesopotamianPlains,Turnhout,Brepols (PALMAIII).

NieuwenhuyseO.P.,AkkermansP.M.M.G.,andVanderPlichtJ.2010 Notsocoarse,noralwaysplain–theearliestpotteryof Syria,Antiquity84:71-85.

NieuwenhuyseO.P.andDooijesR.2008 Anewlifeforoldpots.Earlypotteryrepairsfrom7th millenniumTellSabiAbyad(northernSyria),Leiden JournalofPotteryStudies24:159-170.

NilhamnB.2003 RevealingDomesticity.Whitewareasanindicator ofchangeinNearEasternArchaeology.Uppsala: InstitutionenförArkeologiochAntikHistoria, UppsalaUniversitet(D-uppsats).

NilhamnB.,AstrucL.,andGaulonA.2008 Whiteware-NearEasternplastercontainers.InL. Astruc,A.Gaulon,andL.Salanova(eds.),Méthodes d´approchdespremièresproductionscéramiques. EtudedecasdanslesBalkansetauLevant:63-72, InternationaleArchäologie,VerlagMarieLeidorf GmbH.

NilhamnB.andKoekE.Inpress TheWhiteWarefromEarlyPotteryNeolithicTell SabiAbyad.InO.P.Nieuwenhuyse,R.Bernbeck, P.M.M.G.Akkermans,andA.Russell(eds.), InterpretingtheLateNeolithic,Turnhout,Brepols.

RehhoffL.,AkkermansP.,LeonardsenE.,andThuesenI.1990 Plasters:gypsumorcalcite?Apreliminarycasestudy ofSyrianplasters,Paléorient16/2:79-87.

VerhoevenM.1999 AnArchaeologicalEthnographyofaNeolithic Community.Space,PlaceandSocialRelationsinthe BurntVillageatTellSabiAbyad,Syria,Istanbul, NHAI.

WilkinsonT.J.1996 SabiAbyad:thegeoarchaeologyofacomplex landscape.InP.M.M.G.Akkermans(ed.),TellSabi Abyad.TheLateNeolithicSettlement:1-24,Istanbul, NHAI.

WilkinsonT.J.andTuckerD.J.1995 SettlementDevelopmentintheNorthJazira,Iraq.A StudyoftheArchaeologicalLandscape,London, BritischSchoolofArchaeologyinIraq.

WorldHealthOrganization(WHO)2005 Minimumwaterquantityneededfordomesticusein emergencies,WorldHealthOrganization–Technical NotesforEmergencies,TechnicalNoteNo.9Draft revised:7.1.05

LivingbytheWater

Neo-Lithics2/1059


Introduction

Despite a long and on-going discussion on thedevelopmentofearlysedentismandthebroadspectrumrevolution as a precondition for sedentary farmingcommunities, many studies have been biased byfocusingonthestudyofwildcerealremains.However,recent botanical and archaeozoological studies haveshownclearlyawidespectrumofplantsandsmallgamethat were used by hunter-gatherers opportunistically(e.g.Hillmanetal.1989;Stineretal.2000;Savardetal.2006;fortheoreticalconsiderationsseeBenz2000:75-90; Olszewski 2004). Many ethnographic examplesand pioneering studies on prehistoric coastal fishingand even trade of marine fishes into the hinterlandduring the early Holocene (e.g. Lernau and Lernau1994;Zoharetal.2001:1051,forfurtherliteratureseeSampson2008:205)demonstratetheimportanceoffishforsedentarycommunities.Nevertheless,fishremainshave rarely been studied systematically. In a recentoverviewondataofNearEasternEarlyNeolithicsites,vanNeer et al. (2005) could list only a hand-full ofEpipalaeolithic andEarlyNeolithic sites forwhich asystematiccollectionoffishboneshadbeenpractised.The missing systematic collection of microfaunaand fish remains from flotation or fine sieving hashamperedquantitative aswell as qualitative analysesoffishremainsandmicrofaunaonmanysites.

Although a systematic collection of fish remainsfrom flotation samples will become possible atKörtik Tepe only in future seasons, we argue thatthe archaeological materials and archaeozoologicalremains in thesedimentsandgravesclearly illustratethatfreshwaterresourcessuchasfishandwaterfowl,besides other small game such as tortoise, played animportant role for the flourishing of theKörtikTepecommunityduringthePPNA1andcontributedmuchtoitsrichnessandidentity.2

The Site and Environmental Conditions

The extraordinaryfindings and the lavishly endowedburials of the early Holocene site of Körtik Tepe(37°48’51.90”N,40°59’02.02”E)havebeenpresentedrecentlyinthisjournalandinmanyotherpublications(e.g. Özkaya 2009; Özkaya and Coşkun 2009; for14C-dataseeCoşkunetal.2010).Thesite is locatednear the confluence of the Batman Creek andTigrisRiver.AnoldchanneloftheBatmanCreekvisibleontheaerialphotopassesdirectlybythesite.PreliminaryanalysesofcharcoalremainssuggestthatKörtikTepelay in the oak park-woodland at the beginnings ofthe Holocene, with the dominance of oak and someAmygdalus sp., Maloideae, Pistacia sp., Celtis sp.andRhamnussp. Furthermore,Tamarixsp.,Populussp. /Salix sp., Vitis sp., Alnus sp. and Fraxinus sp.hint at the proximity of gallery forests indicative ofwater. The seed remains underline the proximity towater reservoirs.3 They comprise a wide spectrumof wild plants including hygrophilous species suchas sea club rush (Scirpus maritimus) (12 %). Theabundanceoftaxasuchastragant(Astragalussp.)andmedusahead(Taeniatherumcaput-medusea/crinitium),however, indicate the presence of open vegetation.Large-seeded grasses (Poaceae) contribute the mainportion (37 %) and occur in every sample, whereasprogenitors of modern cereals account for less than6%.Aspecializationononeortheotherplantdoesnotshowupinthebotanicalremains,anddomesticationofplantscouldnotbeenprovensofar(Riehletal.n.d.).ThepeopleofKörtikTepethushadaccesstoatleastthree different environmental milieus, of which theyusedtheplantandanimalresourcesopportunistically.

Living by the Water – Boon and Bane for the People of Körtik Tepe

Aytaç Coşkun DicleUniversity,Diyarbakır [email protected]

Marion Benz UniversityofFreiburg [email protected]

Yilmaz S. Erdal HacettepeUniversityAnkara [email protected]

Melis M. Koruyucu HacettepeUniversityAnkara [email protected]

Katleen Deckers UniversityofTübingen [email protected]

Simone Riehl UniversityofTübingen [email protected]

Angelina Siebert UniversityofMainz [email protected]

Kurt W. Alt UniversityofMainz [email protected]

Vecihi Özkaya DicleUniversity,Diyarbakır [email protected]

LivingbytheWater

Neo-Lithics2/1060


Matting

Remainsoffiberson thefloors,onstonevesselsandin graves suggest that mats and lines (nets) werecommon on the site. Impressions of textiles on thegypsum,whichsurroundssomeoftheburials,indicatethat theskeletonswereadditionallywrappedinmats.Additional evidence for matting is the geometricdecoration of many stone vessels that resemblesbasketry. An especially thoroughly decorated stoneobjectlookslikeaplaitedcontainerwithalid(Fig.1).Althoughthefibershavenotbeendeterminedsofar,itmaybesuggestedthatseaclub-rushwasonepossibleresourcethatwasusedformatting.

Animal Remains

Thewidespectrumofplantremainsiscorroboratedbythemany faunal remains that were exclusively fromwildspecies,includingwildcattle,reddeer,sheep,andgoats,whichmakeupthemajorityofthesample.Otherwildanimalsincludepigs,fox,wolf,hareandgazelle.Waterfowl such as mallard (Anas platyrhynchos),goose(Ansersp.)andtwoothermembersofAnatidaewereidentified.BecauseofthehighfrequencyofwingpartsArbuckleandÖzkaya(2006:17)suggestedthatthe feathers of the birds could have been used fordecoration.Butoncehunted,theirmeatwasprobablyconsumedtoo.Mostof the identifiedwaterfowlwereagoodadditionalfoodinwinterastheyaretypicallywinter visitors to eastern Turkey except formallard,whichisasummervisitor(ArbuckleandÖzkaya2006:126).

Sofar,fishremainshavebeenrecoveredbyhandandbysievingthesedimentfromgraves.OnespecimenhasbeenidentifiedasaCyprinidae(ArbuckleandÖzkaya2006).Yet,ifremainsarecollectedbyhand,ubiquitousand large fish such as Cyprinidae are systematicallyoverrepresented (Van Neer et al. 2005). The sampleis therefore probably biased for large species, but inthefollowingseasonsitwillbepossibletocollectfishremainsandmicrofaunasystematicallyduringflotation.

Grave findings document that fish vertebraewereoccasionallyusedasbeads,buttheemphasiswasclearlyonotherjewelrylikesmallstoneringbeads,serpentinebeads, and shell/gastropod beads. Additionally, 21fish jaws were found, of which two were found ingraves.Threeofthemshowsomepolish.ThegravesinwhichfishremainswerefounddonotshowanyotherspecificitybutreflectthewidespectrumofgravetypesfromKörtikTepe.Itishoweverinterestingtonotethat

Fig. 2 32 stone vessels with this standardized specific decoration of concentric circles (a) (sometimes combined with the representation of long horned animals [b]) have been found so far on the site, but in none of the burials discussed in this paper such a vessel has been found.

Fig. 1 Chlorite stone object decorated with a pattern similar to woven textiles or matting.

LivingbytheWater

Neo-Lithics2/1061


in the graves with fish remains decoration of stonevessels with concentric circles and goats (cf. below,Fig. 2) never occur, and the vessels’ decorations aregenerallyrathercrude.

Fishing Equipment

Fish Hooks

Ninefishhooksmadeofbone(Fig.3)havebeenfoundsofar(Özkaya2009:Fig.11);eightofthemcomefromlevelsbetween -310cmand -235cmbelow thezeropointoftheexcavation,suggestingthattheybelongedtothesecondmainoccupationperiodassociatedwithstonebuildings.4Thereisonlyonehookthatstemsfromahigherlevel(-175cm)(Fig.3b).Thedistributiononthe site doesnot hint at a specializationbecausefishhooks have been found in all parts of the settlement(Fig. 4). Three items of a rather crude shape werefoundinthegraveofamaleadult(M10,A80;cf.Tab.1andFig.3c,h,iandFig.5)combinedwithapestle,abonepinandatortoiseshell lyingontheheadoftheindividual.The hooks and the pin lay close togethersuggesting that they had been placed in a perishablecontainer.

Themostrecenthook(Fig.3b)wasfoundinagrave(M5,A80)thatbelongstothelavishlyendowedgravesof the upper layers. Beside 275 stone beads and 242shellbeads,thegravegoodscomprisedtworectangularserpentine beads, two large perforated stone objects(possibly net weights), two longish perforated stoneobjects(7.8cmand6.6cmrespectively)andtwostonebowls,oneofwhichisdecoratedwitharathercrudelyincised,unrecognizablepatternorrepresentation.Alloftheseitemsmightbeinterpretedasthatofafishermanwithfishhooks,netandfishinglineweights.

Many perforated but otherwise unworked stoneshavebeenfoundinsomegravesandinothercontexts.Accordingtotheirusetracestheymayhavehungonalineassinkersforthehooks.

Shape of the Hooks

MostoftheKörtikTepefishhookshaveaU-shapewithahighandthickbowpart,moreresemblingMesolithicfishhooksthanNeolithicones(cf.HernekandJonsson2003;Hüster-Plogmann2004:Fig.326;Herling2007;Sampson 2008: 203-207, plate 12.1A-B). The gapes,thespacebetweentheshankandthepoint,isquitelargeexceptforoneexemplar.NoneoftheKörtikTepefishhookshasabarbedpoint.Twoitems,theonefromtheupperlevelandonefromadeeperlevel(-303cm)haveadifferentshapewitharectangularlowerpartofthebow.Additionallytherecentexemplarhasaverywidegapeandtwoholes.Thesetwoholesmighthavebeenusedtofixasecondhookorhooksinker.Perhapstheholesconnectedby a stringweremade for protecting the hook that itwouldnotbreakwhilecatchingbigfishes(Fig.3b).AsOlsonetal.(2008)coulddemonstrate,bowfracturesare

themostcommonfreshfractureswithintheirsampleof384fishhooksoftheStoneAgesiteofAjvide,Sweden,and of replicas, which have been used for materialstrengthtests.Thetopoftheshankispreservedonlyinthreeitems,whichhaveathickenedroundendtofixtheline.Noneoftheitemshasgroovesoraperforationontheshank,butthreeofthemshowathickenedtop.ThestrengthtestsofOlsonetal.demonstratethatthefixingofthelinehasnoconsequencesontheloadwhichcanbecaught.

ConcludingfromtheshapeandthefewnumbersandthedistributionoffishhooksfromKörtikTepe,fishingwithapolewastechnologicallynotveryelaborated,norwasitobviouslyaveryspecializedoccupation.However,fishing with such equipment implies good skills andknowledgeasthelinemustbekepttightonceafishhasbeen caught.Otherwise the risk that the fish unhooksitselfisveryhigh.Additionally,thethickenedpartofthebowofnearlyallitemsindicatesthattheproducerofthehooksknewtheweakpointofthehooksverywell.Itisastonishingthatnoneofthehookshadabarbedpoint.

The stratigraphic position of the hooks shows thattherewasnotypologicalchangefromtheuppertothelowerlayers.Therectangularshapeofthemostrecenthookissimilartoanolderitem.Theshapeofthefewexampleswasquitestandardizedanddidnotchangetoomuchovertime.Butasthereisonlyonepiecefromtheupperlevelsandnonefromthedeepcutthisobservationhastobeverifiedbyfurtherexcavation.

Net Fishing

Net fishing is one of the neglected occupations inprehistory. Several hundreds of net sinkers have beenrecovered in the circum-alpine pile dwellings (e.g.Hüster-Plogmann 2004). Probably some of theKörtikTepeperforatedgroundstonetoolsmayhavebeenusedasnetsinkerstoo.Usetracesontheleftandrightsideoftheholeonsomeoftheperforatedstoneobjectsalsosuggestthattheyhavenotbeenfixedonastickasmaceheadsorothertools,butthatastringhadbeenpulledthrough

Fig. 3 Fish hooks found on the site, in grave A80, M5 (b), and in grave A80, M10 (c, h, i).

LivingbytheWater

Neo-Lithics2/1062


theholeandmovedbackandforth(Fig.6).Manyotherperforated stones have been found and document theubiquityofthisoccupation.Severalboneawlsandfineneedlesillustratethatatleasttechnologicallynetknittingwouldhavebeenpossible(cf.anthropologicalevidence).

One technology that leaves no traces is fishing

withtraps.However,theabovementionedpreliminaryanalysesofthebotanicalremainsindicatethatseaclub-rush(Scirpusmaritimus)isveryfrequentonthesite.Incombinationwithwillowtwigs,forexample,itcouldhavebeenpossiblyusedfortheconstructionoftraps,too.

Althoughquantitativeandqualitativeestimationsoffishconsumptionarenotpossiblesofar(cf.e.g.Grosset al. 1990; Schibler et al. 1997: 329-335), we candeducefromthefaunalandarchaeologicalremainsthat

Fig. 4 Distribution of fish hooks and graves with tortoise shell on or nearby the head.

Fig. 5 Burial of an adult man (A80, M10) with three fish hooks, a bone pin, a pestle, and a tortoise shell.

Fig. 6 Perforated stone item with use traces on the left and right side of the hole.

LivingbytheWater

Neo-Lithics2/1063


fishandwaterfowlwereconsumed(cf.anthropologicalevidence).

Excursus: of Tortoises and Men

Because of their slow motion tortoises are highlyvaluedsmallanimals(Stineretal.2000).ThefindingsfromKörtikTepeadditionallyillustratethehighsocialvalue these animals might have had. In 16 burialstortoiseshellswerefoundlyingnearbyorcoveringtheheadoftheindividuals(Table1,Fig.5).Mostofthem(n=14)arelocatedinthewesternpartofthesite(Fig.4),butwhetherthisimpliesacertainspatialaffiliation(household)hastobeverifiedbydeeperexcavationsintheeasternpart.

Most of the identified individuals buried withtortoisesareadultsofdifferentages,butalsochildrenandoneperinatalindividualwereburiedwithtortoiseshells. There is no differentiation by gender either.Concerning theburial ritual, these individualsdonotdiffermuchfromtheotherburials.TheirorientationistypicalformostoftheKörtikTepeburials.Alsofortheuseofplaster it isnotunusual that inthemostupperburialslittleornoplasterwasused.

Concerningadditionalgravegoods,itisinterestingto note that in none of the burials with tortoises, asit was observed for the burials with fish remains,stone vaseswith concentric circles have been found.Additionally,someoftheotherequipmentcanalsoberelated tofishingactivities, suchas thefishhooksofM10 of TrenchA80. Individuals with tortoise shellscover the whole spectrum of the quantity of gravegoods:fromlavishlyendowedonestoburialswithoutanyadditionalgravegoods.

Itcanthusbesummedup,thattherewasaselectionforsomeindividuals,butthatthecriterionwasneitherchronologynor gender or age.The fact that childrenalsowereburiedwithatortoiseshellonorneartheheadmakes a certain professional occupation improbable,butitcannotbeexcludedthatacertainsocialaffiliationorritualpositionwasattributedtothesechildren,too.Theexclusionfromskillfullydecoratedstonevesselsisstrikingandmightimplyadifferentcorporateidentityofthe“fisher-tortoise-men”.

Anthropological Evidence

Possible furtherhints to theactivityof fishingcanbe gained by the anthropological analyses of theskeletons from Körtik Tepe. Besides a low cariesfrequencyindicatinga lowintakeofcarbohydratesand ground resources (Özbek 2005: 42-43), themostimportantevidencehintingatfishingactivitiescomes from auditory exostosis (AE), which is abonyanomalylocatedonthetympanicportionofthetemporalbone(Frayer1988).Of48skeletonshavingat least one temporal bone, 21 individuals (43.8%) have variously sizedAE.Of these, 63.6% are

male(n=11)and57.1%(n=14)femaleindividuals.AE has not been observed among infants youngerthan 2.5 years, but it was observed first at aboutthe ageof6.5-7years.While the frequencyofAEis 38.5% in children, it increases to 50%, 60%and 80 % in young adults, adults and old adults,respectively; in contrast, there is no statisticallysignificant difference between males and females.Körtik Tepe adults have a higher frequency ofAE than other living populations, which show apretty low frequency ofAE (Hanihara and Ishida2001;Okumuraetal.2007;Velasco-Vazquezetal.2000).

Experimental research carried out with guineapigs and humans indicates that there is a strongrelation between the prolonged exposure to coldwaterandthepresence,frequency,anddegreeofAE(Standen et al. 1997; Chaplin and Steward 1998).Similarly, clinical investigations demonstrate thattheAEfrequencyisbetween73-80%amongsurfers,surf life-savers and white-water kayakers (Wonget al. 1999; Chaplin and Steward 1998;Moore etal. 2010). Moreover, it has been widely acceptedthat there is a significant relationship between theyearsspentincoldwaterandAE(Wongetal.1999;ChaplinandSteward1998;Mooreetal.2010).

ThepresenceofAEinKörtikTepeanditsrelationto prolonged exposure to cold water have beenproposedbyÖzbek(2005:44-45).SuchpathologieshavealsobeenobservedinotherskeletalpopulationslivingbywatersourcessuchastheNeolithicsitesofÇayönüandAşıklı(Özbek1992:151;Özbek2004:33).Similaranthropologicinterpretationshavealsobeenmadefordifferentsitesintheworld.Namely,ithasbeensuggestedthattheMesolithicpopulationof Vlasac living by the Danube were associatedwithaquaticactivities taking inaccount the faunalremainsand34%ofAE(Frayer1988).Inaddition,Standen et al. (1997), who have worked on threedifferentChileanpopulationsdatedto7000BCand1450AD,haveemphasizedthestrongrelationshipsbetween the activities such as diving and fishing(by which the ear is exposed to cold water) andthe development of AE. Similarly, archaeologicalfindings indicatingfishandshell-fishconsumptionsuggest that life atGranCanariamostly dependedonmarineresources(Velasco-Vazquez2000).

Generally, these investigations have shown thatthelifestyledependingonfishingandtheexposureoftheeartocoldwatercancausethedevelopmentofAE,andinthesekindsofpopulationsthefrequencyishigherthaninotherpopulationshavingdifferentlifestyles. Although the exposure to cold watermightbeduetoactivitiessuchasbathing,cleaning,swimmingandplayinginwaterasanentertainment,the above mentioned archaeological data suggestthatfishingplayedanimportantroleindailylifeinKörtikTepe,whichislocatedbyrichwatersourceslike the Batman Creek and Tigris. While fishingwith poles and nets does not require the ear to be

LivingbytheWater

Neo-Lithics2/1064


exposed to cold water, it is highly possible thatKörtikTepeindividualsmighthavebeensubjectedtocoldwaterwhilesettingtrapsanddivinginordertocatchfishorotheraquaticresources.Inbrief,theearsofKörtikTepepeoplemighthavebeenexposedto coldwater over the long term, and this kind ofdailylifemusthavebeencontinuedforalifetime.

Secondary data related to fishing have beenextracted from dental grooves on 11 individualsout of 53 adults. Dental abrasion observed on theanterior dentition has mainly resulted from theproduction of cord, rugs, blankets, duck decoys,funerarybags,baskets,andfowlingbags.Moreover,it could also result from the manufacture of nets,traps for fish, and also fishing activity (Cybulski1974; Larsen 1985). It is concluded that some ofthe dental grooves on the anterior dentitionmighthave resulted from the activity related to fishing(Cybulski1974;Schulz1977;Larsen1985).Thesedatasuggestthattherichnessofthefaunaandfloranear thewaterwas thus not only a boon, but alsoa bane for some individuals. They paidwith theirdentalor/andearhealth,andprobablytheirgeneralhealth.

Isotopic Evidence

Despite fairly bad preservation of collagen, we havemanaged to gain the δ13C- and δ15N-values from 18out of a total sample of 42 individuals so far. Somepreliminary results show that although the group ofindividualsisquitesmall,thereissomevariationofthedietaryinputthatconsistedofproteinofplantandanimalorigin(Siebertetal.inprep.).However,concerningthemanagement of water resources, the δ13C- and δ15N-values do not indicate a significant proportion of fishin thediet.A loweringeffectof δ15N-valuesdue to ahighintakeofpulsesashasbeensuggestedforNevalıÇori(Löschetal.2006)seemstoberatherimprobablebecausetheδ13C-valuesalsohintatamixeddietratherthanaspecializationonaquaticresources.

Water and Aquatic Resources in Figurative Representations

FigurativerepresentationsatKörtikTepeshowawidespectrumofanimalscomprising long-hornedanimals(sheeporgoat),birds,scorpions,deer,snakesandsome

Trench Grave Sex1,2 Age1,2 Inside house²

Level cm

Face Orien-tation

Posi-tion²

Plaster² Grave goods

A 80 M10 male 30-40 yrs X -309 S NE-SW

Hl X 3 fish hooks, pestle, bone point

A 85 M3 male 45+ yrs ? -269 S E-W Hl X Ovoid chlorite pendant (2 x 1,1 x 0,5cm)

A44 M1 ? adolescent X -268 E N-S Hl X+ ochre None

A92 M3 ? adult³ ? -253 N E-W Hr X Horn of a wild goat, animal bones, fragments of a bone pin.

A63 M1 ? adult³ ? -241 W NE-SW

Hl X+ ochre 1 bone point (borer)

A83 M15 ? 10 yrs X -233 S N-S Hb X+ ochre two tortoises

A89 M3 female young adult

X -227 E NE-SW

Hl X+ ochre 241 stone ring beads,532 gastropod/shell beads, 1 undecorated lime stone vessel

A93 M5 ? adult³ Outside -227 S E-W Hl - None

A85 M2 male 25-28 yrs ? -219 N NE-SW

Hr (?) X 7 undecorated stone vessels, 3039 gastropod/shell beads, 5091 small stone beads.

A84 M7 female 23-27 yrs X -218 W NE-SW

Hr X+ ochre 1 fish bone [?]

A83 M27 ? child³ X -217 NW NE-SW

Hr X 395 stone ring beads, 492 gastropod beads, 1 undecorated shaft-straightener, 2 perforated stone tools,1 perforated limestone tool, 2 undecorated stone vessels, 1 bone awl, 1 piece of obsidian, 1 net weight/mace head4.

A70 M5 ? adult³ ? -200 E N-S Semi Hl X+ ochre 1 bone point

A88 M8 ? Perinatal ? -193 ? ? destroit - 2 gastropod/shell beads, fragments of undecorated stone vessels, piece of bone decorated with parallel lines.

A95 M5 ? child³ ? -172 N E-W Hr - None

A 80 M1 female 35-40 yrs X -163 SE N-S Hb - 1 piece of obsidian, flint stone, 2 decorated, 1 undecorated stone vessel, 1 perforated stone tool, 1 mace head/net weight4, 1 mortar, 585 small ring stone beads, 1 serpentine bead, 799 gastropod/shell beads, 19 fish vertebrae as beads.

A88 M1 male 45-50 yrs ? -118 W N-S Hr - 1 fragment of undecorated stone vessel

1 Determination of age and sex (pers. comm. Y.S. Erdal)2 ? unknown; Hr=Hocker lying on the right side; HL=Hocker lying on the left side; Hb=Hocker lying on the back. Plaster: X=present; - =without3 approximate estimation of age according to bone measurements (humerus/femur/tibia) and cranial sutures taken from photos.4 a final distinction between mace heads and net weights will become possible only when systematic use traces will be analysed.

Table 1 Burials with tortoise shells near or on the head of the skeletons.

LivingbytheWater

Neo-Lithics2/1065


unidentifiedanimals,possiblyinsects,whichareverysimilartofiguresinterpretedas“insects”or“spiders”onthepillarsofGöbekliTepe(e.g.Schmidt2007:90).However,representationsofaquaticresourcesarequitescarce.Themanywavyandzigzag lines inmetopes,all-over decoration, or ribbons surrounding the stonevases might be interpreted as stylization of water,but as the decoration of a bone item and of a stonevesselwithconcentriccirclesclearlyshow,theselinescouldbestylizationsofsnakestoo(Fig.2).However,abstractrepresentationscouldbepolyvalentandsooneinterpretationdoesnotexcludetheother.

Thereisonestonevesselwhichcouldgiveacluetotheidentificationaswaterfowlandfishes(ÖzkayaandCoşkun2007:146;Fig.7).Onthisvessel thetypicalstylization of birds is surrounded by many parallelzigzag lines and a half bow surrounding the birds.Whetherthedoublelinesurroundingthebirdsshouldrepresentatraporfishingpoleremainsspeculative.Ontheoppositeside,anellipticalformwithpointedendsissurroundedbythesamezigzagpattern.Althoughthisformcouldbeinterpretedasaboatwhichisattachedtosomekindoffootbridge,itmightrepresentafishorashelltoo.Thesamealmond-likesignisrepresentedontwoboneamulets,incombinationwithascorpionandasnakerespectively.Thiscouldspeakinfavorofananimal.

Similar bundles of zigzag lines combined withidenticallystylizedbirdswereincisedonseveralstonevessels (e.g. Özkaya and Coşkun 2007: 145-146;ÖzkayaandSan2007:Fig.17).Intheabovementionedgravewithatortoise(M1,A80;cf.Table1),onestonevessel was decorated all over on its upper part withsimilarparallelzigzaglines.

Besidesthenaturalisticandabstractrepresentationsof birds/waterfowl, the upper ends of some stonepestleshavetheshapeofbirdheads.Althoughaclear

identificationaswaterfowlhastobeproven,giventhehighfrequencyofwaterfowlinthearchaeozoologicalremainsandthefrequentcombinationofzigzaglinesandbirdsonthevesseldecoration,itcanbesuggestedthat the stylized birds could representwaterfowl andneednotberelatedcoercivelytovulturesanddeathasithasbeenconvincinglydemonstrated forother sites(Stordeurn.d.;Schmidt2007).Asmallchloriteanimalheadresemblingmoreaduckorgoosethanabirdwitha pointed beak could corroborate this interpretation(Fig.8).

If we accept this interpretation, waterfowl arerepresented quite frequently. The high frequencyof wing parts led Arbuckle and Özkaya (2006: 17)to suggest that the feathers might have been usedfor decoration. Both observations hint at the socialimportance - at least of the secondary products ofwaterfowl-fortheidentityofthepeople.

Incontrast,fishand tortoisesarealmostabsent indecorativeart.Besidestheabovementionedgeometricsymbol, two ovoid forms on a bone item, whichmight be interpreted as catfish (Yayın balığı, Silurustriostegus),werecombinedwithsomekindofinsectsandagainscorpions(Fig.9).Thedecorationofasmallchloriteitemcouldrepresentaturtle/tortoisehead(Fig.10).5Itshouldbekeptinmindthat-exceptinonecase(Özkaya2004:598,Fig.a)-noneoftherepresentationsofbirdsorfisheswerecombinedwith theconcentriccircles so often used as decorations on stone vesselsandotherstoneitems(Fig.2).Additionally,thelatterrepresentationshavebeenfoundinnoneoftheabovementioned graves with fish hooks or tortoises, butinsteadthoseofwater.

Thisexclusionofoneortheotherdecorationinthegravesissignificantandmighthintataspecialidentityofthepeoplewiththetortoiseandfishingequipment.However, there seems tobenoexclusiveusebyone

Fig. 7 Stone vessel with the representations of water and birds, possibly waterfowl. (Özkaya and Coşkun 2007: 146; Arbuckle and Özkaya 2006: fig. 3).

LivingbytheWater

Neo-Lithics2/1066


segmentofthesociety.Vaseswithconcentriccirclesaswellasgraveswith tortoisesandbird representationshavebeenfoundinthesametrenches.

Discussion

Taking the evidence from the different studiesaltogether,wesuggest that thepeopleofKörtikTepeused a wide spectrum of freshwater animals andhygrophilous plants for their subsistence, personaladornments,andequipment.Amixofhuntedlargeandsmallanimalsandwildplantsseemstohaveprovidedthemain calorific input.Our results thus corroboratethe findings of other contemporaneous sites wherean opportunistic use of plants and animals could bedemonstrated (Savard et al. 2006; Starkovich andStiner2009).Wesuggest that the intensive,probablyyear-roundpermanentuseofthesiteisnotduetotheintensiveuseorevencultivationofcerealsashasbeensuggested for theNatufian of the Levant. Rather, itseemsthathighlyvaluedand/orcalorie-richresourcessuch as acorns, pistachios, hackberry, and probablyalmonds,aswellaseasytocatchsmallanimalsliketortoisesorfish,contributedtothediet.Therichanddiversified environment made the site attractive fora permanent settlement.A specialization on cerealscould not be observed so far. The interpretation ofplant remains has long been biased by our modernperspective,wherethefocusoncerealsasoneofthebasicnutritionalelementshasbeenprojectedontothepast(Olszewski2004).

MicrowearanalysesonthegrindingandpoundingtoolsfromKörtikTepecouldfurtherelucidatewhichplants were ground. Concerning small game, fishhave especially been a neglected resource becausesampling methods for a systematic analysis have

been insufficient (e.g. Starkovich and Stiner 2009:50). Even if their quantitative contribution to thedietandtheirsocialrolefortheinhabitantsofKörtikTepewereofminor importance, theywereprobablyavaluableadditiontothediet.Pathologicalfindings,suchasauditoryexostosis,hintatprolongedexposuretowater,possiblybyfishingorcollectingotheraquaticresources (Frayer 1988;Standenet al. 1997;Özbek

Fig. 8 Chlorite item in the shape of a goose or duck head.

Fig. 9 Decorated bone item with representations of scorpions, some kind of insect and possible representations of (cat-) fish found in Grave M13, A87.

Fig. 10 Chlorite item, which might represent a tortoise head.

LivingbytheWater

Neo-Lithics2/1067


2005:42-45;ErdalandKoruyucun.d.).Furthermore,dentalgroovescouldresultfrompreparingfibersfornetsorotherfishingequipment.

As far as it is possible to conclude from thedistributionofartifacts,aspecializationonfishingbysomeinhabitantsdidnotexist.Fishingwithapolewasnotaverydevelopedtechnology,either.However,fishremainshavetobesampledsystematicallytoconsidertheimportanceoffishandotherpossibletechnologiesforfishing.Although tortoisesmighthavebeeneatenasithasbeenrecordedforthenearbycontemporaneoussite of Hallan Çemi (Starkovich and Stiner 2009:58), theuseof the tortoise shell to indicatea specialsocial identityhasbeen restrictedobviously toa fewindividuals. The comparison with other sites wheretortoise shellshavebeen found in aburial (Grosmanetal.2008)suggeststhattheroleoftheseindividualsmight have been in the ritual shamanistic sphere.However,atKörtikTepechildrenwerealsoendowedwith tortoise shells, therefore, a shamanistic identityseemsratherimprobable.

Conclusion

Although therewas no “domestication ofwater”, noinstallations such as dikes, footbridges or fishingponds, the evidence discussed above suggests thatpermanent water and its related resources madethe site attractive for a permanent living near theBatmanCreekandTigrisRiverandcontributedtoitssuccess.Burialremainshintatahighlydifferentiatedsocialcommunitywithmanyrichlyendowedburials.Obviously, the different social identities had to bedemonstrated by personal items and body decoration(in its widest sense). Despite similarities with othercontemporaneous sites, the people of Körtik Tepedeveloped their own iconographic repertoire. Theyseemtodistinguishthemselvesfromtheotherpeopleintheregion,althoughtheytookpartinwideexchangenetworksofobsidianandofotherexoticmaterialssuchasserpentine(Özkaya2009).

However,withintheirownvillageaccesstoaquaticresources does not seem to have been restricted toa certain group. If there was a commodification ofresources(sensuGebel2010),itdidnotshowupintheeconomicrealmofaquaticresourcesoraccessanduseofwaterbutratherinthepersonalandritual/ideologicalspherewith the tortoise burials and bodydecoration.Fishobviouslydidnotplayan important role for thedemonstration of social identities.They do not showup–orifsoonlyrarely–inthesymbolicrepertoireofthesite,andthefishvertebrae,whichmighthavebeenused as beads, are of a negligiblequantity comparedto other ornaments. In contrast, tortoise shells andprobably the feathers of birds/waterfowl were usedto demonstrate a personal – and more probably – acertaingroupidentity.Theburialswithtortoiseshellsaredistinctfromothersymbolicrepertoires,suchastheconcentriccirclesandgoats.However,thedistinction

wasneithergender-norage-specific.Futurestudiesarenecessary toclarify thismatter,whetheradistinctionis, for example, also reflected in a different kind ofsubsistenceorprovenance.6

These trends will be verified by systematic anddetailed studies of the fish bones andmicrofauna togain more information on subsistence practices atKörtik Tepe. Morphometric studies of small gamecouldcontributeasmuchtoquestionsofsubsistenceaswilldosystematicisotopicstudies.TheshiftoffocusontheopportunisticbehaviorofearlyHolocenehunter-gatherers avoidsprojecting the importanceof cerealsontothepastandcontributestoabetterunderstandingoftheprocessofsedentarisationandcommodificationof resources and material culture during the EarlyHolocene.

Endnotes

1 We use the term Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (PPNA) as achronological term, being aware of the cultural differencesbetween the PPNA of the Levant and southeastern Anatolia,and despite the fact that neither domestication of plants nor ofanimals could be demonstrated at Körtik Tepe and despite theEpipalaeolithic character of the flint and obsidian remains. ThemoreappropriatetermofProtoneolithicasithasbeensuggestedby several authors (Schyle 1996; Benz 2000; Aurenche et al.2001) couldnotbeestablished in the scientificcommunity.ThetermRoundHousePhase(cf.Savardetal.2006)isnotusedeitherbecause itusesaconstructionalspecificitywhichalsooccurs inotherprehistoricperiods.

2This studywasmade possible through samples andmaterialsprovidedbyoneoftheauthors,Prof.Dr.VecihiÖzkaya,directorof the Körtik Tepe Excavation.We are grateful to him for thepermissiontostudythesematerials.

3ThearchaeobotanicalandisotopicanalysiscouldbedonethankstothefinancialsupportoftheGermanResearchFoundation(BE-4218/B1-2;AL287/9-1).WearegratefultoProf.Dr.VecihiÖzkayaforthepermissiontostudythesematerials.

4An older settlement periodwith round buildings dug into thesedimentswithpostholeshasbeen identified in a testdeepcutduring the 2010 season. However, the excavated surface is toosmalltoconcludeanythingaboutfishingsofarduringthisearliestsettlementperiod.

5Theonlypossible,butmuchdebatedrepresentationofaturtle/tortoisestemsfromthelaterMPPNBsiteofNevalıÇorı,ontheEuphrates(Hauptmann1999).

6 Familial relationships might have played an important role,but unfortunately DNA is preserved too poorly for systematicanalysesofthiskind.

LivingbytheWater

Neo-Lithics2/1068


References

ArbuckleB.andÖzkayaV.2006 AnimalExploitationatKörtikTepe:Anearly AceramicNeolithicsiteinsoutheasternTurkey. Paléorient32(2):113-136.

AurencheO.,GaletP.,Régagnon-CarolineE.,andÉvinJ.2001 Proto-NeolithicandNeolithicCulturesintheMiddle East–TheBirthofAgriculture,LivestockRaising,and Ceramics:aCalibrated14CChronology12,500-5,500 calBC.Radiocarbon43(3):1191-1202.

BenzM.2000 DieNeolithisierungimVorderenOrient.Theorien, archäologischeDatenundeinethnologischesModell. StudiesinEarlyNearEasternProduction,Subsistence, andEnvironment7.Berlin,exoriente.

ChaplinJ.M.andStewardI.A.1998 ThePrevalenceofExostosesintheExternalAuditory MeatusofSurfers.ClinicalOtolaryngology23:326- 330.

CoşkunA.,BenzM.,andÖzkayaV.2010 KörtikTepe.In:PPND-PlatformforthePublication ofNeolithicRadiocarbonDates(http://www.exoriente. org/associated_projects/ppnd_site.php?s=81).

CybulskiJ.S.1974 ToothWearandMaterialCulture:PrecontactPatterns intheTsimshianArea,BritishColumbia.Syesis7: 31–35.

ErdalY.S.andKoruyucuM.M.n.d. Auditoryexostosis:AnAnomalyRelatedtoDaily LifeatKörtikTepe.4thNationalBiological AnthropologySymposium.Ankara,4-6November, 2010.

FrayerD.W.1988 AuditoryExostosisandEvidenceforFishingatVlasac. CurrentAnthropology29:346-349.

GebelH.G.K.2010 CommodificationandtheformationofEarly Neolithicsocialidentity.Theissuesasseenfromthe southernJordanianHighlands.In:M.Benz(ed.),The PrincipleofSharing.SegregationandConstructionof SocialIdentitiesattheTransitionfromForagingto Farming.StudiesinEarlyNearEasternProduction, Subsistence,andEnvironment14:35-80.Berlin,ex oriente.

GrossE.,JacometS.,andSchiblerJ.1990 SelbstversorgunginneolithischenDörfernam Zürichsee.In:SchweizerischesLandesmuseum(ed.), DieerstenBauern:105-116.ZürichseeDruckereiStäfa: Zürich.

GrosmanL.,MunroD.N.,andBelfer-CohenA.2008 A12,000-year-oldShamanburialfromthesouthern Levant(Israel).PNAS105(46):17665-17669.

HaniharaT.andIshidaH.2001 FrequencyVariationsofDiscreteCranialTraitsin MajorHumanPopulations.III.Hyperostotic Variations.JournalofAnatomy199:251-272.

HauptmannH.1999 TheUrfaRegion.In:M.ÖzdoğanandN.Başgelen (eds.),NeolithicinTurkey–Thecradleofcivilization: 65-86.Istanbul,ArkeolojiveSanatYayinlari.

HerlingL.2007 Haken/Angelhaken.In:BadischesLandesmusem(ed.), Vor12.000JahreninAnatolien.Dieältesten MonumentederMenschheit:332.Stuttgart,Konrad TheissVerlag.

HernekR.andJonssonL.2003 FörhisotrisktfiskeIBohuslän–främstunderstenålder ochbronsålder.BOHUSLÄNÅrsbok:83-102.

HillmanG.C.,ColledgeS.M.,andHarrisD.R.1989 Plant-foodeconomyduringtheEpipalaeolithicperiod atTellAbuHureyra,Syria:dietarydiversity, seasonality,andmodesofexploitation.In:D.R. HarrisandG.C.Hillman(eds.),FromForagingto Farming.TheEvolutionofPlantExploitation:240-268. London,UnwinHyman.

Hüster-PlogmannH.2004 FischfangundKleintierbeute.Ergebnisseder UntersuchungvonTierrestenausdenSchlämmproben. In:S.Jacomet,U.LeuzingerandJ.Schibler(eds.),Die jungsteinzeitlicheSeeufersiedlungArbonBleiche3. UmweltundWirtschaft.ArchäologieimThurgau12: 253-276.Frauenfeld.

LarsenC.S.1985 DentalModificationsandToolUseintheWestern GreatBasin.AmericanJournalofPhysical Anthropology67:393–402.

LernauH.andLernauO.1994 Thefishremains.In:M.LechevallierandA.Ronen (eds.),LesitedeHatoulaenJudéeOccidentale,Israël. MémoiresetTravauxduCentredeRechercheFrançais deJérusalem8:111-124.Paris,AssociationPaléorient.

LöschS.,GrupeG.,andPetersJ.2006 Stableisotopesanddietaryadaptationsinhumansand animalsatPre-PotteryNeolithicNevalıÇori,southeast Anatolia.AmericanJournalofPhysicalAnthropology 131(2):181-193.

LivingbytheWater

Neo-Lithics2/1069


MooreR.D.,SchumanT.A.,ScottT.A.,MannS.E.,DavidsonM.A.,andLabadieR.F.2010 ExostosesoftheExternalAuditoryCanalinWhite- WaterKayakers.TheLaryngoscope120:582-590.

OlsonC.,LimburgK.,andSöderblomM.2008 StoneAgefishhooks–howweretheydimensioned? Morphology,strengthtest,andbreakagepatternof NeolithicbonefishhooksfromAjvide,Gotland, Sweden.JournalofArchaeologicalScience35:2813- 1823.

OlszewskiD.I.2004 PlantFoodSubsistenceIssuesandScientificInquiryin theEarlyNatufian.In:C.Delage(ed.),TheLast Hunter-GatherersintheNearEast.BARinternational series1320:189-210.Oxford,Archaeopress.

OkumuraM.M.M.,BoyadjianC.H.C.,andEggersS.2007 AuditoryExostosesasanAquaticActivityMarker: AComparisonofCoastalandInlandSkeletalRemains FromTropicalandSubtropicalRegionsofBrazil. AmericanJournalofPhysicalAnthropology132:558– 567.

ÖzbekM.1992 AşıklıHöyükNeolitikİnsanları.ArkeometriSonuçları Toplantısı7:145-1602004 Çayönü’ndeİnsan.İstanbul:ArkeolojiveSanat.2005 KörtikTepe’deInsanSağlılı.ArkeometriSonuçları ToplantısıXX:41-52.

ÖzkayaV.2009 ExcavationsatKörtikTepe.ANewPre-Pottery NeolithicASiteinSoutheasternAnatolia.Neo-Lithics 1/09:3-8.2004 KörtikTepe:AnEarlyPrepotteryNeolithicSitein theUpperTigrisValley.In:T.Korkut(ed.),Anadolu’da Doğdu.FestschriftfürFahriIşıkzum60.Geburstag: 585-599.Istanbul,EgeYayınları.

ÖzkayaV.andCoşkunA.2007 KörtikTepe.In:N.Başgelen(ed.),12000YılÖnce. UygarlığınAnadolu’danAvrupa’yaYolculuğunun BaşlangıcıNeolitikDönem:86-88,143-156.Istanbul, KültürveTurizmBakanliǧi.2009 KörtikTepe,anewPre-PotteryNeolithicAsitein south-easternAnatolia.Antiquity,ProjectGallery 83(320):http://antiquity.ac.uk/projgall/ozkaya/.

ÖzkayaV.andSanO.2007 KörtikTepe:BulgularIşığındaKültürelDoku ÜzerineİlkGözlemler.In:M.ÖzdoğanandN. Başgelen(eds.),Anadolu’daUygarlığınDoğuşu veAvrupa’yaYayılımı:Türkiye’deNeolitik Dönem,YeniKazılar,YeniBulgular:21-36. Istanbul,ArkeolojiveSanatYayınları.

RiehlS.,DeckersK.,ZeidiM.,ConardN.,BenzM.,FazeliH.,andDarabiH.n.d. ThemodalitiesofplantuseinthreePPN sitesofthenorthernandeasternFertileCrescent –Apreliminaryreport.SpecialIssueVegetation HistoryandArchaeobotany(inrevision).

SampsonA.2008 TheCaveoftheCyclops:Mesolithicand NeolithicnetworksintheNorthernAegean, Greece.PrehistoryMonographs21.Philadelphia, INSTAPAcademicPress.SavardM.,NesbittM.,andJonesM.K.2006 Theroleofwildgrassesinsubsistenceand sedentism:newevidencefromthenorthern FertileCrescent.WorldArchaeology38(2):179- 196.

SchiblerJ.,JacometS.,Hüster-PlogmannH.,andBrombacherC.1997 Synthese–DiewirtschaftlicheEntwicklungvom 38.zum36.Jahrhundertv.Chr.In:J.Schibler, H.Hüster-Plogmann,S.Jacomet,C.Brombacher, E.Gross-KleeandA.Rast-Eicher,Ökonomie undÖkologieneolithischerundbronzezeitlicher UfersiedlungenamZürichsee.Monographiender KantonsarchäologieZürich20:329-361.Zürich undEgg,FotorotarAG.

SchmidtK.2007 DieSteinkreiseunddieReliefsdesGöbekli Tepe.In:BadischesLandesmuseumKarlsruhe (ed.),Vor12000JahreninAnatolien. DieältestenMonumentederMenschheit:83-96. Stuttgart,KonradTheissVerlag.

SchulzP.D.1977 TaskActivityandAnteriorToothGroovingin thePrehistoricCaliforniaIndians.American JournalofPhysicalAnthropology46:87–92.

SchyleD.1996 DasEpipalaeolithikumdesVorderenOrients. BeiheftezumTAVO,ReiheB85(1).Wiesbaden, Reichert.

SiebertA.etal.inprep. MobilityanddietatKörtikTepe-stableisotope studiesonδ13C,δ15Nand87/86Sr.Araştırma SonuçlarıToplantısı.

StandenV.G.,ArriazaB.T.,andSantoroC.M.1997 ExternalAuditoryExostosisinPrehistoric ChileanPopulations:ATestoftheColdWater Hypothesis.AmericanJournalofPhysical Anthropology103:119-129.

LivingbytheWater

Neo-Lithics2/1070


StarkovichB.M.andStinerM.C.2009 HallanÇemiTepesi:High-rankedGameExploitation alongsideIntensiveSeedProcessingatthe Epipaleolithic-NeolithicTransitioninSoutheastern Turkey.Anthropozoologica44(1):41-61.

StinerM.C.,MunroN.D.,andSurovellT.A.2000 TheTortoiseandtheHare:Small-GameUse,the Broad-SpectrumRevolution,andPaleolithic Demography.CurrentAnthropology41(1):39-79.StordeurD.n.d. Domesticationdesplantesetdesanimaux. Domesticationdessymboles?Communicationgivenin Freiburg31st,January2009.

VanNeerW.,ZoharI.,andLernauO.2005 TheEmergenceofFishingCommunitiesintheEastern Mediterraneanregion:AsurveyofEvidencefromPre- andProtohistoricPeriods.Paléorient31(1):131-157.

Velasco-VazquezJ.,Betancor-RodriguezA.,Arnay-De-LaRosaM.,andGonzalez-ReimersE.2000 AuricularExostosesinthePrehistoricPopulationof GranCanaria.AmericanJournalofPhysical Anthropology112:49-55.

WongB.J.F.,CervantesW.,DoyleK.J.,KaramzadehA.M.,BoysP.,BrauelG.,andMushtaqE.1999 PrevalenceofExternalAuditoryCanalExostosesin Surfers.ArchivesofOtolaryngologyHeadandNeck Surgery125:969-972.

ZoharI.,DayanT.,GaliliE.,andSpanierE.2001 FishProcessingDuringtheEarlyHolocene:A TaphonomicCaseStudyfromCoastalIsrael.Journal ofArchaeologicalScience28:1041–1053.

EarlyWaterExploitation

Neo-Lithics2/1072


Introduction

Even thoughwater isessential for theexistenceofhumanbeings, itsuse inearly timeshas longbeenneglected. The usages of water differ and changeduringprehistory,butincontrasttothearchaeologyofearlymetallurgy(cf.HauptmannandStrahm2009;Strahm1994),uptonowtherehasbeenlittleefforton a systematic dealingwithwater. (I donot haveenough space here to elaborate on all innovationsconnectedwithwater; a larger volume is currentlyunderpreparation;cf.Eichmannetal.inpress)

Apart fromdrinkingwater,water is a sourceofsubsistence (Fig. 1):Already inPalaeolithic times,humangroupsusedthevicinityofpredatorstowaterto feed upon the carcasses left behind by these,for instance at ElKnown,Syria (LeTensorer andMuhesen 1997; Le Tensorer et al. 2007; cf. alsoBaales in press). Being a natural barrier, watercould also be used to trap fleeing animals, as thecontext of the famous spears from Schöninghen,Lower Saxony, Germany suggests (Thieme 1997;1999).Lastbutnot least, therewasofcourse,alsothepossibility topreyuponmarineanimals,whichseems to have become common from theYoungerPalaeolithiconwardsandresultedintheimpressivehighlyspecialisedkøkkenmoddinger(shellmiddens)that appear worldwide since the Epipalaeolithic(Noll2002).EventheuseofraftsorboatshasbeensuggestedfortheolderandmiddlePalaeolithicand

iscurrentlydiscussed(cf.BednarikandKuckenburg1999;Bednarik1997,1999,2008):ThefindsofflinttoolsfromMataMengeandBoaLezaontheislandof Flores in the SoaBassinwere deposited duringa period inwhich the islandwas divided from themainlandby50-150mofwaterandthusthemakersand users of these tools are thought to have hadaccess to primitive watercraft to reach the island(Gibbons1998).TherearesignificantimprovementsinthealreadyknownusesduringtheEpipalaeolithicandNeolithic.SeavoyagesintheMediterraneanarebecoming a daily routine and able to bridgemuchgreater distances. This is visible, for instance, inthe finds of obsidian from the island of Melos inthe Franchti cave on the Argolis (Jacobsen 1972:83ff;Cherry1985:14-16;Torrence1986;Williams-Thorpe1995)orthesettlementofCyprusduringthePPNwhichnotonlybringscoloniststotheislandbutalsodomesticandwildanimals(cf.GuilaineandLeBrun 2003; Peltenburg andWasse 2004; Simmons2007;cf.also:Ammermanetal.2008);fromnorthernmiddleEuropethereisalsoartefactualandpictorialevidence from early seagoing vessels from theLateUpper Palaeolithic, though both finds are notundisputed(Elmers1980;Tromnau1984).SinceV.GordonChildemasterfullydescribed thespreadingof archaeological cultures along the Danube, it isclearthatwaterisanimportantmediumoverwhichlong-distance contacts, exchange networks andsocial relations evolve (Childe 1929). B. Cunliffeelaborated on these ideas and has lately writtenan archaeological “history“ of Western Europein which he tries to explain the specific culturalevolution: because allWestern European societieswere“FacingtheOcean”(Cunliffe2001).

These modes of using water change drasticallyafter the advent of Neolithic economies. Ceramicvessels made cooking with water now easier andallowedmuchmorecomplexdishes tobeprepared(Sherrat 2002); even though cooking with boilingstoneswasknownfromPalaeolithic timesonward,theuseofceramicpotsallowedanewqualityinitsuse.Andfinallytheculticuseofwaterseemstogoalongwith theNeolithisation, although one has tostress that this seems to be rather a phenomenontypical for the later Neolithic of Europe (cf. Rech1979;Klimscha2011).

A Hydrological Revolution? Neolithic Water Use

Themoststrikingchangeinusingwateris,however,the building of wells and earthen structures. The

Early Water Exploitation and its Post-Neolithic Aftermath

Florian Klimscha GermanArchaeologicalInstitute,Berlin [email protected]

Fig. 1 Schematic overview about the possible uses of water in pre- and protohistoric times (Klimscha).


Neo-Lithics2/1073


new technologies available in theNeolithic allowedfor new ways of allocation, conduct and storage ofwater.Water has to be collected in vessels tomoveit from the source.The easiest possibility for this istheemploymentoforganicvessels.Eventhoughtherearenosuchfinds in theearlyprehistoryof theNearEast,asmallnumberofbirchbarkvesselsareknownfromtheBaltic(Ošibkina2007)andcentralGermany(Gramsch 1993, 2000).As long as this is the onlypossibility to move and store water, the activity ofhumangroupsiscloselyboundtonaturalwatersourcesand the possibility to manufacture and transportstorage vessels. The construction of wells on theotherhandenabledhumangroupstobuildsettlementsindependently of natural water sources, like springsandrivers,whichgoesalongwellwithcurrentmodelsfortheNeolithisationwhichstressorganisationamongothersasa typicalNeolithic trait (e.g.Cauvin2000;Bellwood 2005).The well was therefore accuratelycharacterised as eau portable (Bakels 1983, 17). Itenabledhumangroupsto“create”waterreservoirsofconsiderablesizeandthustoaugmentboththeirsizeandtheirLebensraum.

Wellsnotonlyenableabetterqualityofdrinkingwaterbutalsotoraisethequantityofavailablehigh-qualitywater;incomparisontoMesolithicwaterholesfromthetypeastheywereexcavatedbyB.GramschinFriesack,Brandenburg,Germany(Gramsch1998).

Therefore the well enables a society to develop anunderstanding of hygiene. It was even suggestedthat the higher water quality allowed for a socialstratification of Neolithic societies into groups withprimary rights on the water from wells and thosewithoutthoserights(CampenandStäuble1998/1999;Stäuble2002),althoughonehastobecarefulhere,nottooveremphasizethestillsparsenumberofNeolithicwells,whichcouldalsobeaproductofarchaeologicalresearchstrategies(Weinerinpress).

DuringthePPNAtheearliestwells,yetdiscovered,areknownfromCyprus(Peltenburgetal.2001)andshortlythereafterfromthesouthernLevant(Garfinkeletal.2006).IfthistechnologyistransportedtoEuropewiththearrivalofNeolithicpeople,orifthewellsoftheEuropeanNeolithicareanindependentinventionis still under discussion. Since modern excavationsregularlydetectwellsinEarlyNeolithicsettlementsinEurope (e.g.Kottera2007;Lorscheider andSchade-Lindig 2007; Elburg 2008; Stäuble and Fröhlich2006),itseemsreasonablethatatleasttheknowledgehowtoattainsubterraneanwatersourceswaspartoftheNeolithicpackageandwastranslatedintolocallyadaptedtechnologies.

Thedatingof the inventionofwells is still underdiscussion,becausethereisthepossibilitythatitmaybeolderthantheNeolithic:InNorthernAmericatherehas been excavated a vertically sunk shaft, that can

Fig. 2 Tall Hujayrat al-Ghuzlan. Overview of the Late Chalcolithic/Early Bronze Age tell site, facing NW in spring 2010 (Becker/DAI; to be published in Khalil and Schmidt forthcoming).


Neo-Lithics2/1074


plausiblybeinterpretedasaprimitivewell.Downrightsensational is the age of this structurewhich can beattributedtotheCloviscultureandthusdatedintothePaleolithic(Green1962).ComparablestructuresareuptonowunknownintheNearEast,buttheirexistenceispossible,asIwillshow:Pitextractionofchertisknownsince theAcheulean, butwith theUpperPalaeolithicundergroundminingwas practiced. InNazletKhater4, situated in the Upper Egyptian Nile valley, anUpperPalaeolithicbladeindustrywasproducedfromchert that was mined on the site. The excavationsdiscoveredverticalshaftswhichweredugatleast1.5mdeep into the gravel; thesewere sometimes enlargedat their base. Several carbon 14-datings securely fixthediggingactivitiesbetweenca.35,000and30,000BP(Vermeerschetal.1984,1995;Vermeersch2003).The sinking techniques displayed atNazletKhater 4are comparable to those needed for the constructionofwells.ThediscoveryofmininginPaleolithictimestherefore could be very closely connected with thenecessary technical evolution that finally enabledwellsinking. Incontrast toflintandchert,waterwaseasier available in many regions, and therefore theknowledgeofsinkingdoesnotnecessarilyhavepushedtheconstructionofwells;howeveritshouldbekeptinmind,thatthenecessarypre-requisiteswereavailableintheNearEastfromat least theUpperPalaeolithic.Onceagroupunderstood,thatwithinthehydrologicalcircuit water was constantly exchanged between

subterraneanreservoirs,above-groundsourcesandtheatmosphere,theknowledgedevelopedviachertminingcouldbemadeuseofto“mine”forwater.

Positive (walls, dikes) and negative (ditches)earthen structures allowed the transport of water.Watercouldnowbedivertedfromahumanhabitationorbroughtintoit, tobemorespecificontothefields.The innovative use of earthworks for the control ofwater movement was discussed by Gebel (2004) aswellastheuseofstonedikeswhichcouldhavebeenusedtostopwadifloodings(KujitandGoring-Morris2002).Storageofwaterinlargerdimensionscanonlybemeaningfultogroupswhichconstantlystayonthesameplace (or at leastwho stay as long at the sameplaceasnecessarytouseupthestoredwater).

The Combination of Neolithic Technologies: Early Irrigation Systems of the Chalcolithic in Jordan

The transport of water is a major shift in man’srelationship to nature. While the Palaeolithic andEpipalaeolithicusagessummedupfurtheraboveusedwater as a transport medium or as a food source inits unmodified natural environment, the constructionofwells andearthworks, changes theenvironment toeasetheaccesstowater.Humancommunitiesbegintoloosenlargeramountsofwaterfromthehydrologicalcircuitfordomesticandagriculturaluse.

Fig. 3 Overview of the hydrological structures in the vicinity of Tall Hujayrat al-Ghuzlan (Siegel/DAI).


Neo-Lithics2/1075


However,ifwaterwastobeusedinadistancefromwhere itwas “extracted”, somemeansof conductionhadtobeused.Tobesuccessful,suchatransportneededthe combination of several technical achievementsalready mentioned: First of all a regular source ofwater,thatiseitheranaturaloneoroneormorewellstoprovideenoughwatertomakeanartificialtransportexpedient.Incontrasttomostothersubstances,watermovesbyitself,andthereforeiseasytomove.Allthatisneededisaslightslopetocreatehydrostaticpressureplusstructuresthatconfineitsway,i.e.eitheraditchorwallsoracombinationofboth.

Such a system was examined between 2004 and2006 in Tall Hujayrat al-Ghuzlan (Fig. 2), a lateChalcolithic/EarlyBronzeAgesettlement,nearAqaba,southernJordan(KhalilandSchmidt2009;Heemeieret al.2009;Klimscha andSiegel 2007; Siegel 2009;Klimschaetal.inpress).TheAqabaareaisresearchedsince1998byaJordanian-Germancooperationbetweenthe University of Jordan and the Orient Departmentof theGermanArchaeologicalInstitute.TheASEYMProject(ArchaeologicalSurveyandExcavationintheYutumandMagaşşArea)isdirectedbyR.Eichmann,K.SchmidtandL.Khalil(TheresearchwasassistedbytheA.Hauptmann,BochumandM.Grottker,Lübeck.Forthehistoryofresearchcf.toKhalil2009;Klimschaand Siegel 2007;Müller-Neuhof et al. 2003; for thefinalresultsoftheresearch1998-2006cf.Brückneret.al.2002andKhalilandSchmidt2009;anothervolumedealingwiththeperiodof2006-2010iscurrentlyunderpreparation).Since2002 theexcavationsandsurveyswere focused on Tall Hujayrat al-Ghuzlan and itssurroundingsandworkwasfinanciallyassistedbytheGermanResearchFoundation(DFG).

Hereacombinationofbasinsandcanalswasusedtoaccumulatewaterandtransportittoagriculturalareas300meterssouth-westofthesettlement(Fig.3).Severalareaswithwater saturated soil layers consisting of a

sand/gravelmixturecouldbeidentifiedviageoelectrics(Heemeier et al. 2009: 257-261). During a surveystructuresbuildfromlargebouldersandwadipebblescouldstillbeseenabove-ground.Thestructurescanbesorted into roundish and sub-rectangular “basins” ontheonehandandlongishrowsofparallelstonerowsontheotherhand(Fig.4).

Excavationswere undertaken 2005 and 2006 andcould provide evidence for the use as an irrigationsystem: There were no artifacts inside any of thestructures excavated and sinter accumulations inthe longish, parallel rows suggest thatwater had runhere on a regular basis. Dating the structures is noteasy, because the carbon 14-analyses of the sinteraccumulations were probably contaminated andallowedadatingbetweentheNeolithicandtheIslamicperiod(cf.Klimschainpress).Howeversincetherearenootherarchaeologicalfeatures in thevicinityof thestructuresthantheChalcolithictellandsinceoptical-stimulatedLuminescencedating (OSL)generated thesameagerangefor the telland the irrigationsystem,one can relatively securely attribute the latter to theChalcolithicperiod.Thewaterwascollectedinopen,roundbasinsneartheareaswhereitcametothesurface(Fig.5)andfromthereitwastransportedviathecanals(Fig.6;7)ontoterracedfieldsinthesouthandsouth-westernareaofthesettlement(Fig.8).Especiallythesouth-easternfieldswereverywellpreservedandshowthat there existed several zones of similar shape andsizeontowhichthewaterwasbrought(Fig.9).

Such a system is atypical for the Chalcolithic ofthesouthernLevantandnotknownfromneighboringareas in northern Jordan and Israel and also not inpredynasticEgypt.Comparablestructuresare,however,documented on the Golan (Epstein 1978): Withinthe circumference of Majami’ several rectangularstructures were recognised and near those structuresstaggered“stoneheaps”werefoundandidentifiedasthe

Fig. 4 Surroundings of Tall Hujayrat al-Ghuzlan. Area of site 85; wadi boulder structures in the south of Tall Hujayrat al-Ghuzlan showing a system of water catchment and water distribution (Heemeier et al. 2009: 262, Fig. 12).


Neo-Lithics2/1076


boundariesoffields.Stonesettingswhichwereeitherparallel to or divergent fromareaswith an increasedhumidityontheotherhandwereinterpretedasanearlyirrigationsystemthattriedtocontrolthespreadingofthismoisture(Epstein1978:32).IrrigationsystemsarealsoconsideredforsomeoftheChalcolithicsitesintheNegev (Epstein 1978;Gilead1988;Levy1995: 230;Bourke2002).

Sincethetellwassituatedinanarid,desertlikezone,itwastheprerequisiteofthesettlement,whichallowed150-200peopletolivethere(cf.Klimschaetal.inpress),whichengagedincoppersmeltingandtheproductionofadornmentsmadefrommolluskshellsandcopperingots.CurrentlygeologicalexaminationsintheAqabaregionsuggest that during the Chalcolithic, the coastal zonewasmarshland;thereforethenumberofinhabitantsmaybecorrectedslightlyupwards in thefuture(cf.AllisonandNiemi2010;NiemiandSmith1999).

The single elements of the irrigation system areneithernewnorinnovative;however,theircombinationand resulting from this efficiency is remarkable. Thebuilding and especially cleaning of such a systemrequired a form of central control over labor and,therefore, social innovations which had resulted intenser organization and probably social inequalityhavetobeassumedbeforesuchsystemcouldbebuilt.Theremusthavebeen rules regulatingwhowas todotheadditionalworkaddedtothework-loadofasocietyand there must also have been a way of accessing asociety’saccumulatedexperiencewithNeolithicwatertechnology. Without some experience about how toraise andmove subterranean water, such a system asencountered in Tall Hujayrat al-Ghuzlan would notonlybeunthinkable to itsprehistoricbuildersbutalsounefficient.Theremust have been experiencewith alldifferent elements and especially with moving largermassesofwaterovershorterdistances.ThisexperiencemusthavebeenaccumulatedoverseveralgenerationsandprobablyoutsideoftheAqabaregion,becausetherearenopredecessorsoftheirrigationsystem.Consequently,

the systemproves the existenceof socialmechanismsenabling aLateChalcolithic, alliterate society to refertoexperiencecollectedinprecedingtimes,anduseittoconstructinnovativehydrologicalstrategiesthatallowedthepermanentlifeindesertregions.

An Evolution of the Use of Water. Some Thoughts on the Use of Innovative Techniques in Hydrology

Theevolutionofwater-use,i.e.hydro-technology,canbeunderstoodbestwhencomparingitwiththatoffire-use,i.e.pyro-technology.ThefirstoneisessentialforlivingandinnovationsenablelargerquantitiesofwatertobemadeavailablefromtheNeolithiconwards.Fireisalsoessentialforhumanlife,butitsuseforthemanufactureofceramicsandmetalsisaimedatproducingsecondaryproducts. These technologies were perfected andallowed the production ofmore goods that are easieravailable.ThepopulationexplosionofHighMedievalEurope,forexample,canpartiallybeexplainedbytheextensiveuseofironscythesmadeavailablebyadvancesinsmithingtechnologywhichresultedinashorteningoftheharvestingperiod(Ohler1997).Theuseofwaterhad the same tendencies already in prehistoric andprotohistoric times. Contrasting the Mesolithic waterholeswithNeolithicwells andChalcolithic irrigationsystems makes clear that the quantity of availablewateristhemaincriterionbywhichthesethreecanbeexplainedinanevolutionaryhistoricalscheme.

Thefirst phase of such an approachwould be thesimpleuseofnaturalwaterresourcesasitcanbeseenfrom(atleast)EarlyLowerPalaeolithictimesonwards(Tab.1).Thisincludesnotonlytheacquisitionoffoodsand drinking water from surface water but also theuseofprimitivewatercraft.Thisstrategyisboundtoaforagingwayoflifeandcanbeseeninperfectionwithinthe late Mesolithic hunter-gatherer-fisher societies intheBalticwhostillcling to their subsistencenearlyathousandyearsafterneighboringregionshavechanged

Fig. 5 Surroundings of Tall Hujayrāt al-Ghuzlān. Humid area with increased soil humidity enclosed by wadi boulders; site 85, loc 8 (Siegel 2009: 291, Fig. 87).

Fig. 6 Surroundings of Tall Hujayrat al-Ghuzlan. Canal during excavation; site 85 loc. 1 and 4 seen from the west (Siegel 2009: 291, Fig. 84).


Neo-Lithics2/1077


totheNeolithicmodeofproduction.Humansocietiesareboundtoavicinityofwater.Thereforewaterwaysarealsotheidealmeansoftravellinglongerdistancesandpush innovative technologies likedugoutcanoeswhichagainallowadvancedfishing techniquesandahighermobility.EventhelateCopperAgesocietiesintheEasternBalkansstillpartiallyuse thissubsistencestrategytofeedasocietywhichisground-breakingintheworkingofcopperandpreciousmetals,ascanbeseenintheextremelyrichgravesintheVarnacemeteryon the Black Sea coast (Fol and Lichardus 1988).HumansocietiesareboundtowaterinthePalaeolithic;whiletheyuseitintensivelyandadvantageousfromtheEpipalaeolithic/Mesolithiconwards.

With the construction of wells in the Neolithicit becomes possible to be independent from surfacewater and this also raises the quality and quantity ofdrinkingwater.Evenif theinventionofwellsmaybesubjectoffurtherdiscussion, ithastobestressedthattheinnovativeuseofwellsseemstobeclearlyboundtotheNeolithic.TheNeolithic, if then,is thatturningpoint inwhich thehydrologicalcircuit ischanged forthe first time. The building and use of wells impliesknowledgeaboutthathydrologicalcircuit,namelythe

Fig. 7 Surroundings of Tall Hujayrat al-Ghuzlan. Profile of the canal construction excavated at site 85, loc 2 (Siegel 2009: 292, Fig. 90)

Fig. 8 Surroundings of Tall Hujayrat al-Ghuzlan. Terrace wall at site X13 (Siegel 2009: 280, Fig. 16).

Fig. 9 Reconstruction of the canal and terrace system at the sites X13 and X14 (Siegel 2009: 280, Fig. 17).


Neo-Lithics2/1078


existence of underground water; however certainconstructionalinnovationsarealsonecessarytobuildawell(seeabove).Thecombinationofthesetwofeaturesallowhumangroupstointeractwiththeirsurroundingsinanewway;theystartshapingtheenvironmenttosuithumanneeds.

A further evolutionary “step” can be seen in theinvention of hydrological systems as they are knowninMesopotamia from theUbaid timeonwardsand inTall Hujayrat al-Ghuzlan, Jordan. These systems arecharacterisedbythecontrolledcombinationofknownhydrological elements (wells, ditches and dikes).Thepermanentsettlementofarid,hostilezonesisprobablythegreatestadvantageofthesesystemswhichseemtobenecessarilyevolvingintocomplexsocietiesinwhichlabour iscontrolled regulatedbyasmall socialgroup(cf.Wittfogel1963).ThetechnologyallowedhumanlifeinzoneswhichwerehostileandterraincognitafortheprecedingNeolithiccommunities.Settlementsthereforecouldnotstartonatryanderrorbasisbutmusthavehada inventory of knowledge about natural phenomena,especially the sources of water, and a technologicalrepertoiretobringthiswaterontothedesiredspot.

These phases are not simply following one afterthe other, but as I tried to show are bound to certainsocial and technological prerequisites. Since culturalevolutionnevergoesuniformlystraightaheadandalsodoesnotneedtobesimilareverywhere,theuseofwaterdoesneitherperfectlygoalongwiththearchaeologicalperiodsnorisitlimitedtothetimeofitsfirstappearance.While the Balkans in the CopperAge seem to haveenjoyed a mixture of specialised use and re-shapingof water, we can grasp a controlled combination ofknownelementsinthesouthernLevantasanafterlifeofNeolithicwatertechnology.

Acknowledgements. I thankDr.Hans-GeorgGebelforinvitingme to participate in this volume. I also thankKlausSchmidtandUlrikeSiegelforproof-readingandcommentingonthistext.

References

AllisonA.J.andNiemiT.2010 PaleoenvironmentalReconstructionofHolocene CoastalSedimentsadjacenttoarchaeologicalRuinsin Aqaba,Jordan,Geoarchaeology.25.5:602-625.

AmmermanA.,FlourentzosP.,GabrielliR.,HighamT.,McCartneyC.,andTurnbullT.2008 ThirdreportonearlysitesonCyprus,Reportofthe DepartmentofAntiquities,Cyprus2008:1-32.

BaalesM.inpress DerpleistozäneMenschunddasWasser.In R.Eichmann,F.Klimscha,C.SchulerandH. Fahlbusch(Hrsg.),InnovativeWassernutzung. ClusterforschungdesDeutschenArchäologischen Instituts.Cluster2.Innovation:technisch,sozial.

BakelsC.C.1983 L‘exploitationparl‘hommedurubanédesonmilieu natureletenpraticulierdessourcesminérales. InProgrèsRécentsdansl‘ÉtudeduNéolithqueAncien. DissertationesArchaeologicaeGandenses21,17-20.

BednarikR.G.1997 TheEarliestEvidenceofOceanNavigation. InternationalJournalofNauticalArchaeology26:183- 191.1999 SeefahrtimPleistozän.Quartär49-50:95-1092008 ZurSeefahrtimPaläolithikum.Ethnographisch- ArchäologischeZeitschrift49:257-270

BednarikR.G.andKuckenburgM.1999 NaleTasih.EineFloßfahrtindieSteinzeit.Stuttgart, Thorbecke.

BellwoodP.2005 Firstfarmers:theoriginsofagriculturalsocieties. Oxford,Blackwell.

Characteristics Innovations Technical and social consequences

Human groups are forced to connect their habitats to natural sources of water

Settlement along riversUse of the food resources bound to watersUse of water surfaces as for travel (early watercraft)

Regular contact with water “favours” the improvement of innovations.

Human groups make intensive use of surface water reservoirs in many ways

Specialised weapons and tools for fishingDug out boatsWater holes

Improvement of known innovations;Conservative economies in coastal areas with large quantities of food make extensive use of old and new techniques and often ignore the NeolithisationImprovement of personal mobility Improvement of hygiene with drinking water

Change of the hydrological circuit.Human groups start to change their natural environment to use water; water can now now be bound to human groups

WellsDikes, ditches (unclear if used for water protection/distribution)

Better mobility for Neolithic groupsPermanent settlement in areas without natural waterImprovement of personal mobility Improvement of hygiene with drinking waterIncrease of settlement size

Human groups make use of more extensive changes to the environment; Known elements are combined into the first irrigation systems

CisternsCanalsArtificial irrigation systems

Settlement sizes may be further increasedArid zones can be permanently settled

Table 1 Evolutionary scheme about the use of water in early prehistory (Klimscha).


Neo-Lithics2/1079


BourkeS.J.2002 TheOriginsofSocialComplexityintheSouthern Levant:NewEvidencefromTeleilatGhassul,Jordan. PalestineExplorationQuaterly134:2-27.

BrücknerH.,EichmannR.,HerlingL.,KallweitH.,KernerS.,KhalilL.,andMiqdadiR.2002 ChalcolithicandEarlyBronzeAgeSitesnearAqaba, Jordan.ArchaeologicalSurveyandExcavationin theWadial-YututmandTallal-MagassArea (ASEYM).InR.Eichmann(Hrsg.),Ausgrabungenund SurveysimVorderenOrientI.OrientArchäologie5: 215-332.Rahden,Leidorf.

CampenI.andStäubleH.1998/1999HolzfundeimBraunkohlentagebauZwenkau: AusnahmeoderRegel?Plattform7/8:46-57.

CauvinJ.2000 TheBirthoftheGodsandtheOriginsofAgriculture. Cambridge,CambridgeUniversityPress.

CherryJ.F.1985 IslandsoutofStream:IsolationandInteractioninearly eastMediterraneaninsularprehistory.InA.Knapp andT.Tech(eds.),ProductionandExchange:The AegeanandEastMediterranean,12-29.LosAngeles, UCLAInstituteofArchaeology

ChildeV.G.1929 TheDanubeinPrehistory.Oxford.

CunliffeB.2001 FacingtheOcean.London,OxfordUniversityPress.

EichmannR.,FahlbuschH.,KlimschaF.,andSchulerC.(Hrsg.)inpress InnovativeWassernutzung.Clusterforschungdes DeutschenArchäologischenInstituts.Cluster2. Innovation:technisch,sozial.

ElburgR.2008 SiebzigTonnenSteinzeit,Ausgrabungdes bandkeramischenBrunnensvonAltscherbitz.Archaeo 5:12-17.

ElmersD.1980 EinFellboot-FragmentderAhrensburgerKulturaus Husum,Schleswig-Holstein?OffaBücher37:19-24.

EpsteinC.1978 ANewAspectofChalcolithicCulture.BASOR229: 27-45.

FolA.andLichardusJ.(eds.)1988 Macht,HerrschaftundGold.DasGräberfeldvon Varna(Bulgarien)unddieAnfängeeineneuen Zivilisation.Saarbrücken,StiftungSaarländischer Kulturbesitz.

GarfinkelY.,VeredA.,andBar-YosefO.2006 Thedomesticationofwater:theNeolithicwellatSha’ar Hagolan,JordanValley,Israel,Antiquity80:686-696.

GebelH.G.K.2004 Thedomesticationofwater.EvidencefromEarly NeolithicBa‘ja.InH.D.BienertandJ.Häser (eds.),MenofDikesandCanals.TheArchaeologyof WaterintheMiddleEast.Orient-Archäologie10:25- 36.Rahden,Leidorf.

GibbonsA.1998 AncientIslandtoolssuggestHomoErectuswasa seafarer.Science279:1635-1637.

GileadI.1988 TheChalcolithicperiodintheLevant.Journalof WorldPrehistory2.4:297-443.

GreenF.E.1962 AdditionalnotesonprehistoricwellsattheClovissite. AmericanAntiquity28:230-234.

GuilaineJ.andLeBrunA.2003 LenéolithiquedeChypre:actesducolloque internationalorganiséparleDépartementdesantiquités deChypreetl‘Ecolefrançaised‘Athènes,Nicosie, 17-19mai2001.SupplementaryvolumeoftheBulletin deCorrespondanceHellènique43.Athènes.

GramschB.1993 EinmesolithischerBirkenrindenbehältervonFriesack. VeröffentlichungendesBrandenburgischen LandesmuseumsfürUr-undFrühgeschichtePotsdam 27:7-15.1998 MesolithischeWasserlöcherinBrandenburg.In BrunnenderJungsteinzeit.Internationales SymposiumErkelenz.27.bis29.Oktober.Materialien zurBodendenkmalpflegeimRheinland11:17-24.Köln andBonn.2000 Friesack.LetzteJägerundSammlerinBrandenburg. JahrbuchdesRömisch-GermanischenZentralmuseums Mainz47:51-96.

HauptmannA.andStrahmC.2009 TheMetallurgicalDevelopmentalPhasesintheOld World.InT.K.KienlinandB.W.Roberts(eds.),Metals andSocieties.StudiesinhonourofBarbaraS. Ottaway:116-128.Universitätsforschungenzur prähistorischenArchäologie169,Bonn,Habelt.

HeemeierB.,RauenA.,WaldhörM.,andGrottkerM.2009 WaterManagementatTallHujayrātal-Ghuzlān.In K.SchmidtandL.Khalil(eds.),PrehistoricAqabaI. OrientArchäologie23:247-272.Rahden.

JacobsenT.W.1972 ExcavationsintheFranchtiCave1969-71.Hesperia42: 45-88;253-283.


Neo-Lithics2/1080


KhalilL.2009 ‘AqabathroughtheAges.InK.SchmidtandL.Khalil (eds.),PrehistoricAqabaI.OrientArchäologie23:1-4. Rahden,Leidorf.

KhalilL.andSchmidtK.(eds.)2009 PrehistoricAqabaI.OrientArchäologie23.Rahden, Leidorf.inpress PrehistoricAqabaII.OrientArchäologie.Rahden, Leidorf.

KlimschaF.2011 DasOpferunddasGeopferte.Versucheiner kontextuellenDeutungderreinenBeilhorteund derhölzernenBeilschäftungeninneolithischenHorten derTrichterbecherkultur.Archäologische Informationen31:119-129.inpress DieabsoluteChronologiederBesiedlungvonTall Hujayratal-GhuzlananhandvonRadiokarbondaten. ZeitschriftfürOrientArchäologie.

KlimschaF.andSiegelU.2007 TorzurWelt.EinekupferzeitlicheSiedlungamGolf vonAkaba.ArchäologieinDeutschland4:14-19.

KlimschaF.,SiegelU.,andHeemeierB.inpress DaswasserwirtschaftlicheSystemdesTall Hujayratal-Ghuzlan.InR.Eichmann,F.Klimscha, C.Schuler,andH.Fahlbusch(Hrsg.),Innovative Wassernutzung.ClusterforschungdesDeutschen ArchäologischenInstituts.Cluster2.Innovation: technisch,sozial.

KotteraM.2007 DererstebandkeramischeBrunnenderPfalz. ArchäologieinDeutschland3:53.

KujitI.andGoring-MorrisN.2002 Foraging,Farming,andSocialComplexityinthe Pre-PotteryNeolithicoftheSouthernLevant:A ReviewandSynthesis.JournalofWorldPrehistory16: 361-440.

LevyT.1995 Cult,MetallurgyandRanksocieties.Chalcolithic Period(ca.4500-3500BCE).InT.Levy(ed.),The ArchaeologyofSocietyintheHolyLand:226-244. London,Continuum.

LeTensorerJ.-M.andMuhesenS.1997 Lespremiershommesdudésertsyrien.FouillesSyrio- SuissesàNadaouiyehAïnAskar.Paris,Editionsdu Muséumd‘HistoireNaturelle.

LeTensorerJ.-M.,JagherR.,RenzelP.,HauckT.,Ismail-MeyerK.,PümpinC.,andWojczak,D.2007 Long-termsiteformationprocessesatthenatural springsNadaouiyehandHummalintheElKowm Oasis,CentralSyria.Geoarchaeology22:621-640.

LorscheiderF.andSchade-LindigS.2007 JungbandkeramischeSiedlungmitErdwerkund BrunnenbeiWetzlar-Dalheim,Lahn-Dill-Kreis, Hessen-Archäologie2006:37-40.Wiesbaden.

Müller-NeuhofB.,KhalilL.,andEichmannR.2003 WarenproduktionundFernhandelvor6000Jahren. TallHujayratal-GhuzlanbeiAqaba.AlterOrient Aktuell4:22-25.

NiemiT.M.andSmithA.M.1999 InitialResultsoftheSoutheasternWadiAraba, JordanGeoarchaeologicalStudy:Implicationsfor ShiftsinLateQuaternaryAridity,Geoarchaeology 14/8:791-820.

NollE.2002 EthnoarchaeologischeStudienanMuschelhaufen. Münster,Waxmann.

OhlerN.1997 KriegundFriedenimMittelalter.München,Beck.

OšibkinaS.V.2007 HolzartefakteundHölzerneKonstruktionendes MesolithikumsimNordenOsteuropas. ArchäologischesKorrespondenzblatt37:169-188.

PeltenburgE.andWasseA.(eds.)2004 NeolithicRevolution:newperspectivesonsouthwest AsiainlightofrecentdiscoveriesonCyprus.Levant SupplementarySeries1.Oxford,Oxbow.

PeltenburgE.,CroftP.,JacksonA.,McCartneyC.,andMurryM.2001 Well-EstablishedColonists:Mylouthkia1andthe Cypro-Pre-PotteryNeolithicB.InS.Swiny(ed.),The earliestPrehistoryofCyprus.FromColonizationto Exploitation:61-94.Boston,CAARIMonographSeries 2.Boston,ASOR.

RechM.1979 StudienzudenDepotfundenderTrichterbecher-und EinzelgrabkulturdesNordens.OffaBücher39. Neumünster,Wacholtz.

SherratA.2002 Dietandcuisine:farminganditstransformationsas reflectedinpottery,DocumentaPraehistorica29: 61-71.

SiegelU.2009 HydrologicalStructuresintheWadial-Yutumfanin theVicinityofTallHujayratal-Ghuzlan.InK.Schmidt andL.Khalil(eds.),PrehistoricAqabaI.Orient Archäologie23:243-294.Rahden.

SimmonsA.H.2007 TheNeolithicRevolutionintheNearEast.Tucson.


Neo-Lithics2/1081


StäubleH.2002 BrunnenderLinienbandkeramik.Einunerschöpfliches Wissensreservoir.InW.MenghinandD.Planck (Hrsg.),Menschen-Zeiten-Räume.Archäologiein Deutschland:139-141.Stuttgart,Theiss.

StäubleH.andFröhlichM.2006 ZweiFerkelimbandkeramischenBrunnen.Sachsen entwickeltsichzueinerregelrechtenFundgrubefür steinzeitlicheBrunnen.Archaeo3:16-21.StrahmC.1994 DieAnfängederMetallurgieinMitteleuropa.Helvetia Archaeologia25:2-39.

ThiemeH.1997 LowerPalaeolithichuntingspearsfromGermany. Nature385:807-811.1999 AlpaläolithischeHolzgeräteausSchöningen,Landkreis Helmstedt.BedeutsameFundezurKulturentwicklung desfrühenMenschen.Germania77:451-487.

TorrenceR.1986 ProductionandExchangeofStoneTools.Prehistoric ObsidianintheAegean.Cambridge.

TrommauG.1984 RentierjagdwährenddesSpätpaläolithikumsvon Bootenaus?HammaburgN.F.6:29-37

VermeerschP.M.(ed.)2003 PaleolithicquarryingsitesinUpperandMiddleEgypt. Leuven,LeuvenUniversityPress.

VermeerschP.M.,PaulissenE.,GijselingsG.,OtteM.,ThomaA.,vanPeerP.,andLauwersR.1984 33,000-yroldchertminingsiteandrelatedhomointhe EgyptianNileValley.Nature309:342-344.

VermeerschP.M.,PaulissenE.,andPeerP.van1995 PalaeolithicchertmininginEgypt.Archaeologia Polona33:11-30.

WeinerJ.inpress BandkeramischeBrunnen.Ausnahmebefunde oderStandardinstallationenzurWasserversorgung?In R.Eichmann,F.Klimscha,C.Schuler,andH. Fahlbusch(Hrsg.),InnovativeWassernutzung. ClusterforschungdesDeutschenArchäologischen Instituts.Cluster2.Innovation:technisch,sozial.

Williams-ThorpeO.1995 ObsidianintheMediterraneanandtheNearEast:a provenancingsuccessstory.Archaeometry37:217-248.

WittfogelK.A.1963 OrientalDespotism:acomparativestudyofTotal Power.Yale.

Othercontribution

Neo-Lithics2/1082


ThePPN settlement ofGöbekliTepe in southeasternTurkeyhasdeliveredtheoldestexamplesofreligiousmonumental architecture known so far.The archaeo-logical dating of the sites´ two main layers is quiteclear.The oldest Layer III, which contains thewell-knowncircularenclosuresformedbyT-shapedpillarsgatheredaroundapairofbiggercentralpillarscanbedatedtothePPNAthroughlithicfindscomprisingpro-jectilepointsmainlyoftheNemrikandHelwantypes.The superimposing Layer II with its smaller, rectan-gular rooms often containing only two, considerablysmallercentralpillars,ornoneatall, ischaracterisedespeciallybyByblosandafewNevalıÇoritypepro-jectilepointsdatingtotheearlyandmiddlePPNB.LatePPNBfindsareabsentfromGöbekliTepe.ConcerningthemomentarystateoftheradiocarbonchronologyforthePre-PotteryNeolithic,onewouldexpectadurationof9600–8800calBCforthePPNAcomplexesofLayerIII and 8800–8200 calBC for the EPPNB /MPPNBactivitiesinLayerII,respectively.

But,asarecentreviewofthedataavailableshows,abiggerpartofthemisbiasedbymethodologicalprob-lems,althoughquitedifferentsamplingstrategieswereapplied(Dietrich,inpress).Abiggerseriesofdatawasobtained from pedogenic carbonates on architecturalstructures(Pustovoytov,SchmidtandParzinger2007).Unfortunatelytheyareofnouseindatingthesampledstructures themselves, as the carbonate layers startedformingonlyafterthemomentoftheirburial.Atleast

thesesamplesofferagoodterminusantequemfortherefillingof theenclosures.For layer III this terminusantequemliesinthesecondhalfofthe9thmillenniumcalBC,whileforlayerIIitislocatedinthemiddleofthe8thmillenniumcalBC.

Arecentlyobtainedseriesofdatafrombonesdis-coveredinthefillingandlayersisatleastpartiallybi-asedbymethodologicalproblems(Dietrich,inpress).Atleastwithinthegroupofsampleschosen,collagenconservation ispoorand isotopicexchangeprocesseswithcarbonrichsurfaceandgroundwatersmayhavecausealterationsinthecarbonatecontentsofbonesthatleadtoproblemswiththedatingofapatitefractions.

The best dates available so far for Göbekli Tepestemfromcharcoalsamplesofshort-livedplants.TwodatesforEnclosureAsettleinthelate10thandearly9thmillenniumcalBC(KromerandSchmidt1998),buttheycouldalso indicate theuseofolderfillmaterial.ThelastintrusionsinthebigenclosurescanbedatedbyacharcoalsamplefoundunderafallenpillarfragmentinEnclosureAtothemiddleofthe9thmillennium(Di-etrich,inpress).

As charcoal seems to be the sample material ofchoice atGöbekli, an attempt to date the big Enclo-suresof layer III directlywasmadeby sampling thewallplasterofEnclosureD(AreaL9-68,Loc.782.3,29.10.2010). This plaster is formed of loam, whichfortunatelycontainsalsosmallamountsofcharcoal.Atthe 14C laboratoryKiel a sample big enough for an

A Radiocarbon Date from the Wall Plaster of Enclosure D of Göbekli Tepe

Oliver Dietrich GermanArchaeologicalInstitute [email protected] Schmidt GermanArchaeologicalInstitute [email protected]

Fig. 1 Calibrated Radiocarbon Age using OxCal 4.1 (Datensatz IntCal09); two Sigma Range: 9675 (93,9%) 9314 calBC

Othercontribution

Neo-Lithics2/1083


AMSdatingcouldbeobtainedfromtheplaster.Theresultreadsasfollows(Fig.1):

RadiocarbonAge(KIA-44149):9984+/-42BP,δ13C-26,31+/-0,57.

CalibratedRadiocarbonAgeusingOxCal4.1(DatensatzIntCal09);twoSigmaRange:

9675(93,9%)9314calBC

WiththisdatethereisforthefirsttimeundisputableevidencefortheabsoluteconstructiontimeofthebigenclosuresintheearlyPPNA.Alsothedateseemstobeproof to theobservation thatEnclosureD isolderthan EnclosureA. In addition, a succesful samplingstrategy for Göbekli Tepe has been lined out, whichwillbepursuedfurtherinthefuture.

References

DietrichO.inpress Radiocarbondatingthefirsttemplesofmankind. Commentson14C-DatesfromGöbekliTepe. ZeitschriftfürOrient-Archäologie4.

KromerB.andSchmidtK.1998 TworadiocarbondatesfromGöbekliTepe,South EasternTurkey.Neo-Lithics3/1998:8-9.

PustovoytovK.,SchmidtK.,andParzingerH.2007 Radiocarbondatingofthinpedogeniccarbonate laminaefromHolocenearchaeologicalsites.The Holocene17,6:835-843.

Neo-Lithics2/10

Masthead

84

EditorialBoard AdvisoryBoard

Co-EditorsGaryO.Rollefson,WhitmanCollege,WallaWallaHansGeorgK.Gebel,FreeUniversityofBerlin

ManagingEditorsDörteRokitta-Krumnow,FreeUniversityofBerlinJanKrumnow,UniversityofAppliedSiences,Berlin

OferBar-Yosef,HarvardUniversityDidierBinder,C.N.R.S.,ValbonneFrankHole,YaleUniversityPederMortensen,CopenhagenUniv.HansJ.Nissen,FreieUniversitätBerlinMehmetÖzdoğan,UniversityofIstanbulDanielleStordeur,Archéorient,CNRS,Jalès

Submissions NEO-LITHICS,Prof.Dr.GaryO.Rollefson,DepartmentofAnthropology,WhitmanCollege, WallaWalla,WA99362,USA,Email:[email protected].

NEO-LITHICS,Dr.des.DörteRokitta-Krumnow/JanKrumnow/Dr.HansGeorgK.Gebel, exoriente,c/oFreeUniversityofBerlin,Hüttenweg7,14195Berlin,Germany, Emails:[email protected]·[email protected],Fax00493098311246.

Orders pleaseviawww.exoriente.org/bookshop,orsendtoexorientee.V.,c/oFreeUniversityofBerlin,Hüttenweg7, 14195Berlin,Germany,www.exoriente.org·[email protected]·Fax00493098311246.

Subscription Minimumofthreeyearssubscriptionrequested=6issues,c.40-50pageseach,66Euro for6issues/minimumsubscriptionperiod(postageincluded);backissuesavailable;membersof exorientereceiveNeo-Lithicsfreeofcharge(includedintheannualmembershipfee:40Eurofor employedmembers,15Euroforstudents/unemployedmembers).

Deadlines twiceayear:15thofMayand15thofNovember

SubmissionGuidelinesTextformats:inWordwithoutformatting;forthegeneralstyleoftext,bibliography,andcaptionsconsultthisorarecentissueofNeo-Lithics-Illustrationformats:individualEPS,TIFF-filesorJPEGinhighresolutions;illustrationsshouldnotbeembeddedintheWordfile.Please,sentahardcopyofthemanuscriptincaseofcomplexcontributions;keepbibliographicreferencestotheutmostminimum.Authorsareobligedtopresentwiththeirsubmissionsformallettersofagreementbycopyrightownersiftheyuseillustrations,texts,materials,orideasfromoralpresentationsobtainedfromsourcesnottheirown.

SubscriptionInformationIntheupperrightpartoftheaddressfield(envelope)youwillfindtheissuementioneduntilwhich(included)youpaidyoursubscription.Ifyoufindaninvoicewiththisissue,arenewalofsubscriptionisnecessaryforthenextthreeyears/6issues.Ifaninvoiceisnotpaidaftertwomonthsitisunderstoodthataprolongationofthesubscriptionisnotdesired,andnofurtherissueswillbesend.

NoteAuthors of Neo-Lithics receive a pdf file of their individual contribution upon publication. Please, understand that yourcontributionissubjecttothecopyrightsofexorientePublishers.However,youarelicensedtocirculatethepdffileofyourcontributionprivately,butbeyondthisweaskyounottopublishit(orpartsofit)intheWorldWideWeb,orinanyotherformwithoutourpriorpermission.

Neo-Lithicsispublishedanddistributedbyexoriente,Berlin.PrintingHouse:dbusiness,Berlin©exorientee.V.,Berlin-ISSN1434-6990

Documents

NEO-LITHICS 2/10 - ex oriente eV