«By Nathan B. Goodale A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY WASHINGTON STATE ...»
However, it is possible that the PPNB arose independently in several areas of the Levant (Khalaily 2007). Whatever the case, sites such as Motza contain abundant obsidian, from Anatolia, suggesting that long distance trade networks existed between the northern and southern Levant (Khalaily 2007:33).
forms of wheat, barley, and lentils where they potentially appear in the southern Levant by the end of the PPNA as evidenced from ZAD 2 discussed earlier (Edwards et al. 2004). EPPNB Motza contains evidence for the first use of the naviform core reduction technique, a highly sophisticated and standardized approach, argued to represent craft artisan support (Khalaily 2007). Burials at Motza are flexed to disarticulated positions and both primary and secondary internments. There are single adult and child burials, but also a grave with a mature male and infant buried together (Khalaily 2007).
Architecture at the site of Motza is represented by curvilinear and rectilinear structures with exterior courtyards and hearths. Motza potentially contains the first archaeological evidence of lime plastered floors in the southern Levant, a characteristic that becomes ubiquitous in the Middle and Late Pre-Pottery Neolithic.
Storage technology during the EPPNB may be represented by a series of interior installations (Khalaily 2007). Yet, the complete nature of storage technology during the EPPNB remains unclear due to the limited sites assigned to this period.
Additionally, sparse evidence of community organization provides minimal interpretation regarding the social organization of EPPNB communities.
The Middle Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (MPPNB) (10,100-9,250 cal BP) has a wealth of information to characterize many aspects of socioeconomic systems from sites including Jericho, ‘Ain Ghazal, Kfar HaHoresh, Ghwair I, Wadi Shu’eib and Beidha (Figure 5.10). During this time there is the emergence of large communities up to 4-5 hectares in size (Rollefson et al. 1992). The archaeological record of the MPPNB indicates increased population aggregation, complex burial practices with systematic skull removal and re-burial, as well as sophisticated lithic technology that may be representative of craft artisan support (Quintero and Wilke 1995).
MPPNB settlements usually occur in the Mediterranean zone in the Jordan Valley and adjacent areas with desert zone seasonal sites (Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002). Residential architecture during this time includes rectilinear to subrectangular complexes built within close proximity of each other. Early in the MPPNB sequence, posts for supporting roofs are large, 50-60 cm in diameter, but decrease through time suggesting the over exploitation of the environment (Rollefson et al.1992). Buildings always have intensively prepared floors (and often walls) with lime plaster produced by burning lime at high temperatures. At Ain Ghazal and Jericho structures are usually standardized in size and shape with dimensions of 8x4.5m with less than 50cm difference between buildings (Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002; Rollefson et al. 1992). Other sites such as Kfar HaHoresh and Horvat Galil illustrate the existence of greater size variation and the use of internal partitions and
architecture is characterized by sub rectangular to circular structures that are both placed in the center of the village and outside of the village. These structures are found at Beidha, and Kfar HaHoresh (Byrd 1994; Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002;
Dietary reconstruction through isotope analysis for the MPPNB has suggested that animal protein contributed very little to the human diet during this time (Lösch et al. 2006). While this evidence is from Nevali Çori in southeastern Anatolia, this pattern has not been confirmed in the southern Levant. However, if this were the case, it could indicate that animals were domesticated for purposes other than their meat, potentially for the products that they produce such as wool and milk (Lösch et al. 2006:190). Dietary animal reliance may have been highly variable between communities. Some sites such as Ain Ghazal show that caprines were likely domesticated based on a diminution of size (Köhler-Rollefson et al. 1988). Other sites such as Kfar HaHoresh and Yiftahel yielded no evidence of caprines. MPPNB people subsisted on a wide range of domesticated plants including wheat, barley, peas, lentils, and chickpeas (Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002:399).
During the MPPNB there is good evidence for large-scale storage practices (Kuijt 2008a:301). Storage techniques demonstrate interior storage facilities within houses (Twiss 2007:29) demonstrated by Garfinkel’s (1987) recovery of the remains of a grain storage installation with a domestic structure at Yiftahel. Additionally, the shift from centrally located grain storage structures in the Early Neolithic to within
male and female adults, 2) the internment of infants in single graves, and 3) the secondary removal of some but not all skulls. This has both fascinated and confused archaeologists as to the meanings behind these type of burial practice. As Kuijt (2000) points out, skulls in many instances were reburied in multiples of three.
Furthering this argument, Kuijt (2002) suggests that the primary burial within household, or more private areas, represents the initial importance of the ancestor to the household while the secondary removal and reburial of the skull in more public contexts served the purpose to unite different households or the community under more complex social ties (Kuijt 2008b).
In comparison to earlier time periods, the MPPNB shows the advent of systematic realms of symbols, such as a range of face masks, statues, and figurines recovered from Ain Ghazal and Jericho. Other items include clay figurines and at ‘Ain Ghazal are a series of killed cattle where flint blades have been stuck into the figurines (Rollefson et al. 1992). This has lead to an interesting aspect of the relationship between wild and domesticated species; Hodder (1990) points out the symbolic depiction of wild rather than domesticated forms in what appears to be ritual contexts and objects.
Social organization for the MPPNB has been discussed and debated for a long time. While most Near East archaeologists would probably agree that there is some evidence for differentiation within Middle and Late PPNB communities, a centralized
Morris 2002:420). However, there was also likely inter-community integration as evidenced by two-headed statues that have been used to argue that they united members from different communities (see Rollefson et al. 1992). However, many of the other lines of evidence to discuss social organization have not been identified – such as inter and intra-household organization – that will aid in a discussion to adequately assess social organization. Most doubt that the organizational level of a chiefdom was reached during the MPPNB or even the Late Pre-Pottery Neolithic B with a central political authority over many of the large settlements in the southern Levant (Rollefson 2004).
The lithic technology of the MPPNB has been heavily focused on the reduction sequence and greater social importance of the naviform technique (as indicated above, the naviform technique is present at EPPNB Motza) (Quintero and Wilke 1995; Khalailey 2007). The naviform technique was also often utilized on specific raw materials (including pink-purple flint that is available in a few known outcrops in the area; Rollefson et al. 2007). This high quality flint has been found in what has been called specialist workshop areas in a number of sites including ‘Ain Ghazal and Wadi Shu’eib (Quintero and Wilke 1995). The naviform technique is a specialized and highly standardized method of core reduction that permits the consistent removal of long straight blades from an opposed platform core (Quintero and Wilke 1995). During this time projectile point types include Jericho and Byblos
ovate axes (Rollefson et al. 1992).
In summary, the MPPNB represents a very dynamic time in the southern Levant when people established villages on a scale not known in this region before.
Domesticated animals as well as plants were in full use, and new symbolic systems were well-developed. The scale and intensity of the number of people in settlements allowed the number of social roles to expand significantly, perhaps enough to support craft artisans. While the MPPNB is a monumental time in the southern Levant, there were tumultuous changes in settlement patterns at the beginning of the Late PrePottery Neolithic B.
Late Pre-Pottery Neolithic B The transition from the MPPNB to the Late Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (LPPNB) (9,250-8,700 cal BP) includes a drastic change in settlement systems and through an abandonment of villages in the west with the occupation of highly populated villages east of the Jordan Valley (Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002) (Figure 5.11). It has been suggested that this represents a mass migration of people to the east (Rollefson 2004).
Structures at this time are built in very close proximity to each other, similar to the MPPNB, a potential indication of increasing populations within the community (Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002). Residential architecture in the form of true twostory structures developed with morphologies and stone work similar to the Pueblos in the American Southwest (Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002).
any domestic artifacts (Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002:407). Furthermore, two-story buildings have been found in several sites with the first floor as storage with a residential second story (Kuijt 2008a). Nonresidential architecture still appears with special buildings that have unique interior features (inset stones) and little else within them (Rollefson 1998; 2004).
Mortuary practices change in a number of ways from the MPPNB.
Differences include the increase of human burial with animals (Kuijt and GoringMorris 2002:410), and for the first time in the Neolithic there are systematic grave goods including necklaces, shell, pendants, stone beads, bracelets at Ain Ghazal, Basta, Ba’ja, Es-Sifiya (Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002). Additionally, secondary burials increase dramatically during the MPPNB. Lines of evidence for continuity from the MPPNB is minimal but include burial practices are the presence of stone skull masks at Basta and plastered human skulls at Ramad (Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002).
Subsistence shows the domestication of animals such as goats, pigs, cattle, and sheep (Köhler-Rollefson et al. 1988; Bar-Yosef and Meadow 1995). Although complete analysis of plant remains from many of the large scale LPPNB villages is yet to happen, small scale projects have demonstrated that people were utilizing a broad range of domesticated plants.
Lithics are very similar to the MPPNB, but Kuijt and Goring-Morris (2002:412) have noted the possible decline in naviform products or potentially
very prevalent in assemblages along with flint sickle blades and groundstone tools.
Late Pre-Pottery Neolithic sites with obtainable data for the paleodemographic model presented in Chapter Seven.
an increase of human population numbers, and probably the most intense growth is toward the end of the LPPNB. Along with this we see that the overall importance of domesticated animals had increased substantially, especially with the introduction of domesticated sheep. True two story architecture probably aided in the ability to store foods in order to feed a larger population.
Pre Pottery Neolithic C The final period of the Pre-Pottery Neolithic, named the Final Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (FPPNB) or more recently called the Pre-Pottery Neolithic C (PPNC) (Rollefson 1990; Rollefson and Simmons 1986) is a fairly new time stratigraphic unit.
Until 25 years ago, settlements of this period were unknown. However, as demonstrated by ‘Ain Ghazal, Wadi Sh’eib and other sites, the formally regarded hiatus from the Pre-Pottery Neolithic to the Pottery Neolithic is instead a dramatic shift in settlement patterns (Figure 5.12). This time shows the abandonment of most of the large Pre-Pottery Neolithic villages but some were not abandoned and are characterized by reused PPNB architecture or newly constructed more ephemeral buildings. ‘Ain Ghazal contracted in size and population size probably decline significantly (Rollefson 2000:187).
It has been argued that this period may represent a higher reliance on more nomadic pastoralism. Some have argued that the over-exploitation of local wood for the production of lime plaster had the consequence of damaging the environment to
This also indicated a time when lime plastering of house floors and walls decreased completely.
Pre-Pottery Neolithic C sites with obtainable data for the Figure 5.12.
paleodemographic model presented in Chapter Seven.
provided little information regarding social organization however, with the major changes in settlement, there was likely a large scale social reorganization. Burials in the PPNC are often in single to multiple individual internments and isolated human bone fragments are quite common which may be representative of disturbed earlier burials (Rollefson 1998). Interestingly, the first known case of tuberculosis has been recovered from PPNC ‘Ain Ghazal which el-Najjar et al. (1996) suggest may be a direct indicator of humans interaction with diseased animals. Increased reliance on only a limited number of plant and animal species may be indicated and domesticate caprines comprised about 70 percent of the recovered faunal assemblages where sheep appear to far outweigh goats (Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002; Kuijt 2008a).