reassessing animal exploitation in northern syria from the early bronze age to the...

TELL TUQAN EXCAVATIONSAND REGIONAL PERSPECTIVES

CULTURAL DEVELOPMENTS IN INNER SYRIAFROM THE EARLY BRONZE AGE

TO THE PERSIAN/HELLENISTIC PERIOD

Proceedings of the International ConferenceMay 15th-17th 2013

Lecce

edited by

Francesca BAFFI, Roberto FIORENTINO, Luca PEYRONEL

CONGEDO EDITORE 2014

Contents

7 Preface

9 FRANCESCA BAFFI, LUCA PEYRONELTell Tuqan and the Matkh Basin in a Regional Perspective. Thoughts and Questions Raised by the International Conference

35 PAOLO MATTHIAEA Note on Tell Tuqan and the Archaic Urbanization in Western Syria.Some Cue for Future Reflections

45 AGNESE VACCAThe Tuqan IC Pottery Sequence from Area P South

85 MICHEL AL-MAQDISSINotes d’Archéologie Levantine XLVII. Nouvelles données sur la coupolede Loth à Mishirfeh-Qatna

95 GEORGES MOUAMARTell Al-r/Al-Sankar: une nouvelle agglomération circulaire du Bronzeancien IV à la lisière de la steppe syrienne

115 LUCA PEYRONELLiving Near the Lake. The Matkh Region (Syria) during the Early andMiddle Bronze Ages

163 FRANCESCA BAFFIThe Defences at Tell Tuqan in the 2nd Millennium B.C.

189 ENRICO ASCALONEThe Long Life of the Dead. A Middle Bronze IB Necropolis at TellTuqan, Syria

227 FRANCES PINNOCKThe Ceramic Horizon of Middle Bronze I-II in North Inner Syria: The Case of Ebla

247 ELENA FELLUCAClay Figurines from Tell Tuqan

275 DANIELE MORANDI BONACOSSISome Considerations on the Urban Layout of Second Millennium BCQatna

297 FABRIZIO VENTURIThe Late Bronze Age Sequence at Tell Afis

325 JOACHIM BRETSCHNEIDER, GRETA JANS, ANNE-SOPHIE VAN VYVEThe Early Iron Age at Tell Tweini: Results from the 2008, 2009 and 2010Excavations

343 STEFANIA MAZZONIThe Archaeology of Tell Afis and the Iron Age II-III in Syria: AReassessment

391 ROBERTO FIORENTINOThe Urban Settlement at Tell Tuqan during the Iron Age

427 FRANCESCA BAFFITell Tuqan: A Village of the Persian Period on the Shores of the Lake

447 GRAZIA SEMERARONotes on Terra Sigillata Pottery from Tell Tuqan

459 CLAUDIA MINNITIReassessing Animal Exploitation in Northern Syria from the Early BronzeAge to the Persian/Hellenistic Period: The Evidence from Tell Tuqan

485 VALENTINA CARACUTA, GIROLAMO FIORENTINOGarbage Disposal in the Middle Bronze Age in Tell Mardikh-Ebla (NWSyria): Using Plant Remains to Investigate Midden Formation Processes

507 LUCIO CALCAGNILE, GIANLUCA QUARTA, MARISA D’ELIANuclear Physics for Archaeology: Radiocarbon Dating from Tell Tuqanand Ebla by the Tandetron Accelerator at CEDAD

517 GIOVANNI QUARTA, CHIARA MARCHIORI, DAVIDE MELICAArchaeometric Study of Mud Bricks from Excavations of Tell Tuqan:Preliminary Results

541 ETTORE JANULARDOMoravia: Visions of Syria

551 List of Plates

6 Contents

1 Minniti 2008.2 Minniti 2006; 2008; 2011.

Reassessing Animal Exploitation in Northern Syria from the Early Bronze Age to the Persian/Hellenistic Period:

The Evidence from Tell Tuqan

CLAUDIA MINNITIUniversità del Salento

IntroductionThe paper discusses the zooarchaeological data from Tell Tuqan in view

of our understanding of the economy of the settlement and its relationshipwith the surrounding countryside from the Early Bronze Age to the Persianand Hellenistic periods.

The evidence that I am going to present concerns only partly the animalbones and teeth assemblages brought to light in the site. They come from AreasD, F, L north and south, P, Q and T and they were collected during the 1993,2007, 2008 and the 2009 excavation seasons. As shown by Fig. 1, animalremains are related to these areas and to all chronological periods documentedat the site in different ratios. Half of the remains come from Area P; theassemblages from other areas are smaller, though more equally represented. Interms of chronology, the Middle Bronze Age is mostly represented, followed bythe Early Bronze Age and the Iron Age; the animal bone assemblages from theLate Bronze Age, Persian and Hellenistic periods are small in size.

All the evidence relates to domestic activities, with the exception of theLate Bronze Age sample which concerns the animal offerings found in sometombs of the cemetery located in area L. The details of the methods ofanalysis followed in this paper have already been described,1 and resultsfrom each excavations season have also been published previously.2

Species occurrence through time and with comparisonAll assemblages are largely dominated by the remains of the main

domestic animals - cattle (Bos taurus L.), sheep/goat (Ovis aries vel Capra

hircus L.) and pig (Sus domesticus Erx.), Dog (Canis familiaris L.), horse(Equus caballus L.), and domestic fowl (Gallus gallus L.) have also beenfound, but not in all features and the last two only from the Middle BronzeAge onwards (Figs. 2-4).3

Sheep/goats are always the most common species according to thenumber of identified specimens (NISP), with sheep being more commonthan goats (Fig. 5). Their remains amount to 89% and 91% in Early BronzeAge III and IV, and decrease to 67% during Middle Bronze Age II andfurther to 57% during the Iron Age, though this last result could be affectedby the small size of the sample. The percentage rises again to 95% in thePersian period. The low number of remains from the Hellenistic periodprevents us from drawing reliable conclusions about the frequency ofcaprines in this period.

Remarkable similarities are found when species frequencies from TellTuqan are compared to other sites of northern Syria, in which economieswere mainly based on sheep/goat husbandry throughout the entire BronzeAge.4 The relative proportion of the main domesticate animals documentedat Tell Tuqan in the Early Bronze Age III and IV particularly resembles thepatterns observed at Tell Mardikh-Ebla in the same periods and thatobserved at Tell Afis during the Early Bronze Age IV, although they differfrom Tell Tuqan respectively in a higher frequency of cattle and of pigs.5

A similar decrease in sheep/goat remains during the Early/Middle BronzeAge transition has also been documented preliminarily at Tell Mardikh-Ebla,6 but in other sites such as Tell es-Sweeyhat,7 Tell Habuba Kabira,8 TellHalawa,9 and Qatna,10 sheep/goats increase. At Tell Afis sheep/goats areequally represented in the Early Bronze Age and the Middle Bronze Age,and increase during the Late Bronze Age.11 At Tell Munbaqa12 the decreasein sheep/goats is apparent from the Late Bronze Age onwards.

On average the frequency of cattle at Tell Tuqan is about 9% in the EarlyBronze Age and about 16-14% respectively in the Middle Bronze Age andIron Age, but this percentage decreases to 3% in the Persian period. Thesefrequencies are consistent with the general trend seen in other contemporarysites of northern Syria in which cattle never rise above 25%, except for a few

460 Claudia Minniti

3 Scientific nomenclature of taxa follows Gentry et al. 2004.4 Koli!ski 2012; Minniti 2013.5 Minniti 2013; Wilkens 2000.6 Minniti 2013.7 Buitenhuis 1986; Weber 1997.8 von den Driesch 1993.9 Boessneck - von den Driesch 1989.10 Vila - Gourichon 2007.11 Wilkens 1998; 2000; 2002; 2005.12 Boessneck - von den Driesch 1986.

Reassessing Animal Exploitation in Northern Syria 461

13 De Grossi Mazzorin - Minniti 2000.14 Minniti 2013.15 Wilkens 1998; 2000; 2002.16 Vila 2006a, with reference therein. 17 Vila - Gourichon 2007.18 Grigson 2007.19 Baffi 2006: 9.20 Grigson 1987; 2007; Koli!ski 2012.

cases of high peaks that may have been affected by different modes ofoccupation, disposal factors, and preservation occurring at different locationson sites at the same time, as is the case for the refuse pit (F.5861/F.5701)located at Tell Mardikh-Ebla, outside the Northern Palace P.13

The pig is almost absent in the Early Bronze Age and very low in the lastperiods, but it is fairly common in the Middle Bronze Age and in the IronAge with average percentages of 16% and 29%. The high peak of pigremains during Middle Bronze Age II does not seem to be derived from asingle deposit that was particularly rich in pig bones, as values between 6%and 25% have been documented in different areas of the tell. As pig keepingis not particularly suitable to arid environments, due to the high waterrequirements and low temperatures that pigs usually need to survive, theirrelative importance in domestic economy at Tell Tuqan is particularlysignificant. Comparison with other contemporary sites of the region alsoshows a possible socio-economic differentiation in pig keeping. It was verypoorly practised at Tell Mardikh-Ebla14 but it seems to have been importantand have increased over time at Tell Afis.15 Pig remains are rarelyrepresented in most sites of the Middle Euphrates, such as El Qitar, TellSelenkahiye, Tell es-Sweyhat, Tell Habuba Kabira, Tell Hadidi, Tell Halawa,Tell Khuera or Tell Munbaqa. They are more widely represented in severalsites of upper Khabur basin, such as Tell Brak and Tell Leilan, but practicallyabsent in other sites of lower Khabur, such as Tell Bderi.16 Pigs are wellrepresented at Apamea and Tell Mishrifé-Qatna17 located west of the aridmargins of Syria, as well as at Tell Shiukh Fawqani, located to the north,near the border between Turkey and Syria. The presence or absence ofsignificant numbers of pigs in sites of the Near East has been thus correlatedwith the limit of dry farming, thought micro-ecological areas in dry regionswhere moist shady conditions existed could have encouraged pig keeping.18This seems to be the case of Tell Tuqan, as Lake Matkh was located near thesouthern and eastern border of the tell during the Middle Bronze Age.19However, the high fluctuation in pig frequencies on contemporary siteslocated close to each other has already demonstrated that several factors -environmental, social, political and economic - may have contributed to thescenario and are not mutually exclusive.20 Previous studies have shown that

21 Diener - Robkin 1978.22 Dobney et al. 2003; Zeder 1998.23 Meadow 1986: 275; Weber 2006, with other reference therein.

the unsuitability of pig keeping could be linked to centrally controlledeconomies21 and several indications have emerged of a relationship betweensocial stratification and the consumption of pork.22 Pigs may have been themeat resource of the ordinary people with small-scale sty-based pig keepingunlike sheep, goats and cattle which were kept in large herds and whosemovements and management were closely controlled by the ruling élites.

Wild species are less common. The evidence suggests that hunting played aminor role in all periods. Comparing the occurrence of domestic and wildanimals by period, the general pattern provides a higher proportion of wildspecies in the Early Bronze Age III than in the Early Bronze Age IV, the highestfrequency in the Middle Bronze Age II, and a return to lower proportions in theassemblages dated to the Iron Age and the Persian/Hellenistic periods. It is,however, important to bear in mind that almost certainly this pattern isaffected by the difficulty of discriminating wild equids (asiatic wild ass -Equus hemionus L., wild ass - Equus africanus L.) from the domestic species,particularly from donkeys (Equus asinus L.), and this prevents us fromdrawing any definite conclusion about the real importance of hunting in thesubsistence economy. The wild taxa spectrum also includes fallow deer(Dama dama L.), roe deer (Capreolus capreolus L.), gazelle (Gazellasubgutturosa L.), wild sheep (Ovis orientalis Gmelin) and wild goat (Capraaegagrus L.), wild boar (Sus scrofa L.), hare (Lepus capensis L.) and differentspecies of birds. A partial skeleton of a weasel (Mustela nivalis L.) was foundin south area L and is dated to the Middle Bronze Age II.

A fair number of equid remains have been found in all areas of the townand are dated to all the documented periods. Mainly due to the recovery bias,their high degree of fragmentation made their specific identificationaccording to morphometric characteristics difficult. In the cases where it waspossible to take measurements, attempts to discriminate between all speciesof equids that have coexisted in Syria from the end of third millennium weremade.

A few small equid bones and an isolated upper tooth, from an elderlyexample according to tooth wear stages, come from the Early Bronze Agefeatures. No horse remains dating to the Early Bronze Age have been found.A fragment of distal radius from silos S.781 (Early Bronze Age IIIB) locatedin Area P can be identified as asiatic wild ass on the basis of the indexresulting from the distal articulation divided by the depth of the distalarticulation (index value: 1.62).23 An upper second premolar from theMiddle Bronze Age I-II layers located in south Area L has been identified as

462 Claudia Minniti

24 Uerpmann 1986.25 Eisenmann - Beckouche 1986.26 Archi 1998; Vila 2006b; Weber 2006.27 Payne 1973.28 Helmer et al. 2007.

horse. An articulated part skeleton of an equid was recovered from pit F.798located in Area P. Fusion data and tooth wear stages indicates that the equidwas between 4 and 5 years old when it died. The equid could be related tothe donkey as most of the post-cranial bones were small and the presence ofthe caballine fold and the acronomion close to the acetabulum of the scapulaare typical characteristics of the donkey.24 Cut marks were found on thescapula and humerus, possibly linked to the skinning process. Half of equidsamples dated to the Middle Bronze Age II are from room L.184 of thesouth-eastern urban gate in Area F. The large proportion of loose teeth in theassemblage indicates a high level of fragmentation, due to recovery bias. Theminimum number of individuals (MNI) count suggests that at least eightadult animals and two juveniles were represented. Among the adultindividuals two horses and six small equids have been identified. Only twometacarpals provided adequate measurements for specific identification.Their greatest length ranged from 211 to 217 mm; the slenderness index forthe first specimen resulted as 12.80. According to the relationship betweenthe metacarpal dimensions and using the log difference method,25 they couldbe from asiatic wild ass hybrids (crossed with E. asinus) or donkey hybrids(crossed with E. caballus). Epigraphic and archaeozoological evidenceindicates the occurrence of asiatic wild ass hybrids in Mesopotamia andnorthern Syria during the third millennium as a high status animal.26

Husbandry strategies and livestock typesAn evaluation of husbandry strategies relies mainly on kill-off patterns as

animals will be slaughtered at different ages according to the main purposeof their use. Concerning caprine husbandry strategies a general analysis ofthe kill-off patterns shows little change over time. The fusion data show thatin all periods most of the animals were adult and mature, although a numberof juvenile and very young sheep/goats are also present (Fig. 6). Theiroccurrence varies over time, with highest frequencies in the Iron Age andPersian period. The wear stage of lower teeth (loose teeth and teeth inmandibles together) has been analysed only for the Early Bronze and theMiddle Bronze Ages assemblages, using the categories of Payne27 and theirrelative correlation with categories of caprine management shown by Helmeret al.28 (Fig. 7). One group comprised heavy lambs killed at 6-12 months of


29 This pattern could be linked to the particular exploitation of milk in which lambs arereared apart from their mothers in order to use the milk without affecting the survival of theyounger animals (Helmer et al. 2007).

30 Minniti 2013.31 Davis 1996.

age (class C) for their tender meat and milk29 and animals killed at 1-2 yearsof age (class D) for meat. The larger group comprised the individuals killedbetween two and six years of age (classes E-F-G) that could representmainly the barren females culled because of decreased milk yield or qualityof fleece. Their frequencies increase notably during the Middle Bronze Age.Another group comprised individuals killed after 6 years of age for woolproduction and reproduction. In sum, the variety of ages at which the sheepand the goat were slaughtered proves quite clearly that there was nospecialization towards meat, milk, and wool. All of these would have beenconsidered valuable products. During the Middle Bronze Age the economyseems to become slightly more specialised towards milk and woolproduction. Similar patterns of sheep/goat killing-off have been observed atTell Mardikh-Ebla.30

According to the fusion data, that are available for the Early Bronze andthe Middle Bronze Ages, the majority of cattle bones belonged to adult andmature individuals in both periods (Figs. 8-9). The high frequency of adultspoints to the possibility that cattle were exploited for their traction powerand therefore that their main use was in support of agriculture. A fewjuvenile individuals were also present. The most important differencebetween the two periods is the increase in remains from juvenile and veryyoung individuals in the later period. This could suggest an increasedconsumption of beef.

Pigs were mostly killed in juvenile and sub-adult ages, the number ofadult animals being very low (Fig. 10). Pigs are exclusively meat producers,and the survival of higher numbers of these animals in adult life would makelittle economic sense.

Sheep/goat remains provided the largest quantity of biometric data. Inorder to obtain large enough samples to make better comparisons betweenperiods, log ratios were calculated (Fig. 11).

The standard used for the log ratio calculations was the mean of a groupof Shetland ewes.31 In terms of absolute size the Tell Tuqan sheep/goatsbones measurements in the Early Bronze and the Middle Bronze Ages wereabout the same but were somewhat smaller in the length and widthmeasurements in the Middle Bronze Age sample. For the later periodssheep/goats were slightly larger in all dimensions.

Comparison between the Early Bronze and Middle Bronze Age IImaterial from Tell Tuqan and the Early Bronze and Middle Bronze Age I

464 Claudia Minniti

32 Clark 1985.33 Mogliazza 2006.

assemblages from Tell Mardikh-Ebla shows the size of the sheep/goatsappears similar in the two sites, though at Tell Mardikh an increase seems tohave occurred in the Early/Middle Bronze Age transition, whereas at TellTuqan this increase in size seems not to have occurred.

Dog remains belonged to adult and young animals. A variability in size,calculated on the basis of metapodials following Clark32, is documentedparticularly in the Middle Bronze Age, with some small animals that were 41-44 cm high, another group which was ca. 47-53 cm high, and larger dogs thatwere ca. 59 cm high. The metapodials of a large dog, that was ca. 49-55 cmhigh, are also documented in room L.875 in Area Q, dated to Iron Age III.

A few cat bones (Felis sp.) were found in pit F.798 in Area P, dated to theMiddle Bronze Age IIB. They probably come from the same individual, eventhough the bones were disarticulated. According to biometricalcharacteristics it is likely to have been domestic (cfr. catus).

Animal offeringsAnimal bones and teeth have been found into the tombs D.451, D.458,

D.463, D.481, and D.506, from the Late Bronze Age cemetery located inArea L. All of the tombs belonged to ordinary people. The analysis of humanskeletons showed a large occurrence of stress marks probably related toheavy work.33 Although the number of tombs is very low, the occurrence ofanimal remains in all of them suggests that the practise of animal offeringswas common at Tell Tuqan and not a factor of social discrimination.

Animal remains mainly belonged to sheep/goats and secondarily to pigs(Fig. 12). Other species comprised cattle, equids and wild birds. Someremains from two pig skeletons were found in tomb D.451. One of theindividuals was very young, less than 12 months of age (scapula, thirdmetacarpal, pelvis, and fibula); the other was an adult/mature female over 3years of age (skull, maxilla, mandibles, atlas, and scapula). A sesamoid bonebelonging to an equid was also found in this tomb. An adult sheep/goatmandible was found in tomb D.458. Animal remains from tomb D.481belonged to a variety of species, sheep/goat, pig, cattle (ulna), and bird(scapula). The caprine remains (teeth, astragal, phalanx 1) relate to a sheepthat was about 24 years old, while the pig remains belonged to a youngindividual (maxilla, mandible). Tomb D.506 furnished a few remains of asheep (carpal bone, ulna, phalanx 2) that was killed between the third and thefourth year of life. A group of 38 caprine astragals were found in tomb D.463that belonged to a child (8-10 years old). Eight of these were smoothed onboth their dorsal and plantar; two had cut marks on their distal surface.


34 Finnegan 1986.35 Horwitz 2002.36 Tufnell 1958.37 Bate 1938.38 Legg - Zeder 1988.39 Martin 1988.40 Lev-Tov - Maher 2001.41 Their meaning has recently been reviewed by Minniti - Peyronel 2005.42 Minniti - Peyronel 2005.43 Guy 1938: 115, 11.44 McGovern 1986: 317-319.45 Horwitz 2002.46 von den Driesch 1976.47 Eisenmann et al. 1988.

Data on animal offerings for comparison are available from several LateBronze Age cemeteries located most further to the south. Sheep/goats, cattle,donkey and dog were mainly represented in Caves A2, A4, and B3 from theBaq’ah Valley.34 At Tell Dan a partial skeleton of a caprine in association witha few cattle bones, the remains of a fish and and two horn cores of fallow deerand gazelle were found in tomb 387.35 At Lachish an equid mandible lay intomb 4002-3 that was in use from the Middle Bronze Age to the Late BronzeAge.36 Several animal offerings, mainly of to sheep/goats, cattle, equids andpigs come from many tombs in Megiddo, dated between Middle Bronze Age Iand Late Bronze Age II.37 At Gezer, Cave I.10A had some sheep and fishremains in a bowl.38 In the cemetery of Tell es-Sa’idiyeh the occurrence ofanimal offerings (mainly sheep/goats, equid, and cattle) seems to characteriseonly those tombs that belonged to rich individuals.39 At Tel Dothan, commontomb 1 contained the remains of sheep/goats, cattle, pigs, gazelle and perch.40

The custom of placing groups of astragals into tombs is also welldocumented in the Near East, starting from the Middle Bronze Age.41 It iswell testified at Tell Mardikh-Ebla,42 at Megiddo,43 in Cave B3 of the Beqa’Valley44 and in tomb 387 at Tel Dan.45 As in most sites, at Tell Tuqan groupsof astragals, sorted and preserved from the other animal remains andsometimes modified, were also found in domestic features. A group of 52caprid astragals (six of them have been identified as goats, and thirty-sevenas sheep) come from room L.846 in Area Q and are dated to the Hellenisticperiod. Five of them were slightly modified and seem to be glossy,suggesting that they had been manipulated for a long time.

MeasurementsAll measurements are given in millimetres (to one decimal place) and

follow von den Driesch46, with the exceptions of equids that also followEisenmann et al.47 Imprecise measurements are denoted with an *.

466 Claudia Minniti

(EBA = Early Bronze Age; MBA = Middle Bronze Age; LBA = Late BronzeAge; IA = Iron Age).

Equus sp.Area D (MBA II): upper teeth: 1) (2)=27.2; (3)=10.9; 2) (2)=29.3; (3)=9.4*;(4)=25.3; lower M3: 1) (4)=12.6; (5)=10.9; (3)=8.5; (2)=25.2; (6)=12.2Area D (IA II-III): mandible: 1) (2)=25.3; (3)=9.3; (4)=16.6; (5)=12.8;(6)=14.8; humerus: 1) (8)=65.9; (9)=36.8; (10)=30.9; Dd=62.6Area F (MBA II): humerus: 1) Bd=60.0; Dd=62.0; DD=32.8; (3)=29.7; 2)Bd=62.0; Dd=64.0; 3) Bd=65.0Area P (EBA IIIB): radius: 1) (8)=53.7; (9)=33.1; (10)=64.4; (11)=23.6;(12)=12.8; phalanx 3: 1) (1)=38.6; (2)=35.0; (3)=45.2*; (4)=33.4; (5)=23.6;(6)=28.5Area P (EBA IVB): radius: 1) (8)=61.6; (9)=26.8*; (10)=10.8; (11)=21.8;(12)=11.7Area P (MBA IIA): mandible: 1) (7)=72.4; P4=(2)=28.3; (3)=8.3; (4)=13.5;(6)=12.1; M1=(1)=74.2; (2)=25.5; (4)=13.3; (5)=10.3; (6)=11.1;M2=(1)=75.3; (3)=8.1*; (4)=12.1; (5)=9.3; (6)=10.6; M3=(1)=60.7;(2)=20.8; (3)=7.6; (4)=10.3; (6)=7.8; lower M3: 1) (2)=29.4; (4)=11.4;(6)=8.3; scapula: 1) (4)=40.1; (5)=35.7; radius: 1) (8)=48.5; (9)=24.3;(10)=58.2; (11)=12.7; (12)=20.5; metacarpal III: 1) (5)=38.8; (6)=25.9;(7)=31.9; (8)=9.3; (9)=6.8; Dp=28.9; 2) (5)=39.5*; (6)=25.9; Dp=26.7;(8)=10.9; (5)=41; (6)=28.7; (7)=36.6; 3) (1)=211; GLl=208.0; Ll=205.0;(3)=27.0; DD=17.9; (10)=38.1; (12)=28.8; 4) (1)=217.0; GLl=215.0;Ll=212.0; (5)=44.8; Dp=31.0; femur: 1) (7)=74.5; (9)=49.0*; metatarsal III:1) (6)=29.2; Dp=34.6; (5)=38.5; (7)=35.1; (8)=8.8; (9)=4.6; tibia: 1)(5)=73.6; (6)=70; 2) (7)=57.9; (8)=39; astragalus: 1) (1)=44.1; (2)=41.8;(3)=24.2; (4)=46.0; (5)=37.1; (6)=24.8; (7)=47.3; 2) (1)=50.5; (2)=50.8;(3)=25.2; (4)=51.1; (5)=43.6; (6)=29.2; 3) (1)=51; (2)=48.1; (3)=23.8;(4)=52.0; (5)=40.5; (6)=25; (7)=39.1; 4) (1)=57.1; (2)=55.5; (3)=27.1;(4)=66.0; (5)=52.6; (6)=35.0; (7)=47.5; 5) (1)=56.0; (2)=53.0; (4)=48.0;(5)=39.6; calcaneum: 1) (1)=93.0; (2)=60.8; (3)=17.0; (4)=28.7; (5)=42.3;(7)=44.0; 2) (1)=112.0; (2)=68.3; (3)=22.1; (5)=48.1; (4)=26.8; (6)=49.0;(7)=62; phalanx 1: 1) (1)=64.0; (2)=56.1; (3)=21.8; (4)=36.4; (5)=25.8;(6)=31.1; (7)=30.3; 2) (1)=69.0; (2)=59.0; (3)=23.3; (4)=37.8; (5)=27.2;(6)=32.6; (7)=31.1; (9)=36.5; 3) (1)=73.0; (2)=64.7; (3)=25.1; (4)=38.8;(5)=30.8; (6)=33.3; (7)=31.1; (9)=37.3; 4) (1)=74.0; (2)=60.3; (3)=23.5;(4)=40.4; (5)=29.2; (6)=32.5; (7)=32.6; (9)=39.6; 5) (1)=76.0; (2)=66.1;(3)=24.8; (4)=40.9; (5)=32.3; (6)=35.4; (7)=32.5; (9)=38.3; phalanx 2: 1)(1)=36.0; (2)=25.5; (3)=30.1; (4)=34.7; (5)=23.6; (6)=30.3; 2) (1)=41.0;


(2)=28.6; (3)=33.2; (4)=36.5; (5)=26.3; (6)=33.3; phalanx 3: 1) (1)=43.4;(2)=42.6; (3)=51.0; (4)=32.9; (5)=22.5; (6)=24.8; 2) (1)=47.1; (2)=44.6;(3)=53.2*; (4)=36.5; (5)=24.4; (6)=26.3Area P (MBA IIA2-IIB1): phalanx 2: 1) (1)=38.0; (2)=24.9; (3)=34.1;(4)=38.4; (5)=24.2; (6)=35.7Area P (MBA IIB1): radius: 1) (10)=60.9; (9)=30.1; (11)=20.7; (12)=12.1;metacarpal III: 1) (1)=230.0; (2)=226.0; (3)=31.6*; (5)=44.3; (6)=27.8;Dp=28.4; (7)=35.9; (8)=9.6; (10)=43.2; (11)=40.2; (12)=30.6; phalanx 1: 1)(1)=76.0; (2)=67.1; (3)=27.1; (4)=43.2; (5)=31.1; (6)=36.7; (7)=34.2;(9)=41.2; 2) (1)=82; (2)=71.3; (3)=26; (4)=42.8; (5)=33.2; (6)=36.1;(7)=35.3; (9)=44.8; phalanx III: 1) (1)=44.7; (2)=44.1; (3)=56.0; (4)=36.7;(5)=22.7; (6)=42; GL=47.0Area Q (IA III): phalanx 1: 1) (1)=66.8; (2)=61.6; (3)=23.6; (4)=35.8;(5)=25.5; (6)=32.6; (6)=32.6; (7)=32.6; (8)=19.1; (9)=40.1; (10)=59.6;(11)=57.2; (12)=10.2; (13)=9.9; metacarpal III: 1) (3)=9.7; (4)=14.1Area Q (Hellenistic): maxilla: 1) (7)=82.4; (25)=32.6x24.6; P3: (2)=25.0;(3)=8.0; (4)=25.2; P4: (2)=20.3; (3)=9.6; (4)=22.3; M1: (2)=22.8; (3)=19.4;(4)=26.0; phalanx 1: 1) (1)=66.8; (2)=60.0; (3)=23.3; (4)=35.9; (5)=20.0;(6)=33.2. (7)=33.2; (8)=17.8; (10)=58.8; (11)=56.0; (13)=14.5; (12)=11.4; 2)(1)=72.7; (2)=68.1; (3)=23.7; (4)=38.6; (5)=25.4*; (6)=33.4; (7)=33.2;(8)=18.3; (10)=63.0; (11)=62.5; (12)=12.8; (13)=10.1

Bos taurus L.Area F (MBA II): lower M3: 1) (10)=35.9x12.7; 2) (10)=37.5x13.4; radius:1) Bd=56.1; Dd=35.9; metacarpal: 1) Bd=52.8; Dd=30.1; femur: 1)Bd=70.0; Dd=83.0Area P (EBA IVB): femur: 1) DC=47.8Area P (MBA IIA): scapula: 1) GLP=69.6; BG=48.5; humerus: 1)Dp=100.9; Bd=81.0; Dd=78.0; SD=34.2; DD=42.1; metacarpal: 1) Bd=54.3;Dd=32.4; femur: 1) DC=47.9Area P (MBA IIA2-IIB1): astragal: 1) GLl=67.6; Dl=29.7; 2) GLl=71.6;GLm=41.7; Dl=37.4; Dm=41.4; Bd=47.2Area P (MBA IIB): metacarpal: 1) Bd=58.1; Dd=32.2; 2) Bd=69.9; femur: 1)DC=40.8Area P (MBA IIB1): astragal: 1) GLl=67.0; GLm=62.2; Dl=37.3; Dm=36.6;Bd=45.0; 2) GLl=75.8; GLm=67.4; Dl=40.3; Dm=39.4; Bd=52.8Area Q (IA III): mandible: 1) (8)=86.1; (10)=38.5x13.1

468 Claudia Minniti

Ovis vel CapraArea D (MBA II): mandible: 1) (8)=53.2; (10)=25.2x9.8; lower teeth: 1)(10)=22.6x8.2; 2) (10)=25.7x19.7; scapula: 1) GLP=34.5; BG=22.4;SLC=21.8; humerus: 1) Bp=47.6; Dp=39.0; femur: 1) DC=22.1; tibia: 1)Bd=25.8; Dd=18.8Area F (IA III): lower teeth: 1) (10)=23.4x8.4Area F (MBA II): scapula: 1) GLP=30.7; BG=20.5; SLC=16.8; humerus: 1)Bd=36.8; Dd=26.2; BT=33.0; SD=10.2; DD=10.6; radius: 1) Bd=32.6;Dd=22.6; 2) Bp=35.0*; Dp=11.7*; 3) Bd=34.2; Dd=23.0; SD=19.7.DD=12.8; ulna: 1) BPC=20.0; femur: 1) Bd=32.2; Dd=41.1; astragal: 1)GLl=32.0*; Bd=20.0*Area L North: (MBA IIA): mandible: 1) (9)=22.6; (15c)=15.2; humerus: 1)Bd=34.6; BT= 34.3; Dd=31.2; tibia: 1) Bd=29.1; Dd=24.1; astragalus: 1)GLm=25.9; Dm=15.5Area L South (LBA II): lower teeth: 1) (10)=23.2x14.0Area L South (MBAI-IIA): humerus: 1) Bd=30.4; Dd=26.6; BT=28.0; ulna:1) SDO=23.1; DPA=25.0; BPC=21.3Area P (EBA IVB): lower teeth: 1) (10)=23.2x8.5: 2) (10)=23.4x8.9; 3)(10)=24x9.1; 4) (10)=25.3x8.8; (10)=25.2x9.0; scapula: 1) GLP=29.8;BG=19.6; SLC=18.5; 2) GLP=32.0; 3) GLP=33.3; BG=21.7; SLC=21.0; 4)GLP=33.8; BG=21.2; SLC=20.5; 5) GLP=36.7; BG=22.6; SLC=21.4;humerus: 1) Bd=28.8; BT=28.1; 2) Bd=32.2; BT=28.1; 3) Bd=33.9;BT=33.3; radius: 1) Bd=30.6; Dd=19.7; 2) Bp=36.7; Dp=19.6; tibia: 1)Bd=27.6; Dd=20.5Area P (EBA IIIB): mandible: 1) (10)=22.3x8.9; scapula: 1) GLP=31.5;BG=19.5*; SLC=20.2; 2) GLP=31.0; BG=20.0; SLC=23.7; humerus: 1)Bd=34.9; BT=31.2; 2) Bd=36.2; Dd=28.3*; BT=33.9; radius: 1) Bd=30.6;Dd=18.5; 2) Bd=31.6; Dd=21.3; femur: 1) DC=19.4; calcaneum: 1)GL=61.7; GB=19.0Area P (MBA IIA): maxilla: 1) (21)=48.8; mandible: 1) (10)=20.2x10.3; 2)(10)=23.8x9.1; 3) (7)=66.7; (8)=46.6; (9)=31.7; (10)=21.7x9.2; 4) (7)=70.6;(8)=48.8;(9)=21; (10)=22x9.4; 5) (7)=72.0; (8)=49.7; (9)=21.6;(10)=20.5x7.4; 6) (7)=73.8; (8)=50.5; (9)=22.1; (10)=25.3x9.7; 7) (8)=45.6;(10)=20.6x8.8; (15a)=33.5; (15b)=18.8; (15c)=14.4; 8) (8)=45.8;(10)=21.5x9.4; 9) (8)=50.5; (10)=25.1x10.1 lower teeth: 1) (10)=20.2x9.9;2) (10)=20.3x8.2; 3) (10)=25.2; 9.5; scapula: 1) BG=20.8; 2) GLP=31.1;BG=22.0; 3) GLP=32.1; BG=19.8; SLC=20.4; 4) GLP=32.4; BG=21.3; 5)GLP=33.8; BG=23.5; 6) GLP=34.6; BG=22.5;SLC=22.1; 7) SLC=21.5; 8)GLP=38.8; BG=27.2 (orientalis/aegagrus?); humerus: 1) Bd=31.2;


BT=29.4; 2) Bd=31.5; BT=30.4; radius: 1) Bd=31.1; Dd=20.9; 2) Bd=29.9;Dd=19.2; ulna: 1) BPC=19.4; SDO=21.9; DPA=25.5; LO=39.2; 2)BPC=20.4; SDO=28.1; DPA=27.5; pelvis: 1) LA=26.1; femur: 1) Bd=35.6;Dd=39.7; 2) Bd=36.2; Dd=43.1; 3) Bd=36.5; Dd=46.5; 4) Bd=38.3;Dd=43.7; 5) Bd=40.8; Dd=47.7; 6) Bd=40.0; Dd=44.1; 7) DC=21.1; 8)DC=22.4; tibia: 1) Bd=22.6; Dd=19.9; 2) Bd=25.7; Dd=19.8; 3) Bd=27.3;Dd=20.5; astragalus: 1) GLl=30.7*; Bd=20.8*Area P (MBAIIA2-IIB1): mandible: 1) (7)=74.2; (8)=49.0; (9)=24.4;(10)=20.2x6.7; 2) (15c)=16.4; (15b)=22.5; 3) (8)=45.8; (10)=23x9; 4)(9)=21.2; atlas: 1) BFcd=45.0; H=37.4; scapula: 1) GLP=32.4; BG=20.3;SLC=20.2; humerus: 1) Bd=36.9; BT=36.1 (orientalis/aegagrus?); tibia: 1)Bd=27.7; Dd=21.9; 2) Bd=27.9; Dd=20.5Area P (MBA IIB/IIB1): mandible: 1) (10)=25.3x9.6; scapula:1) GLP=31.4;BG=18.8; SLC=20.2; 2) GLP=32.8; BG=20.4; SLC=18.5; femur: 1)Bp=54.4; DC=24.2 (orientalis/aegagrus?); tibia: 1) Bd=30.3; Dd=23.1*Area Q (IA III): humerus: 1) Bd=34.6; BT=32.6Area Q (Hellenistic): astragalus: 1) GLl=28.4; GLm=27.6; Dl=16.7;Bd=17.9; 2) GLl=30.6; Bd=18.7; 3) GLl=30.7; Glm=28.5; Dl=15.4;Bd=19.4; 4) GLl=30.9; Dl=16.3; Bd=20.3; 5) GLl=31.9; GLm=30.4;Dl=17.5; Bd=20.9; 6) GLl=34.4; Bd=22.5; 6) GLm=28.6; Bd=20.2; tibia: 1)Bp=41.6; Dp=38.5Area Q (Persian/Hellenistic): scapula: 1) GLP=32.2; BG=18.4; SLC=18.2;astragalus: 1) GLl=26.5; Dl=15.4; Bd=18.0Area T (Persian): humerus: 1) Bd=33.7; BT=31.9; radius: 1) Bd=32.3;Dd=24.3; 3) Bd=37.5 (orientalis/aegagrus?); tibia: 1) Bd=24.8; Dd=20.2

OvisArea D (MBA II): scapula: 1) SLC=70.6; BG=21.4; humerus: 1) Bd=30;Dd=25.3; BT=28.8; 2) Bd=32.5; Dd=28.7; BT=29.1; metacarpal: 1)Bd=28.2; Dd=18.8Area L South (BMI-IIA): metatarsal: 1) Bd=24.1; Dd=17.0Area P (EBA IVB): metacarpal: 1) Bd=24.8; Dd=17.3; 2) Bd=30.5*;Dd=19.0; tibia: 1) Bd=27.2; Dd=22.5; 2) Bd=28.4; Dd=22.2; astragalus: 1)GLl=27.3; GLm=26.4; Dl=15.1; Bd=18.8; 2) GLl=28.5; Dl=16.0; Bd=18.4;3) GLl=28.6; GLm=27.5; Dl=15.8; Dm=16.1; Bd=18.2Area P (MBA IIA): humerus: 1) Bd=28.8; Dd=25.3; BT=27.4; 2) Bd=28.8;Dd=26.3; BT=27.9; 3) Bd=28.9; BT=28.3; 4) Bd=29.5; Dd=24.2; 5)Bd=29.5; Dd=25.5; BT=27.4; 6) Bd=30.1; Dd=25.5; BT=29.6; 7) Bd=30.1;

470 Claudia Minniti

Dd=26.7; BT=29.4; 8) Bd=30.8; Dd=26.2; BT=29.8; 9) Bd=31.6; BT=28.9;10) Bd=36.9; Dd=29.6; BT=32.8; 11) GLC=131.0; Bd=28.6; BT=28.3;Dd=26.6; SD=13.8; DD=10.9; metacarpal: 1) Bd=25.8; Dd=17.4; 2)Bd=26.6; Dd=17.2; 3) GL=102.0*; SD=14.5; DD=9.6; Bd=25.1; Dd=15.9;femur: 1) Bp=43.8; DC=22.6; tibia: 1) Bd=28.5; Dd=22.9; 2) Bd=29.2;Dd=22.1; calcaneum: 1) GL=57.1; GB=20.5; 2) GL=57.6; GB=23.0Area P (MBA IIA2-IIB1): humerus: 1) Bd=30.1; BT=29.5; 2) Bd=32.7;Dd=29.9; BT=31.6; Area P (MBA IIB1): humerus: 1) Bd=33.4; BT=31.2; 2) Bd=34.6; Dd=29.7;BT=30.9Area Q (IA III): astragalus: 1) GLl=29.8; Dl=15.6; Bd=18.4; 2) GLl=30.3;Dl=16.7; Bd=19.1; 3) GLl=30.8; Dl=17.6; Bd=19.8; 4) GLl=31.1; Dl=17.4;Bd=19.6; 5) GLl=32.9; Dl=18.6; Bd=20.5; 6) GLl=33.5; Dl=19.2; Bd=23.2Area Q (Hellenistic): humerus: 1) Bd=33.1; Dd=30.6; BT=31.2; astragalus:1) GLl=29.1; GLm=28.1; Dl=16.2; Dm=16.8; Bd=19.1*; 2) GLl=29.4;GLm=27.1; Dl=17.3; Dm=17.9; Bd=19.9; 3) GLl=29.9; GLm=29; Dl=17.6;Bd=20.1; 4) GLl=30.1*; GLm=29.5; Dl=17.2; Dm=18.8; Bd=20.2; 5)GLl=30.5; Glm=29.4; Dl=16.8; Dm=17.3; Bd=19.4; 6) GLl=30.9;GLm=29.1; Dl=17.3; Dm=17.5; Bd=21.1; 7) GLl=31.1; GLm=28.8;Dl=17.2; Bd=19.8; 8) GLl=31.1; GLm=29.6; Dl=17.4; Dm=15.8*; Bd=20.5;8) GLl=31.2; GLm=29.8; Dl=17.3; Dm=17.7; Bd=20.6; 9) GLl=31.3;GLm=29.9; Dl=17.4; Bd=20.0; 10) GLl=31.4; GLm=29.4; Dl=17.1;Bd=20.1; 11) GLl=31.5; 12) GLl=31.5; GLm=28.9; Dl=17.9; Dm=18.9;Bd=20.5; 13) GLl=31.6; GLm=30.4; Dl=17.5; Bd=20.9; 14) GLl=31.8;GLm=29.5; Dl=17.9; Dm=18.5; Bd=20.6; 15) GLl=31.8; GLm=31.4;Dl=18.3; Dm=19.1; Bd=20.2; 16) GLl=31.9; GLm=30.1; Dl=18.8;Dm=17.8; Bd=20.7; 17) GLl=31.9; GLm=30.3; Dl=17.8; Dm=18.0;Bd=20.1; 18) GLl=32.1; GLm=30.6; Dl=17.2; Bd=19.8; 19) GLl=32.5;Bd=21.2; 20) GLl=32.8; GLm=30.8; Dl=18.2; Dm=18.4; Bd=20.5; 21)GLl=32.9; GLm=31.1; Dl=18.6; Bd=21.6; 22) GLl=33.3; GLm=31.8;Bd=21.0; 23) GLl=33.5; GLm=31.5; Dl=18.8; Dm=19.8; Bd=20.0*; 24)GLl=33.5; GLm=31.6; Dl=18.7; Dm=18.9; Bd=21.3; 25) GLl=33.5;GLm=31.6; Dl=19.8; Dm=19.5; Bd=21.4; 26) GLl=33.7; GLm=32.1;Dl=18.8; Bd=21.1; 27) GLm=29.4; 28) GLm=29.9; Bd=20.2; 29)GLm=29.9;Bd=20.2; 30) GLm=30.3; Dm=18.2; 31) GLm=30.7; Dm=17.7;Bd=20.8; 32) GLm=31.4; 33) GLm=31.8; Dl=17.2Area Q (Islamic): astragalus: 1) GLl=29.2; GLm=27.1; Dl=16.1; Dm=16.3;Bd=19.9Area Q (Persian/Hellenistic): astragalus: 1) GLl=31.3; GLm=29.1; Dl=16.7;Dm=18.8; Bd=20.5; 2) GLl=34.6; GLm=32.8; Dl=19.7; Dm=18.8; Bd=22.7


Area T (Persian): scapula: 1) GLP=35.1; BG=22.3*; SLC=25.0 (orientalis?);humerus: 1) Bd=29.2; Dd=24.6; BT=26.8; femur: 1) DC=20.4; calcaneum:1) GL=68.3; GB=22.0; tibia: 1) Bp=44.3* (orientalis?)

CapraArea P (EBA IVB): humerus: 1) Bd=28.6; Dd=22.2; BT=27.8. radius: 1)Bp=36.0; Dp=19.6 (aegagrus?)Area P (MBA IIB1): metatarsal: 1) GL=116.0*; astragalus: 1) GLl=28.5;GLm=27.1; Dl=15.3; Dm=14.8; Bd=18.2; 2) GLl=28.7; GLm=27.4;Dl=14.9; Dm=15.5; Bd=18.1Area Q (Hellenistic): astragalus: 1) GLl=27.4; GLm=25.9; Dl=14.7;Dm=15.3; Bd=17.6; 2) GLl=28.8; Glm=26.7; Dl=14.8; Dm=15.5; Bd=18.2;3) GLl=29.8; GLm=28.2; Dl=15.8; Dm=15.9; Bd=18.2; 4) GLl=30.2;GLm=27.2; Dl=15.5; Dm=16.8; Bd=19.1; 5) GLl=30.0; GLm=27.7;Dl=16.9; Dm=16.1*; Bd=19.1; 6) GLl=31.2; Dl=16.6; Bd=19.6Area T (Persian): radius: 1) Bp=40.5 (aegagrus?)

Sus domesticus Erx.Area D (MBA II): metatarsal 3: 1) GL=73.0Area F (MBA II): mandible: 1) (10)=32.4x14.5; 2) (9a)=32.4; (9)=47.5;(8)=61.2*; (10)=28x10.2*; (7)=92.5*; (7a)=110.0*; (8)=58.8*;(10)=26.7x11.6*Area L South (MBA I-IIA): mandible: 1) (10)=26.7x13.2Area L South (LBA II): scapula: 1) GLP=32.2; BG=191; SLC=21.3Area P (MBA IIA): mandible: 1) (8)=61.1; (10)=30.7x14.5; atlas: 1)GLF=40.1; BFcr=58.3; BFcd=49.1; H=42.3; scapula: 1) GLP=31.8;SLC=21.1; BG=22.2; 2) GLP=36.9; BG=27.3; SLC=26.9; 3) SLC=20.3;humerus: 1) Bd=32.8; Dd=29.9; BT=25.9; 2) Bd=33.1; Dd=27.9; 3)Bd=37.9; Dd=37.4; metacarpal 4: 1) GL=70.7; tibia: 1) Bd=25.8; Dd=22.4;2) Bd=25; Dd=21.5; 3) Bd=27.5; Dd=23.1Area P (MBA IIA2-IIB1): scapula: SLC=18.9; 1) metacarpal 3: 1) GL=70.4*Area P (MBA IIB1): metacarpal 2: 1) GL=61.4; 1) astragalus: 1) GLl=37.9;Dl=17.9; Bd=21.6; calcaneum: 1) GL=76.0; GB=21.0Area Q (IA III): metacarpal 4: 1) GL=58.5

Canis familiaris L.Area F (MBA II): maxilla: 1) (16)=17.2; 2) (16)=18.5

472 Claudia Minniti

Area F (LBA/IA): lower teeth: 1) (13)=20.5; radius: 1) Bd=20.5; Dd=15;ulna: 1) DPA=21.8; tibia: 1) Bd=19.6; Dd=15.1; 2) Bd=20.3; Dd=15;metatarsal 2: 1) GL=53.0Area L North (MBA IIA): mandible: 1) (13)=25.2x10.9Area L South (IA I-II): ulna: 1) SDO=21.2; DPA=24.8; tibia: 1) Bd=22.1;Dd=15.7Area P (EBA IIIB): metacarpal 2: 1) GL=46.5; pelvis: 1) LA=28.3Area P (EBA IVB): mandible: 1) (2)=62.3*; (8)=57.3; (9)=52.6; (20)=11.9;(19)=13.4; (10)=28.6; (11)=27.1; humerus: 1) Bd=29.7; Dd=21.1; radius: 1)Bp=16.3; Dp=11.2Area P (MBA IIA): maxilla: 1) (18a)=8.5; (21)=12x14.6; mandible: 1)(8)=69.7; (13)=20.6x7.8; atlas: 1) GB=77.9; GL=41.0; BFcd=30.3;BFcr=40.8; LAd=16; H=28.9; scapula: 1) GLP=33.3; SLC=27.7; BG=19.3;2) HS=136.0*; GLP=29.4*; BG=18.6; humerus: 1) Bp=39.3; SD=19.6;DD=14.8; radius: 1) Bp=18.2; Dp=12.8; metacarpal 2: 1) GL=56.8;metacarpal 4: 1) GL=66.8; tibia: 1) Bd=23.9; Dd=17.0Area P (MBA IIB1): mandible: 1) (1)=150.0; (2)=142.5; (3)=123.5;(4)=121.8; (5)=116.8; (6)=121.9; (7)=81.9; (8)=73.6; (9)=69.0; (10)=37.1;(11)=36.9; (12)=31.6; (14)=20.8; (15)=9.3x7.2; (17)=14.3; (18)=57.3;(19)=20.3; (20)=18.6; metatarsal 2: 1) GL=70.4*; metatarsal 3: 1) GL=57.3;metatarsal 4: 1) GL=59.4; metatarsal 5: 1) GL=54.4Area Q (IA III): metatarsal 3: 1) GL=66.4; metatarsal 4: 1) GL=68.1;metatarsal 5: 1) GL=61.4Gallus gallus L.Area D (MBA II): coracoid: 1) GL=53.9; Lm=52.6; BF=24.2; Bb=20.2;humerus: 1) Bp=19.3Dama dama L.Area Q (Hellenistic): scapula: 1) GLP=37.6; BG=25.4; SLC=24.2Capreolus capreolus L.Area L North (MBA IIA): astragalus: 1) GLl=28.9; Dl=16.0Gazella subgutturosa L.Area P (EBA IIIB): tibia: 1) Bp=29.0Area P (MBA IIA2-IIB1): mandible: 1) (7)=60.1; (8)=40.3; (9)=18.4;(10)=18x7.1; (15a)=28.6; (15b)=17.2; (15c)=13.9


Area P (MBA IIB/IIB1): scapula: 1) GLP=26.4; BG=20.2; humerus: 1)Bd=24.3; Dd=22.5; BT=22.7; radius: 1) Bp=24.2; Dp=14.0Area Q (Hellenistic): tibia: 1) Bd=21.4; Dd=17.3Area T (Persian): humerus: 1) Bd=25.4; Dd=21.6; BT=22.1Sus scrofa L.Area P (MBA IIA2-IIB1): tibia: 1) Bd=39.5; Dd=35.6

Felis sp.Area P (MBA IIB): radius: 1) GL=101.6; Bp=8.9; Dp=5.8; SD=6.8; DD=3.3;Bd=12.7; Dd=7.3; ulna: 1) GL=118.8; femur: 1) Bp=21.1; DC=9.3; tibia: 1)GL=120.1; Bp=20.4; Dp=18.5; SD=7.7; DD=7.1; Bd=14.7; Dd=9.3; 2)GL=120.8; Bp=19.5; Dp=15.6; SD=7.1; DD=8.1; Bd=15.4; Dd=9.3

LepusArea P (EBA IIIB/IVA1): pelvis: 1) LA=14.7Area P (MBA IIA): pelvis: 1) LA=11.6

Bibliography

Archi, A.1998 The Regional State of Nagar according to the Texts of Ebla. In M. Lebeau

(ed.), About Subartu. Studies Devoted to Upper Mesopotamia. Volume I:Landscape, Archeology, Settlement, (Subartu 4), Leuven: 1-16.

Baffi, F.2006 Localizzazione e introduzione sull’ambiente. In F. Baffi (ed.), Tell Tuqan.

Ricerche archeologiche italiane nella regione del Maath (Siria), Galatina(Lecce): 9-11.

Bate, D.M.A.1938 Animal Remains. In P.L.O. Guy (ed.), Megiddo Tombs, (Oriental Institute

Publications 33), Chicago: 209-213.Boessneck, J. - von den Driesch, A.1986 Tierknoche-und Molluskenfunde aus Munb"qa, Mitteilungen der Deutschen

Orient-Gesellschaft zu Berlin 118: 147-160.1989 Die Faunenreste vom Tell Halawa am Assad-See/Nordsyrien (Drittes und

Anfang zweites Jahrtausend v. Chr.). In W. Orthmann (Hrsg.), Halawa 1980

474 Claudia Minniti

bis 1986. Vorläufiger Bericht über die 4.-9. Grabungskampagne, (SaarbrückerBeiträge zu Altertumskunde 52): 113-152.

Buitenhuis, H.1986 The Animal Remains of Tell Sweyhat, Syria, Palaeohistoria 25: 131-144.Clark, K.M.1985 The Later Prehistoric and Protohistoric Dog: The Emergence of Canine

Diversity, Archaeozoologia 7/2: 9-32.Davis, S.J.M.1996 Measurements of a Group of Adult Female Shetland Sheep Skeletons from a

Single Flock: A Baseline for Zooarchaeologists, Journal of ArchaeologicalScience 23: 593-612.

De Grossi Mazzorin, J. - Minniti, C.2000 The Northern Palace at Ebla: Archaeological Analysis of a Refuse Pit. In P.

Matthiae et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the First International Congress on theArchaeology of the Ancient Near East, Rome, May 18th-23rd 1998, Roma:311-322.

Diener, P. - Robkin, E.E.1978 Ecology and Evolution and the Search for Culture Origins: The Question of

the Islamic Pig Prohibition, Current Anthropology 19: 493-540.Dobney, K. et al.2003 Diet, Economy and Status: Evidence from the Animal Bones. In R. Matthews

(ed.), Excavations at Tell Brak. Vol. 4: Exploring an Upper MesopotamianRegional Centre, 1994-1996, Cambridge: 417-430.

Eisenmann, V. et al.1988 Studying Fossil Horse. Volume I: Methodology. In M. Woodburne - P.

Sondaar (eds.), Collected Papers after the New York International HipparionConference, 1981, Leiden - New York.

Eisenmann, V. - Beckouche, S.1986 Identification and Discrimination of Metapodials from Pleistocene and

Modern Equus, Wild and Domestic. In R.H. Meadow - H.-P. Uerpmann(eds.), Equids in the Ancient World, Vol. I, (Beihefte zum Tübinger Atlas desVorderen Orients 19/1), Wiesbaden: 117-163.

Finnegan, M.1986 The Faunal Remains. Cave Khirbet Umm ad-Danamir. In P. McGovern (ed.),

The Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age of Central Transjordan. The Baq’ahValley Project, Philadelphia: 315-316.

Gentry A. et al.2004 The Naming of Wild Animal Species and Their Domestic Derivatives, Journal

of Archaeological Science 31: 645–651.


Grigson, C.1987 Pastoralism. Pig-keeping and Other Aspects of the Chalcolithic in the

Northern Negev. In T.E. Levy (ed.), Siqmim I, (British ArchaeologicalReports - International Series 356), Oxford: 219-241.

2007 Culture, Ecology, and Pigs from the 5th to the 3rd Millennium BC around theFertile Crescent. In U. Albarella et al. (eds.), Pigs and Humans 10,000 Yearsof Interaction, Oxford: 83-108.

Guy, P.L.O.1938 Megiddo Tombs, (Oriental Institute Publications 33), Chicago.Helmer, D. et al.2007 The Development of the Exploitation of Products from Capra and Ovis

(Meat, Milk and Fleece) from the PPNB to the Early Bronze in the NorthernNear East (8700 to 2000 BC cal.), Anthropozoologica 42/2: 41-69.

Horwitz, L.K.2002 The Animal Remains. In A. Biran - R. Ben-Dov (eds.), Dan II. A Chronicle of

the Excavations and the Late Bronze Age “Mycenean” Tomb, Jerusalem:219-221.

Koli!ski, R.2012 The Mountain Sheep are Sweeter… In N. Laneri et al. (eds.), Looking North.

The Socioeconomic Dynamics of Northern Mesopotamian and AnatolianRegions during the Late Third and Early Second Millennium BC, Wiesbaden:237-252.

Legge, A.J. - Zeder, M.1988 Faunal Analysis. In J.D. Seger - H.D. Lance (eds.), Gezer V: The Field I

Caves, Jerusalem: 147.Lev-Tov, J.S.E. - Maher, E.F.2001 Food in Late Bronze Age Funerary Offerings: Faunal Evidence from Tomb 1

at Tell Dothan, Palestine Exploration Quarterly 133: 91-110.Martin, L.1988 The Faunal Remains form Tell es-Sa’idiyeh, Levant 20: 83-84.McGovern, P.1986 The Late Bronze Age and the Early Iron Age of Central Transjordan. The

Baq’ah Valley Project, Philadelphia.Meadow, R.H.1986 Some Equid Remains from Cayönü, Southeastern Turkey. In R.H. Meadow -

H.-P. Uerpmann (eds.), Equids in the Ancient World, Vol. I, (Beihefte zumTübinger Atlas des Vorderen Orients 19/1), Wiesbaden: 266-301.

Minniti, C.2006 I resti ossei animali provenienti da Tell Tuqan (Siria): campagna di scavo

476 Claudia Minniti

1993. In F. Baffi (ed.), Tell Tuqan. Ricerche archeologiche italiane nellaregione del Maath (Siria), Galatina (Lecce): 313-328.

2008 The Middle Bronze Age Animal Bones from Area P at Tell Tuqan. In F. Baffi(ed.), Tell Tuqan. Excavations 2006-2007, Galatina (Lecce): 231-340.

2011 Appendix B. Animal Bones from Tell Tuqan (2007-2009 ExcavationSeasons). In F. Baffi (ed.), Tell Tuqan. Excavations 2008-2010, Galatina(Lecce): 323-334.

2013 Exploiting Animals. The Zooarchaeological Evidence through the EarlyBronze Age at Ebla. In P. Matthiae - N. Marchetti (eds.), Ebla and itsLandscape. Early State Formation in the Ancient Near East, Walnut Creek(CA): 413-430.

Minniti, C. - Peyronel, L.2005 Symbolic or Functional Astragali from Tell Mardikh-Ebla (Syria), Archaeo -

fauna 14: 7-26.Mogliazza, S.2006 Appendice D. Indicatori di stress funzionali e stato di salute della comunità di

Tell Tuqan (Siria). In F. Baffi (ed.), Tell Tuqan, Ricerche archeologicheitaliane nella regione del Maath (Siria), Galatina (Lecce): 303-312.

Payne, S.1973 Kill-off Patterns in Sheep and Goats: The Mandibles from Asvan Kale,

Anatolian Studies 33: 281-303.Tufnell, O.1958 Lachish IV: The Bronze Age, London.Uerpmann H.-P.1986 Halafian Equid Remains from Shams ed-Din Tannira. In R.H. Meadow - H.-

P. Uerpmann (eds.), Equids in the Ancient World, Vol. I, (Beihefte zumTübinger Atlas des Vorderen Orients 19/1), Wiesbaden: 246-265.

Vila, E.2006a Données archéozoologiques sur les suidés de la periode Halaf à l’Âge du Fer.

In B. Lion - C. Michel (éds.), De la domestication au tabou: le cas de suidésdans le Proche-Orient ancien, Nanterre: 137-153.

2006b Data on Equids from Late Fourth and Third Millennium Sites in NorthernSyria. In C. Grier et al. (eds.), Beyond Affluent Foragers. Rethinking Hunter-Gatherer Complexity, Proceedings of the 9th Conference of the InternationalCouncil of Archaeozoology, Durham, August 2002, Oxford: 101-123.

Vila, E. - Gourichon, L.2007 Apport de l’étude de la faune mammalienne et de l’avifaune à la réflexion sur

l’environnement de Qatna à l’Age du Bronze et à l’Age du Fer. In D.Morandi Bonacossi (ed.), Urban and Natural Landscapes of an AncientSyrian Capital. Settlement and Environment at Tell Mishrifeh/Qatna and inCentral-Western Syria, (Studi Archeologici su Qatna 1 - Documentsd’Archéologie Syrienne 12), Udine: 145-152.


von den Driesch, A.1976 A Guide to the Measurement of Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites,

Peabody Museum Bulletin 1: 1-138.1993 Faunal Remains from Habuba Kabira in Syria. In H. Buitenhuis - A.T. Clason

(eds.), Archaeozoology of the Near East I, Leiden: 52-59.Weber, J.A.1997 Remains from Tell es-Sweyhat and Tell Hajji Ibrahim. In R.L. Zettler (ed.),

Subsistence and Settlement in a Marginal Environment: Tell es-Sweyhat,1989-1995 Preliminary Report, (MASCA Research Papers in Science andArchaeology 14), Philadelphia: 133-167.

2006 Elite Equids. Redefining Equid Burials of the Mid- to Late 3rd MillenniumBC from Um el-Marra, Syria. In E. Vila et al. (eds.), Archaeozoology of theNear East VIII, Tome II. Actes des huitièmes Rencontres internationalesd’Archéozoologie de l’Asie du Sud-Ouest et des régions adjacentes.Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium on the Archaeozoology ofSouthwestern Asia and Adjacent Areas, Lyon 28 juin - 1er juillet 2006, Lyon,June 28th - July 1st, 2006, (Travaux de la Maison de l’Orient et de laMéditerranée 49), Lyon: 499-519.

Wilkens, B.1998 The Faunal Remains. In S.M. Cecchini - S. Mazzoni (eds.), Tell Afis (Siria).

Scavi sull’Acropoli 1988-1992. The 1988-1992 Excavations on the Acropolis,(Ricerche di Archeologia del Vicino Oriente 1), Pisa: 433-450.

2000 Archaeozoology Westwards: The Fauna of Tell Afis (Syria), Topoi Orient-Occident 2: 5-14.

2002 I resti faunistici. In S. Mazzoni et al., Tell Afis (Siria) 2000-2001, Egitto eVicino Oriente 25: 58-67.

2005 Relazione preliminare sui resti faunistici provenienti dalle campagne di scavo2002-2003-2004, Egitto e Vicino Oriente 28: 104-111.

Zeder, M.1998 Pigs and Emergent Complexity in the Ancient Near East. In S.M. Nelson

(ed.), Ancestors for the Pigs: Pigs in Prehistory, (MASCA Research Papersin Science and Archaeology 15), Philadelphia: 109-122.

478 Claudia Minniti


Fig. 1. Tell Tuqan: number of animal remains by area and period.

Fig. 2. Tell Tuqan: numbers of fragments (NISP) of each taxon by area from the Early BronzeAge (EBA).

480 Claudia Minniti

Fig. 3. Tell Tuqan: numbers of fragments (NISP) of each taxon by area from the MiddleBronze Age (MBA). * = skeleton.

Fig. 4. Tell Tuqan: numbers of fragments (NISP) of each taxon by area from the Iron Age(IA), the Persian and the Hellenistic periods (** = including groups of astragals).


Fig. 5. Main domestic species proportions (% NISP) by period, from Tell Tuqan.

Fig. 6. Tell Tuqan: frequencies of unfused (U), and fused (F) bones of sheep/goats (p. = proximalepiphyses; d. = distal epiphyses; a. = acetabulum) by period.

482 Claudia Minniti

Fig. 7. Sheep/goat:kill-off patternsfrom the mandibu-lar wear stage databy period, fromTell Tuqan.

Fig. 8. Tell Tuqan:frequencies of un-fused (U), andfused (F) bones ofcattle (p. = proxi-mal epiphyses; d. =distal epiphyses; a.= acetabulum) byperiod.


Fig. 9. Cattle: kill-off patterns from the fusion data by relevant period, from Tell Tuqan.

Fig. 10. Tell Tuqan: frequencies of unfused (U), and fused (F) bones of pigs (p. = proximalepiphyses; d. = distal epiphyses; a. = acetabulum) by period.

484 Claudia Minniti

Fig. 11. Sheep/goat: log ratiodiagrams for measurementsby period, from Tell Tuqan.

Fig. 12. Tell Tuqan:frequency of the three mostcommon domestic mammalsby number of identifiedspecimens (NISP) by tomb,from the Late Bronze Agecemetery.