tzur natan, a pre-pottery neolithic a site in central israel and observations on regional settlement...

TZUR NATAN, A PRE-POTTERY NEOLITHIC A SITE IN CENTRAL ISRAEL AND OBSERVATIONS ON REGIONAL SETTLEMENT PATTERNS

O. MARDER, A.N. GORING-MORRIS, H. KHALAILY, I. MILEVSKI, R. RABINOVICH and V. ZBENOVICH

Abstract: The results of salvage investigations conducted at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (PPNA) site of Tzur Natan are described. The site is located on the western fl anks of the Samarian Hills bordering the central coastal plain (Shephelah). The excavations revealed no architectural features but numerous cupmarked bedrock installations. The small fi nds included fl int and groundstone artefacts, as well as a small faunal assemblage. The vast majority of the fl int tools can be attributed to the PPNA, although there may also be a small Middle Epipalaeolithic Geometric Kebaran element present. Notable are the numbers of bifacial tools, some sickle blades, but few projectile points. Local settlement patterns are discussed in light of several other recent investigations of PPNA sites in the region. In addition to a few larger permanent settlements with architecture, such as Hatoula and Nahal Oren, at the western edges of the Judean, Samarian and Carmel hills, there are numbers of more ephemeral sites, also located on the fl anks of the hill zone. These have little or no architectural remains but quantities of cup-marked installations and groundstone are found in addition to lithic tool assemblages. These smaller sites perhaps focused primarily on (seasonal?) processing of (vegetal?) resources, as well as the production and use of bifacials. Some sickle blades are found but projectile points are rare or absent. Few, if any, PPNA sites are documented actually within the coastal plain. This settlement pattern contrasts markedly with the Early and Middle Epipalaeolithic and the PPNB, but may refl ect some continuity from the Late Natufi an.

Résumé : Cet article décrit les résultats de la fouille de sauvetage effectuée à Tzur Natan, un site du Néolithique pré-céramique A (PPNA), situé sur le fl anc occidental des collines de Samarie en bordure de la plaine centrale côtière, la Shephelah. De nombreuses installations à cupules creusées dans le rocher ont été mises au jour, mais aucun vestige architectural ne l’a été. Des outils en silex et des objets en pierre ainsi qu’un petit ensemble faunique ont été découverts. La majorité des outils en silex peut être attribuée au PPNA bien qu’un faible nombre d’éléments épipaléolithiques (Kébarien géométrique) sont aussi présents. Il faut signaler de nombreux bifaces, quelques lames de faucille, mais peu de pointes de projectiles. L’organisation de l’espace est discutée, à la lumière de plusieurs autres fouilles récentes effectuées dans la région sur des sites PPNA. Aux quelques grands établissements permanents qui présentent de l’architecture tels que Hatoula et Nahal Oren, s’ajoute en bordure des collines de Judée, de Samarie et du Carmel, un certain nombre de sites éphémères qui se situent également sur les fl ancs de la zone de collines. Ceux-ci ont peu ou pas de restes d’architecture mais recèlent tous un grand nombre de cupules creusées dans le rocher et, outre l’industrie lithique, d’objets en pierre. Ces gisements, de surface plus réduite, pourraient avoir été utilisés prioritairement pour le traitement (saisonnier ?) de ressources (végétales ?), mais également pour la production d’outils bifaciaux. Sur ces sites se trouvent des lames de faucilles et, quand il y en a, de très rares pointes de projectile. Sur la plaine côtière, peu de sites PPNA, même s’il y en a, sont en fait décrits. Cette installation, même si elle est très différente de celles de l’Épipaléolithique ancien ou moyen et des sites PPNB, pourrait néanmoins montrer une certaine continuité avec le Natoufi en récent.

Keywords: PPNA, Settlement Patterns, Cupmarks.Mots-clés : PPNA, Organisation spatiale, Cupules.

Paléorient, vol. 33.2, p. 79-100 © CNRS ÉDITIONS 2007 Manuscrit reçu le 8 janvier 2007, accepté le 12 décembre 2007

079-100.indd 79079-100.indd 79 23/05/08 11:57:0523/05/08 11:57:05

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

atrt

- C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

80 MARDER et al.

Paléorient, vol. 33.2, p. 79-100 © CNRS ÉDITIONS 2007

In recent decades considerable research in the Southern

Levant has focused on the emergence of early village life dur-

ing the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A, and some debate has centered

on the nature of the transition from the Natufi an to the PPNA.1

Most of this research has been conducted in and around the

Rift Valley.2 Yet, with the notable exceptions of Nahal Oren at

the western edge of Mt. Carmel and Hatoula located further

south,3 few sites have been systematically described from the

western fl anks of the central hill zone of Samaria and Judea

(the Shephelah), abutting the coastal plain (fi g. 1). The present

paper summarizes the recent investigations at the PPNA site

of Tzur Natan, which seems to represent a different type of

occupation from those reported to date in the Southern Levant.

The nature of local PPNA subsistence systems and settlement

patterns are then discussed briefl y in light of data deriving from

a series of other recent salvage projects in the region. Together

these sites appear to differ considerably in size and nature from

previously described PPNA sites elsewhere.

TZUR NATAN

The site of Tzur Natan is located ca 18 km from the Medi-

terranean coast, in the Shephelah, at the ecotone between the

coastal plain and the central hill country of Samaria (fi g. 1).4

The site is perched on an exposed hill top, ca 80 m above sea

level.5 The hillslope is covered by a thin layer of terra rosa

and recent afforestation has partially disturbed the area. The

site is extensively eroded, with fl int and groundstone artefacts

scattered over an area of ca 0.5 hectare. Obviously, prior to

slopewash, the original occupation was much more restricted

1. BAR-YOSEF, 2001; BELFER-COHEN and BAR-YOSEF, 2000; BAR-

YOSEF and MEADOW, 1995; GORING-MORRIS and BELFER-COHEN, 1997;

KUIJT, 1994.

2. BAR-YOSEF and GOPHER, 1997; FINLAYSON et al., 2003: 17-36;

EDWARDS et al., 2004; BAR-YOSEF et al., in press; GARFINKEL and DAG,

2006.

3. LECHEVALLIER et RONEN, 1985 and 1994; STEKELIS and YIZRAELY,

1963.

4. The site (IG 182887/149993) was discovered by E. Ayalon as part

of the national survey mapping project conducted by the Israel Antiquities

Authority. Limited salvage excavations were conducted by three of us [O.M.,

H.K. and I.M.] in 2002 prior to building activities (Permit A-3638/2002).

5. Bedrock in the area comprises Cenomanian limestone of the Kfar

Shaul formation (ILANI, 1985). The exposures revealed small to medium-

sized (mostly 5-15 cm) fl int and chert nodules and some larger cobbles (up

to 25 cm diameter). The fl int comes in a variety of shapes, from tabular, to

rounded and elliptical.

in extent. Additionally, numbers of cupmarks were noted on

bedrock exposures.

Three areas (A, B, C) were systematically excavated, each

consisting of two squares of 4 x 4 m (total of 96 m2). System-

atic surface collections of artefacts were made in a further

27 locales, each one having a radius of 10-20 m. In addition a

grab collection was made over the entire area. Large limestone

mortars were noted in four locales, and cupmarked bedrock

surfaces were noted in 17 of them (fi g. 2).

THE EXCAVATIONS

The stratigraphy of Areas A and C is similar, with a loose col-

luvial layer of terra rosa topsoil, 25-30 cm thick, mixed with angu-

lar fragmented stones directly overlying the bedrock. Numerous

fl int artefacts and a few weathered bones were recovered, with

quantities diminishing sharply in the 10 cm above bedrock. In

Area A the bedrock was pocked by numerous cupmarks.

The stratigraphic sequence in Area B consists of a 10-15 cm

thick brownish clay layer sandwiched between the topsoil and the

bedrock. This layer was compacted and contained few angular

stones. Here animal bones were less weathered and four ground-

stone tools were recovered in addition to fl int artefacts, perhaps

indicating that this layer represents the original occupation.

THE FINDS

Cupmarks and Installations

A total of 17 cupmarked limestone exposures were recorded

throughout the site, in addition to a number of cupmarked

slabs (fi g. 3-5). Most cupmarks were located on the brow of

the hill, with few discovered on the slopes. The cupmarks on

each surface varied from 3 to 30 cm in depth, with most being

shallow (4-6 cm deep) and narrow (10-15 cm diameter), some

with v-shaped profi les. The interior surfaces of some were

roughly chiseled, while others were smooth. In addition, three

stone slabs with cupmarks and several limestone mortars were

recorded. Given that bedrock exposures are patchy, it is likely

that the quantities reported here represent only a fraction of the

total cupmarks present on-site.

The Chipped Stone Assemblage

The fl int assemblage consists of 11,520 artefacts, origi-

nating from three different locales: the majority derived from

the excavated areas (Areas A, B and C); others were collected

079-100.indd 80079-100.indd 80 23/05/08 11:57:0523/05/08 11:57:05

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

atrt

- C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tzur Natan, a Pre-Pottery Neolithic A Site in Central Israel 81


Fig. 1: Map of Late Natufi an and PPNA sites from the western side of the Rift Valley mentioned in the text. Contours at 300 m and 900 m asl.

unsystematically throughout the site; additional items retrieved

during systematic surface collection on the central and north-

ern part of the hill (tab. 1). The majority of fi nds can be attrib-

uted to the PPNA, with a minor additional element that can

perhaps be assigned to the Middle Epipalaeolithic Geometric

Kebaran (see below).

The most frequent raw material utilized at the site is multi-

coloured (buff, grey and brown) fi ne-grained high quality fl int.

In addition, cherty coarse-grained fl int with crystalline inclu-

sions was also exploited for the production of backed blades,

massive tools, and bifacials. An additional type of fl int utilized

at the site was a high quality fi ne-grained pink-purple fl int,

079-100.indd 81079-100.indd 81 23/05/08 11:57:0523/05/08 11:57:05

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

atrt

- C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

82 MARDER et al.


200080 200100 200120 200140

6829

4068

2960

6829

8068

3000

6830

20 12

115

4 53

5257

5510 6

3 2

309

50 51

Area A0

32

Area C

Area B

54

62

16

5661

21

1820

22

0 20 m

35

N

Fig. 2: Map of excavation areas at Tzur Natan showing cupmarked surfaces and collection locales. Labels: rectangles, excavated areas; squares, locales (the main ones are displayed); polygons, limestone mortars; circles, cupmarks (the main ones are displayed).

which was primarily used for the manufacture of sickle blades.

No cores made of this type of raw material were found.

The fl int assemblage is characterized by the production

of fl akes, while blade/lets were less common. The blade/let

to fl ake ratio among the debitage is 0.71: 1. A similar ratio

pertains amongst the tools (tab. 1). These relative frequencies

differ from several other PPNA chipped stone assemblages in

the Southern Levant, where blade/let blanks were favoured for

making tools.6

The cores are mainly of the single platform type, pyramidal

or globular in shape, and bearing blade/let scars (fi g. 6: 1-2, 4;

tab. 2). Other core types, such as amorphous, multiple platforms

and fragments are also common, and mainly display fl ake scars

(fi g. 6: 3; tab. 2). Within the single platform cores, it is worth

mentioning a distinct group of narrow cores shaped from small

tabular plaques (5-10 cm maximum dimension). A fl at natural

platform was most commonly used, although at times a single

cortical blade/let was removed from the bottom of the plaque in

order to prepare the striking platform (fi g. 6: 1-2). Subsequently,

a few narrow bladelets (up to seven) were knapped from the

narrow side of the core. This type of core is known also both

from Kebaran and Geometric Kebaran industries.7

Core trimming elements are not common (0.7 per core;

tab. 1). This group is characterized by clearly non-standardised

items, which were removed to shape the core during the reju-

venation of the debitage plane or the distal end.

The toolkit is dominated by the retouched fl ake, retouched

blade/let, awl, notch and denticulate and scraper classes (tab. 3;

fi g. 7: 1-4; fi g. 8). Truncations are also common but in lesser

quantities. Within this category, two sub-groups are of par-

ticular interest. The fi rst consists of items with a straight or

6. NADEL, 1997: tab. 4.11; GOODALE et al., 2002; DAG et al., in press.

7. GORING-MORRIS, 1987; SHIMELMITZ, 2002.

Fig. 3: Area A, bedrock surface with cupmarks.

079-100.indd 82079-100.indd 82 23/05/08 11:57:0623/05/08 11:57:06

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

atrt

- C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns



Type Surface A-C Locales Total

N % N % N % N %

Primary elements 256 21.2 427 24.8 317 35.1 1,000 26.1

Flakes 548 45.4 592 34.4 281 31.1 1,421 37.1

Blade/lets 295 24.4 553 32.1 160 17.7 1,008 26.3

TOTAL Sub-Group 1,099 91.0 1,572 91.3 758 83.8 3,429 89.5

Ridge blades 14 1.2 24 1.4 29 3.2 67 1.7

Core tablets 19 1.6 22.0 1.3 30 3.3 71 1.9

CTE-Others 53 4.4 69 4.0 64 7.1 186 4.9

Overpassed 5 0.4 9 0.5 10 1.1 24 0.6

TOTAL CTE 91 7.5 124 7.2 133 14.7 348 9.1

Tranchets 1 0.1 4 0.2 4 0.4 9 0.2

Bifacial spalls 1 0.1 4 0.2 5 0.6 10 0.3

Burin spalls 16 1.3 17 1.0 4 0.4 37 1.0

TOTAL Spalls 18 1.5 25 1.5 13 1.4 56 1.5

TOTAL Debitage 1,208 100 1,721 100.0 904 100.0 3,833 100.0

Chunks 437 20.5 381 14.5 623 44.2 1,441 23.3

Chips 1,696 79.5 2,251 85.5 786 55.8 4,733 76.7

TOTAL Debris 2,133 100.0 2,632 100.0 1,409 100.0 6,174 100.0

Debitage 1,208 31.8 1,721 35.8 904 30.9 3,833 33.3

Debris 2,133 56.2 2,632 54.8 1,409 48.2 6,174 53.6

Cores 120 3.2 120 2.5 262 9.0 502 4.4

Tools 334 8.8 328 6.8 349 11.9 1,011 8.8

TOTAL 3,795 100 4,801 100.0 2,924 100.0 11,520 100.0

Tool/Core 2.0

Debitage/Core 7.6

Debitage/Tool 3.8

CTE/Core 0.7

Blade/lets/Flakes within the debitage 0.71

Blade/lets/Flakeswithin the tools 0.70

Tab. 1: Breakdown of the chipped stone tool assemblage at Tzur Natan by major category.

079-100.indd 83079-100.indd 83 23/05/08 11:57:0623/05/08 11:57:06

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

atrt

- C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

84 MARDER et al.


Fig. 4: Locale 51, view of bedrock surface with cupmarks. Fig. 5: Negative of extracted fl int nodule.

1

2

3

4

0 2 cm

Fig. 6: Cores.

079-100.indd 84079-100.indd 84 23/05/08 11:57:0723/05/08 11:57:07

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

atrt

- C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns



Core TypeA-C Surface Locales TOTAL

N % N % N % N %

Single platform blade/let 37 29.6 24 20.2 82 29.4 143 27.3

Single platform fl ake 30 24.0 15 12.6 73 26.2 118 22.6

Multiple platform blade/let 5 4.0 8 6.7 17 6.1 30 5.7

Multiple platform fl ake 11 8.8 11 9.2 11 3.9 33 6.3

Amorphous 24 19.2 30 25.2 65 23.3 119 22.8

Fragments 10 8.0 26 21.8 24 8.6 60 11.5

Discoidal 8 6.4 5 4.2 7 2.5 20 3.8

TOTAL 125 100.0 119 100.0 279 100.0 523 100.0

Tab. 2: Chipped stone tool assemblage, cores typology.

Tool TypeA-C Surface Locales Total

N % N % N % N %

Points 2 0.6 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 0.2

Awls 49 14.9 49 14.4 41 11.7 139 13.7

Borers 1 0.3 4 1.2 1 0.3 6 0.6

Sickle blades 10 3.0 11 3.2 14 4.0 35 3.4

Bifacial 5 1.5 23 6.8 19 5.4 47 4.6

Scrapers 28 8.5 34 10.0 46 13.1 108 10.6

Burins 22 6.7 21 6.2 17 4.9 59 5.8

Hagdud truncations 4 1.2 2 0.6 0 0.0 6 0.6

Retouched blades 57 17.4 39 11.5 26 7.4 122 12.0

Microliths 14 4.3 12 3.5 1 0.3 27 2.7

Geometric microliths 6 1.8 6 1.8 0 0.0 12 1.2

Notches-denticulates 46 14.0 44 12.9 53 15.1 143 14.1

Truncations 20 6.1 27 7.9 27 7.7 74 7.3

Retouched fl akes 57 17.4 55 16.2 85 24.3 197 19.4

Splintered pieces 1 0.3 1 0.3 2 0.6 4 0.4

Multiple tools 1 0.3 2 0.6 10 2.9 13 1.3

Massive tools 1 0.3 6 1.8 0 0.0 7 0.7

Varia 4 1.2 4 1.2 8 2.3 16 1.6

TOTAL 328 100 340 100 350 100 1,017 100

Tab. 3: Chipped stone tool assemblage, tool types.

079-100.indd 85079-100.indd 85 23/05/08 11:57:1123/05/08 11:57:11

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

atrt

- C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

86 MARDER et al.


1 2 3

4

5 6

7

8

9 10 1112 13

14

0 2 cm

Fig. 7: 1-3, geometric microliths; 4, backed blade; 5-6, sickle blades; 7-8, possible projectile points; 9-12, Hagdud truncations; 13, truncation; 14, Hagdud truncation (in preparation).

079-100.indd 86079-100.indd 86 23/05/08 11:57:1123/05/08 11:57:11

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

atrt

- C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns



1 2 3

4

5 6

7

89

0 2 cm

Fig. 8: 1, awl; 2, 3 and 5, borers; 4, burin made of recycled awl; 6, burin; 7-8, scrapers; 9, end-scraper on recycled sickle blade.

oblique truncation, which were probably waste products from

microlith production (fi g. 7: 13).8 The second includes bro-

ken items with ‘Couze’ retouch on the break. Although simi-

8. MARDER, 2003.

lar items are documented from Geometric Kebaran contexts,

these items most probably represent broken Hagdud trunca-

tions (fi g. 7: 14).9

9. BAR-YOSEF and GORING-MORRIS, 1977.

079-100.indd 87079-100.indd 87 23/05/08 11:57:1123/05/08 11:57:11

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

atrt

- C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

88 MARDER et al.


1

2

3

0

2 cm

Fig. 9: Bifacials.

079-100.indd 88079-100.indd 88 23/05/08 11:57:1123/05/08 11:57:11

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

atrt

- C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns



Chronologically diagnostic tools are not common within

the tool kit. Bifacials (fi g. 9 and 10: 1) are the most prominent

tools, while sickle blades (fi g. 7: 5-6; 8: 9), Hagdud truncations

and microliths are rare (tab. 3, fi g. 7: 9-12). The assemblage

lacks projectile points, other than two items that may repre-

sent unsuccessful attempts to produce such items10 (see below).

10. NADEL, 1997.

1

2

3

4

0

2 cm

Fig. 10: 1, bifacial; 2, massive tool; 3-4, transversal spalls.

079-100.indd 89079-100.indd 89 23/05/08 11:57:1123/05/08 11:57:11

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

atrt

- C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

90 MARDER et al.


One of these pieces exhibits two bilateral notches at the proxi-

mal end and a broken tip (fi g. 7: 7); the second exhibits a deep

notch, which created a winged proximal end (fi g. 7: 8).

The bifacial tool class represents a distinct reduction

sequence. Flint was the preferred raw material for shaping

bifacial tools (75.1%) but a few were fashioned on cherty

fl int (14.9%). In general, the bifacials made on fl int are nar-

row (length 57.2 ± 11.5; width 28.3 ± 2.1, n = 40), occasionally

with a little polish on the working edge (12.5%), and transver-

sal blows (22.5%; fi g. 9: 1-3). Cherty fl int bifacials are larger

(length 74.8 ± 12.9 mm; width 35.1 ± 11.0 mm, n = 7), heavier

(79.0 ± 65.2 gr contra 32.7 ± 13.5 gr in the case of those made

of fi ne-grained high quality fl int) and lack polish (fi g. 10). Elon-

gated axes with a relatively narrow working edge (20-40 mm)

dominate the bifacial tools, while chisels, picks and adzes

are rare (tab. 3; fi g. 9). Tranchet removal scars are quite

common, appearing on 21.2% of the complete items (fi g. 9:

2-3). According to a recent use-wear study of bifacials from

Netiv Hagdud, narrow tranchet axes and chisels were used

for lighter woodcraft rather than heavy chopping activities.11

It is interesting to note that transversal spalls are rare at Tzur

Natan, as indicated by the low transversal spall/bifacial ratio

of 0.2:1 (fi g. 10: 3-4). The bifacial group also comprises atypi-

cal items, such as a tool reused as a core, and a large borer that

was shaped by bifacial retouch. When comparing the bifacials

of Tzur Natan to other PPNA and Early PPNB assemblages,

tool dimensions are similar, although the working edges of the

Tzur Natan bifacials were less frequently shaped by transversal

blows.12

Two types of high quality fl int were used for sickle blade

production. Half of the sickles were made on high quality fi ne-

grained purple/violet fl int (51.4%), while the other half was

produced on multi-coloured (buff, grey and brown) fi ne-grained

high quality fl int (48.6%). Most of the sickle blades are plain

with pronounced gloss on only one edge (fi g. 7: 5-6; fi g. 8:

9). Additional items display regular (non-invasive) retouch on

the ventral surface, or abrupt backing. No unequivocal Beit

Ta’amir knives were found.

Of interest is a group of massive tools, including scrapers,

denticulates and battered pieces, which were recovered in the

surface collection (e.g., fi g. 10: 1). Similar tools are known,

particularly from Natufi an (e.g., Eynan) and PPNA contexts

(e.g., Hatoula), but they also occur in earlier Epipalaeolithic

11. YERKES et al., 2003.

12. BARKAI, 2005: tab. 33, 44, fi g. 82, 117; KHALAILY et al., 2007.

assemblages (e.g., Shunera XVII).13 Of particular interest is a

broken obsidian bladelet found at the site.

Groundstone Tool Assemblage

Most of the groundstone tools are made on basalt (ca 57%),

although chert and limestone were also commonly utilized

(tab. 4). The closest sources of basalt are located ca 40-50 km

to the north in Ramat Manasseh, at Mei Ami and at Givat

Kipod. Recently at Givat Kipod, a Neolithic workshop for the

manufacture of basalt bifaces was tested (fi g. 1).14 However, it

should be noted that during the Late Epipalaeolithic Natufi an

at el-Wad, distant sources of basalt were exploited (e.g., Golan

Heights), even though basalt exposures are available nearby on

Mt. Carmel.15

0 5 cm

Fig. 11: Grinding slab.

13. LECHEVALLIER et RONEN, 1985; GORING-MORRIS, 1987; SAREL,

1995.

14. SHIMELMITZ et al., 2005.

15. WEINSTEIN-EVRON et al., 1995, 1999 and 2001.

079-100.indd 90079-100.indd 90 23/05/08 11:57:1423/05/08 11:57:14

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

atrt

- C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns



The groundstone artefacts consist of a variety of tool types

(tab. 4). These include mainly grinding slabs (fi g. 11), pestles

(fi g. 12: 1), pounders, handstones (fi g. 12: 2; fi g. 13: 1), and

hammerstones (fi g. 13: 2).16 In addition, multi-purpose tools

(e.g., pestle/pounder; fi g. 13: 3), anvils, grooved items (fi g. 12:

4), basalt chipped stone debitage and recycled axes that were

converted into pounders (fi g. 12: 3) were collected. Mobile

mortars are rare, suggesting that the cupmarks found were used

for pounding activities.

The ratio of grinding tools to pounding elements is 1:4.6,

taking into consideration the quantity of grinding slabs and

16. We follow here the classifi cation system proposed by WRIGHT,

1992. Handstones have also been labelled ‘upper grinding stones’ elsewhere

(MILEVSKI, 1998).

pounding elements (pounders, pestles and hammerstones).

Similar ratios are observed at PPNA Jericho (1:5) and at

Hatoula (1:6).17 At Netiv Hagdud, however, the ratio is 1:1.9,

taking in consideration what were labeled as ‘processors’ (i.e. handstones), ‘hammerstones/pounders’ and ‘pestles’.18

The diversity of the groundstone tool assemblage demon-

strates the intensity of the tasks involving these tools performed

at Tzur Natan, which is in accordance with the changes attested

to from the Natufi an onwards.19

17. WRIGHT, 1993: tab. 4; SAMZUN, 1994.

18. GOPHER, 1997: tab. 5.1.

19. GORING-MORRIS, 1987: 439; WRIGHT, 1993: 97.

Raw material typeBasalt Limestone Beachrock

-Sandstone Chert Other TOTAL

N % N % N % N % N % N %

Grinding slabs 0 0 2 13.3 1 50 2 16.7 0 0 5 7.1

Handstones 1 2.5 2 13.3 0 0 1 8.3 0 0 4 5.7

Pounders 1 2.5 2 13.3 1 50 2 16.7 0 0 6 8.6

Pestles 5 12.5 4 26.7 0 0 0 0.0 1 100.0 10 14.3

Hammerstones 0 0 1 6.7 0 0 3 25.0 0 0 4 5.7

Hammerstones or pounder fragments 8 20 0 0.0 0 0 1 8.3 0 0 9 12.9

Multiple tools (handstones & pounders) 2 5 1 6.7 0 0 2 16.7 0 0 5 7.1

Recycled (axes to pounder) 1 2.5 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 1 1.4

Mortars cup-marks 0 0 1 6.7 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 1 1.4

Discs 0 0 2 13.3 0 0 1 8.3 0 0 3 4.3

Worked pebbles 2 5 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 2 2.9

Grooved items 1 2.5 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 1 1.4

Basalt fl akes 11 27.5 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 11 15.7

Basalt chunks 7 17.5 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 7 10.0

Unidentifi ed 1 2.5 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 1 1.4

Sub-total 40 100.0 15 100.0 2 100.0 12 100.0 1 100.0 70 100.0

TOTAL 40 57.1 15 21.4 2 2.9 12 17.1 1 1.4 70 100.0

Tab. 4: Groundstone tool assemblage.

079-100.indd 91079-100.indd 91 23/05/08 11:57:1423/05/08 11:57:14

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

atrt

- C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

92 MARDER et al.


1

2

3 4

0

2 cm

Fig. 12: 1, pestle; 2, handstone; 3, recycled axe to pounder; 4, grooved item.

079-100.indd 92079-100.indd 92 23/05/08 11:57:1423/05/08 11:57:14

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

atrt

- C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns



Fig. 13: 1, handstone; 2, hammerstone;3, multi-function tool (pestle and pounder).

079-100.indd 93079-100.indd 93 23/05/08 11:57:4323/05/08 11:57:43

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

atrt

- C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

94 MARDER et al.


The Faunal Assemblage

Most of the fauna from Tzur Natan originates from the

three excavated areas (A, B, C). The bones from the surface

and from the different locales were excluded from the report as

they represent similar species, with different colouration and

severe weathering, suggesting erosion by water or wet sedi-

ment/vegetation. It is important to keep in mind the taphonomic

history of the site when analyzing the faunal data from Tzur

Natan. However, the importance of the Tzur Natan assemblage

resides in the fact that this is the only PPNA site with a faunal

assemblage in this region with the exception of Hatoula.20

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

%

Bovid Gazelle Pig Hare Fox Mediummammal

Largemammal

Tzur Natan Fauna (N=116)

Fig. 14: Faunal frequencies.

Species

Gazella BP DP

Metacarpal, proximal 19.95 13.66

Bos primigenius GL BP BD

Phalanx II 51.77 38.7 34.85

BD H

Humerus, distal 95.5 44.95

Tab. 5: Measurements of gazelle and aurochs.

20. DAVIS, 1985.

The faunal assemblage from Tzur Natan (n = 483, of which

367 are unidentifi ed and 116 identifi ed) is composed of gazelle

(Gazella gazella), aurochs (Bos primigenius), and several

remains of fox (Vulpes vulpes), hare (Lepus capensis), pig

(Sus scrofa) and fragments of medium and large sized mam-

mals (fi g. 14). The elements assigned to the large sized mam-

mals probably originate from bovids-equids, while the size of

medium-size mammals corresponds to gazelles-goats. There

are also remains of lesser mole rat (Spalax leucodon ehren-bergi) (three mandibles) and one chelonian carapace fragment.

In addition there are a few mollusk fragments, including a frag-

ment of the ventral margin of a bivalve from the Mediterra-

nean, Cerastoderma glaucum.21

The gazelle is the most common species in the assemblage

(n = 50, 43%) and it comprises mostly adult animals, other

than two items (a foetus and a one-year old). The aurochs is

less common (n = 18, 16%). Though very few elements were

measurable, the aurochs seems to have been of very large size

(tab. 5).

The distribution of skeletal elements (tab. 6) shows the

absence of scapulae and pelves. This absence is uncommon

in archaeological assemblages and may be related to erosion

down the slope, as is visible on some of the aurochs remains.22

This observation accords with the post-depositional effects

noted for the archaeological sediments.

Very few modifi cations were detected on the animal bones,

due to the encrustations that cover most of the bone surfaces,

especially on the bones that originate in Area B. Cut marks

were observed on the shaft of a rib of a large mammal, while

small animals (most likely red fox) had gnawed on two uniden-

tifi able bone fragments.

The recovered artiodactyl species are typically Mediterra-

nean; the mountain gazelle lives in many habitats, but not in

dense forest, and the aurochs prefer open parkland, swamps

and river valleys, while wild boar prefers dense thickets, forest

and riverine habitats.23 The modern appearance of lesser mole

rat occurs throughout the Mediterranean zone and the Northern

Negev, while hare and red fox are common in all parts of the

country.24

Aside from Hatoula, the comparison with other PPNA sites

is restricted to present-day arid and semi-arid zones, mainly

in the Jordan Valley.25 In most PPNA sites (Hatoula, Gesher,

21. Mienis, personal observation.

22. LYMAN, 1994. Similar patterns of fl int artefacts rolling-downslope

were described for Epipalaeolithic sites (FUCHS et al., 1977: 172).

23. MENDELSSOHN and YOM-TOV, 1999; VAN VUURE, 2002.

24. MENDELSSOHN and YOM-TOV, 1999.

25. HORWITZ et al., in press.

079-100.indd 94079-100.indd 94 23/05/08 11:57:4323/05/08 11:57:43

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

atrt

- C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns



Gilgal, and Netiv Hagdud)26 gazelle is the most common spe-

cies, followed by pig or aurochs. Most of the above sites have

numerous birds (over 30%, save Gesher). The absence of birds

and other small species in Tzur Natan is likely related to the

method of bone collection and, especially post-depositional

taphonomic processes.

Bones Gazelle Aurochs

Skull-Horn core 4 3

Maxilla 1

Mandible 1

Tooth 9 6

Vertebra 5 1

Rib 5

Scapula 1

Humerus 3 1

Radius 1

Ulna

Carpal 1

Metacarpal 2 1

Pelvis

Femur 1

Tibia 1

Tarsal 5

Metatarsal 2

Metapodial 6 2

Phalanx 5 1

TOTAL 50 18

Tab. 6: Skeletal representation of gazelle and aurochs.

TZUR NATAN IN A REGIONAL CONTEXT

Investigations at Tzur Natan have revealed a partially in situ and relatively ephemeral PPNA occupation located on the

western fl anks of the Samarian hills, a site type poorly docu-

26. DAVIS, 1985; DAVIS et al., 1994; TCHERNOV, 1994; HORWITZ and

ASHKENAZI, 2006; HORWITZ et al., in press.

mented to date in the Mediterranean zone of the Southern

Levant. The original extent of the site is diffi cult to estimate

but was clearly much more limited than the present distribution

of artefacts.

No evidence whatsoever was found for architectural fea-

tures. Still, the presence of numerous shallow cupmarked sur-

faces and an accompanying groundstone tool assemblage are

notable. Amongst the chipped stone assemblage the occurrence

of tranchet axes and chisels with accompanying tranchet spalls,

plain irregular sickle blades, borers on blade/lets, and Hagdud

truncations are all diagnostic of the PPNA. Projectile points are

extremely rare. In spite of the fact that some elements may be

indicative of the Sultanian tradition (e.g., tranchet and bifacial

spalls), the ascription of the site within a particular stage of the

PPNA is diffi cult to ascertain because of the nature of site, the

lack of radiocarbon dates and the lack of Bet Ta‘amir knives

and the fact that the few projectile points are not diagnostic.

Broadly comparable cupmarked surfaces on bedrock and

slabs, together with similar lithic assemblages were described

from further south at Hatoula (Area B) and on the other side of

the central mountain range in the Jordan Valley at both Gilgal

and Netiv Hagdud.27

Nevertheless, it seems that the fl int assemblage at Tzur

Natan is not entirely homogenous, since certain items, such as

the trapezes/rectangles, rounded and circular end-scrapers, and

narrow blade/let cores, can be more comfortably attributed to

the Epipalaeolithic period (Geometric Kebaran).

An attraction for the PPNA inhabitants to the site may have

been the accessibility of fl int nodules from veins in bedrock

exposures. Indeed, it is likely that shallow cavities were ini-

tially formed during extraction (fi g. 5). Such cavities deriving

from fl int extraction and resembling cup-marks have recently

been documented in the nari bedrock at Hatoula.28 Neverthe-

less, it is important to stress that at sites like Hatoula and Quleh

there is also a clear association between the quantities of cup-

marks and the accompanying groundstone tool assemblages,

which include abundant pounding tools.29 Although some of the

cup-marks at Tzur Natan may have initially derived from fl int

extraction, the nature of the hard bedrock and the smoothed,

symmetrical interior surfaces indicate that their main func-

tion likely involved pounding and grinding activities.30 Series

of cupmarks on boulders placed within residential structures

are normative in many PPNA settlements (e.g., Hatoula,

27. LECHEVALLIER et RONEN, 1994; BAR-YOSEF et al., in press; BAR-

YOSEF and GOPHER, 1997.

28. GROSSMAN and GOREN-INBAR, 2007.

29. LECHEVALLIER et RONEN, 1994; ZBENOVICH, in press a.

30. And see WRIGHT, 1993: 97.

079-100.indd 95079-100.indd 95 23/05/08 11:57:4323/05/08 11:57:43

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

atrt

- C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

96 MARDER et al.


Gilgal, and Netiv Hagdud). Thus, while it is speculative to

suggest what materials were processed, vegetal resources

(seeds, nuts, etc.) seem to offer plausible candidates.

Notwithstanding poor preservation, the small faunal

assemblage recovered at Tzur Natan indicates the exploita-

tion of gazelle together with aurochs, pig, fox and hare from a

surrounding landscape that included a mosaic of open park-

land, forest and riverine habitats.

Indeed, the PPNA occupation at Tzur Natan is not a unique

phenomenon in the area. This region encompasses the Shep-

helah, i.e. the western fl anks of the Samarian and Judean hills

between 80 and 400 m asl. Most PPNA sites are located close to

water sources, but not necessarily on permanent springs. Aside

from the site of Nahal Oren,31 located at the western edge of

Mt. Carmel, the other sites discussed here include (from north

to south): Sha’ar Ephraim,32 where a ca 500 m2 surface scatter

of Late Natufi an/PPNA fl int artefacts was collected; Quleh, an

in situ site extending over 1.4 ha;33 Modi’in-Bareqet,34 a cluster

of dispersed lithic scatters in the Ayalon basin, each measuring

between 4-14 ha, parts of which were excavated; the large, 1 ha

Late Natufi an-PPNA village site of Hatoula on the fl oodplain

of Nahal Nahshon;35 and the 0.4 ha site of Nahal Yarmuth.36 By

contrast, there is almost no evidence for settlement or exploita-

tion of the coastal plain during the PPNA.

A comparative chart provides observations on the setting,

nature and diagnostic features of the PPNA sites known in

this region (tab. 7). With the exception of the major settlement

of Hatoula, all are located on the exposed slopes or tops of

moderate hills, usually relatively high above the surrounding

landscape. Most sites are located on bare limestone bedrock

surfaces, accompanied by Cenomanian and Senonian fl int out-

crops. Only Hatoula and Quleh provide evidence for durable

architectural features. Cup-marked bedrock surfaces and slabs

are common at Tzur Natan, Quleh and Hatoula, together with

abundant groundstone tool assemblages.

The lithic assemblages, while commonly poor in terms of

diagnostic elements generally seem to be attributable to the Sul-

tanian culture, and are orientated towards fl ake production. The

most common tools include mostly the so-called ad hoc and

non-diagnostic types: retouched fl akes, notches and denticu-

lates, and retouched blades as well as scrapers. Bifacials, often

31. STEKELIS and YIZRAELY, 1963.

32. BARKAI, 1998.

33. ZBENOVICH, in press a.

34. ROSENBERG and GROMAN-YAROSLAVSKI, 2005; ZBENOVICH,

2005 and in press b, c, d.

35. LECHEVALLIER et RONEN, 1985 and 1994.

36. ZBENOVICH, in press e.

with tranchet sharpening of the working edges, are the most

dominant diagnostic tool class, although they appear in lesser

frequencies at Quleh and Hatoula. Plain and backed sickle

blades occur in small quantities. Projectile points are notable

by being almost absent. Microliths and Hagdud truncations are

also very rare, except at Hatoula, Quleh and Tzur Natan.

The general picture that emerges is one of a variety of

settlement types existing in this central region, the differences

refl ecting variation in their specifi c functions. Some were per-

manent or semi-permanent settlements, such as Hatoula and

Quleh (and, further north, Nahal Oren), with durable residential

architectural remains, some burials and a subsistence base prob-

ably involving cultivation, collection and hunting.37 Others were

more ephemeral short-lived sites, such as those in the Modi’in

area and Nahal Yarmuth, which were based on the exploitation

of raw materials and the production and use of bifacials.

Tzur Natan appears to occupy somewhat of an intermediate

position, given the absence of architecture. But the high den-

sity of cup-marked surfaces, the groundstone tool assemblage,

the relatively high density of fl int artefacts, and the presence of

animal bones, all indicate that a relatively wide range of activi-

ties took place on-site. Of course it is possible that this refl ects

a repeatedly (seasonally?) occupied location over a long period

of use.

Nevertheless, in comparison to the size, scope and inten-

sity of many PPNA sites in the Rift Valley (i.e. Netiv Hagdud,

Gilgal, Jericho, Dhra’, Zharat adh-Dhra’2),38 the more perma-

nent settlements on the western fl anks of the central hill range

(Hatoula, Quleh and Nahal Oren) are much smaller, and occu-

pation intensity appears more peripheral.39

When comparing this PPNA settlement pattern with earlier

and later periods several observations appear to be pertinent.

The PPNA pattern clearly differs signifi cantly from the Early

and Middle Epipalaeolithic when sites were concentrated in

the coastal plain on the kurkar ridges, but not further inland.40

There is little evidence for subsequent Early Natufi an settle-

ment either in the coastal plain or further inland in the Shep-

helah. However, from the Late Natufi an cave sites are known

from middle elevations on slopes above some of the major

wadis draining the hills (e.g. Shuqba and Nahal Qana), while

others appear at the exit from the hills into the coastal plain

(e.g. Hatoula, Nahal Oren). Although there is evidence for the

37. BARKAI, 2005; LECHEVALLIER et RONEN, 1994; ZBENOVICH, in

press a; STEKELIS and YIZRAELY, 1963.

38. BAR-YOSEF and GOPHER, 1997; KENYON, 1981; GOODALE et al., 2002; FINLAYSON et al., 2003: 17-36; EDWARDS et al., 2004.

39. GORING-MORRIS and BELFER-COHEN, 1997.

40. Ibid.

079-100.indd 96079-100.indd 96 23/05/08 11:57:4323/05/08 11:57:43

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

atrt

- C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns



Site

(and

refe

renc

e)Lo

catio

n(P

rese

rvat

ion)

Elev

.(m

asl

)Si

ze

(ha.

)Pe

riods

Arc

hite

ctur

al

feat

ures

&

inst

alla

tions

Raw

Mat

eria

l (a

vaila

bilit

y)Li

thic

Ass

embl

age

Size

& D

iagn

ostic

s

Hat

oula

(L

EC

HE

VA

LLIE

R

et R

ON

EN

, 198

5,

1994

)

Terr

ace/

fl ood

plai

n of

N

ahal

Nah

shon

.In

situ

.21

51.

0PP

NA

(Sul

tani

an

& K

hiam

ian)

Epi

pala

eolit

hic

Res

iden

tial

stru

ctur

es,

cupm

arke

d su

rface

s,bu

rials

Mes

hash

,S

enon

ian

Eoc

ene

(on-

site

)

Khi

amia

n as

sem

blag

e: n

=91,

212;

tool

s (2

.9%

). S

ulta

nian

ass

embl

age:

n=1

48,2

62; t

ools

(14.

4%).

Flak

e do

min

ated

.K

hiam

ian-

tool

kit d

omin

ated

by

bore

rs, e

l Khi

am p

oint

s (3

.6%

). S

ulta

nian

-tool

kit d

omin

ated

by

bore

rs, e

l Khi

am p

oint

s (4

.2%

), bi

faci

als

(0.8

%).

Nah

al Y

arm

uth

(ZB

EN

OV

ICH

, nd)

Hill

top.

Ero

ded.

440-

415

0.4

PPN

AE

pipa

laeo

lithi

cLa

te N

eolit

hic

Cla

ssic

al

Mes

hash

,S

enon

ian

(2 k

m d

ista

nt

-eas

t of N

ahal

Za

noah

)

Flin

t ass

embl

age:

n=8

,066

; too

ls (6

.3%

). Li

thic

indu

stry

is fl

ake

dom

inat

ed. T

oolk

it do

min

ated

by

ad-h

oc to

ols.

Sic

kle

blad

es (0

.98%

), bi

faci

als

(5.5

%).

Poi

nts

are

abse

nt.

Mod

i’in

Kai

zer

(ZB

EN

OV

ICH

, 200

6)H

ill to

p.E

rode

d.25

04.

0PP

NA

Sev

eral

cu

pmar

ks

Mes

hash

,S

enon

ian

(on-

site

)

Flin

t ass

embl

age:

n=3

,318

; too

ls: n

= 98

4 (2

9.6%

). Li

thic

indu

stry

is

fl ake

dom

inat

ed. T

oolk

it do

min

ated

by

ad-h

oc to

ols.

Sic

kle

blad

es

(0.8

%),

bifa

cial

s (1

1.7%

). P

oint

s ar

e ra

re.

Mod

i’in

Sh

imsh

oni

Buc

hman

Hab

ial e

l-Jan

anna

(BA

RK

AI,

2005

; ZB

EN

OV

ICH

, nd)

Hill

top.

Ero

ded

270-

285

14.0

PPN

AE

pipa

laeo

lithi

cLa

te N

eolit

hic

Cha

lcol

ithic

Cla

ssic

al

A fe

w c

upm

arks

Mes

hash

,S

enon

ian

(on-

site

)

Flin

t ass

embl

age:

n=6

1,89

3; to

ols

(6.6

-10.

8%).

Lith

ic in

dust

ry s

imila

r to

Mod

i’in

Kai

zer.

Dia

gnos

tic to

ols

cons

ist o

f sic

kle

blad

es (0

.4-0

.9%

) in

clud

ing

Bei

t Ta’

amir,

bifa

cial

s (2

.3-1

5.8%

). P

oint

s an

d m

icro

liths

are

al

mos

t abs

ent.

A fe

w o

bsid

ian

item

s.

Tel B

areq

et(R

OS

EN

BE

RG

et a

l., 2

005)

Hill

top

Cor

e ar

ea in

situ

, m

argi

ns p

artia

lly

erod

ed.

115

―P

PN

AEB

IIC

lass

ical

A fe

w c

upm

arks

Cen

oman

ian/

Turo

nian

(on-

site

)

Col

lect

ion

of P

PN

A di

agno

stic

tool

s. T

ools

: n=6

8. B

ifaci

als,

tran

sver

sal

spal

ls, o

ne B

et T

a’am

ir kn

ife a

nd o

ne p

oint

.

Qul

eh(Z

BE

NO

VIC

H, n

d)S

mal

l fl a

t hill

.M

ostly

in s

itu.

801.

4PP

NA

Wal

ls, n

umer

ous

bedr

ock

cupm

arks

, bur

ials

Cen

oman

ian/

Turo

nian

(on-

site

)

Flin

t ass

embl

age:

n=7

1,76

0; to

ols:

n=1

,205

(10.

9%).

The

debi

tage

as

sem

blag

e cl

early

dom

inat

ed b

y fl a

kes,

whi

le a

mon

gst t

ools

ther

e is

on

ly a

slig

ht p

refe

renc

e fo

r fl a

kes.

Too

lkit

dom

inat

ed b

y ad

-hoc

tool

s.

Sic

kle

blad

es (1

.8%

) inc

ludi

ng B

et T

a’am

ir, B

ifaci

als

(1.5

%).

Poi

nts

(0.1

%).

Geo

met

ric m

icro

liths

, esp

ecia

lly lu

nate

s (0

.7%

) and

Hag

dud

trunc

atio

ns (0

.6%

) are

rare

. Gro

und

ston

e (n

=97)

dom

inat

ed b

y po

undi

ng to

ols.

Obs

idia

n re

lativ

ely

com

mon

.

Tzur

Nat

anTo

p &

slo

pes

of

low

hill

.M

ostly

ero

ded.

800.

5PP

NA

Epi

pala

eolit

hic

Num

erou

s cu

pmar

ked

surfa

ces

Cen

oman

ian/

Turo

nian

(on-

site

)

Flin

t ass

embl

age:

n=1

1,52

0; to

ols:

n=1

,011

(8.8

%).

Lith

ic in

dust

ry is

fl a

ke d

omin

ated

incl

udin

g to

ol b

lank

s. T

oolk

it do

min

ated

by

ad h

oc

tool

s. S

ickl

e bl

ades

(3.6

%) w

ithou

t Bet

Ta’

amir

kniv

es, b

ifaci

als

(4.3

%)

and

trans

vers

al s

palls

. Poi

nts

(0.2

%).

Mic

rolit

hs (3

.9%

) and

Hag

dud

trunc

atio

ns (0

.6%

) are

alm

ost a

bsen

t. G

roun

d st

one

tool

s re

lativ

ely

com

mon

. One

obs

idia

n bl

adel

et. F

auna

con

sist

s of

wild

cat

tle, g

azel

le,

rabb

it an

d w

olf.

Sha’

ar E

phra

im(B

AR

KA

I, 19

98)

Ero

ded.

80

0.05

Late

Nat

ufi a

n/PP

NA

Geo

met

ric

Keb

aran

Cen

oman

ian/

Turo

nian

Flin

t ass

embl

age:

n=7

,762

; too

ls: 7

50 (9

.7%

).

Tab.

7:

Com

para

tive

tabl

e of

PP

NA

sit

es in

the

cent

ral r

egio

n. M

ain

stag

es o

f occ

upat

ion

at e

ach

site

is m

arke

d in

bol

d. P

PN

A c

ultu

res

are

unde

rlin

ed.

079-100.indd 97079-100.indd 97 23/05/08 11:57:4323/05/08 11:57:43

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

atrt

- C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

98 MARDER et al.


exploitation of marine resources from inland sites, few sites are

known from the coastal plain itself (perhaps Poleg 18M and

Gath Rimon).41 This Late Natufi an pattern is in some respects

similar to the PPNA pattern described herein but with some dif-

ferences. During most of the PPNB the coastal plain remained

largely unoccupied and the few known settlements are located

on wadi terraces adjacent to major springs (at about 300 m asl)

within the Samarian hills. This shift in the Late Natufi an and

PPNA is probably connected with intensifi ed exploitation of

vegetal resources (woodworking and clearing small plots for

incipient cultivation or collection?), which was accompanied

by on-site extraction and exploitation of fl int.

SUMMARY

The site of Tzur Natan provides a useful addition to our

knowledge of seemingly task specifi c, non-residential PPNA

occupations on the fl anks of the central hill zone in the South-

ern Levant. The site appears to have primarily been involved

in the processing of vegetal resources in the numerous cup-

marks found on the site, perhaps on a seasonal basis. Addition-

ally, the inhabitants of Tzur Natan may have exploited fl int

sources within and in the immediate vicinity of the site. Such

task specifi c sites complemented and were subsidiary to the

more permanent settlements in the region and thus provide an

opportunity to understand the complexity of local adaptations

during a period of major change from extractive to productive

economies.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors wish to express their special thanks to L. Zeiger who

prepared the drawings of the tools and to L. Barda who prepared

the plan in fi gure 2. Thanks are due to L. Grosman and N. Goren-

Inbar for fruitful discussions and their suggestions concerning raw

material exploitation and procurement. E. Ayalon, R. Barkai and

D. Rosenberg provided important information on Tzur Natan and

other sites mentioned in this article. J. Uziel assisted with the English

editing of the article. This study was partially sponsored by the Dr.

S. Krauthammer chair in archaeology at Bar-Ilan University.

41. BAR-YOSEF, 1970; GOPHER et al., 1998

Ofer MARDERIsrael Antiquities AuthorityPOB 586 – Jerusalem 91004

ISRAEL

[email protected]

A. Nigel GORING-MORRISInstitute of Archaeology

The Hebrew University of JerusalemJerusalem 91905

ISRAEL

[email protected]

Hamoudi KHALAILYIsrael Antiquities AuthorityPOB 586, Jerusalem 91004

ISRAEL

[email protected]

Ianir MILEVSKIIsrael Antiquities AuthorityPOB 586, Jerusalem 91004

ISRAEL

[email protected]

Rivka RABINOVICHDept. of Evolution, Systematics and Ecology

The Hebrew University of JerusalemJerusalem 91904

ISRAEL

[email protected]

Vladimir ZBENOVICHIsrael Antiquities AuthorityPOB 586 – Jerusalem 91004

ISRAEL

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BARKAI R.

1998 Sha’ar Ephraim South: A Late Natufian Campsite. Tel Aviv 25:

94-103.

2005 Flint and Stone Axes as Cultural Markers: Socio-Economic Changes as Reflected in Holocene Flint Tool Industries of the Southern Levant. Berlin: ex oriente (SENEPSE 11).

BAR-YOSEF O.

1970 The Epipalaeolithic Cultures of Palestine. Unpublished Ph.D.

Jerusalem: The Hebrew University.

2001 From Sedentary Foragers to Village Hierarchies: The Emer-

gence of Social Institutions. In: RUNCIMAN G. (ed.), The Origin of Social Human Institutions: 1-38. Oxford: Oxford University

Press.

BAR-YOSEF O. and GOPHER A. (eds)

1997 An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley. Part I: The Archaeology of Netiv Hagdud. Cambridge, MA: Peabody

079-100.indd 98079-100.indd 98 23/05/08 11:57:4323/05/08 11:57:43

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

atrt

- C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns



Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University

(American School of Prehistoric Research Bulletin 43).

BAR-YOSEF O. and GORING-MORRIS A.N.

1977 Geometric Kebaran A Occurrences. In: BAR-YOSEF O. and

PHILLIPS J.L. (eds), Prehistoric Investigations in Gebel Maghara, Northern Sinai: 115-148. Jerusalem: Institute of Archaeology,

The Hebrew University (Qedem 7).

BAR-YOSEF O. and MEADOW R.H.

1995 The Origin of Agriculture in the Near East. In: PRICE T.D. and

GEBAUER A.B. (eds), Last Hunters, First Farmers: New Pers-pectives on the Prehistoric Transition to Agriculture: 39-94.

Santa Fe: School of American Research Press.

BAR-YOSEF O., GORING-MORRIS A.N. and GOPHER A. (eds)

In press Gilgal: Excavations at Early Neolithic Sites in the Lower Jordan Valley. The Excavations of Tamar Noy. Boston: Brill Academic

Publishers (ASPR Monograph Series).

BELFER-COHEN A. and BAR-YOSEF O.

2000 Early Sedentism in the Near East: A Bumpy Ride to Village Life.

In: KUIJT I. (ed.), Life in Neolithic Farming Communities: Social Organization, Identity, and Differentiations: 19-37. New York:

Plenum Press.

DAG D., GROMAN I., GOPHER A. and GORING-MORRIS A.N.

In press Lithic Assemblage of Gilgal I. In: BAR-YOSEF O., GORING-

MORRIS A.N. and GOPHER A. (eds), Gilgal: Excavations at Early Neolithic Sites in the Lower Jordan Valley. The Excava-tions of Tamar Noy. Boston: Brill Academic Publishers (ASPR Monograph Series).

DAVIS S.J.M.

1985 A Preliminary Report of the Fauna from Hatoula: A Natufian and

Khiamian (PPNA) Site near Latroun, Israel. In : LECHEVALLIER

M. et RONEN A. (éd.), Le site natoufien-khiamien de Hatoula, près de Latroun, Israël. Fouilles 1980-1982. Rapport prélimi-naire : 71-98. Paris : CRFJ (Les Cahiers du Centre de recherche français de Jérusalem 1).

DAVIS S.J.M., LERNAU O. and PICHON J.

1994 The Animal Remains: New Light on the Origin of Animal Hus-

bandry. In : LECHEVALLIER M. et RONEN A. (éd.), Le gisement de Hatoula en Judée occidentale, Israël : 83-100. Paris : Asso-

ciation Paléorient (Mémoires et Travaux du Centre de recherche français de Jérusalem 8).

EDWARDS P.C., MEADOWS J., SAYEJ G. and WESTAWAY M.

2004 From the PPNA to the PPNB: New Views from the Southern

Levant after Excavations at Zahrat adh-Dhra’2 in Jordan. Palé-orient 30,2 : 21-60.

FINLAYSON B., KUIJT I., ARPIN T., CHESSON M., DENNIS S., GOODALE N.,

KADOWAKI S., MAHER L., SMITH S., SCHURR M. and MCKAY J.

2003 Dhra’, Excavation Project, 2002. Interim Report. Levant 35: 1-38.

FUCHS C., KAUFMAN D. and RONEN A.

1977 Erosion and Artifact Distribution in Open-Air Epi-Palaeolithic

Sites on the Coastal Plain of Israel. Journal of Field Archaeo-logy 4: 171-179.

GARFINKEL Y. and DAG D. (eds)

2006 Gesher: A PPNA Site in the Central Jordan Valley, Israel. Berlin:

ex oriente (Bibliotheca neolithica Asiae meridionalis et occidenta-lis).

GOODALE N., KUIJT I. and FINLAYSON B.

2002 Results from the 2001 Excavations at Dhra’, Jordan: Chipped

Stone Technology, Typology, and Intra-assemblage Variability.

Paléorient 28,1: 125-140.

GOPHER A.

1997 Groundstone Tools and other Stone Object from Netiv Hagdud.

In: BAR-YOSEF O. and GOPHER A. (eds), An Early Neoli-thic Village in the Jordan Valley. Part I: The Archaeology of Netiv Hagdud: 151-180. Cambridge, MA: Peabody Museum

of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University (American School of Prehistoric Research Bulletin 43).

GOPHER A., BURIAN F. and FRIEDMAN E.

1998 Prehistoric Sites on the Northern Bank of Nahal Poleg: Site 18M

revisited. Mitekufat Haeven – Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society 28: 81-104.

GORING-MORRIS A.N.

1987 At the Edge: Terminal Pleistocene Hunter-Gatherers in the Negev and Sinai. Oxford (BAR Int. Ser. 361).

GORING-MORRIS A.N. and BELFER-COHEN A.

1997 The Articulation of Cultural Processes and Late Quaternary Envi-

ronmental Changes in Cisjordan. Paléorient 23,2 : 71-93.

GROSMAN L. and GOREN-INBAR N.

2007 “Taming” Rocks and Changing Landscapes: A New Interpreta-

tion of Neolithic Cupmarks. Current Anthropology 48,5: 732-

740.

HORWITZ L.K. and ASHKENAZI S.

2006 The Fauna. In: GARFINKEL Y. and DAG D. (eds), Gesher: A PPNA Site in the Central Jordan Valley, Israel: 159-174. Berlin:

ex oriente (Bibliotheca neolithica Asiae meridionalis et occiden-talis).

HORWITZ L.K., SIMMONS T., LERNAU O. and TCHERNOV E.

In press Fauna from the Sites of Gilgal I-III. In: BAR-YOSEF O., GORING-

MORRIS A.N. and GOPHER A. (eds), Gilgal: Excavations at Early Neolithic Sites in the Lower Jordan Valley. The Excava-tions of Tamar Noy. Boston: Brill Academic Publishers (ASPR Monograph Series).

ILANI S.

1985 Netanya Geological Map, 1:50,000. Jerusalem: The Geological

Survey of Israel.

KENYON K.

1981 Excavations at Jericho. Vol. 3. The Architecture and Stratigraphy of the Tell. London: The British School of Archaeology in Jerusa-

lem.

KHALAILY H., BAR-YOSEF O., BARZILAI O., BOARETTO E.,

BOCQUENTIN F., EIRIKH-ROSE A., GREENHUT Z., GORING-MORRIS A.N.,

LE DOSSEUR G., MARDER O., SAPIR-HEN L. and YIZHAQ M.

2007 Excavations at Motza in the Judean Hills and the Early Pre-

Pottery Neolithic B in the Southern Levant. Paléorient 33,2 :

5-37.

KUIJT I.

1994 Pre-Pottery Neolithic A Settlement Variability Evidence for

Sociopolitical Developments in the Southern Levant. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 7: 165-192.

LECHEVALLIER M. et RONEN A. (éd.)

1985 Le site natoufien-khiamien de Hatoula près de Latroun, Israël. Fouilles 1980-1982. Rapport préliminaire. Paris : Association

079-100.indd 99079-100.indd 99 23/05/08 11:57:4323/05/08 11:57:43

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

atrt

- C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

100 MARDER et al.


Paléorient (Cahiers du Centre de recherche français de Jérusa-lem 1).

1994 Le gisement de Hatoula en Judée occidentale, Israël. Paris : Asso-

ciation Paléorient (Mémoires et Travaux du Centre de recherche français de Jérusalem 8).

LYMAN R.L.

1994 Vertebrate Taphonomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

MARDER O.

2003 The Lithic Technology of Epipalaeolithic Hunter-Gatherers in the Negev: The Implications of Refitting Studies. Unpublished

Ph.D. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University.

MENDELSSOHN H. and YOM-TOV Y.

1999 Mammalia of Israel. Fauna Palaestina. Jerusalem: The Israel

Academy of Sciences and Humanities.

MILEVSKI I.

1998 The Ground Stone Tools. In: EDELSTEIN G., MILEVSKI I. and

AURANT S. (eds), Villages, Terraces and Stone Mounds. Excava-tions at Manahat, Jerusalem 1987-1989: 61-77. Jerusalem: Israel

Antiquities Authority (IAA Reports 3).

NADEL D.

1997 The Chipped Stone Industry of Netiv Hagdud. In: BAR-YOSEF O.

and GOPHER A. (eds), An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley. Part I: The Archaeology of Netiv Hagdud: 71-149.Cambridge,

MA: Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard

University (American School of Prehistoric Research Bulletin 43).

ROSENBERG D. and GROMAN-YAROSLAVSKI I.

2005 A PPNA Bifacial Assemblage from Tel Bareqet, Central Israel.

Neo-Lithics 1/05: 24-28.

SAMZUN A.

1994 Le mobilier en pierre. In : LECHEVALLIER M. et RONEN A. (éd.),

Le gisement de Hatoula en Judée occidentale, Israël : 211-226.

Paris : Association Paléorient (Mémoires et Travaux du Centre de recherche français de Jérusalem 8).

SAREL J.

1995 The Massive Lithic Industry from the Site of Eynan (Mallaha) in the Northern Jordan Valley. Unpublished M.A. thesis. Jerusalem:

The Hebrew University. (Hebrew)

SHIMELMITZ R.

2002 Technological Aspects of the Flint Industry from the Kebaran Site Nahal Hadera V. Unpublished M.A. thesis. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv

University. (Hebrew)

SHIMELMITZ R., ROSENBERG D. and NATIV A.

2005 Giv’at Kipod: A Basalt Quarry and a Workshop for the Production

of Bifacial Tools in the Manasseh Hills, Israel. Neo-Lithics 1/05:

9-12.

STEKELIS M. and YISRAELY T.

1963 Excavations at Nahal Oren – Preliminary Report. Israel Explora-tion Journal 13: 1-12.

TCHERNOV E.

1994 An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley. Part II: The Fauna of Netiv Hagdud. Cambridge, MA: Peabody Museum

of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University (American School of Prehistoric Research Bulletin 44).

VAN VUURE T.

2002 History, Morphology and Ecology of the Aurochs (Bos taurus primigenius). Lutra 45/1: 1-16.

WEINSTEIN-EVRON M., KAUFMAN D. and BIRD-DAVID N.

2001 Rolling Stones: Basalt Implements as Evidence for Trade/

Exchange in the Levantine Epipalaeolithic. Mitekufat Haeven – Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society 31: 25-42.

WEINSTEIN-EVRON M., LANG B. and ILANI S.

1999 Natufian Trade/Exchange in Basalt Implements as Evidence from

Northern Israel. Archaeometry 41: 267-273.

WEINSTEIN-EVRON M., LANG B., ILANI S., STENITZ G. and KAUFMAN D.

1995 K/Ar Dating as a Means of Sourcing Levantine Epipalaeolithic

Basalt Implements. Archaeometry 37: 37-40.

WRIGHT K.

1992 A Classification System for Ground Stone Tools from the Prehis-

toric Levant. Paléorient 18,2 : 53-81.

1993 Early Holocene Ground Stone Assemblages in the Levant.

Levant 25: 93-111.

YERKES R.W., BARKAI R., GOPHER A. and BAR-YOSEF O.

2003 Microwear Analysis of Early Neolithic (PPNA) Axes and Bifa-

cial Tools from Netiv Hagdud in the Jordan Valley, Israel. Journal of Archaeological Science 30: 1051-1066.

ZBENOVICH V.

2006 Salvage Excavations at a Pre-Pottery Neolithic site at Modi’in.

‘Atiqot 51: 1-14.

In press a Excavations at the Early Neolithic (PPNA) site of Quleh. ‘Atiqot.In press b The Flint Assemblage from the Early Neolithic (PPNA) site F9 at

Modi’in – Shimshoni. ‘Atiqot.In press c Salvage Excavations at the Early Neolithic (PPNA) site F3 at

Modi’in – Buchman. ‘Atiqot.In press d Salvage Excavations at the Early Neolithic (PPNA) site of

Habayil El-Jannana. ‘Atiqot.In press e The Early Neolithic (PPNA) site at Nahal Yarmuth: Salvage

Excavations. ‘Atiqot.

079-100.indd 100079-100.indd 100 23/05/08 11:57:4423/05/08 11:57:44

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

atrt

- C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

Tiré

à p

art

- CN

RS É

dit

ion

sTi

ré à

par

t - C

NRS

Éd

itio

ns

tzur natan, a pre-pottery neolithic a site in central israel and observations on regional settlement...

Documents