upper pleistocene and middle holocene net sinkers from the sea of galilee, israel

/ משקולות לרשתות דייג מן הפלייסטוקן העליון וההולוקן התיכון באגם הכינרת, ישראל Upper Pleistocene and Mid-Holocene Net Sinkers From the Sea of Galilee, IsraelAuthor(s): DANI NADEL, YOSSI ZAIDNER, דני נדל and יוסף זיידנרSource: Mitekufat Haeven: Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society / מתקופת האבן, כרך ל"בpp. 49-71 תשס"ב, 2002Published by: Israel Prehistoric Society / העמותה הישראלית לפרהיסטוריהStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23380266 .

Accessed: 31/01/2014 02:27

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Israel Prehistoric Society / העמותה הישראלית לפרהיסטוריה is collaborating with JSTOR todigitize, preserve and extend access to Mitekufat Haeven: Journal of the Israel PrehistoricSociety / מתקופת האבן

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 132.74.95.21 on Fri, 31 Jan 2014 02:27:23 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=isrpresoc

http://www.jstor.org/stable/23380266?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


Journal of The Israel Prehistoric Society 32 (2002), 49-71

Upper Pleistocene and Mid-Holocene Net Sinkers From the Sea of Galilee, Israel

DANI NADEL AND YOSSI ZAIDNER

Zinman Institute of Archaeology,

Haifa University, Mt. Carmel 31905, Israel

ABSTRACT

The earliest Levantine double-notched pebbles were recently recovered from in situ

context at Ohalo II (Sea of Galilee, Jordan Valley), radiometrically dated to 19,500 B.P.

The implements are made of limestone and basalt, and usually weigh 150-400 gr. An

additional assemblage of weights was found on the surface of Haon Beach, another

lakeshore site. Here, there are pottery sherds from the Early Bronze and the Late Roman

periods. It is suggested that most of the notched pebbles served as net sinkers and/or

underwater trap anchors. If so, the Ohalo II implements are the oldest of their kind from

this part of the world. In the prehistoric Levant, an assemblage of similar finds was

found at Natufian Abu Hureyra. In other Natufian and Neolithic sites, notched pebbles are rare or absent. Around the Sea of Galilee, notched pebbles served as tackle also in

historic times.

INTRODUCTION

Pebbles with two opposed notches are very rare in southern Levantine prehistoric and

historic sites. When reported, they usually seem to be isolated finds, very small in numbers,

and almost always referred to as weights for fishing nets (Perrot 1966; Le Brun 1989;

Nun 1993; Garfinkel 1999; Valla et al. 1999; but see Moore 2000 for the finds from Abu

Hureyra in the Northern Levant). However, as they were rare finds, detailed presentations of their technological and typological characteristics were hardly provided. Furthermore,

no diachronic discussion of their role as tackle was advanced.

49



50 NADEL & ZAIDNER

200 210

1255 ff 1

Mediterranean f Sea

/mstudy m area

s

xryt———i.

OHALO I

OHALO IIV*

250"

240'

N

0 1 2, 1 ii i ■ ii km

200 210

Figure 1 : Sea of Galilee map with the location of submerged sites containing notched

pebbles and discussed in text.



UPPER PLEISTOCENE AND MID-HOLOCENE NET SINKERS FROM THE SEA OF GALILEE, ISRAEL 51

«•' > 3 < • < 7 « • <|Q

wm^. h

Figure 2: Notched pebbles from the surface of Ohalo II.

In recent years, archaeological work along the Sea of Galilee shores focused on

submerged sites exposed due to extremely low water levels. The project included

excavations at the 19.5 ky in situ site of Ohalo II (Nadel et al. 1994, 1995) and a survey of the usually submerged beaches (Nadel 1993). During this work, we encountered three

concentrations of double-notched pebbles. One came from Ohalo II, another from Haon

Beach and a third from Ohalo I (Figure 1). The double-notched artefacts discussed in this paper are worked pebbles (Figures 2

12). The pebbles could be of any locally available raw material, and most of their surface

is usually unmodified. The shape is usually oval or sub-oval, though pebbles of

other shapes were also used. Most conspicuous are two opposed notches set more or less

in the middle of the long sides of the stone. The notches were prepared in two basic

ways. In one technique the notch was produced by pecking with a stone or a chisel (more common on limestone than on flint: Figures 6:2, 8:2, 10:3, 12:1). The other way was to

flake a notch, in a similar method commonly used for flaking flint tools (Figures 4:1,

6:1, 7:2, 8:1, 10:1). In some of the Sea of Galilee specimens, a combination of the two

was used - sometimes even on the same notch (Figures 4:1-2, 5:2, 6:1-2, 7:1-2, 10:2,

11:1-3, 12:2-3). In a rare case the notch was created by deep incisions (only possible on

soft rock).



5 2 NADEL & ZAIDNER

0 1 2 3 4 5

Figure 3: A bifacially worked notched pebble from the floor of hut 13, Ohalo II.

Preliminary observations showed that differences in notch size and notch manufacture

technology could reflect distinct ways of using the pebbles. The types may also have

cultural affiliations and chronological implications. Accordingly, the following analysis of the Sea of Galilee finds emphasizes the notches as the key factor for understanding the role of these pebbles in past subsistence activities.

THE OHALO II FINDS

A. The in situ finds

Ohalo II is a large camp located on the now submerged beach of the lake, at 212/213 m

below msl. So far the remains of six brush huts have been excavated, as well as a grave, hearths and other installations. The site is excellently preserved, and radiometrically dated by 33 readings to 19,500 B.P. (Nadel et al. 1994, 1995; Nadel and Werker 1999). In addition to a rich flint assemblage, limestone and basalt pebbles were modified by

shaping two opposed notches on their sides. So far, six double-notched implements were

found in situ, and 41 on the surface.

Two complete notched specimens were found on the floor of brush hut 13. The first



54 NADEL & ZAIDNER





UPPER PLEISTOCENE AND MID-HOLOCENE NET SINKERS FROM THE SEA OF GALILEE, ISRAEL 5 5


P "€ dm. J

0 1 2 3 4 5

Figure 9: A notched pebble from the bottom of the stone circle, Haon Beach.



56 NADEL & ZAIDNER

(Sq. AJ40d; Figure 3) has large flake scars on both faces. The second (Sq. AJ39d) has

two small and shallow opposed notches. They were prepared by pecking and one or two

small flakings. A basalt specimen was found on the bottom floor of hut 1 (Sq. G80a). It is small and

oval, with shallow asymmetrical notches. Another implement was found in the fill above

the floor of hut 2 (Sq. E84c). It is made of fossil-rich limestone and crudely shaped. The

notches are relatively deep. A different type of weight was recovered from the midden of locus 10, near a small

hearth, (Sq. L78c). Here, the limestone pebble was shaped by the removal of a very large flake from one surface. The other face carries the signs of a shallow pecked groove between the two notches.

The sixth artefact was recovered from a concentration of hearths (Locus 18, Sq. AJ74b).

It is made on a basalt flake and is somewhat smaller than the other implements (though not lighter). The proximal end is thick, while the distal end is regularly shaped by small

flakings on both sides. The side notches are shallow.

It should be noted that additional in situ pieces similar to the notched pebbles in

general dimensions and shape were also recovered, but they lack clear evidence of

modification. They have no signs of notch preparation though the sides are concave or

have an irregular concavity. These were excluded from the current study. It is noteworthy that large and small flakes of limestone and basalt are present in the

excavated floors and hearths. These are indicative of on-site preparation of stone

implements. Some flakes are similar in shape and dimensions to the scars observed on

the notched pebbles. The six in situ implements are similar in that they are all crudely shaped from local

pebbles. They always have two opposed notches - but never symmetrical in size or

depth. Interestingly, they show a wide range of variability in raw material, weight and

details of manufacture and shape. They seem to represent an attitude where the functional

aspect of the implement is important, while other details are not. This attitude is also

recorded for the flint assemblage (Nadel 1999).

B. The surface finds

The large assemblage (N=41) is mostly made of soft limestone or chalk (N=24). There

are also nine specimens made of harder limestone, four of basalt, two of flint and two of

chert. All materials are locally available. The specimens are complete, and most of them

are not rolled. The smallest is only 8.0 cm long (Table 1), while the lightest weighs 83 gr

(average 353 gr). The largest is 15 cm long, weighing 941 gr. However, 30 implements are 10-13 cm long, with a weight of 200-450 gr.




Table 1 : Average dimensions (mm) and weights (gr) of double-notched pebbles from

submerged sites in the Sea of Galilee.

SITE L W TH WEIGHT N

OHALO II AVG 96 77 34 290 6

(in situ) STD 16 13 8 136

OHALO II AVG 111 85 37 353 41

(Surface) STD 16 16 10 162

OHALO II AVG 114 78 39 387 4

(Alluvial Fan) STD 19 8 6 243

OHALOI AVG 133 100 45 759 6

STD 31 16 14 565

HAON BEACH AVG 94 68 33 277 55

STD 21 13 10 151

Fourteen specimens have two small notches prepared by pecking. Although opposed, the notches are never symmetrical in width or depth. Such notches are usually found on

oval pebbles. In two additional cases the notches are connected, or partially connected,

by a shallow pecked groove on one face (Figures 6:2, 8:2).

Twenty-two specimens have their notches fashioned by flaking. In these cases, the

notches are conspicuously asymmetrical. In 11 cases one notch is widened by one or

more large scars. There are several examples where these scars reach the center of the

implements' face (Figures 4:1, 6:1). When the two notches are widened in this method,

the large scars are on opposite faces (Figures 7:1, 8:1, 10:1). The most intriguing specimens are bifacially worked. There are two pebbles shaped

by crude and incomplete bifacial flakings (Figure 8:1), and seven where such flakings cover one face (Figures 5:1, 6:2, 8:2). In addition, these implements have small scars of

various kinds at least on one of the short edges (Figures 5:1-2, 7:1, 8:1). These are either

the result of working hard material (use signs), and/or the result of final shaping of the

edge. Furthermore, some of the specimens that are not bifacially flaked also have similar

use signs on one or two edges (Figure 7:2). One of the most outstanding features is the longitudinal asymmetry of the implements.

It is always easy to distinguish between the notches, as one is usually much wider and/or

deeper than the other. However, the notches are always opposed and more or less in the

center of the artefact. When a string is tied through them, the stone is usually balanced.

The last observation concerns the incisions / scratches on the surface of seven pebbles

(Figures 4:2, 5:2, 6:1). On four of the five specimens worked on one face there are such

remains. The lines are usually straight, creating small parallel and diagonal patterns. In



5 8 N ADEL & ZAIDNER

each case the patterns consist of a small number of lines and they never run from

one side to the other. The lines seem to be of two kinds, according to thickness. There

are some very delicate lines (less than 0.5 mm wide), as well as wider ones (more than

1 mm). The lines could not be the result of working the surface, according to these

observations. Rather, they are the result of a sharp tool intentionally used to scratch or

incise the surface of the stone.

THE HAON BEACH FINDS

The site of Haon Beach is located on the eastern shore of the lake, at ca. 211.5/212.5 m

below msl (Nadel 1993). Small stone circles are scattered on an area of several thousand

sq meters. The site was never completely mapped or surveyed, though a systematical collection of finds from one part took place in 1990. Three stone circles were excavated,

but only one yielded diagnostic finds. First, pottery sherds dating to the end of the Roman

period were recovered from within the circle. Second, a small notched pebble was found

in a stony layer directly underlying the circle (Figure 9). Accordingly, the pebble should

be dated to an earlier period. Several pottery sherds were collected from the surface of

the site, belonging to the Early Bronze and Late Roman periods.

Fifty-four notched pebbles were found on the surface and one under the stone circle.

Hard limestone was used in 34 cases, chert in 16 cases and flint in five (Figures 10-12). The shortest is 5.4 cm long, and there are additional 17 specimens not longer than 9 cm,

weighing 25-180 gr. The largest is 13.2 cm long weighing 685 gr (Table 1). These data, as well as the average length (9.4 cm) and weight (277 gr), clearly indicate that the Haon

Beach specimens are smaller and lighter than the Ohalo II ones.

There are 41 specimens with at least one notch prepared by pecking (Figures 10:2-3,

11, 12). Specimens with a wide flaked notch are rare (N=4, Figure 10:1). On one stone

there is a notch shaped by deep incisions (the other by pecking), and there are two cases

of a shallow groove all around the stone. Bifacial examples are absent altogether. There are no incisions similar to the ones recorded for the Ohalo II finds. However,

there is one specimen that has an unusual snake-like groove along one face, though it is

possibly natural. In two cases there are straight short shallow grooves running from one

notch towards the center (Figure 10-3). These could be the result of continuous use of a

string tied around the pebble; more plausibly, they could have been prepared in order to

accommodate a tying string. The Haon Beach site probably functioned as part of a fishing system. This is suggested

by considering the location of the site (on the beach) and the presence of tens of notched

pebbles. There were hardly any other finds near or in the stone circles, apart from isolated

pottery sherds, one large grinding stone and three broken stone bowls. It appears that




%

Figure 10: Notched pebbles from the surface of Haon Beach.



60 NADEL & ZAIDNER

Figure 11 : Notched pebbles from the surface of Haon Beach.




Figure 12: Notched pebbles from the surface of Haon Beach.



62 NADEL & ZAIDNER

fishermen used this location during the Early Bronze Age and the Roman period.

Accordingly, the site reflects two occasions of low water level in the lake.

OTHER SEA OF GALILEE SITES

Two small assemblages were collected from Ohalo I and an alluvial fan between Ohalo

II and Ohalo I.

A. Ohalo I (N=6)

Three implements are made of soft limestone, and three others are made of basalt. The

largest is 18.2 cm long, the longest in the entire collection presented here. Two basalt

implements are also the heaviest of all, 1.3 and 1.6 kg. One of them has a wide shallow

groove around the middle. The other four implements are similar to each other in their

dimensions dimensions (ca. 11-12 cm long).

B. Ohalo II Alluvial Fan (N=4)

These were found on the surface, immediately to the north of Ohalo II (ca. 50-150 m

away). Three are made of soft chalk / limestone and one is made of basalt. In terms of

average dimensions and weight, the finds are extremely similar to those of Ohalo II

assemblage. Two stones have one clear notch, while the other notch is shallow and vague. One of

these implements also has bifacial scars on one edge. In one case the two notches were

prepared by pecking. The basalt implement also has one bifacial edge.

COMPARISON

The Ohalo II and Haon Beach implements differ in several ways. Most of the

Haon Beach stones weigh 150-250 gr, while most of the Ohalo II implements

weigh 200-450 gr (Figure 13). This difference is also apparent in the dimensions (Figure

14, Table 1).

Technologically, there is similarity in the asymmetry of notches observed in many cases at both sites. Nonetheless, the assemblages differ in manufacture techniques. The

bifacial (partial or full, though somewhat crude) is common at Ohalo II and absent at

Haon Beach. Also, the use of pecking was much more common at Haon Beach.

Furthermore, the flake scars at Haon Beach are smaller. Use signs and flake scars on the

short edge are rare at Haon and common at Ohalo II. Incisions were found on seven

specimens at Ohalo II and not recorded for the Haon Beach finds.

It is thus clear that the two assemblages do reflect similar use of stone weights.



UPPER Pt.RTSTOCP.NF. AND MID-HOLOCENE NET SINKERS FROM THE SEA OF GALILEE, ISRAEL 63

10

8

6

4

l HAON

i OH II surf

■ OH II

^ ^ & op V <$ & & # ^ #" #' & ^ # # #

Weight (gr)

Figure 13: Weight of notched pebbles from three Sea of Galilee sites. Note the lighter

weights of the Haon specimens.

12

10

8

6

4

■ , ■ 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-99 100- 110- 120- 130- 140- 150

109 119 129 139 149 159

Length (mm)

HAON

OH II surf

■ OH II

1

Figure 14: Lengths of notched pebbles from three Sea of Galilee sites. Note the smaller

dimensions of the Haon specimens.



64 NADEL & ZAIDNER

However, the details of manufacture differ. These are probably due to the fact that the

Ohalo II assemblage (Early Epipalaeolithic) predates the Haon Beach finds (Early Bronze

and/or Roman) by at least 14,000 radiocarbon years.

DISCUSSION

As notched pebbles are commonly considered as weights/sinkers for fishing nets, it is

worth mentioning two kinds of relevant finds from Ohalo II. First, hundreds of thousands

of fish bones were recovered from in situ hut floors and other installations (Nadel et al.

1994; Irit Zohar, personal communication). Second, small pieces of burnt strings were

found on the floor of brush hut 1 (Nadel et al. 1994). These could be the remains of

baskets or nets, but their size renders further interpretation impossible. The use of the double-notched pebbles is reconstructed on the basis of physical

characteristics, use signs in the notches, ethnography, archaeological provenance and

common sense. One should bear in mind that most of the Ohalo II fish were small (15-25 cm long, see Nadel et al. 1994). Accordingly, catching thousands of small fish would

have been easy by using nets or traps. Some pebbles have abrasion signs in the notches, and it is reasonable to assume that

strings tied around the stones created these. Accordingly, the notched pebbles could

have been used as weights of various kinds, from light net sinkers to heavier net anchors

or trap anchors (Figure 15). In addition, the lighter ones could have been used as sinkers

for fishing lines (see Moore 2000: Figure 176 and ref. there).

Fishing must have been very important in the economy of the Ohalo II people. Fish

are a nutritious food resource, and as they were available year-round in the lake, they could have been a reliable part of the diet. This is unlike most foods, especially fruit,

seeds and certain game species, which are common or nutritious only during a short part of the year. Inhabiting a lake shore with a fishing technology, the locals had a reliable,

highly-nutritious and year-round dietaiy basis. Supplemented at each season with available

vegetal food (Kislev et al. 1992) and animal proteins (Rabinovitch 1998) there was no

need to go elsewhere at any particular time of the year. Identical stones were used for these functions around the world for millennia. At

ancient Egypt such weights are depicted on fishing nets (Brewer and Friedman 1989:

Figure 2.38). Fishermen along the northwest coast of North America also used them in

the 20th century, as well as in the past (Stewart 1981,1982: 31,127). The same is true for

past Japanese fishermen (Matusi 1992, figure. 9; Museum Catalogue 1987). As the largest concentration of double-notched pebbles reported from the Levant derives from two

lakeshore sites, the interpretation of weights used for fishing nets or fishing traps does

seem reasonable.




•/ • \ ■ v. - ••• 'r

Figure 15: Possible use of symmetric and asymmetric notched pebbles from the Sea of

Galilee sites. Reconstructions are based on the presence of stone weights, string fragments and many thousands of fish bones. Top: Net sinkers could be tied to the net or hang from

it. In both cases the knot is accommodated in a wide notch. Bottom: A schematic fishing

trap anchored to the ground by sticks and stones. No "lid" of the trap is presented. Similar

techniques of anchoring traps have been recorded for northwest American Indians, see

Stewart 1981, 1982.



66 NADEL & ZAIDNER

Another aspect concerns the dimensions of the notches. These could reflect the

thickness of the string going through them. If so, the strings could have had a diameter of

up to ca. 1-1.5 cm in most cases. Much thicker strings could not fit most of the notches.

It is also important to note that when held by the notches, the stones are horizontally balanced. Even in cases where the notches are somewhat diagonal to each other, a string

through them will keep the stone balanced.

We suggest that even the specimens with a very wide notch (and an opposed small

one) could have been tied by a string. They could have been trap weights, where the

wide notch is used to fit the base of a trap (a branch or a stick, for example; see Figure 15

and Stewart 1982: 127). They could also have served as net sinkers, with the wide notch

accommodating a thick string, a large knot on the net, etc.

Nonetheless, one has to explain the bifacial flakings and the use signs on edges of

some implements. These elements do not seem to be directly correlated to tying a string around the middle of the stone, or to use as weights in the water. Rather, somewhat

similar to the later Neolithic bifacial tools, they belong to a completely different sphere of technology. It is therefore suggested that some implements were hafted as heads of

crude heavy duty axes/adzes/hammers - maybe to work relatively soft tissues. It is possible that they first served as weights and then converted into a different tool, but it is hard to

conceive that they functioned only as weights. The longitudinal asymmetry of the implements with a wide notch could reflect a

certain hafting technique. Such a hafting secured the stone to a handle and enabled heavy

duty work (similar to documented examples, see Stewart 1981: 50,56, 1982: 127). It

should be stressed that the hafting of larger tools, and even microliths, was asymmetrical

during the entire Upper and Epipalaeolithic periods in the Levant. The Neolithic

arrowheads are the first to show true left-right symmetry (Nadel 1994b). Whatever the

hafting technique was, it should also be remembered that some of the Ohalo II surface

specimens have a wide butt (Figure 5: 1-2). This again could reflect the use of the stone

as a hammer or other heavy-duty implement - and not necessarily as axes of some kind.

It is clear that the weights were used by the Ohalo II fishermen, and most probably by

Early Bronze fishermen, too. The latter seems to be the case for the Haon Beach finds, as

one of them was found under a Roman installation, and as EB pottery sherds are present. In addition, two somewhat similar specimens were found in a sealed Early Bronze context

at Tell Beit Yerah, located immediately to the west of Ohalo II (Nimrod Getzov, personal

communication, January 2000). However, these artefacts are smaller than most of the

finds described here. The notches are somewhat different, and in one pebble they were

exclusively manufactured by deep incisions, a technology very rare in the Haon Beach

assemblage. Furthermore, a pottery fragment of the Band Slip type with two opposed notches was also recovered from Early Bronze context at the Tell (ibid.).




The submerged Sea of Galilee shores have been exposed five times during the last

decade. A systematic survey focusing on prehistoric sites and surface artefacts was

conducted by one of us in 1991 (Nadel 1993) and in 1999. In addition, a devoted amateur

has walked the beaches countless times, recording ancient remains and collecting thousands of artefacts. This collection focused on stone weights of all kinds: from the

smallest implements to the heaviest anchors (Nun 1993). It is of importance to note that

in his survey, Nun hardly found any notched pieces - even not in the many fishermen

installations he identified on the beaches (cautiously ascribed to the Roman period). In

other words, although thousands of worked and natural perforated stones of a wide variety of dimensions and raw materials have been collected, double-notched pebbles were hardly found (apart from the Ohalo II and Haon Beach assemblages). It is reasonable to conclude

that these stones were not in common use around the lake during the Roman period. The

small number of finds at Ohalo I could reflect the presence of another ancient location

where such implements were used. However, other surface finds here include

Epipalaeolithic, late PPNB and Pottery Neolithic flint tools. As there are only five notched

stones, and as there is evidence for the presence of several prehistoric cultures, it is

premature to correlate this small assemblage to any period. It is also possible that these

remains belong to the Ohalo II fishermen, as the site is only several hundred meters from

Ohalo II.

Noteworthy are the patterns of straight lines on some of the Ohalo II pebbles. It is

suggested that these are markings and notations of some kind, with no direct functional

importance (e.g., if the stone was used as a weight or as a heavy duty implement). Incisions,

striations and notations were found on animal bones. The most elaborate one found in a

grave, behind the skull of an adult male (Rabinovitch and Nadel 1994-95; Nadel 1994;

Nadel and Hershkovitz 1991). Some incised artefacts, including a limestone bowl

fragment, come from floor 13, where two in situ double-notched specimens were found.

A cursory survey of the Near Eastern literature concerning Late Pleistocene - Early Holocene sites reveals that double-notched stones were not in common use. The earliest

documentation of their use (excluding Ohalo II) is in Natufian sites. At Eynan, a large Natufian site on the edge of the Hulah lake, four specimens were found during the early

years of excavations (Perrot 1966: figure 20:1-4), and one in recent work (Valla et al.

1999: figure 11:3). The Eynan specimens are ca. 4-6 cm long, and relatively narrow and

thin. These are much smaller than most of the Sea of Galilee pebbles. Nonetheless, at

least one of them has a notch with a large flaking scar. This implement is very similar in

technology and asymmetry to some of the Ohalo II finds (Perrot 1966: figure 20:4). It

should be noted that although a large volume of the Eynan site has been excavated, the

number of reported notched stones is very small.

Twenty-five specimens were reported from the Natufian layer at Tell Abu Hureyra



68 NADEL & ZAIDNER

(Moore et al. 1975: figure 5:38,39; Moore 2000: figure 7.14). The length of most notched

pebbles is 8-13 cm, while none are thicker than 2.5 cm. The opposed notches were

shaped by flakings, and in four of the illustrated pebbles one notch is much wider than

the other. The weight of 20 specimens ranges between 43-700 gr, with an average of

285.15 gr. It is noteworthy that 13 pebbles weigh between 215-484 gr. The Abu Hureyra finds form the largest Natufian sample, second in number only to the assemblages

reported here. This Natufian sample is large enough for comparisons. Indeed, in shape and simple technology the sample is similar to Ohalo II, with almost identical average

weight (285 gr for Abu Hureyra and 290 gr for the Ohalo II in situ finds). The most

outstanding difference is the lack of bifacial shaping on any of the Abu Hureyra

pebbles. One notched specimen was reported from the Natufian site of Jayroud 9. It is a

bifacially worked stone, ca. 10 cm long (Cauvin 1991: figure 6:2). The two sides are

concave and asymmetrical, with a wide notch on one side. Although Natufian, the

resemblance to the Ohalo II bifacial notched specimens is higher than to the small Eynan ones.

Several Neolithic sites have yielded isolated finds. One was reported from Demirkoy

Hoyuk in Turkey, belonging to the early aceramic Neolithic (Rosenberg and Peasnall

1998: figure 3:3). The specimen is narrow and thin, almost 10 cm long. It has two opposed and flaked notches, one evidently wider and deeper than the other.

At Khirokitia one double-notched pebble is of particular interest (Le Brun 1989:

figure 53:1). It is oval and ca. 7 cm long, and the two notches are small and not flaked.

The presence of straight incisions on one face makes it look very similar to some of the

Sea of Galilee specimens. One example of a double-notched pebble from Darkvety-shelter, a Neolithic site in

the southern Caucasus, was recently published (Korobkova 1996: figure 4). The stone is

ca.ca. 8 cm long, and the two notches look alike.

Returning back to the Jordan Valley, the Sha'ar Hagolan site yielded a large number

of worked pebbles, including the largest assemblage of Pottery-Neolithic figurines.

However, double-notched implements are rare. The nearest published example is a pebble with two concave sides. The concavities are large and deep, and there are incisions on

the surface (Garfinkel 1999). The resemblance to the double-notched pebbles discussed

here is low, and it could belong to a different sphere of technology and use. Two pebbles with concave sides were also reported from the Neolithic layers of Tel Eli (Prausnitz 1970: figure 32).

One should note that no implements of the kind discussed here were found in any of

the Carmel Coast submerged Neolithic sites, although at least some of them were

fishermen villages, and they are more or less contemporaneous to the above-mentioned




Neolithic sites (Galili personal communication, January 2000; Nadel personal

observations). This paper focused on the double-notched pebbles. However, there are pebbles that

were shaped in more elaborate ways. The most relevant here are the ones with a groove around them. It is reasonable to suggest that the groove was used for tying a string around the stone. However, in some cases the grooved stones seem to belong to the

realm of imagery. Such grooved stones are common in many parts of the world throughout later prehistoric and historic times. As they are not the center of this study, a survey of

their technological, chronological and cultural characteristics will not be presented here.

To conclude, double-notched pebbles were used as tackle in many continents and

from Palaeolithic times onwards. The preparation of the weights was very simple, and

usually did not require sophisticated technology. In the Levant, notched weights are

uncommon, and stone weights with a hole are more common from the later Neolithic

onwards. At Ohalo II, both notching the pebbles and modifying them in a crude bifacial

manner are unique phenomena and are unknown from other broadly contemporaneous sites. Indeed, if some of the Ohalo II double-notched implements were used as sinkers of

fishing nets, or weights of fishing traps, they represent the oldest fishing gear so far

retrieved from a prehistoric site in the Levant.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We wish to thank Pierre Vermeersch and Philip Van Peer for the opportunity to see the

Nazlet Khater 4 material and for sharing their data with us. We also wish to thank Nimrod

Getzov for showing us the Beit Yerah Early Bronze material, and Mendel Nun and Yoel

Ben-Yosef for showing us their finds from the shores of the lake. We thank Francois

Valla for providing useful information concerning Eynan, and Debbi Hershman for letting us look at the Israel Museum exhibits and archives. We also appreciate the suggestions of two anonymous reviewers. Polina Spivak prepared the drawings. Figure 2 is by courtesy of the Israel Antiquities Authority. The Ohalo II - Sea of Galilee project was generously

supported by the Irene Levi Sala CARE Archaeological Foundation, the Jerusalem Center

for Anthropological Studies, the L.S.B. Leakey Foundation, MAFCAF, the National

Geographic Society, the M. Stekelis Museum of Prehistory in Haifa and the Israel

Antiquities Authority (license numbers: 1989- 1634; 1990- 1724, 1725; 1991 -93/91;

1998 - G-160; 1999 - G-61, G-69; 2000 - G-20). We also wish to thank Chen Lamdan

for generously supporting the project.



70 NADEL & ZAIDNER

BIBLIOGRAPHY Brewer D.J. and Friedman R.F. 1989. Fish and Fishing in Ancient Egypt. The Natural History of

Egypt, Vol.11. Warminster: Aris and Phillips. Cauvin M.C. 1991. Du Natoufien au Levant Nord? Jayroud et Mureybet (Syrie). In Bar-Yosef O. and

Valla F.R. (eds.), The Natufian Culture in the Levant, pp. 295-314. Ann Arbor: International

Monographs in Prehistory, Archaeological Series 1.

Garfinkel Y. 1999. The Yarmukians. Neolithic Art from Sha 'arHagolan. Jerusalem: Bible Land Museum.

Kislev M.E., Nadel D. and Carmi I. 1992. Epipalaeolithic (19,000) cereal and fruit diet at Ohalo II,

Sea of Galilee, Israel. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 73: 161-166.

Korobkova G.F. 1996. The Neolithic chipped stone industries of the southern Caucasus. In Kozlowski

S.K. and Gebel H.G.K. (eds.), Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent and their

Contemporaries Contemporaries in Adjacent Regions, pp. 57-89. Studies in Early Near Eastern Production,

Subsistence and Environment 3. Berlin: ex-oriente.

Le Brun A. 1989. Fouilles Recentes à Khirokitia (Chypre) 1983-1986. Paris: Editions Recherche sur

les Civilisations, Mémoire no. 81.

Matusi A. 1992. Wetland sites in Japan. In Coles B. (ed.), The Wetland Revolution in Prehistory, pp. 5

14. Exeter: WARP Occasional Papers 6, The Prehistoric Society.

Moore A.M.T., Hillman G.C. and Legge A.F. 1975. Excavations of Tell Abu Hureyra. Proceedings of the the Prehistoric Society 41: 50-77.

Moore, A.M.T., Hillman G.C. and Legge A.F 2000. Village on the Euphrates. From Foraging to

Farming Farming at Abu Hureyra. Oxford: Oxford University Press [including tables in the web site:

http://www.rit.edu.http://www.rit.edu. asbuhureyra].

Moore, A.M.T. 2000. Stone and other artifacts. In Moore A.M.T., Hillman G.C. and Legge A.F (eds.),

Village Village on the Euphrates. From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra, pp. 165-186. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

Museum Catalogue 1987. Special Exhibition: Archaeology of Fishing Gear, Catching Fishes. Sakai:

Sakai City Museum.

Nadel D. 1993. Submerged archaeological sites on the shores of Lake Kinneret, Israel. 'Atiqot (English

Series) XXII: 1-12.

Nadel D. 1994a. Levantine Upper Palaeolithic - Early Epipalaeolithic burial customs: Ohalo II as a

case study. Paléorient 20(1): 113-121.

Nadel D. 1994b. New symmetry of Early Neolithic tools: arrowheads and truncated elements. In

Gebel H.G.K. and Kozlowski S.K. (eds.), Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent,

pp. 407-421. Studies in Early Near Eastern Production, Subsistence and Environment I. Berlin:

ex-oriente.ex-oriente.

Nadel D. 1999. Scalene and proto-triangles from Ohalo II. Mitekufat Haeven, Journal of the Israel

Prehistoric Prehistoric Society 29: 5-16.

Nadel D. and Hershkovitz 1.1991. New subsistence data and human remains from the earliest Levantine

Epipalaeolithic. Current Anthropology 32(5): 631-635.

Nadel D., Danin A., Werker E., Schick T., Kislev M.E. and Stewart K. 1994.19,000 years-old twisted

fibers from Ohalo II. Current Anthropology 35(4): 451-458.

Nadel D., Carmi I. and Segal D. 1995. Radiocarbon dating of Ohalo II: archaeological and

methodological implications. Journal of Archaeological Science 22(6): 811-822.

Nadel D. and Werker E. 1999. The oldest ever brush hut plant remains from Ohalo II, Jordan Valley, Israel (19 ka BP). Antiquity 73 (282): 755-764.

Nun M. 1993. Ancient Stone Anchors and Net Sinkers from the Sea of Galilee. Kibbutz Ein Gev:

Tourist Department and Kinnereth Sailing Co.

Perrot J. 1966. Le gisement Natoufien de Mallaha (Eynan), Israel. L'Anthropologie 70 (5-6): 437-484.



UPPER PLEISTOCENE AND MID-HOLOCENE NET SINKERS FROM THE SEA OF GALILEE, ISRAEL 7 J

Prausnitz M.W. 1970. From Hunter to Farmer and Trader: studies in the lithic industries of Israel and

adjacent adjacent countries (from the Mesolithic to the Chalcolithic age). Jerusalem: Habelt.

Rabinovich, R. 1998. Patterns of Animal exploitation and subsistence in Israel during the Upper Palaeolithic Palaeolithic and Epipalaeolithic (40,000-12,500 BP), based upon selected case studies.

Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, The Hebrew University, Jerusalem.

Rabinovich R. and Nadel D. 1994-5. Bone tools from Ohalo II - a morphological and functional study.

MitekufatMitekufat Haeven, Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society 26: 32-62.

Rosenberg M. and Peasnall B. 1998. A report on soundings at Demirkoy Hoyuk: an Aceramic Neolithic

site in eastern Anatolia. Anatolica XXIV: 195-207.

Simmons A.H. and Mandel R. 1998. Test excavations at Akrotiri-Aetokremnos (Site E), an early

prehistoric occupation in Cyprus: preliminary report. Report of the Department of Antiquities

Cyprus,Cyprus, 1988 (Part 1), pp. 15-24. Nicosia-Cyprus. Stewart H. 1981. Artifacts of the Northwest Coast Indians. Hancock House Publishers.

Stewart H. 1982. Indian Fishing. Early Methods on the Northwest Coast. Vancouver: Douglas and

Mclntyre. Valla F.R., Bocquentin F., Plisson H., Khalaily H., Delage C., Rabinovitch R., Samuelian N., Valentin

B. and Belfer-Cohen A. 1999. Le Natoufien final et les nouvelles fouilles a Mallaha (Eynan), Israel 1996-1997. Mitekufat Haeven, Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society 28: 105-176.

Vermeersch P.M., Paulissen E., Gijselings G., Otte M., Thoma A„ Van Peer P. and Lauwers R. 1984.

33,000-yr old chert mining site and related Homo in the Egyptian Nile Valley. Nature 309: 342

344. Vermeersch P.M., Paulissen E. and Van Peer P. 1990. Palaeolithic chert exploitation in the limestone

stretch of the Egyptian Nile Valley. The African Archaeological Review 8: 77-102.



upper pleistocene and middle holocene net sinkers from the sea of galilee, israel

Documents