sign in sign up
<<
Home , Bouqras, Jericho, Mureybet, Yarmukian culture

The Walls of : An Alternative Interpretation

The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters

Citation Bar-Yosef, O. 1986. The Walls of Jericho: An Alternative Interpretation. Current Anthropology 27, no. 2: 157-162.

Published Version doi:10.1086/203413

Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:12211567

Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA sitionalevents in this area; these sectionsare based on Ken- REPORTS yon's fielddrawings and writtendescriptions (Kenyon 1981). The available 14C dates as reportedby Burleigh(1981, 1983) are shownin boththe table and the figure.The firstNeolithic The Walls of Jericho:An Alternative occupationswere labelled "Proto-"by KenyQn,but the lithicanalysis of Crowfoot-Payne(1983) has demonstrated Interpretation' thatthe assemblage,mainly derived from a limitedexcavation in Square M, does not differfrom the restof the Pre- Neolithic A (henceforthPPNA) assemblages. This industry by 0. BAR-YOSEF was renamed "Sultanian" and has since been found at two Institute of ,Hebrew University, in Schulden- 91905, . 30 VI 85 additionalsites the JordanValley- (Noy, rein, and Tchernov 1980) and Netiv Hagdud (Bar-Yosef, "The walls of Jericho"immediately remind us of the biblical Gopher,and Goring-Morris1980). storydescribing the conquest of this ancienttown by It is onlysubsequent to theearliest occupations that the free- and the invadingIsraelite army. Like the Homericepic about standingwall and towerwere built. The firstperimeter wall, the destructionof Troy, which motivatedH. Schliemannto 3.6 m high,was 1.8 m thickat its base and only 1.1 m at its conductone of the firstexcavations in the , so the preservedtop. The tower,placed inside the perimeterof the tale of Jerichohas made the site attractiveto scholarsinter- settlement,was 8.2 m high(ca. 9 m in diameterat thebase and ested in revealing biblical remains beneath the dust. The 7 m at thetop) and builtof undressedstones. It had a staircase mound of es-Sultanin the JordanValley has long been leading to the top with 22 steps built of dressed slabs. Its confidentlyequated withthe biblicalJericho, and the wish to preservedoutlet seems to be the originalone. No roomswere uncoverthe walls that collapsed at the blast of the Israelite foundinside the tower.The available 14C dates indicatethat trumpetshas led to a seriesof excavations at themound (fig. 1). the constructionoccurred between 8300 B.C. and 7800 B.C., The pioneerwas C. Warren,who dug a fewholes in 1873 but whichmay mean around 8000 B.C. as estimatedby Kenyon. thenabandoned the site and wenton to excavatein Jerusalem. Stages IV-V consistedof the buildingof an additionalwall The Germans E. Sellin and C. Watzingerdug a series of (or only the thickeningof the firstwall) and the diggingof a trenchesbetween 1907 and 1909, and theywere followedby ditch in frontof it, probablybecause the continuousrapid J. Garstang,1930-36, and K. Kenyon, 1952-58. alluviationwas endangeringthe existing structures. The tower While the town walls destroyedby Joshua'sarmy have not was an extremelyheavy structure (about 1,000tons) and prob- been found,a seriesof Early Bronze-and Middle Bronze-Age ably experienceddifferential subsidence of the underlying slip- walls and an impressiverampart have been uncoveredand perymarl. There is clear archaeologicalevidence that it had to studiedin detail. Beneath the biblicalJericho, first Garstang's be repairedat thisstage. and later the major excavationsof Kenyon uncoveredthick The ditch was filledrapidly, motivating the additionof a depositsof very early Pre-Pottery Neolithic occupation. A par- thirdwall, and at the same period the staircasewas blocked ticularlysurprising discovery made by Kenyon in the basal (Stages VI and VIA). Continuousaccumulations on bothsides layersof thisoccupation was the existenceof a massive stone consistingof naturalaggradation enriched with occupational perimeterwall. It is withthe interpretation of this wall and the debris on the westernface and occupationalremains on the towerassociated with it thatthis paper is concerned.The re- easternface caused thewalls to go out ofuse, leavingthe tower cent publicationof the finalarchaeological reports, a project stillsomewhat elevated above its surroundings.The 14Cread- forwhich T. A. Holland is to be congratulated,makes it possi- ings pointto a date of ca. 7400-7300 B.C. In thefinal stage of ble to reexamineKenyon's conclusions using her own detailed the PPNA periodthe perimeterwall was entirelyburied. observations(Kenyon 1981; Kenyonand Holland 1982, 1983). The lower courses of the PPNA perimeterwall were also The oldest remains at Jerichoare dated to the Natufian foundin the northerntrench (Trench II) and were somewhat culture,though not to its latestphase as recentlydefined (Bar- betterpreserved in the southerntrench (Trench III). In these Yosef 1981a, Valla 1984). Then, followinga gap of nearlya instancesthe wall was thinner,only 1.4 m and 1.6 m respec- millennium(ca. 9200-8350 B.C.), thesite was settledby one of tively.At thenorthern end ofthe settlement the perimeter wall theearly farming communities. The occupiedarea was a mod- was heavilydamaged by a floodingwadi which leftonly the eratelysloping plain formedby the retreatof the Late Pleis- lowercourse of stonesunder a channelsome 15 m wide toceneLisan Lake (fig.1). The plain is coveredby brownsoils and about 1.5 m deep in itscentral thalweg. That thewadi was and gravelswashed in by Wadi Nuceima,Wadi el-Mafjar,and able to wash away a supposedlystone wall is somewhatunex- Wadi Qilt, formingthe arable land of the Jerichooasis. pected, given the presenceof softoccupation levels on either Table 1 summarizesthe main constructionand destruction side; perhapsit was a mud-brickconstruction on stonefounda- eventsin the area of Trench I and squares FI, DI, and DII, tions. In the southerntrench the truncationof the already wherethe walls, the tower,and adjacent buildingswere par- buried PPNA layers is interpretedas resultingfrom severe tiallyexposed. Figure 2 tentativelyreconstructs the main depo- floodingin Wadi el-Mafjar. Kenyonconcluded that the oval mound of Jerichowas en- circledby a defensivewall enclosingan area of 2.4 hectares (originallymiscalculated as 4.0). Her estimateof 3,000-4,000 ' ? 1986 by The Wenner-GrenFoundation for Anthropological Re- forthe site's populationis too high in view of the size of the search,all rightsreserved 0011-3204/86/2702-0005$1.00. The reexami- site, and the resultsof recent ethnoarchaeologicalresearch nationof some of the archaeological problems of Jericho stemmed from (Kramer 1982) point to an estimateof 400-900. Additional researchon Early Neolithicsites in the Lower JordanValley. Field- work was fundedby the Wenner-GrenFoundation for Anthropolog- walls, also interpretedby Kenyonas "town walls," were un- ical Research (1980-81) and by the National Geographic Society coveredin the westerntrench and dated to the followingpe- (1983-84), to whomI am verygrateful for their support. I would like riod, the Pre-PotteryNeolithic B (ca. 7300-6000 B.C.). These to thankP. Goldbergand A. Gopherof the Instituteof Archaeology, were slantingwalls built of large undressedstones, retaining Hebrew University,for many useful discussions in the field;GI. the earlierlevels. Both the picturesof the walls and the draw- and J. Merkel of the Peabody Museum, Harvard University,and Z. ing ofthe trench-section clearly show that,as has been pointed Herzog of the Instituteof Archaeology,Tel Aviv University,for their helpfulcomments on an earlierdraft; and B. Isaac forthe drawings.I out by Mellaart (1975:59), thesewere retainingwalls. am, however,fully responsible for any shortcomingsof the present Kenyon'sinterpretations of her strikingdiscoveries may be version. summarizedas follows:

Vol. 27 * No. 2 * April 1986 157

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Sun, 11 May 2014 22:17:58 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 'I~~~~~~Q

\) ,

.0 0 0 o.. JFF~ICHO` *.o .

00 O~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~0 kml

...... *--~~~~~~~~~~~JERICHO

FIG. 1. The topographicsituation of the tellof Jericho. Note the low ridge,immediately west of the tell,bordered by Wadi Nuceimain thenorth and Wadi el-Mafjarin the south. Topographyis shownin 10-rncontours. Today's springrises on the mid-easteredge of the tell.

1. The presenceof a thick,free-standing wall and a tower that period and the specific location of Jericho and the indicatea communaleffort to fortifythe settlement. (The effort geomorphicprocesses that may have influencedits history. requiredto build the perimeterwall was later calculated by The evolutionof prehistoricentities as representedin the Dorrell[1978] as about a week's worthfor 200 men; a recalcu- archaeologicalrecord has recentlybeen studiedin depthin the lationbased on a morerealistic estimate of 0.5 m3per man per various geographicunits of the Near East (Sinai, the Negev, day yieldsa figureof 10,400work days or about 104 workdays Edom, the Valley, the Damascus plateau, the El for 100 men). Kowm basin, and the Middle EuphratesValley). On the basis 2. As a walled site, Jerichodeserves to be called a "town" of such featuresas site size, lithic and faunal assemblages, and is thereforecomparable to thelater Near Easternfortified topographiclocations, and zonal distribution,some general towns. trendshave been discerned(Cauvin 1978; Bar-Yosef1981a, b; Both in the site reportsand in her popular summary(Ken- Henry 1983; Moore 1985). Withoutelaboration, these major yon 1957), Kenyon avoided a certain numberof intriguing developmentsmay be summarizedas a sequence of changes questions: which took place from 11/12,000B.C. through6000 B.C. 1. Who were the enemiesof Jerichothat justified this com- mainlyin the Mediterraneanand Irano-Turanianvegetation munal effort,especially the investmentin erectingthe tower? zones, which shiftedbecause of climaticfluctuations (Butzer 2. When the walls and the towerof the PPNA periodwent 1978, Van Zeist, and Bottema 1982, Bintliff1982). out of use because of the naturalaccumulation of house debris The firstchange took place when small mobile groupsof and refuseboth inside and outsidethe settlement,why did the hunter-gatherersbecame partiallyor fullysedentary; long-term inhabitantsnot at once build new "townwalls"? occupiedsites accommodated larger bands (perhapsup to 50- 3. Why was a terracewall sufficientfortification during the 80 persons).This change is associatedwith the emergenceof PPNB period? the Natufianculture, best recordedfrom the excavationsof 4. Whyis thereno recordof otherfortified sites in theNear base camps such as Eynan (Ain Mallaha), HayonimCave and East eitherat the timeor thereafterup to about 5500 B.C.? Terrace,El-Wad Cave and Terrace,and Nahal Oren Terrace 5. Why was the towerat Jerichobuilt not on the outsideof (Perrot1966, Valla 1984, Bar-Yosefand Goren 1973, Garrod the wall, where its projectionwould enable the defendersto and Bate 1937, Noy, Legge, and Higgs 1973). The Natufian shootattackers trying to climbit, but on the inside? economywas based on gathering(for which the evidence is To reconsiderKenyon's interpretation we mustexplore the ratherscanty due to poor preservationin Mediterraneansoils), generalevolution of prehistoriccultures in the Near East at hunting(mainly gazelle, fallow , roe deer,wild boar, ibex,

158 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Sun, 11 May 2014 22:17:58 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions TABLE 1

SEQUENCE OF STAGES IN THE WESTERN SECTOR OF JERICHO

STRUCTURE

STAGE Walls Tower OtherStructures 14C DATE B.C.

I "Proto-Neolithic,"no (BM-106) 8350 ? 200 structures II PPNA houses III "Town Wall" I Tower (BM-105) 8300 + 200 IV FI, DII enclosures (P-378) 7825 ? 110 (BM-1327) 7610 + 65 IVA DI "silo" (BM-1322) 7430 + 85 V "Town Wall" II added, (BM-250) 8350 + 500 infillingchipped from ditchin frontof it VI Ditch siltedup "Skin Wall" added Enclosuresdestroyed (BM-251) 7440 + 150 (P1. 236 JIll) VIA Staircaseblocked, 12 "Silo" burned;rounded (P-379) 7705 ? 84 bodies inserted house built (BM-1323) 7430 + 85 VII "Town Wall" III added "Skin Wall" rebuilt Houses alteredand rebuilt; on top of I and II House AE builtover "Town Wall" III VIIA "Town Walls" out of use VIIIA Top rebuilt(?) Houses rebuilt;erosion begins (BM-1787) 7330 + 100 (BM-1321) 7280 + 80 (BM-1326) 7280 + 220 (BM-152) 7330 + 150 VIIIB Tower out of use Fire VIIIC Ceremonialstructure in Fl IX Fill almostreaches top Domesticstructures (BM-110) 8230 + 200 of tower (BM-1789) 7250 + 70 X Contractionof site, domesticstructures XI Expansion,houses in TrenchI (west of tower) Erosionalphase

SOURCES. Kenyon(1981), Kenyonand Holland (1982, 1983) etc.), and fishing,mainly in inlandlakes such as Hula Lake, on "FertileCrescent." Many commonfeatures in art,ritual, mor- the shoresof which the site of Eynan was established(Bar- tuarypractices, and the use of prestigegoods, not detailed Yosef 1983). here,point to thepresence of close contactsthrough gift giving, Despite the expansion of the Natufianculture northward exchange,and "down-the-line"trade over most of the Near intothe Middle EuphratesValley and southwardto theNegev, East and especiallyin the (Renfrewand Dixon 1976, small groupsof hunter-gathererspersisted in the deserticre- Mellaart 1975, Cauvin 1978, Moore 1985). gions. There is no archaeologicalevidence, in the formof burned The establishmentof farmingcommunities cultivating both settlements,the remainsof mass massacres,or fortifications, pulses and (wheat and )took place duringthe forthe existenceof social aggressionin the Levant beforethe PPNA period ('4C-dated ca. 8300-7300 B.C.). Huntingwas 6th millenniumB.C. This is not to say that there were no onlypartially replaced during the PPNB period(ca. 7300-6000 rivalriesthat ended in some fighting,but the archaeological B.C.) by the introductionof domesticatedsheep and recordas shown in the deep stratigraphiesof many tell sites (Clutton-Brock1981, Davis 1982, Smith,Bar-Yosef, and Sil- (such as ,Abu Hureyra,, Ramad, Asswad, len 1984). Presumablythese were herded fromthe Zagros Jericho,Ain Ghazal, and Netiv Hagdud) was mainlyformed () area, where the evidence fortheir from by the naturalcollapse and subsequentrebuilding of or local game is substantial,into the Levantinelandscape (Hesse mud-brickhouses. The noncontemporaryerection of mud 1982).However, it is notimpossible that goats, although only a houses (sometimeson stone foundations)created what is verysmall fractionof the previouslyhunted Levantine fauna, knownin archaeologicaljargon as "spiral stratigraphy";new were domesticatedlocally.. The economyof the PPNB sites, buildinglayers are not recognizableover the entirearea of a situated in fertileareas such as the Valley, the given tell, each excavation area having its own sequence of Damascus plain, theTrans-Jordanian plateau, and theJordan buildingevents (Kramer 1983). On rareoccasions general plan- and JezreelValleys, was based on legumesand cultiva- ningcan be seen (as in thecase of Tell Bouqras), but it is in no tionwith some huntingand herding.In its finalphase, at the way interpretableas rebuildingafter total destructioncaused end of the 7th millenniumB.C., cattleraising commenced. by warfare(Akkermans, Fokkens, and Waterbolk1981). Duringthis period, climatic amelioration favoured the con- Most LevantineNeolithic sites are partiallyand sometimes tinued occupation of the desertsby hunter-gatherers.Their even completelyburied in alluvial deposits.This is thecase in sitesare foundeverywhere in the Negev, Sinai, and the Syro- the , where sites like Beisamoun, Tell cEli, Arabian desert. It is quite possible that the "desert kites," Shacar HaGolan, Munhatta,and Netiv Hagdud have at least trappingdevices forherd animals consistingof two long low- theirbasal layersbeneath the surfacelevel of the surrounding lyingwalls leadingto an enclosure(often below a small cliff), depositsand in many cases are entirelycovered by wereconstructed in orderto supplymeat to thefarmers of the these deposits (Lechevallier 1978, Prausnitz 1970, Stekelis

Vol. 27 * No. 2 * April 1986 159

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Sun, 11 May 2014 22:17:58 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions STAGES III-IV (ca.8000-7800bc _7_| 4 STAGES Vll-VIl (ca.7500-7400 bc)r_ ? - l g 5 ;+ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~r--- --n

House AE in Sq FT "Town Wall"I.

2 STAGE V (ca. 7800-7600bc) - - | 5 STAGE Vill (ca.7400-7300 bc)

\'?II ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~Si

Wall"

/ - - - \ I, T -7 - /1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~z

3 STAGES Vl-VII (ca7600-7500bc) 6 STAGES IX-XI (ca.7300-7200 bc)

House

"Town Wall"iW NIA 11 ~~~~~~~~~~

WEST "EAST

FIG. 2. Reconstructedsequence of depositionaland buildingevents as identifiedby K. Kenyonin Trench I. Major stages are indicated. The estimateddates are derivedfrom the listof '4C determinationsgiven in table 1. The brokenline marksthe suggestedreconstructions of the walls and a (?).

1972, Perrot 1964, Bar-Yosef, Gopher, and Goring-Morris The situationof Neolithic sites, especiallythe early ones, 1980). Similar phenomena have been observed in the hilly near watercoursesand in low-lyingareas possiblyreflects the areas, at Abu Ghosh and Yiftahel(Lechevallier 1978, Lamdan desireof theirinhabitants to have drinkingand washingwater and Davis 1983), in the Negev, at Nahal Issaron (Goring- immediatelyavailable and to live close to fieldsthat made use Morrisand Gopher1983), and along thecoastal plain, at Neve ofreadily cultivated soils on alluvial fansand terraces.In some Yam (Wreschner1977). The same situationhas apparently cases the potentialfor simple irrigationmay have been an been observedin otherregions of the Near East. Indeed, even added incentive.Despite the limitednumber of palynological sites of later periods, when located in proximityto wadi recordsfrom lakes (Van Zeist and Bottema 1982) and their courses,are partiallyor entirelyburied. Such is the case with partial disagreement,it seems that both PPNA and PPNB the Chalcolithicsites in Wadi Fazael (JordanValley), along periodshad more favourableclimatic conditions than today. Nahal Beer Sheva and Nahal Besor (northernNegev), and on Average annual temperatureswere somewhatlower, the sea the coastal plain (e.g., Olesh). The Early Bronze I site of cEn was continuallyrising, achieving its maximumheight only a Shadud (JezreelValley) indicates that even sites as late as millenniumlater, and the distributionof annual around 3000 B.C. may have been buried (Braun and Gibson resultedin betterspread of Mediterraneanforests and richer 1984). The sectiondrawing from Trench I in Jerichoclearly Irano-Turaniansteppes. Geomorphologicalevidence supports shows that Kenyon observed this phenomenon.Alluvial de- thisgeneral picture and indicatesthat the 7thmiLllennium B.C. positsfilled the ditch dug by the Neolithicinhabitants. Stream was wetterthan the previous or followingones, permittingthe flowremoved the PPNA wall on the northernedge of the tell existenceof inland lakes in , Trans-Jordan,Arabia, the and levelledthe top of the PPNA depositsin TrenchIII. JordanValley, and otherintermontane valleys. The aggrada-

160 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Sun, 11 May 2014 22:17:58 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions tionaldeposits in alluvial fansshow fewlarge boulders such as posed a terracewall, 2 m high and at least 50 m long, which thosecarried by severefloods in historicaland presenttimes. It protectedthe wadi terraceon whichthe site was builtfrom the seems that the annual floodingof terracesand alluvial fans flowingwater. Kirkbride never claimed that this wall was part provideda new veneerof soil whichin the absence of organic ofa defensivesystem, because in herfirst sounding she founda fertilizersmade possible almost continuouscultivation. This staircasebuilt on its outerface. She interpretedthe wall as a kind of annual or semiannualsheetwash and mudflow,how- supportfor the sandy terraceon which this PPNB -sitewas ever, requiredsome kind of protectionfor settlements located built, but in realityit could have been a protectionagainst amongstthe fields. A defensesystem providing protection from constantdenudation by water undercuttingthe terrace. Fi- natural activitiescan be a simple one-a water-diverting nally,either in PPNB timesor laterthe entirewadi was filled trench-or a more sophisticatedone, given the situationand up and the terracewall buriedin a sandy-graveldeposit. the capabilitiesof the inhabitants. Undoubtedlymore testing is needed at othersites, and good The tellof Jericho is, as I have said, locatedon what used to candidatesfor such an operationwill be those located in the be a moderatelysloping plain whichformed the residual land- JordanValley. For example,the PPNA moundof Netiv Hag- scape of a recedinglake. The marlswhich form the bedrock at dud is situated350 m fromthe apex of an alluvial fan, just Jerichoaccumulated in this lake, which regressedfrom this wherethe wadi comes out ontothe plain (Bar-Yosef,Gopher, area ca. 11,000B.C. On the westside, theJericho sector of the and Goring-Morris1980). This shallow tell(ca. 4 m high)was slope is protectedby a low ridge,ca. 2 kmlong, which more or totallycovered on its westernside by sand and gravelaccumu- less encirclesthe area (fig. 1). Two borderthis ridge, lations.The resultsof past water activityare visible,and the Wadi Nuceimaat the northernend and Wadi el-Mafjarat the questionis, Did the inhabitantsof Netiv Hagdud need to do southern.Wadi el-Mafjardescends from the Judean Hills and somethingabout it? Only furtherexcavations will enable us to has a small drainagebasin (ca. 20 kM2); the apex of its former resolvethis question. alluvialfan is onlyabout 500 m fromthe tell. That thewadis of Untilnow an alternativeinterpretation for the tower has not the regiononce carriedmore water than theydo todayseems been discussed.The laterhistory of Near Easternfortifications obvious fromthe erosionreported by Kenyonon the northern seemsto ruleout its use as partof a fortress.Perhaps the most edge of the mound. Heavy sedimentdischarge from the wadis intriguingthing about it is its finestate of preservation. would be expectedwith an increasein directprecipitation on In view of the erosionalphase whichoccupied the timegap theJudean Hills but perhapsalso would have come as a result betweenthe PPNA periodand theonset of the PPNB period,it of vegetationaldestruction caused by the local inhabitants. is surprisingthat such a building remained almost intact. The cuttingof wood (e.g., poplar, tamarisk,willow, oak, fig) Moreover,while the height of PPNA depositsin otherparts of and bushesis evidentnot only in thelarge amounts of charcoal the mound is 3.5-4.5 m, in the area of the tower the total in the archaeologicaldeposits but also in the use-wearvisible thicknessamounts to 8.5 m (includingthe so-called Proto- on the cuttingedges of the axes-adzes (Western1983, Keeley Neolithic). The special mud-brickstructures uncovered by 1983). To what extentfire became a tool forland clearingis Kenyonon the northernside of the towerhave been described unknown, although botanical studies following fires in as "watertanks" which later servedas silos (Kenyon1981) or Mediterraneanmaquis have shown that it has none of the "tanningvats" (Marshall 1982). The constructionof water advantagesthere that it has in tropicalor temperatezones. reservoirsonly 80 m froma bountifulspring seems highly un- Given all the available data, it seems thata plausiblealter- likelyand indicatesthat Kenyon's interpretation was based on nativeinterpretation for the Neolithicwalls of Jerichois that herview thatJericho was a fortifiedtown which, like thoseof theywere built in stagesas a defensesystem against floods and the Iron Age, needed water supplies inside the walls. The mudflows.The PPNA inhabitantsof Jericho chose to live near locationof the springon the easternedge of the moundpoints a copious spring on a sloping plain which was subject to to thepossibility of its being included within the perimeter wall mudflowsand sheetwash.Their responsewas to build a wall circumference,if thiswall did indeed encirclethe entiresite. and then,when necessary, dig a ditch.The necessityfor better The archaeologicalremains indicate that the towerwas a protectionon thewestern side would explainthe varying thick- special structureand perhaps held a special place withinthe ness of the wall, whichduring Stages IV-VI was ca. 3.5 m in settlement.A preliminarycomposite north-south cross-section the west but remainedonly 1.4-1.6 m in the northand the of the tell, based on the available drawn sections(Kenyon south.The dangersof erosionare evidentin thedestruction of 1981), indicatesthat the towercreated a bump in the general the wall on the northernedge of Jerichoat the end of the topographicconfiguration of the tell, and I would ventureto PPNA or before.Later, in PPNB days, the tell was presum- predict that there was only one tower in the Pre-Pottery ably highenough to stand above the floods,and such protec- NeolithicA of Jericho.The preservationof its top would be tion as may have been necessarywas providedby a simple explainedif one postulatedthat it had been capped by a mud- terracerevetment. Moreover, this terrace wall couldhave been bricksuperstructure (fig. 2). The presenceof the storage facili- just a structuraldevice to provide sound foundationsfor tiesattached to it in its earlydays mayhint that it was publicly houses on the top level above it and at its base. owned or at the serviceof the community.It is quite possible Testingof this alternativeexplanation at Jerichoand other thatit was also a place or a centerfor ritual activities. Some sites is needed. One may predict(1) that the PPNA wall at evidence in supportof this suggestionis given by Kenyon's Jerichoonly partiallyprotected the early occupations,(2) its findsin Square Fl (immediatelynorth of the tower) in theform heightand thicknessvary in responseto unevenalluviation or of peculiar structureswhich suggested"a ceremonialsignifi- flowingwater, and (3) similar devices will be uncoveredat cance" (Kenyon1981:50). Finally,it shouldbe mentionedthat othersites of the period. thetower is close to thespring. Unfortunately, Kenyon did not Kenyonfailed to finda continuationof the wall on thewest- have timeor fundsto finishher excavation at SiteH (only50 m ernedge, whereshe opened an additionalexcavation (Site M). fromthe tower),which was aimed at reachingthe prehistoric The easternend of the mound is partiallydestroyed and cov- outletof the spring. ered by the main north-southJordan Valley road. (A rough The climaticoptimum of the earlyHolocene made possible estimateindicates that the easternwall, if therewas one on theemergence and growthof farming communities in theNear thatside, would be about 4-7 m below Area H.) East. Agricultureas a new subsistencestrategy succeeded be- One otherexcavated Neolithic site at whichthe edge of the cause the environmentalconditions were appropriatewhile site has been exposed is Beidha, located northwestof Petra new social structureswere in the processof being formed.It (Jordan)and situatedin a wide wadi, deeply entrenchedin was onlylater, duringthe 6th millenniumB.C., that climatic Nubian sandstone(Kirkbride 1968). There the excavatorex- fluctuations,demographic pressures, the developmentof pas-

Vol. 27 * No. 2 * April 1986 161

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Sun, 11 May 2014 22:17:58 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions toral societies,and the collapse of simplesocial organizations KEELEY, L. H. 1983. "Microscopic examination of adzes," in in partsof the Near East caused thegroup aggression that was Excavations at Jericho, vol 5. Edited by K. M. Kenyon and met by new means of defensein the formof fortificationsys- T. A. Holland, p. 759. : BritishSchool of Archaeologyin tems.It seemsthat the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A walls ofJericho Jerusalem. KENYON, K. 1957. Diggingup Jericho.London: Benn. were built in a period when the people had otherthings in . 1981. Excavations at Jericho.Vol 3. The architectureand mind,namely, protecting their settlement from the vagaries of stratigraphyof the tell. Edited by T. A. Holland. London: British nature. School of Archaeologyin Jerusalem. KENYON, K., and T. A. HOLLAND. Editors. 1982. Excavations at Jericho.Vol. 4. The pottery-typeseries and otherfinds.London BritishSchool of Archaeologyin Jerusalem. ReferencesCited . Editors. 1983. Excavations at Jericho.Vol. 5. The pottery phasesof the tell and otherfinds.London: British School of Archaeol- AKKERMANS, P. A., H. FOKKENS, and H. T. WATERBOLK. 1981. ogy in Jerusalem. "Stratigraphy,, and layoutof Bouqras," in Prehistoire KIRKBRIDE, D. 1968. Beidha 1967: An interimreport. Ex- du Levant. Edited by J. Cauvin and P. Sanlaville, pp. 485-502. plorationQuarterly 100:90-96. Paris: CNRS. KRAMER, C. 1982. Village ethnoarchaeology.New York: Academic BAR-YOSEF, 0. 1981a. "Epi-Palaeolithiccomplexes in the southern Press. Levant," in Prehistoiredu Levant. Edited by J. Cauvin and P. 1983. "Spatial organization in contemporarySouthwest Sanlaville, pp. 389-408. Paris: CNRS. Asian villages," in The hilly flanks. Edited by T C. Young, - 1981b. "The 'Pre-PotteryNeolithic' period in thesouthern Le- P. E. L. Smith,and P. Mortensen,pp. 347-68. OrientalInstitute vant," in Prehistoiredu Levant. Edited byJ. Cauvin and P. Sanla- of the Universityof Chicago Studies in AncientOriental Civiliza- ville, pp. 555-69. Paris: CNRS. tions36. . 1983. "The Natufianin the southernLevant," in The hilly LAMDAN, M., and M. DAVIS. 1983. Le site de Yiftah'el (Israel). flanks: Essays on the prehistoryof SouthwesternAsia. Edited by L'Anthropologie87:275-76 T. C. Young, P. E. L. Smith,and P. Mortensen,pp. 11-42. Orien- LECHEVALLIER, M. 1978. Abou Ghoshet Beisamoun:Deux gisements tal Instituteof the Studiesin AncientOriental du VIle millenaireavant l'ere chretienneen Israel. (M6moireset Civilizations36. Travaux du Centre de Recherches Pr6historiquesFrancais de BAR-YOSEF, O., and N. GOREN. 1973. Natufianremains in Hayonim J6rusalem2.) Paris: AssociationPaleorient. Cave. Paleorient 1:49-68. MARSHALL, D. N. 1982. "Jerichobone tools and objects,"in Excava- BAR-YOSEF, O., A. GOPHER,andA. N. GORING-MORRIS. 1980. Netiv tions at Jericho,vol. 4. Edited by K. M Kenyonand T. A. Hol- Hagdud: A Sultanian mound in the Lower JordanValley. Paleo- land, pp. 570-622. London: British School of Archaeologyin rient6:201-6. Jerusalem. BINTLIFF, J. 1982. "Palaeoclimatic modelling of environmental MELLAART, J. 1975. The Neolithicof the Near East. London Thames changesin the East Mediterraneanregion since the last glaciation," and Hudson. in Palaeoclimates,palaeoenvironments, and humancommunities in MOORE, A. 1985. "The developmentin Neolithicsocieties in theNear the easternMediterranean region in laterprehistory, pt. 2. Edited East," in Advancesin worldarchaeology, vol. 5. Edited by F Wen- by J. L. Bintliffand W. Van Zeist, pp. 485-527 British Ar- dorfand A. E Close. New York: Academic Press. In press. chaeologicalReports International Series 133. Noy, T., A. J. LEGGE, and E. S. HIGGS. 1973. Recentexcavations at BRAUN, E., and S. GIBSON. 1984. 'En Shadud: An Early Bronze I Nahal Oren, Israel. Proceedingsof the PrehistoricSociety 39:75- farmingcommunity in the JezreelValley. Bulletinof the American 99. Schools of OrientalResearch 253:41-54. Noy, T., J. SCHULDENREIN, and E. TCHERNOV. 1980. Gilgal: A Pre- BURLEIGH, R. 1981. "Radiocarbondates," in Excavationsat Jericho, PotteryNeolithic A site in the Lower JordanValley. Israel Explora- vol. 3. Edited by T. A. Holland, pp. 501-4. London: BritishSchool tionJournal 30:63-82. of Archaeologyin Jerusalem. PERROT, J. 1964. Les deux premieres campagnes de fouille a . 1983. "Additionalradiocarbon dates forJericho," in Excava- Munhatta.Syria 41 328-45. tions at Jericho,vol. 5. Edited by K. M. Kenyonand T. A. Hol- . 1966. Le gisementNatoufien de Mallaha (Eynan) Israel. land, pp. 760-65. London: British School of Archaeologyin L'Anthropologie70:437-84. Jerusalem. PRAUSNITZ, M. W. 1970. From hunter to farmer and trader. BUTZER, K. W. 1978. "The late prehistoricenvironmental history of Jerusalem:Sivan Press. the Near East," in Environmentalhistory of the Near East and RENFREW, C., and J. DIXON. 1976. " in WesternAsia. A Middle East since thelast glacial age. Edited by W. C. Brice,pp. 5- review,"in Problemsin economicand social archaeology.Edited by 12. London: Academic Press. G. de G. Sieveking,I. H. Longworth,and K. E. Wilson,pp. 137- CAUVIN, J. 1978.Les premiersvillages de Syrie-Palestinede IXeme au 50. London: Duckworth. VIIeme millenaireavant J.C. : Maison de l'Orient. SMITH, P., 0. BAR-YOSEF, and A. SILLEN. 1984. "Archaeological CLUTTON-BROCK, J. 1981. Domesticatedanimals from early times. and skeletalevidence for dietary change during the late Pleistocene/ Austin:University of Texas Press. Early Holocene in the Levant," in Paleopathologyat the originsof CROWFOOT-PAYNE, J. 1983. "The flintindustries of Jericho," in Exca- .Edited by M. N. Cohen and G. J. Armelagos,pp. 101- vations at Jericho,vol. 5. Edited by K. M. Kenyon and T. A 36 New York: Academic Press. Holland, pp. 622-759. London: BritishSchool of Archaeologyin STEKELIS, M. 1972. The Yarmukianculture. Jerusalem:Magness Jerusalem. Press, Hebrew University. DAVIS, S. 1982. Climatechange and theadvent of domestication:The VALLA, F. R. 1984 Les industriesde silex de Mallaha (Eynan) et du successionof artiodactyls in theLate Pleistocene-Holoceneperiod in Natufiendans le Levant. (Memoireset Travaux du Centrede Re- the Israel region.Pale'orient 8:5-14. cherchesPrehistoriques Francais de Jerusalem5.) Paris:Association DORRELL, P. 1978. "The uniquenessof Jericho," in Archaeologyin the Paleorient. Levant: Essays for Kathleen Kenyon. Edited by R. Moorey and VAN ZEIST, W., and S. BOTTEMA. 1982. "Vegetationalhistory P. Parr, pp. 11-18. Warminster:Aris and Phillips. of the easternMediterranean and the Near East duringthe last GARROD, D. A. E., and D. M. A. BATE. 1937. The Stone Age of 20,000 years," in Palaeoclimates, palaeoenvironments,and Mount Carmel. Oxford:Clarendon. communitiesin the easternMediterranean region in later GORING-MORRIS, A. N., and A. GOPHER. 1983. Nahal Issaron: A ,pt. 2. Edited by J. L. Bintliffand W. Van Zeist, pp. Neolithicsettlement in thesouthern Negev. Israel ExplorationJour- 277-321. British Archaeological Reports International Series nal 33:149-62. 133. HENRY, D. 0. 1983. "Adaptiveevolution within the of WESTERN, A. C. 1983. "Catalogue of identifiedcharcoal samples," in theNear East," in Advancesin worldarchaeology, vol. 2. Edited by Excavations at Jericho,vol. 5. Edited by K. M. Kenyonand T. A. F. Wendorfand A. E. Close, pp. 99-160. New York: Academic Holland, pp. 770-73. London: BritishSchool of Archaeologyin Press. Jerusalem. HESSE, B. 1982. Slaughterpatterns and domestication:The begin- WRESCHNER, E. E. 1977. Neve Yam: A submergedLate Neolithic ningsof pastoralismin westernIran. Man 17:403-17. settlementnear Mt. Carmel. Eretz Israel 13:259-70.

162 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Sun, 11 May 2014 22:17:58 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions