Experimental Harvesting of Wild Peas in Israel: Implications for the Origins of Near East Farming

Journal of Archaeological Science 35 (2008) 922e929 http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jas

Experimental harvesting of wild peas in Israel: implications for the origins of Near East farming

Shahal Abbo a, Inbar Zezak a, Efrat Schwartz a, Simcha Lev-Yadun b, Avi Gopher c,*

a RH Smith Institute of Plant Science and Genetics in Agriculture, The Levi Eshkol School of Agriculture, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Rehovot 76100, Israel b Department of Biology, Faculty of Science and Science Education, University of Haifa-Oranim, Tivon 36006, Israel c Sonia and Marco Nadler, Institute of Archaeology, Tel-Aviv University, Ramat Aviv 69978, Israel Received 25 March 2007; received in revised form 23 June 2007; accepted 27 June 2007

Abstract

Previous evaluations of the potential advantage of farming over foraging have been based on experimental harvesting of wild cereals in Near Eastern ecosystems. The highly successful combination of cereals and legumes, ‘‘the Near Eastern crops assemblage’’, is considered a natural choice due to the complementary nutritional value of the two crop types. Yet, legumes were rarely referred to in models describing early farming and the transition from foraging to farming. Wild legumes differ from wild cereals in several attributes pertaining to domestication, including population density (patchy vs. dense), growth habit (indeterminate vs. determinate), dispersal units (camouﬂaged seeds vs. awned spikelets), seed dormancy (90e80% vs. 50%), and year to year establishment (erratic vs. regular). We have analyzed the yield potential of three wild pea species (Pisum elatius, P. humile, and P. fulvum) in several ecosystems in Israel. All three pea species have patchy distribution patterns and the yield potential of the wild populations is highly variable. A harvest rate of 0.6e610 grams (calculated per collector) of clean dry grain per hour of harvest time was estimated. Among the three species studied the one adopted for domestication appears to be the least productive. This suggests that the potential productivity of wild peas was not the only or even the major consideration for domestication. Ó 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Neolithic Revolution; Israel; Wild pea harvest; Pea domestication

1. Introduction 2000; Rindos, 1984; Zohary, 2004). Therefore, it should be possible to test some of the hypotheses that were put forward Understanding the processes leadingtotheNeolithicRev- to account for the plant biology aspects of the Agricultural olution in the Near East and plant domestication could Revolution (e.g., Abbo et al., 2005; Harlan and Zohary, benefit from systematic harvesting exercises of the wild 1966; Kislev et al., 2004, 2006). taxa that were adopted as crop plants and their close relatives Most attempts to evaluate the potential advantage of in natural ecosystems. Population structure and the potential farming over foraging were based on collection exercises yield of wild stands is highly relevant here because from the of wild cereals in Near Eastern ecosystems. The literature very first intensification attempts that eventually led to true on the subject is based mostly on two studies, namely, the domestication, plant-human interaction was largely depen- seminal wild wheat harvest of Harlan (1967) in eastern Tur- dent upon the biological characteristics of the species in- key and Ladizinsky’s (1975) wild cereals collection in the volved (e.g., Ladizinsky, 1979, 1987; Lev-Yadun et al., Jordan Valley. The work of Kislev et al. (2004) who collected wild barley and wheat in Israel is too recent to have made a paradigm shift. Indeed, this does not come as * Corresponding author. a surprise, since the vast majority of botanical (Harlan and E-mail address: [email protected] (A. Gopher). Zohary, 1966), evolutionary (Harlan et al., 1973), genetic

(Salamini et al., 2002), archaeological (Hillman et al., 2001), To that end we report herein the results of wild pea (Pisum and economic-botanical (Ladizinsky, 1975; Weiss et al., sp.) harvest in several ecosystems in Israel and discuss the im- 2004) studies on agriculture origins (and numerous refer- plications of the results on the ongoing discussion regarding ences therein) have focused on cereals. the origin of grain legume farming. All three pea taxa native Unlike cereals, grain legumes have attracted relatively little to Israel were studied, Pisum elatius M. Bieb., P. humile Boiss. research attention (e.g., Abbo et al., 2003; Bouby and Leá, & Noe¨, and P. fulvum Sibth & Sm. The first two species are 2006; Butler, 1992; Fuller and Harvey, 2006; Kerem et al., closely related to domesticated pea, while the latter represents 2007; Kislev and Bar-Yosef, 1988; Ladizinsky, 1987, 1989b, a wild pea species which most probably was not domesticated 1993; Zohary and Hopf, 1973). Moreover, none of the above (Ben-Ze’ev and Zohary, 1973). studies reported harvest of wild legumes, the reason being, probably, their patchy population structure and erratic year to year establishment. Consequently, collection of wild le- 2. Materials and methods gumes was rarely discussed in the context of prehistoric economy including the Neolithic Revolution (Ladizinsky, 1993; 2.1. Wild pea harvest Lev et al., 2005). To our knowledge no data about Near East- ern wild legume grain yield per time unit of collection are Wild peas were harvested in several sites across the available. As to the wild lentil collection exercises conducted Mediterranean zone of Israel (Table 1). A preliminary popula- by the late C. Sperling in Turkey, apparently the results were tion survey was conducted based on the records of the herbar- disappointing (in terms of the grain yield) and were not pub- ium of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem (Giva’t-Ram, lished. Moreover, unlike wild cereals, which can be gathered Jerusalem) and our field experience. The chosen sites and their in appreciable amounts from the ground (Kislev et al., physical characteristics are listed in Table 1. These sites repre- 2004), no comparable quantities of wild pea or lentil seeds sent the typical plant formations in which the three Pisum can be collected upon maturity, because their pods shatter, species occur. Special efforts were made to select sites and the camouflaged seeds are scattered on the ground and/ free from over-grazing and protected from human interference or fall into rocky crevices. as much as possible. Activity within nature reserves was The differences between wild legumes and wild cereals bi- conducted under a special license from the Israeli Park & Nature ology are far reaching. These include differences in population Reserve Authority. density (patchy vs. dense), growth habit (indeterminate vs. de- Collectors were assigned to a certain area in each site. Each terminate), dispersal units (camouflaged seeds vs. awned collector was equipped with paper bags and a stopper watch to spikelets), seed dormancy (90e80% vs. 50%), and year to monitor harvest time. In most sites each collector conducted 2e year establishment (erratic vs. regular) between wild legumes 3runs,10e30 min each, placing the collected material of each and cereals, respectively (Harlan et al., 1973; Ladizinsky, run into a separate marked bag. The collectors picked ripe pods 1987, 1989a,b; Kislev et al., 2004). Therefore, in our view, and/or pulled whole plants, according to their personal prefer- the discussion on the origin of agriculture must take into ac- ence, and placed the harvested material in the marked bags. Fol- count the unique features of wild (and domesticated) legume lowing the harvest, paper bags were placed in an oven at 48 Cfor biology. 3e4 days to dry. The plant material in each bag was carefully

Table 1 Location and physical characteristics of the wild pea harvest sites in Israel Site Longitude Latitude Geographic region Average annual Altitude Soil type Lithology (E) (N) rainfall (mm) (m) Latrun 034590 31500 Judean Mts. 520 380 Brown rendzina Carbonate Conglomerate Machsiya 035010 31440 Judean Mts. 526 581 Terra rossa Limestone or Dolomite Zanoach 035000 31420 Judean Mts. 445 460 Terra rossa Limestone or Dolomite Lachish 034520 31330 Shfela 348 254 Browm rendzina Nari on Chalk Etziyona J. 035000 31410 Judean foothills 445 350 Brown rendzina Carbonate conglomerate Etziyona e Mata’ Rd. 035000 31420 Judean foothills 445 420 Terra rossa Dolomite or Limestone Elyakim 035050 32380 Carmel Mt. 518 143 Grey rendzina Chalk Mt. Ravid 035280 32510 Lower Galilee 467 22 Basaltic vertisol Basalt Wadi Amud 035300 32520 Lower Galilee 451 145 Terra rossa Limestone Sursuk A (wheat) 035110 33000 Western Galilee 706 200 Alluvial vertisol Irrelevant Sursuk B (orchard) 035110 33000 Western Galilee 706 200 Terra rossa Dolomite or limestone Kziv creek 035110 33020 Western Galilee 700 115 Terra rossa Limestone or Dolomite Ikrit 035160 33040 Upper Galilee 802 545 Terra rossa Limestone or Dolomite Avital Mt. 035470 33070 Golan 850 1050 Brown basaltic soil Coarse Scoria Bental Rd. 035460 33070 Golan 850 980 Brown basaltic soil Coarse Scoria Bental & Avital 035470 33070 Golan 850 950 Brown basaltic soil Coarse Scoria Bab el Hawa 035460 33080 Golan 850 1010 Brown basaltic soil Basalt Massade Forest 035440 33100 Golan 850 890 Brown basaltic soil Basalt Baron Mt. 035460 33090 Golan 850 1056 Brown basaltic soil Coarse Scoria 924 S. Abbo et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 35 (2008) 922e929 separated over trays in the laboratory, each pod was opened, and first type includes man-made habitats, fallow fields, field all the seeds recovered from each bag were weighed. edges, abandoned orchards and road sides, all within or in very close proximity to farmland where pea cultivation was 2.2. Wild pea seed increase or is still being practiced. These sites occur from the northern Negev, near Gaza and Beer-Sheva, through the Judean Moun- A small plot planted with P. elatius seeds, originally col- tains, the Jordan Valley and up to the Lower Galilee (Post and lected in the site of Ikrit (Table 1), was sown in the second Dinsmore, 1932). Due to the resemblance of the plants to do- week of December 2005, under protected net-house conditions mesticated pea of Dunn type and their confinement to ruderal in the experimental farm of the Faculty of Agriculture, Reho- and disturbed niches, we suspect that these are feral plants vot, Israel. Adequate fertilization and irrigation were applied which escaped human cultivation. Therefore, we chose to and the plants were supported to prevent lodging. Grain yield study sites of the second habitat type only, where the plants per harvest time unit from these plants served as a reference occur in steppe herbaceous plant formations in mixed stands for the values obtained in the wild ecosystems. with wild lentils, vetches, and medics among others. Such sites are located in the northern part of the country, in the Golan and Mt. Hermon. 3. Results The actual P. humile grain yield hardly exceeded 6 g, and in most instances was closer to zero, demonstrating the The results presented (Tables 2e4) are in terms of the ac- rarity of the plant (Table 2). However, the data includes tual clean grain yield (g) by each collector during each run a case where a collector encountered a populated patch and (of 10, 15, 20 or 30 min), as well as the calculated return the calculated harvest efficiency exceeded 150 g per hour per hour of harvest time. We did not take into account the (Table 2). time of separating the seeds from other plant material, i.e., pods, straw and chaff separation. 3.2. Pisum fulvum 3.1. Pisum humile This species is the most common wild pea in Israel and it This species was reported from two types of habitats in Is- occurs across the Mediterranean belt of Israel from the south- rael (Ben-Ze’ev and Zohary, 1973; Ladizinsky, 1989a). The ern Judean Mountains up to Mt. Hermon. It is mostly a

Table 2 Harvest data of wild Pisum humile in Israel, spring 2006 Site Collection Collectors* Collection Actual Grand site Mean yield Mean yield per Calculated harvest date time (min) yield (g) mean (g) per collector (g) exercise (g) efﬁciency (g/h) Avital Mt. 14.5.06 A 20 0.0 A 20 0.5 A 20 1.5 0.7 2.0 B 20 0.0 0.0 C 15 1.0 4.0 F 60 0.6 0.6 0.6 18.5.06 A 2 5.1 153.3 C 20 0.0 0.0 D 20 1.5 4.6 G 20 2.9 8.7 H 20 6.1 1.7 3.1 18.2 Avital & Bental 18.5.06 C 15 3.3 13.3 E 15 0.0 0.0 G 15 0.0 1.1 1.1 0.0 Avital & Bental Rd. 18.5.06 A 15 3.8 15.2 D þ I 15 0.0 0.0 H 15 0.0 1.3 1.3 0.0 Baro’n Mt. 19.5.06 A 20 0.0 C 20 0.0 D 20 0.0 E 20 0.0 G 20 0.0 H 20 0.0 I 20 0.0 0 0.0 CV 96.1 * e Collectors’ identity: A e Inbar Zezak, B e Efrat Schwartz, C e Shahal Abbo, D e Roi Barak, E e Avi Gopher, F e Avishai Abbo, G e Mickey Frenkel, H e Ariela Sharvet, I e Alona Rivlin, K e Simcha Lev-Yadun. Table 3 Harvest data of wild Pisum fulvum in Israel, spring 2006 Site Collection Collectors* Collection Actual Grand (actual) Mean yield Mean yield Calculated harvest date time (min) yield (g) site mean (g) per collector (g) per exercise (g) efﬁciency (g/h) Latrun 11.4.06 A 20 14.2 A 20 14.2 A 20 4.7 11.0 33.2 C 20 3.0 C 20 5.9 4.4 13.3 D 20 12.3 D 20 24.0 D 20 6.4 10.6 14.2 10.6 42.6 Machsiya 11.4.06 A 20 6.5 A 20 0.0 A 20 4.1 3.5 10.6 C 20 64.7 C 20 58.1 C 20 131.8 84.9 44.2 254.6 14.4.06 A 20 5.8 A 20 13.0 A 20 7.6 8.8 26.4 C 20 0.2 C 20 20.0 C 20 11.1 26.9 10.4 9.6 31.3 Lachish 11.4.06 A 20 0.1 A 20 0.4 0.2 0.7 B 20 4.8 B 20 1.9 B 20 17.9 8.2 24. 7 D 20 0.00 D 20 0.00 D 20 0.00 3.1 0.0 3.1 0.0 Zanoach 14.4.6 A 20 0.5 A 20 0.6 A 20 0.7 0.6 1.7 C 20 0.3 C 20 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.5 1.2 Etziyona junct. 20.4.06 B 20 9.3 B 20 12.3 B 20 8.0 9.9 29.6 C 20 27.8 C 20 30.9 C 20 12.9 16.9 23.9 16.9 71.6 Etziyona - Mata’ Rd. 20.4.06 A 20 19.8 A 20 10.1 15.0 44.9 D 20 0.0 D 20 0.0 D 20 0.0 6.0 0.0 6.0 0.0 Elyakim 23.4.06 A 40 77.2 A 20 101.5 A 15 70.5 83.0 234.1 B þ K 30 117.5 B 30 79.5 A þ B 20 49.6 82.6 49.3 82.6 90.5 Migdal Rd. 23.4.06 A 30 17.5 17.5# 17.5# 35.0# Bab el Hawa 19.5.06 C 20 0.6 1.7 D 20 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.0 Odem 19.5.06 A 20 0.0 0.0 0.0 D þ I 20 0.0 0.0 H 20 0.0 0.0 0.0 Masa’ade forest 19.5.06 C 25 1 plant no seeds 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 CV 153.3 151.9 # e No statistics, single go. * e For collectors’ identity see Table 2. 926 S. Abbo et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 35 (2008) 922e929

Table 4 Harvest data of Pisum elatius in Israel, spring 2006 Site Collection Collectors* Collection Actual Grand site Mean yield Mean yield Calculated yield date time (min) yield (g) mean (g) per collector (g) per exercise (g) efficiency (g/h) Wadi Amud 23.4.06 A þ B 15 39.7 39.7# 79.3# 27.4.06 A 30 15.9 A 20 4.6 A 20 9.6 10.0 24.7 B 20 0.7 B 20 4.2 B 20 0.7 10.7 1.8 5.9 5.5 Sursuk A 27.4.06 C 12 111.4 111.4# 557.2# (wheat field edge) 4.5.06 C 15 152.6 610.3 D 15 52.1 102.3 208.2 14.5.06 C 17 112.3 107.1 112.3# 396.3# Sursuk B (orchard) 27.4.06 A 20 5.4 A 5 13.3 9.3 87.7 B 20 0.8 6.5 2.4 14.5.06 D þ F 30 43 43.0 F 22 14.8 40.4 D 27 22.3 26.7 49.5 21.5.06 A 10 34.8 A 22 31.7 33.2 147.5 B 30 74.0 26. 7 46.8 148.0 Kziv creek 14.5.06 C þ D þ F 20 31.3 31.3# 31.3# Ikrit 14.5.06 A 20 85.0 A 20 34.8 A 20 17.0 45.6 136.8 B 20 21.2 B 20 38.1 B 20 17.6 25.6 76.9 C 30 25.9 C 10 8.3 17.1 50. 7 D 50 22.7 30.1 27.2 21.5.06 A 60 315.8 315.8 B 60 100.9 208.4 100.9 25.5.06 B 25 26.8 64.2 A 25 33.1 57.5 30.0 79.5 CV 107.6 94.3 * e For collectors’ identity see Table 2.#e No statistics, only one go. half-shade plant, climbing around short stature trees, shrubs plenty of shady niches and support from short trees of Quercus and low oak and pistachio bushes, and rarely invades the calliprinos Webb, Pistacia palaestina Boiss., and Pistacia len- open herbaceous patches of the open park-forest. Populations tiscus L. shrubs. Indeed, this site supports one of the most pro- occurring in batha formations (low shrubs mixed with annual ductive populations we encountered (Table 3). Lachish, some and perennial herbaceous plants) with hardly any trees or 15 kilometers south of Machsiya, is a drier Mediterranean ga- shady niches are thin and mostly comprised of creeping, low rigue site, where heavy grazing of cattle has taken place for productive individuals. These may be considered as relics several decades. In this site, the plants survive mostly within that survived the over exploitation of the woody vegetation the spiny Rhamnus sp. shrubs and are difficult to spot else- in the last few centuries. where, as expressed in the low yield figures (0e24.7 g per The grain yields of P. fulvum are given in Table 3.Mean hour). A similar situation occurred in Masaade forest and yield efficiency ranged from close to zero up to more than Bab el-Hawa, both in the Golan Heights, where we found 250 g per hour (Table 3). The actual yield in the different just one specimen because of heavy cattle grazing. Variation sites represents pretty well the physical conditions and the in plant occurrence and consequently yield were found be- ecological preferences of the plant. In Latrun (a protected tween- as well as within-sites as demonstrated by the yield site), the plants grow in an open batha formation in associ- in Etziona junc. and Haela Valley, two adjacent sites (Table 3). ation with Hordeum bulbosum L. and Sarcopoterium spinosum This within-site variation is a result of the patchy distribution (L.) Spach, and with hardly any shrubs that may provide pattern of the plant. Pisum fulvum hardly establishes itself as shade or mechanical support for climbing. In Machsiya, a a weed in man-managed habitats and is not known as a weed typical Judean Mts. open park forest site, the plants have of cultivated fields in Israel. However, one of the most S. Abbo et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 35 (2008) 922e929 927 productive sites we encountered occurred within a secondary and repeat the collection exercises in the next several years habitat, a pine reforested site (Elyakim). There, dense stands as part of our long term project. thrive along the open forest roads enjoying the park protection The mostly low yield figures (Tables 2e4), combined with andthehalfshadeprovidedbythetalltrees.Thus,collection the patchy distribution and the small population sizes of the while walking along the wide dirt road, with no need to watch wild pea species suggest that wild peas could have provided one’s steps, gave rise to very high yields with efficiency of only a small fraction of the hunters-gatherers’ diet and are un- 234 g per hour, only second to the rich natural site of Machsiya likely to have been a major staple in pre-agricultural times. (Table 3). This was most likely the case also for the rare wild chickpea (Cicer reticulatum Ladiz.) and for wild lentil (Lens orientalis Hand-Mazz.) as argued by Ladizinsky (1987, 1993). 3.3. Pisum elatius Our data calls for re-evaluation of the relative importance of cereals and legumes in the first early (trial and error) This species is also confined to semi-shady habitats but un- domestication attempts by early farmers in the Near East. like P. fulvum it grows only in rather moist niches, namely, Hence, whereas wild cereals’ stands are rich throughout the alongside wadi-beds where seasonal rain or spring water oak-pistachio belt of the Near- and Middle- East (Harlan flow come about several months a year, and in oak forest and Zohary, 1966), wild populations of legumes, although po- clearings, mostly in the Upper Galilee and Mt. Carmel. Like tentially an important food resource, are not quite as reliable P. fulvum, this species is mostly confined to primary habitats and rich compared with wild cereals. Here comes a dilemma: and only one of the studied populations occurred in a weedy on the one hand, wild species of pea, chickpea and lentils are association (Sursuk A, Table 4). unlikely to have been a major staple (our data, Ladizinsky, The yield data of the P. elatius harvest are given in Table 4. 1987), on the other hand, to date, chickpea, pea and lentils In general, the actual yield data in most P. elatius sites were are three major crops upon which many millions of humans much higher compared with the other two pea species (Tables 2 depend for their dietary proteins (FAO, 2006). The abundance and 3). Two of the populations, Sursuk (A and B patches) and of wild cereals vs. the relative scarcity of wild legumes may Ikrit, were harvested repeatedly (more than once) because the suggest a stronger ancient incentive for legume domestication plants carried large numbers of immature pods and were still in the early stages of intensification. It seems, therefore, that in blossom when the first pods became ripe. As a result, the while the ancient taste for lentil soup may have developed cumulative yield of these populations was by far higher com- upon gathering from the wild, one had to grow plots of pea pared with most sites of the other two species (Tables 2e4). It or lentils to satisfy the desire for pea or lentil soup e or any should be noted, however, that the Sursuk A population was in other food prepared from these plants e on a regular basis. fact a patch measuring less than 5 by 5 meters, so the rarity of This may suggest that grain legumes might have been more such sites should be taken into account. important than cereals in the very early domestication at- The productivity of the P. elatius populations is also evi- tempts, as suggested by Kislev and Bar-Yosef (1988), based dent from the high calculated harvest efficiency, at times ex- on scarce pre Neolithic archaeological evidence. ceeding 0.5 kg per hour, a figure not recorded for the other One could argue that the current distribution and abundance of two pea taxa. These high figures are similar to those obtained the wild pea populations does not reflect the situation in prehistoric for wild P. elatius plants grown in the experimental farm of the times, and that before the domestication of sheep, goat and cattle Faculty of Agriculture in Rehovot, ranging between 72 and and the cumulative impact of their grazing on the vegetation, 354 g per hour with an average of 226 g/h. wild pea populations might have been more abundant. However, by the same token, this argument could apply also for wild wheat 4. Discussion and barley across the Near East. Indeed, more than 100 years ago, wild emmer wheat was a rare plant in northern Israel that sur- Our data demonstrate the yield potential of wild pea vived in rocky refuges due to an intense over-grazing regime populations in a single season. If repeated for several con- (Aaronsohn, 1910). However, since the introduction of nature con- secutive seasons, our attempt to remove all the ripe pods servation measures and legislation, the populations of wild emmer encountered in the studied sites may have an impact on the wheat in Israel have recovered (e.g., Noy-Meir et al., 1991a,b). establishment of the plants in the following years and, There is therefore no a-priori reason to assume that similar recov- consequently, on the yield potential of these sites. We ery did not occur among wild pea populations in Israel. Thus, when assume that at present the soil seed-bank is saturated due considering wild cereals data in modeling the Neolithic Revolution to the relatively strong seed dormancy (hardseededness), one is obliged to assume that the recorded situation among wild which ensures that no more than 10e20% of the seeds ger- peas is similarly valid for the same purpose. minate in the autumn following their maturation, similar to In several ancient agricultural centers, both cereals and le- the adaptive strategy of wild lentil (Ladizinsky, 1985, gumes were adopted in prehistoric times, e.g., maize and beans 1987) and wild pea (Werker et al., 1979). Therefore, two in Central America, sorghum and cowpea in Africa (Harlan, or maybe three seasons are required to detect a long-term 1992). For the Near East, the joint adoption of legumes and ce- effect of such predation by human gatherers on the wild reals is referred to as an almost simultaneous process, hence populations. To that end, we intend to visit the study sites the ‘‘crops assemblage’’ concept (Zohary and Hopf, 2000,p. 928 S. Abbo et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 35 (2008) 922e929

242). This ancient and highly successful combination of cereals were chosen based on their suitability for cereal cultivation and legumes is usually referred to as a natural choice due to the (Bar-Yosef and Meadow, 1995, pp. 70e71). complementary nutrient contents of the two crop types (Zohary Our wild pea data provide a first badly missing means to and Hopf, 2000, p. 92). Unlike cereals, no reliable morphological balance this state of affairs towards a more comprehensive markers are available for identifying domestication of legumes view of the subject. We are aware of the fact that our data is archaeobotanical remains. Hence legumes domestication could prone to discussions and reinterpretations by other students, be inferred based on their co-occurrence with domesticated ce- possibly leading to different conclusions. However, the harvest reals (e.g. Bouby and Leá, 2006; Fuller and Harvey, 2006). figures are solid, well controlled and the exercises can be Such clear identification of domestication is possible only out- repeated. The rapid development pressures throughout the side the natural distribution of the cereals component of the ar- Near East, in Israel, Lebanon, Jordan, and neighboring coun- chaeobotanical complex, e.g., in Western Europe (Bouby and tries, including urbanization, road construction, expansion of Leá, 2006)orIndia(Fuller and Harvey, 2006). However, such arable land and modernization of farming practices, suggest (late) evidence taken from well established farming cultures is that this is almost the last chance to conduct such studies. not quite helpful in discussing the role of grain legumes in pre- Our data corroborates the idea that the wild legume species agrarian societies in general and in the core area of the Near East- selected for adoption as crop plants are unlikely to have been ern crop assemblage in particular. selected due to their role in pre-farming economy (e.g., Kerem Despite the recognition of the indispensable role of grain et al., 2007). Otherwise it is very difficult to explain, for exam- legumes in ancient and indeed in modern farming systems ple, why the least productive of all three wild pea species stud- and world economy, it hardly found an expression in the ied (P. humile) was the one selected for domestication. This models describing early farming and the transition from species is more common in the core agricultural area in south foraging to farming. The debate regarding the role of seed dor- eastern Turkey (cf. Lev-Yadun et al., 2000) compared with the mancy in the process leading to legume domestication is a rare situation in Israel (Abbo, unpublished). However, even in that example (Blumler, 1991; Ladizinsky, 1987, 1989b, 1993; region, it forms very loose stands, comprised mostly of 1e3 Zohary, 1989). Even the provocative claim by Ladizinsky, individuals which are rather short statured and not very pro- 1987, (of ‘‘pulse domestication before cultivation’’) that free ductive. Alternatively, it is possible that the candidates for germinating lentil mutants had to establish themselves in domestication were perhaps chosen on the basis of intimate pre-agricultural times to attract the attention of ancient food knowledge of their nutritional value and potential to contribute gatherers, even before being considered as candidates for do- to the nutritive welfare of consumers, as recently suggested for mestication (Ladizinsky, 1987), did not trigger studies of the chickpea (Kerem et al., 2007). yield potential of wild legume populations. The central role of cereals in the attempts to explain the Acknowledgement incentive for cultivation or the need for resource intensification finds expression in a recent study (Weiss et al., 2004) that This study is supported by a Bikoorah-ISF grant to SA and reassessed the broad spectrum hypothesis based on plant AG. The authors thank the Israeli Nature and Park authority for remains e almost exclusively cereals. Similarly, focused on granting permit to study within protected areas. Thanks are due cereals, in our view, is the contention made by Bar-Yosef and to students that participated in the collection exercises: Alona Meadow (1995) that upon the expansion of the first farming Rivlin, Ariela Sharvet, Roi Barak, and Mikey Frenkel; and to communities across the Near East, new settlement locations Ms. Hagar Leshner of the Hebrew University herbarium.

Appendix Table 5. Harvest data of wild cereals stands in Israel, spring 2006 Site Collection Collector* and Collection Straw and Spike Calculated Calculated oats date sickle type time (min) spikes yield (g) material (g) barley þ wheat harvest harvest efficiency (g/h) efficiency (g/h) Zanoach 14.4.06 E (wood) 19 1230 986 1374 43.7 Machsiya 14.4.06 E (wood) 12 4 4997 4007 2210 70.3 Rosh-Pinna 5.5.06 C (bone) 16 1816 1674 2026 268.3 Rosh-Pinna 5.5.06 E (wood) 19 3659 3375 3439 455.3 Many pea collection sites in our study also provide wild cereal stands. Considering the wealth of theoretical literature based on the harvest of wild cereals (e.g., Harlan, 1967; Ladizinsky, 1975), we harvested cereals too in order to verify that we operate within the reported harvest efficiency and the yield potential of such ecosystems. These data could serve as a yardstick upon which our pea data could be considered. We used two types of sickles into which flint blades were inserted. A straight one made of wood, and a slightly curved one made of a cow’s rib, both prepared by Dodi Ben-Ami of Katzrin, Israel. In Machsiya and Zanoach, typical oak-pistachio habitats, mostly barley (Hordeum spontaneum C. Koch) and very rarely wild Triticum dicoccoides (Ko¨rn) Thell., grow. In the Rosh-Pinna grassland site, a mixed stand of both wild barley and emmer wheat occur. The harvested material was dried, weighed and separated manually into straw and the reproductive fraction (spikes and spikelets). A random 100 g sub-sample of the reproductive fraction was threshed manually to release the grain from the chaff and awns. Sub- sequently, the grains were separated into wheat þ barley and oats and weighed. Using the ratio of cleaned grain to the spike fraction, the grain fraction of the bulk of the harvested material was calculated (Table 5). It is impossible to completely remove the barley chaff by naked hand processing, and considering inevitable material loss during processing, we estimate that the net grain fraction of the above figures is ca. 80%. * e Refer to names in Table 2. S. Abbo et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 35 (2008) 922e929 929

References Kislev, M.E., Hartmann, A., Bar-Yosef, O., 2006. Early domesticated fig in the Jordan Valley. Science 312, 1372e1374. Ladizinsky, G., 1975. Collection of wild cereals in the upper Jordan Valley. Aaronsohn, A., 1910. Agricultural and botanical explorations in Palestine. Economic Botany 29, 264e267. Bulletin No. 180. USDA. Bureau of Plant Industry, Washington DC. Ladizinsky, G., 1979. Seed dispersal in relation to the domestication of Middle Abbo, S., Shtienberg, D., Lichtenzveig, J., Lev-Yadun, S., Gopher, A., 2003. East legumes. Economic Botany 33, 284e289. Chickpea, summer cropping, and a new model for pulse domestication Ladizinsky, G., 1985. The genetics of hard seed coat in the genus Lens. Euphy- in the ancient Near-East. Quarterly Review of Biology 78, 435e448. tica 34, 539e543. Abbo, S., Lev-Yadun, S., Rubin, B., Gopher, A., 2005. On the origin of Near Ladizinsky, G., 1987. Pulse domestication before cultivation. Economic Bot- Eastern founder crops and the ‘dump-heap hypothesis’. Genetic Resources any 41, 60e65. of Crop Evolution 52, 491e495. Ladizinsky, G., 1989a. Origin and domestication of the Southwest Asian Bar-Yosef, O., Meadow, R.H., 1995. The origins of agriculture in the Near grain legumes. In: Harris, D.R., Hillman, G.C. (Eds.), Foraging and East. In: Price, T.D., Gebauer, A.B. (Eds.), Last Hunters e First Farmers: Farming the Evolution of Plant Exploitation. Unwin Hyman, London, New Perspectives on the Prehistoric Transition to Agriculture. School of pp. 374e389. American Research Press, Santa Fe, pp. 39e94. Ladizinsky, G., 1989b. Pulse domestication: fact and fiction. Economic Botany Ben-Ze’ev, N., Zohary, D., 1973. Species relationships in the genus Pisum L. 43, 131e132. in Israel. Israel Journal of Botany 22, 73e91. Ladizinsky, G., 1993. Lentil domestication: On the quality of evidence and Blumler, M.A., 1991. Modelling the origins of legume domestication and arguments. Economic Botany 47, 60e64. cultivation. Economic Botany 45, 243e250. Lev, E., Kislev, M.E., Bar-Yosef, O., 2005. Mousterian vegetal food in Kebara Bouby, L., Leá, V., 2006. Exploitation de la vesce commune (Vicia sativa L.) Cave, Mt. Carmel. Journal of Archaeological Science 32, 475e484. au Neólithique moyen dans le Sud de la France. Donneés carpologiques du Lev-Yadun, S., Gopher, A., Abbo, S., 2000. The cradle of agriculture. Science site de Claparouse (Lagnes, Vaucluse). Paleóntologie humaine et pre´his- 288, 1602e1603. toire (Archeólogie pre´historique)/Human palaeontology and prehistory. Noy-Meir, I., Agami, M., Cohen, E., Anikster, Y., 1991a. Floristic and ecolog- Comptes Rendus Palevol 5, 973e980. ical differentiation of habitats within a wild wheat population at Ammiad. Butler, A., 1992. Pulse agronomy: traditional systems and implications for Israel Journal of Botany 40, 363e384. early cultivation. In: Anderson, P.C. (Ed.), Prehistory de L’Agriculture: Noy-Meir, I., Agami, M., Anikster, Y., 1991b. Changes in the population Nouvelles Approaches Experimentales Et Ethnographiques. Monographie density of wild emmer wheat (Triticum turgidum var. dicoccoides)in du CRA no. 6, CNRS, Paris, pp. 67e78. a Mediterranean grassland. Israel Journal of Botany 40, 385e306. FAO, 2006. Agricultural production database. www.fao.org. Post, G.E., Dinsmore, J.E., 1932. Flora of Syria, Palestine and Sinai. American Fuller, D.Q., Harvey, E.L., 2006. The archaeobotany of Indian pulses: identi- Press, Beirut. fication, processing and evidence for cultivation. Environmental Archaeol- Rindos, D., 1984. The Origin of Agriculture: an Evolutionary Perspective. ogy 11, 219e246. Academic Press, New York. Harlan, J.R., 1967. A wild wheat harvest in Turkey. Archaeology 20, 197e201. Salamini, F., O¨ zkan, H., Brandolini, A., Schafer-Pregl, R., Martin, W., 2002. Harlan, J.R., 1992. Crops and Man, second ed. American Society of Agron- Genetics and geography of wild cereal domestication in the Near East. omy and Crop Science Society of America, Madison. Nature Reviews Genetics 3, 429e441. Harlan, J.R., Zohary, D., 1966. Distribution of wild wheats and barley. Science Weiss, E., Wetterstorm, W., Nadel, D., Bar-Yosef, O., 2004. The broad spec- 153, 1074e1080. trum revisited: evidence from plant remains. Proceedings of the National Harlan, J.R., de Wet, J.M.J., Price, E.G., 1973. Comparative evolution of Academy of Science USA 101, 9551e9555. cereals. Evolution 27, 311e325. Werker, E., Marbach, I., Mayer, A.M., 1979. Relation between the anatomy Hillman, G., Hedges, R., Moore, A., Colledge, S., Pettitt, P., 2001. New evi- of the testa, water permeability and the presence of phenolics in the genus dence of Lateglacial cereal cultivation at Abu Hureyra on the Euphrates. Pisum. Annals of Botany 43, 765e771. Holocene 11, 383e393. Zohary, D., 1989. Pulse domestication and cereal domestication: how different Kerem, Z., Gopher, A., Lev-Yadun, S., Weinberg, P., Abbo, S., 2007. Chickpea are they? Economic Botany 43, 31e34. domestication in the Neolithic Levant through the nutritional perspective. Zohary, D., 2004. Unconscious selection and the evolution of domesticated Journal of Archaeological Science 34, 1289e1293. plants. Economic Botany 58, 5e10. Kislev, M.E., Bar-Yosef, O., 1988. The legumes: the earliest domesticated Zohary, D., Hopf, M., 1973. Domestication of pulses in the Old World. plants in the Near East? Current Anthropology 29, 175e179. Science 182, 887e894. Kislev, M.E., Weiss, E., Hartmann, A., 2004. Impetus for sowing and the Zohary, D., Hopf, M., 2000. Domestication of Plants in the Old World, third beginning of agriculture: ground collecting of wild cereals. Proceedings ed. Clarendon Press, Oxford. of the National Academy of Science USA 101, 2692e2695.