Hunting Specialisation and the Broad Spectrum Revolution in the Early Epipalaeolithic: Gazelle Exploitation at Urkan e-Rubb IIa, Jordan Valley by Emma Suzanne Humphrey A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Anthropology University of Toronto © Copyright by Emma Suzanne Humphrey 2012 Hunting Specialisation and the Broad Spectrum Revolution in the Early Epipalaeolithic: Gazelle Exploitation at Urkan e-Rub IIa, Jordan Valley Emma Suzanne Humphrey Doctor of Philosophy Department of Anthropology University of Toronto 2012 Abstract This present research explores the impact of Flannery’s (1969) Broad Spectrum Revolution model within the context of the Levantine Epipalaeolithic, specifically the early (Kebaran) Epipalaeolithic. This model attempts to explain changes in subsistence behaviour associated with the end of the Pleistocene leading up to the development of agriculture. The Jordan valley represents an ideal model for Flannery’s marginal habitat because of the range of different flora and fauna required more intensive resource exploitation strategies. The discussion here focuses on the zooarchaeological and taphonomic analysis of two faunal assemblages (representing two sub-horizons) from Urkan e-Rubb IIa, a Kebaran site located in the lower Jordan Valley, and excavated by E. Hovers (Institute of Archaeology, Hebrew University Jerusalem), in 1986 and 1988. This site shows evidence of specialised gazelle hunting and processing. Initial interpretations of the site argued for a multi-purpose residential base camp, supported by lithic tool and shell bead manufacturing. ii Recent discussions of Epipalaeolithic diet breadth have concentrated on the end of the Pleistocene (Munro 2001, 2003, 2004, 2009; Stiner 2001; Stiner & Munro 2002; Stiner et al. 1999, 2000; Stutz et al. 2009) and have been directed towards explaining changing subsistence patterns towards the end of the Epipalaeolithic (i.e. the Natufian), where an increased use of wild cereals and small game has been well documented. The view that it is not until the Natufian that broad spectrum resource strategies were used is questioned here. Major questions that are addressed with this research include: What do the faunal assemblages from Urkan e-Rubb IIa tell us about Kebaran subisistence behaviour? Do broad spectrum models help to shed light on subsistence adaptations at the end of the Last Glacial Maximum? What can recent analyses of Jordan Valley faunal assemblages contribute to the discussion? These are addressed through a detailed zooarchaeological and taphonomic analysis of the Urkan e-Rubb IIa fauana, followed by synchronic and diachronic analyses of Levantine Epipalaeolithic assemblages, through a combination of taxonomy-based diversity indices and prey-ranking indices. iii Acknowledgments To begin, I would like to thank my core committee, Dr. Michael Chazan, Dr. T. Maxwell Friesen, and Dr. Genevieve Dewar, for their continued support and advice, without which this research would not have been possible. I would also like to thank Dr. E.B.Banning and Dr. Ariane Burke for their thoughtful comments and suggestions. Your support and encouragement are greatly appreciated. A special thank you to Dr. Erella Hovers, Institute of Archaeology, Hebrew University Jerusalem, for allowing me to access and base my dissertation on the material from her excavations. I appreciate your trust in me. Thank you to Dr. Liora Kolska Horwitz, for your guidance and suggestions on how to approach the faunal material from Urkan e-Rubb IIa, and for sharing your incredible experience and knowledge on the subject. Thank you also to Dr. Rivka Rabinovich, both in your capacity as the curator of the Zoology Laboratory, Department of Systematics, Evolution, and Ecology, Hebrew University Jerusalem, where the fauna from Urkan e-Rubb IIa is stored, as well as for being a helpful colleague and friend. You welcomed me both into the lab ‘family’ and into your home, helping this lonely Canadian feel less alone in a foreign land (even if you always did make me dress up for Purim!). Thank you to Dr. Haskel Greenfield and Tina Greenfield, for very helpful comments while we sat at our respective work tables in the zoology lab in Israel, as well as for advice and suggestions for approaching my data. I would like to give very grateful appreciation to Andrea and Charles Bronfman for their generous financial support (through the Andrea and Charles Bronfman Philanthropies). Without your support in 2006, 2007 and 2009, this research would not have been possible. Thank you also to The University of Toronto Fellowship for their partial funding of my graduate studies. I would also like to thank the Kenyan Institute and its staff, the Jerusalem branch of the Council for British Research in the Levant. You were my home-away-from-home for months at a time. Despite the eccentricities of the place, the staff and other visitors often helped me stay sane. iv A very large ‘thank you’ to Peter Bikoulis for help with my maps. I only wish we could have made all of your mapping ideas work! As well, thank you to Danielle MacDonald for help with digging up mapping coordinates for some of the pesky sites mentioned in the text, and Dr. Jennifer Campbell for help with constructing many of my images. I want to thank my friends who have supported me over the years, while I have been working on this project. We have whined, moaned, supported and cheered each other along, and I couldn’t have done this without you. I dedicate this to my father, and in loving memory, to my mother. Dad, you have encouraged my interest in archaeology since I was in the 6th grade, and you’ve always been ready to talk about new archaeological and palaeoanthropological discoveries. Mum, you always believed in me, no matter what I chose to do with my life. I love you both so much. v Table of Contents Abstract ………………………………..………………………………………………………….ii Acknowledgments ……………………………………………………………………………….iv Table of Contents …………………………………………..………………………………….…vi List of Tables ………………………..…………………………………………………………...ix List of Figures ……………………………..…………………………………………………....xiii List of Appendices ………………………………..…………………………………………...xviii Chapter 1 Introduction …………………………………..………………………………………..1 1.1 Current Paradigm in Epipalaeolithic Faunal Research ……………………………………….1 1.1.1 The Broad Spectrum Revolution Model …...……….…………………….………1 1.1.2 Recent Discussion of the BSR Model ………...…………………………...….......6 1.2 Broad Spectrum Diets and the Kebaran …………………………………………………..9 1.3 Dissertation Structure ……………………………………………………………………13 Chapter 2 Environment and Cultural Context of Levantine Epipalaeolithic ……………....…....15 2.1 Terrain and Palaeoenvironment …………………………………………………………15 2.1.1 Palaeoclimate……...……………………………………………………………..18 2.1.1.1 Pollen …………………………………………………………………...23 2.1.1.2 Speleothem Deposits ……………………………………………………25 2.1.1.3 Lake Lisan ………………………………………………………………28 2.2 Epipalaeolithic Culture History …………………………………………………………31 2.2.1 Early Epipalaeolithic (23,000 to 17,500 cal. years BP) ………...……………….31 2.2.1.1 Masraqan ………………………………………………………………..33 2.2.1.2 Qalkhan …………………………………………………………………33 2.2.1.3 Nebekian ………………………………………………………………..34 2.2.1.4 Kebaran …………………………………………………………………34 2.2.1.5 Nizzanian ……………………………………………………………….36 2.2.2 Middle Epipalaeolithic (17,500 to 14,600 cal. years BP) ……………..…….…..37 2.2.2.1 Geometric Kebaran ……………………………………………………..37 2.2.2.1 Mushabian ……………………………………………………....………39 2.2.3 Later Epipalaeolithic (14,600 to 11,600 cal. years BP) …………………………41 2.2.3.1 Ramonian ……………………………………………………………….41 2.2.3.2 Natufian …………………………………………………………………42 2.2.3.3 Harifian …………………………………………………………………43 Chapter 3 Upper Jordan Valley ………………………………………………………………….45 3.1 Jordan Valley Geology and Environment …………………………………...…………..45 3.2 Urkan e-Rubb IIa ……………………………………………………………………….48 3.2.1 Site Stratigraphy …………………………………………….…………..............50 3.2.2 Excavation Description ………...…………………………………………….....50 3.2.3 Artefacts and Dating …………………………………………...………………..53 3.3 Northern Jordan Valley Kebaran Sites ……………………………………...…………..63 3.3.1 Ohalo II ………...………………………………………………………………..63 3.3.2 Ein Gev I………...…………………………………………………………….…67 3.4 Wadi Fazael ………………………………...…………………………………………...69 3.5 Summary …………………………………...……………………………………………71 vi Chapter 4 Zooarchaeological and Taphonomic Methodology …….. ……………………………74 4.1 Taxonomic Identification and Bone Recording ………………………….……………...74 4.2 Quantification …………………………………………………………………………...77 4.3 Bone Density …………………………………………………………………………….80 4.4 Diagenetic Processes and Bone Preservation …………………………………………...82 4.4.1 Fragmentation …………………………………………………………………...82 4.4.2 NISP : MNE Ratios ……………………………………………………………...83 4.4.3 Bone-Based versus Tooth-Based MNI Ratios …………………………………..84 4.4.4 Tarsal and Carpal Survivorship …………………………………………………84 4.4.5 Proximal/Distal Humerus and Tibia ………………………………….…………85 4.5 Carnivore Modification ………………………………………………………………….86 4.6 Shaft Circumference and Shaft Length ………………………………………………….86 4.7 Natural Attrition …………………………………………………………………………87 4.7.1 Fluvial Transport ………………………………………………………………...87 4.7.2 Weathering and Root Damage ……………………………………………..........88 4.8 NISP : MNE Ratios and Marrow Weight ……………………………………………….89 4.9 Fracture Patterns: Angle, Outline, and Texture …………………………………………90 4.10 Cut Marks ………………………………………………………………………………..91 4.11 Burning ………………………………………………………………………………….93 4.12 Species Demographics Area A ………………………………………………………….94 4.12.1 Age Profiles: Epiphyseal Fusion and Tooth