Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-55597f9d44-l69ms Total loading time: 0.489 Render date: 2022-08-16T05:16:58.419Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

Article contents

Ochre and hide-working at a Natufian burial place

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Laure Dubreuil
Affiliation:
TUARC, Anthropology Department, Trent University, 1600 West Bank Drive, Peterborough ON K9J 7B8, Canada
Leore Grosman
Affiliation:
Institute of Archaeology, The Hebrew University, Mt. Scopus, Jerusalem, Israel; and Computerized Archaeology, Physics of Complex Systems, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, 76100, Israel

Abstract

Particular stones found on Epi-Palaeolithic sites in the Levant are thought to be for grinding vegetable matter and to be essential instruments in the development of food processing. Finding an assemblage of these tools in a burial cave, the authors ask a harder question: could they have been used for processing hides with ochre? Use-wear analysis allows a positive verdict, and so the tools take their place in the ritual apparatus associated with burial.

Type
Research
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, J. L. 1988. Use-wear analysis on manos and hide-processing stones. Journal of Field Archaeology 15(3): 307–15.Google Scholar
Adams, J. L. 1993. Technological development of manos and metates on the Hopi Mesas. Kiva 58(3): 331–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adams, J. L. 2002. Ground stone analysis. A technological approach. Salt Lake City (UT): University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
Adams, J., Delgado, S., Dubreuil, L., Hamon, C., Plisson, H. & Risch, R.. In Press. Functional analysis of macro-lithic artifacts, in Sternke, F., Costa, L. J. & Eigeland, L. (ed). Non-flint raw material use in prehistory: old prejudices and new directions. Oxford: Archaeopress.Google Scholar
Albright, S. 1984. Tahltan ethnoarchaeology. Burnaby (BC): Archaeological Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, P. 1981. Contribution méthodologique à l'analyse des microtraces d'utilisation sur les outils préhistoriques. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Université de Bordeaux I.Google Scholar
Audoin, F. & Plisson, H.. 1982. Les ocres et leurs témoins au Paléolithique en France: enquête et expériences sur leur validité archéologique. Cahier du Centre de Recherches Préhistoriques 8: 3380.Google Scholar
Bar-Yosef, O. 1980. Prehistory of the Levant. Annual Review of Anthropology 9: 101–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bar-Yosef, O. 1998. The Natufian culture in the Levant, threshold to the origins of agriculture. Evolutionary Anthropology 6(5): 159–77.3.0.CO;2-7>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bar-Yosef, O. & Belfer-Cohen, A.. 1989. The origins of sedentism and farming communities in the Levant. Journal of World Prehistory 3(4): 447–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, M. 1999. Reconstructing prehistoric hunter-gatherer mobility patterns and the implication for the shift to sedentism: a perspective from the Near East. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Colorado.Google Scholar
Belitz, B. 1979. Brain tanning the Sioux way. Pine Ridge (SD): Pine Ridge Reservation Publication.Google Scholar
Beyries, S. 2002. Le travail du cuir chez les Tchouktches et les Athapaskans: implications ethno-archéologiques, in Audoin-Rouzeau, F. & Beyries, S. (ed.) Le travail du cuir de la Préhistoire à nos jours: 143–57. Antibes: Editions APDCA.Google Scholar
Bocquentin, F. 2003. Pratiques funéraires, paramètres biologiques et identités culturelles au Natoufien: une analyse archéo-anthropologique. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Université de Bordeaux I.Google Scholar
Brandt, O. & Weedman, K.. 2002. The ethnoarchaeology of hide working and stone tool use in Konso, southern Ethiopia: an introduction, in Audoin-Rouzeau, F. & Beyries, S. (ed.) Le travail du cuir de la Préhistoire à nos jours: 113–29. Antibes: Editions APDCA.Google Scholar
Byrd, B. 1989. The Natufian: settlement variability and economic adaptation in the Levant at the end of the Pleistocene. Journal of World Prehistory 3(2): 159–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chahine, C. 2002. Evolution des techniques de fabrication du cuir et problèmes de conservation, in Audoin-Rouzeau, F. & Beyries, S. (ed.) Le travail du cuir de la Préhistoire à nos jours: 1329. Antibes: Editions APDCA.Google Scholar
Cooper, J. M. 1917. Analytical and critical bibliography of the tribes of Tierra del Fuego and adjacent territory (Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 63). Washington (DC): Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Couraud, C. 1988. Pigments utilisés en préhistoire. Provenance, préparation, mode d'utilisation. L'Anthropologie (Paris) 92(1): 1728.Google Scholar
De Beaune, S.A. 1989. Exemple ethnographique de l'utilisation plurifonctionnelle d'un galet de quartz. Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française 86: 61–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Fontanelle, J.M. 1981. Nouveau manuel complet du chamoiseur, pelletier-fourreur, maroquinier, mégisseur et parcheminier. Paris: Chez Léonce Laget.Google Scholar
Délaporte, Y. & Roué, M.. 1978. La préparation de la peau de renne chez les Lapons de Kautokeino. Journal d'Agriculture Traditionnelle et de Botanique Appliquée 25(4): 219–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delgado, S. 2008. Practicas economicas y gestion social de recursos (macro)liticos en la prehistoria reciente (III-I Milenios AC) del mediterraneo occidental. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Universitat de Barcelona.Google Scholar
Delgado, S. & Risch, R.. 2008. Lithic perspectives on metallurgy: an example from Copper and Bronze Age south-east Iberia, in Longo, L. (ed.) ‘Prehistoric technology’ 40 years later: functional studies and the Russian legacy: 235–53. Verona: Museo Civico di Verona and Universita degli Studi di Verona.Google Scholar
D'Iatchenko, V. & David, F.. 2002. La préparation traditionnelles des peaux de poissons et de mammifères marins chez les populations de l'Extrême-Orient sibérien de langue toungouze, in Audoin-Rouzeau, F. & Beyries, S. (ed.) Le travail du cuir de la Préhistoire à nos jours: 175–92. Antibes: Editions APDCA.Google Scholar
Digard, J.-P. 1981. Techniques des Nomades Baxtyari d'Iran. Paris: Maison des Sciences de l'Homme.Google Scholar
Dionne, M.-M. 2007. Le traitement des peaux et la femme dorsétienne dans le détroit d'Hudson (Nunavik): ethnoarchéologie, tracéologie et fonction de l'outillage, in Beyries, S. & Vat, V.é (ed.) Les civilisations du renne d'hier et d'aujourd'hui. Approches ethnohistoriques et anthropologiques: 457–71. Antibes: Editions APDCA.Google Scholar
Dubreuil, L. 2002. Etude fonctionnelle des outils de broyage natoufiens: nouvelles perspectives sur l'émergence de l'agriculture au Proche-Orient. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Université de Bordeaux 1.Google Scholar
Dubreuil, L. 2004. Long-term trends in Natufian subsistence: a use-wear analysis of ground stone tools. Journal of Archaeological Science 31: 1613–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dubreuil, L. 2008. Mortar versus grinding slabs function in the context of the Neolithization process in the Near East, in Longo, L. (ed.) ‘Prehistoric technology’ 40 years later: functional analysis and the Russian legacy: 169–77. Verona: Museo Civico di Verona and Universita degli Studi di Verona.Google Scholar
Ewers, J. C. 1958. The Blackfeet. Raiders on the Northwestern Plains. Norman (OK): University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
Flannery, K. 1969. Origins and ecological effects of early domestication in Iran and Near East, in Ucko, P. & Dimbleby, G. W. (ed.) The domestication and exploitation of plants and animals: 2353. Chicago (IL): Aldine Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Flannery, K. 1973. The origins of agriculture. Annual Review of Anthropology 2: 271310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forbes, R. J. 1964. Studies in ancient technology. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
Fullagar, R. & Field, J.. 1997. Pleistocene seed-grinding implements from the Australian arid zone. Antiquity 71: 300–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Georges, J.-M. 2000. Frottement, Usure et Lubrification. La tribologie ou Science des Surfaces. Paris: CNRS éditions.Google Scholar
González, J. & Ibáñez, J.. 2002. The use of pebbles in Eastern Vizcaya between 12,000 and 10,000 BP, in Procopiou, H. & Treuil, R. (ed.) Moudre et Broyer. Volume 1: Méthode: 6980. Paris: CTHS.Google Scholar
Goring-Morris, N. 2000. The quick and the dead, in Kuijt, I. (ed.) Life in the Neolithic farming communities: social organization, identity, and differenciation: 103–36. New York: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
Goring-Morris, N. & Belfer-Cohen, A.. 1997. The articulation of cultural processes and Late Quaternary environmental changes in Cisjordan. Paléorient 23(2): 7193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grosman, L. 2003. Preserving cultural traditions in a period of instability: the Late Natufian of the hilly Mediterranean zone. Current Anthropology 44: 571–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grosman, L. & Munro, N. D.. 2007. The sacred and the mundane: domestic activities at a Late Natufian burial site in the Levant. Before Farming 4(4): 114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grosman, L., Munro, N. D. & Belfer-Coher, A.. 2008. A 12,000 year old Shaman burial from the Southern Levant (Israel). Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 105: 17665-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gusinde, M. 1931/1982. Los indios de Tierra de Fuego. Volume 1. Buenos Aires: Centro Argentino de Etnologi'a Americana.Google Scholar
Hardy-Smith, T. & Edwards, P.. 2004. The garbage crisis in prehistory: artefact discard patterns at the Early Natufian site of Wadi Hammeh 27 and the origins of household refuse disposal strategies. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 23: 253–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamon, C. 2007. Functional analysis of stone grinding and polishing tools from the earliest Neolithic of north-western Europe. Journal of Archaeological Science 35(6): 1502–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamon, C. & Plisson, H.. 2008. Which analytical framework for the functional analysis of grinding stones? The blind test contribution, in Longo, L. (ed.) ‘Prehistoric Technology’ 40 years later: functional studies and the Russian legacy: 2938.Verona: Museo Civico di Verona and Universita degli Studi di Verona.Google Scholar
Hassrick, R. B. 1993. Les Sioux. Paris: Albin Michel.Google Scholar
Hatt, G. 1969. Arctic skin clothing in Eurasia and America, an ethnographic study. Artic Anthropology 5(2): 3133.Google Scholar
Hayden, B. 1990. The right rub: hide working in high ranking households, in Knutsson, H., Knutsson, K. & Taffinder, J. (ed.) The interpretative possibilities of microwear studies: 89101. Uppsala: Societas Archaeologica Upsaliensis.Google Scholar
Hayden, B. 1993. Investigating status with hideworking use-wear: a preliminary assessment, in Anderson, P. C., Beyries, S., Otte, M. & Plisson, H. (ed.) Traces et Fonction, les Gestes Retrouvés. Volume 1: 118–30. Valbonne: Centre de Recherches Archéologiques du CNRS. 2002. L'évolution des premiers vêtements en cuir, in Audoin-Rouzeau, F. & Beyries, S. (ed.) Le travail du Cuir de la Préhistoire à nos Jours: 193216. Antibes: Editions APDCA.Google Scholar
Hovers, E., Ilani, S., Bar-Yosef, O. & Vandermeersch, B.. 2003. An early case of color symbolism. Current Anthropology 44(4): 491522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ibáñez, J. & González, J.. 1996. From tool use to site function: use-wear analysis in some Final Upper Palaeolithic sites in the Basque country (British Archaeological Reports International Series 658). Oxford: Tempus Reparatum.Google Scholar
Ibáñez, J., González, J. & Moreno, M.. 2002. Le travail de la peau en milieu rural: le cas de la Jebala marocaine, in Audoin-Rouzeau, F. & Beyries, S. (ed.) Le travail du cuir de la Préhistoire à nos jours: 7997. Antibes: Editions APDCA.Google Scholar
Kamminga, J. 1982. Over the edge: functional analysis of Australian stone tools (Occasional Papers in Anthropology 12). St Lucia: Anthropology Museum, University of Queensland.Google Scholar
Keeley, L. H. 1980. Experimental eetermination of stone tool uses. Chicago (IL): University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kewanwytewa, J. & Bartlett, K.. 1946. Hopi moccasin making. Plateau 19: 21–8.Google Scholar
Laloy, L. 1906. Compte-rendu de Steinmann S.. L'Anthropologie 17: 153–5.Google Scholar
Laubin, R. & Laubin, G.. 1977. The Indian tipi, its history, construction and use. Norman (OK): University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
Lapena, F. 1978. The Wintu, in Heizer, R. (ed.) Handbook of North American Indians. Volume 8: California: 324–40. Washington (DC): Smithsonian Institution.Google Scholar
Le Mouël, J.-F. 1973. Préparation et utilisation des peaux de phoques chez les Eskimos Naujamiut, in L'homme d'Hier et d'Aujourd'hui. Recueil d'études en hommage à A. Leroi-Gourhan. Paris: Cujas editions.Google Scholar
Leroi-Gourhan, A. 1971. L'Homme et la Matière. Second edition. Paris: Albin Michel.Google Scholar
Leroi-Gourhan, A. 1973. Milieu et technique. Second edition. Paris: Albin Michel.Google Scholar
Logan, E. & Fratt, L.. 1993. Pigment processing at Homol'ovi III: a preliminary study. Kiva 58(3): 415–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mandl, I. 1961. Collagenasis and elastases. Advances in Enzymology 23: 164264.Google Scholar
Mansur, M. E. 1997. Functional analysis of polished stone-tools: some considerations about the nature of polishing, in Bustillo, M. A. & Millan, A. Ramos (ed.) Siliceous rocks and culture: 465–86. Madrid: CSIC.Google Scholar
Menasanch, M., Risch, R.. & Soldevilla, J. A.. 2002. Los tecnologias del procesado de cereal en el sudeste de la peninsula ibérica durante el III y el II milenio A.N.E., in Procopiou, H. & Treuil, R. (ed.) Moudre et Broyer. Volume I: Méthodes: 81110. Paris: CTHS.Google Scholar
Moore, A.T.M., Hillman, G. C. & Legge, A. G.. 2000. Village on the Euphrates. From foraging to farming at Abu Hureyra. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Moss, E. H. 1983. The functional analysis of flint implements. Pincevent and Pont d'Ambon: two case studies from the French Final Palaeolithic (British Archaeological Reports International Series 177). Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.Google Scholar
Orthmann, A. C. 1945. Tanning processes. Chicago (IL): Hide and Leather Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Osgood, C. 1936. Contribution to the ethnography of the Kutchin (Yale University Publications in Anthropology 14). New Haven (CT): Department of Anthropology, Yale University.Google Scholar
Osgood, C. 1970. Ingalik material culture. NewHaven (CT): Human Relations Area Files Press.Google Scholar
Osgood, C. 1976. The ethnography of the Tanaina. NewHaven (CT): Human Relations Area Files Press.Google Scholar
Peabody, C. 1928. Red paint. Journal de la Société des Américanistes de Paris 19: 207–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pécheux, H. 1922. Le cuir, les os, l'ivoire, la corne, l'écaille, la nacre et les perles, le corail. Paris: Librairie Baillière et Fils.Google Scholar
Philibert, S. 1994. L'ocre et le traitement des peaux: révision d'une conception traditionnelle des grattoirs ocrés de la Balma Margidena (Andorre). L'Anthropologie 98(2-3): 447–53.Google Scholar
Plisson, H. 1985. Etude fonctionnelle d'outillages lithiques préhistoriques par l'analyse des micro-usures: recherche méthodologique et archéologique. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Université de Paris 1.Google Scholar
Plisson, H. 1992. Le cuir au Paléolithique, in Sarrat-Langer, S. (ed.) Autour du cuir. Compte-rendu des rencontres archéologiques de Guiry, 5-6 Avril 1991: 718. Guiry-en-Vexin: Musée archéologique départemental du Val d'Oise.Google Scholar
Procopiou, H., Jautee, E., Vargiolu, R. & Zahouni, H.. 1998. Petrographic and use-wear analysis of a quern from Syvritos Kephala, in Facchini, F., di Cesnola, A. Palma, Piperno, M. & Peretto, C. (ed.) Analyse fonctionnelle des pièces lithiques: situation actuelle de la recherche: 1183–92. Forli: A. B. A. C. O.Google Scholar
Ramos, R. 2005. The function of the edge-ground cobble put to the test: an initial assessment. Journal of Caribbean Archaeology 6: 122.Google Scholar
Risch, R. 2002. Recursos naturales, medios de producción y explotación social. Un análisis económico de la industria lítica de Fuente Alamo (Almería), 2250-1400 ANE. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern.Google Scholar
Robbe, B. 1975. Le traitement des peaux de phoque chez les Ammassalimuiut observé en 1972 dans le village de Tileqilaq. Objets et Monde 15: 199208.Google Scholar
Roux, V. 1986. Le matériel de broyage. Etude ethnoarchéologique à Tichitt (R.I Mauritanie). Paris: Editions Recherche sur les Civilisations.Google Scholar
Rudner, I. 1982. Khoisan pigments and paints and their relationship to rock paintings. Cape Town: South African Museum.Google Scholar
Sollas, W. J. 1924. Ancient hunters and their modern representatives. London: MacMillan.Google Scholar
Spier, L. 1970. Yuman tribes of the Gila River. New York: Cooper Square Publishers.Google Scholar
Unger-Hamilton, R. 1988. Method in microwear analysis (British Archaeological Reports International Series 435). Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.Google Scholar
Van Gjin, A. 1990. The wear and tear of flint. Leiden: University of Leiden, Institute of Prehistory.Google Scholar
Velo, J. 1984. Ochre as medicine: a suggestion for the interpretation of the archaeological record. Current Anthropology 25: 674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Victor, P. E. & Robert-Lamblin, J.. 1989. La civilisation du phoque. Bourges: Armand Colin.Google Scholar
Wadley, L. 2005. Putting ochre to test: replication studies of adhesives that may have been used for hafting tools in the Middle Stone Age. Journal of Human Evolution 49: 587601.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wallace, E. & Hoebel, A.. 1970. The Commanche. Lords of the South Plains. Norman (OK): University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
Watts, I. 2002. Ochre in the Middle Stone Age of southern Africa: ritualized display or hide preservative? South African Archaeological Bulletin 57: 114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webley, L. 2005. Hideworking among descendants of Khoekhoen pastoralists in the Northern Cape, South Africa, in Frink, L. & Weedman, K. (ed.) Gender and hide production: 153–74. New York: Altamira.Google Scholar
Weinstein-Evron, M. & Ilani, S.. 1994. Provenance of ochre in Natufian layers of El-Wad Cave, Mount Carmel, Israël. Journal of Archaeological Science 21(4): 461–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, K. 1991. The origins and development of ground stone assemblages in Late Pleistocene southwest Asia. Paléorient 17(1): 1945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, K. 1992. Ground stone assemblages variation and subsistence strategies in the Levant, 22 000-5500 BP. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Yale University.Google Scholar
Zurro, D., Risch, R. & Conte, I. Clemente. 2005. Analysis of an archaeological grinding tool: what to do with archaeological artefacts, in Terradas, X. (ed.) Lithic toolkits in ethoarchaeological contexts (British Archaeological Reports International Series 1370): 5764. Oxford: Archaeopress.Google Scholar
34
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Ochre and hide-working at a Natufian burial place
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Ochre and hide-working at a Natufian burial place
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Ochre and hide-working at a Natufian burial place
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *