Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-cjp7w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-24T15:22:38.692Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Between Novelty and Variability: Natufian Hunter-Gatherers (c. 15–11.7 kyr) Proto-Agrotechnology and the Question of Morphometric Variations of the Earliest Sickles

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 May 2021

Danny Rosenberg  and
Rivka Chasan
Danny Rosenberg
Affiliation:
Laboratory for Ground Stone Tools Research, Zinman Institute of Archaeology, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel. drosen@research.haifa.ac.il
Rivka Chasan
Affiliation:
Laboratory for Ground Stone Tools Research, Zinman Institute of Archaeology, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel. rivka.chasan@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

How hunter-gatherers manipulated and utilised their natural surroundings is a widely studied topic among anthropologists and archaeologists alike. This focuses on the Natufian culture of the Late Epipalaeolithic period (c. 15–11.7 kyr), the last Levantine hunter-gatherer population, and specifically on the earliest composite tools designed for harvesting. These tools are widely referred to as sickles. They consisted of a haft into which a groove was cut and flint inserts affixed. This revolutionised harvesting and established it on new grounds. While the plants manipulated by these tools are yet to be identified with certainty, it is evident that these implements were rapidly integrated and dispersed throughout the Natufian interaction sphere, suggesting that they provided a significant advantage, which probably constituted a critical step toward agriculture. At the same time, the Natufian haft assemblage demonstrates high morphometric variability. We review the available data concerning Natufian hafts and offer three possible models to explain the noted variability. We conclude that while these models are not mutually exclusive, this varied technological pattern is best understood as deriving from a protracted formative phase of technological development, progressing through incremental processes of trial and error.

Résumé

RÉSUMÉ

Entre nouveauté et variabilité: chasseurs cueilleurs Natoufienes (vers 15–11.7 kya) proto-agrotechnologie et la question des variations morphologiques métriques des plus anciennes faucilles, de Danny Rosenberg et Rivka Chasan

Comment les chasseurs-cueilleurs manipulaient et utilisaient leur environnement naturel est un sujet largement étudié aussi bien par les anthropologues que par les archéologues. Notre étude se concentre sur la culture natoufienne de l’épipaléolithique tardif (vers 15–11.7 kya), dernière population de chasseurs cueilleurs du levantin et plus particulièrement sur les plus précoces outils composés élaborés pour la récolte. On se réfère généralement à ces outils sous le nom de faucilles. Ils consistaient en un manche dans lequel on avait creusé un sillon et inséré des fragments de silex. Ceci a révolutionné la moisson et l’a établie sur de nouvelles terres. Bien qu’il nous reste à identifier avec certitude quelles étaient les plantes manipulées par ces outils, il est évident que ces outils furent rapidement intégreés et dispersés partout dans la sphère d’interaction de la culture natoufienne, ce qui donne à penser qu’ils apportaient un avantage majeur qui constituait probablement une étape critique vers l’agriculture. En même temps l’assemblage du manche natoufien fait preuve d’un niveau élevé de variabilité morphométrique. Dans le courant article nous révisons les données disponibles concernant les manches natoufiens et offrons trois modèles possibles qui expliquent la variabilité identifiée. Nous concluons que, tandis que ces modèles ne s’excluent pas l’un l’autre ce schéma technologique varié se comprend le mieux comme dérivant d’une phase retardée de développement technologique progressant graduellement à travers un procédé d’essais et d’erreurs.

Zusammenfassung

ZUSAMMENFASSUNG

Zwischen Neuartigkeit und Variabilität: Die Proto-Agrotechnologie der Jäger-Sammler des Natufien (ca. 15–11.7 kyr) und die Frage morphometrischer Variationen der frühesten Sicheln, von Danny Rosenberg und Rivka Chasan

Wie Jäger und Sammler ihre natürliche Umgebung manipulierten und nutzten, ist ein von Anthropolog wie von Archäolog innen weithin untersuchtes Thema. Unsere Untersuchung konzentriert sich auf die Natufien-Kultur des späten Epipaläolithikums (ca. 15–11.7 kyr), die letzte Jäger- und Sammlerpopulation der Levante, und speziell auf die frühesten zusammengesetzten Werkzeuge, die für die Ernte entwickelt wurden. Diese Werkzeuge werden allgemein als Sicheln bezeichnet. Sie bestanden aus einem Griff, in den eine Rille geschnitten und Einsätze aus Feuerstein eingefügt wurden. Dies revolutionierte die Ernte und etablierte sie auf neuem Terrain. Während die Pflanzen, die mit diesen Werkzeugen bearbeitet wurden, noch nicht mit Sicherheit identifiziert werden können, ist es offensichtlich, dass diese Werkzeuge schnell integriert und im gesamten Interaktionsbereich der Natufien-Kultur verbreitet wurden, was darauf hindeutet, dass sie einen bedeutenden Vorteil boten, der wahrscheinlich einen entscheidenden Schritt in Richtung Landwirtschaft darstellte. Gleichzeitig zeigt die Griff-Assemblage des Natufien eine hohe morphometrische Variabilität. In dieser Arbeit überprüfen wir die verfügbaren Daten zu den Griffen des Natufien und bieten drei mögliche Modelle an, die die festgestellte Variabilität erklären. Wir kommen zu dem Schluss, dass sich diese Modelle zwar nicht gegenseitig ausschließen, dass aber dieses vielfältige technologische Muster am besten als Ergebnis einer langwierigen formativen Phase der technologischen Entwicklung zu verstehen ist, die durch schrittweise Prozesse von Versuch und Irrtum fortschreitet.

Resumen

RESUMEN

Entre la novedad y la variabilidad: protoagrotecnología entre los cazadores-recolectores natufienses (c. 15–11.7kyr) y la cuestión de las variaciones morfométricas de las primeras hoces, por Danny Rosenberg y Rivka Chasan

Cómo los cazadores-recolectores manipularon y utilizaron su entorno natural es un tema ampliamente estudiado por los antrópologos y arqueólogos. Nuestro estudio se centra en la cultura Natufiense del Epipaleolítico final (c. 15–11.7 kyr), las últimas poblaciones de cazadores-recolectores levantinas, y específicamente en las primeras herramientas compuestas y diseñadas para la siega. Estas herramientas se conocen ampliamente como hoces. Consistían en un mango en el que se cortaba una ranura y se colocaban inserciones de sílex. Esto revolucionó la forma de cosechar y permitió expandirla en nuevos terrenos. Aunque las plantas manipuladas por estas herramientas aún no se han identificado con certeza, es evidente que estos instrumentos se integraron rápidamente y se dispersaron en la esfera de interacción natufiense, sugiriendo que aportaban una ventaja significativa, que probablemente constituyó un paso crítico hacia la agricultura. Al mismo tiempo, el conjunto de mangos natufienses demuestra una alta variabilidad morfométrica. En este artículo, se aporta una revisión de los datos disponibles sobre los mangos natufienses y se ofrecen tres modelos que explican la variabilidad observada. Concluimos que mientras estos modelos no son mutuamente exclusivos, este patrón tecnológicamente variado se entiende mejor como derivado de una fase formativa prolongada de desarrollo tecnológico que se va modificando a través de procesos de prueba y error.

Keywords

NatufianNear EastEpipaleolithicHarvestingSicklesHunter-gatherers
Type
Research Article
Information
Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society , Volume 87 , December 2021 , pp. 31 - 50
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Prehistoric Society

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

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Akazawa, S., Muhesen, S., Kanjou, Y., Nishiaki, Y., Nakata, H., Yoneda, M., Kondo, O. & Tanno, K. 2010. The 2007–2008 season’s excavations at Dederiyeh Cave, Afrin, northwest Syria. Chronique Archéologique en Syrie 4, 31–7Google Scholar
Anderson, P.C. 1991. Harvesting of wild cereals during the Natufian as seen from experimental cultivation and harvest of wild einkorn wheat and microwear analysis of stone tools. In Bar-Yosef & Valla (eds) 1991, 521–56Google Scholar
Arranz-Otaegui, A., Carretero, L.G., Roe, J. & Richter, T. 2018a. ‘Founder crops’ v. wild plants: assessing the plant-based diet of the last hunter-gatherers in southwest Asia. Quaternary Science Reviews 186, 263–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arranz-Otaegui, A., Carretero, L.G., Ramsay, M.N., Fuller, D.Q. & Richter, T. 2018b. Archaeobotanical evidence reveals the origins of bread 14,400 years ago in northeastern Jordan. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115, 7925–30CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arthur, W.B. 2007. The structure of invention. Research Policy 36, 274–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asouti, E. & Fuller, D.Q. 2013. A contextual approach to the emergence of agriculture in southwest Asia: Reconstructing Early Neolithic plant-food production. Current Anthropology 54, 299–345 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Astruc, L., Ben-Ykaya, M. & Torchy, L. 2012. De l’efficaté des faucilles Néolithiques au proche-Orient: Approche expérimentale. Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Francaise 109, 671–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barlow, K.R. & Heck, M.D. 2002. More on acorn eating during the Natufian: Expected patterning in diet and the archaeological record of subsistence. In Mason, S.L.R. & Hather, J.G. (eds), Hunter-Gatherer Archaeobotany, 128–45. London: University College London Google Scholar
Bar-Oz, G., Dayan, T., Kaufman, D. & Weinstein-Evron, M. 2004. The Natufian economy at el-Wad Terrace with special reference to gazelle exploitation patterns. Journal of Archaeological Science 31, 217–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bar-Yosef, O. 1983. The Natufian in the southern Levant. In Cuyler-Young, T. Jr, Smith, P.E.L., & Mortensen, P. (eds), The Hilly Flanks and Beyond: Essays on the prehistory of southern Asia presented to Robert J. Braidwood, 11–42. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Google Scholar
Bar-Yosef, O. 2002. Natufian: A complex society of foragers. In Fitzhugh, B. & Habu, J. (eds), Beyond Foraging and Collecting: Evolutionary change in hunter-gatherer settlement systems, 91–149. New York: Springer CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bar-Yosef, O. 2011. Climatic fluctuations and early farming in West and East Asia. Current Anthropology 52(S4), S175–93 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bar-Yosef, O. & Belfer-Cohen, A. 1989. The origins of sedentism and farming communities in the Levant. Journal of World Prehistory 3, 447–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bar-Yosef, O. & Belfer-Cohen, A. 2000. Nahal Ein Gev II – A late Epi-Paleolithic site in the Jordan Valley. Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society 30, 49–71 Google Scholar
Bar-Yosef, O. & Tchernov, E. 1970. The Natufian bone industry of Ha-Yonim Cave. Israel Exploration Journal 20, 141–50Google Scholar
Bar-Yosef, O. & Valla, F.R. (eds). 1991, The Natufian Culture in the Levant. Ann Arbor, MI: International Monographs in Prehistory Google Scholar
Bar-Yosef, O. & Valla, F.R. (eds). 2013, Natufian Foragers in the Levant: Terminal Pleistocene Social Changes in Western Asia. Ann Arbor MI: International Monographs in Prehistory CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belfer-Cohen, A. 1988. The Natufian Settlement at Hayonim Cave. A Hunter-Gatherer Band on the Threshold of Agriculture. Unpublished PhD thesis, Hebrew University Google Scholar
Belfer-Cohen, A. 1991a. The Natufian in the Levant. Annual Review of Anthropology 20, 167–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belfer-Cohen, A. 1991b. Art items from layer B, Hayonim Cave: A case study of art in a Natufian context. In Bar-Yosef & Valla (eds) 1991, 569–88Google Scholar
Belfer-Cohen, A. & Bar-Yosef, O. 2000. Early sedentism in the Near East: A bumpy road to village life. In Kuijt, I. (ed.), Life in Neolithic Farming Communities, 19–37. New York: Kluwer Google Scholar
Bender, B. 1978. Gatherer-hunter to farmer: A social perspective. World Archaeology 10, 204–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohrer, V. 1972. On the relation of harvest methods to early agriculture in the Near East. Economic Botany 26, 145–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bousman, B.C. 1993. Hunter-gatherer adaptations, economic risk and tool design. Lithic Technology 18, 59–86 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, B. 2012. The Hayonim Terrace bone artifact assemblage. In Valla (ed.) 2012, 349–82Google Scholar
Büller, H. 1982. Methodological problems in the microwear analysis of tools selected from the Natufian sites of el Wad and Aïn Mallaha. In Cauvin, M-C. (ed.), Traces d’utilisaiton sur les Outils Neolithiques du Proche Orient. Table ronde CNRS tenue à Lyon du 8 au 10 juin 1982, 107–25. Lyon: Maison de l’Orient Google Scholar
Byrd, B.F. 1989. The Natufian: Settlement variability and economic adaptations in the Levant at the end of the Pleistocene. Journal of World Prehistory 3, 159–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campana, D.V. 1989. Natufian and Protoneolithic Bone Tools: The manufacture and use of bone implements in the Zagros and the Levant. Oxford: British Archaeological Report S494CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cane, S. 1989. Australian aboriginal seed grinding and its archaeological record: A case study from the Western Desert. In Harris, D.R. & Hillman, G.C. (eds), Foraging and Farming: The evolution of plant exploitation, 99–119. London: Routledge Google Scholar
Caracuta, V., Weinstein-Evron, M., Kaufman, D., Yeshurun, R., Silvent, J. & Baoretto, E. 2016. 14,000-year-old seeds indicate the Levantine origin of the lost progenitor of faba bean. Scientific Reports 6, 37399 [doi: 10.1038/srep37399]CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Colledge, S. 2001. Plant Exploitation on Epipaleolithic and Early Neolithic Sites in the Levant. Oxford: British Archaeological Report S986CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colledge, S. 2012. Plants remains and archaeobotanical analysis. In Edwards (ed.) 2012b, 353–65Google Scholar
Colledge, S. & Conolly, J. 2010. Reassessing the evidence for the cultivation of wild crops during the Younger Dryas at Tell Abu Hureyra, Syria. Environmental Archaeology 15, 124–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dubreuil, L. 2004. Long-term trends in Natufian subsistence: A use-wear analysis of ground stone tools. Journal of Archaeological Science 31, 1613–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D’Errico, F., Giacobini, G., Gather, J., Powers-Jones, A.H. & Radmilli, A.M. 1995. Possible bone threshing tools from Neolithic levels of the Grotta dei Piccioni (Abruzzo, Italy). Journal of Archaeological Science 22, 537–649 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, P.C. 1991. Wadi Hammeh 27: An early Natufian site at Pella, Jordan. In Bar-Yosef & Valla (eds) 1991, 123–48Google Scholar
Edwards, P.C. 2007. A 14000-year-old hunter-gatherer’s toolkit. Antiquity 81, 865–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, P.C. 2012a. Visual representations in stone and bone. In Edwards (ed.) 2012b, 287–320Google Scholar
Edwards, P.C. (ed.) 2012b. Wadi Hammeh 27, an Early Natufian Settlement at Pella in Jordan. Leiden: Brill Google Scholar
Edwards, P.C. & Dosseur, G. le. 2012. Tools and ornaments of bone. In Edwards (ed.) 2012b, 249–74Google Scholar
Edwards, P.C. & Webb, J. 2012. The basaltic artefacts and their origin. In Edwards (ed.) 2012b, 205–33Google Scholar
Edwards, P.C., Shewan, L., Webb, J., Delage, C., Valdiosera, C., Robertson, R., Shev, E. & Valka, A.M. 2015. La Trobe University’s 2015 geological survey and archaeological excavation season at the Natufian site of Wadi Hammeh 27. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 59, 259–71Google Scholar
Garrard, A.N. 1991. Natufian settlement in the Azraq Basin, eastern Jordan. In Bar-Yosef & Valla (eds) 1991, 235–44Google Scholar
Garrard, A.N., & Yazbeck, C. 2013. The Natufian of Moghr el-Ahwal in the Qadisha Valley, northern Lebanon. In Bar-Yosef & Valla (eds) 2013, 17–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrod, D.A.E. 1932. A new Mesolithic industry: The Natufian of Palestine. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 62, 257–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrod, D.A.E. 1937. Mugharet el-Wad. Archaeological material. Layer A. In Garrod, D.A.E. & Bate, D.M.A. (eds), The Stone Age of Mount Carmel, 29–57. Oxford: Clarendon Google Scholar
Garrod, D.A.E. 1957. The Natufian culture: The life and economy of a Mesolithic people in the Near East. Proceedings of the British Academy 43, 211–27Google Scholar
Goring-Morris, N. & Belfer-Cohen, A. 2013. Ruminations on the role of periphery and centre in the Natufian. In Bar-Yosef & Valla (eds) 2013, 562–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goring-Morris, N., Goldberg, P., Goren, Y., Baruch, U. & Bar-Yosef Mayer, D. 1999. Saflulim: A Late Natufian base camp in the central Negev highlands, Israel. Palestine Exploration Quarterly 131, 36–64 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Groman-Yaroslavski, I. 2014. The Transition to Early Neolithic Economy Reconstructed by Functional Analysis of Blades: A case study of Late Natufian and Pre-Pottery Neolithic A sites in the Salibiya Basin, southern Jordan Valley. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of HaifaGoogle Scholar
Groman-Yaroslavski, I., Weiss, E. & Nadel, D. 2016. Composite sickles and cereal harvesting methods at 23,000-years-old Ohalo II, Israel. PloS ONE 11, e0167151 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grosman, L., Ashkenazy, H. & Belfer-Cohen, A. 2005. The Natufian occupation of Nahal Oren, Mt. Carmel, Israel – the lithic evidence. Paléorient 31(2), 5–26 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harlan, J.R. 1999. Harvesting of wild-grass seed and implications for domestication. In Anderson, P.C. (ed.), Prehistory of Agriculture, New Experimental and Ethnographic Approaches, 1–5. Los Angeles CA: University of California Press Google Scholar
Henry, D.O. 1985. Pre-agricultural sedentism: The Natufian example. In Price, T.D. & Brown, J.A. (eds), Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers: The emergence of cultural complexity, 365–84. New York: Academic Press Google Scholar
Henry, D.O. 1989. From Foraging to Agriculture: The Levant at the end of the Ice Age. Philadelphia PA: University of Pennsylvania Press CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hillman, G.C. 2000. Plant food economy of Abu Hureyra. In Moore, A.M.T., Hillman, G.C. & Legge, A.T. (eds), Village on the Euphrates, from Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra, 372–92. Oxford: Oxford University Press Google Scholar
Hillman, G.C. & Davies, M.S. 1990. Measured domestication rates in wild wheats and barley under primitive cultivation, and their archaeological implications. Journal of World Prehistory 4, 157–222 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopf, M. & Bar-Yosef, O. 1987. Plant remains from Hayonim Cave, Western Galilee. Paléorient 13(1), 117–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keeley, L.H. 1982. Hafting and retooling effects on the archaeological record. American Antiquity 47, 798–809 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keeley, L.H. 1988. Hunter-gatherer economic complexity and ‘population pressure’: A cross-cultural analysis. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 7, 373–411 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, R.L. 1995. The Foraging Spectrum: Diversity in hunter-gatherer lifeways. Washington DC: Smithsonian Institution Press Google Scholar
Klein, N., Belfer-Cohen, A. & Grosman, L. 2016. Bone tools as the paraphernalia of ritual activities: A case study from Hilazon Tachtit Cave. Eurasian Prehistory 13, 91–104 Google Scholar
Klimscha, F. 2020. Innovation diffusion in antiquity. Case studies and their relevance for the coming of iron. In Brumlich, M., Lenhard, E. & Meyer, M. (eds), The Coming of Iron. Beginnings of Iron Smelting in Europe, 13–26. Berlin: TOPOI Google Scholar
Leeuw, S.E. van der. 1990. Archaeology, material culture and innovation. SubStance 19(2/3), 92–109 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, L., Wang, J., Rosenberg, D., Zhaoi, H., Lengyel, G. & Nadel, D. 2018. Fermented beverage and food storage in 13,000 y-old stone mortars at Raqefet Cave, Israel: Investigating Natufian ritual feasting. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 21, 783–93Google Scholar
Maher, L.A., Banning, E.B. & Chazan, M. 2011. Oasis or mirage? Assessing the role of abrupt climate change in the prehistory of the southern Levant. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 21(1), 1–29 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mazzucco, N., Capuzzo, G., Pannocchia, C.P., Ibáñez, J.J. & Gibaja, J.F. 2018. Harvesting tools and the spread of the Neolithic into central-western Mediterranean area. Quaternary International 470, 511–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, N.F. 1992. The origins of plant cultivation in the Near East. In Cowan, C.W. & Watson, P.J. (eds), The Origins of Agriculture: An international perspective, 39–58. Washington DC: Smithsonian Institution Google Scholar
Munro, N. 2004. Zooarchaeological measures of hunting pressure and occupation intensity in the Natufian: Implications for agricultural origins. Current Anthropology 45, S5–S34 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munro, N., Petrillo, A. & Grosman, L. 2021. Specialized aquatic resource exploitation at the Late Natufian site of Nahal Ein Gev II, Israel. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences 13(6), 1–15 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neuville, R. 1951. Le Paléolithique et Mésolithique du Desert de Judée. Paris: Archives de l’Institut de la Paléntologie Humaine, Mémoire 24Google Scholar
Nishiaki, Y., Yoneda, M., Kanjo, Y. & Akazawa, T. 2017. Natufian in the north: The Late Epipaleolithic cultural entity at Dederiyeh Cave, northwest Syria. Paléorient 43(2), 7–24 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noy, T. 1989. Some aspects of Natufian mortuary behavior at Nahal Oren. In Hershkovitz, I. (ed.), People and Culture in Change, 53–7. Oxford: British Archaeological Report S508Google Scholar
Noy, T. 1991 Art and decoration in the Natufian at Nahel Oren. In Bar-Yosef & Valla (eds) 1991, 557–68Google Scholar
Olszewski, D.I. 1991. Social complexity in the Natufian? Assessing the relationship of ideas and data. In Clark, G.A. (ed), Perspectives on the Past: Theoretical biases in Mediterranean hunter-gatherer research, 322–40. Philadelphia PA: University of Pennsylvania Press Google Scholar
Olszewski, D.I. 2004. Plant food subsistence issues and scientific inquiry in the Early Natufian. In Delage, C. (ed.), The Last Hunter-Gatherers in the Near East, 189–209. Oxford: British Archaeological Report S1320Google Scholar
Perrot, J. 1960. Excavations at ‘Eynan (‘Ain Mallaha); Preliminary report on the 1959 season. Israel Exploration Journal 10, 14–22 Google Scholar
Perrot, J. 1966. Le gisement Natoufien de Mallaha (Eynan), Israël. L’Anthropologie 70, 437–83Google Scholar
Piperno, D.R., Weiss, E., Holst, I. & Nadel, D. 2004. Processing of wild cereal grains in the Upper Palaeolithic revealed by starch grain analysis. Nature 430, 670–3CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Portillo, M., Rosen, A.M. & Weinstein-Evron, M. 2010. Natufian plant uses at el-Wad Terrace (Mount Carmel, Israel): The phytolith evidence. Eurasian Prehistory 7, 99–112 Google Scholar
Power, R.C., Rosen, A.M. & Nadel, D. 2014. The economic and ritual utilisation of plants at the Raqefet Cave Natufian site: The evidence from phytoliths. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 33, 49–65 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richter, T. 2007. A comparative use-wear analysis of late Epipalaeolithic (Natufian) chipped stone artefacts from the southern Levant. Levant 39, 97–122 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, R., Edwards, P.C. & Coates, R. 2019. A zoomorphic sickle terminal from the Natufian site of Wadi Hammeh 27 in Jordan. Palestine Exploration Quarterly 151, 36–49 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogers, E.M. 1983. Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Free Press Google Scholar
Ronen, A. & Lechevallier, M. 1991. The Natufian of Hatoula. In Bar-Yosef & Valla (eds) 1991, 149–60Google Scholar
Rosen, A.M. 2010. Natufian plant exploitation: Managing risk and stability in an environment of change. Eurasian Prehistory 7, 117–31Google Scholar
Rosen, A.M. 2012. Phytolith evidence for environmental and plant exploitation at Hayonim Terrace. In Valla (ed.) 2012, 85–92Google Scholar
Rosen, A.M. 2013. Natufian foragers and the ‘Monocot Revolution’: A phytolith perspective. In Bar-Yosef & Valla (eds) 2013, 638–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosen, A.M. & Rivera-Collazo, I. 2012. Climate change, adaptive cycles, and the persistence of foraging economies during the late Pleistocene/Holocene transition in the Levant. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 109(10), 3640–5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rosenberg, D. 2008. The possible use of acorns in past economies of the southern Levant: A staple food or a negligible food source? Levant 40, 167–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, D. 2013. Not ‘just another brick in the wall?’ The symbolism of groundstone tools in Natufian and Early Neolithic Levantine constructions. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 23, 185–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, D. & Nadel, D. 2014. The sounds of pounding: Boulder mortars and their significance to Natufian burial customs. Current Anthropology 55, 784–812 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, D. & Nadel, D. 2017. The significance of the morphometric and contextual variation in stone hewn mortars during the Natufian-PPNA transition in the southern Levant. Quaternary International 439, 83–93 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, D., Chasan, R., Lengyel, G. & Nadel, D. 2020. Stone ‘canvas’ and Natufian art: An incised human figure from the Natufian cemetery at Raqefet Cave, Israel. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 39, 128–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, D., Kaufman, D., Yeshurun, R. & Weinstein-Evron, M. 2012. The broken record: The Natufian groundstone assemblage from el-Wad Terrace (Mount Carmel, Israel)—attributes and their interpretation. Eurasian Prehistory 9, 93–128 Google Scholar
Samzun, A. 1994. Le mobilier en pierre. In M. Lechevallier & A. Ronen (eds), Le gisement de Hatoula en Judée occidentale, Israël, 193–226. Paris: Mémoires et travaux du Centre de recherche français de Jérusalem 8Google Scholar
Shaham, D. & Belfer-Cohen, A. 2013. Incised slabs from Hayonim Cave: A methodological case study for reading Natufian art. In F. Borrell, J.J. Ibáňez & M. Molist (eds), Stone Tools in Transition: From hunter-gatherers to farming societies in the Near East, 407–19. Barcelona: Universitat Autònoma BarcelonaGoogle Scholar
Sharon, G., Grosman, L., Allué, E., Barash, A., Bar-Yosef Mayer, D.E., Biton, R., Bunin, E.J., Langgut, D., Melamed, Y., Miscchke, S., Valleta, F. & Munro, N.D. 2020. Jordan River Dureijat: 10,000 years of intermittent Epipaleolithic activity on the shore of the Palaeolake Hula. PaleoAnthropology 2020, 34–64Google Scholar
Snir, A., Nadel, D. & Weiss, E. 2015. Plant-food preparation on two consecutive floors at Upper Paleolithic Ohalo II, Israel. Journal of Archaeological Science 53, 61–71 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spivak, P. & Nadel, D. 2016. The use of stone at Ohalo II, a 23,000 year old site in the Jordan Valley, Israel. Journal of Lithic Studies 3(3), 523–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanin, Z. 2012. Hammeh and sickle: A microwear analysis of retouched flint blades and bladelets. In Edwards (ed.) 2012b, 189–203Google Scholar
Stordeur, D. 1987. Manches et emmanchements préhistoriques: quelques propositions préliminaires. In D. Stordeur (ed.), La Main et L’Outil: Manches et Emmanchements Préhistoriques, 11–35. Lyon: Maison de l’Orient MéditerranéenGoogle Scholar
Stutz, A.J., Munro, N.D. & Bar-Oz, G. 2009. Increasing the resolution of the Broad Spectrum Revolution in the southern Levantine Epipaleolithic (19–12 ka). Journal of Human Evolution 56, 294–306 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutjana, D.P., Adiputra, N., Manuaba, A. & O’Neill, D. 1999. Improvement of sickle quality through ergonomic participatory approach at Batunya village Tabanan regency. Journal of Occupational Health 41, 131–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanno, K., Willcox, G., Muhesen, S., Nishiaki, Y., Kanjo, Y. & Akazawa, T. 2013. Preliminary results from analyses of charred plant remains from a burnt Natufian building at Dederiyeh Cave in northwest Syria. In Bar-Yosef & Valla (eds) 2013, 83–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Terradas, X., Ibáñez, J.J., Braemer, F., Gourichon, L. & Teira, L.C. 2013. The Natufian occupations of Qarassa 3 (Sweida, southern Syria). In Bar-Yosef & Valla (eds) 2013, 45–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turville-Petre, F. 1932. Excavations in the Mugheret el-Kebarah. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 62, 271–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Unger-Hamilton, R. 1989. The Epi-Palaeolithic southern Levant and the origins of cultivation. Current Anthropology 30, 88–103 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Unger-Hamilton, R. 1991. Natufian plant husbandry in the southern Levant and comparison with that of the Neolithic Periods: The lithic perspective. In Bar-Yosef & Valla (eds) 1991, 483–517Google Scholar
Valla, F.R. 2012. Les Fouilles de la Terrasse d’Hayonim, Israël 1980–1981 et 1985–1989. Paris: de Boccard Google Scholar
Valla, F.R. 2018. Sedentism, the ‘point of non-return’, and the Natufian issue. A historical perspective. Paléorient 44(1), 19–33 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valla, F.R., Khalaily, H., Valladas, H., Kaltnecker, E., Bocquentin, F., Cabellos, T., Bar-Yosef Mayer, D.E., le Dosseur, G., Reger, L., Chu, V., Weiner, S., Boaretto, E., Samuelian, N., Valentin, B., Delerue, S., Poupeau, G., Bridault, A., Rabinovich, R., Simmons, T., Zohar, I., Ashkenazi, S., Delgado Huertas, A., Spiro, B., Mienis, H.K., Rosen, A.M., Porat, N. & Belfer-Cohen, A. 2007. Les fouilles de Ain Mallaha (Eynan) de 2003 à 2005: Quatrième rapport préliminaire. Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society 37, 135–379 Google Scholar
Watkins, T. 2005. From foragers to complex societies in southwest Asia. In Scarre, C. (ed.), The Human Past: World prehistory and the development of human societies, 200–33. London: Thames & Hudson Google Scholar
Weinstein-Evron, M. 1998. Early Natufian el-Wad Revisited. Liege: Etudes et Recherches Archeologiques de l’Universite de LiegeGoogle Scholar
Wright, K. 1991. The origins and development of ground stone assemblages in late Pleistocene southwest Asia. Paléorient 17(1), 19–45 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, K. 1994. Ground-stone tools and hunter-gatherer subsistence in southwest Asia: Implications for the transition to farming. American Antiquity 59, 238–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yaroshevich, A., Kaufman, D., Nuzhnyy, D., Bar-Yosef, O. & Weinstein-Evron, M. 2010. Design and performance of microlithic implemented projectiles during the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and archaeological evidence. Journal of Archaeological Science 37, 368–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yeshurun, R., Bar-Oz, G. & Nadel, D. 2013. The social role of food in the Natufian cemetery of Raqefet Cave, Mount Carmel, Israel. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 32, 511–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar