THE

NEOLITHIC

OF

THE

LEVANT

A.M.T.

Moore

University

College

Volume

2

Thesis

submitted

for the

Degree

of

Doctor

of

Philosophy,

Oxford

University

1978

Chapter

5

NEOLITHIC

3

About

6000

B.C.

there

is

evidence

in

the

archaeological

record

of

marked

changes

in

material

remains,

economy,

settlement

patterns

and

social

organi-

zation

signifying

the

emergence

of

a

new

stage

in

the

Neolithic

of the

Levant

which

I

shall

call

Neolithic

3.

The

Neolithic

2

tradition

of

building

recti-

linear

single

or

multiple-roomed

mud-brick

houses

was

continued

on

some

Neolithic

3

sites

but

on

others

the

inhabitants

lived

in

sub-circular

pit

dwellings.

Other

large

pits

which

may have

served

as

working

or

cooking

hollows

are

another

conspicuous

feature

of

many

Neolithic

3

settlements.

The

characteristic

flint

industry

of

Neolithic

2

was

modified

in

Neo-

lithic

3

though

many

of

its

general

features

were

preserved.

The

emphasis

of

Neolithic

3

flint

production

remained

the

manufacture

of

blade

tools

but

they

were usually

smaller

than

in

Neolithic

2.

Pyramidal

cores

were

now

preferred

which

yielded

shorter

blades

than

the

double-ended

cores

of

Neolithic

3.

Arrowheads

were

usually

smaller

though

in

Syria

and

Lebanon

several

types

of

very

large

arrowhead

continued

to

be

made

throughout Neolithic

3.

Short,

regular,

segmented

sickle

blades

hafted

in

composite

sickles

were

now

used

rather

than

the

large

blades

of

Neolithic

2.

These

segmented

sickle

blades

had

a

serrated

or

denticulated

cutting

edge

and

cut

most

effectively

when

the

sickle

was

used with

a

sawing

motion.

A

new

feature

of

the

flint

industry

on

some

Neolithic

3

sites

was

the

manufacture

of

large

axes,

adzes,

picks

and

other

heavy

flaked

tools.

These

tools

were

apparently

developed

to

cut

timber

and

prepare

land

in

areas

which

had

not

previously

been

favoured

for

permanent

settlement.

The

principal

cultural

innovation

in

Neolithic

3

was the

making

of

pottery,

Pottery

was

first

used

on sites

in

Syria

and

Lebanon

about

6000

B.C.

At

the

beginning

it

was made

in

small

quantities

but

the

craft

flourished

so

that

soon

after

its

introduction pottery

became

an

item

of

every

day

use

throughout

-

295

-

the

central

and

northern

Levant

although

pottery

was not

used

in

the

southern

Levant

until

several

centuries

later.

From

the

outset there

was

much

variety

in

fabric

and

decoration.

Pottery

is

such

a

conspicuous

item

in

the

archaeo-

logical

record

that

its

introduction

is

the

principal indicator

of

innovations

in

material

culture.

Other

important

changes

were

taking

place

in

economy

and

the

pattern

of

settlement

at

the

time

that

pottery

was introduced. These

changes

in

artifacts

and

way

of

life

are

the

main

evidence

that

a

new

stage

of

the

Neolithic

was

developing.

Pottery

is

the

most

easily

recognisable

new

artifact

and

for

this

reason

the

moment

when

its

manufacture

began

is

the

most

convenient

point

at

which

to

date

the

beginning

of

Neolithic

3.

Although

the

introduction

of

pottery

was

such

a

striking

innovation

the

changes

in

the

buildings

and

flint

industry

were

simply

a

modification

of

the

Neolithic

2

tradition.

In

general

there

was

cultural

continuity

from

Neolithic

2

to

Neolithic

3

in

the

Levant,

evidence

for

which

has

been

found

at

Abu

Hureyra,

Buqras,

Ras

Shamra,

Tell

Ramad

and

Tell

Labweh.

In

Palestine

the

Neolithic

2

pattern

of

existence

was

disrupted

and

the

Neolithic

3

way

of life

there,

when

finally

established,

was

somewhat

different

from

further

north.

The

Neolithic

3

economy

differed

in

several

ways

from

that

of

Neolithic

2

though

it

developed

from

it.

There

was

a

stronger

emphasis

on

agriculture

in

the

villages

of

Neolithic

3

than

in

Neolithic

2.

Herding

grew

markedly

in

importance

on

some

sites

while

hunting

and

the

gathering

of

wild

plants

contributed

less

to

the

diet

of

the

settled population

than

before.

The

settlement

pattern

underwent

considerable

modification

in

Neolithic

3

(Fig.

35)-

The

expansion

of

settlement

into

the

semi-arid

areas of

central

Syria,

TransJordan

and

in

the

extreme

south-east

of

the

Levant

which

had

taken

place

in

Neolithic

2

was

reversed.

No

permanent

Neolithic

3

settlements

have

been

found

in

these

areas

and

they

seem

to

have

been

occupied

no more than

intermittently

by

mobile

groups.

On the

other

hand

a

considerable

expansion

of

settlement

took

place

in

western

Syria

and

Lebanon

in

areas

that

were

quite

thinly

populated

in

Neolithic

2.

New

sites

were

founded

and

old

sites

Fig.35

Extent

of

Neolithic

3

settlement

A

sites

abandoned

early

in

Neolithic

3

scale

1

=

4,000,000

FIGURE

35

Extent

of

Neolithic

3

settlement

1

Tell

Chagar

Bazar

2

Tell

Halaf

3

Tell

Aswad

(Balikh)

4

Tell

Abu

Hureyra

5

El

Kum

6

Buqras

7

Judaidah

Jabbul

8

Tell

Judaidah

9

Tell

esh-Sheikh

10

Ras

Shamra

11

Tell Sukas

12

Hama

13

Tabbat

el

Hanunam

14

Kubbah

I

15

Byblos

16

Tell

Labweh

17

Tell

Neba'a

Faour

I

18

Kaukaba

19

Tell

Ramad

20

Kfar

Giladi

21

Hagosherim

22

Beisamun

23

Kabri

24

Shaar

Hagolan

25

Munhatta

26

Beth-Shan

27

Megiddo

28

Vadi

Rabah

29

Lydda

30

Jericho

31

Abu

Gosh

32

Teluliot

Batashi

33

Givat

Haparsa

34

Nizzanim

35

Tell

ed-Duweir

-

296

-

enlarged

along

the

Syrian

and

Lebanese

coasts

and

in

the

Beka'a

and

Orontes

valleys.

There

was

also

settlement

expansion

in

the

Amuq

basin

and

north-

west

Syria

to

the

west

of the Euphrates.

In

Palestine

the

old

settlement

pattern

was

considerably

disturbed.

Most

Neolithic

2

sites

were

abandoned

then

new

sites

were

founded

later

in

slightly

different positions.

The

population

of

the

Negev

and Sinai was

much

reduced

although

there

are

indications

that

these

areas

continued

to

be

inhabited.

Having

briefly

mentioned

the

most

important

developments

that

took

place

in

Neolithic

3 I

shall

now

consider

the

archaeological

evidence

in

detail

taking

each

region

in

turn.

Middle

Euphrates

The

principal Neolithic

2

settlement

sites

along the

Middle

Euphrates

were

abandoned

in

Neolithic

3.

Permanent

occupation

at

Mureybat

ceased

at

the

end

of

phase

IV

sometime

in

Neolithic

2

and

although

there

are

indications

that

the

site

was

used

in

later

periods,

even

possibly

in

Neolithic

3»

it

was

never

subsequently inhabited

as

a

permanent

settlement.

Abu

Hureyra

continued

to

be

occupied

until

early

in

Neolithic

3

so

that

here

one

can

trace

the

development

of

some

of

the

features

of

the

new

stage.

In

the

ceramic

Neolithic

phase

of

occupation

there

were

some

changes

in

the

structures

used

at

the

site

as

we

have

seen.

Shallow

pits

were

dug

between

the

buildings

which

continued

to

be

built

of

mud-brick

on

a

rectilinear

plan.

The

settlement

itself

shrank until

it

covered

only

half

the

area

of

the

aceramic

site.

There

were

slight

changes

in

the

flint

industry,

the

most

noticeable

being

an

increase

in

the

amount

of

retouch

by

squamous

pressure-

flaking

on

arrowheads

and

a

few

other

tools. The

other

artifacts

were

as

varied

as

they

had

been

in

the

later

ceramic

phase,

the

one

innovation

being

the

introduction

of

pottery.

This

and

the

other

new

features

found

in

the

excavation

were

sufficient

to

mark

a

new

phase

of

occupation,

the

ceramic

Neolithic,

even

if

it

was

obviously

a

continuation

of

the

later

aceramic

-

297

-

Neolithic

settlement.

The

appearance

of

pottery,

albeit

in

modest

amounts,

the

changes

in

the

flint

industry

and

the

digging

of

large

pits

around

the

mud-brick

"buildings

are

all

hallmarks

of

Neolithic

3

so

that

the

ceramic

Neolithic

phase

of

occupation

at

Abu

Hureyra

can

be

ascribed

to

this

stage.

The

remains

of

the

Neolithic

3

settlement

at

Abu

Hureyra

had

suffered

considerably

from

weathering

and

much

of

the

deposit

had

simply

been

eroded

away.

For

this

reason

it

is

difficult

to

know

exactly

when

the

settlement

was

abandoned

but

from

the

typology

of

the

artifacts

it

would

appear

that

occupation

ceased

about

the

same

time

as

at

Buqras,

that

is

early

in

the 6th

millennium.

Tell

Kreyn

near

Abu

Hureyra

was

certainly

occupied

in

Neolithic

2

and

again

in

the

Halaf.

The

foci

of these two

settlements

were

several

tens

of

metres

apart

and there

were

no

surface

indications

of

material

that

would

fill

the gap

between

the

two

phases

of

occupation,

a

gap that

corresponds

to

Neolithic

3.

The

inference

to

be

drawn

from

this,

admittedly

inconclusive,

evidence

is

that

the

site

was

abandoned

during

the 6th

millennium.

The

level

III

occupation

at

Buqras

also

falls

in

Neolithic

3

on

the

evidence

of

the

few

potsherds

that

were

found

in

the

deposit.

The

other

artifacts

were

similar

in

type

to

those

of

levels

II

and

I.

The

structures

in

level

III

consisted

of

mud-brick

walls

as

in

the

earlier

levels.

The

sequence

at

Buqras was

continuous

and

occupation

at

the

site

came

to

an

end

about

5900

B.C.,

as

we

have already

noted.

Abu

Hureyra,

Kreyn

and

Buqras

all

seem

to have

been

abandoned

in

the

first

half

of

the

6th

millennium

and

Mureybat

perhaps

a

little

earlier.

In

itself

such

a

break

in

the

occupation

of

sites

along

the

Euphrates

need

not

have

been

significant

since

few

excavated

Neolithic

sites

have

proved

to

be

continuously

occupied

for

more

than

several

centuries

at

a

time.

Each

may

have

been

abandoned

because

of

local

circumstances, perhaps

a

change

in

the

structure

of

the

settlement

or

the

local environment.

The

important

fact

to

note

is

that

once

these

sites

were

abandoned

no

others

were founded

along

the

-

298

-

Middle

Euphrates

until

much

later.

This

observation

is

based

upon

inadequate

information

since

the

course

of

the

Middle

Euphrates

has

not

yet

been

fully

surveyed

but

in

the

areas

which

have

been

examined Neolithic

2

and

Halaf

settlements

have

been

found

but

none

that

could

be

attributed

to

Neolithic

3.

This

is

most

obvious

in

the

area

above

the

new

Euphrates

dam

at

Tabqa

where

80

km

of

the

river

valley

have

been

carefully

surveyed.

There

are

three

Halaf

sites

known

in

this

area,

Shams

ed-Din

which

has

recently

been

excavated,

the

gas

station

site

at

Mureybat

(van

Loon,

1967

5

12)

and

Kreyn.

No

Neolithic

3

sites

have

been located

in

this

area

except

for

the

ceramic

Neolithic

phase

at

Abu

Hureyra.

The

same

observation

holds

true

for the

Jebel

Abdul

Aziz.

We

have

seen

that

the

Japanese

survey

team

found

Neolithic

2

sites

in

this

area

but

nothing

that

could

be

attributed

to

Neolithic

3.

Similar

results

were

obtained

by

the

same

team

when

they

surveyed

the

area

around

Palmyra.

All

the

Neolithic

sites

they

found

could

be

attributed

to

Neolithic

2

and

none to

Neolithic

3.

One

site

in

this

region,

El

Kum,

was

occupied

in

Neolithic

3.

The

remains

of

the

ceramic

Neolithic

settlement

were

substantial

consisting

of

at

least

two

superimposed

layers of

buildings.

The artifacts,

too,

were

abundant but,

except

for the

pottery,

little

different

from

those

of

the

aceramic Neolithic

phase

of

occupation.

For

this

reason

I

believe

El

Kum

may

not

have

been

occupied

for

more

than

the

earlier

centuries

of

the

6th

millennium

but

until

further

excavations

are

carried

out

in

the

untested

deposits

at

the

site

we

shall

not

know

for

certain.

A

great

deal of

pottery

was

found

in

the

brief

excavations

at

El

Kum.

The

soft,

straw-tempered

fabric

of most of

the

sherds

and

the

few

with

grit

filler

can

be

matched

on

most

Neolithic

3

sites

in

Syria

and

Lebanon.

The

red

painted

and

burnished

sherds

are

more

unusual

since

these

are

uncommon

on

sites

further

west

at

this

early

date.

Some

of

the

sherds

from

Buqras,

however,

have

a

similar

finish,

an

interesting

parallel

which

is

supported

by

the

similarities

in

the

flint

industries

and

other

remains

at

these

two

sites.

-

299

-

Having

considered

the

slight traces

of

Neolithic

3

settlement

in

the

Euphrates

region

I

will

now

turn

to

north-western

Syria where

many

Neolithic

3

sites

are

known

(Fig.

36)

and

describe

their

remains

in

turn.

North

Syria

Ras

Shamra

Ras

Shamra

was

occupied throughout Neolithic

3

and

its

deposits

provide

the

key

sequence

for

this

stage

in

north

Syria.

Remains

of

the

Neolithic

3

settlement have

been

found

in

the soundings

on

the

temple

acropolis

and

also

in

the

Palace

garden

(Schaeffer,

1962,

163)

so

it

appears to

have

"been

quite

as

extensive

as

the

Neolithic

2

site.

The

deposit

varied

from

2.6

to

3.3

m

in

depth

and

has

been

divided

into

two

phases,

V

B or

Middle

Neolithic

(N<§olithique

Moyen)

and

V

A

or Late

Neolithic

(Neolithique

Recent).

The

houses

in

Phase

V

B

were

separated

from

each

other

and

had

a

single

rectangular

room

with

stone

walls

and

a

mud-brick

superstructure

(Kuschke,

1962,

260;

de

Contenson,

1963,

36).

Plaster

floors

were

associated

with

these

buildings

in

some

layers

(de

Contenson,

1962,

507)

and

other

trodden

earth

floors

were

quite

common.

A

clay-lined

pit

full

of

burned

earth,

charcoal

and

stones

was

also

excavated

in

these

layers

(de

Contenson,

1962,

509).

Much the

same

kind

of

rectilinear

structures

built

of

walls

with

stone

footings

were

found

in

Phase

V

A

(Kuschke,

1962,

259).

The

remains of

the

superstructure

of

one

of

these

buildings

was

found

in

one

area;

it

consisted

of

large

timbers

which

had

been

covered

with

vegetable

matter

and

clay

(de

Contenson,

1962,

505).

Many

floor surfaces

and

some

hearths

were

also

found

around

the

buildings

of

this

Phase.

These

features

were similar

to

the

domestic

structures

of

Phase

V

C

at

Ras

Shamra

so

there

was

no

change

in

the

building

tradition

here

between

Neolithic

2

and

3.

The

flint

tools

were

also

in

the

same

tradition

as

before

which,

it

should

be

remembered,

was

a

little

different

from

other

sites

in

Syria.

The

main

tool

types

were

pressure-flaked tanged

arrowheads

and

sickle

blades

with

finely-

Fig.

36

Neolithic

3

North

Syrian

sites

FIGURE

36

Neolithic

3

North

Syrian

sites

1

Tell

Chagar

Bazar

2

Tell

Halaf

3

Tell

Hannnam

4

Tell

Aswad

(Balikh)

5

Tell

Khirbet

el

Bassal

6

Judaidah

Jabbul

7

Tell

Judaidah

8 Tell

Dhahab

9

¥adi

Hammam

10 Tell

Mahmutliye

11 Tell

Turundah

12

Tell

Faruq

13

Burj

Abdal

14

Gtfltepe

15

Tell

Davutpasa

16

Karaca

Khirbat

Ali

17

Tell

Qinanah

18

JJatal

Httylttk

19 Al

Kanisah

20

Myttktepe

21

Tell

Kurdu

22

Tell

Hasanusagi

23

Hasanusagi

al

Daiah

24

Qaddahiyyat

Ali

Bey

25

Tell

Karatas

26

Tell

esh-Sheikh

27

Janudiyeh

28

Ras

Shamra

29

Qal'at

er-Rus

30

Tell

Sukas

31

Qal'at

el

Mudiq

32

Kama

33

Horns

AH

Tell

Abu

Hureyra

B

Buqras

EK

El

Kum

M

Mersin

S

Sakcagflzu

1

T

Tarsus

TT

Tell

Turlu

-

300

-

denticulated

cutting

edges;

some

of

these

were

backed. Borers

and

scrapers,

including

at

least

one

fan

scraper

(de

Contenson,

1962,

505)

5

were

also

made.

Associated

with

these

tools

were

spherical

stone

hammers

which

may

have

been

used

in

flint

working

or

in

other

tasks.

A

little

obsidian

was

used

in

these

phases

but

from

which

sources

is

not

known.

The

flint

industry

gradually

"degenerated"

through

time,

to

use

de

Contenson's

phrase

(1962,

510)

which

means

that

fewer

of the

carefully-retouched

arrowheads

and

other

pressure-

flaked

tools

were

made.

This

is

an

indication

of

changing

needs

that

can

probably

be

linked

to

the

developments

which

were

taking

place

in

the

economy

of

the

site.

White plaster

ware

continued

to

be

made

in

the

lower

layers

of

Phase

V

B

(de

Contenson,

1962,

507)

"but

by

Phase

V

A

its

manufacture

had

been

discon-

tinued.

The

shapes

were

typical

of

those

found

on

Neolithic

2

sites

,

the

most

common

being

large

bowls

with

thick

walls

and

flat

or

hollow

bases.

The

surface

of

these

vessels

was

burnished

and

a

few

had

been

decorated

with

red

paint.

The

most

important cultural change

in

these

phases was

the

introduction

of

pottery.

This

new

artifact

is

the

main

distinguishing

feature

between

Phases

V

B

and

V

A

and

Phase

V

C.

The

earliest

pottery found

on

the

site

was

a

lightly

fired

crumbly

ware.

Sherds

of

this

pottery

were

found

in

some

quantity

at

the

bottom

of

the

V

B

layers

in

the

Palace garden

sounding

(Kuschke,

1962, 261)

but

only

a

handful

were

found

in

the

sounding

west

of

the

Temple

of

Baal

(de

Contenson,

1962,

50?).

The

most

common

class

of

pottery

was

a

series

of

thick-walled

vessels

made of

a

dark

fabric

with

grit

and

vegetable

filler

which

had

been

fired

quite

hard.

There

were

hemispherical

bowls,

globular

hole-mouth

jars,

jars

with

a

collar

neck

and

other

simple

shapes

(de

Contenson,

1962,

503,

507)

They

had

rounded

or

ring

bases

and

a

few

were

fitted

with

handles

or lugs

for

carrying.

One

or

two

fenestrated

bases

were

found

but

as

the

pieces

were

incomplete

we

do

not

know

how

they were

used.

The

surfaces

of

all

these

-

301

-

vessels

had

been

partly

or

completely

"burnished

and

a

few

were

decorated

with

incisions

or

even

red

paint.

One

unusual

group

of

vessels

made of

the

same

ware

was

a

series

of

"husking

trays"

found

in

Phase

V

A

(de

Contenson,

1962,

fig.

25)

which

resembled

those

found

in

Levels

II

to

VI

at

Tell

Hassuna

(Lloyd,

Safar,

19^5,

277ff).

Ras

Shamra

is

the only

site

in

the

Levant

at

which

these

unusual

vessels

have

been

discovered

so

it is

difficult

to

assess

their

significance

but

they

are

so

similar

to

the

Hassuna

examples

that

they

must indicate

a

cultural

connection

between

the two

regions.

Phase

V

A

immediately

precedes

Phase

IV

C,

the

phase

in

which Halaf

material

occurs,

so

the

"husking

trays"

may

be

the

first

indications

of

that

north

Mesopotamian

influence

which

became

so

marked

later

on.

The

third

class

of

vessels

was

a

group

of

thin-walled

globular

or

carinated

bowls

and

jars

with

short necks

made

from

a

dark

fabric

which

again

had

been

quite

hard

fired.

The

vessels of

this

fine

ware were

coloured

black,

brown

or

red

and

had

been

highly

burnished.

Some

of

them

were incised

with

a

dot

pattern

after

firing.

Another

characteristic

form

of

decoration

found

in

Phase

V

A

was

"pattern

burnishing"

in

which

a

series

of

lines

had

been

drawn

on

the

surface

of the

vessels

with

the

burnishing

tool

to

create

herring-

bone

and

diamond

patterns

(de

Contenson,

1962, figs. 26,

27).

The

name

"dark-faced

burnished

ware"

was

given

by

the

Braidwoods

(Braidwood,

Braidwood,

1960,

U9ff)

to

a

broad

category

of

black

and

brown

burnished

vessels

at

Tells

Judaidah

and

Dhahab.

This

term

has

since

been

used by

archaeologists

to

describe

almost

all

types

of

simple

burnished

pottery

found

on

Neolithic

3

sites

in

the

Levant

and

in

the

process

has

lost

much

of

its

descriptive

value.

For

this

reason

I

propose

to

avoid

using

the

phrase

except

when

discussing

material

from

the

Amuq.

sites

for

which

it

was

invented.

Another

term

is

still

needed

to

describe

that

class

of

highly-burnished

black

and

brown

fine

ware

found

at

Ras

Shamra

in

Phases

V

B

and

V

A, in

Amuq

B

and

on

other

sites

in

Syria.

I

propose

to call

this

distinctive

pottery

"dark

polished

ware".

One

other

group

of

sherds

was

found

in

Ras

Shamra

V

B.

These

had

a

white

-

302

-

plaster

coating

(de

Contenson,

1962,

507),

perhaps

to

make then

more

water-

tight.

Similar

sherds

were

found

at

Byblos

in

Neolithic

3

"but

neither

there

nor

at

Ras

Shamra

did

this

class

of

pottery

continue

in

use

very

long.

There

were

several other

classes

of

artifacts

in

these

levels

at

Ras

Shamra.

Fragments

of

stone

bowls

and

dishes

were

quite

common

(de

Contenson,

1962,

505);

these

were usually

made

of

limestone

"but

there

were

basalt

ones

too.

A

number

of small

polished

stone

axes

were

found

and

also

stone

grinding

tools

such

as

rubbers

and saddle

querns.

The

bone

industry

included

borers

and

hafts

for

other

tools.

Baked

clay

was

used

for

objects

other

than pottery,

one

of

which

was

a

spoon

and

another

a

stamp

seal

with

a

simple

linear

design

(de

Contenson,

1962,

5.05

9

fig-

32).

The

stamp

seal

seems

definitely

to

have

been

used

to

print

a

design

on

other

objects.

Personal

ornaments

made of

polished

stone

or

shell

were

another

abundant

group

of

artifacts

at

Ras

Shamra.

One

ll

*C

determination

has

been

obtained

for

each

of

these

two phases

at

Ras

Shamra,

5736

±

112

B.C.

P-U58

for V

B

and

523U

±

Qk

B.C.

P-U57

for

V

A

(de

Contenson,

196U,

U7).

Since

the

transition

from

Phase

V

C

to V

B

took

place

at

or

a

little

after

6000

B.C.

Phases

V

B

and

V

A

lasted

for

most

of

the

6th

millennium

on

the

evidence

of

these

dates.

These

are

the phases

that

fall

in

Neolithic

3

for

with

the

advent of

Phase

IV

C

the

occupation

at

Ras

Shamra

takes

a

different

course

from

that

on

other

sites

further

south

in

the

Levant.

Tell

Sukas

Tell

Sukas

lies

on

the

coast

of

Syria

6

km

south

of

Jeble.

It

is

situated

on a

promontory

between

two

small

bays

which

served

as

harbours

in

ancient

times;

two

streams

flow

into

these

bays

on

either

side of

the

site

(Riis,

Thrane,

197**>

8).

The

earliest

settlement

was

a

Neolithic

village

founded

on

a

low

natural

rise

about

U.5

m

above

sea

level.

This

was

covered

by

debris

from later

periods

of

occupation.

The

remains

of

the

Neolithic

settlement

were

found

at

the

bottom

of

a

sounding

made

beneath

the

later

city.

The deposit

was

3

m

deep.

The

earliest

occupation

(period

N11)

consisted

of

traces

of

plaster

floors

and

a

pit

60

cm

-

303

-

in

diameter

dug

into

the

natural

subsoil

(Riis,

Thrane,

197*+,

10ff).

Above

this

were

several

layers

in

which

remains

of

"buildings

were

found

(periods

N10-N6).

These

structures

were

rectilinear

with

at

least

two

rooms

in

some

instances

and

were

orientated

north-south.

The

walls

had

stone

footings

with

clay

or

mud-brick

walls.

Associated

with

these

buildings

were

plastered

and

trodden

floors,

pits,

hearths

and

much

occupation

debris.

The

upper

levels

(periods N5-N1)

consisted

of

more

plaster

floors

and

other

surfaces

with

pits

and

hearths

but

the

only

structure

was

a

stone

wall

found

in

layer

63

(Riis,

Thrane,

197**,

70).

The

remains

found

in

these

levels

indicate

that

the

area

excavated

was

then

an

open

space

between

buildings.

An

area

of

dark

loam

was

found

over

part

of

N1

which

was

thought

to

have

been

formed

after

the

Neolithic

settlement

was

abandoned

(Riis,

Thrane,

197*+,

80).

The

layer

above

this

has

been

dated

by

a

lk

C

determination

of

3960

±

100

B.C.

K-936

(Radiocarbon

15,

1973,

108)

so

occupation

of

the

Neolithic

settlement

must

have

ceased

well

before

to

allow

the

soil

to develop.

Relatively

few

flint

tools

were

found

at

Tell

Sukas,

doubtless

because

the

sounding

was

so

small.

Among

them

were

a

number

of

Amuq

1

and

2

arrow-

heads,

leaf-shaped

and

tanged

arrowheads,

a

few

sickle

blades,

a

burin

and

some

flake

scrapers

as

well

as

retouched

blades

(Riis,

Thrane,

197*+,

*+0,

18,

16).

Obsidian

was

used

throughout

the

life of

the

Neolithic

settlement.

Other

stone artifacts

were

also rare

but

they

included

polished

axes

and

adzes,

basalt

querns

and

rubbers,

and

bowls

(Riis,

Thrane,

197*+,

16,

55,

36,

80,

63).

Potsherds

were

abundant

in

nearly

all

the

layers.

Many

of

the

vessels

were

simple

in

shape,

consisting

for

the

most

part

of

hemispherical

bowls

and

collared

jars

with

ledge

handles

for

lifting

(Riis,

Thrane,

197*+,

23).

These

vessels

were

usually

black,

grey

or

brown

in

colour

with

a

burnished

surface

although

unburnished

pots

were

also

made.

Some

vessels

had

incised,

impressed

or

combed

decoration,

particularly

in

the

later

phases,

and

a

few

were

painted

(Riis,

Thrane,

197*+,

63,

68,

19).

Others

had

a

plaster

coating

and

one

was

pattern

burnished

(Riis,

Thrane,

197*+,

52,

18).

White ware

was

also

present

-

SOU

-

throughout

and

again

the

vessels

were

simple

in

shape.

The

two

principal

types

were

open

bowls

with

splayed

sides

and

hemispherical

bowls

some

of

which

had

ring

bases

(Riis,

Thrane,

197U,

26,

77);

a

few

of

these

vessels

were

painted.

The

buildings

and

artifacts

from

Tell

Sukas

have

much

in

common

with

Ras

Shamra,

particularly

in

Phase

V

B.

The

site thus

appears

to

have

been

first

occupied

early

in

the

6th

millennium

and

then

continuously

inhabited

until

quite late

in

Neolithic

3.

Tell

Sukas

may

be

ascribed

to

the

North

Syrian

group

although

it

has

certain

traits

such

as

impressed

and

combed

decoration

on

pottery

in

common

with

Tabbat

el

Ham-mam

and

other

sites

further

s

outh.

Qal'at

er-Rus

6

km

north

of

Jeble

may

also

have

first

been

occupied

in

Neolithic

3

since

plain

burnished

and

pattern

burnished

vessels

were

found

in the

lower

levels

(Ehrich,

1939,

10,

18).

Kama

The

River

Orontes

is

deeply

incised

into

the

Syrian

plateau

at

Hama.

The

ancient

mound

lies

on

a

terrace

in

the

valley beside

the

river

in

the

heart

of

the

modern

town.

The

site

was

excavated

from

1932

to

1938

but

only

the

upper

levels

were

cleared

to any extent.

A

Roman cistern

was

cleaned

out

and

below

this

a

sounding

was

dug

to

the

sterile

subsoil

(Fugmann,

1958,

12).

The

sounding

took

the

form

of

a

circular

shaft

1.5

m

in

diameter

which

enabled

the

excavators

to

ascertain

the

stratigraphic

sequence

but

was

too

narrow

for

much

to

be

learned

about

the

nature

of

the

earlier

settlements

(Fugmann,

1958,

pi.

IX).

This

deep

sounding,

G

11

X,

was sunk

in

the

northern

sector

of the

mound

near

the

river

(Fugmann,

1958,

fig.

9).

It

was

found

that

the

earliest

settlement

of

Period

M

was

established

on

the

natural

subsoil

and

that

the

deposit

was

6

m

deep.

Such

a

considerable

accumulation

of

debris

suggests

that

the

settlement

was

substantial

but

we

do

not

know,

of

course,

how

extensive

it

was.

Some

of

the

layers

were

ashy

and

others

pebbly.

These

-

305

-

were presumably

the

remains

of

occupation

debris

and

floors.

There

was

also

a

little

painted

plaster

from

buildings,

the

only

indication

of

substantial

structures.

The

finds

were

meagre

simply

because

the

sounding

was

so

small.

Pottery

of

two

sorts

was

found

throughout

Period

M.

One was

a

thick

coarse

ware

and

the

other

a

finer

ware

which

had

been

coloured

red

or

black

and

burnished

(ingholt,

19^-0,

11);

some

of

these

sherds

were

also

incised.

The

only

other

finds

reported

were

flint

and

obsidian

blades.

The

layers

of

Period

M

were

stratified

beneath

those

of

Period

L

which

contained

Halaf

pottery.

Its

position

in

the

stratigraphic

sequence

and

the

nature

of

the

pottery

indicate

that

the

settlement

of

Period

M

was

occupied

in

Neolithic

3

and

can

be equated

with

Ras

Shamra

V

B

and

V

A.

Horns

A

series

of

flints

was

collected

from

the

surface

of

a

prehistoric

site

near

Horns

and

is

now

in

a

private collection

(de

Contenson,

1969c,

63).

They

formed

a

homogeneous

group

and

can

be

quite

closely

dated

on

their

typology.

They

consisted

of

eight arrowheads and

eight

blank

blades.

The

arrowheads

were

all

Amuq

points,

that

is

long

pointed

blades

of

triangular

cross-section

with

a

stem

retouched

by

pressure-flaking

to

form

a

blunt

point.

Cauvin

has

defined

two

types

of

Amuq

point,

type

1

shaped

like

a

willow

leaf

with

retouch

over

much

of

the

ventral

and

sometimes

also

the

dorsal

surfaces

and

type

2

made

on

a

broader

blade

with

one

end

narrowed

by

retouch

to

form

a

tang

(Cauvin,

1968,

U9,

53).

Both

types

were

present

in

the

Horns

collection

(Fig.

37).

Amuq

points

have

been

found

in

late

Neolithic

2

contexts

such

as

the

later

aceramic

Neolithic

levels

at

Abu

Hureyra

and

in

Ras

Shamra

V

C

(de

Contenson,

1969c,

65).

They

are

more common

in

Neolithic

3

recurring

in

both

Ras

Shamra

V

B

and

Ne"olithique

Ancien

and

Moyen

at

Byblos

as

well

as

in

Amuq

A

and

B

(Braidwood,

Braidwood,

1960, figs.

30,

60,

37^;

pi.

65).

Thus

the

Horns

site

may

have

been

occupied

in

Neolithic

2

but

it

is

more

likely

it

was

Fig.

37

Horns

-

Amuq

points

(after

de

Contenson)

a

-

Amuq

1

b

-

Amuq

2

-

306

-

inhabited

in

Neolithic

3

sometime

during

the

6th

millennium

B.C.

Qal'at

el

Mudiq

Qal'at

el

Mudiq

lies

north-west

of

Kama

overlooking

the

valley

of

the

Orontes

from

the

east.

Numerous

flint

tools

and

scraps of

obsidian

have

been

found

on

the

lower

slopes

of

the

castle

mound

which

probably

came

from

the

earliest

levels

of

occupation

at

the

site.

The

few

diagnostic

tools

were

an

Amuq

arrowhead

and

several

segmented

sickle

blades

(Dewez,

1970,

pis.

11:5,

111:1-10.

Most

of

the

flakes

and

blades

found

had been

struck

off

prismatic

cores.

This

scanty

information

would

suggest

that

Qal'at

el

Mudiq

was

occupied

during

the

Neolithic,

probably

in

stage

3.

Janudiyeh

The

site

of

Janudiyeh

is

situated

on

the

heights

above

the

west

bank

of

the

Orontes

north

of

Jisr

esh-Shaghur.

Both

flint

tools

and

potsherds

have

been

collected

from

the

surface and

it

is

possible

to

ascertain

from

these when

the

site

was

occupied.

Many

of

the

flints

were

Amuq

arrowheads

of

both

types

1

and

2

while

there

were

also

retouched blades,

a

sickle

blade

and

flake

scrapers,

among

them

several

discoids

(de

Contenson,

1969c,

68ff).

The sherds

all

belonged

to

vessels

of simple

shapes

such

as

hemispherical

bowls

and

jars

with

hole-mouths

or

collared

necks

(de

Contenson,

1969c,

TO).

Almost

all

were

dark

in

colour

with

a

burnished

surface

while

a

few

had

incised

decoration.

The

flints

and

the

pottery

are

similar

to

the

material

found

at

Ras

Shamra

in

Phase

V

B

so

the

site

was

occupied

quite

early

in

Neolithic

3.

The

site

itself

is

unusual

as

it

is

at

an

elevation

of

about

500

m

in

what

was

then

forested,

hilly

country.

There

is

cultivable

land

nearby

so

Janudiyeh

could

have

been

either

an

agricultural

or

a

pastoral

settlement.

The

extreme

north-west

corner

of

the

Levant

is

today

the

Turkish province

of

the

Hatay.

The

Amanus

Mountains

on

the

west

separate

most

of

the

region

-

307

-

from

the

Mediterranean.

Behind

them

to

the

east

lies

the

Amuq

plain

and

here

the

Orontes

after flowing

north

through

Syria

turns

south-west

to

meet

the

sea.

Several

roads

pass

from

the

plain

through

low

hills to

the east

up

to the

Syrian

plateau

so

that

geographically

the

region

is

more

an

extension

of

Syria

than

a

part

of

Turkey

although

there

is

also

an

easy

route

to

the

north

up the

valley

of

the

Karasu.

The

fertile

plain

is

dotted

with

ancient

settlements

and

several

of

these

have

"been

shown

in

excavations

to

have

been

occupied

as

early

as

Neolithic

3.

The

remains

of

the

Neolithic

settlements

are

always

found

to

be

well

below

the

present

level of

the

plain

because

an

enormous

amount

of

alluvium

has

accumulated

since

the

lower

course

of

the

Orontes

was

blocked

in

the

earthquakes

that

destroyed

ancient

Antioch.

It

is

known

that

the

region

has

been

inhabited

since

the

lower

Palaeolithic

from

discoveries

made

in

the

hills

around

the

Amuq

plain

(Hours

et

al., 19T3

9

2U2)

but

sites

dating from

Neolithic

1

and

2

have

not

yet

been

found

there.

Any

settlement

sites

of

this date

founded

on

the

plain

itself

would

have

subse-

quently

been

buried.

Much

of

our

information

about

the

sequence

of

Neolithic

occupation

on

the

Amuq

plain

comes

from

the

excavations

of

the

Oriental

Institute

of

CTiicago

University

at

Tell

Judaidah

and

Tell

Dhahab

both

of

which

lie

in

the

south-

eastern

corner

of

the the

Amuq

plain

near

Rehanli.

The

Neolithic

deposits

at

Tell

Judaidah,

designated

level

XIV,

were

divided

on

the

typology

of the

pottery

into

two

phases,

A

and

B,

both

of

which

fall

in

Neolithic

3.

The

only

Neolithic

occupation

at

Tell

Dhahab

was

a

short-lived

settlement

of

phase

A

(Braidwood,

Braidwood,

1960,

U6).

Tell

Judaidah

The

lowest

layers

reached

at

Judaideh

were

below

the

water

table

which

seriously

impeded

the

excavation and

limited

the

information

that

could

be

recovered

from

the

deep

sounding

made

there.

No

buildings were

found

in

phase

A

though

they

may

have

existed

(Braidwood,

Braidwood,

1960,

-

308

-

Remains

of

rectilinear

buildings

with

stone

foundations

and

perhaps

mud-brick

or

mud

walls

were

found

in

the

phase

B

layers

above

(Braidwood,

Braidwood,

1960,

68).

23

The

chipped

stone

industry

was

of

the

same

character

throughout

phases

A

and

B.

Most

of the

tools

kept

for

study

were

made

on

blades

struck

from

single-ended

pyramidal

or

conical

cores,

the

by-products

of

which

included

crested

blades

and

core

tablets.

The

most

abundant

tools

seem

to

have

been

arrowheads

and

sickle

blades

(Payne,

1960,

525,

526).

Many

of the

arrowheads

were

of

the

types

called

Amuq

1

and

2

by

Cauvin.

These

were

mostly

quite

long,

long

enough

to be called

javelin

heads

in

the

published

account,

although

on

ethnographic

analogy

all

could

have

been

used

to

arm

arrows

.

They

were

extensively

pressure-flaked

on

the

upper

surface

and

had

some

retouch

on

the

back

at

the

tip

and

tang.

Most of the

type

2

arrowheads

had

swollen

tangs.

Some

of

the

arrowheads

though

still

tanged

were

much

shorter

than

these

and

a

few

were

finished

with

abrupt

retouch.

All

the

sickle

blades

were

segmented

and

usually

about

3.5

cm

in

length.

Most

of these

blade

sections

had

been

snapped

off

at

the

required

length

although

a

few

were

made

by

the

notch

technique.

The

cutting

edge

of

many

of

the sickle

blades

had

been

slightly

retouched

but

they

were

not

backed.

Many

still

retained

traces

of

the

mastic

which

secured

them

in

the

sickle.

Among

the

other

tools

were

borers

on

blade

segments

and

single-blow,

angle

and

dihedral

burins. There

were

also

end-scrapers

on

blades

and

flake

scrapers

some

of

which

were

discoid

(Payne,

1960,

52?)

Obsidian

was

quite

plentiful

as

a

raw

material

and

was

worked

on

the

spot,

the

evidence

for

this

being

pyramidal

cores,

crested blades

and

core

tablets

(Payne,

1960,

528,

529).

Not

only

were

there obsidian

blades and

flakes

but

also

small

borers

and

arrowhead

tangs.

One

piece

has

been

analysed

from

Judaidah

which

was

found

to

have

come

from

the

Ciftlik

source

(Renfrew

et

al.,

1966,

65).

The

chipped

stone

industry

is

in

general

quite

similar

to

what

we

know

of

the

material from

Ras

Shamra

V

B

and

V

A

although

there

are

differences

in

the

-

309

-

types

of

sickle

blades

preferred

at

each site

and

the

quantities

of

obsidian present,

a

function

of

ease

of

communication

with

and

distance

from

the

sources.

The

other

stone tools

at

Judaidah were

both

abundant

and

varied.

Trapezoidal

stone

axes

and

adzes

were

particularly

common

(Braidwood,

Braidwood,

1960,

58,

87).

These

were

quite

thin

and

had

straight

sides

with

a

bevelled

cutting

edge.

All

were

ground

and

partly

polished.

They

were

made

in

both

large

and

small

sizes

so

would

have

been

suitable

both

for

preparing

rough

timber

and

shaping

wooden

artifacts.

Disc rubbers

were

abundant

while

hammers

and

slingstones

were

also

present

(Braidwood,

Braidwood,

1960,

55,

61, 86,

90).

One

macehead

was

found

in

the

phase

B

levels,

a

grooved

stone

in

phase

A

and

several

stamp

seals

in

both

phases

(Braidwood,

Braidwood,

1960,

61,

63,

90,

9^).

The

stamp

seals

were

incised

with

geometric

patterns

which

in

most

cases

consisted

of

criss-cross

lines.

Spindle

whorls

were

made from

both

stone

and

baked

clay

while

circular

stone

dishes

were

also

used.

These

were

usually ground

and

polished

and

at

least

one

had

a

spout

for

pouring

(Braidwood,

Braidwood,

1960,

fig. 32,

8).

Decorative

stone

objects

were

also

made,

among

them

two

studs,

pendants

and beads.

The

latter

included

several

butterfly

beads

of

the

kind

found

in

such

abundance

at

Abu

Hureyra

in

both

Neolithic

3

and

Neolithic

2

contexts (Braidwood,

Braidwood,

1960,

figs.

36:

5~7,

67:7).

The

usual

bone

awls,

needles

and

spatulae

were

also

used

at

the

site

(Braidwood,

Braidwood,

1960,

65-67,

97~99).

Three

principal

types of

pottery

have

been

distinguished

from

Judaidah

although

there

were

small

quantities

of

several

others

in

phase

B.

The

shapes

of the

vessels

were

quite

simple,

consisting

for the

most

part of

globular

hole-mouth

jars,

some

collared

jars

and

bowls

with

flat

bases.

The

most common

type

was

dark-faced

burnished

ware,

a

group

of

thick-walled

medium-fired

vessels

made

of clay

tempered

with

grit,

sand

and

some

organic

matter

(Braidwood,

Braidwood,

1960,

^9ff).

When

fired

the

core

was

usually

dark

grey

or

black.

The

surface

colour

of

these

pots

varied

from

buff

to

-

310

-

black

but

most

of

them

were

in

shades

of

brown.

All

had

been

roughly

bur-

nished.

Surface

decoration

was

limited

to

jabs

and

incised

shell

or

finger-

nail

impressions

on

a

few

pots.

Some

jars

had

ledge

handles

for

lifting.

In

phase

B

certain

vessels

were

made

with

thinner

walls

and

given

more

even surface

treatment

(Fig.

38).

Some

of

these

pots

were

decorated

with

pattern

burnish

(Braidwood,

Braidwood,

1960,

77).

Carinated

bowls

were

made

for the

first

time

in

phase

B

which,

together

with

a

few

other

pots,

could

be

classed

as

dark

polished

ware.

The

second

type of

pottery

was coarse

simple

ware,

a

group

of

thick-walled

vessels

of

a

softer

fabric

with

much

straw

filler

(Braidwood,

Braidwood,

1960,

U7ff)

The

surface colour

of

the

pots

ranged

from

light

buff

to

orange

and

brown.

The

third

type

was

washed

impressed

ware,

a

series

of

vessels

with

the

varied

surface

colours

of

the

other

varieties

but

which

had

been

partly

covered

in

thin

red

paint

(Braidwood,

Braidwood,

1960,

52ff).

The

rims

were

painted

red

and

often

burnished

with

a

band

of

impressed

decoration

below

usually

done

with

the

edge

of

a

shell.

The

pottery

was

a

little

more

elaborate

in

phase

B

with

more

varied

surface

treatment

(Braidwood,

Braidwood,

1960,

69).

A

number

of

vessels

were

coated

with

red

slip

and

burnished,

a

type

of

finish

quite

rare

in

phase

A.

A

brittle

painted

ware

could

be

distinguished,

the

vessels

of

which

were

painted

with

lines

of

reddish

paint

on

a

burnished

surface

(Braidwood,

Braidwood,

1960,

80ff).

Other

pots

were

decorated

more

extensively

with

incised

lines

and

shell-impressed

patterns.

Amuq

A

and

B

pottery

was

found

in

great

quantity

at

Judaidah

which

enables

us

to

see

just

how

varied

in

fabric

and

decoration

the

finished

product

was.

The

pots

were

probably

made

by

many

individuals

using

methods

that

would

have

been

irregular

and

subject

to

uncertainty.

The

vessels

were

probably

fired

in

bonfires

which

would

account

for

the

uneven

colours

and

textures

of

the

fabrics.

Because

the

pottery

was

made

in

this

way

the

result

was

bound

to

vary

considerably

from

site

to

site.

One cannot

use

pottery

at

\

J

SC.

1=3

SC.

1:3

Fig.

38

Pattern-burnished

vessels

a-Tell

Judaidah

(after

Braidwood

and

Braidwood)

b

-

Byblos

(after

Dunand)

-

311

-

this

early

stage,

therefore,

for

a

precise

chronological

or

cultural

comparison

between

sites

in

the

way

one

can

with

Halaf

and

later

stages.

That

being

said,

it

is

still

possible

to

make

certain

general

comparisons

between

the

pottery

of

different

sites

in

Neolithic

3.

The

Amuq

A

and

B

dark-faced

burnished

ware

bears

a

general

resemblance

to

the

burnished

wares

of

Ras

Shamra

V

B

and

V

A.

Dark

polished

red and

black

ware,

so

abundant

at

Ras

Shamra,

is,

however,

quite

rare

at

Judaidah.

The

pattern

burnished

vessels

are

generally

similar

at

both

sites.

The

Amuq

coarse

simple

ware

has

some

features

in

common

with

the

unburnished

grosser

vessels

at

Ras

Shamra

but

the

washed

impressed

ware

is

virtually

absent

so

far

as

we

know.

Painted

pottery

seems

to

have

been

more common

in

the

Amuq

than

at

Ras

Shamra.

Judaidah

and

Ras

Shamra

are

separated

from

each

other

by

the

Jebel

Akra

(Mount

Cassius)

massif.

This

geographical

separation

is

reflected

in

the

cultural

differences

in

the

chipped

stone

industry

and

pottery

that we have

noted between

the

sites.

One

would

also

point

out

that

the

stamp

seals,

butterfly

beads

and other

carefully-worked

stone

objects

found

at

Judaidah

are

virtually

absent

at

Ras

Shamra

and

that

polished

stone

axes

are

much

less

common

at

the

latter

site.

Nonetheless

the

chipped

stone

industries

at

both

sites

are

fundamentally

of the

same

tradition

both

in

core

technique and

tool

types.

A

good

deal

of

the

Judaidah

pottery

and

some

of

the

other

objects

can

also

be

paralleled

at

Ras

Shamra.

One

may,

therefore, place

both

sites

in

the

same

cultural

group

while

taking

note of

the

differences that

are

apparent

in

the

two

assemblages.

If

we knew

more

about

the

deposits of

these

two

sites

and

others

in

their

vicinities

we

might

be

able

to

draw

finer

cul-

tural

distinctions

but

that cannot

be

done

at

present.

The deposits

of

Amuq

phases

A

and

B

were stratified

beneath

the

First

Mixed

Range

and

phase

C

in

which

the

earliest

Halaf material

was

found

(Braidwood,

Braidwood,

1960,

11U,

138).

Their

stratigraphical

position

and

the

typological

parallels

with

Ras

Shamra V

B

and

V

A

place

Amuq A

and

B

-

312

-

firmly

in

Neolithic

3.

No

14 C

determinations

have

ever

been

made

on

samples

from

Judaidah

so

the

duration

of phases

A

and

B

cannot

be

determined

with

certainty. The

substantial

nature

of the

deposits

suggests

that

the

site

was

occupied

for

much

of

Neolithic

3,

that

is

for

most

of

the

6th

millennium

B.C.

The

Oriental

Institute

team

surveyed

all the

other

mounds

in

the

Amuq

plain.

From

the

sherd

collections

they

made

they

estimated

that

several

other

sites

had

been

occupied

in

the

Amuq

A

and

B

phases,

Six

mounds,

GUltepe,

Tell

Kurdu,

Tell

Hasanusagi,

Qaddahiyyat

Ali

Bey,

Tell

Davutpasa

and

Karaca

Khirbat

Ali

were

believed

to

contain

Neolithic

3

deposits

(Braidwood,

1937,

25, 29,

30,

32,

36,

37)

and

ten

others,

Al

Kanisah,

BUyuktepe,

Tell

Turundah,

Tell

Mahmutliye,

Burj

Abdal,

Tell

Faruq,

Hasanusagi

al

Daiah,

Tell Karatas,

Catal

Huyttk

and

Tell

Qinanah

were

thought

possibly

to

have

been

occupied

then

(Braidwood,

1937,

22,

2U, 26,

27,

29,

31,

37)

on

the

evidence

of

the

surface

material.

The

edge of

the

Amuq

plain

near

Tell

Judaidah

is

marked

by

limestone

hills

cut

by

several

wadis.

A

deep

shelter

in

the

Wadi

Hammam

was

excavated

by

O'Brien

at

the

same

time

that

the

Oriental

Institute

was

investigating

the

tells

on the

plain.

The

shelter

and

a

little

of

the

terrace

were

shown

to

have

been

occupied

in

the

Neolithic,

the

deposits

extending

over

an

area

of

about

120

sq

m

(O'Brien,

1933,

17^).

They

consisted

of

layers

of

dark

soil

and

ashes;

one

hearth

was

found

but

no

other

structures

were

noted.

Several

of

the

occupation

layers

were

separated

by

debris

which

had

fallen

from

the

roof

indicating

that

the

cave

could

not

have

been

inhabited

continuously.

Nevertheless

the

Neolithic

material

remains

were homogeneous

and

belonged

to

a

single

cultural

phase.

The

Wadi

Hammam

shelter

produced

a

varied

collection

of

finds

though

no

great

quantity

of

any

particular

type

apparently.

Among

the

flints

were

an

Amuq

2

arrowhead,

points and

retouched

blades

or

knives.

There

was

also

a

disc

core

or

scraper

and

a

flint

hammer

as

well

as

several

obsidian

blades

(O'Brien,

1933,

pi. 0).

A

number

of

small

greenstone

axes

and

chisels

were

-

313

-

found

in

the

Neolithic

deposits

and

also

a

stone

pestle.

Slender

points

were

the

only

"bone

tools

reported.

At

least

four

carefully

fashioned

stone

beads

or

pendants

were

found,

one

of

which

was

a

"butterfly

bead

(O'Brien,

1933,

pi.

0,

fig. 2,

h)

similar

to

examples

from

Abu

Hureyra

and

also

probably

made

of

serpentine.

Two

of

the

pendants

with

incised

designs

(O'Brien,

1933,

pi.

0,

fig.

k

9

3,

10)

may

have

been

used

as

stamp

seals.

A

few

human

bones

of

both

babies

and

adults

were

found

in

the

shelter

(O'Brien,

1933,

177).

These

may

have

been

all

that

was

left

of

intentional

burials

which

had

subsequently

decayed

in

the

soil

or

been

disturbed.

Pottery

was

quite

abundant

in

the

shelter

and

at

least

two

wares

were

represented.

One was

a

coarse

buff

ware

with

straw

temper.

Parts

of

at

least

two

vessels

were

found

in

this

ware,

one

a

hole-mouth

bowl

with

incised rim

decoration

and

the

other

a

collared

jar

with

a

strainer

incorporated

in

the

neck

(O'Brien,

1933, figs.

5:12;

6).

The

second

ware

was

coloured

red,

brown

or

black

on

the

surface

and

highly

burnished.

Hole-mouth

pots,

carinated

bowls

and

collared

jars

were

all

made

in this

ware

(O'Brien,

1933,

176,

177)-

Several were

decorated

with

incised

zig-zags

or

patterns

of

short

incisions

usually

just

below

the

rim.

The

flint tools

,

other

stone

artifacts

and

the

pottery

can all

be

parallel-

ed

closely

in

the

Amuq

A

and

B

deposits

at

Tells

Judaidah

and

Dhahab

nearby.

The

Wadi

Hammam

shelter

was

thus

occupied

during

Neolithic

3,

perhaps

at

the

same

time

as

the tells.

It

would

seem,

therefore,

that

there

was

intense

occupation

of

this

corner

of

the

Amuq

plain,

indeed

of

the

whole

lower

Afrin

drainage,

during

the 6th

millennium

B.C.

The

size

of

the

Wadi

Ha.Tmna.Tn

shelter

and

the

nature

of

the

occupation

deposits

within

it

suggest

that

it

was

inhabited

by

a

few

families

from

time

to

time

over

several

centuries.

The

variety

of

artifacts

found

indicates

that

it

was

a

settlement

site

rather

than

a

temporary

camp.

Tell

Dhahab

nearby

was

probably

a

small

village

while

Tell

Judaidah

was

a

much

larger

settlement.

Thus

groups

of

different

sizes

were

occupying

sites

close

together

in

Neolithic

3.

-

31U

-

Tell

esh-Sheikh

One

other

Neolithic

site,

Tell

esh-Sheikh,

has

been

excavated

in

the

Amuq

plain.

It

lies

a

little

south of

Jisr

el

Hadid

and

west

of

the

present

course of the

Orontes.

When Woolley

excavated

Tell

Atchana

he

found

that

the

city

was

first

settled

in

the

Early

Bronze

Age.

Seeking

to

obtain

a

record

of

earlier

periods

of

occupation

than

this

in

the

Amuq

plain

he

excavated

Tell

esh-Sheikh

because

the

surface

material indicated

that

the

site

was

older

than

Atchana

(Woolley,

1953,

22).

The

site

was

probably

a

large

mound

original-

ly

but

most

of

it

has

been

buried

under

the

alluvium

of

the

plain.

12

levels

of

occupation

could

be

distinguished,

11

of

which

had

affinities

with

Halaf

and

northern

Ubaid

(Woolley,

1950,

6U).

The

settlement

of

Level

XII

had

been

founded

on

the

natural

subsoil

and

was

the

earliest

occupation

on

the

site.

It

consisted

of

rectilinear

mud-brick

buildings

with

associated

floor

levels.

The

excavation

has

never

been

fully

published

so

that

we

do

not

know

how

varied

the

artifacts

were.

From

the

little

material

I

have

seen

in

Ankara

and

Antakya

it

would

seem

that the

chipped

stone

industry

of

Level

XII

consisted

of

Amuq

2

type arrowheads,

abruptly-retouched

tanged

arrowheads,

segmented

backed

sickle

blades,

single-blow

burins, end-scrapers

on

blades, discoid

and

side-scrapers.

These

artifacts

are

broadly

comparable

with

those

found

in

Amuq A

and

B

although

the

sickle

blades

are

a

slightly

later

type

which

may

have

come

from

the

upper

levels

at

Tell

esh-Sheikh.

The

pottery

was

a

fairly

uniform

hard-fired

ware

with

a

dark

fabric

incorporating

a

little sandy

filler.

The

vessels

were

mostly

simple,

rather

heavy

bowls

with

thickened

plain

rims.

Their

surfaces

had

been

coloured

black

or

red

and

some

pots

had

been

burnished.

This

pottery

is

Amuq

A

and

B

dark-faced

burnished

ware

although

the

fabric

is

a

little

different

from

most

of

the vessels

at

Tell

Judaidah.

The

settlement

at

Tell

esh-Sheikh

XII

is

stratified

beneath

the

earliest

Halaf

deposit

of

Level

XI.

Since

the

affinities

of

the

material

remains

are

with

Amuq

A

and

B

this

settlement

was

occupied

in

Neolithic

3.

The

pottery

and

flints

are

more

closely

Amuq

B

at

Tell

Judaidah

which

suggests

-

315

-

that Tell

esh-Sheikh

was

not

occupied

until fairly

late

in

Neolithic

3.

The

Amanus

Mountains

mark

the

western

limit

of

the

North

Syrian

group

of

Neolithic

3

sites.

Beyond

the

mountains

lies

the

Cilician

plain,

a

region

which,

like

the

Amuq,

is

clearly

defined

geographically

and

rich

in

visible

remains

of

ancient

sites.

Neolithic

settlements

have

been

revealed

in

excavations

at

the

base

of

two

of

these,

Mersin

and

Tarsus.

It

used

to

be

thought

that

these

sites

were

closely

contemporary

settlements

in

the

Amuq

and

at

Ras

Shamra.

Archaeologists

joined

them

together

with

the

North

Syrian

sites

I

have

discussed

in

a

"Syro-Cilician" group

(Braidwood,

1955»

7*0.

The

excavations

which

have

taken

place

on

the

Konya

plain

since

1961

have

set

the

Cilician

sites

in a

new

perspective.

It

can

now

be

seen

that

while

culturally

they

share

certain

features

with

the

North

Syrian

settlements

they have

much

in

common

with

the

Anatolian

sites

of

Catal

HUyUk

East

and

West

and Can

Hasan

situated

on

the

northern

side

of

the Taurus,

a

link

which

Mellaart

has

recently

emphasised

(1975

5

125).

Mersin

was

never

excavated

to

the

natural

subsoil

since

the

earliest

deposit

lay

below

the

present

water

table. The

lowest levels

reached,

XXXIII

to

XXVII,

were

designated Lower Neolithic

by

Garstang

(1953,

13).

A

date

of

6000

±

250

B.C.

W-617

"was

obtained

from

a

charcoal

sample

taken

from

one

of

these

levels

in

1955

(Radiocarbon

2,

1960,

183).

This

date

should

be of

the

right

order

of

magnitude

for

such

a

deposit even

though the

determination

was

made

so

long

ago.

Above

these

levels

were

the

Upper

Neolithic

levels

XXVI

and

XXV

(Garstang,

1953,

27).

The

settlements

of

these

levels

were

occupied

during

approximately

the

same

period

as

the

Neolithic

3

North

Syrian

sites.

It

is

possible

that

the

Proto-Chalcolithic

level

XXIV

and

the

Early

Chalco-

lithic

levels

XXIII

to

XX

were

also

contemporaneous

with

the

latter

part of

Neolithic

3.

-

316

-

Remains

of

straight

vails

"built

of

stones

from

the

river

which

flows

beside

the

site

were

found

in

the

Lower

Neolithic

levels

but

no

complete

structures could

be

made

out

(Garstang,

1953,

1*0.

Two

rectilinear

buildings

with

stone

walls

and

cell-like

rooms

were

excavated

in

Level

XXVI

(Garstang,

1953,

fig.

12)

but

their

function

was

uncertain.

The

chipped

stone

industry

at

Mersin

was

quite

homogeneous

throughout

the

earlier

levels.

Most

of the

tools

were

made

of

obsidian

and

only

a

few

from

flint.

The

use

of large

quantities

of

obsidian

is

one

important

differ-

ence

between

Mersin

and

the

North

Syrian

sites.

Mersin

is

quite close

to

the

obsidian

sources

around

Aksaray

so

the

inhabitants

could

easily

obtain

it.

The

considerable

quantity

of

obsidian

found

at

Mersin

indicates

that

the

inhabitants

were

in

frequent

contact

with

the

plateau

by

way

of

the

Cilician

Gates.

2U

Most

of

the

tools

were

made

on

blades struck

from

pyramidal

cores.

The

arrowheads

which

were particularly

numerous

were

usually long

and exten-

sively

retouched

by

pressure-flaking

(Garstang,

1953,

15).

These arrowheads

often

had

tangs

with

slight

shoulders

but

on a

few

the

tang

was

not

separated

from

the

blade,

a

type

similar

to

Amuq

1

points.

Some

arrowheads

were

leaf-

shaped

and

much

shorter.

The

other common

obsidian

tools

were

borers

on

blades,

backed

blades

and

flake

scrapers.

Sickle

blades

were

made

on

flint

obtained

locally.

One

or

both

edges

of

these

were

lightly

retouched

but

usually

they

were

not

backed.

The

chipped

stone

industry

of

levels

XXIV

to XX

was

of

the

same

character

though

the

proportions

of

arrowheads,

awls

and

scrapers

diminished

markedly

(Garstang,

1953,

50).

The

assemblage

from

these

levels

was

composed

princi-

pally of

plain

and

retouched

blades.

Flint sickle

blades

were

also

used

in

greater

numbers.

The

chipped

stone

industry

of

the

lower

levels

at

Mersin

bears

a

general

resemblance

to

the

Neolithic

3

industry

from

Tell

Judaidah.

The

core

technique

and

use of

pressure-flaking

are

similar

while

Amuq

1

arrowheads

are

common

to

-

317

-

both

assemblages.

In

other

aspects

there

are

important differences

in

detail

between

the

two.

The

usual

form

of

Mersin

tanged

arrowhead

is

rarely

found

at

Tell

Judaidah.

The

Mersin

sickle

blades

are

normally

complete

blades

while

those

at

Judaidah

are

segmented.

Burins

are

found

in

some

numbers

at

the

latter

but

are

virtually

absent

at

Mersin.

Most

of

the

important

features

of the

Mersin

industry

can

be

seen

in

the

assemblage

from

Catal

Huytik

East

although

here

again

there

are

certain

tools

common

at

the

latter

which

are

not

present

at

Mersin.

Both

industries

are

based

on

the

production

of

blades

from pyramidal

obsidian

cores.

All

the

Mersin

types

of

arrowhead,awls

and

scrapers

are

found

in

abundance

at

Catal

HUyUk

(Bialor,

1962,

69ff)

though

not

the

sickle

blades.

Very

few

sickle

blades

could

be

distinguished

at

Catal

HUytlk,

perhaps

because

they were

made

of

obsidian. The

Mersin

flint

sickle

blades

appear

to

be

a

specific Cilician

type

in

this

period.

If we

consider

the

pottery

from

Mersin

we find

that,

like

the

flints,

there

are

certain general similarities

between

it

and

the

Amuq.

material

but

that

the closest

parallel

is

the

pottery from

the

plateau

sites.

There

were

two

classes

of

pottery

in

the lowest

levels

at

Mersin,

a

fine

burnished

ware

and

a

coarse

ware

(Garstang,

1953,

18,

19).

The

fine

ware

was

quite

hard

fired

and

usually

had

a

brown

or

black

surface

although

some

vessels

were

buff

or

red.

The

coarse

ware

was more

plentiful;

this

had

a

softer

buff

or

brown

fabric

with

straw

and

grit

filler.

Its

surface

was

usually

brown

or

grey

in

colour

and

smoothed

not

burnished.

Hole-mouth

pots,

bowls

and

dishes

were

made

in

both

wares

and

a

few

carinated

vessels

in

the

fine

burnished

ware.

The

vessels

had

both

flat

and

rounded

bases.

Some

pots

were decorated

with

incised

patterns.

In

levels

XXVI

and

XXV

larger

globular

jars

with

collared

rims

were

made

(Garstang,

1953,

35ff)

Some

vessels

were

burnished

to

a

high

gloss

and

a

few

pots

were

painted

for

the

first

time.

Their

surfaces

were

covered

with

designs

in

red

paint

which

was

sometimes

applied

over

a

slip.

In

levels

-

318

-

XXIV

to

XX

the

burnished

and

coarse

wares

continued

to

"be

made

but

the red

painted

vessels

were

decorated with

more

elaborate

designs (Garstang,

1953,

58ff,

78ff).

The

burnished

ware

at

Mersin

is

quite

like

the

dark-faced

burnished

ware

at

Tell

Judaidah

and

the

highly

burnished

vessels

also

resemble

the

North

Syrian

dark

polished

wares.

Pattern

burnish,

that

distinctive

decoration

on

some

North

Syrian

pottery,

is

not

found

at

Mersin, however.

The

coarse

ware

at

Mersin

again

is

somewhat

like

the

Judaidah

coarse

simple

ware

though

not so

heavy but

the

Judaidah

washed

impressed

ware

is

not

found

at

Mersin.

Another

important difference

between

the

pottery

from

the

two

sites

is

that

nothing

like

the

Mersin

painted

ware

of

level

XXV and

later

is

found

at

Judaidah. The

patterns

of

the

Mersin

ware

are

much

bolder

than

the

Judaidah

painted

pottery

while

the use

of

a

cream

slip

as

background

is

unknown

in

the

Amuq.

Plain

burnished

pottery

and

some

lighter

buff

wares

very

similar

in

shape

and finish to

those

found

at

Mersin were made

at

Catal

HuyUk

East, Catal

Huytlk

West

and

Can

Hasan

(Mellaart,

1965,

136;

1967,

216,

217;

French,

1966,

118,

120);

the

only

difference was

that

incised

decoration

was

hardly

ever

used

on

the

plateau

sites.

The

Mersin

coarse

ware

is

not

found

on

the

plateau

and

since

it

is

a

little

different

to

the

Tell

Judaidah

coarse

simple

ware

it

seems

that

this

pottery

is

specifically

Cilician.

The

Mersin

painted

pottery

of

level

XXV

and

later

can

be

closely

paralleled

across

the

Taurus

since

vessels

of

similar

shape

and

decoration

were

made

at

Catal

HUyUk

West,

parti-

cularly

the

"Catal

Huytlk

West

ware",

and

Can

Hasan

in

levels

3

and

2B

(Mellaart,

1965,

135ff;

French,

1966,

118,

120).

The

pottery

at

both

sites

was

painted

red

both

on

a

plain

background

and

a

cream

or

white

slip

as

at

Mersin.

The

main

difference

in

the

painted

pottery

of

the

two

areas

is

that

the

designs

on

the

Catal

HUyUk

West

and

Can

Hasan

pots.were

often

more

elaborate

than

at

Mersin,

particularly

in

the

later

levels

at

both

sites.

-

319

-

Insufficient

is

known

about

the

buildings

and

other artifacts from

Mersin

for

these

to

be

usefully

compared vith

sites

in

neighbouring

regions

but

the

flint

tools

and

pottery

are

varied

enough

for

us

to

deduce

their

cultural relationships.

While

some

of this

material

is

quite

like

flints

and

pots

made

in

the

Amuq

and

on

other

sites

in

the

North

Syrian

group

it

resembles

much

more

closely

the

artifacts

used

on

contemporary

sites

on

the

southern

Anatolian

plateau.

Certain

artifacts

which

do

not

match

either

plateau

or

Amuq

material

are

of

local Cilician

inspiration.

When

thought

of

in

human

terms

these cultural

comparisons

suggest that

the

inhabitants

of

Mersin

had

a

local

tradition

of

making

objects

of

everyday

use.

They

also

maintained

close

contact

with

the

inhabitants

of

the

southern

Anatolian

plateau

from

where

they

obtained

their

obsidian.

Some

more general

relationship

existed

between them

and

their

contemporaries

to

the

east

of

the

Amanus.

The

same

observations

may

be

made

about

the

site

of

Tarsus

situated

about

26

km

north-east

of

Mersin.

The

Neolithic

and

Chalcolithic

levels

here

were

sounded

in

a

small

trench

from

which

relatively

little

material

was

recovered;

the

bottom

of

the

site

was

not

reached

because,

as

at

Mersin,

it

lay

beneath

25

the

present

water

table

(Goldman,

1956,

3).

The

pottery

from

Tarsus

matched

that

from Mersin

very closely

throughout

the

lower

levels,

as

might

be

expected

since

the

sites

are

so

close

together.

The

dark

burnished

wares

at

Tarsus

were

rather

finer

than

in

the

Amuq,

a

trait

which

the

Mersin

pottery

shares.

At

least

one

pattern

burnished

sherd

was

found

here,

now

in

the

Peabody

Museum.

Tarsus

and Mersin

are

the

only

two

Neolithic

sites

excavated

on

the

Cilician

plain.

Their

material

remains

suggest

that

both enjoyed

a

flourishing

local

culture

that

also

closely

reflected

the

Anatolian

sequence.

The

Cilician

sites

in

Neolithic

3,

though

sharing

certain

features

with

the

North Syrian

settlements,

formed

a

distinct

group

on

their

own.

Material

comparable

to

that

from

Ras

Shamra

and

Tell

Judaidah

in

Neolithic

3

has

been

found

at

several

sites

north

and

east

of

the

Amuq.

-

320

-

I

will

now review

the

evidence from

these

sites

to see

whether

or

not

they

belong

within

the

North

Syrian

group

in

Neolithic

3.

SakcaggzU

The

Rift

valley

extends northward

from

the

Amuq

plain

as

far

as

Maras

where

it

ends.

Some

90

km

up

the

valley

from

the

Amuq

there

is

a

marshy

area

which

forms

the

watershed

between

the

Karasu

and

Aksu

rivers.

The

mounds

at

Sakcagb'zti

are

to

be

found

a

little

to

the

east

of

this

section

of

the

Rift

valley.

The

principal

excavations

conducted

at

the

site

were

carried

out

by

Garstang

in

1908

and

1911.

He

dug

two

soundings,

A

and

Z,

in

the

north-east

slope

of

the

mound

of

Jobba

Huytlk

and

discovered

at

the

bottom

traces

of

a

prehistoric

settlement

(Garstang

et

al.,

1937,

121ff).

This

was

founded

on

the

natural

subsoil

and

its

remains

comprised

the

three

lowest

strata

11

to

13,

designated

Period

I

(Garstang

et

al.

,

1937,

128).

Period

I

was

stratified

beneath

the

remains

of

Period

II

in

which

Halaf

material

was

found.

Further

excavations

were

carried

out

at

the

site

in

19^9

in

which

Period

I

levels

were

reached

in

the

south-east

sector

of

the

mound

(du

Plat

Taylor

et

al.

,

1950,

55)

The

structures

of

Period

I

consisted

of

hearths,

small

sub-circular

chambers

built

partly

of

stone

and

traces

of

a

lime

plaster

floor

(Garstang

et

al.,

1937,

121,

127).

The

published

section

and

plan

also

show

rectilinear

structures

at

the

bottom

of

sounding

Z

which

belonged

to

Period

I

(Garstang

et

al.,

1937,

pl«

XXII).

Several

pits

and

ditches

but

no

buildings

were

found

at

the

bottom

of

the

trench

in

the

south-east

sector

(du

Plat

Taylor

et

al.,

1950,

7*0-

We

do

not

know

enough

about

these

pits

and

structures

to

deduce

their

function

but

the

buildings

are

not

inconsistent

in

shape

with

those

on

contemporary

sites

further

south.

Both

obsidian

and

flint

artifacts

were

found

but

in

small

quantities

only

(Garstang

et

al.,

1937,

133).

The

flints

were

mostly

flakes

from which

it

is

not

possible

to

make

comparisons

with

material

from

other

sites

but

a

great

deal

of

pottery

was

recovered

in

Period

I

which

does

permit

one

to

draw

-

321

-

conclusions

about

its

affinities.

Of

the

three

wares

which

could

be

distinguished

the

most

abundant

was

a

well-fired

grey

gritty

ware with

a

grey

or

black

burnished

surface

(Garstang

et

al.,

1937

5

132ff).

Some of

this

pottery

carried

incised

patterns

of chevrons,

cross-hatching

or

dashes

usually

near

the

rim.

The

incised

patterns

on

certain

vessels

had

been

filled

with

white

clay.

Other

vessels

had

been

pattern

burnished

in

zig-zag

or

lattice

patterns.

The

second

ware

which

was

much

less

common

had

a

buff

or

brown

fabric

and was

decorated

with

lines

of

red

or

black

paint.

The

third

was

a

plain

coarse

ware

of variable

colour. The

vessels

in

this

group

were

usually

made

in

the

simplest

shapes

with

thick

walls.

The

shapes of

the

other

vessels

were

a

little

more

varied.

There

were globular

jars

with

hole-

mouth

or

everted

rims

and

also

collared

jars.

Many of

the

dark

burnished

and

incised

vessels

were

dishes

or

bowls

with

flat

bases,

splayed

straight

sides

and

a

plain

rim.

The

painted

and

plain

wares

at

SakcagGzll

are

somewhat

similar

to

the

washed

impressed ware

and

coarse

simple

ware

at

Tell

Judaidah

for

example

or

the

painted

and

coarse

wares

at

Ras

Shamra.

The

grey

or

black

burnished

ware,

while

sharing

certain general

traits of

colour

and

finish,

is

different

from

that

found

on

more

southerly

sites.

The

flat-bottomed

dishes

with

splayed

sides

typical

of

SakcogOztl

occur rarely

if

at

all

further

south

while

the

distinctive

carinated

bowls

found

at

Ras

Shamra,

in

the

Amuq

and,

as

we shall

see,

Tell

Ramad,

are not

known

on

the

northern

site.

Some

of

the

incised

patterns

with

their

white

filling

are

characteristic

of

SakcagOztl,

the

bands

of

decoration

forming

a

cross

on

the

bottom

of

some dishes

for

example

(Garstang

et

al.,

1937»

pi-

XXIV,

9),

but

are

not

found

on

the

southern

sites.

Period

I

at

SakcogOztl

has

for

long

been

linked with

Tell

Judaidah,

Ras

Shamra

and

other

sites

over

a

wide

area

stretching

from

Cilicia

through

north

Syria

into

Mesopotamia

because

it

was

thought

that

all

shared

a

common

pottery

tradition

typified by

dark

burnished

wares

and

other

general

cultural

charac-

teristics

(Seton

Williams,

19^8,

35ff;

Braidwood,

1960,

502,

506;

Mellaart,

1975,

225,

231).

I

do

not

think

that

this

view

can

be

maintained

-

322

-

any

longer.

Enough

sites

have

been excavated

now

for

us

to

determine

regional

cultural

variations

and

so

subdivide

the

older

broader

groupings.

Period

I

at

SakcagOzU

is

characterised

by

dark

burnished

pottery

vessels

of

simple

shapes

and

the

deposits

are

stratified

beneath

Halaf

levels.

This

is

sufficient

to

indicate

its

contemporaneity

with

Neolithic

3

in

the

Levant.

On

the

evidence

of

the

pattern

burnished

pots

one

could

even

equate

it

with

Amuq

B

and

Ras

Shamra

V

A,

that

is

quite

late

in

Neolithic

3.

Yet,

as

we

have

seen,

while

SakcagQztl

has

certain

general

cultural traits

and

a

few

detailed

ones

in

common

with

those

sites

the

differences

are

still quite

marked.

For

that

reason

I

do

not

think

Sakcagb'zll

can

properly

be

included

within

the

North

Syrian

group

of

Neolithic

3

sites

even

though

it

has

much

in

common

with

them.

It

is

best

thought

of

as

a

site

at

the

border

of

the

North

Syrian

group

which

has

certain

features

more

typical

of

the

region

beyond.

Tell

Turlu

Tell

Turlu

lies

about

k5

km

east

of

Gaziantep

on

the

road

to

Nizip

(Watson,

1965s

TO).

It

is

a

substantial

mound

with

a

long

sequence

of

late

prehistoric

occupation

as

well

as

other

material.

Perrot

sounded

the

site

in

1962

and

established

that

the

earliest

settlement

of levels

1

and

2

had

been

founded

on

the

natural

subsoil

(Mellink,

196U,

156).

These

levels

were

stratified

beneath

levels

3

and

h

from

which Halaf

pottery

was

recovered.

The

houses

in

levels

1

and

2

and

also

levels

3

to

6

above

were

circular

and

built

of

stone

with

silos

nearby.

The

excavation

has

not

been published

so

that

we

do

not

know

the

full

range

of

what was

found

there.

I

have

seen

a

little

of

the

material

in

the

Gaziantep

Museum

and

so

can

describe

some

of

the

pottery

and

flints.

The

main

class

of

pottery

in

levels

1

and

2

was

a

buff

or

brown

coarse

ware

with

straw

filler,

some

vessels

of

which were

lightly

burnished.

A

few

vessels

of

this

buff

ware

had

been

painted

with

red

and

black

lines.

There

was

also

a

quite

hard

fired

dark

ware coloured

grey,

black

or

occasionally

red and

then

-

323

-

well

burnished

(Perrot,

1968,

col.

UOT).

Hole-mouth

jars

or

jars

with

everted

rims

and

collared

jars

were

made

in

"both

wares;

some

of

these

vessels

had

flat

bases.

The

stone

artifacts

included

a

number

of

polished

greenstone

axes

as

well

as

many

flint

and

obsidian

tools.

Most

of the

flint

tools

were

made

on

broad

blades

and

large

flakes.

Flake

side-scrapers

and

end-scrapers

on

blades

were

quite

common

as

were

borers

on

blades. Some of

the

sickle

blades

had

nibbled

edges

with

no

other

retouch

but

most

were

segmented

and

backed

with

abrupt

retouch.

The

assemblage

included

a

few

pressure-flaked

tanged

arrowheads.

The

dark

burnished

pottery

at

Tell

Turlu

may

be

compared

with

that

in

Amuq

A

and

B

but we

must

remember

that

this

kind

of

pottery

was

in

use on

sites

over

a

wide

area

for

a

long

period.

The

coarse

buff

ware

also

may

be

compared

with

Amuq

types

though

it

is

more

like

the

plain

ware

at

SakcagOztl.

The

flints,

with

the

exception

of the

arrowheads,

differ

from

Amuq A

and

B

in

the

use

of

large

flakes

and

broad

blades

as

well

as

segmented

sickle

blades,

a

trait

that

is

found

in

the

Amuq

in

later

phases.

The

Tell

Turlu

flints do

resemble

quite

closely

the

little

material

we

know

of

from

SakcagOzti.

The

settlement

of Tell

Turlu

levels

1

and

2

was

on

stratigraphic

evidence

occupied

before

Halaf.

The

pottery

and

flints

may

be

compared

with

Neolithic

3

material

in

the

Amuq

and

at

SakcagQzll

but

on

the

evidence

of

the

flint

industry

it

would

appear

that

the

site

was

occupied

late

in

this

stage.

The

material

is

more like

that

from

SakcagOztl

than

the

Amuq

which

suggests

that

Tell

Turlu

also

lies

on

the

fringe

of

the

North

Syrian

group

of

Neolithic

3

sites.

A

survey of

ancient

sites

was

carried

out

in

the

spring

of

1939

on

the

plain

between

Aleppo

and

Meskene

and

north-east

as

far

as

Membij

(Maxwell

Hyslop

et

al.,

19^2,

18).

The

area

is

studded

with

tells

most

of

which

were

found

to

have

been

occupied

in

late

prehistoric

and

historic

times.

Two

sites,

Judaidah

Jabbul

and

Sheikh

Ahmed,

were

thought

to

have

been

occupied

-

32k

-

earlier

than

any

of

the

others

(Maxwell

Hyslop

et

al.

,

19^2, 2k).

It

is

possible

that

some

of

the

larger

tells

may

also

conceal

early

settlements

within

their

bulk

but

artifacts

typical

of

these

deposits

were

not

exposed

on

their

surfaces.

The

earliest

pottery

noted

at

Judaidah

Jabbul

and

Sheikh

Ahmed

was

Ubaid

and

Halaf

with,

in

addition,

a

red

or

black

painted

buff

ware

(Maxwell

Hyslop

et

al.,

19^2, figs.

15,

16,

17).

It

is

not

known

for

certain

if

there

are

Neolithic

deposits

at

Sheikh

Ahmed

but,

having

visited

Judaidah

Jabbul

myself,

I

am

certain

that

this

site

was

occupied

in

pre-Halaf

times.

Judaidah

Jabbul

The

mound

of

Judaidah

Jabbul

is

situated

east

of

Aleppo

and

a

little

south

of

the

present

road

to

Meskene

and

the

Euphrates

valley.

It

lies

on

the

left

bank

of

the

Wadi

ed-Dahab

where

it

joins

the

old

north

shore

of

the

Jabbul

salt

lake.

The site

is

a

long

mound

about

12

m

high

with gentle

contours

except

on the

west

side

where

the

wadi

has

washed

away

some of

the

deposit.

The

site

extends

south

under

the

present

village

of

Judaidah

and

rises

again

beyond

to

form

a

subsidiary

mound.

The

two

mounds

were

distinguish-

ed

as

separate

sites

in

the

original

survey

(Maxwell

Hyslop

et

al.

,

19^-2,

3^-).

Much

of

the

painted

pottery

to

be

seen

on

the

surface

today

is

of

Halaf

or

Ubaid

type

as

was

noted

by

Maxwell

Hyslop

and

her

collaborators.

There

are

also

sherds

of

grey,

black

and red

burnished

wares,

much

coarse

buff

straw-

tempered

ware

and

buff

pottery

painted

simply

with

red

lines.

None

of

these

sherds

is

sufficiently

diagnostic

to

indicate

that

the

site

was

occupied

in

the

Neolithic

for

all

these

wares

continued

to

be

used

into

Halaf

times.

The

flint

artifacts

decide

the

matter

since

there

are

many

blade

tools,

among

them

sickle

blades

with

little

or

no

backing

and

tanged

arrowheads

finished by both

abrupt

retouch

and

pressure-flaking.

These

tools

are

similar

to

those

in

the

ceramic

Neolithic

levels

at

Abu

Hureyra

as

is

some

of

the

pottery.

The

pottery

and

flints

are

also

similar

to

material

found

in

Amuq

A

and

B

so

we

may

con-

clude

from

these

surface

indications

that

Judaidah

Jabbul

was

occupied

at

least

-

325

-

as

early

as

Neolithic

3

and

that

it

belongs

within

the

North

Syrian

group

of

sites.

Archaeologists

have

thought

that

several

sites

situated

on

the

Euphrates

or

beyond

in

the

northern

Jezireh

were

occupied

in

Neolithic

3.

The

question

is

important

since

these

sites

would

lie

on

the

northern

and

eastern

limits

of

the

North

Syrian

group.

Unfortunately

there

is

insufficient

evidence

from

several

of

the

sites

concerned

for

us

to

be

certain

they

were

occupied

in

Neolithic

3.

I

will now

attempt

to

reconstruct

the

pattern

of

settlement

in

this

area by

briefly

reviewing

the

information

we

have

about

these

sites.

The

westernmost

site

is

Carchemish

situated

on

the

right

bank

of

the

Euphrates

at

the

point

where

it

flows

across

the

Syro-Turkish

frontier.

A

deep

cut

was

excavated

on

the east

side

of

the

citadel

mound

facing

the

river

(Woolley,

193^,

158ff)«

Some

dark

burnished

and

incised

sherds

were

found

here

at

the

bottom

of

the

cut

but

always

in

association

with

painted

pottery

of

Halaf

type.

The

earliest

deposits

for

which

we have

evidence

in

the

Carchemish

citadel

are

Halaf,

therefore,

although

it

remains

possible

that

a

Neolithic

3

settlement

may

lie

within

the

heart

of

the

mound.

Much

brown,

grey,

black

and

red

burnished

pottery,

some

of

it

with incised

decorations,

was

also

found

in

the

Yunus

Kilns

just

outside

the

walls

of

Carchemish

but

it

had

been

made

at

the

same

time

as

painted

Halaf

pottery

and

was

associated

with

Halaf

flint

tools

(Woolley,

193^,

1^9,

15^).

There

is

no

reason

to

suppose

that

the

kilns

were

used

in

Neolithic

3

despite

the

resemblance

of

the

burnished

pottery

to

Neolithic

3

wares.

One

site

in

the

Balikh

valley,

Tell

Aswad

(Balikh)

was

certainly

occupied

in

Neolithic

3.

There

were

three

kinds

of

pottery

at

the

site,

a

brown

or

red

burnished

ware,

a

coarse

buff

ware

with much

straw

temper

and

a

little

red

painted

ware.

These

can

be

paralleled

in

the

ceramic

Neolithic

levels

at

Abu

Hureyra

and

Buqras

III

as

we have

noted

in

the

preceding

chapter.

They

also

bear

a

general

resemblance

to

much

of

the

pottery

found

in

Ras

Shamra

V

B

and

V

A.

-

326

-

It

is

possible

that

the

site

of

Tell

Khirbet

el

Bassal

discovered

by

Cauvin

was

also

occupied

in

Neolithic

3.

We

have

seen

that

it

was

probably

occupied

in

Neolithic

2

as

well

as

the

Halaf

but

the

presence

of

brown

burnished

sherds

(Cauvin,

1970,

287)

suggests

that

the

site

may

also

have

been

inhabited

during

the

intervening

stage

of

Neolithic

3.

One

other

site

on

the

Balikh,

Tell

Hammam,

may

have

been

inhabited

during

Neolithic

3.

This

mound

is

situated

3-5

km

south

of

Tell

Abyad

(Mallowan,

19^-6,

136);

the

upper

levels

date

from

the

Bronze

Age

and

Classical

times

but

the

heart

of

the

tell

is

much

older.

A

few

sherds

described

as

pre-

Ubaid

were

found

here

and

also

a

collection

of

flint

tools

with

an

obsidian

blade

(Mallowan,

19^6,

fig.

13:1-8).

Two

of

these

artifacts

were

tanged

arrowheads

and

at

least

one

other

was

an

end-scraper

on

a

flake.

The

arrow-

heads

are

the

most

diagnostic

of

the

tools:

the

tang of

one

was

retouched

abruptly

and

the

other

with

pressure

flaking.

Neither

arrowhead

was

retouched

very

extensively.

These

two

arrowheads

are

typical

of

the

later

aceramic

and

ceramic

Neolithic

levels

at

Abu

Hureyra

and

so

probably

belong

in a

late

Neolithic

2

or early

Neolithic

3

context.

In

view

of

the

presence

of

early

pottery

at

Tell

Hammam

the

likelihood

is

that

the

flints

were

of

the

same

age

or

not

much

earlier

than

the

sherds

so

that

the

site

may

have

been

inhabited

in

Neolithic

3.

We

know

that

Tell

Aswad

(Balikh)

was

occupied

in

Neolithic

3

even

if

we

cannot be

certain

that

the other

sites

I

have

mentioned were

inhabited

contemporaneously.

The

material

from

Tell

Aswad

(Balikh)

places

it

firmly

within

the

North

Syrian

group

so

that

we

know

the

Balikh

valley

should

be

included

in

this

zone

of

sites

with

similar

remains.

Tell

Halaf

which

lies

on

a

tributary

of the

upper

Khabur

3

km

south-west

of

Ras

el

Ain

was

also

probably

occupied

in

Neolithic

3.

Von

Oppenheim

dug

several

deep

trenches

on

the

northern

side

of

the

mound

which

revealed

something

of

the

prehistoric

remains

at

the

heart

of

the

site.

Beneath

levels

containing

Halaf

material

he

found

deposits

characterised

by

plain

or

burnished

dark

brown,

grey

and

-

327

-

black

pottery

(Schmidt,

19^3,

25ff).

Many

of

the

vessels

were

globular

or

flat-based

hole-mouth

jars

with

ledge

handles

or lugs

for

lifting.

There

were

also

splayed

bowls

with

ring

bases.

This

pottery

was

accompanied

by

a

range

of

flint

and

obsidian

tools

which

included

tanged

arrowheads,

end-scrapers

on

blades

and

borers.

These artifacts

and

their

stratigraphic

position

would

suggest that Tell

Halaf

was

occupied

in

Neolithic

3

though

we

cannot

be sure

of

the

cultural

relationships of

these

early

levels

without

further

exploration.

Braidwood

collected

a

sample

from

the

lowest

Halaf

deposit

at

Tell Halaf,

immediately

above

the

Neolithic

3

levels,

which

gave

a

date

of

5620

±

35

B.C.

GrN-2660

(Radiocarbon

6,

196U,

355).

If

correct

this

would

indicate that

the

Neolithic

3

settlement

was

occupied

in

the

first

half

of

the

6th

millennium.

We

do

not

know

how

much further

east

and

north

the

North

Syrian

group

of

sites

extended because

few

of

the

earliest

settlements

on

the

Khabur

and

Jaghjagha

rivers

have

been

investigated.

Tell

Chagar

Bazar

h3

km

north-north-

east

of

Hassake

on

the

road

to

Amuda

may

have

been

first

settled

in

Neolithic

3

but

the

evidence

is

inconclusive.

Mallowan

sounded

the

earliest

deposits

in

a

deep

trench

at

the

north-west

end of the

site

(Mallowan,

1936,

7)«

He

found

that

the

lowest

level,

level

15

s

rested

on

the

virgin

soil

(1936,

11).

No

buildings

could

be

discerned

in

this

level

but

two

pits,

presumably

dug

down

from

a

higher

level,

contained

Samarra pottery

(1936,

17).

Within

level

15

there

were

sherds of

both

painted

Halaf

and

grey

or

black

burnished

ware.

The

burnished

sherds

were

found

together

in

a

"cache"

(1936,

11)

which

suggests

that

they

had

been

deposited

separately from

the

Halaf

pottery

and

so

may have

come

from

an

earlier

settlement,

perhaps

Neolithic

3

in

date.

More

substantial

remains

of

such

a

settlement

may

lie

beneath

the centre

of

the

site

which

was

not

tested

in a

deep

sounding.

Some

of

the

burnished

pottery from

level

15

had

been

decorated

with

incised

designs (Mallowan,

1936,

12)

in

a

similar

manner

to

vessels

from

Ras

Shamra V

B

and

V

A

although

one

sherd

(Mallowan,

1936,

pi.

Ill,

10)

had

rows

of

incised

cross-hatched

triangles

reminiscent

of

vessels

from

SakcagQzU.

-

328

-

Another

sherd

had

been

pattern

"burnished

(Mallowan,

1936,

12).

The

affinities

of

this

material

are

mostly

with

sites

in

the

North

Syrian

group

"but

the

sherds

would

not

be

out

of

place

in

a

Halaf

context

so

we

cannot

be

sure

that

there was

a

Neolithic

3

settlement

at

Chagar

Bazar.

Davidson

carried

out

a

survey

of

early

sites

in

the

northern Jezireh

in

197^

(Davidson,

McKerrell,

19?6,

^5ff)

"but

the

earliest

sites he

discovered

were

all

of

Halaf

type.

He

has

told

me

that

he

found

no

certain

traces

of

Neolithic

3

settlement

in

the

area.

This

does

not

necessarily

mean

that

the

region

was

uninhabited

then,

an

unlikely

hypothesis

I

would

think

since

so

much

of

north

Syria

further

west

but

in

the

same

latitude

was

settled

in

Neolithic

3.

There

is

a

great

density

of

tells

in

this

area

indicating

its

suitability

for

settlement

in

ancient

times

and

remains

of

Neolithic

3

sites

may

be

concealed

within

these

mounds.

There

appears

to

have

been

some soil

movement

which

has

raised

the

level

of

parts

of

the

north

Jezireh

plain

since

the

lower

deposits

on

several

sites

are

below

the

present

ground

surface.

This

process

may

have

buried

other

Neolithic

3

settlements.

Only

when

definite

indications

of

Neolithic

3

occupation

have

been

found

in

excavation

on

the

Khabur

and

Jaghjagha

headwaters

will

we

know

if

the

area

was

occupied

by

people

using

similar

equipment

to

those

on

North

Syrian

sites

further

west

and

along

the Euphrates.

I

have

now

discussed

all the

known

Neolithic

3

sites

that

belong

within

the

North

Syrian

group.

There

is

another

series

of

Neolithic

3

sites

in

southern

Syria

and

Lebanon

which

I

shall

call

the

South

Syrian

group

(Fig.

39)

The

material

remains

on

these

sites

are

more

varied

than

in

the

North

Syrian

group

so

that

one

may

distinguish

sub-groups

on

the

Lebanese

coast,

in

the

Beka'a

and

the

Damascus

basin.

The

type-site

for the

whole

area

is

Byblos

which

I

shall

describe

first.

DAMASCUS

BASIN

Fig.

39

Neolithic

3

South

Syrian sites

FIGURE

39

Neolithic

3

South

Syrian

sites

1

Tabbat

el

Hammam

2

Tell

Kirri

3

Kubbah

I

4

Byblos

5

Hermel

IV

6

Ras

Baalbek

7

Tell

Labweh

North

8

Tell

Labweh

9

Tell

Hashbai

10

Tell Bab

ez-Zeitun

11

Tell

Neba'a

Faour

I

12

Tell

Shamsine

13

Kaukaba

14

Tell

ez-Zeitun

15

Tell

Ramad

16

Tannur

17

Ain

Hashomer

18

Kfar

Giladi

19

Qat

20

Zug

Fuqani

21

Hagosherim

22

Tell

Turmus

23

Beisamun

24

Kabri

-

329

-

South

Syria

Lebanese

coast

Byblos

Byblos,

now

the little

town

of

Jubail,

lies

about

30

km

north-east

of

Beirut

on

the

Lebanese

coast.

To

the

east

of

the

site

there

is

a

narrow

though

fertile

coastal

plain

and

then

the

Mountains

of

Lebanon

which

rise

steeply

behind.

The

ancient settlement

is

situated

on

a

promontory

just

to

the

south

of

a

tiny

inlet.

This

inlet

is

the

old

port

of

Byblos

which

is

still

used

as

a

fishing

harbour.

On

the

south

side

of

the

promontory

there

is

another

cove

at

the

mouth

of

a

little

valley

which

ran

across

the

site

before

it

became

filled

with

occupation

debris. This cove

was

probably

a

subsidiary

landing

place

in

ancient

times

(Dunand,

1973,

5);

it

may

have

been

used

more

by

the

Neolithic

inhabitants

than

the

inlet

to

the

north

which

lay

further

away

down

a

steep

slope.

Beyond

this cove

is

an

open

sandy

beach

which

would

have

been

a

good

landing

place

in

fine

weather.

It

is

important

to

remember

that

the

sea

probably

only

reached

its

present

height

during

the

6th

millennium

as

we

saw

in

Chapter

1

so

that

it

was not

until

Neolithic

3

that

Byblos

could

have

served

as

a

port.

By

the

same

reasoning

it

would

only have

been

during

this

period

that

the

bay

of

Minet

el

Beidha

to

the

west

of

Ras

Shamra

would

have

assumed

its

present

configuration

and

provided

a

convenient

harbour

for the

large

settlement

a

little

way

inland.

We

know

that

fish

were

eaten

in

considerable

quantities

at

Byblos

during

this

period

since

their

remains

comprised

1%

of the

bones

identified

from

the

site

(Dunand,

1973,

36)

and

they

were

still

probably

consumed

at

Ras

Shamra

as

fish

vertebrae

had

been

recovered

in

the

Neolithic

2

levels.

It

is

likely

that

by

now

some

of

these

fish

were

caught

from

boats

at

sea

which

could

have

conveniently

been

launched

from

the

new

harbours.

We have

no

evidence

that

maritime

trade

had

commenced

along

the Levant

coast

in

Neolithic

3

though

since

we

know

that

small

quantities

of

many

materials

were

being

exchanged between

sites

it

would

not

be

surprising

if

a

little of

-

330

-

this

traffic

was

conducted

by

sea.

In

the

absence

of

positive

evidence,

however,

we

must conclude

that

the

potential

of

the

harbours

at

Byblos and

Ras

Shamra

was

not

realised

until

much

later.

The

ancient

site

of Byblos

has

been

excavated

almost

continuously

by

Dunand

for

over

ho

years,

At

least

1.5

ha

has

now

been

cleared

to

bedrock

so that

a

greater

area

of

the

prehistoric

settlement

at

the

base

has

been

exposed

than

on

any

other

site

in

the

Levant.

A

considerable

amount

of

information

has

thus

been

recovered

about

the

structures

of

the

successive

Neolithic

settlements

and

the

artifacts

used

by

their

inhabitants.

The

original

topography

of

the

site

has

also

been

determined

fairly

precisely.

The

promontory

at

Byblos

once

consisted

of

two

hills,

one

higher

than

the

other,

separated

by

a

little

valley

in

which

lay

a

spring

of

good

water

(Dunand,

1973,

1,

^,

pi.

C).

The

higher

of

the

two

hills

was

on

the

west

side

of

the

valley.

The first

substantial

settlement

at

Byblos was

established

on

the

seaward

slope

of

this

hill

and

later

spread

south

into

the

valley

(Dunand,

1973,

10,

33).

This

phase of

settlement

has

been

designated

"Ne"olithique

And

en"

by

Dunand.

The

principal

attractions of

the

site

have

always

been

the

spring,

the

protected

landings

for

boats

and

the

fertility

of

the

immediate

hinterland;

presumably

these

factors

also

induced

the inhabitants

of

the

Ne"olithique

Ancien

site

to

settle

here.

We

may

note

in

passing

that

the

site

was

occupied briefly

at

an

earlier

period.

A

small

deposit

was

found

which

contained

no

pottery

but

which

yielded

a

tanged

and

notched

arrowhead

as

well

as

several

microliths,

one

of

them

backed

with

Helwan

retouch

(Dunand,

1973,

k2.

,

n. 5;

Cauvin,

1968,

92).

This

suggests

that

a

group

may

have

lived

here

for

a

while

in

one

of

the two

earlier

Neolithic

stages

or

Mesolithic

2.

The

debris

of

the

N olithique Ancien

settlement

was

spread

over

about

1.2

ha,

an

area

that

would

have

been

more

extensive

originally

since

part

of

the

site

has

washed

away

on

the

seaward

side

(Dunand,

1973,

pi.

G).

Much of

the

deposit

was

composed

of

occupation

soil,

building

remains

being

concentrated

on

an

area

of

only

5000

sq.

m.

Dunand estimated

that

about

20

houses

were

-

331

-

occupied

at

one

time

and

that

the

settlement

was

no

more

than

a

small

village

(1973,

90).

These houses

had

been

robbed

for

building

materials

so

that

in

some

instances

little

of the

original

dwelling

remained.

It

seems

probable

to me

that

there

were

more

houses

in

the

village

than

Dunand

suggests

and

that

some

of

these

were

completely

destroyed

by

robbing

and

disturbance after

they were

abandoned.

Thus

the

likely

area

of

intensive

occupation

would

have

been

greater

than

the

5000

sq

m

proposed

by

Dunand.

The

houses

were

rectangular

with

a

single

room to

which

other

more

lightly

built

structures

were

sometimes

added

(Dunand,

1973

S

10,

17)-

These

houses

varied

in

size

(Fig.

ho)

but

several

were

about

5

m

long

and

k

m

wide.

Their

walls

were

built

of

stone

but

none

was

found

standing

more than

1

m

high.

The

entrance

was

in

the

long

side

of

a

room.

The

floors

were

usually

made

of

hard

white

lime

plaster laid

on

a

bed

of

pebbles

which

sometimes

curved

a

little

way

up

the

walls

(Dunand,

1973,

12).

The

surface

of

the

plaster

was

then

polished.

Dunand

did

not

think

that

the

stone

walls

of

many

of

the

houses

ever

stood

much

higher

than

1

m.

This

led

him

to

suggest

that

the

houses

were

framed

and

roofed

with

poles

covered

by

mats

or skins

(Dunand,

1973,

1^).

He

believed

that the

wall

posts

must

have

been

set

up

outside

the

low

stone

walls

as

no

trace

of

roof

supports

was

found

within

the

buildings

(Dunand,

1973,

fig.

3)

;

we

may

note

in

passing

that

he

does

not

report that

post-holes

were

found

along

the

outsides

of

the

walls

either.

The

stone

walls

and

plaster

floors

of

the

Ne"olithique

Ancien

houses

were

stoutly

and

carefulJybuilt

so

it

is

probable

that

their

superstructures

were

completed

in

a

similar

fashion.

We

have

already

seen

that

the

walls

of

these

buildings

were

damaged

by

robbing,

an

observation

supported

by

the

absence of

collapsed

walling

within

them

(Dunand,

1973,

1U).

The

walls

may

have

been

built

high

enough

to

support

the

roof

but

subsequently

were

reduced

by

robbing

to no

more than

stubs.

If the

walls

had

originally

carried

the

roofs

that

would

explain

why

no

trace

of

wall

or

roof

supports was

found

inside,

or

outside

the

houses.

\

v-

V

\

V

\

\\

•''

\

:

:'^'

3

SC.

1

=100

Fig.

40

Byblos-

Neolithique

Ancien

houses

(after

Dunand)

-

332

-

Several

of

these

houses

had

a

little

platform

built

inside

against

one

of

the

short

walls

(Dunand,

1973,

12).

These

may

have

been

hearths

but

Dunand

preferred

to

think

of

them

as

associated

with

a

domestic

cult.

In

one

house

a

mortar

had

been

set

in

the

floor

(Dunand,

1973,

13)

while

in

others

a

depression

was

found

on

the

floor

where

mortars

or

querns

had

probably

stood

(Dunand,

1973,

20).

Scattered

on

the

floors

were

grinding

tools

and

other

domestic

artifacts.

Outside

the

houses

stubs

of

walls

and

other

stones

were

used

as

benches

(Dunand,

1973,

17,

18).

The

houses

were

aligned

either

north-south

or

east-west.

This

happened

to

be

the

most

convenient

way

to

build

them

because

of

the

slope

of

the

ground

but

it

also

meant

that

the

doorways of

many

of

the

houses

faced

the

sun.

The

houses

were

rebuilt

on

the

same

spot

on

about

the

same

alignment

usually

three

times

but

in

one

area

as

much

as

six

or

seven

(Dunand,

1973,

15).

Each

house

stood

alone and was

separated

from

its

neighbours

by

large

open

spaces

(Dunand,

1973,

pi.

Ha).

A

little

paving

was

found

in

these

open

spaces

and

also

heavy

stone

grinding

tools left

in

place,

bedrock

mortars

and

hearths

(Dunand,

1973,

29).

The

dead

were

buried

in

the

settlement

between

the

buildings.

The

corpses

were

laid

in

a

crouched

position

on

their

left

sides

in

shallow

graves

(Dunand,

1973,

30);

the

bodies

of

infants

were

buried

in

jars

(Dunand,

1973,

32).

Two

groups

of

adult

burials

were

noted,

one

in

which

the

bodies

were

placed

in

simple

graves

with

a

few

artifacts

and

a

second

in

which

the

corpses

were laid

on

a

bed

of

stones

with

more

grave

goods;

the

former

was

more

common.

The

accompanying

artifacts

consisted

of

flint

tools,

polished

stone

axes,

pottery

and

occasional

ornaments.

33

burials

were

found

alto-

gether,

not

many

when

one

considers

the

size

of

the

settlement

and

the

length

of

time

it

was

occupied.

Dunand

noted

that some

graves

may

have

been

destroyed

by

building

activity

in

this

and

later

phases

and

also

remarked

that

not

all

the

dead

may

have

been

buried

within

the

village

anyway

(1973,

32).

The

inhabitants

of

the

Neolithic

settlements

at

Byblos

obtained

their

-

333

-

flint

from nodules

on

the

floors

of

neighbouring

wadis.

In

the

Wadi

Deir

el

Banat

which

reaches

the

sea

just

south

of

Byblos beds

of

excellent

flint

exposed

in

either

bank

were

apparently

quarried

for

raw

material

(Cauvin,

1968,

i|0).

Not

many

cores

were

found

on

the

site

(Cauvin,

1968,

92)

which

implies that

blades

were

usually

prepared

where

the

flint

was quarried.

Such

cores

as

were recovered

were

pyramidal

or

double-ended

in

type

(Cauvin,

1968,

fig.

33).

18

pieces of

obsidian were

found

in

the

Ne"olithique

Ancien

settle-

ment

three

of

which

have

been

analysed

spectrographically.

Two

came

from

the

1

e-f

source,

probably

Acigo"!

near

Kayseri,

and

one

from

Ciftlik

(Renfrew

et

al.

,

1966, 63,

65).

Most

of

the flint

tools

found

at

Byblos

were

of

four

classes:

sickle

blades,

arrowheads,

burins

and

axes

with

chisels.

The

sickle

blades

were

all

made

on

segmented

blades

and

hafted

together

to

form

composite

sickles

(Cauvin,

1968,

TO).

They

were retouched

straight

or

obliquely

at

one

or

both

ends

and

some

were

abruptly

retouched

along

the

back

(Fig.

Ma).

The

cutting

edge

was

denticulated

but

sometimes

both

long

sides

were

retouched

in

this way.

A

great

many

truncated

blades

were

found

in

one

spot

in

the

Ne"olithique

Ancien

settlement

(Cauvin,

1968,

73)

which

were

in

the

process

of

being

made

into

segmented

sickle

blades.

The

place

where

they were

found

was

thus

a

working

floor

for

the

manufacture

of

these

tools.

The

sickles

of

which

these

segmented

denticulated

blades

make

up

the

cutting

edge

are

poor

tools

with

which

to

cut

cereals

although

they

could

have

been

used

to scrape

ears

of

wheat

off

the

stalks

into

baskets.

It

has

also

been suggested

that

they

may

have

been

used

to

cut

down

plants

with

tough

siliceous

stems

such

as

reeds.

The

problem

is

difficult

to

resolve

since

there

is

evidence

for

both

cereal

agriculture

and

the

use of

reeds

at

Byblos

and

at

other

sites

on

which

these

tools

have

been

found.

As

I

have

explained

elsewhere

(Moore,

1973,

U3)»

we

do

not

know

if

these

sickles

were

used

for

harvesting

cereals

or some

other

plant and

so

cannot

definitely

associate

them

with

agricultural

activities

as

Cauvin

has

done

(1968,

SC.

2

=

3

A

^

Fig.

41

Byblos

Neolithique

Ancien

a

-

sickle

blades

b-

Byblos

points

(after

Cauvin)

-

33^

-

Most

of

the

arrowheads

were

of

three

types

,

all

of

which

were

tanged.

Two

were

the

Amuq

points

1

and

2

and

the

third

was

what

Cauvin

has

called

the

"Byblos

point"