Content uploaded by Liora Kolska Horwitz
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Liora Kolska Horwitz on Oct 12, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
VOLUME 66 • NUMBER 2 • 2016
CONTENTS
129 EHUD GALILI,ALLA YAROSHEVICH,BARUCH ROSEN,NIMROD GETZOV,
IANIR MILEVSKI,ESTELLE ORRELLE and LIORA KOLSKA HORWITZ:
Figurative Representations from Neveh Yam and Other Sites in Israel:
Markers of the Late Neolithic/Early Chalcolithic South Levant Cultures
151 DANIEL VAINSTUB and DAVID BEN-SHLOMO: A Hebrew Seal and an
Ostracon from Tel Hebron
161 ASSAF KLEIMAN,ADAM KAPLAN and ISRAEL FINKELSTEIN: Building 338
at Megiddo: New Evidence from the Field
177 LIORA FREUD: A Note on Sixth-Century BCE Phoenician Chalice-Shaped
Vessels from Judah
188 SUEMBIKYA I. FRUMIN and YANA TCHEKHANOVETS: Plant Imprints on
Pottery Reveal Fig Tree in Hellenistic Jerusalem
202 YUVAL GADOT and YONATAN ADLER: A Quantitative Analysis of Jewish
Chalk Vessel Frequencies in Early Roman Jerusalem: A View from the
City’s Garbage Dump
220 RIVKA ELITZUR LEIMAN and UZI LEIBNER: An Amulet from Khirbet Wadi
¡amam
232 LILY SINGER-AVITZ: Khirbet Qeiyafa: Late Iron Age I in Spite of It All —
Once Again
245 NOTES AND NEWS
248 REVIEWS
250 HEBREW BOOKS AND PAPERS
Page layout by Avraham Pladot
Typesetting by Marzel A.S. — Jerusalem
Printed by Old City Press, Jerusalem
Israel
Exploration
Journal
VOLUME 66 • NUMBER 2
JERUSALEM, ISRAEL • 2016
I
E
J
66
2
ISRAEL EXPLORATION JOURNAL
Published twice yearly by the Israel Exploration Society and the Institute of
Archaeology of the Hebrew University, with the assistance of the Nathan
Davidson Publication Fund in Archaeology, Samis Foundation, Seattle WA,
and Dorot Foundation, Providence RI
Founders
A. Reifenberg, D. Amiran
Former Editors
Michael Avi-Yonah, Dan Barag, Jonas C. Greenfield, Baruch A. Levine,
Amihai Mazar, Miriam Tadmor
Editorial Board
Shmuel A¢ituv, Aren M. Maeir and Zeev Weiss, Editors
Tsipi Kuper-Blau, Executive Editor
Joseph Aviram, President, Israel Exploration Society
Editorial Advisory Board
Gideon Avni, Ofer Bar-Yosef, Shlomo Bunimovitz, Israel Ephªal,
Baruch A. Levine, Amihai Mazar, Ronny Reich, Myriam Rosen-Ayalon
IEJ is now available online on JSTOR
Email: iej.editors@gmail.com
Books for review: Israel Exploration Journal, P.O.B. 7041, Jerusalem 91070,
Israel
Guidelines: http://israelexplorationsociety.huji.ac.il
Copyright © 2016 Israel Exploration Society
ISSN 0021-2059
The Editors are not responsible for opinions expressed by the contributors
ABBREVIATIONS
AASOR Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research
ADAJ Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan
AJA American Journal of Archaeology
AfO Archiv für Orientforschung
ANET Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament3, ed. J.B. Pritchard,
Princeton, 1969
BA The Biblical Archaeologist
BASOR Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research
BT Babylonian Talmud
CAD Chicago Assyrian Dictionary
CIS Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum
DJD Discoveries in the Judaean Desert
DSD Dead Sea Discoveries
EI Eretz-Israel: Archaeological, Historical and Geographical Studies
ESI Excavations and Surveys in Israel
IAA Reports Israel Antiquities Authority Reports
IEJ Israel Exploration Journal
JAOS Journal of the American Oriental Society
JBL Journal of Biblical Literature
JCS Journal of Cuneiform Studies
JEA Journal of Egyptian Archaeology
JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies
KAI W. Donner and W. Röllig: Kanaanäische und aramäische Inschriften 1–3,
Wiesbaden, 1962–1964; 15, 2002
NEAEHL The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land (English
Edition), Jerusalem, 1993
PEQ Palestine Exploration Quarterly
PT Palestinian Talmud
QDAP Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities in Palestine
RA Revue d’Assyriologie et d’Archéologie Orientale
RB Revue Biblique
RE Pauly-Wissowa’s Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft
RQ Revue de Qumran
VT Vetus Testamentum
ZA Zeitschrift für Assyriologie
ZDPV Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins
ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTION RATES
2017: $73 including postage or equivalent payable to
the Israel Exploration Society, P.O.B. 7041, Jerusalem 91070, Israel.
All subscribers are entitled to a 25% reduction on the publications of the Society.
Subscribers should give full name and postal address when paying their
subscription, and should send notice of change of address at least five weeks before
it is to take effect; the old as well as the new address should be given.
Single issue: $37 or equivalent.
VOLUME 66 • NUMBER 2 • 2016
CONTENTS
129 EHUD GALILI,ALLA YAROSHEVICH,BARUCH ROSEN,NIMROD GETZOV,
IANIR MILEVSKI,ESTELLE ORRELLE and LIORA KOLSKA HORWITZ:
Figurative Representations from Neveh Yam and Other Sites in Israel:
Markers of the Late Neolithic/Early Chalcolithic South Levant Cultures
151 DANIEL VAINSTUB and DAVID BEN-SHLOMO: A Hebrew Seal and an
Ostracon from Tel Hebron
161 ASSAF KLEIMAN,ADAM KAPLAN and ISRAEL FINKELSTEIN: Building 338
at Megiddo: New Evidence from the Field
177 LIORA FREUD: A Note on Sixth-Century BCE Phoenician Chalice-Shaped
Vessels from Judah
188 SUEMBIKYA I. FRUMIN and YANA TCHEKHANOVETS: Plant Imprints on
Pottery Reveal Fig Tree in Hellenistic Jerusalem
202 YUVAL GADOT and YONATAN ADLER: A Quantitative Analysis of Jewish
Chalk Vessel Frequencies in Early Roman Jerusalem: A View from the
City’s Garbage Dump
220 RIVKA ELITZUR LEIMAN and UZI LEIBNER: An Amulet from Khirbet Wadi
¡amam
232 LILY SINGER-AVITZ: Khirbet Qeiyafa: Late Iron Age I in Spite of It All —
Once Again
245 NOTES AND NEWS
248 REVIEWS
250 HEBREW BOOKS AND PAPERS
Page layout by Avraham Pladot
Typesetting by Marzel A.S. — Jerusalem
Printed by Old City Press, Jerusalem
Israel
Exploration
Journal
VOLUME 66 • NUMBER 2
JERUSALEM, ISRAEL • 2016
I
E
J
66
2
ISRAEL EXPLORATION JOURNAL
Published twice yearly by the Israel Exploration Society and the Institute of
Archaeology of the Hebrew University, with the assistance of the Nathan
Davidson Publication Fund in Archaeology, Samis Foundation, Seattle WA,
and Dorot Foundation, Providence RI
Founders
A. Reifenberg, D. Amiran
Former Editors
Michael Avi-Yonah, Dan Barag, Jonas C. Greenfield, Baruch A. Levine,
Amihai Mazar, Miriam Tadmor
Editorial Board
Shmuel A¢ituv, Aren M. Maeir and Zeev Weiss, Editors
Tsipi Kuper-Blau, Executive Editor
Joseph Aviram, President, Israel Exploration Society
Editorial Advisory Board
Gideon Avni, Ofer Bar-Yosef, Shlomo Bunimovitz, Israel Ephªal,
Baruch A. Levine, Amihai Mazar, Ronny Reich, Myriam Rosen-Ayalon
IEJ is now available online on JSTOR
Email: iej.editors@gmail.com
Books for review: Israel Exploration Journal, P.O.B. 7041, Jerusalem 91070,
Israel
Guidelines: http://israelexplorationsociety.huji.ac.il
Copyright © 2016 Israel Exploration Society
ISSN 0021-2059
The Editors are not responsible for opinions expressed by the contributors
ABBREVIATIONS
AASOR Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research
ADAJ Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan
AJA American Journal of Archaeology
AfO Archiv für Orientforschung
ANET Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament3, ed. J.B. Pritchard,
Princeton, 1969
BA The Biblical Archaeologist
BASOR Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research
BT Babylonian Talmud
CAD Chicago Assyrian Dictionary
CIS Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum
DJD Discoveries in the Judaean Desert
DSD Dead Sea Discoveries
EI Eretz-Israel: Archaeological, Historical and Geographical Studies
ESI Excavations and Surveys in Israel
IAA Reports Israel Antiquities Authority Reports
IEJ Israel Exploration Journal
JAOS Journal of the American Oriental Society
JBL Journal of Biblical Literature
JCS Journal of Cuneiform Studies
JEA Journal of Egyptian Archaeology
JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies
KAI W. Donner and W. Röllig: Kanaanäische und aramäische Inschriften 1–3,
Wiesbaden, 1962–1964; 15, 2002
NEAEHL The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land (English
Edition), Jerusalem, 1993
PEQ Palestine Exploration Quarterly
PT Palestinian Talmud
QDAP Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities in Palestine
RA Revue d’Assyriologie et d’Archéologie Orientale
RB Revue Biblique
RE Pauly-Wissowa’s Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft
RQ Revue de Qumran
VT Vetus Testamentum
ZA Zeitschrift für Assyriologie
ZDPV Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins
ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTION RATES
2017: $73 including postage or equivalent payable to
the Israel Exploration Society, P.O.B. 7041, Jerusalem 91070, Israel.
All subscribers are entitled to a 25% reduction on the publications of the Society.
Subscribers should give full name and postal address when paying their
subscription, and should send notice of change of address at least five weeks before
it is to take effect; the old as well as the new address should be given.
Single issue: $37 or equivalent.
Figurative Representations from Neveh Yam and
Other Sites in Israel: Markers of the Late Neolithic/
Early Chalcolithic South Levant Cultures*
EHUD GALILI
Israel Antiquities Authority
and Haifa University
ALLA YAROSHEVICH
Israel Antiquities
Authority
BARUCH ROSEN
Israel Antiquities
Authority
NIMROD GETZOV
Israel Antiquities Authority
IANIR MILEVSKI
Israel Antiquities Authority
ESTELLE ORRELLE
University of East London
LIORA KOLSKA HORWITZ
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
ABSTRACT: Four symbolic artefacts were recovered from the Late Neolithic/Early
Chalcolithic (Wadi Rabah culture) site of Neveh Yam, dated to the sixth–fifth
millennia BCE. These comprise two anthropomorphic figurines made of stone, one
anthropomorphic image incised on bone and a sherd with zoomorphic incisions.
These artefacts are described and discussed with reference to similar objects found
in additional Late Neolithic/Early Chalcolithic sites in the southern Levant and
later sites in Mesopotamia, the Aegean and the Iberian Peninsula. It is proposed
that the bone figurines from Neveh Yam, ªEn ¥ippori and Ha-Gosherim could
represent a symbolic marker for the Wadi Rabah culture and contemporary cultures
in the southern Levant.
INTRODUCTION
THE aim of this article is to describe and discuss figurative artefacts from Neveh
IEJ 66 (2016): 129–150 129
Israel Exploration Journal
VOLUME 66 • NUMBER 2 • 2016
*The authors would like to thank the following: the Israel Antiquities Authority for
providing access to the illustrations of the Ha-Gosherim figurine; Debby Hershman
(Israel Museum) for facilitating access to the greenstone figurine curated at the Israel
Museum and for arranging photography of this item; the Israel Museum for permis-
sion to publish this photograph (fig. 6); Leonid Ziegler for drawing the Neveh Yam
bone figurine (fig. 2) and the ªEn ¥ippori fragment; and the anonymous reviewers for
their useful comments. The article was submitted for publication on January 11, 2015
and was accepted on April 21, 2015.
Yam, including a newly discovered anthropomorphic bone figurine. The Neveh
Yam finds are studied in light of similar human figurines recovered from ªEn
¥ippori and Ha-Gosherim, as well as other southern Levant sites and items from
other regions. Neveh Yam is one of six submerged settlements attributed to the
Wadi Rabah culture, situated along the northern Carmel coast: Neveh Yam,
Megadim, Tel Hreiz, Na¢al Galim, Kfar Galim and Kfar Samir (fig. 1). The sites
are currently inundated due to global, post-glacial sea-level rise (Galili and
Weinstein-Evron 1985; Galili and Schick 1990; Galili 2004; Galili, Weinstein-
Evron and Zohary 1989; Galili et al. 2009; Galili and Rosen 2011a; 2011b;
Horwitz et al. 2002; Horwitz, Galili and Lernau 2006; Greenfield, Galili and
Horwitz 2006; Galili et al. 2013; Galili, Horwitz and Rosen 2015).
Figurative and non-figurative symbolic artefacts are among the most intrigu-
ing components left in the archaeological record by prehistoric societies in the
southern Levant. Beginning in the Palaeolithic period, their quantity and variety
increased over time and included abstract ornaments, carefully engraved
zoomorphic figurines and schematic anthropomorphic representations made of
bone or stone (e.g., Weinstein-Evron and Belfer-Cohen 1993; Noy 1989; Yizraeli-
Noy 1999; Bednarik 2003: 7–8; Hansen 2007; Hershman and Belfer-Cohen 2010;
Major 2013, Yaroshevich et al. 2016). To date, the small size of assemblages has
prevented comprehensive and quantitative investigation of these and later finds.
As such, their study has largely been descriptive and concentrated on tracing
parallels with other similar iconographic motifs, noting variation of types and
recognizing cultural markers (fossiles directeurs) of particular cultures (for back-
ground summaries, see Gopher and Orrelle 1995; Orrelle 2014). In addition, the
assemblages are largely composed of unique items that cannot be classified into
known ‘types’ or of fragmented ones that defy reconstruction. Consequently,
interpretations based on publications of a few whole or reconstructed items proba-
bly do not reflect the realities of the original record (Orrelle 2014: 21–22; Gopher
and Gophna 1993: 302). Despite these drawbacks and the fact that the exact mean-
ing of these artefacts is sometimes enigmatic, their study can offer a unique
window into the conceptual world of past human communities.
Cauvin (2000) noted a general shift in Levantine artistic imagery, from a focus
on zoomorphs in the Natufian to an emphasis on anthropomorphic images in the
Pre-Pottery Neolithic (PPN), a manifestation of significant changes in the
economic and ritual world of local communities. This change is best illustrated by
the imagery assemblage of the PPNB, which represents the greatest variety of
types, sizes and materials used in portraying humans of all periods prior to the
Pottery Neolithic (PN) (Yizraeli-Noy 1999; Orrelle 2014; Garfinkel 1995; 1999;
Schmandt-Besserat 2013). Moreover, the PPNB repertoire includes large statues
and life-size masks that may be associated with public, rather than private, cultic
conduct.
Goring-Morris and Belfer-Cohen (2002: 73) noted that although marked
130 EHUD GALILI ET AL.
changes took place at the transition from the Natufian to PPN, ‘there was no total
replacement of the cosmological and ritual system, but rather additions, embel-
lishments and intensifications to the “secure” and familiar existing framework’.
This is especially visible in the small symbolic artefacts of the PPN, with
zoomorphic statuettes that were common in the Natufian and earlier periods, still
FIGURATIVE REPRESENTATIONS FROM NEVEH YAM AND OTHER SITES 131
Fig. 1. Location map showing the Neveh Yam site (E. Galili)
notably more numerous than anthropomorphic ones (Freikman and Garfinkel
2009). These zoomorphic depictions are sometimes deliberately disfigured, inter-
preted as symbolic acts of ‘killing’ the animal prior to hunting (Schmandt-
Besserat 2013). Freikman and Garfinkel (2009) have suggested that the role of
these small zoomorphic figurines was further reduced by the PN, apparently
related to the decreased importance of hunting and increased reliance on animal
husbandry.
In the PN period, represented by the Yarmukian culture, the quantities and
types of symbolic artefacts differ from the preceding PPN but also display some
degree of continuity (Gopher and Gophna 1993; Gopher 1995). The Yarmukian
offers a rich spectrum of human and animal images with a prevalence of anthropo-
morphic female figurines (Stekelis 1972: 25–35, pls. 45–61, 63–68; Garfinkel
1995; Yizraeli-Noy 1999; Garfinkel, Ben-Shlomo and Korn 2010). These include
‘cowrie-eyed’ human clay statuettes and stylised pebble figurines, both serving as
fossiles directeurs of this culture. Large concentrations of these figurines were
recovered at Shaªar ha-Golan (Garfinkel and Miller 2002), Mun¢ata Ib (Garfinkel
1995; Gopher and Orrelle 1995) and Na¢al Zehora II (Gopher and Eyal 2012).
The subsequent Wadi Rabah culture is assigned by some researchers to the
Early Chalcolithic culture (Kaplan 1958; Freikman and Garfinkel 2009), while
others place it at the end of the PN sequence (Gopher and Gophna 1993). In
contrast to the Yarmukian, the corpus of images recovered from Wadi Rabah sites
is extremely small (Yizraeli-Noy 1999: 101; Banning 2007; Orrelle 2014), but it
includes zoomorphic and anthropomorphic figurines, manufactured of clay and
stone, as well as appliqués on ceramic vessels (Kaplan 1969; Gopher and Gophna
1993; Garfinkel 1995: Gopher 1995; Garfinkel and Matskevich 2002).
The present study presents four symbolic artefacts, made of stone, bone and
ceramic, recovered during surveys and excavations at Neveh Yam, a submerged
Wadi Rabah settlement (spanning the period between 7600–6750 cal. BP). These
four items are described, discussed and compared to recent finds from contempo-
rary sites in the region and areas beyond. Together, they offer a new outlook on
artefact types and their geographic distributions and present artistic motifs that
may serve as symbolic markers of these Late Neolithic/Early Chalcolithic
cultures.
THE NEVEH YAM SITE
The site of Neveh Yam is located between the coastline and a submerged kurkar
(aeolian sand stone) ridge at a depth of 5–0 m below the present sea-level (Galili
et al. 2009: fig. 3). The archaeological remains are embedded in the upper layer of
hard clay of terrestrial origin, deposited in a trough between the coastal kurkar
ridges that were formed during the late Pleistocene. The site is usually covered by
a 1–2 m layer of sand. Aportion of the eastern section of the site was first exposed
132 EHUD GALILI ET AL.
during the late 1960s following a sea storm, and in 1968 a small rescue excavation
was conducted on shore in the central area of the site (Prausnitz 1977; Wreschner
1977). In 1983–1995 and 2005 large sections of the submerged site were exposed.
Underwater surveys and rescue excavations carried out by the Israel Antiquities
Authority and the University of Haifa (Galili 2004; Galili, Sharvit and Nagar
1998; Galili et al. 2009; Galili et al. 2013) revealed foundations of rectangular
structures and walls built of two rows of undressed kurkar stones, postholes,
paved surfaces made of small undressed stones, stone slabs or pottery fragments,
unpaved pits and hearths. Large assemblages of flint, bone and stone artefacts,
animal bones, floral remains and pottery vessels were collected. A separate orga-
nized burial area, the earliest known from the region, was found in the southern
section of the site. It consists of 11 stone-built cist graves covered with stone
slabs. The remains of 15 individuals of both sexes and a range of dates, buried in
the clay, were recovered (Galili et al. 2009).
The site is dated to the second half of the eighth/early seventh millennium cal.
BP on the basis of three 14C dates (Galili et al. 2009: table 1).
The flint tools recovered are characteristic of Wadi Rabah assemblages in the
southern Levant (Galili 2004: 155–171, figs. 20–37). There are truncated rectan-
gular sickle blades, adzes, chisels and axes with polished working edges and
additional tools made on flakes. A variety of bone tools were recovered, mainly
fashioned into awls (points). The groundstone tool assemblage consists of lime-
stone and basalt grinding stones, pedestaled bowls, bowls and a few mace heads
(Galili 2004: 189–192, figs. 60–65). The ceramic assemblage includes carinated
bowls, flower-pot (straight-walled) bowls, bowls with concave sides, kraters,
spouted vessels, holemouth jars, bow-rim jars and pithoi with thickened rims.
Some vessels have lug handles. Many of the sherds are black or dark red slipped,
with some displaying painted bands along the rims (Galili 2004: 172–188, figs.
39–59). Characteristic Wadi Rabah decorations (Gopher and Gophna 1993;
Gopher 1995; Garfinkel 1999; Gopher and Eyal 2012) include painted, punctu-
ated and combed designs, and wide herringbone motifs and rope-like designs.
Faunal remains indicate that the animal economy was based on domestic herd
animals typical of the Mediterranean region — sheep, goat, cattle and pig
(Horwitz, Galili and Lernau 2006). About one-third of the cattle and the caprines
were adult animals, probably maintained for breeding purposes and secondary
products. The kill-off patterns focused on the slaughter of juvenile animals, prob-
ably males, indicating that the primary goal of cattle, caprine and pig keeping was
meat procurement (Horwitz, Galili and Lernau 2006). The paucity of remains of
game animals (represented by gazelle, badger and possibly also wild boar and
aurochs) attests to the minor role of hunting in the settlement’s economy. Fish
remains at Neveh Yam and other submerged PN settlements off the Carmel coast
are relatively scarce (only 22 bones in Neveh Yam) (Horwitz et al. 2002; Horwitz,
Galili and Lernau 2006), compared to the far greater number (n = 3,842 bones)
FIGURATIVE REPRESENTATIONS FROM NEVEH YAM AND OTHER SITES 133
found in the earlier, PPNC, site of ªAtlit-Yam (Galili et al. 1993). While this may
suggest a limited role of fishing in these later coastal PN communities, it is more
likely that it is due to the sampling techniques, since most remains from Neveh
Yam were handpicked during surface surveys. Moreover, at ªAtlit-Yam a far larger
area was investigated, and much of the material was derived from sieved exca-
vated deposits. Butchery marks were observed on 8.2% of the domestic cattle
bones, on 5.7% of the identified caprine remains, on 4.8% of the domestic pig
bones and on the isolated bones of game animals (Greenfield, Galili and Horwitz
2006). The bone-processing analysis indicates that the full range of butchery-
related activities (slaughter, disarticulation, filleting and skinning) was conducted
on-site, implying that whole carcasses were butchered and consumed locally.
THE SYMBOLIC ARTEFACTS FROM NEVEH YAM
1. Anthropomorphic Bone Figurine
Stratigraphic context. — This female figure, incised on an animal bone (cattle
femur) (fig. 2), was recovered in the southern section of the graveyard area, c.
20 m from the shore, at 0.5 m water depth. It was embedded in the clay together
with another femur, bearing no engraving. The two bones were located c.25cm
south-east of a hearth containing charcoal and a few burnt, rectangular mudbricks
(Galili et al. 2013; Galili, Horwitz and Rosen 2015).
Raw material and dimensions. — The
images were incised on the cranial
aspect of the shaft of a cattle (Bos
taurus) femur (21 cm long; minimum
shaft width 3.7 cm; minimum shaft
circumference 13 cm). Based on the
size of the bone and its texture, it
derives from an adult animal.
The identification of the bone to
skeletal element and species was based
on morphological and metric criteria
and on a comparison with specimens
held in the modern comparative
osteological collection of the Hebrew
University of Jerusalem. Although
lacking epiphyseal ends, the size and
shape of the shaft and surviving
morphological features, such as the shape and location of the supra-condyloid
fossa on the posterior aspect of the bone, facilitated its identification as a femur.
Visual and metric comparison of its overall size with other cattle femora from the
134 EHUD GALILI ET AL.
Fig. 2. Bone figurine from Neveh Yam
(photograph by E. Galili; drawing by
Leonid Ziegler)
site, along with the robust nature of the decorated femur shaft, support its identifi-
cation as belonging to domestic cattle (Bos taurus). Indeed, the vast majority of
cattle remains recovered from the site represent domestic animals (34.4% of all
identified taxa), rather than wild aurochs (Bos primigenius) (Horwitz, Galili and
Lernau 2006).
The proximal epiphysis and proximal end of the femur shaft were broken in antiq-
uity, leaving a stepped horizontal fracture — typical of a post-deposition, dry-bone
break (Lyman 1994). As a result, a small portion of the topmost part of the engraved
image is missing. In contrast, the distal epiphysis is complete and was intention-
ally severed and the edges of the shaft smoothed and polished. This appears to
have been preparation for the creation of a roughly rectangular shaped item.
Description. — The bone shaft has only been engraved on the cranial aspect,
where the image of an anthropomorph intermingled with other motifs is incised.
The features of the anthropomorphic figure are schematic: an inverted stippled
triangle filled with a row of short vertical lines, probably representing a pubis, is
depicted on the narrower distal end of the shaft. No engraving is found below or
adjacent to the outline of the pubis. On the broader and slightly flatter proximal
end, two eyes are depicted, each outlined by incised, oval double lines that join at
the left and right inner extremities of the eyes. At the centre of each eye there is a
large, round and shallow depression representing the pupil. Above and below the
eyes, eyelashes are depicted by numerous short, incised vertical lines placed close
together (as if forming a fringe). The upper right part of the shaft is broken above
the left eye. Above the ‘eyelashes’ on this side there is an incised line, above
which there are multiple, incised short vertical lines (executed in a style similar to
the eyelashes) that may represent hair or a headdress. No nose, mouth, or breasts
are depicted. Beneath the eyes three upright triangles are incised, each filled with
a cross-hatching pattern, alternating with four upright plant-like features that may
represent a tree, palm fronds, ears or sheaves of grain. Underneath this, two sets of
three parallel lines are set c. 30 mm apart, encircling half of the bone shaft, i.e., the
caudal surface that is worked. It may represent a belt. The area between these hori-
zontal lines is filled with cross-hatching.
The restriction of engraving to the cranial aspect of the bone is probably due to
two factors. First, the caudal aspect has a deep sulcus (the supracondyloid fossa),
as well as a ridge associated with muscle attachment (the medial supracondyloid
crest), both located on the shaft, slightly above but adjacent to the distal epiphysis,
so that this aspect of the bone does not offer a smooth and continuous surface for
incising. Second, the artist used the natural triangular shape of the cranial aspect
of the femur shaft to emphasize the shape of the pubis, since the point of the
incised triangle forming the pubis is aligned with the natural triangular point of
the bone. As a result, the full image can only be viewed from one aspect.
Parallels. — The closest parallel to the Neveh Yam figurine in the southern
FIGURATIVE REPRESENTATIONS FROM NEVEH YAM AND OTHER SITES 135
Levant is an incised bone artefact from the Late Neolithic/Early Chalcolithic level
at the site of Ha-Gosherim (fig. 3). The Ha-Gosherim item is much smaller (c.
5 cm long; 5 mm thick), having been incised on the radius shaft of a caprine. As at
Neveh Yam, the engraving portrays an anthropomorphic figure defined by eyes
and a triangle for a pubis. In the space between the eyes and pubis there is an
engraving of what was identified as an antelope, shown in profile, grazing on a
tree (or a sheaf of cereal), the latter
composed of three fronds — a central
one and two side branches. The quad-
ruped, shown in profile, probably
represents a gazelle rather than a goat,
given the delicate legs and feet, slender
body and elongated neck and face; the
parallel horns exhibit a bend imitating
the curvature typically found in
gazelles. Several animals depicted in a
similar fashion on the third-millen-
nium BCE stele from Mari in Syria
(discussed below) were identified by
Schumacher (2013) as male deer
(stags), due to the depiction of the
horns. In our opinion, this is highly
unlikely, since deer antlers would be
depicted as a central stem with multi-
ple branches extending from it, rather
than a single horn with a zigzag
pattern, as on the Mari quadrupeds. It seems more feasible that the Mari stele
quadrupeds are male goats or schematic gazelles (Uehlinger 2014).
The manner of execution of the eyes on the Ha-Gosherim figurine is identical
to that of the Neveh Yam figurine: a large, central shallow depression depicts the
pupil, a double row of incised lines depicts the ovoid outline of the eyes and short
parallel lines depict the eyelashes. An upper line and fringe represent the hairline
or headdress. The depiction of the pubis is also similar: an inverted triangle below
three parallel horizontal lines. The eye motif on the Neveh Yam objects bears
certain similarities to the one depicted on a bone figurine of a head and upper torso
from Late Neolithic/Early Chalcolithic levels at Kabri (Prausnitz 1970: pl. 36;
Yizraeli-Noy 1999: fig. 110) and on a fragment of a stone palette from ªEn
¥ippori, also dated to the Late Neolithic/Early Chalcolithic (Wadi Rabah culture)
(Milevski et al. 2015: fig. 6).
The eye motif also appears on a fragment of a bone figurine associated with the
Late Neolithic/Early Chalcolithic recently uncovered at ªEn ¥ippori (Milevski et
al. 2015: fig. 10:1,2; Yaroshevich 2016). There, an incised depiction of the upper
136 EHUD GALILI ET AL.
Fig. 3. Bone figurine from Ha-Gosherim
(after Getzov 2011: fig. 10:43a,b)
half of an eye outlined by double concentric circles was observed on a 5×3×1 cm
fragment of a worked bone (fig. 4:1). The bone fragment from ªEn ¥ippori is
derived from a long bone shaft of a large mammal, possibly cattle. Since the bone
edges do not show fresh breakage, the artefact was broken in antiquity. The pupil
is represented by a round shallow depression. Above the eye there are numerous
incised vertical lines placed very close together, and at times even overlapping
one another, in a manner resembling — although not identical to — the other two
figurines. Above the ‘eyelashes’ there are two incised lines, one arched and the
other horizontal. Multiple short, incised vertical lines above the arched line may
represent hair or a headdress; there is a hint of similar lines above the horizontal
incision, but the bone is broken at this point.
Another incised bone fragment from ªEn ¥ippori (fig. 4:2) resembles the
Neveh Yam figurine. This piece is too small for the incised pattern to be clearly
identified in terms of its original size and shape. It portrays a similar horizontal
register with parallel and crossed lines and a cross-hatched pattern, probably parts
of several triangles and netlike crosslines. The two incised bone fragments from
ªEn ¥ippori do not appear to belong to the same artefact as they do not fit one
another and they show some differences in the manner in which the images were
incised.
FIGURATIVE REPRESENTATIONS FROM NEVEH YAM AND OTHER SITES 137
Fig. 4. Two fragments of bone figurines from ªEn ¥ippori: (1: after Yaroshevich 2016;
2: after Milevski et al. 2015)
Eye motif. — A simple painted form of the eye motif is common on ossuaries and
ritual vessels from the Late Chalcolithic site of Peqiªin (Shalem, Gal and
Smithline 2013). Eyes surrounded by concentric circles are a dominant feature on
the hundreds of votive figures found in the excavation of the fourth-millennium
BCE ‘Eye Temple’ at Tell Brak, north-eastern Syria (Mallowan 1947; Oates and
Oates 1991).
Pubis motif. — An inverted triangle depicting a pubis, as executed on the Neveh
Yam bone, appears on two limestone figurines found on the surface at Ha-
Gosherim and considered to be of PN or Chalcolithic date (Yizraeli-Noy 1999:
nos. 106, 107), as well as on a stone pebble with schematic engraving from a Late
PN layer at Tel Teºo (Gopher and Eisenberg 2001). Yizraeli-Noy (1999: no. 105)
and subsequently Orrelle (2014) mention earlier Yarmukian examples of figurines
from the southern Levant with delineated pubes, for example from Shaªar ha-
Golan, but in these figurines the pubis is not depicted as a triangle but by two
parallel curvy lines. Stippling on the depiction of the pubis, as on the Neveh Yam
artefact, is known from a wide variety of locales and periods, such as the fifth-
millennium BCE ivory figurine from Chalcolithic Bir es-Safadi (Perrot 1968)
and the third-millennium BCE figurines from Anatolia (Yizraeli-Noy 1999).
Rather than emphasizing the pubis, it may have been an artistic depiction of pubic
hair.
Tree motif. — Several suggestions have been made for the identification of the
plants depicted on the Neveh Yam and Ha-Gosherim artefacts. On the Ha-
Gosherim figurine these have been interpreted as palm fronds (Ziffer 2010). In
later periods in the ancient Near East the date palm (Phoenix dactylifera) was
considered a symbol of life (Keel 1998; Keel and Uehlinger 1998; Ziffer 2010).
Though wild palms grew in the southern Levant, their distribution would have
been restricted to the warmer and drier regions to the south of the Mediterranean
phytogeographic zone, i.e., not in the immediate proximity of Neveh Yam. It is
not clear whether this plant species had already been domesticated in the late PN
period, since the earliest evidence for domestic date palms in the southern Levant
is from the Late Chalcolithic (Zohary, Hopf and Weiss 2012). A single date pit of
Phoenix theophrastii has been recovered from the earlier submerged PPNC site of
ªAtlit-Yam, and traces of wood of the date palm Phoenix dactylifera have been
recovered from water-well 11 at this site (Galili et al. 1993; Galili 2004: 138, 142,
table 33). However, no evidence for these date species have been recovered from
Neveh Yam, and it seems that they were not common in the coastal region at the
time of the site’s occupation. The archaeological finds suggest that the date was
not a component of subsistence in the ªAtlit-Yam, Neveh Yam, ªEn ¥ippori, or Ha-
Gosherim Late Neolithic/ Early Chalcolithic cultures. Consequently, its use as an
iconographic symbol is doubtful. Nevertheless, iconographic motifs found in one
138 EHUD GALILI ET AL.
or two sites should not represent only the realia of the sites but that of a period or a
culture.
Cereals, on the other hand, served as the cornerstone of the subsistence econ-
omy of all Near Eastern Neolithic and Chalcolithic communities. Therefore, the
plants depicted on the Neveh Yam figurine may represent ears of a cereal, either
wheat or barley, rather than palm fronds. Indeed, domesticated wheat (Triticum
aestivum) and barley (Hordeum vulgare) were the most common plant remains
identified in the submerged PPNC and PN villages (Galili et al. 2013). They were
also the major component of the three charred botanical assemblages found close
to the PN cemetery at Neveh Yam, tentatively interpreted as representing ritual
meals (Galili et al. 2009; Galili et al. 2013: 194, 196). These finds offer a further
connection to the bone figurine since it too was recovered in the cemetery area.
As for a symbolic interpretation, this plant motif from Neveh Yam can be
viewed as a precursor of the well-known, historically recorded motif of two
horned quadrupeds (usually identified as caprids) flanking a ‘Tree of Life’. The
importance of this motif has been discussed by Keel (1998), Ziffer (2010) and
Uehlinger (2014). The significance of these finds would lie in the very early
appearance of this symbolic structure, since the depiction of the ‘Tree of Life’
assumes many different forms (Keel and Uehlinger 1998).
Summary. — In all four incised bones — from Neveh Yam, Ha-Gosherim, Kabri
and ªEn ¥ippori — the incised decoration appears on only one aspect of the bone,
suggesting that the figurine was intended to be viewed only from this angle.
Getzov (2011), following Ziffer (2010), pointed out the remarkable similarity of
the Ha-Gosherim artefact to a third-millennium BCE cult stele found associated
with a temple dedicated to the deity Ninhursag in Mari, Syria (Schumacher 2013;
Uehlinger 2014). The similarity of the Mari stele with later votive eye idols
(‘oculados’) from the Chalcolithic period of the Iberian Peninsula, dating from the
first half of the third millennium BCE (Gimbutas 1989: 54, 55; Cacho et al. 2010:
41, 88, 117, 127; Lillios 2008) has been noted by Schumacher (2013) and
Uehlinger (2014). The ‘oculados’ closely resemble the Late Neolithic/Early
Chalcolithic figurines from Israel in their motifs and raw material, since many
were engraved on long animal bones. The southern Levantine, Mesopotamian and
Iberian examples may demonstrate the diffusion of this symbolic imagery through
time and space.
2. Anthropomorphic Sandstone Stele
Stratigraphic Context. — This stele (fig. 5) was recovered, at a depth of 0.7 m,
some 30 m from the coast in the centre of the southern part of the site (the grave-
yard area).
Raw material and dimensions. — The stele (32.5 cm high; 26 cm wide; 10.5 cm
thick) is carved out of kurkar (aeolian, calcareous-cemented sandstone).
FIGURATIVE REPRESENTATIONS FROM NEVEH YAM AND OTHER SITES 139
Description. — The object is generally
oval in shape and cross-section. A
circumscribed groove representing the
‘neck’ separates the triangular ‘head’
from the almost round ‘body’. The
figure is roughly made, although the
‘front’ face of the stone is more care-
fully worked than the ‘back’. On the
‘front’, the groove depicting the ‘neck’
is more pronounced and the body more
convex. The anthropomorph seems to be genderless, with no sexual characteris-
tics depicted.
Parallels. — Four similar oval stone artefacts with a circumscribed groove are
known from the inundated PPNC site of ªAtlit-Yam (Galili et al. 1993: figs. 15:2,
18:2,3,4). An anthropomorphic kurkar stele, considerably larger (170×105×
30 cm) than the one from Neveh Yam, was found there (Galili 2004: 87; Orrelle
2014: 61, 71, fig. 73). Imagery of this kind is most prevalent in the preliterate
iconography of the Near East in several periods: in the Natufian (Weinstein-Evron
and Belfer-Cohen 1993: 104; Hansen 2007; Major 2013) the PPNA (Noy 1989:
fig. 5; Hershman and Belfer-Cohen 2010) and the PN (Gopher and Eisenberg
2001: fig. 9.6.8; Gopher and Orrelle 1995: fig. 40:3). Many of the oval stone
artefacts with a circumscribed groove have been interpreted as phalli (Gopher and
Orrelle 1996: 261; Orrelle 2014: 71; Galili et al. 1993) or, more generally, as
fertility symbols (Goring-Morris and Birkenfeld 2008).
Perhaps the closest parallel to the Neveh Yam stele in its schematic depiction
of the human form, in the rough outline of body and head and especially in the use
of a carved furrow to separate head from torso is a sandstone figurine from Givªat
Haparsa, interpreted as depicting a seated figure (Yizraeli-Noy 1999: 98–99).
This was a surface find associated with Wadi Rabah material remains, although
Yizraeli-Noy (1999) noted that the slanted eyes resemble those of the earlier
Yarmukian figurines.
3. Anthropomorphic Greenstone Figurine
Stratigraphic context. — This figurine (fig. 6) was found washed up on the beach
adjacent to the site of Neveh Yam (Broshi 1971; Yizraeli-Noy 1999: 108).1
Material and dimensions. — The raw material of the figurine (5.7 cm long; 2.1 cm
wide; 1.5 cm thick) was identified as a crystalline, medium metamorphic rock
140 EHUD GALILI ET AL.
Fig. 5. Stone stele from Neveh Yam (E.
Galili)
1The object (Israel Museum no. 70.120.614) was found by Mr. Nisim Shevah, a
member of Kibbutz Neveh Yam; it was bought by the Israel Museum through a private
donation and is curated there.
resembling epidiorite.2According to
Aryeh Shimron (personal note to
Broshi, 1971), this is not a local stone
and could have originated in Cyprus,
Lebanon, or north Syria.
Description. — This genderless figu-
rine was first described by Broshi
(1971) and subsequently by Yizraeli-
Noy (1999: 108), who both noted that
it is unique in the assemblage of
human figurines from Israel. The body
is elongated and ovaloid, with a plano-
convex cross-section. The head, rect-
angular from the front and triangular in
cross-section (its back is almost flat, whereas the front aspect is triangular), is
separated from the body by a semi-circular groove on the front and the sides (the
‘neck’), which does not extend to the back. The top of the head is flat and rounded
at the sides. Round shallow cavities, drilled into the face and possibly filled with
some coloured material, represent eyes.
The mouth is indicated by a straight incision. The nose appears to have been
carved as a continuum of the face, which has a pronounced snout-like (triangular)
projection. The face is well preserved. No signs of gender are depicted on the face
or the body (Yizraeli-Noy 1999: 108). The reverse side of the torso is flat, the
front side is curved and the corners are rounded. The waist area is narrow, and the
lower part of the figurine terminates in a straight flat surface. The arms are formed
by straight incisions parallel to the body. A vertical line engraved on the lower
front part of the figurine indicates the groin and represents the two attached legs.
The figurine has a T-shaped hole in the area of the neck for suspension or
attachment. One transverse double-coned hole (5 mm and 3 mm in diameter) was
drilled from both sides of the neck. Another hole (7 mm in diameter) was drilled
from the flat back and met the transverse hole. Although it has been suggested that
the artefact was used as a pendant (Broshi 1971), the complex T-shaped perfora-
tion and the flat back make it more likely that the artefact was attached to a flat
surface (a wooden plank or a piece of fabric or leather). The artefact could have
been attached to the surface by means of twine or a leather thong, which was then
tightened from the back, so that the attachment was invisible from the front. The
complex drilling of the T-shaped hole was apparently intended to avoid damaging
the visible aspect of the artefact when connecting it securely to a flat surface.
FIGURATIVE REPRESENTATIONS FROM NEVEH YAM AND OTHER SITES 141
Fig. 6. The anthropomorphic greenstone
figurine from Neveh Yam (photograph
courtesy of the Israel Museum)
2The identification was made for M. Broshi (1971) by Aryeh Shimron (Institute of
Earth Sciences, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem).
Parallels. — As noted above, this piece has no close parallels in the Levant. Like
the kurkar stele uncovered at Neveh Yam, it is genderless, but the level of work-
manship exhibited here is higher. The selection of greenstone for the manufacture
of ornaments, such as beads, in early farming communities in the Near East has
been noted by Bar-Yosef Mayer and Porat (2008), who discuss the symbolism of
the colour green and how it relates to the increased interest in fertility of plants
and animals following the onset of agriculture and animal husbandry. The use of
greenstone in the Neveh Yam figurine may relate to that symbolic world.
4. Pottery Fragment with Fish Engravings
Stratigraphic context. — This sherd (fig. 7) was recovered at a depth of 1 m, some
35 m from the shore, in the southern part of the site (the graveyard area).
Raw material and dimensions. — The
sherd (19×7.5×0.9 cm) is made of
pink clay with small limestone
inclusions.
Description. — This is a curved, non-
indicative body sherd of a pottery
vessel, possibly a bowl (50 cm in
diameter). The sherd bears several
engravings on its convex external face,
executed with a sharp tool post-firing.
It cannot be determined whether the
engraving was executed before or after
the container was broken, but the
multiple decorative elements suggest
that it was part of a larger group of motifs that perhaps encircled the vessel. The
engravings are arranged in a curved line composed of four groups of elements:
two fish and two sets of angled lines. The elements (from right to left) include the
following: a set of three parallel chevrons (angled lines at 90° or less) pointing to
the left; a fish, swimming to the left, with open mouth and a tail depicted by three
lines, and with no eye depicted; a set of two parallel chevrons pointing to the right;
and another fish, bigger and longer than the former and with an eye.
Parallels. — To the best of our knowledge, no similar fish motifs have been
uncovered at any other Neolithic site in the Levant. Pendants depicting fish made
of picrolite are known from the Neolithic site of Khirokitia, Cyprus (Dikaios
1953: pl. 93.A, figs. 107, 408, no. 1476). An engraving of a single fish on a pottery
fragment (possibly a bowl) was reported by Olson (2008: 38, 39, fig. 8) from the
Pitted Ware PN coastal site of Fräkenrönningen, Gästrikland, in the Baltic Sea
region.
142 EHUD GALILI ET AL.
Fig. 7. Pottery fragment bearing incisions
of fish and herringbone pattern from
Neveh Yam (E. Galili)
DISCUSSION
The fact that three of the four Neveh Yam figurines recovered from different parts
of the site represent anthropomorphs (fig. 8) is not a coincidence and reflects the
trend towards anthropomorphic depictions identified by Cauvin (2000). Of
special note is that the two stone anthropomorphs lack any clear depiction of
gender (breasts, pubis, a beard, and so on). Orrelle (2014) identified
anthropomorphs depicted either with mixed gender or sexless as gods, arguing
that their genderless state signaled their supra-natural character.
The four items from Neveh Yam
were manufactured on different raw
materials — animal bone, clay and two
kinds of stones — reflecting the range
of materials and technologies used for
iconographic depictions by Late
Neolithic/Early Chalcolithic Levan-
tine communities (Garfinkel 1995;
Garfinkel and Miller 2002; Yizraeli-
Noy 1999; Gopher and Orrelle 1996).
The Neveh Yam pieces also vary in
terms of their craftsmanship, with the
greenstone figurine perhaps the most
carefully worked and the kurkar stele
the least. Although the choice of raw
material may have played a role in
limiting what could be accomplished,
the intended function may have been
equally important. The stele, a rela-
tively large and heavy piece, appears to have been intended for display outdoors;
it therefore retained its natural rough surface and was worked minimally to create
only a suggestive outline of an anthropomorph. The bulk of this piece makes it an
imposing work — to some extent still an unformed part of nature. The greenstone
figurine, in contrast, is relatively small in proportions and the figure is outlined in
a refined manner. Given the perforation on its back, it may have been intended for
attachment to cloth or wood; its relatively small size suggests that it was placed in
a more intimate setting, perhaps indoors. Alternatively, it could have been
attached to a garment, such as a special dress or costume.
Stylistically, the incised bone artefact represents quite a different execution: it
was engraved on a minimally modified bone, the natural form and features of
which were used to highlight features of the image. The incised schematic motifs
were precisely executed and clearly defined.
The positioning and exhibition of the anthropomorphic artefacts appear to
FIGURATIVE REPRESENTATIONS FROM NEVEH YAM AND OTHER SITES 143
Fig. 8. The depictions on the three bone
figurines (modified by E. Galili after
Getzov 2011)
have been predetermined. The three were intended to stand upright facing the
observer, given that only one aspect was worked. The bone figurine was designed
to stand upright independently and without support. The base was chosen in the
heaviest part of the bone, which was severed so that it could be carefully flattened.
The flattened back and perforated head of the greenstone figurine indicate that it
was intended to be attached to a flat surface. The more abstract stone stele was
probably meant to be inserted in the ground, with its front face and its size hinting
at multiple observers. Thus, it is likely that each of these symbolic artefacts was
manufactured with a particular place and function in mind, suggesting that they
were associated with a spectrum of prescribed rituals.
Three of the four artefacts described here — the sandstone stele, the bone figu-
rine and the sherd — are associated with the Neveh Yam burial grounds. It is
speculated that the unique fish-inscribed sherd was part of a vessel that served as a
burial offering. Alternatively, it may have been used in a ritual meal, a possibility
supported by the presence of three concentrations of charred seeds (barley, emmer
wheat and lentils), recovered in proximity to the cist graves and interpreted as
remains of ceremonial meals (Galili et al. 2009; Galili et al. 2013). The fact that
the largest artefact — the sandstone stele — was recovered from the burial area
hints at a ritual role. Its monumental size follows the tradition of earlier PPN
objects, examples of which include a large orthostat of pure white limestone,
apparently representing a stylized human being, inserted into one of the walls of a
building in the Late PPNB at ªAin Ghazal (Rollefson 1998), and the large plaster
statuary from that site (Schmandt-Besserat 2013). Following the hypothesis
proposed by Renfrew (2007: 123), Schmandt-Besserat (2013) suggested that the
uniqueness of such a large statuary lies in its monumental nature. It reflects the
shift from domestic figurines to public statues, a feature that would be instrumen-
tal in the shift from domestic to public ritual in late Neolithic Levantine
communities. Such large icons were intended to impress and serve a large group
of people, reflecting the political and economic function of cultic ceremonies
performed at this time.
While a symbolic function can be attributed to the three anthropomorphic figu-
rines from Neveh Yam with some degree of confidence (based on parallels from
the region too, as noted above), the fish depiction is perhaps the most challenging
item in this assemblage. The appearance of an artefact incised with fish images in
a coastal village suggests that this is a literal form of decoration related to the local
subsistence base of the site, which, indeed, was a mixed economy that consisted of
agro-pastoralism and fishing (Horwitz, Galili and Lernau 2006). Given the
absence of any direct parallels in the Levant, it is hard to determine whether it was
created with a purely decorative function in mind (the notion of ‘art for art’s sake’)
or was associated with a functional purpose (for example, the fish motif may have
some culinary significance) or a symbolic one, the different sizes and directions of
the fish and accompanying motifs alluding to a myth, for example. The fish motif
144 EHUD GALILI ET AL.
may be part of the corpus of new symbolic imagery in this period, as suggested by
the innovative decorative motifs that appear on Wadi Rabah pottery (Gopher
1995; Orrelle and Gopher 2000).
Elements of continuity with earlier periods are found in the depiction of
anthropomorphs and genderless figures, both well-documented features of earlier
Epi-Palaeolithic, PPN and Yarmukian PN symbolic assemblages (e.g., Yizraeli-
Noy 1999; Garfinkel, Ben-Shlomo and Korn 2010; Hershman and Belfer-Cohen
2010; Orrelle 2014). Similarly, multiple media were used in the manufacture of
such items in periods preceding the Wadi Rabah culture. In terms of the size of the
objects, some aspects of the iconography and raw materials used, the currently
known corpus of symbolic artefacts associated with the Late PN/Early
Chalcolithic (mainly the Wadi Rabah culture) appears to fall within the range of
items known from preceding periods in the southern Levant. The composite of
motifs on the incised bones, however, is quite innovative in nature and could be
said to represent a unique regional development in the late sixth millennium BCE.
As noted above, several motifs that appear on incised bone artefacts from Israel
are also engraved on the much later (third-millennium BCE) Mari stele, as well as
on the third-millennium BCE eye idols from the Iberian Peninsula. At this stage,
however, given the chronological and spatial gaps between the objects, it is not
possible to determine whether these similarities stem from dissemination of this
iconographic image from the southern Levant northward and then westward, or
whether they represent completely independent developments.
This small concentration of symbolic material at Late Neolithic/Early
Chalcolithic sites in northern Israel (on the coast and inland) hints at the develop-
ment of a new geographic locale of symbolic activity in the sixth and fifth
millennia BCE, contrasted with the concentrations of symbolic material from the
earlier Yarmukian culture primarily found in the middle Jordan Valley. The corpus
of symbolic artefacts discussed here displays an array of motifs, some of which
are innovative. The incised bone images, in particular, can probably be defined as
a symbolic marker of the Wadi Rabah culture and contemporaneous entities in the
southern Levant. This assemblage, along with its parallels from other sites in the
region, offers new insights into the artistic and symbolic world of the Late
Neolithic/Early Chalcolithic communities in the southern Levant, one that
focused on anthropomorphic depictions that may have embodied supernatural
powers and were intended for both public and private ritual activities.
REFERENCES
Banning, E.B.
2007 Wadi Rabah and Related Assemblages in the Southern Levant: Interpreting the
Radiocarbon Evidence, Paléorient 33: 77–101
FIGURATIVE REPRESENTATIONS FROM NEVEH YAM AND OTHER SITES 145
Bar-Yosef Mayer, D.E. and Porat, N.
2008 Green Stone Beads at the Dawn of Agriculture, Proceedings of the National Acad-
emy of Sciences 105: 8548–8551
Bednarik, R.G.
2003 The Earliest Evidence of Paleoart, Rock Art Research 20: 3–28
Broshi, M.
1971 Statuette from Newe Yam, Qadmoniot 16: 122–123 (Hebrew)
Cacho, C., Maicas, R., Galán, E. and Martos, J.A.
2010 Ojos que nunca se cierran. Ídolos en las primeras sociedades campesinas, Madrid
Cauvin, J.
2000 The Beginnings of Agriculture in the Near East. A Symbolic Interpretation,
Cambridge, U.K.
Dikaios, P.
1953 Khirokitia, Oxford
Freikman, M. and Garfinkel, Y.
2009 The Zoomorphic Figurines from Shaªar Hagolan: Hunting Magic Practices in the
Neolithic Near East, Levant 41: 5–17
Galili, E.
2004 Submerged Prehistoric Settlements of the 6th–7th mill. BP off the Northern Carmel
Coast, Israel (Ph.D. diss., Tel Aviv University; Hebrew)
Galili, E., Eshed, V., Rosen, B., Kislev, M., Simchoni, O., Hershkovitz, I. and Gopher, A.
2009 Evidence for a Separate Burial Ground at the Submerged Pottery Neolithic Site of
Neve-Yam, Israel, Paléorient 35: 31–46
Galili, E., Horwitz, L.K., Eshed, V., Rosen, B. and Hershkovitz, I.
2013 Submerged Prehistoric Settlements off the Mediterranean Coast of Israel, Skyllis 13:
181–204
Galili, E., Horwitz, L.K. and Rosen, B.
2015 Anthropomorphic Bone Figurine from Neve-Yam. A Submerged Late Neolithic
Site, Israel, ¡adashot Arkhaeologiyot 127, http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/
Report_Detail.aspx?id=18743&mag_id=122[29/07/2015 11:20:10]
Galili, E. and Rosen, B.
2011a Submerged Neolithic Settlements off the Mediterranean Coast of Israel, in
Benjamin, J., Bonsall, C., Pickard, C. and Fischer, A. (eds.), Submerged Prehistory,
Oxford: 272–286
2011b Submerged Neolithic Settlements off the Mediterranean Carmel Coast of Israel and
Water Mining in the Southern Levant, Neo-Lithics 2/10: 47–52
Galili, E. and Schick, T.
1990 Basketry and a Wooden Bowl from the Pottery Neolithic Submerged Site of Kefar
Samir, Mitekufat Haeven 23: 65–68 (Hebrew), 142*–151* (English)
Galili, E., Sharvit, J. and Nagar, A.
1998 Nevé-Yam — Underwater Survey, ESI 18: 54–56, 35–36 (Hebrew and English)
146 EHUD GALILI ET AL.
Galili, E. and Weinstein-Evron, M.
1985 Prehistory and Paleoenvironments of Submerged Sites along the Carmel Coast of
Israel, Paléorient 11: 37–52
Galili, E., Weinstein-Evron, M., Hershkovitz, I., Gopher, A., Kislev, M., Lernau, O., Horwitz,
L.K. and Lernau, H.
1993 Atlit-Yam: A Prehistoric Site on the Sea Floor off the Israeli Coast, Journal of Field
Archaeology 20: 133–156
Galili, E., Weinstein-Evron, M. and Zohary, D.
1989 Appearance of Olives in Submerged Neolithic Sites along the Carmel Coast,
Mitekufat Haeven 22: 52–53 (Hebrew), 95*–97* (English)
Garfinkel, Y.
1995 Human and Animal Figurines of Munhata (Israel), Paris
1999 Neolithic and Chalcolithic Pottery of the Southern Levant, Jerusalem
Garfinkel, Y., Ben-Shlomo, D. and Korn, N.
2010 Shaªar Hagolan 3. Symbolic Dimensions of the Yarmukian Culture: Canonization in
Neolithic Art, Jerusalem
Garfinkel, Y. and Matskevich, Z.
2002 Abu Zureiq, a Wadi Rabah Site in the Jezreel Valley: Final Report of the 1962 Exca-
vation, IEJ 52: 129–178
Garfinkel, Y. and Miller, M.A.
2002 Shaªar Hagolan 1. Neolithic Art in Context, Oxford
Getzov, N.
2011 Seals and Figurines from the Beginning of the Early Chalcolithic Period at the Site
of Ha-Gosherim, ªAtiqot 67: 1–83 (Hebrew)
Gimbutas, M.
1989 Language of the Goddess, New York
Gopher, A.
1995 Early Pottery-Bearing Groups in Israel — The Pottery Neolithic Period, in Levy T.E.
(ed.), The Archaeology of Society in the Holy Land, Leicester: 205–225
Gopher, A. and Eisenberg, E.
2001 Groundstone Artefacts and Small Finds, in Eisenberg, E., Gopher, A. and
Greenberg, R. (eds.), Tel Teºo. A Neolithic, Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age Site in
the Hula Valley, Jerusalem: 139–150
Gopher, A. and Eyal, R.
2012 The Pottery Assemblages at the Nahal Zehora Sites: A Summary, in Gopher, A.
(ed.), Village Communities of the Pottery Neolithic Period in the Menashe Hills,
Israel. Archaeological Investigations at the Sites of Nahal Zehora, Tel Aviv:
697–744
Gopher, A. and Gophna, R.
1993 Cultures of the Eighth and Seventh Millennia BP in the Southern Levant: A Review
for the 1990s, Journal of World Prehistory 7: 297–353
FIGURATIVE REPRESENTATIONS FROM NEVEH YAM AND OTHER SITES 147
Gopher, A. and Orrelle, E.
1995 The Groundstone Assemblages of Munhata. A Neolithic Site in the Jordan Valley,
Israel. A Report, Paris
1996 An Alternative Interpretation for the Material Imagery of the Yarmukian, a Neolithic
Culture of the Sixth Millennium BC in the Southern Levant, Cambridge Archaeo-
logical Journal 6: 255–279
Goring-Morris, A.N. and Belfer-Cohen, A.
2002 Symbolic Behaviour from the Epipalaeolithic and Early Neolithic of the Near East:
Preliminary Observations on Continuity and Change, in Gebel, H.G.K., Dahl
Hermansen, B. and Hoffmann Jensen, C. (eds.), Magic Practices and Ritual in the
Near Eastern Neolithic, Berlin: 67–79
Goring-Morris, A.N. and Birkenfeld, M.
2008 Kfar HaHoresh, a Cult and Mortuary Site, Past Horizons (Online Journal of Volun-
teer Archaeology and Training) 5: 21–25
Greenfield, H., Galili, E. and Horwitz, L.K.
2006 The Butchered Animal Bones from Newe-Yam. A Submerged Pottery Neolithic Site
off the Carmel Coast, Mitekufat Haeven 36: 173–200
Hansen, S.
2007 Bildervom Menschen der Steinzeit. Untersuchungen zur anthropomorphen Plastik
der Jungsteinzeit und Kupferzeit in Südosteuropa, Mainz
Hershman, D. and Belfer-Cohen, A.
2010 ‘It’s Magic!’Artistic and Symbolic Material Manifestations from the Gilgal Sites, in
Bar-Yosef, O., Goring-Morris, A.N. and Gopher, A. (eds.), Gilgal. Early Neolithic
Occupations in the Lower Jordan Valley. The Excavations of Tamar Noy, Oxford:
185–216
Horwitz, L.K., Galili, E., Sharvit, J. and Lernau, O.
2002 Fauna from Five Submerged Pottery Neolithic Sites off the Carmel Coast, Mitekufat
Haeven 32: 147–174
Horwitz, L.K., Galili, E. and Lernau, O
2006 Fauna from the Pottery Neolithic Site of Newe Yam, Mitekufat Haeven 36: 139–171
Kaplan, J.
1958 The Chalcolithic and Neolithic in Tel Aviv and Its Surroundings (unpublished Ph.D.
diss., The Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Hebrew)
1969 ªEin el Jarba, BASOR 194: 2–39
Keel, O.
1998 Goddesses and Trees, New Moon and Yahweh Ancient Near Eastern Art and the
Hebrew Bible, Sheffield
Keel, O. and Uehlinger, C.
1998 Gods, Goddesses and Images of God in Ancient Israel, Minneapolis
Lillios, K.T.
2008 Heraldry for the Dead: Memory, Identity, and the Engraved Stone Plaques of
Neolithic Iberia, Austin TX
148 EHUD GALILI ET AL.
Lyman, R.L.
1994 Vertebrate Taphonomy, Cambridge, U.K.
Major, J.
2013 Art Items from Wadi Hammeh 27, in Bar-Yosef, O. and Valla, F.R. (eds.), Natufian
Foragers in the Levant — Terminal Pleistocene Social Changes in Western Asia,
Ann Arbor MI: 349–381
Mallowan, M.E.L.
1947 Excavations at Brak and Chagar Bazar, Iraq 9: 1–259
Milevski, I., Getzov, N., Galili, E., Horwitz, L.K. and Yaroshevich, A.
2015 Die Palette von Ein Zippori und andere weibliche Kompositfiguren aus dem
sechsten und fünften Jahrtausend v. u. Z. in der südlichen Levante und in
Mesopotamien, Das Altertum.Zeitschrift für populäre Archäologie der Berlin-
Brandenburgischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 60: 241–262
Noy, T.
1989 Gilgal, A Pre-Pottery Neolithic Site, Israel. The 1985–1987 Seasons, Paléorient 15:
11–18
Oates, D. and Oates, J.
1991 Excavations at Tell Brak, 1990–91, Iraq 53: 127–145
Olson, C.
2008 Neolithic Fisheries, Osteoarchaeology of Fish Remains in the Baltic Sea Region
(Ph.D. diss., Stockholm University)
Orrelle, E.
2014 Material Images of Humans from the Natufian to Pottery Neolithic Periods in the
Levant, Oxford
Orrelle, E. and Gopher, A.
2000 The Pottery Neolithic Period: Questions about Pottery Decoration, Symbolism, and
Meaning, in Kuijt, I. (ed.), Life in Neolithic Farming Communities: Social Organi-
zation, Identity and Differentiation, New York: 295–310
Perrot, J.
1968 Préhistoire Palestinienne, in Pirot, L. and Robert, A. (eds.), Supplément au
Dictionaire de la Bible, Paris: 286–466
Prausnitz, M.W.
1970 From Hunter to Farmer and Trader, Jerusalem
1977 The Pottery at Newe Yam, EI 13: 272*–276*
Renfrew, C.
2007 Monumentality and Presence, in Renfrew, C. and Morley, I. (eds.), Image and Imag-
ination, Exeter: 121–133
Rollefson, G.O.
1998 ªAin Ghazal (Jordan): Ritual and Ceremony III, Paléorient 24: 43–58
FIGURATIVE REPRESENTATIONS FROM NEVEH YAM AND OTHER SITES 149
Schmandt-Besserat, D.
2013 Ain Ghazal ‘Monumental’ Figures: A Stylistic Analysis, in Schmandt-Besserat, D.
(ed.), Symbols at ªAin Ghazal (ªAin Ghazal Excavation Reports 3), Berlin: 317–334
Schumacher, T.S.
2013 Some Reflections about an Alabaster Stele from Mari (Syria) and Its Possible Rela-
tions to the Western Mediterranean, Cuadernos de Prehistoria y Arqueología
Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (CuPAUAM) 39: 7–20
Shalem, D., Gal, Z. and Smithline, H.
2013 Peqiªin. A Late Chalcolithic Burial Site Upper Galilee, Israel, Kinneret
Stekelis, M.
1972 The Yarmukian Culture, Jerusalem
Uehlinger, C.
2014 Nin¤ursagº a oder ‘Große Mutter’? Eine ikonographisch-ikonologische Skizze zu
einem Phänomen der longue durée, in Wimmer, S.J. and Gafus, G. (eds.), ‘Vom
Leben umfangen’. Ägypten, das Alte Testament und das Gespräch der Religionen.
Gedenkschrift für Manfred Görg, Münster: 407–424
Weinstein-Evron, M. and Belfer-Cohen, A.
1993 Natufian Figurines from the New Excavations of the El-Wad Cave, Mt. Carmel,
Israel, Rock Art Research 10: 102–106
Wreschner, E.E.
1977 Newe Yam — A Submerged Late-Neolithic Settlement Near Mount Carmel, EI 13:
260*–271*
Yaroshevich, A.
2016 ªEin ªippori (Givat Rabi East). Preliminary Report, ¡adashot Arkhaeologiyot —
ESI 128
Yaroshevich, A., Bar-Yosef, O., Boaretto, E., Caracuta, V., Greenbaum, N. and Porat, N.
2016 A Unique Assemblage of Engraved Plaquettes from Ein Qashish South, Jezreel
Valley, Israel: Figurative and Non-Figurative Symbols of Late Pleistocene Hunters-
Gatherers in the Levant, PLoS ONE 11/8: e0160687. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.
0160687
Yizraeli-Noy, T.
1999 The Human Figure in Prehistoric Art in the Land of Israel, Jerusalem (Hebrew)
Ziffer, I.
2010 Western Asiatic Tree-Goddesses, Ägypten und Levante 20: 411–430
Zohary, D., Hopf, M. and Weiss, E.
2012 Domestication of Plants in the Old World (4th ed.), Oxford
150 EHUD GALILI ET AL.