ISBN 13 : 978-2-913667-36-5 11/13 70 #

-:HSMJLD=[[\X[Z:

ÉÉttuuddeess aanncciieennnneess 5522

46534-cv ok_Mise en page 1 30/10/13 17:26 Page1

DES DÉSERTS ET DES HOMMES :WĀDI RAMM

(JORDANIE)

HISTOIRE ÉCONOMIQUE, RELIGIEUSE, SOCIALE ET ENVIRONNEMENTALE

Actes du colloque international à Wādī Ramm,les 11, 12 et 13 novembre 2011

Sous la direction de Saba Farès

La région de Wādī Ramm, dont les paysages désertiques fascinent aujourd’hui un nombre toujours plus important de touristes venus du monde entier, était dans l'Antiquité l’habitat d’un peuple qui, pour survivre, a su créer un système social et économique complexe. Ce peuple est demeuré un mystère du fait de l'absence de documents historiques de première main. Aujourd’hui, grâce au progrès des recherches, il est possible de confronter les documents épigraphiques et archéolo-giques présents dans le wādī Ramm afin de mieux comprendre le rôle qu’a joué cette région dans l’histoire du Proche-Orient. The region of Wadi Ramm, which the fascinating desert landscapes attracts large numbers of tourists, was in antiquity the place where people lived and has developed a complex social and economic system. Those people remained mysterious because of a gap in the historical documentation. Today, thanks to the progress of the research, we can lead comparative studies based on archaeological and epigraphical documentation founded in the region for better understanding of the history of Wadi Ramm and its role in larger context. Mots clés : Wadi Ramm, Hudayb al-Rih, Dissi, al-Titin, al-Kharaza, Abou Nukhayla Pétra Umm Daraj, sanctuaire, culte, inscriptions, architecture, nabatéen, préhistoire, archéobotanique, olivier, climat, système hydraulique, tourisme, géologie. Keyword : Wadi Ramm Hudayb al-Rih, Dissi, al-Titin, al-Kharaza, Abou Nukhayla, Pétra Umm Daraj, sanctuaries, worship, inscriptions, architecture, nabatean, prehistory, archaeobotany, Olive tree, weathering, hydrology, tourism, geology.

Saba

Far

ès

DES

DES

ERTS

ET

DES

HO

MM

ES :

Wād

ī Ram

m (J

orda

nie)

46534-46536_46534-46536-cv adra_13/11/2013_14:40:50_1_F

orm

e simp

le_Black__

46534-46536_46534-46536-cv adra_13/11/2013_14:40:50_1_F

orm

e simp

le_Cyan

__46534-46536_46534-46536-cv ad

ra_13/11/2013_14:40:50_1_Fo

rme sim

ple_M

agen

ta__46534-46536_46534-46536-cv ad

ra_13/11/2013_14:40:50_1_Fo

rme sim

ple_Y

ellow

__46534-46536_46534-46536-cv ad

ra_13/11/2013_14:40:50_1_Fo

rme sim

ple_P

AN

TO

NE

354 C__

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF LITHIC ARTIFACTS FROM EXCAVATION AND SURVEY IN WĀDĪ RAMM

GARY O. ROLLEFSON*

Introduction The French-Jordanian Joint Archaeological Project undertook surveys in the Wādī Ramm area in 2002 and 2004 and also excavated the site of Huḍayb al-Rīḥ. A total of 43 samples of chipped stone and groundstone artifacts was recovered, and the following is a report on the analysis and interpretation of those artifacts. The Huḍayb ar-Rīḥ Lithic Materials The debitage classes for the Huḍayb ar-Rīḥ chipped stone artifacts are tabulated in Table 1. The strong presence of cores, microflakes, and debris1 in the assemblage is a good indicator that lithic reduction was undertaken inside and immediately outside the structure at Huḍayb. Flakes dominate blades, even when bladelets are included. The cores include three semi-radial flake cores, one multiplatform flake core, two single platform blade cores, a single platform bipolar core2, and three unclassifiable core fragments; one rolled wādī cobble was used as a hammerstone3. The flint was of mediocre quality whose source is not known. Striking platforms on the flakes and blades were

* Gary O. Rollefson, Department of Anthropology, Whitman College, Walla Walla, WA

99362 USA, rollefgo@whitman.edu 1 One piece of debris exhibited fire damage. 2 The term “bipolar core” is used here in the sense that the core was rested on an anvil and

struck on the platform, resulting in removals of flakes but with accompanying chipping of the end that rested on the anvil.

3 One flat pebble had been drilled and engraved with Arabic characters; this piece was not included in the artifact counts.

150 G. O. ROLLEFSON broad and steep, typical of production technologies of the Late Prehistoric periods (Late Neolithic, Chalcolithic, and Early Bronze Age). More than half of the flakes (n=26) and several pieces of debris and a number of microflakes were made on colorless or milky white quartz instead of flint. Quartz often occurs in veins in granite, so the source of this material is probably not far away. The flakes were all made using the bipolar technique: that is, the distal end shows considerable damage as the flake came off the core in contact with the anvil on which the core rested. There is no indication that the quartz flakes were utilized, and no core of white or colorless quartz occurred in the assemblage. The tools (Table 2) were not absolutely numerous. Knives, side- and endscrapers, retouched blades, and the burin are typical of unspecialized household activities, and from the quantity of micro-flakes and debris among the debitage, it would appear that the tools were made on location. The presence of bladelets and tools made on bladelets (two of the drills were on bladelet blanks) might seem to indicate an Epipaleo-lithic character to the assemblage, but this is not the case. Microlithic technologies disappeared during the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B, PPNC, and earlier part of the Late Neolithic periods, but they returned during the Late Prehistoric periods4. Two of the radiocarbon dates from the excavation fall near the end of the Late Neolithic (5277 ± 64 and 5182 ± 44 cal. BC5), and a third (2653 ± 181cal. BC) is near the end of EB II. In summary, the tools found in Huḍayb ar-Rīḥ were probably manufactured, used, and discarded there. They represent a small domestic tool kit that could have been used for a variety of purposes. The number of artifacts in the assemblage (294 pieces) is remarkably small compared to most semi-permanent settlements, and this could be interpreted in several ways. First, the site was occupied for a very short period of time, although this does not seem to be the case in view of the efforts to construct the building. Second, it may be the case that most of the daily activities involving the production, use, and abandonment of stone tools took place outside of the area sampled by the excavations, which is more likely in the case of Huḍayb al-Rīḥ. 4 Rosen 1997: 64-71; 2011: 88-96). 5 14C dates kindly provided by Saba Farès.

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF LITHIC ARTIFACTS 151

Lithics Collections from the Survey Dating of the survey samples was based on the presence of particular tool types or techniques of production or retouch when these were informative; patination was also used in some cases, although admittedly this criterion can be misleading in many cases and should not be used for definitive classification. It has been suggested that there was a “rediscovery” of the Levallois techniques during the Chalcolithic6, but in the three samples with Levallois material from the Wadi Ramm survey, the state of patination is very different from the Late Prehistoric artifacts in the other samples. The samples varied widely in terms of size and selectivity, and often only a very general temporal character could be determined (e.g., “Lower or Middle Paleolithic,” “Upper or Epipaleolithic,” “Late Neolithic to Early Bronze Age”). Earlier surveys in the Wadi Ramm area7 and subsequent work, especially by Italian researchers8 , indicated that the region was at least sporadically utilized throughout almost the entire temporal span of human occupation in the Levant. That picture is upheld by the samples analyzed from the 2002 and 2004 surveys, for these collec-tions include material from the earlier Paleolithic through relatively recent times (Table 3). The small sample sizes impinge on more than the dating of the samples: the paucity of tools also restricts the interpretation of site use; nothing in the samples suggests any specialization in terms of site function. The frequency of cores in some samples indicates local reduction and tool manufacture, but one can’t go any farther than this. The quality of the flint in the different samples varies conside-rably, with the greatest range (from poor to excellent) falling during the Late Prehistoric (Late Neolithic to Early Bronze Age) times. Huwayjir-type flint9, including typical purple-pink flint so desirable in the PPNB, occurs relatively abundantly in a few of the samples, and while there is a slight tendency for the high quality flint to appear more often in the Natufian or later Epipaleolithic, it also occurs in a

6 Cattarin and Mercatanti 1997. 7 e.g., Kirkbride and Harding 1947; Kirkbride 1960; Copeland and Hours 1971; Stanley Price

and Garrard 1971. 8 e.g. Borzatti von Löwenstern 1983; Angelotti and Berna 2000; Fabiano and Primiceri 2001. 9 Quintero 1996

152 G. O. ROLLEFSON couple of Late Prehistoric samples. Although there are poor to medium quality flint sources in remnants of Cenomanian limestone formations atop mountains in the southeastern part of the Wadi Ramm area10, including Jabal Ka’keh, all of the better quality flint must have been imported into Wadi Ramm. The source of the purple-pink flint was probably the Amman Silicified Limestone formation at the edge of the Ma’an Plateau11, supporting Henry’s contention that the Hisma/Ramm area was almost always used seasonally in an eleva-tional transhumance pattern12. Another aspect of the stone resources used by the hunter-herders of the Wadi Ramm area concerns the use of colorless and milky white quartz. This material was found in several samples and is primarily associated with Late Prehistoric artifacts. (In some of the samples there are also Epipaleolithic/Natufian artifacts, but these are made on flint, not quartz). The temporal pattern in Table 3 reflects a classic situation in terms of “archaeological visibility”, and caution should be used in the interpretation of the figures. The higher frequencies in the more recent periods, for example, might be taken to reflect an increasing intensity of use of the Wadi Ramm area through time, perhaps as a conse-quence of growing population numbers. But the older an archaeo-logical site is, the greater the amount of time for natural forces to render the site invisible, either by outright site destruction through erosion (and several samples indicate local stream action) or by the hiding of a site as overlying sediments increase in thickness year after year13. Finally, there is no information included with the lithics samples that characterize the nature of the sites from which they were collected. Settlements, whether permanent or seasonal, have been noted for the region around Wadi Ramm for the PPN and Late Prehistoric periods, for example14, and if permanent or semi-permanent structures were noted during the Wadi Ramm Survey, they should be investigated more intensively in the future.

10 Bender 1968: 46, 48 and abb. 46. 11 Henry et al. 2003: 16; cf. Rollefson et al. 2007. 12 Henry et al. 2003: 16-17; 25-26. 13 Rollefson 1987. 14 Henry et al. 2003; Angelotti and Berna 2000; Cattarin and Mercantiti 2000.

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF LITHIC ARTIFACTS 153

The character of the collections, especially of the smaller ones, need not be elaborated, but some of the survey areas produced assem-blages that deserve additional comment: al-Ka’ka. The al-Ka’ka collection had one of the broadest ranges of time represented in the survey samples. Among the 50 pieces, all of which were made on a locally available medium-quality gray flint, five bore a brilliant reddish-orange patina, very unlike the rest of the material from this location. The red weathering might indicate Lower Paleolithic age since there was a similar patina among Lower Paleolithic artifacts we recovered from the Wadi Hudruj survey15, which never occurred in Middle Paleolithic or later period artifacts. On the other hand, 17 artifacts from al-Ka’ka were clearly Middle Paleolithic, including three Levallois cores (one each of point, blade, and flake cores). Three blades in this sample are Pre-Pottery Neolithic B naviform blades, including one made of orthoquartzite, similar to parts of the inventory from LPPNB ‘Ain Jammam and Basta16, although none of this group were tools. The remainder of the collec-tion was attributable to the Late Prehistoric period on the basis of the broad steep striking platforms on the blades and flakes; there were no tools among this group, either. Khishim al-Ka’ka. This collection totaled 71 pieces, again all made on locally available medium-grade flint. The Middle Paleolithic was represented by one Levallois point and one Levallois blade. Two blade/bladelet cores could be either Upper Paleolithic (Ahmarian) or Epipaleolithic in age. The rest are all probably Late Prehistoric based on comparisons with material from al-Jafr17. al-Bzūrī. This collection contained 114 items, including seven cores, 25 flakes, and 45 blades and bladelets. One of the flakes was of colorless quartz, and three of the 18 pieces of debris were of milky quartz, recalling the situation at Huḍayb al-Rīḥ. The cores comprised one bladelet core on a thick flake, two single platform bladelet cores, one opposed platform bladelet core, a microradial flake core, and two cores on flakes. Tools included seven backed bladelets/blades (three 15 Wasse and Rollefson 2005. 16 Wilke et al. 2007. 17 Quintero et al. 2002.

154 G. O. ROLLEFSON of which bore Helwan backing), a trapeze microlith, two endscrapers and a sidescraper, three notches, a denticulate, and a retouched blade. The collections came from three zones of the al-Bzuri area, so nothing can be said of the “toolkit” beyond noting that the tools and cores fit the Early Natufian part of the Epipaleolithic very nicely. Wadi Rābigh. A total of 123 artifacts were collected from the Wadi Rābigh, including 19 cores, 63 flakes, 23 blades, five bladelets, and the rest microflakes, debris, and core trimming elements. All of the material appears to be Late Prehistoric in age. The cores include three multiple platform flake cores, three cores on thick flakes, one radial flake core, two single platform blade cores, and a poor pyramidal blade core. The 19 tools comprise three borers (all on blades), six sidescrapers, an end-notched blade, a transverse burin, a backed bladelet, a pick, a chopper, a hammerstone, a basalt handstone, and a sandstone rubber; the last two tools are the only evidence of grinding operations from the survey and excavation collections. Overall, one can see similarities of this material with the collection from the Huḍayb ar-Rīḥ excavations. Concluding Remarks In summary, despite the grim (if compellingly beautiful and attractive) barrenness that constitutes the landscape of the Wadi Ramm area today, humans have left their footprints (figuratively18) at the base of the mountains and along the wādī since the early phases of the Paleolithic19 all the way up to modern times. There is reason to believe that the Pleistocene and Early Holocene landscape may have been more verdant than the sandy expanses we see today, and the presence of water and vegetation (even if only seasonal) would have been powerful attractions for animals and their hunters in the past. Even occasional agriculture, albeit on a part-time and unpredictable basis, may have been practiced as early as the 8th millennium cal. BC20. But it appears that by the end of the 6th millennium cal. BC,

18 Inglis 1988. 19 Fabiano and Succi Fabiano 2005. 20 Henry et al. 2003.

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF LITHIC ARTIFACTS 155

Late Neolithic and Chalcolithic/Early Bronze Age visitors to Wadi Ramm may have encountered conditions similar to what we see today. So far, most of the Wadi Ramm area has received survey attention over only part of the territory, and excavations have been confined to only a few sites. The variety of site types remains inadequately explored on both the absolute and relative scales, so that despite some of our insights that we have developed so far, there is much more to investigate, and such investigations might change our current understandings considerably. Acknowledgements: I would like to thank Saba Farès for the opportunity to examine the lithic collections from the Wadi Ramm French-Jordanian Archaeological Project surveys and excavations.

156 G. O. ROLLEFSON

BIBLIOGRAPHY Angelotti M., Berna F. 2000 : "Industria litica del villaggio Neolitico

preceramico di Giabal Arga (Giordania meridionale)", Studi per l’Ecologia del Quaternario 22, 29-62.

Borzatti von Löwenstern E. 1983, "Il Musteriano di Wadi Ramm nella Giordania Meridionale", Studi per l’Ecologia del Quaternario 5, 43-55.

Cattarin L., Mercatanti L. 1997 : "Il Calcolitico di tecnica levallois di Giabal Leghdèr (Giordania meridionale). Studi per l’Ecologia del Quaternario 19: 63-98.

Cattarin L., Mercatanti L. 2000 : "Il villaggio calcolitico di Uadi Umm Erraiàt nella Giordania meridionale", Studi per l’Ecologia del Quaternario 22, 63-84.

Copeland L., Hours F. 1971 : "A Microlithic Flint Site in the Wadi Rum, Jordan, and a Review of the Epi-Paleolithic of Northern Arabia", Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 1, 7-21.

Fabiano M., Primiceri P. 2001 : "L’Acheuleano inferiore di Giabal el Issua nella Giordania meridionale", Studi per l’Ecologia del Quaternario 23, 9-42.

Fabiano M., Succi Fabiani L. 2005 : "Il Paleolitico inferiore sui terrazii alluvionali di Sahl Umm Turifa (Girodania meridionale)", Studi per l’Ecologia del Quaternario 27, 21-40.

Henry D.O., Cordova C, White J.J., Dean R.M., Beaver J.E., Ekstrom H., Kadowaki S., McCorriston J., Nowell A. et Scott-Cummings L. 2003 : "The Early Neolithic Site of Ayn Abu Nukhayla, Southern Jordan", Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 330, 1-30.

Inglis B. 1988 : "Incision di piedi e calzari sulle rocce del deserto della Giordania meridionale", Studi per l’Ecologia del Quater-nario 10, 67-92.

Kirkbride A.S., Harding G.L. 1947 : "Hasma", Palestine Exploration Quarterly 79, 7-26.

Kirkbride D. 1960 : "Chronique archéologique : Région du Wadi Ramm, ‘Ain Abu Nakhaileh, Khirbet Rizqeh, Seyl Aqlat, Beida

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF LITHIC ARTIFACTS 157

prés de Petra, Petra, Wadi Musa et Wadi Mamagha", Revue Biblique 67, 230-239.

Quintero L.A. 1996 : "Flint Mining in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic: Preliminary Report on the Exploitation of Flint at Neolithic ‘Ain Ghazal in Highland Jordan", in S.K. Kozlowski and H.G. Gebel (eds.), Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent and Their Contemporaries in Adjacent Regions, 233-242. SENEPSE 3 ; Berlin: ex oriente.

Quintero L.A., Wilke P.J., Rollefson G.O. 2002 : "From Flint mine to Fan Scraper: The Late Prehistoric Jafr Industrial Complex, Southeastern Jordan", Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 327, 17-48.

Rollefson G.O. 1987 : "Chipped Stone Artifacts from the Limes Arabicus Surveys", in S.T. Parker (ed.), The Roman Frontier in Central Jordan, Chapter 24, 757-792 ; British Archaeological Reports, International Series 340 ; Oxford: B.A.R.

Rollefson G., Quintero L., Wilke P. 2007 : "Purple-Pink Flint Sources in Jordan", in C. Delage (ed.), Chert Availability and Prehistoric Exploitation in the Near East: 55-67 ; British Archaeological Reports, International Series 1615 ; Oxford: B.A.R.

Rosen S. 1997, Lithics after the Stone Age, London: AltaMira Press. Rosen S. 2011, An Investigation into Early Desert Pastoralism: Exca-

vations at the Camel Site, Negev, Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, Monograph 69.

Stanley Price N.P., Garrard A. 1975 : "A Prehistoric Site in the Rum Area of the Hisma", Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 20, 91-93.

Wasse A., Rollefson G. 2005 : "The Wadi Sirhan Project: Report on the 2002 Archaeological Reconnaissance of Wadi Hudruj and Jabal Thawra, Jordan", Levant 37, 1-20.

Wilke P.J, Quintero L.A., Rollefson G.O., Gebel H.G.K. 2007 : "The Naviform Core-and-Blade Industry in Orthoquartzite at ‘Ain Jammam, Jordan", in L. Astruc, D. Binder and F. Briois (eds.), Technical Systems and Near Eastern PPN Communities, 193-201, Quetigny, France: Librairie Archéologique.

158 G. O. ROLLEFSON Table 1. Distribution of debitage types from the Huḍayb ar-Rīḥ lithics sample.

Debitage class n % %’ Bladelet 16 5.44 10.39 Blade 34 11.56 22.08 Flake 93 31.63 60.39 Core 11 3.74 7.14 Microflake 56 19.04 Debris 84 28.57 (Tool) (33) (21.4) Total 294 100.0 100.0

Table 2. Chipped stone tools from the excavations at Huḍayb al-Rīḥ.

Tool type n % %’ Burin 1 3.03 3.85 Unifacial knife 1 3.03 3.85 Backed knife 1 3.03 3.85 Backed blade 1 3.03 3.85 Backed bladelet 4 12.12 15.38 Lunate microlith 1 3.03 3.85 Borer 5 15.15 19.23 Endscraper 1 3.03 3.85 Sidescraper 4 12.12 15.38 Retouched blade 3 9.09 11.54 Pièce ésquillée 2 6.06 7.69 Other 2 6.06 7.69 Indeterminate 7 21.21 Total 33 100.0 100.0

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF LITHIC ARTIFACTS 159

Table 3. Distribution of time periods among the lithic samples from the Wadi Ramm Survey seasons (not including material from Huḍayb al-Rīḥ). Percentages do not total 100% because several samples had more than one time period represented among the artifacts in the collection. (Late Prehistoric refers to Late Neolithic through Early Bronze Age).

Period n % Late Prehistoric 16 45.7 Pre-Pottery Neolithic B 4 11.4 Epipaleolithic 7 20.0 Upper/Epipaleolithic 2 5.7 Middle Paleolithic 2 5.7 Lower/Middle Paleolithic 1 2.9 Lower Paleolithic 1 2.9 Indeterminate 2 5.7

160 G. O. ROLLEFSON Table 4. Distribution of artifacts by collection sample. Samples marked with an asterisk (*) are discussed more fully in the text.

Site Name Comments 306 Animal tooth, bone fragments. 1 piece natural stone

discarded. aṭ-Ṭufayḥa 9 flakes (3 racloir fragments, 1 indeterminate tool); 10

blades (1 backed blade fragment, one retouched blade); 3 bladelets; 1 CTE (core tablet fragment) ; 29 microflakes; 32 debris (1 borer tip) This appears to be mostly LN-EB, although there may be some earlier material as well (Natufian? white patina). Evidence of fire on some of the pieces. A lot of gravel indicates a nearby seasonal water course. A lot of small flakes suggests in situ knapping and retouching, although there are no cores in the sample. 2 pieces of milky/colorless quartz/quartzite.

Umm Nujayleh

2 cores (1 microradial, 1 “bipolar”); 3 blades (1 proximally truncated endscraper;; 12 flakes (one cortical = fan scraper fragment?) (1 truncated + retouched flake; 1 CTE (tiny crested blade); 1 indeterminate debitage (made into a borer); 7 microflakes; 11 debris. Cores suggest LN-EB, but one blade might be PPN. Some evidence of fire.

Ḥalqūm al-Nughra

2 blades; 2 microflakes; 1 debris; 3 potsherds Very small sample, possibly mixed LN-EB and Upper/Epipaleolithic.

Abu Ḥamaṭ 2 cores (1 single platform blade/let, 1 indeterminate); 10 flakes (1 racloir [double patina], 1 endscraper); 8 blades ; 3 bladelets ; 12 microflakes ; 20 debris (1 burin, 3 racloir fragments). Probably mostly Late Neolithic to Early Bronze, although double patina on one of the sidescrapers indicates an earlier period, as does the differential patination.

Umm al-Quṣayr

64 pieces total, mostly chips and flake/blade fragments. Most of this is probably Epipaleolithic (3 single platform bladelet cores, 1 backed & retouched bladelet), although some could be PPN and even LN-EB. 3 pieces pottery

al-Kharaza 30 pieces total. 1 backed blade, 4 endscrapers, 1 single platform, ~ pyramidal bladelet core, and several bladelets and blade fragments. Most suggest Epipaleolithic (although PPNA is possible), and 2-3 possibly LN-EB flakes.

al Ka’ka 50 pieces total. Includes material from the Lower and Middle Paleolithic, PPNB, and Late Neolithic to Early

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF LITHIC ARTIFACTS 161

Bronze Age. Khishim al Ka’ka

71 pieces total, including material from the Middle Paleolithic, Upper/Epipaleolithic, and Late Neolithic-Early Bonze Age.

Abu Nukhlayla

46 pieces total. Probably 2 main periods are represented: 1) the more heavily patinated pieces are probably Epipaleolithic (based on a backed & truncated bladelet), but 2) many probably LN-EB.

Abu Ḥamāṭ 2 flakes are probably LN-EB based on broad, steep platforms; one flake of unknown age.

al-Bzūrī* 78 pieces total, all probably from the Early Natufian of the Late Epipaleolithic period.

Wadi Ḥafīr (Bufle)

18 pieces total, no tools. Possibly a couple of Epipaleolithic pieces, but most appear to be LN-EB.

Wadi Ḥafīr 1 Levallois flake (Middle/Lower Paleolithic), 1 undatable blade

Umm Najayleh

One small (15 gm, l=38 mm) basalt flake, plain platform, possible groundstone trimming flake. One large (325 gm, 113x63x14 mm) flint racloir (crude), platform and bulb removed and possibly used as a wedge or chopper. Both are probably Late Neolithic to Early Bronze.

al-Ḥārik 41 blades, 7 bladelets, 12 flakes, and 9 microflakes. Most PPNB, although a couple of blades might be Late Neolithic to Early Bronze. Five tools (all on blades) including 1 knife, 1 notch, 1 retouched blade, and two utilized blades.

Swaybiṭ 3 cores (1 micro-pyramidal [LN-EB], one 90° change-of-orientation [Natufian], 1 fragment) ; 24 flakes (including 4 unidentifiable retouched tools); 13 blades (including a truncated blade and a wedge); 4 bladelets; 22 microflakes; 37 debris (including 1 racloir, 1 endscraper, and a borer.

al-Kharaza 6 cores (2 fragments, 4 radial/disc) ; 13 flakes (1 broken racloir); 1 blade; 2 indeterminate debitage (1 burin, 1 borer); 3 microflakes; 2 debris. Probably Late Neolithic to Early Bronze Age.

Wadi Rābigh*

123 pieces total, probably all Late Neolithic to Early Bronze in age.

TABLE DES MATIÈRES Préface de SAR la Princesse Sumaya bint El Hassan, Vice Chairman of the board of trustees, Jordan Museum 5 Avant-propos de Saba Farès 7 Saba Farès Résultats préliminaires des prospections et des fouilles archéologiques à wādī Ramm 11 Zeidan Kafafi Pottery Sherds from Test Excavations and Surveys at Wādī Ramm : A Preliminary Report 79 Linda Herveux Subsistence strategies in the Wādī Ramm : an archaeo- botanical study of the site of Hudayb al-Rih 133 Gary Rollefson Analysis and Interpretation of Lithic Artifacts from : Excavation and Survey in Wadi Ramm 149 Donald Henry Adaptation to the Arid Zone in the Levantine Early Neolithic as Seen from Research at the Site of Ayn Abū Nukhayla in the Wadi Rum 163 Gary Rollefson Enigmas in the Desert: Late Prehistoric and Nabataean Structures at Turayf al-Maragh 177 Fares Khoury On the Status and Ecology of Breeding Birds in Wādī Rum 217

TABLE DES MATIÈRES 426

Bertrand Moulin Prospection Dendrologique sur le wādī Hafir 229 Bertrand Moulin Interprétation des paysages du wādī Hafir 237 Saba Farès Umm Daraj et al-Kharza : les barrages antiques au service des nomades d’aujourd’hui 245 Dennine Dudley and M. Barbara Reeves Immersed in Grandeur: The Eastern Complex at Wādī Rum 281 Laura Strachan Development promises, Bedouin involvement and local knowledge 315 Cassandra Bennett Desert Deities and those who worshipped them: the religious 359 Thomas Paradis Natural and anthropogenic influences on sandstone weathering 371 Patricia Warke, B.J. Smith, F. Bala’awi & F. Ishakat Rapid base-line condition assessment of rock-cut tombs at Petra 397 Abd al-Aziz al-Maani Wādī Ramm chez les historiographes arabes 419