An early epipalaeolithic sitting burial from the Azraq Oasis, Jordan.

An early epipalaeolithic sitting burial from the Azraq Oasis, Jordan. [ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] Introduction The rarity of human remains from late Upper Palaeolithic and EarlyEpipalaeolithic contexts in south-west Asia has, to date, prevented afuller examination and discussion of human burial practices during theFinal Pleistocene in the region. This is in marked contrast to theevidence from the Late Epipalaeolithic (Natufian), which has enabled thereconstruction of social organisation, status, identity, pathology anddemography (e.g. Wright 1978; Belfer-Cohen 1988, 1995; Byrd &Monahan 1995; Boyd 2001; Peterson 2002; Eshed et al. 2004b; Stock et al.2005; Bocquentin 2007). Grosman et al. (2008), for example, haverecently reported the remains of an individual buried with multipletortoise carapaces and other animal parts from Hilazon Tachtit, whichthe authors interpreted as the burial of a shaman. This rich record ofhuman burials in the Natufian has been widely seen as an indicator ofthe emergent social and cultural complexity of Natufian gatherer-hunters(e.g. Bar-Yosef & Meadow 1995; Valla 1995; Bar-Yosef 1998; Bar-Yosef& Belfer-Cohen 2000). Natufian burial practices have therefore beenvariously described as means to establish strong inter-group identitiesand territories to alleviate various ecological risks and create strongsocial ties (Belfer-Cohen 1995; Grosman 2003). The comparatively largenumber of Late Epipalaeolithic burials from the Levant has also enabledmore detailed discussions of diet, demography, health and biologicaldiversity (e.g. Hassan 1981 ; Belfer-Cohen et al. 1991; Peterson 2002;Eshed et al. 2004a & b, 2006; Bocquentin 2007). While these studiesvary in material and focus, they collectively illustrate a longcontinuity in the Late Pleistocene and Holocene population history ofthe Levant, while emphasising regional and temporal cultural, biologicaland behavioural variation. By comparison, Late Upper Palaeolithic, as well as Early and MiddleEpipalaeolithic burials are much rarer (Nadel 1994, 1995) with onlyabout 17 burials excavated to date across the region (some of whichinclude more than one individual). Only recently has the MiddleEpipalaeolithic skeletal record been greatly expanded, as a result ofthe discovery of 13 individuals at the Geometric Kebaran site of'Uyyun al-Hamam in the northern Jordan Valley (Maher 2005, 2007a& b). A variety of arguments have been put forward why Late UpperPalaeolithic, Early and Middle Epipalaeolithic burials appear to berarer than Late Epipalaeolithic (Natufian) human remains, including lowpopulation density, poor preservation, a lack of research, the nature ofLate Pleistocene burial practices or a combination of these factors(Nadel 1994, 1995). In this paper we present evidence from the Early Epipalaeolithicsite of 'Ayn Qasiyya, situated in eastern Transjordan, whereexcavations in 2007 recovered an articulated human burial found in ahighly unusual burial position. Here we provide a report of the burial,discuss its taphonomy and offer an interpretation of its original burialposition. These provide some new insights into our understanding of theLate Pleistocene burial record in south-west Asia. Background The Early Epipalaeolithic site of 'Ayn Qasiyya is located inthe Azraq Oasis, a formerly lush wet- and marshland setting within theIrano-Tuhranian steppe and Saharo-Arabian desert of south-west Asia,situated c. 100km east of the Jordanian capital Amman. The region has arich local sequence of prehistoric settlement, in which sites dating tothe Early, Middle and Late Epipalaeolithic are well represented (Garrardet al. 1988, 1994; Muheisen 1988a & b; Byrd & Garrard 1989;Betts 1991, 1998; Garrard 1991, 1998; Garrard & Byrd 1992; Rollefsonet al. 1997, 1999, 2001; Maher et al. 2007). Site The site is located immediately north of the 'Ayn Qasiyyapool, which was formerly a small pond associated with a copious spring(Figure 1). Excavations in four main trenches in 2005, 2006 and 2007(Figure 2), as well as examination of exposed sections in the pool,showed dense concentrations of lithic artefacts and faunal remainssituated within a dark-brown, highly organic buried marsh deposit(Richter et al. 2007, 2010; Richter & Rohl 2007). It is verycomparable to modern day marsh sediments in the oasis, both incomposition and colour and partially derives from decayed plant mattermixed with fine sand and silt particles. This deposit is situated in most places above a sterile,greenish-grey silty clay of lacustrine origin, and is capped by atopsoil of carbonate concretions with a fine silt matrix. Whileexcavations in Area C revealed a channel fill containing a mixed lithicassemblage, consisting of Early Epipalaeolithic, Natufian and PPNBdiagnostic chipped stone artefacts, Areas A, B and D revealedexclusively Early Epipalaeolithic artefacts (Richter et al. 2007, 2010).Seven AMS dates on charcoal have now been obtained from the buried marshdeposit in Areas A, B and D. Section 1 and Area A produced a tightlyclustered series of four dates: OXA-18829: 17 550+75 (21 072-20 440 calBP INTCal04), OXA-18831:17 555+75 (21 004-20 389 cal BP INTCal04),OxA-18832: 17 495 [+ or -] 70 (21 003-20 399 cal BP INTCal04), andPoz-33101 19 690 [+ or -] 150 (22 864-24 004 cal BP INTCal04). Twoindividual dates are available from the same horizon in Areas B and Drespectively; Area B: Poz-33103, 16 960 [+ or -] 110 (19 875-20 337 calBP INTCal04); Area D: Poz-33106, 16 080 [+ or -] 100 (19 035-19 453 calBP INTCal04). Two distinct lithic industries were recognised in thethree principal excavation areas (Richter et al. 2007, 2010): Areas Aand B are characterised by abundant obliquely truncated and backedbladelets amongst the retouched microlithic tool spectrum, which wereproduced without the use of the microburin technique. Area D on theother hand produced an assemblage containing piquant triedre andarched-backed bladelets. These assemblages fall within the spectrum ofother known Early Epipalaeolithic chipped stone industries known fromthe Azraq Basin and the Levant in general (Bar-Yosef & Vogel 1987;Bar-Yosef 1989; Hours 1992; Byrd 1994; Goring-Morris 1995; Schyle &Uerpmann 1996; Olszewski 2001, 2006; Stutz & Estabrook 2004). Inaddition, the site has produced a sizeable faunal assemblage, which hasto date only been preliminarily examined (Richter et al. 2010). [FIGURE 1 OMITTED] [FIGURE 2 OMITTED] The burial: context and date Within Area B the semi-articulated remains of an individual werefirst partially exposed during the 2006 season (Richter et al. 2007,2010). An extension of the trench in 2007 fully exposed the remains,which we named 'Ayn Qasiyya 1 (Figures 3 & 4). The remains werefound within the marsh deposit just beneath the carbonate concretedtopsoil, which caps the site. The stratigraphic succession wasundisturbed by later intrusions so that the burial is dearly associatedwith the Epipalaeolithic deposits. Early Epipalaeolithic chipped stone(Kebaran) is the only material culture associated with this marshdeposit in Area B. Field observations and examination of thestratigraphy have not provided any evidence for a burial pit. Study ofthe formation processes of the buried marsh deposit, as well as a seriesof seven highly correlated AMS dates, provide evidence that the burialdates to somewhere between 19 800 and 20 400 cal BE To date, this makes'Ayn Qasiyya 1 the oldest securely dated human remains found inJordan. A previous attempt to date the human skeletal remains directlyusing AMS failed, as the collagen preservation in the bone is too poorto yield a reliable result (T. Higham pets. comm.). [FIGURE 3 OMITTED] Anatomy Preserved skeletal elements of 'Ayn Qasiyya 1 include afragmentary cranial vault, including portions of the frontal, occipital,left and right parietal and temporal bones, maxillae, mandible and apartial dentition, a partial right clavicle, right and left humeri,diaphyses of the left radius and ulna, left and right femora, tibiae andfibulae. Little was preserved of the thorax and pelvis, apart fromfragmentary left and right mid-thoracic ribs, fragments of the right andleft sacral alae, the right acetabulum and a few fragments of vertebralbodies. The bones of the right foot are better preserved than the left,with most elements represented, while the left consists of a partialcalcaneus and metatarsal fragments. All visible long bone epiphyses are fused, and the dentition ischaracterised by extremely heavy tooth wear, with significant exposureof dentine on most molars, which suggests either that the individual isan adult of middle to older age or that tooth wear was particularlyrapid. While the state of preservation precludes observation of manytypically sexually dimorphic traits, several characteristics of theskull and mandible suggest that this skeleton is that of a male. Anestimate of the length of the fragmentary right femur taken with thebones in situ indicates a maximum length of approximately 431 mm, whichsuggests a relatively small adult stature of approximately 161cm, usinga regression equation developed for ancient Egyptians (Raxter et al.2008). The diameter of the better preserved left femoral head was44.9mm, suggesting a body mass of approximately 62.4kg, using the meanof three regression equations published by Ruff et al. (1997). While theestimated body mass is slightly below the mean of later Natufian males,it is comparable to the Early and Middle Epipalaeolithic skeletons fromKharanneh IV and Wadi Mataha, but contrasts with the large body size ofOhalo II H2 (Hershkovitz et al. 1995; Stock et al. 2005). This, incombination with the relatively small stature of 'Ayn Qasiyya 1, isconsistent with a pattern of morphological heterogeneity in the Levantprior to the Natufian (Stock et al. 2005). [FIGURE 4 OMITTED] Taphonomy Although the body was lying on its back, the burial position wasunusual (Figures 3 & 4). The knees were tightly flexed, with thecalcanei relatively close to the proximal femora, and the femoral shaftsextending laterally in opposing directions away from the midline of thebody. The better preserved left arm passed over the anterior side of thepelvic region, with the palmar surface facing towards the body. Threemetacarpal shafts discovered between the pelvic region and the calcanei,suggest that the left hand extended towards the feet, with the palmarsurface facing the body. The lack of right forearm elements leaves theirorientation unknown. The thorax and upper body angle somewhat laterallyfrom the lower limbs, towards the left side. The skull was situatedabove the left ribs, facing superiorly across the region of the leftshoulder. This suggests that it had rotated post-depositionally towardsthe superior side of the left shoulder. The orientation of pedalelements may shed some light on post-depositional taphonomic movement ofthe skeleton. The fifth metatarsals on each side are oriented with theirproximal ends towards the midline of the body. Other metatarsals of bothfeet were oriented with the proximal ends towards the lateral sides ofthe burial with the distal ends extending medially. This suggests thatthere was lateral rotation of the legs post-depositionally, probablyshortly after interment, with the toes maintaining the originalorientation. This is also supported by the position of the fibulae,which were situated below but proximal to the tibiae relative to therest of the body. If the legs had been placed in the position as found,the fibulae would be expected to be directly underneath the tibiae.While the orientation of metatarsals could have been achieved throughcompression of the pedal elements in situ, the evidence for movement androtation of the cranium may be more easily explained if the legs movedlaterally post-depositionally, allowing the skull to shift forwards androtate laterally as the thorax compressed. When the sum of these factorsis considered, the original burial position was likely'sitting' with the thorax close to the femora. Discussion The burial position of 'Ayn Qasiyya 1 is highly unusual andhas no direct parallels in the Levant from the same broad chronologicalhorizon. We argue here that a number of taphonomic indicators suggestthat the body was originally interred in an upright, seated position. Atthe time of burial the marsh deposit was very soft, muddy and wet, i.e.a highly permeable environment. This is analogous to modern conditionsin many wet- and marshland settings, as they can be observed in theAzraq Wetlands Reserve today. The position of some skeletal elementsshows that the lower limbs rotated outwards post-deposition. Theposition of the metatarsals, and possibly of the fibulae, indicates thisoutward rotational movement of the lower limbs. We therefore suggestthat the lower limbs were originally positioned upright and tightlyflexed. The collapsed state of the torso and the rotation of the skullfurther suggest that the body was originally in an upright, sittingposition, with the lower limbs flexed tightly towards the torso and theskull leaning forward and resting on the knees. Such a tightly flexedposition would most likely be achieved if the body was either bound orotherwise contained (e.g. wrapped in some kind of cloth). Given the lackof evidence for a burial pit the body would have been placed into thepermeable marshland soil in a bound state. Figure 5 shows areconstruction of the original burial position and the gradual decay ofthe body. If this hypothesis is correct, the present position of'Ayn Qasiyya 1 has to be understood as a result ofpost-depositional processes in which bodily decay played a major role. [FIGURE 5 OMITTED] Our argument for a rotational movement of the legs is based on theposition of tarsals and metatarsals in the pedal elements, and theposition of the fibulae. There is a possibility that both of these couldhave occurred as part of other post-depositional displacement ofskeletal parts. If this was the case, the legs of the individual mayhave been laid out in the current tightly flexed position. However, theposition of the skull is best explained if the torso was originallyupright, with the skull rotating and collapsing as the thorax andconnective tissue broke down. Dirkmaat and Sienicki (Dirkmaat &Sienicki 1995; Roksandic 2002) observed that in the sequence of bodilydecay the cranium is most often the first body part to becomedislocated, while the legs remain the last part to become displaced asdecomposition proceeds. This lends credence to our suggestion outlinedabove since 'Ayn Qasiyya 1's cranium is the most severelydislocated element, while the legs remain in close anatomicalarticulation. In the absence of a burial pit there would, however, havebeen no physical feature to initially support the torso: hence oursuggestion that the body may have been interred in a bound state. Weinfer from the body's position that there was sufficient space forthe body to expand and move as it decayed. At the same time, thereappears to have been little resistance to the movement of thebody's parts as the legs rotated outwards and the torso collapsed(Duday 1987, 1990; Duday & Masset 1987; Duday et al. 1990; Roksandic2002). We are not aware of any directly comparable instances of an EarlyEpipalaeolithic sitting burial in the region, although the burial of anadult male at Ohalo II was also found in a position with tightly flexedlower limbs (Nadel 1994, 1995; Hershkovitz et al. 1995). Burialpositions in the Late Epipalaeolithic Natufian--from which the largestsample of human burials of any of the Epipalaeolithic phases isknown--tend toward flexed or semi-flexed positions (Belfer-Cohen 1988,1991; Byrd & Monahan 1995). However, Garrod (1932; Weinstein-Evron2003) reported one half-upright, sitting burial from layer B at Shukhba,as well as a number of sitting burials from el-Wad terrace (Garrod &Bate 1937; Mastin 1964; Boyd 2001). Perrot and Ladiray (Perrot et al.1988) reported one sitting burial from Ayn Mallaha (Eynan). In the EarlyNatufian phase Homo 19 was found with the legs tightly flexed, butsplayed outward very similarly to 'Ayn Qasiyya 1 (Perrot et al.1988: Plate V). Generally speaking, however, these appear to beexceptions to the norm. 'Ayn Qasiyya 1 and the Early Epipalaeolithic burial record inthe Levant In addition to the binding or containment of bodies in cloth, weargue here that 'Ayn Qasiyya 1 provides evidence for a hitherto notfully recognised burial practice in the Early Epipalaeolithic Levant:exposure or placement of dead corpses in open, unaltered surroundings.Nadel (1994, 1995) has argued that the lack of Late Upper Palaeolithic,Early and Middle Epipalaeolithic burials may relate to taphonomic andpreservational factors which may in turn be related to burial practices.He noted that burial in shallow pits, which are liable to be affected byerosion and later disturbances (Nadel 1994: 119), were a distinctpossibility that could account for this lack of preservation. Inaddition, he pointed out that disarticulated human remains were a commonoccurrence in settlement deposits during the Late Upper Palaeolithic toMiddle Epipalaeolithic. This suggests that burials were either disturbedby later settlement activity or that corpses did not receive formalburial, but may have been left exposed to the elements for the purposeof excarnation. As Henderson has argued (1987), the relative lack ofhuman burials in the archaeological record and the presence ofdisarticulated remains in settlement deposits make exposure a distinctpossibility. Exposure of corpses is a relatively common ethnographicallyand archaeologically documented practice amongst many societies aroundthe world (e.g. Kroeber 1927; Ucko 1969; Parker Pearson 1999: 131-2). We argue that 'Ayn Qasiyya l's deposition in the Azraqwetlands is analogous to the exposure of corpses and practices ofexcarnating human remains. The bound body of the individual was placedin the soft, permeable soil of the Azraq marsh without making provisionsfor a more permanent installation (e.g. a burial pit). This practice hasa number of implications for our understanding of Early Epipalaeolithicburial practices as a whole. It provides a potential explanation for thelack of human remains in the archaeological record for this time period.Although it is important to recognise that comparatively more LateEpipalaeolithic sites have been excavated and larger areas at Natufiansites have been exposed, we would still expect to find more humanremains from the Early and Middle Epipalaeolithic. The burial of anadult male at Ohalo II (Hershkovitz et al. 1995), as well as the case of'Ayn Qasiyya show that only rapid burial by fine-grained sedimentsfacilitated the preservation of these remains. At Kharaneh IV the twohuman burials found at the site were situated beneath an occupationsurface, indicating that here also, burials were initially relativelyshallow (Rolston 1982; Muheisen 1983, 1988a). This contrasts somewhatwith the burial of a female from Ein Gev I, which was found buried in apit underneath a floor densely packed with animal bone (Arensburg &Bar-Yosef 1973). At Wadi Mataha the remains of a tightly flexedindividual were also situated in a shallow pit relatively close to thesurface (Johnson et al. 1999; Stock et al. 2005). This strongly suggeststhat site formation and taphonomic factors are the prime factorsaffecting the preservation of human burials from the Late UpperPalaeolithic to Middle Epipalaeolithic time frame in the Levant. Within this small data set there is variation. While exposure andexcarnation of bodies appears to have been one practice, someindividuals were buried in more formal graves (e.g. Ein Gev I, Ohalo II,Khareneh IV). This may suggest that certain individuals received adifferent treatment than others. Due to a lack of available data it isvery difficult to ascertain why these differences may have existed. Itis interesting, however, that the majority of formal burials found todate are male and, more often than not, are of an advanced age at death.If we accept that exposure of corpses was a common occurrence in theEarly Epipalaeolithic, the burial of certain individuals would seem toindicate some kind of differentiation that was drawn between these andother members of the community. This does not necessarily imply a socialdifferentiation in terms of emergent status or hierarchy, however.Individuals could have been singled out for special treatment for alarge variety of reasons. Exposure and excarnation of the dead also provides evidence for howthe process of death may have been understood and dealt with byEpipalaeolithic communities. In contrast to many later burials, wherethe construction of graves and grave goods are evident, exposure of thedead could indicate a sense of transience. In many cases there seems tohave been no obvious concern for maintaining the integrity of thegraves, dead bodies or making specific reference to the memory of thedeceased within the burial context. The places at which excarnationswere made have often been identified as localities where the worlds ofthe living and the dead intersect (Parker Pearson 1999: 131). In thecase of 'Ayn Qasiyya, it would seem possible to make a connectionbetween the significance of the Azraq wetland springs and their copioussupply of water, and the deposition of dead bodies in the marshland.Water was undoubtedly an essential feature of life in this environment,so that this location likely held some significance. This significancemay have been reinforced, heightened or concreted by making connectionsbetween the worlds of the living and the dead in which the bodies of thedead served as critical media. Although the available evidence is sparse, the 'Ayn Qasiyyaburial may suggest that there are perceivable differences in the mannerin which people treated the bodies of the deceased when we compare theEarly with the Middle and Late Epipalaeolithic. Although there are cleardifferences between the Early and the Late Natufian in the type ofinterment and treatment of the bodies (Belfer-Cohen 1991, 1995; Byrd& Monahan 1995; Bar-Yosef & Belfer-Cohen 2000), these burialsshare the fact that time and resources were invested in theirdeposition. Pits for graves were excavated, and in some casesembellished with stones, grave goods were prepared and placed with thedead. Secondary burials, more common in the Late Natufian, reflect evenmore elaborate processes of re-opening graves and involving dead bodiesin likely ceremonial practices. It is tempting to understand this kindof personal and material investment to reflect a sense of permanency andof fixing relations with the dead amongst the living. In contrast, thelack of such practices in the Early Epipalaeolithic could be understoodas a more fluid and flexible structure of how the living perceived theirdead. Leaving the bodies of the dead in open settings, relativelyunprotected, for the elements to take hold, such as in the case of'Ayn Qasiyya, suggests a perception of dead bodies as malleable,mobile and non-fixed. Decay and fluidity may have been accepted, ratherthan sought to be prevented or held-up through constructing specific,fixed and permanent memories through the physical and socialconstruction of graves. Acknowledgements We are grateful to Gary Rollefson, Leslie Quintero and Philip Wilkefor giving their permission to work at 'Ayn Qasiyya and theircontinued support and encouragement. We are also grateful to theDepartment of Antiquities of Jordan and the Royal Society for theConservation of Nature for research permissions and support. Fieldworkat 'Ayn Qasiyya has been sponsored by grants from the Arts andHumanities Research Council (doctoral award and via the EpipalaeolithicForagers in Azraq Project), the Palestine Exploration Fund, theInstitute of Archaeology at University College London, UCL GraduateSchool, and the University of London's Central Research Fund. We are also grateful for comments provided by four reviewers. Received: 28 July 2009; Accepted: 25 September 2009; Revised: 20November 2009 References ARENSBURG, B. & O. BAR-YOSEF. 1973. Human remains from Ein GevI, Jordan Valley, Israel. Paleorient 1: 201-202. BAR-YOSEF, O. 1989. The Last Glacial Maximum in the MediterraneanLevant, in O. Soffer & C. Gamble (ed.) The world at 18,000 BP.Volume 2. Low latitudes: 58-77. London: Unwin Hyman. --1998. The Natufian culture in the Levant. Threshold to theorigins of agriculture. Evolutionary Anthropology 6:159-77. BAR-YOSEF, O. & A. BELFER-COHEN. 2000. Early sedenstism in theNear East: a bumpy ride to village life, in I. Kujit (ed.) Life inNeolithic farming communities: social organization, identity, anddifferentiation: 19-62. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum. BAR-YOSEF, O. & R.H. MEADOW. 1995. The origins of agriculturein the Near East, in T.D. Price & A.B. Gebauer (ed.) Lasthunters-first farmers: new perspectives on the prehistoric transition toagriculture: 39-94. Santa Fe (NM): School of American Research Press. BAR-YOSEF, O. & J.C. VOGEL. 1987. Relative and absolutechronology of the Epipalaeolithic in the southern Levant, in O.Aurenche, J. Evin & E Hours (ed.) Chronologies in the Near East(British Archaeological Reports International Series 379): 219-46.Oxford: British Archaeological Reports. BELFER-COHEN, A. 1988. The Natufian graveyard in Hayonim Cave.Paleorient 14: 297-308. --1991. The Natufian in the Levant. Annual Review of Anthropology20: 167-86. --1995. Rethinking social stratification in the Natufian culture:the evidence from burials, in S. Campbell & A. Green (ed.) Thearchaeology of death in the ancient Near East: 297-308. Oxford: Oxbow. BELFER-COHEN, A., L.A. SCHEPARTZ & O. BAR-YOSEF. 1991. Newbiological data for the Natufian populations in Israel, in O. Bar-Yosef& F.F. Valla (ed.) The Natufian culture in the Levant (InternationalMonographs in Prehistory 1): 411-24. Ann Arbor (MI): InternationalMonographs in Prehistory. BETTS, A.V.G. 1991. The Late Epipalaeolithic in the Black Desert,eastern Jordan, in O. Bar-Yosef & ER. Valla (ed.) The Natufianculture in the Levant (International Monographs in Prehistory 1): 9-23.Ann Arbor (MI): International Monographs in Prehistory. --1998. The Harra and the Hamad: excavations and surveys in easternJordan. Volume 1. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press. BOCQUENTIN, F. 2007. A Final Natufian population: health and burialstatus at Eynan-Mallaha, in M. Faerman, L.K. Horwitz, T. Khana & U.Zilberman (ed.) Faces from the past: diachronic patterns in the biologyof human populations from the Eastern Mediterranean. Papers in honour ofPatricia Smith (British Archaeological Reports International Series1603): 66-81. Oxford: Archaeopress. BOYD, B. 2001. The Natufian burials from el-Wad, Mt. Carmel: beyondissues of social differentiation. Journal of the Israel PrehistoricSociety 31: 185-200. BYRD, B.F. 1994. Late Quaternary hunter-gatherer complexes in theLevant between 20,000 and 10,000 BP, in O. Bar-Yosef & R.S. Kra(ed.) Late Quaternary chronology and paleoclimates of the easternMediterranean: 205-26. Tucson (AZ): Radiocarbon; Cambridge (MA):American School of Prehistoric Research. BYRD, B.F. & A.N. GARRARD. 1989. The Last Glacial Maximum inthe Jordanian desert, in O. Softer & C. Gamble (ed.) The world at18,000 BP. Volume 2. Low latitudes: 78-96. London: Unwin Hyman. BYRD, B.F. & C.M. MONAHAN. 1995. Death, mortuary ritual andNatufian social structure. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology14:251-87. DIRKMAAT, D.C. & L.A. SIENICKI. 1995. Taphonomy in thenortheast woodlands: four cases from western Pennsylvania. Proceedingsof the 47th Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences1: 10. DUDAY, H. 1987. Nouvelles observations sur la decomposition descorps dans un espace libre, in H. Duday & C. Masset (ed.) anthropologie physique et archeologie:methode d'etude des sepultures. Comptes rendus de la table ronde dela RCP 742, St-Germain-en-Laye: 6-13. Paris: CNRS. --1990. Observations osteologiques et decomposition du cadavre:sepulture en espace colmate ou en espace vide? Revue Archeologique duCentre de la France 29:193-6. DUDAY, H. & C. MASSET (ed.) 1987. Anthropologie physique etarcheologie: methode d'etude des sepultures. Comptes rendus de latable ronde de la RCP 742, St-Germain-en-Laye. Paris: CNRS. DUDAY, H., P. COURTAUD, E. CRUZBEZY, P. SELLIER & A.M. TILLIER.1990. Eanthropologie de 'terrain': reconnaissance etinterpretation des gestes funeraires. Bulletins et Memoires de laSociete d'Anthropologie de Paris 2: 26-49. ESHED, V., A. GOPHER, T.B. GAGE & I. HERSHKOVITZ. 2004a. Hasthe transition to agriculture reshaped the demographic structure ofprehistoric populations? New evidence from the Levant. American Journalof Physical Anthropology 124: 315-29. ESHED, V., A. GOPHER, E. GALILI & L. HERSHKOVITZ. 2004b.Musculoskeletal stress markers in Natufian hunter-gatherers andNeolithic farmers in the Levant: the upper limb. American Journal ofPhysical Anthropology 123: 303-15. ESHED, V., A. GOPHER & I. HERSHKOVITZ. 2006. Tooth wear anddental pathology at the advent of agriculture: new evidence from theLevant. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 130: 145-59. GARRARD, A.N. 1991. Natufian settlement in the Azraq Basin, easternJordan, in O. Bar-Yosef & F.F. Valla (ed.) The Natufian culture inthe Levant (International Monographs in Prehistory 1): 235-44. Ann Arbor(MI): International Monographs in Prehistory. --1998. Environment and cultural adaptations in the Azraq Basin:24,000-7,000 BP, in D.O. Henry (ed.) The prehistoric archaeology ofJordan (British Archaeological Reports International Series 705):139-48. Oxford: Archaeopress. GARRARD, A.N. & B.F. BYRD. 1992. New dimensions to theEpipalaeolithic of the Wadi el-Jilat in central Jordan. Paleorient 18:47-62. GARRARD, A.N., A. BETTS, B.F. BYRD, S. COLLEDGE & C. HUNT.1988. Summary of the palaeoenvironmental and prehistoric investigationsin the Azraq Basin, in A.N. Garrard & H.G. Gebel (ed.) Theprehistory of Jordan: the state of research in 1986 (BritishArchaeological Reports International Series 396): 311-37. Oxford:British Archaeological Reports. GARRARD, A.N., D. BAIRD, S. COLLEDGE, L. MARTIN & K. WRIGHT.1994. Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin: aninterim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons. Levant 26:73-109. GARROD, D.A.E. 1932. Excavations at the Wady el-Mughara(Palestine), 1931. Quarterly Statement of the Palestine Exploration Fund64:46-51. GARROD, D.A.E. & D.M. BATE. 1937. The Stone Age of MountCarmel. Oxford: Clarendon Press. GORING-MORRIS, A.N. 1995. Complex hunter/gatherers at the end ofthe Paleolithic, in T. Levy (ed.) The archaeology of society in the HolyLand: 141-67. London: Leicester University Press. GROSMAN, L. 2003. Preserving cultural traditions in a period ofinstability: the Late Natufian of the hilly Mediterranean zone. CurrentAnthropology 44: 571-80. GROSMAN, L., N.D. MUNRO & A. BELFER-COHEN. 2008. A12,000-year-old shaman burial from the southern Levant (Israel).Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States 105:17665-9. HASSAN, F.A. 1981. Demographic archaeology. New York; London:Academic Press. HENDERSON, J. 1987. Factors determining the state of preservationof human remains, in A. Boddington, A.N. Garland & R.C. Janaway(ed.) Death, decay and reconstruction: approaches to archaeology andforensic science: 43-54. Manchester: Manchester University Press. HERSHKOVITZ, I., M.S. SPIERS, D. FRAYERD, D. NADEL, S. WISHBARATZ& B. ARENSBURG. 1995. Ohalo 11: a 19,000-year-old skeleton from awater-logged site at the Sea of Galilee. American Journal of PhysicalAnthropology 96: 215-34. HOURS, E 1992. Le Paleolithique et l'Epipaleeolithique de laSyrie et du Liban. Beirut: Dar El-Machreq. JOHNSON, D., J. JANETSKI, M. CHAZAN, S. WITCHER & R. MEADOW.1999. Preliminary report on Brigham Young University's first seasonof excavation and survey at Wadi Al-Mataha, Petra, Jordan. Annual of theDepartment of Antiquities of Jordan 43: 249-60. KROEBER, A.L. 1927. Disposal of the dead. American Anthropologist29: 308-15. MAHER, L. 2005. Recent excavations at the Middle Epipalaeolithicencampment of 'Uyun al-Hammam, northern Jordan. Annual of theDepartment of Antiquities of Jordan 49: 101-14. --2007a. 2005 Excavations at the Geometric Kebaran site of'Uyun al-Hammam, Al Koura District, Jordan. Annual of theDepartment of Antiquities of Jordan 51:263-72. --2007b. Microliths and mortuary practices: new perspectives on theEpipalaeolithic in northern and eastern Jordan, in T.E. Levy, M. Daviau,R.W. Younker & M. Sharer (ed.) Crossing Jordan: North Americancontributions to the archaeology of Jordan: 195-202. London: Equinox. MAHER, L., T. RICHTER & D. JONES. 2007. Archaeological surveyat the Epipalaeolithic site of Kharaneh IV. Annual of the Department ofAntiquities of Jordan 51: 263-72. MASTIN, B.A. 1964. The extended burials at the Mugharet el-Wad. TheJournal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain andIreland 94: 44-51. MUHEISEN, M. 1983. La Prehistoire en Jordanie. Recherches surl'Epipaleolithique. Volume 2. L'exemple du gisement deKharaneh IV. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Universite de Bordeaux. --1988a. The Epipalaeolithic phases of Kharaneh IV, in A.N. Garrard& H.G. Gebel (ed.) Theprehistory of Jordan: the state of research in1986 (British Archaeological Reports International Series 396): 353-67.Oxford: British Archaeological Reports. --1988b. Le gisement de Kharaneh IV, note sommaire sur la phase D.Paleorient 14: 265-82. NADEL, D. 1994. Levantine Upper Palaeolithic-Early Epipalaeolithicburial customs: Ohalo II as a case study. Paleorient 20:113-21. --1995. The visibility of prehistoric burials in the southernLevant. How rare are the Upper Palaeolithic/Early Epipalaeolithicgraves?, in S.A.G. Campbell & A. Green (ed.) The archaeology of death in theancient Near East (Oxbow Monograph 51): 1-8. Oxford: Oxbow. OLSZEWSKI, D.I. 2001. The Palaeolithic, including theEpipalaeolithic, in B. MacDonald, R. Adams & P. Bienkowski (ed.) Thearchaeology of Jordan (Levantine Archaeology 1): 31-65. Sheffield:Sheffield Academic Press. --2006. Issues in the Levantine Epipalaeolithic: the Madamaghan,Nebekian and Qalkhan (Levant Epipalaeolithic). Paleorient 32:19-26. PARKER PEARSON, M. 1999. The archaeology of death and burial.Stroud: Sutton. PERROT, J., D. LADIRAY & O. SOLIVERES-MASSEI. 1988. Les hommesde Mallaha (Eynan) Israel (Memoires et Travaux du Centre de Recherchefrancais de Jerusalem 7). Paris: Association Paleorient. PETERSON, J. 2002. Sexual revolutions: gender and labor at the dawnof agriculture (Gender and Archaeology Series 4). Walnut Creek (CA);Oxford: Altamira. RAXTER, M.H., C.B. RUFF, A. AZAB, M. FRFAN, M. SOLIMAN & A.EL-SAWAF. 2008. Stature estimation in ancient Egyptians: a new techniquebased on anatomical reconstruction of stature. American Journal ofPhysical Anthropology 136: 147-55. RICHTER, T. & C. ROHL. 2007. Rescue excavations atEpipalaeolithic 'Ayn Qasiyah: report on the 2005 season. Annual ofthe Department of Antiquities of Jordan 50: 313-28. RICHTER, T., S. COLLEDGE, S. LUDDY, D. JONES, M. JONES, L. MAHER& R. KELLY. 2007. Preliminary report on the 2006 season atEpipalaeolithic 'Ayn Qasiyah, Azraq es-Shishan. Annual of theDepartment of Antiquities o f Jordan 51: 313-28. RICHTER, T., S. ALCOCK, E. ASOUTI, S. COLLEDGE, M. JONES, L. MAHER,L. MARTIN, J. STOCK & B. THORNE. 2010. New light on FinalPleistocene settlement diversity in the Azraq Basin: some preliminaryresults from Ayn Qasiyah and AWS 48. Paleorient 35. ROKSANDIC, M. 2002. Position of skeletal remains as a key tounderstanding mortuary behavior, in W.D. Haglund & M.H. Sorg (ed.)Advances in forensic taphonomy: method, theory, and archaeologicalperspectives: 99-117. Boca Raton (FL); London: CRC Press. ROLLEFSON, G., D. SCHNURRENBERGER, L. QUINTERO, R.P. WATSON &R. LOW. 1997. Ain Soda and 'Ayn Qasiya: new Late Pleistocene andEarly Holocene sites in the Azraq Shishan area, eastern Jordan, inH.G.K. Gebel, Z. Kafafi & G.O. Rollefson (ed.) The prehistory ofJordan, II: perspectives from 1997 (Studies in early Near Easternproduction, subsistence and environment 4): 45-58. Berlin: Ex Oriente. ROLLEFSON, G., L. QUINTERO & P. WILKE. 1999. Bawwab al-Ghazal:preliminary report on the testing season 1998. Neo-Lithics 1:2-4. --2001. Azraq wetlands survey 2000: preliminary report. Annual ofthe Department of Antiquities of Jordan 45: 71-82. ROLSTON, S.L, 1982. Two prehistoric burials from Qasr Kharaneh.Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 26: 221-9. RUFF, C.B., E. TRINKHAUS & T.W. HOLLIDAY. 1997. Body mass andencephalization in Pleistocene Homo. Nature 387: 173-6. SCHYLE, D. & H. UERPMANN. 1996. Das Epipaliiolithikum desVorderen Orients, Bd. 1. T1. 1: das Epipalaolithikum und der Ubergangzum Neolithikum in der Levante und in Agypten (Beihefte zum TubingerAtlas des Vorderen Orients. Reihe B, Geisteswissenschaften 85/1).Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reichert. STOCK, J., S. PFEIFFER, M. CHAZAN & J. JANETSKI. 2005. F-81skeleton from Wadi Mataha, Jordan, and its bearing on human variabilityin the Epipaleolithic of the Levant. American Journal of PhysicalAnthropology 128: 453-65. STUTZ, A.J. & G.E ESTABROOK. 2004. Computationally intensivemultivariate statistics and relative frequency distributions inarchaeology (with an application to the Early Epipaleolithic of theLevant). Journal of Archaeological Science 31: 1643-58. UCKO, P. 1969. Ethnography and archaeological interpretation offunerary remains. World Archaeology 1: 262-80. VALLA, E R. 1995. The first settled societies - Natufian(12,500-10,200 BP), in T. Levy (ed.) The archaeology of the Holy Land:169-90. London: Leicester University Press. WEINSTEIN-EVRON, M. 2003. In B or not in B: a reappraisal of theNatufian burials at Shukbah Cave, Judaea, Palestine. Antiquity 77:96-101. WRIGHT, G.A. 1978. Social differentiation in the early Natufian, inC.L. Redman, M.J. Berman, E.V. Curtin, W.T. Langhorne Jr., N.M. Versaggi& J.C. Wanser (ed.) Social anthropology: 210-24. New York: AcademicPress. T. Richter (1) *, Jay T. Stock(1), L. Maher (1) & C. Hebron (2) (1) Leverhulme Centre for Human Evolutionary Studies, The HenryWellcome Building, University of Cambridge, Fitzwilliam Street,Cambridge CB2 1QH, UK (2) 5b Friar's Stile Road, Richmond Hill, London TW10 6NM, UK * Author for correspondence (Email: t.richter@gmx.com)