Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T02:42:35.677Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dorothy Garrod's Excavations in the Late Mousterian of Shukbah Cave in Palestine Reconsidered

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 February 2014

Jane Callander
Jane Callander
Affiliation:
5 Sandra Court, Spencer Rd., Chiswick, London W4 3SU. e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Professor Dorothy A.E. Garrod's 1928 excavation of the Mousterian Layer D at Shukbah Cave in the Wadi en-Natuf (Palestine) has been neglected by prehistorians in favour of the Epipalaeolithic Layer B with its Natufian culture, for which Shukbah is the typesite. The excavation of Layer D is now re-examined with the aid of Garrod's own unpublished documentation and photographs, and the lithic industry analysed in the light of her conclusion that it was the work of a late Middle Palaeolithic hominid population, probably of Neanderthal type. Application of current analytical methods to approximately one half of the recovered assemblage confirms Garrod's correlation of the Shukbah Mousterian with Tabun Layer B in the later model for the Mount Carmel Levantine Palaeolithic succession. Comparison is made, and consistency demonstrated, with the late Mousterian industry of Kebara Cave (Mount Carmel, excavation 1982–90) and the Shukbah D assemblage is further considered in the wider regional context of approximately contemporary sites ranging from southern Jordan to northern Syria. Suggestions are made regarding future excavation at Shukbah.

Résumé

Les fouilles, effectuées par le Professeur Dorothy A.E. Garrod en 1928, de la couche moustérienne D de la grotte de Shukbah dans le Wadi en-Natuf (Palestine) ont été négligées par les préhistoriens en faveur de la couche B épipaléolithique et de sa culture natufienne, dont Shukbah est un site type. On rééxamine maintenant les fouilles de la couche D à l'aide des propres photographies et documents inédits de Garrod, et on analyse l'industrie lithique à la lumière de sa conclusion qu'il s'agissait du travail d'une population d'hominidés de la fin du paléolithique moyen, probablement de type Néanderthal.

En appliquant les méthodes analytiques courantes à environ la moitié de la collection recouvrée, on a pu confirmer la corrélation établie par Garrod entre le Moustérien de Shukbah et la couche B Tabun dans le modèle plus récent de la succession paléolithique Levantine du Mont Carmel. On fait la comparaison, et on démontre la cohérence, avec l'industrie du Moustérien tardif de la grotte de Kebara (Mont Carmel, fouillée entre 1982–90) enfin l'assemblage de Shukbah D est examiné plus en détail dans le contexte régional plus large de sites approximativement contemporains allant du sud de la Jordanie à la Syrie du Nord. On émet quelques suggestions quant à de futures excavations à Shukbah.

Zusammenfassung

Professor Dorothy A.E. Garrods Ausgrabung der Moustérien-Schicht D in der Shukbah Höhle im Wadi en-Natuf (Palästina) aus dem Jahr 1928 ist von Prähistorikern zugunsten der epi-paläolithischen Schicht (Natoufien-Kultur), für die die Shukbah die Schlüsselfundstelle darstellt, bisher vernachlässigt worden. Auf der Grundlage von Garrods eigener noch unpublizierter Dokumentation und Fotografien wurde die Ausgrabung der D-Schicht jetzt erneut untersucht. Vor dem Hintergrund von Garrods Aussagen, dass sie von einer späten mittelpaläolithischen Hominidenpopulation, wahrscheinlich vom Neanderthal-Typus, stammt, wurde die lithische Industrie erneut analysiert. Unter Anwendung neuester analytischer Methoden bei ungefähr der Hälfte des geborgenen Inventars, konnte für das spätere Modell der Mount Carmel Levantinischen paläolithischen Abfolge, Garrods Korrelation des Shukbah-Moustériens mit der Tabun-Schicht B bestätigt werden. In dem Beitrag wird ein Vergleich mit der späten Moustérien Industrie der Kebara Höhle (Mount Carmel, ausgegraben 1982–1990) durchgeführt und die Übereinstimmung gezeigt; zudem wird das Inventar von Shukbah D in den weiteren regionalen Kontext ungefähr gleichzeitiger Fundstellen gestellt, die vom südlichen Jordanien bis nach Nordsyrien reichen. Es wird angeregt, die Ausgrabungen in Shukbah fortzusetzen.

Résumen

La excavación llevada a cabo por la Profesora Dorothy A.E. Garrod en 1928 del estrato musteriense D en la Cueva de Shukbah en Wadi en-Natuf (Palestina) ha sido practicamente olvidada por los estudiosos de la prehistoria en favor del estrato Epipalaeolítico B con su cultura Natufia, de la que Shukbah es el yacimiento-tipo. La excavación del Estrato D ha sido ahora re-examinada con la ayuda de la documentación y fotografías inéditas de Garrod. Se ha analizado también la industria lítica con referencia a la conclusión de Garrod de que se trataba de la producción de una población homínida – probablemente de tipo Neándertal – en un periodo avanzado del Paleolítico Medio. La aplicación de los actuales métodos analíticos a aproximádamente la mitad del material recobrado confirma la correlación hecha por Garrod entre el musteriense de Shukbah y el Estrato B de Tabun, en el modelo más reciente propuesto para la serie del Paleolítico levantino del Monte Carmelo. Este trabajo compara, y demuestra la consistencia existente con la industria del Musteriense Tardío de la Cueva de Kebara (Monte Carmelo, excavada entre 1982–90) y considera el repertorio lítico de Shukbah D en el más amplio contexto regional de yacimientos aproximádamente contemporáneos en la zona que va desde el sur de Jordania al norte de Siria. El trabajo plantea una serie de sugerencias para futuras excavaciones en Shukbah.

Type
Research Article
Information
Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society , Volume 70 , 2004 , pp. 207 - 231
Copyright
Copyright © The Prehistoric Society 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Akazawa, T., Muhesen, S., Dodo, Y., Kondo, O., Mizoguchi, Y., Abe, Y., Nishiaki, Y., Ohta, S., Ochuchi, T. & Haydal, J. 1995. Neanderthal infant burial from the Dederiyeh Cave in Syria. Paléorient 21(2), 77–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akazawa, T., Aoki, K. & Bar-Yosef, O. (eds). 1998. Neandertals and Modern Humans in Western Asia. New York & London: Plenum PressGoogle Scholar
Akazawa, T., Muhesen, S., Ishida, H., Kondo, O. & Griggo, C. 1999. New Discovery of a Neanderthal Child Burial from the Dederiyeh Cave in Syria. Paléorient 25(2), 129–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bar-Yosef, O. 1998. The chronology of the Middle Palaeolithic of the Levant. In Akazawa, T., Aoki, K. & Bar-Yosef, O. (eds), Neandertals and Modern Humans in Western Asia, 39–56. New York & London: Plenum PressGoogle Scholar
Bar-Yosef, O. 2000. The Middle and Early Upper Palaeolithic in southwest Asia and neighbouring regions. In Bar-Yosef, O. & Pilbeam, D. (eds), The Geography of Neandertals and Modern Humans in Europe and the Greater Mediterranean, 107–56. Peabody Museum Bulletin 8Google Scholar
Bar-Yosef, O. & Callander, J. 1997. A forgotten archaeologist: the life of Francis Turville-Petre. Palestine Exploration Quarterly 129, 2–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bar-Yosef, O. & Callander, J. 1999. The woman from Tabun: Garrod's doubts in historical perspective, Journal of Human Evolution 37, 879–85CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bar-Yosef, O. & Dibble, H.L. 1995. Preface to The Definition and Interpretation of Levallois Technology. In Dibble, & Bar-Yosef, 1995, ix–xiiiGoogle Scholar
Bar-Yosef, O. & Meignen, L. 1992. Insights into Levantine Middle Palaeolithic cultural variability. In Dibble, H.L. & Mellars, P.A. (eds), The Middle Palaeolithic: adaptation, behaviour, and variability, 163–82. Philadelphia: University Museum of the University of PennsylvaniaGoogle Scholar
Bar-Yosef, O., Vandermeersch, B., Arensburg, B., Belfer-Cohen, A., Goldberg, P., Laville, H., Meignen, L., Rak, Y., Speth, J.D., Tchernov, E., Tillier, A-M. & Weiner, S. 1992. The Excavations in Kebara Cave, Mt. Carmel. Current Anthropology 33(5), 497–550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barkai, R., Gopher, A. & Friedmann, E. 1997. Prehistoric Occurrences in Western Samaria. The 1967–68 Survey. In Finkelstein, I. & Lederman, Z. (eds), Highlands of Many Cultures 857–81. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv UniversityGoogle Scholar
Bate, D.M.A. 1937. Palaeontology: the fossil fauna of the Wady El Mughara Caves. In Garrod, D.A.E. & Bate, D.M.A., The Stone Age of Mount Carmel, 135–240. Oxford: Clarendon PressGoogle Scholar
Bate, D.M.A. 1942. The fossil mammals of Shukbah. Appendix to D.A.E. Garrod, Excavations at the Cave of Shukbah, Palestine, 1928. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 8, 15–20Google Scholar
Baumler, M.F. 1995. Principles and properties of lithic core reduction: implications for Levallois technology. In Bar-Yosef, & Dibble, 1995, 11–23Google Scholar
Boëda, E. 1995. Levallois: a volumetric construction, methods, a technique. In Bar-Yosef, & Dibble, 1995, 41–68.Google Scholar
Boëda, E., Geneste, J.M., Griggo, C., Mercier, N., Muhesen, S., Reyss, J-L., Taha, A. & Valladas, H. 1999. A Levallois point embedded in the vertebra of a wild ass (Equus africanus): hafting, projectiles and Mousterian hunting weapons. Antiquity 73, 394–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, B. & Crossland, Z. 2000. New fieldwork at Shuqba Cave and in Wadi en-Natuf, Western Judea. Antiquity 74, 755–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
B.S.A.J./British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem, 1918–1960. Minute Book No.1, Archives of the Palestine Exploration Fund, LondonGoogle Scholar
Callander, J. & Bar-Yosef, O. 2000. Saving Mount Carmel Caves: a cautionary tale for archaeology in our times. Palestine Exploration Quarterly 132, 96–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caton-Thompson, G. 1969. Dorothy Annie Elizabeth Garrod 1892–1968. Proceedings of the British Academy 55, 338–61Google Scholar
Copeland, L. 1975. The Middle and Upper Palaeolithic of Lebanon and Syria in the light of recent research. In Wendorf, F. & Marks, A.E. (eds), Problems in Prehistory: North Africa and the Levant, 317–50. Dallas: Southern Methodist University PressGoogle Scholar
Copeland, L. 1983. Levallois/non–Levallois determinations in the Early Levant Mousterian: problems and questions for 1983. Paléorient 9(2), 15–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Copeland, L. 1999. The impact of Dorothy Garrod's excavations in the Lebanon on the Palaeolithic of the Near East. In Davies, W. & Charles, R. (eds), Dorothy Garrod and the Progress of the Palaeolithic, 152–66. Oxford: OxbowGoogle Scholar
Crew, H.L. 1975. An evaluation of the relationship between the Mousterian Complexes of the Eastern Mediterranean: a technological perspective. In Wendorf, F. & Marks, A.E. (eds), Problems in Prehistory: North Africa and the Levant, 427–37. Dallas: Southern Methodist University PressGoogle Scholar
Davies, W. 1999. Dorothy Annie Elizabeth Garrod (5th May, 1892–18th December, 1968). A Short Biography. In Davies, W. & Charles, R. (eds), Dorothy Garrod and the Progress of the Palaeolithic, 1–14. Oxford: OxbowGoogle Scholar
Davis, S.J.M. 1977. The ungulate remains from Kebara Cave. Eretz Israel 13. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 150–63Google Scholar
Debénath, A. & Dibble, H.L. 1994. Handbook of Palaeolithic Typology: Vol 1. Lower and Middle Palaeolithic of Europe. Philadelphia: University Museum, University of PennsylvaniaGoogle Scholar
Dibble, H.L. & Bar-Yosef, O. (eds). 1995. The Definition and Interpretation of Levallois Technology. Wisconsin: Monographs in World Archaeology 23Google Scholar
Gabunia, L., Vekua, A., Lordkipanidze, D., Swisher, C.C., Ferring, R., Justus, A., Nioradze, M., Tvalchrelidze, M., Antón, S.C., Bosinski, G., Jöris, O., Lumley, M-A. de, Majsuradze, G. & Mouskhelishvili, A. 2000. Earliest Pleistocene hominid cranial remains from Dmanisi, Republic of Georgia: taxonomy, geological setting, and age. Science 288, 1019–25CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Garrard, A.N. 1982. The Environmental implications of a reanalysis of the large mammal fauna from the Wadi El-Mughara Caves, Palestine. In Bintliffe, J.L. & van Zeist, W. (eds), Palaeoclimates, Palaeoenvironments and Human Communities in the Eastern Mediterranean Region in Later Prehistory, 165–87. Oxford: British Archaeological Report SI33Google Scholar
Garrod, D.A.E. 1926. The Upper Palaeolithic Age in Britain. Oxford: ClarendonGoogle Scholar
Garrod, D.A.E. 1928a. Excavation of a Palaeolithic cave in western Judaea. Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly Statement 60, 182–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrod, D.A.E. 1928b. Nova et vetera: a plea for a new method in Palæolithic archaeology. Presidential Address for 1928. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society of East Anglia 5, 260–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrod, D.A.E. 1928c. ‘Shukba 1928’. Unpublished handwritten excavation diary, 4 April–2nd June. In Box 63 [Inventory no. 33 431], Garrod Archive in the Fonds Suzanne Cassou de St. Mathurin, Musée des Antiquités Nationales, St. Germain-en-Laye 78103, FranceGoogle Scholar
Garrod, D.A.E. 1929a. Excavations in the Mugharet El-Wad, near Athlit. April–June 1929. Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly Statement 62, 220–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrod, D.A.E. 1929b. 25.2.29 – Catalogue of finds & Record of Divisions, handwritten document in British Mandate Administrative File ATQ/19/6. Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority Archives, Rockefeller MuseumGoogle Scholar
Garrod, D.A.E. 1931. Excavations at the Mugharet El-Wad, 1929. Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly Statement 64, 99–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrod, D.A.E. 1932. Report on Excavations in the Mugharet et-Tabun. Oct.-Dec. 1932. Handwritten unpublished MS signed and dated 30 December 1932. In British Mandate Administrative File 193. Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority Archives, Rockefeller MuseumGoogle Scholar
Garrod, D.A.E. 1942. Excavations at the Cave of Shukbah, Palestine, 1928. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 8, 1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrod, D.A.E. 1962. The Middle Palaeolithic of the Near East and the problem of Mount Carmel man (Huxley Memorial Lecture). Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 92, 232–51Google Scholar
Garrod, D.A.E. 1965. Pre-Aurignacian and Amudian: a comparative study of the earliest blade industries of the Near East (page proof of article for Rust–Festschrift). In Box 65, Garrod Archive in the Fonds Suzanne Cassou de St. Mathurin, Musée des Antiquités Nationales, St. Germain-en-Laye 78103, FranceGoogle Scholar
Garrod, D.A.E., Buxton, L.H.D., Eliot Smith, G. & Bate, D.M.A. 1928. Excavation of a Mousterian rock–shelter at Devil's Tower, Gibraltar. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 58, 33–113Google Scholar
Garrod, D.A.E. & Bate, D.M.A. 1937. The Stone Age of Mount Carmel, Vol. I. Oxford: Clarendon PressGoogle Scholar
Garrod, D.A.E. & Gardner, E.W. 1935. Pleistocene Coastal Deposits in Palestine. Nature 135, 108–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, S. 1999. British Archaeological Institutions in Mandatory Palestine, 1917–48. Palestine Exploration Quarterly 131, 115–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilead, I. 1995. Problems and prospects in the study of the Levallois technology in the Levant: the case of Fara II, Israel. In Dibble, & Bar-Yosef, 1995, 79–91Google Scholar
Gilead, I. & Grigson, C. 1984. Fara II: A Middle Palaeolithic open-air site in the northern Negev, Israel. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 50, 71–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, P. & Bar-Yosef, O. 1998. Site formation processes in Kebara and Hayonim Caves and their significance in Levantine prehistoric caves. In Akazawa, et al. (eds) 1998, 107–25Google Scholar
Goren-Inbar, N. 1990. Quneitra: A Mousterian Site on the Golan Heights. QEDEM 31. Jerusalem: Institute of Archaeology, Hebrew UniversityGoogle Scholar
Goren-Inbar, N. & Belfer-Cohen, A. 1998. The technological abilities of the Levantine Mousterians. In Akazawa, et al. (eds) 1998, 205–21Google Scholar
Grün, R. & Stringer, C.B. 2000. Tabun revisited: revised ESR chronology and new ESR and U–series analyses of dental material from Tabun C1. Journal of Human Evolution 39, 601–12CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Henry, D.O. 1992. Transhumance during the Late Levantine Mousterian. In Dibble, H.L. & Mellars, P.A. (eds), The Middle Palaeolithic: adaptation, behaviour, and variability, 143–62. Philadelphia: University Museum, University of PennsylvaniaGoogle Scholar
Henry, D.O. 1995. Late Levantine Mousterian patterns of adaptation and cognition. In Henry, D.O. (ed.), Prehistoric Cultural Ecology and Evolution, 107–32. New York & London: Plenum PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henry, D.O. 1998a. The Middle Palaeolithic of Jordan. In Henry, D.O. (ed.), The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan, 23–38. Oxford: British Archaeological Report S705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henry, D.O. 1998b. Intrasite spatial patterns and behavioural modernity. Indications from the Late Levantine Mousterian rockshelter of Tor Faraj, southern Jordan. In Akazawa, et al. (eds) 1998, 127–42Google Scholar
Hooijer, D. 1961. The fossil vertebrates of Ksar Akil, a Palaeolithic rockshelter in Lebanon. Zoologische Verhandelingen 49, 4–65Google Scholar
Hovers, E. 1998. The Lithic assemblages of Amud Cave: implications for understanding the end of the Mousterian in the Levant. In Akazawa, et al. (eds) 1998, 143–63Google Scholar
Hovers, E., Rak, Y., Lavi, R. & Kimbel, W.H. 1995. Hominid remains from Amud Cave in the context of the Levantine Middle Palaeolithic. Paléorient 21(2), 47–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hublin, J-J. 1998. Climatic changes, paleogeography and the evolution of the Neandertals. In Akazawa, et al. (eds) 1998, 295–310Google Scholar
Hublin, J-J. 2000. Modern–nonmodern hominid interactions: a Mediterranean perspective. In Bar-Yosef, O. & Pilbeam, D. (eds), The Geography of Neandertals and Modern Humans in Europe and the Greater Mediterranean, 157–82. Cambridge MA: Peabody Museum Bulletin 8Google Scholar
Hublin, J-J. 2002. An Assessment of the Value of the Stage 3 Project Approach for European Palaeoanthropology. Lecture on 22 June, Godwin Stage 3 Conference, Cambridge 19–22 JuneGoogle Scholar
Jelinek, A.J. 1982. The Middle Palaeolithic in the southern Levant, with comments on the appearance of modern Homo sapiens. In Ronen, A. (ed), The Transition from Lower to Middle Palaeolithic and the Origin of Modern Man, 57–104. Oxford: British Archaeological Report S151Google Scholar
Karge, P. 1917. Rephaïm. Die vorgeschichtliche Kultur Palästinas und Phöniziens. MünsterGoogle Scholar
Keith, A. 1931. New Discoveries Relating to the Antiquity of Man. London: Williams & NorgateGoogle Scholar
MacCurdy, G.G. 1958. It Happened in my Time: the Autobiography of George Grant MacCurdy. Unpublished MS in the papers of George Grant MacCurdy: 995–3, Box 6, Peabody Museum Archives, Harvard University.Google Scholar
Mallon, A. 1924. Quelques stations préhistorique de Palestine. Mélanges de l'Université Saint-Joseph 10, 191 ffGoogle Scholar
McCown, T.D. & Keith, A. 1939. The Stone Age of Mount Carmel, Vol. 2: the fossil human remains from the Levalloiso–Mousterian. Oxford: Clarendon PressGoogle Scholar
Meignen, L. 1995. Levallois lithic production systems in the Middle Palaeolithic of the Near East: the case of the unidirectional method. In Dibble, & Bar-Yosef, O. (eds) 1995, 361–79Google Scholar
Meignen, L. 1998. Hayonim Cave lithic assemblages in the context of the Near Eastern Middle Paleolithic: a preliminary report. In Akazawa, et al. (eds) 1998, 165–80Google Scholar
Meignen, L. 2000. Early Middle Palaeolithic blade technology in south western Asia. Acta Anthropologica Sinica (supplement to Vol. 19), 158–68Google Scholar
Meignen, L. & Bar-Yosef, O. 1992. Middle Palaeolithic variability in Kebara Cave, Mount Carmel, Israel. In Akazawa, T., Aoki, K. & Kimura, T. (eds), The Evolution and Dispersal of Modern Humans in Asia, 129–48. Tokyo: Hokusen-ShaGoogle Scholar
Mellars, P.A. 1996. The Neanderthal Legacy. Princeton: University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mercier, N., Valladas, H., Valladas, G., Reyss, J.L., Jelinek, A., Meignen, L. & Joron, J.L. 1995. TL dates of burnt flints from Jelinek's excavations at Tabun and their implications. Journal of Archaeological Science 22, 495–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nishiaki, Y. & Copeland, L. 1992. Keoue Cave, Northern Lebanon, and its place in the context of the Levantine Mousterian. In Akazawa, T., Aoki, K. & Kimura, T. (eds), The Evolution and Dispersal of Modern Humans in Asia, 107–27. Tokyo: Hokusen-ShaGoogle Scholar
Oakley, K.P., Campbell, B.G. & Molleson, T.I. 1975. Catalogue of Fossil Hominids, 2nd edn. Part 3, Americas, Asia, Australasia. London: British Museum (Natural History)Google Scholar
Ohnuma, K. 1992. The significance of Layer B (Square 8–19) of the Amud Cave (Israel) in the Levantine Levalloiso–Mousterian: a technological study. In Akazawa, T., Aoki, K. & Kimura, T. (eds), The Evolution and Dispersal of Modern Humans in Asia, 88–106. Tokyo: Hokusen-ShaGoogle Scholar
Ovchinnikov, I.V., Götherströms, A., Romanova, G.P., Kharltonov, V.M., Lidén, K. & Goodwin, W. 2000. Molecular analysis of Neanderthal DNA from the northern Caucasus. Nature 404, 490–3CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rabinovich, R. 1990. Taphonomic research on the faunal assemblage from the Quneitra Site. In Goren-Inbar, 1990, 189–219Google Scholar
Ronen, A. 1977. Mousterian sites in red loam in the coastal plain of Mount Carmel. Eretz Israel 13, 183–90. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration SocietyGoogle Scholar
Ronen, A. 1995. The Levallois method as a cultural constraint. In Dibble, & Bar-Yosef, O. (eds) 1995, 293–304Google Scholar
Schick, T. & Stekelis, M. 1977. Mousterian assemblages in Kebara Cave, Mount Carmel. Eretz Israel 13, 97–149. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society.Google Scholar
Schlanger, N. 1994. Mindful technology: unleashing the chaine operatoire for an archaeology of mind. In Renfrew, A.C. & Zubrow, E.B.W. (eds), The Ancient Mind, 143–51. Cambridge: University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shea, J.J. 1995. Behavioural factors affecting the production of Levallois points in the Levantine Mousterian. In Dibble, & Bar-Yosef, (eds) 1995, 279–92Google Scholar
Shea, J.J. 1998. Neanderthal and early modern human behavioral variability. Current Anthopology 39 Supplement, S45–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, P.J., Callander, J., Bahn, P.G. & Pinçon, G. 1997. Dorothy Garrod in words and pictures. Antiquity 72 265–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solecki, R.L. & Solecki, R.S. 1995. The Mousterian industries of Yabroud Shelter I: a reconsideration. In Dibble, & Bar-Yosef, (eds) 1995, 381–97Google Scholar
Tchernov, E. 1998. The faunal sequence of the southwest Asian Middle Palaeolithic in relation to hominid dispersal events. In Akazawa, et al. (eds) 1998, 77–90Google Scholar
Turville-Petre, F. 1927. Researches in Prehistoric Galilee 1925–1926. London: Council of the British School of Archaeology in JerusalemGoogle Scholar
Van Peer, P. 1992. The Levallois Reduction Strategy. Wisconsin: Monographs in World Prehistory 13Google Scholar
Weinstein-Evron, M. 2003. In B or not in B: a reappraisal of the Natufian burials at Shukbah Cave, Judea, Palestine. Antiquity 77, 96–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ziaei, M., Schwarz, H.P., Hall, C.M. & Grün, R. 1990. Radiometric dating of the Mousterian site at Quneitra. In Goren–Inbar, 1990, 00–00Google Scholar
Zumoffen, G. 1900. La Phénicie avant les Phéniciens. Beirut: Imprimerie CatholiqueGoogle Scholar