Intensive Field Survey in the Zarzi Region

THE EARLY NEOLITHIC OF THE EASTERN FERTILE CRESCENT: EXCAVATIONS AT BESTANSUR AND SHIMSHARA, IRAQI KURDISTAN CENTRAL ZAGROS ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROJECT CZAP REPORTS VOLUME 2 EditEd by RogER MatthEws, wEndy MatthEws, KaMal RashEEd RahEEM and aMy RichaRdson Oxford & Philadelphia Published in the United Kingdom in 2020 by OXBOW BOOKS The Old Music Hall, 106–108 Cowley Road, Oxford, OX4 1JE and in the United States by OXBOW BOOKS 1950 Lawrence Road, Havertown, PA 19083 © Oxbow Books and the individual authors 2020 Hardcover Edition: ISBN 978-1-78925-526-3 Digital Edition: ISBN 978-1-78925-527-0 (epub) A CIP record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Control Number: 2020934985 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission from the publisher in writing. Printed in Malta by Melita Press Typeset in the UK by Frabjous Books ~ www.frabjousbooks.com For a complete list of Oxbow titles, please contact: UNITED KINGDOM Oxbow Books Telephone (01865) 241249 Email: oxbow@oxbowbooks.com www.oxbowbooks.com UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Oxbow Books Telephone (610) 853-9131, Fax (610) 853-9146 Email: queries@casemateacademic.com www.casemateacademic.com/oxbow Oxbow Books is part of the Casemate Group Front cover: Excavations at the Early Neolithic site of Bestansur, Shahrizor Plain, Sulaimani province, Kurdistan Region, Iraq Photo: Roger Matthews, University of Reading CONTENTS Contributors...................................................................................................................................................................................... v Preface and Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................................................................vii PART 1: INTRODUCTION 1. The Neolithic transition in the Eastern Fertile Crescent: project themes, aims and objectives ................................. 1 Roger Matthews, Wendy Matthews, Amy Richardson and Kamal Rasheed Raheem PART 2: ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL FIELDWORK 2. Excavation, recording and sampling methodologies ........................................................................................................ 19 Amy Richardson, Roger Matthews and Wendy Matthews 3. Palaeoclimate and environment of the Iraqi Central Zagros .......................................................................................... 35 Matt Bosomworth, Dominik Fleitmann and Maria Rabbani 4. Intensive field survey in the Zarzi Region .......................................................................................................................... 43 Roger Matthews, Wendy Matthews, Amy Richardson and Kamal Raeuf Aziz 5. Fluxgate gradiometry survey at Bestansur......................................................................................................................... 57 David Thornley 6. Geoarchaeological borehole, sediment and microfossil analyses at Bestansur ........................................................... 65 Maria Rabbani, Alessandro Guaggenti, Chris Green, Rob Batchelor and Wendy Matthews 7. Ethnoarchaeological research in Bestansur: insights into vegetation, land-use, animals and animal dung .......... 91 Sarah Elliott, Robin Bendrey, Jade Whitlam and Kamal Raeuf Aziz 8. Conservation .......................................................................................................................................................................... 107 Jessica S. Johnson 9. Excavations and contextual analyses: Bestansur............................................................................................................. 115 Amy Richardson, Roger Matthews, Wendy Matthews, Sam Walsh, Kamal Raeuf Aziz and Adam Stone 10. Excavations and contextual analyses: Shimshara ........................................................................................................... 177 Wendy Matthews, Roger Matthews, Kamal Raeuf Aziz and Amy Richardson 11. Radiocarbon dating of Bestansur and Shimshara ........................................................................................................... 187 Pascal Flohr, Roger Matthews, Wendy Matthews, Amy Richardson and Dominik Fleitmann PART 3: MICRO-CONTEXTUAL AND BIOARCHAEOLOGICAL APPROACHES 12. Sustainability of early sedentary agricultural communities: new insights from high-resolution microstratigraphic and micromorphological analyses................................................................................................... 197 Wendy Matthews iv Contents 13. Integrated micro-analysis of the built environment and resource use: high-resolution microscopy and geochemical, mineralogical, phytolith and biomolecular approaches ................................................................ 265 Wendy Matthews, Aroa García-Suárez, Marta Portillo, Chris Speed, Georgia Allistone, Ian Bull, Jessica Godleman and Matthew Almond 14. Microarchaeology: the small traces of Neolithic activities............................................................................................ 287 Ingrid Iversen 15. Animal remains and human-animal-environment relationships at Early Neolithic Bestansur and Shimshara .................................................................................................................................................... 311 Robin Bendrey, Wim Van Neer, Salvador Bailon, Juan Rofes, Jeremy Herman, Mel Morlin and Tom Moore 16. Early Neolithic animal management and ecology: integrated analysis of faecal material ...................................... 353 Sarah Elliott with contributions from Wendy Matthews and Ian Bull 17. Bestansur molluscs: regional context and local activities ............................................................................................. 397 Ingrid Iversen 18. The charred plant remains from Early Neolithic levels at Bestansur and Shimshara .............................................. 411 Jade Whitlam, Charlotte Diffey, Amy Bogaard and Mike Charles 19. Human remains from Bestansur: demography, diet and health ................................................................................... 429 Sam Walsh PART 4: MATERIAL CULTURE AND COMMUNITY ARCHAEOLOGY 20. Early Neolithic chipped stone worlds of Bestansur and Shimshara ............................................................................ 461 Roger Matthews, Amy Richardson and Osamu Maeda 21. Material culture and networks of Bestansur and Shimshara ........................................................................................ 533 Amy Richardson 22. Ground stone tools and technologies ................................................................................................................................ 567 David Mudd 23. Public archaeology at Bestansur ........................................................................................................................................ 613 Rhi Smith, Othman Fattah, Hero Salih, Hawar Hawas, Mathew Britten, Amy Richardson and Wendy Matthews PART 5: THEMATIC SYNTHESIS AND DISCUSSION 24. The Neolithic transition in the Eastern Fertile Crescent: thematic synthesis and discussion ................................ 623 Wendy Matthews, Roger Matthews, Amy Richardson and Kamal Rasheed Raheem Bibliography.................................................................................................................................................................................. 657 CONTRIBUTORS gEoRgia allistonE Department of Archaeology University of Reading aRoa gaRcía-suáREz School of Oriental Studies University of Oxford MatthEw alMond Department of Chemistry University of Reading JEssica godlEMan Department of Chemistry University of Reading salvadoR bailon Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle Sorbonne University, Paris chRis gREEn Quaternary Scientific (QUEST) University of Reading Rob batchEloR Quaternary Scientific (QUEST) University of Reading alEssandRo guaggEnti Department of Archaeology University of Reading Robin bEndREy School of History, Classics and Archaeology University of Edinburgh hawaR hawas Department of Archaeology Salahaddin University, Erbil aMy bogaaRd School of Archaeology University of Oxford JEREMy hERMan Natural Sciences Department National Museums of Scotland, Edinburgh Matt bosoMwoRth Department of Archaeology University of Reading ingRid ivERsEn Department of Archaeology University of Reading MathEw bRittEn East Lancashire Railway Manchester JEssica s. Johnson Museum Conservation Institute Smithsonian Institution, Washington DC ian bull School of Chemistry University of Bristol osaMu MaEda School of Humanities and Culture University of Tsukuba MiKE chaRlEs School of Archaeology University of Oxford RogER MatthEws Department of Archaeology University of Reading chaRlottE diffEy Department of Archaeology University of Reading wEndy MatthEws Department of Archaeology University of Reading saRah Elliott Department of Archaeology and Anthropology Bournemouth University toM MooRE Independent Stroud othMan fattah Department of Archaeology Sulaimani University, Sulaimaniyah MEl MoRlin School of History, Classics and Archaeology University of Edinburgh doMiniK flEitMann Department of Environmental Sciences University of Basel david Mudd Department of Archaeology University of Reading Pascal flohR EAMENA, School of Archaeology University of Oxford MaRta PoRtillo Spanish National Research Council Institución Milá y Fontanals, Barcelona vi Contributors MaRia Rabbani Department of Archaeology University of Reading chRis sPEEd Analytical Technical Services University of Reading KaMal RashEEd RahEEM Sulaimaniyah Directorate of Antiquities and Heritage Sulaimaniyah adaM stonE Independent London aMy RichaRdson Department of Archaeology University of Reading david thoRnlEy School of Archaeology, Geography and Environmental Science University of Reading Juan RofEs Department of Archaeological Studies University of the Philippines wiM van nEER Laboratory of Biodiversity and Evolutionary Genetics Katholieke Universiteit Leuven KaMal RaEuf aziz Sulaimaniyah Directorate of Antiquities and Heritage Sulaimaniyah saM walsh Department of Archaeology University of Reading hERo salih Sulaimaniyah Directorate of Antiquities and Heritage Sulaimaniyah JadE whitlaM School of Archaeology University of Oxford Rhi sMith University Museums and Special Collections Services University of Reading PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This volume is the final report on excavations, survey and analyses undertaken within the Central Zagros Archaeological Project (CZAP) between autumn 2011 and summer 2017. The project’s activities in this period were generously supported by a range of funding bodies, to all of whom we owe a huge debt of gratitude. Above all, from 2011 to 2014 investigations under the project title ‘Sedentism and Resource Management in the Neolithic of the Central Zagros’ were supported by a major research grant from the UK Arts and Humanities Research Council (Grant AH/H034315/2). Subsequent research was funded by the National Geographic Society (Grant HJ-R005-17), the British Institute for the Study of Iraq, and Gerald Averay Wainwright Fund at the University of Oxford. Additional support was received from the University of Reading’s School of Archaeology, Geography and Environmental Science, and the University of Reading’s Undergraduate Research Opportunities scheme to develop outreach and student involvement programmes, and to support borehole and phytolith analyses by Maria Rabbani and Georgia Allistone. A grant from the British Academy International Partnership and Mobility scheme (Grant IP090128) supported the project ‘RADII: Recording Archaeological Data from Iraq and Iran’ from 2010 to 2013, which provided specialist training for Iraqi and Iranian archaeologists in the use of integrated archaeological data-bases. Within this scheme three sessions of training, in London, Ankara and Sulaimaniyah, were provided by Mike Rains to a total of c. 50 archaeologists from Iran and Iraq. This project has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement No 787264), 2018–2023, which has assisted considerably with completion of this volume. The editors and authors wish to express deepest gratitude to our colleagues in Iraq who have made this project both possible and thoroughly rewarding, in particular: staff at Sulaimaniyah Directorate of Antiquities and Heritage, above all the Director Kamal Rasheed Raheem, and our government representatives who have been and remain integral members of the team: Kamal Raeuf Aziz, Sami Hama Rashid, Sabr Ahmed Sabr and Parween Yawar Manda; staff at Slemani Museum, directed by Hashim Hama Abdullah; staff at Erbil Directorate of Antiquities and Heritage, directed formerly by Abubakir Zainaddin (Mala Awat) and currently by Kaifi Mustafa Ali; staff at the Rania Office of Antiquities; and staff at the State Board of Antiquities and Heritage, Baghdad, directed formerly by Qais Hussein Rasheed. We owe a huge debt of gratitude to the villagers of Bestansur for hosting us and working with us in the field, laboratory and house through many months of fieldwork, in particular to Umaid Hama Rasheed, Nawruz Mohammed, Amir Mohammed, Raheem Mahmud and Khalid Rasheed, as well as all the men and women of Bestansur who have joined us on the project. We sincerely thank Simone Mühl for her support at the project’s initiation, Jesper Eidem for help and support in working at Shimshara, Melinda Zeder for her invaluable academic input as Project Advisor through 2011-2014, and Mike Charles and Amy Bogaard for expert archaeobotanical support throughout the project. The editors wish to thank academic and support staff in the Department of Archaeology, School of Archaeology, Geography and Environmental Science, and in central support at the University of Reading. We also thank Steve Mithen and Tobias Richter for kindly reviewing this volume in draft and enhancing it through their critical insights and advice. All remaining errors are solely the fault of the editors. The project teams in the field, 2011–2017, have included those listed in the Team Table (affiliation at time of participation). We thank them all for their hard work and dedication to the project. Additionally, for Chapter 12 the author is very grateful to Sandy Harrison for comments on a draft of part of the text and to QUEST and Aroa García-Suárez for manufacture of the thin-sections. For Chapter 13, the fieldwork and research conducted by Marta Portillo was supported by EU Horizon 2020 MICROARCHEODUNG project (H2020MSCA-IF-2015-702529). The authors of Chapters 13 and 16 thank the Natural Environment Research Council, UK, for supporting GC-MS analyses at the NERC Scientific viii Preface and Acknowledgements Support and Facilities, Bristol (Contract No. R8/H10/63; Application no. lsmsf_bristol_049). We are very grateful to Graham Luke, School of Biological Sciences for the training and support in the CLSM analyses. We are grateful to QUEST for conducting the pH, particle size, and XRD analyses, including G. P. Warren. For Chapter 15, the authors thank Louise Martin (University College London) for kind support and digital resources/databases; Judith White and Jo Cooper (Natural History Museum, Tring) and; Andrew Kitchener and Zena Timmons (National Museums of Scotland) for access to the extensive comparative osteological reference collections held in these institutions. Wim Wouters (RBINS, Brussels) is acknowledged for his help with the identification of the fish remains. The contribution of Wim Van Neer to this chapter presents research results of the Interuniversity Team table. Roger Matthews Wendy Matthews Kamal Rasheed Raheem Amy Richardson Kamal Raeuf Aziz Sami Hama Rashid Sabr Ahmed Parween Yawar Manda Hero Salih Ahmed Halala Salih Ahmed Sam Walsh Robin Bendrey Sarah Elliott Jade Whitlam David Mudd Ingrid Iversen Dominik Fleitmann Pascal Flohr David Thornley Mike Charles Gemma Martin Chris Beckman Zoe Robinson Adam Stone Jeroen de Reu Aroa García-Suárez Garcia Suarez Nick Harper Will Owen Matt Bosomworth Alessandro Guaggenti Tom Moore Lisa Cooper Zuhair Rijib Chelsea Gardner Lynn Welton Sheri Pak Miles Tysoe Rory Williams-Burrell Agnieszka Trambowicz Nichirwan Khosravi Golnaz Ahadi Rosie Everett Zoe Richardson Mathew Britten Rhi Smith Rob Batchelor Alice Williams Hawar Najmadin Hawas Jessica Johnson Nyan Nasser Julie Unruh Nedal Haj Darwich Marta Portillo Kayce Herrick Samira Idriss Maria Rabbani Mubariz Rabbani University of Reading University of Reading Sulaimaniyah Directorate of Antiquities and Heritage University of Reading Sulaimaniyah Directorate of Antiquities and Heritage Sulaimaniyah Directorate of Antiquities and Heritage Sulaimaniyah Directorate of Antiquities and Heritage Sulaimaniyah Directorate of Antiquities and Heritage Sulaimaniyah Directorate of Antiquities and Heritage Sulaimaniyah Directorate of Antiquities and Heritage University of Reading University of Reading University of Reading University of Reading University of Reading University of Reading University of Reading University of Reading University of Reading University of Sheffield University of Sheffield University of Reading Oxford Brookes University University of Cambridge University of Ghent University of Reading University of Reading University of Reading University of Reading University of Reading University of Reading University of British Columbia University of Baghdad University of British Columbia University of British Columbia University of British Columbia University of Reading University of Reading University of Reading Bu Ali Sina University University of Tehran University of Reading University of Reading University of Reading University of Reading University of Reading University of Oxford University of Cairo IICAH Erbil IICAH trainee Erbil Independent Independent University of Reading University of Reading University of Reading University of Reading University of Reading Project Co-Director, lithics, excavation Project Co-Director, micromorphology, excavation Co-Director Project Assistant Director, data-base, excavation, pXRF, finds Chief Representative, excavation Representative, excavation Representative, excavation Representative, excavation Excavation Excavation Human remains Zooarchaeology Micromorphology, excavation, pXRF analyses Archaeobotany Groundstone Microarchaeology Cave survey Excavation, 14C dating Geophysics Archaeobotany Archaeobotany Photography, excavation Excavation, lithics Excavation 3D recording Excavation Excavation Excavation Excavation Excavation Excavation Director of Iron Age excavations Ceramics Excavation Excavation, surveying, ceramics Excavation, photogrammetry Excavation Excavation Excavation Excavation Archaeobotany Excavation Excavation Excavation, outreach Outreach Coring Archaeobotany Excavation Conservation Conservation Conservation Excavation Animal ethnoarchaeology Excavation Excavation Excavation Excavation Preface and Acknowledgements Attraction Poles Programme – Belgian Science Policy. Karin K. Lindboe is thanked for discussion on marrow use from phalanges. For Chapter 18, the authors acknowledge the support of a NERC/AHRC grant (NF/2016/2/5) for 14C dates and a British Academy grant (pf170053) which supported some of the writing up. For Chapter 22, the author wishes to thank Wendy Matthews, Danny Rosenberg and Anna Stroulia for their helpful suggestions on comparanda and interpretation. For Chapter 23, Wendy Matthews and Amy Richardson wish to thank the Director and staff at the Slemani Museum for the opportunity to collaborate in the new Prehistory Gallery, including its Director Hashim Hama Abdullah, Shazad Jaseem Tofiq, Rebin Mohammed Rashid, and Dr Rozhen Mohammed-Amin, Sulaimani Polytechnic University. Although in some fields it is common practice to round off radiocarbon dates to the nearest decade (Mook 1986), we adhere to the precise given date throughout the volume. As Millard (2014) advises, where higher precision is required precise dates should be adhered to, ix without decadal rounding off. Given the extremely tight stratigraphy and associated chronology of the human burials at Bestansur, Trench 10, Space 50, in particular, where individual burial events appear to be separated by very short timespans, we prefer to adhere to precise dates throughout the volume. For assistance with production of this volume the editors express special thanks to David Mudd for his tireless support and generous input of time and expertise. At Oxbow Books we wish to thank the production team headed by Julie Gardiner, for their support, patience and understanding during the gestation and production of this volume. Interim reports on all field seasons at Bestansur, Shimshara and Zarzi, along with much other relevant information, are available at: https://www.czap.org/. A new 5-year phase of the project, entitled MENTICA Middle East Neolithic Transition: Integrated Community Approaches, commenced in October 2018 supported by a European Research Council Advanced Grant (Grant ERC-AdG 787264: https://research.reading.ac.uk/mentica/). The Editors 4. IN T E N S I V E F IE L D SURV E Y IN T HE Z A RZI RE G IO N Roger Matthews, Wendy Matthews, Amy Richardson and Kamal Raeuf Aziz Research aims and context The CZAP team conducted a short season of intensive field survey in January 2013, in the region of Zarzi, the type site for the Epipalaeolithic lithic industries of the Eastern Fertile Crescent (Wahida 1981).The cave or rock shelter site of Zarzi is located approximately halfway between the two Neolithic sites of Bestansur and Shimshara (Fig. 4.1). The survey included systematic, intensive field-walking in transects in order to search for archaeological sites, including isolated single finds. The emphasis of the survey was on early prehistoric issues with the particular aim to identify sites of Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene date that would be approximately contemporary with the project’s research focus on the transition from hunter-forager to farmer-herder in the Early Neolithic period, c. 10,000–7000 BC. The project permit issued by the Directorates of Antiquities and Heritage in Erbil and Sulaimaniyah allows for archaeological survey by the CZAP team in a region 15 × 15km, with the Chemi Tabin valley of Zarzi located in the north of the survey region (Fig. 4.2). We also undertook initial exploration of appropriate cave sites, in particular with the aim to identify potential candidates for speleothem analysis in order to contribute new evidence for research into the past climate of the region, including the interaction between changes in climate and human ecology and social interactions during the Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene (Chapter 3). The region of Zarzi and the Chemi Tabin valley was chosen for intensive survey partly because of the important discoveries made at Zarzi cave, where an Epipalaeolithic sequence was excavated in the 1920s and 1980s (see below; Garrod 1930; Wahida 1981). Wahida argued that there were likely to be seasonally occupied open-air sites within the vicinity of Zarzi cave given climatic amelioration after the Late Glacial Maximum and during the Bølling–Allerød interstadial in particular. Through intensive survey of the environs of Zarzi we aimed to situate the Epipalaeolithic occupation of the cave within a wider landscape context, and to investigate the possibility of there being archaeological sites in this valley and its adjacent region which span the transition from the Epipalaeolithic into the Early Neolithic. Methodology: systematic intensive fieldwalking Archaeological surveys in Iraq have generally focused on readily identifiable components in the landscape such as tells, route-ways and rock-cut sites, employing what may be called an extensive survey methodology. There has so far been little use in Iraq of systematic, intensive field survey techniques that have been developed in Mediterranean archaeology and frequently applied in landscape research projects in countries such as Italy, Greece, Bulgaria and, occasionally, Turkey (Matthews and Glatz 2009). Only with the application of systematic, intensive techniques can truly representative quantities and types of archaeological material be recovered and adequate emphasis given to less obvious features in the archaeological landscape such as lithic scatters or small rural or camp sites. It is essential to employ a methodology appropriate to the discovery and recording of small-scale early prehistoric sites, as otherwise sites of this date are likely to be underrepresented and may lie buried below alluvium or 44 Roger Matthews, Wendy Matthews, Amy Richardson and Kamal Raeuf Aziz Figure 4.1. Location of Zarzi in relation to Bestansur and Shimshara. colluvium. The potential for intensive field survey in the region, however, has been highlighted by the results from Palaeolithic-focused survey along the Tigris valley north of Mosul, for example, which detected no fewer than 22 small-scale Lower Palaeolithic sites in an area of 15km2, including spreads of hand-axes and chopping tools (Inizan 1985; Mazurowski 1987). A similarly intensive foot survey in western Kermanshah province in Iran, close to the border of Iraq, identified large numbers of Upper Palaeolithic and Epipalaeolithic sites, the latter with lithics in the Zarzian tradition (Biglari and Shidrang 2016). During the January 2013 Zarzi survey season, a total of ten transects, each 2.5km long, was walked in three major zones, with a consistent team of six members walking at 20m intervals, thus covering a breadth of 100m (Figs 4.3–4.5). Survey zones and transects within the zones were not randomly chosen but were selected on the basis of a range of factors, including type of landscape, nature of local resources, and proximity to known archaeological sites. We carried out the survey in winter as the ground vegetation cover is low at this time of year and thus visibility of artefacts and cultural debris on the ground is high. Weather conditions, however, were mixed and on occasion stormy, but there was no snow cover and we were able to walk transects for three full days and to conduct cave survey for two further days. We will conduct further periods of survey in the Zarzi region in future seasons in accordance with the CZAP permit, to build on the important sites discovered here. The location of the three survey zones is indicated on the map, Figure 4.2. Within these zones ten transects were walked (Zone A: Transects 1–6; Zone B: Transects 7–9; Zone C: Transect 10). The priority was to survey along the major river valleys of the 4. Intensive Field Survey in the Zarzi Region 45 Figure 4.2. 15 × 15km extent of CZAP Zarzi survey region, showing location of intensive survey zones and visited caves. Figure 4.3. Intensive field-walking in Zone A, below Qizkapan Iron Age rock-cut site (top left). 46 Roger Matthews, Wendy Matthews, Amy Richardson and Kamal Raeuf Aziz Figure 4.4. Intensive field-walking in Zone B. Figure 4.5. Intensive field-walking in Zone C. 4. Intensive Field Survey in the Zarzi Region 47 Table 4.1. Archaeological sites investigated during the Zarzi survey. Zone/Transect Site Name Material A A A/3 A/1 C/10 C/10 ZS1 ZS2 ZS3 ZS4 ZS5 ZS6 Zarzi cave Zarzi slopes None Holina None None Lithics Lithics Lithics Lithics Hand-axe Lithics, pottery region, walking on the terraces parallel with the river courses, as these are prime locations for sites close to water sources and above the flood zone. In total, six archaeological sites were located and investigated during the survey, as summarised in Table 4.1. Each site was assigned a site code and details of the location and extent recorded. The identified sites are discussed below within their chronological contexts. Given the low quantities of cultural materials encountered on these sites, we collected 100% of finds from the surface of all detected sites. All finds from the survey are stored in the dedicated CZAP store within Sulaimaniyah Directorate of Antiquities. Results A Lower Palaeolithic find In the context of Palaeolithic research, one of the most significant sites is the bifacial Acheulian hand-axe find at ZS5 in Zone C, Transect 10 (Figs 4.6–4.7), at a location 725m above sea level on an eroded terrace of a small stream near its confluence with the Chemi Tabin (Figs 4.8–4.9). The site appears to consist of a single hand-axe, perhaps discarded after use or re-deposited from elsewhere by natural agencies. We could not find any associated lithic material in the vicinity. The handaxe has excellent parallels with material excavated at the Lower-Middle Palaeolithic site of Barda Balka (Wright and Howe 1951; Braidwood and Howe 1960; Howe 2014: pls 9–11), located only 25km to the southsouthwest at an altitude of 740m above sea level, as well as dispersed artefact scatters in the region of Barda Balka and Jarmo (Braidwood and Howe 1960: 62). While difficult to date precisely, Rowan’s recent reassessment of Howe’s original dating estimation suggests that Barda Balka, and therefore the handaxe from ZS5, must be dated to c. 250,000 BP or earlier and that upland sites such as Barda Balka, Shanidar and Hazar Merd represent summer camps for seasonally mobile hunter-gatherers during the Lower and Middle Palaeolithic (Rowan 2014: ix–xi). Archaeological surveys in the Iranian high Zagros to the southeast and east have recovered evidence for a significant Lower Palaeolithic presence, although no sites of this date have been excavated (Biglari and Dating Epipalaeolithic (‘Zarzian’) Epipalaeolithic (‘Zarzian’) Epipalaeolithic (‘Zarzian’) ? Lower Palaeolithic (‘Barda Balkan’) Chalcolithic/Early Bronze Age Shidrang 2006; Conard et al. 2013; Heydari-Guran 2014). Faunal remains from Barda Balka (Fraser 1953; Howe 2014: 22) give a unique insight into the ecology of the lower Zagros region during this far-distant time, with evidence for Indian elephant, rhinoceros, large cattle, sheep or goat and, most commonly, a type of equid which may be onager. It is likely that many of these species were hunted or scavenged at these small, dispersed sites by hominin groups, who we cannot identify to species due to the absence of physical anthropological remains. Intriguingly, edible land snails, Helix salomonica, also occur amongst the Barda Balka deposits but it is not clear whether they were used as a food resource at that date. The solo find of an Acheulian hand-axe at site ZS5 adds important knowledge to our sparse understanding of the distribution and extent of Lower Palaeolithic activity in this region of Southwest Asia. The Epipalaeolithic of the region and Zarzi cave We located a highly significant Epipalaeolithic site at ZS3 in Zone A, Transect 3. ZS3 is a flat open site located on a spur overlooking the Chemi Tabin river and situated within line of sight of Zarzi cave, across the river exactly 1km to the northeast (Fig. 4.10). Site ZS3 consists of a dispersed scatter of chipped stone materials over an area of c. 50 × 50m (Fig. 4.11), as well as a large boulder of limestone with three cup hollows (Fig. 4.12) and a small number of ground-stone implements (Fig. 4.13). The chipped stone material compares well with Epipalaeolithic assemblages excavated at Zarzi cave, including small blades and burin facets (Wahida 1981; 1999). The distinctive cupholed limestone boulder has good parallels at Late Pleistocene Natufian sites in the WFC (Terradas et al. 2013: 56–57), where they are associated with an intensification of food production involving grinding and pounding of grass seeds and nuts such as acorns using hand-held pestles (Nadel et al. 2009). Similarly, at ninth millennium BC Pınarbaşı in central Anatolia, limestone bedrock mortars may have been used for pounding of almond and terebinth nuts, common in 48 Roger Matthews, Wendy Matthews, Amy Richardson and Kamal Raeuf Aziz Figure 4.6. Lower Palaeolithic hand-axe at site ZS5. Scale: 25cm. Figure 4.7. Lower Palaeolithic hand-axe from site ZS5. Scale: 10cm. 4. Intensive Field Survey in the Zarzi Region 49 Figure 4.8. Terrace location of site ZS5, looking northeast. the archaeobotanical evidence from the site (Baird 2012: 195). The presence of the cup-hollow boulder at site ZS3 indicates that significant time and energy were invested by the Epipalaeolithic community at the site, firstly in hollowing out the 10–12cm-deep holes in the boulder surface and secondly in repeated use of the boulder over a lengthy period of time, probably for processing of plants or nuts and/or pigments such as ochre as identified at other sites of this period (Nadel et al. 2009). This investment in turn suggests a long-term, if episodic, attachment to place shaped by seasonal availability of valued resources. If associated with acorn or almond processing, the cup-holed boulder fits with evidence for an increase in oak and almond trees in the region during the last centuries of the Late Pleistocene, as attested at Zarzi and Palegawra caves. We interpret site ZS3 as a small open-air site of hunter-foragers. We will excavate this site in the next phase of the project in order to establish whether there are traces of architecture, and to investigate the nature and duration of activities on this advantageous knoll overlooking the Chemi Tabin river below. Open-air sites of this period are extremely difficult to locate, being small, low and with dispersed surface remains, and they can only be detected using intensive survey methods. Site ZS3 is the first open-air (non-cave or rock shelter) Epipalaeolithic site identified in this region since Braidwood’s 1951 discovery of the sites of Turkaka and Kowri Khan on the Chemchemal Plain 25km south-southwest of Zarzi (Braidwood and Howe 1960, 55–57; Wahida 1999: 187–188). The discovery of site ZS3 allows us to contextualise the earlier excavations at the famous site of Zarzi cave. Zarzi cave is located at 760m above sea level within a grand natural amphitheatre created by erosion of the rock massif to the north and west of the site (Figs 4.14–4.15). The cave is modest in size, 2.25m high, 7m deep and 10m wide at its mouth, commanding a panoramic view southwards across the fertile valley below (Fig. 4.16). Zarzi was excavated by Dorothy Garrod in 1928 (Garrod 1930) and by Ghanim Wahida in 1971 (Wahida 1981; 1999). The chipped stone assemblage from the cave defines a distinctive Epipalaeolithic tradition, named as the Zarzian after Garrod’s initial excavations, and characterised by small blade-based tools including notched and denticulated blades, scrapers and burins. Geometric microliths are mainly found in the upper levels and the industry is almost entirely chert based with only two fragments of obsidian, both from the Nemrut Dağ source in eastern Anatolia (Renfrew et al. 1966: 42; Barge et al. 2018; Frahm and Tryon 2018). 50 Roger Matthews, Wendy Matthews, Amy Richardson and Kamal Raeuf Aziz Figure 4.9. Zarzi survey, Zone C, Transect 10. There are no radiocarbon dates but the stone tool typology places the site between 14,000 and 11,000 BC, with evidence for a long duration of episodic use of the cave. During our survey we noted a dispersed distribution of Zarzian lithics on the slopes directly below the cave mouth (Fig. 4.17), possibly washed down from the excavation spoil heaps, which we designated as site ZS2. The evidence for human presence in the central Zagros region from c. 14,000 BC provided by excavations at cave sites, including Zarzi, brings to an end a 10,000-year hiatus in evidence for any human activity in Iraqi Kurdistan. Between the end of the Upper Palaeolithic, as dated at Shanidar level C to c. 25,000 BC (Solecki and Solecki 1983), and the earliest dated Epipalaeolithic evidence from the cave sites of Zarzi, Palegawra and Shanidar level B2, at c. 15,000 BC, there are as yet no detected cave or open-air sites at all (Matthews 2000: 24–29). The apparent absence of significant, or any, human presence in this elevated region for the millennia between 25,000 and 15,000 BC can be associated with the onset and peak of the Würm Pleniglacial, characterised in this region by extreme dryness, coldness and a lowering of the snow line, as supported by analysis of the pollen record from Lake Zeribar (Bottema and van Zeist 1981). 4. Intensive Field Survey in the Zarzi Region Figure 4.10. The Epipalaeolithic site of ZS3 in the foreground. Arrow indicates Zarzi cave. Figure 4.11. Chipped stone artefacts from site ZS3. Scale: 10cm. 51 52 Roger Matthews, Wendy Matthews, Amy Richardson and Kamal Raeuf Aziz Figure 4.12. Boulder with cupholes from site ZS3. Scale: 25cm. Figure 4.13. Ground-stone polisher or rubber from site ZS3. Scale: 10cm. 4. Intensive Field Survey in the Zarzi Region Figure 4.14. Location of Zarzi cave within a natural amphitheatre, looking northeast. Arrow indicates Zarzi cave. Figure 4.15. Zarzi cave, centre, looking north. 53 54 Roger Matthews, Wendy Matthews, Amy Richardson and Kamal Raeuf Aziz Figure 4.16. View from mouth of Zarzi cave, looking southwest. Arrow indicates location of site ZS3, on opposite bank of Chemi Tabin stream. Figure 4.17. Chipped stone items from Zarzi slopes, site ZS2. Initially, the Epipalaeolithic environment of Zarzi appears to have been steppic and dry, with oak, pine, lilac and almond trees attested only in the latest levels of occupation towards the end of the Pleistocene (Wahida 1999: 194). At about the same time, environmental evidence from the nearby cave site of Palegawra, dated to c. 12,500 BC, indicates spread of oak, tamarisk, poplar and conifers (Braidwood and Howe 1960: 59). The valley below Zarzi cave, with its perennial fresh water resources, would have been a major factor in attracting seasonally migrating herds of animals such as gazelle, commonly attested in the 4. Intensive Field Survey in the Zarzi Region Figure 4.18. Retouched obsidian tool from Transect 9, Zone A. Scale: 5cm. faunal remains from the cave (Bate 1930), and onager as attested at Palegawra (Turnbull and Reed 1974). The river would have provided a good supply of fish, also well-attested in the Zarzi deposits (Wahida 1999: 190). Edible land snails, Helix salomonica, occur in large quantities in the upper levels of Zarzi (Wahida 1999: 194) and Palegawra (Braidwood and Howe 1960: 59), arguably the start of a long local tradition of consumption of this seasonally available food resource (Chapter 17). Wahida (1981: 31; 1999: 207) argued that cave sites of the region, such as Zarzi, Palegawra and Shanidar, should be viewed as only one component of multisited habitation of an extensive landscape, whereby hunter-foragers made use of food and other resources according to seasonal availability and to long-standing cultural traditions. Within this model, he argued that there should be open-air sites contemporary with the cave occupations, and that they would only be located through programmes of intensive field survey. Prior to our survey, the only known Epipalaeolithic open-air sites in Iraqi Kurdistan were Turkaka and Kowri Khan on the Chemchemal plain, which Braidwood and Howe (1960: 55–57) theorised as possible habitation components in a seasonally structured way of living using both caves and openair sites. More recent regional survey in northwestern Sulaimaniyah province (Van Ess and Luciani 2015) focused on known mounded sites and did not locate occupation earlier than Late Neolithic, as is also the case with the Shahrizor Survey Project (Altaweel et al. 2012: 20). The new evidence from site ZS3 provisionally confirms the hypothesis of Braidwood and Howe and Wahida that Epipalaeolithic groups of this region moved between cave and open-air sites perhaps in seasonal or longer-term patterns of mobility, maximising their opportunities for hunting and gathering of a wide range of plant and animal resources. Pending excavation, site ZS3 may 55 be comparable to the Late Epipalaeolithic open-air occupation at Zawi Chemi Shanidar, at a similar altitude on the banks of the Greater Zab, at 425m above sea level, where boulder mortars were also found (Solecki 1981). Other than sites ZS5 and ZS3, finds from the intensive survey transects included small quantities of isolated finds of sherds, ground-stone, chert and obsidian artefacts, including a single retouched obsidian blade in Transect 9 of Zone A, which could have served as a barb on an arrow fired at moving prey in this upland landscape, possibly during the Neolithic period (Fig. 4.18). Impact damage along the retouched edge suggests that this arrow hit its target (or a nearby solid object). The small mounded site of ZS6 in transect C/10 (Fig. 4.9) yielded a small scatter of lithics and sherds of Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age date, while on the mound at Holina, site ZS4 in transect A/1, a single piece of worked obsidian was found. Portable x-ray fluorescence analysis of the Holina obsidian confirms the material’s origin as the east Anatolian Nemrut Dağ source. We did not locate sites of definite Neolithic date during the survey and, although we sampled only three small sub-regions of the survey area (Fig. 4.2), taken in conjunction with earlier survey work in the area, in particular the Van Ess-Luciani 2011–13 survey (Van Ess and Luciani 2015), we can at least state that the Epipalaeolithic and Early Neolithic occupation of this region of Sulaimaniyah province is sparse, at most. At present, we know of no sites in this region that fall within the period c. 11,000 to 6000 BC, but much further work remains to be carried out. Cave survey Initial visits were made to two major caves of the region (Fig. 4.2), within an ongoing programme of palaeoclimate research through analysis of speleothems (Chapter 3). To the east of the survey region, Gejkar cave (Fig. 4.19) was visited and a speleothem sample collected for analysis (Chapters 3, 24; Flohr et al. 2017). In the west of the survey region, Sahra cave (Fig. 4.20) was visited and was found not to contain suitable material for sampling. Other caves in the region will be visited in future field activities along with further intensive survey in this key region for integrated palaeoclimatic, geomorphological and archaeological investigations, including targeted excavation, to investigate further the important early prehistory of this region. 56 Roger Matthews, Wendy Matthews, Amy Richardson and Kamal Raeuf Aziz Figure 4.19. Entrance to Gejkar cave. Figure 4.20. Approach to Sahra cave.