Download - Wrightetal2008 Levant
Stone Bead Technologies and Early CraftSpecialization Insights from Two NeolithicSites in Eastern Jordan
Katherine I Wright Pat Critchley and Andrew GarrardWith contributions by Douglas Baird Roseleen Bains and Simon Groom
What social groups were involved in Neolithic craft production What was the nature of early forms
of craft specialization long before urban economies evolved One way to look at this is to
investigate manufacture of Neolithic prestige goods Seasonal camps in Wadi Jilat (eastern
Jordan) revealed unusually detailed evidence for manufacture of stone beads debris blanks
finished beads and tools for drilling sawing and abrasion The material is lsquoDabba Marblersquo a
metamorphic rock of which the major source is nearby This article describes lapidary technology
at Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 equivalent in age to the Pre-Pottery Neolithic C (PPNC) Mineral-chemical
characterization data on Dabba Marble are presented These sites raise issues about early craft
specialization These beadmakers seem to have been master craftsmenwomen We suggest that
these sites illustrate a particular form of lsquosite specializationrsquo namely sites located in remote
territories and focused on special materials and intensive production of prestige goods However
these craft activities were also embedded in hunting herding and perhaps ritual as suggested
by figurines and pillars
Keywords technology specialization Neolithic stone beads Levant Jordan
Introduction
The Neolithic in the Near East involved a technolo-
gical revolution which included expansions in the use
of stone clay and plaster The social significance of
this expansion is still not understood One example is
stone bead-making which began to expand in the
Late Epipalaeolithic (cf Natufian) and expanded
much further in the Neolithic From the perspective
of use personal ornaments have much potential for
questions about social identity and the body as a
medium of enculturation (Bourdieu 1977 94) Dress
expresses and reproduces social identities such as
gender age and group affiliation (Barnes and Eicher
1992 Eicher 1995 Meskell 2001 Sciama and Eicher
1998 Sorenson 1997 Treherne 1995)
However from the perspective of manufacture key
technical questions are still unanswered Detailed
data on Neolithic stone bead-making may permit us
to identify individual artisans skills choices chaines
operatoires (Roux et al 1995 Vidale et al 1992) and
help us to understand craft specialization better in its
earlier stages as opposed to the later version seen in
urban societies (Kenoyer 1992a Roux and Matarasso
1999 Vidale 1989)
One goal of this paper is to present the lapidary
techniques revealed in two Jordanian manufacturing
sites of the Pre-Pottery Neolithic C early Late
Neolithic (PPNCELN) A second goal is to consider
these data in terms of early forms of craft specializa-
tion We consider issues of individual specialists
specialist households and regional specialist sites
Finally we consider how these data relate to other
information on Neolithic stone beadmaking in the
southern Levant
Stone Beads and the Near Eastern Neolithic
In the Near East stone beads are exceedingly rare in
pre-Natufian sites Even in the Natufian ornaments
made of shell bone and teeth greatly outnumber
Katherine I Wright (corresponding author) Pat Critchley Andrew GarrardRoseleen Bains and Simon Groom Institute of Archaeology UniversityCollege London 31ndash34 Gordon Square London WC1H 0PY UK emailkwrightuclacuk Douglas Baird School of Archaeology Classics andEgyptology University of Liverpool Abercromby Square Liverpool UK
Council for British Research in the Levant 2008Published by ManeyDOI 101179175638008X348016 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 131
stone beads and stone beads are known only from
selected sites (eg Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1991 Larson
1978 Marechal 1991 Moore 2000 Reese 1991 Valla
et al 2004) In the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A and B
stone ornaments expand widely in numbers and
forms (eg Critchley 2007 Gopher 1997 Talbot
1983 Wheeler 1983) From the PPNC onward there
are hints of expanding trade networks in stone beads
(eg Wright and Garrard 2003 cf Bar-Yosef Mayer
et al 2004 Diamanti 2003 Dubin 1995 Hamilton
2005 Jackson 2005 Wright 2008 Wright 2006)
Neolithic stone beads are often found in contexts of
use or discard (houses middens graves) Of manufac-
turing areas and production techniques we have
mostly brief reports (Berna 1995 Fabiano et al 2004
Finlayson and Betts 1990 Garfinkel 1987 Gorelick
and Gwinnett 1990 Hauptmann 2004 Jensen 2004
Kaliszan et al 2002 Rollefson 2002 Rollefson and
Parker 2002) We know more about other regions
(Barthelmy de Saizieu and Bouquillon 1994) or later
periods (eg Bar-Yosef Mayer et al 2004 Calley
1989) How were Neolithic stone beads made What
variations of material and technique do we see
Substantial evidence on one tradition comes from
sites of the Jilat-Azraq project eastern Jordan
(Fig 1) A preliminary description of bead assem-
blages and typology has appeared (Wright and
Garrard 2003) Here we present details of manufac-
turing technology from two production sites Jilat 13
and Jilat 25 (Fig 2) equivalent in age to the PPNC
or ELN (c 6950ndash6400 cal BC)
The Sites
Wadi Jilat lies in limestone steppe 30ndash40 km east of
the present-day margins of the Levantine Corridor
where rain-fed cultivation is possible and where large
Neolithic villages emerged (Fig 1) Azraq Oasis is
50 km north-east of Jilat between limestone and
basalt steppe-desert In this work 18 Palaeolithic and
Neolithic sites were excavated (Baird et al 1992
Garrard et al 1986 1987 1994a 1994b 1996
Garrard 1998 Garrard in preparation Garrard and
Byrd 1992)
Bone and shell beads were found at the majority of
the 10 late Upper Palaeolithic and Epipalaeolithic
sites investigated but no stone beads were discovered
mdash even at Azraq 18 which is a Natufian site This
may be an accident of samplingdiscovery as some
Natufian sites have significant numbers of stone
beads (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Cauvin 1974 Marechal 1991 Moore 2000
Valla et al 2004) However at the time of writing no
stone beads have been found at pre-PPNB sites in
Figure 1 Map of the southern Levant showing sites and raw material sources mentioned in the text
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
132 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
eastern Jordan (Richter et al 2008 T Richter
personal communication)
All eight Neolithic sites revealed stone bead
production along with shell and bone beads The
sites date to the PPNB (eg Jilat 7 26 32 Azraq
31) and PPNCELN (Azraq 31 Jilat 13 and 25) The
other two are lsquoburin sitesrsquo of either LPPNB or
PPNCELN age (Jilat 23 24) (Garrard et al 1994b)
All of these sites were seasonal camps of small
groups engaged in varying combinations of
hunting trapping foraging cultivating herding
(Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999) They lived in
shelters constructed of upright limestone slab
foundations
The Neolithic sites yielded 10547 artefacts of stone
beads or related debris from secure contexts About
88 of these came from Jilat 13 and Jilat 25
(Table 1) They include finished ornaments unfin-
ished roughouts and bead blanks and debitage
(Tables 2ndash5) Densities of beads blanks and debris
Figure 2 (a) Plan of Wadi Jilat 13 Late Phase Note location of workslab in the centre-left area of the oval structure (b)
Plan of Wadi Jilat 25 Area A structure
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 133
and other data indicate intensification of stone
beadmaking in PPNCELN sites in the Jilat-Azraq
region relative to the PPNB (Wright and Garrard
2003) It is of interest that this coincides with the first
appearance of domestic sheep-goat in the Jilat sites
(see Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999)
Stratigraphy site formation and chronology of
Jilat 13 and 25 are discussed in more depth elsewhere
(Garrard et al 1994a Wright and Garrard 2003) The
sites were excavated as part of a regional programme
and areas of excavation vary At Jilat 25 surface
artefacts extended across an area of 3200 sq m From
the surface one oval upright-slab structure (7 x
45 m) was visible (Fig 2b) About 50 of this was
excavated an area of 21 sq m and a total volume of
78 cu m Three occupation phases were identified
The early phase included an occupation fill (Aa19)
rich in primary refuse this yielded a date of 8020 iexcl
80 uncal BP (OxA-2408) Above this the middle
phase involved addition of bins and hearths and
accumulation of an ashy occupation fill (Aa15) also
rich in primary refuse A final occupation fill (Aa7)
accumulated and the building was filled with rubble
followed by a deposit of sand which sealed the layers
below (Table 6) In each phase artefact clusters on
occupational surfaces and within their fills were
identified via 1 x 1 m horizontal units (i ii etc)
we discuss these clusters selectively here The chipped
stone assemblage from Jilat 25 is characterized by
debitage dominated by flakes although both flake
and blade cores were found However 84ndash85 of
tools were made on blades Prominent tools include
Nizzanim points (the sole point type) burins drill
bits made from burin spalls and other types (Baird
1993 469 521 Baird in Garrard et al 1994a 85
table 1) Further details on the chipped stone
assemblages are available in a number of works
(Baird 1993 1994 1995 2001a 2001b)
Surface artefacts at Jilat 13 extended across an 800
sq m area One large oval upright-slab building (10 x
65 m) was visible at surface Almost all of this was
excavated an area of 735 sq m (Fig 2a) Three
phases were identified In the early phase the
excavated volume of deposit was 145 cu m the
structure was built and primary occupation deposits
accumulated then a pavement was laid down in the
western area and hearths were constructed in the
south and east Dates from this phase were 7920 iexcl
100 uncal BP (OxA-1800) and 7870 iexcl 100 uncal BP
(OxA-1801) The middle phase exposed 87 cu m of
deposit and yielded no C14 dates An interior
partition wall separated the western end of the
building and pits and stone-lined hearths were added
in the eastern area The late phase of which 174 cu m
of deposit was excavated yielded two dates of 7900
iexcl 80 uncal BP (OxA-2411) and 7830 iexcl 90 uncal BP
(UB-3462) At this time a new upper pavement was
added above a rubble foundation In the western area
a large workbench with evidence of drilling abrasion
and flaking is associated with this phase (Figs 2a
14c) Primary refuse was found in all phases (selected
contexts are shown in Table 7) but the stratigraphy
is more complex than at Jilat 25 In the chipped stone
assemblage at Jilat 13 each phase revealed a
bladebased assemblage with blades or bladelets
making up 57 of debitage Most tools are made
on blades (78ndash81 of all tools are blade based)
Major tool types include projectile points burins
piercers and drills scapers and endscrapers notches
and denticulates and bifacial tools such as tile
knives In the early phase for which we have most
detailed information burins and points are the most
Table 1 Summary of Dabba Marble artefacts at Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 (see also Wright and Garrard 2003 279ndash80)
Artefact Category
Jilat 13 Jilat 13 Jilat 25 Jilat 25
Raw frequency (N) Weight (grams) Raw frequency (N) Weight (grams)
Finished beads(secure contexts)
144 60 115 62
Finished beads(surfacemixed contexts)
12 no data 4 no data
Roughouts and blanks(secure contexts)
180 222 89 82
Roughouts and blanks(surfacemixed contexts)
43 no data 4 no data
Debitage(secure contexts)
7369 6905 1381 976
(5 all debitage from nodulesto microflakes and shatter)TOTAL (secure contexts) 7693 7187 1585 1120TOTAL (secure contextsz beads and blanks from surfacemixed)
7748 1593
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
134 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Ta
ble
2B
ea
ds
an
db
lan
ks
J
ila
t2
5(a
llc
on
tex
ts)
Gre
en
Dab
ba
Marb
le
Gre
en
Dab
ba
Marb
le
Red
Dab
ba
Marb
le
Red
Dab
ba
Marb
le
Bla
ck
Dab
ba
Marb
le
Bla
ck
Dab
ba
Marb
leW
hit
eC
halk
Wh
ite
Ch
alk
Wh
ite
Qu
art
zite
Wh
ite
Qu
art
zite
Oth
er
Oth
er
To
tal
To
tal
To
tal
To
tal
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
ead
s-
B
lan
ks
-N
Bla
nks
-
Dis
cb
ead
s12
21
67
39
410
74
51
95
79
875
80
6R
ing
bead
s2
21
7O
valb
ead
sC
ylin
der
bead
s1
10
8B
arr
elb
ead
s9
63
112
10
17
75
Irre
gula
rb
ead
sIn
dete
rmin
ate
or
frag
ment
16
10
86
65
Pend
ants
-tr
iang
ula
rP
end
ants
-tr
ap
ezoid
al
Pend
ants
-oval
Pend
ants
-re
cta
ng
ula
rP
end
ants
-sq
uare
11
11
Pend
ants
-te
ard
rop
Pend
ants
-oth
er
or
ind
ete
rmin
ate
14
10
84
43
Bra
cele
ts7
75
9
TO
TA
L-
Bead
s-
N24
70
614
50
119
100
0TO
TA
L-
Bead
s-
20
258
85
011
84
20
0100
0TO
TA
L-
Bla
nks
-N
38
40
10
41
93
100
0TO
TA
L-
Bla
nks
-
40
943
010
84
31
1100
0
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 135
Ta
ble
3B
ea
ds
an
db
lan
ks
J
ila
t1
3(a
llc
on
tex
ts)
Gre
en
Da
bb
aM
arb
le
Gre
en
Da
bb
aM
arb
le
Re
dD
ab
ba
Ma
rble
Re
dD
ab
ba
Ma
rble
Bla
ck
Da
bb
aM
arb
le
Bla
ck
Da
bb
aM
arb
leW
hit
eC
ha
lkW
hit
eC
ha
lkW
hit
eQ
ua
rtzi
teW
hit
eQ
ua
rtzi
teO
the
rO
the
rT
ota
lT
ota
lT
ota
lT
ota
l
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
ead
s-
B
lan
ks
-N
Bla
nks
-
Dis
cb
ead
s7
36
40
810
22
21
59
38 1
49
22 0
Rin
gb
ead
s2
12
51
20
12 9
00 0
Ovalb
ead
s0
0 0
00 0
Cylin
der
bead
s1
13
42 6
10 4
Barr
elb
ead
s36
57
13
24
11
254
34 8
62
27 8
Irre
gula
rb
ead
s1
00 0
10 4
Ind
ete
rmin
ate
fr
ag
ment
794
11
74 5
96
43 0
Pend
ants
-tr
iang
ula
r1
11
0 6
10 4
Pend
ants
-tr
ap
ezoid
al
21
21 3
10 4
Pend
ants
-oval
11
21 3
00 0
Pend
ants
-re
cta
ng
ula
r1
10 6
00 0
Pend
ants
-sq
uare
11
10 6
10 4
Pend
ants
-te
ard
rop
22
1 3
00 0
Pend
ants
-oth
er
in
dete
rmin
ate
111
12
1 3
11
4 9
Bra
cele
ts0
0 0
00 0
TO
TA
L-
Bead
s-
N62
68
20
11
3155
100 0
TO
TA
L-
Bead
s-
40 4
43 6
12 8
0 6
0 6
1 9
100 0
TO
TA
L-
Bla
nks
-N
202
11
42
04
223
100 0
TO
TA
L-
Bla
nks
-
90 6
4 9
1 8
0 9
0 0
1 8
100 0
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
136 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
frequently occurring types burins constitute 29 of
tools and points 16 Piercers and drills occur in
much lower numbers (4 of tools) as do other tool
types Of projectile points Nizzanim points are the
most frequent (397 of points) followed by Byblos
(313) Herzeliya (12) Amuq (84) Transverse
(6) and Haparsah (24) points (Baird 1993 469
500ndash17 625 Baird in Garrard et al 1994a 85
table 1)
The 14C dates from these two sites have been
recalibrated using IntCal 2004 and the date ranges at
one standard deviation are as follows Jilat 25 (early
phase) context Aa19a (OxA2408) 5 9020ndash8760 cal
BP Jilat 13 (early phase) context A21a (OxA1800) 5
8980ndash8600 cal BP Jilat 13 (early phase) context A15a
(OxA1801) 5 8980ndash8550 cal BP Jilat 13 (late phase)
context C24 (OxA2411) 5 8980ndash8590 cal BP Jilat 13
(late phase) context C22 (UB3462) 5 8780ndash8460 cal
BP
Thus stratigraphy and radiocarbon dates suggest
that we are dealing with two sites of reasonably good
temporal resolution followed by abandonment and
sealing of primary refuse deposits Five C14 dates
indicate occupation between about 7830 and 8020
uncal BP with low standard deviations for each date
In radiocarbon terms this is about as precise as it
gets and the two sites may overlap in time However
projectile points do suggest we are dealing with a
somewhat wider time span for the Jilat 13 sample
than the Jilat 25 sample
Given different extents of excavation comparisons
of these and other stone bead-making sites entail
challenges Density data however mdash as measured by
numbers of beads blanks and debris per cu m volume
of excavated deposit mdash can be revealing For
example the PPNB occupations in Wadi Jilat (3
sites 11 occupations) had low densities mdash an average
of 1072 artefacts per cu m and a maximum of 313
per cu m (Wright and Garrard 2003 table 2) In
contrast the density data for Jilat 25 are 2223 per cu
m (early phase) 3312 per cu m (middle phase) and
562 per cu m (late phase) Density data for Jilat 13
are 3102 stone bead artefacts per cu m (early phase)
1615 per cu m (middle phase) and 1099 per cu m
(late phase) This suggests greater intensity of bead-
making in Jilat 13 and 25
Sources Quarrying and Raw Materials
Most Jilat beads were made of Dabba Marble which
occurs in green pinkred and black (Appendix A)
This is our focus here A few other materials were also
used other local sedimentary rocks and non-local
turquoise (nearest source Sinai) malachite (nearest
sources Faynan and Timna) and carnelian (nearest
source unknown) Non-local stones formed only 015
of the materials (Wright and Garrard 2003)
The largest known sources of Dabba Marble lie
15ndash25 km west of Jilat 13 and 25 some may be
closer (Fig 1 and Appendix A) These are bodies of
limestones chalks and cherts lightly metamorphosed
Table 4 Finished disc beads size data (complete or measurable beads) (na 5 not applicable)
Site N
Diameter (mm) HeightThickness (mm) Perforation Diameter (mm)
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Jilat 7 PPNB 13 87 36 30 28 28 10Jilat 26 PPNB 0 na na na na na naJilat 32 PPNB 0 na na na na na naAzraq 31 PPNB 2 98 46 25 14 23 04Jilat 25 PPNCELN 66 83 16 26 08 21 05Jilat 13 PPNCELN 47 69 24 25 09 19 06Azraq 31 PPNCELN 34 68 16 26 11 18 04
Table 5 Finished barrel beads size data (complete or measurable beads) (na 5 not applicable)
Site N
Diameter (mm) HeightThickness (mm) Perforation Diameter (mm)
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Jilat 7 PPNB 1 45 na 40 na 15 naJilat 26 PPNB 2 75 na 65 na 25 naJilat 32 PPNB 0 na na na na 00 naAzraq 31 PPNB 1 115 na 100 na 40 naJilat 25 PPNCELN 6 63 14 64 17 21 09Jilat 13 PPNCELN 28 68 28 71 39 22 09Azraq 31 PPNCELN 13 109 56 133 91 29 09
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 137
and injected with various minerals eg apatites red
iron oxides (Fig 3a) Outcrops show substantial
variations in mineralization even over small areas
in Fig 3b the left side of the outcrop is soft green
Dabba Marble the right side is red Dabba Marble
The geology and mineralogy of Dabba Marble are
presented in Appendices AndashB The Neolithic Jilat
beads are consistent with this source (Appendix B)
Methods of Analysis
Comprehensive recovery of small beads debitage and
micro-artefacts was possible due to intensive fine-
scale sieving All excavated contexts were sieved
through a 5 mm mesh many samples were dry sieved
or wet sieved through a 15 mm mesh (the latter after
flotation) Artefacts from floors were collected from 1
sq m horizontal grid units to permit identification of
activity areas Fine-grained spatial data and micro-
artefacts are important in understanding lithic
technologies (Dunnell and Stein 1989 Cessford and
Mitrovic 2005) This is borne out by the Jilat data
since micro-flakes are one byproduct of stone bead
retouch In cases of intense housecleaning micro-
artefacts may reveal bead-making where macro-
artefacts do not (Wright and Bains 2007)
For each context artefacts were separated by raw
material and classified into major groups nodules
and debitage (Fig 4) roughouts (Fig 5) unfinished
blanks and finished ornaments (Figs 6ndash10) We
counted and weighed each group to determine
relationships between debitage and finished beads
Measurements (diameter height perforation dia-
meter) were taken on beads and blanks to assess
standardization and drilling techniques
Finished ornaments were classified into 8 basic
types (Wright and Garrard 2003) Circular disc beads
are the most numerous smallest and most standar-
dized (Figs 6d 7endashf) They occur in the widest range
of materials most red Dabba Marble beads were
discs Barrelshaped beads are larger more variable
and mostly made of green Dabba Marble (Fig 9endashf)
Pendants are the largest rarest and most diverse
items shaped as triangles rectangles and ovals most
are of green Dabba Marble (Fig 10d f) Bracelets
were made of white chalk (Tables 2ndash3)
Unfinished beads (blanks) were classified according
to the same typology as finished beads when the
intended final product could be ascertained (eg disc
blank) (Tables 2ndash3 Figs 6andashc 7andashd 8 9andashd 10c e)
Within these categories blanks were further classified
according to traces of flaking grinding perforation
Figure 8 shows these stages for 3 sequences of disc
bead manufacture Differences between Sequences A
B and C are differences in the original blank (Stage 1
thin flake thick flake tabular roughout) and presence
or absence of flaking retouch on edges (Stage 2)
Further analyses of sequences for these and other
bead types are still in progress
Debitage was sorted into nodules cores rough-
outs flakes angular shatter micro-flakes and
Table 6 Stone beads blanks and debris Jilat 25 all contexts
Phase Context Description Beads Blanks Debris Comments Selected associated artefacts
Early Aa24 Fill of bedrock cut 0 0 2Early Aa27 Fill of bedrock cut 0 0 1Early Aa19 First occupation fill 29 23 384 1 cutmarked slab 3 sandstone fragments
probably handstones 1 limestone handstoneEarly Aa20 First occupation fill 1 5 6Early Aa21 First occupation fill 4 1 4Early Aa18 Early fill in entrance area 1 5 8Early A 44 Early fill in entrance area 0 0 3Middle Aa15 Second occupation fill 47 31 544 1 limestone capstone 1 grooved stone (basalt)
1 sandstone abraderMiddle Aa16 Hearth 1 1 0Middle Aa13 Fill of stone feature 1 0 81Middle Aa10 Fill of stone feature 0 0 3Middle Aa11 Ash lense 3 0 17Middle Aa7 Third occupation fill 17 15 109 2 grooved stones (limestone and basalt)
2 basalt handstones 1 sandstone fragmentMiddle Aa8 Third occupation fill 1 1 1Middle Aa14 Fill in entrance area 7 3 4Middle A 42 Fill in entrance area 0 0 1
Late Aa 2 Sandy late fill 1 0 55 1 sandstone abrader Bead 1 RDM disc Debris all GDMLate A 6 Rubbly late fill 7 4 72Late A 33 Late fill in entrance area 0 0 1Late A 36 Late fill in entrance area 0 0 6Late A 34 Fill of late intrusive feature 1 0 0
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
138 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
micro-shatter (Fig 4) Definitions of these categories
are broadly similar to those established in chipped
stone analysis (Andrefsky 1998)
Flaking and Initial Reduction Nodules CoresDebitage and Roughouts
The soft limestone and hard chert in Dabba Marble
permits it to be worked via chipping flaking
grinding sawing and drilling To varying degrees
the material has conchoidal fracture Where chert
content is high conchoidal fracture is excellent
Limestone itself also has conchoidal fracture parti-
cularly when fine-grained as Dabba Marble is The
tabular structure of the laminated limestones also
makes it possible to create flat faces easily
The difficulty of shaping beads would have varied
depending on specific material Most green Dabba
marble is fairly homogeneous composed of calcite-rich
soft limestone (Mohs 5 3) and apatite (Mohs 5 5)
Red Dabba marble occurs in a soft pale pink variety
(Mohs 5 3ndash4) a dark pink variety of medium
hardness and a dark red siliceous variety essentially
red chert (Mohs 5 7) This red chert variant (Mohs 7)
will have been more difficult to modify Flaking and
chipping were particularly important in working this
material and abrasion will have been more difficult
This may be why so many beads of the red cherty
Dabba Marble were disc beads made on flakes (Fig 7)
Flaking figured prominently in the making of
beads from softer materials However sawing and
abrasion played a greater role in modification of these
materials Comparable variations in technique
depending on material hardness are seen at other
prehistoric sites (Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990)
Table 7 Stone beads blanks and debris Jilat 13 selected contexts
Phase Context Description Beads Blanks Debris Comments Selected associated artefacts
Early C106 Fill of bedrock cut 0 0 1 1 circular limestone diskEarly B77 First occupation fill 1 5 752Early B79 Fill of hearth 0 0 6 1 limestone handstoneEarly B71 Second occupation fill 10 11 750 1 drilled and grooved limestone object
1 flaked limestone rsquoscraperrsquo 6 basalt fragmentsEarly A17 Lower pavement 0 0 0 1 cutmarked slabEarly A15 Third occupation fill 1 8 8 1 worked limestone object snake-shaped flint pebbleEarly A16 Third occupation fill 2 1 17 1 miniature pestle basaltEarly A18 Third occupation fill 0 0 11 Basalt fragments 3 from vessels
1 handstonepestle fragment 6 unidentifiableEarly B44 Third occupation fill 5 9 74Early B45 Third occupation fill 0 2 139 1 basalt handstone fragmentEarly B69 Third occupation fill 6 5 383 No ground stoneEarly C56 Third occupation fill 8 5 313 1 double-grooved sandstone abrader (Fig 15a)
Middle A3 Fourth occupation fill 3 4 60 1 limestone capstone ( 2 surfaces) 5 basalt fragmentsMiddle A5 Fourth occupation fill 7 9 139 1 cutmarked flint slab 1 grooved limestone object
ochred flints figurines pillarsMiddle B31 Fourth occupation fill 4 2 33Middle B38 Fourth occupation fill 12 6 520Middle B54 Fourth occupation fill 1 0 9 1 limestone figurine (bird)Middle B56 Fourth occupation fill 1 1 14 1 basalt grinding slab fragmentMiddle C39 Fourth occupation fill 10 12 254 1 flint cutmarked slab flaked limestone rsquoscraperrsquo
Late C14 Foundation for upperpavement
0 5 65 1 basalt ground fragment
Late B3 Upper pavement 0 0 0 1 cutmarked limestone slab 1 post-socketLate C4 Upper pavement 0 0 0 1 drilling and abrading bench (Fig 14c)Late A2 Fifth occupation fill 4 2 154 10 figurines or figurine preforms suggesting animals
phalluses arrows (flint limestone travertine) 1 pebblemortar or capstone with ochre (limestone) 1 perforatedobject 1 handstone on flake (flint) 2 vessel fragments1 ochred pebble burnt pebble (limestone) 1 groundindeterminate stone (basalt) Beads are 2 barrels and2 pendants blanks are 1 barrel and 1 indeterminate
Late B4 Fifth occupation fill 0 2 7 1 grooved limestone abrader (Fig 15c) Blanks are bothpendant blanks
Late B7 Fifth occupation fill 2 5 150 1 cutmarked limestone 1 basalt handstonepestlefragment
Late B9 Fifth occupation fill 0 0 3 1 perforated pumice abraderLate B21 Fifth occupation fill 5 7 193 1 basalt handstone 2 basalt fragmentsLate C3 Fifth occupation fill 2 4 61
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 139
Five main stages of manufacture were identified
although reduction sequences vary These are (1)
reduction of raw nodules to cores roughouts and
flakes via flaking and chipping (2) shaping of
roughouts and flakes into blanks via further flaking
chipping sawing and rough grinding (3) perforation
via boring andor drilling (4) further grinding to
produce the final shape (5) final polishing
Nodules cores and debitage were recovered in
large amounts at Jilat 13 (7369 artefacts 6905 grams)
and Jilat 25 (1381 artefacts 976 grams) The largest
unworked blocks are of green Dabba Marble They
are about 15 cm in diameter but most are about the
size of an adult human fist Some nodules were
weathered suggesting that they were picked up from
surface rather than quarried from bedrock layers
(Fig 4 top)
Reduction of nodules by flaking resulted in (1)
cores (2) tabular roughouts (3) large flakes (4) large
angular shatter fragments (5) micro-flakes and (6)
micro-shatter (Fig 4) Cores defined as nodules with
two or more flake scars are not numerous or
consistent in form Shatter micro-flakes and micro-
shatter were normally discarded as byproducts
Tabular roughouts and larger flakes were used as
the basis for further reduction into bead blanks
Roughouts are early stages in bead reduction
(Kenoyer 2003 16) At Jilat 13 and 25 roughouts
are tabular reflecting the bedded structure of the
material They were flaked and chipped around the
edges into roughly symmetrical shapes (Figs 5a 10a)
Roughouts were sometimes subjected to initial
drilling or sawing at an early stage prior to any
intense abrasion (Fig 5b) In other cases roughouts
were abraded first (Fig 5d) and then sawn or drilled
(Fig 5c) Tabular roughouts were the basis for
making larger thicker ornaments such as most
pendants and barrel beads (Figs 9ndash10)
Small subcircular flakes were the basis of most disc
beads (Figs 6ndash7) The flakes have platforms bulbs of
percussion on ventral surfaces and often scars from
previous removals on dorsal surfaces A certain
consistency in size shape and morphology suggests
that a prepared-core technology was used to predict
and produce these flakes Since cores are rare we do
not yet know precisely how this was achieved
Experiments are still needed but we suspect that
chipping and flaking was accomplished by varying
Figure 3 (a) View of the modern Dabba Marble quarry west of Wadi Jilat from which raw material samples were
obtained (see Appendices AndashB) (b) Close-up view of metamorphosed deposits in situ with interdigitating green
(left) and red (right) Dabba Marble
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
140 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
uses of indirect percussion soft-hammer percussion
andor pressure flaking since the small size of the
beads required precision The use of antler or horn
for pressure flaking of soft stones is widely seen in the
ethnographic record and experimentally (Foreman
1978 19) Even hard stones can be flaked with soft
hammers made of animal horn (Kenoyer 1986 1994
2003 Kenoyer et al 1991) Cores and flakes do not
clearly indicate use of the Cambay technique of
inverse indirect percussion as seen in carnelian bead-
making (Kenoyer 2003 Possehl 1981) Many blanks
display micro-retouch on the edges On thicker disc
bead blanks micro-flakes were removed by striking
downward at the edge of each bead face (Fig 7c) The
retouch scars show that striking was bipolar ie from
opposite directions Products of this procedure were
micro-flakes (Fig 4 bottom)
Clear indications of heat treatment were rare but
burnt pieces do occur
Sawing Drilling and Abrasion Bead Blanks andFinished Beads
Bead blanks are the further reduction of a roughout
into a form closer to the final bead shape (Kenoyer
2003 16) At Jilat 13 and 25 blanks were abandoned
at many different stages The most extensive evidence
for lithic reduction concerns disc beads it is possible
to identify some chaines operatoires (Fig 8)
Figure 6 illustrates two of these paths for green
Dabba Marble disc beads made on flakes
Sometimes circular flakes were perforated early
before any abrasion (Fig 6c) More often flakes
were abraded slightly on ventral and dorsal surfaces
before any drilling (Fig 6andashb) At this stage edges
were still rough Perforation was added later (Fig
6d) In such cases a number of disc beads were
probably then strung together and abraded on the
edges by rolling the string back and forth on abrasive
stones of varying textures such as coarse sandstone
fine sandstone or limestone The final products were
evenly smoothed disc beads relatively standardized
in size The procedure also resulted in edges that are
sharp perpendicular to the bead faces and flat rather
than convex (Figs 6d 7endashf) Experiments indicate
that this procedure also contributes to the polishing
of faces and edges of beads (cf Foreman 1978)
Figure 7 shows artefacts from one context at Jilat 25
indicating a similar sequence for red Dabba Marble
disc beads from subcircular flake to final disc
For barrel beads the starting point was typically
not a flake but a tabular roughout A roughout was
often flaked into an approximately cylindrical form
sometimes with a hexagonal transverse cross section
(that is the section perpendicular to the perforation)
(Fig 9a) Scars indicate that the hexagonal form was
accomplished by flaking Sometimes hexagonal
blanks were perforated before much abrasion (Fig
9b) In many cases hexagonal blanks were heavily
abraded to obliterate sharp angles before any
perforation was begun (Fig 9c) Resulting bead
forms varied in cross section from circular to
elliptical or lenticular (see Wright and Garrard
2003 fig 3) Perforation of barrel beads was from
opposite directions resulting in hourglass perfora-
tions (Fig 9e) and occasionally perforation errors
(Fig 9d)
Most pendants were begun as tabular roughouts
chipped into shapes anticipating the final form such
as an asymmetrical triangular pendant (Fig 10a cf
Fig 5a for a rectangular pendant) Roughouts were
Figure 4 Example of raw material nodule (top) angular
shatter (upper centre) flakes (lower centre) and
micro-debitage (lower row) from a single context
at Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 141
then abraded and sawing was sometimes applied (Fig
10b) One unfinished pendant shows that perforation
preceded final abrasion (Fig 10c) The most common
form is the asymmetrical triangular pendant (Fig
10d) but there are also rectangular square and oval
pendants Not all pendants were made on tabular
roughouts some were made on thin flakes eg
rectangular and lsquoteardroprsquo forms (Fig 10endashf)
Sawing
Disc beads were made individually one by one on
flakes as opposed to being sawn from a perforated
cylinder which is another possible way However
sawing was central to the production of pendants and
barrel beads (cf Fig 5c 10b) In some cases the
roughout was sawn only to a shallow depth
permitting unwanted material to be snapped off
leaving a protruding piece of stone mdash a kind of
groove and snap technique (Fig 5c) The protruding
lsquobossrsquo was then abraded
A range of chipped stone tools in the sites might be
suitable for sawing These include tabular chert knives
sometimes also called tile knives (Fig 11) These are
bifacially retouched cutting tools characteristic of the
eastern Jordanian Neolithic (Baird in Garrard et al
1994a 89) However typically the bifacial retouch
produces an edge that is robust but somewhat sinuous
in profile (Fig 11) In addition many tile knife edges
have significant curvature in plan Use of tile knives
would probably generate relatively wide and slightly
sinuous cut marks but this is an area worthy of
experimentation and use wear study Alternative tools
that perhaps better match the relative scale and
precision of cut marks on bead blanks are a range of
relatively robust non-formal tools on blade or elon-
gated flake blanks with edges that are relatively
straight in profile and plan These are found in some
numbers in conjunction with the bead making debris in
Jilat 13 and 25 It is also notable that despite the
purported dominance of flakes in many broadly
contemporary PPNCELN assemblages significant
a b
c d
Figure 5 (a) Tabular roughout rectangular (b) Tabular roughout subcircular with drill mark (c) Abraded roughout with
sawing mark at bottom note that the sawing is incomplete the groove and snap technique has resulted in both
the saw mark and an irregular protrusion of stone (d) Abraded tabular roughout subcircular
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
142 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
proportions of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 tool blanks are
blades (Baird 1993 469 and figs 818ndash821) even
though the debitage assemblages are mostly flake
dominated Other possible sawing tools include flaked
limestone artefacts with a thin edge (Fig 12c)
Several cutmarked limestone slabs were found at
Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 (Fig 12andashb) The cutmarks are
shallow or deep incisions Interestingly the cut-
marked slabs do not display evidence of drilling
Conversely the Jilat 13 bench with marks probably
resulting from drilling (Fig 14c see below) has no
cutmarks This suggests segregation of drilling and
sawing activities Some variability in spatial distribu-
tion of different stages in the bead making process
may be further borne out by the discrete distribution
of drills in Jilat 25 contexts where substantial bead
making debris was recovered For example in Jilat 25
Context A15 drills were found clustered in spatial
units towards the northern end of the structure
Drilling
Experiments in drilling of Dabba Marble are in
progress (Bains forthcoming) Here we present
evidence for drilling from bead perforations and
stone tools Other experiments show that perforation
morphology reveals drilling methods and shape
diameter and length of the drill used (eg Gwinnett
and Gorelick 1999) At Jilat perforations indicate
that drilling methods varied and that choices were
probably affected by material hardness
Hand Drilling with Large Piercers and Borers
The simplest method used appears to have been hand
drilling Soft Dabba Marble could have been drilled
using a borer or piercer held in the hand and not
hafted to a drilling stick Drilling by this method
would produce rough irregular and relatively large
perforations (Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990) we see
examples of this in broken beads Borers and piercers
were found at the sites They are relatively large
perforation tools made on blades suitable for
manipulation by hand without a haft (Fig 13 nos
9ndash11)
Rotary Drilling From Two Directions with Hafted Drills
The most common method involved rotary drilling
from two directions Drilling was almost always
a b
c d
Figure 6 Green Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads (andashb) Circular flakes slightly abraded (c) Unabraded
perforated flake (d) Finished disc bead
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 143
bipolar That is the blank was drilled to roughly
halfway through then turned and the perforation
completed from the opposite direction As the two
perforations converged the result was an hourglass-
shaped perforation (Fig 9e) Experiments indicate
that this prevents chipping and flaking of the
alternate face which can occur if a blank is perforated
completely from only one direction (Possehl 1981)
Most hourglass perforations on both soft and
hard stones appear to have been produced by rotary
drilling Rotary drilling results in regular perforations
and concentric striations on them (Gorelick and
Gwinnett 1990) We observed both traits on many
broken beads and blanks (Fig 9b) Perforations of
hourglass form included very small drillholes indi-
cating that the drilling tools were smaller than
piercers and borers made on blades The probable
drills in this case were small drills on bladelets and
especially drill bits on burin spalls (Fig 13 nos 1 4
5 7) Microscopic examination of perforations is in
progress (Bains forthcoming)
Oddly piercing and drilling tools were found in
relatively low absolute numbers at the two sites (eg
Baird 1993 505ndash06 625 for Jilat 13 early phase
about 4 of tools were piercers or drills for the Jilat
25 which have concentrations of bead-making debris
just under 3 of tools were spall drills) However
specific contextual data other technological consid-
erations and comparisons with other sites give us
confidence that these were the main tools involved in
the drilling and that the low absolute numbers of
drills abandoned may sometimes relate to systematic
removal or discard of these tools by the artisans For
example burin spall drills were closely associated
spatially with bead-making debris in specific activity
areas in the Jilat 25 structure eg Context Aa15 in
the buildingrsquos northern area (Baird 1993 521 see
Table 6) In addition Jilat 13 and 25 produced large
numbers of angle burins including truncation burins
from which burin spalls were detached (eg about
29 of all tools at J13rsquos early phase were burins)
(Baird 1993 500 516 520ndash26 625) Burins are
a b c
d e f
Figure 7 Red Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads from Jilat 25 Context Aa15 (andashb) Circular flakes
slightly abraded (c) Heavily abraded and perforated disc bead blank edge abrasion incomplete (d) Abraded
perforated blank abrasion not complete on face (endashf) Finished disc beads
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
144 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
contextually closely associated with drills and bead-
making debris in occupation fills at Jilat 25 (c 30 of
tools from relevant Jilat 25 contexts were burins) mdash a
situation also seen at Jebel Naja in the Basalt Desert mdash
where both experiments and microwear studies suggest
that drill bits on burin spalls were used for bead-
making (Baird 1993 521 Finlayson and Betts 1990)
Burin spall drills would have had some technolo-
gical advantages over bladelet drills One advantage
is that the triangular or rectangular cross-sections of
burin spall drills make them stronger and less likely
to break during drilling In addition the manner of
their retouch from the same direction on each edge
creates a prismatic cross-section that probably served
to produce a neater hole and to make drilling more
efficient and possibly faster and reduce breakage in
drilling The tips of burin spall drills are blunted
which is an advantage in drilling hard stone (Gorelick
and Gwinnett 1990) Predictability and miniaturiza-
tion of burin spall drills may be relevant to an
Figure 8 Chaines operatoires for disc beads Sequence A refers to a disc bead made on a thin flake Sequence B refers
to a disc bead made on a thick flake Sequence C refers to a disc bead made on a tabular roughout not a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 145
apparent increased standardization in perforation
size observed at Jilat 25 from an early phase to a later
phase (Critchley 2000)
Since we have evidence of rotary drilling from bead
perforations we believe that drill bits were hafted to
sticks (probably made of wood) Drill bits on burin
spalls would have been too small to manipulate
effectively by hand alone
To work efficiently a drill needs to be weighted
and stabilized and there must be some means of
protecting the artisanrsquos hand Ground stone artefacts
support the idea that rotary drilling with drill bits
hafted to drilling sticks was in use They include a
probable capstone made of limestone from Jilat 25
The capstone would have been held in the hand
enabling the beadmaker to manipulate the drilling
stick from the top (Fig 14a) This artefact resembles
a miniature bowl and fits easily into one hand The
interior surface displays use wear circular striations
parallel to the rim and vertical striations perpendi-
cular to the rim The base of the interior converges to
a flat surface about 1 cm in diameter
Some Levantine Neolithic sites have revealed
similar objects with similar wear (Banning 1998
Wright 1992 fig 5ndash15b) and a comparable item
was found at Jarmo (Moholy-Nagy 1983 fig 12913
Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990 30) Capstones are
characteristic of the use of bow drills (Banning
1998 Foreman 1978) but strictly speaking they
are not necessarily diagnostic of the bow drill
(theoretically simpler drilling techniques involving
hafting might have been facilitated by the use of
a capstone) For the moment we can say that
at Jilat 13 and 15 the evidence for rotary drilling
is unequivocal However the evidence for the use
of the bow drill while suggestive is not quite
definitive
Size data considered carefully support a link
between burin-spall drills and beads To interpret
dimensions of drills and perforations we must keep
in mind that stone bead drilling was overwhelmingly
bipolar and converging Thus drills did not have to
penetrate all the way through the full height of the
bead mdash only about half of it Therefore what matters
a b c
d e f
Figure 9 Green Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks and finished beads (a) Hexagonal blank flaked but not abraded (b)
Abraded hexagonal blank (c) Abraded blank not perforated (d) Perforation error on abraded blank (e)
Finished bead broken showing bipolar perforation and hourglass perforation shape (f) Perforated barrel bead
almost finished except for final abrasion to smooth out last surface irregularities
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
146 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
is the very tips of the drill bits mdash the upper few
millimetres mdash not the full length of the drills
Since disc beads are consistently about 25 to
26 mm in height only the upper 15 mm or so of the
drills mdash the most distal ends of the tips mdash had to
have been about 21 mm or less in thickness to
lsquomatchrsquo the perforation diameters of disc beads
(Table 4) In the case of barrel beads since barrel
beads were between 64 and 71 mm in height about
32 to 36 mm of the most distal ends of the drill bits
have to have been about 21 mm or less in thickness
to lsquomatchrsquo the perforations of barrel beads (Table 5)
Measurements of the drill bit tips within these
small uppermost reaches show that the maximal
thicknesses of the drill bitsrsquo distal tips fall within the
range of sizes indicated by the perforations (Fig 13)
Multi-stage Drilling
Sometimes drilling may have been accomplished in
several stages Some beads particularly those made of
harder stones have smooth cylindrical perforations
with parallel walls displaying no hint of the
hourglass shape
One way to achieve this is to create the hourglass
perforation and then to turn it into a perfect
cylindrical perforation via the use of a second drilling
procedure An example of this was cited by Calley
(1989) who proposed that two tools found in
carnelian bead workshops at Early Bronze Age
Kumartepe (Turkey) had complementary functions
a drill bit for making the initial hourglass perforation
and a borer for finishing and smoothing it into a
cylindrical perforation Since both drill bits and
borers were found on the Jilat sites this method of
finishing perforations could have been used
At Jilat 13 and 25 evidence for multi-stage drilling
can be seen in some beads which have a depression on
one or both faces The depression may be a result of
drilling with a larger drill bit first in order to provide
a guide for the final perforation with a finer drill bit
Such a technique is seen in India-Pakistan (Possehl
1981 39 Kenoyer 1992b 73)
a b c
d e f
Figure 10 Green Dabba Marble pendant blanks and finished pendants (a) Tabular roughout flaked into approximately
trapezoidal shape but not abraded (b) Abraded trapezoidal blank with sawing mark at bottom (c) Perforated
asymmetrical triangular pendant blank incompletely abraded (note striations on face) (d) Finished asymmetri-
cal triangular pendant (e) Pendant blank made on a flake unabraded (f) Nearly-finished pendant made on a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 147
Stabilizing Beads Anvils and Drilling Benches
What method was used to stabilize a bead during
drilling The simplest technique is to fix a bead to a
stone anvil with an adhesive Ethnography and
experiments show that such anvils can be small (the
size of handstones) (Foreman 1978 figs 6ndash7) Use of
such an anvil should result in small shallow
depressions a form of use-damage resulting from
force exerted from above Figure 14b shows a small
flat stone from Jilat 25 with a central depression of
the expected size and depth
Figure 14c shows the limestone bench from Jilat 13
(previously discussed) with a number of such pits in
the centre The marks are evenly spaced and are
concentrated in one small well-defined area on the
widest part of the bench this wide area was also
finely abraded
We see this bench as a multifunctional worktable
anvil We suspect that the beadmaker sat on the
narrow part of the bench (straddling it) placed bead
blanks on the pitted work surface fixed them with
adhesive and then drilled them The bench also
displays evidence of other activities including flaking
and grinding
Adhesives for hafting chipped stone tools could
have been adapted for use in fixing beads to anvils
Bitumen would be one candidate In some cultures a
wooden frame with cup-holes is sometimes used for
stabilizing beads (Kenoyer 1986 P Wright 1982)
The holes are filled with beeswax and clay the bead is
inserted into the wax-clay mixture which hardens
holding the bead steady After drilling beads are
released by breaking the wax-clay mixture (Allchin
1979 Stocks 1989) As wood was probably scarce in
Jilat and as there are no indications of the use of
clay we can probably rule out this technique
However stone items with cup-holes are seen in
Neolithic sites (Kirkbride 1966 Wright 1992
fig 527b)
Abrasion
Ground stone artefacts are crucial to bead produc-
tion in traditional technologies (Foreman 1978
Inizan et al 1992 Kenoyer et al 1991 53 Moholy-
Nagy 1983 294 Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58)
Grinding of beads can be achieved by abrading
each bead individually with a hand held abrader or
by rubbing them on a large grinding slab Either
method will produce linear striations of the type we
see on many unfinished beads (cf Figs 7cndashd and 10c)
However final shaping of disc and cylindrical beads
was most likely achieved by stringing them or loading
them on to a thin rod capable of penetrating the
perforation (individually or in groups) and then
rolling them on a grinding slab adding abrasives
(such as sand) and water to produce a smoother finish
(Foreman 1978 Moholy-Nagy 1983 298) Some disc
beads with parallel edges perpendicular to the faces
would probably have been rolled on a flat smooth
stone Other beads with facetted sharply angled or
bevelled edges (eg many barrel beads) suggest that
they were rolled or abraded along a stone with
grooves and slanting sides (eg Fig 15a c)
Abrasion of bead blanks may have been a multi-
stage process involving a number of materials of
different textures and hardness In an early stage
grinding of bead materials on vesicular basalt would
have been the easiest way to abrade a large nodule
quickly The pores of vesicular basalt and pumice
form natural cutting lsquoteethrsquo comparable to the metal
rasp used by present-day sculptors At Jilat 13 and
Jilat 25 we found broken fragments of vesicular
basalt grinding slabs but not large complete exam-
ples The small fragments suggest two possibilities
either there were large complete slabs at one time
which were then broken worn out and discarded or
only small fragments of these heavy duty grinding
tools were needed
For finer abrasion sandstone grinding slabs might
be expected None were found However small
Figure 11 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic
sites Tile knives or possible saws for bead-
making From Baird 1993 fig 85
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
148 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
handheld abraders made of sandstones with coarse
hard quartz crystals were found at both sites (Fig
15andashb) Sandstone is not local to Wadi Jilat and these
items were imported and probably used extensively
(resulting in the small size)
For even finer abrasion limestone could have been
used Such needs could have been met by the large
bench of Jilat 13 (Fig 14c) which was finely ground
over a very large area (within which the possible
drilling marks were placed)
Some might see the grooved items made of
sandstone (Fig 15a) and limestone (Fig 15c) as
lsquoshaft straightenersrsquo One or two shaft straightener
fragments made of basalt occur at Jilat 13 Like other
basalt shaft straighteners in Neolithic Jilat (eg Jilat
7) (Garrard et al 1994a Wright 1993) the use-
surfaces of these have U-shaped cross-sections By
contrast the cross sections of the use surfaces on the
sandstone and limestone grooved items are not U-
shaped but have sharp angles We see these tools
mainly as abraders for grinding bead facets espe-
cially on barrel beads The widths of the use surfaces
are 11 mm for the sandstone tool and 138 mm for
the limestone one These dimensions correspond to
the average diameter (5 width) of 31 measured green
Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks from Jilat 13 (N 5
31 Mean diameter 5 92 mm standard deviation 5
28) Grooved stones are used in bead grinding in
a
b c
Figure 12 Ground stone artefacts probably for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Cutmarked slab (limestone) Jilat
13 The cutmarks are shallow and are concentrated in the left area running parallel to the main axes of the
slab (b) Cutmarked slab fragment (limestone) Jilat 13 showing deep cutmarks (c) Flaked and ground abra-
sive cutting tool made of limestone Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 149
modern India (Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58) a
grooved sandstone tool was found with an unfinished
bead at Catalhoyuk (Wright and Bains 2007)
Tosi and Vidale (1990) regard failure resulting
from breakage or human error as more common in
the grinding stage than during perforation although
this depends on material and opinion (Kenoyer 2003
18) In some cases it might be more efficient to shape
the bead first before attempting perforation This
may explain why barrel beads tend to be shaped and
abraded prior to perforation
Finished beads were always finely abraded and
sometimes polished to the extent of reflecting light
Ethnographic observations indicate that polishing is
sometimes done by placing beads en masse in a
leather bag along with an abrasive and shaking and
rolling the bags for long periods (Allchin 1979
Kenoyer 2003) This simple method would have been
more likely than the method of rolling beads and
abrasives in a wooden barrel which is also docu-
mented ethnographically (Kenoyer 2003)
However shaking beads in a bag with an abrasive
tends to produce beads with rounded convex edges
(Gwinnett and Gorelick 1989) Some beads at Jilat
have this form but many mdash especially those made of
the hard cherty red Dabba Marble mdash have sharp
edges perpendicular to bead faces indicating that
they were individually polished or polished during
rolling on a string or stick Alternative methods of
polishing can include rubbing with leather or wood
with the addition of fine sand or chalk and water or
with animal hairwool and animal fat (Kenoyer 1986
20) These methods would have been possible with
Jilat technology
Craft Specialization and Comparisons withOther Sites
Technology needs to be studied not only in terms of
materials and techniques but also in terms of social
groups involved in artefact production individual
artisans and skill (Dobres and Hoffmann 1999 2ndash12)
In egalitarian societies craft skill and knowledge of
Figure 13 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic sites Drilling and piercing tools From Baird 1993 fig 82
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
150 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
special materials can enhance the power of an
individual or a group encouraging hierarchy
(Dobres 2000 119ndash20)
These questions force us to reconsider issues of
craft specialization a term often used loosely or in
widely different ways Three concepts of specializa-
tion are considered here individual specialists
specialization between households or domestic
groups within a given site and site specialization
within a regional or social network of craft produc-
tion and exchange
Costin (1991) draws a contrast between indepen-
dent specialization and attached specialization
Independent specialization involves production of
utilitarian goods for nonelites and can be household-
based or based in special workshops Attached
specialization refers to production of prestige goods
under control of elites Whilst Costin notes that
attached specialization can also be based in house-
holds or workshops we often think of attached
specialization in connection with central institutions
and urban or state-level societies It is of considerable
interest that in early urban societies the making of
stone personal ornaments in association with central
institutions figures prominently (Stein 1996 Vidale
1989)
How earlier forms of craft specialization may have
evolved into large-scale attached specialization is
poorly understood Most research has concentrated
on later stages in this process (eg Stein 1996) in
discussions of earlier forms of specialization defini-
tions and criteria for diagnosis could sometimes be
clearer (eg Quintero and Wilke 1998 Rollefson and
Parker 2002 Rosen 1997) If we are dealing with
a
c
b
Figure 14 Ground stone artefacts probably used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Capstone made of limestone
Jilat 25 (b) Handstone probably used as an anvil or hammer Jilat 25 note depression in face and flake scars
at edges (c) Limestone drilling bench Jilat 13 Note evidence of use-wear on the left and widest area of the
bench smooth abraded surface drill marks in the centre-left face small flake scars with negative bulbs of per-
cussion close to the edge of the bench
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 151
specialization in Neolithic societies it is probably
independent specialization Still Neolithic societies
may fall between Costinrsquos two categories Neolithic
groups were clearly producing prestige goods perso-
nal ornaments are not strictly utilitarian and there is
at least a possibility that elites were emerging (Byrd
1994 Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002 Verhoeven
2002)
Individual Specialists
First there is the issue of identifying individual
specialists Some use lsquospecializationrsquo to refer to any
situation in which some artisans have high levels of
skill a view that has been criticized (Rice 1991) We
agree with Rice that identifying a high level of
technical skill in a craft is not on its own sufficient
for a diagnosis of specialization since it robs the
concept of force in discussing long term change (by
this criterion the Upper Palaeolithic was riddled
with craft specialists) However we would argue
that if there are other indications of craft specializa-
tion a search for levels of ability in different
individuals is appropriate mdash if the data permit
Such data would be primary refuse from well-dated
sites of high temporal resolution in which technical
processes (eg errors in chaines operatoires) can
reveal experts vs novices (Pigeot 1990 Stout 2002
Vanzetti and Vidale 1994)
In the case of Jilat 13 and 25 we are dealing with
much primary refuse and two closely dated sites (see
above and Tables 6ndash7) mdash with periodic use of the
sites over a time range on the order of 200 years at
most and possibly much less Jilat 25 yielded activity
areas with clear spatial clusters as do a number of
contexts at Jilat 13 Space does not permit us to
present all details (this awaits the final site report)
but we feel confident that aggregate consideration of
the data from each site allows us to discuss general
questions of individual skills mdash master craftsmen vs
novices
a b
c
Figure 15 Ground stone artefacts possibly used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Grooved sandstone abrading
tool Jilat 13 (b) Sandstone hand-held abrader Jilat 25 (c) Grooved limestone abrading tool Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
152 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
To explore this we analysed unfinished blanks and
the frequency of perforation errors Drilling is a
sensitive moment in bead production when many
things can go wrong (Kenoyer 2003) A low incidence
in perforation errors combined with high numbers of
successfully finished beads and evidence of standar-
dization should be reasonably good indicators of an
artisanrsquos mastery This is the situation seen at Jilat 25
(Fig 7) In all of 93 blanks from Jilat 25 only 2 were
perforation errors a failure rate of only 2
On the other hand a high incidence of perforation
errors would suggest that a beadmaker was a relative
novice Jilat 13 produced more blanks with perfora-
tion errors than Jilat 25 We thought we might find
individual contexts with a high rate of error
suggesting apprentices
The data did not bear this out Of 223 bead blanks
from Jilat 13 (all phases) 22 were perforation errors
mdash a failure rate of 98 All but two errors were on
barrel bead blanks of green Dabba Marble The
others were one pendant blank and one irregular
bead blank These 22 blanks were distributed across
20 different contexts and no more than 2 perforation
errors were found in any one context
A close look at those contexts reveals low error
rates In Context B21 2 green barrel bead blanks
with perforation errors were found with 5 other
blanks The others included green and red barrel and
disc blanks This context also yielded 5 successfully
finished beads including black and red barrel beads
and a green disc Black and green debitage and a
discoidal handstone were also found here In Context
B71 2 blanks with perforation errors were found
along with 9 other blanks and 10 successfully
finished beads including green Dabba Marble barrel
beads but also black and red disc beads Much
debitage was found along with a flaked limestone
cutting tool (cf Fig 12c) and a limestone object with
a drill mark
The higher rate of error at Jilat 13 compared to
Jilat 25 could be because artisans at Jilat 13 were
making more of the larger more complex barrel
beads (as opposed to simple discs see Tables 2ndash3)
which offer greater chances of failure due to the
longer drilling distance However at Jilat 13 the
overall failure rate was still quite low particularly
considering the overall volume of material recovered
(Table 1)
We conclude that the beadmakers at Jilat 13
included few trainees These appear to have been
skilled artisans a small task force composed of
relative experts This raises the question of whether
these beadmakers were examples of lsquoproducer
specialistsrsquo as traditionally defined that is people
involved in
production of a good by a relatively small number of
individuals (compared to the total output and
number of consumers) individuals who are as a
result of this selectivity and the routinization or
repetition of their tasks particularly skilled in
manufacture (Rice 1991 263)
Jilat 13 and 25 do suggest small numbers of
individuals and a certain selectivity in who was
involved in stone bead making The quantity of
debitagedebris relative to (1) the number of finished
beads and (2) the modest sizes of these structures
collectively suggest that these craftsmenwomen
served a larger number of consumers relative to the
number of craftsmen involved here If so who were
these consumers mdash other residents of Jilat or groups
beyond
Intra-site Specialization Between Domestic Groups
Several studies suggest ways of identifying different
forms of craft specialization between domestic groups
in a site For later sites Stein (1996) has explored
spatial data particularly how craft production
facilities are dispersed among domestic units or
located near special (or central) institutions In
Neolithic sites questions about dispersal between
households and possible links between craft produc-
tion and special buildings or special sites have been
underexplored
For specialization Costin (1991) suggests that we
would expect (1) variability between production
units (eg households occupations regions) in
relevant artefacts (2) high densities of craft produc-
tion debris relative to some other generally used
item in some production units (3) high ratios of
unfinished goods to finished goods in some produc-
tion units Kenoyer et alrsquos (1991) ethnoarchaeolo-
gical studies of modern stone bead-making in
Khambat (India) suggest something similar in the
case of households as production units There non-
specialist households engaging in casual opportu-
nistic bead production revealed low quantities of
bead-making debris few unfinished beads and little
standardization in finished beads By contrast
households specializing in bead production were
characterized by stockpiling of large quantities of
raw materials many unfinished beads and more
standardized finished products
In looking at whole occupations (ie phases within
sites) as a unit of observation we argue elsewhere
(Wright and Garrard 2003) that artefact densities and
other data from 13 PPNB and 8 PPNCELN
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 153
occupations in the Jilat-Azraq region suggest that
PPNCELN producers were more specialized than
those of the PPNB mdash at least in the Jilat-Azraq
region Unlike the PPNB sites Jilat 13 and 25 have
very high densities of bead-making debris specialized
tools for drilling and sawing there is an abundance of
unfinished materials relative to finished products
bead-making tools and debris are abundant relative
to normal domestic food processing equipment
(ground stone artefacts) (Wright and Garrard 2003
cf Costin 1991)
That argument is chronological comparing the
PPNB to the PPNCELN occupations and we stand
behind it for the Jilat-Azraq case (different trajec-
tories may apply to south Jordan and the Negev see
below) Still it leaves open the issue of house-to-
house variation within Jilat 25 or Jilat 13 As we have
only one excavated structure per site we cannot on
present evidence argue that each building housed a
group of specialists serving other households within
the same site In fact we have no direct evidence that
there were other structures on each site mdash the ones
excavated were the only ones visible on the surface
There are nuances of material and typological
choices between the Jilat 25 structure (red disc beads)
and the Jilat 13 structure (larger complex green
ornaments) but these nuances are beyond the scope
of this paper
In all we suspect that stone bead production at
Jilat 13 and 25 was geared not for other domestic
units lsquoin camprsquo but for use by these quite mobile
communities themselves mdash as well as export to other
sites within the steppe and beyond (see below) In
Costinrsquos terms (Costin 1991) Jilat 13 and 25 might
each be an example of an independent non-centra-
lized dispersed workshop possibly lsquofamily runrsquo (Rice
1991 262) mdash in which handling of Dabba Marble
was not routinely entrusted to novices
There are hints of house-to-house variations in
bead-making in major villages with larger samples of
domestic structures as in PPNB Beidha At PPNB
Beidha (earlier than Jilat 13 and 25) Building 14
stands out
Other forms of production besides food preparation
were less common Building 14 represented the best
example of artefact production in these basements
A wide range of artefacts was recovered apparently
associated with building 14rsquos basement floor
Particularly widespread were stone polishers bone
tools raw material (including hematite malachite
and magnesium) more than 60 unmodified marine
shells and at least two dozen beads of shell stone
and bone some of which were in various stages of
production Some artifacts lay on stone slabs
indicating that at least some slabs may have
functioned as work surfaces (Byrd 2005 117)
Such hints are intriguing Still macro-artefacts
from house floors are affected by problems of site
formation and house abandonment Micro-artefact
data can help (Rainville 2005) House-by-house
exploration with attention to micro-artefacts is
needed (Wright and Bains 2007)
Site Specialization Within a Regional Network of Craft
Production and Exchange
Both sites and other Neolithic sites in Jilat and
Azraq exhibit resource specialization
the selective use of particular resources in craft
manufacture such as certain clays that are repeat-
edly used (Rice 1991 262)
The Jilat artisans emphasized Dabba Marble from
a wider array of available stone types The Jilat-
Azraq sites collectively show that green Dabba
Marble was a special target This is revealed in both
frequencies and weights (for debris data and weight
data see Wright and Garrard 2003 for frequency
data on beads and blanks see Tables 2 and 3) At
both sites debris is greatly dominated by green
Dabba Marble mdash 80ndash95 of debris by both weight
(grams) and frequency Green Dabba Marble also
dominates blanks in terms of weight at both sites mdash
indicating the use of green for making larger heavier
and more conspicuous ornaments
Turning to frequencies at Jilat 13 about 90 of
blanks are green and only 5 are red However
finished beads include both green and red forms in
comparable percentages (404 and 436 respec-
tively) (Table 3) suggesting that finished red beads
were brought into the building from a place of
manufacture located somewhere else At Jilat 25
blanks of red and green Dabba Marble occur in
comparable proportions (409 green 43 red)
whilst finished beads are predominantly red (588)
(Table 2) If Jilat 13 and 25 were absolute contem-
poraries this could suggest variations in choices and
exchange between residents of different structures
Rice (1991) has defined site specialization as a
situation in which a site is located near a special
resource and the inhabitants emphasize production of
a craft based on that resource Relative to other sites
not so located the range of site functions and
activities would be expected to be more limited
Thus site specialization
involves individual localities or sites having evidence
of limited functions or intensive productive activity
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
154 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
often determined by fortuitous environmental fac-
tors This includes proximity to mineral deposits
and so forth (Rice 1991 262)
Do Jilat 13 and 25 fit this concept In both sites
15 km from the source we have a wealth of evidence
for intensive stone bead production and scanty
evidence for routine food processing tools (Wright
and Garrard 2003) However Jilat 25 may be closer
to the limited function model envisioned by Rice In
Jilat 13 bead-making is clearly intensive but we are
also dealing with a chipped stone assemblage of not
only drills and burins but also projectile points and
other tools Jilat 13 also reveals production of
figurines (of animals phalluses and arrow-shaped
forms) and sculpted pillars (Baird 1993 Garrard
et al 1994a Martin 1999 Wright 1992 1993)
In all Jilat 13 and 25 suggest that we can apply
Ricersquos lsquosite specializationrsquo on the grounds of intensive
productive activity and proximity to source mdash but
with the qualification that this specialization was also
embedded in hunting-herding activities and at Jilat
13 production of other special crafts unique among
the sites of a symbolic nature (figurines pillars)
One possibility is that we are dealing with a camp
of hunter-herder corporate groups mdash part of a wider
regional network mdash engaged in special activities in
remote areas involving art personal ornaments and
ritual Such groups are suggested by other data from
the PPNBndashPPNC time span for example Nahal
Hemar (ornaments masks hunting tools) Dhuweila
(carving of hunters with dress variations)
Catalhoyuk (images of hunters with dress variations
as in the bull hunt mural) and Gobeklitepe (sculpture
production including a quarry wild-animal icono-
graphy hunting) (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988 Betts
1998 Mellaart 1967 Schmidt 2000) In all these data
hint that craft production of special items was
embedded in hunting andor herding activities in
remote areas this may have been a key means by
which exotic materials reached major villages In a
very broad way this supports a sketch outlined by
Bar Yosef (Bar-Yosef 2001) although we do not
necessarily agree with specifics of his model eg the
territories boundaries social groups and mechanisms
which he suggests (cf Asouti 2006) Instead we see
this as one example of diverse strategies of social
networking linking lineages households and commu-
nities in the Neolithic (Wright forthcoming)
Returning to the stone bead data from Jilat 13 and
25 the apparent stockpiling of raw material and
intensive production activity hints at production of
the green material for export (see above and Wright
and Garrard 2003) New data now add weight to this
idea and suggest the following provisional picture of
regional specializations and exchanges in ornaments
(1) Based on typology technology and materials thereappears to be a distinctive eastern Jordanian koine ornetwork of stone bead manufacture and exchangefeaturing Dabba Marble and a probable regionalspecialization in it
Other Neolithic bead production sites are known
from eastern Jordan Indications are that most of the
green bead materials are Dabba Marble probably
from Jilat (further work is needed) In these sites
diversity of materials used seems low with few
imports from beyond the steppe Shells however
testify to wider networks (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989
Cooke and Reese in Betts 1998 Garrard et al 1994a
Reese 1991)
Azraq 31 (PPNB and ELN) is in our suite of study
materials (Baird et al 1992 Garrard et al 1994a
Wright and Garrard 2003) and debris blanks and
beads were found Preliminary XRF analysis of green
samples (by Groom) indicates that the material is
consistent with Jilat Dabba Marble Typology and
technology are also similar and as at Jilat 25 burin
spall drills were closely associated with bead-making
in specific activity areas (Baird 1993 521 Baird et al
1992 25) However the ground stone revealed no
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
(Wright 1992 1993 Wright in Baird et al 1992)
Material used for beads at Dhuweila (PPNB and
ELN) has been called Dabba Marble (Cooke and
Reese in Betts 1998) It is consistent in appearance
with our material although we have no details on
mineralogy or source Typologically these beads are
similar to those of Jilat 13 and 25 The ground stone
is very different from the suite at the Jilat sites
(Wright in Betts 1998) for comparisons of chipped
stone assemblages see Baird (1993)
At Bawwab al-Ghazal (Late PPNB) Rollefson
et al found drills bits on burin spalls tile knives
beads bead blanks and bead debris some of which
they called green Dabba Marble (Rollefson et al
1999 Quintero et al 2004) They argued that there is
a possible source of this material outcropping near
the site mdash lsquoFor the last raw material [green Dabba
Marble] small nodules of the green limestone were
embedded in the local bedrockrsquo (Rollefson et al 1999
3) However as shown in Appendix A the true
Dabba Marble only occurs in a restricted area west of
Wadi Jilat The lsquobedrockrsquo which outcrops near Azraq
31 and Bawwab al-Ghazal is travertine and some of
this formed during the late Pleistocene and Holocene
The nearby Epipalaeolithic site of Azraq 17 was
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 155
found partially embedded in travertine and artefacts
including nodules of imported basalt were found in
the travertine at this site It is possible that the
nodules of green limestone found at Bawwab al-
Ghazal were imported Dabba Marble which subse-
quently became incorporated in a travertine near the
site An alternative possibility is that the local
travertine is infused with green minerals In Wadi
Jilat travertines were noted with traces of green
minerals and in the Siwaqa area to the south-west of
Jilat there are extensive travertines some of which
are infused with pale green minerals including
volkonskoite (Barjous 1986 mdash see also Appendix A)
In eastern Jordan some Neolithic sites are greatly
dominated by burins (lsquoburin sitesrsquo) At a number of
these there is evidence for stone bead-making (eg
Jebel Naja) These lsquoburin sitesrsquo typically reveal few
ground stone tools we know of no examples of
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
from them It was argued that the main role of the
burins was production of spalls for drills used mainly
for beads (Betts 1987 1998 Finlayson and Betts
1990) However burin sites are not universally
associated with stone bead making At Jilat 23 24
and 26 burins were numerous but other evidence for
bead-making is scanty (Baird 1993 520)
Therefore some have questioned whether
burins and burin spalls in such sites were solely or
primarily intended for making drills and beads
noting that other functions are possible (Quintero
et al 2004 209) Given that these sites typically
represent short-term occupations it is possible that
many sites might be spall manufacture sites with
spalls transported to other settings where drill
manufacture and bead manufacture took place such
as Jilat 13 and 25 Rollefson expressed doubt that
either bladelet or burin spall drills would have been
used in bow drills partly because of their fragility and
also because most of them have a pronounced curve
on the long axis which would have made high speed
drilling impossible (Rollefson and Parker 2002) But
Finlayson and Betts (1990) and Berna (1995)
successfully experimented using burin spalls with
bow drills and Kenoyer (personal communication
2007) notes that drills made on burin spalls are the
most common type of drill in diverse prehistoric
stone bead-making sites (in India Pakistan and
elsewhere)
In the case of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 we believe burin-
spall drills were part of the bead-making repertoire
for reasons noted above This does not rule out other
uses of burin spalls Nor does it rule out the use of
other perforating techniques Drills do not have to be
made of stone when soft stones are being perforated
mdash wood bone and abrasives can be used (Foreman
1978)
(2) There are hints of export of Dabba Marble to at leastsome villages in the Levantine corridor However majorNeolithic villages display much diversity in materials andespecially more importing of exotic stones than is seen inthe eastern Jordanian sites
Many writers report Neolithic beads made of
unspecified lsquogreenstonersquo This term is unfortunate
since it can refer to metabasalt and similar altered
igneous rocks (Schumann 1992 248) Some of these
lsquogreenstonesrsquo may be limestone with apatite or other
materials (eg Garfinkel 1987 81ndash82 Hauptmann
2004 Talbot 1983 789) Beads of green limestones
rich in fluorapatite were found at late PPNB Basta in
southern Jordan (Hauptmann 2004) as confirmed by
XRF and XRD Green beads identified as Dabba
Marble were also reported from Ain Ghazal a site
with both PPNB and PPNC occupations (Rollefson
et al 1990 103ndash04) Whether these are Dabba
Marble from the Jilat source (Appendices AndashB) is
not yet fully clear Ongoing research will sort out
these mysteries (eg D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal
communication Hauptmann 2004)
Major villages in the Levantine Corridor reveal
different degrees of emphasis in styles and materials
often we see a certain emphasis on local materials and
preferences However considerable exchange net-
works are indicated in major villages which display
much wider ranges of stone ornament materials
compared to the eastern Jordanian sites (such as
Ain Ghazal Yiftahel Basta Barsquoja Ghuwayr 1
Fidan 1) mdash along with of course shells (Affonso
and Pernicka 2004 Bienert and Gebel 1998 84ndash86
Garfinkel 1987 Hauptmann 2004 Rollefson and
Simmons 1984 1986 Rollefson et al 1990 Simmons
and Najjar 1998 Starck 1988)
As the Neolithic evolved stone bead-making
entailed increasingly diverse techniques and materi-
als One example may be drills In earlymiddle PPNB
sites most drills are made on bladelets In the late
PPNB PPNC and Late Neolithic there may have
been a gradual increase in drills made on burin spalls
although perhaps not in all regions (Jensen 2004
Rollefson and Parker 2002) Underlining increasing
diversity of technological practice between groups
Baird (2001b) pointed out geographic variation in
this technology with spall drills dominating in the
north-eastern Jordanian steppe from MPPNB
through Early Late Neolithic whilst contemporary
sites to west and south use bladelet blanks for their
piercing tools
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
156 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
stone beads and stone beads are known only from
selected sites (eg Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1991 Larson
1978 Marechal 1991 Moore 2000 Reese 1991 Valla
et al 2004) In the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A and B
stone ornaments expand widely in numbers and
forms (eg Critchley 2007 Gopher 1997 Talbot
1983 Wheeler 1983) From the PPNC onward there
are hints of expanding trade networks in stone beads
(eg Wright and Garrard 2003 cf Bar-Yosef Mayer
et al 2004 Diamanti 2003 Dubin 1995 Hamilton
2005 Jackson 2005 Wright 2008 Wright 2006)
Neolithic stone beads are often found in contexts of
use or discard (houses middens graves) Of manufac-
turing areas and production techniques we have
mostly brief reports (Berna 1995 Fabiano et al 2004
Finlayson and Betts 1990 Garfinkel 1987 Gorelick
and Gwinnett 1990 Hauptmann 2004 Jensen 2004
Kaliszan et al 2002 Rollefson 2002 Rollefson and
Parker 2002) We know more about other regions
(Barthelmy de Saizieu and Bouquillon 1994) or later
periods (eg Bar-Yosef Mayer et al 2004 Calley
1989) How were Neolithic stone beads made What
variations of material and technique do we see
Substantial evidence on one tradition comes from
sites of the Jilat-Azraq project eastern Jordan
(Fig 1) A preliminary description of bead assem-
blages and typology has appeared (Wright and
Garrard 2003) Here we present details of manufac-
turing technology from two production sites Jilat 13
and Jilat 25 (Fig 2) equivalent in age to the PPNC
or ELN (c 6950ndash6400 cal BC)
The Sites
Wadi Jilat lies in limestone steppe 30ndash40 km east of
the present-day margins of the Levantine Corridor
where rain-fed cultivation is possible and where large
Neolithic villages emerged (Fig 1) Azraq Oasis is
50 km north-east of Jilat between limestone and
basalt steppe-desert In this work 18 Palaeolithic and
Neolithic sites were excavated (Baird et al 1992
Garrard et al 1986 1987 1994a 1994b 1996
Garrard 1998 Garrard in preparation Garrard and
Byrd 1992)
Bone and shell beads were found at the majority of
the 10 late Upper Palaeolithic and Epipalaeolithic
sites investigated but no stone beads were discovered
mdash even at Azraq 18 which is a Natufian site This
may be an accident of samplingdiscovery as some
Natufian sites have significant numbers of stone
beads (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Cauvin 1974 Marechal 1991 Moore 2000
Valla et al 2004) However at the time of writing no
stone beads have been found at pre-PPNB sites in
Figure 1 Map of the southern Levant showing sites and raw material sources mentioned in the text
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
132 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
eastern Jordan (Richter et al 2008 T Richter
personal communication)
All eight Neolithic sites revealed stone bead
production along with shell and bone beads The
sites date to the PPNB (eg Jilat 7 26 32 Azraq
31) and PPNCELN (Azraq 31 Jilat 13 and 25) The
other two are lsquoburin sitesrsquo of either LPPNB or
PPNCELN age (Jilat 23 24) (Garrard et al 1994b)
All of these sites were seasonal camps of small
groups engaged in varying combinations of
hunting trapping foraging cultivating herding
(Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999) They lived in
shelters constructed of upright limestone slab
foundations
The Neolithic sites yielded 10547 artefacts of stone
beads or related debris from secure contexts About
88 of these came from Jilat 13 and Jilat 25
(Table 1) They include finished ornaments unfin-
ished roughouts and bead blanks and debitage
(Tables 2ndash5) Densities of beads blanks and debris
Figure 2 (a) Plan of Wadi Jilat 13 Late Phase Note location of workslab in the centre-left area of the oval structure (b)
Plan of Wadi Jilat 25 Area A structure
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 133
and other data indicate intensification of stone
beadmaking in PPNCELN sites in the Jilat-Azraq
region relative to the PPNB (Wright and Garrard
2003) It is of interest that this coincides with the first
appearance of domestic sheep-goat in the Jilat sites
(see Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999)
Stratigraphy site formation and chronology of
Jilat 13 and 25 are discussed in more depth elsewhere
(Garrard et al 1994a Wright and Garrard 2003) The
sites were excavated as part of a regional programme
and areas of excavation vary At Jilat 25 surface
artefacts extended across an area of 3200 sq m From
the surface one oval upright-slab structure (7 x
45 m) was visible (Fig 2b) About 50 of this was
excavated an area of 21 sq m and a total volume of
78 cu m Three occupation phases were identified
The early phase included an occupation fill (Aa19)
rich in primary refuse this yielded a date of 8020 iexcl
80 uncal BP (OxA-2408) Above this the middle
phase involved addition of bins and hearths and
accumulation of an ashy occupation fill (Aa15) also
rich in primary refuse A final occupation fill (Aa7)
accumulated and the building was filled with rubble
followed by a deposit of sand which sealed the layers
below (Table 6) In each phase artefact clusters on
occupational surfaces and within their fills were
identified via 1 x 1 m horizontal units (i ii etc)
we discuss these clusters selectively here The chipped
stone assemblage from Jilat 25 is characterized by
debitage dominated by flakes although both flake
and blade cores were found However 84ndash85 of
tools were made on blades Prominent tools include
Nizzanim points (the sole point type) burins drill
bits made from burin spalls and other types (Baird
1993 469 521 Baird in Garrard et al 1994a 85
table 1) Further details on the chipped stone
assemblages are available in a number of works
(Baird 1993 1994 1995 2001a 2001b)
Surface artefacts at Jilat 13 extended across an 800
sq m area One large oval upright-slab building (10 x
65 m) was visible at surface Almost all of this was
excavated an area of 735 sq m (Fig 2a) Three
phases were identified In the early phase the
excavated volume of deposit was 145 cu m the
structure was built and primary occupation deposits
accumulated then a pavement was laid down in the
western area and hearths were constructed in the
south and east Dates from this phase were 7920 iexcl
100 uncal BP (OxA-1800) and 7870 iexcl 100 uncal BP
(OxA-1801) The middle phase exposed 87 cu m of
deposit and yielded no C14 dates An interior
partition wall separated the western end of the
building and pits and stone-lined hearths were added
in the eastern area The late phase of which 174 cu m
of deposit was excavated yielded two dates of 7900
iexcl 80 uncal BP (OxA-2411) and 7830 iexcl 90 uncal BP
(UB-3462) At this time a new upper pavement was
added above a rubble foundation In the western area
a large workbench with evidence of drilling abrasion
and flaking is associated with this phase (Figs 2a
14c) Primary refuse was found in all phases (selected
contexts are shown in Table 7) but the stratigraphy
is more complex than at Jilat 25 In the chipped stone
assemblage at Jilat 13 each phase revealed a
bladebased assemblage with blades or bladelets
making up 57 of debitage Most tools are made
on blades (78ndash81 of all tools are blade based)
Major tool types include projectile points burins
piercers and drills scapers and endscrapers notches
and denticulates and bifacial tools such as tile
knives In the early phase for which we have most
detailed information burins and points are the most
Table 1 Summary of Dabba Marble artefacts at Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 (see also Wright and Garrard 2003 279ndash80)
Artefact Category
Jilat 13 Jilat 13 Jilat 25 Jilat 25
Raw frequency (N) Weight (grams) Raw frequency (N) Weight (grams)
Finished beads(secure contexts)
144 60 115 62
Finished beads(surfacemixed contexts)
12 no data 4 no data
Roughouts and blanks(secure contexts)
180 222 89 82
Roughouts and blanks(surfacemixed contexts)
43 no data 4 no data
Debitage(secure contexts)
7369 6905 1381 976
(5 all debitage from nodulesto microflakes and shatter)TOTAL (secure contexts) 7693 7187 1585 1120TOTAL (secure contextsz beads and blanks from surfacemixed)
7748 1593
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
134 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Ta
ble
2B
ea
ds
an
db
lan
ks
J
ila
t2
5(a
llc
on
tex
ts)
Gre
en
Dab
ba
Marb
le
Gre
en
Dab
ba
Marb
le
Red
Dab
ba
Marb
le
Red
Dab
ba
Marb
le
Bla
ck
Dab
ba
Marb
le
Bla
ck
Dab
ba
Marb
leW
hit
eC
halk
Wh
ite
Ch
alk
Wh
ite
Qu
art
zite
Wh
ite
Qu
art
zite
Oth
er
Oth
er
To
tal
To
tal
To
tal
To
tal
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
ead
s-
B
lan
ks
-N
Bla
nks
-
Dis
cb
ead
s12
21
67
39
410
74
51
95
79
875
80
6R
ing
bead
s2
21
7O
valb
ead
sC
ylin
der
bead
s1
10
8B
arr
elb
ead
s9
63
112
10
17
75
Irre
gula
rb
ead
sIn
dete
rmin
ate
or
frag
ment
16
10
86
65
Pend
ants
-tr
iang
ula
rP
end
ants
-tr
ap
ezoid
al
Pend
ants
-oval
Pend
ants
-re
cta
ng
ula
rP
end
ants
-sq
uare
11
11
Pend
ants
-te
ard
rop
Pend
ants
-oth
er
or
ind
ete
rmin
ate
14
10
84
43
Bra
cele
ts7
75
9
TO
TA
L-
Bead
s-
N24
70
614
50
119
100
0TO
TA
L-
Bead
s-
20
258
85
011
84
20
0100
0TO
TA
L-
Bla
nks
-N
38
40
10
41
93
100
0TO
TA
L-
Bla
nks
-
40
943
010
84
31
1100
0
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 135
Ta
ble
3B
ea
ds
an
db
lan
ks
J
ila
t1
3(a
llc
on
tex
ts)
Gre
en
Da
bb
aM
arb
le
Gre
en
Da
bb
aM
arb
le
Re
dD
ab
ba
Ma
rble
Re
dD
ab
ba
Ma
rble
Bla
ck
Da
bb
aM
arb
le
Bla
ck
Da
bb
aM
arb
leW
hit
eC
ha
lkW
hit
eC
ha
lkW
hit
eQ
ua
rtzi
teW
hit
eQ
ua
rtzi
teO
the
rO
the
rT
ota
lT
ota
lT
ota
lT
ota
l
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
ead
s-
B
lan
ks
-N
Bla
nks
-
Dis
cb
ead
s7
36
40
810
22
21
59
38 1
49
22 0
Rin
gb
ead
s2
12
51
20
12 9
00 0
Ovalb
ead
s0
0 0
00 0
Cylin
der
bead
s1
13
42 6
10 4
Barr
elb
ead
s36
57
13
24
11
254
34 8
62
27 8
Irre
gula
rb
ead
s1
00 0
10 4
Ind
ete
rmin
ate
fr
ag
ment
794
11
74 5
96
43 0
Pend
ants
-tr
iang
ula
r1
11
0 6
10 4
Pend
ants
-tr
ap
ezoid
al
21
21 3
10 4
Pend
ants
-oval
11
21 3
00 0
Pend
ants
-re
cta
ng
ula
r1
10 6
00 0
Pend
ants
-sq
uare
11
10 6
10 4
Pend
ants
-te
ard
rop
22
1 3
00 0
Pend
ants
-oth
er
in
dete
rmin
ate
111
12
1 3
11
4 9
Bra
cele
ts0
0 0
00 0
TO
TA
L-
Bead
s-
N62
68
20
11
3155
100 0
TO
TA
L-
Bead
s-
40 4
43 6
12 8
0 6
0 6
1 9
100 0
TO
TA
L-
Bla
nks
-N
202
11
42
04
223
100 0
TO
TA
L-
Bla
nks
-
90 6
4 9
1 8
0 9
0 0
1 8
100 0
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
136 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
frequently occurring types burins constitute 29 of
tools and points 16 Piercers and drills occur in
much lower numbers (4 of tools) as do other tool
types Of projectile points Nizzanim points are the
most frequent (397 of points) followed by Byblos
(313) Herzeliya (12) Amuq (84) Transverse
(6) and Haparsah (24) points (Baird 1993 469
500ndash17 625 Baird in Garrard et al 1994a 85
table 1)
The 14C dates from these two sites have been
recalibrated using IntCal 2004 and the date ranges at
one standard deviation are as follows Jilat 25 (early
phase) context Aa19a (OxA2408) 5 9020ndash8760 cal
BP Jilat 13 (early phase) context A21a (OxA1800) 5
8980ndash8600 cal BP Jilat 13 (early phase) context A15a
(OxA1801) 5 8980ndash8550 cal BP Jilat 13 (late phase)
context C24 (OxA2411) 5 8980ndash8590 cal BP Jilat 13
(late phase) context C22 (UB3462) 5 8780ndash8460 cal
BP
Thus stratigraphy and radiocarbon dates suggest
that we are dealing with two sites of reasonably good
temporal resolution followed by abandonment and
sealing of primary refuse deposits Five C14 dates
indicate occupation between about 7830 and 8020
uncal BP with low standard deviations for each date
In radiocarbon terms this is about as precise as it
gets and the two sites may overlap in time However
projectile points do suggest we are dealing with a
somewhat wider time span for the Jilat 13 sample
than the Jilat 25 sample
Given different extents of excavation comparisons
of these and other stone bead-making sites entail
challenges Density data however mdash as measured by
numbers of beads blanks and debris per cu m volume
of excavated deposit mdash can be revealing For
example the PPNB occupations in Wadi Jilat (3
sites 11 occupations) had low densities mdash an average
of 1072 artefacts per cu m and a maximum of 313
per cu m (Wright and Garrard 2003 table 2) In
contrast the density data for Jilat 25 are 2223 per cu
m (early phase) 3312 per cu m (middle phase) and
562 per cu m (late phase) Density data for Jilat 13
are 3102 stone bead artefacts per cu m (early phase)
1615 per cu m (middle phase) and 1099 per cu m
(late phase) This suggests greater intensity of bead-
making in Jilat 13 and 25
Sources Quarrying and Raw Materials
Most Jilat beads were made of Dabba Marble which
occurs in green pinkred and black (Appendix A)
This is our focus here A few other materials were also
used other local sedimentary rocks and non-local
turquoise (nearest source Sinai) malachite (nearest
sources Faynan and Timna) and carnelian (nearest
source unknown) Non-local stones formed only 015
of the materials (Wright and Garrard 2003)
The largest known sources of Dabba Marble lie
15ndash25 km west of Jilat 13 and 25 some may be
closer (Fig 1 and Appendix A) These are bodies of
limestones chalks and cherts lightly metamorphosed
Table 4 Finished disc beads size data (complete or measurable beads) (na 5 not applicable)
Site N
Diameter (mm) HeightThickness (mm) Perforation Diameter (mm)
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Jilat 7 PPNB 13 87 36 30 28 28 10Jilat 26 PPNB 0 na na na na na naJilat 32 PPNB 0 na na na na na naAzraq 31 PPNB 2 98 46 25 14 23 04Jilat 25 PPNCELN 66 83 16 26 08 21 05Jilat 13 PPNCELN 47 69 24 25 09 19 06Azraq 31 PPNCELN 34 68 16 26 11 18 04
Table 5 Finished barrel beads size data (complete or measurable beads) (na 5 not applicable)
Site N
Diameter (mm) HeightThickness (mm) Perforation Diameter (mm)
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Jilat 7 PPNB 1 45 na 40 na 15 naJilat 26 PPNB 2 75 na 65 na 25 naJilat 32 PPNB 0 na na na na 00 naAzraq 31 PPNB 1 115 na 100 na 40 naJilat 25 PPNCELN 6 63 14 64 17 21 09Jilat 13 PPNCELN 28 68 28 71 39 22 09Azraq 31 PPNCELN 13 109 56 133 91 29 09
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 137
and injected with various minerals eg apatites red
iron oxides (Fig 3a) Outcrops show substantial
variations in mineralization even over small areas
in Fig 3b the left side of the outcrop is soft green
Dabba Marble the right side is red Dabba Marble
The geology and mineralogy of Dabba Marble are
presented in Appendices AndashB The Neolithic Jilat
beads are consistent with this source (Appendix B)
Methods of Analysis
Comprehensive recovery of small beads debitage and
micro-artefacts was possible due to intensive fine-
scale sieving All excavated contexts were sieved
through a 5 mm mesh many samples were dry sieved
or wet sieved through a 15 mm mesh (the latter after
flotation) Artefacts from floors were collected from 1
sq m horizontal grid units to permit identification of
activity areas Fine-grained spatial data and micro-
artefacts are important in understanding lithic
technologies (Dunnell and Stein 1989 Cessford and
Mitrovic 2005) This is borne out by the Jilat data
since micro-flakes are one byproduct of stone bead
retouch In cases of intense housecleaning micro-
artefacts may reveal bead-making where macro-
artefacts do not (Wright and Bains 2007)
For each context artefacts were separated by raw
material and classified into major groups nodules
and debitage (Fig 4) roughouts (Fig 5) unfinished
blanks and finished ornaments (Figs 6ndash10) We
counted and weighed each group to determine
relationships between debitage and finished beads
Measurements (diameter height perforation dia-
meter) were taken on beads and blanks to assess
standardization and drilling techniques
Finished ornaments were classified into 8 basic
types (Wright and Garrard 2003) Circular disc beads
are the most numerous smallest and most standar-
dized (Figs 6d 7endashf) They occur in the widest range
of materials most red Dabba Marble beads were
discs Barrelshaped beads are larger more variable
and mostly made of green Dabba Marble (Fig 9endashf)
Pendants are the largest rarest and most diverse
items shaped as triangles rectangles and ovals most
are of green Dabba Marble (Fig 10d f) Bracelets
were made of white chalk (Tables 2ndash3)
Unfinished beads (blanks) were classified according
to the same typology as finished beads when the
intended final product could be ascertained (eg disc
blank) (Tables 2ndash3 Figs 6andashc 7andashd 8 9andashd 10c e)
Within these categories blanks were further classified
according to traces of flaking grinding perforation
Figure 8 shows these stages for 3 sequences of disc
bead manufacture Differences between Sequences A
B and C are differences in the original blank (Stage 1
thin flake thick flake tabular roughout) and presence
or absence of flaking retouch on edges (Stage 2)
Further analyses of sequences for these and other
bead types are still in progress
Debitage was sorted into nodules cores rough-
outs flakes angular shatter micro-flakes and
Table 6 Stone beads blanks and debris Jilat 25 all contexts
Phase Context Description Beads Blanks Debris Comments Selected associated artefacts
Early Aa24 Fill of bedrock cut 0 0 2Early Aa27 Fill of bedrock cut 0 0 1Early Aa19 First occupation fill 29 23 384 1 cutmarked slab 3 sandstone fragments
probably handstones 1 limestone handstoneEarly Aa20 First occupation fill 1 5 6Early Aa21 First occupation fill 4 1 4Early Aa18 Early fill in entrance area 1 5 8Early A 44 Early fill in entrance area 0 0 3Middle Aa15 Second occupation fill 47 31 544 1 limestone capstone 1 grooved stone (basalt)
1 sandstone abraderMiddle Aa16 Hearth 1 1 0Middle Aa13 Fill of stone feature 1 0 81Middle Aa10 Fill of stone feature 0 0 3Middle Aa11 Ash lense 3 0 17Middle Aa7 Third occupation fill 17 15 109 2 grooved stones (limestone and basalt)
2 basalt handstones 1 sandstone fragmentMiddle Aa8 Third occupation fill 1 1 1Middle Aa14 Fill in entrance area 7 3 4Middle A 42 Fill in entrance area 0 0 1
Late Aa 2 Sandy late fill 1 0 55 1 sandstone abrader Bead 1 RDM disc Debris all GDMLate A 6 Rubbly late fill 7 4 72Late A 33 Late fill in entrance area 0 0 1Late A 36 Late fill in entrance area 0 0 6Late A 34 Fill of late intrusive feature 1 0 0
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
138 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
micro-shatter (Fig 4) Definitions of these categories
are broadly similar to those established in chipped
stone analysis (Andrefsky 1998)
Flaking and Initial Reduction Nodules CoresDebitage and Roughouts
The soft limestone and hard chert in Dabba Marble
permits it to be worked via chipping flaking
grinding sawing and drilling To varying degrees
the material has conchoidal fracture Where chert
content is high conchoidal fracture is excellent
Limestone itself also has conchoidal fracture parti-
cularly when fine-grained as Dabba Marble is The
tabular structure of the laminated limestones also
makes it possible to create flat faces easily
The difficulty of shaping beads would have varied
depending on specific material Most green Dabba
marble is fairly homogeneous composed of calcite-rich
soft limestone (Mohs 5 3) and apatite (Mohs 5 5)
Red Dabba marble occurs in a soft pale pink variety
(Mohs 5 3ndash4) a dark pink variety of medium
hardness and a dark red siliceous variety essentially
red chert (Mohs 5 7) This red chert variant (Mohs 7)
will have been more difficult to modify Flaking and
chipping were particularly important in working this
material and abrasion will have been more difficult
This may be why so many beads of the red cherty
Dabba Marble were disc beads made on flakes (Fig 7)
Flaking figured prominently in the making of
beads from softer materials However sawing and
abrasion played a greater role in modification of these
materials Comparable variations in technique
depending on material hardness are seen at other
prehistoric sites (Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990)
Table 7 Stone beads blanks and debris Jilat 13 selected contexts
Phase Context Description Beads Blanks Debris Comments Selected associated artefacts
Early C106 Fill of bedrock cut 0 0 1 1 circular limestone diskEarly B77 First occupation fill 1 5 752Early B79 Fill of hearth 0 0 6 1 limestone handstoneEarly B71 Second occupation fill 10 11 750 1 drilled and grooved limestone object
1 flaked limestone rsquoscraperrsquo 6 basalt fragmentsEarly A17 Lower pavement 0 0 0 1 cutmarked slabEarly A15 Third occupation fill 1 8 8 1 worked limestone object snake-shaped flint pebbleEarly A16 Third occupation fill 2 1 17 1 miniature pestle basaltEarly A18 Third occupation fill 0 0 11 Basalt fragments 3 from vessels
1 handstonepestle fragment 6 unidentifiableEarly B44 Third occupation fill 5 9 74Early B45 Third occupation fill 0 2 139 1 basalt handstone fragmentEarly B69 Third occupation fill 6 5 383 No ground stoneEarly C56 Third occupation fill 8 5 313 1 double-grooved sandstone abrader (Fig 15a)
Middle A3 Fourth occupation fill 3 4 60 1 limestone capstone ( 2 surfaces) 5 basalt fragmentsMiddle A5 Fourth occupation fill 7 9 139 1 cutmarked flint slab 1 grooved limestone object
ochred flints figurines pillarsMiddle B31 Fourth occupation fill 4 2 33Middle B38 Fourth occupation fill 12 6 520Middle B54 Fourth occupation fill 1 0 9 1 limestone figurine (bird)Middle B56 Fourth occupation fill 1 1 14 1 basalt grinding slab fragmentMiddle C39 Fourth occupation fill 10 12 254 1 flint cutmarked slab flaked limestone rsquoscraperrsquo
Late C14 Foundation for upperpavement
0 5 65 1 basalt ground fragment
Late B3 Upper pavement 0 0 0 1 cutmarked limestone slab 1 post-socketLate C4 Upper pavement 0 0 0 1 drilling and abrading bench (Fig 14c)Late A2 Fifth occupation fill 4 2 154 10 figurines or figurine preforms suggesting animals
phalluses arrows (flint limestone travertine) 1 pebblemortar or capstone with ochre (limestone) 1 perforatedobject 1 handstone on flake (flint) 2 vessel fragments1 ochred pebble burnt pebble (limestone) 1 groundindeterminate stone (basalt) Beads are 2 barrels and2 pendants blanks are 1 barrel and 1 indeterminate
Late B4 Fifth occupation fill 0 2 7 1 grooved limestone abrader (Fig 15c) Blanks are bothpendant blanks
Late B7 Fifth occupation fill 2 5 150 1 cutmarked limestone 1 basalt handstonepestlefragment
Late B9 Fifth occupation fill 0 0 3 1 perforated pumice abraderLate B21 Fifth occupation fill 5 7 193 1 basalt handstone 2 basalt fragmentsLate C3 Fifth occupation fill 2 4 61
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 139
Five main stages of manufacture were identified
although reduction sequences vary These are (1)
reduction of raw nodules to cores roughouts and
flakes via flaking and chipping (2) shaping of
roughouts and flakes into blanks via further flaking
chipping sawing and rough grinding (3) perforation
via boring andor drilling (4) further grinding to
produce the final shape (5) final polishing
Nodules cores and debitage were recovered in
large amounts at Jilat 13 (7369 artefacts 6905 grams)
and Jilat 25 (1381 artefacts 976 grams) The largest
unworked blocks are of green Dabba Marble They
are about 15 cm in diameter but most are about the
size of an adult human fist Some nodules were
weathered suggesting that they were picked up from
surface rather than quarried from bedrock layers
(Fig 4 top)
Reduction of nodules by flaking resulted in (1)
cores (2) tabular roughouts (3) large flakes (4) large
angular shatter fragments (5) micro-flakes and (6)
micro-shatter (Fig 4) Cores defined as nodules with
two or more flake scars are not numerous or
consistent in form Shatter micro-flakes and micro-
shatter were normally discarded as byproducts
Tabular roughouts and larger flakes were used as
the basis for further reduction into bead blanks
Roughouts are early stages in bead reduction
(Kenoyer 2003 16) At Jilat 13 and 25 roughouts
are tabular reflecting the bedded structure of the
material They were flaked and chipped around the
edges into roughly symmetrical shapes (Figs 5a 10a)
Roughouts were sometimes subjected to initial
drilling or sawing at an early stage prior to any
intense abrasion (Fig 5b) In other cases roughouts
were abraded first (Fig 5d) and then sawn or drilled
(Fig 5c) Tabular roughouts were the basis for
making larger thicker ornaments such as most
pendants and barrel beads (Figs 9ndash10)
Small subcircular flakes were the basis of most disc
beads (Figs 6ndash7) The flakes have platforms bulbs of
percussion on ventral surfaces and often scars from
previous removals on dorsal surfaces A certain
consistency in size shape and morphology suggests
that a prepared-core technology was used to predict
and produce these flakes Since cores are rare we do
not yet know precisely how this was achieved
Experiments are still needed but we suspect that
chipping and flaking was accomplished by varying
Figure 3 (a) View of the modern Dabba Marble quarry west of Wadi Jilat from which raw material samples were
obtained (see Appendices AndashB) (b) Close-up view of metamorphosed deposits in situ with interdigitating green
(left) and red (right) Dabba Marble
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
140 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
uses of indirect percussion soft-hammer percussion
andor pressure flaking since the small size of the
beads required precision The use of antler or horn
for pressure flaking of soft stones is widely seen in the
ethnographic record and experimentally (Foreman
1978 19) Even hard stones can be flaked with soft
hammers made of animal horn (Kenoyer 1986 1994
2003 Kenoyer et al 1991) Cores and flakes do not
clearly indicate use of the Cambay technique of
inverse indirect percussion as seen in carnelian bead-
making (Kenoyer 2003 Possehl 1981) Many blanks
display micro-retouch on the edges On thicker disc
bead blanks micro-flakes were removed by striking
downward at the edge of each bead face (Fig 7c) The
retouch scars show that striking was bipolar ie from
opposite directions Products of this procedure were
micro-flakes (Fig 4 bottom)
Clear indications of heat treatment were rare but
burnt pieces do occur
Sawing Drilling and Abrasion Bead Blanks andFinished Beads
Bead blanks are the further reduction of a roughout
into a form closer to the final bead shape (Kenoyer
2003 16) At Jilat 13 and 25 blanks were abandoned
at many different stages The most extensive evidence
for lithic reduction concerns disc beads it is possible
to identify some chaines operatoires (Fig 8)
Figure 6 illustrates two of these paths for green
Dabba Marble disc beads made on flakes
Sometimes circular flakes were perforated early
before any abrasion (Fig 6c) More often flakes
were abraded slightly on ventral and dorsal surfaces
before any drilling (Fig 6andashb) At this stage edges
were still rough Perforation was added later (Fig
6d) In such cases a number of disc beads were
probably then strung together and abraded on the
edges by rolling the string back and forth on abrasive
stones of varying textures such as coarse sandstone
fine sandstone or limestone The final products were
evenly smoothed disc beads relatively standardized
in size The procedure also resulted in edges that are
sharp perpendicular to the bead faces and flat rather
than convex (Figs 6d 7endashf) Experiments indicate
that this procedure also contributes to the polishing
of faces and edges of beads (cf Foreman 1978)
Figure 7 shows artefacts from one context at Jilat 25
indicating a similar sequence for red Dabba Marble
disc beads from subcircular flake to final disc
For barrel beads the starting point was typically
not a flake but a tabular roughout A roughout was
often flaked into an approximately cylindrical form
sometimes with a hexagonal transverse cross section
(that is the section perpendicular to the perforation)
(Fig 9a) Scars indicate that the hexagonal form was
accomplished by flaking Sometimes hexagonal
blanks were perforated before much abrasion (Fig
9b) In many cases hexagonal blanks were heavily
abraded to obliterate sharp angles before any
perforation was begun (Fig 9c) Resulting bead
forms varied in cross section from circular to
elliptical or lenticular (see Wright and Garrard
2003 fig 3) Perforation of barrel beads was from
opposite directions resulting in hourglass perfora-
tions (Fig 9e) and occasionally perforation errors
(Fig 9d)
Most pendants were begun as tabular roughouts
chipped into shapes anticipating the final form such
as an asymmetrical triangular pendant (Fig 10a cf
Fig 5a for a rectangular pendant) Roughouts were
Figure 4 Example of raw material nodule (top) angular
shatter (upper centre) flakes (lower centre) and
micro-debitage (lower row) from a single context
at Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 141
then abraded and sawing was sometimes applied (Fig
10b) One unfinished pendant shows that perforation
preceded final abrasion (Fig 10c) The most common
form is the asymmetrical triangular pendant (Fig
10d) but there are also rectangular square and oval
pendants Not all pendants were made on tabular
roughouts some were made on thin flakes eg
rectangular and lsquoteardroprsquo forms (Fig 10endashf)
Sawing
Disc beads were made individually one by one on
flakes as opposed to being sawn from a perforated
cylinder which is another possible way However
sawing was central to the production of pendants and
barrel beads (cf Fig 5c 10b) In some cases the
roughout was sawn only to a shallow depth
permitting unwanted material to be snapped off
leaving a protruding piece of stone mdash a kind of
groove and snap technique (Fig 5c) The protruding
lsquobossrsquo was then abraded
A range of chipped stone tools in the sites might be
suitable for sawing These include tabular chert knives
sometimes also called tile knives (Fig 11) These are
bifacially retouched cutting tools characteristic of the
eastern Jordanian Neolithic (Baird in Garrard et al
1994a 89) However typically the bifacial retouch
produces an edge that is robust but somewhat sinuous
in profile (Fig 11) In addition many tile knife edges
have significant curvature in plan Use of tile knives
would probably generate relatively wide and slightly
sinuous cut marks but this is an area worthy of
experimentation and use wear study Alternative tools
that perhaps better match the relative scale and
precision of cut marks on bead blanks are a range of
relatively robust non-formal tools on blade or elon-
gated flake blanks with edges that are relatively
straight in profile and plan These are found in some
numbers in conjunction with the bead making debris in
Jilat 13 and 25 It is also notable that despite the
purported dominance of flakes in many broadly
contemporary PPNCELN assemblages significant
a b
c d
Figure 5 (a) Tabular roughout rectangular (b) Tabular roughout subcircular with drill mark (c) Abraded roughout with
sawing mark at bottom note that the sawing is incomplete the groove and snap technique has resulted in both
the saw mark and an irregular protrusion of stone (d) Abraded tabular roughout subcircular
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
142 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
proportions of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 tool blanks are
blades (Baird 1993 469 and figs 818ndash821) even
though the debitage assemblages are mostly flake
dominated Other possible sawing tools include flaked
limestone artefacts with a thin edge (Fig 12c)
Several cutmarked limestone slabs were found at
Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 (Fig 12andashb) The cutmarks are
shallow or deep incisions Interestingly the cut-
marked slabs do not display evidence of drilling
Conversely the Jilat 13 bench with marks probably
resulting from drilling (Fig 14c see below) has no
cutmarks This suggests segregation of drilling and
sawing activities Some variability in spatial distribu-
tion of different stages in the bead making process
may be further borne out by the discrete distribution
of drills in Jilat 25 contexts where substantial bead
making debris was recovered For example in Jilat 25
Context A15 drills were found clustered in spatial
units towards the northern end of the structure
Drilling
Experiments in drilling of Dabba Marble are in
progress (Bains forthcoming) Here we present
evidence for drilling from bead perforations and
stone tools Other experiments show that perforation
morphology reveals drilling methods and shape
diameter and length of the drill used (eg Gwinnett
and Gorelick 1999) At Jilat perforations indicate
that drilling methods varied and that choices were
probably affected by material hardness
Hand Drilling with Large Piercers and Borers
The simplest method used appears to have been hand
drilling Soft Dabba Marble could have been drilled
using a borer or piercer held in the hand and not
hafted to a drilling stick Drilling by this method
would produce rough irregular and relatively large
perforations (Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990) we see
examples of this in broken beads Borers and piercers
were found at the sites They are relatively large
perforation tools made on blades suitable for
manipulation by hand without a haft (Fig 13 nos
9ndash11)
Rotary Drilling From Two Directions with Hafted Drills
The most common method involved rotary drilling
from two directions Drilling was almost always
a b
c d
Figure 6 Green Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads (andashb) Circular flakes slightly abraded (c) Unabraded
perforated flake (d) Finished disc bead
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 143
bipolar That is the blank was drilled to roughly
halfway through then turned and the perforation
completed from the opposite direction As the two
perforations converged the result was an hourglass-
shaped perforation (Fig 9e) Experiments indicate
that this prevents chipping and flaking of the
alternate face which can occur if a blank is perforated
completely from only one direction (Possehl 1981)
Most hourglass perforations on both soft and
hard stones appear to have been produced by rotary
drilling Rotary drilling results in regular perforations
and concentric striations on them (Gorelick and
Gwinnett 1990) We observed both traits on many
broken beads and blanks (Fig 9b) Perforations of
hourglass form included very small drillholes indi-
cating that the drilling tools were smaller than
piercers and borers made on blades The probable
drills in this case were small drills on bladelets and
especially drill bits on burin spalls (Fig 13 nos 1 4
5 7) Microscopic examination of perforations is in
progress (Bains forthcoming)
Oddly piercing and drilling tools were found in
relatively low absolute numbers at the two sites (eg
Baird 1993 505ndash06 625 for Jilat 13 early phase
about 4 of tools were piercers or drills for the Jilat
25 which have concentrations of bead-making debris
just under 3 of tools were spall drills) However
specific contextual data other technological consid-
erations and comparisons with other sites give us
confidence that these were the main tools involved in
the drilling and that the low absolute numbers of
drills abandoned may sometimes relate to systematic
removal or discard of these tools by the artisans For
example burin spall drills were closely associated
spatially with bead-making debris in specific activity
areas in the Jilat 25 structure eg Context Aa15 in
the buildingrsquos northern area (Baird 1993 521 see
Table 6) In addition Jilat 13 and 25 produced large
numbers of angle burins including truncation burins
from which burin spalls were detached (eg about
29 of all tools at J13rsquos early phase were burins)
(Baird 1993 500 516 520ndash26 625) Burins are
a b c
d e f
Figure 7 Red Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads from Jilat 25 Context Aa15 (andashb) Circular flakes
slightly abraded (c) Heavily abraded and perforated disc bead blank edge abrasion incomplete (d) Abraded
perforated blank abrasion not complete on face (endashf) Finished disc beads
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
144 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
contextually closely associated with drills and bead-
making debris in occupation fills at Jilat 25 (c 30 of
tools from relevant Jilat 25 contexts were burins) mdash a
situation also seen at Jebel Naja in the Basalt Desert mdash
where both experiments and microwear studies suggest
that drill bits on burin spalls were used for bead-
making (Baird 1993 521 Finlayson and Betts 1990)
Burin spall drills would have had some technolo-
gical advantages over bladelet drills One advantage
is that the triangular or rectangular cross-sections of
burin spall drills make them stronger and less likely
to break during drilling In addition the manner of
their retouch from the same direction on each edge
creates a prismatic cross-section that probably served
to produce a neater hole and to make drilling more
efficient and possibly faster and reduce breakage in
drilling The tips of burin spall drills are blunted
which is an advantage in drilling hard stone (Gorelick
and Gwinnett 1990) Predictability and miniaturiza-
tion of burin spall drills may be relevant to an
Figure 8 Chaines operatoires for disc beads Sequence A refers to a disc bead made on a thin flake Sequence B refers
to a disc bead made on a thick flake Sequence C refers to a disc bead made on a tabular roughout not a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 145
apparent increased standardization in perforation
size observed at Jilat 25 from an early phase to a later
phase (Critchley 2000)
Since we have evidence of rotary drilling from bead
perforations we believe that drill bits were hafted to
sticks (probably made of wood) Drill bits on burin
spalls would have been too small to manipulate
effectively by hand alone
To work efficiently a drill needs to be weighted
and stabilized and there must be some means of
protecting the artisanrsquos hand Ground stone artefacts
support the idea that rotary drilling with drill bits
hafted to drilling sticks was in use They include a
probable capstone made of limestone from Jilat 25
The capstone would have been held in the hand
enabling the beadmaker to manipulate the drilling
stick from the top (Fig 14a) This artefact resembles
a miniature bowl and fits easily into one hand The
interior surface displays use wear circular striations
parallel to the rim and vertical striations perpendi-
cular to the rim The base of the interior converges to
a flat surface about 1 cm in diameter
Some Levantine Neolithic sites have revealed
similar objects with similar wear (Banning 1998
Wright 1992 fig 5ndash15b) and a comparable item
was found at Jarmo (Moholy-Nagy 1983 fig 12913
Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990 30) Capstones are
characteristic of the use of bow drills (Banning
1998 Foreman 1978) but strictly speaking they
are not necessarily diagnostic of the bow drill
(theoretically simpler drilling techniques involving
hafting might have been facilitated by the use of
a capstone) For the moment we can say that
at Jilat 13 and 15 the evidence for rotary drilling
is unequivocal However the evidence for the use
of the bow drill while suggestive is not quite
definitive
Size data considered carefully support a link
between burin-spall drills and beads To interpret
dimensions of drills and perforations we must keep
in mind that stone bead drilling was overwhelmingly
bipolar and converging Thus drills did not have to
penetrate all the way through the full height of the
bead mdash only about half of it Therefore what matters
a b c
d e f
Figure 9 Green Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks and finished beads (a) Hexagonal blank flaked but not abraded (b)
Abraded hexagonal blank (c) Abraded blank not perforated (d) Perforation error on abraded blank (e)
Finished bead broken showing bipolar perforation and hourglass perforation shape (f) Perforated barrel bead
almost finished except for final abrasion to smooth out last surface irregularities
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
146 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
is the very tips of the drill bits mdash the upper few
millimetres mdash not the full length of the drills
Since disc beads are consistently about 25 to
26 mm in height only the upper 15 mm or so of the
drills mdash the most distal ends of the tips mdash had to
have been about 21 mm or less in thickness to
lsquomatchrsquo the perforation diameters of disc beads
(Table 4) In the case of barrel beads since barrel
beads were between 64 and 71 mm in height about
32 to 36 mm of the most distal ends of the drill bits
have to have been about 21 mm or less in thickness
to lsquomatchrsquo the perforations of barrel beads (Table 5)
Measurements of the drill bit tips within these
small uppermost reaches show that the maximal
thicknesses of the drill bitsrsquo distal tips fall within the
range of sizes indicated by the perforations (Fig 13)
Multi-stage Drilling
Sometimes drilling may have been accomplished in
several stages Some beads particularly those made of
harder stones have smooth cylindrical perforations
with parallel walls displaying no hint of the
hourglass shape
One way to achieve this is to create the hourglass
perforation and then to turn it into a perfect
cylindrical perforation via the use of a second drilling
procedure An example of this was cited by Calley
(1989) who proposed that two tools found in
carnelian bead workshops at Early Bronze Age
Kumartepe (Turkey) had complementary functions
a drill bit for making the initial hourglass perforation
and a borer for finishing and smoothing it into a
cylindrical perforation Since both drill bits and
borers were found on the Jilat sites this method of
finishing perforations could have been used
At Jilat 13 and 25 evidence for multi-stage drilling
can be seen in some beads which have a depression on
one or both faces The depression may be a result of
drilling with a larger drill bit first in order to provide
a guide for the final perforation with a finer drill bit
Such a technique is seen in India-Pakistan (Possehl
1981 39 Kenoyer 1992b 73)
a b c
d e f
Figure 10 Green Dabba Marble pendant blanks and finished pendants (a) Tabular roughout flaked into approximately
trapezoidal shape but not abraded (b) Abraded trapezoidal blank with sawing mark at bottom (c) Perforated
asymmetrical triangular pendant blank incompletely abraded (note striations on face) (d) Finished asymmetri-
cal triangular pendant (e) Pendant blank made on a flake unabraded (f) Nearly-finished pendant made on a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 147
Stabilizing Beads Anvils and Drilling Benches
What method was used to stabilize a bead during
drilling The simplest technique is to fix a bead to a
stone anvil with an adhesive Ethnography and
experiments show that such anvils can be small (the
size of handstones) (Foreman 1978 figs 6ndash7) Use of
such an anvil should result in small shallow
depressions a form of use-damage resulting from
force exerted from above Figure 14b shows a small
flat stone from Jilat 25 with a central depression of
the expected size and depth
Figure 14c shows the limestone bench from Jilat 13
(previously discussed) with a number of such pits in
the centre The marks are evenly spaced and are
concentrated in one small well-defined area on the
widest part of the bench this wide area was also
finely abraded
We see this bench as a multifunctional worktable
anvil We suspect that the beadmaker sat on the
narrow part of the bench (straddling it) placed bead
blanks on the pitted work surface fixed them with
adhesive and then drilled them The bench also
displays evidence of other activities including flaking
and grinding
Adhesives for hafting chipped stone tools could
have been adapted for use in fixing beads to anvils
Bitumen would be one candidate In some cultures a
wooden frame with cup-holes is sometimes used for
stabilizing beads (Kenoyer 1986 P Wright 1982)
The holes are filled with beeswax and clay the bead is
inserted into the wax-clay mixture which hardens
holding the bead steady After drilling beads are
released by breaking the wax-clay mixture (Allchin
1979 Stocks 1989) As wood was probably scarce in
Jilat and as there are no indications of the use of
clay we can probably rule out this technique
However stone items with cup-holes are seen in
Neolithic sites (Kirkbride 1966 Wright 1992
fig 527b)
Abrasion
Ground stone artefacts are crucial to bead produc-
tion in traditional technologies (Foreman 1978
Inizan et al 1992 Kenoyer et al 1991 53 Moholy-
Nagy 1983 294 Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58)
Grinding of beads can be achieved by abrading
each bead individually with a hand held abrader or
by rubbing them on a large grinding slab Either
method will produce linear striations of the type we
see on many unfinished beads (cf Figs 7cndashd and 10c)
However final shaping of disc and cylindrical beads
was most likely achieved by stringing them or loading
them on to a thin rod capable of penetrating the
perforation (individually or in groups) and then
rolling them on a grinding slab adding abrasives
(such as sand) and water to produce a smoother finish
(Foreman 1978 Moholy-Nagy 1983 298) Some disc
beads with parallel edges perpendicular to the faces
would probably have been rolled on a flat smooth
stone Other beads with facetted sharply angled or
bevelled edges (eg many barrel beads) suggest that
they were rolled or abraded along a stone with
grooves and slanting sides (eg Fig 15a c)
Abrasion of bead blanks may have been a multi-
stage process involving a number of materials of
different textures and hardness In an early stage
grinding of bead materials on vesicular basalt would
have been the easiest way to abrade a large nodule
quickly The pores of vesicular basalt and pumice
form natural cutting lsquoteethrsquo comparable to the metal
rasp used by present-day sculptors At Jilat 13 and
Jilat 25 we found broken fragments of vesicular
basalt grinding slabs but not large complete exam-
ples The small fragments suggest two possibilities
either there were large complete slabs at one time
which were then broken worn out and discarded or
only small fragments of these heavy duty grinding
tools were needed
For finer abrasion sandstone grinding slabs might
be expected None were found However small
Figure 11 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic
sites Tile knives or possible saws for bead-
making From Baird 1993 fig 85
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
148 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
handheld abraders made of sandstones with coarse
hard quartz crystals were found at both sites (Fig
15andashb) Sandstone is not local to Wadi Jilat and these
items were imported and probably used extensively
(resulting in the small size)
For even finer abrasion limestone could have been
used Such needs could have been met by the large
bench of Jilat 13 (Fig 14c) which was finely ground
over a very large area (within which the possible
drilling marks were placed)
Some might see the grooved items made of
sandstone (Fig 15a) and limestone (Fig 15c) as
lsquoshaft straightenersrsquo One or two shaft straightener
fragments made of basalt occur at Jilat 13 Like other
basalt shaft straighteners in Neolithic Jilat (eg Jilat
7) (Garrard et al 1994a Wright 1993) the use-
surfaces of these have U-shaped cross-sections By
contrast the cross sections of the use surfaces on the
sandstone and limestone grooved items are not U-
shaped but have sharp angles We see these tools
mainly as abraders for grinding bead facets espe-
cially on barrel beads The widths of the use surfaces
are 11 mm for the sandstone tool and 138 mm for
the limestone one These dimensions correspond to
the average diameter (5 width) of 31 measured green
Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks from Jilat 13 (N 5
31 Mean diameter 5 92 mm standard deviation 5
28) Grooved stones are used in bead grinding in
a
b c
Figure 12 Ground stone artefacts probably for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Cutmarked slab (limestone) Jilat
13 The cutmarks are shallow and are concentrated in the left area running parallel to the main axes of the
slab (b) Cutmarked slab fragment (limestone) Jilat 13 showing deep cutmarks (c) Flaked and ground abra-
sive cutting tool made of limestone Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 149
modern India (Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58) a
grooved sandstone tool was found with an unfinished
bead at Catalhoyuk (Wright and Bains 2007)
Tosi and Vidale (1990) regard failure resulting
from breakage or human error as more common in
the grinding stage than during perforation although
this depends on material and opinion (Kenoyer 2003
18) In some cases it might be more efficient to shape
the bead first before attempting perforation This
may explain why barrel beads tend to be shaped and
abraded prior to perforation
Finished beads were always finely abraded and
sometimes polished to the extent of reflecting light
Ethnographic observations indicate that polishing is
sometimes done by placing beads en masse in a
leather bag along with an abrasive and shaking and
rolling the bags for long periods (Allchin 1979
Kenoyer 2003) This simple method would have been
more likely than the method of rolling beads and
abrasives in a wooden barrel which is also docu-
mented ethnographically (Kenoyer 2003)
However shaking beads in a bag with an abrasive
tends to produce beads with rounded convex edges
(Gwinnett and Gorelick 1989) Some beads at Jilat
have this form but many mdash especially those made of
the hard cherty red Dabba Marble mdash have sharp
edges perpendicular to bead faces indicating that
they were individually polished or polished during
rolling on a string or stick Alternative methods of
polishing can include rubbing with leather or wood
with the addition of fine sand or chalk and water or
with animal hairwool and animal fat (Kenoyer 1986
20) These methods would have been possible with
Jilat technology
Craft Specialization and Comparisons withOther Sites
Technology needs to be studied not only in terms of
materials and techniques but also in terms of social
groups involved in artefact production individual
artisans and skill (Dobres and Hoffmann 1999 2ndash12)
In egalitarian societies craft skill and knowledge of
Figure 13 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic sites Drilling and piercing tools From Baird 1993 fig 82
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
150 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
special materials can enhance the power of an
individual or a group encouraging hierarchy
(Dobres 2000 119ndash20)
These questions force us to reconsider issues of
craft specialization a term often used loosely or in
widely different ways Three concepts of specializa-
tion are considered here individual specialists
specialization between households or domestic
groups within a given site and site specialization
within a regional or social network of craft produc-
tion and exchange
Costin (1991) draws a contrast between indepen-
dent specialization and attached specialization
Independent specialization involves production of
utilitarian goods for nonelites and can be household-
based or based in special workshops Attached
specialization refers to production of prestige goods
under control of elites Whilst Costin notes that
attached specialization can also be based in house-
holds or workshops we often think of attached
specialization in connection with central institutions
and urban or state-level societies It is of considerable
interest that in early urban societies the making of
stone personal ornaments in association with central
institutions figures prominently (Stein 1996 Vidale
1989)
How earlier forms of craft specialization may have
evolved into large-scale attached specialization is
poorly understood Most research has concentrated
on later stages in this process (eg Stein 1996) in
discussions of earlier forms of specialization defini-
tions and criteria for diagnosis could sometimes be
clearer (eg Quintero and Wilke 1998 Rollefson and
Parker 2002 Rosen 1997) If we are dealing with
a
c
b
Figure 14 Ground stone artefacts probably used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Capstone made of limestone
Jilat 25 (b) Handstone probably used as an anvil or hammer Jilat 25 note depression in face and flake scars
at edges (c) Limestone drilling bench Jilat 13 Note evidence of use-wear on the left and widest area of the
bench smooth abraded surface drill marks in the centre-left face small flake scars with negative bulbs of per-
cussion close to the edge of the bench
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 151
specialization in Neolithic societies it is probably
independent specialization Still Neolithic societies
may fall between Costinrsquos two categories Neolithic
groups were clearly producing prestige goods perso-
nal ornaments are not strictly utilitarian and there is
at least a possibility that elites were emerging (Byrd
1994 Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002 Verhoeven
2002)
Individual Specialists
First there is the issue of identifying individual
specialists Some use lsquospecializationrsquo to refer to any
situation in which some artisans have high levels of
skill a view that has been criticized (Rice 1991) We
agree with Rice that identifying a high level of
technical skill in a craft is not on its own sufficient
for a diagnosis of specialization since it robs the
concept of force in discussing long term change (by
this criterion the Upper Palaeolithic was riddled
with craft specialists) However we would argue
that if there are other indications of craft specializa-
tion a search for levels of ability in different
individuals is appropriate mdash if the data permit
Such data would be primary refuse from well-dated
sites of high temporal resolution in which technical
processes (eg errors in chaines operatoires) can
reveal experts vs novices (Pigeot 1990 Stout 2002
Vanzetti and Vidale 1994)
In the case of Jilat 13 and 25 we are dealing with
much primary refuse and two closely dated sites (see
above and Tables 6ndash7) mdash with periodic use of the
sites over a time range on the order of 200 years at
most and possibly much less Jilat 25 yielded activity
areas with clear spatial clusters as do a number of
contexts at Jilat 13 Space does not permit us to
present all details (this awaits the final site report)
but we feel confident that aggregate consideration of
the data from each site allows us to discuss general
questions of individual skills mdash master craftsmen vs
novices
a b
c
Figure 15 Ground stone artefacts possibly used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Grooved sandstone abrading
tool Jilat 13 (b) Sandstone hand-held abrader Jilat 25 (c) Grooved limestone abrading tool Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
152 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
To explore this we analysed unfinished blanks and
the frequency of perforation errors Drilling is a
sensitive moment in bead production when many
things can go wrong (Kenoyer 2003) A low incidence
in perforation errors combined with high numbers of
successfully finished beads and evidence of standar-
dization should be reasonably good indicators of an
artisanrsquos mastery This is the situation seen at Jilat 25
(Fig 7) In all of 93 blanks from Jilat 25 only 2 were
perforation errors a failure rate of only 2
On the other hand a high incidence of perforation
errors would suggest that a beadmaker was a relative
novice Jilat 13 produced more blanks with perfora-
tion errors than Jilat 25 We thought we might find
individual contexts with a high rate of error
suggesting apprentices
The data did not bear this out Of 223 bead blanks
from Jilat 13 (all phases) 22 were perforation errors
mdash a failure rate of 98 All but two errors were on
barrel bead blanks of green Dabba Marble The
others were one pendant blank and one irregular
bead blank These 22 blanks were distributed across
20 different contexts and no more than 2 perforation
errors were found in any one context
A close look at those contexts reveals low error
rates In Context B21 2 green barrel bead blanks
with perforation errors were found with 5 other
blanks The others included green and red barrel and
disc blanks This context also yielded 5 successfully
finished beads including black and red barrel beads
and a green disc Black and green debitage and a
discoidal handstone were also found here In Context
B71 2 blanks with perforation errors were found
along with 9 other blanks and 10 successfully
finished beads including green Dabba Marble barrel
beads but also black and red disc beads Much
debitage was found along with a flaked limestone
cutting tool (cf Fig 12c) and a limestone object with
a drill mark
The higher rate of error at Jilat 13 compared to
Jilat 25 could be because artisans at Jilat 13 were
making more of the larger more complex barrel
beads (as opposed to simple discs see Tables 2ndash3)
which offer greater chances of failure due to the
longer drilling distance However at Jilat 13 the
overall failure rate was still quite low particularly
considering the overall volume of material recovered
(Table 1)
We conclude that the beadmakers at Jilat 13
included few trainees These appear to have been
skilled artisans a small task force composed of
relative experts This raises the question of whether
these beadmakers were examples of lsquoproducer
specialistsrsquo as traditionally defined that is people
involved in
production of a good by a relatively small number of
individuals (compared to the total output and
number of consumers) individuals who are as a
result of this selectivity and the routinization or
repetition of their tasks particularly skilled in
manufacture (Rice 1991 263)
Jilat 13 and 25 do suggest small numbers of
individuals and a certain selectivity in who was
involved in stone bead making The quantity of
debitagedebris relative to (1) the number of finished
beads and (2) the modest sizes of these structures
collectively suggest that these craftsmenwomen
served a larger number of consumers relative to the
number of craftsmen involved here If so who were
these consumers mdash other residents of Jilat or groups
beyond
Intra-site Specialization Between Domestic Groups
Several studies suggest ways of identifying different
forms of craft specialization between domestic groups
in a site For later sites Stein (1996) has explored
spatial data particularly how craft production
facilities are dispersed among domestic units or
located near special (or central) institutions In
Neolithic sites questions about dispersal between
households and possible links between craft produc-
tion and special buildings or special sites have been
underexplored
For specialization Costin (1991) suggests that we
would expect (1) variability between production
units (eg households occupations regions) in
relevant artefacts (2) high densities of craft produc-
tion debris relative to some other generally used
item in some production units (3) high ratios of
unfinished goods to finished goods in some produc-
tion units Kenoyer et alrsquos (1991) ethnoarchaeolo-
gical studies of modern stone bead-making in
Khambat (India) suggest something similar in the
case of households as production units There non-
specialist households engaging in casual opportu-
nistic bead production revealed low quantities of
bead-making debris few unfinished beads and little
standardization in finished beads By contrast
households specializing in bead production were
characterized by stockpiling of large quantities of
raw materials many unfinished beads and more
standardized finished products
In looking at whole occupations (ie phases within
sites) as a unit of observation we argue elsewhere
(Wright and Garrard 2003) that artefact densities and
other data from 13 PPNB and 8 PPNCELN
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 153
occupations in the Jilat-Azraq region suggest that
PPNCELN producers were more specialized than
those of the PPNB mdash at least in the Jilat-Azraq
region Unlike the PPNB sites Jilat 13 and 25 have
very high densities of bead-making debris specialized
tools for drilling and sawing there is an abundance of
unfinished materials relative to finished products
bead-making tools and debris are abundant relative
to normal domestic food processing equipment
(ground stone artefacts) (Wright and Garrard 2003
cf Costin 1991)
That argument is chronological comparing the
PPNB to the PPNCELN occupations and we stand
behind it for the Jilat-Azraq case (different trajec-
tories may apply to south Jordan and the Negev see
below) Still it leaves open the issue of house-to-
house variation within Jilat 25 or Jilat 13 As we have
only one excavated structure per site we cannot on
present evidence argue that each building housed a
group of specialists serving other households within
the same site In fact we have no direct evidence that
there were other structures on each site mdash the ones
excavated were the only ones visible on the surface
There are nuances of material and typological
choices between the Jilat 25 structure (red disc beads)
and the Jilat 13 structure (larger complex green
ornaments) but these nuances are beyond the scope
of this paper
In all we suspect that stone bead production at
Jilat 13 and 25 was geared not for other domestic
units lsquoin camprsquo but for use by these quite mobile
communities themselves mdash as well as export to other
sites within the steppe and beyond (see below) In
Costinrsquos terms (Costin 1991) Jilat 13 and 25 might
each be an example of an independent non-centra-
lized dispersed workshop possibly lsquofamily runrsquo (Rice
1991 262) mdash in which handling of Dabba Marble
was not routinely entrusted to novices
There are hints of house-to-house variations in
bead-making in major villages with larger samples of
domestic structures as in PPNB Beidha At PPNB
Beidha (earlier than Jilat 13 and 25) Building 14
stands out
Other forms of production besides food preparation
were less common Building 14 represented the best
example of artefact production in these basements
A wide range of artefacts was recovered apparently
associated with building 14rsquos basement floor
Particularly widespread were stone polishers bone
tools raw material (including hematite malachite
and magnesium) more than 60 unmodified marine
shells and at least two dozen beads of shell stone
and bone some of which were in various stages of
production Some artifacts lay on stone slabs
indicating that at least some slabs may have
functioned as work surfaces (Byrd 2005 117)
Such hints are intriguing Still macro-artefacts
from house floors are affected by problems of site
formation and house abandonment Micro-artefact
data can help (Rainville 2005) House-by-house
exploration with attention to micro-artefacts is
needed (Wright and Bains 2007)
Site Specialization Within a Regional Network of Craft
Production and Exchange
Both sites and other Neolithic sites in Jilat and
Azraq exhibit resource specialization
the selective use of particular resources in craft
manufacture such as certain clays that are repeat-
edly used (Rice 1991 262)
The Jilat artisans emphasized Dabba Marble from
a wider array of available stone types The Jilat-
Azraq sites collectively show that green Dabba
Marble was a special target This is revealed in both
frequencies and weights (for debris data and weight
data see Wright and Garrard 2003 for frequency
data on beads and blanks see Tables 2 and 3) At
both sites debris is greatly dominated by green
Dabba Marble mdash 80ndash95 of debris by both weight
(grams) and frequency Green Dabba Marble also
dominates blanks in terms of weight at both sites mdash
indicating the use of green for making larger heavier
and more conspicuous ornaments
Turning to frequencies at Jilat 13 about 90 of
blanks are green and only 5 are red However
finished beads include both green and red forms in
comparable percentages (404 and 436 respec-
tively) (Table 3) suggesting that finished red beads
were brought into the building from a place of
manufacture located somewhere else At Jilat 25
blanks of red and green Dabba Marble occur in
comparable proportions (409 green 43 red)
whilst finished beads are predominantly red (588)
(Table 2) If Jilat 13 and 25 were absolute contem-
poraries this could suggest variations in choices and
exchange between residents of different structures
Rice (1991) has defined site specialization as a
situation in which a site is located near a special
resource and the inhabitants emphasize production of
a craft based on that resource Relative to other sites
not so located the range of site functions and
activities would be expected to be more limited
Thus site specialization
involves individual localities or sites having evidence
of limited functions or intensive productive activity
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
154 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
often determined by fortuitous environmental fac-
tors This includes proximity to mineral deposits
and so forth (Rice 1991 262)
Do Jilat 13 and 25 fit this concept In both sites
15 km from the source we have a wealth of evidence
for intensive stone bead production and scanty
evidence for routine food processing tools (Wright
and Garrard 2003) However Jilat 25 may be closer
to the limited function model envisioned by Rice In
Jilat 13 bead-making is clearly intensive but we are
also dealing with a chipped stone assemblage of not
only drills and burins but also projectile points and
other tools Jilat 13 also reveals production of
figurines (of animals phalluses and arrow-shaped
forms) and sculpted pillars (Baird 1993 Garrard
et al 1994a Martin 1999 Wright 1992 1993)
In all Jilat 13 and 25 suggest that we can apply
Ricersquos lsquosite specializationrsquo on the grounds of intensive
productive activity and proximity to source mdash but
with the qualification that this specialization was also
embedded in hunting-herding activities and at Jilat
13 production of other special crafts unique among
the sites of a symbolic nature (figurines pillars)
One possibility is that we are dealing with a camp
of hunter-herder corporate groups mdash part of a wider
regional network mdash engaged in special activities in
remote areas involving art personal ornaments and
ritual Such groups are suggested by other data from
the PPNBndashPPNC time span for example Nahal
Hemar (ornaments masks hunting tools) Dhuweila
(carving of hunters with dress variations)
Catalhoyuk (images of hunters with dress variations
as in the bull hunt mural) and Gobeklitepe (sculpture
production including a quarry wild-animal icono-
graphy hunting) (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988 Betts
1998 Mellaart 1967 Schmidt 2000) In all these data
hint that craft production of special items was
embedded in hunting andor herding activities in
remote areas this may have been a key means by
which exotic materials reached major villages In a
very broad way this supports a sketch outlined by
Bar Yosef (Bar-Yosef 2001) although we do not
necessarily agree with specifics of his model eg the
territories boundaries social groups and mechanisms
which he suggests (cf Asouti 2006) Instead we see
this as one example of diverse strategies of social
networking linking lineages households and commu-
nities in the Neolithic (Wright forthcoming)
Returning to the stone bead data from Jilat 13 and
25 the apparent stockpiling of raw material and
intensive production activity hints at production of
the green material for export (see above and Wright
and Garrard 2003) New data now add weight to this
idea and suggest the following provisional picture of
regional specializations and exchanges in ornaments
(1) Based on typology technology and materials thereappears to be a distinctive eastern Jordanian koine ornetwork of stone bead manufacture and exchangefeaturing Dabba Marble and a probable regionalspecialization in it
Other Neolithic bead production sites are known
from eastern Jordan Indications are that most of the
green bead materials are Dabba Marble probably
from Jilat (further work is needed) In these sites
diversity of materials used seems low with few
imports from beyond the steppe Shells however
testify to wider networks (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989
Cooke and Reese in Betts 1998 Garrard et al 1994a
Reese 1991)
Azraq 31 (PPNB and ELN) is in our suite of study
materials (Baird et al 1992 Garrard et al 1994a
Wright and Garrard 2003) and debris blanks and
beads were found Preliminary XRF analysis of green
samples (by Groom) indicates that the material is
consistent with Jilat Dabba Marble Typology and
technology are also similar and as at Jilat 25 burin
spall drills were closely associated with bead-making
in specific activity areas (Baird 1993 521 Baird et al
1992 25) However the ground stone revealed no
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
(Wright 1992 1993 Wright in Baird et al 1992)
Material used for beads at Dhuweila (PPNB and
ELN) has been called Dabba Marble (Cooke and
Reese in Betts 1998) It is consistent in appearance
with our material although we have no details on
mineralogy or source Typologically these beads are
similar to those of Jilat 13 and 25 The ground stone
is very different from the suite at the Jilat sites
(Wright in Betts 1998) for comparisons of chipped
stone assemblages see Baird (1993)
At Bawwab al-Ghazal (Late PPNB) Rollefson
et al found drills bits on burin spalls tile knives
beads bead blanks and bead debris some of which
they called green Dabba Marble (Rollefson et al
1999 Quintero et al 2004) They argued that there is
a possible source of this material outcropping near
the site mdash lsquoFor the last raw material [green Dabba
Marble] small nodules of the green limestone were
embedded in the local bedrockrsquo (Rollefson et al 1999
3) However as shown in Appendix A the true
Dabba Marble only occurs in a restricted area west of
Wadi Jilat The lsquobedrockrsquo which outcrops near Azraq
31 and Bawwab al-Ghazal is travertine and some of
this formed during the late Pleistocene and Holocene
The nearby Epipalaeolithic site of Azraq 17 was
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 155
found partially embedded in travertine and artefacts
including nodules of imported basalt were found in
the travertine at this site It is possible that the
nodules of green limestone found at Bawwab al-
Ghazal were imported Dabba Marble which subse-
quently became incorporated in a travertine near the
site An alternative possibility is that the local
travertine is infused with green minerals In Wadi
Jilat travertines were noted with traces of green
minerals and in the Siwaqa area to the south-west of
Jilat there are extensive travertines some of which
are infused with pale green minerals including
volkonskoite (Barjous 1986 mdash see also Appendix A)
In eastern Jordan some Neolithic sites are greatly
dominated by burins (lsquoburin sitesrsquo) At a number of
these there is evidence for stone bead-making (eg
Jebel Naja) These lsquoburin sitesrsquo typically reveal few
ground stone tools we know of no examples of
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
from them It was argued that the main role of the
burins was production of spalls for drills used mainly
for beads (Betts 1987 1998 Finlayson and Betts
1990) However burin sites are not universally
associated with stone bead making At Jilat 23 24
and 26 burins were numerous but other evidence for
bead-making is scanty (Baird 1993 520)
Therefore some have questioned whether
burins and burin spalls in such sites were solely or
primarily intended for making drills and beads
noting that other functions are possible (Quintero
et al 2004 209) Given that these sites typically
represent short-term occupations it is possible that
many sites might be spall manufacture sites with
spalls transported to other settings where drill
manufacture and bead manufacture took place such
as Jilat 13 and 25 Rollefson expressed doubt that
either bladelet or burin spall drills would have been
used in bow drills partly because of their fragility and
also because most of them have a pronounced curve
on the long axis which would have made high speed
drilling impossible (Rollefson and Parker 2002) But
Finlayson and Betts (1990) and Berna (1995)
successfully experimented using burin spalls with
bow drills and Kenoyer (personal communication
2007) notes that drills made on burin spalls are the
most common type of drill in diverse prehistoric
stone bead-making sites (in India Pakistan and
elsewhere)
In the case of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 we believe burin-
spall drills were part of the bead-making repertoire
for reasons noted above This does not rule out other
uses of burin spalls Nor does it rule out the use of
other perforating techniques Drills do not have to be
made of stone when soft stones are being perforated
mdash wood bone and abrasives can be used (Foreman
1978)
(2) There are hints of export of Dabba Marble to at leastsome villages in the Levantine corridor However majorNeolithic villages display much diversity in materials andespecially more importing of exotic stones than is seen inthe eastern Jordanian sites
Many writers report Neolithic beads made of
unspecified lsquogreenstonersquo This term is unfortunate
since it can refer to metabasalt and similar altered
igneous rocks (Schumann 1992 248) Some of these
lsquogreenstonesrsquo may be limestone with apatite or other
materials (eg Garfinkel 1987 81ndash82 Hauptmann
2004 Talbot 1983 789) Beads of green limestones
rich in fluorapatite were found at late PPNB Basta in
southern Jordan (Hauptmann 2004) as confirmed by
XRF and XRD Green beads identified as Dabba
Marble were also reported from Ain Ghazal a site
with both PPNB and PPNC occupations (Rollefson
et al 1990 103ndash04) Whether these are Dabba
Marble from the Jilat source (Appendices AndashB) is
not yet fully clear Ongoing research will sort out
these mysteries (eg D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal
communication Hauptmann 2004)
Major villages in the Levantine Corridor reveal
different degrees of emphasis in styles and materials
often we see a certain emphasis on local materials and
preferences However considerable exchange net-
works are indicated in major villages which display
much wider ranges of stone ornament materials
compared to the eastern Jordanian sites (such as
Ain Ghazal Yiftahel Basta Barsquoja Ghuwayr 1
Fidan 1) mdash along with of course shells (Affonso
and Pernicka 2004 Bienert and Gebel 1998 84ndash86
Garfinkel 1987 Hauptmann 2004 Rollefson and
Simmons 1984 1986 Rollefson et al 1990 Simmons
and Najjar 1998 Starck 1988)
As the Neolithic evolved stone bead-making
entailed increasingly diverse techniques and materi-
als One example may be drills In earlymiddle PPNB
sites most drills are made on bladelets In the late
PPNB PPNC and Late Neolithic there may have
been a gradual increase in drills made on burin spalls
although perhaps not in all regions (Jensen 2004
Rollefson and Parker 2002) Underlining increasing
diversity of technological practice between groups
Baird (2001b) pointed out geographic variation in
this technology with spall drills dominating in the
north-eastern Jordanian steppe from MPPNB
through Early Late Neolithic whilst contemporary
sites to west and south use bladelet blanks for their
piercing tools
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
156 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
eastern Jordan (Richter et al 2008 T Richter
personal communication)
All eight Neolithic sites revealed stone bead
production along with shell and bone beads The
sites date to the PPNB (eg Jilat 7 26 32 Azraq
31) and PPNCELN (Azraq 31 Jilat 13 and 25) The
other two are lsquoburin sitesrsquo of either LPPNB or
PPNCELN age (Jilat 23 24) (Garrard et al 1994b)
All of these sites were seasonal camps of small
groups engaged in varying combinations of
hunting trapping foraging cultivating herding
(Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999) They lived in
shelters constructed of upright limestone slab
foundations
The Neolithic sites yielded 10547 artefacts of stone
beads or related debris from secure contexts About
88 of these came from Jilat 13 and Jilat 25
(Table 1) They include finished ornaments unfin-
ished roughouts and bead blanks and debitage
(Tables 2ndash5) Densities of beads blanks and debris
Figure 2 (a) Plan of Wadi Jilat 13 Late Phase Note location of workslab in the centre-left area of the oval structure (b)
Plan of Wadi Jilat 25 Area A structure
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 133
and other data indicate intensification of stone
beadmaking in PPNCELN sites in the Jilat-Azraq
region relative to the PPNB (Wright and Garrard
2003) It is of interest that this coincides with the first
appearance of domestic sheep-goat in the Jilat sites
(see Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999)
Stratigraphy site formation and chronology of
Jilat 13 and 25 are discussed in more depth elsewhere
(Garrard et al 1994a Wright and Garrard 2003) The
sites were excavated as part of a regional programme
and areas of excavation vary At Jilat 25 surface
artefacts extended across an area of 3200 sq m From
the surface one oval upright-slab structure (7 x
45 m) was visible (Fig 2b) About 50 of this was
excavated an area of 21 sq m and a total volume of
78 cu m Three occupation phases were identified
The early phase included an occupation fill (Aa19)
rich in primary refuse this yielded a date of 8020 iexcl
80 uncal BP (OxA-2408) Above this the middle
phase involved addition of bins and hearths and
accumulation of an ashy occupation fill (Aa15) also
rich in primary refuse A final occupation fill (Aa7)
accumulated and the building was filled with rubble
followed by a deposit of sand which sealed the layers
below (Table 6) In each phase artefact clusters on
occupational surfaces and within their fills were
identified via 1 x 1 m horizontal units (i ii etc)
we discuss these clusters selectively here The chipped
stone assemblage from Jilat 25 is characterized by
debitage dominated by flakes although both flake
and blade cores were found However 84ndash85 of
tools were made on blades Prominent tools include
Nizzanim points (the sole point type) burins drill
bits made from burin spalls and other types (Baird
1993 469 521 Baird in Garrard et al 1994a 85
table 1) Further details on the chipped stone
assemblages are available in a number of works
(Baird 1993 1994 1995 2001a 2001b)
Surface artefacts at Jilat 13 extended across an 800
sq m area One large oval upright-slab building (10 x
65 m) was visible at surface Almost all of this was
excavated an area of 735 sq m (Fig 2a) Three
phases were identified In the early phase the
excavated volume of deposit was 145 cu m the
structure was built and primary occupation deposits
accumulated then a pavement was laid down in the
western area and hearths were constructed in the
south and east Dates from this phase were 7920 iexcl
100 uncal BP (OxA-1800) and 7870 iexcl 100 uncal BP
(OxA-1801) The middle phase exposed 87 cu m of
deposit and yielded no C14 dates An interior
partition wall separated the western end of the
building and pits and stone-lined hearths were added
in the eastern area The late phase of which 174 cu m
of deposit was excavated yielded two dates of 7900
iexcl 80 uncal BP (OxA-2411) and 7830 iexcl 90 uncal BP
(UB-3462) At this time a new upper pavement was
added above a rubble foundation In the western area
a large workbench with evidence of drilling abrasion
and flaking is associated with this phase (Figs 2a
14c) Primary refuse was found in all phases (selected
contexts are shown in Table 7) but the stratigraphy
is more complex than at Jilat 25 In the chipped stone
assemblage at Jilat 13 each phase revealed a
bladebased assemblage with blades or bladelets
making up 57 of debitage Most tools are made
on blades (78ndash81 of all tools are blade based)
Major tool types include projectile points burins
piercers and drills scapers and endscrapers notches
and denticulates and bifacial tools such as tile
knives In the early phase for which we have most
detailed information burins and points are the most
Table 1 Summary of Dabba Marble artefacts at Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 (see also Wright and Garrard 2003 279ndash80)
Artefact Category
Jilat 13 Jilat 13 Jilat 25 Jilat 25
Raw frequency (N) Weight (grams) Raw frequency (N) Weight (grams)
Finished beads(secure contexts)
144 60 115 62
Finished beads(surfacemixed contexts)
12 no data 4 no data
Roughouts and blanks(secure contexts)
180 222 89 82
Roughouts and blanks(surfacemixed contexts)
43 no data 4 no data
Debitage(secure contexts)
7369 6905 1381 976
(5 all debitage from nodulesto microflakes and shatter)TOTAL (secure contexts) 7693 7187 1585 1120TOTAL (secure contextsz beads and blanks from surfacemixed)
7748 1593
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
134 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Ta
ble
2B
ea
ds
an
db
lan
ks
J
ila
t2
5(a
llc
on
tex
ts)
Gre
en
Dab
ba
Marb
le
Gre
en
Dab
ba
Marb
le
Red
Dab
ba
Marb
le
Red
Dab
ba
Marb
le
Bla
ck
Dab
ba
Marb
le
Bla
ck
Dab
ba
Marb
leW
hit
eC
halk
Wh
ite
Ch
alk
Wh
ite
Qu
art
zite
Wh
ite
Qu
art
zite
Oth
er
Oth
er
To
tal
To
tal
To
tal
To
tal
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
ead
s-
B
lan
ks
-N
Bla
nks
-
Dis
cb
ead
s12
21
67
39
410
74
51
95
79
875
80
6R
ing
bead
s2
21
7O
valb
ead
sC
ylin
der
bead
s1
10
8B
arr
elb
ead
s9
63
112
10
17
75
Irre
gula
rb
ead
sIn
dete
rmin
ate
or
frag
ment
16
10
86
65
Pend
ants
-tr
iang
ula
rP
end
ants
-tr
ap
ezoid
al
Pend
ants
-oval
Pend
ants
-re
cta
ng
ula
rP
end
ants
-sq
uare
11
11
Pend
ants
-te
ard
rop
Pend
ants
-oth
er
or
ind
ete
rmin
ate
14
10
84
43
Bra
cele
ts7
75
9
TO
TA
L-
Bead
s-
N24
70
614
50
119
100
0TO
TA
L-
Bead
s-
20
258
85
011
84
20
0100
0TO
TA
L-
Bla
nks
-N
38
40
10
41
93
100
0TO
TA
L-
Bla
nks
-
40
943
010
84
31
1100
0
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 135
Ta
ble
3B
ea
ds
an
db
lan
ks
J
ila
t1
3(a
llc
on
tex
ts)
Gre
en
Da
bb
aM
arb
le
Gre
en
Da
bb
aM
arb
le
Re
dD
ab
ba
Ma
rble
Re
dD
ab
ba
Ma
rble
Bla
ck
Da
bb
aM
arb
le
Bla
ck
Da
bb
aM
arb
leW
hit
eC
ha
lkW
hit
eC
ha
lkW
hit
eQ
ua
rtzi
teW
hit
eQ
ua
rtzi
teO
the
rO
the
rT
ota
lT
ota
lT
ota
lT
ota
l
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
ead
s-
B
lan
ks
-N
Bla
nks
-
Dis
cb
ead
s7
36
40
810
22
21
59
38 1
49
22 0
Rin
gb
ead
s2
12
51
20
12 9
00 0
Ovalb
ead
s0
0 0
00 0
Cylin
der
bead
s1
13
42 6
10 4
Barr
elb
ead
s36
57
13
24
11
254
34 8
62
27 8
Irre
gula
rb
ead
s1
00 0
10 4
Ind
ete
rmin
ate
fr
ag
ment
794
11
74 5
96
43 0
Pend
ants
-tr
iang
ula
r1
11
0 6
10 4
Pend
ants
-tr
ap
ezoid
al
21
21 3
10 4
Pend
ants
-oval
11
21 3
00 0
Pend
ants
-re
cta
ng
ula
r1
10 6
00 0
Pend
ants
-sq
uare
11
10 6
10 4
Pend
ants
-te
ard
rop
22
1 3
00 0
Pend
ants
-oth
er
in
dete
rmin
ate
111
12
1 3
11
4 9
Bra
cele
ts0
0 0
00 0
TO
TA
L-
Bead
s-
N62
68
20
11
3155
100 0
TO
TA
L-
Bead
s-
40 4
43 6
12 8
0 6
0 6
1 9
100 0
TO
TA
L-
Bla
nks
-N
202
11
42
04
223
100 0
TO
TA
L-
Bla
nks
-
90 6
4 9
1 8
0 9
0 0
1 8
100 0
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
136 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
frequently occurring types burins constitute 29 of
tools and points 16 Piercers and drills occur in
much lower numbers (4 of tools) as do other tool
types Of projectile points Nizzanim points are the
most frequent (397 of points) followed by Byblos
(313) Herzeliya (12) Amuq (84) Transverse
(6) and Haparsah (24) points (Baird 1993 469
500ndash17 625 Baird in Garrard et al 1994a 85
table 1)
The 14C dates from these two sites have been
recalibrated using IntCal 2004 and the date ranges at
one standard deviation are as follows Jilat 25 (early
phase) context Aa19a (OxA2408) 5 9020ndash8760 cal
BP Jilat 13 (early phase) context A21a (OxA1800) 5
8980ndash8600 cal BP Jilat 13 (early phase) context A15a
(OxA1801) 5 8980ndash8550 cal BP Jilat 13 (late phase)
context C24 (OxA2411) 5 8980ndash8590 cal BP Jilat 13
(late phase) context C22 (UB3462) 5 8780ndash8460 cal
BP
Thus stratigraphy and radiocarbon dates suggest
that we are dealing with two sites of reasonably good
temporal resolution followed by abandonment and
sealing of primary refuse deposits Five C14 dates
indicate occupation between about 7830 and 8020
uncal BP with low standard deviations for each date
In radiocarbon terms this is about as precise as it
gets and the two sites may overlap in time However
projectile points do suggest we are dealing with a
somewhat wider time span for the Jilat 13 sample
than the Jilat 25 sample
Given different extents of excavation comparisons
of these and other stone bead-making sites entail
challenges Density data however mdash as measured by
numbers of beads blanks and debris per cu m volume
of excavated deposit mdash can be revealing For
example the PPNB occupations in Wadi Jilat (3
sites 11 occupations) had low densities mdash an average
of 1072 artefacts per cu m and a maximum of 313
per cu m (Wright and Garrard 2003 table 2) In
contrast the density data for Jilat 25 are 2223 per cu
m (early phase) 3312 per cu m (middle phase) and
562 per cu m (late phase) Density data for Jilat 13
are 3102 stone bead artefacts per cu m (early phase)
1615 per cu m (middle phase) and 1099 per cu m
(late phase) This suggests greater intensity of bead-
making in Jilat 13 and 25
Sources Quarrying and Raw Materials
Most Jilat beads were made of Dabba Marble which
occurs in green pinkred and black (Appendix A)
This is our focus here A few other materials were also
used other local sedimentary rocks and non-local
turquoise (nearest source Sinai) malachite (nearest
sources Faynan and Timna) and carnelian (nearest
source unknown) Non-local stones formed only 015
of the materials (Wright and Garrard 2003)
The largest known sources of Dabba Marble lie
15ndash25 km west of Jilat 13 and 25 some may be
closer (Fig 1 and Appendix A) These are bodies of
limestones chalks and cherts lightly metamorphosed
Table 4 Finished disc beads size data (complete or measurable beads) (na 5 not applicable)
Site N
Diameter (mm) HeightThickness (mm) Perforation Diameter (mm)
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Jilat 7 PPNB 13 87 36 30 28 28 10Jilat 26 PPNB 0 na na na na na naJilat 32 PPNB 0 na na na na na naAzraq 31 PPNB 2 98 46 25 14 23 04Jilat 25 PPNCELN 66 83 16 26 08 21 05Jilat 13 PPNCELN 47 69 24 25 09 19 06Azraq 31 PPNCELN 34 68 16 26 11 18 04
Table 5 Finished barrel beads size data (complete or measurable beads) (na 5 not applicable)
Site N
Diameter (mm) HeightThickness (mm) Perforation Diameter (mm)
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Jilat 7 PPNB 1 45 na 40 na 15 naJilat 26 PPNB 2 75 na 65 na 25 naJilat 32 PPNB 0 na na na na 00 naAzraq 31 PPNB 1 115 na 100 na 40 naJilat 25 PPNCELN 6 63 14 64 17 21 09Jilat 13 PPNCELN 28 68 28 71 39 22 09Azraq 31 PPNCELN 13 109 56 133 91 29 09
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 137
and injected with various minerals eg apatites red
iron oxides (Fig 3a) Outcrops show substantial
variations in mineralization even over small areas
in Fig 3b the left side of the outcrop is soft green
Dabba Marble the right side is red Dabba Marble
The geology and mineralogy of Dabba Marble are
presented in Appendices AndashB The Neolithic Jilat
beads are consistent with this source (Appendix B)
Methods of Analysis
Comprehensive recovery of small beads debitage and
micro-artefacts was possible due to intensive fine-
scale sieving All excavated contexts were sieved
through a 5 mm mesh many samples were dry sieved
or wet sieved through a 15 mm mesh (the latter after
flotation) Artefacts from floors were collected from 1
sq m horizontal grid units to permit identification of
activity areas Fine-grained spatial data and micro-
artefacts are important in understanding lithic
technologies (Dunnell and Stein 1989 Cessford and
Mitrovic 2005) This is borne out by the Jilat data
since micro-flakes are one byproduct of stone bead
retouch In cases of intense housecleaning micro-
artefacts may reveal bead-making where macro-
artefacts do not (Wright and Bains 2007)
For each context artefacts were separated by raw
material and classified into major groups nodules
and debitage (Fig 4) roughouts (Fig 5) unfinished
blanks and finished ornaments (Figs 6ndash10) We
counted and weighed each group to determine
relationships between debitage and finished beads
Measurements (diameter height perforation dia-
meter) were taken on beads and blanks to assess
standardization and drilling techniques
Finished ornaments were classified into 8 basic
types (Wright and Garrard 2003) Circular disc beads
are the most numerous smallest and most standar-
dized (Figs 6d 7endashf) They occur in the widest range
of materials most red Dabba Marble beads were
discs Barrelshaped beads are larger more variable
and mostly made of green Dabba Marble (Fig 9endashf)
Pendants are the largest rarest and most diverse
items shaped as triangles rectangles and ovals most
are of green Dabba Marble (Fig 10d f) Bracelets
were made of white chalk (Tables 2ndash3)
Unfinished beads (blanks) were classified according
to the same typology as finished beads when the
intended final product could be ascertained (eg disc
blank) (Tables 2ndash3 Figs 6andashc 7andashd 8 9andashd 10c e)
Within these categories blanks were further classified
according to traces of flaking grinding perforation
Figure 8 shows these stages for 3 sequences of disc
bead manufacture Differences between Sequences A
B and C are differences in the original blank (Stage 1
thin flake thick flake tabular roughout) and presence
or absence of flaking retouch on edges (Stage 2)
Further analyses of sequences for these and other
bead types are still in progress
Debitage was sorted into nodules cores rough-
outs flakes angular shatter micro-flakes and
Table 6 Stone beads blanks and debris Jilat 25 all contexts
Phase Context Description Beads Blanks Debris Comments Selected associated artefacts
Early Aa24 Fill of bedrock cut 0 0 2Early Aa27 Fill of bedrock cut 0 0 1Early Aa19 First occupation fill 29 23 384 1 cutmarked slab 3 sandstone fragments
probably handstones 1 limestone handstoneEarly Aa20 First occupation fill 1 5 6Early Aa21 First occupation fill 4 1 4Early Aa18 Early fill in entrance area 1 5 8Early A 44 Early fill in entrance area 0 0 3Middle Aa15 Second occupation fill 47 31 544 1 limestone capstone 1 grooved stone (basalt)
1 sandstone abraderMiddle Aa16 Hearth 1 1 0Middle Aa13 Fill of stone feature 1 0 81Middle Aa10 Fill of stone feature 0 0 3Middle Aa11 Ash lense 3 0 17Middle Aa7 Third occupation fill 17 15 109 2 grooved stones (limestone and basalt)
2 basalt handstones 1 sandstone fragmentMiddle Aa8 Third occupation fill 1 1 1Middle Aa14 Fill in entrance area 7 3 4Middle A 42 Fill in entrance area 0 0 1
Late Aa 2 Sandy late fill 1 0 55 1 sandstone abrader Bead 1 RDM disc Debris all GDMLate A 6 Rubbly late fill 7 4 72Late A 33 Late fill in entrance area 0 0 1Late A 36 Late fill in entrance area 0 0 6Late A 34 Fill of late intrusive feature 1 0 0
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
138 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
micro-shatter (Fig 4) Definitions of these categories
are broadly similar to those established in chipped
stone analysis (Andrefsky 1998)
Flaking and Initial Reduction Nodules CoresDebitage and Roughouts
The soft limestone and hard chert in Dabba Marble
permits it to be worked via chipping flaking
grinding sawing and drilling To varying degrees
the material has conchoidal fracture Where chert
content is high conchoidal fracture is excellent
Limestone itself also has conchoidal fracture parti-
cularly when fine-grained as Dabba Marble is The
tabular structure of the laminated limestones also
makes it possible to create flat faces easily
The difficulty of shaping beads would have varied
depending on specific material Most green Dabba
marble is fairly homogeneous composed of calcite-rich
soft limestone (Mohs 5 3) and apatite (Mohs 5 5)
Red Dabba marble occurs in a soft pale pink variety
(Mohs 5 3ndash4) a dark pink variety of medium
hardness and a dark red siliceous variety essentially
red chert (Mohs 5 7) This red chert variant (Mohs 7)
will have been more difficult to modify Flaking and
chipping were particularly important in working this
material and abrasion will have been more difficult
This may be why so many beads of the red cherty
Dabba Marble were disc beads made on flakes (Fig 7)
Flaking figured prominently in the making of
beads from softer materials However sawing and
abrasion played a greater role in modification of these
materials Comparable variations in technique
depending on material hardness are seen at other
prehistoric sites (Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990)
Table 7 Stone beads blanks and debris Jilat 13 selected contexts
Phase Context Description Beads Blanks Debris Comments Selected associated artefacts
Early C106 Fill of bedrock cut 0 0 1 1 circular limestone diskEarly B77 First occupation fill 1 5 752Early B79 Fill of hearth 0 0 6 1 limestone handstoneEarly B71 Second occupation fill 10 11 750 1 drilled and grooved limestone object
1 flaked limestone rsquoscraperrsquo 6 basalt fragmentsEarly A17 Lower pavement 0 0 0 1 cutmarked slabEarly A15 Third occupation fill 1 8 8 1 worked limestone object snake-shaped flint pebbleEarly A16 Third occupation fill 2 1 17 1 miniature pestle basaltEarly A18 Third occupation fill 0 0 11 Basalt fragments 3 from vessels
1 handstonepestle fragment 6 unidentifiableEarly B44 Third occupation fill 5 9 74Early B45 Third occupation fill 0 2 139 1 basalt handstone fragmentEarly B69 Third occupation fill 6 5 383 No ground stoneEarly C56 Third occupation fill 8 5 313 1 double-grooved sandstone abrader (Fig 15a)
Middle A3 Fourth occupation fill 3 4 60 1 limestone capstone ( 2 surfaces) 5 basalt fragmentsMiddle A5 Fourth occupation fill 7 9 139 1 cutmarked flint slab 1 grooved limestone object
ochred flints figurines pillarsMiddle B31 Fourth occupation fill 4 2 33Middle B38 Fourth occupation fill 12 6 520Middle B54 Fourth occupation fill 1 0 9 1 limestone figurine (bird)Middle B56 Fourth occupation fill 1 1 14 1 basalt grinding slab fragmentMiddle C39 Fourth occupation fill 10 12 254 1 flint cutmarked slab flaked limestone rsquoscraperrsquo
Late C14 Foundation for upperpavement
0 5 65 1 basalt ground fragment
Late B3 Upper pavement 0 0 0 1 cutmarked limestone slab 1 post-socketLate C4 Upper pavement 0 0 0 1 drilling and abrading bench (Fig 14c)Late A2 Fifth occupation fill 4 2 154 10 figurines or figurine preforms suggesting animals
phalluses arrows (flint limestone travertine) 1 pebblemortar or capstone with ochre (limestone) 1 perforatedobject 1 handstone on flake (flint) 2 vessel fragments1 ochred pebble burnt pebble (limestone) 1 groundindeterminate stone (basalt) Beads are 2 barrels and2 pendants blanks are 1 barrel and 1 indeterminate
Late B4 Fifth occupation fill 0 2 7 1 grooved limestone abrader (Fig 15c) Blanks are bothpendant blanks
Late B7 Fifth occupation fill 2 5 150 1 cutmarked limestone 1 basalt handstonepestlefragment
Late B9 Fifth occupation fill 0 0 3 1 perforated pumice abraderLate B21 Fifth occupation fill 5 7 193 1 basalt handstone 2 basalt fragmentsLate C3 Fifth occupation fill 2 4 61
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 139
Five main stages of manufacture were identified
although reduction sequences vary These are (1)
reduction of raw nodules to cores roughouts and
flakes via flaking and chipping (2) shaping of
roughouts and flakes into blanks via further flaking
chipping sawing and rough grinding (3) perforation
via boring andor drilling (4) further grinding to
produce the final shape (5) final polishing
Nodules cores and debitage were recovered in
large amounts at Jilat 13 (7369 artefacts 6905 grams)
and Jilat 25 (1381 artefacts 976 grams) The largest
unworked blocks are of green Dabba Marble They
are about 15 cm in diameter but most are about the
size of an adult human fist Some nodules were
weathered suggesting that they were picked up from
surface rather than quarried from bedrock layers
(Fig 4 top)
Reduction of nodules by flaking resulted in (1)
cores (2) tabular roughouts (3) large flakes (4) large
angular shatter fragments (5) micro-flakes and (6)
micro-shatter (Fig 4) Cores defined as nodules with
two or more flake scars are not numerous or
consistent in form Shatter micro-flakes and micro-
shatter were normally discarded as byproducts
Tabular roughouts and larger flakes were used as
the basis for further reduction into bead blanks
Roughouts are early stages in bead reduction
(Kenoyer 2003 16) At Jilat 13 and 25 roughouts
are tabular reflecting the bedded structure of the
material They were flaked and chipped around the
edges into roughly symmetrical shapes (Figs 5a 10a)
Roughouts were sometimes subjected to initial
drilling or sawing at an early stage prior to any
intense abrasion (Fig 5b) In other cases roughouts
were abraded first (Fig 5d) and then sawn or drilled
(Fig 5c) Tabular roughouts were the basis for
making larger thicker ornaments such as most
pendants and barrel beads (Figs 9ndash10)
Small subcircular flakes were the basis of most disc
beads (Figs 6ndash7) The flakes have platforms bulbs of
percussion on ventral surfaces and often scars from
previous removals on dorsal surfaces A certain
consistency in size shape and morphology suggests
that a prepared-core technology was used to predict
and produce these flakes Since cores are rare we do
not yet know precisely how this was achieved
Experiments are still needed but we suspect that
chipping and flaking was accomplished by varying
Figure 3 (a) View of the modern Dabba Marble quarry west of Wadi Jilat from which raw material samples were
obtained (see Appendices AndashB) (b) Close-up view of metamorphosed deposits in situ with interdigitating green
(left) and red (right) Dabba Marble
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
140 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
uses of indirect percussion soft-hammer percussion
andor pressure flaking since the small size of the
beads required precision The use of antler or horn
for pressure flaking of soft stones is widely seen in the
ethnographic record and experimentally (Foreman
1978 19) Even hard stones can be flaked with soft
hammers made of animal horn (Kenoyer 1986 1994
2003 Kenoyer et al 1991) Cores and flakes do not
clearly indicate use of the Cambay technique of
inverse indirect percussion as seen in carnelian bead-
making (Kenoyer 2003 Possehl 1981) Many blanks
display micro-retouch on the edges On thicker disc
bead blanks micro-flakes were removed by striking
downward at the edge of each bead face (Fig 7c) The
retouch scars show that striking was bipolar ie from
opposite directions Products of this procedure were
micro-flakes (Fig 4 bottom)
Clear indications of heat treatment were rare but
burnt pieces do occur
Sawing Drilling and Abrasion Bead Blanks andFinished Beads
Bead blanks are the further reduction of a roughout
into a form closer to the final bead shape (Kenoyer
2003 16) At Jilat 13 and 25 blanks were abandoned
at many different stages The most extensive evidence
for lithic reduction concerns disc beads it is possible
to identify some chaines operatoires (Fig 8)
Figure 6 illustrates two of these paths for green
Dabba Marble disc beads made on flakes
Sometimes circular flakes were perforated early
before any abrasion (Fig 6c) More often flakes
were abraded slightly on ventral and dorsal surfaces
before any drilling (Fig 6andashb) At this stage edges
were still rough Perforation was added later (Fig
6d) In such cases a number of disc beads were
probably then strung together and abraded on the
edges by rolling the string back and forth on abrasive
stones of varying textures such as coarse sandstone
fine sandstone or limestone The final products were
evenly smoothed disc beads relatively standardized
in size The procedure also resulted in edges that are
sharp perpendicular to the bead faces and flat rather
than convex (Figs 6d 7endashf) Experiments indicate
that this procedure also contributes to the polishing
of faces and edges of beads (cf Foreman 1978)
Figure 7 shows artefacts from one context at Jilat 25
indicating a similar sequence for red Dabba Marble
disc beads from subcircular flake to final disc
For barrel beads the starting point was typically
not a flake but a tabular roughout A roughout was
often flaked into an approximately cylindrical form
sometimes with a hexagonal transverse cross section
(that is the section perpendicular to the perforation)
(Fig 9a) Scars indicate that the hexagonal form was
accomplished by flaking Sometimes hexagonal
blanks were perforated before much abrasion (Fig
9b) In many cases hexagonal blanks were heavily
abraded to obliterate sharp angles before any
perforation was begun (Fig 9c) Resulting bead
forms varied in cross section from circular to
elliptical or lenticular (see Wright and Garrard
2003 fig 3) Perforation of barrel beads was from
opposite directions resulting in hourglass perfora-
tions (Fig 9e) and occasionally perforation errors
(Fig 9d)
Most pendants were begun as tabular roughouts
chipped into shapes anticipating the final form such
as an asymmetrical triangular pendant (Fig 10a cf
Fig 5a for a rectangular pendant) Roughouts were
Figure 4 Example of raw material nodule (top) angular
shatter (upper centre) flakes (lower centre) and
micro-debitage (lower row) from a single context
at Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 141
then abraded and sawing was sometimes applied (Fig
10b) One unfinished pendant shows that perforation
preceded final abrasion (Fig 10c) The most common
form is the asymmetrical triangular pendant (Fig
10d) but there are also rectangular square and oval
pendants Not all pendants were made on tabular
roughouts some were made on thin flakes eg
rectangular and lsquoteardroprsquo forms (Fig 10endashf)
Sawing
Disc beads were made individually one by one on
flakes as opposed to being sawn from a perforated
cylinder which is another possible way However
sawing was central to the production of pendants and
barrel beads (cf Fig 5c 10b) In some cases the
roughout was sawn only to a shallow depth
permitting unwanted material to be snapped off
leaving a protruding piece of stone mdash a kind of
groove and snap technique (Fig 5c) The protruding
lsquobossrsquo was then abraded
A range of chipped stone tools in the sites might be
suitable for sawing These include tabular chert knives
sometimes also called tile knives (Fig 11) These are
bifacially retouched cutting tools characteristic of the
eastern Jordanian Neolithic (Baird in Garrard et al
1994a 89) However typically the bifacial retouch
produces an edge that is robust but somewhat sinuous
in profile (Fig 11) In addition many tile knife edges
have significant curvature in plan Use of tile knives
would probably generate relatively wide and slightly
sinuous cut marks but this is an area worthy of
experimentation and use wear study Alternative tools
that perhaps better match the relative scale and
precision of cut marks on bead blanks are a range of
relatively robust non-formal tools on blade or elon-
gated flake blanks with edges that are relatively
straight in profile and plan These are found in some
numbers in conjunction with the bead making debris in
Jilat 13 and 25 It is also notable that despite the
purported dominance of flakes in many broadly
contemporary PPNCELN assemblages significant
a b
c d
Figure 5 (a) Tabular roughout rectangular (b) Tabular roughout subcircular with drill mark (c) Abraded roughout with
sawing mark at bottom note that the sawing is incomplete the groove and snap technique has resulted in both
the saw mark and an irregular protrusion of stone (d) Abraded tabular roughout subcircular
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
142 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
proportions of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 tool blanks are
blades (Baird 1993 469 and figs 818ndash821) even
though the debitage assemblages are mostly flake
dominated Other possible sawing tools include flaked
limestone artefacts with a thin edge (Fig 12c)
Several cutmarked limestone slabs were found at
Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 (Fig 12andashb) The cutmarks are
shallow or deep incisions Interestingly the cut-
marked slabs do not display evidence of drilling
Conversely the Jilat 13 bench with marks probably
resulting from drilling (Fig 14c see below) has no
cutmarks This suggests segregation of drilling and
sawing activities Some variability in spatial distribu-
tion of different stages in the bead making process
may be further borne out by the discrete distribution
of drills in Jilat 25 contexts where substantial bead
making debris was recovered For example in Jilat 25
Context A15 drills were found clustered in spatial
units towards the northern end of the structure
Drilling
Experiments in drilling of Dabba Marble are in
progress (Bains forthcoming) Here we present
evidence for drilling from bead perforations and
stone tools Other experiments show that perforation
morphology reveals drilling methods and shape
diameter and length of the drill used (eg Gwinnett
and Gorelick 1999) At Jilat perforations indicate
that drilling methods varied and that choices were
probably affected by material hardness
Hand Drilling with Large Piercers and Borers
The simplest method used appears to have been hand
drilling Soft Dabba Marble could have been drilled
using a borer or piercer held in the hand and not
hafted to a drilling stick Drilling by this method
would produce rough irregular and relatively large
perforations (Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990) we see
examples of this in broken beads Borers and piercers
were found at the sites They are relatively large
perforation tools made on blades suitable for
manipulation by hand without a haft (Fig 13 nos
9ndash11)
Rotary Drilling From Two Directions with Hafted Drills
The most common method involved rotary drilling
from two directions Drilling was almost always
a b
c d
Figure 6 Green Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads (andashb) Circular flakes slightly abraded (c) Unabraded
perforated flake (d) Finished disc bead
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 143
bipolar That is the blank was drilled to roughly
halfway through then turned and the perforation
completed from the opposite direction As the two
perforations converged the result was an hourglass-
shaped perforation (Fig 9e) Experiments indicate
that this prevents chipping and flaking of the
alternate face which can occur if a blank is perforated
completely from only one direction (Possehl 1981)
Most hourglass perforations on both soft and
hard stones appear to have been produced by rotary
drilling Rotary drilling results in regular perforations
and concentric striations on them (Gorelick and
Gwinnett 1990) We observed both traits on many
broken beads and blanks (Fig 9b) Perforations of
hourglass form included very small drillholes indi-
cating that the drilling tools were smaller than
piercers and borers made on blades The probable
drills in this case were small drills on bladelets and
especially drill bits on burin spalls (Fig 13 nos 1 4
5 7) Microscopic examination of perforations is in
progress (Bains forthcoming)
Oddly piercing and drilling tools were found in
relatively low absolute numbers at the two sites (eg
Baird 1993 505ndash06 625 for Jilat 13 early phase
about 4 of tools were piercers or drills for the Jilat
25 which have concentrations of bead-making debris
just under 3 of tools were spall drills) However
specific contextual data other technological consid-
erations and comparisons with other sites give us
confidence that these were the main tools involved in
the drilling and that the low absolute numbers of
drills abandoned may sometimes relate to systematic
removal or discard of these tools by the artisans For
example burin spall drills were closely associated
spatially with bead-making debris in specific activity
areas in the Jilat 25 structure eg Context Aa15 in
the buildingrsquos northern area (Baird 1993 521 see
Table 6) In addition Jilat 13 and 25 produced large
numbers of angle burins including truncation burins
from which burin spalls were detached (eg about
29 of all tools at J13rsquos early phase were burins)
(Baird 1993 500 516 520ndash26 625) Burins are
a b c
d e f
Figure 7 Red Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads from Jilat 25 Context Aa15 (andashb) Circular flakes
slightly abraded (c) Heavily abraded and perforated disc bead blank edge abrasion incomplete (d) Abraded
perforated blank abrasion not complete on face (endashf) Finished disc beads
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
144 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
contextually closely associated with drills and bead-
making debris in occupation fills at Jilat 25 (c 30 of
tools from relevant Jilat 25 contexts were burins) mdash a
situation also seen at Jebel Naja in the Basalt Desert mdash
where both experiments and microwear studies suggest
that drill bits on burin spalls were used for bead-
making (Baird 1993 521 Finlayson and Betts 1990)
Burin spall drills would have had some technolo-
gical advantages over bladelet drills One advantage
is that the triangular or rectangular cross-sections of
burin spall drills make them stronger and less likely
to break during drilling In addition the manner of
their retouch from the same direction on each edge
creates a prismatic cross-section that probably served
to produce a neater hole and to make drilling more
efficient and possibly faster and reduce breakage in
drilling The tips of burin spall drills are blunted
which is an advantage in drilling hard stone (Gorelick
and Gwinnett 1990) Predictability and miniaturiza-
tion of burin spall drills may be relevant to an
Figure 8 Chaines operatoires for disc beads Sequence A refers to a disc bead made on a thin flake Sequence B refers
to a disc bead made on a thick flake Sequence C refers to a disc bead made on a tabular roughout not a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 145
apparent increased standardization in perforation
size observed at Jilat 25 from an early phase to a later
phase (Critchley 2000)
Since we have evidence of rotary drilling from bead
perforations we believe that drill bits were hafted to
sticks (probably made of wood) Drill bits on burin
spalls would have been too small to manipulate
effectively by hand alone
To work efficiently a drill needs to be weighted
and stabilized and there must be some means of
protecting the artisanrsquos hand Ground stone artefacts
support the idea that rotary drilling with drill bits
hafted to drilling sticks was in use They include a
probable capstone made of limestone from Jilat 25
The capstone would have been held in the hand
enabling the beadmaker to manipulate the drilling
stick from the top (Fig 14a) This artefact resembles
a miniature bowl and fits easily into one hand The
interior surface displays use wear circular striations
parallel to the rim and vertical striations perpendi-
cular to the rim The base of the interior converges to
a flat surface about 1 cm in diameter
Some Levantine Neolithic sites have revealed
similar objects with similar wear (Banning 1998
Wright 1992 fig 5ndash15b) and a comparable item
was found at Jarmo (Moholy-Nagy 1983 fig 12913
Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990 30) Capstones are
characteristic of the use of bow drills (Banning
1998 Foreman 1978) but strictly speaking they
are not necessarily diagnostic of the bow drill
(theoretically simpler drilling techniques involving
hafting might have been facilitated by the use of
a capstone) For the moment we can say that
at Jilat 13 and 15 the evidence for rotary drilling
is unequivocal However the evidence for the use
of the bow drill while suggestive is not quite
definitive
Size data considered carefully support a link
between burin-spall drills and beads To interpret
dimensions of drills and perforations we must keep
in mind that stone bead drilling was overwhelmingly
bipolar and converging Thus drills did not have to
penetrate all the way through the full height of the
bead mdash only about half of it Therefore what matters
a b c
d e f
Figure 9 Green Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks and finished beads (a) Hexagonal blank flaked but not abraded (b)
Abraded hexagonal blank (c) Abraded blank not perforated (d) Perforation error on abraded blank (e)
Finished bead broken showing bipolar perforation and hourglass perforation shape (f) Perforated barrel bead
almost finished except for final abrasion to smooth out last surface irregularities
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
146 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
is the very tips of the drill bits mdash the upper few
millimetres mdash not the full length of the drills
Since disc beads are consistently about 25 to
26 mm in height only the upper 15 mm or so of the
drills mdash the most distal ends of the tips mdash had to
have been about 21 mm or less in thickness to
lsquomatchrsquo the perforation diameters of disc beads
(Table 4) In the case of barrel beads since barrel
beads were between 64 and 71 mm in height about
32 to 36 mm of the most distal ends of the drill bits
have to have been about 21 mm or less in thickness
to lsquomatchrsquo the perforations of barrel beads (Table 5)
Measurements of the drill bit tips within these
small uppermost reaches show that the maximal
thicknesses of the drill bitsrsquo distal tips fall within the
range of sizes indicated by the perforations (Fig 13)
Multi-stage Drilling
Sometimes drilling may have been accomplished in
several stages Some beads particularly those made of
harder stones have smooth cylindrical perforations
with parallel walls displaying no hint of the
hourglass shape
One way to achieve this is to create the hourglass
perforation and then to turn it into a perfect
cylindrical perforation via the use of a second drilling
procedure An example of this was cited by Calley
(1989) who proposed that two tools found in
carnelian bead workshops at Early Bronze Age
Kumartepe (Turkey) had complementary functions
a drill bit for making the initial hourglass perforation
and a borer for finishing and smoothing it into a
cylindrical perforation Since both drill bits and
borers were found on the Jilat sites this method of
finishing perforations could have been used
At Jilat 13 and 25 evidence for multi-stage drilling
can be seen in some beads which have a depression on
one or both faces The depression may be a result of
drilling with a larger drill bit first in order to provide
a guide for the final perforation with a finer drill bit
Such a technique is seen in India-Pakistan (Possehl
1981 39 Kenoyer 1992b 73)
a b c
d e f
Figure 10 Green Dabba Marble pendant blanks and finished pendants (a) Tabular roughout flaked into approximately
trapezoidal shape but not abraded (b) Abraded trapezoidal blank with sawing mark at bottom (c) Perforated
asymmetrical triangular pendant blank incompletely abraded (note striations on face) (d) Finished asymmetri-
cal triangular pendant (e) Pendant blank made on a flake unabraded (f) Nearly-finished pendant made on a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 147
Stabilizing Beads Anvils and Drilling Benches
What method was used to stabilize a bead during
drilling The simplest technique is to fix a bead to a
stone anvil with an adhesive Ethnography and
experiments show that such anvils can be small (the
size of handstones) (Foreman 1978 figs 6ndash7) Use of
such an anvil should result in small shallow
depressions a form of use-damage resulting from
force exerted from above Figure 14b shows a small
flat stone from Jilat 25 with a central depression of
the expected size and depth
Figure 14c shows the limestone bench from Jilat 13
(previously discussed) with a number of such pits in
the centre The marks are evenly spaced and are
concentrated in one small well-defined area on the
widest part of the bench this wide area was also
finely abraded
We see this bench as a multifunctional worktable
anvil We suspect that the beadmaker sat on the
narrow part of the bench (straddling it) placed bead
blanks on the pitted work surface fixed them with
adhesive and then drilled them The bench also
displays evidence of other activities including flaking
and grinding
Adhesives for hafting chipped stone tools could
have been adapted for use in fixing beads to anvils
Bitumen would be one candidate In some cultures a
wooden frame with cup-holes is sometimes used for
stabilizing beads (Kenoyer 1986 P Wright 1982)
The holes are filled with beeswax and clay the bead is
inserted into the wax-clay mixture which hardens
holding the bead steady After drilling beads are
released by breaking the wax-clay mixture (Allchin
1979 Stocks 1989) As wood was probably scarce in
Jilat and as there are no indications of the use of
clay we can probably rule out this technique
However stone items with cup-holes are seen in
Neolithic sites (Kirkbride 1966 Wright 1992
fig 527b)
Abrasion
Ground stone artefacts are crucial to bead produc-
tion in traditional technologies (Foreman 1978
Inizan et al 1992 Kenoyer et al 1991 53 Moholy-
Nagy 1983 294 Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58)
Grinding of beads can be achieved by abrading
each bead individually with a hand held abrader or
by rubbing them on a large grinding slab Either
method will produce linear striations of the type we
see on many unfinished beads (cf Figs 7cndashd and 10c)
However final shaping of disc and cylindrical beads
was most likely achieved by stringing them or loading
them on to a thin rod capable of penetrating the
perforation (individually or in groups) and then
rolling them on a grinding slab adding abrasives
(such as sand) and water to produce a smoother finish
(Foreman 1978 Moholy-Nagy 1983 298) Some disc
beads with parallel edges perpendicular to the faces
would probably have been rolled on a flat smooth
stone Other beads with facetted sharply angled or
bevelled edges (eg many barrel beads) suggest that
they were rolled or abraded along a stone with
grooves and slanting sides (eg Fig 15a c)
Abrasion of bead blanks may have been a multi-
stage process involving a number of materials of
different textures and hardness In an early stage
grinding of bead materials on vesicular basalt would
have been the easiest way to abrade a large nodule
quickly The pores of vesicular basalt and pumice
form natural cutting lsquoteethrsquo comparable to the metal
rasp used by present-day sculptors At Jilat 13 and
Jilat 25 we found broken fragments of vesicular
basalt grinding slabs but not large complete exam-
ples The small fragments suggest two possibilities
either there were large complete slabs at one time
which were then broken worn out and discarded or
only small fragments of these heavy duty grinding
tools were needed
For finer abrasion sandstone grinding slabs might
be expected None were found However small
Figure 11 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic
sites Tile knives or possible saws for bead-
making From Baird 1993 fig 85
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
148 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
handheld abraders made of sandstones with coarse
hard quartz crystals were found at both sites (Fig
15andashb) Sandstone is not local to Wadi Jilat and these
items were imported and probably used extensively
(resulting in the small size)
For even finer abrasion limestone could have been
used Such needs could have been met by the large
bench of Jilat 13 (Fig 14c) which was finely ground
over a very large area (within which the possible
drilling marks were placed)
Some might see the grooved items made of
sandstone (Fig 15a) and limestone (Fig 15c) as
lsquoshaft straightenersrsquo One or two shaft straightener
fragments made of basalt occur at Jilat 13 Like other
basalt shaft straighteners in Neolithic Jilat (eg Jilat
7) (Garrard et al 1994a Wright 1993) the use-
surfaces of these have U-shaped cross-sections By
contrast the cross sections of the use surfaces on the
sandstone and limestone grooved items are not U-
shaped but have sharp angles We see these tools
mainly as abraders for grinding bead facets espe-
cially on barrel beads The widths of the use surfaces
are 11 mm for the sandstone tool and 138 mm for
the limestone one These dimensions correspond to
the average diameter (5 width) of 31 measured green
Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks from Jilat 13 (N 5
31 Mean diameter 5 92 mm standard deviation 5
28) Grooved stones are used in bead grinding in
a
b c
Figure 12 Ground stone artefacts probably for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Cutmarked slab (limestone) Jilat
13 The cutmarks are shallow and are concentrated in the left area running parallel to the main axes of the
slab (b) Cutmarked slab fragment (limestone) Jilat 13 showing deep cutmarks (c) Flaked and ground abra-
sive cutting tool made of limestone Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 149
modern India (Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58) a
grooved sandstone tool was found with an unfinished
bead at Catalhoyuk (Wright and Bains 2007)
Tosi and Vidale (1990) regard failure resulting
from breakage or human error as more common in
the grinding stage than during perforation although
this depends on material and opinion (Kenoyer 2003
18) In some cases it might be more efficient to shape
the bead first before attempting perforation This
may explain why barrel beads tend to be shaped and
abraded prior to perforation
Finished beads were always finely abraded and
sometimes polished to the extent of reflecting light
Ethnographic observations indicate that polishing is
sometimes done by placing beads en masse in a
leather bag along with an abrasive and shaking and
rolling the bags for long periods (Allchin 1979
Kenoyer 2003) This simple method would have been
more likely than the method of rolling beads and
abrasives in a wooden barrel which is also docu-
mented ethnographically (Kenoyer 2003)
However shaking beads in a bag with an abrasive
tends to produce beads with rounded convex edges
(Gwinnett and Gorelick 1989) Some beads at Jilat
have this form but many mdash especially those made of
the hard cherty red Dabba Marble mdash have sharp
edges perpendicular to bead faces indicating that
they were individually polished or polished during
rolling on a string or stick Alternative methods of
polishing can include rubbing with leather or wood
with the addition of fine sand or chalk and water or
with animal hairwool and animal fat (Kenoyer 1986
20) These methods would have been possible with
Jilat technology
Craft Specialization and Comparisons withOther Sites
Technology needs to be studied not only in terms of
materials and techniques but also in terms of social
groups involved in artefact production individual
artisans and skill (Dobres and Hoffmann 1999 2ndash12)
In egalitarian societies craft skill and knowledge of
Figure 13 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic sites Drilling and piercing tools From Baird 1993 fig 82
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
150 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
special materials can enhance the power of an
individual or a group encouraging hierarchy
(Dobres 2000 119ndash20)
These questions force us to reconsider issues of
craft specialization a term often used loosely or in
widely different ways Three concepts of specializa-
tion are considered here individual specialists
specialization between households or domestic
groups within a given site and site specialization
within a regional or social network of craft produc-
tion and exchange
Costin (1991) draws a contrast between indepen-
dent specialization and attached specialization
Independent specialization involves production of
utilitarian goods for nonelites and can be household-
based or based in special workshops Attached
specialization refers to production of prestige goods
under control of elites Whilst Costin notes that
attached specialization can also be based in house-
holds or workshops we often think of attached
specialization in connection with central institutions
and urban or state-level societies It is of considerable
interest that in early urban societies the making of
stone personal ornaments in association with central
institutions figures prominently (Stein 1996 Vidale
1989)
How earlier forms of craft specialization may have
evolved into large-scale attached specialization is
poorly understood Most research has concentrated
on later stages in this process (eg Stein 1996) in
discussions of earlier forms of specialization defini-
tions and criteria for diagnosis could sometimes be
clearer (eg Quintero and Wilke 1998 Rollefson and
Parker 2002 Rosen 1997) If we are dealing with
a
c
b
Figure 14 Ground stone artefacts probably used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Capstone made of limestone
Jilat 25 (b) Handstone probably used as an anvil or hammer Jilat 25 note depression in face and flake scars
at edges (c) Limestone drilling bench Jilat 13 Note evidence of use-wear on the left and widest area of the
bench smooth abraded surface drill marks in the centre-left face small flake scars with negative bulbs of per-
cussion close to the edge of the bench
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 151
specialization in Neolithic societies it is probably
independent specialization Still Neolithic societies
may fall between Costinrsquos two categories Neolithic
groups were clearly producing prestige goods perso-
nal ornaments are not strictly utilitarian and there is
at least a possibility that elites were emerging (Byrd
1994 Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002 Verhoeven
2002)
Individual Specialists
First there is the issue of identifying individual
specialists Some use lsquospecializationrsquo to refer to any
situation in which some artisans have high levels of
skill a view that has been criticized (Rice 1991) We
agree with Rice that identifying a high level of
technical skill in a craft is not on its own sufficient
for a diagnosis of specialization since it robs the
concept of force in discussing long term change (by
this criterion the Upper Palaeolithic was riddled
with craft specialists) However we would argue
that if there are other indications of craft specializa-
tion a search for levels of ability in different
individuals is appropriate mdash if the data permit
Such data would be primary refuse from well-dated
sites of high temporal resolution in which technical
processes (eg errors in chaines operatoires) can
reveal experts vs novices (Pigeot 1990 Stout 2002
Vanzetti and Vidale 1994)
In the case of Jilat 13 and 25 we are dealing with
much primary refuse and two closely dated sites (see
above and Tables 6ndash7) mdash with periodic use of the
sites over a time range on the order of 200 years at
most and possibly much less Jilat 25 yielded activity
areas with clear spatial clusters as do a number of
contexts at Jilat 13 Space does not permit us to
present all details (this awaits the final site report)
but we feel confident that aggregate consideration of
the data from each site allows us to discuss general
questions of individual skills mdash master craftsmen vs
novices
a b
c
Figure 15 Ground stone artefacts possibly used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Grooved sandstone abrading
tool Jilat 13 (b) Sandstone hand-held abrader Jilat 25 (c) Grooved limestone abrading tool Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
152 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
To explore this we analysed unfinished blanks and
the frequency of perforation errors Drilling is a
sensitive moment in bead production when many
things can go wrong (Kenoyer 2003) A low incidence
in perforation errors combined with high numbers of
successfully finished beads and evidence of standar-
dization should be reasonably good indicators of an
artisanrsquos mastery This is the situation seen at Jilat 25
(Fig 7) In all of 93 blanks from Jilat 25 only 2 were
perforation errors a failure rate of only 2
On the other hand a high incidence of perforation
errors would suggest that a beadmaker was a relative
novice Jilat 13 produced more blanks with perfora-
tion errors than Jilat 25 We thought we might find
individual contexts with a high rate of error
suggesting apprentices
The data did not bear this out Of 223 bead blanks
from Jilat 13 (all phases) 22 were perforation errors
mdash a failure rate of 98 All but two errors were on
barrel bead blanks of green Dabba Marble The
others were one pendant blank and one irregular
bead blank These 22 blanks were distributed across
20 different contexts and no more than 2 perforation
errors were found in any one context
A close look at those contexts reveals low error
rates In Context B21 2 green barrel bead blanks
with perforation errors were found with 5 other
blanks The others included green and red barrel and
disc blanks This context also yielded 5 successfully
finished beads including black and red barrel beads
and a green disc Black and green debitage and a
discoidal handstone were also found here In Context
B71 2 blanks with perforation errors were found
along with 9 other blanks and 10 successfully
finished beads including green Dabba Marble barrel
beads but also black and red disc beads Much
debitage was found along with a flaked limestone
cutting tool (cf Fig 12c) and a limestone object with
a drill mark
The higher rate of error at Jilat 13 compared to
Jilat 25 could be because artisans at Jilat 13 were
making more of the larger more complex barrel
beads (as opposed to simple discs see Tables 2ndash3)
which offer greater chances of failure due to the
longer drilling distance However at Jilat 13 the
overall failure rate was still quite low particularly
considering the overall volume of material recovered
(Table 1)
We conclude that the beadmakers at Jilat 13
included few trainees These appear to have been
skilled artisans a small task force composed of
relative experts This raises the question of whether
these beadmakers were examples of lsquoproducer
specialistsrsquo as traditionally defined that is people
involved in
production of a good by a relatively small number of
individuals (compared to the total output and
number of consumers) individuals who are as a
result of this selectivity and the routinization or
repetition of their tasks particularly skilled in
manufacture (Rice 1991 263)
Jilat 13 and 25 do suggest small numbers of
individuals and a certain selectivity in who was
involved in stone bead making The quantity of
debitagedebris relative to (1) the number of finished
beads and (2) the modest sizes of these structures
collectively suggest that these craftsmenwomen
served a larger number of consumers relative to the
number of craftsmen involved here If so who were
these consumers mdash other residents of Jilat or groups
beyond
Intra-site Specialization Between Domestic Groups
Several studies suggest ways of identifying different
forms of craft specialization between domestic groups
in a site For later sites Stein (1996) has explored
spatial data particularly how craft production
facilities are dispersed among domestic units or
located near special (or central) institutions In
Neolithic sites questions about dispersal between
households and possible links between craft produc-
tion and special buildings or special sites have been
underexplored
For specialization Costin (1991) suggests that we
would expect (1) variability between production
units (eg households occupations regions) in
relevant artefacts (2) high densities of craft produc-
tion debris relative to some other generally used
item in some production units (3) high ratios of
unfinished goods to finished goods in some produc-
tion units Kenoyer et alrsquos (1991) ethnoarchaeolo-
gical studies of modern stone bead-making in
Khambat (India) suggest something similar in the
case of households as production units There non-
specialist households engaging in casual opportu-
nistic bead production revealed low quantities of
bead-making debris few unfinished beads and little
standardization in finished beads By contrast
households specializing in bead production were
characterized by stockpiling of large quantities of
raw materials many unfinished beads and more
standardized finished products
In looking at whole occupations (ie phases within
sites) as a unit of observation we argue elsewhere
(Wright and Garrard 2003) that artefact densities and
other data from 13 PPNB and 8 PPNCELN
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 153
occupations in the Jilat-Azraq region suggest that
PPNCELN producers were more specialized than
those of the PPNB mdash at least in the Jilat-Azraq
region Unlike the PPNB sites Jilat 13 and 25 have
very high densities of bead-making debris specialized
tools for drilling and sawing there is an abundance of
unfinished materials relative to finished products
bead-making tools and debris are abundant relative
to normal domestic food processing equipment
(ground stone artefacts) (Wright and Garrard 2003
cf Costin 1991)
That argument is chronological comparing the
PPNB to the PPNCELN occupations and we stand
behind it for the Jilat-Azraq case (different trajec-
tories may apply to south Jordan and the Negev see
below) Still it leaves open the issue of house-to-
house variation within Jilat 25 or Jilat 13 As we have
only one excavated structure per site we cannot on
present evidence argue that each building housed a
group of specialists serving other households within
the same site In fact we have no direct evidence that
there were other structures on each site mdash the ones
excavated were the only ones visible on the surface
There are nuances of material and typological
choices between the Jilat 25 structure (red disc beads)
and the Jilat 13 structure (larger complex green
ornaments) but these nuances are beyond the scope
of this paper
In all we suspect that stone bead production at
Jilat 13 and 25 was geared not for other domestic
units lsquoin camprsquo but for use by these quite mobile
communities themselves mdash as well as export to other
sites within the steppe and beyond (see below) In
Costinrsquos terms (Costin 1991) Jilat 13 and 25 might
each be an example of an independent non-centra-
lized dispersed workshop possibly lsquofamily runrsquo (Rice
1991 262) mdash in which handling of Dabba Marble
was not routinely entrusted to novices
There are hints of house-to-house variations in
bead-making in major villages with larger samples of
domestic structures as in PPNB Beidha At PPNB
Beidha (earlier than Jilat 13 and 25) Building 14
stands out
Other forms of production besides food preparation
were less common Building 14 represented the best
example of artefact production in these basements
A wide range of artefacts was recovered apparently
associated with building 14rsquos basement floor
Particularly widespread were stone polishers bone
tools raw material (including hematite malachite
and magnesium) more than 60 unmodified marine
shells and at least two dozen beads of shell stone
and bone some of which were in various stages of
production Some artifacts lay on stone slabs
indicating that at least some slabs may have
functioned as work surfaces (Byrd 2005 117)
Such hints are intriguing Still macro-artefacts
from house floors are affected by problems of site
formation and house abandonment Micro-artefact
data can help (Rainville 2005) House-by-house
exploration with attention to micro-artefacts is
needed (Wright and Bains 2007)
Site Specialization Within a Regional Network of Craft
Production and Exchange
Both sites and other Neolithic sites in Jilat and
Azraq exhibit resource specialization
the selective use of particular resources in craft
manufacture such as certain clays that are repeat-
edly used (Rice 1991 262)
The Jilat artisans emphasized Dabba Marble from
a wider array of available stone types The Jilat-
Azraq sites collectively show that green Dabba
Marble was a special target This is revealed in both
frequencies and weights (for debris data and weight
data see Wright and Garrard 2003 for frequency
data on beads and blanks see Tables 2 and 3) At
both sites debris is greatly dominated by green
Dabba Marble mdash 80ndash95 of debris by both weight
(grams) and frequency Green Dabba Marble also
dominates blanks in terms of weight at both sites mdash
indicating the use of green for making larger heavier
and more conspicuous ornaments
Turning to frequencies at Jilat 13 about 90 of
blanks are green and only 5 are red However
finished beads include both green and red forms in
comparable percentages (404 and 436 respec-
tively) (Table 3) suggesting that finished red beads
were brought into the building from a place of
manufacture located somewhere else At Jilat 25
blanks of red and green Dabba Marble occur in
comparable proportions (409 green 43 red)
whilst finished beads are predominantly red (588)
(Table 2) If Jilat 13 and 25 were absolute contem-
poraries this could suggest variations in choices and
exchange between residents of different structures
Rice (1991) has defined site specialization as a
situation in which a site is located near a special
resource and the inhabitants emphasize production of
a craft based on that resource Relative to other sites
not so located the range of site functions and
activities would be expected to be more limited
Thus site specialization
involves individual localities or sites having evidence
of limited functions or intensive productive activity
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
154 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
often determined by fortuitous environmental fac-
tors This includes proximity to mineral deposits
and so forth (Rice 1991 262)
Do Jilat 13 and 25 fit this concept In both sites
15 km from the source we have a wealth of evidence
for intensive stone bead production and scanty
evidence for routine food processing tools (Wright
and Garrard 2003) However Jilat 25 may be closer
to the limited function model envisioned by Rice In
Jilat 13 bead-making is clearly intensive but we are
also dealing with a chipped stone assemblage of not
only drills and burins but also projectile points and
other tools Jilat 13 also reveals production of
figurines (of animals phalluses and arrow-shaped
forms) and sculpted pillars (Baird 1993 Garrard
et al 1994a Martin 1999 Wright 1992 1993)
In all Jilat 13 and 25 suggest that we can apply
Ricersquos lsquosite specializationrsquo on the grounds of intensive
productive activity and proximity to source mdash but
with the qualification that this specialization was also
embedded in hunting-herding activities and at Jilat
13 production of other special crafts unique among
the sites of a symbolic nature (figurines pillars)
One possibility is that we are dealing with a camp
of hunter-herder corporate groups mdash part of a wider
regional network mdash engaged in special activities in
remote areas involving art personal ornaments and
ritual Such groups are suggested by other data from
the PPNBndashPPNC time span for example Nahal
Hemar (ornaments masks hunting tools) Dhuweila
(carving of hunters with dress variations)
Catalhoyuk (images of hunters with dress variations
as in the bull hunt mural) and Gobeklitepe (sculpture
production including a quarry wild-animal icono-
graphy hunting) (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988 Betts
1998 Mellaart 1967 Schmidt 2000) In all these data
hint that craft production of special items was
embedded in hunting andor herding activities in
remote areas this may have been a key means by
which exotic materials reached major villages In a
very broad way this supports a sketch outlined by
Bar Yosef (Bar-Yosef 2001) although we do not
necessarily agree with specifics of his model eg the
territories boundaries social groups and mechanisms
which he suggests (cf Asouti 2006) Instead we see
this as one example of diverse strategies of social
networking linking lineages households and commu-
nities in the Neolithic (Wright forthcoming)
Returning to the stone bead data from Jilat 13 and
25 the apparent stockpiling of raw material and
intensive production activity hints at production of
the green material for export (see above and Wright
and Garrard 2003) New data now add weight to this
idea and suggest the following provisional picture of
regional specializations and exchanges in ornaments
(1) Based on typology technology and materials thereappears to be a distinctive eastern Jordanian koine ornetwork of stone bead manufacture and exchangefeaturing Dabba Marble and a probable regionalspecialization in it
Other Neolithic bead production sites are known
from eastern Jordan Indications are that most of the
green bead materials are Dabba Marble probably
from Jilat (further work is needed) In these sites
diversity of materials used seems low with few
imports from beyond the steppe Shells however
testify to wider networks (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989
Cooke and Reese in Betts 1998 Garrard et al 1994a
Reese 1991)
Azraq 31 (PPNB and ELN) is in our suite of study
materials (Baird et al 1992 Garrard et al 1994a
Wright and Garrard 2003) and debris blanks and
beads were found Preliminary XRF analysis of green
samples (by Groom) indicates that the material is
consistent with Jilat Dabba Marble Typology and
technology are also similar and as at Jilat 25 burin
spall drills were closely associated with bead-making
in specific activity areas (Baird 1993 521 Baird et al
1992 25) However the ground stone revealed no
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
(Wright 1992 1993 Wright in Baird et al 1992)
Material used for beads at Dhuweila (PPNB and
ELN) has been called Dabba Marble (Cooke and
Reese in Betts 1998) It is consistent in appearance
with our material although we have no details on
mineralogy or source Typologically these beads are
similar to those of Jilat 13 and 25 The ground stone
is very different from the suite at the Jilat sites
(Wright in Betts 1998) for comparisons of chipped
stone assemblages see Baird (1993)
At Bawwab al-Ghazal (Late PPNB) Rollefson
et al found drills bits on burin spalls tile knives
beads bead blanks and bead debris some of which
they called green Dabba Marble (Rollefson et al
1999 Quintero et al 2004) They argued that there is
a possible source of this material outcropping near
the site mdash lsquoFor the last raw material [green Dabba
Marble] small nodules of the green limestone were
embedded in the local bedrockrsquo (Rollefson et al 1999
3) However as shown in Appendix A the true
Dabba Marble only occurs in a restricted area west of
Wadi Jilat The lsquobedrockrsquo which outcrops near Azraq
31 and Bawwab al-Ghazal is travertine and some of
this formed during the late Pleistocene and Holocene
The nearby Epipalaeolithic site of Azraq 17 was
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 155
found partially embedded in travertine and artefacts
including nodules of imported basalt were found in
the travertine at this site It is possible that the
nodules of green limestone found at Bawwab al-
Ghazal were imported Dabba Marble which subse-
quently became incorporated in a travertine near the
site An alternative possibility is that the local
travertine is infused with green minerals In Wadi
Jilat travertines were noted with traces of green
minerals and in the Siwaqa area to the south-west of
Jilat there are extensive travertines some of which
are infused with pale green minerals including
volkonskoite (Barjous 1986 mdash see also Appendix A)
In eastern Jordan some Neolithic sites are greatly
dominated by burins (lsquoburin sitesrsquo) At a number of
these there is evidence for stone bead-making (eg
Jebel Naja) These lsquoburin sitesrsquo typically reveal few
ground stone tools we know of no examples of
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
from them It was argued that the main role of the
burins was production of spalls for drills used mainly
for beads (Betts 1987 1998 Finlayson and Betts
1990) However burin sites are not universally
associated with stone bead making At Jilat 23 24
and 26 burins were numerous but other evidence for
bead-making is scanty (Baird 1993 520)
Therefore some have questioned whether
burins and burin spalls in such sites were solely or
primarily intended for making drills and beads
noting that other functions are possible (Quintero
et al 2004 209) Given that these sites typically
represent short-term occupations it is possible that
many sites might be spall manufacture sites with
spalls transported to other settings where drill
manufacture and bead manufacture took place such
as Jilat 13 and 25 Rollefson expressed doubt that
either bladelet or burin spall drills would have been
used in bow drills partly because of their fragility and
also because most of them have a pronounced curve
on the long axis which would have made high speed
drilling impossible (Rollefson and Parker 2002) But
Finlayson and Betts (1990) and Berna (1995)
successfully experimented using burin spalls with
bow drills and Kenoyer (personal communication
2007) notes that drills made on burin spalls are the
most common type of drill in diverse prehistoric
stone bead-making sites (in India Pakistan and
elsewhere)
In the case of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 we believe burin-
spall drills were part of the bead-making repertoire
for reasons noted above This does not rule out other
uses of burin spalls Nor does it rule out the use of
other perforating techniques Drills do not have to be
made of stone when soft stones are being perforated
mdash wood bone and abrasives can be used (Foreman
1978)
(2) There are hints of export of Dabba Marble to at leastsome villages in the Levantine corridor However majorNeolithic villages display much diversity in materials andespecially more importing of exotic stones than is seen inthe eastern Jordanian sites
Many writers report Neolithic beads made of
unspecified lsquogreenstonersquo This term is unfortunate
since it can refer to metabasalt and similar altered
igneous rocks (Schumann 1992 248) Some of these
lsquogreenstonesrsquo may be limestone with apatite or other
materials (eg Garfinkel 1987 81ndash82 Hauptmann
2004 Talbot 1983 789) Beads of green limestones
rich in fluorapatite were found at late PPNB Basta in
southern Jordan (Hauptmann 2004) as confirmed by
XRF and XRD Green beads identified as Dabba
Marble were also reported from Ain Ghazal a site
with both PPNB and PPNC occupations (Rollefson
et al 1990 103ndash04) Whether these are Dabba
Marble from the Jilat source (Appendices AndashB) is
not yet fully clear Ongoing research will sort out
these mysteries (eg D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal
communication Hauptmann 2004)
Major villages in the Levantine Corridor reveal
different degrees of emphasis in styles and materials
often we see a certain emphasis on local materials and
preferences However considerable exchange net-
works are indicated in major villages which display
much wider ranges of stone ornament materials
compared to the eastern Jordanian sites (such as
Ain Ghazal Yiftahel Basta Barsquoja Ghuwayr 1
Fidan 1) mdash along with of course shells (Affonso
and Pernicka 2004 Bienert and Gebel 1998 84ndash86
Garfinkel 1987 Hauptmann 2004 Rollefson and
Simmons 1984 1986 Rollefson et al 1990 Simmons
and Najjar 1998 Starck 1988)
As the Neolithic evolved stone bead-making
entailed increasingly diverse techniques and materi-
als One example may be drills In earlymiddle PPNB
sites most drills are made on bladelets In the late
PPNB PPNC and Late Neolithic there may have
been a gradual increase in drills made on burin spalls
although perhaps not in all regions (Jensen 2004
Rollefson and Parker 2002) Underlining increasing
diversity of technological practice between groups
Baird (2001b) pointed out geographic variation in
this technology with spall drills dominating in the
north-eastern Jordanian steppe from MPPNB
through Early Late Neolithic whilst contemporary
sites to west and south use bladelet blanks for their
piercing tools
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
156 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
and other data indicate intensification of stone
beadmaking in PPNCELN sites in the Jilat-Azraq
region relative to the PPNB (Wright and Garrard
2003) It is of interest that this coincides with the first
appearance of domestic sheep-goat in the Jilat sites
(see Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999)
Stratigraphy site formation and chronology of
Jilat 13 and 25 are discussed in more depth elsewhere
(Garrard et al 1994a Wright and Garrard 2003) The
sites were excavated as part of a regional programme
and areas of excavation vary At Jilat 25 surface
artefacts extended across an area of 3200 sq m From
the surface one oval upright-slab structure (7 x
45 m) was visible (Fig 2b) About 50 of this was
excavated an area of 21 sq m and a total volume of
78 cu m Three occupation phases were identified
The early phase included an occupation fill (Aa19)
rich in primary refuse this yielded a date of 8020 iexcl
80 uncal BP (OxA-2408) Above this the middle
phase involved addition of bins and hearths and
accumulation of an ashy occupation fill (Aa15) also
rich in primary refuse A final occupation fill (Aa7)
accumulated and the building was filled with rubble
followed by a deposit of sand which sealed the layers
below (Table 6) In each phase artefact clusters on
occupational surfaces and within their fills were
identified via 1 x 1 m horizontal units (i ii etc)
we discuss these clusters selectively here The chipped
stone assemblage from Jilat 25 is characterized by
debitage dominated by flakes although both flake
and blade cores were found However 84ndash85 of
tools were made on blades Prominent tools include
Nizzanim points (the sole point type) burins drill
bits made from burin spalls and other types (Baird
1993 469 521 Baird in Garrard et al 1994a 85
table 1) Further details on the chipped stone
assemblages are available in a number of works
(Baird 1993 1994 1995 2001a 2001b)
Surface artefacts at Jilat 13 extended across an 800
sq m area One large oval upright-slab building (10 x
65 m) was visible at surface Almost all of this was
excavated an area of 735 sq m (Fig 2a) Three
phases were identified In the early phase the
excavated volume of deposit was 145 cu m the
structure was built and primary occupation deposits
accumulated then a pavement was laid down in the
western area and hearths were constructed in the
south and east Dates from this phase were 7920 iexcl
100 uncal BP (OxA-1800) and 7870 iexcl 100 uncal BP
(OxA-1801) The middle phase exposed 87 cu m of
deposit and yielded no C14 dates An interior
partition wall separated the western end of the
building and pits and stone-lined hearths were added
in the eastern area The late phase of which 174 cu m
of deposit was excavated yielded two dates of 7900
iexcl 80 uncal BP (OxA-2411) and 7830 iexcl 90 uncal BP
(UB-3462) At this time a new upper pavement was
added above a rubble foundation In the western area
a large workbench with evidence of drilling abrasion
and flaking is associated with this phase (Figs 2a
14c) Primary refuse was found in all phases (selected
contexts are shown in Table 7) but the stratigraphy
is more complex than at Jilat 25 In the chipped stone
assemblage at Jilat 13 each phase revealed a
bladebased assemblage with blades or bladelets
making up 57 of debitage Most tools are made
on blades (78ndash81 of all tools are blade based)
Major tool types include projectile points burins
piercers and drills scapers and endscrapers notches
and denticulates and bifacial tools such as tile
knives In the early phase for which we have most
detailed information burins and points are the most
Table 1 Summary of Dabba Marble artefacts at Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 (see also Wright and Garrard 2003 279ndash80)
Artefact Category
Jilat 13 Jilat 13 Jilat 25 Jilat 25
Raw frequency (N) Weight (grams) Raw frequency (N) Weight (grams)
Finished beads(secure contexts)
144 60 115 62
Finished beads(surfacemixed contexts)
12 no data 4 no data
Roughouts and blanks(secure contexts)
180 222 89 82
Roughouts and blanks(surfacemixed contexts)
43 no data 4 no data
Debitage(secure contexts)
7369 6905 1381 976
(5 all debitage from nodulesto microflakes and shatter)TOTAL (secure contexts) 7693 7187 1585 1120TOTAL (secure contextsz beads and blanks from surfacemixed)
7748 1593
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
134 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Ta
ble
2B
ea
ds
an
db
lan
ks
J
ila
t2
5(a
llc
on
tex
ts)
Gre
en
Dab
ba
Marb
le
Gre
en
Dab
ba
Marb
le
Red
Dab
ba
Marb
le
Red
Dab
ba
Marb
le
Bla
ck
Dab
ba
Marb
le
Bla
ck
Dab
ba
Marb
leW
hit
eC
halk
Wh
ite
Ch
alk
Wh
ite
Qu
art
zite
Wh
ite
Qu
art
zite
Oth
er
Oth
er
To
tal
To
tal
To
tal
To
tal
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
ead
s-
B
lan
ks
-N
Bla
nks
-
Dis
cb
ead
s12
21
67
39
410
74
51
95
79
875
80
6R
ing
bead
s2
21
7O
valb
ead
sC
ylin
der
bead
s1
10
8B
arr
elb
ead
s9
63
112
10
17
75
Irre
gula
rb
ead
sIn
dete
rmin
ate
or
frag
ment
16
10
86
65
Pend
ants
-tr
iang
ula
rP
end
ants
-tr
ap
ezoid
al
Pend
ants
-oval
Pend
ants
-re
cta
ng
ula
rP
end
ants
-sq
uare
11
11
Pend
ants
-te
ard
rop
Pend
ants
-oth
er
or
ind
ete
rmin
ate
14
10
84
43
Bra
cele
ts7
75
9
TO
TA
L-
Bead
s-
N24
70
614
50
119
100
0TO
TA
L-
Bead
s-
20
258
85
011
84
20
0100
0TO
TA
L-
Bla
nks
-N
38
40
10
41
93
100
0TO
TA
L-
Bla
nks
-
40
943
010
84
31
1100
0
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 135
Ta
ble
3B
ea
ds
an
db
lan
ks
J
ila
t1
3(a
llc
on
tex
ts)
Gre
en
Da
bb
aM
arb
le
Gre
en
Da
bb
aM
arb
le
Re
dD
ab
ba
Ma
rble
Re
dD
ab
ba
Ma
rble
Bla
ck
Da
bb
aM
arb
le
Bla
ck
Da
bb
aM
arb
leW
hit
eC
ha
lkW
hit
eC
ha
lkW
hit
eQ
ua
rtzi
teW
hit
eQ
ua
rtzi
teO
the
rO
the
rT
ota
lT
ota
lT
ota
lT
ota
l
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
ead
s-
B
lan
ks
-N
Bla
nks
-
Dis
cb
ead
s7
36
40
810
22
21
59
38 1
49
22 0
Rin
gb
ead
s2
12
51
20
12 9
00 0
Ovalb
ead
s0
0 0
00 0
Cylin
der
bead
s1
13
42 6
10 4
Barr
elb
ead
s36
57
13
24
11
254
34 8
62
27 8
Irre
gula
rb
ead
s1
00 0
10 4
Ind
ete
rmin
ate
fr
ag
ment
794
11
74 5
96
43 0
Pend
ants
-tr
iang
ula
r1
11
0 6
10 4
Pend
ants
-tr
ap
ezoid
al
21
21 3
10 4
Pend
ants
-oval
11
21 3
00 0
Pend
ants
-re
cta
ng
ula
r1
10 6
00 0
Pend
ants
-sq
uare
11
10 6
10 4
Pend
ants
-te
ard
rop
22
1 3
00 0
Pend
ants
-oth
er
in
dete
rmin
ate
111
12
1 3
11
4 9
Bra
cele
ts0
0 0
00 0
TO
TA
L-
Bead
s-
N62
68
20
11
3155
100 0
TO
TA
L-
Bead
s-
40 4
43 6
12 8
0 6
0 6
1 9
100 0
TO
TA
L-
Bla
nks
-N
202
11
42
04
223
100 0
TO
TA
L-
Bla
nks
-
90 6
4 9
1 8
0 9
0 0
1 8
100 0
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
136 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
frequently occurring types burins constitute 29 of
tools and points 16 Piercers and drills occur in
much lower numbers (4 of tools) as do other tool
types Of projectile points Nizzanim points are the
most frequent (397 of points) followed by Byblos
(313) Herzeliya (12) Amuq (84) Transverse
(6) and Haparsah (24) points (Baird 1993 469
500ndash17 625 Baird in Garrard et al 1994a 85
table 1)
The 14C dates from these two sites have been
recalibrated using IntCal 2004 and the date ranges at
one standard deviation are as follows Jilat 25 (early
phase) context Aa19a (OxA2408) 5 9020ndash8760 cal
BP Jilat 13 (early phase) context A21a (OxA1800) 5
8980ndash8600 cal BP Jilat 13 (early phase) context A15a
(OxA1801) 5 8980ndash8550 cal BP Jilat 13 (late phase)
context C24 (OxA2411) 5 8980ndash8590 cal BP Jilat 13
(late phase) context C22 (UB3462) 5 8780ndash8460 cal
BP
Thus stratigraphy and radiocarbon dates suggest
that we are dealing with two sites of reasonably good
temporal resolution followed by abandonment and
sealing of primary refuse deposits Five C14 dates
indicate occupation between about 7830 and 8020
uncal BP with low standard deviations for each date
In radiocarbon terms this is about as precise as it
gets and the two sites may overlap in time However
projectile points do suggest we are dealing with a
somewhat wider time span for the Jilat 13 sample
than the Jilat 25 sample
Given different extents of excavation comparisons
of these and other stone bead-making sites entail
challenges Density data however mdash as measured by
numbers of beads blanks and debris per cu m volume
of excavated deposit mdash can be revealing For
example the PPNB occupations in Wadi Jilat (3
sites 11 occupations) had low densities mdash an average
of 1072 artefacts per cu m and a maximum of 313
per cu m (Wright and Garrard 2003 table 2) In
contrast the density data for Jilat 25 are 2223 per cu
m (early phase) 3312 per cu m (middle phase) and
562 per cu m (late phase) Density data for Jilat 13
are 3102 stone bead artefacts per cu m (early phase)
1615 per cu m (middle phase) and 1099 per cu m
(late phase) This suggests greater intensity of bead-
making in Jilat 13 and 25
Sources Quarrying and Raw Materials
Most Jilat beads were made of Dabba Marble which
occurs in green pinkred and black (Appendix A)
This is our focus here A few other materials were also
used other local sedimentary rocks and non-local
turquoise (nearest source Sinai) malachite (nearest
sources Faynan and Timna) and carnelian (nearest
source unknown) Non-local stones formed only 015
of the materials (Wright and Garrard 2003)
The largest known sources of Dabba Marble lie
15ndash25 km west of Jilat 13 and 25 some may be
closer (Fig 1 and Appendix A) These are bodies of
limestones chalks and cherts lightly metamorphosed
Table 4 Finished disc beads size data (complete or measurable beads) (na 5 not applicable)
Site N
Diameter (mm) HeightThickness (mm) Perforation Diameter (mm)
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Jilat 7 PPNB 13 87 36 30 28 28 10Jilat 26 PPNB 0 na na na na na naJilat 32 PPNB 0 na na na na na naAzraq 31 PPNB 2 98 46 25 14 23 04Jilat 25 PPNCELN 66 83 16 26 08 21 05Jilat 13 PPNCELN 47 69 24 25 09 19 06Azraq 31 PPNCELN 34 68 16 26 11 18 04
Table 5 Finished barrel beads size data (complete or measurable beads) (na 5 not applicable)
Site N
Diameter (mm) HeightThickness (mm) Perforation Diameter (mm)
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Jilat 7 PPNB 1 45 na 40 na 15 naJilat 26 PPNB 2 75 na 65 na 25 naJilat 32 PPNB 0 na na na na 00 naAzraq 31 PPNB 1 115 na 100 na 40 naJilat 25 PPNCELN 6 63 14 64 17 21 09Jilat 13 PPNCELN 28 68 28 71 39 22 09Azraq 31 PPNCELN 13 109 56 133 91 29 09
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 137
and injected with various minerals eg apatites red
iron oxides (Fig 3a) Outcrops show substantial
variations in mineralization even over small areas
in Fig 3b the left side of the outcrop is soft green
Dabba Marble the right side is red Dabba Marble
The geology and mineralogy of Dabba Marble are
presented in Appendices AndashB The Neolithic Jilat
beads are consistent with this source (Appendix B)
Methods of Analysis
Comprehensive recovery of small beads debitage and
micro-artefacts was possible due to intensive fine-
scale sieving All excavated contexts were sieved
through a 5 mm mesh many samples were dry sieved
or wet sieved through a 15 mm mesh (the latter after
flotation) Artefacts from floors were collected from 1
sq m horizontal grid units to permit identification of
activity areas Fine-grained spatial data and micro-
artefacts are important in understanding lithic
technologies (Dunnell and Stein 1989 Cessford and
Mitrovic 2005) This is borne out by the Jilat data
since micro-flakes are one byproduct of stone bead
retouch In cases of intense housecleaning micro-
artefacts may reveal bead-making where macro-
artefacts do not (Wright and Bains 2007)
For each context artefacts were separated by raw
material and classified into major groups nodules
and debitage (Fig 4) roughouts (Fig 5) unfinished
blanks and finished ornaments (Figs 6ndash10) We
counted and weighed each group to determine
relationships between debitage and finished beads
Measurements (diameter height perforation dia-
meter) were taken on beads and blanks to assess
standardization and drilling techniques
Finished ornaments were classified into 8 basic
types (Wright and Garrard 2003) Circular disc beads
are the most numerous smallest and most standar-
dized (Figs 6d 7endashf) They occur in the widest range
of materials most red Dabba Marble beads were
discs Barrelshaped beads are larger more variable
and mostly made of green Dabba Marble (Fig 9endashf)
Pendants are the largest rarest and most diverse
items shaped as triangles rectangles and ovals most
are of green Dabba Marble (Fig 10d f) Bracelets
were made of white chalk (Tables 2ndash3)
Unfinished beads (blanks) were classified according
to the same typology as finished beads when the
intended final product could be ascertained (eg disc
blank) (Tables 2ndash3 Figs 6andashc 7andashd 8 9andashd 10c e)
Within these categories blanks were further classified
according to traces of flaking grinding perforation
Figure 8 shows these stages for 3 sequences of disc
bead manufacture Differences between Sequences A
B and C are differences in the original blank (Stage 1
thin flake thick flake tabular roughout) and presence
or absence of flaking retouch on edges (Stage 2)
Further analyses of sequences for these and other
bead types are still in progress
Debitage was sorted into nodules cores rough-
outs flakes angular shatter micro-flakes and
Table 6 Stone beads blanks and debris Jilat 25 all contexts
Phase Context Description Beads Blanks Debris Comments Selected associated artefacts
Early Aa24 Fill of bedrock cut 0 0 2Early Aa27 Fill of bedrock cut 0 0 1Early Aa19 First occupation fill 29 23 384 1 cutmarked slab 3 sandstone fragments
probably handstones 1 limestone handstoneEarly Aa20 First occupation fill 1 5 6Early Aa21 First occupation fill 4 1 4Early Aa18 Early fill in entrance area 1 5 8Early A 44 Early fill in entrance area 0 0 3Middle Aa15 Second occupation fill 47 31 544 1 limestone capstone 1 grooved stone (basalt)
1 sandstone abraderMiddle Aa16 Hearth 1 1 0Middle Aa13 Fill of stone feature 1 0 81Middle Aa10 Fill of stone feature 0 0 3Middle Aa11 Ash lense 3 0 17Middle Aa7 Third occupation fill 17 15 109 2 grooved stones (limestone and basalt)
2 basalt handstones 1 sandstone fragmentMiddle Aa8 Third occupation fill 1 1 1Middle Aa14 Fill in entrance area 7 3 4Middle A 42 Fill in entrance area 0 0 1
Late Aa 2 Sandy late fill 1 0 55 1 sandstone abrader Bead 1 RDM disc Debris all GDMLate A 6 Rubbly late fill 7 4 72Late A 33 Late fill in entrance area 0 0 1Late A 36 Late fill in entrance area 0 0 6Late A 34 Fill of late intrusive feature 1 0 0
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
138 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
micro-shatter (Fig 4) Definitions of these categories
are broadly similar to those established in chipped
stone analysis (Andrefsky 1998)
Flaking and Initial Reduction Nodules CoresDebitage and Roughouts
The soft limestone and hard chert in Dabba Marble
permits it to be worked via chipping flaking
grinding sawing and drilling To varying degrees
the material has conchoidal fracture Where chert
content is high conchoidal fracture is excellent
Limestone itself also has conchoidal fracture parti-
cularly when fine-grained as Dabba Marble is The
tabular structure of the laminated limestones also
makes it possible to create flat faces easily
The difficulty of shaping beads would have varied
depending on specific material Most green Dabba
marble is fairly homogeneous composed of calcite-rich
soft limestone (Mohs 5 3) and apatite (Mohs 5 5)
Red Dabba marble occurs in a soft pale pink variety
(Mohs 5 3ndash4) a dark pink variety of medium
hardness and a dark red siliceous variety essentially
red chert (Mohs 5 7) This red chert variant (Mohs 7)
will have been more difficult to modify Flaking and
chipping were particularly important in working this
material and abrasion will have been more difficult
This may be why so many beads of the red cherty
Dabba Marble were disc beads made on flakes (Fig 7)
Flaking figured prominently in the making of
beads from softer materials However sawing and
abrasion played a greater role in modification of these
materials Comparable variations in technique
depending on material hardness are seen at other
prehistoric sites (Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990)
Table 7 Stone beads blanks and debris Jilat 13 selected contexts
Phase Context Description Beads Blanks Debris Comments Selected associated artefacts
Early C106 Fill of bedrock cut 0 0 1 1 circular limestone diskEarly B77 First occupation fill 1 5 752Early B79 Fill of hearth 0 0 6 1 limestone handstoneEarly B71 Second occupation fill 10 11 750 1 drilled and grooved limestone object
1 flaked limestone rsquoscraperrsquo 6 basalt fragmentsEarly A17 Lower pavement 0 0 0 1 cutmarked slabEarly A15 Third occupation fill 1 8 8 1 worked limestone object snake-shaped flint pebbleEarly A16 Third occupation fill 2 1 17 1 miniature pestle basaltEarly A18 Third occupation fill 0 0 11 Basalt fragments 3 from vessels
1 handstonepestle fragment 6 unidentifiableEarly B44 Third occupation fill 5 9 74Early B45 Third occupation fill 0 2 139 1 basalt handstone fragmentEarly B69 Third occupation fill 6 5 383 No ground stoneEarly C56 Third occupation fill 8 5 313 1 double-grooved sandstone abrader (Fig 15a)
Middle A3 Fourth occupation fill 3 4 60 1 limestone capstone ( 2 surfaces) 5 basalt fragmentsMiddle A5 Fourth occupation fill 7 9 139 1 cutmarked flint slab 1 grooved limestone object
ochred flints figurines pillarsMiddle B31 Fourth occupation fill 4 2 33Middle B38 Fourth occupation fill 12 6 520Middle B54 Fourth occupation fill 1 0 9 1 limestone figurine (bird)Middle B56 Fourth occupation fill 1 1 14 1 basalt grinding slab fragmentMiddle C39 Fourth occupation fill 10 12 254 1 flint cutmarked slab flaked limestone rsquoscraperrsquo
Late C14 Foundation for upperpavement
0 5 65 1 basalt ground fragment
Late B3 Upper pavement 0 0 0 1 cutmarked limestone slab 1 post-socketLate C4 Upper pavement 0 0 0 1 drilling and abrading bench (Fig 14c)Late A2 Fifth occupation fill 4 2 154 10 figurines or figurine preforms suggesting animals
phalluses arrows (flint limestone travertine) 1 pebblemortar or capstone with ochre (limestone) 1 perforatedobject 1 handstone on flake (flint) 2 vessel fragments1 ochred pebble burnt pebble (limestone) 1 groundindeterminate stone (basalt) Beads are 2 barrels and2 pendants blanks are 1 barrel and 1 indeterminate
Late B4 Fifth occupation fill 0 2 7 1 grooved limestone abrader (Fig 15c) Blanks are bothpendant blanks
Late B7 Fifth occupation fill 2 5 150 1 cutmarked limestone 1 basalt handstonepestlefragment
Late B9 Fifth occupation fill 0 0 3 1 perforated pumice abraderLate B21 Fifth occupation fill 5 7 193 1 basalt handstone 2 basalt fragmentsLate C3 Fifth occupation fill 2 4 61
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 139
Five main stages of manufacture were identified
although reduction sequences vary These are (1)
reduction of raw nodules to cores roughouts and
flakes via flaking and chipping (2) shaping of
roughouts and flakes into blanks via further flaking
chipping sawing and rough grinding (3) perforation
via boring andor drilling (4) further grinding to
produce the final shape (5) final polishing
Nodules cores and debitage were recovered in
large amounts at Jilat 13 (7369 artefacts 6905 grams)
and Jilat 25 (1381 artefacts 976 grams) The largest
unworked blocks are of green Dabba Marble They
are about 15 cm in diameter but most are about the
size of an adult human fist Some nodules were
weathered suggesting that they were picked up from
surface rather than quarried from bedrock layers
(Fig 4 top)
Reduction of nodules by flaking resulted in (1)
cores (2) tabular roughouts (3) large flakes (4) large
angular shatter fragments (5) micro-flakes and (6)
micro-shatter (Fig 4) Cores defined as nodules with
two or more flake scars are not numerous or
consistent in form Shatter micro-flakes and micro-
shatter were normally discarded as byproducts
Tabular roughouts and larger flakes were used as
the basis for further reduction into bead blanks
Roughouts are early stages in bead reduction
(Kenoyer 2003 16) At Jilat 13 and 25 roughouts
are tabular reflecting the bedded structure of the
material They were flaked and chipped around the
edges into roughly symmetrical shapes (Figs 5a 10a)
Roughouts were sometimes subjected to initial
drilling or sawing at an early stage prior to any
intense abrasion (Fig 5b) In other cases roughouts
were abraded first (Fig 5d) and then sawn or drilled
(Fig 5c) Tabular roughouts were the basis for
making larger thicker ornaments such as most
pendants and barrel beads (Figs 9ndash10)
Small subcircular flakes were the basis of most disc
beads (Figs 6ndash7) The flakes have platforms bulbs of
percussion on ventral surfaces and often scars from
previous removals on dorsal surfaces A certain
consistency in size shape and morphology suggests
that a prepared-core technology was used to predict
and produce these flakes Since cores are rare we do
not yet know precisely how this was achieved
Experiments are still needed but we suspect that
chipping and flaking was accomplished by varying
Figure 3 (a) View of the modern Dabba Marble quarry west of Wadi Jilat from which raw material samples were
obtained (see Appendices AndashB) (b) Close-up view of metamorphosed deposits in situ with interdigitating green
(left) and red (right) Dabba Marble
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
140 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
uses of indirect percussion soft-hammer percussion
andor pressure flaking since the small size of the
beads required precision The use of antler or horn
for pressure flaking of soft stones is widely seen in the
ethnographic record and experimentally (Foreman
1978 19) Even hard stones can be flaked with soft
hammers made of animal horn (Kenoyer 1986 1994
2003 Kenoyer et al 1991) Cores and flakes do not
clearly indicate use of the Cambay technique of
inverse indirect percussion as seen in carnelian bead-
making (Kenoyer 2003 Possehl 1981) Many blanks
display micro-retouch on the edges On thicker disc
bead blanks micro-flakes were removed by striking
downward at the edge of each bead face (Fig 7c) The
retouch scars show that striking was bipolar ie from
opposite directions Products of this procedure were
micro-flakes (Fig 4 bottom)
Clear indications of heat treatment were rare but
burnt pieces do occur
Sawing Drilling and Abrasion Bead Blanks andFinished Beads
Bead blanks are the further reduction of a roughout
into a form closer to the final bead shape (Kenoyer
2003 16) At Jilat 13 and 25 blanks were abandoned
at many different stages The most extensive evidence
for lithic reduction concerns disc beads it is possible
to identify some chaines operatoires (Fig 8)
Figure 6 illustrates two of these paths for green
Dabba Marble disc beads made on flakes
Sometimes circular flakes were perforated early
before any abrasion (Fig 6c) More often flakes
were abraded slightly on ventral and dorsal surfaces
before any drilling (Fig 6andashb) At this stage edges
were still rough Perforation was added later (Fig
6d) In such cases a number of disc beads were
probably then strung together and abraded on the
edges by rolling the string back and forth on abrasive
stones of varying textures such as coarse sandstone
fine sandstone or limestone The final products were
evenly smoothed disc beads relatively standardized
in size The procedure also resulted in edges that are
sharp perpendicular to the bead faces and flat rather
than convex (Figs 6d 7endashf) Experiments indicate
that this procedure also contributes to the polishing
of faces and edges of beads (cf Foreman 1978)
Figure 7 shows artefacts from one context at Jilat 25
indicating a similar sequence for red Dabba Marble
disc beads from subcircular flake to final disc
For barrel beads the starting point was typically
not a flake but a tabular roughout A roughout was
often flaked into an approximately cylindrical form
sometimes with a hexagonal transverse cross section
(that is the section perpendicular to the perforation)
(Fig 9a) Scars indicate that the hexagonal form was
accomplished by flaking Sometimes hexagonal
blanks were perforated before much abrasion (Fig
9b) In many cases hexagonal blanks were heavily
abraded to obliterate sharp angles before any
perforation was begun (Fig 9c) Resulting bead
forms varied in cross section from circular to
elliptical or lenticular (see Wright and Garrard
2003 fig 3) Perforation of barrel beads was from
opposite directions resulting in hourglass perfora-
tions (Fig 9e) and occasionally perforation errors
(Fig 9d)
Most pendants were begun as tabular roughouts
chipped into shapes anticipating the final form such
as an asymmetrical triangular pendant (Fig 10a cf
Fig 5a for a rectangular pendant) Roughouts were
Figure 4 Example of raw material nodule (top) angular
shatter (upper centre) flakes (lower centre) and
micro-debitage (lower row) from a single context
at Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 141
then abraded and sawing was sometimes applied (Fig
10b) One unfinished pendant shows that perforation
preceded final abrasion (Fig 10c) The most common
form is the asymmetrical triangular pendant (Fig
10d) but there are also rectangular square and oval
pendants Not all pendants were made on tabular
roughouts some were made on thin flakes eg
rectangular and lsquoteardroprsquo forms (Fig 10endashf)
Sawing
Disc beads were made individually one by one on
flakes as opposed to being sawn from a perforated
cylinder which is another possible way However
sawing was central to the production of pendants and
barrel beads (cf Fig 5c 10b) In some cases the
roughout was sawn only to a shallow depth
permitting unwanted material to be snapped off
leaving a protruding piece of stone mdash a kind of
groove and snap technique (Fig 5c) The protruding
lsquobossrsquo was then abraded
A range of chipped stone tools in the sites might be
suitable for sawing These include tabular chert knives
sometimes also called tile knives (Fig 11) These are
bifacially retouched cutting tools characteristic of the
eastern Jordanian Neolithic (Baird in Garrard et al
1994a 89) However typically the bifacial retouch
produces an edge that is robust but somewhat sinuous
in profile (Fig 11) In addition many tile knife edges
have significant curvature in plan Use of tile knives
would probably generate relatively wide and slightly
sinuous cut marks but this is an area worthy of
experimentation and use wear study Alternative tools
that perhaps better match the relative scale and
precision of cut marks on bead blanks are a range of
relatively robust non-formal tools on blade or elon-
gated flake blanks with edges that are relatively
straight in profile and plan These are found in some
numbers in conjunction with the bead making debris in
Jilat 13 and 25 It is also notable that despite the
purported dominance of flakes in many broadly
contemporary PPNCELN assemblages significant
a b
c d
Figure 5 (a) Tabular roughout rectangular (b) Tabular roughout subcircular with drill mark (c) Abraded roughout with
sawing mark at bottom note that the sawing is incomplete the groove and snap technique has resulted in both
the saw mark and an irregular protrusion of stone (d) Abraded tabular roughout subcircular
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
142 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
proportions of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 tool blanks are
blades (Baird 1993 469 and figs 818ndash821) even
though the debitage assemblages are mostly flake
dominated Other possible sawing tools include flaked
limestone artefacts with a thin edge (Fig 12c)
Several cutmarked limestone slabs were found at
Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 (Fig 12andashb) The cutmarks are
shallow or deep incisions Interestingly the cut-
marked slabs do not display evidence of drilling
Conversely the Jilat 13 bench with marks probably
resulting from drilling (Fig 14c see below) has no
cutmarks This suggests segregation of drilling and
sawing activities Some variability in spatial distribu-
tion of different stages in the bead making process
may be further borne out by the discrete distribution
of drills in Jilat 25 contexts where substantial bead
making debris was recovered For example in Jilat 25
Context A15 drills were found clustered in spatial
units towards the northern end of the structure
Drilling
Experiments in drilling of Dabba Marble are in
progress (Bains forthcoming) Here we present
evidence for drilling from bead perforations and
stone tools Other experiments show that perforation
morphology reveals drilling methods and shape
diameter and length of the drill used (eg Gwinnett
and Gorelick 1999) At Jilat perforations indicate
that drilling methods varied and that choices were
probably affected by material hardness
Hand Drilling with Large Piercers and Borers
The simplest method used appears to have been hand
drilling Soft Dabba Marble could have been drilled
using a borer or piercer held in the hand and not
hafted to a drilling stick Drilling by this method
would produce rough irregular and relatively large
perforations (Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990) we see
examples of this in broken beads Borers and piercers
were found at the sites They are relatively large
perforation tools made on blades suitable for
manipulation by hand without a haft (Fig 13 nos
9ndash11)
Rotary Drilling From Two Directions with Hafted Drills
The most common method involved rotary drilling
from two directions Drilling was almost always
a b
c d
Figure 6 Green Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads (andashb) Circular flakes slightly abraded (c) Unabraded
perforated flake (d) Finished disc bead
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 143
bipolar That is the blank was drilled to roughly
halfway through then turned and the perforation
completed from the opposite direction As the two
perforations converged the result was an hourglass-
shaped perforation (Fig 9e) Experiments indicate
that this prevents chipping and flaking of the
alternate face which can occur if a blank is perforated
completely from only one direction (Possehl 1981)
Most hourglass perforations on both soft and
hard stones appear to have been produced by rotary
drilling Rotary drilling results in regular perforations
and concentric striations on them (Gorelick and
Gwinnett 1990) We observed both traits on many
broken beads and blanks (Fig 9b) Perforations of
hourglass form included very small drillholes indi-
cating that the drilling tools were smaller than
piercers and borers made on blades The probable
drills in this case were small drills on bladelets and
especially drill bits on burin spalls (Fig 13 nos 1 4
5 7) Microscopic examination of perforations is in
progress (Bains forthcoming)
Oddly piercing and drilling tools were found in
relatively low absolute numbers at the two sites (eg
Baird 1993 505ndash06 625 for Jilat 13 early phase
about 4 of tools were piercers or drills for the Jilat
25 which have concentrations of bead-making debris
just under 3 of tools were spall drills) However
specific contextual data other technological consid-
erations and comparisons with other sites give us
confidence that these were the main tools involved in
the drilling and that the low absolute numbers of
drills abandoned may sometimes relate to systematic
removal or discard of these tools by the artisans For
example burin spall drills were closely associated
spatially with bead-making debris in specific activity
areas in the Jilat 25 structure eg Context Aa15 in
the buildingrsquos northern area (Baird 1993 521 see
Table 6) In addition Jilat 13 and 25 produced large
numbers of angle burins including truncation burins
from which burin spalls were detached (eg about
29 of all tools at J13rsquos early phase were burins)
(Baird 1993 500 516 520ndash26 625) Burins are
a b c
d e f
Figure 7 Red Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads from Jilat 25 Context Aa15 (andashb) Circular flakes
slightly abraded (c) Heavily abraded and perforated disc bead blank edge abrasion incomplete (d) Abraded
perforated blank abrasion not complete on face (endashf) Finished disc beads
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
144 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
contextually closely associated with drills and bead-
making debris in occupation fills at Jilat 25 (c 30 of
tools from relevant Jilat 25 contexts were burins) mdash a
situation also seen at Jebel Naja in the Basalt Desert mdash
where both experiments and microwear studies suggest
that drill bits on burin spalls were used for bead-
making (Baird 1993 521 Finlayson and Betts 1990)
Burin spall drills would have had some technolo-
gical advantages over bladelet drills One advantage
is that the triangular or rectangular cross-sections of
burin spall drills make them stronger and less likely
to break during drilling In addition the manner of
their retouch from the same direction on each edge
creates a prismatic cross-section that probably served
to produce a neater hole and to make drilling more
efficient and possibly faster and reduce breakage in
drilling The tips of burin spall drills are blunted
which is an advantage in drilling hard stone (Gorelick
and Gwinnett 1990) Predictability and miniaturiza-
tion of burin spall drills may be relevant to an
Figure 8 Chaines operatoires for disc beads Sequence A refers to a disc bead made on a thin flake Sequence B refers
to a disc bead made on a thick flake Sequence C refers to a disc bead made on a tabular roughout not a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 145
apparent increased standardization in perforation
size observed at Jilat 25 from an early phase to a later
phase (Critchley 2000)
Since we have evidence of rotary drilling from bead
perforations we believe that drill bits were hafted to
sticks (probably made of wood) Drill bits on burin
spalls would have been too small to manipulate
effectively by hand alone
To work efficiently a drill needs to be weighted
and stabilized and there must be some means of
protecting the artisanrsquos hand Ground stone artefacts
support the idea that rotary drilling with drill bits
hafted to drilling sticks was in use They include a
probable capstone made of limestone from Jilat 25
The capstone would have been held in the hand
enabling the beadmaker to manipulate the drilling
stick from the top (Fig 14a) This artefact resembles
a miniature bowl and fits easily into one hand The
interior surface displays use wear circular striations
parallel to the rim and vertical striations perpendi-
cular to the rim The base of the interior converges to
a flat surface about 1 cm in diameter
Some Levantine Neolithic sites have revealed
similar objects with similar wear (Banning 1998
Wright 1992 fig 5ndash15b) and a comparable item
was found at Jarmo (Moholy-Nagy 1983 fig 12913
Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990 30) Capstones are
characteristic of the use of bow drills (Banning
1998 Foreman 1978) but strictly speaking they
are not necessarily diagnostic of the bow drill
(theoretically simpler drilling techniques involving
hafting might have been facilitated by the use of
a capstone) For the moment we can say that
at Jilat 13 and 15 the evidence for rotary drilling
is unequivocal However the evidence for the use
of the bow drill while suggestive is not quite
definitive
Size data considered carefully support a link
between burin-spall drills and beads To interpret
dimensions of drills and perforations we must keep
in mind that stone bead drilling was overwhelmingly
bipolar and converging Thus drills did not have to
penetrate all the way through the full height of the
bead mdash only about half of it Therefore what matters
a b c
d e f
Figure 9 Green Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks and finished beads (a) Hexagonal blank flaked but not abraded (b)
Abraded hexagonal blank (c) Abraded blank not perforated (d) Perforation error on abraded blank (e)
Finished bead broken showing bipolar perforation and hourglass perforation shape (f) Perforated barrel bead
almost finished except for final abrasion to smooth out last surface irregularities
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
146 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
is the very tips of the drill bits mdash the upper few
millimetres mdash not the full length of the drills
Since disc beads are consistently about 25 to
26 mm in height only the upper 15 mm or so of the
drills mdash the most distal ends of the tips mdash had to
have been about 21 mm or less in thickness to
lsquomatchrsquo the perforation diameters of disc beads
(Table 4) In the case of barrel beads since barrel
beads were between 64 and 71 mm in height about
32 to 36 mm of the most distal ends of the drill bits
have to have been about 21 mm or less in thickness
to lsquomatchrsquo the perforations of barrel beads (Table 5)
Measurements of the drill bit tips within these
small uppermost reaches show that the maximal
thicknesses of the drill bitsrsquo distal tips fall within the
range of sizes indicated by the perforations (Fig 13)
Multi-stage Drilling
Sometimes drilling may have been accomplished in
several stages Some beads particularly those made of
harder stones have smooth cylindrical perforations
with parallel walls displaying no hint of the
hourglass shape
One way to achieve this is to create the hourglass
perforation and then to turn it into a perfect
cylindrical perforation via the use of a second drilling
procedure An example of this was cited by Calley
(1989) who proposed that two tools found in
carnelian bead workshops at Early Bronze Age
Kumartepe (Turkey) had complementary functions
a drill bit for making the initial hourglass perforation
and a borer for finishing and smoothing it into a
cylindrical perforation Since both drill bits and
borers were found on the Jilat sites this method of
finishing perforations could have been used
At Jilat 13 and 25 evidence for multi-stage drilling
can be seen in some beads which have a depression on
one or both faces The depression may be a result of
drilling with a larger drill bit first in order to provide
a guide for the final perforation with a finer drill bit
Such a technique is seen in India-Pakistan (Possehl
1981 39 Kenoyer 1992b 73)
a b c
d e f
Figure 10 Green Dabba Marble pendant blanks and finished pendants (a) Tabular roughout flaked into approximately
trapezoidal shape but not abraded (b) Abraded trapezoidal blank with sawing mark at bottom (c) Perforated
asymmetrical triangular pendant blank incompletely abraded (note striations on face) (d) Finished asymmetri-
cal triangular pendant (e) Pendant blank made on a flake unabraded (f) Nearly-finished pendant made on a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 147
Stabilizing Beads Anvils and Drilling Benches
What method was used to stabilize a bead during
drilling The simplest technique is to fix a bead to a
stone anvil with an adhesive Ethnography and
experiments show that such anvils can be small (the
size of handstones) (Foreman 1978 figs 6ndash7) Use of
such an anvil should result in small shallow
depressions a form of use-damage resulting from
force exerted from above Figure 14b shows a small
flat stone from Jilat 25 with a central depression of
the expected size and depth
Figure 14c shows the limestone bench from Jilat 13
(previously discussed) with a number of such pits in
the centre The marks are evenly spaced and are
concentrated in one small well-defined area on the
widest part of the bench this wide area was also
finely abraded
We see this bench as a multifunctional worktable
anvil We suspect that the beadmaker sat on the
narrow part of the bench (straddling it) placed bead
blanks on the pitted work surface fixed them with
adhesive and then drilled them The bench also
displays evidence of other activities including flaking
and grinding
Adhesives for hafting chipped stone tools could
have been adapted for use in fixing beads to anvils
Bitumen would be one candidate In some cultures a
wooden frame with cup-holes is sometimes used for
stabilizing beads (Kenoyer 1986 P Wright 1982)
The holes are filled with beeswax and clay the bead is
inserted into the wax-clay mixture which hardens
holding the bead steady After drilling beads are
released by breaking the wax-clay mixture (Allchin
1979 Stocks 1989) As wood was probably scarce in
Jilat and as there are no indications of the use of
clay we can probably rule out this technique
However stone items with cup-holes are seen in
Neolithic sites (Kirkbride 1966 Wright 1992
fig 527b)
Abrasion
Ground stone artefacts are crucial to bead produc-
tion in traditional technologies (Foreman 1978
Inizan et al 1992 Kenoyer et al 1991 53 Moholy-
Nagy 1983 294 Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58)
Grinding of beads can be achieved by abrading
each bead individually with a hand held abrader or
by rubbing them on a large grinding slab Either
method will produce linear striations of the type we
see on many unfinished beads (cf Figs 7cndashd and 10c)
However final shaping of disc and cylindrical beads
was most likely achieved by stringing them or loading
them on to a thin rod capable of penetrating the
perforation (individually or in groups) and then
rolling them on a grinding slab adding abrasives
(such as sand) and water to produce a smoother finish
(Foreman 1978 Moholy-Nagy 1983 298) Some disc
beads with parallel edges perpendicular to the faces
would probably have been rolled on a flat smooth
stone Other beads with facetted sharply angled or
bevelled edges (eg many barrel beads) suggest that
they were rolled or abraded along a stone with
grooves and slanting sides (eg Fig 15a c)
Abrasion of bead blanks may have been a multi-
stage process involving a number of materials of
different textures and hardness In an early stage
grinding of bead materials on vesicular basalt would
have been the easiest way to abrade a large nodule
quickly The pores of vesicular basalt and pumice
form natural cutting lsquoteethrsquo comparable to the metal
rasp used by present-day sculptors At Jilat 13 and
Jilat 25 we found broken fragments of vesicular
basalt grinding slabs but not large complete exam-
ples The small fragments suggest two possibilities
either there were large complete slabs at one time
which were then broken worn out and discarded or
only small fragments of these heavy duty grinding
tools were needed
For finer abrasion sandstone grinding slabs might
be expected None were found However small
Figure 11 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic
sites Tile knives or possible saws for bead-
making From Baird 1993 fig 85
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
148 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
handheld abraders made of sandstones with coarse
hard quartz crystals were found at both sites (Fig
15andashb) Sandstone is not local to Wadi Jilat and these
items were imported and probably used extensively
(resulting in the small size)
For even finer abrasion limestone could have been
used Such needs could have been met by the large
bench of Jilat 13 (Fig 14c) which was finely ground
over a very large area (within which the possible
drilling marks were placed)
Some might see the grooved items made of
sandstone (Fig 15a) and limestone (Fig 15c) as
lsquoshaft straightenersrsquo One or two shaft straightener
fragments made of basalt occur at Jilat 13 Like other
basalt shaft straighteners in Neolithic Jilat (eg Jilat
7) (Garrard et al 1994a Wright 1993) the use-
surfaces of these have U-shaped cross-sections By
contrast the cross sections of the use surfaces on the
sandstone and limestone grooved items are not U-
shaped but have sharp angles We see these tools
mainly as abraders for grinding bead facets espe-
cially on barrel beads The widths of the use surfaces
are 11 mm for the sandstone tool and 138 mm for
the limestone one These dimensions correspond to
the average diameter (5 width) of 31 measured green
Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks from Jilat 13 (N 5
31 Mean diameter 5 92 mm standard deviation 5
28) Grooved stones are used in bead grinding in
a
b c
Figure 12 Ground stone artefacts probably for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Cutmarked slab (limestone) Jilat
13 The cutmarks are shallow and are concentrated in the left area running parallel to the main axes of the
slab (b) Cutmarked slab fragment (limestone) Jilat 13 showing deep cutmarks (c) Flaked and ground abra-
sive cutting tool made of limestone Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 149
modern India (Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58) a
grooved sandstone tool was found with an unfinished
bead at Catalhoyuk (Wright and Bains 2007)
Tosi and Vidale (1990) regard failure resulting
from breakage or human error as more common in
the grinding stage than during perforation although
this depends on material and opinion (Kenoyer 2003
18) In some cases it might be more efficient to shape
the bead first before attempting perforation This
may explain why barrel beads tend to be shaped and
abraded prior to perforation
Finished beads were always finely abraded and
sometimes polished to the extent of reflecting light
Ethnographic observations indicate that polishing is
sometimes done by placing beads en masse in a
leather bag along with an abrasive and shaking and
rolling the bags for long periods (Allchin 1979
Kenoyer 2003) This simple method would have been
more likely than the method of rolling beads and
abrasives in a wooden barrel which is also docu-
mented ethnographically (Kenoyer 2003)
However shaking beads in a bag with an abrasive
tends to produce beads with rounded convex edges
(Gwinnett and Gorelick 1989) Some beads at Jilat
have this form but many mdash especially those made of
the hard cherty red Dabba Marble mdash have sharp
edges perpendicular to bead faces indicating that
they were individually polished or polished during
rolling on a string or stick Alternative methods of
polishing can include rubbing with leather or wood
with the addition of fine sand or chalk and water or
with animal hairwool and animal fat (Kenoyer 1986
20) These methods would have been possible with
Jilat technology
Craft Specialization and Comparisons withOther Sites
Technology needs to be studied not only in terms of
materials and techniques but also in terms of social
groups involved in artefact production individual
artisans and skill (Dobres and Hoffmann 1999 2ndash12)
In egalitarian societies craft skill and knowledge of
Figure 13 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic sites Drilling and piercing tools From Baird 1993 fig 82
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
150 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
special materials can enhance the power of an
individual or a group encouraging hierarchy
(Dobres 2000 119ndash20)
These questions force us to reconsider issues of
craft specialization a term often used loosely or in
widely different ways Three concepts of specializa-
tion are considered here individual specialists
specialization between households or domestic
groups within a given site and site specialization
within a regional or social network of craft produc-
tion and exchange
Costin (1991) draws a contrast between indepen-
dent specialization and attached specialization
Independent specialization involves production of
utilitarian goods for nonelites and can be household-
based or based in special workshops Attached
specialization refers to production of prestige goods
under control of elites Whilst Costin notes that
attached specialization can also be based in house-
holds or workshops we often think of attached
specialization in connection with central institutions
and urban or state-level societies It is of considerable
interest that in early urban societies the making of
stone personal ornaments in association with central
institutions figures prominently (Stein 1996 Vidale
1989)
How earlier forms of craft specialization may have
evolved into large-scale attached specialization is
poorly understood Most research has concentrated
on later stages in this process (eg Stein 1996) in
discussions of earlier forms of specialization defini-
tions and criteria for diagnosis could sometimes be
clearer (eg Quintero and Wilke 1998 Rollefson and
Parker 2002 Rosen 1997) If we are dealing with
a
c
b
Figure 14 Ground stone artefacts probably used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Capstone made of limestone
Jilat 25 (b) Handstone probably used as an anvil or hammer Jilat 25 note depression in face and flake scars
at edges (c) Limestone drilling bench Jilat 13 Note evidence of use-wear on the left and widest area of the
bench smooth abraded surface drill marks in the centre-left face small flake scars with negative bulbs of per-
cussion close to the edge of the bench
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 151
specialization in Neolithic societies it is probably
independent specialization Still Neolithic societies
may fall between Costinrsquos two categories Neolithic
groups were clearly producing prestige goods perso-
nal ornaments are not strictly utilitarian and there is
at least a possibility that elites were emerging (Byrd
1994 Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002 Verhoeven
2002)
Individual Specialists
First there is the issue of identifying individual
specialists Some use lsquospecializationrsquo to refer to any
situation in which some artisans have high levels of
skill a view that has been criticized (Rice 1991) We
agree with Rice that identifying a high level of
technical skill in a craft is not on its own sufficient
for a diagnosis of specialization since it robs the
concept of force in discussing long term change (by
this criterion the Upper Palaeolithic was riddled
with craft specialists) However we would argue
that if there are other indications of craft specializa-
tion a search for levels of ability in different
individuals is appropriate mdash if the data permit
Such data would be primary refuse from well-dated
sites of high temporal resolution in which technical
processes (eg errors in chaines operatoires) can
reveal experts vs novices (Pigeot 1990 Stout 2002
Vanzetti and Vidale 1994)
In the case of Jilat 13 and 25 we are dealing with
much primary refuse and two closely dated sites (see
above and Tables 6ndash7) mdash with periodic use of the
sites over a time range on the order of 200 years at
most and possibly much less Jilat 25 yielded activity
areas with clear spatial clusters as do a number of
contexts at Jilat 13 Space does not permit us to
present all details (this awaits the final site report)
but we feel confident that aggregate consideration of
the data from each site allows us to discuss general
questions of individual skills mdash master craftsmen vs
novices
a b
c
Figure 15 Ground stone artefacts possibly used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Grooved sandstone abrading
tool Jilat 13 (b) Sandstone hand-held abrader Jilat 25 (c) Grooved limestone abrading tool Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
152 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
To explore this we analysed unfinished blanks and
the frequency of perforation errors Drilling is a
sensitive moment in bead production when many
things can go wrong (Kenoyer 2003) A low incidence
in perforation errors combined with high numbers of
successfully finished beads and evidence of standar-
dization should be reasonably good indicators of an
artisanrsquos mastery This is the situation seen at Jilat 25
(Fig 7) In all of 93 blanks from Jilat 25 only 2 were
perforation errors a failure rate of only 2
On the other hand a high incidence of perforation
errors would suggest that a beadmaker was a relative
novice Jilat 13 produced more blanks with perfora-
tion errors than Jilat 25 We thought we might find
individual contexts with a high rate of error
suggesting apprentices
The data did not bear this out Of 223 bead blanks
from Jilat 13 (all phases) 22 were perforation errors
mdash a failure rate of 98 All but two errors were on
barrel bead blanks of green Dabba Marble The
others were one pendant blank and one irregular
bead blank These 22 blanks were distributed across
20 different contexts and no more than 2 perforation
errors were found in any one context
A close look at those contexts reveals low error
rates In Context B21 2 green barrel bead blanks
with perforation errors were found with 5 other
blanks The others included green and red barrel and
disc blanks This context also yielded 5 successfully
finished beads including black and red barrel beads
and a green disc Black and green debitage and a
discoidal handstone were also found here In Context
B71 2 blanks with perforation errors were found
along with 9 other blanks and 10 successfully
finished beads including green Dabba Marble barrel
beads but also black and red disc beads Much
debitage was found along with a flaked limestone
cutting tool (cf Fig 12c) and a limestone object with
a drill mark
The higher rate of error at Jilat 13 compared to
Jilat 25 could be because artisans at Jilat 13 were
making more of the larger more complex barrel
beads (as opposed to simple discs see Tables 2ndash3)
which offer greater chances of failure due to the
longer drilling distance However at Jilat 13 the
overall failure rate was still quite low particularly
considering the overall volume of material recovered
(Table 1)
We conclude that the beadmakers at Jilat 13
included few trainees These appear to have been
skilled artisans a small task force composed of
relative experts This raises the question of whether
these beadmakers were examples of lsquoproducer
specialistsrsquo as traditionally defined that is people
involved in
production of a good by a relatively small number of
individuals (compared to the total output and
number of consumers) individuals who are as a
result of this selectivity and the routinization or
repetition of their tasks particularly skilled in
manufacture (Rice 1991 263)
Jilat 13 and 25 do suggest small numbers of
individuals and a certain selectivity in who was
involved in stone bead making The quantity of
debitagedebris relative to (1) the number of finished
beads and (2) the modest sizes of these structures
collectively suggest that these craftsmenwomen
served a larger number of consumers relative to the
number of craftsmen involved here If so who were
these consumers mdash other residents of Jilat or groups
beyond
Intra-site Specialization Between Domestic Groups
Several studies suggest ways of identifying different
forms of craft specialization between domestic groups
in a site For later sites Stein (1996) has explored
spatial data particularly how craft production
facilities are dispersed among domestic units or
located near special (or central) institutions In
Neolithic sites questions about dispersal between
households and possible links between craft produc-
tion and special buildings or special sites have been
underexplored
For specialization Costin (1991) suggests that we
would expect (1) variability between production
units (eg households occupations regions) in
relevant artefacts (2) high densities of craft produc-
tion debris relative to some other generally used
item in some production units (3) high ratios of
unfinished goods to finished goods in some produc-
tion units Kenoyer et alrsquos (1991) ethnoarchaeolo-
gical studies of modern stone bead-making in
Khambat (India) suggest something similar in the
case of households as production units There non-
specialist households engaging in casual opportu-
nistic bead production revealed low quantities of
bead-making debris few unfinished beads and little
standardization in finished beads By contrast
households specializing in bead production were
characterized by stockpiling of large quantities of
raw materials many unfinished beads and more
standardized finished products
In looking at whole occupations (ie phases within
sites) as a unit of observation we argue elsewhere
(Wright and Garrard 2003) that artefact densities and
other data from 13 PPNB and 8 PPNCELN
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 153
occupations in the Jilat-Azraq region suggest that
PPNCELN producers were more specialized than
those of the PPNB mdash at least in the Jilat-Azraq
region Unlike the PPNB sites Jilat 13 and 25 have
very high densities of bead-making debris specialized
tools for drilling and sawing there is an abundance of
unfinished materials relative to finished products
bead-making tools and debris are abundant relative
to normal domestic food processing equipment
(ground stone artefacts) (Wright and Garrard 2003
cf Costin 1991)
That argument is chronological comparing the
PPNB to the PPNCELN occupations and we stand
behind it for the Jilat-Azraq case (different trajec-
tories may apply to south Jordan and the Negev see
below) Still it leaves open the issue of house-to-
house variation within Jilat 25 or Jilat 13 As we have
only one excavated structure per site we cannot on
present evidence argue that each building housed a
group of specialists serving other households within
the same site In fact we have no direct evidence that
there were other structures on each site mdash the ones
excavated were the only ones visible on the surface
There are nuances of material and typological
choices between the Jilat 25 structure (red disc beads)
and the Jilat 13 structure (larger complex green
ornaments) but these nuances are beyond the scope
of this paper
In all we suspect that stone bead production at
Jilat 13 and 25 was geared not for other domestic
units lsquoin camprsquo but for use by these quite mobile
communities themselves mdash as well as export to other
sites within the steppe and beyond (see below) In
Costinrsquos terms (Costin 1991) Jilat 13 and 25 might
each be an example of an independent non-centra-
lized dispersed workshop possibly lsquofamily runrsquo (Rice
1991 262) mdash in which handling of Dabba Marble
was not routinely entrusted to novices
There are hints of house-to-house variations in
bead-making in major villages with larger samples of
domestic structures as in PPNB Beidha At PPNB
Beidha (earlier than Jilat 13 and 25) Building 14
stands out
Other forms of production besides food preparation
were less common Building 14 represented the best
example of artefact production in these basements
A wide range of artefacts was recovered apparently
associated with building 14rsquos basement floor
Particularly widespread were stone polishers bone
tools raw material (including hematite malachite
and magnesium) more than 60 unmodified marine
shells and at least two dozen beads of shell stone
and bone some of which were in various stages of
production Some artifacts lay on stone slabs
indicating that at least some slabs may have
functioned as work surfaces (Byrd 2005 117)
Such hints are intriguing Still macro-artefacts
from house floors are affected by problems of site
formation and house abandonment Micro-artefact
data can help (Rainville 2005) House-by-house
exploration with attention to micro-artefacts is
needed (Wright and Bains 2007)
Site Specialization Within a Regional Network of Craft
Production and Exchange
Both sites and other Neolithic sites in Jilat and
Azraq exhibit resource specialization
the selective use of particular resources in craft
manufacture such as certain clays that are repeat-
edly used (Rice 1991 262)
The Jilat artisans emphasized Dabba Marble from
a wider array of available stone types The Jilat-
Azraq sites collectively show that green Dabba
Marble was a special target This is revealed in both
frequencies and weights (for debris data and weight
data see Wright and Garrard 2003 for frequency
data on beads and blanks see Tables 2 and 3) At
both sites debris is greatly dominated by green
Dabba Marble mdash 80ndash95 of debris by both weight
(grams) and frequency Green Dabba Marble also
dominates blanks in terms of weight at both sites mdash
indicating the use of green for making larger heavier
and more conspicuous ornaments
Turning to frequencies at Jilat 13 about 90 of
blanks are green and only 5 are red However
finished beads include both green and red forms in
comparable percentages (404 and 436 respec-
tively) (Table 3) suggesting that finished red beads
were brought into the building from a place of
manufacture located somewhere else At Jilat 25
blanks of red and green Dabba Marble occur in
comparable proportions (409 green 43 red)
whilst finished beads are predominantly red (588)
(Table 2) If Jilat 13 and 25 were absolute contem-
poraries this could suggest variations in choices and
exchange between residents of different structures
Rice (1991) has defined site specialization as a
situation in which a site is located near a special
resource and the inhabitants emphasize production of
a craft based on that resource Relative to other sites
not so located the range of site functions and
activities would be expected to be more limited
Thus site specialization
involves individual localities or sites having evidence
of limited functions or intensive productive activity
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
154 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
often determined by fortuitous environmental fac-
tors This includes proximity to mineral deposits
and so forth (Rice 1991 262)
Do Jilat 13 and 25 fit this concept In both sites
15 km from the source we have a wealth of evidence
for intensive stone bead production and scanty
evidence for routine food processing tools (Wright
and Garrard 2003) However Jilat 25 may be closer
to the limited function model envisioned by Rice In
Jilat 13 bead-making is clearly intensive but we are
also dealing with a chipped stone assemblage of not
only drills and burins but also projectile points and
other tools Jilat 13 also reveals production of
figurines (of animals phalluses and arrow-shaped
forms) and sculpted pillars (Baird 1993 Garrard
et al 1994a Martin 1999 Wright 1992 1993)
In all Jilat 13 and 25 suggest that we can apply
Ricersquos lsquosite specializationrsquo on the grounds of intensive
productive activity and proximity to source mdash but
with the qualification that this specialization was also
embedded in hunting-herding activities and at Jilat
13 production of other special crafts unique among
the sites of a symbolic nature (figurines pillars)
One possibility is that we are dealing with a camp
of hunter-herder corporate groups mdash part of a wider
regional network mdash engaged in special activities in
remote areas involving art personal ornaments and
ritual Such groups are suggested by other data from
the PPNBndashPPNC time span for example Nahal
Hemar (ornaments masks hunting tools) Dhuweila
(carving of hunters with dress variations)
Catalhoyuk (images of hunters with dress variations
as in the bull hunt mural) and Gobeklitepe (sculpture
production including a quarry wild-animal icono-
graphy hunting) (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988 Betts
1998 Mellaart 1967 Schmidt 2000) In all these data
hint that craft production of special items was
embedded in hunting andor herding activities in
remote areas this may have been a key means by
which exotic materials reached major villages In a
very broad way this supports a sketch outlined by
Bar Yosef (Bar-Yosef 2001) although we do not
necessarily agree with specifics of his model eg the
territories boundaries social groups and mechanisms
which he suggests (cf Asouti 2006) Instead we see
this as one example of diverse strategies of social
networking linking lineages households and commu-
nities in the Neolithic (Wright forthcoming)
Returning to the stone bead data from Jilat 13 and
25 the apparent stockpiling of raw material and
intensive production activity hints at production of
the green material for export (see above and Wright
and Garrard 2003) New data now add weight to this
idea and suggest the following provisional picture of
regional specializations and exchanges in ornaments
(1) Based on typology technology and materials thereappears to be a distinctive eastern Jordanian koine ornetwork of stone bead manufacture and exchangefeaturing Dabba Marble and a probable regionalspecialization in it
Other Neolithic bead production sites are known
from eastern Jordan Indications are that most of the
green bead materials are Dabba Marble probably
from Jilat (further work is needed) In these sites
diversity of materials used seems low with few
imports from beyond the steppe Shells however
testify to wider networks (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989
Cooke and Reese in Betts 1998 Garrard et al 1994a
Reese 1991)
Azraq 31 (PPNB and ELN) is in our suite of study
materials (Baird et al 1992 Garrard et al 1994a
Wright and Garrard 2003) and debris blanks and
beads were found Preliminary XRF analysis of green
samples (by Groom) indicates that the material is
consistent with Jilat Dabba Marble Typology and
technology are also similar and as at Jilat 25 burin
spall drills were closely associated with bead-making
in specific activity areas (Baird 1993 521 Baird et al
1992 25) However the ground stone revealed no
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
(Wright 1992 1993 Wright in Baird et al 1992)
Material used for beads at Dhuweila (PPNB and
ELN) has been called Dabba Marble (Cooke and
Reese in Betts 1998) It is consistent in appearance
with our material although we have no details on
mineralogy or source Typologically these beads are
similar to those of Jilat 13 and 25 The ground stone
is very different from the suite at the Jilat sites
(Wright in Betts 1998) for comparisons of chipped
stone assemblages see Baird (1993)
At Bawwab al-Ghazal (Late PPNB) Rollefson
et al found drills bits on burin spalls tile knives
beads bead blanks and bead debris some of which
they called green Dabba Marble (Rollefson et al
1999 Quintero et al 2004) They argued that there is
a possible source of this material outcropping near
the site mdash lsquoFor the last raw material [green Dabba
Marble] small nodules of the green limestone were
embedded in the local bedrockrsquo (Rollefson et al 1999
3) However as shown in Appendix A the true
Dabba Marble only occurs in a restricted area west of
Wadi Jilat The lsquobedrockrsquo which outcrops near Azraq
31 and Bawwab al-Ghazal is travertine and some of
this formed during the late Pleistocene and Holocene
The nearby Epipalaeolithic site of Azraq 17 was
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 155
found partially embedded in travertine and artefacts
including nodules of imported basalt were found in
the travertine at this site It is possible that the
nodules of green limestone found at Bawwab al-
Ghazal were imported Dabba Marble which subse-
quently became incorporated in a travertine near the
site An alternative possibility is that the local
travertine is infused with green minerals In Wadi
Jilat travertines were noted with traces of green
minerals and in the Siwaqa area to the south-west of
Jilat there are extensive travertines some of which
are infused with pale green minerals including
volkonskoite (Barjous 1986 mdash see also Appendix A)
In eastern Jordan some Neolithic sites are greatly
dominated by burins (lsquoburin sitesrsquo) At a number of
these there is evidence for stone bead-making (eg
Jebel Naja) These lsquoburin sitesrsquo typically reveal few
ground stone tools we know of no examples of
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
from them It was argued that the main role of the
burins was production of spalls for drills used mainly
for beads (Betts 1987 1998 Finlayson and Betts
1990) However burin sites are not universally
associated with stone bead making At Jilat 23 24
and 26 burins were numerous but other evidence for
bead-making is scanty (Baird 1993 520)
Therefore some have questioned whether
burins and burin spalls in such sites were solely or
primarily intended for making drills and beads
noting that other functions are possible (Quintero
et al 2004 209) Given that these sites typically
represent short-term occupations it is possible that
many sites might be spall manufacture sites with
spalls transported to other settings where drill
manufacture and bead manufacture took place such
as Jilat 13 and 25 Rollefson expressed doubt that
either bladelet or burin spall drills would have been
used in bow drills partly because of their fragility and
also because most of them have a pronounced curve
on the long axis which would have made high speed
drilling impossible (Rollefson and Parker 2002) But
Finlayson and Betts (1990) and Berna (1995)
successfully experimented using burin spalls with
bow drills and Kenoyer (personal communication
2007) notes that drills made on burin spalls are the
most common type of drill in diverse prehistoric
stone bead-making sites (in India Pakistan and
elsewhere)
In the case of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 we believe burin-
spall drills were part of the bead-making repertoire
for reasons noted above This does not rule out other
uses of burin spalls Nor does it rule out the use of
other perforating techniques Drills do not have to be
made of stone when soft stones are being perforated
mdash wood bone and abrasives can be used (Foreman
1978)
(2) There are hints of export of Dabba Marble to at leastsome villages in the Levantine corridor However majorNeolithic villages display much diversity in materials andespecially more importing of exotic stones than is seen inthe eastern Jordanian sites
Many writers report Neolithic beads made of
unspecified lsquogreenstonersquo This term is unfortunate
since it can refer to metabasalt and similar altered
igneous rocks (Schumann 1992 248) Some of these
lsquogreenstonesrsquo may be limestone with apatite or other
materials (eg Garfinkel 1987 81ndash82 Hauptmann
2004 Talbot 1983 789) Beads of green limestones
rich in fluorapatite were found at late PPNB Basta in
southern Jordan (Hauptmann 2004) as confirmed by
XRF and XRD Green beads identified as Dabba
Marble were also reported from Ain Ghazal a site
with both PPNB and PPNC occupations (Rollefson
et al 1990 103ndash04) Whether these are Dabba
Marble from the Jilat source (Appendices AndashB) is
not yet fully clear Ongoing research will sort out
these mysteries (eg D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal
communication Hauptmann 2004)
Major villages in the Levantine Corridor reveal
different degrees of emphasis in styles and materials
often we see a certain emphasis on local materials and
preferences However considerable exchange net-
works are indicated in major villages which display
much wider ranges of stone ornament materials
compared to the eastern Jordanian sites (such as
Ain Ghazal Yiftahel Basta Barsquoja Ghuwayr 1
Fidan 1) mdash along with of course shells (Affonso
and Pernicka 2004 Bienert and Gebel 1998 84ndash86
Garfinkel 1987 Hauptmann 2004 Rollefson and
Simmons 1984 1986 Rollefson et al 1990 Simmons
and Najjar 1998 Starck 1988)
As the Neolithic evolved stone bead-making
entailed increasingly diverse techniques and materi-
als One example may be drills In earlymiddle PPNB
sites most drills are made on bladelets In the late
PPNB PPNC and Late Neolithic there may have
been a gradual increase in drills made on burin spalls
although perhaps not in all regions (Jensen 2004
Rollefson and Parker 2002) Underlining increasing
diversity of technological practice between groups
Baird (2001b) pointed out geographic variation in
this technology with spall drills dominating in the
north-eastern Jordanian steppe from MPPNB
through Early Late Neolithic whilst contemporary
sites to west and south use bladelet blanks for their
piercing tools
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
156 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
Ta
ble
2B
ea
ds
an
db
lan
ks
J
ila
t2
5(a
llc
on
tex
ts)
Gre
en
Dab
ba
Marb
le
Gre
en
Dab
ba
Marb
le
Red
Dab
ba
Marb
le
Red
Dab
ba
Marb
le
Bla
ck
Dab
ba
Marb
le
Bla
ck
Dab
ba
Marb
leW
hit
eC
halk
Wh
ite
Ch
alk
Wh
ite
Qu
art
zite
Wh
ite
Qu
art
zite
Oth
er
Oth
er
To
tal
To
tal
To
tal
To
tal
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Bead
s-
NB
ead
s-
B
lan
ks
-N
Bla
nks
-
Dis
cb
ead
s12
21
67
39
410
74
51
95
79
875
80
6R
ing
bead
s2
21
7O
valb
ead
sC
ylin
der
bead
s1
10
8B
arr
elb
ead
s9
63
112
10
17
75
Irre
gula
rb
ead
sIn
dete
rmin
ate
or
frag
ment
16
10
86
65
Pend
ants
-tr
iang
ula
rP
end
ants
-tr
ap
ezoid
al
Pend
ants
-oval
Pend
ants
-re
cta
ng
ula
rP
end
ants
-sq
uare
11
11
Pend
ants
-te
ard
rop
Pend
ants
-oth
er
or
ind
ete
rmin
ate
14
10
84
43
Bra
cele
ts7
75
9
TO
TA
L-
Bead
s-
N24
70
614
50
119
100
0TO
TA
L-
Bead
s-
20
258
85
011
84
20
0100
0TO
TA
L-
Bla
nks
-N
38
40
10
41
93
100
0TO
TA
L-
Bla
nks
-
40
943
010
84
31
1100
0
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 135
Ta
ble
3B
ea
ds
an
db
lan
ks
J
ila
t1
3(a
llc
on
tex
ts)
Gre
en
Da
bb
aM
arb
le
Gre
en
Da
bb
aM
arb
le
Re
dD
ab
ba
Ma
rble
Re
dD
ab
ba
Ma
rble
Bla
ck
Da
bb
aM
arb
le
Bla
ck
Da
bb
aM
arb
leW
hit
eC
ha
lkW
hit
eC
ha
lkW
hit
eQ
ua
rtzi
teW
hit
eQ
ua
rtzi
teO
the
rO
the
rT
ota
lT
ota
lT
ota
lT
ota
l
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
ead
s-
B
lan
ks
-N
Bla
nks
-
Dis
cb
ead
s7
36
40
810
22
21
59
38 1
49
22 0
Rin
gb
ead
s2
12
51
20
12 9
00 0
Ovalb
ead
s0
0 0
00 0
Cylin
der
bead
s1
13
42 6
10 4
Barr
elb
ead
s36
57
13
24
11
254
34 8
62
27 8
Irre
gula
rb
ead
s1
00 0
10 4
Ind
ete
rmin
ate
fr
ag
ment
794
11
74 5
96
43 0
Pend
ants
-tr
iang
ula
r1
11
0 6
10 4
Pend
ants
-tr
ap
ezoid
al
21
21 3
10 4
Pend
ants
-oval
11
21 3
00 0
Pend
ants
-re
cta
ng
ula
r1
10 6
00 0
Pend
ants
-sq
uare
11
10 6
10 4
Pend
ants
-te
ard
rop
22
1 3
00 0
Pend
ants
-oth
er
in
dete
rmin
ate
111
12
1 3
11
4 9
Bra
cele
ts0
0 0
00 0
TO
TA
L-
Bead
s-
N62
68
20
11
3155
100 0
TO
TA
L-
Bead
s-
40 4
43 6
12 8
0 6
0 6
1 9
100 0
TO
TA
L-
Bla
nks
-N
202
11
42
04
223
100 0
TO
TA
L-
Bla
nks
-
90 6
4 9
1 8
0 9
0 0
1 8
100 0
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
136 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
frequently occurring types burins constitute 29 of
tools and points 16 Piercers and drills occur in
much lower numbers (4 of tools) as do other tool
types Of projectile points Nizzanim points are the
most frequent (397 of points) followed by Byblos
(313) Herzeliya (12) Amuq (84) Transverse
(6) and Haparsah (24) points (Baird 1993 469
500ndash17 625 Baird in Garrard et al 1994a 85
table 1)
The 14C dates from these two sites have been
recalibrated using IntCal 2004 and the date ranges at
one standard deviation are as follows Jilat 25 (early
phase) context Aa19a (OxA2408) 5 9020ndash8760 cal
BP Jilat 13 (early phase) context A21a (OxA1800) 5
8980ndash8600 cal BP Jilat 13 (early phase) context A15a
(OxA1801) 5 8980ndash8550 cal BP Jilat 13 (late phase)
context C24 (OxA2411) 5 8980ndash8590 cal BP Jilat 13
(late phase) context C22 (UB3462) 5 8780ndash8460 cal
BP
Thus stratigraphy and radiocarbon dates suggest
that we are dealing with two sites of reasonably good
temporal resolution followed by abandonment and
sealing of primary refuse deposits Five C14 dates
indicate occupation between about 7830 and 8020
uncal BP with low standard deviations for each date
In radiocarbon terms this is about as precise as it
gets and the two sites may overlap in time However
projectile points do suggest we are dealing with a
somewhat wider time span for the Jilat 13 sample
than the Jilat 25 sample
Given different extents of excavation comparisons
of these and other stone bead-making sites entail
challenges Density data however mdash as measured by
numbers of beads blanks and debris per cu m volume
of excavated deposit mdash can be revealing For
example the PPNB occupations in Wadi Jilat (3
sites 11 occupations) had low densities mdash an average
of 1072 artefacts per cu m and a maximum of 313
per cu m (Wright and Garrard 2003 table 2) In
contrast the density data for Jilat 25 are 2223 per cu
m (early phase) 3312 per cu m (middle phase) and
562 per cu m (late phase) Density data for Jilat 13
are 3102 stone bead artefacts per cu m (early phase)
1615 per cu m (middle phase) and 1099 per cu m
(late phase) This suggests greater intensity of bead-
making in Jilat 13 and 25
Sources Quarrying and Raw Materials
Most Jilat beads were made of Dabba Marble which
occurs in green pinkred and black (Appendix A)
This is our focus here A few other materials were also
used other local sedimentary rocks and non-local
turquoise (nearest source Sinai) malachite (nearest
sources Faynan and Timna) and carnelian (nearest
source unknown) Non-local stones formed only 015
of the materials (Wright and Garrard 2003)
The largest known sources of Dabba Marble lie
15ndash25 km west of Jilat 13 and 25 some may be
closer (Fig 1 and Appendix A) These are bodies of
limestones chalks and cherts lightly metamorphosed
Table 4 Finished disc beads size data (complete or measurable beads) (na 5 not applicable)
Site N
Diameter (mm) HeightThickness (mm) Perforation Diameter (mm)
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Jilat 7 PPNB 13 87 36 30 28 28 10Jilat 26 PPNB 0 na na na na na naJilat 32 PPNB 0 na na na na na naAzraq 31 PPNB 2 98 46 25 14 23 04Jilat 25 PPNCELN 66 83 16 26 08 21 05Jilat 13 PPNCELN 47 69 24 25 09 19 06Azraq 31 PPNCELN 34 68 16 26 11 18 04
Table 5 Finished barrel beads size data (complete or measurable beads) (na 5 not applicable)
Site N
Diameter (mm) HeightThickness (mm) Perforation Diameter (mm)
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Jilat 7 PPNB 1 45 na 40 na 15 naJilat 26 PPNB 2 75 na 65 na 25 naJilat 32 PPNB 0 na na na na 00 naAzraq 31 PPNB 1 115 na 100 na 40 naJilat 25 PPNCELN 6 63 14 64 17 21 09Jilat 13 PPNCELN 28 68 28 71 39 22 09Azraq 31 PPNCELN 13 109 56 133 91 29 09
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 137
and injected with various minerals eg apatites red
iron oxides (Fig 3a) Outcrops show substantial
variations in mineralization even over small areas
in Fig 3b the left side of the outcrop is soft green
Dabba Marble the right side is red Dabba Marble
The geology and mineralogy of Dabba Marble are
presented in Appendices AndashB The Neolithic Jilat
beads are consistent with this source (Appendix B)
Methods of Analysis
Comprehensive recovery of small beads debitage and
micro-artefacts was possible due to intensive fine-
scale sieving All excavated contexts were sieved
through a 5 mm mesh many samples were dry sieved
or wet sieved through a 15 mm mesh (the latter after
flotation) Artefacts from floors were collected from 1
sq m horizontal grid units to permit identification of
activity areas Fine-grained spatial data and micro-
artefacts are important in understanding lithic
technologies (Dunnell and Stein 1989 Cessford and
Mitrovic 2005) This is borne out by the Jilat data
since micro-flakes are one byproduct of stone bead
retouch In cases of intense housecleaning micro-
artefacts may reveal bead-making where macro-
artefacts do not (Wright and Bains 2007)
For each context artefacts were separated by raw
material and classified into major groups nodules
and debitage (Fig 4) roughouts (Fig 5) unfinished
blanks and finished ornaments (Figs 6ndash10) We
counted and weighed each group to determine
relationships between debitage and finished beads
Measurements (diameter height perforation dia-
meter) were taken on beads and blanks to assess
standardization and drilling techniques
Finished ornaments were classified into 8 basic
types (Wright and Garrard 2003) Circular disc beads
are the most numerous smallest and most standar-
dized (Figs 6d 7endashf) They occur in the widest range
of materials most red Dabba Marble beads were
discs Barrelshaped beads are larger more variable
and mostly made of green Dabba Marble (Fig 9endashf)
Pendants are the largest rarest and most diverse
items shaped as triangles rectangles and ovals most
are of green Dabba Marble (Fig 10d f) Bracelets
were made of white chalk (Tables 2ndash3)
Unfinished beads (blanks) were classified according
to the same typology as finished beads when the
intended final product could be ascertained (eg disc
blank) (Tables 2ndash3 Figs 6andashc 7andashd 8 9andashd 10c e)
Within these categories blanks were further classified
according to traces of flaking grinding perforation
Figure 8 shows these stages for 3 sequences of disc
bead manufacture Differences between Sequences A
B and C are differences in the original blank (Stage 1
thin flake thick flake tabular roughout) and presence
or absence of flaking retouch on edges (Stage 2)
Further analyses of sequences for these and other
bead types are still in progress
Debitage was sorted into nodules cores rough-
outs flakes angular shatter micro-flakes and
Table 6 Stone beads blanks and debris Jilat 25 all contexts
Phase Context Description Beads Blanks Debris Comments Selected associated artefacts
Early Aa24 Fill of bedrock cut 0 0 2Early Aa27 Fill of bedrock cut 0 0 1Early Aa19 First occupation fill 29 23 384 1 cutmarked slab 3 sandstone fragments
probably handstones 1 limestone handstoneEarly Aa20 First occupation fill 1 5 6Early Aa21 First occupation fill 4 1 4Early Aa18 Early fill in entrance area 1 5 8Early A 44 Early fill in entrance area 0 0 3Middle Aa15 Second occupation fill 47 31 544 1 limestone capstone 1 grooved stone (basalt)
1 sandstone abraderMiddle Aa16 Hearth 1 1 0Middle Aa13 Fill of stone feature 1 0 81Middle Aa10 Fill of stone feature 0 0 3Middle Aa11 Ash lense 3 0 17Middle Aa7 Third occupation fill 17 15 109 2 grooved stones (limestone and basalt)
2 basalt handstones 1 sandstone fragmentMiddle Aa8 Third occupation fill 1 1 1Middle Aa14 Fill in entrance area 7 3 4Middle A 42 Fill in entrance area 0 0 1
Late Aa 2 Sandy late fill 1 0 55 1 sandstone abrader Bead 1 RDM disc Debris all GDMLate A 6 Rubbly late fill 7 4 72Late A 33 Late fill in entrance area 0 0 1Late A 36 Late fill in entrance area 0 0 6Late A 34 Fill of late intrusive feature 1 0 0
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
138 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
micro-shatter (Fig 4) Definitions of these categories
are broadly similar to those established in chipped
stone analysis (Andrefsky 1998)
Flaking and Initial Reduction Nodules CoresDebitage and Roughouts
The soft limestone and hard chert in Dabba Marble
permits it to be worked via chipping flaking
grinding sawing and drilling To varying degrees
the material has conchoidal fracture Where chert
content is high conchoidal fracture is excellent
Limestone itself also has conchoidal fracture parti-
cularly when fine-grained as Dabba Marble is The
tabular structure of the laminated limestones also
makes it possible to create flat faces easily
The difficulty of shaping beads would have varied
depending on specific material Most green Dabba
marble is fairly homogeneous composed of calcite-rich
soft limestone (Mohs 5 3) and apatite (Mohs 5 5)
Red Dabba marble occurs in a soft pale pink variety
(Mohs 5 3ndash4) a dark pink variety of medium
hardness and a dark red siliceous variety essentially
red chert (Mohs 5 7) This red chert variant (Mohs 7)
will have been more difficult to modify Flaking and
chipping were particularly important in working this
material and abrasion will have been more difficult
This may be why so many beads of the red cherty
Dabba Marble were disc beads made on flakes (Fig 7)
Flaking figured prominently in the making of
beads from softer materials However sawing and
abrasion played a greater role in modification of these
materials Comparable variations in technique
depending on material hardness are seen at other
prehistoric sites (Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990)
Table 7 Stone beads blanks and debris Jilat 13 selected contexts
Phase Context Description Beads Blanks Debris Comments Selected associated artefacts
Early C106 Fill of bedrock cut 0 0 1 1 circular limestone diskEarly B77 First occupation fill 1 5 752Early B79 Fill of hearth 0 0 6 1 limestone handstoneEarly B71 Second occupation fill 10 11 750 1 drilled and grooved limestone object
1 flaked limestone rsquoscraperrsquo 6 basalt fragmentsEarly A17 Lower pavement 0 0 0 1 cutmarked slabEarly A15 Third occupation fill 1 8 8 1 worked limestone object snake-shaped flint pebbleEarly A16 Third occupation fill 2 1 17 1 miniature pestle basaltEarly A18 Third occupation fill 0 0 11 Basalt fragments 3 from vessels
1 handstonepestle fragment 6 unidentifiableEarly B44 Third occupation fill 5 9 74Early B45 Third occupation fill 0 2 139 1 basalt handstone fragmentEarly B69 Third occupation fill 6 5 383 No ground stoneEarly C56 Third occupation fill 8 5 313 1 double-grooved sandstone abrader (Fig 15a)
Middle A3 Fourth occupation fill 3 4 60 1 limestone capstone ( 2 surfaces) 5 basalt fragmentsMiddle A5 Fourth occupation fill 7 9 139 1 cutmarked flint slab 1 grooved limestone object
ochred flints figurines pillarsMiddle B31 Fourth occupation fill 4 2 33Middle B38 Fourth occupation fill 12 6 520Middle B54 Fourth occupation fill 1 0 9 1 limestone figurine (bird)Middle B56 Fourth occupation fill 1 1 14 1 basalt grinding slab fragmentMiddle C39 Fourth occupation fill 10 12 254 1 flint cutmarked slab flaked limestone rsquoscraperrsquo
Late C14 Foundation for upperpavement
0 5 65 1 basalt ground fragment
Late B3 Upper pavement 0 0 0 1 cutmarked limestone slab 1 post-socketLate C4 Upper pavement 0 0 0 1 drilling and abrading bench (Fig 14c)Late A2 Fifth occupation fill 4 2 154 10 figurines or figurine preforms suggesting animals
phalluses arrows (flint limestone travertine) 1 pebblemortar or capstone with ochre (limestone) 1 perforatedobject 1 handstone on flake (flint) 2 vessel fragments1 ochred pebble burnt pebble (limestone) 1 groundindeterminate stone (basalt) Beads are 2 barrels and2 pendants blanks are 1 barrel and 1 indeterminate
Late B4 Fifth occupation fill 0 2 7 1 grooved limestone abrader (Fig 15c) Blanks are bothpendant blanks
Late B7 Fifth occupation fill 2 5 150 1 cutmarked limestone 1 basalt handstonepestlefragment
Late B9 Fifth occupation fill 0 0 3 1 perforated pumice abraderLate B21 Fifth occupation fill 5 7 193 1 basalt handstone 2 basalt fragmentsLate C3 Fifth occupation fill 2 4 61
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 139
Five main stages of manufacture were identified
although reduction sequences vary These are (1)
reduction of raw nodules to cores roughouts and
flakes via flaking and chipping (2) shaping of
roughouts and flakes into blanks via further flaking
chipping sawing and rough grinding (3) perforation
via boring andor drilling (4) further grinding to
produce the final shape (5) final polishing
Nodules cores and debitage were recovered in
large amounts at Jilat 13 (7369 artefacts 6905 grams)
and Jilat 25 (1381 artefacts 976 grams) The largest
unworked blocks are of green Dabba Marble They
are about 15 cm in diameter but most are about the
size of an adult human fist Some nodules were
weathered suggesting that they were picked up from
surface rather than quarried from bedrock layers
(Fig 4 top)
Reduction of nodules by flaking resulted in (1)
cores (2) tabular roughouts (3) large flakes (4) large
angular shatter fragments (5) micro-flakes and (6)
micro-shatter (Fig 4) Cores defined as nodules with
two or more flake scars are not numerous or
consistent in form Shatter micro-flakes and micro-
shatter were normally discarded as byproducts
Tabular roughouts and larger flakes were used as
the basis for further reduction into bead blanks
Roughouts are early stages in bead reduction
(Kenoyer 2003 16) At Jilat 13 and 25 roughouts
are tabular reflecting the bedded structure of the
material They were flaked and chipped around the
edges into roughly symmetrical shapes (Figs 5a 10a)
Roughouts were sometimes subjected to initial
drilling or sawing at an early stage prior to any
intense abrasion (Fig 5b) In other cases roughouts
were abraded first (Fig 5d) and then sawn or drilled
(Fig 5c) Tabular roughouts were the basis for
making larger thicker ornaments such as most
pendants and barrel beads (Figs 9ndash10)
Small subcircular flakes were the basis of most disc
beads (Figs 6ndash7) The flakes have platforms bulbs of
percussion on ventral surfaces and often scars from
previous removals on dorsal surfaces A certain
consistency in size shape and morphology suggests
that a prepared-core technology was used to predict
and produce these flakes Since cores are rare we do
not yet know precisely how this was achieved
Experiments are still needed but we suspect that
chipping and flaking was accomplished by varying
Figure 3 (a) View of the modern Dabba Marble quarry west of Wadi Jilat from which raw material samples were
obtained (see Appendices AndashB) (b) Close-up view of metamorphosed deposits in situ with interdigitating green
(left) and red (right) Dabba Marble
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
140 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
uses of indirect percussion soft-hammer percussion
andor pressure flaking since the small size of the
beads required precision The use of antler or horn
for pressure flaking of soft stones is widely seen in the
ethnographic record and experimentally (Foreman
1978 19) Even hard stones can be flaked with soft
hammers made of animal horn (Kenoyer 1986 1994
2003 Kenoyer et al 1991) Cores and flakes do not
clearly indicate use of the Cambay technique of
inverse indirect percussion as seen in carnelian bead-
making (Kenoyer 2003 Possehl 1981) Many blanks
display micro-retouch on the edges On thicker disc
bead blanks micro-flakes were removed by striking
downward at the edge of each bead face (Fig 7c) The
retouch scars show that striking was bipolar ie from
opposite directions Products of this procedure were
micro-flakes (Fig 4 bottom)
Clear indications of heat treatment were rare but
burnt pieces do occur
Sawing Drilling and Abrasion Bead Blanks andFinished Beads
Bead blanks are the further reduction of a roughout
into a form closer to the final bead shape (Kenoyer
2003 16) At Jilat 13 and 25 blanks were abandoned
at many different stages The most extensive evidence
for lithic reduction concerns disc beads it is possible
to identify some chaines operatoires (Fig 8)
Figure 6 illustrates two of these paths for green
Dabba Marble disc beads made on flakes
Sometimes circular flakes were perforated early
before any abrasion (Fig 6c) More often flakes
were abraded slightly on ventral and dorsal surfaces
before any drilling (Fig 6andashb) At this stage edges
were still rough Perforation was added later (Fig
6d) In such cases a number of disc beads were
probably then strung together and abraded on the
edges by rolling the string back and forth on abrasive
stones of varying textures such as coarse sandstone
fine sandstone or limestone The final products were
evenly smoothed disc beads relatively standardized
in size The procedure also resulted in edges that are
sharp perpendicular to the bead faces and flat rather
than convex (Figs 6d 7endashf) Experiments indicate
that this procedure also contributes to the polishing
of faces and edges of beads (cf Foreman 1978)
Figure 7 shows artefacts from one context at Jilat 25
indicating a similar sequence for red Dabba Marble
disc beads from subcircular flake to final disc
For barrel beads the starting point was typically
not a flake but a tabular roughout A roughout was
often flaked into an approximately cylindrical form
sometimes with a hexagonal transverse cross section
(that is the section perpendicular to the perforation)
(Fig 9a) Scars indicate that the hexagonal form was
accomplished by flaking Sometimes hexagonal
blanks were perforated before much abrasion (Fig
9b) In many cases hexagonal blanks were heavily
abraded to obliterate sharp angles before any
perforation was begun (Fig 9c) Resulting bead
forms varied in cross section from circular to
elliptical or lenticular (see Wright and Garrard
2003 fig 3) Perforation of barrel beads was from
opposite directions resulting in hourglass perfora-
tions (Fig 9e) and occasionally perforation errors
(Fig 9d)
Most pendants were begun as tabular roughouts
chipped into shapes anticipating the final form such
as an asymmetrical triangular pendant (Fig 10a cf
Fig 5a for a rectangular pendant) Roughouts were
Figure 4 Example of raw material nodule (top) angular
shatter (upper centre) flakes (lower centre) and
micro-debitage (lower row) from a single context
at Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 141
then abraded and sawing was sometimes applied (Fig
10b) One unfinished pendant shows that perforation
preceded final abrasion (Fig 10c) The most common
form is the asymmetrical triangular pendant (Fig
10d) but there are also rectangular square and oval
pendants Not all pendants were made on tabular
roughouts some were made on thin flakes eg
rectangular and lsquoteardroprsquo forms (Fig 10endashf)
Sawing
Disc beads were made individually one by one on
flakes as opposed to being sawn from a perforated
cylinder which is another possible way However
sawing was central to the production of pendants and
barrel beads (cf Fig 5c 10b) In some cases the
roughout was sawn only to a shallow depth
permitting unwanted material to be snapped off
leaving a protruding piece of stone mdash a kind of
groove and snap technique (Fig 5c) The protruding
lsquobossrsquo was then abraded
A range of chipped stone tools in the sites might be
suitable for sawing These include tabular chert knives
sometimes also called tile knives (Fig 11) These are
bifacially retouched cutting tools characteristic of the
eastern Jordanian Neolithic (Baird in Garrard et al
1994a 89) However typically the bifacial retouch
produces an edge that is robust but somewhat sinuous
in profile (Fig 11) In addition many tile knife edges
have significant curvature in plan Use of tile knives
would probably generate relatively wide and slightly
sinuous cut marks but this is an area worthy of
experimentation and use wear study Alternative tools
that perhaps better match the relative scale and
precision of cut marks on bead blanks are a range of
relatively robust non-formal tools on blade or elon-
gated flake blanks with edges that are relatively
straight in profile and plan These are found in some
numbers in conjunction with the bead making debris in
Jilat 13 and 25 It is also notable that despite the
purported dominance of flakes in many broadly
contemporary PPNCELN assemblages significant
a b
c d
Figure 5 (a) Tabular roughout rectangular (b) Tabular roughout subcircular with drill mark (c) Abraded roughout with
sawing mark at bottom note that the sawing is incomplete the groove and snap technique has resulted in both
the saw mark and an irregular protrusion of stone (d) Abraded tabular roughout subcircular
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
142 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
proportions of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 tool blanks are
blades (Baird 1993 469 and figs 818ndash821) even
though the debitage assemblages are mostly flake
dominated Other possible sawing tools include flaked
limestone artefacts with a thin edge (Fig 12c)
Several cutmarked limestone slabs were found at
Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 (Fig 12andashb) The cutmarks are
shallow or deep incisions Interestingly the cut-
marked slabs do not display evidence of drilling
Conversely the Jilat 13 bench with marks probably
resulting from drilling (Fig 14c see below) has no
cutmarks This suggests segregation of drilling and
sawing activities Some variability in spatial distribu-
tion of different stages in the bead making process
may be further borne out by the discrete distribution
of drills in Jilat 25 contexts where substantial bead
making debris was recovered For example in Jilat 25
Context A15 drills were found clustered in spatial
units towards the northern end of the structure
Drilling
Experiments in drilling of Dabba Marble are in
progress (Bains forthcoming) Here we present
evidence for drilling from bead perforations and
stone tools Other experiments show that perforation
morphology reveals drilling methods and shape
diameter and length of the drill used (eg Gwinnett
and Gorelick 1999) At Jilat perforations indicate
that drilling methods varied and that choices were
probably affected by material hardness
Hand Drilling with Large Piercers and Borers
The simplest method used appears to have been hand
drilling Soft Dabba Marble could have been drilled
using a borer or piercer held in the hand and not
hafted to a drilling stick Drilling by this method
would produce rough irregular and relatively large
perforations (Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990) we see
examples of this in broken beads Borers and piercers
were found at the sites They are relatively large
perforation tools made on blades suitable for
manipulation by hand without a haft (Fig 13 nos
9ndash11)
Rotary Drilling From Two Directions with Hafted Drills
The most common method involved rotary drilling
from two directions Drilling was almost always
a b
c d
Figure 6 Green Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads (andashb) Circular flakes slightly abraded (c) Unabraded
perforated flake (d) Finished disc bead
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 143
bipolar That is the blank was drilled to roughly
halfway through then turned and the perforation
completed from the opposite direction As the two
perforations converged the result was an hourglass-
shaped perforation (Fig 9e) Experiments indicate
that this prevents chipping and flaking of the
alternate face which can occur if a blank is perforated
completely from only one direction (Possehl 1981)
Most hourglass perforations on both soft and
hard stones appear to have been produced by rotary
drilling Rotary drilling results in regular perforations
and concentric striations on them (Gorelick and
Gwinnett 1990) We observed both traits on many
broken beads and blanks (Fig 9b) Perforations of
hourglass form included very small drillholes indi-
cating that the drilling tools were smaller than
piercers and borers made on blades The probable
drills in this case were small drills on bladelets and
especially drill bits on burin spalls (Fig 13 nos 1 4
5 7) Microscopic examination of perforations is in
progress (Bains forthcoming)
Oddly piercing and drilling tools were found in
relatively low absolute numbers at the two sites (eg
Baird 1993 505ndash06 625 for Jilat 13 early phase
about 4 of tools were piercers or drills for the Jilat
25 which have concentrations of bead-making debris
just under 3 of tools were spall drills) However
specific contextual data other technological consid-
erations and comparisons with other sites give us
confidence that these were the main tools involved in
the drilling and that the low absolute numbers of
drills abandoned may sometimes relate to systematic
removal or discard of these tools by the artisans For
example burin spall drills were closely associated
spatially with bead-making debris in specific activity
areas in the Jilat 25 structure eg Context Aa15 in
the buildingrsquos northern area (Baird 1993 521 see
Table 6) In addition Jilat 13 and 25 produced large
numbers of angle burins including truncation burins
from which burin spalls were detached (eg about
29 of all tools at J13rsquos early phase were burins)
(Baird 1993 500 516 520ndash26 625) Burins are
a b c
d e f
Figure 7 Red Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads from Jilat 25 Context Aa15 (andashb) Circular flakes
slightly abraded (c) Heavily abraded and perforated disc bead blank edge abrasion incomplete (d) Abraded
perforated blank abrasion not complete on face (endashf) Finished disc beads
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
144 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
contextually closely associated with drills and bead-
making debris in occupation fills at Jilat 25 (c 30 of
tools from relevant Jilat 25 contexts were burins) mdash a
situation also seen at Jebel Naja in the Basalt Desert mdash
where both experiments and microwear studies suggest
that drill bits on burin spalls were used for bead-
making (Baird 1993 521 Finlayson and Betts 1990)
Burin spall drills would have had some technolo-
gical advantages over bladelet drills One advantage
is that the triangular or rectangular cross-sections of
burin spall drills make them stronger and less likely
to break during drilling In addition the manner of
their retouch from the same direction on each edge
creates a prismatic cross-section that probably served
to produce a neater hole and to make drilling more
efficient and possibly faster and reduce breakage in
drilling The tips of burin spall drills are blunted
which is an advantage in drilling hard stone (Gorelick
and Gwinnett 1990) Predictability and miniaturiza-
tion of burin spall drills may be relevant to an
Figure 8 Chaines operatoires for disc beads Sequence A refers to a disc bead made on a thin flake Sequence B refers
to a disc bead made on a thick flake Sequence C refers to a disc bead made on a tabular roughout not a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 145
apparent increased standardization in perforation
size observed at Jilat 25 from an early phase to a later
phase (Critchley 2000)
Since we have evidence of rotary drilling from bead
perforations we believe that drill bits were hafted to
sticks (probably made of wood) Drill bits on burin
spalls would have been too small to manipulate
effectively by hand alone
To work efficiently a drill needs to be weighted
and stabilized and there must be some means of
protecting the artisanrsquos hand Ground stone artefacts
support the idea that rotary drilling with drill bits
hafted to drilling sticks was in use They include a
probable capstone made of limestone from Jilat 25
The capstone would have been held in the hand
enabling the beadmaker to manipulate the drilling
stick from the top (Fig 14a) This artefact resembles
a miniature bowl and fits easily into one hand The
interior surface displays use wear circular striations
parallel to the rim and vertical striations perpendi-
cular to the rim The base of the interior converges to
a flat surface about 1 cm in diameter
Some Levantine Neolithic sites have revealed
similar objects with similar wear (Banning 1998
Wright 1992 fig 5ndash15b) and a comparable item
was found at Jarmo (Moholy-Nagy 1983 fig 12913
Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990 30) Capstones are
characteristic of the use of bow drills (Banning
1998 Foreman 1978) but strictly speaking they
are not necessarily diagnostic of the bow drill
(theoretically simpler drilling techniques involving
hafting might have been facilitated by the use of
a capstone) For the moment we can say that
at Jilat 13 and 15 the evidence for rotary drilling
is unequivocal However the evidence for the use
of the bow drill while suggestive is not quite
definitive
Size data considered carefully support a link
between burin-spall drills and beads To interpret
dimensions of drills and perforations we must keep
in mind that stone bead drilling was overwhelmingly
bipolar and converging Thus drills did not have to
penetrate all the way through the full height of the
bead mdash only about half of it Therefore what matters
a b c
d e f
Figure 9 Green Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks and finished beads (a) Hexagonal blank flaked but not abraded (b)
Abraded hexagonal blank (c) Abraded blank not perforated (d) Perforation error on abraded blank (e)
Finished bead broken showing bipolar perforation and hourglass perforation shape (f) Perforated barrel bead
almost finished except for final abrasion to smooth out last surface irregularities
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
146 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
is the very tips of the drill bits mdash the upper few
millimetres mdash not the full length of the drills
Since disc beads are consistently about 25 to
26 mm in height only the upper 15 mm or so of the
drills mdash the most distal ends of the tips mdash had to
have been about 21 mm or less in thickness to
lsquomatchrsquo the perforation diameters of disc beads
(Table 4) In the case of barrel beads since barrel
beads were between 64 and 71 mm in height about
32 to 36 mm of the most distal ends of the drill bits
have to have been about 21 mm or less in thickness
to lsquomatchrsquo the perforations of barrel beads (Table 5)
Measurements of the drill bit tips within these
small uppermost reaches show that the maximal
thicknesses of the drill bitsrsquo distal tips fall within the
range of sizes indicated by the perforations (Fig 13)
Multi-stage Drilling
Sometimes drilling may have been accomplished in
several stages Some beads particularly those made of
harder stones have smooth cylindrical perforations
with parallel walls displaying no hint of the
hourglass shape
One way to achieve this is to create the hourglass
perforation and then to turn it into a perfect
cylindrical perforation via the use of a second drilling
procedure An example of this was cited by Calley
(1989) who proposed that two tools found in
carnelian bead workshops at Early Bronze Age
Kumartepe (Turkey) had complementary functions
a drill bit for making the initial hourglass perforation
and a borer for finishing and smoothing it into a
cylindrical perforation Since both drill bits and
borers were found on the Jilat sites this method of
finishing perforations could have been used
At Jilat 13 and 25 evidence for multi-stage drilling
can be seen in some beads which have a depression on
one or both faces The depression may be a result of
drilling with a larger drill bit first in order to provide
a guide for the final perforation with a finer drill bit
Such a technique is seen in India-Pakistan (Possehl
1981 39 Kenoyer 1992b 73)
a b c
d e f
Figure 10 Green Dabba Marble pendant blanks and finished pendants (a) Tabular roughout flaked into approximately
trapezoidal shape but not abraded (b) Abraded trapezoidal blank with sawing mark at bottom (c) Perforated
asymmetrical triangular pendant blank incompletely abraded (note striations on face) (d) Finished asymmetri-
cal triangular pendant (e) Pendant blank made on a flake unabraded (f) Nearly-finished pendant made on a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 147
Stabilizing Beads Anvils and Drilling Benches
What method was used to stabilize a bead during
drilling The simplest technique is to fix a bead to a
stone anvil with an adhesive Ethnography and
experiments show that such anvils can be small (the
size of handstones) (Foreman 1978 figs 6ndash7) Use of
such an anvil should result in small shallow
depressions a form of use-damage resulting from
force exerted from above Figure 14b shows a small
flat stone from Jilat 25 with a central depression of
the expected size and depth
Figure 14c shows the limestone bench from Jilat 13
(previously discussed) with a number of such pits in
the centre The marks are evenly spaced and are
concentrated in one small well-defined area on the
widest part of the bench this wide area was also
finely abraded
We see this bench as a multifunctional worktable
anvil We suspect that the beadmaker sat on the
narrow part of the bench (straddling it) placed bead
blanks on the pitted work surface fixed them with
adhesive and then drilled them The bench also
displays evidence of other activities including flaking
and grinding
Adhesives for hafting chipped stone tools could
have been adapted for use in fixing beads to anvils
Bitumen would be one candidate In some cultures a
wooden frame with cup-holes is sometimes used for
stabilizing beads (Kenoyer 1986 P Wright 1982)
The holes are filled with beeswax and clay the bead is
inserted into the wax-clay mixture which hardens
holding the bead steady After drilling beads are
released by breaking the wax-clay mixture (Allchin
1979 Stocks 1989) As wood was probably scarce in
Jilat and as there are no indications of the use of
clay we can probably rule out this technique
However stone items with cup-holes are seen in
Neolithic sites (Kirkbride 1966 Wright 1992
fig 527b)
Abrasion
Ground stone artefacts are crucial to bead produc-
tion in traditional technologies (Foreman 1978
Inizan et al 1992 Kenoyer et al 1991 53 Moholy-
Nagy 1983 294 Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58)
Grinding of beads can be achieved by abrading
each bead individually with a hand held abrader or
by rubbing them on a large grinding slab Either
method will produce linear striations of the type we
see on many unfinished beads (cf Figs 7cndashd and 10c)
However final shaping of disc and cylindrical beads
was most likely achieved by stringing them or loading
them on to a thin rod capable of penetrating the
perforation (individually or in groups) and then
rolling them on a grinding slab adding abrasives
(such as sand) and water to produce a smoother finish
(Foreman 1978 Moholy-Nagy 1983 298) Some disc
beads with parallel edges perpendicular to the faces
would probably have been rolled on a flat smooth
stone Other beads with facetted sharply angled or
bevelled edges (eg many barrel beads) suggest that
they were rolled or abraded along a stone with
grooves and slanting sides (eg Fig 15a c)
Abrasion of bead blanks may have been a multi-
stage process involving a number of materials of
different textures and hardness In an early stage
grinding of bead materials on vesicular basalt would
have been the easiest way to abrade a large nodule
quickly The pores of vesicular basalt and pumice
form natural cutting lsquoteethrsquo comparable to the metal
rasp used by present-day sculptors At Jilat 13 and
Jilat 25 we found broken fragments of vesicular
basalt grinding slabs but not large complete exam-
ples The small fragments suggest two possibilities
either there were large complete slabs at one time
which were then broken worn out and discarded or
only small fragments of these heavy duty grinding
tools were needed
For finer abrasion sandstone grinding slabs might
be expected None were found However small
Figure 11 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic
sites Tile knives or possible saws for bead-
making From Baird 1993 fig 85
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
148 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
handheld abraders made of sandstones with coarse
hard quartz crystals were found at both sites (Fig
15andashb) Sandstone is not local to Wadi Jilat and these
items were imported and probably used extensively
(resulting in the small size)
For even finer abrasion limestone could have been
used Such needs could have been met by the large
bench of Jilat 13 (Fig 14c) which was finely ground
over a very large area (within which the possible
drilling marks were placed)
Some might see the grooved items made of
sandstone (Fig 15a) and limestone (Fig 15c) as
lsquoshaft straightenersrsquo One or two shaft straightener
fragments made of basalt occur at Jilat 13 Like other
basalt shaft straighteners in Neolithic Jilat (eg Jilat
7) (Garrard et al 1994a Wright 1993) the use-
surfaces of these have U-shaped cross-sections By
contrast the cross sections of the use surfaces on the
sandstone and limestone grooved items are not U-
shaped but have sharp angles We see these tools
mainly as abraders for grinding bead facets espe-
cially on barrel beads The widths of the use surfaces
are 11 mm for the sandstone tool and 138 mm for
the limestone one These dimensions correspond to
the average diameter (5 width) of 31 measured green
Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks from Jilat 13 (N 5
31 Mean diameter 5 92 mm standard deviation 5
28) Grooved stones are used in bead grinding in
a
b c
Figure 12 Ground stone artefacts probably for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Cutmarked slab (limestone) Jilat
13 The cutmarks are shallow and are concentrated in the left area running parallel to the main axes of the
slab (b) Cutmarked slab fragment (limestone) Jilat 13 showing deep cutmarks (c) Flaked and ground abra-
sive cutting tool made of limestone Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 149
modern India (Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58) a
grooved sandstone tool was found with an unfinished
bead at Catalhoyuk (Wright and Bains 2007)
Tosi and Vidale (1990) regard failure resulting
from breakage or human error as more common in
the grinding stage than during perforation although
this depends on material and opinion (Kenoyer 2003
18) In some cases it might be more efficient to shape
the bead first before attempting perforation This
may explain why barrel beads tend to be shaped and
abraded prior to perforation
Finished beads were always finely abraded and
sometimes polished to the extent of reflecting light
Ethnographic observations indicate that polishing is
sometimes done by placing beads en masse in a
leather bag along with an abrasive and shaking and
rolling the bags for long periods (Allchin 1979
Kenoyer 2003) This simple method would have been
more likely than the method of rolling beads and
abrasives in a wooden barrel which is also docu-
mented ethnographically (Kenoyer 2003)
However shaking beads in a bag with an abrasive
tends to produce beads with rounded convex edges
(Gwinnett and Gorelick 1989) Some beads at Jilat
have this form but many mdash especially those made of
the hard cherty red Dabba Marble mdash have sharp
edges perpendicular to bead faces indicating that
they were individually polished or polished during
rolling on a string or stick Alternative methods of
polishing can include rubbing with leather or wood
with the addition of fine sand or chalk and water or
with animal hairwool and animal fat (Kenoyer 1986
20) These methods would have been possible with
Jilat technology
Craft Specialization and Comparisons withOther Sites
Technology needs to be studied not only in terms of
materials and techniques but also in terms of social
groups involved in artefact production individual
artisans and skill (Dobres and Hoffmann 1999 2ndash12)
In egalitarian societies craft skill and knowledge of
Figure 13 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic sites Drilling and piercing tools From Baird 1993 fig 82
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
150 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
special materials can enhance the power of an
individual or a group encouraging hierarchy
(Dobres 2000 119ndash20)
These questions force us to reconsider issues of
craft specialization a term often used loosely or in
widely different ways Three concepts of specializa-
tion are considered here individual specialists
specialization between households or domestic
groups within a given site and site specialization
within a regional or social network of craft produc-
tion and exchange
Costin (1991) draws a contrast between indepen-
dent specialization and attached specialization
Independent specialization involves production of
utilitarian goods for nonelites and can be household-
based or based in special workshops Attached
specialization refers to production of prestige goods
under control of elites Whilst Costin notes that
attached specialization can also be based in house-
holds or workshops we often think of attached
specialization in connection with central institutions
and urban or state-level societies It is of considerable
interest that in early urban societies the making of
stone personal ornaments in association with central
institutions figures prominently (Stein 1996 Vidale
1989)
How earlier forms of craft specialization may have
evolved into large-scale attached specialization is
poorly understood Most research has concentrated
on later stages in this process (eg Stein 1996) in
discussions of earlier forms of specialization defini-
tions and criteria for diagnosis could sometimes be
clearer (eg Quintero and Wilke 1998 Rollefson and
Parker 2002 Rosen 1997) If we are dealing with
a
c
b
Figure 14 Ground stone artefacts probably used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Capstone made of limestone
Jilat 25 (b) Handstone probably used as an anvil or hammer Jilat 25 note depression in face and flake scars
at edges (c) Limestone drilling bench Jilat 13 Note evidence of use-wear on the left and widest area of the
bench smooth abraded surface drill marks in the centre-left face small flake scars with negative bulbs of per-
cussion close to the edge of the bench
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 151
specialization in Neolithic societies it is probably
independent specialization Still Neolithic societies
may fall between Costinrsquos two categories Neolithic
groups were clearly producing prestige goods perso-
nal ornaments are not strictly utilitarian and there is
at least a possibility that elites were emerging (Byrd
1994 Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002 Verhoeven
2002)
Individual Specialists
First there is the issue of identifying individual
specialists Some use lsquospecializationrsquo to refer to any
situation in which some artisans have high levels of
skill a view that has been criticized (Rice 1991) We
agree with Rice that identifying a high level of
technical skill in a craft is not on its own sufficient
for a diagnosis of specialization since it robs the
concept of force in discussing long term change (by
this criterion the Upper Palaeolithic was riddled
with craft specialists) However we would argue
that if there are other indications of craft specializa-
tion a search for levels of ability in different
individuals is appropriate mdash if the data permit
Such data would be primary refuse from well-dated
sites of high temporal resolution in which technical
processes (eg errors in chaines operatoires) can
reveal experts vs novices (Pigeot 1990 Stout 2002
Vanzetti and Vidale 1994)
In the case of Jilat 13 and 25 we are dealing with
much primary refuse and two closely dated sites (see
above and Tables 6ndash7) mdash with periodic use of the
sites over a time range on the order of 200 years at
most and possibly much less Jilat 25 yielded activity
areas with clear spatial clusters as do a number of
contexts at Jilat 13 Space does not permit us to
present all details (this awaits the final site report)
but we feel confident that aggregate consideration of
the data from each site allows us to discuss general
questions of individual skills mdash master craftsmen vs
novices
a b
c
Figure 15 Ground stone artefacts possibly used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Grooved sandstone abrading
tool Jilat 13 (b) Sandstone hand-held abrader Jilat 25 (c) Grooved limestone abrading tool Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
152 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
To explore this we analysed unfinished blanks and
the frequency of perforation errors Drilling is a
sensitive moment in bead production when many
things can go wrong (Kenoyer 2003) A low incidence
in perforation errors combined with high numbers of
successfully finished beads and evidence of standar-
dization should be reasonably good indicators of an
artisanrsquos mastery This is the situation seen at Jilat 25
(Fig 7) In all of 93 blanks from Jilat 25 only 2 were
perforation errors a failure rate of only 2
On the other hand a high incidence of perforation
errors would suggest that a beadmaker was a relative
novice Jilat 13 produced more blanks with perfora-
tion errors than Jilat 25 We thought we might find
individual contexts with a high rate of error
suggesting apprentices
The data did not bear this out Of 223 bead blanks
from Jilat 13 (all phases) 22 were perforation errors
mdash a failure rate of 98 All but two errors were on
barrel bead blanks of green Dabba Marble The
others were one pendant blank and one irregular
bead blank These 22 blanks were distributed across
20 different contexts and no more than 2 perforation
errors were found in any one context
A close look at those contexts reveals low error
rates In Context B21 2 green barrel bead blanks
with perforation errors were found with 5 other
blanks The others included green and red barrel and
disc blanks This context also yielded 5 successfully
finished beads including black and red barrel beads
and a green disc Black and green debitage and a
discoidal handstone were also found here In Context
B71 2 blanks with perforation errors were found
along with 9 other blanks and 10 successfully
finished beads including green Dabba Marble barrel
beads but also black and red disc beads Much
debitage was found along with a flaked limestone
cutting tool (cf Fig 12c) and a limestone object with
a drill mark
The higher rate of error at Jilat 13 compared to
Jilat 25 could be because artisans at Jilat 13 were
making more of the larger more complex barrel
beads (as opposed to simple discs see Tables 2ndash3)
which offer greater chances of failure due to the
longer drilling distance However at Jilat 13 the
overall failure rate was still quite low particularly
considering the overall volume of material recovered
(Table 1)
We conclude that the beadmakers at Jilat 13
included few trainees These appear to have been
skilled artisans a small task force composed of
relative experts This raises the question of whether
these beadmakers were examples of lsquoproducer
specialistsrsquo as traditionally defined that is people
involved in
production of a good by a relatively small number of
individuals (compared to the total output and
number of consumers) individuals who are as a
result of this selectivity and the routinization or
repetition of their tasks particularly skilled in
manufacture (Rice 1991 263)
Jilat 13 and 25 do suggest small numbers of
individuals and a certain selectivity in who was
involved in stone bead making The quantity of
debitagedebris relative to (1) the number of finished
beads and (2) the modest sizes of these structures
collectively suggest that these craftsmenwomen
served a larger number of consumers relative to the
number of craftsmen involved here If so who were
these consumers mdash other residents of Jilat or groups
beyond
Intra-site Specialization Between Domestic Groups
Several studies suggest ways of identifying different
forms of craft specialization between domestic groups
in a site For later sites Stein (1996) has explored
spatial data particularly how craft production
facilities are dispersed among domestic units or
located near special (or central) institutions In
Neolithic sites questions about dispersal between
households and possible links between craft produc-
tion and special buildings or special sites have been
underexplored
For specialization Costin (1991) suggests that we
would expect (1) variability between production
units (eg households occupations regions) in
relevant artefacts (2) high densities of craft produc-
tion debris relative to some other generally used
item in some production units (3) high ratios of
unfinished goods to finished goods in some produc-
tion units Kenoyer et alrsquos (1991) ethnoarchaeolo-
gical studies of modern stone bead-making in
Khambat (India) suggest something similar in the
case of households as production units There non-
specialist households engaging in casual opportu-
nistic bead production revealed low quantities of
bead-making debris few unfinished beads and little
standardization in finished beads By contrast
households specializing in bead production were
characterized by stockpiling of large quantities of
raw materials many unfinished beads and more
standardized finished products
In looking at whole occupations (ie phases within
sites) as a unit of observation we argue elsewhere
(Wright and Garrard 2003) that artefact densities and
other data from 13 PPNB and 8 PPNCELN
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 153
occupations in the Jilat-Azraq region suggest that
PPNCELN producers were more specialized than
those of the PPNB mdash at least in the Jilat-Azraq
region Unlike the PPNB sites Jilat 13 and 25 have
very high densities of bead-making debris specialized
tools for drilling and sawing there is an abundance of
unfinished materials relative to finished products
bead-making tools and debris are abundant relative
to normal domestic food processing equipment
(ground stone artefacts) (Wright and Garrard 2003
cf Costin 1991)
That argument is chronological comparing the
PPNB to the PPNCELN occupations and we stand
behind it for the Jilat-Azraq case (different trajec-
tories may apply to south Jordan and the Negev see
below) Still it leaves open the issue of house-to-
house variation within Jilat 25 or Jilat 13 As we have
only one excavated structure per site we cannot on
present evidence argue that each building housed a
group of specialists serving other households within
the same site In fact we have no direct evidence that
there were other structures on each site mdash the ones
excavated were the only ones visible on the surface
There are nuances of material and typological
choices between the Jilat 25 structure (red disc beads)
and the Jilat 13 structure (larger complex green
ornaments) but these nuances are beyond the scope
of this paper
In all we suspect that stone bead production at
Jilat 13 and 25 was geared not for other domestic
units lsquoin camprsquo but for use by these quite mobile
communities themselves mdash as well as export to other
sites within the steppe and beyond (see below) In
Costinrsquos terms (Costin 1991) Jilat 13 and 25 might
each be an example of an independent non-centra-
lized dispersed workshop possibly lsquofamily runrsquo (Rice
1991 262) mdash in which handling of Dabba Marble
was not routinely entrusted to novices
There are hints of house-to-house variations in
bead-making in major villages with larger samples of
domestic structures as in PPNB Beidha At PPNB
Beidha (earlier than Jilat 13 and 25) Building 14
stands out
Other forms of production besides food preparation
were less common Building 14 represented the best
example of artefact production in these basements
A wide range of artefacts was recovered apparently
associated with building 14rsquos basement floor
Particularly widespread were stone polishers bone
tools raw material (including hematite malachite
and magnesium) more than 60 unmodified marine
shells and at least two dozen beads of shell stone
and bone some of which were in various stages of
production Some artifacts lay on stone slabs
indicating that at least some slabs may have
functioned as work surfaces (Byrd 2005 117)
Such hints are intriguing Still macro-artefacts
from house floors are affected by problems of site
formation and house abandonment Micro-artefact
data can help (Rainville 2005) House-by-house
exploration with attention to micro-artefacts is
needed (Wright and Bains 2007)
Site Specialization Within a Regional Network of Craft
Production and Exchange
Both sites and other Neolithic sites in Jilat and
Azraq exhibit resource specialization
the selective use of particular resources in craft
manufacture such as certain clays that are repeat-
edly used (Rice 1991 262)
The Jilat artisans emphasized Dabba Marble from
a wider array of available stone types The Jilat-
Azraq sites collectively show that green Dabba
Marble was a special target This is revealed in both
frequencies and weights (for debris data and weight
data see Wright and Garrard 2003 for frequency
data on beads and blanks see Tables 2 and 3) At
both sites debris is greatly dominated by green
Dabba Marble mdash 80ndash95 of debris by both weight
(grams) and frequency Green Dabba Marble also
dominates blanks in terms of weight at both sites mdash
indicating the use of green for making larger heavier
and more conspicuous ornaments
Turning to frequencies at Jilat 13 about 90 of
blanks are green and only 5 are red However
finished beads include both green and red forms in
comparable percentages (404 and 436 respec-
tively) (Table 3) suggesting that finished red beads
were brought into the building from a place of
manufacture located somewhere else At Jilat 25
blanks of red and green Dabba Marble occur in
comparable proportions (409 green 43 red)
whilst finished beads are predominantly red (588)
(Table 2) If Jilat 13 and 25 were absolute contem-
poraries this could suggest variations in choices and
exchange between residents of different structures
Rice (1991) has defined site specialization as a
situation in which a site is located near a special
resource and the inhabitants emphasize production of
a craft based on that resource Relative to other sites
not so located the range of site functions and
activities would be expected to be more limited
Thus site specialization
involves individual localities or sites having evidence
of limited functions or intensive productive activity
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
154 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
often determined by fortuitous environmental fac-
tors This includes proximity to mineral deposits
and so forth (Rice 1991 262)
Do Jilat 13 and 25 fit this concept In both sites
15 km from the source we have a wealth of evidence
for intensive stone bead production and scanty
evidence for routine food processing tools (Wright
and Garrard 2003) However Jilat 25 may be closer
to the limited function model envisioned by Rice In
Jilat 13 bead-making is clearly intensive but we are
also dealing with a chipped stone assemblage of not
only drills and burins but also projectile points and
other tools Jilat 13 also reveals production of
figurines (of animals phalluses and arrow-shaped
forms) and sculpted pillars (Baird 1993 Garrard
et al 1994a Martin 1999 Wright 1992 1993)
In all Jilat 13 and 25 suggest that we can apply
Ricersquos lsquosite specializationrsquo on the grounds of intensive
productive activity and proximity to source mdash but
with the qualification that this specialization was also
embedded in hunting-herding activities and at Jilat
13 production of other special crafts unique among
the sites of a symbolic nature (figurines pillars)
One possibility is that we are dealing with a camp
of hunter-herder corporate groups mdash part of a wider
regional network mdash engaged in special activities in
remote areas involving art personal ornaments and
ritual Such groups are suggested by other data from
the PPNBndashPPNC time span for example Nahal
Hemar (ornaments masks hunting tools) Dhuweila
(carving of hunters with dress variations)
Catalhoyuk (images of hunters with dress variations
as in the bull hunt mural) and Gobeklitepe (sculpture
production including a quarry wild-animal icono-
graphy hunting) (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988 Betts
1998 Mellaart 1967 Schmidt 2000) In all these data
hint that craft production of special items was
embedded in hunting andor herding activities in
remote areas this may have been a key means by
which exotic materials reached major villages In a
very broad way this supports a sketch outlined by
Bar Yosef (Bar-Yosef 2001) although we do not
necessarily agree with specifics of his model eg the
territories boundaries social groups and mechanisms
which he suggests (cf Asouti 2006) Instead we see
this as one example of diverse strategies of social
networking linking lineages households and commu-
nities in the Neolithic (Wright forthcoming)
Returning to the stone bead data from Jilat 13 and
25 the apparent stockpiling of raw material and
intensive production activity hints at production of
the green material for export (see above and Wright
and Garrard 2003) New data now add weight to this
idea and suggest the following provisional picture of
regional specializations and exchanges in ornaments
(1) Based on typology technology and materials thereappears to be a distinctive eastern Jordanian koine ornetwork of stone bead manufacture and exchangefeaturing Dabba Marble and a probable regionalspecialization in it
Other Neolithic bead production sites are known
from eastern Jordan Indications are that most of the
green bead materials are Dabba Marble probably
from Jilat (further work is needed) In these sites
diversity of materials used seems low with few
imports from beyond the steppe Shells however
testify to wider networks (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989
Cooke and Reese in Betts 1998 Garrard et al 1994a
Reese 1991)
Azraq 31 (PPNB and ELN) is in our suite of study
materials (Baird et al 1992 Garrard et al 1994a
Wright and Garrard 2003) and debris blanks and
beads were found Preliminary XRF analysis of green
samples (by Groom) indicates that the material is
consistent with Jilat Dabba Marble Typology and
technology are also similar and as at Jilat 25 burin
spall drills were closely associated with bead-making
in specific activity areas (Baird 1993 521 Baird et al
1992 25) However the ground stone revealed no
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
(Wright 1992 1993 Wright in Baird et al 1992)
Material used for beads at Dhuweila (PPNB and
ELN) has been called Dabba Marble (Cooke and
Reese in Betts 1998) It is consistent in appearance
with our material although we have no details on
mineralogy or source Typologically these beads are
similar to those of Jilat 13 and 25 The ground stone
is very different from the suite at the Jilat sites
(Wright in Betts 1998) for comparisons of chipped
stone assemblages see Baird (1993)
At Bawwab al-Ghazal (Late PPNB) Rollefson
et al found drills bits on burin spalls tile knives
beads bead blanks and bead debris some of which
they called green Dabba Marble (Rollefson et al
1999 Quintero et al 2004) They argued that there is
a possible source of this material outcropping near
the site mdash lsquoFor the last raw material [green Dabba
Marble] small nodules of the green limestone were
embedded in the local bedrockrsquo (Rollefson et al 1999
3) However as shown in Appendix A the true
Dabba Marble only occurs in a restricted area west of
Wadi Jilat The lsquobedrockrsquo which outcrops near Azraq
31 and Bawwab al-Ghazal is travertine and some of
this formed during the late Pleistocene and Holocene
The nearby Epipalaeolithic site of Azraq 17 was
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 155
found partially embedded in travertine and artefacts
including nodules of imported basalt were found in
the travertine at this site It is possible that the
nodules of green limestone found at Bawwab al-
Ghazal were imported Dabba Marble which subse-
quently became incorporated in a travertine near the
site An alternative possibility is that the local
travertine is infused with green minerals In Wadi
Jilat travertines were noted with traces of green
minerals and in the Siwaqa area to the south-west of
Jilat there are extensive travertines some of which
are infused with pale green minerals including
volkonskoite (Barjous 1986 mdash see also Appendix A)
In eastern Jordan some Neolithic sites are greatly
dominated by burins (lsquoburin sitesrsquo) At a number of
these there is evidence for stone bead-making (eg
Jebel Naja) These lsquoburin sitesrsquo typically reveal few
ground stone tools we know of no examples of
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
from them It was argued that the main role of the
burins was production of spalls for drills used mainly
for beads (Betts 1987 1998 Finlayson and Betts
1990) However burin sites are not universally
associated with stone bead making At Jilat 23 24
and 26 burins were numerous but other evidence for
bead-making is scanty (Baird 1993 520)
Therefore some have questioned whether
burins and burin spalls in such sites were solely or
primarily intended for making drills and beads
noting that other functions are possible (Quintero
et al 2004 209) Given that these sites typically
represent short-term occupations it is possible that
many sites might be spall manufacture sites with
spalls transported to other settings where drill
manufacture and bead manufacture took place such
as Jilat 13 and 25 Rollefson expressed doubt that
either bladelet or burin spall drills would have been
used in bow drills partly because of their fragility and
also because most of them have a pronounced curve
on the long axis which would have made high speed
drilling impossible (Rollefson and Parker 2002) But
Finlayson and Betts (1990) and Berna (1995)
successfully experimented using burin spalls with
bow drills and Kenoyer (personal communication
2007) notes that drills made on burin spalls are the
most common type of drill in diverse prehistoric
stone bead-making sites (in India Pakistan and
elsewhere)
In the case of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 we believe burin-
spall drills were part of the bead-making repertoire
for reasons noted above This does not rule out other
uses of burin spalls Nor does it rule out the use of
other perforating techniques Drills do not have to be
made of stone when soft stones are being perforated
mdash wood bone and abrasives can be used (Foreman
1978)
(2) There are hints of export of Dabba Marble to at leastsome villages in the Levantine corridor However majorNeolithic villages display much diversity in materials andespecially more importing of exotic stones than is seen inthe eastern Jordanian sites
Many writers report Neolithic beads made of
unspecified lsquogreenstonersquo This term is unfortunate
since it can refer to metabasalt and similar altered
igneous rocks (Schumann 1992 248) Some of these
lsquogreenstonesrsquo may be limestone with apatite or other
materials (eg Garfinkel 1987 81ndash82 Hauptmann
2004 Talbot 1983 789) Beads of green limestones
rich in fluorapatite were found at late PPNB Basta in
southern Jordan (Hauptmann 2004) as confirmed by
XRF and XRD Green beads identified as Dabba
Marble were also reported from Ain Ghazal a site
with both PPNB and PPNC occupations (Rollefson
et al 1990 103ndash04) Whether these are Dabba
Marble from the Jilat source (Appendices AndashB) is
not yet fully clear Ongoing research will sort out
these mysteries (eg D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal
communication Hauptmann 2004)
Major villages in the Levantine Corridor reveal
different degrees of emphasis in styles and materials
often we see a certain emphasis on local materials and
preferences However considerable exchange net-
works are indicated in major villages which display
much wider ranges of stone ornament materials
compared to the eastern Jordanian sites (such as
Ain Ghazal Yiftahel Basta Barsquoja Ghuwayr 1
Fidan 1) mdash along with of course shells (Affonso
and Pernicka 2004 Bienert and Gebel 1998 84ndash86
Garfinkel 1987 Hauptmann 2004 Rollefson and
Simmons 1984 1986 Rollefson et al 1990 Simmons
and Najjar 1998 Starck 1988)
As the Neolithic evolved stone bead-making
entailed increasingly diverse techniques and materi-
als One example may be drills In earlymiddle PPNB
sites most drills are made on bladelets In the late
PPNB PPNC and Late Neolithic there may have
been a gradual increase in drills made on burin spalls
although perhaps not in all regions (Jensen 2004
Rollefson and Parker 2002) Underlining increasing
diversity of technological practice between groups
Baird (2001b) pointed out geographic variation in
this technology with spall drills dominating in the
north-eastern Jordanian steppe from MPPNB
through Early Late Neolithic whilst contemporary
sites to west and south use bladelet blanks for their
piercing tools
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
156 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
Ta
ble
3B
ea
ds
an
db
lan
ks
J
ila
t1
3(a
llc
on
tex
ts)
Gre
en
Da
bb
aM
arb
le
Gre
en
Da
bb
aM
arb
le
Re
dD
ab
ba
Ma
rble
Re
dD
ab
ba
Ma
rble
Bla
ck
Da
bb
aM
arb
le
Bla
ck
Da
bb
aM
arb
leW
hit
eC
ha
lkW
hit
eC
ha
lkW
hit
eQ
ua
rtzi
teW
hit
eQ
ua
rtzi
teO
the
rO
the
rT
ota
lT
ota
lT
ota
lT
ota
l
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
lan
ks
-N
Be
ad
s-
NB
ead
s-
B
lan
ks
-N
Bla
nks
-
Dis
cb
ead
s7
36
40
810
22
21
59
38 1
49
22 0
Rin
gb
ead
s2
12
51
20
12 9
00 0
Ovalb
ead
s0
0 0
00 0
Cylin
der
bead
s1
13
42 6
10 4
Barr
elb
ead
s36
57
13
24
11
254
34 8
62
27 8
Irre
gula
rb
ead
s1
00 0
10 4
Ind
ete
rmin
ate
fr
ag
ment
794
11
74 5
96
43 0
Pend
ants
-tr
iang
ula
r1
11
0 6
10 4
Pend
ants
-tr
ap
ezoid
al
21
21 3
10 4
Pend
ants
-oval
11
21 3
00 0
Pend
ants
-re
cta
ng
ula
r1
10 6
00 0
Pend
ants
-sq
uare
11
10 6
10 4
Pend
ants
-te
ard
rop
22
1 3
00 0
Pend
ants
-oth
er
in
dete
rmin
ate
111
12
1 3
11
4 9
Bra
cele
ts0
0 0
00 0
TO
TA
L-
Bead
s-
N62
68
20
11
3155
100 0
TO
TA
L-
Bead
s-
40 4
43 6
12 8
0 6
0 6
1 9
100 0
TO
TA
L-
Bla
nks
-N
202
11
42
04
223
100 0
TO
TA
L-
Bla
nks
-
90 6
4 9
1 8
0 9
0 0
1 8
100 0
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
136 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
frequently occurring types burins constitute 29 of
tools and points 16 Piercers and drills occur in
much lower numbers (4 of tools) as do other tool
types Of projectile points Nizzanim points are the
most frequent (397 of points) followed by Byblos
(313) Herzeliya (12) Amuq (84) Transverse
(6) and Haparsah (24) points (Baird 1993 469
500ndash17 625 Baird in Garrard et al 1994a 85
table 1)
The 14C dates from these two sites have been
recalibrated using IntCal 2004 and the date ranges at
one standard deviation are as follows Jilat 25 (early
phase) context Aa19a (OxA2408) 5 9020ndash8760 cal
BP Jilat 13 (early phase) context A21a (OxA1800) 5
8980ndash8600 cal BP Jilat 13 (early phase) context A15a
(OxA1801) 5 8980ndash8550 cal BP Jilat 13 (late phase)
context C24 (OxA2411) 5 8980ndash8590 cal BP Jilat 13
(late phase) context C22 (UB3462) 5 8780ndash8460 cal
BP
Thus stratigraphy and radiocarbon dates suggest
that we are dealing with two sites of reasonably good
temporal resolution followed by abandonment and
sealing of primary refuse deposits Five C14 dates
indicate occupation between about 7830 and 8020
uncal BP with low standard deviations for each date
In radiocarbon terms this is about as precise as it
gets and the two sites may overlap in time However
projectile points do suggest we are dealing with a
somewhat wider time span for the Jilat 13 sample
than the Jilat 25 sample
Given different extents of excavation comparisons
of these and other stone bead-making sites entail
challenges Density data however mdash as measured by
numbers of beads blanks and debris per cu m volume
of excavated deposit mdash can be revealing For
example the PPNB occupations in Wadi Jilat (3
sites 11 occupations) had low densities mdash an average
of 1072 artefacts per cu m and a maximum of 313
per cu m (Wright and Garrard 2003 table 2) In
contrast the density data for Jilat 25 are 2223 per cu
m (early phase) 3312 per cu m (middle phase) and
562 per cu m (late phase) Density data for Jilat 13
are 3102 stone bead artefacts per cu m (early phase)
1615 per cu m (middle phase) and 1099 per cu m
(late phase) This suggests greater intensity of bead-
making in Jilat 13 and 25
Sources Quarrying and Raw Materials
Most Jilat beads were made of Dabba Marble which
occurs in green pinkred and black (Appendix A)
This is our focus here A few other materials were also
used other local sedimentary rocks and non-local
turquoise (nearest source Sinai) malachite (nearest
sources Faynan and Timna) and carnelian (nearest
source unknown) Non-local stones formed only 015
of the materials (Wright and Garrard 2003)
The largest known sources of Dabba Marble lie
15ndash25 km west of Jilat 13 and 25 some may be
closer (Fig 1 and Appendix A) These are bodies of
limestones chalks and cherts lightly metamorphosed
Table 4 Finished disc beads size data (complete or measurable beads) (na 5 not applicable)
Site N
Diameter (mm) HeightThickness (mm) Perforation Diameter (mm)
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Jilat 7 PPNB 13 87 36 30 28 28 10Jilat 26 PPNB 0 na na na na na naJilat 32 PPNB 0 na na na na na naAzraq 31 PPNB 2 98 46 25 14 23 04Jilat 25 PPNCELN 66 83 16 26 08 21 05Jilat 13 PPNCELN 47 69 24 25 09 19 06Azraq 31 PPNCELN 34 68 16 26 11 18 04
Table 5 Finished barrel beads size data (complete or measurable beads) (na 5 not applicable)
Site N
Diameter (mm) HeightThickness (mm) Perforation Diameter (mm)
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Jilat 7 PPNB 1 45 na 40 na 15 naJilat 26 PPNB 2 75 na 65 na 25 naJilat 32 PPNB 0 na na na na 00 naAzraq 31 PPNB 1 115 na 100 na 40 naJilat 25 PPNCELN 6 63 14 64 17 21 09Jilat 13 PPNCELN 28 68 28 71 39 22 09Azraq 31 PPNCELN 13 109 56 133 91 29 09
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 137
and injected with various minerals eg apatites red
iron oxides (Fig 3a) Outcrops show substantial
variations in mineralization even over small areas
in Fig 3b the left side of the outcrop is soft green
Dabba Marble the right side is red Dabba Marble
The geology and mineralogy of Dabba Marble are
presented in Appendices AndashB The Neolithic Jilat
beads are consistent with this source (Appendix B)
Methods of Analysis
Comprehensive recovery of small beads debitage and
micro-artefacts was possible due to intensive fine-
scale sieving All excavated contexts were sieved
through a 5 mm mesh many samples were dry sieved
or wet sieved through a 15 mm mesh (the latter after
flotation) Artefacts from floors were collected from 1
sq m horizontal grid units to permit identification of
activity areas Fine-grained spatial data and micro-
artefacts are important in understanding lithic
technologies (Dunnell and Stein 1989 Cessford and
Mitrovic 2005) This is borne out by the Jilat data
since micro-flakes are one byproduct of stone bead
retouch In cases of intense housecleaning micro-
artefacts may reveal bead-making where macro-
artefacts do not (Wright and Bains 2007)
For each context artefacts were separated by raw
material and classified into major groups nodules
and debitage (Fig 4) roughouts (Fig 5) unfinished
blanks and finished ornaments (Figs 6ndash10) We
counted and weighed each group to determine
relationships between debitage and finished beads
Measurements (diameter height perforation dia-
meter) were taken on beads and blanks to assess
standardization and drilling techniques
Finished ornaments were classified into 8 basic
types (Wright and Garrard 2003) Circular disc beads
are the most numerous smallest and most standar-
dized (Figs 6d 7endashf) They occur in the widest range
of materials most red Dabba Marble beads were
discs Barrelshaped beads are larger more variable
and mostly made of green Dabba Marble (Fig 9endashf)
Pendants are the largest rarest and most diverse
items shaped as triangles rectangles and ovals most
are of green Dabba Marble (Fig 10d f) Bracelets
were made of white chalk (Tables 2ndash3)
Unfinished beads (blanks) were classified according
to the same typology as finished beads when the
intended final product could be ascertained (eg disc
blank) (Tables 2ndash3 Figs 6andashc 7andashd 8 9andashd 10c e)
Within these categories blanks were further classified
according to traces of flaking grinding perforation
Figure 8 shows these stages for 3 sequences of disc
bead manufacture Differences between Sequences A
B and C are differences in the original blank (Stage 1
thin flake thick flake tabular roughout) and presence
or absence of flaking retouch on edges (Stage 2)
Further analyses of sequences for these and other
bead types are still in progress
Debitage was sorted into nodules cores rough-
outs flakes angular shatter micro-flakes and
Table 6 Stone beads blanks and debris Jilat 25 all contexts
Phase Context Description Beads Blanks Debris Comments Selected associated artefacts
Early Aa24 Fill of bedrock cut 0 0 2Early Aa27 Fill of bedrock cut 0 0 1Early Aa19 First occupation fill 29 23 384 1 cutmarked slab 3 sandstone fragments
probably handstones 1 limestone handstoneEarly Aa20 First occupation fill 1 5 6Early Aa21 First occupation fill 4 1 4Early Aa18 Early fill in entrance area 1 5 8Early A 44 Early fill in entrance area 0 0 3Middle Aa15 Second occupation fill 47 31 544 1 limestone capstone 1 grooved stone (basalt)
1 sandstone abraderMiddle Aa16 Hearth 1 1 0Middle Aa13 Fill of stone feature 1 0 81Middle Aa10 Fill of stone feature 0 0 3Middle Aa11 Ash lense 3 0 17Middle Aa7 Third occupation fill 17 15 109 2 grooved stones (limestone and basalt)
2 basalt handstones 1 sandstone fragmentMiddle Aa8 Third occupation fill 1 1 1Middle Aa14 Fill in entrance area 7 3 4Middle A 42 Fill in entrance area 0 0 1
Late Aa 2 Sandy late fill 1 0 55 1 sandstone abrader Bead 1 RDM disc Debris all GDMLate A 6 Rubbly late fill 7 4 72Late A 33 Late fill in entrance area 0 0 1Late A 36 Late fill in entrance area 0 0 6Late A 34 Fill of late intrusive feature 1 0 0
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
138 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
micro-shatter (Fig 4) Definitions of these categories
are broadly similar to those established in chipped
stone analysis (Andrefsky 1998)
Flaking and Initial Reduction Nodules CoresDebitage and Roughouts
The soft limestone and hard chert in Dabba Marble
permits it to be worked via chipping flaking
grinding sawing and drilling To varying degrees
the material has conchoidal fracture Where chert
content is high conchoidal fracture is excellent
Limestone itself also has conchoidal fracture parti-
cularly when fine-grained as Dabba Marble is The
tabular structure of the laminated limestones also
makes it possible to create flat faces easily
The difficulty of shaping beads would have varied
depending on specific material Most green Dabba
marble is fairly homogeneous composed of calcite-rich
soft limestone (Mohs 5 3) and apatite (Mohs 5 5)
Red Dabba marble occurs in a soft pale pink variety
(Mohs 5 3ndash4) a dark pink variety of medium
hardness and a dark red siliceous variety essentially
red chert (Mohs 5 7) This red chert variant (Mohs 7)
will have been more difficult to modify Flaking and
chipping were particularly important in working this
material and abrasion will have been more difficult
This may be why so many beads of the red cherty
Dabba Marble were disc beads made on flakes (Fig 7)
Flaking figured prominently in the making of
beads from softer materials However sawing and
abrasion played a greater role in modification of these
materials Comparable variations in technique
depending on material hardness are seen at other
prehistoric sites (Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990)
Table 7 Stone beads blanks and debris Jilat 13 selected contexts
Phase Context Description Beads Blanks Debris Comments Selected associated artefacts
Early C106 Fill of bedrock cut 0 0 1 1 circular limestone diskEarly B77 First occupation fill 1 5 752Early B79 Fill of hearth 0 0 6 1 limestone handstoneEarly B71 Second occupation fill 10 11 750 1 drilled and grooved limestone object
1 flaked limestone rsquoscraperrsquo 6 basalt fragmentsEarly A17 Lower pavement 0 0 0 1 cutmarked slabEarly A15 Third occupation fill 1 8 8 1 worked limestone object snake-shaped flint pebbleEarly A16 Third occupation fill 2 1 17 1 miniature pestle basaltEarly A18 Third occupation fill 0 0 11 Basalt fragments 3 from vessels
1 handstonepestle fragment 6 unidentifiableEarly B44 Third occupation fill 5 9 74Early B45 Third occupation fill 0 2 139 1 basalt handstone fragmentEarly B69 Third occupation fill 6 5 383 No ground stoneEarly C56 Third occupation fill 8 5 313 1 double-grooved sandstone abrader (Fig 15a)
Middle A3 Fourth occupation fill 3 4 60 1 limestone capstone ( 2 surfaces) 5 basalt fragmentsMiddle A5 Fourth occupation fill 7 9 139 1 cutmarked flint slab 1 grooved limestone object
ochred flints figurines pillarsMiddle B31 Fourth occupation fill 4 2 33Middle B38 Fourth occupation fill 12 6 520Middle B54 Fourth occupation fill 1 0 9 1 limestone figurine (bird)Middle B56 Fourth occupation fill 1 1 14 1 basalt grinding slab fragmentMiddle C39 Fourth occupation fill 10 12 254 1 flint cutmarked slab flaked limestone rsquoscraperrsquo
Late C14 Foundation for upperpavement
0 5 65 1 basalt ground fragment
Late B3 Upper pavement 0 0 0 1 cutmarked limestone slab 1 post-socketLate C4 Upper pavement 0 0 0 1 drilling and abrading bench (Fig 14c)Late A2 Fifth occupation fill 4 2 154 10 figurines or figurine preforms suggesting animals
phalluses arrows (flint limestone travertine) 1 pebblemortar or capstone with ochre (limestone) 1 perforatedobject 1 handstone on flake (flint) 2 vessel fragments1 ochred pebble burnt pebble (limestone) 1 groundindeterminate stone (basalt) Beads are 2 barrels and2 pendants blanks are 1 barrel and 1 indeterminate
Late B4 Fifth occupation fill 0 2 7 1 grooved limestone abrader (Fig 15c) Blanks are bothpendant blanks
Late B7 Fifth occupation fill 2 5 150 1 cutmarked limestone 1 basalt handstonepestlefragment
Late B9 Fifth occupation fill 0 0 3 1 perforated pumice abraderLate B21 Fifth occupation fill 5 7 193 1 basalt handstone 2 basalt fragmentsLate C3 Fifth occupation fill 2 4 61
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 139
Five main stages of manufacture were identified
although reduction sequences vary These are (1)
reduction of raw nodules to cores roughouts and
flakes via flaking and chipping (2) shaping of
roughouts and flakes into blanks via further flaking
chipping sawing and rough grinding (3) perforation
via boring andor drilling (4) further grinding to
produce the final shape (5) final polishing
Nodules cores and debitage were recovered in
large amounts at Jilat 13 (7369 artefacts 6905 grams)
and Jilat 25 (1381 artefacts 976 grams) The largest
unworked blocks are of green Dabba Marble They
are about 15 cm in diameter but most are about the
size of an adult human fist Some nodules were
weathered suggesting that they were picked up from
surface rather than quarried from bedrock layers
(Fig 4 top)
Reduction of nodules by flaking resulted in (1)
cores (2) tabular roughouts (3) large flakes (4) large
angular shatter fragments (5) micro-flakes and (6)
micro-shatter (Fig 4) Cores defined as nodules with
two or more flake scars are not numerous or
consistent in form Shatter micro-flakes and micro-
shatter were normally discarded as byproducts
Tabular roughouts and larger flakes were used as
the basis for further reduction into bead blanks
Roughouts are early stages in bead reduction
(Kenoyer 2003 16) At Jilat 13 and 25 roughouts
are tabular reflecting the bedded structure of the
material They were flaked and chipped around the
edges into roughly symmetrical shapes (Figs 5a 10a)
Roughouts were sometimes subjected to initial
drilling or sawing at an early stage prior to any
intense abrasion (Fig 5b) In other cases roughouts
were abraded first (Fig 5d) and then sawn or drilled
(Fig 5c) Tabular roughouts were the basis for
making larger thicker ornaments such as most
pendants and barrel beads (Figs 9ndash10)
Small subcircular flakes were the basis of most disc
beads (Figs 6ndash7) The flakes have platforms bulbs of
percussion on ventral surfaces and often scars from
previous removals on dorsal surfaces A certain
consistency in size shape and morphology suggests
that a prepared-core technology was used to predict
and produce these flakes Since cores are rare we do
not yet know precisely how this was achieved
Experiments are still needed but we suspect that
chipping and flaking was accomplished by varying
Figure 3 (a) View of the modern Dabba Marble quarry west of Wadi Jilat from which raw material samples were
obtained (see Appendices AndashB) (b) Close-up view of metamorphosed deposits in situ with interdigitating green
(left) and red (right) Dabba Marble
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
140 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
uses of indirect percussion soft-hammer percussion
andor pressure flaking since the small size of the
beads required precision The use of antler or horn
for pressure flaking of soft stones is widely seen in the
ethnographic record and experimentally (Foreman
1978 19) Even hard stones can be flaked with soft
hammers made of animal horn (Kenoyer 1986 1994
2003 Kenoyer et al 1991) Cores and flakes do not
clearly indicate use of the Cambay technique of
inverse indirect percussion as seen in carnelian bead-
making (Kenoyer 2003 Possehl 1981) Many blanks
display micro-retouch on the edges On thicker disc
bead blanks micro-flakes were removed by striking
downward at the edge of each bead face (Fig 7c) The
retouch scars show that striking was bipolar ie from
opposite directions Products of this procedure were
micro-flakes (Fig 4 bottom)
Clear indications of heat treatment were rare but
burnt pieces do occur
Sawing Drilling and Abrasion Bead Blanks andFinished Beads
Bead blanks are the further reduction of a roughout
into a form closer to the final bead shape (Kenoyer
2003 16) At Jilat 13 and 25 blanks were abandoned
at many different stages The most extensive evidence
for lithic reduction concerns disc beads it is possible
to identify some chaines operatoires (Fig 8)
Figure 6 illustrates two of these paths for green
Dabba Marble disc beads made on flakes
Sometimes circular flakes were perforated early
before any abrasion (Fig 6c) More often flakes
were abraded slightly on ventral and dorsal surfaces
before any drilling (Fig 6andashb) At this stage edges
were still rough Perforation was added later (Fig
6d) In such cases a number of disc beads were
probably then strung together and abraded on the
edges by rolling the string back and forth on abrasive
stones of varying textures such as coarse sandstone
fine sandstone or limestone The final products were
evenly smoothed disc beads relatively standardized
in size The procedure also resulted in edges that are
sharp perpendicular to the bead faces and flat rather
than convex (Figs 6d 7endashf) Experiments indicate
that this procedure also contributes to the polishing
of faces and edges of beads (cf Foreman 1978)
Figure 7 shows artefacts from one context at Jilat 25
indicating a similar sequence for red Dabba Marble
disc beads from subcircular flake to final disc
For barrel beads the starting point was typically
not a flake but a tabular roughout A roughout was
often flaked into an approximately cylindrical form
sometimes with a hexagonal transverse cross section
(that is the section perpendicular to the perforation)
(Fig 9a) Scars indicate that the hexagonal form was
accomplished by flaking Sometimes hexagonal
blanks were perforated before much abrasion (Fig
9b) In many cases hexagonal blanks were heavily
abraded to obliterate sharp angles before any
perforation was begun (Fig 9c) Resulting bead
forms varied in cross section from circular to
elliptical or lenticular (see Wright and Garrard
2003 fig 3) Perforation of barrel beads was from
opposite directions resulting in hourglass perfora-
tions (Fig 9e) and occasionally perforation errors
(Fig 9d)
Most pendants were begun as tabular roughouts
chipped into shapes anticipating the final form such
as an asymmetrical triangular pendant (Fig 10a cf
Fig 5a for a rectangular pendant) Roughouts were
Figure 4 Example of raw material nodule (top) angular
shatter (upper centre) flakes (lower centre) and
micro-debitage (lower row) from a single context
at Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 141
then abraded and sawing was sometimes applied (Fig
10b) One unfinished pendant shows that perforation
preceded final abrasion (Fig 10c) The most common
form is the asymmetrical triangular pendant (Fig
10d) but there are also rectangular square and oval
pendants Not all pendants were made on tabular
roughouts some were made on thin flakes eg
rectangular and lsquoteardroprsquo forms (Fig 10endashf)
Sawing
Disc beads were made individually one by one on
flakes as opposed to being sawn from a perforated
cylinder which is another possible way However
sawing was central to the production of pendants and
barrel beads (cf Fig 5c 10b) In some cases the
roughout was sawn only to a shallow depth
permitting unwanted material to be snapped off
leaving a protruding piece of stone mdash a kind of
groove and snap technique (Fig 5c) The protruding
lsquobossrsquo was then abraded
A range of chipped stone tools in the sites might be
suitable for sawing These include tabular chert knives
sometimes also called tile knives (Fig 11) These are
bifacially retouched cutting tools characteristic of the
eastern Jordanian Neolithic (Baird in Garrard et al
1994a 89) However typically the bifacial retouch
produces an edge that is robust but somewhat sinuous
in profile (Fig 11) In addition many tile knife edges
have significant curvature in plan Use of tile knives
would probably generate relatively wide and slightly
sinuous cut marks but this is an area worthy of
experimentation and use wear study Alternative tools
that perhaps better match the relative scale and
precision of cut marks on bead blanks are a range of
relatively robust non-formal tools on blade or elon-
gated flake blanks with edges that are relatively
straight in profile and plan These are found in some
numbers in conjunction with the bead making debris in
Jilat 13 and 25 It is also notable that despite the
purported dominance of flakes in many broadly
contemporary PPNCELN assemblages significant
a b
c d
Figure 5 (a) Tabular roughout rectangular (b) Tabular roughout subcircular with drill mark (c) Abraded roughout with
sawing mark at bottom note that the sawing is incomplete the groove and snap technique has resulted in both
the saw mark and an irregular protrusion of stone (d) Abraded tabular roughout subcircular
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
142 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
proportions of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 tool blanks are
blades (Baird 1993 469 and figs 818ndash821) even
though the debitage assemblages are mostly flake
dominated Other possible sawing tools include flaked
limestone artefacts with a thin edge (Fig 12c)
Several cutmarked limestone slabs were found at
Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 (Fig 12andashb) The cutmarks are
shallow or deep incisions Interestingly the cut-
marked slabs do not display evidence of drilling
Conversely the Jilat 13 bench with marks probably
resulting from drilling (Fig 14c see below) has no
cutmarks This suggests segregation of drilling and
sawing activities Some variability in spatial distribu-
tion of different stages in the bead making process
may be further borne out by the discrete distribution
of drills in Jilat 25 contexts where substantial bead
making debris was recovered For example in Jilat 25
Context A15 drills were found clustered in spatial
units towards the northern end of the structure
Drilling
Experiments in drilling of Dabba Marble are in
progress (Bains forthcoming) Here we present
evidence for drilling from bead perforations and
stone tools Other experiments show that perforation
morphology reveals drilling methods and shape
diameter and length of the drill used (eg Gwinnett
and Gorelick 1999) At Jilat perforations indicate
that drilling methods varied and that choices were
probably affected by material hardness
Hand Drilling with Large Piercers and Borers
The simplest method used appears to have been hand
drilling Soft Dabba Marble could have been drilled
using a borer or piercer held in the hand and not
hafted to a drilling stick Drilling by this method
would produce rough irregular and relatively large
perforations (Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990) we see
examples of this in broken beads Borers and piercers
were found at the sites They are relatively large
perforation tools made on blades suitable for
manipulation by hand without a haft (Fig 13 nos
9ndash11)
Rotary Drilling From Two Directions with Hafted Drills
The most common method involved rotary drilling
from two directions Drilling was almost always
a b
c d
Figure 6 Green Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads (andashb) Circular flakes slightly abraded (c) Unabraded
perforated flake (d) Finished disc bead
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 143
bipolar That is the blank was drilled to roughly
halfway through then turned and the perforation
completed from the opposite direction As the two
perforations converged the result was an hourglass-
shaped perforation (Fig 9e) Experiments indicate
that this prevents chipping and flaking of the
alternate face which can occur if a blank is perforated
completely from only one direction (Possehl 1981)
Most hourglass perforations on both soft and
hard stones appear to have been produced by rotary
drilling Rotary drilling results in regular perforations
and concentric striations on them (Gorelick and
Gwinnett 1990) We observed both traits on many
broken beads and blanks (Fig 9b) Perforations of
hourglass form included very small drillholes indi-
cating that the drilling tools were smaller than
piercers and borers made on blades The probable
drills in this case were small drills on bladelets and
especially drill bits on burin spalls (Fig 13 nos 1 4
5 7) Microscopic examination of perforations is in
progress (Bains forthcoming)
Oddly piercing and drilling tools were found in
relatively low absolute numbers at the two sites (eg
Baird 1993 505ndash06 625 for Jilat 13 early phase
about 4 of tools were piercers or drills for the Jilat
25 which have concentrations of bead-making debris
just under 3 of tools were spall drills) However
specific contextual data other technological consid-
erations and comparisons with other sites give us
confidence that these were the main tools involved in
the drilling and that the low absolute numbers of
drills abandoned may sometimes relate to systematic
removal or discard of these tools by the artisans For
example burin spall drills were closely associated
spatially with bead-making debris in specific activity
areas in the Jilat 25 structure eg Context Aa15 in
the buildingrsquos northern area (Baird 1993 521 see
Table 6) In addition Jilat 13 and 25 produced large
numbers of angle burins including truncation burins
from which burin spalls were detached (eg about
29 of all tools at J13rsquos early phase were burins)
(Baird 1993 500 516 520ndash26 625) Burins are
a b c
d e f
Figure 7 Red Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads from Jilat 25 Context Aa15 (andashb) Circular flakes
slightly abraded (c) Heavily abraded and perforated disc bead blank edge abrasion incomplete (d) Abraded
perforated blank abrasion not complete on face (endashf) Finished disc beads
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
144 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
contextually closely associated with drills and bead-
making debris in occupation fills at Jilat 25 (c 30 of
tools from relevant Jilat 25 contexts were burins) mdash a
situation also seen at Jebel Naja in the Basalt Desert mdash
where both experiments and microwear studies suggest
that drill bits on burin spalls were used for bead-
making (Baird 1993 521 Finlayson and Betts 1990)
Burin spall drills would have had some technolo-
gical advantages over bladelet drills One advantage
is that the triangular or rectangular cross-sections of
burin spall drills make them stronger and less likely
to break during drilling In addition the manner of
their retouch from the same direction on each edge
creates a prismatic cross-section that probably served
to produce a neater hole and to make drilling more
efficient and possibly faster and reduce breakage in
drilling The tips of burin spall drills are blunted
which is an advantage in drilling hard stone (Gorelick
and Gwinnett 1990) Predictability and miniaturiza-
tion of burin spall drills may be relevant to an
Figure 8 Chaines operatoires for disc beads Sequence A refers to a disc bead made on a thin flake Sequence B refers
to a disc bead made on a thick flake Sequence C refers to a disc bead made on a tabular roughout not a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 145
apparent increased standardization in perforation
size observed at Jilat 25 from an early phase to a later
phase (Critchley 2000)
Since we have evidence of rotary drilling from bead
perforations we believe that drill bits were hafted to
sticks (probably made of wood) Drill bits on burin
spalls would have been too small to manipulate
effectively by hand alone
To work efficiently a drill needs to be weighted
and stabilized and there must be some means of
protecting the artisanrsquos hand Ground stone artefacts
support the idea that rotary drilling with drill bits
hafted to drilling sticks was in use They include a
probable capstone made of limestone from Jilat 25
The capstone would have been held in the hand
enabling the beadmaker to manipulate the drilling
stick from the top (Fig 14a) This artefact resembles
a miniature bowl and fits easily into one hand The
interior surface displays use wear circular striations
parallel to the rim and vertical striations perpendi-
cular to the rim The base of the interior converges to
a flat surface about 1 cm in diameter
Some Levantine Neolithic sites have revealed
similar objects with similar wear (Banning 1998
Wright 1992 fig 5ndash15b) and a comparable item
was found at Jarmo (Moholy-Nagy 1983 fig 12913
Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990 30) Capstones are
characteristic of the use of bow drills (Banning
1998 Foreman 1978) but strictly speaking they
are not necessarily diagnostic of the bow drill
(theoretically simpler drilling techniques involving
hafting might have been facilitated by the use of
a capstone) For the moment we can say that
at Jilat 13 and 15 the evidence for rotary drilling
is unequivocal However the evidence for the use
of the bow drill while suggestive is not quite
definitive
Size data considered carefully support a link
between burin-spall drills and beads To interpret
dimensions of drills and perforations we must keep
in mind that stone bead drilling was overwhelmingly
bipolar and converging Thus drills did not have to
penetrate all the way through the full height of the
bead mdash only about half of it Therefore what matters
a b c
d e f
Figure 9 Green Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks and finished beads (a) Hexagonal blank flaked but not abraded (b)
Abraded hexagonal blank (c) Abraded blank not perforated (d) Perforation error on abraded blank (e)
Finished bead broken showing bipolar perforation and hourglass perforation shape (f) Perforated barrel bead
almost finished except for final abrasion to smooth out last surface irregularities
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
146 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
is the very tips of the drill bits mdash the upper few
millimetres mdash not the full length of the drills
Since disc beads are consistently about 25 to
26 mm in height only the upper 15 mm or so of the
drills mdash the most distal ends of the tips mdash had to
have been about 21 mm or less in thickness to
lsquomatchrsquo the perforation diameters of disc beads
(Table 4) In the case of barrel beads since barrel
beads were between 64 and 71 mm in height about
32 to 36 mm of the most distal ends of the drill bits
have to have been about 21 mm or less in thickness
to lsquomatchrsquo the perforations of barrel beads (Table 5)
Measurements of the drill bit tips within these
small uppermost reaches show that the maximal
thicknesses of the drill bitsrsquo distal tips fall within the
range of sizes indicated by the perforations (Fig 13)
Multi-stage Drilling
Sometimes drilling may have been accomplished in
several stages Some beads particularly those made of
harder stones have smooth cylindrical perforations
with parallel walls displaying no hint of the
hourglass shape
One way to achieve this is to create the hourglass
perforation and then to turn it into a perfect
cylindrical perforation via the use of a second drilling
procedure An example of this was cited by Calley
(1989) who proposed that two tools found in
carnelian bead workshops at Early Bronze Age
Kumartepe (Turkey) had complementary functions
a drill bit for making the initial hourglass perforation
and a borer for finishing and smoothing it into a
cylindrical perforation Since both drill bits and
borers were found on the Jilat sites this method of
finishing perforations could have been used
At Jilat 13 and 25 evidence for multi-stage drilling
can be seen in some beads which have a depression on
one or both faces The depression may be a result of
drilling with a larger drill bit first in order to provide
a guide for the final perforation with a finer drill bit
Such a technique is seen in India-Pakistan (Possehl
1981 39 Kenoyer 1992b 73)
a b c
d e f
Figure 10 Green Dabba Marble pendant blanks and finished pendants (a) Tabular roughout flaked into approximately
trapezoidal shape but not abraded (b) Abraded trapezoidal blank with sawing mark at bottom (c) Perforated
asymmetrical triangular pendant blank incompletely abraded (note striations on face) (d) Finished asymmetri-
cal triangular pendant (e) Pendant blank made on a flake unabraded (f) Nearly-finished pendant made on a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 147
Stabilizing Beads Anvils and Drilling Benches
What method was used to stabilize a bead during
drilling The simplest technique is to fix a bead to a
stone anvil with an adhesive Ethnography and
experiments show that such anvils can be small (the
size of handstones) (Foreman 1978 figs 6ndash7) Use of
such an anvil should result in small shallow
depressions a form of use-damage resulting from
force exerted from above Figure 14b shows a small
flat stone from Jilat 25 with a central depression of
the expected size and depth
Figure 14c shows the limestone bench from Jilat 13
(previously discussed) with a number of such pits in
the centre The marks are evenly spaced and are
concentrated in one small well-defined area on the
widest part of the bench this wide area was also
finely abraded
We see this bench as a multifunctional worktable
anvil We suspect that the beadmaker sat on the
narrow part of the bench (straddling it) placed bead
blanks on the pitted work surface fixed them with
adhesive and then drilled them The bench also
displays evidence of other activities including flaking
and grinding
Adhesives for hafting chipped stone tools could
have been adapted for use in fixing beads to anvils
Bitumen would be one candidate In some cultures a
wooden frame with cup-holes is sometimes used for
stabilizing beads (Kenoyer 1986 P Wright 1982)
The holes are filled with beeswax and clay the bead is
inserted into the wax-clay mixture which hardens
holding the bead steady After drilling beads are
released by breaking the wax-clay mixture (Allchin
1979 Stocks 1989) As wood was probably scarce in
Jilat and as there are no indications of the use of
clay we can probably rule out this technique
However stone items with cup-holes are seen in
Neolithic sites (Kirkbride 1966 Wright 1992
fig 527b)
Abrasion
Ground stone artefacts are crucial to bead produc-
tion in traditional technologies (Foreman 1978
Inizan et al 1992 Kenoyer et al 1991 53 Moholy-
Nagy 1983 294 Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58)
Grinding of beads can be achieved by abrading
each bead individually with a hand held abrader or
by rubbing them on a large grinding slab Either
method will produce linear striations of the type we
see on many unfinished beads (cf Figs 7cndashd and 10c)
However final shaping of disc and cylindrical beads
was most likely achieved by stringing them or loading
them on to a thin rod capable of penetrating the
perforation (individually or in groups) and then
rolling them on a grinding slab adding abrasives
(such as sand) and water to produce a smoother finish
(Foreman 1978 Moholy-Nagy 1983 298) Some disc
beads with parallel edges perpendicular to the faces
would probably have been rolled on a flat smooth
stone Other beads with facetted sharply angled or
bevelled edges (eg many barrel beads) suggest that
they were rolled or abraded along a stone with
grooves and slanting sides (eg Fig 15a c)
Abrasion of bead blanks may have been a multi-
stage process involving a number of materials of
different textures and hardness In an early stage
grinding of bead materials on vesicular basalt would
have been the easiest way to abrade a large nodule
quickly The pores of vesicular basalt and pumice
form natural cutting lsquoteethrsquo comparable to the metal
rasp used by present-day sculptors At Jilat 13 and
Jilat 25 we found broken fragments of vesicular
basalt grinding slabs but not large complete exam-
ples The small fragments suggest two possibilities
either there were large complete slabs at one time
which were then broken worn out and discarded or
only small fragments of these heavy duty grinding
tools were needed
For finer abrasion sandstone grinding slabs might
be expected None were found However small
Figure 11 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic
sites Tile knives or possible saws for bead-
making From Baird 1993 fig 85
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
148 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
handheld abraders made of sandstones with coarse
hard quartz crystals were found at both sites (Fig
15andashb) Sandstone is not local to Wadi Jilat and these
items were imported and probably used extensively
(resulting in the small size)
For even finer abrasion limestone could have been
used Such needs could have been met by the large
bench of Jilat 13 (Fig 14c) which was finely ground
over a very large area (within which the possible
drilling marks were placed)
Some might see the grooved items made of
sandstone (Fig 15a) and limestone (Fig 15c) as
lsquoshaft straightenersrsquo One or two shaft straightener
fragments made of basalt occur at Jilat 13 Like other
basalt shaft straighteners in Neolithic Jilat (eg Jilat
7) (Garrard et al 1994a Wright 1993) the use-
surfaces of these have U-shaped cross-sections By
contrast the cross sections of the use surfaces on the
sandstone and limestone grooved items are not U-
shaped but have sharp angles We see these tools
mainly as abraders for grinding bead facets espe-
cially on barrel beads The widths of the use surfaces
are 11 mm for the sandstone tool and 138 mm for
the limestone one These dimensions correspond to
the average diameter (5 width) of 31 measured green
Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks from Jilat 13 (N 5
31 Mean diameter 5 92 mm standard deviation 5
28) Grooved stones are used in bead grinding in
a
b c
Figure 12 Ground stone artefacts probably for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Cutmarked slab (limestone) Jilat
13 The cutmarks are shallow and are concentrated in the left area running parallel to the main axes of the
slab (b) Cutmarked slab fragment (limestone) Jilat 13 showing deep cutmarks (c) Flaked and ground abra-
sive cutting tool made of limestone Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 149
modern India (Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58) a
grooved sandstone tool was found with an unfinished
bead at Catalhoyuk (Wright and Bains 2007)
Tosi and Vidale (1990) regard failure resulting
from breakage or human error as more common in
the grinding stage than during perforation although
this depends on material and opinion (Kenoyer 2003
18) In some cases it might be more efficient to shape
the bead first before attempting perforation This
may explain why barrel beads tend to be shaped and
abraded prior to perforation
Finished beads were always finely abraded and
sometimes polished to the extent of reflecting light
Ethnographic observations indicate that polishing is
sometimes done by placing beads en masse in a
leather bag along with an abrasive and shaking and
rolling the bags for long periods (Allchin 1979
Kenoyer 2003) This simple method would have been
more likely than the method of rolling beads and
abrasives in a wooden barrel which is also docu-
mented ethnographically (Kenoyer 2003)
However shaking beads in a bag with an abrasive
tends to produce beads with rounded convex edges
(Gwinnett and Gorelick 1989) Some beads at Jilat
have this form but many mdash especially those made of
the hard cherty red Dabba Marble mdash have sharp
edges perpendicular to bead faces indicating that
they were individually polished or polished during
rolling on a string or stick Alternative methods of
polishing can include rubbing with leather or wood
with the addition of fine sand or chalk and water or
with animal hairwool and animal fat (Kenoyer 1986
20) These methods would have been possible with
Jilat technology
Craft Specialization and Comparisons withOther Sites
Technology needs to be studied not only in terms of
materials and techniques but also in terms of social
groups involved in artefact production individual
artisans and skill (Dobres and Hoffmann 1999 2ndash12)
In egalitarian societies craft skill and knowledge of
Figure 13 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic sites Drilling and piercing tools From Baird 1993 fig 82
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
150 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
special materials can enhance the power of an
individual or a group encouraging hierarchy
(Dobres 2000 119ndash20)
These questions force us to reconsider issues of
craft specialization a term often used loosely or in
widely different ways Three concepts of specializa-
tion are considered here individual specialists
specialization between households or domestic
groups within a given site and site specialization
within a regional or social network of craft produc-
tion and exchange
Costin (1991) draws a contrast between indepen-
dent specialization and attached specialization
Independent specialization involves production of
utilitarian goods for nonelites and can be household-
based or based in special workshops Attached
specialization refers to production of prestige goods
under control of elites Whilst Costin notes that
attached specialization can also be based in house-
holds or workshops we often think of attached
specialization in connection with central institutions
and urban or state-level societies It is of considerable
interest that in early urban societies the making of
stone personal ornaments in association with central
institutions figures prominently (Stein 1996 Vidale
1989)
How earlier forms of craft specialization may have
evolved into large-scale attached specialization is
poorly understood Most research has concentrated
on later stages in this process (eg Stein 1996) in
discussions of earlier forms of specialization defini-
tions and criteria for diagnosis could sometimes be
clearer (eg Quintero and Wilke 1998 Rollefson and
Parker 2002 Rosen 1997) If we are dealing with
a
c
b
Figure 14 Ground stone artefacts probably used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Capstone made of limestone
Jilat 25 (b) Handstone probably used as an anvil or hammer Jilat 25 note depression in face and flake scars
at edges (c) Limestone drilling bench Jilat 13 Note evidence of use-wear on the left and widest area of the
bench smooth abraded surface drill marks in the centre-left face small flake scars with negative bulbs of per-
cussion close to the edge of the bench
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 151
specialization in Neolithic societies it is probably
independent specialization Still Neolithic societies
may fall between Costinrsquos two categories Neolithic
groups were clearly producing prestige goods perso-
nal ornaments are not strictly utilitarian and there is
at least a possibility that elites were emerging (Byrd
1994 Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002 Verhoeven
2002)
Individual Specialists
First there is the issue of identifying individual
specialists Some use lsquospecializationrsquo to refer to any
situation in which some artisans have high levels of
skill a view that has been criticized (Rice 1991) We
agree with Rice that identifying a high level of
technical skill in a craft is not on its own sufficient
for a diagnosis of specialization since it robs the
concept of force in discussing long term change (by
this criterion the Upper Palaeolithic was riddled
with craft specialists) However we would argue
that if there are other indications of craft specializa-
tion a search for levels of ability in different
individuals is appropriate mdash if the data permit
Such data would be primary refuse from well-dated
sites of high temporal resolution in which technical
processes (eg errors in chaines operatoires) can
reveal experts vs novices (Pigeot 1990 Stout 2002
Vanzetti and Vidale 1994)
In the case of Jilat 13 and 25 we are dealing with
much primary refuse and two closely dated sites (see
above and Tables 6ndash7) mdash with periodic use of the
sites over a time range on the order of 200 years at
most and possibly much less Jilat 25 yielded activity
areas with clear spatial clusters as do a number of
contexts at Jilat 13 Space does not permit us to
present all details (this awaits the final site report)
but we feel confident that aggregate consideration of
the data from each site allows us to discuss general
questions of individual skills mdash master craftsmen vs
novices
a b
c
Figure 15 Ground stone artefacts possibly used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Grooved sandstone abrading
tool Jilat 13 (b) Sandstone hand-held abrader Jilat 25 (c) Grooved limestone abrading tool Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
152 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
To explore this we analysed unfinished blanks and
the frequency of perforation errors Drilling is a
sensitive moment in bead production when many
things can go wrong (Kenoyer 2003) A low incidence
in perforation errors combined with high numbers of
successfully finished beads and evidence of standar-
dization should be reasonably good indicators of an
artisanrsquos mastery This is the situation seen at Jilat 25
(Fig 7) In all of 93 blanks from Jilat 25 only 2 were
perforation errors a failure rate of only 2
On the other hand a high incidence of perforation
errors would suggest that a beadmaker was a relative
novice Jilat 13 produced more blanks with perfora-
tion errors than Jilat 25 We thought we might find
individual contexts with a high rate of error
suggesting apprentices
The data did not bear this out Of 223 bead blanks
from Jilat 13 (all phases) 22 were perforation errors
mdash a failure rate of 98 All but two errors were on
barrel bead blanks of green Dabba Marble The
others were one pendant blank and one irregular
bead blank These 22 blanks were distributed across
20 different contexts and no more than 2 perforation
errors were found in any one context
A close look at those contexts reveals low error
rates In Context B21 2 green barrel bead blanks
with perforation errors were found with 5 other
blanks The others included green and red barrel and
disc blanks This context also yielded 5 successfully
finished beads including black and red barrel beads
and a green disc Black and green debitage and a
discoidal handstone were also found here In Context
B71 2 blanks with perforation errors were found
along with 9 other blanks and 10 successfully
finished beads including green Dabba Marble barrel
beads but also black and red disc beads Much
debitage was found along with a flaked limestone
cutting tool (cf Fig 12c) and a limestone object with
a drill mark
The higher rate of error at Jilat 13 compared to
Jilat 25 could be because artisans at Jilat 13 were
making more of the larger more complex barrel
beads (as opposed to simple discs see Tables 2ndash3)
which offer greater chances of failure due to the
longer drilling distance However at Jilat 13 the
overall failure rate was still quite low particularly
considering the overall volume of material recovered
(Table 1)
We conclude that the beadmakers at Jilat 13
included few trainees These appear to have been
skilled artisans a small task force composed of
relative experts This raises the question of whether
these beadmakers were examples of lsquoproducer
specialistsrsquo as traditionally defined that is people
involved in
production of a good by a relatively small number of
individuals (compared to the total output and
number of consumers) individuals who are as a
result of this selectivity and the routinization or
repetition of their tasks particularly skilled in
manufacture (Rice 1991 263)
Jilat 13 and 25 do suggest small numbers of
individuals and a certain selectivity in who was
involved in stone bead making The quantity of
debitagedebris relative to (1) the number of finished
beads and (2) the modest sizes of these structures
collectively suggest that these craftsmenwomen
served a larger number of consumers relative to the
number of craftsmen involved here If so who were
these consumers mdash other residents of Jilat or groups
beyond
Intra-site Specialization Between Domestic Groups
Several studies suggest ways of identifying different
forms of craft specialization between domestic groups
in a site For later sites Stein (1996) has explored
spatial data particularly how craft production
facilities are dispersed among domestic units or
located near special (or central) institutions In
Neolithic sites questions about dispersal between
households and possible links between craft produc-
tion and special buildings or special sites have been
underexplored
For specialization Costin (1991) suggests that we
would expect (1) variability between production
units (eg households occupations regions) in
relevant artefacts (2) high densities of craft produc-
tion debris relative to some other generally used
item in some production units (3) high ratios of
unfinished goods to finished goods in some produc-
tion units Kenoyer et alrsquos (1991) ethnoarchaeolo-
gical studies of modern stone bead-making in
Khambat (India) suggest something similar in the
case of households as production units There non-
specialist households engaging in casual opportu-
nistic bead production revealed low quantities of
bead-making debris few unfinished beads and little
standardization in finished beads By contrast
households specializing in bead production were
characterized by stockpiling of large quantities of
raw materials many unfinished beads and more
standardized finished products
In looking at whole occupations (ie phases within
sites) as a unit of observation we argue elsewhere
(Wright and Garrard 2003) that artefact densities and
other data from 13 PPNB and 8 PPNCELN
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 153
occupations in the Jilat-Azraq region suggest that
PPNCELN producers were more specialized than
those of the PPNB mdash at least in the Jilat-Azraq
region Unlike the PPNB sites Jilat 13 and 25 have
very high densities of bead-making debris specialized
tools for drilling and sawing there is an abundance of
unfinished materials relative to finished products
bead-making tools and debris are abundant relative
to normal domestic food processing equipment
(ground stone artefacts) (Wright and Garrard 2003
cf Costin 1991)
That argument is chronological comparing the
PPNB to the PPNCELN occupations and we stand
behind it for the Jilat-Azraq case (different trajec-
tories may apply to south Jordan and the Negev see
below) Still it leaves open the issue of house-to-
house variation within Jilat 25 or Jilat 13 As we have
only one excavated structure per site we cannot on
present evidence argue that each building housed a
group of specialists serving other households within
the same site In fact we have no direct evidence that
there were other structures on each site mdash the ones
excavated were the only ones visible on the surface
There are nuances of material and typological
choices between the Jilat 25 structure (red disc beads)
and the Jilat 13 structure (larger complex green
ornaments) but these nuances are beyond the scope
of this paper
In all we suspect that stone bead production at
Jilat 13 and 25 was geared not for other domestic
units lsquoin camprsquo but for use by these quite mobile
communities themselves mdash as well as export to other
sites within the steppe and beyond (see below) In
Costinrsquos terms (Costin 1991) Jilat 13 and 25 might
each be an example of an independent non-centra-
lized dispersed workshop possibly lsquofamily runrsquo (Rice
1991 262) mdash in which handling of Dabba Marble
was not routinely entrusted to novices
There are hints of house-to-house variations in
bead-making in major villages with larger samples of
domestic structures as in PPNB Beidha At PPNB
Beidha (earlier than Jilat 13 and 25) Building 14
stands out
Other forms of production besides food preparation
were less common Building 14 represented the best
example of artefact production in these basements
A wide range of artefacts was recovered apparently
associated with building 14rsquos basement floor
Particularly widespread were stone polishers bone
tools raw material (including hematite malachite
and magnesium) more than 60 unmodified marine
shells and at least two dozen beads of shell stone
and bone some of which were in various stages of
production Some artifacts lay on stone slabs
indicating that at least some slabs may have
functioned as work surfaces (Byrd 2005 117)
Such hints are intriguing Still macro-artefacts
from house floors are affected by problems of site
formation and house abandonment Micro-artefact
data can help (Rainville 2005) House-by-house
exploration with attention to micro-artefacts is
needed (Wright and Bains 2007)
Site Specialization Within a Regional Network of Craft
Production and Exchange
Both sites and other Neolithic sites in Jilat and
Azraq exhibit resource specialization
the selective use of particular resources in craft
manufacture such as certain clays that are repeat-
edly used (Rice 1991 262)
The Jilat artisans emphasized Dabba Marble from
a wider array of available stone types The Jilat-
Azraq sites collectively show that green Dabba
Marble was a special target This is revealed in both
frequencies and weights (for debris data and weight
data see Wright and Garrard 2003 for frequency
data on beads and blanks see Tables 2 and 3) At
both sites debris is greatly dominated by green
Dabba Marble mdash 80ndash95 of debris by both weight
(grams) and frequency Green Dabba Marble also
dominates blanks in terms of weight at both sites mdash
indicating the use of green for making larger heavier
and more conspicuous ornaments
Turning to frequencies at Jilat 13 about 90 of
blanks are green and only 5 are red However
finished beads include both green and red forms in
comparable percentages (404 and 436 respec-
tively) (Table 3) suggesting that finished red beads
were brought into the building from a place of
manufacture located somewhere else At Jilat 25
blanks of red and green Dabba Marble occur in
comparable proportions (409 green 43 red)
whilst finished beads are predominantly red (588)
(Table 2) If Jilat 13 and 25 were absolute contem-
poraries this could suggest variations in choices and
exchange between residents of different structures
Rice (1991) has defined site specialization as a
situation in which a site is located near a special
resource and the inhabitants emphasize production of
a craft based on that resource Relative to other sites
not so located the range of site functions and
activities would be expected to be more limited
Thus site specialization
involves individual localities or sites having evidence
of limited functions or intensive productive activity
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
154 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
often determined by fortuitous environmental fac-
tors This includes proximity to mineral deposits
and so forth (Rice 1991 262)
Do Jilat 13 and 25 fit this concept In both sites
15 km from the source we have a wealth of evidence
for intensive stone bead production and scanty
evidence for routine food processing tools (Wright
and Garrard 2003) However Jilat 25 may be closer
to the limited function model envisioned by Rice In
Jilat 13 bead-making is clearly intensive but we are
also dealing with a chipped stone assemblage of not
only drills and burins but also projectile points and
other tools Jilat 13 also reveals production of
figurines (of animals phalluses and arrow-shaped
forms) and sculpted pillars (Baird 1993 Garrard
et al 1994a Martin 1999 Wright 1992 1993)
In all Jilat 13 and 25 suggest that we can apply
Ricersquos lsquosite specializationrsquo on the grounds of intensive
productive activity and proximity to source mdash but
with the qualification that this specialization was also
embedded in hunting-herding activities and at Jilat
13 production of other special crafts unique among
the sites of a symbolic nature (figurines pillars)
One possibility is that we are dealing with a camp
of hunter-herder corporate groups mdash part of a wider
regional network mdash engaged in special activities in
remote areas involving art personal ornaments and
ritual Such groups are suggested by other data from
the PPNBndashPPNC time span for example Nahal
Hemar (ornaments masks hunting tools) Dhuweila
(carving of hunters with dress variations)
Catalhoyuk (images of hunters with dress variations
as in the bull hunt mural) and Gobeklitepe (sculpture
production including a quarry wild-animal icono-
graphy hunting) (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988 Betts
1998 Mellaart 1967 Schmidt 2000) In all these data
hint that craft production of special items was
embedded in hunting andor herding activities in
remote areas this may have been a key means by
which exotic materials reached major villages In a
very broad way this supports a sketch outlined by
Bar Yosef (Bar-Yosef 2001) although we do not
necessarily agree with specifics of his model eg the
territories boundaries social groups and mechanisms
which he suggests (cf Asouti 2006) Instead we see
this as one example of diverse strategies of social
networking linking lineages households and commu-
nities in the Neolithic (Wright forthcoming)
Returning to the stone bead data from Jilat 13 and
25 the apparent stockpiling of raw material and
intensive production activity hints at production of
the green material for export (see above and Wright
and Garrard 2003) New data now add weight to this
idea and suggest the following provisional picture of
regional specializations and exchanges in ornaments
(1) Based on typology technology and materials thereappears to be a distinctive eastern Jordanian koine ornetwork of stone bead manufacture and exchangefeaturing Dabba Marble and a probable regionalspecialization in it
Other Neolithic bead production sites are known
from eastern Jordan Indications are that most of the
green bead materials are Dabba Marble probably
from Jilat (further work is needed) In these sites
diversity of materials used seems low with few
imports from beyond the steppe Shells however
testify to wider networks (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989
Cooke and Reese in Betts 1998 Garrard et al 1994a
Reese 1991)
Azraq 31 (PPNB and ELN) is in our suite of study
materials (Baird et al 1992 Garrard et al 1994a
Wright and Garrard 2003) and debris blanks and
beads were found Preliminary XRF analysis of green
samples (by Groom) indicates that the material is
consistent with Jilat Dabba Marble Typology and
technology are also similar and as at Jilat 25 burin
spall drills were closely associated with bead-making
in specific activity areas (Baird 1993 521 Baird et al
1992 25) However the ground stone revealed no
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
(Wright 1992 1993 Wright in Baird et al 1992)
Material used for beads at Dhuweila (PPNB and
ELN) has been called Dabba Marble (Cooke and
Reese in Betts 1998) It is consistent in appearance
with our material although we have no details on
mineralogy or source Typologically these beads are
similar to those of Jilat 13 and 25 The ground stone
is very different from the suite at the Jilat sites
(Wright in Betts 1998) for comparisons of chipped
stone assemblages see Baird (1993)
At Bawwab al-Ghazal (Late PPNB) Rollefson
et al found drills bits on burin spalls tile knives
beads bead blanks and bead debris some of which
they called green Dabba Marble (Rollefson et al
1999 Quintero et al 2004) They argued that there is
a possible source of this material outcropping near
the site mdash lsquoFor the last raw material [green Dabba
Marble] small nodules of the green limestone were
embedded in the local bedrockrsquo (Rollefson et al 1999
3) However as shown in Appendix A the true
Dabba Marble only occurs in a restricted area west of
Wadi Jilat The lsquobedrockrsquo which outcrops near Azraq
31 and Bawwab al-Ghazal is travertine and some of
this formed during the late Pleistocene and Holocene
The nearby Epipalaeolithic site of Azraq 17 was
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 155
found partially embedded in travertine and artefacts
including nodules of imported basalt were found in
the travertine at this site It is possible that the
nodules of green limestone found at Bawwab al-
Ghazal were imported Dabba Marble which subse-
quently became incorporated in a travertine near the
site An alternative possibility is that the local
travertine is infused with green minerals In Wadi
Jilat travertines were noted with traces of green
minerals and in the Siwaqa area to the south-west of
Jilat there are extensive travertines some of which
are infused with pale green minerals including
volkonskoite (Barjous 1986 mdash see also Appendix A)
In eastern Jordan some Neolithic sites are greatly
dominated by burins (lsquoburin sitesrsquo) At a number of
these there is evidence for stone bead-making (eg
Jebel Naja) These lsquoburin sitesrsquo typically reveal few
ground stone tools we know of no examples of
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
from them It was argued that the main role of the
burins was production of spalls for drills used mainly
for beads (Betts 1987 1998 Finlayson and Betts
1990) However burin sites are not universally
associated with stone bead making At Jilat 23 24
and 26 burins were numerous but other evidence for
bead-making is scanty (Baird 1993 520)
Therefore some have questioned whether
burins and burin spalls in such sites were solely or
primarily intended for making drills and beads
noting that other functions are possible (Quintero
et al 2004 209) Given that these sites typically
represent short-term occupations it is possible that
many sites might be spall manufacture sites with
spalls transported to other settings where drill
manufacture and bead manufacture took place such
as Jilat 13 and 25 Rollefson expressed doubt that
either bladelet or burin spall drills would have been
used in bow drills partly because of their fragility and
also because most of them have a pronounced curve
on the long axis which would have made high speed
drilling impossible (Rollefson and Parker 2002) But
Finlayson and Betts (1990) and Berna (1995)
successfully experimented using burin spalls with
bow drills and Kenoyer (personal communication
2007) notes that drills made on burin spalls are the
most common type of drill in diverse prehistoric
stone bead-making sites (in India Pakistan and
elsewhere)
In the case of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 we believe burin-
spall drills were part of the bead-making repertoire
for reasons noted above This does not rule out other
uses of burin spalls Nor does it rule out the use of
other perforating techniques Drills do not have to be
made of stone when soft stones are being perforated
mdash wood bone and abrasives can be used (Foreman
1978)
(2) There are hints of export of Dabba Marble to at leastsome villages in the Levantine corridor However majorNeolithic villages display much diversity in materials andespecially more importing of exotic stones than is seen inthe eastern Jordanian sites
Many writers report Neolithic beads made of
unspecified lsquogreenstonersquo This term is unfortunate
since it can refer to metabasalt and similar altered
igneous rocks (Schumann 1992 248) Some of these
lsquogreenstonesrsquo may be limestone with apatite or other
materials (eg Garfinkel 1987 81ndash82 Hauptmann
2004 Talbot 1983 789) Beads of green limestones
rich in fluorapatite were found at late PPNB Basta in
southern Jordan (Hauptmann 2004) as confirmed by
XRF and XRD Green beads identified as Dabba
Marble were also reported from Ain Ghazal a site
with both PPNB and PPNC occupations (Rollefson
et al 1990 103ndash04) Whether these are Dabba
Marble from the Jilat source (Appendices AndashB) is
not yet fully clear Ongoing research will sort out
these mysteries (eg D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal
communication Hauptmann 2004)
Major villages in the Levantine Corridor reveal
different degrees of emphasis in styles and materials
often we see a certain emphasis on local materials and
preferences However considerable exchange net-
works are indicated in major villages which display
much wider ranges of stone ornament materials
compared to the eastern Jordanian sites (such as
Ain Ghazal Yiftahel Basta Barsquoja Ghuwayr 1
Fidan 1) mdash along with of course shells (Affonso
and Pernicka 2004 Bienert and Gebel 1998 84ndash86
Garfinkel 1987 Hauptmann 2004 Rollefson and
Simmons 1984 1986 Rollefson et al 1990 Simmons
and Najjar 1998 Starck 1988)
As the Neolithic evolved stone bead-making
entailed increasingly diverse techniques and materi-
als One example may be drills In earlymiddle PPNB
sites most drills are made on bladelets In the late
PPNB PPNC and Late Neolithic there may have
been a gradual increase in drills made on burin spalls
although perhaps not in all regions (Jensen 2004
Rollefson and Parker 2002) Underlining increasing
diversity of technological practice between groups
Baird (2001b) pointed out geographic variation in
this technology with spall drills dominating in the
north-eastern Jordanian steppe from MPPNB
through Early Late Neolithic whilst contemporary
sites to west and south use bladelet blanks for their
piercing tools
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
156 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
frequently occurring types burins constitute 29 of
tools and points 16 Piercers and drills occur in
much lower numbers (4 of tools) as do other tool
types Of projectile points Nizzanim points are the
most frequent (397 of points) followed by Byblos
(313) Herzeliya (12) Amuq (84) Transverse
(6) and Haparsah (24) points (Baird 1993 469
500ndash17 625 Baird in Garrard et al 1994a 85
table 1)
The 14C dates from these two sites have been
recalibrated using IntCal 2004 and the date ranges at
one standard deviation are as follows Jilat 25 (early
phase) context Aa19a (OxA2408) 5 9020ndash8760 cal
BP Jilat 13 (early phase) context A21a (OxA1800) 5
8980ndash8600 cal BP Jilat 13 (early phase) context A15a
(OxA1801) 5 8980ndash8550 cal BP Jilat 13 (late phase)
context C24 (OxA2411) 5 8980ndash8590 cal BP Jilat 13
(late phase) context C22 (UB3462) 5 8780ndash8460 cal
BP
Thus stratigraphy and radiocarbon dates suggest
that we are dealing with two sites of reasonably good
temporal resolution followed by abandonment and
sealing of primary refuse deposits Five C14 dates
indicate occupation between about 7830 and 8020
uncal BP with low standard deviations for each date
In radiocarbon terms this is about as precise as it
gets and the two sites may overlap in time However
projectile points do suggest we are dealing with a
somewhat wider time span for the Jilat 13 sample
than the Jilat 25 sample
Given different extents of excavation comparisons
of these and other stone bead-making sites entail
challenges Density data however mdash as measured by
numbers of beads blanks and debris per cu m volume
of excavated deposit mdash can be revealing For
example the PPNB occupations in Wadi Jilat (3
sites 11 occupations) had low densities mdash an average
of 1072 artefacts per cu m and a maximum of 313
per cu m (Wright and Garrard 2003 table 2) In
contrast the density data for Jilat 25 are 2223 per cu
m (early phase) 3312 per cu m (middle phase) and
562 per cu m (late phase) Density data for Jilat 13
are 3102 stone bead artefacts per cu m (early phase)
1615 per cu m (middle phase) and 1099 per cu m
(late phase) This suggests greater intensity of bead-
making in Jilat 13 and 25
Sources Quarrying and Raw Materials
Most Jilat beads were made of Dabba Marble which
occurs in green pinkred and black (Appendix A)
This is our focus here A few other materials were also
used other local sedimentary rocks and non-local
turquoise (nearest source Sinai) malachite (nearest
sources Faynan and Timna) and carnelian (nearest
source unknown) Non-local stones formed only 015
of the materials (Wright and Garrard 2003)
The largest known sources of Dabba Marble lie
15ndash25 km west of Jilat 13 and 25 some may be
closer (Fig 1 and Appendix A) These are bodies of
limestones chalks and cherts lightly metamorphosed
Table 4 Finished disc beads size data (complete or measurable beads) (na 5 not applicable)
Site N
Diameter (mm) HeightThickness (mm) Perforation Diameter (mm)
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Jilat 7 PPNB 13 87 36 30 28 28 10Jilat 26 PPNB 0 na na na na na naJilat 32 PPNB 0 na na na na na naAzraq 31 PPNB 2 98 46 25 14 23 04Jilat 25 PPNCELN 66 83 16 26 08 21 05Jilat 13 PPNCELN 47 69 24 25 09 19 06Azraq 31 PPNCELN 34 68 16 26 11 18 04
Table 5 Finished barrel beads size data (complete or measurable beads) (na 5 not applicable)
Site N
Diameter (mm) HeightThickness (mm) Perforation Diameter (mm)
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Jilat 7 PPNB 1 45 na 40 na 15 naJilat 26 PPNB 2 75 na 65 na 25 naJilat 32 PPNB 0 na na na na 00 naAzraq 31 PPNB 1 115 na 100 na 40 naJilat 25 PPNCELN 6 63 14 64 17 21 09Jilat 13 PPNCELN 28 68 28 71 39 22 09Azraq 31 PPNCELN 13 109 56 133 91 29 09
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 137
and injected with various minerals eg apatites red
iron oxides (Fig 3a) Outcrops show substantial
variations in mineralization even over small areas
in Fig 3b the left side of the outcrop is soft green
Dabba Marble the right side is red Dabba Marble
The geology and mineralogy of Dabba Marble are
presented in Appendices AndashB The Neolithic Jilat
beads are consistent with this source (Appendix B)
Methods of Analysis
Comprehensive recovery of small beads debitage and
micro-artefacts was possible due to intensive fine-
scale sieving All excavated contexts were sieved
through a 5 mm mesh many samples were dry sieved
or wet sieved through a 15 mm mesh (the latter after
flotation) Artefacts from floors were collected from 1
sq m horizontal grid units to permit identification of
activity areas Fine-grained spatial data and micro-
artefacts are important in understanding lithic
technologies (Dunnell and Stein 1989 Cessford and
Mitrovic 2005) This is borne out by the Jilat data
since micro-flakes are one byproduct of stone bead
retouch In cases of intense housecleaning micro-
artefacts may reveal bead-making where macro-
artefacts do not (Wright and Bains 2007)
For each context artefacts were separated by raw
material and classified into major groups nodules
and debitage (Fig 4) roughouts (Fig 5) unfinished
blanks and finished ornaments (Figs 6ndash10) We
counted and weighed each group to determine
relationships between debitage and finished beads
Measurements (diameter height perforation dia-
meter) were taken on beads and blanks to assess
standardization and drilling techniques
Finished ornaments were classified into 8 basic
types (Wright and Garrard 2003) Circular disc beads
are the most numerous smallest and most standar-
dized (Figs 6d 7endashf) They occur in the widest range
of materials most red Dabba Marble beads were
discs Barrelshaped beads are larger more variable
and mostly made of green Dabba Marble (Fig 9endashf)
Pendants are the largest rarest and most diverse
items shaped as triangles rectangles and ovals most
are of green Dabba Marble (Fig 10d f) Bracelets
were made of white chalk (Tables 2ndash3)
Unfinished beads (blanks) were classified according
to the same typology as finished beads when the
intended final product could be ascertained (eg disc
blank) (Tables 2ndash3 Figs 6andashc 7andashd 8 9andashd 10c e)
Within these categories blanks were further classified
according to traces of flaking grinding perforation
Figure 8 shows these stages for 3 sequences of disc
bead manufacture Differences between Sequences A
B and C are differences in the original blank (Stage 1
thin flake thick flake tabular roughout) and presence
or absence of flaking retouch on edges (Stage 2)
Further analyses of sequences for these and other
bead types are still in progress
Debitage was sorted into nodules cores rough-
outs flakes angular shatter micro-flakes and
Table 6 Stone beads blanks and debris Jilat 25 all contexts
Phase Context Description Beads Blanks Debris Comments Selected associated artefacts
Early Aa24 Fill of bedrock cut 0 0 2Early Aa27 Fill of bedrock cut 0 0 1Early Aa19 First occupation fill 29 23 384 1 cutmarked slab 3 sandstone fragments
probably handstones 1 limestone handstoneEarly Aa20 First occupation fill 1 5 6Early Aa21 First occupation fill 4 1 4Early Aa18 Early fill in entrance area 1 5 8Early A 44 Early fill in entrance area 0 0 3Middle Aa15 Second occupation fill 47 31 544 1 limestone capstone 1 grooved stone (basalt)
1 sandstone abraderMiddle Aa16 Hearth 1 1 0Middle Aa13 Fill of stone feature 1 0 81Middle Aa10 Fill of stone feature 0 0 3Middle Aa11 Ash lense 3 0 17Middle Aa7 Third occupation fill 17 15 109 2 grooved stones (limestone and basalt)
2 basalt handstones 1 sandstone fragmentMiddle Aa8 Third occupation fill 1 1 1Middle Aa14 Fill in entrance area 7 3 4Middle A 42 Fill in entrance area 0 0 1
Late Aa 2 Sandy late fill 1 0 55 1 sandstone abrader Bead 1 RDM disc Debris all GDMLate A 6 Rubbly late fill 7 4 72Late A 33 Late fill in entrance area 0 0 1Late A 36 Late fill in entrance area 0 0 6Late A 34 Fill of late intrusive feature 1 0 0
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
138 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
micro-shatter (Fig 4) Definitions of these categories
are broadly similar to those established in chipped
stone analysis (Andrefsky 1998)
Flaking and Initial Reduction Nodules CoresDebitage and Roughouts
The soft limestone and hard chert in Dabba Marble
permits it to be worked via chipping flaking
grinding sawing and drilling To varying degrees
the material has conchoidal fracture Where chert
content is high conchoidal fracture is excellent
Limestone itself also has conchoidal fracture parti-
cularly when fine-grained as Dabba Marble is The
tabular structure of the laminated limestones also
makes it possible to create flat faces easily
The difficulty of shaping beads would have varied
depending on specific material Most green Dabba
marble is fairly homogeneous composed of calcite-rich
soft limestone (Mohs 5 3) and apatite (Mohs 5 5)
Red Dabba marble occurs in a soft pale pink variety
(Mohs 5 3ndash4) a dark pink variety of medium
hardness and a dark red siliceous variety essentially
red chert (Mohs 5 7) This red chert variant (Mohs 7)
will have been more difficult to modify Flaking and
chipping were particularly important in working this
material and abrasion will have been more difficult
This may be why so many beads of the red cherty
Dabba Marble were disc beads made on flakes (Fig 7)
Flaking figured prominently in the making of
beads from softer materials However sawing and
abrasion played a greater role in modification of these
materials Comparable variations in technique
depending on material hardness are seen at other
prehistoric sites (Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990)
Table 7 Stone beads blanks and debris Jilat 13 selected contexts
Phase Context Description Beads Blanks Debris Comments Selected associated artefacts
Early C106 Fill of bedrock cut 0 0 1 1 circular limestone diskEarly B77 First occupation fill 1 5 752Early B79 Fill of hearth 0 0 6 1 limestone handstoneEarly B71 Second occupation fill 10 11 750 1 drilled and grooved limestone object
1 flaked limestone rsquoscraperrsquo 6 basalt fragmentsEarly A17 Lower pavement 0 0 0 1 cutmarked slabEarly A15 Third occupation fill 1 8 8 1 worked limestone object snake-shaped flint pebbleEarly A16 Third occupation fill 2 1 17 1 miniature pestle basaltEarly A18 Third occupation fill 0 0 11 Basalt fragments 3 from vessels
1 handstonepestle fragment 6 unidentifiableEarly B44 Third occupation fill 5 9 74Early B45 Third occupation fill 0 2 139 1 basalt handstone fragmentEarly B69 Third occupation fill 6 5 383 No ground stoneEarly C56 Third occupation fill 8 5 313 1 double-grooved sandstone abrader (Fig 15a)
Middle A3 Fourth occupation fill 3 4 60 1 limestone capstone ( 2 surfaces) 5 basalt fragmentsMiddle A5 Fourth occupation fill 7 9 139 1 cutmarked flint slab 1 grooved limestone object
ochred flints figurines pillarsMiddle B31 Fourth occupation fill 4 2 33Middle B38 Fourth occupation fill 12 6 520Middle B54 Fourth occupation fill 1 0 9 1 limestone figurine (bird)Middle B56 Fourth occupation fill 1 1 14 1 basalt grinding slab fragmentMiddle C39 Fourth occupation fill 10 12 254 1 flint cutmarked slab flaked limestone rsquoscraperrsquo
Late C14 Foundation for upperpavement
0 5 65 1 basalt ground fragment
Late B3 Upper pavement 0 0 0 1 cutmarked limestone slab 1 post-socketLate C4 Upper pavement 0 0 0 1 drilling and abrading bench (Fig 14c)Late A2 Fifth occupation fill 4 2 154 10 figurines or figurine preforms suggesting animals
phalluses arrows (flint limestone travertine) 1 pebblemortar or capstone with ochre (limestone) 1 perforatedobject 1 handstone on flake (flint) 2 vessel fragments1 ochred pebble burnt pebble (limestone) 1 groundindeterminate stone (basalt) Beads are 2 barrels and2 pendants blanks are 1 barrel and 1 indeterminate
Late B4 Fifth occupation fill 0 2 7 1 grooved limestone abrader (Fig 15c) Blanks are bothpendant blanks
Late B7 Fifth occupation fill 2 5 150 1 cutmarked limestone 1 basalt handstonepestlefragment
Late B9 Fifth occupation fill 0 0 3 1 perforated pumice abraderLate B21 Fifth occupation fill 5 7 193 1 basalt handstone 2 basalt fragmentsLate C3 Fifth occupation fill 2 4 61
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 139
Five main stages of manufacture were identified
although reduction sequences vary These are (1)
reduction of raw nodules to cores roughouts and
flakes via flaking and chipping (2) shaping of
roughouts and flakes into blanks via further flaking
chipping sawing and rough grinding (3) perforation
via boring andor drilling (4) further grinding to
produce the final shape (5) final polishing
Nodules cores and debitage were recovered in
large amounts at Jilat 13 (7369 artefacts 6905 grams)
and Jilat 25 (1381 artefacts 976 grams) The largest
unworked blocks are of green Dabba Marble They
are about 15 cm in diameter but most are about the
size of an adult human fist Some nodules were
weathered suggesting that they were picked up from
surface rather than quarried from bedrock layers
(Fig 4 top)
Reduction of nodules by flaking resulted in (1)
cores (2) tabular roughouts (3) large flakes (4) large
angular shatter fragments (5) micro-flakes and (6)
micro-shatter (Fig 4) Cores defined as nodules with
two or more flake scars are not numerous or
consistent in form Shatter micro-flakes and micro-
shatter were normally discarded as byproducts
Tabular roughouts and larger flakes were used as
the basis for further reduction into bead blanks
Roughouts are early stages in bead reduction
(Kenoyer 2003 16) At Jilat 13 and 25 roughouts
are tabular reflecting the bedded structure of the
material They were flaked and chipped around the
edges into roughly symmetrical shapes (Figs 5a 10a)
Roughouts were sometimes subjected to initial
drilling or sawing at an early stage prior to any
intense abrasion (Fig 5b) In other cases roughouts
were abraded first (Fig 5d) and then sawn or drilled
(Fig 5c) Tabular roughouts were the basis for
making larger thicker ornaments such as most
pendants and barrel beads (Figs 9ndash10)
Small subcircular flakes were the basis of most disc
beads (Figs 6ndash7) The flakes have platforms bulbs of
percussion on ventral surfaces and often scars from
previous removals on dorsal surfaces A certain
consistency in size shape and morphology suggests
that a prepared-core technology was used to predict
and produce these flakes Since cores are rare we do
not yet know precisely how this was achieved
Experiments are still needed but we suspect that
chipping and flaking was accomplished by varying
Figure 3 (a) View of the modern Dabba Marble quarry west of Wadi Jilat from which raw material samples were
obtained (see Appendices AndashB) (b) Close-up view of metamorphosed deposits in situ with interdigitating green
(left) and red (right) Dabba Marble
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
140 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
uses of indirect percussion soft-hammer percussion
andor pressure flaking since the small size of the
beads required precision The use of antler or horn
for pressure flaking of soft stones is widely seen in the
ethnographic record and experimentally (Foreman
1978 19) Even hard stones can be flaked with soft
hammers made of animal horn (Kenoyer 1986 1994
2003 Kenoyer et al 1991) Cores and flakes do not
clearly indicate use of the Cambay technique of
inverse indirect percussion as seen in carnelian bead-
making (Kenoyer 2003 Possehl 1981) Many blanks
display micro-retouch on the edges On thicker disc
bead blanks micro-flakes were removed by striking
downward at the edge of each bead face (Fig 7c) The
retouch scars show that striking was bipolar ie from
opposite directions Products of this procedure were
micro-flakes (Fig 4 bottom)
Clear indications of heat treatment were rare but
burnt pieces do occur
Sawing Drilling and Abrasion Bead Blanks andFinished Beads
Bead blanks are the further reduction of a roughout
into a form closer to the final bead shape (Kenoyer
2003 16) At Jilat 13 and 25 blanks were abandoned
at many different stages The most extensive evidence
for lithic reduction concerns disc beads it is possible
to identify some chaines operatoires (Fig 8)
Figure 6 illustrates two of these paths for green
Dabba Marble disc beads made on flakes
Sometimes circular flakes were perforated early
before any abrasion (Fig 6c) More often flakes
were abraded slightly on ventral and dorsal surfaces
before any drilling (Fig 6andashb) At this stage edges
were still rough Perforation was added later (Fig
6d) In such cases a number of disc beads were
probably then strung together and abraded on the
edges by rolling the string back and forth on abrasive
stones of varying textures such as coarse sandstone
fine sandstone or limestone The final products were
evenly smoothed disc beads relatively standardized
in size The procedure also resulted in edges that are
sharp perpendicular to the bead faces and flat rather
than convex (Figs 6d 7endashf) Experiments indicate
that this procedure also contributes to the polishing
of faces and edges of beads (cf Foreman 1978)
Figure 7 shows artefacts from one context at Jilat 25
indicating a similar sequence for red Dabba Marble
disc beads from subcircular flake to final disc
For barrel beads the starting point was typically
not a flake but a tabular roughout A roughout was
often flaked into an approximately cylindrical form
sometimes with a hexagonal transverse cross section
(that is the section perpendicular to the perforation)
(Fig 9a) Scars indicate that the hexagonal form was
accomplished by flaking Sometimes hexagonal
blanks were perforated before much abrasion (Fig
9b) In many cases hexagonal blanks were heavily
abraded to obliterate sharp angles before any
perforation was begun (Fig 9c) Resulting bead
forms varied in cross section from circular to
elliptical or lenticular (see Wright and Garrard
2003 fig 3) Perforation of barrel beads was from
opposite directions resulting in hourglass perfora-
tions (Fig 9e) and occasionally perforation errors
(Fig 9d)
Most pendants were begun as tabular roughouts
chipped into shapes anticipating the final form such
as an asymmetrical triangular pendant (Fig 10a cf
Fig 5a for a rectangular pendant) Roughouts were
Figure 4 Example of raw material nodule (top) angular
shatter (upper centre) flakes (lower centre) and
micro-debitage (lower row) from a single context
at Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 141
then abraded and sawing was sometimes applied (Fig
10b) One unfinished pendant shows that perforation
preceded final abrasion (Fig 10c) The most common
form is the asymmetrical triangular pendant (Fig
10d) but there are also rectangular square and oval
pendants Not all pendants were made on tabular
roughouts some were made on thin flakes eg
rectangular and lsquoteardroprsquo forms (Fig 10endashf)
Sawing
Disc beads were made individually one by one on
flakes as opposed to being sawn from a perforated
cylinder which is another possible way However
sawing was central to the production of pendants and
barrel beads (cf Fig 5c 10b) In some cases the
roughout was sawn only to a shallow depth
permitting unwanted material to be snapped off
leaving a protruding piece of stone mdash a kind of
groove and snap technique (Fig 5c) The protruding
lsquobossrsquo was then abraded
A range of chipped stone tools in the sites might be
suitable for sawing These include tabular chert knives
sometimes also called tile knives (Fig 11) These are
bifacially retouched cutting tools characteristic of the
eastern Jordanian Neolithic (Baird in Garrard et al
1994a 89) However typically the bifacial retouch
produces an edge that is robust but somewhat sinuous
in profile (Fig 11) In addition many tile knife edges
have significant curvature in plan Use of tile knives
would probably generate relatively wide and slightly
sinuous cut marks but this is an area worthy of
experimentation and use wear study Alternative tools
that perhaps better match the relative scale and
precision of cut marks on bead blanks are a range of
relatively robust non-formal tools on blade or elon-
gated flake blanks with edges that are relatively
straight in profile and plan These are found in some
numbers in conjunction with the bead making debris in
Jilat 13 and 25 It is also notable that despite the
purported dominance of flakes in many broadly
contemporary PPNCELN assemblages significant
a b
c d
Figure 5 (a) Tabular roughout rectangular (b) Tabular roughout subcircular with drill mark (c) Abraded roughout with
sawing mark at bottom note that the sawing is incomplete the groove and snap technique has resulted in both
the saw mark and an irregular protrusion of stone (d) Abraded tabular roughout subcircular
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
142 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
proportions of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 tool blanks are
blades (Baird 1993 469 and figs 818ndash821) even
though the debitage assemblages are mostly flake
dominated Other possible sawing tools include flaked
limestone artefacts with a thin edge (Fig 12c)
Several cutmarked limestone slabs were found at
Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 (Fig 12andashb) The cutmarks are
shallow or deep incisions Interestingly the cut-
marked slabs do not display evidence of drilling
Conversely the Jilat 13 bench with marks probably
resulting from drilling (Fig 14c see below) has no
cutmarks This suggests segregation of drilling and
sawing activities Some variability in spatial distribu-
tion of different stages in the bead making process
may be further borne out by the discrete distribution
of drills in Jilat 25 contexts where substantial bead
making debris was recovered For example in Jilat 25
Context A15 drills were found clustered in spatial
units towards the northern end of the structure
Drilling
Experiments in drilling of Dabba Marble are in
progress (Bains forthcoming) Here we present
evidence for drilling from bead perforations and
stone tools Other experiments show that perforation
morphology reveals drilling methods and shape
diameter and length of the drill used (eg Gwinnett
and Gorelick 1999) At Jilat perforations indicate
that drilling methods varied and that choices were
probably affected by material hardness
Hand Drilling with Large Piercers and Borers
The simplest method used appears to have been hand
drilling Soft Dabba Marble could have been drilled
using a borer or piercer held in the hand and not
hafted to a drilling stick Drilling by this method
would produce rough irregular and relatively large
perforations (Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990) we see
examples of this in broken beads Borers and piercers
were found at the sites They are relatively large
perforation tools made on blades suitable for
manipulation by hand without a haft (Fig 13 nos
9ndash11)
Rotary Drilling From Two Directions with Hafted Drills
The most common method involved rotary drilling
from two directions Drilling was almost always
a b
c d
Figure 6 Green Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads (andashb) Circular flakes slightly abraded (c) Unabraded
perforated flake (d) Finished disc bead
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 143
bipolar That is the blank was drilled to roughly
halfway through then turned and the perforation
completed from the opposite direction As the two
perforations converged the result was an hourglass-
shaped perforation (Fig 9e) Experiments indicate
that this prevents chipping and flaking of the
alternate face which can occur if a blank is perforated
completely from only one direction (Possehl 1981)
Most hourglass perforations on both soft and
hard stones appear to have been produced by rotary
drilling Rotary drilling results in regular perforations
and concentric striations on them (Gorelick and
Gwinnett 1990) We observed both traits on many
broken beads and blanks (Fig 9b) Perforations of
hourglass form included very small drillholes indi-
cating that the drilling tools were smaller than
piercers and borers made on blades The probable
drills in this case were small drills on bladelets and
especially drill bits on burin spalls (Fig 13 nos 1 4
5 7) Microscopic examination of perforations is in
progress (Bains forthcoming)
Oddly piercing and drilling tools were found in
relatively low absolute numbers at the two sites (eg
Baird 1993 505ndash06 625 for Jilat 13 early phase
about 4 of tools were piercers or drills for the Jilat
25 which have concentrations of bead-making debris
just under 3 of tools were spall drills) However
specific contextual data other technological consid-
erations and comparisons with other sites give us
confidence that these were the main tools involved in
the drilling and that the low absolute numbers of
drills abandoned may sometimes relate to systematic
removal or discard of these tools by the artisans For
example burin spall drills were closely associated
spatially with bead-making debris in specific activity
areas in the Jilat 25 structure eg Context Aa15 in
the buildingrsquos northern area (Baird 1993 521 see
Table 6) In addition Jilat 13 and 25 produced large
numbers of angle burins including truncation burins
from which burin spalls were detached (eg about
29 of all tools at J13rsquos early phase were burins)
(Baird 1993 500 516 520ndash26 625) Burins are
a b c
d e f
Figure 7 Red Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads from Jilat 25 Context Aa15 (andashb) Circular flakes
slightly abraded (c) Heavily abraded and perforated disc bead blank edge abrasion incomplete (d) Abraded
perforated blank abrasion not complete on face (endashf) Finished disc beads
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
144 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
contextually closely associated with drills and bead-
making debris in occupation fills at Jilat 25 (c 30 of
tools from relevant Jilat 25 contexts were burins) mdash a
situation also seen at Jebel Naja in the Basalt Desert mdash
where both experiments and microwear studies suggest
that drill bits on burin spalls were used for bead-
making (Baird 1993 521 Finlayson and Betts 1990)
Burin spall drills would have had some technolo-
gical advantages over bladelet drills One advantage
is that the triangular or rectangular cross-sections of
burin spall drills make them stronger and less likely
to break during drilling In addition the manner of
their retouch from the same direction on each edge
creates a prismatic cross-section that probably served
to produce a neater hole and to make drilling more
efficient and possibly faster and reduce breakage in
drilling The tips of burin spall drills are blunted
which is an advantage in drilling hard stone (Gorelick
and Gwinnett 1990) Predictability and miniaturiza-
tion of burin spall drills may be relevant to an
Figure 8 Chaines operatoires for disc beads Sequence A refers to a disc bead made on a thin flake Sequence B refers
to a disc bead made on a thick flake Sequence C refers to a disc bead made on a tabular roughout not a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 145
apparent increased standardization in perforation
size observed at Jilat 25 from an early phase to a later
phase (Critchley 2000)
Since we have evidence of rotary drilling from bead
perforations we believe that drill bits were hafted to
sticks (probably made of wood) Drill bits on burin
spalls would have been too small to manipulate
effectively by hand alone
To work efficiently a drill needs to be weighted
and stabilized and there must be some means of
protecting the artisanrsquos hand Ground stone artefacts
support the idea that rotary drilling with drill bits
hafted to drilling sticks was in use They include a
probable capstone made of limestone from Jilat 25
The capstone would have been held in the hand
enabling the beadmaker to manipulate the drilling
stick from the top (Fig 14a) This artefact resembles
a miniature bowl and fits easily into one hand The
interior surface displays use wear circular striations
parallel to the rim and vertical striations perpendi-
cular to the rim The base of the interior converges to
a flat surface about 1 cm in diameter
Some Levantine Neolithic sites have revealed
similar objects with similar wear (Banning 1998
Wright 1992 fig 5ndash15b) and a comparable item
was found at Jarmo (Moholy-Nagy 1983 fig 12913
Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990 30) Capstones are
characteristic of the use of bow drills (Banning
1998 Foreman 1978) but strictly speaking they
are not necessarily diagnostic of the bow drill
(theoretically simpler drilling techniques involving
hafting might have been facilitated by the use of
a capstone) For the moment we can say that
at Jilat 13 and 15 the evidence for rotary drilling
is unequivocal However the evidence for the use
of the bow drill while suggestive is not quite
definitive
Size data considered carefully support a link
between burin-spall drills and beads To interpret
dimensions of drills and perforations we must keep
in mind that stone bead drilling was overwhelmingly
bipolar and converging Thus drills did not have to
penetrate all the way through the full height of the
bead mdash only about half of it Therefore what matters
a b c
d e f
Figure 9 Green Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks and finished beads (a) Hexagonal blank flaked but not abraded (b)
Abraded hexagonal blank (c) Abraded blank not perforated (d) Perforation error on abraded blank (e)
Finished bead broken showing bipolar perforation and hourglass perforation shape (f) Perforated barrel bead
almost finished except for final abrasion to smooth out last surface irregularities
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
146 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
is the very tips of the drill bits mdash the upper few
millimetres mdash not the full length of the drills
Since disc beads are consistently about 25 to
26 mm in height only the upper 15 mm or so of the
drills mdash the most distal ends of the tips mdash had to
have been about 21 mm or less in thickness to
lsquomatchrsquo the perforation diameters of disc beads
(Table 4) In the case of barrel beads since barrel
beads were between 64 and 71 mm in height about
32 to 36 mm of the most distal ends of the drill bits
have to have been about 21 mm or less in thickness
to lsquomatchrsquo the perforations of barrel beads (Table 5)
Measurements of the drill bit tips within these
small uppermost reaches show that the maximal
thicknesses of the drill bitsrsquo distal tips fall within the
range of sizes indicated by the perforations (Fig 13)
Multi-stage Drilling
Sometimes drilling may have been accomplished in
several stages Some beads particularly those made of
harder stones have smooth cylindrical perforations
with parallel walls displaying no hint of the
hourglass shape
One way to achieve this is to create the hourglass
perforation and then to turn it into a perfect
cylindrical perforation via the use of a second drilling
procedure An example of this was cited by Calley
(1989) who proposed that two tools found in
carnelian bead workshops at Early Bronze Age
Kumartepe (Turkey) had complementary functions
a drill bit for making the initial hourglass perforation
and a borer for finishing and smoothing it into a
cylindrical perforation Since both drill bits and
borers were found on the Jilat sites this method of
finishing perforations could have been used
At Jilat 13 and 25 evidence for multi-stage drilling
can be seen in some beads which have a depression on
one or both faces The depression may be a result of
drilling with a larger drill bit first in order to provide
a guide for the final perforation with a finer drill bit
Such a technique is seen in India-Pakistan (Possehl
1981 39 Kenoyer 1992b 73)
a b c
d e f
Figure 10 Green Dabba Marble pendant blanks and finished pendants (a) Tabular roughout flaked into approximately
trapezoidal shape but not abraded (b) Abraded trapezoidal blank with sawing mark at bottom (c) Perforated
asymmetrical triangular pendant blank incompletely abraded (note striations on face) (d) Finished asymmetri-
cal triangular pendant (e) Pendant blank made on a flake unabraded (f) Nearly-finished pendant made on a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 147
Stabilizing Beads Anvils and Drilling Benches
What method was used to stabilize a bead during
drilling The simplest technique is to fix a bead to a
stone anvil with an adhesive Ethnography and
experiments show that such anvils can be small (the
size of handstones) (Foreman 1978 figs 6ndash7) Use of
such an anvil should result in small shallow
depressions a form of use-damage resulting from
force exerted from above Figure 14b shows a small
flat stone from Jilat 25 with a central depression of
the expected size and depth
Figure 14c shows the limestone bench from Jilat 13
(previously discussed) with a number of such pits in
the centre The marks are evenly spaced and are
concentrated in one small well-defined area on the
widest part of the bench this wide area was also
finely abraded
We see this bench as a multifunctional worktable
anvil We suspect that the beadmaker sat on the
narrow part of the bench (straddling it) placed bead
blanks on the pitted work surface fixed them with
adhesive and then drilled them The bench also
displays evidence of other activities including flaking
and grinding
Adhesives for hafting chipped stone tools could
have been adapted for use in fixing beads to anvils
Bitumen would be one candidate In some cultures a
wooden frame with cup-holes is sometimes used for
stabilizing beads (Kenoyer 1986 P Wright 1982)
The holes are filled with beeswax and clay the bead is
inserted into the wax-clay mixture which hardens
holding the bead steady After drilling beads are
released by breaking the wax-clay mixture (Allchin
1979 Stocks 1989) As wood was probably scarce in
Jilat and as there are no indications of the use of
clay we can probably rule out this technique
However stone items with cup-holes are seen in
Neolithic sites (Kirkbride 1966 Wright 1992
fig 527b)
Abrasion
Ground stone artefacts are crucial to bead produc-
tion in traditional technologies (Foreman 1978
Inizan et al 1992 Kenoyer et al 1991 53 Moholy-
Nagy 1983 294 Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58)
Grinding of beads can be achieved by abrading
each bead individually with a hand held abrader or
by rubbing them on a large grinding slab Either
method will produce linear striations of the type we
see on many unfinished beads (cf Figs 7cndashd and 10c)
However final shaping of disc and cylindrical beads
was most likely achieved by stringing them or loading
them on to a thin rod capable of penetrating the
perforation (individually or in groups) and then
rolling them on a grinding slab adding abrasives
(such as sand) and water to produce a smoother finish
(Foreman 1978 Moholy-Nagy 1983 298) Some disc
beads with parallel edges perpendicular to the faces
would probably have been rolled on a flat smooth
stone Other beads with facetted sharply angled or
bevelled edges (eg many barrel beads) suggest that
they were rolled or abraded along a stone with
grooves and slanting sides (eg Fig 15a c)
Abrasion of bead blanks may have been a multi-
stage process involving a number of materials of
different textures and hardness In an early stage
grinding of bead materials on vesicular basalt would
have been the easiest way to abrade a large nodule
quickly The pores of vesicular basalt and pumice
form natural cutting lsquoteethrsquo comparable to the metal
rasp used by present-day sculptors At Jilat 13 and
Jilat 25 we found broken fragments of vesicular
basalt grinding slabs but not large complete exam-
ples The small fragments suggest two possibilities
either there were large complete slabs at one time
which were then broken worn out and discarded or
only small fragments of these heavy duty grinding
tools were needed
For finer abrasion sandstone grinding slabs might
be expected None were found However small
Figure 11 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic
sites Tile knives or possible saws for bead-
making From Baird 1993 fig 85
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
148 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
handheld abraders made of sandstones with coarse
hard quartz crystals were found at both sites (Fig
15andashb) Sandstone is not local to Wadi Jilat and these
items were imported and probably used extensively
(resulting in the small size)
For even finer abrasion limestone could have been
used Such needs could have been met by the large
bench of Jilat 13 (Fig 14c) which was finely ground
over a very large area (within which the possible
drilling marks were placed)
Some might see the grooved items made of
sandstone (Fig 15a) and limestone (Fig 15c) as
lsquoshaft straightenersrsquo One or two shaft straightener
fragments made of basalt occur at Jilat 13 Like other
basalt shaft straighteners in Neolithic Jilat (eg Jilat
7) (Garrard et al 1994a Wright 1993) the use-
surfaces of these have U-shaped cross-sections By
contrast the cross sections of the use surfaces on the
sandstone and limestone grooved items are not U-
shaped but have sharp angles We see these tools
mainly as abraders for grinding bead facets espe-
cially on barrel beads The widths of the use surfaces
are 11 mm for the sandstone tool and 138 mm for
the limestone one These dimensions correspond to
the average diameter (5 width) of 31 measured green
Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks from Jilat 13 (N 5
31 Mean diameter 5 92 mm standard deviation 5
28) Grooved stones are used in bead grinding in
a
b c
Figure 12 Ground stone artefacts probably for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Cutmarked slab (limestone) Jilat
13 The cutmarks are shallow and are concentrated in the left area running parallel to the main axes of the
slab (b) Cutmarked slab fragment (limestone) Jilat 13 showing deep cutmarks (c) Flaked and ground abra-
sive cutting tool made of limestone Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 149
modern India (Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58) a
grooved sandstone tool was found with an unfinished
bead at Catalhoyuk (Wright and Bains 2007)
Tosi and Vidale (1990) regard failure resulting
from breakage or human error as more common in
the grinding stage than during perforation although
this depends on material and opinion (Kenoyer 2003
18) In some cases it might be more efficient to shape
the bead first before attempting perforation This
may explain why barrel beads tend to be shaped and
abraded prior to perforation
Finished beads were always finely abraded and
sometimes polished to the extent of reflecting light
Ethnographic observations indicate that polishing is
sometimes done by placing beads en masse in a
leather bag along with an abrasive and shaking and
rolling the bags for long periods (Allchin 1979
Kenoyer 2003) This simple method would have been
more likely than the method of rolling beads and
abrasives in a wooden barrel which is also docu-
mented ethnographically (Kenoyer 2003)
However shaking beads in a bag with an abrasive
tends to produce beads with rounded convex edges
(Gwinnett and Gorelick 1989) Some beads at Jilat
have this form but many mdash especially those made of
the hard cherty red Dabba Marble mdash have sharp
edges perpendicular to bead faces indicating that
they were individually polished or polished during
rolling on a string or stick Alternative methods of
polishing can include rubbing with leather or wood
with the addition of fine sand or chalk and water or
with animal hairwool and animal fat (Kenoyer 1986
20) These methods would have been possible with
Jilat technology
Craft Specialization and Comparisons withOther Sites
Technology needs to be studied not only in terms of
materials and techniques but also in terms of social
groups involved in artefact production individual
artisans and skill (Dobres and Hoffmann 1999 2ndash12)
In egalitarian societies craft skill and knowledge of
Figure 13 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic sites Drilling and piercing tools From Baird 1993 fig 82
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
150 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
special materials can enhance the power of an
individual or a group encouraging hierarchy
(Dobres 2000 119ndash20)
These questions force us to reconsider issues of
craft specialization a term often used loosely or in
widely different ways Three concepts of specializa-
tion are considered here individual specialists
specialization between households or domestic
groups within a given site and site specialization
within a regional or social network of craft produc-
tion and exchange
Costin (1991) draws a contrast between indepen-
dent specialization and attached specialization
Independent specialization involves production of
utilitarian goods for nonelites and can be household-
based or based in special workshops Attached
specialization refers to production of prestige goods
under control of elites Whilst Costin notes that
attached specialization can also be based in house-
holds or workshops we often think of attached
specialization in connection with central institutions
and urban or state-level societies It is of considerable
interest that in early urban societies the making of
stone personal ornaments in association with central
institutions figures prominently (Stein 1996 Vidale
1989)
How earlier forms of craft specialization may have
evolved into large-scale attached specialization is
poorly understood Most research has concentrated
on later stages in this process (eg Stein 1996) in
discussions of earlier forms of specialization defini-
tions and criteria for diagnosis could sometimes be
clearer (eg Quintero and Wilke 1998 Rollefson and
Parker 2002 Rosen 1997) If we are dealing with
a
c
b
Figure 14 Ground stone artefacts probably used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Capstone made of limestone
Jilat 25 (b) Handstone probably used as an anvil or hammer Jilat 25 note depression in face and flake scars
at edges (c) Limestone drilling bench Jilat 13 Note evidence of use-wear on the left and widest area of the
bench smooth abraded surface drill marks in the centre-left face small flake scars with negative bulbs of per-
cussion close to the edge of the bench
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 151
specialization in Neolithic societies it is probably
independent specialization Still Neolithic societies
may fall between Costinrsquos two categories Neolithic
groups were clearly producing prestige goods perso-
nal ornaments are not strictly utilitarian and there is
at least a possibility that elites were emerging (Byrd
1994 Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002 Verhoeven
2002)
Individual Specialists
First there is the issue of identifying individual
specialists Some use lsquospecializationrsquo to refer to any
situation in which some artisans have high levels of
skill a view that has been criticized (Rice 1991) We
agree with Rice that identifying a high level of
technical skill in a craft is not on its own sufficient
for a diagnosis of specialization since it robs the
concept of force in discussing long term change (by
this criterion the Upper Palaeolithic was riddled
with craft specialists) However we would argue
that if there are other indications of craft specializa-
tion a search for levels of ability in different
individuals is appropriate mdash if the data permit
Such data would be primary refuse from well-dated
sites of high temporal resolution in which technical
processes (eg errors in chaines operatoires) can
reveal experts vs novices (Pigeot 1990 Stout 2002
Vanzetti and Vidale 1994)
In the case of Jilat 13 and 25 we are dealing with
much primary refuse and two closely dated sites (see
above and Tables 6ndash7) mdash with periodic use of the
sites over a time range on the order of 200 years at
most and possibly much less Jilat 25 yielded activity
areas with clear spatial clusters as do a number of
contexts at Jilat 13 Space does not permit us to
present all details (this awaits the final site report)
but we feel confident that aggregate consideration of
the data from each site allows us to discuss general
questions of individual skills mdash master craftsmen vs
novices
a b
c
Figure 15 Ground stone artefacts possibly used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Grooved sandstone abrading
tool Jilat 13 (b) Sandstone hand-held abrader Jilat 25 (c) Grooved limestone abrading tool Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
152 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
To explore this we analysed unfinished blanks and
the frequency of perforation errors Drilling is a
sensitive moment in bead production when many
things can go wrong (Kenoyer 2003) A low incidence
in perforation errors combined with high numbers of
successfully finished beads and evidence of standar-
dization should be reasonably good indicators of an
artisanrsquos mastery This is the situation seen at Jilat 25
(Fig 7) In all of 93 blanks from Jilat 25 only 2 were
perforation errors a failure rate of only 2
On the other hand a high incidence of perforation
errors would suggest that a beadmaker was a relative
novice Jilat 13 produced more blanks with perfora-
tion errors than Jilat 25 We thought we might find
individual contexts with a high rate of error
suggesting apprentices
The data did not bear this out Of 223 bead blanks
from Jilat 13 (all phases) 22 were perforation errors
mdash a failure rate of 98 All but two errors were on
barrel bead blanks of green Dabba Marble The
others were one pendant blank and one irregular
bead blank These 22 blanks were distributed across
20 different contexts and no more than 2 perforation
errors were found in any one context
A close look at those contexts reveals low error
rates In Context B21 2 green barrel bead blanks
with perforation errors were found with 5 other
blanks The others included green and red barrel and
disc blanks This context also yielded 5 successfully
finished beads including black and red barrel beads
and a green disc Black and green debitage and a
discoidal handstone were also found here In Context
B71 2 blanks with perforation errors were found
along with 9 other blanks and 10 successfully
finished beads including green Dabba Marble barrel
beads but also black and red disc beads Much
debitage was found along with a flaked limestone
cutting tool (cf Fig 12c) and a limestone object with
a drill mark
The higher rate of error at Jilat 13 compared to
Jilat 25 could be because artisans at Jilat 13 were
making more of the larger more complex barrel
beads (as opposed to simple discs see Tables 2ndash3)
which offer greater chances of failure due to the
longer drilling distance However at Jilat 13 the
overall failure rate was still quite low particularly
considering the overall volume of material recovered
(Table 1)
We conclude that the beadmakers at Jilat 13
included few trainees These appear to have been
skilled artisans a small task force composed of
relative experts This raises the question of whether
these beadmakers were examples of lsquoproducer
specialistsrsquo as traditionally defined that is people
involved in
production of a good by a relatively small number of
individuals (compared to the total output and
number of consumers) individuals who are as a
result of this selectivity and the routinization or
repetition of their tasks particularly skilled in
manufacture (Rice 1991 263)
Jilat 13 and 25 do suggest small numbers of
individuals and a certain selectivity in who was
involved in stone bead making The quantity of
debitagedebris relative to (1) the number of finished
beads and (2) the modest sizes of these structures
collectively suggest that these craftsmenwomen
served a larger number of consumers relative to the
number of craftsmen involved here If so who were
these consumers mdash other residents of Jilat or groups
beyond
Intra-site Specialization Between Domestic Groups
Several studies suggest ways of identifying different
forms of craft specialization between domestic groups
in a site For later sites Stein (1996) has explored
spatial data particularly how craft production
facilities are dispersed among domestic units or
located near special (or central) institutions In
Neolithic sites questions about dispersal between
households and possible links between craft produc-
tion and special buildings or special sites have been
underexplored
For specialization Costin (1991) suggests that we
would expect (1) variability between production
units (eg households occupations regions) in
relevant artefacts (2) high densities of craft produc-
tion debris relative to some other generally used
item in some production units (3) high ratios of
unfinished goods to finished goods in some produc-
tion units Kenoyer et alrsquos (1991) ethnoarchaeolo-
gical studies of modern stone bead-making in
Khambat (India) suggest something similar in the
case of households as production units There non-
specialist households engaging in casual opportu-
nistic bead production revealed low quantities of
bead-making debris few unfinished beads and little
standardization in finished beads By contrast
households specializing in bead production were
characterized by stockpiling of large quantities of
raw materials many unfinished beads and more
standardized finished products
In looking at whole occupations (ie phases within
sites) as a unit of observation we argue elsewhere
(Wright and Garrard 2003) that artefact densities and
other data from 13 PPNB and 8 PPNCELN
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 153
occupations in the Jilat-Azraq region suggest that
PPNCELN producers were more specialized than
those of the PPNB mdash at least in the Jilat-Azraq
region Unlike the PPNB sites Jilat 13 and 25 have
very high densities of bead-making debris specialized
tools for drilling and sawing there is an abundance of
unfinished materials relative to finished products
bead-making tools and debris are abundant relative
to normal domestic food processing equipment
(ground stone artefacts) (Wright and Garrard 2003
cf Costin 1991)
That argument is chronological comparing the
PPNB to the PPNCELN occupations and we stand
behind it for the Jilat-Azraq case (different trajec-
tories may apply to south Jordan and the Negev see
below) Still it leaves open the issue of house-to-
house variation within Jilat 25 or Jilat 13 As we have
only one excavated structure per site we cannot on
present evidence argue that each building housed a
group of specialists serving other households within
the same site In fact we have no direct evidence that
there were other structures on each site mdash the ones
excavated were the only ones visible on the surface
There are nuances of material and typological
choices between the Jilat 25 structure (red disc beads)
and the Jilat 13 structure (larger complex green
ornaments) but these nuances are beyond the scope
of this paper
In all we suspect that stone bead production at
Jilat 13 and 25 was geared not for other domestic
units lsquoin camprsquo but for use by these quite mobile
communities themselves mdash as well as export to other
sites within the steppe and beyond (see below) In
Costinrsquos terms (Costin 1991) Jilat 13 and 25 might
each be an example of an independent non-centra-
lized dispersed workshop possibly lsquofamily runrsquo (Rice
1991 262) mdash in which handling of Dabba Marble
was not routinely entrusted to novices
There are hints of house-to-house variations in
bead-making in major villages with larger samples of
domestic structures as in PPNB Beidha At PPNB
Beidha (earlier than Jilat 13 and 25) Building 14
stands out
Other forms of production besides food preparation
were less common Building 14 represented the best
example of artefact production in these basements
A wide range of artefacts was recovered apparently
associated with building 14rsquos basement floor
Particularly widespread were stone polishers bone
tools raw material (including hematite malachite
and magnesium) more than 60 unmodified marine
shells and at least two dozen beads of shell stone
and bone some of which were in various stages of
production Some artifacts lay on stone slabs
indicating that at least some slabs may have
functioned as work surfaces (Byrd 2005 117)
Such hints are intriguing Still macro-artefacts
from house floors are affected by problems of site
formation and house abandonment Micro-artefact
data can help (Rainville 2005) House-by-house
exploration with attention to micro-artefacts is
needed (Wright and Bains 2007)
Site Specialization Within a Regional Network of Craft
Production and Exchange
Both sites and other Neolithic sites in Jilat and
Azraq exhibit resource specialization
the selective use of particular resources in craft
manufacture such as certain clays that are repeat-
edly used (Rice 1991 262)
The Jilat artisans emphasized Dabba Marble from
a wider array of available stone types The Jilat-
Azraq sites collectively show that green Dabba
Marble was a special target This is revealed in both
frequencies and weights (for debris data and weight
data see Wright and Garrard 2003 for frequency
data on beads and blanks see Tables 2 and 3) At
both sites debris is greatly dominated by green
Dabba Marble mdash 80ndash95 of debris by both weight
(grams) and frequency Green Dabba Marble also
dominates blanks in terms of weight at both sites mdash
indicating the use of green for making larger heavier
and more conspicuous ornaments
Turning to frequencies at Jilat 13 about 90 of
blanks are green and only 5 are red However
finished beads include both green and red forms in
comparable percentages (404 and 436 respec-
tively) (Table 3) suggesting that finished red beads
were brought into the building from a place of
manufacture located somewhere else At Jilat 25
blanks of red and green Dabba Marble occur in
comparable proportions (409 green 43 red)
whilst finished beads are predominantly red (588)
(Table 2) If Jilat 13 and 25 were absolute contem-
poraries this could suggest variations in choices and
exchange between residents of different structures
Rice (1991) has defined site specialization as a
situation in which a site is located near a special
resource and the inhabitants emphasize production of
a craft based on that resource Relative to other sites
not so located the range of site functions and
activities would be expected to be more limited
Thus site specialization
involves individual localities or sites having evidence
of limited functions or intensive productive activity
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
154 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
often determined by fortuitous environmental fac-
tors This includes proximity to mineral deposits
and so forth (Rice 1991 262)
Do Jilat 13 and 25 fit this concept In both sites
15 km from the source we have a wealth of evidence
for intensive stone bead production and scanty
evidence for routine food processing tools (Wright
and Garrard 2003) However Jilat 25 may be closer
to the limited function model envisioned by Rice In
Jilat 13 bead-making is clearly intensive but we are
also dealing with a chipped stone assemblage of not
only drills and burins but also projectile points and
other tools Jilat 13 also reveals production of
figurines (of animals phalluses and arrow-shaped
forms) and sculpted pillars (Baird 1993 Garrard
et al 1994a Martin 1999 Wright 1992 1993)
In all Jilat 13 and 25 suggest that we can apply
Ricersquos lsquosite specializationrsquo on the grounds of intensive
productive activity and proximity to source mdash but
with the qualification that this specialization was also
embedded in hunting-herding activities and at Jilat
13 production of other special crafts unique among
the sites of a symbolic nature (figurines pillars)
One possibility is that we are dealing with a camp
of hunter-herder corporate groups mdash part of a wider
regional network mdash engaged in special activities in
remote areas involving art personal ornaments and
ritual Such groups are suggested by other data from
the PPNBndashPPNC time span for example Nahal
Hemar (ornaments masks hunting tools) Dhuweila
(carving of hunters with dress variations)
Catalhoyuk (images of hunters with dress variations
as in the bull hunt mural) and Gobeklitepe (sculpture
production including a quarry wild-animal icono-
graphy hunting) (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988 Betts
1998 Mellaart 1967 Schmidt 2000) In all these data
hint that craft production of special items was
embedded in hunting andor herding activities in
remote areas this may have been a key means by
which exotic materials reached major villages In a
very broad way this supports a sketch outlined by
Bar Yosef (Bar-Yosef 2001) although we do not
necessarily agree with specifics of his model eg the
territories boundaries social groups and mechanisms
which he suggests (cf Asouti 2006) Instead we see
this as one example of diverse strategies of social
networking linking lineages households and commu-
nities in the Neolithic (Wright forthcoming)
Returning to the stone bead data from Jilat 13 and
25 the apparent stockpiling of raw material and
intensive production activity hints at production of
the green material for export (see above and Wright
and Garrard 2003) New data now add weight to this
idea and suggest the following provisional picture of
regional specializations and exchanges in ornaments
(1) Based on typology technology and materials thereappears to be a distinctive eastern Jordanian koine ornetwork of stone bead manufacture and exchangefeaturing Dabba Marble and a probable regionalspecialization in it
Other Neolithic bead production sites are known
from eastern Jordan Indications are that most of the
green bead materials are Dabba Marble probably
from Jilat (further work is needed) In these sites
diversity of materials used seems low with few
imports from beyond the steppe Shells however
testify to wider networks (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989
Cooke and Reese in Betts 1998 Garrard et al 1994a
Reese 1991)
Azraq 31 (PPNB and ELN) is in our suite of study
materials (Baird et al 1992 Garrard et al 1994a
Wright and Garrard 2003) and debris blanks and
beads were found Preliminary XRF analysis of green
samples (by Groom) indicates that the material is
consistent with Jilat Dabba Marble Typology and
technology are also similar and as at Jilat 25 burin
spall drills were closely associated with bead-making
in specific activity areas (Baird 1993 521 Baird et al
1992 25) However the ground stone revealed no
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
(Wright 1992 1993 Wright in Baird et al 1992)
Material used for beads at Dhuweila (PPNB and
ELN) has been called Dabba Marble (Cooke and
Reese in Betts 1998) It is consistent in appearance
with our material although we have no details on
mineralogy or source Typologically these beads are
similar to those of Jilat 13 and 25 The ground stone
is very different from the suite at the Jilat sites
(Wright in Betts 1998) for comparisons of chipped
stone assemblages see Baird (1993)
At Bawwab al-Ghazal (Late PPNB) Rollefson
et al found drills bits on burin spalls tile knives
beads bead blanks and bead debris some of which
they called green Dabba Marble (Rollefson et al
1999 Quintero et al 2004) They argued that there is
a possible source of this material outcropping near
the site mdash lsquoFor the last raw material [green Dabba
Marble] small nodules of the green limestone were
embedded in the local bedrockrsquo (Rollefson et al 1999
3) However as shown in Appendix A the true
Dabba Marble only occurs in a restricted area west of
Wadi Jilat The lsquobedrockrsquo which outcrops near Azraq
31 and Bawwab al-Ghazal is travertine and some of
this formed during the late Pleistocene and Holocene
The nearby Epipalaeolithic site of Azraq 17 was
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 155
found partially embedded in travertine and artefacts
including nodules of imported basalt were found in
the travertine at this site It is possible that the
nodules of green limestone found at Bawwab al-
Ghazal were imported Dabba Marble which subse-
quently became incorporated in a travertine near the
site An alternative possibility is that the local
travertine is infused with green minerals In Wadi
Jilat travertines were noted with traces of green
minerals and in the Siwaqa area to the south-west of
Jilat there are extensive travertines some of which
are infused with pale green minerals including
volkonskoite (Barjous 1986 mdash see also Appendix A)
In eastern Jordan some Neolithic sites are greatly
dominated by burins (lsquoburin sitesrsquo) At a number of
these there is evidence for stone bead-making (eg
Jebel Naja) These lsquoburin sitesrsquo typically reveal few
ground stone tools we know of no examples of
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
from them It was argued that the main role of the
burins was production of spalls for drills used mainly
for beads (Betts 1987 1998 Finlayson and Betts
1990) However burin sites are not universally
associated with stone bead making At Jilat 23 24
and 26 burins were numerous but other evidence for
bead-making is scanty (Baird 1993 520)
Therefore some have questioned whether
burins and burin spalls in such sites were solely or
primarily intended for making drills and beads
noting that other functions are possible (Quintero
et al 2004 209) Given that these sites typically
represent short-term occupations it is possible that
many sites might be spall manufacture sites with
spalls transported to other settings where drill
manufacture and bead manufacture took place such
as Jilat 13 and 25 Rollefson expressed doubt that
either bladelet or burin spall drills would have been
used in bow drills partly because of their fragility and
also because most of them have a pronounced curve
on the long axis which would have made high speed
drilling impossible (Rollefson and Parker 2002) But
Finlayson and Betts (1990) and Berna (1995)
successfully experimented using burin spalls with
bow drills and Kenoyer (personal communication
2007) notes that drills made on burin spalls are the
most common type of drill in diverse prehistoric
stone bead-making sites (in India Pakistan and
elsewhere)
In the case of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 we believe burin-
spall drills were part of the bead-making repertoire
for reasons noted above This does not rule out other
uses of burin spalls Nor does it rule out the use of
other perforating techniques Drills do not have to be
made of stone when soft stones are being perforated
mdash wood bone and abrasives can be used (Foreman
1978)
(2) There are hints of export of Dabba Marble to at leastsome villages in the Levantine corridor However majorNeolithic villages display much diversity in materials andespecially more importing of exotic stones than is seen inthe eastern Jordanian sites
Many writers report Neolithic beads made of
unspecified lsquogreenstonersquo This term is unfortunate
since it can refer to metabasalt and similar altered
igneous rocks (Schumann 1992 248) Some of these
lsquogreenstonesrsquo may be limestone with apatite or other
materials (eg Garfinkel 1987 81ndash82 Hauptmann
2004 Talbot 1983 789) Beads of green limestones
rich in fluorapatite were found at late PPNB Basta in
southern Jordan (Hauptmann 2004) as confirmed by
XRF and XRD Green beads identified as Dabba
Marble were also reported from Ain Ghazal a site
with both PPNB and PPNC occupations (Rollefson
et al 1990 103ndash04) Whether these are Dabba
Marble from the Jilat source (Appendices AndashB) is
not yet fully clear Ongoing research will sort out
these mysteries (eg D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal
communication Hauptmann 2004)
Major villages in the Levantine Corridor reveal
different degrees of emphasis in styles and materials
often we see a certain emphasis on local materials and
preferences However considerable exchange net-
works are indicated in major villages which display
much wider ranges of stone ornament materials
compared to the eastern Jordanian sites (such as
Ain Ghazal Yiftahel Basta Barsquoja Ghuwayr 1
Fidan 1) mdash along with of course shells (Affonso
and Pernicka 2004 Bienert and Gebel 1998 84ndash86
Garfinkel 1987 Hauptmann 2004 Rollefson and
Simmons 1984 1986 Rollefson et al 1990 Simmons
and Najjar 1998 Starck 1988)
As the Neolithic evolved stone bead-making
entailed increasingly diverse techniques and materi-
als One example may be drills In earlymiddle PPNB
sites most drills are made on bladelets In the late
PPNB PPNC and Late Neolithic there may have
been a gradual increase in drills made on burin spalls
although perhaps not in all regions (Jensen 2004
Rollefson and Parker 2002) Underlining increasing
diversity of technological practice between groups
Baird (2001b) pointed out geographic variation in
this technology with spall drills dominating in the
north-eastern Jordanian steppe from MPPNB
through Early Late Neolithic whilst contemporary
sites to west and south use bladelet blanks for their
piercing tools
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
156 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
and injected with various minerals eg apatites red
iron oxides (Fig 3a) Outcrops show substantial
variations in mineralization even over small areas
in Fig 3b the left side of the outcrop is soft green
Dabba Marble the right side is red Dabba Marble
The geology and mineralogy of Dabba Marble are
presented in Appendices AndashB The Neolithic Jilat
beads are consistent with this source (Appendix B)
Methods of Analysis
Comprehensive recovery of small beads debitage and
micro-artefacts was possible due to intensive fine-
scale sieving All excavated contexts were sieved
through a 5 mm mesh many samples were dry sieved
or wet sieved through a 15 mm mesh (the latter after
flotation) Artefacts from floors were collected from 1
sq m horizontal grid units to permit identification of
activity areas Fine-grained spatial data and micro-
artefacts are important in understanding lithic
technologies (Dunnell and Stein 1989 Cessford and
Mitrovic 2005) This is borne out by the Jilat data
since micro-flakes are one byproduct of stone bead
retouch In cases of intense housecleaning micro-
artefacts may reveal bead-making where macro-
artefacts do not (Wright and Bains 2007)
For each context artefacts were separated by raw
material and classified into major groups nodules
and debitage (Fig 4) roughouts (Fig 5) unfinished
blanks and finished ornaments (Figs 6ndash10) We
counted and weighed each group to determine
relationships between debitage and finished beads
Measurements (diameter height perforation dia-
meter) were taken on beads and blanks to assess
standardization and drilling techniques
Finished ornaments were classified into 8 basic
types (Wright and Garrard 2003) Circular disc beads
are the most numerous smallest and most standar-
dized (Figs 6d 7endashf) They occur in the widest range
of materials most red Dabba Marble beads were
discs Barrelshaped beads are larger more variable
and mostly made of green Dabba Marble (Fig 9endashf)
Pendants are the largest rarest and most diverse
items shaped as triangles rectangles and ovals most
are of green Dabba Marble (Fig 10d f) Bracelets
were made of white chalk (Tables 2ndash3)
Unfinished beads (blanks) were classified according
to the same typology as finished beads when the
intended final product could be ascertained (eg disc
blank) (Tables 2ndash3 Figs 6andashc 7andashd 8 9andashd 10c e)
Within these categories blanks were further classified
according to traces of flaking grinding perforation
Figure 8 shows these stages for 3 sequences of disc
bead manufacture Differences between Sequences A
B and C are differences in the original blank (Stage 1
thin flake thick flake tabular roughout) and presence
or absence of flaking retouch on edges (Stage 2)
Further analyses of sequences for these and other
bead types are still in progress
Debitage was sorted into nodules cores rough-
outs flakes angular shatter micro-flakes and
Table 6 Stone beads blanks and debris Jilat 25 all contexts
Phase Context Description Beads Blanks Debris Comments Selected associated artefacts
Early Aa24 Fill of bedrock cut 0 0 2Early Aa27 Fill of bedrock cut 0 0 1Early Aa19 First occupation fill 29 23 384 1 cutmarked slab 3 sandstone fragments
probably handstones 1 limestone handstoneEarly Aa20 First occupation fill 1 5 6Early Aa21 First occupation fill 4 1 4Early Aa18 Early fill in entrance area 1 5 8Early A 44 Early fill in entrance area 0 0 3Middle Aa15 Second occupation fill 47 31 544 1 limestone capstone 1 grooved stone (basalt)
1 sandstone abraderMiddle Aa16 Hearth 1 1 0Middle Aa13 Fill of stone feature 1 0 81Middle Aa10 Fill of stone feature 0 0 3Middle Aa11 Ash lense 3 0 17Middle Aa7 Third occupation fill 17 15 109 2 grooved stones (limestone and basalt)
2 basalt handstones 1 sandstone fragmentMiddle Aa8 Third occupation fill 1 1 1Middle Aa14 Fill in entrance area 7 3 4Middle A 42 Fill in entrance area 0 0 1
Late Aa 2 Sandy late fill 1 0 55 1 sandstone abrader Bead 1 RDM disc Debris all GDMLate A 6 Rubbly late fill 7 4 72Late A 33 Late fill in entrance area 0 0 1Late A 36 Late fill in entrance area 0 0 6Late A 34 Fill of late intrusive feature 1 0 0
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
138 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
micro-shatter (Fig 4) Definitions of these categories
are broadly similar to those established in chipped
stone analysis (Andrefsky 1998)
Flaking and Initial Reduction Nodules CoresDebitage and Roughouts
The soft limestone and hard chert in Dabba Marble
permits it to be worked via chipping flaking
grinding sawing and drilling To varying degrees
the material has conchoidal fracture Where chert
content is high conchoidal fracture is excellent
Limestone itself also has conchoidal fracture parti-
cularly when fine-grained as Dabba Marble is The
tabular structure of the laminated limestones also
makes it possible to create flat faces easily
The difficulty of shaping beads would have varied
depending on specific material Most green Dabba
marble is fairly homogeneous composed of calcite-rich
soft limestone (Mohs 5 3) and apatite (Mohs 5 5)
Red Dabba marble occurs in a soft pale pink variety
(Mohs 5 3ndash4) a dark pink variety of medium
hardness and a dark red siliceous variety essentially
red chert (Mohs 5 7) This red chert variant (Mohs 7)
will have been more difficult to modify Flaking and
chipping were particularly important in working this
material and abrasion will have been more difficult
This may be why so many beads of the red cherty
Dabba Marble were disc beads made on flakes (Fig 7)
Flaking figured prominently in the making of
beads from softer materials However sawing and
abrasion played a greater role in modification of these
materials Comparable variations in technique
depending on material hardness are seen at other
prehistoric sites (Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990)
Table 7 Stone beads blanks and debris Jilat 13 selected contexts
Phase Context Description Beads Blanks Debris Comments Selected associated artefacts
Early C106 Fill of bedrock cut 0 0 1 1 circular limestone diskEarly B77 First occupation fill 1 5 752Early B79 Fill of hearth 0 0 6 1 limestone handstoneEarly B71 Second occupation fill 10 11 750 1 drilled and grooved limestone object
1 flaked limestone rsquoscraperrsquo 6 basalt fragmentsEarly A17 Lower pavement 0 0 0 1 cutmarked slabEarly A15 Third occupation fill 1 8 8 1 worked limestone object snake-shaped flint pebbleEarly A16 Third occupation fill 2 1 17 1 miniature pestle basaltEarly A18 Third occupation fill 0 0 11 Basalt fragments 3 from vessels
1 handstonepestle fragment 6 unidentifiableEarly B44 Third occupation fill 5 9 74Early B45 Third occupation fill 0 2 139 1 basalt handstone fragmentEarly B69 Third occupation fill 6 5 383 No ground stoneEarly C56 Third occupation fill 8 5 313 1 double-grooved sandstone abrader (Fig 15a)
Middle A3 Fourth occupation fill 3 4 60 1 limestone capstone ( 2 surfaces) 5 basalt fragmentsMiddle A5 Fourth occupation fill 7 9 139 1 cutmarked flint slab 1 grooved limestone object
ochred flints figurines pillarsMiddle B31 Fourth occupation fill 4 2 33Middle B38 Fourth occupation fill 12 6 520Middle B54 Fourth occupation fill 1 0 9 1 limestone figurine (bird)Middle B56 Fourth occupation fill 1 1 14 1 basalt grinding slab fragmentMiddle C39 Fourth occupation fill 10 12 254 1 flint cutmarked slab flaked limestone rsquoscraperrsquo
Late C14 Foundation for upperpavement
0 5 65 1 basalt ground fragment
Late B3 Upper pavement 0 0 0 1 cutmarked limestone slab 1 post-socketLate C4 Upper pavement 0 0 0 1 drilling and abrading bench (Fig 14c)Late A2 Fifth occupation fill 4 2 154 10 figurines or figurine preforms suggesting animals
phalluses arrows (flint limestone travertine) 1 pebblemortar or capstone with ochre (limestone) 1 perforatedobject 1 handstone on flake (flint) 2 vessel fragments1 ochred pebble burnt pebble (limestone) 1 groundindeterminate stone (basalt) Beads are 2 barrels and2 pendants blanks are 1 barrel and 1 indeterminate
Late B4 Fifth occupation fill 0 2 7 1 grooved limestone abrader (Fig 15c) Blanks are bothpendant blanks
Late B7 Fifth occupation fill 2 5 150 1 cutmarked limestone 1 basalt handstonepestlefragment
Late B9 Fifth occupation fill 0 0 3 1 perforated pumice abraderLate B21 Fifth occupation fill 5 7 193 1 basalt handstone 2 basalt fragmentsLate C3 Fifth occupation fill 2 4 61
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 139
Five main stages of manufacture were identified
although reduction sequences vary These are (1)
reduction of raw nodules to cores roughouts and
flakes via flaking and chipping (2) shaping of
roughouts and flakes into blanks via further flaking
chipping sawing and rough grinding (3) perforation
via boring andor drilling (4) further grinding to
produce the final shape (5) final polishing
Nodules cores and debitage were recovered in
large amounts at Jilat 13 (7369 artefacts 6905 grams)
and Jilat 25 (1381 artefacts 976 grams) The largest
unworked blocks are of green Dabba Marble They
are about 15 cm in diameter but most are about the
size of an adult human fist Some nodules were
weathered suggesting that they were picked up from
surface rather than quarried from bedrock layers
(Fig 4 top)
Reduction of nodules by flaking resulted in (1)
cores (2) tabular roughouts (3) large flakes (4) large
angular shatter fragments (5) micro-flakes and (6)
micro-shatter (Fig 4) Cores defined as nodules with
two or more flake scars are not numerous or
consistent in form Shatter micro-flakes and micro-
shatter were normally discarded as byproducts
Tabular roughouts and larger flakes were used as
the basis for further reduction into bead blanks
Roughouts are early stages in bead reduction
(Kenoyer 2003 16) At Jilat 13 and 25 roughouts
are tabular reflecting the bedded structure of the
material They were flaked and chipped around the
edges into roughly symmetrical shapes (Figs 5a 10a)
Roughouts were sometimes subjected to initial
drilling or sawing at an early stage prior to any
intense abrasion (Fig 5b) In other cases roughouts
were abraded first (Fig 5d) and then sawn or drilled
(Fig 5c) Tabular roughouts were the basis for
making larger thicker ornaments such as most
pendants and barrel beads (Figs 9ndash10)
Small subcircular flakes were the basis of most disc
beads (Figs 6ndash7) The flakes have platforms bulbs of
percussion on ventral surfaces and often scars from
previous removals on dorsal surfaces A certain
consistency in size shape and morphology suggests
that a prepared-core technology was used to predict
and produce these flakes Since cores are rare we do
not yet know precisely how this was achieved
Experiments are still needed but we suspect that
chipping and flaking was accomplished by varying
Figure 3 (a) View of the modern Dabba Marble quarry west of Wadi Jilat from which raw material samples were
obtained (see Appendices AndashB) (b) Close-up view of metamorphosed deposits in situ with interdigitating green
(left) and red (right) Dabba Marble
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
140 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
uses of indirect percussion soft-hammer percussion
andor pressure flaking since the small size of the
beads required precision The use of antler or horn
for pressure flaking of soft stones is widely seen in the
ethnographic record and experimentally (Foreman
1978 19) Even hard stones can be flaked with soft
hammers made of animal horn (Kenoyer 1986 1994
2003 Kenoyer et al 1991) Cores and flakes do not
clearly indicate use of the Cambay technique of
inverse indirect percussion as seen in carnelian bead-
making (Kenoyer 2003 Possehl 1981) Many blanks
display micro-retouch on the edges On thicker disc
bead blanks micro-flakes were removed by striking
downward at the edge of each bead face (Fig 7c) The
retouch scars show that striking was bipolar ie from
opposite directions Products of this procedure were
micro-flakes (Fig 4 bottom)
Clear indications of heat treatment were rare but
burnt pieces do occur
Sawing Drilling and Abrasion Bead Blanks andFinished Beads
Bead blanks are the further reduction of a roughout
into a form closer to the final bead shape (Kenoyer
2003 16) At Jilat 13 and 25 blanks were abandoned
at many different stages The most extensive evidence
for lithic reduction concerns disc beads it is possible
to identify some chaines operatoires (Fig 8)
Figure 6 illustrates two of these paths for green
Dabba Marble disc beads made on flakes
Sometimes circular flakes were perforated early
before any abrasion (Fig 6c) More often flakes
were abraded slightly on ventral and dorsal surfaces
before any drilling (Fig 6andashb) At this stage edges
were still rough Perforation was added later (Fig
6d) In such cases a number of disc beads were
probably then strung together and abraded on the
edges by rolling the string back and forth on abrasive
stones of varying textures such as coarse sandstone
fine sandstone or limestone The final products were
evenly smoothed disc beads relatively standardized
in size The procedure also resulted in edges that are
sharp perpendicular to the bead faces and flat rather
than convex (Figs 6d 7endashf) Experiments indicate
that this procedure also contributes to the polishing
of faces and edges of beads (cf Foreman 1978)
Figure 7 shows artefacts from one context at Jilat 25
indicating a similar sequence for red Dabba Marble
disc beads from subcircular flake to final disc
For barrel beads the starting point was typically
not a flake but a tabular roughout A roughout was
often flaked into an approximately cylindrical form
sometimes with a hexagonal transverse cross section
(that is the section perpendicular to the perforation)
(Fig 9a) Scars indicate that the hexagonal form was
accomplished by flaking Sometimes hexagonal
blanks were perforated before much abrasion (Fig
9b) In many cases hexagonal blanks were heavily
abraded to obliterate sharp angles before any
perforation was begun (Fig 9c) Resulting bead
forms varied in cross section from circular to
elliptical or lenticular (see Wright and Garrard
2003 fig 3) Perforation of barrel beads was from
opposite directions resulting in hourglass perfora-
tions (Fig 9e) and occasionally perforation errors
(Fig 9d)
Most pendants were begun as tabular roughouts
chipped into shapes anticipating the final form such
as an asymmetrical triangular pendant (Fig 10a cf
Fig 5a for a rectangular pendant) Roughouts were
Figure 4 Example of raw material nodule (top) angular
shatter (upper centre) flakes (lower centre) and
micro-debitage (lower row) from a single context
at Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 141
then abraded and sawing was sometimes applied (Fig
10b) One unfinished pendant shows that perforation
preceded final abrasion (Fig 10c) The most common
form is the asymmetrical triangular pendant (Fig
10d) but there are also rectangular square and oval
pendants Not all pendants were made on tabular
roughouts some were made on thin flakes eg
rectangular and lsquoteardroprsquo forms (Fig 10endashf)
Sawing
Disc beads were made individually one by one on
flakes as opposed to being sawn from a perforated
cylinder which is another possible way However
sawing was central to the production of pendants and
barrel beads (cf Fig 5c 10b) In some cases the
roughout was sawn only to a shallow depth
permitting unwanted material to be snapped off
leaving a protruding piece of stone mdash a kind of
groove and snap technique (Fig 5c) The protruding
lsquobossrsquo was then abraded
A range of chipped stone tools in the sites might be
suitable for sawing These include tabular chert knives
sometimes also called tile knives (Fig 11) These are
bifacially retouched cutting tools characteristic of the
eastern Jordanian Neolithic (Baird in Garrard et al
1994a 89) However typically the bifacial retouch
produces an edge that is robust but somewhat sinuous
in profile (Fig 11) In addition many tile knife edges
have significant curvature in plan Use of tile knives
would probably generate relatively wide and slightly
sinuous cut marks but this is an area worthy of
experimentation and use wear study Alternative tools
that perhaps better match the relative scale and
precision of cut marks on bead blanks are a range of
relatively robust non-formal tools on blade or elon-
gated flake blanks with edges that are relatively
straight in profile and plan These are found in some
numbers in conjunction with the bead making debris in
Jilat 13 and 25 It is also notable that despite the
purported dominance of flakes in many broadly
contemporary PPNCELN assemblages significant
a b
c d
Figure 5 (a) Tabular roughout rectangular (b) Tabular roughout subcircular with drill mark (c) Abraded roughout with
sawing mark at bottom note that the sawing is incomplete the groove and snap technique has resulted in both
the saw mark and an irregular protrusion of stone (d) Abraded tabular roughout subcircular
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
142 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
proportions of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 tool blanks are
blades (Baird 1993 469 and figs 818ndash821) even
though the debitage assemblages are mostly flake
dominated Other possible sawing tools include flaked
limestone artefacts with a thin edge (Fig 12c)
Several cutmarked limestone slabs were found at
Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 (Fig 12andashb) The cutmarks are
shallow or deep incisions Interestingly the cut-
marked slabs do not display evidence of drilling
Conversely the Jilat 13 bench with marks probably
resulting from drilling (Fig 14c see below) has no
cutmarks This suggests segregation of drilling and
sawing activities Some variability in spatial distribu-
tion of different stages in the bead making process
may be further borne out by the discrete distribution
of drills in Jilat 25 contexts where substantial bead
making debris was recovered For example in Jilat 25
Context A15 drills were found clustered in spatial
units towards the northern end of the structure
Drilling
Experiments in drilling of Dabba Marble are in
progress (Bains forthcoming) Here we present
evidence for drilling from bead perforations and
stone tools Other experiments show that perforation
morphology reveals drilling methods and shape
diameter and length of the drill used (eg Gwinnett
and Gorelick 1999) At Jilat perforations indicate
that drilling methods varied and that choices were
probably affected by material hardness
Hand Drilling with Large Piercers and Borers
The simplest method used appears to have been hand
drilling Soft Dabba Marble could have been drilled
using a borer or piercer held in the hand and not
hafted to a drilling stick Drilling by this method
would produce rough irregular and relatively large
perforations (Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990) we see
examples of this in broken beads Borers and piercers
were found at the sites They are relatively large
perforation tools made on blades suitable for
manipulation by hand without a haft (Fig 13 nos
9ndash11)
Rotary Drilling From Two Directions with Hafted Drills
The most common method involved rotary drilling
from two directions Drilling was almost always
a b
c d
Figure 6 Green Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads (andashb) Circular flakes slightly abraded (c) Unabraded
perforated flake (d) Finished disc bead
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 143
bipolar That is the blank was drilled to roughly
halfway through then turned and the perforation
completed from the opposite direction As the two
perforations converged the result was an hourglass-
shaped perforation (Fig 9e) Experiments indicate
that this prevents chipping and flaking of the
alternate face which can occur if a blank is perforated
completely from only one direction (Possehl 1981)
Most hourglass perforations on both soft and
hard stones appear to have been produced by rotary
drilling Rotary drilling results in regular perforations
and concentric striations on them (Gorelick and
Gwinnett 1990) We observed both traits on many
broken beads and blanks (Fig 9b) Perforations of
hourglass form included very small drillholes indi-
cating that the drilling tools were smaller than
piercers and borers made on blades The probable
drills in this case were small drills on bladelets and
especially drill bits on burin spalls (Fig 13 nos 1 4
5 7) Microscopic examination of perforations is in
progress (Bains forthcoming)
Oddly piercing and drilling tools were found in
relatively low absolute numbers at the two sites (eg
Baird 1993 505ndash06 625 for Jilat 13 early phase
about 4 of tools were piercers or drills for the Jilat
25 which have concentrations of bead-making debris
just under 3 of tools were spall drills) However
specific contextual data other technological consid-
erations and comparisons with other sites give us
confidence that these were the main tools involved in
the drilling and that the low absolute numbers of
drills abandoned may sometimes relate to systematic
removal or discard of these tools by the artisans For
example burin spall drills were closely associated
spatially with bead-making debris in specific activity
areas in the Jilat 25 structure eg Context Aa15 in
the buildingrsquos northern area (Baird 1993 521 see
Table 6) In addition Jilat 13 and 25 produced large
numbers of angle burins including truncation burins
from which burin spalls were detached (eg about
29 of all tools at J13rsquos early phase were burins)
(Baird 1993 500 516 520ndash26 625) Burins are
a b c
d e f
Figure 7 Red Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads from Jilat 25 Context Aa15 (andashb) Circular flakes
slightly abraded (c) Heavily abraded and perforated disc bead blank edge abrasion incomplete (d) Abraded
perforated blank abrasion not complete on face (endashf) Finished disc beads
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
144 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
contextually closely associated with drills and bead-
making debris in occupation fills at Jilat 25 (c 30 of
tools from relevant Jilat 25 contexts were burins) mdash a
situation also seen at Jebel Naja in the Basalt Desert mdash
where both experiments and microwear studies suggest
that drill bits on burin spalls were used for bead-
making (Baird 1993 521 Finlayson and Betts 1990)
Burin spall drills would have had some technolo-
gical advantages over bladelet drills One advantage
is that the triangular or rectangular cross-sections of
burin spall drills make them stronger and less likely
to break during drilling In addition the manner of
their retouch from the same direction on each edge
creates a prismatic cross-section that probably served
to produce a neater hole and to make drilling more
efficient and possibly faster and reduce breakage in
drilling The tips of burin spall drills are blunted
which is an advantage in drilling hard stone (Gorelick
and Gwinnett 1990) Predictability and miniaturiza-
tion of burin spall drills may be relevant to an
Figure 8 Chaines operatoires for disc beads Sequence A refers to a disc bead made on a thin flake Sequence B refers
to a disc bead made on a thick flake Sequence C refers to a disc bead made on a tabular roughout not a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 145
apparent increased standardization in perforation
size observed at Jilat 25 from an early phase to a later
phase (Critchley 2000)
Since we have evidence of rotary drilling from bead
perforations we believe that drill bits were hafted to
sticks (probably made of wood) Drill bits on burin
spalls would have been too small to manipulate
effectively by hand alone
To work efficiently a drill needs to be weighted
and stabilized and there must be some means of
protecting the artisanrsquos hand Ground stone artefacts
support the idea that rotary drilling with drill bits
hafted to drilling sticks was in use They include a
probable capstone made of limestone from Jilat 25
The capstone would have been held in the hand
enabling the beadmaker to manipulate the drilling
stick from the top (Fig 14a) This artefact resembles
a miniature bowl and fits easily into one hand The
interior surface displays use wear circular striations
parallel to the rim and vertical striations perpendi-
cular to the rim The base of the interior converges to
a flat surface about 1 cm in diameter
Some Levantine Neolithic sites have revealed
similar objects with similar wear (Banning 1998
Wright 1992 fig 5ndash15b) and a comparable item
was found at Jarmo (Moholy-Nagy 1983 fig 12913
Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990 30) Capstones are
characteristic of the use of bow drills (Banning
1998 Foreman 1978) but strictly speaking they
are not necessarily diagnostic of the bow drill
(theoretically simpler drilling techniques involving
hafting might have been facilitated by the use of
a capstone) For the moment we can say that
at Jilat 13 and 15 the evidence for rotary drilling
is unequivocal However the evidence for the use
of the bow drill while suggestive is not quite
definitive
Size data considered carefully support a link
between burin-spall drills and beads To interpret
dimensions of drills and perforations we must keep
in mind that stone bead drilling was overwhelmingly
bipolar and converging Thus drills did not have to
penetrate all the way through the full height of the
bead mdash only about half of it Therefore what matters
a b c
d e f
Figure 9 Green Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks and finished beads (a) Hexagonal blank flaked but not abraded (b)
Abraded hexagonal blank (c) Abraded blank not perforated (d) Perforation error on abraded blank (e)
Finished bead broken showing bipolar perforation and hourglass perforation shape (f) Perforated barrel bead
almost finished except for final abrasion to smooth out last surface irregularities
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
146 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
is the very tips of the drill bits mdash the upper few
millimetres mdash not the full length of the drills
Since disc beads are consistently about 25 to
26 mm in height only the upper 15 mm or so of the
drills mdash the most distal ends of the tips mdash had to
have been about 21 mm or less in thickness to
lsquomatchrsquo the perforation diameters of disc beads
(Table 4) In the case of barrel beads since barrel
beads were between 64 and 71 mm in height about
32 to 36 mm of the most distal ends of the drill bits
have to have been about 21 mm or less in thickness
to lsquomatchrsquo the perforations of barrel beads (Table 5)
Measurements of the drill bit tips within these
small uppermost reaches show that the maximal
thicknesses of the drill bitsrsquo distal tips fall within the
range of sizes indicated by the perforations (Fig 13)
Multi-stage Drilling
Sometimes drilling may have been accomplished in
several stages Some beads particularly those made of
harder stones have smooth cylindrical perforations
with parallel walls displaying no hint of the
hourglass shape
One way to achieve this is to create the hourglass
perforation and then to turn it into a perfect
cylindrical perforation via the use of a second drilling
procedure An example of this was cited by Calley
(1989) who proposed that two tools found in
carnelian bead workshops at Early Bronze Age
Kumartepe (Turkey) had complementary functions
a drill bit for making the initial hourglass perforation
and a borer for finishing and smoothing it into a
cylindrical perforation Since both drill bits and
borers were found on the Jilat sites this method of
finishing perforations could have been used
At Jilat 13 and 25 evidence for multi-stage drilling
can be seen in some beads which have a depression on
one or both faces The depression may be a result of
drilling with a larger drill bit first in order to provide
a guide for the final perforation with a finer drill bit
Such a technique is seen in India-Pakistan (Possehl
1981 39 Kenoyer 1992b 73)
a b c
d e f
Figure 10 Green Dabba Marble pendant blanks and finished pendants (a) Tabular roughout flaked into approximately
trapezoidal shape but not abraded (b) Abraded trapezoidal blank with sawing mark at bottom (c) Perforated
asymmetrical triangular pendant blank incompletely abraded (note striations on face) (d) Finished asymmetri-
cal triangular pendant (e) Pendant blank made on a flake unabraded (f) Nearly-finished pendant made on a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 147
Stabilizing Beads Anvils and Drilling Benches
What method was used to stabilize a bead during
drilling The simplest technique is to fix a bead to a
stone anvil with an adhesive Ethnography and
experiments show that such anvils can be small (the
size of handstones) (Foreman 1978 figs 6ndash7) Use of
such an anvil should result in small shallow
depressions a form of use-damage resulting from
force exerted from above Figure 14b shows a small
flat stone from Jilat 25 with a central depression of
the expected size and depth
Figure 14c shows the limestone bench from Jilat 13
(previously discussed) with a number of such pits in
the centre The marks are evenly spaced and are
concentrated in one small well-defined area on the
widest part of the bench this wide area was also
finely abraded
We see this bench as a multifunctional worktable
anvil We suspect that the beadmaker sat on the
narrow part of the bench (straddling it) placed bead
blanks on the pitted work surface fixed them with
adhesive and then drilled them The bench also
displays evidence of other activities including flaking
and grinding
Adhesives for hafting chipped stone tools could
have been adapted for use in fixing beads to anvils
Bitumen would be one candidate In some cultures a
wooden frame with cup-holes is sometimes used for
stabilizing beads (Kenoyer 1986 P Wright 1982)
The holes are filled with beeswax and clay the bead is
inserted into the wax-clay mixture which hardens
holding the bead steady After drilling beads are
released by breaking the wax-clay mixture (Allchin
1979 Stocks 1989) As wood was probably scarce in
Jilat and as there are no indications of the use of
clay we can probably rule out this technique
However stone items with cup-holes are seen in
Neolithic sites (Kirkbride 1966 Wright 1992
fig 527b)
Abrasion
Ground stone artefacts are crucial to bead produc-
tion in traditional technologies (Foreman 1978
Inizan et al 1992 Kenoyer et al 1991 53 Moholy-
Nagy 1983 294 Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58)
Grinding of beads can be achieved by abrading
each bead individually with a hand held abrader or
by rubbing them on a large grinding slab Either
method will produce linear striations of the type we
see on many unfinished beads (cf Figs 7cndashd and 10c)
However final shaping of disc and cylindrical beads
was most likely achieved by stringing them or loading
them on to a thin rod capable of penetrating the
perforation (individually or in groups) and then
rolling them on a grinding slab adding abrasives
(such as sand) and water to produce a smoother finish
(Foreman 1978 Moholy-Nagy 1983 298) Some disc
beads with parallel edges perpendicular to the faces
would probably have been rolled on a flat smooth
stone Other beads with facetted sharply angled or
bevelled edges (eg many barrel beads) suggest that
they were rolled or abraded along a stone with
grooves and slanting sides (eg Fig 15a c)
Abrasion of bead blanks may have been a multi-
stage process involving a number of materials of
different textures and hardness In an early stage
grinding of bead materials on vesicular basalt would
have been the easiest way to abrade a large nodule
quickly The pores of vesicular basalt and pumice
form natural cutting lsquoteethrsquo comparable to the metal
rasp used by present-day sculptors At Jilat 13 and
Jilat 25 we found broken fragments of vesicular
basalt grinding slabs but not large complete exam-
ples The small fragments suggest two possibilities
either there were large complete slabs at one time
which were then broken worn out and discarded or
only small fragments of these heavy duty grinding
tools were needed
For finer abrasion sandstone grinding slabs might
be expected None were found However small
Figure 11 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic
sites Tile knives or possible saws for bead-
making From Baird 1993 fig 85
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
148 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
handheld abraders made of sandstones with coarse
hard quartz crystals were found at both sites (Fig
15andashb) Sandstone is not local to Wadi Jilat and these
items were imported and probably used extensively
(resulting in the small size)
For even finer abrasion limestone could have been
used Such needs could have been met by the large
bench of Jilat 13 (Fig 14c) which was finely ground
over a very large area (within which the possible
drilling marks were placed)
Some might see the grooved items made of
sandstone (Fig 15a) and limestone (Fig 15c) as
lsquoshaft straightenersrsquo One or two shaft straightener
fragments made of basalt occur at Jilat 13 Like other
basalt shaft straighteners in Neolithic Jilat (eg Jilat
7) (Garrard et al 1994a Wright 1993) the use-
surfaces of these have U-shaped cross-sections By
contrast the cross sections of the use surfaces on the
sandstone and limestone grooved items are not U-
shaped but have sharp angles We see these tools
mainly as abraders for grinding bead facets espe-
cially on barrel beads The widths of the use surfaces
are 11 mm for the sandstone tool and 138 mm for
the limestone one These dimensions correspond to
the average diameter (5 width) of 31 measured green
Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks from Jilat 13 (N 5
31 Mean diameter 5 92 mm standard deviation 5
28) Grooved stones are used in bead grinding in
a
b c
Figure 12 Ground stone artefacts probably for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Cutmarked slab (limestone) Jilat
13 The cutmarks are shallow and are concentrated in the left area running parallel to the main axes of the
slab (b) Cutmarked slab fragment (limestone) Jilat 13 showing deep cutmarks (c) Flaked and ground abra-
sive cutting tool made of limestone Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 149
modern India (Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58) a
grooved sandstone tool was found with an unfinished
bead at Catalhoyuk (Wright and Bains 2007)
Tosi and Vidale (1990) regard failure resulting
from breakage or human error as more common in
the grinding stage than during perforation although
this depends on material and opinion (Kenoyer 2003
18) In some cases it might be more efficient to shape
the bead first before attempting perforation This
may explain why barrel beads tend to be shaped and
abraded prior to perforation
Finished beads were always finely abraded and
sometimes polished to the extent of reflecting light
Ethnographic observations indicate that polishing is
sometimes done by placing beads en masse in a
leather bag along with an abrasive and shaking and
rolling the bags for long periods (Allchin 1979
Kenoyer 2003) This simple method would have been
more likely than the method of rolling beads and
abrasives in a wooden barrel which is also docu-
mented ethnographically (Kenoyer 2003)
However shaking beads in a bag with an abrasive
tends to produce beads with rounded convex edges
(Gwinnett and Gorelick 1989) Some beads at Jilat
have this form but many mdash especially those made of
the hard cherty red Dabba Marble mdash have sharp
edges perpendicular to bead faces indicating that
they were individually polished or polished during
rolling on a string or stick Alternative methods of
polishing can include rubbing with leather or wood
with the addition of fine sand or chalk and water or
with animal hairwool and animal fat (Kenoyer 1986
20) These methods would have been possible with
Jilat technology
Craft Specialization and Comparisons withOther Sites
Technology needs to be studied not only in terms of
materials and techniques but also in terms of social
groups involved in artefact production individual
artisans and skill (Dobres and Hoffmann 1999 2ndash12)
In egalitarian societies craft skill and knowledge of
Figure 13 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic sites Drilling and piercing tools From Baird 1993 fig 82
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
150 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
special materials can enhance the power of an
individual or a group encouraging hierarchy
(Dobres 2000 119ndash20)
These questions force us to reconsider issues of
craft specialization a term often used loosely or in
widely different ways Three concepts of specializa-
tion are considered here individual specialists
specialization between households or domestic
groups within a given site and site specialization
within a regional or social network of craft produc-
tion and exchange
Costin (1991) draws a contrast between indepen-
dent specialization and attached specialization
Independent specialization involves production of
utilitarian goods for nonelites and can be household-
based or based in special workshops Attached
specialization refers to production of prestige goods
under control of elites Whilst Costin notes that
attached specialization can also be based in house-
holds or workshops we often think of attached
specialization in connection with central institutions
and urban or state-level societies It is of considerable
interest that in early urban societies the making of
stone personal ornaments in association with central
institutions figures prominently (Stein 1996 Vidale
1989)
How earlier forms of craft specialization may have
evolved into large-scale attached specialization is
poorly understood Most research has concentrated
on later stages in this process (eg Stein 1996) in
discussions of earlier forms of specialization defini-
tions and criteria for diagnosis could sometimes be
clearer (eg Quintero and Wilke 1998 Rollefson and
Parker 2002 Rosen 1997) If we are dealing with
a
c
b
Figure 14 Ground stone artefacts probably used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Capstone made of limestone
Jilat 25 (b) Handstone probably used as an anvil or hammer Jilat 25 note depression in face and flake scars
at edges (c) Limestone drilling bench Jilat 13 Note evidence of use-wear on the left and widest area of the
bench smooth abraded surface drill marks in the centre-left face small flake scars with negative bulbs of per-
cussion close to the edge of the bench
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 151
specialization in Neolithic societies it is probably
independent specialization Still Neolithic societies
may fall between Costinrsquos two categories Neolithic
groups were clearly producing prestige goods perso-
nal ornaments are not strictly utilitarian and there is
at least a possibility that elites were emerging (Byrd
1994 Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002 Verhoeven
2002)
Individual Specialists
First there is the issue of identifying individual
specialists Some use lsquospecializationrsquo to refer to any
situation in which some artisans have high levels of
skill a view that has been criticized (Rice 1991) We
agree with Rice that identifying a high level of
technical skill in a craft is not on its own sufficient
for a diagnosis of specialization since it robs the
concept of force in discussing long term change (by
this criterion the Upper Palaeolithic was riddled
with craft specialists) However we would argue
that if there are other indications of craft specializa-
tion a search for levels of ability in different
individuals is appropriate mdash if the data permit
Such data would be primary refuse from well-dated
sites of high temporal resolution in which technical
processes (eg errors in chaines operatoires) can
reveal experts vs novices (Pigeot 1990 Stout 2002
Vanzetti and Vidale 1994)
In the case of Jilat 13 and 25 we are dealing with
much primary refuse and two closely dated sites (see
above and Tables 6ndash7) mdash with periodic use of the
sites over a time range on the order of 200 years at
most and possibly much less Jilat 25 yielded activity
areas with clear spatial clusters as do a number of
contexts at Jilat 13 Space does not permit us to
present all details (this awaits the final site report)
but we feel confident that aggregate consideration of
the data from each site allows us to discuss general
questions of individual skills mdash master craftsmen vs
novices
a b
c
Figure 15 Ground stone artefacts possibly used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Grooved sandstone abrading
tool Jilat 13 (b) Sandstone hand-held abrader Jilat 25 (c) Grooved limestone abrading tool Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
152 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
To explore this we analysed unfinished blanks and
the frequency of perforation errors Drilling is a
sensitive moment in bead production when many
things can go wrong (Kenoyer 2003) A low incidence
in perforation errors combined with high numbers of
successfully finished beads and evidence of standar-
dization should be reasonably good indicators of an
artisanrsquos mastery This is the situation seen at Jilat 25
(Fig 7) In all of 93 blanks from Jilat 25 only 2 were
perforation errors a failure rate of only 2
On the other hand a high incidence of perforation
errors would suggest that a beadmaker was a relative
novice Jilat 13 produced more blanks with perfora-
tion errors than Jilat 25 We thought we might find
individual contexts with a high rate of error
suggesting apprentices
The data did not bear this out Of 223 bead blanks
from Jilat 13 (all phases) 22 were perforation errors
mdash a failure rate of 98 All but two errors were on
barrel bead blanks of green Dabba Marble The
others were one pendant blank and one irregular
bead blank These 22 blanks were distributed across
20 different contexts and no more than 2 perforation
errors were found in any one context
A close look at those contexts reveals low error
rates In Context B21 2 green barrel bead blanks
with perforation errors were found with 5 other
blanks The others included green and red barrel and
disc blanks This context also yielded 5 successfully
finished beads including black and red barrel beads
and a green disc Black and green debitage and a
discoidal handstone were also found here In Context
B71 2 blanks with perforation errors were found
along with 9 other blanks and 10 successfully
finished beads including green Dabba Marble barrel
beads but also black and red disc beads Much
debitage was found along with a flaked limestone
cutting tool (cf Fig 12c) and a limestone object with
a drill mark
The higher rate of error at Jilat 13 compared to
Jilat 25 could be because artisans at Jilat 13 were
making more of the larger more complex barrel
beads (as opposed to simple discs see Tables 2ndash3)
which offer greater chances of failure due to the
longer drilling distance However at Jilat 13 the
overall failure rate was still quite low particularly
considering the overall volume of material recovered
(Table 1)
We conclude that the beadmakers at Jilat 13
included few trainees These appear to have been
skilled artisans a small task force composed of
relative experts This raises the question of whether
these beadmakers were examples of lsquoproducer
specialistsrsquo as traditionally defined that is people
involved in
production of a good by a relatively small number of
individuals (compared to the total output and
number of consumers) individuals who are as a
result of this selectivity and the routinization or
repetition of their tasks particularly skilled in
manufacture (Rice 1991 263)
Jilat 13 and 25 do suggest small numbers of
individuals and a certain selectivity in who was
involved in stone bead making The quantity of
debitagedebris relative to (1) the number of finished
beads and (2) the modest sizes of these structures
collectively suggest that these craftsmenwomen
served a larger number of consumers relative to the
number of craftsmen involved here If so who were
these consumers mdash other residents of Jilat or groups
beyond
Intra-site Specialization Between Domestic Groups
Several studies suggest ways of identifying different
forms of craft specialization between domestic groups
in a site For later sites Stein (1996) has explored
spatial data particularly how craft production
facilities are dispersed among domestic units or
located near special (or central) institutions In
Neolithic sites questions about dispersal between
households and possible links between craft produc-
tion and special buildings or special sites have been
underexplored
For specialization Costin (1991) suggests that we
would expect (1) variability between production
units (eg households occupations regions) in
relevant artefacts (2) high densities of craft produc-
tion debris relative to some other generally used
item in some production units (3) high ratios of
unfinished goods to finished goods in some produc-
tion units Kenoyer et alrsquos (1991) ethnoarchaeolo-
gical studies of modern stone bead-making in
Khambat (India) suggest something similar in the
case of households as production units There non-
specialist households engaging in casual opportu-
nistic bead production revealed low quantities of
bead-making debris few unfinished beads and little
standardization in finished beads By contrast
households specializing in bead production were
characterized by stockpiling of large quantities of
raw materials many unfinished beads and more
standardized finished products
In looking at whole occupations (ie phases within
sites) as a unit of observation we argue elsewhere
(Wright and Garrard 2003) that artefact densities and
other data from 13 PPNB and 8 PPNCELN
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 153
occupations in the Jilat-Azraq region suggest that
PPNCELN producers were more specialized than
those of the PPNB mdash at least in the Jilat-Azraq
region Unlike the PPNB sites Jilat 13 and 25 have
very high densities of bead-making debris specialized
tools for drilling and sawing there is an abundance of
unfinished materials relative to finished products
bead-making tools and debris are abundant relative
to normal domestic food processing equipment
(ground stone artefacts) (Wright and Garrard 2003
cf Costin 1991)
That argument is chronological comparing the
PPNB to the PPNCELN occupations and we stand
behind it for the Jilat-Azraq case (different trajec-
tories may apply to south Jordan and the Negev see
below) Still it leaves open the issue of house-to-
house variation within Jilat 25 or Jilat 13 As we have
only one excavated structure per site we cannot on
present evidence argue that each building housed a
group of specialists serving other households within
the same site In fact we have no direct evidence that
there were other structures on each site mdash the ones
excavated were the only ones visible on the surface
There are nuances of material and typological
choices between the Jilat 25 structure (red disc beads)
and the Jilat 13 structure (larger complex green
ornaments) but these nuances are beyond the scope
of this paper
In all we suspect that stone bead production at
Jilat 13 and 25 was geared not for other domestic
units lsquoin camprsquo but for use by these quite mobile
communities themselves mdash as well as export to other
sites within the steppe and beyond (see below) In
Costinrsquos terms (Costin 1991) Jilat 13 and 25 might
each be an example of an independent non-centra-
lized dispersed workshop possibly lsquofamily runrsquo (Rice
1991 262) mdash in which handling of Dabba Marble
was not routinely entrusted to novices
There are hints of house-to-house variations in
bead-making in major villages with larger samples of
domestic structures as in PPNB Beidha At PPNB
Beidha (earlier than Jilat 13 and 25) Building 14
stands out
Other forms of production besides food preparation
were less common Building 14 represented the best
example of artefact production in these basements
A wide range of artefacts was recovered apparently
associated with building 14rsquos basement floor
Particularly widespread were stone polishers bone
tools raw material (including hematite malachite
and magnesium) more than 60 unmodified marine
shells and at least two dozen beads of shell stone
and bone some of which were in various stages of
production Some artifacts lay on stone slabs
indicating that at least some slabs may have
functioned as work surfaces (Byrd 2005 117)
Such hints are intriguing Still macro-artefacts
from house floors are affected by problems of site
formation and house abandonment Micro-artefact
data can help (Rainville 2005) House-by-house
exploration with attention to micro-artefacts is
needed (Wright and Bains 2007)
Site Specialization Within a Regional Network of Craft
Production and Exchange
Both sites and other Neolithic sites in Jilat and
Azraq exhibit resource specialization
the selective use of particular resources in craft
manufacture such as certain clays that are repeat-
edly used (Rice 1991 262)
The Jilat artisans emphasized Dabba Marble from
a wider array of available stone types The Jilat-
Azraq sites collectively show that green Dabba
Marble was a special target This is revealed in both
frequencies and weights (for debris data and weight
data see Wright and Garrard 2003 for frequency
data on beads and blanks see Tables 2 and 3) At
both sites debris is greatly dominated by green
Dabba Marble mdash 80ndash95 of debris by both weight
(grams) and frequency Green Dabba Marble also
dominates blanks in terms of weight at both sites mdash
indicating the use of green for making larger heavier
and more conspicuous ornaments
Turning to frequencies at Jilat 13 about 90 of
blanks are green and only 5 are red However
finished beads include both green and red forms in
comparable percentages (404 and 436 respec-
tively) (Table 3) suggesting that finished red beads
were brought into the building from a place of
manufacture located somewhere else At Jilat 25
blanks of red and green Dabba Marble occur in
comparable proportions (409 green 43 red)
whilst finished beads are predominantly red (588)
(Table 2) If Jilat 13 and 25 were absolute contem-
poraries this could suggest variations in choices and
exchange between residents of different structures
Rice (1991) has defined site specialization as a
situation in which a site is located near a special
resource and the inhabitants emphasize production of
a craft based on that resource Relative to other sites
not so located the range of site functions and
activities would be expected to be more limited
Thus site specialization
involves individual localities or sites having evidence
of limited functions or intensive productive activity
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
154 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
often determined by fortuitous environmental fac-
tors This includes proximity to mineral deposits
and so forth (Rice 1991 262)
Do Jilat 13 and 25 fit this concept In both sites
15 km from the source we have a wealth of evidence
for intensive stone bead production and scanty
evidence for routine food processing tools (Wright
and Garrard 2003) However Jilat 25 may be closer
to the limited function model envisioned by Rice In
Jilat 13 bead-making is clearly intensive but we are
also dealing with a chipped stone assemblage of not
only drills and burins but also projectile points and
other tools Jilat 13 also reveals production of
figurines (of animals phalluses and arrow-shaped
forms) and sculpted pillars (Baird 1993 Garrard
et al 1994a Martin 1999 Wright 1992 1993)
In all Jilat 13 and 25 suggest that we can apply
Ricersquos lsquosite specializationrsquo on the grounds of intensive
productive activity and proximity to source mdash but
with the qualification that this specialization was also
embedded in hunting-herding activities and at Jilat
13 production of other special crafts unique among
the sites of a symbolic nature (figurines pillars)
One possibility is that we are dealing with a camp
of hunter-herder corporate groups mdash part of a wider
regional network mdash engaged in special activities in
remote areas involving art personal ornaments and
ritual Such groups are suggested by other data from
the PPNBndashPPNC time span for example Nahal
Hemar (ornaments masks hunting tools) Dhuweila
(carving of hunters with dress variations)
Catalhoyuk (images of hunters with dress variations
as in the bull hunt mural) and Gobeklitepe (sculpture
production including a quarry wild-animal icono-
graphy hunting) (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988 Betts
1998 Mellaart 1967 Schmidt 2000) In all these data
hint that craft production of special items was
embedded in hunting andor herding activities in
remote areas this may have been a key means by
which exotic materials reached major villages In a
very broad way this supports a sketch outlined by
Bar Yosef (Bar-Yosef 2001) although we do not
necessarily agree with specifics of his model eg the
territories boundaries social groups and mechanisms
which he suggests (cf Asouti 2006) Instead we see
this as one example of diverse strategies of social
networking linking lineages households and commu-
nities in the Neolithic (Wright forthcoming)
Returning to the stone bead data from Jilat 13 and
25 the apparent stockpiling of raw material and
intensive production activity hints at production of
the green material for export (see above and Wright
and Garrard 2003) New data now add weight to this
idea and suggest the following provisional picture of
regional specializations and exchanges in ornaments
(1) Based on typology technology and materials thereappears to be a distinctive eastern Jordanian koine ornetwork of stone bead manufacture and exchangefeaturing Dabba Marble and a probable regionalspecialization in it
Other Neolithic bead production sites are known
from eastern Jordan Indications are that most of the
green bead materials are Dabba Marble probably
from Jilat (further work is needed) In these sites
diversity of materials used seems low with few
imports from beyond the steppe Shells however
testify to wider networks (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989
Cooke and Reese in Betts 1998 Garrard et al 1994a
Reese 1991)
Azraq 31 (PPNB and ELN) is in our suite of study
materials (Baird et al 1992 Garrard et al 1994a
Wright and Garrard 2003) and debris blanks and
beads were found Preliminary XRF analysis of green
samples (by Groom) indicates that the material is
consistent with Jilat Dabba Marble Typology and
technology are also similar and as at Jilat 25 burin
spall drills were closely associated with bead-making
in specific activity areas (Baird 1993 521 Baird et al
1992 25) However the ground stone revealed no
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
(Wright 1992 1993 Wright in Baird et al 1992)
Material used for beads at Dhuweila (PPNB and
ELN) has been called Dabba Marble (Cooke and
Reese in Betts 1998) It is consistent in appearance
with our material although we have no details on
mineralogy or source Typologically these beads are
similar to those of Jilat 13 and 25 The ground stone
is very different from the suite at the Jilat sites
(Wright in Betts 1998) for comparisons of chipped
stone assemblages see Baird (1993)
At Bawwab al-Ghazal (Late PPNB) Rollefson
et al found drills bits on burin spalls tile knives
beads bead blanks and bead debris some of which
they called green Dabba Marble (Rollefson et al
1999 Quintero et al 2004) They argued that there is
a possible source of this material outcropping near
the site mdash lsquoFor the last raw material [green Dabba
Marble] small nodules of the green limestone were
embedded in the local bedrockrsquo (Rollefson et al 1999
3) However as shown in Appendix A the true
Dabba Marble only occurs in a restricted area west of
Wadi Jilat The lsquobedrockrsquo which outcrops near Azraq
31 and Bawwab al-Ghazal is travertine and some of
this formed during the late Pleistocene and Holocene
The nearby Epipalaeolithic site of Azraq 17 was
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 155
found partially embedded in travertine and artefacts
including nodules of imported basalt were found in
the travertine at this site It is possible that the
nodules of green limestone found at Bawwab al-
Ghazal were imported Dabba Marble which subse-
quently became incorporated in a travertine near the
site An alternative possibility is that the local
travertine is infused with green minerals In Wadi
Jilat travertines were noted with traces of green
minerals and in the Siwaqa area to the south-west of
Jilat there are extensive travertines some of which
are infused with pale green minerals including
volkonskoite (Barjous 1986 mdash see also Appendix A)
In eastern Jordan some Neolithic sites are greatly
dominated by burins (lsquoburin sitesrsquo) At a number of
these there is evidence for stone bead-making (eg
Jebel Naja) These lsquoburin sitesrsquo typically reveal few
ground stone tools we know of no examples of
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
from them It was argued that the main role of the
burins was production of spalls for drills used mainly
for beads (Betts 1987 1998 Finlayson and Betts
1990) However burin sites are not universally
associated with stone bead making At Jilat 23 24
and 26 burins were numerous but other evidence for
bead-making is scanty (Baird 1993 520)
Therefore some have questioned whether
burins and burin spalls in such sites were solely or
primarily intended for making drills and beads
noting that other functions are possible (Quintero
et al 2004 209) Given that these sites typically
represent short-term occupations it is possible that
many sites might be spall manufacture sites with
spalls transported to other settings where drill
manufacture and bead manufacture took place such
as Jilat 13 and 25 Rollefson expressed doubt that
either bladelet or burin spall drills would have been
used in bow drills partly because of their fragility and
also because most of them have a pronounced curve
on the long axis which would have made high speed
drilling impossible (Rollefson and Parker 2002) But
Finlayson and Betts (1990) and Berna (1995)
successfully experimented using burin spalls with
bow drills and Kenoyer (personal communication
2007) notes that drills made on burin spalls are the
most common type of drill in diverse prehistoric
stone bead-making sites (in India Pakistan and
elsewhere)
In the case of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 we believe burin-
spall drills were part of the bead-making repertoire
for reasons noted above This does not rule out other
uses of burin spalls Nor does it rule out the use of
other perforating techniques Drills do not have to be
made of stone when soft stones are being perforated
mdash wood bone and abrasives can be used (Foreman
1978)
(2) There are hints of export of Dabba Marble to at leastsome villages in the Levantine corridor However majorNeolithic villages display much diversity in materials andespecially more importing of exotic stones than is seen inthe eastern Jordanian sites
Many writers report Neolithic beads made of
unspecified lsquogreenstonersquo This term is unfortunate
since it can refer to metabasalt and similar altered
igneous rocks (Schumann 1992 248) Some of these
lsquogreenstonesrsquo may be limestone with apatite or other
materials (eg Garfinkel 1987 81ndash82 Hauptmann
2004 Talbot 1983 789) Beads of green limestones
rich in fluorapatite were found at late PPNB Basta in
southern Jordan (Hauptmann 2004) as confirmed by
XRF and XRD Green beads identified as Dabba
Marble were also reported from Ain Ghazal a site
with both PPNB and PPNC occupations (Rollefson
et al 1990 103ndash04) Whether these are Dabba
Marble from the Jilat source (Appendices AndashB) is
not yet fully clear Ongoing research will sort out
these mysteries (eg D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal
communication Hauptmann 2004)
Major villages in the Levantine Corridor reveal
different degrees of emphasis in styles and materials
often we see a certain emphasis on local materials and
preferences However considerable exchange net-
works are indicated in major villages which display
much wider ranges of stone ornament materials
compared to the eastern Jordanian sites (such as
Ain Ghazal Yiftahel Basta Barsquoja Ghuwayr 1
Fidan 1) mdash along with of course shells (Affonso
and Pernicka 2004 Bienert and Gebel 1998 84ndash86
Garfinkel 1987 Hauptmann 2004 Rollefson and
Simmons 1984 1986 Rollefson et al 1990 Simmons
and Najjar 1998 Starck 1988)
As the Neolithic evolved stone bead-making
entailed increasingly diverse techniques and materi-
als One example may be drills In earlymiddle PPNB
sites most drills are made on bladelets In the late
PPNB PPNC and Late Neolithic there may have
been a gradual increase in drills made on burin spalls
although perhaps not in all regions (Jensen 2004
Rollefson and Parker 2002) Underlining increasing
diversity of technological practice between groups
Baird (2001b) pointed out geographic variation in
this technology with spall drills dominating in the
north-eastern Jordanian steppe from MPPNB
through Early Late Neolithic whilst contemporary
sites to west and south use bladelet blanks for their
piercing tools
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
156 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
micro-shatter (Fig 4) Definitions of these categories
are broadly similar to those established in chipped
stone analysis (Andrefsky 1998)
Flaking and Initial Reduction Nodules CoresDebitage and Roughouts
The soft limestone and hard chert in Dabba Marble
permits it to be worked via chipping flaking
grinding sawing and drilling To varying degrees
the material has conchoidal fracture Where chert
content is high conchoidal fracture is excellent
Limestone itself also has conchoidal fracture parti-
cularly when fine-grained as Dabba Marble is The
tabular structure of the laminated limestones also
makes it possible to create flat faces easily
The difficulty of shaping beads would have varied
depending on specific material Most green Dabba
marble is fairly homogeneous composed of calcite-rich
soft limestone (Mohs 5 3) and apatite (Mohs 5 5)
Red Dabba marble occurs in a soft pale pink variety
(Mohs 5 3ndash4) a dark pink variety of medium
hardness and a dark red siliceous variety essentially
red chert (Mohs 5 7) This red chert variant (Mohs 7)
will have been more difficult to modify Flaking and
chipping were particularly important in working this
material and abrasion will have been more difficult
This may be why so many beads of the red cherty
Dabba Marble were disc beads made on flakes (Fig 7)
Flaking figured prominently in the making of
beads from softer materials However sawing and
abrasion played a greater role in modification of these
materials Comparable variations in technique
depending on material hardness are seen at other
prehistoric sites (Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990)
Table 7 Stone beads blanks and debris Jilat 13 selected contexts
Phase Context Description Beads Blanks Debris Comments Selected associated artefacts
Early C106 Fill of bedrock cut 0 0 1 1 circular limestone diskEarly B77 First occupation fill 1 5 752Early B79 Fill of hearth 0 0 6 1 limestone handstoneEarly B71 Second occupation fill 10 11 750 1 drilled and grooved limestone object
1 flaked limestone rsquoscraperrsquo 6 basalt fragmentsEarly A17 Lower pavement 0 0 0 1 cutmarked slabEarly A15 Third occupation fill 1 8 8 1 worked limestone object snake-shaped flint pebbleEarly A16 Third occupation fill 2 1 17 1 miniature pestle basaltEarly A18 Third occupation fill 0 0 11 Basalt fragments 3 from vessels
1 handstonepestle fragment 6 unidentifiableEarly B44 Third occupation fill 5 9 74Early B45 Third occupation fill 0 2 139 1 basalt handstone fragmentEarly B69 Third occupation fill 6 5 383 No ground stoneEarly C56 Third occupation fill 8 5 313 1 double-grooved sandstone abrader (Fig 15a)
Middle A3 Fourth occupation fill 3 4 60 1 limestone capstone ( 2 surfaces) 5 basalt fragmentsMiddle A5 Fourth occupation fill 7 9 139 1 cutmarked flint slab 1 grooved limestone object
ochred flints figurines pillarsMiddle B31 Fourth occupation fill 4 2 33Middle B38 Fourth occupation fill 12 6 520Middle B54 Fourth occupation fill 1 0 9 1 limestone figurine (bird)Middle B56 Fourth occupation fill 1 1 14 1 basalt grinding slab fragmentMiddle C39 Fourth occupation fill 10 12 254 1 flint cutmarked slab flaked limestone rsquoscraperrsquo
Late C14 Foundation for upperpavement
0 5 65 1 basalt ground fragment
Late B3 Upper pavement 0 0 0 1 cutmarked limestone slab 1 post-socketLate C4 Upper pavement 0 0 0 1 drilling and abrading bench (Fig 14c)Late A2 Fifth occupation fill 4 2 154 10 figurines or figurine preforms suggesting animals
phalluses arrows (flint limestone travertine) 1 pebblemortar or capstone with ochre (limestone) 1 perforatedobject 1 handstone on flake (flint) 2 vessel fragments1 ochred pebble burnt pebble (limestone) 1 groundindeterminate stone (basalt) Beads are 2 barrels and2 pendants blanks are 1 barrel and 1 indeterminate
Late B4 Fifth occupation fill 0 2 7 1 grooved limestone abrader (Fig 15c) Blanks are bothpendant blanks
Late B7 Fifth occupation fill 2 5 150 1 cutmarked limestone 1 basalt handstonepestlefragment
Late B9 Fifth occupation fill 0 0 3 1 perforated pumice abraderLate B21 Fifth occupation fill 5 7 193 1 basalt handstone 2 basalt fragmentsLate C3 Fifth occupation fill 2 4 61
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 139
Five main stages of manufacture were identified
although reduction sequences vary These are (1)
reduction of raw nodules to cores roughouts and
flakes via flaking and chipping (2) shaping of
roughouts and flakes into blanks via further flaking
chipping sawing and rough grinding (3) perforation
via boring andor drilling (4) further grinding to
produce the final shape (5) final polishing
Nodules cores and debitage were recovered in
large amounts at Jilat 13 (7369 artefacts 6905 grams)
and Jilat 25 (1381 artefacts 976 grams) The largest
unworked blocks are of green Dabba Marble They
are about 15 cm in diameter but most are about the
size of an adult human fist Some nodules were
weathered suggesting that they were picked up from
surface rather than quarried from bedrock layers
(Fig 4 top)
Reduction of nodules by flaking resulted in (1)
cores (2) tabular roughouts (3) large flakes (4) large
angular shatter fragments (5) micro-flakes and (6)
micro-shatter (Fig 4) Cores defined as nodules with
two or more flake scars are not numerous or
consistent in form Shatter micro-flakes and micro-
shatter were normally discarded as byproducts
Tabular roughouts and larger flakes were used as
the basis for further reduction into bead blanks
Roughouts are early stages in bead reduction
(Kenoyer 2003 16) At Jilat 13 and 25 roughouts
are tabular reflecting the bedded structure of the
material They were flaked and chipped around the
edges into roughly symmetrical shapes (Figs 5a 10a)
Roughouts were sometimes subjected to initial
drilling or sawing at an early stage prior to any
intense abrasion (Fig 5b) In other cases roughouts
were abraded first (Fig 5d) and then sawn or drilled
(Fig 5c) Tabular roughouts were the basis for
making larger thicker ornaments such as most
pendants and barrel beads (Figs 9ndash10)
Small subcircular flakes were the basis of most disc
beads (Figs 6ndash7) The flakes have platforms bulbs of
percussion on ventral surfaces and often scars from
previous removals on dorsal surfaces A certain
consistency in size shape and morphology suggests
that a prepared-core technology was used to predict
and produce these flakes Since cores are rare we do
not yet know precisely how this was achieved
Experiments are still needed but we suspect that
chipping and flaking was accomplished by varying
Figure 3 (a) View of the modern Dabba Marble quarry west of Wadi Jilat from which raw material samples were
obtained (see Appendices AndashB) (b) Close-up view of metamorphosed deposits in situ with interdigitating green
(left) and red (right) Dabba Marble
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
140 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
uses of indirect percussion soft-hammer percussion
andor pressure flaking since the small size of the
beads required precision The use of antler or horn
for pressure flaking of soft stones is widely seen in the
ethnographic record and experimentally (Foreman
1978 19) Even hard stones can be flaked with soft
hammers made of animal horn (Kenoyer 1986 1994
2003 Kenoyer et al 1991) Cores and flakes do not
clearly indicate use of the Cambay technique of
inverse indirect percussion as seen in carnelian bead-
making (Kenoyer 2003 Possehl 1981) Many blanks
display micro-retouch on the edges On thicker disc
bead blanks micro-flakes were removed by striking
downward at the edge of each bead face (Fig 7c) The
retouch scars show that striking was bipolar ie from
opposite directions Products of this procedure were
micro-flakes (Fig 4 bottom)
Clear indications of heat treatment were rare but
burnt pieces do occur
Sawing Drilling and Abrasion Bead Blanks andFinished Beads
Bead blanks are the further reduction of a roughout
into a form closer to the final bead shape (Kenoyer
2003 16) At Jilat 13 and 25 blanks were abandoned
at many different stages The most extensive evidence
for lithic reduction concerns disc beads it is possible
to identify some chaines operatoires (Fig 8)
Figure 6 illustrates two of these paths for green
Dabba Marble disc beads made on flakes
Sometimes circular flakes were perforated early
before any abrasion (Fig 6c) More often flakes
were abraded slightly on ventral and dorsal surfaces
before any drilling (Fig 6andashb) At this stage edges
were still rough Perforation was added later (Fig
6d) In such cases a number of disc beads were
probably then strung together and abraded on the
edges by rolling the string back and forth on abrasive
stones of varying textures such as coarse sandstone
fine sandstone or limestone The final products were
evenly smoothed disc beads relatively standardized
in size The procedure also resulted in edges that are
sharp perpendicular to the bead faces and flat rather
than convex (Figs 6d 7endashf) Experiments indicate
that this procedure also contributes to the polishing
of faces and edges of beads (cf Foreman 1978)
Figure 7 shows artefacts from one context at Jilat 25
indicating a similar sequence for red Dabba Marble
disc beads from subcircular flake to final disc
For barrel beads the starting point was typically
not a flake but a tabular roughout A roughout was
often flaked into an approximately cylindrical form
sometimes with a hexagonal transverse cross section
(that is the section perpendicular to the perforation)
(Fig 9a) Scars indicate that the hexagonal form was
accomplished by flaking Sometimes hexagonal
blanks were perforated before much abrasion (Fig
9b) In many cases hexagonal blanks were heavily
abraded to obliterate sharp angles before any
perforation was begun (Fig 9c) Resulting bead
forms varied in cross section from circular to
elliptical or lenticular (see Wright and Garrard
2003 fig 3) Perforation of barrel beads was from
opposite directions resulting in hourglass perfora-
tions (Fig 9e) and occasionally perforation errors
(Fig 9d)
Most pendants were begun as tabular roughouts
chipped into shapes anticipating the final form such
as an asymmetrical triangular pendant (Fig 10a cf
Fig 5a for a rectangular pendant) Roughouts were
Figure 4 Example of raw material nodule (top) angular
shatter (upper centre) flakes (lower centre) and
micro-debitage (lower row) from a single context
at Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 141
then abraded and sawing was sometimes applied (Fig
10b) One unfinished pendant shows that perforation
preceded final abrasion (Fig 10c) The most common
form is the asymmetrical triangular pendant (Fig
10d) but there are also rectangular square and oval
pendants Not all pendants were made on tabular
roughouts some were made on thin flakes eg
rectangular and lsquoteardroprsquo forms (Fig 10endashf)
Sawing
Disc beads were made individually one by one on
flakes as opposed to being sawn from a perforated
cylinder which is another possible way However
sawing was central to the production of pendants and
barrel beads (cf Fig 5c 10b) In some cases the
roughout was sawn only to a shallow depth
permitting unwanted material to be snapped off
leaving a protruding piece of stone mdash a kind of
groove and snap technique (Fig 5c) The protruding
lsquobossrsquo was then abraded
A range of chipped stone tools in the sites might be
suitable for sawing These include tabular chert knives
sometimes also called tile knives (Fig 11) These are
bifacially retouched cutting tools characteristic of the
eastern Jordanian Neolithic (Baird in Garrard et al
1994a 89) However typically the bifacial retouch
produces an edge that is robust but somewhat sinuous
in profile (Fig 11) In addition many tile knife edges
have significant curvature in plan Use of tile knives
would probably generate relatively wide and slightly
sinuous cut marks but this is an area worthy of
experimentation and use wear study Alternative tools
that perhaps better match the relative scale and
precision of cut marks on bead blanks are a range of
relatively robust non-formal tools on blade or elon-
gated flake blanks with edges that are relatively
straight in profile and plan These are found in some
numbers in conjunction with the bead making debris in
Jilat 13 and 25 It is also notable that despite the
purported dominance of flakes in many broadly
contemporary PPNCELN assemblages significant
a b
c d
Figure 5 (a) Tabular roughout rectangular (b) Tabular roughout subcircular with drill mark (c) Abraded roughout with
sawing mark at bottom note that the sawing is incomplete the groove and snap technique has resulted in both
the saw mark and an irregular protrusion of stone (d) Abraded tabular roughout subcircular
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
142 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
proportions of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 tool blanks are
blades (Baird 1993 469 and figs 818ndash821) even
though the debitage assemblages are mostly flake
dominated Other possible sawing tools include flaked
limestone artefacts with a thin edge (Fig 12c)
Several cutmarked limestone slabs were found at
Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 (Fig 12andashb) The cutmarks are
shallow or deep incisions Interestingly the cut-
marked slabs do not display evidence of drilling
Conversely the Jilat 13 bench with marks probably
resulting from drilling (Fig 14c see below) has no
cutmarks This suggests segregation of drilling and
sawing activities Some variability in spatial distribu-
tion of different stages in the bead making process
may be further borne out by the discrete distribution
of drills in Jilat 25 contexts where substantial bead
making debris was recovered For example in Jilat 25
Context A15 drills were found clustered in spatial
units towards the northern end of the structure
Drilling
Experiments in drilling of Dabba Marble are in
progress (Bains forthcoming) Here we present
evidence for drilling from bead perforations and
stone tools Other experiments show that perforation
morphology reveals drilling methods and shape
diameter and length of the drill used (eg Gwinnett
and Gorelick 1999) At Jilat perforations indicate
that drilling methods varied and that choices were
probably affected by material hardness
Hand Drilling with Large Piercers and Borers
The simplest method used appears to have been hand
drilling Soft Dabba Marble could have been drilled
using a borer or piercer held in the hand and not
hafted to a drilling stick Drilling by this method
would produce rough irregular and relatively large
perforations (Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990) we see
examples of this in broken beads Borers and piercers
were found at the sites They are relatively large
perforation tools made on blades suitable for
manipulation by hand without a haft (Fig 13 nos
9ndash11)
Rotary Drilling From Two Directions with Hafted Drills
The most common method involved rotary drilling
from two directions Drilling was almost always
a b
c d
Figure 6 Green Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads (andashb) Circular flakes slightly abraded (c) Unabraded
perforated flake (d) Finished disc bead
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 143
bipolar That is the blank was drilled to roughly
halfway through then turned and the perforation
completed from the opposite direction As the two
perforations converged the result was an hourglass-
shaped perforation (Fig 9e) Experiments indicate
that this prevents chipping and flaking of the
alternate face which can occur if a blank is perforated
completely from only one direction (Possehl 1981)
Most hourglass perforations on both soft and
hard stones appear to have been produced by rotary
drilling Rotary drilling results in regular perforations
and concentric striations on them (Gorelick and
Gwinnett 1990) We observed both traits on many
broken beads and blanks (Fig 9b) Perforations of
hourglass form included very small drillholes indi-
cating that the drilling tools were smaller than
piercers and borers made on blades The probable
drills in this case were small drills on bladelets and
especially drill bits on burin spalls (Fig 13 nos 1 4
5 7) Microscopic examination of perforations is in
progress (Bains forthcoming)
Oddly piercing and drilling tools were found in
relatively low absolute numbers at the two sites (eg
Baird 1993 505ndash06 625 for Jilat 13 early phase
about 4 of tools were piercers or drills for the Jilat
25 which have concentrations of bead-making debris
just under 3 of tools were spall drills) However
specific contextual data other technological consid-
erations and comparisons with other sites give us
confidence that these were the main tools involved in
the drilling and that the low absolute numbers of
drills abandoned may sometimes relate to systematic
removal or discard of these tools by the artisans For
example burin spall drills were closely associated
spatially with bead-making debris in specific activity
areas in the Jilat 25 structure eg Context Aa15 in
the buildingrsquos northern area (Baird 1993 521 see
Table 6) In addition Jilat 13 and 25 produced large
numbers of angle burins including truncation burins
from which burin spalls were detached (eg about
29 of all tools at J13rsquos early phase were burins)
(Baird 1993 500 516 520ndash26 625) Burins are
a b c
d e f
Figure 7 Red Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads from Jilat 25 Context Aa15 (andashb) Circular flakes
slightly abraded (c) Heavily abraded and perforated disc bead blank edge abrasion incomplete (d) Abraded
perforated blank abrasion not complete on face (endashf) Finished disc beads
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
144 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
contextually closely associated with drills and bead-
making debris in occupation fills at Jilat 25 (c 30 of
tools from relevant Jilat 25 contexts were burins) mdash a
situation also seen at Jebel Naja in the Basalt Desert mdash
where both experiments and microwear studies suggest
that drill bits on burin spalls were used for bead-
making (Baird 1993 521 Finlayson and Betts 1990)
Burin spall drills would have had some technolo-
gical advantages over bladelet drills One advantage
is that the triangular or rectangular cross-sections of
burin spall drills make them stronger and less likely
to break during drilling In addition the manner of
their retouch from the same direction on each edge
creates a prismatic cross-section that probably served
to produce a neater hole and to make drilling more
efficient and possibly faster and reduce breakage in
drilling The tips of burin spall drills are blunted
which is an advantage in drilling hard stone (Gorelick
and Gwinnett 1990) Predictability and miniaturiza-
tion of burin spall drills may be relevant to an
Figure 8 Chaines operatoires for disc beads Sequence A refers to a disc bead made on a thin flake Sequence B refers
to a disc bead made on a thick flake Sequence C refers to a disc bead made on a tabular roughout not a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 145
apparent increased standardization in perforation
size observed at Jilat 25 from an early phase to a later
phase (Critchley 2000)
Since we have evidence of rotary drilling from bead
perforations we believe that drill bits were hafted to
sticks (probably made of wood) Drill bits on burin
spalls would have been too small to manipulate
effectively by hand alone
To work efficiently a drill needs to be weighted
and stabilized and there must be some means of
protecting the artisanrsquos hand Ground stone artefacts
support the idea that rotary drilling with drill bits
hafted to drilling sticks was in use They include a
probable capstone made of limestone from Jilat 25
The capstone would have been held in the hand
enabling the beadmaker to manipulate the drilling
stick from the top (Fig 14a) This artefact resembles
a miniature bowl and fits easily into one hand The
interior surface displays use wear circular striations
parallel to the rim and vertical striations perpendi-
cular to the rim The base of the interior converges to
a flat surface about 1 cm in diameter
Some Levantine Neolithic sites have revealed
similar objects with similar wear (Banning 1998
Wright 1992 fig 5ndash15b) and a comparable item
was found at Jarmo (Moholy-Nagy 1983 fig 12913
Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990 30) Capstones are
characteristic of the use of bow drills (Banning
1998 Foreman 1978) but strictly speaking they
are not necessarily diagnostic of the bow drill
(theoretically simpler drilling techniques involving
hafting might have been facilitated by the use of
a capstone) For the moment we can say that
at Jilat 13 and 15 the evidence for rotary drilling
is unequivocal However the evidence for the use
of the bow drill while suggestive is not quite
definitive
Size data considered carefully support a link
between burin-spall drills and beads To interpret
dimensions of drills and perforations we must keep
in mind that stone bead drilling was overwhelmingly
bipolar and converging Thus drills did not have to
penetrate all the way through the full height of the
bead mdash only about half of it Therefore what matters
a b c
d e f
Figure 9 Green Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks and finished beads (a) Hexagonal blank flaked but not abraded (b)
Abraded hexagonal blank (c) Abraded blank not perforated (d) Perforation error on abraded blank (e)
Finished bead broken showing bipolar perforation and hourglass perforation shape (f) Perforated barrel bead
almost finished except for final abrasion to smooth out last surface irregularities
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
146 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
is the very tips of the drill bits mdash the upper few
millimetres mdash not the full length of the drills
Since disc beads are consistently about 25 to
26 mm in height only the upper 15 mm or so of the
drills mdash the most distal ends of the tips mdash had to
have been about 21 mm or less in thickness to
lsquomatchrsquo the perforation diameters of disc beads
(Table 4) In the case of barrel beads since barrel
beads were between 64 and 71 mm in height about
32 to 36 mm of the most distal ends of the drill bits
have to have been about 21 mm or less in thickness
to lsquomatchrsquo the perforations of barrel beads (Table 5)
Measurements of the drill bit tips within these
small uppermost reaches show that the maximal
thicknesses of the drill bitsrsquo distal tips fall within the
range of sizes indicated by the perforations (Fig 13)
Multi-stage Drilling
Sometimes drilling may have been accomplished in
several stages Some beads particularly those made of
harder stones have smooth cylindrical perforations
with parallel walls displaying no hint of the
hourglass shape
One way to achieve this is to create the hourglass
perforation and then to turn it into a perfect
cylindrical perforation via the use of a second drilling
procedure An example of this was cited by Calley
(1989) who proposed that two tools found in
carnelian bead workshops at Early Bronze Age
Kumartepe (Turkey) had complementary functions
a drill bit for making the initial hourglass perforation
and a borer for finishing and smoothing it into a
cylindrical perforation Since both drill bits and
borers were found on the Jilat sites this method of
finishing perforations could have been used
At Jilat 13 and 25 evidence for multi-stage drilling
can be seen in some beads which have a depression on
one or both faces The depression may be a result of
drilling with a larger drill bit first in order to provide
a guide for the final perforation with a finer drill bit
Such a technique is seen in India-Pakistan (Possehl
1981 39 Kenoyer 1992b 73)
a b c
d e f
Figure 10 Green Dabba Marble pendant blanks and finished pendants (a) Tabular roughout flaked into approximately
trapezoidal shape but not abraded (b) Abraded trapezoidal blank with sawing mark at bottom (c) Perforated
asymmetrical triangular pendant blank incompletely abraded (note striations on face) (d) Finished asymmetri-
cal triangular pendant (e) Pendant blank made on a flake unabraded (f) Nearly-finished pendant made on a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 147
Stabilizing Beads Anvils and Drilling Benches
What method was used to stabilize a bead during
drilling The simplest technique is to fix a bead to a
stone anvil with an adhesive Ethnography and
experiments show that such anvils can be small (the
size of handstones) (Foreman 1978 figs 6ndash7) Use of
such an anvil should result in small shallow
depressions a form of use-damage resulting from
force exerted from above Figure 14b shows a small
flat stone from Jilat 25 with a central depression of
the expected size and depth
Figure 14c shows the limestone bench from Jilat 13
(previously discussed) with a number of such pits in
the centre The marks are evenly spaced and are
concentrated in one small well-defined area on the
widest part of the bench this wide area was also
finely abraded
We see this bench as a multifunctional worktable
anvil We suspect that the beadmaker sat on the
narrow part of the bench (straddling it) placed bead
blanks on the pitted work surface fixed them with
adhesive and then drilled them The bench also
displays evidence of other activities including flaking
and grinding
Adhesives for hafting chipped stone tools could
have been adapted for use in fixing beads to anvils
Bitumen would be one candidate In some cultures a
wooden frame with cup-holes is sometimes used for
stabilizing beads (Kenoyer 1986 P Wright 1982)
The holes are filled with beeswax and clay the bead is
inserted into the wax-clay mixture which hardens
holding the bead steady After drilling beads are
released by breaking the wax-clay mixture (Allchin
1979 Stocks 1989) As wood was probably scarce in
Jilat and as there are no indications of the use of
clay we can probably rule out this technique
However stone items with cup-holes are seen in
Neolithic sites (Kirkbride 1966 Wright 1992
fig 527b)
Abrasion
Ground stone artefacts are crucial to bead produc-
tion in traditional technologies (Foreman 1978
Inizan et al 1992 Kenoyer et al 1991 53 Moholy-
Nagy 1983 294 Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58)
Grinding of beads can be achieved by abrading
each bead individually with a hand held abrader or
by rubbing them on a large grinding slab Either
method will produce linear striations of the type we
see on many unfinished beads (cf Figs 7cndashd and 10c)
However final shaping of disc and cylindrical beads
was most likely achieved by stringing them or loading
them on to a thin rod capable of penetrating the
perforation (individually or in groups) and then
rolling them on a grinding slab adding abrasives
(such as sand) and water to produce a smoother finish
(Foreman 1978 Moholy-Nagy 1983 298) Some disc
beads with parallel edges perpendicular to the faces
would probably have been rolled on a flat smooth
stone Other beads with facetted sharply angled or
bevelled edges (eg many barrel beads) suggest that
they were rolled or abraded along a stone with
grooves and slanting sides (eg Fig 15a c)
Abrasion of bead blanks may have been a multi-
stage process involving a number of materials of
different textures and hardness In an early stage
grinding of bead materials on vesicular basalt would
have been the easiest way to abrade a large nodule
quickly The pores of vesicular basalt and pumice
form natural cutting lsquoteethrsquo comparable to the metal
rasp used by present-day sculptors At Jilat 13 and
Jilat 25 we found broken fragments of vesicular
basalt grinding slabs but not large complete exam-
ples The small fragments suggest two possibilities
either there were large complete slabs at one time
which were then broken worn out and discarded or
only small fragments of these heavy duty grinding
tools were needed
For finer abrasion sandstone grinding slabs might
be expected None were found However small
Figure 11 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic
sites Tile knives or possible saws for bead-
making From Baird 1993 fig 85
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
148 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
handheld abraders made of sandstones with coarse
hard quartz crystals were found at both sites (Fig
15andashb) Sandstone is not local to Wadi Jilat and these
items were imported and probably used extensively
(resulting in the small size)
For even finer abrasion limestone could have been
used Such needs could have been met by the large
bench of Jilat 13 (Fig 14c) which was finely ground
over a very large area (within which the possible
drilling marks were placed)
Some might see the grooved items made of
sandstone (Fig 15a) and limestone (Fig 15c) as
lsquoshaft straightenersrsquo One or two shaft straightener
fragments made of basalt occur at Jilat 13 Like other
basalt shaft straighteners in Neolithic Jilat (eg Jilat
7) (Garrard et al 1994a Wright 1993) the use-
surfaces of these have U-shaped cross-sections By
contrast the cross sections of the use surfaces on the
sandstone and limestone grooved items are not U-
shaped but have sharp angles We see these tools
mainly as abraders for grinding bead facets espe-
cially on barrel beads The widths of the use surfaces
are 11 mm for the sandstone tool and 138 mm for
the limestone one These dimensions correspond to
the average diameter (5 width) of 31 measured green
Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks from Jilat 13 (N 5
31 Mean diameter 5 92 mm standard deviation 5
28) Grooved stones are used in bead grinding in
a
b c
Figure 12 Ground stone artefacts probably for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Cutmarked slab (limestone) Jilat
13 The cutmarks are shallow and are concentrated in the left area running parallel to the main axes of the
slab (b) Cutmarked slab fragment (limestone) Jilat 13 showing deep cutmarks (c) Flaked and ground abra-
sive cutting tool made of limestone Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 149
modern India (Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58) a
grooved sandstone tool was found with an unfinished
bead at Catalhoyuk (Wright and Bains 2007)
Tosi and Vidale (1990) regard failure resulting
from breakage or human error as more common in
the grinding stage than during perforation although
this depends on material and opinion (Kenoyer 2003
18) In some cases it might be more efficient to shape
the bead first before attempting perforation This
may explain why barrel beads tend to be shaped and
abraded prior to perforation
Finished beads were always finely abraded and
sometimes polished to the extent of reflecting light
Ethnographic observations indicate that polishing is
sometimes done by placing beads en masse in a
leather bag along with an abrasive and shaking and
rolling the bags for long periods (Allchin 1979
Kenoyer 2003) This simple method would have been
more likely than the method of rolling beads and
abrasives in a wooden barrel which is also docu-
mented ethnographically (Kenoyer 2003)
However shaking beads in a bag with an abrasive
tends to produce beads with rounded convex edges
(Gwinnett and Gorelick 1989) Some beads at Jilat
have this form but many mdash especially those made of
the hard cherty red Dabba Marble mdash have sharp
edges perpendicular to bead faces indicating that
they were individually polished or polished during
rolling on a string or stick Alternative methods of
polishing can include rubbing with leather or wood
with the addition of fine sand or chalk and water or
with animal hairwool and animal fat (Kenoyer 1986
20) These methods would have been possible with
Jilat technology
Craft Specialization and Comparisons withOther Sites
Technology needs to be studied not only in terms of
materials and techniques but also in terms of social
groups involved in artefact production individual
artisans and skill (Dobres and Hoffmann 1999 2ndash12)
In egalitarian societies craft skill and knowledge of
Figure 13 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic sites Drilling and piercing tools From Baird 1993 fig 82
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
150 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
special materials can enhance the power of an
individual or a group encouraging hierarchy
(Dobres 2000 119ndash20)
These questions force us to reconsider issues of
craft specialization a term often used loosely or in
widely different ways Three concepts of specializa-
tion are considered here individual specialists
specialization between households or domestic
groups within a given site and site specialization
within a regional or social network of craft produc-
tion and exchange
Costin (1991) draws a contrast between indepen-
dent specialization and attached specialization
Independent specialization involves production of
utilitarian goods for nonelites and can be household-
based or based in special workshops Attached
specialization refers to production of prestige goods
under control of elites Whilst Costin notes that
attached specialization can also be based in house-
holds or workshops we often think of attached
specialization in connection with central institutions
and urban or state-level societies It is of considerable
interest that in early urban societies the making of
stone personal ornaments in association with central
institutions figures prominently (Stein 1996 Vidale
1989)
How earlier forms of craft specialization may have
evolved into large-scale attached specialization is
poorly understood Most research has concentrated
on later stages in this process (eg Stein 1996) in
discussions of earlier forms of specialization defini-
tions and criteria for diagnosis could sometimes be
clearer (eg Quintero and Wilke 1998 Rollefson and
Parker 2002 Rosen 1997) If we are dealing with
a
c
b
Figure 14 Ground stone artefacts probably used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Capstone made of limestone
Jilat 25 (b) Handstone probably used as an anvil or hammer Jilat 25 note depression in face and flake scars
at edges (c) Limestone drilling bench Jilat 13 Note evidence of use-wear on the left and widest area of the
bench smooth abraded surface drill marks in the centre-left face small flake scars with negative bulbs of per-
cussion close to the edge of the bench
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 151
specialization in Neolithic societies it is probably
independent specialization Still Neolithic societies
may fall between Costinrsquos two categories Neolithic
groups were clearly producing prestige goods perso-
nal ornaments are not strictly utilitarian and there is
at least a possibility that elites were emerging (Byrd
1994 Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002 Verhoeven
2002)
Individual Specialists
First there is the issue of identifying individual
specialists Some use lsquospecializationrsquo to refer to any
situation in which some artisans have high levels of
skill a view that has been criticized (Rice 1991) We
agree with Rice that identifying a high level of
technical skill in a craft is not on its own sufficient
for a diagnosis of specialization since it robs the
concept of force in discussing long term change (by
this criterion the Upper Palaeolithic was riddled
with craft specialists) However we would argue
that if there are other indications of craft specializa-
tion a search for levels of ability in different
individuals is appropriate mdash if the data permit
Such data would be primary refuse from well-dated
sites of high temporal resolution in which technical
processes (eg errors in chaines operatoires) can
reveal experts vs novices (Pigeot 1990 Stout 2002
Vanzetti and Vidale 1994)
In the case of Jilat 13 and 25 we are dealing with
much primary refuse and two closely dated sites (see
above and Tables 6ndash7) mdash with periodic use of the
sites over a time range on the order of 200 years at
most and possibly much less Jilat 25 yielded activity
areas with clear spatial clusters as do a number of
contexts at Jilat 13 Space does not permit us to
present all details (this awaits the final site report)
but we feel confident that aggregate consideration of
the data from each site allows us to discuss general
questions of individual skills mdash master craftsmen vs
novices
a b
c
Figure 15 Ground stone artefacts possibly used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Grooved sandstone abrading
tool Jilat 13 (b) Sandstone hand-held abrader Jilat 25 (c) Grooved limestone abrading tool Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
152 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
To explore this we analysed unfinished blanks and
the frequency of perforation errors Drilling is a
sensitive moment in bead production when many
things can go wrong (Kenoyer 2003) A low incidence
in perforation errors combined with high numbers of
successfully finished beads and evidence of standar-
dization should be reasonably good indicators of an
artisanrsquos mastery This is the situation seen at Jilat 25
(Fig 7) In all of 93 blanks from Jilat 25 only 2 were
perforation errors a failure rate of only 2
On the other hand a high incidence of perforation
errors would suggest that a beadmaker was a relative
novice Jilat 13 produced more blanks with perfora-
tion errors than Jilat 25 We thought we might find
individual contexts with a high rate of error
suggesting apprentices
The data did not bear this out Of 223 bead blanks
from Jilat 13 (all phases) 22 were perforation errors
mdash a failure rate of 98 All but two errors were on
barrel bead blanks of green Dabba Marble The
others were one pendant blank and one irregular
bead blank These 22 blanks were distributed across
20 different contexts and no more than 2 perforation
errors were found in any one context
A close look at those contexts reveals low error
rates In Context B21 2 green barrel bead blanks
with perforation errors were found with 5 other
blanks The others included green and red barrel and
disc blanks This context also yielded 5 successfully
finished beads including black and red barrel beads
and a green disc Black and green debitage and a
discoidal handstone were also found here In Context
B71 2 blanks with perforation errors were found
along with 9 other blanks and 10 successfully
finished beads including green Dabba Marble barrel
beads but also black and red disc beads Much
debitage was found along with a flaked limestone
cutting tool (cf Fig 12c) and a limestone object with
a drill mark
The higher rate of error at Jilat 13 compared to
Jilat 25 could be because artisans at Jilat 13 were
making more of the larger more complex barrel
beads (as opposed to simple discs see Tables 2ndash3)
which offer greater chances of failure due to the
longer drilling distance However at Jilat 13 the
overall failure rate was still quite low particularly
considering the overall volume of material recovered
(Table 1)
We conclude that the beadmakers at Jilat 13
included few trainees These appear to have been
skilled artisans a small task force composed of
relative experts This raises the question of whether
these beadmakers were examples of lsquoproducer
specialistsrsquo as traditionally defined that is people
involved in
production of a good by a relatively small number of
individuals (compared to the total output and
number of consumers) individuals who are as a
result of this selectivity and the routinization or
repetition of their tasks particularly skilled in
manufacture (Rice 1991 263)
Jilat 13 and 25 do suggest small numbers of
individuals and a certain selectivity in who was
involved in stone bead making The quantity of
debitagedebris relative to (1) the number of finished
beads and (2) the modest sizes of these structures
collectively suggest that these craftsmenwomen
served a larger number of consumers relative to the
number of craftsmen involved here If so who were
these consumers mdash other residents of Jilat or groups
beyond
Intra-site Specialization Between Domestic Groups
Several studies suggest ways of identifying different
forms of craft specialization between domestic groups
in a site For later sites Stein (1996) has explored
spatial data particularly how craft production
facilities are dispersed among domestic units or
located near special (or central) institutions In
Neolithic sites questions about dispersal between
households and possible links between craft produc-
tion and special buildings or special sites have been
underexplored
For specialization Costin (1991) suggests that we
would expect (1) variability between production
units (eg households occupations regions) in
relevant artefacts (2) high densities of craft produc-
tion debris relative to some other generally used
item in some production units (3) high ratios of
unfinished goods to finished goods in some produc-
tion units Kenoyer et alrsquos (1991) ethnoarchaeolo-
gical studies of modern stone bead-making in
Khambat (India) suggest something similar in the
case of households as production units There non-
specialist households engaging in casual opportu-
nistic bead production revealed low quantities of
bead-making debris few unfinished beads and little
standardization in finished beads By contrast
households specializing in bead production were
characterized by stockpiling of large quantities of
raw materials many unfinished beads and more
standardized finished products
In looking at whole occupations (ie phases within
sites) as a unit of observation we argue elsewhere
(Wright and Garrard 2003) that artefact densities and
other data from 13 PPNB and 8 PPNCELN
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 153
occupations in the Jilat-Azraq region suggest that
PPNCELN producers were more specialized than
those of the PPNB mdash at least in the Jilat-Azraq
region Unlike the PPNB sites Jilat 13 and 25 have
very high densities of bead-making debris specialized
tools for drilling and sawing there is an abundance of
unfinished materials relative to finished products
bead-making tools and debris are abundant relative
to normal domestic food processing equipment
(ground stone artefacts) (Wright and Garrard 2003
cf Costin 1991)
That argument is chronological comparing the
PPNB to the PPNCELN occupations and we stand
behind it for the Jilat-Azraq case (different trajec-
tories may apply to south Jordan and the Negev see
below) Still it leaves open the issue of house-to-
house variation within Jilat 25 or Jilat 13 As we have
only one excavated structure per site we cannot on
present evidence argue that each building housed a
group of specialists serving other households within
the same site In fact we have no direct evidence that
there were other structures on each site mdash the ones
excavated were the only ones visible on the surface
There are nuances of material and typological
choices between the Jilat 25 structure (red disc beads)
and the Jilat 13 structure (larger complex green
ornaments) but these nuances are beyond the scope
of this paper
In all we suspect that stone bead production at
Jilat 13 and 25 was geared not for other domestic
units lsquoin camprsquo but for use by these quite mobile
communities themselves mdash as well as export to other
sites within the steppe and beyond (see below) In
Costinrsquos terms (Costin 1991) Jilat 13 and 25 might
each be an example of an independent non-centra-
lized dispersed workshop possibly lsquofamily runrsquo (Rice
1991 262) mdash in which handling of Dabba Marble
was not routinely entrusted to novices
There are hints of house-to-house variations in
bead-making in major villages with larger samples of
domestic structures as in PPNB Beidha At PPNB
Beidha (earlier than Jilat 13 and 25) Building 14
stands out
Other forms of production besides food preparation
were less common Building 14 represented the best
example of artefact production in these basements
A wide range of artefacts was recovered apparently
associated with building 14rsquos basement floor
Particularly widespread were stone polishers bone
tools raw material (including hematite malachite
and magnesium) more than 60 unmodified marine
shells and at least two dozen beads of shell stone
and bone some of which were in various stages of
production Some artifacts lay on stone slabs
indicating that at least some slabs may have
functioned as work surfaces (Byrd 2005 117)
Such hints are intriguing Still macro-artefacts
from house floors are affected by problems of site
formation and house abandonment Micro-artefact
data can help (Rainville 2005) House-by-house
exploration with attention to micro-artefacts is
needed (Wright and Bains 2007)
Site Specialization Within a Regional Network of Craft
Production and Exchange
Both sites and other Neolithic sites in Jilat and
Azraq exhibit resource specialization
the selective use of particular resources in craft
manufacture such as certain clays that are repeat-
edly used (Rice 1991 262)
The Jilat artisans emphasized Dabba Marble from
a wider array of available stone types The Jilat-
Azraq sites collectively show that green Dabba
Marble was a special target This is revealed in both
frequencies and weights (for debris data and weight
data see Wright and Garrard 2003 for frequency
data on beads and blanks see Tables 2 and 3) At
both sites debris is greatly dominated by green
Dabba Marble mdash 80ndash95 of debris by both weight
(grams) and frequency Green Dabba Marble also
dominates blanks in terms of weight at both sites mdash
indicating the use of green for making larger heavier
and more conspicuous ornaments
Turning to frequencies at Jilat 13 about 90 of
blanks are green and only 5 are red However
finished beads include both green and red forms in
comparable percentages (404 and 436 respec-
tively) (Table 3) suggesting that finished red beads
were brought into the building from a place of
manufacture located somewhere else At Jilat 25
blanks of red and green Dabba Marble occur in
comparable proportions (409 green 43 red)
whilst finished beads are predominantly red (588)
(Table 2) If Jilat 13 and 25 were absolute contem-
poraries this could suggest variations in choices and
exchange between residents of different structures
Rice (1991) has defined site specialization as a
situation in which a site is located near a special
resource and the inhabitants emphasize production of
a craft based on that resource Relative to other sites
not so located the range of site functions and
activities would be expected to be more limited
Thus site specialization
involves individual localities or sites having evidence
of limited functions or intensive productive activity
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
154 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
often determined by fortuitous environmental fac-
tors This includes proximity to mineral deposits
and so forth (Rice 1991 262)
Do Jilat 13 and 25 fit this concept In both sites
15 km from the source we have a wealth of evidence
for intensive stone bead production and scanty
evidence for routine food processing tools (Wright
and Garrard 2003) However Jilat 25 may be closer
to the limited function model envisioned by Rice In
Jilat 13 bead-making is clearly intensive but we are
also dealing with a chipped stone assemblage of not
only drills and burins but also projectile points and
other tools Jilat 13 also reveals production of
figurines (of animals phalluses and arrow-shaped
forms) and sculpted pillars (Baird 1993 Garrard
et al 1994a Martin 1999 Wright 1992 1993)
In all Jilat 13 and 25 suggest that we can apply
Ricersquos lsquosite specializationrsquo on the grounds of intensive
productive activity and proximity to source mdash but
with the qualification that this specialization was also
embedded in hunting-herding activities and at Jilat
13 production of other special crafts unique among
the sites of a symbolic nature (figurines pillars)
One possibility is that we are dealing with a camp
of hunter-herder corporate groups mdash part of a wider
regional network mdash engaged in special activities in
remote areas involving art personal ornaments and
ritual Such groups are suggested by other data from
the PPNBndashPPNC time span for example Nahal
Hemar (ornaments masks hunting tools) Dhuweila
(carving of hunters with dress variations)
Catalhoyuk (images of hunters with dress variations
as in the bull hunt mural) and Gobeklitepe (sculpture
production including a quarry wild-animal icono-
graphy hunting) (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988 Betts
1998 Mellaart 1967 Schmidt 2000) In all these data
hint that craft production of special items was
embedded in hunting andor herding activities in
remote areas this may have been a key means by
which exotic materials reached major villages In a
very broad way this supports a sketch outlined by
Bar Yosef (Bar-Yosef 2001) although we do not
necessarily agree with specifics of his model eg the
territories boundaries social groups and mechanisms
which he suggests (cf Asouti 2006) Instead we see
this as one example of diverse strategies of social
networking linking lineages households and commu-
nities in the Neolithic (Wright forthcoming)
Returning to the stone bead data from Jilat 13 and
25 the apparent stockpiling of raw material and
intensive production activity hints at production of
the green material for export (see above and Wright
and Garrard 2003) New data now add weight to this
idea and suggest the following provisional picture of
regional specializations and exchanges in ornaments
(1) Based on typology technology and materials thereappears to be a distinctive eastern Jordanian koine ornetwork of stone bead manufacture and exchangefeaturing Dabba Marble and a probable regionalspecialization in it
Other Neolithic bead production sites are known
from eastern Jordan Indications are that most of the
green bead materials are Dabba Marble probably
from Jilat (further work is needed) In these sites
diversity of materials used seems low with few
imports from beyond the steppe Shells however
testify to wider networks (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989
Cooke and Reese in Betts 1998 Garrard et al 1994a
Reese 1991)
Azraq 31 (PPNB and ELN) is in our suite of study
materials (Baird et al 1992 Garrard et al 1994a
Wright and Garrard 2003) and debris blanks and
beads were found Preliminary XRF analysis of green
samples (by Groom) indicates that the material is
consistent with Jilat Dabba Marble Typology and
technology are also similar and as at Jilat 25 burin
spall drills were closely associated with bead-making
in specific activity areas (Baird 1993 521 Baird et al
1992 25) However the ground stone revealed no
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
(Wright 1992 1993 Wright in Baird et al 1992)
Material used for beads at Dhuweila (PPNB and
ELN) has been called Dabba Marble (Cooke and
Reese in Betts 1998) It is consistent in appearance
with our material although we have no details on
mineralogy or source Typologically these beads are
similar to those of Jilat 13 and 25 The ground stone
is very different from the suite at the Jilat sites
(Wright in Betts 1998) for comparisons of chipped
stone assemblages see Baird (1993)
At Bawwab al-Ghazal (Late PPNB) Rollefson
et al found drills bits on burin spalls tile knives
beads bead blanks and bead debris some of which
they called green Dabba Marble (Rollefson et al
1999 Quintero et al 2004) They argued that there is
a possible source of this material outcropping near
the site mdash lsquoFor the last raw material [green Dabba
Marble] small nodules of the green limestone were
embedded in the local bedrockrsquo (Rollefson et al 1999
3) However as shown in Appendix A the true
Dabba Marble only occurs in a restricted area west of
Wadi Jilat The lsquobedrockrsquo which outcrops near Azraq
31 and Bawwab al-Ghazal is travertine and some of
this formed during the late Pleistocene and Holocene
The nearby Epipalaeolithic site of Azraq 17 was
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 155
found partially embedded in travertine and artefacts
including nodules of imported basalt were found in
the travertine at this site It is possible that the
nodules of green limestone found at Bawwab al-
Ghazal were imported Dabba Marble which subse-
quently became incorporated in a travertine near the
site An alternative possibility is that the local
travertine is infused with green minerals In Wadi
Jilat travertines were noted with traces of green
minerals and in the Siwaqa area to the south-west of
Jilat there are extensive travertines some of which
are infused with pale green minerals including
volkonskoite (Barjous 1986 mdash see also Appendix A)
In eastern Jordan some Neolithic sites are greatly
dominated by burins (lsquoburin sitesrsquo) At a number of
these there is evidence for stone bead-making (eg
Jebel Naja) These lsquoburin sitesrsquo typically reveal few
ground stone tools we know of no examples of
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
from them It was argued that the main role of the
burins was production of spalls for drills used mainly
for beads (Betts 1987 1998 Finlayson and Betts
1990) However burin sites are not universally
associated with stone bead making At Jilat 23 24
and 26 burins were numerous but other evidence for
bead-making is scanty (Baird 1993 520)
Therefore some have questioned whether
burins and burin spalls in such sites were solely or
primarily intended for making drills and beads
noting that other functions are possible (Quintero
et al 2004 209) Given that these sites typically
represent short-term occupations it is possible that
many sites might be spall manufacture sites with
spalls transported to other settings where drill
manufacture and bead manufacture took place such
as Jilat 13 and 25 Rollefson expressed doubt that
either bladelet or burin spall drills would have been
used in bow drills partly because of their fragility and
also because most of them have a pronounced curve
on the long axis which would have made high speed
drilling impossible (Rollefson and Parker 2002) But
Finlayson and Betts (1990) and Berna (1995)
successfully experimented using burin spalls with
bow drills and Kenoyer (personal communication
2007) notes that drills made on burin spalls are the
most common type of drill in diverse prehistoric
stone bead-making sites (in India Pakistan and
elsewhere)
In the case of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 we believe burin-
spall drills were part of the bead-making repertoire
for reasons noted above This does not rule out other
uses of burin spalls Nor does it rule out the use of
other perforating techniques Drills do not have to be
made of stone when soft stones are being perforated
mdash wood bone and abrasives can be used (Foreman
1978)
(2) There are hints of export of Dabba Marble to at leastsome villages in the Levantine corridor However majorNeolithic villages display much diversity in materials andespecially more importing of exotic stones than is seen inthe eastern Jordanian sites
Many writers report Neolithic beads made of
unspecified lsquogreenstonersquo This term is unfortunate
since it can refer to metabasalt and similar altered
igneous rocks (Schumann 1992 248) Some of these
lsquogreenstonesrsquo may be limestone with apatite or other
materials (eg Garfinkel 1987 81ndash82 Hauptmann
2004 Talbot 1983 789) Beads of green limestones
rich in fluorapatite were found at late PPNB Basta in
southern Jordan (Hauptmann 2004) as confirmed by
XRF and XRD Green beads identified as Dabba
Marble were also reported from Ain Ghazal a site
with both PPNB and PPNC occupations (Rollefson
et al 1990 103ndash04) Whether these are Dabba
Marble from the Jilat source (Appendices AndashB) is
not yet fully clear Ongoing research will sort out
these mysteries (eg D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal
communication Hauptmann 2004)
Major villages in the Levantine Corridor reveal
different degrees of emphasis in styles and materials
often we see a certain emphasis on local materials and
preferences However considerable exchange net-
works are indicated in major villages which display
much wider ranges of stone ornament materials
compared to the eastern Jordanian sites (such as
Ain Ghazal Yiftahel Basta Barsquoja Ghuwayr 1
Fidan 1) mdash along with of course shells (Affonso
and Pernicka 2004 Bienert and Gebel 1998 84ndash86
Garfinkel 1987 Hauptmann 2004 Rollefson and
Simmons 1984 1986 Rollefson et al 1990 Simmons
and Najjar 1998 Starck 1988)
As the Neolithic evolved stone bead-making
entailed increasingly diverse techniques and materi-
als One example may be drills In earlymiddle PPNB
sites most drills are made on bladelets In the late
PPNB PPNC and Late Neolithic there may have
been a gradual increase in drills made on burin spalls
although perhaps not in all regions (Jensen 2004
Rollefson and Parker 2002) Underlining increasing
diversity of technological practice between groups
Baird (2001b) pointed out geographic variation in
this technology with spall drills dominating in the
north-eastern Jordanian steppe from MPPNB
through Early Late Neolithic whilst contemporary
sites to west and south use bladelet blanks for their
piercing tools
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
156 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
Five main stages of manufacture were identified
although reduction sequences vary These are (1)
reduction of raw nodules to cores roughouts and
flakes via flaking and chipping (2) shaping of
roughouts and flakes into blanks via further flaking
chipping sawing and rough grinding (3) perforation
via boring andor drilling (4) further grinding to
produce the final shape (5) final polishing
Nodules cores and debitage were recovered in
large amounts at Jilat 13 (7369 artefacts 6905 grams)
and Jilat 25 (1381 artefacts 976 grams) The largest
unworked blocks are of green Dabba Marble They
are about 15 cm in diameter but most are about the
size of an adult human fist Some nodules were
weathered suggesting that they were picked up from
surface rather than quarried from bedrock layers
(Fig 4 top)
Reduction of nodules by flaking resulted in (1)
cores (2) tabular roughouts (3) large flakes (4) large
angular shatter fragments (5) micro-flakes and (6)
micro-shatter (Fig 4) Cores defined as nodules with
two or more flake scars are not numerous or
consistent in form Shatter micro-flakes and micro-
shatter were normally discarded as byproducts
Tabular roughouts and larger flakes were used as
the basis for further reduction into bead blanks
Roughouts are early stages in bead reduction
(Kenoyer 2003 16) At Jilat 13 and 25 roughouts
are tabular reflecting the bedded structure of the
material They were flaked and chipped around the
edges into roughly symmetrical shapes (Figs 5a 10a)
Roughouts were sometimes subjected to initial
drilling or sawing at an early stage prior to any
intense abrasion (Fig 5b) In other cases roughouts
were abraded first (Fig 5d) and then sawn or drilled
(Fig 5c) Tabular roughouts were the basis for
making larger thicker ornaments such as most
pendants and barrel beads (Figs 9ndash10)
Small subcircular flakes were the basis of most disc
beads (Figs 6ndash7) The flakes have platforms bulbs of
percussion on ventral surfaces and often scars from
previous removals on dorsal surfaces A certain
consistency in size shape and morphology suggests
that a prepared-core technology was used to predict
and produce these flakes Since cores are rare we do
not yet know precisely how this was achieved
Experiments are still needed but we suspect that
chipping and flaking was accomplished by varying
Figure 3 (a) View of the modern Dabba Marble quarry west of Wadi Jilat from which raw material samples were
obtained (see Appendices AndashB) (b) Close-up view of metamorphosed deposits in situ with interdigitating green
(left) and red (right) Dabba Marble
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
140 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
uses of indirect percussion soft-hammer percussion
andor pressure flaking since the small size of the
beads required precision The use of antler or horn
for pressure flaking of soft stones is widely seen in the
ethnographic record and experimentally (Foreman
1978 19) Even hard stones can be flaked with soft
hammers made of animal horn (Kenoyer 1986 1994
2003 Kenoyer et al 1991) Cores and flakes do not
clearly indicate use of the Cambay technique of
inverse indirect percussion as seen in carnelian bead-
making (Kenoyer 2003 Possehl 1981) Many blanks
display micro-retouch on the edges On thicker disc
bead blanks micro-flakes were removed by striking
downward at the edge of each bead face (Fig 7c) The
retouch scars show that striking was bipolar ie from
opposite directions Products of this procedure were
micro-flakes (Fig 4 bottom)
Clear indications of heat treatment were rare but
burnt pieces do occur
Sawing Drilling and Abrasion Bead Blanks andFinished Beads
Bead blanks are the further reduction of a roughout
into a form closer to the final bead shape (Kenoyer
2003 16) At Jilat 13 and 25 blanks were abandoned
at many different stages The most extensive evidence
for lithic reduction concerns disc beads it is possible
to identify some chaines operatoires (Fig 8)
Figure 6 illustrates two of these paths for green
Dabba Marble disc beads made on flakes
Sometimes circular flakes were perforated early
before any abrasion (Fig 6c) More often flakes
were abraded slightly on ventral and dorsal surfaces
before any drilling (Fig 6andashb) At this stage edges
were still rough Perforation was added later (Fig
6d) In such cases a number of disc beads were
probably then strung together and abraded on the
edges by rolling the string back and forth on abrasive
stones of varying textures such as coarse sandstone
fine sandstone or limestone The final products were
evenly smoothed disc beads relatively standardized
in size The procedure also resulted in edges that are
sharp perpendicular to the bead faces and flat rather
than convex (Figs 6d 7endashf) Experiments indicate
that this procedure also contributes to the polishing
of faces and edges of beads (cf Foreman 1978)
Figure 7 shows artefacts from one context at Jilat 25
indicating a similar sequence for red Dabba Marble
disc beads from subcircular flake to final disc
For barrel beads the starting point was typically
not a flake but a tabular roughout A roughout was
often flaked into an approximately cylindrical form
sometimes with a hexagonal transverse cross section
(that is the section perpendicular to the perforation)
(Fig 9a) Scars indicate that the hexagonal form was
accomplished by flaking Sometimes hexagonal
blanks were perforated before much abrasion (Fig
9b) In many cases hexagonal blanks were heavily
abraded to obliterate sharp angles before any
perforation was begun (Fig 9c) Resulting bead
forms varied in cross section from circular to
elliptical or lenticular (see Wright and Garrard
2003 fig 3) Perforation of barrel beads was from
opposite directions resulting in hourglass perfora-
tions (Fig 9e) and occasionally perforation errors
(Fig 9d)
Most pendants were begun as tabular roughouts
chipped into shapes anticipating the final form such
as an asymmetrical triangular pendant (Fig 10a cf
Fig 5a for a rectangular pendant) Roughouts were
Figure 4 Example of raw material nodule (top) angular
shatter (upper centre) flakes (lower centre) and
micro-debitage (lower row) from a single context
at Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 141
then abraded and sawing was sometimes applied (Fig
10b) One unfinished pendant shows that perforation
preceded final abrasion (Fig 10c) The most common
form is the asymmetrical triangular pendant (Fig
10d) but there are also rectangular square and oval
pendants Not all pendants were made on tabular
roughouts some were made on thin flakes eg
rectangular and lsquoteardroprsquo forms (Fig 10endashf)
Sawing
Disc beads were made individually one by one on
flakes as opposed to being sawn from a perforated
cylinder which is another possible way However
sawing was central to the production of pendants and
barrel beads (cf Fig 5c 10b) In some cases the
roughout was sawn only to a shallow depth
permitting unwanted material to be snapped off
leaving a protruding piece of stone mdash a kind of
groove and snap technique (Fig 5c) The protruding
lsquobossrsquo was then abraded
A range of chipped stone tools in the sites might be
suitable for sawing These include tabular chert knives
sometimes also called tile knives (Fig 11) These are
bifacially retouched cutting tools characteristic of the
eastern Jordanian Neolithic (Baird in Garrard et al
1994a 89) However typically the bifacial retouch
produces an edge that is robust but somewhat sinuous
in profile (Fig 11) In addition many tile knife edges
have significant curvature in plan Use of tile knives
would probably generate relatively wide and slightly
sinuous cut marks but this is an area worthy of
experimentation and use wear study Alternative tools
that perhaps better match the relative scale and
precision of cut marks on bead blanks are a range of
relatively robust non-formal tools on blade or elon-
gated flake blanks with edges that are relatively
straight in profile and plan These are found in some
numbers in conjunction with the bead making debris in
Jilat 13 and 25 It is also notable that despite the
purported dominance of flakes in many broadly
contemporary PPNCELN assemblages significant
a b
c d
Figure 5 (a) Tabular roughout rectangular (b) Tabular roughout subcircular with drill mark (c) Abraded roughout with
sawing mark at bottom note that the sawing is incomplete the groove and snap technique has resulted in both
the saw mark and an irregular protrusion of stone (d) Abraded tabular roughout subcircular
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
142 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
proportions of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 tool blanks are
blades (Baird 1993 469 and figs 818ndash821) even
though the debitage assemblages are mostly flake
dominated Other possible sawing tools include flaked
limestone artefacts with a thin edge (Fig 12c)
Several cutmarked limestone slabs were found at
Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 (Fig 12andashb) The cutmarks are
shallow or deep incisions Interestingly the cut-
marked slabs do not display evidence of drilling
Conversely the Jilat 13 bench with marks probably
resulting from drilling (Fig 14c see below) has no
cutmarks This suggests segregation of drilling and
sawing activities Some variability in spatial distribu-
tion of different stages in the bead making process
may be further borne out by the discrete distribution
of drills in Jilat 25 contexts where substantial bead
making debris was recovered For example in Jilat 25
Context A15 drills were found clustered in spatial
units towards the northern end of the structure
Drilling
Experiments in drilling of Dabba Marble are in
progress (Bains forthcoming) Here we present
evidence for drilling from bead perforations and
stone tools Other experiments show that perforation
morphology reveals drilling methods and shape
diameter and length of the drill used (eg Gwinnett
and Gorelick 1999) At Jilat perforations indicate
that drilling methods varied and that choices were
probably affected by material hardness
Hand Drilling with Large Piercers and Borers
The simplest method used appears to have been hand
drilling Soft Dabba Marble could have been drilled
using a borer or piercer held in the hand and not
hafted to a drilling stick Drilling by this method
would produce rough irregular and relatively large
perforations (Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990) we see
examples of this in broken beads Borers and piercers
were found at the sites They are relatively large
perforation tools made on blades suitable for
manipulation by hand without a haft (Fig 13 nos
9ndash11)
Rotary Drilling From Two Directions with Hafted Drills
The most common method involved rotary drilling
from two directions Drilling was almost always
a b
c d
Figure 6 Green Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads (andashb) Circular flakes slightly abraded (c) Unabraded
perforated flake (d) Finished disc bead
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 143
bipolar That is the blank was drilled to roughly
halfway through then turned and the perforation
completed from the opposite direction As the two
perforations converged the result was an hourglass-
shaped perforation (Fig 9e) Experiments indicate
that this prevents chipping and flaking of the
alternate face which can occur if a blank is perforated
completely from only one direction (Possehl 1981)
Most hourglass perforations on both soft and
hard stones appear to have been produced by rotary
drilling Rotary drilling results in regular perforations
and concentric striations on them (Gorelick and
Gwinnett 1990) We observed both traits on many
broken beads and blanks (Fig 9b) Perforations of
hourglass form included very small drillholes indi-
cating that the drilling tools were smaller than
piercers and borers made on blades The probable
drills in this case were small drills on bladelets and
especially drill bits on burin spalls (Fig 13 nos 1 4
5 7) Microscopic examination of perforations is in
progress (Bains forthcoming)
Oddly piercing and drilling tools were found in
relatively low absolute numbers at the two sites (eg
Baird 1993 505ndash06 625 for Jilat 13 early phase
about 4 of tools were piercers or drills for the Jilat
25 which have concentrations of bead-making debris
just under 3 of tools were spall drills) However
specific contextual data other technological consid-
erations and comparisons with other sites give us
confidence that these were the main tools involved in
the drilling and that the low absolute numbers of
drills abandoned may sometimes relate to systematic
removal or discard of these tools by the artisans For
example burin spall drills were closely associated
spatially with bead-making debris in specific activity
areas in the Jilat 25 structure eg Context Aa15 in
the buildingrsquos northern area (Baird 1993 521 see
Table 6) In addition Jilat 13 and 25 produced large
numbers of angle burins including truncation burins
from which burin spalls were detached (eg about
29 of all tools at J13rsquos early phase were burins)
(Baird 1993 500 516 520ndash26 625) Burins are
a b c
d e f
Figure 7 Red Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads from Jilat 25 Context Aa15 (andashb) Circular flakes
slightly abraded (c) Heavily abraded and perforated disc bead blank edge abrasion incomplete (d) Abraded
perforated blank abrasion not complete on face (endashf) Finished disc beads
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
144 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
contextually closely associated with drills and bead-
making debris in occupation fills at Jilat 25 (c 30 of
tools from relevant Jilat 25 contexts were burins) mdash a
situation also seen at Jebel Naja in the Basalt Desert mdash
where both experiments and microwear studies suggest
that drill bits on burin spalls were used for bead-
making (Baird 1993 521 Finlayson and Betts 1990)
Burin spall drills would have had some technolo-
gical advantages over bladelet drills One advantage
is that the triangular or rectangular cross-sections of
burin spall drills make them stronger and less likely
to break during drilling In addition the manner of
their retouch from the same direction on each edge
creates a prismatic cross-section that probably served
to produce a neater hole and to make drilling more
efficient and possibly faster and reduce breakage in
drilling The tips of burin spall drills are blunted
which is an advantage in drilling hard stone (Gorelick
and Gwinnett 1990) Predictability and miniaturiza-
tion of burin spall drills may be relevant to an
Figure 8 Chaines operatoires for disc beads Sequence A refers to a disc bead made on a thin flake Sequence B refers
to a disc bead made on a thick flake Sequence C refers to a disc bead made on a tabular roughout not a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 145
apparent increased standardization in perforation
size observed at Jilat 25 from an early phase to a later
phase (Critchley 2000)
Since we have evidence of rotary drilling from bead
perforations we believe that drill bits were hafted to
sticks (probably made of wood) Drill bits on burin
spalls would have been too small to manipulate
effectively by hand alone
To work efficiently a drill needs to be weighted
and stabilized and there must be some means of
protecting the artisanrsquos hand Ground stone artefacts
support the idea that rotary drilling with drill bits
hafted to drilling sticks was in use They include a
probable capstone made of limestone from Jilat 25
The capstone would have been held in the hand
enabling the beadmaker to manipulate the drilling
stick from the top (Fig 14a) This artefact resembles
a miniature bowl and fits easily into one hand The
interior surface displays use wear circular striations
parallel to the rim and vertical striations perpendi-
cular to the rim The base of the interior converges to
a flat surface about 1 cm in diameter
Some Levantine Neolithic sites have revealed
similar objects with similar wear (Banning 1998
Wright 1992 fig 5ndash15b) and a comparable item
was found at Jarmo (Moholy-Nagy 1983 fig 12913
Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990 30) Capstones are
characteristic of the use of bow drills (Banning
1998 Foreman 1978) but strictly speaking they
are not necessarily diagnostic of the bow drill
(theoretically simpler drilling techniques involving
hafting might have been facilitated by the use of
a capstone) For the moment we can say that
at Jilat 13 and 15 the evidence for rotary drilling
is unequivocal However the evidence for the use
of the bow drill while suggestive is not quite
definitive
Size data considered carefully support a link
between burin-spall drills and beads To interpret
dimensions of drills and perforations we must keep
in mind that stone bead drilling was overwhelmingly
bipolar and converging Thus drills did not have to
penetrate all the way through the full height of the
bead mdash only about half of it Therefore what matters
a b c
d e f
Figure 9 Green Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks and finished beads (a) Hexagonal blank flaked but not abraded (b)
Abraded hexagonal blank (c) Abraded blank not perforated (d) Perforation error on abraded blank (e)
Finished bead broken showing bipolar perforation and hourglass perforation shape (f) Perforated barrel bead
almost finished except for final abrasion to smooth out last surface irregularities
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
146 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
is the very tips of the drill bits mdash the upper few
millimetres mdash not the full length of the drills
Since disc beads are consistently about 25 to
26 mm in height only the upper 15 mm or so of the
drills mdash the most distal ends of the tips mdash had to
have been about 21 mm or less in thickness to
lsquomatchrsquo the perforation diameters of disc beads
(Table 4) In the case of barrel beads since barrel
beads were between 64 and 71 mm in height about
32 to 36 mm of the most distal ends of the drill bits
have to have been about 21 mm or less in thickness
to lsquomatchrsquo the perforations of barrel beads (Table 5)
Measurements of the drill bit tips within these
small uppermost reaches show that the maximal
thicknesses of the drill bitsrsquo distal tips fall within the
range of sizes indicated by the perforations (Fig 13)
Multi-stage Drilling
Sometimes drilling may have been accomplished in
several stages Some beads particularly those made of
harder stones have smooth cylindrical perforations
with parallel walls displaying no hint of the
hourglass shape
One way to achieve this is to create the hourglass
perforation and then to turn it into a perfect
cylindrical perforation via the use of a second drilling
procedure An example of this was cited by Calley
(1989) who proposed that two tools found in
carnelian bead workshops at Early Bronze Age
Kumartepe (Turkey) had complementary functions
a drill bit for making the initial hourglass perforation
and a borer for finishing and smoothing it into a
cylindrical perforation Since both drill bits and
borers were found on the Jilat sites this method of
finishing perforations could have been used
At Jilat 13 and 25 evidence for multi-stage drilling
can be seen in some beads which have a depression on
one or both faces The depression may be a result of
drilling with a larger drill bit first in order to provide
a guide for the final perforation with a finer drill bit
Such a technique is seen in India-Pakistan (Possehl
1981 39 Kenoyer 1992b 73)
a b c
d e f
Figure 10 Green Dabba Marble pendant blanks and finished pendants (a) Tabular roughout flaked into approximately
trapezoidal shape but not abraded (b) Abraded trapezoidal blank with sawing mark at bottom (c) Perforated
asymmetrical triangular pendant blank incompletely abraded (note striations on face) (d) Finished asymmetri-
cal triangular pendant (e) Pendant blank made on a flake unabraded (f) Nearly-finished pendant made on a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 147
Stabilizing Beads Anvils and Drilling Benches
What method was used to stabilize a bead during
drilling The simplest technique is to fix a bead to a
stone anvil with an adhesive Ethnography and
experiments show that such anvils can be small (the
size of handstones) (Foreman 1978 figs 6ndash7) Use of
such an anvil should result in small shallow
depressions a form of use-damage resulting from
force exerted from above Figure 14b shows a small
flat stone from Jilat 25 with a central depression of
the expected size and depth
Figure 14c shows the limestone bench from Jilat 13
(previously discussed) with a number of such pits in
the centre The marks are evenly spaced and are
concentrated in one small well-defined area on the
widest part of the bench this wide area was also
finely abraded
We see this bench as a multifunctional worktable
anvil We suspect that the beadmaker sat on the
narrow part of the bench (straddling it) placed bead
blanks on the pitted work surface fixed them with
adhesive and then drilled them The bench also
displays evidence of other activities including flaking
and grinding
Adhesives for hafting chipped stone tools could
have been adapted for use in fixing beads to anvils
Bitumen would be one candidate In some cultures a
wooden frame with cup-holes is sometimes used for
stabilizing beads (Kenoyer 1986 P Wright 1982)
The holes are filled with beeswax and clay the bead is
inserted into the wax-clay mixture which hardens
holding the bead steady After drilling beads are
released by breaking the wax-clay mixture (Allchin
1979 Stocks 1989) As wood was probably scarce in
Jilat and as there are no indications of the use of
clay we can probably rule out this technique
However stone items with cup-holes are seen in
Neolithic sites (Kirkbride 1966 Wright 1992
fig 527b)
Abrasion
Ground stone artefacts are crucial to bead produc-
tion in traditional technologies (Foreman 1978
Inizan et al 1992 Kenoyer et al 1991 53 Moholy-
Nagy 1983 294 Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58)
Grinding of beads can be achieved by abrading
each bead individually with a hand held abrader or
by rubbing them on a large grinding slab Either
method will produce linear striations of the type we
see on many unfinished beads (cf Figs 7cndashd and 10c)
However final shaping of disc and cylindrical beads
was most likely achieved by stringing them or loading
them on to a thin rod capable of penetrating the
perforation (individually or in groups) and then
rolling them on a grinding slab adding abrasives
(such as sand) and water to produce a smoother finish
(Foreman 1978 Moholy-Nagy 1983 298) Some disc
beads with parallel edges perpendicular to the faces
would probably have been rolled on a flat smooth
stone Other beads with facetted sharply angled or
bevelled edges (eg many barrel beads) suggest that
they were rolled or abraded along a stone with
grooves and slanting sides (eg Fig 15a c)
Abrasion of bead blanks may have been a multi-
stage process involving a number of materials of
different textures and hardness In an early stage
grinding of bead materials on vesicular basalt would
have been the easiest way to abrade a large nodule
quickly The pores of vesicular basalt and pumice
form natural cutting lsquoteethrsquo comparable to the metal
rasp used by present-day sculptors At Jilat 13 and
Jilat 25 we found broken fragments of vesicular
basalt grinding slabs but not large complete exam-
ples The small fragments suggest two possibilities
either there were large complete slabs at one time
which were then broken worn out and discarded or
only small fragments of these heavy duty grinding
tools were needed
For finer abrasion sandstone grinding slabs might
be expected None were found However small
Figure 11 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic
sites Tile knives or possible saws for bead-
making From Baird 1993 fig 85
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
148 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
handheld abraders made of sandstones with coarse
hard quartz crystals were found at both sites (Fig
15andashb) Sandstone is not local to Wadi Jilat and these
items were imported and probably used extensively
(resulting in the small size)
For even finer abrasion limestone could have been
used Such needs could have been met by the large
bench of Jilat 13 (Fig 14c) which was finely ground
over a very large area (within which the possible
drilling marks were placed)
Some might see the grooved items made of
sandstone (Fig 15a) and limestone (Fig 15c) as
lsquoshaft straightenersrsquo One or two shaft straightener
fragments made of basalt occur at Jilat 13 Like other
basalt shaft straighteners in Neolithic Jilat (eg Jilat
7) (Garrard et al 1994a Wright 1993) the use-
surfaces of these have U-shaped cross-sections By
contrast the cross sections of the use surfaces on the
sandstone and limestone grooved items are not U-
shaped but have sharp angles We see these tools
mainly as abraders for grinding bead facets espe-
cially on barrel beads The widths of the use surfaces
are 11 mm for the sandstone tool and 138 mm for
the limestone one These dimensions correspond to
the average diameter (5 width) of 31 measured green
Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks from Jilat 13 (N 5
31 Mean diameter 5 92 mm standard deviation 5
28) Grooved stones are used in bead grinding in
a
b c
Figure 12 Ground stone artefacts probably for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Cutmarked slab (limestone) Jilat
13 The cutmarks are shallow and are concentrated in the left area running parallel to the main axes of the
slab (b) Cutmarked slab fragment (limestone) Jilat 13 showing deep cutmarks (c) Flaked and ground abra-
sive cutting tool made of limestone Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 149
modern India (Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58) a
grooved sandstone tool was found with an unfinished
bead at Catalhoyuk (Wright and Bains 2007)
Tosi and Vidale (1990) regard failure resulting
from breakage or human error as more common in
the grinding stage than during perforation although
this depends on material and opinion (Kenoyer 2003
18) In some cases it might be more efficient to shape
the bead first before attempting perforation This
may explain why barrel beads tend to be shaped and
abraded prior to perforation
Finished beads were always finely abraded and
sometimes polished to the extent of reflecting light
Ethnographic observations indicate that polishing is
sometimes done by placing beads en masse in a
leather bag along with an abrasive and shaking and
rolling the bags for long periods (Allchin 1979
Kenoyer 2003) This simple method would have been
more likely than the method of rolling beads and
abrasives in a wooden barrel which is also docu-
mented ethnographically (Kenoyer 2003)
However shaking beads in a bag with an abrasive
tends to produce beads with rounded convex edges
(Gwinnett and Gorelick 1989) Some beads at Jilat
have this form but many mdash especially those made of
the hard cherty red Dabba Marble mdash have sharp
edges perpendicular to bead faces indicating that
they were individually polished or polished during
rolling on a string or stick Alternative methods of
polishing can include rubbing with leather or wood
with the addition of fine sand or chalk and water or
with animal hairwool and animal fat (Kenoyer 1986
20) These methods would have been possible with
Jilat technology
Craft Specialization and Comparisons withOther Sites
Technology needs to be studied not only in terms of
materials and techniques but also in terms of social
groups involved in artefact production individual
artisans and skill (Dobres and Hoffmann 1999 2ndash12)
In egalitarian societies craft skill and knowledge of
Figure 13 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic sites Drilling and piercing tools From Baird 1993 fig 82
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
150 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
special materials can enhance the power of an
individual or a group encouraging hierarchy
(Dobres 2000 119ndash20)
These questions force us to reconsider issues of
craft specialization a term often used loosely or in
widely different ways Three concepts of specializa-
tion are considered here individual specialists
specialization between households or domestic
groups within a given site and site specialization
within a regional or social network of craft produc-
tion and exchange
Costin (1991) draws a contrast between indepen-
dent specialization and attached specialization
Independent specialization involves production of
utilitarian goods for nonelites and can be household-
based or based in special workshops Attached
specialization refers to production of prestige goods
under control of elites Whilst Costin notes that
attached specialization can also be based in house-
holds or workshops we often think of attached
specialization in connection with central institutions
and urban or state-level societies It is of considerable
interest that in early urban societies the making of
stone personal ornaments in association with central
institutions figures prominently (Stein 1996 Vidale
1989)
How earlier forms of craft specialization may have
evolved into large-scale attached specialization is
poorly understood Most research has concentrated
on later stages in this process (eg Stein 1996) in
discussions of earlier forms of specialization defini-
tions and criteria for diagnosis could sometimes be
clearer (eg Quintero and Wilke 1998 Rollefson and
Parker 2002 Rosen 1997) If we are dealing with
a
c
b
Figure 14 Ground stone artefacts probably used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Capstone made of limestone
Jilat 25 (b) Handstone probably used as an anvil or hammer Jilat 25 note depression in face and flake scars
at edges (c) Limestone drilling bench Jilat 13 Note evidence of use-wear on the left and widest area of the
bench smooth abraded surface drill marks in the centre-left face small flake scars with negative bulbs of per-
cussion close to the edge of the bench
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 151
specialization in Neolithic societies it is probably
independent specialization Still Neolithic societies
may fall between Costinrsquos two categories Neolithic
groups were clearly producing prestige goods perso-
nal ornaments are not strictly utilitarian and there is
at least a possibility that elites were emerging (Byrd
1994 Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002 Verhoeven
2002)
Individual Specialists
First there is the issue of identifying individual
specialists Some use lsquospecializationrsquo to refer to any
situation in which some artisans have high levels of
skill a view that has been criticized (Rice 1991) We
agree with Rice that identifying a high level of
technical skill in a craft is not on its own sufficient
for a diagnosis of specialization since it robs the
concept of force in discussing long term change (by
this criterion the Upper Palaeolithic was riddled
with craft specialists) However we would argue
that if there are other indications of craft specializa-
tion a search for levels of ability in different
individuals is appropriate mdash if the data permit
Such data would be primary refuse from well-dated
sites of high temporal resolution in which technical
processes (eg errors in chaines operatoires) can
reveal experts vs novices (Pigeot 1990 Stout 2002
Vanzetti and Vidale 1994)
In the case of Jilat 13 and 25 we are dealing with
much primary refuse and two closely dated sites (see
above and Tables 6ndash7) mdash with periodic use of the
sites over a time range on the order of 200 years at
most and possibly much less Jilat 25 yielded activity
areas with clear spatial clusters as do a number of
contexts at Jilat 13 Space does not permit us to
present all details (this awaits the final site report)
but we feel confident that aggregate consideration of
the data from each site allows us to discuss general
questions of individual skills mdash master craftsmen vs
novices
a b
c
Figure 15 Ground stone artefacts possibly used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Grooved sandstone abrading
tool Jilat 13 (b) Sandstone hand-held abrader Jilat 25 (c) Grooved limestone abrading tool Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
152 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
To explore this we analysed unfinished blanks and
the frequency of perforation errors Drilling is a
sensitive moment in bead production when many
things can go wrong (Kenoyer 2003) A low incidence
in perforation errors combined with high numbers of
successfully finished beads and evidence of standar-
dization should be reasonably good indicators of an
artisanrsquos mastery This is the situation seen at Jilat 25
(Fig 7) In all of 93 blanks from Jilat 25 only 2 were
perforation errors a failure rate of only 2
On the other hand a high incidence of perforation
errors would suggest that a beadmaker was a relative
novice Jilat 13 produced more blanks with perfora-
tion errors than Jilat 25 We thought we might find
individual contexts with a high rate of error
suggesting apprentices
The data did not bear this out Of 223 bead blanks
from Jilat 13 (all phases) 22 were perforation errors
mdash a failure rate of 98 All but two errors were on
barrel bead blanks of green Dabba Marble The
others were one pendant blank and one irregular
bead blank These 22 blanks were distributed across
20 different contexts and no more than 2 perforation
errors were found in any one context
A close look at those contexts reveals low error
rates In Context B21 2 green barrel bead blanks
with perforation errors were found with 5 other
blanks The others included green and red barrel and
disc blanks This context also yielded 5 successfully
finished beads including black and red barrel beads
and a green disc Black and green debitage and a
discoidal handstone were also found here In Context
B71 2 blanks with perforation errors were found
along with 9 other blanks and 10 successfully
finished beads including green Dabba Marble barrel
beads but also black and red disc beads Much
debitage was found along with a flaked limestone
cutting tool (cf Fig 12c) and a limestone object with
a drill mark
The higher rate of error at Jilat 13 compared to
Jilat 25 could be because artisans at Jilat 13 were
making more of the larger more complex barrel
beads (as opposed to simple discs see Tables 2ndash3)
which offer greater chances of failure due to the
longer drilling distance However at Jilat 13 the
overall failure rate was still quite low particularly
considering the overall volume of material recovered
(Table 1)
We conclude that the beadmakers at Jilat 13
included few trainees These appear to have been
skilled artisans a small task force composed of
relative experts This raises the question of whether
these beadmakers were examples of lsquoproducer
specialistsrsquo as traditionally defined that is people
involved in
production of a good by a relatively small number of
individuals (compared to the total output and
number of consumers) individuals who are as a
result of this selectivity and the routinization or
repetition of their tasks particularly skilled in
manufacture (Rice 1991 263)
Jilat 13 and 25 do suggest small numbers of
individuals and a certain selectivity in who was
involved in stone bead making The quantity of
debitagedebris relative to (1) the number of finished
beads and (2) the modest sizes of these structures
collectively suggest that these craftsmenwomen
served a larger number of consumers relative to the
number of craftsmen involved here If so who were
these consumers mdash other residents of Jilat or groups
beyond
Intra-site Specialization Between Domestic Groups
Several studies suggest ways of identifying different
forms of craft specialization between domestic groups
in a site For later sites Stein (1996) has explored
spatial data particularly how craft production
facilities are dispersed among domestic units or
located near special (or central) institutions In
Neolithic sites questions about dispersal between
households and possible links between craft produc-
tion and special buildings or special sites have been
underexplored
For specialization Costin (1991) suggests that we
would expect (1) variability between production
units (eg households occupations regions) in
relevant artefacts (2) high densities of craft produc-
tion debris relative to some other generally used
item in some production units (3) high ratios of
unfinished goods to finished goods in some produc-
tion units Kenoyer et alrsquos (1991) ethnoarchaeolo-
gical studies of modern stone bead-making in
Khambat (India) suggest something similar in the
case of households as production units There non-
specialist households engaging in casual opportu-
nistic bead production revealed low quantities of
bead-making debris few unfinished beads and little
standardization in finished beads By contrast
households specializing in bead production were
characterized by stockpiling of large quantities of
raw materials many unfinished beads and more
standardized finished products
In looking at whole occupations (ie phases within
sites) as a unit of observation we argue elsewhere
(Wright and Garrard 2003) that artefact densities and
other data from 13 PPNB and 8 PPNCELN
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 153
occupations in the Jilat-Azraq region suggest that
PPNCELN producers were more specialized than
those of the PPNB mdash at least in the Jilat-Azraq
region Unlike the PPNB sites Jilat 13 and 25 have
very high densities of bead-making debris specialized
tools for drilling and sawing there is an abundance of
unfinished materials relative to finished products
bead-making tools and debris are abundant relative
to normal domestic food processing equipment
(ground stone artefacts) (Wright and Garrard 2003
cf Costin 1991)
That argument is chronological comparing the
PPNB to the PPNCELN occupations and we stand
behind it for the Jilat-Azraq case (different trajec-
tories may apply to south Jordan and the Negev see
below) Still it leaves open the issue of house-to-
house variation within Jilat 25 or Jilat 13 As we have
only one excavated structure per site we cannot on
present evidence argue that each building housed a
group of specialists serving other households within
the same site In fact we have no direct evidence that
there were other structures on each site mdash the ones
excavated were the only ones visible on the surface
There are nuances of material and typological
choices between the Jilat 25 structure (red disc beads)
and the Jilat 13 structure (larger complex green
ornaments) but these nuances are beyond the scope
of this paper
In all we suspect that stone bead production at
Jilat 13 and 25 was geared not for other domestic
units lsquoin camprsquo but for use by these quite mobile
communities themselves mdash as well as export to other
sites within the steppe and beyond (see below) In
Costinrsquos terms (Costin 1991) Jilat 13 and 25 might
each be an example of an independent non-centra-
lized dispersed workshop possibly lsquofamily runrsquo (Rice
1991 262) mdash in which handling of Dabba Marble
was not routinely entrusted to novices
There are hints of house-to-house variations in
bead-making in major villages with larger samples of
domestic structures as in PPNB Beidha At PPNB
Beidha (earlier than Jilat 13 and 25) Building 14
stands out
Other forms of production besides food preparation
were less common Building 14 represented the best
example of artefact production in these basements
A wide range of artefacts was recovered apparently
associated with building 14rsquos basement floor
Particularly widespread were stone polishers bone
tools raw material (including hematite malachite
and magnesium) more than 60 unmodified marine
shells and at least two dozen beads of shell stone
and bone some of which were in various stages of
production Some artifacts lay on stone slabs
indicating that at least some slabs may have
functioned as work surfaces (Byrd 2005 117)
Such hints are intriguing Still macro-artefacts
from house floors are affected by problems of site
formation and house abandonment Micro-artefact
data can help (Rainville 2005) House-by-house
exploration with attention to micro-artefacts is
needed (Wright and Bains 2007)
Site Specialization Within a Regional Network of Craft
Production and Exchange
Both sites and other Neolithic sites in Jilat and
Azraq exhibit resource specialization
the selective use of particular resources in craft
manufacture such as certain clays that are repeat-
edly used (Rice 1991 262)
The Jilat artisans emphasized Dabba Marble from
a wider array of available stone types The Jilat-
Azraq sites collectively show that green Dabba
Marble was a special target This is revealed in both
frequencies and weights (for debris data and weight
data see Wright and Garrard 2003 for frequency
data on beads and blanks see Tables 2 and 3) At
both sites debris is greatly dominated by green
Dabba Marble mdash 80ndash95 of debris by both weight
(grams) and frequency Green Dabba Marble also
dominates blanks in terms of weight at both sites mdash
indicating the use of green for making larger heavier
and more conspicuous ornaments
Turning to frequencies at Jilat 13 about 90 of
blanks are green and only 5 are red However
finished beads include both green and red forms in
comparable percentages (404 and 436 respec-
tively) (Table 3) suggesting that finished red beads
were brought into the building from a place of
manufacture located somewhere else At Jilat 25
blanks of red and green Dabba Marble occur in
comparable proportions (409 green 43 red)
whilst finished beads are predominantly red (588)
(Table 2) If Jilat 13 and 25 were absolute contem-
poraries this could suggest variations in choices and
exchange between residents of different structures
Rice (1991) has defined site specialization as a
situation in which a site is located near a special
resource and the inhabitants emphasize production of
a craft based on that resource Relative to other sites
not so located the range of site functions and
activities would be expected to be more limited
Thus site specialization
involves individual localities or sites having evidence
of limited functions or intensive productive activity
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
154 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
often determined by fortuitous environmental fac-
tors This includes proximity to mineral deposits
and so forth (Rice 1991 262)
Do Jilat 13 and 25 fit this concept In both sites
15 km from the source we have a wealth of evidence
for intensive stone bead production and scanty
evidence for routine food processing tools (Wright
and Garrard 2003) However Jilat 25 may be closer
to the limited function model envisioned by Rice In
Jilat 13 bead-making is clearly intensive but we are
also dealing with a chipped stone assemblage of not
only drills and burins but also projectile points and
other tools Jilat 13 also reveals production of
figurines (of animals phalluses and arrow-shaped
forms) and sculpted pillars (Baird 1993 Garrard
et al 1994a Martin 1999 Wright 1992 1993)
In all Jilat 13 and 25 suggest that we can apply
Ricersquos lsquosite specializationrsquo on the grounds of intensive
productive activity and proximity to source mdash but
with the qualification that this specialization was also
embedded in hunting-herding activities and at Jilat
13 production of other special crafts unique among
the sites of a symbolic nature (figurines pillars)
One possibility is that we are dealing with a camp
of hunter-herder corporate groups mdash part of a wider
regional network mdash engaged in special activities in
remote areas involving art personal ornaments and
ritual Such groups are suggested by other data from
the PPNBndashPPNC time span for example Nahal
Hemar (ornaments masks hunting tools) Dhuweila
(carving of hunters with dress variations)
Catalhoyuk (images of hunters with dress variations
as in the bull hunt mural) and Gobeklitepe (sculpture
production including a quarry wild-animal icono-
graphy hunting) (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988 Betts
1998 Mellaart 1967 Schmidt 2000) In all these data
hint that craft production of special items was
embedded in hunting andor herding activities in
remote areas this may have been a key means by
which exotic materials reached major villages In a
very broad way this supports a sketch outlined by
Bar Yosef (Bar-Yosef 2001) although we do not
necessarily agree with specifics of his model eg the
territories boundaries social groups and mechanisms
which he suggests (cf Asouti 2006) Instead we see
this as one example of diverse strategies of social
networking linking lineages households and commu-
nities in the Neolithic (Wright forthcoming)
Returning to the stone bead data from Jilat 13 and
25 the apparent stockpiling of raw material and
intensive production activity hints at production of
the green material for export (see above and Wright
and Garrard 2003) New data now add weight to this
idea and suggest the following provisional picture of
regional specializations and exchanges in ornaments
(1) Based on typology technology and materials thereappears to be a distinctive eastern Jordanian koine ornetwork of stone bead manufacture and exchangefeaturing Dabba Marble and a probable regionalspecialization in it
Other Neolithic bead production sites are known
from eastern Jordan Indications are that most of the
green bead materials are Dabba Marble probably
from Jilat (further work is needed) In these sites
diversity of materials used seems low with few
imports from beyond the steppe Shells however
testify to wider networks (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989
Cooke and Reese in Betts 1998 Garrard et al 1994a
Reese 1991)
Azraq 31 (PPNB and ELN) is in our suite of study
materials (Baird et al 1992 Garrard et al 1994a
Wright and Garrard 2003) and debris blanks and
beads were found Preliminary XRF analysis of green
samples (by Groom) indicates that the material is
consistent with Jilat Dabba Marble Typology and
technology are also similar and as at Jilat 25 burin
spall drills were closely associated with bead-making
in specific activity areas (Baird 1993 521 Baird et al
1992 25) However the ground stone revealed no
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
(Wright 1992 1993 Wright in Baird et al 1992)
Material used for beads at Dhuweila (PPNB and
ELN) has been called Dabba Marble (Cooke and
Reese in Betts 1998) It is consistent in appearance
with our material although we have no details on
mineralogy or source Typologically these beads are
similar to those of Jilat 13 and 25 The ground stone
is very different from the suite at the Jilat sites
(Wright in Betts 1998) for comparisons of chipped
stone assemblages see Baird (1993)
At Bawwab al-Ghazal (Late PPNB) Rollefson
et al found drills bits on burin spalls tile knives
beads bead blanks and bead debris some of which
they called green Dabba Marble (Rollefson et al
1999 Quintero et al 2004) They argued that there is
a possible source of this material outcropping near
the site mdash lsquoFor the last raw material [green Dabba
Marble] small nodules of the green limestone were
embedded in the local bedrockrsquo (Rollefson et al 1999
3) However as shown in Appendix A the true
Dabba Marble only occurs in a restricted area west of
Wadi Jilat The lsquobedrockrsquo which outcrops near Azraq
31 and Bawwab al-Ghazal is travertine and some of
this formed during the late Pleistocene and Holocene
The nearby Epipalaeolithic site of Azraq 17 was
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 155
found partially embedded in travertine and artefacts
including nodules of imported basalt were found in
the travertine at this site It is possible that the
nodules of green limestone found at Bawwab al-
Ghazal were imported Dabba Marble which subse-
quently became incorporated in a travertine near the
site An alternative possibility is that the local
travertine is infused with green minerals In Wadi
Jilat travertines were noted with traces of green
minerals and in the Siwaqa area to the south-west of
Jilat there are extensive travertines some of which
are infused with pale green minerals including
volkonskoite (Barjous 1986 mdash see also Appendix A)
In eastern Jordan some Neolithic sites are greatly
dominated by burins (lsquoburin sitesrsquo) At a number of
these there is evidence for stone bead-making (eg
Jebel Naja) These lsquoburin sitesrsquo typically reveal few
ground stone tools we know of no examples of
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
from them It was argued that the main role of the
burins was production of spalls for drills used mainly
for beads (Betts 1987 1998 Finlayson and Betts
1990) However burin sites are not universally
associated with stone bead making At Jilat 23 24
and 26 burins were numerous but other evidence for
bead-making is scanty (Baird 1993 520)
Therefore some have questioned whether
burins and burin spalls in such sites were solely or
primarily intended for making drills and beads
noting that other functions are possible (Quintero
et al 2004 209) Given that these sites typically
represent short-term occupations it is possible that
many sites might be spall manufacture sites with
spalls transported to other settings where drill
manufacture and bead manufacture took place such
as Jilat 13 and 25 Rollefson expressed doubt that
either bladelet or burin spall drills would have been
used in bow drills partly because of their fragility and
also because most of them have a pronounced curve
on the long axis which would have made high speed
drilling impossible (Rollefson and Parker 2002) But
Finlayson and Betts (1990) and Berna (1995)
successfully experimented using burin spalls with
bow drills and Kenoyer (personal communication
2007) notes that drills made on burin spalls are the
most common type of drill in diverse prehistoric
stone bead-making sites (in India Pakistan and
elsewhere)
In the case of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 we believe burin-
spall drills were part of the bead-making repertoire
for reasons noted above This does not rule out other
uses of burin spalls Nor does it rule out the use of
other perforating techniques Drills do not have to be
made of stone when soft stones are being perforated
mdash wood bone and abrasives can be used (Foreman
1978)
(2) There are hints of export of Dabba Marble to at leastsome villages in the Levantine corridor However majorNeolithic villages display much diversity in materials andespecially more importing of exotic stones than is seen inthe eastern Jordanian sites
Many writers report Neolithic beads made of
unspecified lsquogreenstonersquo This term is unfortunate
since it can refer to metabasalt and similar altered
igneous rocks (Schumann 1992 248) Some of these
lsquogreenstonesrsquo may be limestone with apatite or other
materials (eg Garfinkel 1987 81ndash82 Hauptmann
2004 Talbot 1983 789) Beads of green limestones
rich in fluorapatite were found at late PPNB Basta in
southern Jordan (Hauptmann 2004) as confirmed by
XRF and XRD Green beads identified as Dabba
Marble were also reported from Ain Ghazal a site
with both PPNB and PPNC occupations (Rollefson
et al 1990 103ndash04) Whether these are Dabba
Marble from the Jilat source (Appendices AndashB) is
not yet fully clear Ongoing research will sort out
these mysteries (eg D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal
communication Hauptmann 2004)
Major villages in the Levantine Corridor reveal
different degrees of emphasis in styles and materials
often we see a certain emphasis on local materials and
preferences However considerable exchange net-
works are indicated in major villages which display
much wider ranges of stone ornament materials
compared to the eastern Jordanian sites (such as
Ain Ghazal Yiftahel Basta Barsquoja Ghuwayr 1
Fidan 1) mdash along with of course shells (Affonso
and Pernicka 2004 Bienert and Gebel 1998 84ndash86
Garfinkel 1987 Hauptmann 2004 Rollefson and
Simmons 1984 1986 Rollefson et al 1990 Simmons
and Najjar 1998 Starck 1988)
As the Neolithic evolved stone bead-making
entailed increasingly diverse techniques and materi-
als One example may be drills In earlymiddle PPNB
sites most drills are made on bladelets In the late
PPNB PPNC and Late Neolithic there may have
been a gradual increase in drills made on burin spalls
although perhaps not in all regions (Jensen 2004
Rollefson and Parker 2002) Underlining increasing
diversity of technological practice between groups
Baird (2001b) pointed out geographic variation in
this technology with spall drills dominating in the
north-eastern Jordanian steppe from MPPNB
through Early Late Neolithic whilst contemporary
sites to west and south use bladelet blanks for their
piercing tools
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
156 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
uses of indirect percussion soft-hammer percussion
andor pressure flaking since the small size of the
beads required precision The use of antler or horn
for pressure flaking of soft stones is widely seen in the
ethnographic record and experimentally (Foreman
1978 19) Even hard stones can be flaked with soft
hammers made of animal horn (Kenoyer 1986 1994
2003 Kenoyer et al 1991) Cores and flakes do not
clearly indicate use of the Cambay technique of
inverse indirect percussion as seen in carnelian bead-
making (Kenoyer 2003 Possehl 1981) Many blanks
display micro-retouch on the edges On thicker disc
bead blanks micro-flakes were removed by striking
downward at the edge of each bead face (Fig 7c) The
retouch scars show that striking was bipolar ie from
opposite directions Products of this procedure were
micro-flakes (Fig 4 bottom)
Clear indications of heat treatment were rare but
burnt pieces do occur
Sawing Drilling and Abrasion Bead Blanks andFinished Beads
Bead blanks are the further reduction of a roughout
into a form closer to the final bead shape (Kenoyer
2003 16) At Jilat 13 and 25 blanks were abandoned
at many different stages The most extensive evidence
for lithic reduction concerns disc beads it is possible
to identify some chaines operatoires (Fig 8)
Figure 6 illustrates two of these paths for green
Dabba Marble disc beads made on flakes
Sometimes circular flakes were perforated early
before any abrasion (Fig 6c) More often flakes
were abraded slightly on ventral and dorsal surfaces
before any drilling (Fig 6andashb) At this stage edges
were still rough Perforation was added later (Fig
6d) In such cases a number of disc beads were
probably then strung together and abraded on the
edges by rolling the string back and forth on abrasive
stones of varying textures such as coarse sandstone
fine sandstone or limestone The final products were
evenly smoothed disc beads relatively standardized
in size The procedure also resulted in edges that are
sharp perpendicular to the bead faces and flat rather
than convex (Figs 6d 7endashf) Experiments indicate
that this procedure also contributes to the polishing
of faces and edges of beads (cf Foreman 1978)
Figure 7 shows artefacts from one context at Jilat 25
indicating a similar sequence for red Dabba Marble
disc beads from subcircular flake to final disc
For barrel beads the starting point was typically
not a flake but a tabular roughout A roughout was
often flaked into an approximately cylindrical form
sometimes with a hexagonal transverse cross section
(that is the section perpendicular to the perforation)
(Fig 9a) Scars indicate that the hexagonal form was
accomplished by flaking Sometimes hexagonal
blanks were perforated before much abrasion (Fig
9b) In many cases hexagonal blanks were heavily
abraded to obliterate sharp angles before any
perforation was begun (Fig 9c) Resulting bead
forms varied in cross section from circular to
elliptical or lenticular (see Wright and Garrard
2003 fig 3) Perforation of barrel beads was from
opposite directions resulting in hourglass perfora-
tions (Fig 9e) and occasionally perforation errors
(Fig 9d)
Most pendants were begun as tabular roughouts
chipped into shapes anticipating the final form such
as an asymmetrical triangular pendant (Fig 10a cf
Fig 5a for a rectangular pendant) Roughouts were
Figure 4 Example of raw material nodule (top) angular
shatter (upper centre) flakes (lower centre) and
micro-debitage (lower row) from a single context
at Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 141
then abraded and sawing was sometimes applied (Fig
10b) One unfinished pendant shows that perforation
preceded final abrasion (Fig 10c) The most common
form is the asymmetrical triangular pendant (Fig
10d) but there are also rectangular square and oval
pendants Not all pendants were made on tabular
roughouts some were made on thin flakes eg
rectangular and lsquoteardroprsquo forms (Fig 10endashf)
Sawing
Disc beads were made individually one by one on
flakes as opposed to being sawn from a perforated
cylinder which is another possible way However
sawing was central to the production of pendants and
barrel beads (cf Fig 5c 10b) In some cases the
roughout was sawn only to a shallow depth
permitting unwanted material to be snapped off
leaving a protruding piece of stone mdash a kind of
groove and snap technique (Fig 5c) The protruding
lsquobossrsquo was then abraded
A range of chipped stone tools in the sites might be
suitable for sawing These include tabular chert knives
sometimes also called tile knives (Fig 11) These are
bifacially retouched cutting tools characteristic of the
eastern Jordanian Neolithic (Baird in Garrard et al
1994a 89) However typically the bifacial retouch
produces an edge that is robust but somewhat sinuous
in profile (Fig 11) In addition many tile knife edges
have significant curvature in plan Use of tile knives
would probably generate relatively wide and slightly
sinuous cut marks but this is an area worthy of
experimentation and use wear study Alternative tools
that perhaps better match the relative scale and
precision of cut marks on bead blanks are a range of
relatively robust non-formal tools on blade or elon-
gated flake blanks with edges that are relatively
straight in profile and plan These are found in some
numbers in conjunction with the bead making debris in
Jilat 13 and 25 It is also notable that despite the
purported dominance of flakes in many broadly
contemporary PPNCELN assemblages significant
a b
c d
Figure 5 (a) Tabular roughout rectangular (b) Tabular roughout subcircular with drill mark (c) Abraded roughout with
sawing mark at bottom note that the sawing is incomplete the groove and snap technique has resulted in both
the saw mark and an irregular protrusion of stone (d) Abraded tabular roughout subcircular
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
142 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
proportions of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 tool blanks are
blades (Baird 1993 469 and figs 818ndash821) even
though the debitage assemblages are mostly flake
dominated Other possible sawing tools include flaked
limestone artefacts with a thin edge (Fig 12c)
Several cutmarked limestone slabs were found at
Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 (Fig 12andashb) The cutmarks are
shallow or deep incisions Interestingly the cut-
marked slabs do not display evidence of drilling
Conversely the Jilat 13 bench with marks probably
resulting from drilling (Fig 14c see below) has no
cutmarks This suggests segregation of drilling and
sawing activities Some variability in spatial distribu-
tion of different stages in the bead making process
may be further borne out by the discrete distribution
of drills in Jilat 25 contexts where substantial bead
making debris was recovered For example in Jilat 25
Context A15 drills were found clustered in spatial
units towards the northern end of the structure
Drilling
Experiments in drilling of Dabba Marble are in
progress (Bains forthcoming) Here we present
evidence for drilling from bead perforations and
stone tools Other experiments show that perforation
morphology reveals drilling methods and shape
diameter and length of the drill used (eg Gwinnett
and Gorelick 1999) At Jilat perforations indicate
that drilling methods varied and that choices were
probably affected by material hardness
Hand Drilling with Large Piercers and Borers
The simplest method used appears to have been hand
drilling Soft Dabba Marble could have been drilled
using a borer or piercer held in the hand and not
hafted to a drilling stick Drilling by this method
would produce rough irregular and relatively large
perforations (Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990) we see
examples of this in broken beads Borers and piercers
were found at the sites They are relatively large
perforation tools made on blades suitable for
manipulation by hand without a haft (Fig 13 nos
9ndash11)
Rotary Drilling From Two Directions with Hafted Drills
The most common method involved rotary drilling
from two directions Drilling was almost always
a b
c d
Figure 6 Green Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads (andashb) Circular flakes slightly abraded (c) Unabraded
perforated flake (d) Finished disc bead
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 143
bipolar That is the blank was drilled to roughly
halfway through then turned and the perforation
completed from the opposite direction As the two
perforations converged the result was an hourglass-
shaped perforation (Fig 9e) Experiments indicate
that this prevents chipping and flaking of the
alternate face which can occur if a blank is perforated
completely from only one direction (Possehl 1981)
Most hourglass perforations on both soft and
hard stones appear to have been produced by rotary
drilling Rotary drilling results in regular perforations
and concentric striations on them (Gorelick and
Gwinnett 1990) We observed both traits on many
broken beads and blanks (Fig 9b) Perforations of
hourglass form included very small drillholes indi-
cating that the drilling tools were smaller than
piercers and borers made on blades The probable
drills in this case were small drills on bladelets and
especially drill bits on burin spalls (Fig 13 nos 1 4
5 7) Microscopic examination of perforations is in
progress (Bains forthcoming)
Oddly piercing and drilling tools were found in
relatively low absolute numbers at the two sites (eg
Baird 1993 505ndash06 625 for Jilat 13 early phase
about 4 of tools were piercers or drills for the Jilat
25 which have concentrations of bead-making debris
just under 3 of tools were spall drills) However
specific contextual data other technological consid-
erations and comparisons with other sites give us
confidence that these were the main tools involved in
the drilling and that the low absolute numbers of
drills abandoned may sometimes relate to systematic
removal or discard of these tools by the artisans For
example burin spall drills were closely associated
spatially with bead-making debris in specific activity
areas in the Jilat 25 structure eg Context Aa15 in
the buildingrsquos northern area (Baird 1993 521 see
Table 6) In addition Jilat 13 and 25 produced large
numbers of angle burins including truncation burins
from which burin spalls were detached (eg about
29 of all tools at J13rsquos early phase were burins)
(Baird 1993 500 516 520ndash26 625) Burins are
a b c
d e f
Figure 7 Red Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads from Jilat 25 Context Aa15 (andashb) Circular flakes
slightly abraded (c) Heavily abraded and perforated disc bead blank edge abrasion incomplete (d) Abraded
perforated blank abrasion not complete on face (endashf) Finished disc beads
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
144 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
contextually closely associated with drills and bead-
making debris in occupation fills at Jilat 25 (c 30 of
tools from relevant Jilat 25 contexts were burins) mdash a
situation also seen at Jebel Naja in the Basalt Desert mdash
where both experiments and microwear studies suggest
that drill bits on burin spalls were used for bead-
making (Baird 1993 521 Finlayson and Betts 1990)
Burin spall drills would have had some technolo-
gical advantages over bladelet drills One advantage
is that the triangular or rectangular cross-sections of
burin spall drills make them stronger and less likely
to break during drilling In addition the manner of
their retouch from the same direction on each edge
creates a prismatic cross-section that probably served
to produce a neater hole and to make drilling more
efficient and possibly faster and reduce breakage in
drilling The tips of burin spall drills are blunted
which is an advantage in drilling hard stone (Gorelick
and Gwinnett 1990) Predictability and miniaturiza-
tion of burin spall drills may be relevant to an
Figure 8 Chaines operatoires for disc beads Sequence A refers to a disc bead made on a thin flake Sequence B refers
to a disc bead made on a thick flake Sequence C refers to a disc bead made on a tabular roughout not a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 145
apparent increased standardization in perforation
size observed at Jilat 25 from an early phase to a later
phase (Critchley 2000)
Since we have evidence of rotary drilling from bead
perforations we believe that drill bits were hafted to
sticks (probably made of wood) Drill bits on burin
spalls would have been too small to manipulate
effectively by hand alone
To work efficiently a drill needs to be weighted
and stabilized and there must be some means of
protecting the artisanrsquos hand Ground stone artefacts
support the idea that rotary drilling with drill bits
hafted to drilling sticks was in use They include a
probable capstone made of limestone from Jilat 25
The capstone would have been held in the hand
enabling the beadmaker to manipulate the drilling
stick from the top (Fig 14a) This artefact resembles
a miniature bowl and fits easily into one hand The
interior surface displays use wear circular striations
parallel to the rim and vertical striations perpendi-
cular to the rim The base of the interior converges to
a flat surface about 1 cm in diameter
Some Levantine Neolithic sites have revealed
similar objects with similar wear (Banning 1998
Wright 1992 fig 5ndash15b) and a comparable item
was found at Jarmo (Moholy-Nagy 1983 fig 12913
Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990 30) Capstones are
characteristic of the use of bow drills (Banning
1998 Foreman 1978) but strictly speaking they
are not necessarily diagnostic of the bow drill
(theoretically simpler drilling techniques involving
hafting might have been facilitated by the use of
a capstone) For the moment we can say that
at Jilat 13 and 15 the evidence for rotary drilling
is unequivocal However the evidence for the use
of the bow drill while suggestive is not quite
definitive
Size data considered carefully support a link
between burin-spall drills and beads To interpret
dimensions of drills and perforations we must keep
in mind that stone bead drilling was overwhelmingly
bipolar and converging Thus drills did not have to
penetrate all the way through the full height of the
bead mdash only about half of it Therefore what matters
a b c
d e f
Figure 9 Green Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks and finished beads (a) Hexagonal blank flaked but not abraded (b)
Abraded hexagonal blank (c) Abraded blank not perforated (d) Perforation error on abraded blank (e)
Finished bead broken showing bipolar perforation and hourglass perforation shape (f) Perforated barrel bead
almost finished except for final abrasion to smooth out last surface irregularities
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
146 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
is the very tips of the drill bits mdash the upper few
millimetres mdash not the full length of the drills
Since disc beads are consistently about 25 to
26 mm in height only the upper 15 mm or so of the
drills mdash the most distal ends of the tips mdash had to
have been about 21 mm or less in thickness to
lsquomatchrsquo the perforation diameters of disc beads
(Table 4) In the case of barrel beads since barrel
beads were between 64 and 71 mm in height about
32 to 36 mm of the most distal ends of the drill bits
have to have been about 21 mm or less in thickness
to lsquomatchrsquo the perforations of barrel beads (Table 5)
Measurements of the drill bit tips within these
small uppermost reaches show that the maximal
thicknesses of the drill bitsrsquo distal tips fall within the
range of sizes indicated by the perforations (Fig 13)
Multi-stage Drilling
Sometimes drilling may have been accomplished in
several stages Some beads particularly those made of
harder stones have smooth cylindrical perforations
with parallel walls displaying no hint of the
hourglass shape
One way to achieve this is to create the hourglass
perforation and then to turn it into a perfect
cylindrical perforation via the use of a second drilling
procedure An example of this was cited by Calley
(1989) who proposed that two tools found in
carnelian bead workshops at Early Bronze Age
Kumartepe (Turkey) had complementary functions
a drill bit for making the initial hourglass perforation
and a borer for finishing and smoothing it into a
cylindrical perforation Since both drill bits and
borers were found on the Jilat sites this method of
finishing perforations could have been used
At Jilat 13 and 25 evidence for multi-stage drilling
can be seen in some beads which have a depression on
one or both faces The depression may be a result of
drilling with a larger drill bit first in order to provide
a guide for the final perforation with a finer drill bit
Such a technique is seen in India-Pakistan (Possehl
1981 39 Kenoyer 1992b 73)
a b c
d e f
Figure 10 Green Dabba Marble pendant blanks and finished pendants (a) Tabular roughout flaked into approximately
trapezoidal shape but not abraded (b) Abraded trapezoidal blank with sawing mark at bottom (c) Perforated
asymmetrical triangular pendant blank incompletely abraded (note striations on face) (d) Finished asymmetri-
cal triangular pendant (e) Pendant blank made on a flake unabraded (f) Nearly-finished pendant made on a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 147
Stabilizing Beads Anvils and Drilling Benches
What method was used to stabilize a bead during
drilling The simplest technique is to fix a bead to a
stone anvil with an adhesive Ethnography and
experiments show that such anvils can be small (the
size of handstones) (Foreman 1978 figs 6ndash7) Use of
such an anvil should result in small shallow
depressions a form of use-damage resulting from
force exerted from above Figure 14b shows a small
flat stone from Jilat 25 with a central depression of
the expected size and depth
Figure 14c shows the limestone bench from Jilat 13
(previously discussed) with a number of such pits in
the centre The marks are evenly spaced and are
concentrated in one small well-defined area on the
widest part of the bench this wide area was also
finely abraded
We see this bench as a multifunctional worktable
anvil We suspect that the beadmaker sat on the
narrow part of the bench (straddling it) placed bead
blanks on the pitted work surface fixed them with
adhesive and then drilled them The bench also
displays evidence of other activities including flaking
and grinding
Adhesives for hafting chipped stone tools could
have been adapted for use in fixing beads to anvils
Bitumen would be one candidate In some cultures a
wooden frame with cup-holes is sometimes used for
stabilizing beads (Kenoyer 1986 P Wright 1982)
The holes are filled with beeswax and clay the bead is
inserted into the wax-clay mixture which hardens
holding the bead steady After drilling beads are
released by breaking the wax-clay mixture (Allchin
1979 Stocks 1989) As wood was probably scarce in
Jilat and as there are no indications of the use of
clay we can probably rule out this technique
However stone items with cup-holes are seen in
Neolithic sites (Kirkbride 1966 Wright 1992
fig 527b)
Abrasion
Ground stone artefacts are crucial to bead produc-
tion in traditional technologies (Foreman 1978
Inizan et al 1992 Kenoyer et al 1991 53 Moholy-
Nagy 1983 294 Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58)
Grinding of beads can be achieved by abrading
each bead individually with a hand held abrader or
by rubbing them on a large grinding slab Either
method will produce linear striations of the type we
see on many unfinished beads (cf Figs 7cndashd and 10c)
However final shaping of disc and cylindrical beads
was most likely achieved by stringing them or loading
them on to a thin rod capable of penetrating the
perforation (individually or in groups) and then
rolling them on a grinding slab adding abrasives
(such as sand) and water to produce a smoother finish
(Foreman 1978 Moholy-Nagy 1983 298) Some disc
beads with parallel edges perpendicular to the faces
would probably have been rolled on a flat smooth
stone Other beads with facetted sharply angled or
bevelled edges (eg many barrel beads) suggest that
they were rolled or abraded along a stone with
grooves and slanting sides (eg Fig 15a c)
Abrasion of bead blanks may have been a multi-
stage process involving a number of materials of
different textures and hardness In an early stage
grinding of bead materials on vesicular basalt would
have been the easiest way to abrade a large nodule
quickly The pores of vesicular basalt and pumice
form natural cutting lsquoteethrsquo comparable to the metal
rasp used by present-day sculptors At Jilat 13 and
Jilat 25 we found broken fragments of vesicular
basalt grinding slabs but not large complete exam-
ples The small fragments suggest two possibilities
either there were large complete slabs at one time
which were then broken worn out and discarded or
only small fragments of these heavy duty grinding
tools were needed
For finer abrasion sandstone grinding slabs might
be expected None were found However small
Figure 11 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic
sites Tile knives or possible saws for bead-
making From Baird 1993 fig 85
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
148 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
handheld abraders made of sandstones with coarse
hard quartz crystals were found at both sites (Fig
15andashb) Sandstone is not local to Wadi Jilat and these
items were imported and probably used extensively
(resulting in the small size)
For even finer abrasion limestone could have been
used Such needs could have been met by the large
bench of Jilat 13 (Fig 14c) which was finely ground
over a very large area (within which the possible
drilling marks were placed)
Some might see the grooved items made of
sandstone (Fig 15a) and limestone (Fig 15c) as
lsquoshaft straightenersrsquo One or two shaft straightener
fragments made of basalt occur at Jilat 13 Like other
basalt shaft straighteners in Neolithic Jilat (eg Jilat
7) (Garrard et al 1994a Wright 1993) the use-
surfaces of these have U-shaped cross-sections By
contrast the cross sections of the use surfaces on the
sandstone and limestone grooved items are not U-
shaped but have sharp angles We see these tools
mainly as abraders for grinding bead facets espe-
cially on barrel beads The widths of the use surfaces
are 11 mm for the sandstone tool and 138 mm for
the limestone one These dimensions correspond to
the average diameter (5 width) of 31 measured green
Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks from Jilat 13 (N 5
31 Mean diameter 5 92 mm standard deviation 5
28) Grooved stones are used in bead grinding in
a
b c
Figure 12 Ground stone artefacts probably for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Cutmarked slab (limestone) Jilat
13 The cutmarks are shallow and are concentrated in the left area running parallel to the main axes of the
slab (b) Cutmarked slab fragment (limestone) Jilat 13 showing deep cutmarks (c) Flaked and ground abra-
sive cutting tool made of limestone Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 149
modern India (Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58) a
grooved sandstone tool was found with an unfinished
bead at Catalhoyuk (Wright and Bains 2007)
Tosi and Vidale (1990) regard failure resulting
from breakage or human error as more common in
the grinding stage than during perforation although
this depends on material and opinion (Kenoyer 2003
18) In some cases it might be more efficient to shape
the bead first before attempting perforation This
may explain why barrel beads tend to be shaped and
abraded prior to perforation
Finished beads were always finely abraded and
sometimes polished to the extent of reflecting light
Ethnographic observations indicate that polishing is
sometimes done by placing beads en masse in a
leather bag along with an abrasive and shaking and
rolling the bags for long periods (Allchin 1979
Kenoyer 2003) This simple method would have been
more likely than the method of rolling beads and
abrasives in a wooden barrel which is also docu-
mented ethnographically (Kenoyer 2003)
However shaking beads in a bag with an abrasive
tends to produce beads with rounded convex edges
(Gwinnett and Gorelick 1989) Some beads at Jilat
have this form but many mdash especially those made of
the hard cherty red Dabba Marble mdash have sharp
edges perpendicular to bead faces indicating that
they were individually polished or polished during
rolling on a string or stick Alternative methods of
polishing can include rubbing with leather or wood
with the addition of fine sand or chalk and water or
with animal hairwool and animal fat (Kenoyer 1986
20) These methods would have been possible with
Jilat technology
Craft Specialization and Comparisons withOther Sites
Technology needs to be studied not only in terms of
materials and techniques but also in terms of social
groups involved in artefact production individual
artisans and skill (Dobres and Hoffmann 1999 2ndash12)
In egalitarian societies craft skill and knowledge of
Figure 13 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic sites Drilling and piercing tools From Baird 1993 fig 82
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
150 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
special materials can enhance the power of an
individual or a group encouraging hierarchy
(Dobres 2000 119ndash20)
These questions force us to reconsider issues of
craft specialization a term often used loosely or in
widely different ways Three concepts of specializa-
tion are considered here individual specialists
specialization between households or domestic
groups within a given site and site specialization
within a regional or social network of craft produc-
tion and exchange
Costin (1991) draws a contrast between indepen-
dent specialization and attached specialization
Independent specialization involves production of
utilitarian goods for nonelites and can be household-
based or based in special workshops Attached
specialization refers to production of prestige goods
under control of elites Whilst Costin notes that
attached specialization can also be based in house-
holds or workshops we often think of attached
specialization in connection with central institutions
and urban or state-level societies It is of considerable
interest that in early urban societies the making of
stone personal ornaments in association with central
institutions figures prominently (Stein 1996 Vidale
1989)
How earlier forms of craft specialization may have
evolved into large-scale attached specialization is
poorly understood Most research has concentrated
on later stages in this process (eg Stein 1996) in
discussions of earlier forms of specialization defini-
tions and criteria for diagnosis could sometimes be
clearer (eg Quintero and Wilke 1998 Rollefson and
Parker 2002 Rosen 1997) If we are dealing with
a
c
b
Figure 14 Ground stone artefacts probably used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Capstone made of limestone
Jilat 25 (b) Handstone probably used as an anvil or hammer Jilat 25 note depression in face and flake scars
at edges (c) Limestone drilling bench Jilat 13 Note evidence of use-wear on the left and widest area of the
bench smooth abraded surface drill marks in the centre-left face small flake scars with negative bulbs of per-
cussion close to the edge of the bench
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 151
specialization in Neolithic societies it is probably
independent specialization Still Neolithic societies
may fall between Costinrsquos two categories Neolithic
groups were clearly producing prestige goods perso-
nal ornaments are not strictly utilitarian and there is
at least a possibility that elites were emerging (Byrd
1994 Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002 Verhoeven
2002)
Individual Specialists
First there is the issue of identifying individual
specialists Some use lsquospecializationrsquo to refer to any
situation in which some artisans have high levels of
skill a view that has been criticized (Rice 1991) We
agree with Rice that identifying a high level of
technical skill in a craft is not on its own sufficient
for a diagnosis of specialization since it robs the
concept of force in discussing long term change (by
this criterion the Upper Palaeolithic was riddled
with craft specialists) However we would argue
that if there are other indications of craft specializa-
tion a search for levels of ability in different
individuals is appropriate mdash if the data permit
Such data would be primary refuse from well-dated
sites of high temporal resolution in which technical
processes (eg errors in chaines operatoires) can
reveal experts vs novices (Pigeot 1990 Stout 2002
Vanzetti and Vidale 1994)
In the case of Jilat 13 and 25 we are dealing with
much primary refuse and two closely dated sites (see
above and Tables 6ndash7) mdash with periodic use of the
sites over a time range on the order of 200 years at
most and possibly much less Jilat 25 yielded activity
areas with clear spatial clusters as do a number of
contexts at Jilat 13 Space does not permit us to
present all details (this awaits the final site report)
but we feel confident that aggregate consideration of
the data from each site allows us to discuss general
questions of individual skills mdash master craftsmen vs
novices
a b
c
Figure 15 Ground stone artefacts possibly used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Grooved sandstone abrading
tool Jilat 13 (b) Sandstone hand-held abrader Jilat 25 (c) Grooved limestone abrading tool Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
152 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
To explore this we analysed unfinished blanks and
the frequency of perforation errors Drilling is a
sensitive moment in bead production when many
things can go wrong (Kenoyer 2003) A low incidence
in perforation errors combined with high numbers of
successfully finished beads and evidence of standar-
dization should be reasonably good indicators of an
artisanrsquos mastery This is the situation seen at Jilat 25
(Fig 7) In all of 93 blanks from Jilat 25 only 2 were
perforation errors a failure rate of only 2
On the other hand a high incidence of perforation
errors would suggest that a beadmaker was a relative
novice Jilat 13 produced more blanks with perfora-
tion errors than Jilat 25 We thought we might find
individual contexts with a high rate of error
suggesting apprentices
The data did not bear this out Of 223 bead blanks
from Jilat 13 (all phases) 22 were perforation errors
mdash a failure rate of 98 All but two errors were on
barrel bead blanks of green Dabba Marble The
others were one pendant blank and one irregular
bead blank These 22 blanks were distributed across
20 different contexts and no more than 2 perforation
errors were found in any one context
A close look at those contexts reveals low error
rates In Context B21 2 green barrel bead blanks
with perforation errors were found with 5 other
blanks The others included green and red barrel and
disc blanks This context also yielded 5 successfully
finished beads including black and red barrel beads
and a green disc Black and green debitage and a
discoidal handstone were also found here In Context
B71 2 blanks with perforation errors were found
along with 9 other blanks and 10 successfully
finished beads including green Dabba Marble barrel
beads but also black and red disc beads Much
debitage was found along with a flaked limestone
cutting tool (cf Fig 12c) and a limestone object with
a drill mark
The higher rate of error at Jilat 13 compared to
Jilat 25 could be because artisans at Jilat 13 were
making more of the larger more complex barrel
beads (as opposed to simple discs see Tables 2ndash3)
which offer greater chances of failure due to the
longer drilling distance However at Jilat 13 the
overall failure rate was still quite low particularly
considering the overall volume of material recovered
(Table 1)
We conclude that the beadmakers at Jilat 13
included few trainees These appear to have been
skilled artisans a small task force composed of
relative experts This raises the question of whether
these beadmakers were examples of lsquoproducer
specialistsrsquo as traditionally defined that is people
involved in
production of a good by a relatively small number of
individuals (compared to the total output and
number of consumers) individuals who are as a
result of this selectivity and the routinization or
repetition of their tasks particularly skilled in
manufacture (Rice 1991 263)
Jilat 13 and 25 do suggest small numbers of
individuals and a certain selectivity in who was
involved in stone bead making The quantity of
debitagedebris relative to (1) the number of finished
beads and (2) the modest sizes of these structures
collectively suggest that these craftsmenwomen
served a larger number of consumers relative to the
number of craftsmen involved here If so who were
these consumers mdash other residents of Jilat or groups
beyond
Intra-site Specialization Between Domestic Groups
Several studies suggest ways of identifying different
forms of craft specialization between domestic groups
in a site For later sites Stein (1996) has explored
spatial data particularly how craft production
facilities are dispersed among domestic units or
located near special (or central) institutions In
Neolithic sites questions about dispersal between
households and possible links between craft produc-
tion and special buildings or special sites have been
underexplored
For specialization Costin (1991) suggests that we
would expect (1) variability between production
units (eg households occupations regions) in
relevant artefacts (2) high densities of craft produc-
tion debris relative to some other generally used
item in some production units (3) high ratios of
unfinished goods to finished goods in some produc-
tion units Kenoyer et alrsquos (1991) ethnoarchaeolo-
gical studies of modern stone bead-making in
Khambat (India) suggest something similar in the
case of households as production units There non-
specialist households engaging in casual opportu-
nistic bead production revealed low quantities of
bead-making debris few unfinished beads and little
standardization in finished beads By contrast
households specializing in bead production were
characterized by stockpiling of large quantities of
raw materials many unfinished beads and more
standardized finished products
In looking at whole occupations (ie phases within
sites) as a unit of observation we argue elsewhere
(Wright and Garrard 2003) that artefact densities and
other data from 13 PPNB and 8 PPNCELN
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 153
occupations in the Jilat-Azraq region suggest that
PPNCELN producers were more specialized than
those of the PPNB mdash at least in the Jilat-Azraq
region Unlike the PPNB sites Jilat 13 and 25 have
very high densities of bead-making debris specialized
tools for drilling and sawing there is an abundance of
unfinished materials relative to finished products
bead-making tools and debris are abundant relative
to normal domestic food processing equipment
(ground stone artefacts) (Wright and Garrard 2003
cf Costin 1991)
That argument is chronological comparing the
PPNB to the PPNCELN occupations and we stand
behind it for the Jilat-Azraq case (different trajec-
tories may apply to south Jordan and the Negev see
below) Still it leaves open the issue of house-to-
house variation within Jilat 25 or Jilat 13 As we have
only one excavated structure per site we cannot on
present evidence argue that each building housed a
group of specialists serving other households within
the same site In fact we have no direct evidence that
there were other structures on each site mdash the ones
excavated were the only ones visible on the surface
There are nuances of material and typological
choices between the Jilat 25 structure (red disc beads)
and the Jilat 13 structure (larger complex green
ornaments) but these nuances are beyond the scope
of this paper
In all we suspect that stone bead production at
Jilat 13 and 25 was geared not for other domestic
units lsquoin camprsquo but for use by these quite mobile
communities themselves mdash as well as export to other
sites within the steppe and beyond (see below) In
Costinrsquos terms (Costin 1991) Jilat 13 and 25 might
each be an example of an independent non-centra-
lized dispersed workshop possibly lsquofamily runrsquo (Rice
1991 262) mdash in which handling of Dabba Marble
was not routinely entrusted to novices
There are hints of house-to-house variations in
bead-making in major villages with larger samples of
domestic structures as in PPNB Beidha At PPNB
Beidha (earlier than Jilat 13 and 25) Building 14
stands out
Other forms of production besides food preparation
were less common Building 14 represented the best
example of artefact production in these basements
A wide range of artefacts was recovered apparently
associated with building 14rsquos basement floor
Particularly widespread were stone polishers bone
tools raw material (including hematite malachite
and magnesium) more than 60 unmodified marine
shells and at least two dozen beads of shell stone
and bone some of which were in various stages of
production Some artifacts lay on stone slabs
indicating that at least some slabs may have
functioned as work surfaces (Byrd 2005 117)
Such hints are intriguing Still macro-artefacts
from house floors are affected by problems of site
formation and house abandonment Micro-artefact
data can help (Rainville 2005) House-by-house
exploration with attention to micro-artefacts is
needed (Wright and Bains 2007)
Site Specialization Within a Regional Network of Craft
Production and Exchange
Both sites and other Neolithic sites in Jilat and
Azraq exhibit resource specialization
the selective use of particular resources in craft
manufacture such as certain clays that are repeat-
edly used (Rice 1991 262)
The Jilat artisans emphasized Dabba Marble from
a wider array of available stone types The Jilat-
Azraq sites collectively show that green Dabba
Marble was a special target This is revealed in both
frequencies and weights (for debris data and weight
data see Wright and Garrard 2003 for frequency
data on beads and blanks see Tables 2 and 3) At
both sites debris is greatly dominated by green
Dabba Marble mdash 80ndash95 of debris by both weight
(grams) and frequency Green Dabba Marble also
dominates blanks in terms of weight at both sites mdash
indicating the use of green for making larger heavier
and more conspicuous ornaments
Turning to frequencies at Jilat 13 about 90 of
blanks are green and only 5 are red However
finished beads include both green and red forms in
comparable percentages (404 and 436 respec-
tively) (Table 3) suggesting that finished red beads
were brought into the building from a place of
manufacture located somewhere else At Jilat 25
blanks of red and green Dabba Marble occur in
comparable proportions (409 green 43 red)
whilst finished beads are predominantly red (588)
(Table 2) If Jilat 13 and 25 were absolute contem-
poraries this could suggest variations in choices and
exchange between residents of different structures
Rice (1991) has defined site specialization as a
situation in which a site is located near a special
resource and the inhabitants emphasize production of
a craft based on that resource Relative to other sites
not so located the range of site functions and
activities would be expected to be more limited
Thus site specialization
involves individual localities or sites having evidence
of limited functions or intensive productive activity
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
154 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
often determined by fortuitous environmental fac-
tors This includes proximity to mineral deposits
and so forth (Rice 1991 262)
Do Jilat 13 and 25 fit this concept In both sites
15 km from the source we have a wealth of evidence
for intensive stone bead production and scanty
evidence for routine food processing tools (Wright
and Garrard 2003) However Jilat 25 may be closer
to the limited function model envisioned by Rice In
Jilat 13 bead-making is clearly intensive but we are
also dealing with a chipped stone assemblage of not
only drills and burins but also projectile points and
other tools Jilat 13 also reveals production of
figurines (of animals phalluses and arrow-shaped
forms) and sculpted pillars (Baird 1993 Garrard
et al 1994a Martin 1999 Wright 1992 1993)
In all Jilat 13 and 25 suggest that we can apply
Ricersquos lsquosite specializationrsquo on the grounds of intensive
productive activity and proximity to source mdash but
with the qualification that this specialization was also
embedded in hunting-herding activities and at Jilat
13 production of other special crafts unique among
the sites of a symbolic nature (figurines pillars)
One possibility is that we are dealing with a camp
of hunter-herder corporate groups mdash part of a wider
regional network mdash engaged in special activities in
remote areas involving art personal ornaments and
ritual Such groups are suggested by other data from
the PPNBndashPPNC time span for example Nahal
Hemar (ornaments masks hunting tools) Dhuweila
(carving of hunters with dress variations)
Catalhoyuk (images of hunters with dress variations
as in the bull hunt mural) and Gobeklitepe (sculpture
production including a quarry wild-animal icono-
graphy hunting) (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988 Betts
1998 Mellaart 1967 Schmidt 2000) In all these data
hint that craft production of special items was
embedded in hunting andor herding activities in
remote areas this may have been a key means by
which exotic materials reached major villages In a
very broad way this supports a sketch outlined by
Bar Yosef (Bar-Yosef 2001) although we do not
necessarily agree with specifics of his model eg the
territories boundaries social groups and mechanisms
which he suggests (cf Asouti 2006) Instead we see
this as one example of diverse strategies of social
networking linking lineages households and commu-
nities in the Neolithic (Wright forthcoming)
Returning to the stone bead data from Jilat 13 and
25 the apparent stockpiling of raw material and
intensive production activity hints at production of
the green material for export (see above and Wright
and Garrard 2003) New data now add weight to this
idea and suggest the following provisional picture of
regional specializations and exchanges in ornaments
(1) Based on typology technology and materials thereappears to be a distinctive eastern Jordanian koine ornetwork of stone bead manufacture and exchangefeaturing Dabba Marble and a probable regionalspecialization in it
Other Neolithic bead production sites are known
from eastern Jordan Indications are that most of the
green bead materials are Dabba Marble probably
from Jilat (further work is needed) In these sites
diversity of materials used seems low with few
imports from beyond the steppe Shells however
testify to wider networks (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989
Cooke and Reese in Betts 1998 Garrard et al 1994a
Reese 1991)
Azraq 31 (PPNB and ELN) is in our suite of study
materials (Baird et al 1992 Garrard et al 1994a
Wright and Garrard 2003) and debris blanks and
beads were found Preliminary XRF analysis of green
samples (by Groom) indicates that the material is
consistent with Jilat Dabba Marble Typology and
technology are also similar and as at Jilat 25 burin
spall drills were closely associated with bead-making
in specific activity areas (Baird 1993 521 Baird et al
1992 25) However the ground stone revealed no
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
(Wright 1992 1993 Wright in Baird et al 1992)
Material used for beads at Dhuweila (PPNB and
ELN) has been called Dabba Marble (Cooke and
Reese in Betts 1998) It is consistent in appearance
with our material although we have no details on
mineralogy or source Typologically these beads are
similar to those of Jilat 13 and 25 The ground stone
is very different from the suite at the Jilat sites
(Wright in Betts 1998) for comparisons of chipped
stone assemblages see Baird (1993)
At Bawwab al-Ghazal (Late PPNB) Rollefson
et al found drills bits on burin spalls tile knives
beads bead blanks and bead debris some of which
they called green Dabba Marble (Rollefson et al
1999 Quintero et al 2004) They argued that there is
a possible source of this material outcropping near
the site mdash lsquoFor the last raw material [green Dabba
Marble] small nodules of the green limestone were
embedded in the local bedrockrsquo (Rollefson et al 1999
3) However as shown in Appendix A the true
Dabba Marble only occurs in a restricted area west of
Wadi Jilat The lsquobedrockrsquo which outcrops near Azraq
31 and Bawwab al-Ghazal is travertine and some of
this formed during the late Pleistocene and Holocene
The nearby Epipalaeolithic site of Azraq 17 was
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 155
found partially embedded in travertine and artefacts
including nodules of imported basalt were found in
the travertine at this site It is possible that the
nodules of green limestone found at Bawwab al-
Ghazal were imported Dabba Marble which subse-
quently became incorporated in a travertine near the
site An alternative possibility is that the local
travertine is infused with green minerals In Wadi
Jilat travertines were noted with traces of green
minerals and in the Siwaqa area to the south-west of
Jilat there are extensive travertines some of which
are infused with pale green minerals including
volkonskoite (Barjous 1986 mdash see also Appendix A)
In eastern Jordan some Neolithic sites are greatly
dominated by burins (lsquoburin sitesrsquo) At a number of
these there is evidence for stone bead-making (eg
Jebel Naja) These lsquoburin sitesrsquo typically reveal few
ground stone tools we know of no examples of
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
from them It was argued that the main role of the
burins was production of spalls for drills used mainly
for beads (Betts 1987 1998 Finlayson and Betts
1990) However burin sites are not universally
associated with stone bead making At Jilat 23 24
and 26 burins were numerous but other evidence for
bead-making is scanty (Baird 1993 520)
Therefore some have questioned whether
burins and burin spalls in such sites were solely or
primarily intended for making drills and beads
noting that other functions are possible (Quintero
et al 2004 209) Given that these sites typically
represent short-term occupations it is possible that
many sites might be spall manufacture sites with
spalls transported to other settings where drill
manufacture and bead manufacture took place such
as Jilat 13 and 25 Rollefson expressed doubt that
either bladelet or burin spall drills would have been
used in bow drills partly because of their fragility and
also because most of them have a pronounced curve
on the long axis which would have made high speed
drilling impossible (Rollefson and Parker 2002) But
Finlayson and Betts (1990) and Berna (1995)
successfully experimented using burin spalls with
bow drills and Kenoyer (personal communication
2007) notes that drills made on burin spalls are the
most common type of drill in diverse prehistoric
stone bead-making sites (in India Pakistan and
elsewhere)
In the case of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 we believe burin-
spall drills were part of the bead-making repertoire
for reasons noted above This does not rule out other
uses of burin spalls Nor does it rule out the use of
other perforating techniques Drills do not have to be
made of stone when soft stones are being perforated
mdash wood bone and abrasives can be used (Foreman
1978)
(2) There are hints of export of Dabba Marble to at leastsome villages in the Levantine corridor However majorNeolithic villages display much diversity in materials andespecially more importing of exotic stones than is seen inthe eastern Jordanian sites
Many writers report Neolithic beads made of
unspecified lsquogreenstonersquo This term is unfortunate
since it can refer to metabasalt and similar altered
igneous rocks (Schumann 1992 248) Some of these
lsquogreenstonesrsquo may be limestone with apatite or other
materials (eg Garfinkel 1987 81ndash82 Hauptmann
2004 Talbot 1983 789) Beads of green limestones
rich in fluorapatite were found at late PPNB Basta in
southern Jordan (Hauptmann 2004) as confirmed by
XRF and XRD Green beads identified as Dabba
Marble were also reported from Ain Ghazal a site
with both PPNB and PPNC occupations (Rollefson
et al 1990 103ndash04) Whether these are Dabba
Marble from the Jilat source (Appendices AndashB) is
not yet fully clear Ongoing research will sort out
these mysteries (eg D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal
communication Hauptmann 2004)
Major villages in the Levantine Corridor reveal
different degrees of emphasis in styles and materials
often we see a certain emphasis on local materials and
preferences However considerable exchange net-
works are indicated in major villages which display
much wider ranges of stone ornament materials
compared to the eastern Jordanian sites (such as
Ain Ghazal Yiftahel Basta Barsquoja Ghuwayr 1
Fidan 1) mdash along with of course shells (Affonso
and Pernicka 2004 Bienert and Gebel 1998 84ndash86
Garfinkel 1987 Hauptmann 2004 Rollefson and
Simmons 1984 1986 Rollefson et al 1990 Simmons
and Najjar 1998 Starck 1988)
As the Neolithic evolved stone bead-making
entailed increasingly diverse techniques and materi-
als One example may be drills In earlymiddle PPNB
sites most drills are made on bladelets In the late
PPNB PPNC and Late Neolithic there may have
been a gradual increase in drills made on burin spalls
although perhaps not in all regions (Jensen 2004
Rollefson and Parker 2002) Underlining increasing
diversity of technological practice between groups
Baird (2001b) pointed out geographic variation in
this technology with spall drills dominating in the
north-eastern Jordanian steppe from MPPNB
through Early Late Neolithic whilst contemporary
sites to west and south use bladelet blanks for their
piercing tools
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
156 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
then abraded and sawing was sometimes applied (Fig
10b) One unfinished pendant shows that perforation
preceded final abrasion (Fig 10c) The most common
form is the asymmetrical triangular pendant (Fig
10d) but there are also rectangular square and oval
pendants Not all pendants were made on tabular
roughouts some were made on thin flakes eg
rectangular and lsquoteardroprsquo forms (Fig 10endashf)
Sawing
Disc beads were made individually one by one on
flakes as opposed to being sawn from a perforated
cylinder which is another possible way However
sawing was central to the production of pendants and
barrel beads (cf Fig 5c 10b) In some cases the
roughout was sawn only to a shallow depth
permitting unwanted material to be snapped off
leaving a protruding piece of stone mdash a kind of
groove and snap technique (Fig 5c) The protruding
lsquobossrsquo was then abraded
A range of chipped stone tools in the sites might be
suitable for sawing These include tabular chert knives
sometimes also called tile knives (Fig 11) These are
bifacially retouched cutting tools characteristic of the
eastern Jordanian Neolithic (Baird in Garrard et al
1994a 89) However typically the bifacial retouch
produces an edge that is robust but somewhat sinuous
in profile (Fig 11) In addition many tile knife edges
have significant curvature in plan Use of tile knives
would probably generate relatively wide and slightly
sinuous cut marks but this is an area worthy of
experimentation and use wear study Alternative tools
that perhaps better match the relative scale and
precision of cut marks on bead blanks are a range of
relatively robust non-formal tools on blade or elon-
gated flake blanks with edges that are relatively
straight in profile and plan These are found in some
numbers in conjunction with the bead making debris in
Jilat 13 and 25 It is also notable that despite the
purported dominance of flakes in many broadly
contemporary PPNCELN assemblages significant
a b
c d
Figure 5 (a) Tabular roughout rectangular (b) Tabular roughout subcircular with drill mark (c) Abraded roughout with
sawing mark at bottom note that the sawing is incomplete the groove and snap technique has resulted in both
the saw mark and an irregular protrusion of stone (d) Abraded tabular roughout subcircular
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
142 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
proportions of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 tool blanks are
blades (Baird 1993 469 and figs 818ndash821) even
though the debitage assemblages are mostly flake
dominated Other possible sawing tools include flaked
limestone artefacts with a thin edge (Fig 12c)
Several cutmarked limestone slabs were found at
Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 (Fig 12andashb) The cutmarks are
shallow or deep incisions Interestingly the cut-
marked slabs do not display evidence of drilling
Conversely the Jilat 13 bench with marks probably
resulting from drilling (Fig 14c see below) has no
cutmarks This suggests segregation of drilling and
sawing activities Some variability in spatial distribu-
tion of different stages in the bead making process
may be further borne out by the discrete distribution
of drills in Jilat 25 contexts where substantial bead
making debris was recovered For example in Jilat 25
Context A15 drills were found clustered in spatial
units towards the northern end of the structure
Drilling
Experiments in drilling of Dabba Marble are in
progress (Bains forthcoming) Here we present
evidence for drilling from bead perforations and
stone tools Other experiments show that perforation
morphology reveals drilling methods and shape
diameter and length of the drill used (eg Gwinnett
and Gorelick 1999) At Jilat perforations indicate
that drilling methods varied and that choices were
probably affected by material hardness
Hand Drilling with Large Piercers and Borers
The simplest method used appears to have been hand
drilling Soft Dabba Marble could have been drilled
using a borer or piercer held in the hand and not
hafted to a drilling stick Drilling by this method
would produce rough irregular and relatively large
perforations (Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990) we see
examples of this in broken beads Borers and piercers
were found at the sites They are relatively large
perforation tools made on blades suitable for
manipulation by hand without a haft (Fig 13 nos
9ndash11)
Rotary Drilling From Two Directions with Hafted Drills
The most common method involved rotary drilling
from two directions Drilling was almost always
a b
c d
Figure 6 Green Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads (andashb) Circular flakes slightly abraded (c) Unabraded
perforated flake (d) Finished disc bead
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 143
bipolar That is the blank was drilled to roughly
halfway through then turned and the perforation
completed from the opposite direction As the two
perforations converged the result was an hourglass-
shaped perforation (Fig 9e) Experiments indicate
that this prevents chipping and flaking of the
alternate face which can occur if a blank is perforated
completely from only one direction (Possehl 1981)
Most hourglass perforations on both soft and
hard stones appear to have been produced by rotary
drilling Rotary drilling results in regular perforations
and concentric striations on them (Gorelick and
Gwinnett 1990) We observed both traits on many
broken beads and blanks (Fig 9b) Perforations of
hourglass form included very small drillholes indi-
cating that the drilling tools were smaller than
piercers and borers made on blades The probable
drills in this case were small drills on bladelets and
especially drill bits on burin spalls (Fig 13 nos 1 4
5 7) Microscopic examination of perforations is in
progress (Bains forthcoming)
Oddly piercing and drilling tools were found in
relatively low absolute numbers at the two sites (eg
Baird 1993 505ndash06 625 for Jilat 13 early phase
about 4 of tools were piercers or drills for the Jilat
25 which have concentrations of bead-making debris
just under 3 of tools were spall drills) However
specific contextual data other technological consid-
erations and comparisons with other sites give us
confidence that these were the main tools involved in
the drilling and that the low absolute numbers of
drills abandoned may sometimes relate to systematic
removal or discard of these tools by the artisans For
example burin spall drills were closely associated
spatially with bead-making debris in specific activity
areas in the Jilat 25 structure eg Context Aa15 in
the buildingrsquos northern area (Baird 1993 521 see
Table 6) In addition Jilat 13 and 25 produced large
numbers of angle burins including truncation burins
from which burin spalls were detached (eg about
29 of all tools at J13rsquos early phase were burins)
(Baird 1993 500 516 520ndash26 625) Burins are
a b c
d e f
Figure 7 Red Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads from Jilat 25 Context Aa15 (andashb) Circular flakes
slightly abraded (c) Heavily abraded and perforated disc bead blank edge abrasion incomplete (d) Abraded
perforated blank abrasion not complete on face (endashf) Finished disc beads
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
144 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
contextually closely associated with drills and bead-
making debris in occupation fills at Jilat 25 (c 30 of
tools from relevant Jilat 25 contexts were burins) mdash a
situation also seen at Jebel Naja in the Basalt Desert mdash
where both experiments and microwear studies suggest
that drill bits on burin spalls were used for bead-
making (Baird 1993 521 Finlayson and Betts 1990)
Burin spall drills would have had some technolo-
gical advantages over bladelet drills One advantage
is that the triangular or rectangular cross-sections of
burin spall drills make them stronger and less likely
to break during drilling In addition the manner of
their retouch from the same direction on each edge
creates a prismatic cross-section that probably served
to produce a neater hole and to make drilling more
efficient and possibly faster and reduce breakage in
drilling The tips of burin spall drills are blunted
which is an advantage in drilling hard stone (Gorelick
and Gwinnett 1990) Predictability and miniaturiza-
tion of burin spall drills may be relevant to an
Figure 8 Chaines operatoires for disc beads Sequence A refers to a disc bead made on a thin flake Sequence B refers
to a disc bead made on a thick flake Sequence C refers to a disc bead made on a tabular roughout not a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 145
apparent increased standardization in perforation
size observed at Jilat 25 from an early phase to a later
phase (Critchley 2000)
Since we have evidence of rotary drilling from bead
perforations we believe that drill bits were hafted to
sticks (probably made of wood) Drill bits on burin
spalls would have been too small to manipulate
effectively by hand alone
To work efficiently a drill needs to be weighted
and stabilized and there must be some means of
protecting the artisanrsquos hand Ground stone artefacts
support the idea that rotary drilling with drill bits
hafted to drilling sticks was in use They include a
probable capstone made of limestone from Jilat 25
The capstone would have been held in the hand
enabling the beadmaker to manipulate the drilling
stick from the top (Fig 14a) This artefact resembles
a miniature bowl and fits easily into one hand The
interior surface displays use wear circular striations
parallel to the rim and vertical striations perpendi-
cular to the rim The base of the interior converges to
a flat surface about 1 cm in diameter
Some Levantine Neolithic sites have revealed
similar objects with similar wear (Banning 1998
Wright 1992 fig 5ndash15b) and a comparable item
was found at Jarmo (Moholy-Nagy 1983 fig 12913
Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990 30) Capstones are
characteristic of the use of bow drills (Banning
1998 Foreman 1978) but strictly speaking they
are not necessarily diagnostic of the bow drill
(theoretically simpler drilling techniques involving
hafting might have been facilitated by the use of
a capstone) For the moment we can say that
at Jilat 13 and 15 the evidence for rotary drilling
is unequivocal However the evidence for the use
of the bow drill while suggestive is not quite
definitive
Size data considered carefully support a link
between burin-spall drills and beads To interpret
dimensions of drills and perforations we must keep
in mind that stone bead drilling was overwhelmingly
bipolar and converging Thus drills did not have to
penetrate all the way through the full height of the
bead mdash only about half of it Therefore what matters
a b c
d e f
Figure 9 Green Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks and finished beads (a) Hexagonal blank flaked but not abraded (b)
Abraded hexagonal blank (c) Abraded blank not perforated (d) Perforation error on abraded blank (e)
Finished bead broken showing bipolar perforation and hourglass perforation shape (f) Perforated barrel bead
almost finished except for final abrasion to smooth out last surface irregularities
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
146 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
is the very tips of the drill bits mdash the upper few
millimetres mdash not the full length of the drills
Since disc beads are consistently about 25 to
26 mm in height only the upper 15 mm or so of the
drills mdash the most distal ends of the tips mdash had to
have been about 21 mm or less in thickness to
lsquomatchrsquo the perforation diameters of disc beads
(Table 4) In the case of barrel beads since barrel
beads were between 64 and 71 mm in height about
32 to 36 mm of the most distal ends of the drill bits
have to have been about 21 mm or less in thickness
to lsquomatchrsquo the perforations of barrel beads (Table 5)
Measurements of the drill bit tips within these
small uppermost reaches show that the maximal
thicknesses of the drill bitsrsquo distal tips fall within the
range of sizes indicated by the perforations (Fig 13)
Multi-stage Drilling
Sometimes drilling may have been accomplished in
several stages Some beads particularly those made of
harder stones have smooth cylindrical perforations
with parallel walls displaying no hint of the
hourglass shape
One way to achieve this is to create the hourglass
perforation and then to turn it into a perfect
cylindrical perforation via the use of a second drilling
procedure An example of this was cited by Calley
(1989) who proposed that two tools found in
carnelian bead workshops at Early Bronze Age
Kumartepe (Turkey) had complementary functions
a drill bit for making the initial hourglass perforation
and a borer for finishing and smoothing it into a
cylindrical perforation Since both drill bits and
borers were found on the Jilat sites this method of
finishing perforations could have been used
At Jilat 13 and 25 evidence for multi-stage drilling
can be seen in some beads which have a depression on
one or both faces The depression may be a result of
drilling with a larger drill bit first in order to provide
a guide for the final perforation with a finer drill bit
Such a technique is seen in India-Pakistan (Possehl
1981 39 Kenoyer 1992b 73)
a b c
d e f
Figure 10 Green Dabba Marble pendant blanks and finished pendants (a) Tabular roughout flaked into approximately
trapezoidal shape but not abraded (b) Abraded trapezoidal blank with sawing mark at bottom (c) Perforated
asymmetrical triangular pendant blank incompletely abraded (note striations on face) (d) Finished asymmetri-
cal triangular pendant (e) Pendant blank made on a flake unabraded (f) Nearly-finished pendant made on a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 147
Stabilizing Beads Anvils and Drilling Benches
What method was used to stabilize a bead during
drilling The simplest technique is to fix a bead to a
stone anvil with an adhesive Ethnography and
experiments show that such anvils can be small (the
size of handstones) (Foreman 1978 figs 6ndash7) Use of
such an anvil should result in small shallow
depressions a form of use-damage resulting from
force exerted from above Figure 14b shows a small
flat stone from Jilat 25 with a central depression of
the expected size and depth
Figure 14c shows the limestone bench from Jilat 13
(previously discussed) with a number of such pits in
the centre The marks are evenly spaced and are
concentrated in one small well-defined area on the
widest part of the bench this wide area was also
finely abraded
We see this bench as a multifunctional worktable
anvil We suspect that the beadmaker sat on the
narrow part of the bench (straddling it) placed bead
blanks on the pitted work surface fixed them with
adhesive and then drilled them The bench also
displays evidence of other activities including flaking
and grinding
Adhesives for hafting chipped stone tools could
have been adapted for use in fixing beads to anvils
Bitumen would be one candidate In some cultures a
wooden frame with cup-holes is sometimes used for
stabilizing beads (Kenoyer 1986 P Wright 1982)
The holes are filled with beeswax and clay the bead is
inserted into the wax-clay mixture which hardens
holding the bead steady After drilling beads are
released by breaking the wax-clay mixture (Allchin
1979 Stocks 1989) As wood was probably scarce in
Jilat and as there are no indications of the use of
clay we can probably rule out this technique
However stone items with cup-holes are seen in
Neolithic sites (Kirkbride 1966 Wright 1992
fig 527b)
Abrasion
Ground stone artefacts are crucial to bead produc-
tion in traditional technologies (Foreman 1978
Inizan et al 1992 Kenoyer et al 1991 53 Moholy-
Nagy 1983 294 Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58)
Grinding of beads can be achieved by abrading
each bead individually with a hand held abrader or
by rubbing them on a large grinding slab Either
method will produce linear striations of the type we
see on many unfinished beads (cf Figs 7cndashd and 10c)
However final shaping of disc and cylindrical beads
was most likely achieved by stringing them or loading
them on to a thin rod capable of penetrating the
perforation (individually or in groups) and then
rolling them on a grinding slab adding abrasives
(such as sand) and water to produce a smoother finish
(Foreman 1978 Moholy-Nagy 1983 298) Some disc
beads with parallel edges perpendicular to the faces
would probably have been rolled on a flat smooth
stone Other beads with facetted sharply angled or
bevelled edges (eg many barrel beads) suggest that
they were rolled or abraded along a stone with
grooves and slanting sides (eg Fig 15a c)
Abrasion of bead blanks may have been a multi-
stage process involving a number of materials of
different textures and hardness In an early stage
grinding of bead materials on vesicular basalt would
have been the easiest way to abrade a large nodule
quickly The pores of vesicular basalt and pumice
form natural cutting lsquoteethrsquo comparable to the metal
rasp used by present-day sculptors At Jilat 13 and
Jilat 25 we found broken fragments of vesicular
basalt grinding slabs but not large complete exam-
ples The small fragments suggest two possibilities
either there were large complete slabs at one time
which were then broken worn out and discarded or
only small fragments of these heavy duty grinding
tools were needed
For finer abrasion sandstone grinding slabs might
be expected None were found However small
Figure 11 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic
sites Tile knives or possible saws for bead-
making From Baird 1993 fig 85
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
148 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
handheld abraders made of sandstones with coarse
hard quartz crystals were found at both sites (Fig
15andashb) Sandstone is not local to Wadi Jilat and these
items were imported and probably used extensively
(resulting in the small size)
For even finer abrasion limestone could have been
used Such needs could have been met by the large
bench of Jilat 13 (Fig 14c) which was finely ground
over a very large area (within which the possible
drilling marks were placed)
Some might see the grooved items made of
sandstone (Fig 15a) and limestone (Fig 15c) as
lsquoshaft straightenersrsquo One or two shaft straightener
fragments made of basalt occur at Jilat 13 Like other
basalt shaft straighteners in Neolithic Jilat (eg Jilat
7) (Garrard et al 1994a Wright 1993) the use-
surfaces of these have U-shaped cross-sections By
contrast the cross sections of the use surfaces on the
sandstone and limestone grooved items are not U-
shaped but have sharp angles We see these tools
mainly as abraders for grinding bead facets espe-
cially on barrel beads The widths of the use surfaces
are 11 mm for the sandstone tool and 138 mm for
the limestone one These dimensions correspond to
the average diameter (5 width) of 31 measured green
Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks from Jilat 13 (N 5
31 Mean diameter 5 92 mm standard deviation 5
28) Grooved stones are used in bead grinding in
a
b c
Figure 12 Ground stone artefacts probably for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Cutmarked slab (limestone) Jilat
13 The cutmarks are shallow and are concentrated in the left area running parallel to the main axes of the
slab (b) Cutmarked slab fragment (limestone) Jilat 13 showing deep cutmarks (c) Flaked and ground abra-
sive cutting tool made of limestone Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 149
modern India (Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58) a
grooved sandstone tool was found with an unfinished
bead at Catalhoyuk (Wright and Bains 2007)
Tosi and Vidale (1990) regard failure resulting
from breakage or human error as more common in
the grinding stage than during perforation although
this depends on material and opinion (Kenoyer 2003
18) In some cases it might be more efficient to shape
the bead first before attempting perforation This
may explain why barrel beads tend to be shaped and
abraded prior to perforation
Finished beads were always finely abraded and
sometimes polished to the extent of reflecting light
Ethnographic observations indicate that polishing is
sometimes done by placing beads en masse in a
leather bag along with an abrasive and shaking and
rolling the bags for long periods (Allchin 1979
Kenoyer 2003) This simple method would have been
more likely than the method of rolling beads and
abrasives in a wooden barrel which is also docu-
mented ethnographically (Kenoyer 2003)
However shaking beads in a bag with an abrasive
tends to produce beads with rounded convex edges
(Gwinnett and Gorelick 1989) Some beads at Jilat
have this form but many mdash especially those made of
the hard cherty red Dabba Marble mdash have sharp
edges perpendicular to bead faces indicating that
they were individually polished or polished during
rolling on a string or stick Alternative methods of
polishing can include rubbing with leather or wood
with the addition of fine sand or chalk and water or
with animal hairwool and animal fat (Kenoyer 1986
20) These methods would have been possible with
Jilat technology
Craft Specialization and Comparisons withOther Sites
Technology needs to be studied not only in terms of
materials and techniques but also in terms of social
groups involved in artefact production individual
artisans and skill (Dobres and Hoffmann 1999 2ndash12)
In egalitarian societies craft skill and knowledge of
Figure 13 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic sites Drilling and piercing tools From Baird 1993 fig 82
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
150 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
special materials can enhance the power of an
individual or a group encouraging hierarchy
(Dobres 2000 119ndash20)
These questions force us to reconsider issues of
craft specialization a term often used loosely or in
widely different ways Three concepts of specializa-
tion are considered here individual specialists
specialization between households or domestic
groups within a given site and site specialization
within a regional or social network of craft produc-
tion and exchange
Costin (1991) draws a contrast between indepen-
dent specialization and attached specialization
Independent specialization involves production of
utilitarian goods for nonelites and can be household-
based or based in special workshops Attached
specialization refers to production of prestige goods
under control of elites Whilst Costin notes that
attached specialization can also be based in house-
holds or workshops we often think of attached
specialization in connection with central institutions
and urban or state-level societies It is of considerable
interest that in early urban societies the making of
stone personal ornaments in association with central
institutions figures prominently (Stein 1996 Vidale
1989)
How earlier forms of craft specialization may have
evolved into large-scale attached specialization is
poorly understood Most research has concentrated
on later stages in this process (eg Stein 1996) in
discussions of earlier forms of specialization defini-
tions and criteria for diagnosis could sometimes be
clearer (eg Quintero and Wilke 1998 Rollefson and
Parker 2002 Rosen 1997) If we are dealing with
a
c
b
Figure 14 Ground stone artefacts probably used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Capstone made of limestone
Jilat 25 (b) Handstone probably used as an anvil or hammer Jilat 25 note depression in face and flake scars
at edges (c) Limestone drilling bench Jilat 13 Note evidence of use-wear on the left and widest area of the
bench smooth abraded surface drill marks in the centre-left face small flake scars with negative bulbs of per-
cussion close to the edge of the bench
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 151
specialization in Neolithic societies it is probably
independent specialization Still Neolithic societies
may fall between Costinrsquos two categories Neolithic
groups were clearly producing prestige goods perso-
nal ornaments are not strictly utilitarian and there is
at least a possibility that elites were emerging (Byrd
1994 Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002 Verhoeven
2002)
Individual Specialists
First there is the issue of identifying individual
specialists Some use lsquospecializationrsquo to refer to any
situation in which some artisans have high levels of
skill a view that has been criticized (Rice 1991) We
agree with Rice that identifying a high level of
technical skill in a craft is not on its own sufficient
for a diagnosis of specialization since it robs the
concept of force in discussing long term change (by
this criterion the Upper Palaeolithic was riddled
with craft specialists) However we would argue
that if there are other indications of craft specializa-
tion a search for levels of ability in different
individuals is appropriate mdash if the data permit
Such data would be primary refuse from well-dated
sites of high temporal resolution in which technical
processes (eg errors in chaines operatoires) can
reveal experts vs novices (Pigeot 1990 Stout 2002
Vanzetti and Vidale 1994)
In the case of Jilat 13 and 25 we are dealing with
much primary refuse and two closely dated sites (see
above and Tables 6ndash7) mdash with periodic use of the
sites over a time range on the order of 200 years at
most and possibly much less Jilat 25 yielded activity
areas with clear spatial clusters as do a number of
contexts at Jilat 13 Space does not permit us to
present all details (this awaits the final site report)
but we feel confident that aggregate consideration of
the data from each site allows us to discuss general
questions of individual skills mdash master craftsmen vs
novices
a b
c
Figure 15 Ground stone artefacts possibly used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Grooved sandstone abrading
tool Jilat 13 (b) Sandstone hand-held abrader Jilat 25 (c) Grooved limestone abrading tool Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
152 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
To explore this we analysed unfinished blanks and
the frequency of perforation errors Drilling is a
sensitive moment in bead production when many
things can go wrong (Kenoyer 2003) A low incidence
in perforation errors combined with high numbers of
successfully finished beads and evidence of standar-
dization should be reasonably good indicators of an
artisanrsquos mastery This is the situation seen at Jilat 25
(Fig 7) In all of 93 blanks from Jilat 25 only 2 were
perforation errors a failure rate of only 2
On the other hand a high incidence of perforation
errors would suggest that a beadmaker was a relative
novice Jilat 13 produced more blanks with perfora-
tion errors than Jilat 25 We thought we might find
individual contexts with a high rate of error
suggesting apprentices
The data did not bear this out Of 223 bead blanks
from Jilat 13 (all phases) 22 were perforation errors
mdash a failure rate of 98 All but two errors were on
barrel bead blanks of green Dabba Marble The
others were one pendant blank and one irregular
bead blank These 22 blanks were distributed across
20 different contexts and no more than 2 perforation
errors were found in any one context
A close look at those contexts reveals low error
rates In Context B21 2 green barrel bead blanks
with perforation errors were found with 5 other
blanks The others included green and red barrel and
disc blanks This context also yielded 5 successfully
finished beads including black and red barrel beads
and a green disc Black and green debitage and a
discoidal handstone were also found here In Context
B71 2 blanks with perforation errors were found
along with 9 other blanks and 10 successfully
finished beads including green Dabba Marble barrel
beads but also black and red disc beads Much
debitage was found along with a flaked limestone
cutting tool (cf Fig 12c) and a limestone object with
a drill mark
The higher rate of error at Jilat 13 compared to
Jilat 25 could be because artisans at Jilat 13 were
making more of the larger more complex barrel
beads (as opposed to simple discs see Tables 2ndash3)
which offer greater chances of failure due to the
longer drilling distance However at Jilat 13 the
overall failure rate was still quite low particularly
considering the overall volume of material recovered
(Table 1)
We conclude that the beadmakers at Jilat 13
included few trainees These appear to have been
skilled artisans a small task force composed of
relative experts This raises the question of whether
these beadmakers were examples of lsquoproducer
specialistsrsquo as traditionally defined that is people
involved in
production of a good by a relatively small number of
individuals (compared to the total output and
number of consumers) individuals who are as a
result of this selectivity and the routinization or
repetition of their tasks particularly skilled in
manufacture (Rice 1991 263)
Jilat 13 and 25 do suggest small numbers of
individuals and a certain selectivity in who was
involved in stone bead making The quantity of
debitagedebris relative to (1) the number of finished
beads and (2) the modest sizes of these structures
collectively suggest that these craftsmenwomen
served a larger number of consumers relative to the
number of craftsmen involved here If so who were
these consumers mdash other residents of Jilat or groups
beyond
Intra-site Specialization Between Domestic Groups
Several studies suggest ways of identifying different
forms of craft specialization between domestic groups
in a site For later sites Stein (1996) has explored
spatial data particularly how craft production
facilities are dispersed among domestic units or
located near special (or central) institutions In
Neolithic sites questions about dispersal between
households and possible links between craft produc-
tion and special buildings or special sites have been
underexplored
For specialization Costin (1991) suggests that we
would expect (1) variability between production
units (eg households occupations regions) in
relevant artefacts (2) high densities of craft produc-
tion debris relative to some other generally used
item in some production units (3) high ratios of
unfinished goods to finished goods in some produc-
tion units Kenoyer et alrsquos (1991) ethnoarchaeolo-
gical studies of modern stone bead-making in
Khambat (India) suggest something similar in the
case of households as production units There non-
specialist households engaging in casual opportu-
nistic bead production revealed low quantities of
bead-making debris few unfinished beads and little
standardization in finished beads By contrast
households specializing in bead production were
characterized by stockpiling of large quantities of
raw materials many unfinished beads and more
standardized finished products
In looking at whole occupations (ie phases within
sites) as a unit of observation we argue elsewhere
(Wright and Garrard 2003) that artefact densities and
other data from 13 PPNB and 8 PPNCELN
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 153
occupations in the Jilat-Azraq region suggest that
PPNCELN producers were more specialized than
those of the PPNB mdash at least in the Jilat-Azraq
region Unlike the PPNB sites Jilat 13 and 25 have
very high densities of bead-making debris specialized
tools for drilling and sawing there is an abundance of
unfinished materials relative to finished products
bead-making tools and debris are abundant relative
to normal domestic food processing equipment
(ground stone artefacts) (Wright and Garrard 2003
cf Costin 1991)
That argument is chronological comparing the
PPNB to the PPNCELN occupations and we stand
behind it for the Jilat-Azraq case (different trajec-
tories may apply to south Jordan and the Negev see
below) Still it leaves open the issue of house-to-
house variation within Jilat 25 or Jilat 13 As we have
only one excavated structure per site we cannot on
present evidence argue that each building housed a
group of specialists serving other households within
the same site In fact we have no direct evidence that
there were other structures on each site mdash the ones
excavated were the only ones visible on the surface
There are nuances of material and typological
choices between the Jilat 25 structure (red disc beads)
and the Jilat 13 structure (larger complex green
ornaments) but these nuances are beyond the scope
of this paper
In all we suspect that stone bead production at
Jilat 13 and 25 was geared not for other domestic
units lsquoin camprsquo but for use by these quite mobile
communities themselves mdash as well as export to other
sites within the steppe and beyond (see below) In
Costinrsquos terms (Costin 1991) Jilat 13 and 25 might
each be an example of an independent non-centra-
lized dispersed workshop possibly lsquofamily runrsquo (Rice
1991 262) mdash in which handling of Dabba Marble
was not routinely entrusted to novices
There are hints of house-to-house variations in
bead-making in major villages with larger samples of
domestic structures as in PPNB Beidha At PPNB
Beidha (earlier than Jilat 13 and 25) Building 14
stands out
Other forms of production besides food preparation
were less common Building 14 represented the best
example of artefact production in these basements
A wide range of artefacts was recovered apparently
associated with building 14rsquos basement floor
Particularly widespread were stone polishers bone
tools raw material (including hematite malachite
and magnesium) more than 60 unmodified marine
shells and at least two dozen beads of shell stone
and bone some of which were in various stages of
production Some artifacts lay on stone slabs
indicating that at least some slabs may have
functioned as work surfaces (Byrd 2005 117)
Such hints are intriguing Still macro-artefacts
from house floors are affected by problems of site
formation and house abandonment Micro-artefact
data can help (Rainville 2005) House-by-house
exploration with attention to micro-artefacts is
needed (Wright and Bains 2007)
Site Specialization Within a Regional Network of Craft
Production and Exchange
Both sites and other Neolithic sites in Jilat and
Azraq exhibit resource specialization
the selective use of particular resources in craft
manufacture such as certain clays that are repeat-
edly used (Rice 1991 262)
The Jilat artisans emphasized Dabba Marble from
a wider array of available stone types The Jilat-
Azraq sites collectively show that green Dabba
Marble was a special target This is revealed in both
frequencies and weights (for debris data and weight
data see Wright and Garrard 2003 for frequency
data on beads and blanks see Tables 2 and 3) At
both sites debris is greatly dominated by green
Dabba Marble mdash 80ndash95 of debris by both weight
(grams) and frequency Green Dabba Marble also
dominates blanks in terms of weight at both sites mdash
indicating the use of green for making larger heavier
and more conspicuous ornaments
Turning to frequencies at Jilat 13 about 90 of
blanks are green and only 5 are red However
finished beads include both green and red forms in
comparable percentages (404 and 436 respec-
tively) (Table 3) suggesting that finished red beads
were brought into the building from a place of
manufacture located somewhere else At Jilat 25
blanks of red and green Dabba Marble occur in
comparable proportions (409 green 43 red)
whilst finished beads are predominantly red (588)
(Table 2) If Jilat 13 and 25 were absolute contem-
poraries this could suggest variations in choices and
exchange between residents of different structures
Rice (1991) has defined site specialization as a
situation in which a site is located near a special
resource and the inhabitants emphasize production of
a craft based on that resource Relative to other sites
not so located the range of site functions and
activities would be expected to be more limited
Thus site specialization
involves individual localities or sites having evidence
of limited functions or intensive productive activity
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
154 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
often determined by fortuitous environmental fac-
tors This includes proximity to mineral deposits
and so forth (Rice 1991 262)
Do Jilat 13 and 25 fit this concept In both sites
15 km from the source we have a wealth of evidence
for intensive stone bead production and scanty
evidence for routine food processing tools (Wright
and Garrard 2003) However Jilat 25 may be closer
to the limited function model envisioned by Rice In
Jilat 13 bead-making is clearly intensive but we are
also dealing with a chipped stone assemblage of not
only drills and burins but also projectile points and
other tools Jilat 13 also reveals production of
figurines (of animals phalluses and arrow-shaped
forms) and sculpted pillars (Baird 1993 Garrard
et al 1994a Martin 1999 Wright 1992 1993)
In all Jilat 13 and 25 suggest that we can apply
Ricersquos lsquosite specializationrsquo on the grounds of intensive
productive activity and proximity to source mdash but
with the qualification that this specialization was also
embedded in hunting-herding activities and at Jilat
13 production of other special crafts unique among
the sites of a symbolic nature (figurines pillars)
One possibility is that we are dealing with a camp
of hunter-herder corporate groups mdash part of a wider
regional network mdash engaged in special activities in
remote areas involving art personal ornaments and
ritual Such groups are suggested by other data from
the PPNBndashPPNC time span for example Nahal
Hemar (ornaments masks hunting tools) Dhuweila
(carving of hunters with dress variations)
Catalhoyuk (images of hunters with dress variations
as in the bull hunt mural) and Gobeklitepe (sculpture
production including a quarry wild-animal icono-
graphy hunting) (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988 Betts
1998 Mellaart 1967 Schmidt 2000) In all these data
hint that craft production of special items was
embedded in hunting andor herding activities in
remote areas this may have been a key means by
which exotic materials reached major villages In a
very broad way this supports a sketch outlined by
Bar Yosef (Bar-Yosef 2001) although we do not
necessarily agree with specifics of his model eg the
territories boundaries social groups and mechanisms
which he suggests (cf Asouti 2006) Instead we see
this as one example of diverse strategies of social
networking linking lineages households and commu-
nities in the Neolithic (Wright forthcoming)
Returning to the stone bead data from Jilat 13 and
25 the apparent stockpiling of raw material and
intensive production activity hints at production of
the green material for export (see above and Wright
and Garrard 2003) New data now add weight to this
idea and suggest the following provisional picture of
regional specializations and exchanges in ornaments
(1) Based on typology technology and materials thereappears to be a distinctive eastern Jordanian koine ornetwork of stone bead manufacture and exchangefeaturing Dabba Marble and a probable regionalspecialization in it
Other Neolithic bead production sites are known
from eastern Jordan Indications are that most of the
green bead materials are Dabba Marble probably
from Jilat (further work is needed) In these sites
diversity of materials used seems low with few
imports from beyond the steppe Shells however
testify to wider networks (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989
Cooke and Reese in Betts 1998 Garrard et al 1994a
Reese 1991)
Azraq 31 (PPNB and ELN) is in our suite of study
materials (Baird et al 1992 Garrard et al 1994a
Wright and Garrard 2003) and debris blanks and
beads were found Preliminary XRF analysis of green
samples (by Groom) indicates that the material is
consistent with Jilat Dabba Marble Typology and
technology are also similar and as at Jilat 25 burin
spall drills were closely associated with bead-making
in specific activity areas (Baird 1993 521 Baird et al
1992 25) However the ground stone revealed no
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
(Wright 1992 1993 Wright in Baird et al 1992)
Material used for beads at Dhuweila (PPNB and
ELN) has been called Dabba Marble (Cooke and
Reese in Betts 1998) It is consistent in appearance
with our material although we have no details on
mineralogy or source Typologically these beads are
similar to those of Jilat 13 and 25 The ground stone
is very different from the suite at the Jilat sites
(Wright in Betts 1998) for comparisons of chipped
stone assemblages see Baird (1993)
At Bawwab al-Ghazal (Late PPNB) Rollefson
et al found drills bits on burin spalls tile knives
beads bead blanks and bead debris some of which
they called green Dabba Marble (Rollefson et al
1999 Quintero et al 2004) They argued that there is
a possible source of this material outcropping near
the site mdash lsquoFor the last raw material [green Dabba
Marble] small nodules of the green limestone were
embedded in the local bedrockrsquo (Rollefson et al 1999
3) However as shown in Appendix A the true
Dabba Marble only occurs in a restricted area west of
Wadi Jilat The lsquobedrockrsquo which outcrops near Azraq
31 and Bawwab al-Ghazal is travertine and some of
this formed during the late Pleistocene and Holocene
The nearby Epipalaeolithic site of Azraq 17 was
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 155
found partially embedded in travertine and artefacts
including nodules of imported basalt were found in
the travertine at this site It is possible that the
nodules of green limestone found at Bawwab al-
Ghazal were imported Dabba Marble which subse-
quently became incorporated in a travertine near the
site An alternative possibility is that the local
travertine is infused with green minerals In Wadi
Jilat travertines were noted with traces of green
minerals and in the Siwaqa area to the south-west of
Jilat there are extensive travertines some of which
are infused with pale green minerals including
volkonskoite (Barjous 1986 mdash see also Appendix A)
In eastern Jordan some Neolithic sites are greatly
dominated by burins (lsquoburin sitesrsquo) At a number of
these there is evidence for stone bead-making (eg
Jebel Naja) These lsquoburin sitesrsquo typically reveal few
ground stone tools we know of no examples of
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
from them It was argued that the main role of the
burins was production of spalls for drills used mainly
for beads (Betts 1987 1998 Finlayson and Betts
1990) However burin sites are not universally
associated with stone bead making At Jilat 23 24
and 26 burins were numerous but other evidence for
bead-making is scanty (Baird 1993 520)
Therefore some have questioned whether
burins and burin spalls in such sites were solely or
primarily intended for making drills and beads
noting that other functions are possible (Quintero
et al 2004 209) Given that these sites typically
represent short-term occupations it is possible that
many sites might be spall manufacture sites with
spalls transported to other settings where drill
manufacture and bead manufacture took place such
as Jilat 13 and 25 Rollefson expressed doubt that
either bladelet or burin spall drills would have been
used in bow drills partly because of their fragility and
also because most of them have a pronounced curve
on the long axis which would have made high speed
drilling impossible (Rollefson and Parker 2002) But
Finlayson and Betts (1990) and Berna (1995)
successfully experimented using burin spalls with
bow drills and Kenoyer (personal communication
2007) notes that drills made on burin spalls are the
most common type of drill in diverse prehistoric
stone bead-making sites (in India Pakistan and
elsewhere)
In the case of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 we believe burin-
spall drills were part of the bead-making repertoire
for reasons noted above This does not rule out other
uses of burin spalls Nor does it rule out the use of
other perforating techniques Drills do not have to be
made of stone when soft stones are being perforated
mdash wood bone and abrasives can be used (Foreman
1978)
(2) There are hints of export of Dabba Marble to at leastsome villages in the Levantine corridor However majorNeolithic villages display much diversity in materials andespecially more importing of exotic stones than is seen inthe eastern Jordanian sites
Many writers report Neolithic beads made of
unspecified lsquogreenstonersquo This term is unfortunate
since it can refer to metabasalt and similar altered
igneous rocks (Schumann 1992 248) Some of these
lsquogreenstonesrsquo may be limestone with apatite or other
materials (eg Garfinkel 1987 81ndash82 Hauptmann
2004 Talbot 1983 789) Beads of green limestones
rich in fluorapatite were found at late PPNB Basta in
southern Jordan (Hauptmann 2004) as confirmed by
XRF and XRD Green beads identified as Dabba
Marble were also reported from Ain Ghazal a site
with both PPNB and PPNC occupations (Rollefson
et al 1990 103ndash04) Whether these are Dabba
Marble from the Jilat source (Appendices AndashB) is
not yet fully clear Ongoing research will sort out
these mysteries (eg D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal
communication Hauptmann 2004)
Major villages in the Levantine Corridor reveal
different degrees of emphasis in styles and materials
often we see a certain emphasis on local materials and
preferences However considerable exchange net-
works are indicated in major villages which display
much wider ranges of stone ornament materials
compared to the eastern Jordanian sites (such as
Ain Ghazal Yiftahel Basta Barsquoja Ghuwayr 1
Fidan 1) mdash along with of course shells (Affonso
and Pernicka 2004 Bienert and Gebel 1998 84ndash86
Garfinkel 1987 Hauptmann 2004 Rollefson and
Simmons 1984 1986 Rollefson et al 1990 Simmons
and Najjar 1998 Starck 1988)
As the Neolithic evolved stone bead-making
entailed increasingly diverse techniques and materi-
als One example may be drills In earlymiddle PPNB
sites most drills are made on bladelets In the late
PPNB PPNC and Late Neolithic there may have
been a gradual increase in drills made on burin spalls
although perhaps not in all regions (Jensen 2004
Rollefson and Parker 2002) Underlining increasing
diversity of technological practice between groups
Baird (2001b) pointed out geographic variation in
this technology with spall drills dominating in the
north-eastern Jordanian steppe from MPPNB
through Early Late Neolithic whilst contemporary
sites to west and south use bladelet blanks for their
piercing tools
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
156 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
proportions of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 tool blanks are
blades (Baird 1993 469 and figs 818ndash821) even
though the debitage assemblages are mostly flake
dominated Other possible sawing tools include flaked
limestone artefacts with a thin edge (Fig 12c)
Several cutmarked limestone slabs were found at
Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 (Fig 12andashb) The cutmarks are
shallow or deep incisions Interestingly the cut-
marked slabs do not display evidence of drilling
Conversely the Jilat 13 bench with marks probably
resulting from drilling (Fig 14c see below) has no
cutmarks This suggests segregation of drilling and
sawing activities Some variability in spatial distribu-
tion of different stages in the bead making process
may be further borne out by the discrete distribution
of drills in Jilat 25 contexts where substantial bead
making debris was recovered For example in Jilat 25
Context A15 drills were found clustered in spatial
units towards the northern end of the structure
Drilling
Experiments in drilling of Dabba Marble are in
progress (Bains forthcoming) Here we present
evidence for drilling from bead perforations and
stone tools Other experiments show that perforation
morphology reveals drilling methods and shape
diameter and length of the drill used (eg Gwinnett
and Gorelick 1999) At Jilat perforations indicate
that drilling methods varied and that choices were
probably affected by material hardness
Hand Drilling with Large Piercers and Borers
The simplest method used appears to have been hand
drilling Soft Dabba Marble could have been drilled
using a borer or piercer held in the hand and not
hafted to a drilling stick Drilling by this method
would produce rough irregular and relatively large
perforations (Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990) we see
examples of this in broken beads Borers and piercers
were found at the sites They are relatively large
perforation tools made on blades suitable for
manipulation by hand without a haft (Fig 13 nos
9ndash11)
Rotary Drilling From Two Directions with Hafted Drills
The most common method involved rotary drilling
from two directions Drilling was almost always
a b
c d
Figure 6 Green Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads (andashb) Circular flakes slightly abraded (c) Unabraded
perforated flake (d) Finished disc bead
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 143
bipolar That is the blank was drilled to roughly
halfway through then turned and the perforation
completed from the opposite direction As the two
perforations converged the result was an hourglass-
shaped perforation (Fig 9e) Experiments indicate
that this prevents chipping and flaking of the
alternate face which can occur if a blank is perforated
completely from only one direction (Possehl 1981)
Most hourglass perforations on both soft and
hard stones appear to have been produced by rotary
drilling Rotary drilling results in regular perforations
and concentric striations on them (Gorelick and
Gwinnett 1990) We observed both traits on many
broken beads and blanks (Fig 9b) Perforations of
hourglass form included very small drillholes indi-
cating that the drilling tools were smaller than
piercers and borers made on blades The probable
drills in this case were small drills on bladelets and
especially drill bits on burin spalls (Fig 13 nos 1 4
5 7) Microscopic examination of perforations is in
progress (Bains forthcoming)
Oddly piercing and drilling tools were found in
relatively low absolute numbers at the two sites (eg
Baird 1993 505ndash06 625 for Jilat 13 early phase
about 4 of tools were piercers or drills for the Jilat
25 which have concentrations of bead-making debris
just under 3 of tools were spall drills) However
specific contextual data other technological consid-
erations and comparisons with other sites give us
confidence that these were the main tools involved in
the drilling and that the low absolute numbers of
drills abandoned may sometimes relate to systematic
removal or discard of these tools by the artisans For
example burin spall drills were closely associated
spatially with bead-making debris in specific activity
areas in the Jilat 25 structure eg Context Aa15 in
the buildingrsquos northern area (Baird 1993 521 see
Table 6) In addition Jilat 13 and 25 produced large
numbers of angle burins including truncation burins
from which burin spalls were detached (eg about
29 of all tools at J13rsquos early phase were burins)
(Baird 1993 500 516 520ndash26 625) Burins are
a b c
d e f
Figure 7 Red Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads from Jilat 25 Context Aa15 (andashb) Circular flakes
slightly abraded (c) Heavily abraded and perforated disc bead blank edge abrasion incomplete (d) Abraded
perforated blank abrasion not complete on face (endashf) Finished disc beads
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
144 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
contextually closely associated with drills and bead-
making debris in occupation fills at Jilat 25 (c 30 of
tools from relevant Jilat 25 contexts were burins) mdash a
situation also seen at Jebel Naja in the Basalt Desert mdash
where both experiments and microwear studies suggest
that drill bits on burin spalls were used for bead-
making (Baird 1993 521 Finlayson and Betts 1990)
Burin spall drills would have had some technolo-
gical advantages over bladelet drills One advantage
is that the triangular or rectangular cross-sections of
burin spall drills make them stronger and less likely
to break during drilling In addition the manner of
their retouch from the same direction on each edge
creates a prismatic cross-section that probably served
to produce a neater hole and to make drilling more
efficient and possibly faster and reduce breakage in
drilling The tips of burin spall drills are blunted
which is an advantage in drilling hard stone (Gorelick
and Gwinnett 1990) Predictability and miniaturiza-
tion of burin spall drills may be relevant to an
Figure 8 Chaines operatoires for disc beads Sequence A refers to a disc bead made on a thin flake Sequence B refers
to a disc bead made on a thick flake Sequence C refers to a disc bead made on a tabular roughout not a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 145
apparent increased standardization in perforation
size observed at Jilat 25 from an early phase to a later
phase (Critchley 2000)
Since we have evidence of rotary drilling from bead
perforations we believe that drill bits were hafted to
sticks (probably made of wood) Drill bits on burin
spalls would have been too small to manipulate
effectively by hand alone
To work efficiently a drill needs to be weighted
and stabilized and there must be some means of
protecting the artisanrsquos hand Ground stone artefacts
support the idea that rotary drilling with drill bits
hafted to drilling sticks was in use They include a
probable capstone made of limestone from Jilat 25
The capstone would have been held in the hand
enabling the beadmaker to manipulate the drilling
stick from the top (Fig 14a) This artefact resembles
a miniature bowl and fits easily into one hand The
interior surface displays use wear circular striations
parallel to the rim and vertical striations perpendi-
cular to the rim The base of the interior converges to
a flat surface about 1 cm in diameter
Some Levantine Neolithic sites have revealed
similar objects with similar wear (Banning 1998
Wright 1992 fig 5ndash15b) and a comparable item
was found at Jarmo (Moholy-Nagy 1983 fig 12913
Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990 30) Capstones are
characteristic of the use of bow drills (Banning
1998 Foreman 1978) but strictly speaking they
are not necessarily diagnostic of the bow drill
(theoretically simpler drilling techniques involving
hafting might have been facilitated by the use of
a capstone) For the moment we can say that
at Jilat 13 and 15 the evidence for rotary drilling
is unequivocal However the evidence for the use
of the bow drill while suggestive is not quite
definitive
Size data considered carefully support a link
between burin-spall drills and beads To interpret
dimensions of drills and perforations we must keep
in mind that stone bead drilling was overwhelmingly
bipolar and converging Thus drills did not have to
penetrate all the way through the full height of the
bead mdash only about half of it Therefore what matters
a b c
d e f
Figure 9 Green Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks and finished beads (a) Hexagonal blank flaked but not abraded (b)
Abraded hexagonal blank (c) Abraded blank not perforated (d) Perforation error on abraded blank (e)
Finished bead broken showing bipolar perforation and hourglass perforation shape (f) Perforated barrel bead
almost finished except for final abrasion to smooth out last surface irregularities
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
146 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
is the very tips of the drill bits mdash the upper few
millimetres mdash not the full length of the drills
Since disc beads are consistently about 25 to
26 mm in height only the upper 15 mm or so of the
drills mdash the most distal ends of the tips mdash had to
have been about 21 mm or less in thickness to
lsquomatchrsquo the perforation diameters of disc beads
(Table 4) In the case of barrel beads since barrel
beads were between 64 and 71 mm in height about
32 to 36 mm of the most distal ends of the drill bits
have to have been about 21 mm or less in thickness
to lsquomatchrsquo the perforations of barrel beads (Table 5)
Measurements of the drill bit tips within these
small uppermost reaches show that the maximal
thicknesses of the drill bitsrsquo distal tips fall within the
range of sizes indicated by the perforations (Fig 13)
Multi-stage Drilling
Sometimes drilling may have been accomplished in
several stages Some beads particularly those made of
harder stones have smooth cylindrical perforations
with parallel walls displaying no hint of the
hourglass shape
One way to achieve this is to create the hourglass
perforation and then to turn it into a perfect
cylindrical perforation via the use of a second drilling
procedure An example of this was cited by Calley
(1989) who proposed that two tools found in
carnelian bead workshops at Early Bronze Age
Kumartepe (Turkey) had complementary functions
a drill bit for making the initial hourglass perforation
and a borer for finishing and smoothing it into a
cylindrical perforation Since both drill bits and
borers were found on the Jilat sites this method of
finishing perforations could have been used
At Jilat 13 and 25 evidence for multi-stage drilling
can be seen in some beads which have a depression on
one or both faces The depression may be a result of
drilling with a larger drill bit first in order to provide
a guide for the final perforation with a finer drill bit
Such a technique is seen in India-Pakistan (Possehl
1981 39 Kenoyer 1992b 73)
a b c
d e f
Figure 10 Green Dabba Marble pendant blanks and finished pendants (a) Tabular roughout flaked into approximately
trapezoidal shape but not abraded (b) Abraded trapezoidal blank with sawing mark at bottom (c) Perforated
asymmetrical triangular pendant blank incompletely abraded (note striations on face) (d) Finished asymmetri-
cal triangular pendant (e) Pendant blank made on a flake unabraded (f) Nearly-finished pendant made on a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 147
Stabilizing Beads Anvils and Drilling Benches
What method was used to stabilize a bead during
drilling The simplest technique is to fix a bead to a
stone anvil with an adhesive Ethnography and
experiments show that such anvils can be small (the
size of handstones) (Foreman 1978 figs 6ndash7) Use of
such an anvil should result in small shallow
depressions a form of use-damage resulting from
force exerted from above Figure 14b shows a small
flat stone from Jilat 25 with a central depression of
the expected size and depth
Figure 14c shows the limestone bench from Jilat 13
(previously discussed) with a number of such pits in
the centre The marks are evenly spaced and are
concentrated in one small well-defined area on the
widest part of the bench this wide area was also
finely abraded
We see this bench as a multifunctional worktable
anvil We suspect that the beadmaker sat on the
narrow part of the bench (straddling it) placed bead
blanks on the pitted work surface fixed them with
adhesive and then drilled them The bench also
displays evidence of other activities including flaking
and grinding
Adhesives for hafting chipped stone tools could
have been adapted for use in fixing beads to anvils
Bitumen would be one candidate In some cultures a
wooden frame with cup-holes is sometimes used for
stabilizing beads (Kenoyer 1986 P Wright 1982)
The holes are filled with beeswax and clay the bead is
inserted into the wax-clay mixture which hardens
holding the bead steady After drilling beads are
released by breaking the wax-clay mixture (Allchin
1979 Stocks 1989) As wood was probably scarce in
Jilat and as there are no indications of the use of
clay we can probably rule out this technique
However stone items with cup-holes are seen in
Neolithic sites (Kirkbride 1966 Wright 1992
fig 527b)
Abrasion
Ground stone artefacts are crucial to bead produc-
tion in traditional technologies (Foreman 1978
Inizan et al 1992 Kenoyer et al 1991 53 Moholy-
Nagy 1983 294 Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58)
Grinding of beads can be achieved by abrading
each bead individually with a hand held abrader or
by rubbing them on a large grinding slab Either
method will produce linear striations of the type we
see on many unfinished beads (cf Figs 7cndashd and 10c)
However final shaping of disc and cylindrical beads
was most likely achieved by stringing them or loading
them on to a thin rod capable of penetrating the
perforation (individually or in groups) and then
rolling them on a grinding slab adding abrasives
(such as sand) and water to produce a smoother finish
(Foreman 1978 Moholy-Nagy 1983 298) Some disc
beads with parallel edges perpendicular to the faces
would probably have been rolled on a flat smooth
stone Other beads with facetted sharply angled or
bevelled edges (eg many barrel beads) suggest that
they were rolled or abraded along a stone with
grooves and slanting sides (eg Fig 15a c)
Abrasion of bead blanks may have been a multi-
stage process involving a number of materials of
different textures and hardness In an early stage
grinding of bead materials on vesicular basalt would
have been the easiest way to abrade a large nodule
quickly The pores of vesicular basalt and pumice
form natural cutting lsquoteethrsquo comparable to the metal
rasp used by present-day sculptors At Jilat 13 and
Jilat 25 we found broken fragments of vesicular
basalt grinding slabs but not large complete exam-
ples The small fragments suggest two possibilities
either there were large complete slabs at one time
which were then broken worn out and discarded or
only small fragments of these heavy duty grinding
tools were needed
For finer abrasion sandstone grinding slabs might
be expected None were found However small
Figure 11 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic
sites Tile knives or possible saws for bead-
making From Baird 1993 fig 85
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
148 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
handheld abraders made of sandstones with coarse
hard quartz crystals were found at both sites (Fig
15andashb) Sandstone is not local to Wadi Jilat and these
items were imported and probably used extensively
(resulting in the small size)
For even finer abrasion limestone could have been
used Such needs could have been met by the large
bench of Jilat 13 (Fig 14c) which was finely ground
over a very large area (within which the possible
drilling marks were placed)
Some might see the grooved items made of
sandstone (Fig 15a) and limestone (Fig 15c) as
lsquoshaft straightenersrsquo One or two shaft straightener
fragments made of basalt occur at Jilat 13 Like other
basalt shaft straighteners in Neolithic Jilat (eg Jilat
7) (Garrard et al 1994a Wright 1993) the use-
surfaces of these have U-shaped cross-sections By
contrast the cross sections of the use surfaces on the
sandstone and limestone grooved items are not U-
shaped but have sharp angles We see these tools
mainly as abraders for grinding bead facets espe-
cially on barrel beads The widths of the use surfaces
are 11 mm for the sandstone tool and 138 mm for
the limestone one These dimensions correspond to
the average diameter (5 width) of 31 measured green
Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks from Jilat 13 (N 5
31 Mean diameter 5 92 mm standard deviation 5
28) Grooved stones are used in bead grinding in
a
b c
Figure 12 Ground stone artefacts probably for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Cutmarked slab (limestone) Jilat
13 The cutmarks are shallow and are concentrated in the left area running parallel to the main axes of the
slab (b) Cutmarked slab fragment (limestone) Jilat 13 showing deep cutmarks (c) Flaked and ground abra-
sive cutting tool made of limestone Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 149
modern India (Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58) a
grooved sandstone tool was found with an unfinished
bead at Catalhoyuk (Wright and Bains 2007)
Tosi and Vidale (1990) regard failure resulting
from breakage or human error as more common in
the grinding stage than during perforation although
this depends on material and opinion (Kenoyer 2003
18) In some cases it might be more efficient to shape
the bead first before attempting perforation This
may explain why barrel beads tend to be shaped and
abraded prior to perforation
Finished beads were always finely abraded and
sometimes polished to the extent of reflecting light
Ethnographic observations indicate that polishing is
sometimes done by placing beads en masse in a
leather bag along with an abrasive and shaking and
rolling the bags for long periods (Allchin 1979
Kenoyer 2003) This simple method would have been
more likely than the method of rolling beads and
abrasives in a wooden barrel which is also docu-
mented ethnographically (Kenoyer 2003)
However shaking beads in a bag with an abrasive
tends to produce beads with rounded convex edges
(Gwinnett and Gorelick 1989) Some beads at Jilat
have this form but many mdash especially those made of
the hard cherty red Dabba Marble mdash have sharp
edges perpendicular to bead faces indicating that
they were individually polished or polished during
rolling on a string or stick Alternative methods of
polishing can include rubbing with leather or wood
with the addition of fine sand or chalk and water or
with animal hairwool and animal fat (Kenoyer 1986
20) These methods would have been possible with
Jilat technology
Craft Specialization and Comparisons withOther Sites
Technology needs to be studied not only in terms of
materials and techniques but also in terms of social
groups involved in artefact production individual
artisans and skill (Dobres and Hoffmann 1999 2ndash12)
In egalitarian societies craft skill and knowledge of
Figure 13 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic sites Drilling and piercing tools From Baird 1993 fig 82
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
150 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
special materials can enhance the power of an
individual or a group encouraging hierarchy
(Dobres 2000 119ndash20)
These questions force us to reconsider issues of
craft specialization a term often used loosely or in
widely different ways Three concepts of specializa-
tion are considered here individual specialists
specialization between households or domestic
groups within a given site and site specialization
within a regional or social network of craft produc-
tion and exchange
Costin (1991) draws a contrast between indepen-
dent specialization and attached specialization
Independent specialization involves production of
utilitarian goods for nonelites and can be household-
based or based in special workshops Attached
specialization refers to production of prestige goods
under control of elites Whilst Costin notes that
attached specialization can also be based in house-
holds or workshops we often think of attached
specialization in connection with central institutions
and urban or state-level societies It is of considerable
interest that in early urban societies the making of
stone personal ornaments in association with central
institutions figures prominently (Stein 1996 Vidale
1989)
How earlier forms of craft specialization may have
evolved into large-scale attached specialization is
poorly understood Most research has concentrated
on later stages in this process (eg Stein 1996) in
discussions of earlier forms of specialization defini-
tions and criteria for diagnosis could sometimes be
clearer (eg Quintero and Wilke 1998 Rollefson and
Parker 2002 Rosen 1997) If we are dealing with
a
c
b
Figure 14 Ground stone artefacts probably used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Capstone made of limestone
Jilat 25 (b) Handstone probably used as an anvil or hammer Jilat 25 note depression in face and flake scars
at edges (c) Limestone drilling bench Jilat 13 Note evidence of use-wear on the left and widest area of the
bench smooth abraded surface drill marks in the centre-left face small flake scars with negative bulbs of per-
cussion close to the edge of the bench
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 151
specialization in Neolithic societies it is probably
independent specialization Still Neolithic societies
may fall between Costinrsquos two categories Neolithic
groups were clearly producing prestige goods perso-
nal ornaments are not strictly utilitarian and there is
at least a possibility that elites were emerging (Byrd
1994 Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002 Verhoeven
2002)
Individual Specialists
First there is the issue of identifying individual
specialists Some use lsquospecializationrsquo to refer to any
situation in which some artisans have high levels of
skill a view that has been criticized (Rice 1991) We
agree with Rice that identifying a high level of
technical skill in a craft is not on its own sufficient
for a diagnosis of specialization since it robs the
concept of force in discussing long term change (by
this criterion the Upper Palaeolithic was riddled
with craft specialists) However we would argue
that if there are other indications of craft specializa-
tion a search for levels of ability in different
individuals is appropriate mdash if the data permit
Such data would be primary refuse from well-dated
sites of high temporal resolution in which technical
processes (eg errors in chaines operatoires) can
reveal experts vs novices (Pigeot 1990 Stout 2002
Vanzetti and Vidale 1994)
In the case of Jilat 13 and 25 we are dealing with
much primary refuse and two closely dated sites (see
above and Tables 6ndash7) mdash with periodic use of the
sites over a time range on the order of 200 years at
most and possibly much less Jilat 25 yielded activity
areas with clear spatial clusters as do a number of
contexts at Jilat 13 Space does not permit us to
present all details (this awaits the final site report)
but we feel confident that aggregate consideration of
the data from each site allows us to discuss general
questions of individual skills mdash master craftsmen vs
novices
a b
c
Figure 15 Ground stone artefacts possibly used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Grooved sandstone abrading
tool Jilat 13 (b) Sandstone hand-held abrader Jilat 25 (c) Grooved limestone abrading tool Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
152 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
To explore this we analysed unfinished blanks and
the frequency of perforation errors Drilling is a
sensitive moment in bead production when many
things can go wrong (Kenoyer 2003) A low incidence
in perforation errors combined with high numbers of
successfully finished beads and evidence of standar-
dization should be reasonably good indicators of an
artisanrsquos mastery This is the situation seen at Jilat 25
(Fig 7) In all of 93 blanks from Jilat 25 only 2 were
perforation errors a failure rate of only 2
On the other hand a high incidence of perforation
errors would suggest that a beadmaker was a relative
novice Jilat 13 produced more blanks with perfora-
tion errors than Jilat 25 We thought we might find
individual contexts with a high rate of error
suggesting apprentices
The data did not bear this out Of 223 bead blanks
from Jilat 13 (all phases) 22 were perforation errors
mdash a failure rate of 98 All but two errors were on
barrel bead blanks of green Dabba Marble The
others were one pendant blank and one irregular
bead blank These 22 blanks were distributed across
20 different contexts and no more than 2 perforation
errors were found in any one context
A close look at those contexts reveals low error
rates In Context B21 2 green barrel bead blanks
with perforation errors were found with 5 other
blanks The others included green and red barrel and
disc blanks This context also yielded 5 successfully
finished beads including black and red barrel beads
and a green disc Black and green debitage and a
discoidal handstone were also found here In Context
B71 2 blanks with perforation errors were found
along with 9 other blanks and 10 successfully
finished beads including green Dabba Marble barrel
beads but also black and red disc beads Much
debitage was found along with a flaked limestone
cutting tool (cf Fig 12c) and a limestone object with
a drill mark
The higher rate of error at Jilat 13 compared to
Jilat 25 could be because artisans at Jilat 13 were
making more of the larger more complex barrel
beads (as opposed to simple discs see Tables 2ndash3)
which offer greater chances of failure due to the
longer drilling distance However at Jilat 13 the
overall failure rate was still quite low particularly
considering the overall volume of material recovered
(Table 1)
We conclude that the beadmakers at Jilat 13
included few trainees These appear to have been
skilled artisans a small task force composed of
relative experts This raises the question of whether
these beadmakers were examples of lsquoproducer
specialistsrsquo as traditionally defined that is people
involved in
production of a good by a relatively small number of
individuals (compared to the total output and
number of consumers) individuals who are as a
result of this selectivity and the routinization or
repetition of their tasks particularly skilled in
manufacture (Rice 1991 263)
Jilat 13 and 25 do suggest small numbers of
individuals and a certain selectivity in who was
involved in stone bead making The quantity of
debitagedebris relative to (1) the number of finished
beads and (2) the modest sizes of these structures
collectively suggest that these craftsmenwomen
served a larger number of consumers relative to the
number of craftsmen involved here If so who were
these consumers mdash other residents of Jilat or groups
beyond
Intra-site Specialization Between Domestic Groups
Several studies suggest ways of identifying different
forms of craft specialization between domestic groups
in a site For later sites Stein (1996) has explored
spatial data particularly how craft production
facilities are dispersed among domestic units or
located near special (or central) institutions In
Neolithic sites questions about dispersal between
households and possible links between craft produc-
tion and special buildings or special sites have been
underexplored
For specialization Costin (1991) suggests that we
would expect (1) variability between production
units (eg households occupations regions) in
relevant artefacts (2) high densities of craft produc-
tion debris relative to some other generally used
item in some production units (3) high ratios of
unfinished goods to finished goods in some produc-
tion units Kenoyer et alrsquos (1991) ethnoarchaeolo-
gical studies of modern stone bead-making in
Khambat (India) suggest something similar in the
case of households as production units There non-
specialist households engaging in casual opportu-
nistic bead production revealed low quantities of
bead-making debris few unfinished beads and little
standardization in finished beads By contrast
households specializing in bead production were
characterized by stockpiling of large quantities of
raw materials many unfinished beads and more
standardized finished products
In looking at whole occupations (ie phases within
sites) as a unit of observation we argue elsewhere
(Wright and Garrard 2003) that artefact densities and
other data from 13 PPNB and 8 PPNCELN
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 153
occupations in the Jilat-Azraq region suggest that
PPNCELN producers were more specialized than
those of the PPNB mdash at least in the Jilat-Azraq
region Unlike the PPNB sites Jilat 13 and 25 have
very high densities of bead-making debris specialized
tools for drilling and sawing there is an abundance of
unfinished materials relative to finished products
bead-making tools and debris are abundant relative
to normal domestic food processing equipment
(ground stone artefacts) (Wright and Garrard 2003
cf Costin 1991)
That argument is chronological comparing the
PPNB to the PPNCELN occupations and we stand
behind it for the Jilat-Azraq case (different trajec-
tories may apply to south Jordan and the Negev see
below) Still it leaves open the issue of house-to-
house variation within Jilat 25 or Jilat 13 As we have
only one excavated structure per site we cannot on
present evidence argue that each building housed a
group of specialists serving other households within
the same site In fact we have no direct evidence that
there were other structures on each site mdash the ones
excavated were the only ones visible on the surface
There are nuances of material and typological
choices between the Jilat 25 structure (red disc beads)
and the Jilat 13 structure (larger complex green
ornaments) but these nuances are beyond the scope
of this paper
In all we suspect that stone bead production at
Jilat 13 and 25 was geared not for other domestic
units lsquoin camprsquo but for use by these quite mobile
communities themselves mdash as well as export to other
sites within the steppe and beyond (see below) In
Costinrsquos terms (Costin 1991) Jilat 13 and 25 might
each be an example of an independent non-centra-
lized dispersed workshop possibly lsquofamily runrsquo (Rice
1991 262) mdash in which handling of Dabba Marble
was not routinely entrusted to novices
There are hints of house-to-house variations in
bead-making in major villages with larger samples of
domestic structures as in PPNB Beidha At PPNB
Beidha (earlier than Jilat 13 and 25) Building 14
stands out
Other forms of production besides food preparation
were less common Building 14 represented the best
example of artefact production in these basements
A wide range of artefacts was recovered apparently
associated with building 14rsquos basement floor
Particularly widespread were stone polishers bone
tools raw material (including hematite malachite
and magnesium) more than 60 unmodified marine
shells and at least two dozen beads of shell stone
and bone some of which were in various stages of
production Some artifacts lay on stone slabs
indicating that at least some slabs may have
functioned as work surfaces (Byrd 2005 117)
Such hints are intriguing Still macro-artefacts
from house floors are affected by problems of site
formation and house abandonment Micro-artefact
data can help (Rainville 2005) House-by-house
exploration with attention to micro-artefacts is
needed (Wright and Bains 2007)
Site Specialization Within a Regional Network of Craft
Production and Exchange
Both sites and other Neolithic sites in Jilat and
Azraq exhibit resource specialization
the selective use of particular resources in craft
manufacture such as certain clays that are repeat-
edly used (Rice 1991 262)
The Jilat artisans emphasized Dabba Marble from
a wider array of available stone types The Jilat-
Azraq sites collectively show that green Dabba
Marble was a special target This is revealed in both
frequencies and weights (for debris data and weight
data see Wright and Garrard 2003 for frequency
data on beads and blanks see Tables 2 and 3) At
both sites debris is greatly dominated by green
Dabba Marble mdash 80ndash95 of debris by both weight
(grams) and frequency Green Dabba Marble also
dominates blanks in terms of weight at both sites mdash
indicating the use of green for making larger heavier
and more conspicuous ornaments
Turning to frequencies at Jilat 13 about 90 of
blanks are green and only 5 are red However
finished beads include both green and red forms in
comparable percentages (404 and 436 respec-
tively) (Table 3) suggesting that finished red beads
were brought into the building from a place of
manufacture located somewhere else At Jilat 25
blanks of red and green Dabba Marble occur in
comparable proportions (409 green 43 red)
whilst finished beads are predominantly red (588)
(Table 2) If Jilat 13 and 25 were absolute contem-
poraries this could suggest variations in choices and
exchange between residents of different structures
Rice (1991) has defined site specialization as a
situation in which a site is located near a special
resource and the inhabitants emphasize production of
a craft based on that resource Relative to other sites
not so located the range of site functions and
activities would be expected to be more limited
Thus site specialization
involves individual localities or sites having evidence
of limited functions or intensive productive activity
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
154 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
often determined by fortuitous environmental fac-
tors This includes proximity to mineral deposits
and so forth (Rice 1991 262)
Do Jilat 13 and 25 fit this concept In both sites
15 km from the source we have a wealth of evidence
for intensive stone bead production and scanty
evidence for routine food processing tools (Wright
and Garrard 2003) However Jilat 25 may be closer
to the limited function model envisioned by Rice In
Jilat 13 bead-making is clearly intensive but we are
also dealing with a chipped stone assemblage of not
only drills and burins but also projectile points and
other tools Jilat 13 also reveals production of
figurines (of animals phalluses and arrow-shaped
forms) and sculpted pillars (Baird 1993 Garrard
et al 1994a Martin 1999 Wright 1992 1993)
In all Jilat 13 and 25 suggest that we can apply
Ricersquos lsquosite specializationrsquo on the grounds of intensive
productive activity and proximity to source mdash but
with the qualification that this specialization was also
embedded in hunting-herding activities and at Jilat
13 production of other special crafts unique among
the sites of a symbolic nature (figurines pillars)
One possibility is that we are dealing with a camp
of hunter-herder corporate groups mdash part of a wider
regional network mdash engaged in special activities in
remote areas involving art personal ornaments and
ritual Such groups are suggested by other data from
the PPNBndashPPNC time span for example Nahal
Hemar (ornaments masks hunting tools) Dhuweila
(carving of hunters with dress variations)
Catalhoyuk (images of hunters with dress variations
as in the bull hunt mural) and Gobeklitepe (sculpture
production including a quarry wild-animal icono-
graphy hunting) (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988 Betts
1998 Mellaart 1967 Schmidt 2000) In all these data
hint that craft production of special items was
embedded in hunting andor herding activities in
remote areas this may have been a key means by
which exotic materials reached major villages In a
very broad way this supports a sketch outlined by
Bar Yosef (Bar-Yosef 2001) although we do not
necessarily agree with specifics of his model eg the
territories boundaries social groups and mechanisms
which he suggests (cf Asouti 2006) Instead we see
this as one example of diverse strategies of social
networking linking lineages households and commu-
nities in the Neolithic (Wright forthcoming)
Returning to the stone bead data from Jilat 13 and
25 the apparent stockpiling of raw material and
intensive production activity hints at production of
the green material for export (see above and Wright
and Garrard 2003) New data now add weight to this
idea and suggest the following provisional picture of
regional specializations and exchanges in ornaments
(1) Based on typology technology and materials thereappears to be a distinctive eastern Jordanian koine ornetwork of stone bead manufacture and exchangefeaturing Dabba Marble and a probable regionalspecialization in it
Other Neolithic bead production sites are known
from eastern Jordan Indications are that most of the
green bead materials are Dabba Marble probably
from Jilat (further work is needed) In these sites
diversity of materials used seems low with few
imports from beyond the steppe Shells however
testify to wider networks (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989
Cooke and Reese in Betts 1998 Garrard et al 1994a
Reese 1991)
Azraq 31 (PPNB and ELN) is in our suite of study
materials (Baird et al 1992 Garrard et al 1994a
Wright and Garrard 2003) and debris blanks and
beads were found Preliminary XRF analysis of green
samples (by Groom) indicates that the material is
consistent with Jilat Dabba Marble Typology and
technology are also similar and as at Jilat 25 burin
spall drills were closely associated with bead-making
in specific activity areas (Baird 1993 521 Baird et al
1992 25) However the ground stone revealed no
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
(Wright 1992 1993 Wright in Baird et al 1992)
Material used for beads at Dhuweila (PPNB and
ELN) has been called Dabba Marble (Cooke and
Reese in Betts 1998) It is consistent in appearance
with our material although we have no details on
mineralogy or source Typologically these beads are
similar to those of Jilat 13 and 25 The ground stone
is very different from the suite at the Jilat sites
(Wright in Betts 1998) for comparisons of chipped
stone assemblages see Baird (1993)
At Bawwab al-Ghazal (Late PPNB) Rollefson
et al found drills bits on burin spalls tile knives
beads bead blanks and bead debris some of which
they called green Dabba Marble (Rollefson et al
1999 Quintero et al 2004) They argued that there is
a possible source of this material outcropping near
the site mdash lsquoFor the last raw material [green Dabba
Marble] small nodules of the green limestone were
embedded in the local bedrockrsquo (Rollefson et al 1999
3) However as shown in Appendix A the true
Dabba Marble only occurs in a restricted area west of
Wadi Jilat The lsquobedrockrsquo which outcrops near Azraq
31 and Bawwab al-Ghazal is travertine and some of
this formed during the late Pleistocene and Holocene
The nearby Epipalaeolithic site of Azraq 17 was
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 155
found partially embedded in travertine and artefacts
including nodules of imported basalt were found in
the travertine at this site It is possible that the
nodules of green limestone found at Bawwab al-
Ghazal were imported Dabba Marble which subse-
quently became incorporated in a travertine near the
site An alternative possibility is that the local
travertine is infused with green minerals In Wadi
Jilat travertines were noted with traces of green
minerals and in the Siwaqa area to the south-west of
Jilat there are extensive travertines some of which
are infused with pale green minerals including
volkonskoite (Barjous 1986 mdash see also Appendix A)
In eastern Jordan some Neolithic sites are greatly
dominated by burins (lsquoburin sitesrsquo) At a number of
these there is evidence for stone bead-making (eg
Jebel Naja) These lsquoburin sitesrsquo typically reveal few
ground stone tools we know of no examples of
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
from them It was argued that the main role of the
burins was production of spalls for drills used mainly
for beads (Betts 1987 1998 Finlayson and Betts
1990) However burin sites are not universally
associated with stone bead making At Jilat 23 24
and 26 burins were numerous but other evidence for
bead-making is scanty (Baird 1993 520)
Therefore some have questioned whether
burins and burin spalls in such sites were solely or
primarily intended for making drills and beads
noting that other functions are possible (Quintero
et al 2004 209) Given that these sites typically
represent short-term occupations it is possible that
many sites might be spall manufacture sites with
spalls transported to other settings where drill
manufacture and bead manufacture took place such
as Jilat 13 and 25 Rollefson expressed doubt that
either bladelet or burin spall drills would have been
used in bow drills partly because of their fragility and
also because most of them have a pronounced curve
on the long axis which would have made high speed
drilling impossible (Rollefson and Parker 2002) But
Finlayson and Betts (1990) and Berna (1995)
successfully experimented using burin spalls with
bow drills and Kenoyer (personal communication
2007) notes that drills made on burin spalls are the
most common type of drill in diverse prehistoric
stone bead-making sites (in India Pakistan and
elsewhere)
In the case of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 we believe burin-
spall drills were part of the bead-making repertoire
for reasons noted above This does not rule out other
uses of burin spalls Nor does it rule out the use of
other perforating techniques Drills do not have to be
made of stone when soft stones are being perforated
mdash wood bone and abrasives can be used (Foreman
1978)
(2) There are hints of export of Dabba Marble to at leastsome villages in the Levantine corridor However majorNeolithic villages display much diversity in materials andespecially more importing of exotic stones than is seen inthe eastern Jordanian sites
Many writers report Neolithic beads made of
unspecified lsquogreenstonersquo This term is unfortunate
since it can refer to metabasalt and similar altered
igneous rocks (Schumann 1992 248) Some of these
lsquogreenstonesrsquo may be limestone with apatite or other
materials (eg Garfinkel 1987 81ndash82 Hauptmann
2004 Talbot 1983 789) Beads of green limestones
rich in fluorapatite were found at late PPNB Basta in
southern Jordan (Hauptmann 2004) as confirmed by
XRF and XRD Green beads identified as Dabba
Marble were also reported from Ain Ghazal a site
with both PPNB and PPNC occupations (Rollefson
et al 1990 103ndash04) Whether these are Dabba
Marble from the Jilat source (Appendices AndashB) is
not yet fully clear Ongoing research will sort out
these mysteries (eg D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal
communication Hauptmann 2004)
Major villages in the Levantine Corridor reveal
different degrees of emphasis in styles and materials
often we see a certain emphasis on local materials and
preferences However considerable exchange net-
works are indicated in major villages which display
much wider ranges of stone ornament materials
compared to the eastern Jordanian sites (such as
Ain Ghazal Yiftahel Basta Barsquoja Ghuwayr 1
Fidan 1) mdash along with of course shells (Affonso
and Pernicka 2004 Bienert and Gebel 1998 84ndash86
Garfinkel 1987 Hauptmann 2004 Rollefson and
Simmons 1984 1986 Rollefson et al 1990 Simmons
and Najjar 1998 Starck 1988)
As the Neolithic evolved stone bead-making
entailed increasingly diverse techniques and materi-
als One example may be drills In earlymiddle PPNB
sites most drills are made on bladelets In the late
PPNB PPNC and Late Neolithic there may have
been a gradual increase in drills made on burin spalls
although perhaps not in all regions (Jensen 2004
Rollefson and Parker 2002) Underlining increasing
diversity of technological practice between groups
Baird (2001b) pointed out geographic variation in
this technology with spall drills dominating in the
north-eastern Jordanian steppe from MPPNB
through Early Late Neolithic whilst contemporary
sites to west and south use bladelet blanks for their
piercing tools
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
156 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
bipolar That is the blank was drilled to roughly
halfway through then turned and the perforation
completed from the opposite direction As the two
perforations converged the result was an hourglass-
shaped perforation (Fig 9e) Experiments indicate
that this prevents chipping and flaking of the
alternate face which can occur if a blank is perforated
completely from only one direction (Possehl 1981)
Most hourglass perforations on both soft and
hard stones appear to have been produced by rotary
drilling Rotary drilling results in regular perforations
and concentric striations on them (Gorelick and
Gwinnett 1990) We observed both traits on many
broken beads and blanks (Fig 9b) Perforations of
hourglass form included very small drillholes indi-
cating that the drilling tools were smaller than
piercers and borers made on blades The probable
drills in this case were small drills on bladelets and
especially drill bits on burin spalls (Fig 13 nos 1 4
5 7) Microscopic examination of perforations is in
progress (Bains forthcoming)
Oddly piercing and drilling tools were found in
relatively low absolute numbers at the two sites (eg
Baird 1993 505ndash06 625 for Jilat 13 early phase
about 4 of tools were piercers or drills for the Jilat
25 which have concentrations of bead-making debris
just under 3 of tools were spall drills) However
specific contextual data other technological consid-
erations and comparisons with other sites give us
confidence that these were the main tools involved in
the drilling and that the low absolute numbers of
drills abandoned may sometimes relate to systematic
removal or discard of these tools by the artisans For
example burin spall drills were closely associated
spatially with bead-making debris in specific activity
areas in the Jilat 25 structure eg Context Aa15 in
the buildingrsquos northern area (Baird 1993 521 see
Table 6) In addition Jilat 13 and 25 produced large
numbers of angle burins including truncation burins
from which burin spalls were detached (eg about
29 of all tools at J13rsquos early phase were burins)
(Baird 1993 500 516 520ndash26 625) Burins are
a b c
d e f
Figure 7 Red Dabba Marble disc bead blanks and finished beads from Jilat 25 Context Aa15 (andashb) Circular flakes
slightly abraded (c) Heavily abraded and perforated disc bead blank edge abrasion incomplete (d) Abraded
perforated blank abrasion not complete on face (endashf) Finished disc beads
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
144 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
contextually closely associated with drills and bead-
making debris in occupation fills at Jilat 25 (c 30 of
tools from relevant Jilat 25 contexts were burins) mdash a
situation also seen at Jebel Naja in the Basalt Desert mdash
where both experiments and microwear studies suggest
that drill bits on burin spalls were used for bead-
making (Baird 1993 521 Finlayson and Betts 1990)
Burin spall drills would have had some technolo-
gical advantages over bladelet drills One advantage
is that the triangular or rectangular cross-sections of
burin spall drills make them stronger and less likely
to break during drilling In addition the manner of
their retouch from the same direction on each edge
creates a prismatic cross-section that probably served
to produce a neater hole and to make drilling more
efficient and possibly faster and reduce breakage in
drilling The tips of burin spall drills are blunted
which is an advantage in drilling hard stone (Gorelick
and Gwinnett 1990) Predictability and miniaturiza-
tion of burin spall drills may be relevant to an
Figure 8 Chaines operatoires for disc beads Sequence A refers to a disc bead made on a thin flake Sequence B refers
to a disc bead made on a thick flake Sequence C refers to a disc bead made on a tabular roughout not a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 145
apparent increased standardization in perforation
size observed at Jilat 25 from an early phase to a later
phase (Critchley 2000)
Since we have evidence of rotary drilling from bead
perforations we believe that drill bits were hafted to
sticks (probably made of wood) Drill bits on burin
spalls would have been too small to manipulate
effectively by hand alone
To work efficiently a drill needs to be weighted
and stabilized and there must be some means of
protecting the artisanrsquos hand Ground stone artefacts
support the idea that rotary drilling with drill bits
hafted to drilling sticks was in use They include a
probable capstone made of limestone from Jilat 25
The capstone would have been held in the hand
enabling the beadmaker to manipulate the drilling
stick from the top (Fig 14a) This artefact resembles
a miniature bowl and fits easily into one hand The
interior surface displays use wear circular striations
parallel to the rim and vertical striations perpendi-
cular to the rim The base of the interior converges to
a flat surface about 1 cm in diameter
Some Levantine Neolithic sites have revealed
similar objects with similar wear (Banning 1998
Wright 1992 fig 5ndash15b) and a comparable item
was found at Jarmo (Moholy-Nagy 1983 fig 12913
Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990 30) Capstones are
characteristic of the use of bow drills (Banning
1998 Foreman 1978) but strictly speaking they
are not necessarily diagnostic of the bow drill
(theoretically simpler drilling techniques involving
hafting might have been facilitated by the use of
a capstone) For the moment we can say that
at Jilat 13 and 15 the evidence for rotary drilling
is unequivocal However the evidence for the use
of the bow drill while suggestive is not quite
definitive
Size data considered carefully support a link
between burin-spall drills and beads To interpret
dimensions of drills and perforations we must keep
in mind that stone bead drilling was overwhelmingly
bipolar and converging Thus drills did not have to
penetrate all the way through the full height of the
bead mdash only about half of it Therefore what matters
a b c
d e f
Figure 9 Green Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks and finished beads (a) Hexagonal blank flaked but not abraded (b)
Abraded hexagonal blank (c) Abraded blank not perforated (d) Perforation error on abraded blank (e)
Finished bead broken showing bipolar perforation and hourglass perforation shape (f) Perforated barrel bead
almost finished except for final abrasion to smooth out last surface irregularities
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
146 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
is the very tips of the drill bits mdash the upper few
millimetres mdash not the full length of the drills
Since disc beads are consistently about 25 to
26 mm in height only the upper 15 mm or so of the
drills mdash the most distal ends of the tips mdash had to
have been about 21 mm or less in thickness to
lsquomatchrsquo the perforation diameters of disc beads
(Table 4) In the case of barrel beads since barrel
beads were between 64 and 71 mm in height about
32 to 36 mm of the most distal ends of the drill bits
have to have been about 21 mm or less in thickness
to lsquomatchrsquo the perforations of barrel beads (Table 5)
Measurements of the drill bit tips within these
small uppermost reaches show that the maximal
thicknesses of the drill bitsrsquo distal tips fall within the
range of sizes indicated by the perforations (Fig 13)
Multi-stage Drilling
Sometimes drilling may have been accomplished in
several stages Some beads particularly those made of
harder stones have smooth cylindrical perforations
with parallel walls displaying no hint of the
hourglass shape
One way to achieve this is to create the hourglass
perforation and then to turn it into a perfect
cylindrical perforation via the use of a second drilling
procedure An example of this was cited by Calley
(1989) who proposed that two tools found in
carnelian bead workshops at Early Bronze Age
Kumartepe (Turkey) had complementary functions
a drill bit for making the initial hourglass perforation
and a borer for finishing and smoothing it into a
cylindrical perforation Since both drill bits and
borers were found on the Jilat sites this method of
finishing perforations could have been used
At Jilat 13 and 25 evidence for multi-stage drilling
can be seen in some beads which have a depression on
one or both faces The depression may be a result of
drilling with a larger drill bit first in order to provide
a guide for the final perforation with a finer drill bit
Such a technique is seen in India-Pakistan (Possehl
1981 39 Kenoyer 1992b 73)
a b c
d e f
Figure 10 Green Dabba Marble pendant blanks and finished pendants (a) Tabular roughout flaked into approximately
trapezoidal shape but not abraded (b) Abraded trapezoidal blank with sawing mark at bottom (c) Perforated
asymmetrical triangular pendant blank incompletely abraded (note striations on face) (d) Finished asymmetri-
cal triangular pendant (e) Pendant blank made on a flake unabraded (f) Nearly-finished pendant made on a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 147
Stabilizing Beads Anvils and Drilling Benches
What method was used to stabilize a bead during
drilling The simplest technique is to fix a bead to a
stone anvil with an adhesive Ethnography and
experiments show that such anvils can be small (the
size of handstones) (Foreman 1978 figs 6ndash7) Use of
such an anvil should result in small shallow
depressions a form of use-damage resulting from
force exerted from above Figure 14b shows a small
flat stone from Jilat 25 with a central depression of
the expected size and depth
Figure 14c shows the limestone bench from Jilat 13
(previously discussed) with a number of such pits in
the centre The marks are evenly spaced and are
concentrated in one small well-defined area on the
widest part of the bench this wide area was also
finely abraded
We see this bench as a multifunctional worktable
anvil We suspect that the beadmaker sat on the
narrow part of the bench (straddling it) placed bead
blanks on the pitted work surface fixed them with
adhesive and then drilled them The bench also
displays evidence of other activities including flaking
and grinding
Adhesives for hafting chipped stone tools could
have been adapted for use in fixing beads to anvils
Bitumen would be one candidate In some cultures a
wooden frame with cup-holes is sometimes used for
stabilizing beads (Kenoyer 1986 P Wright 1982)
The holes are filled with beeswax and clay the bead is
inserted into the wax-clay mixture which hardens
holding the bead steady After drilling beads are
released by breaking the wax-clay mixture (Allchin
1979 Stocks 1989) As wood was probably scarce in
Jilat and as there are no indications of the use of
clay we can probably rule out this technique
However stone items with cup-holes are seen in
Neolithic sites (Kirkbride 1966 Wright 1992
fig 527b)
Abrasion
Ground stone artefacts are crucial to bead produc-
tion in traditional technologies (Foreman 1978
Inizan et al 1992 Kenoyer et al 1991 53 Moholy-
Nagy 1983 294 Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58)
Grinding of beads can be achieved by abrading
each bead individually with a hand held abrader or
by rubbing them on a large grinding slab Either
method will produce linear striations of the type we
see on many unfinished beads (cf Figs 7cndashd and 10c)
However final shaping of disc and cylindrical beads
was most likely achieved by stringing them or loading
them on to a thin rod capable of penetrating the
perforation (individually or in groups) and then
rolling them on a grinding slab adding abrasives
(such as sand) and water to produce a smoother finish
(Foreman 1978 Moholy-Nagy 1983 298) Some disc
beads with parallel edges perpendicular to the faces
would probably have been rolled on a flat smooth
stone Other beads with facetted sharply angled or
bevelled edges (eg many barrel beads) suggest that
they were rolled or abraded along a stone with
grooves and slanting sides (eg Fig 15a c)
Abrasion of bead blanks may have been a multi-
stage process involving a number of materials of
different textures and hardness In an early stage
grinding of bead materials on vesicular basalt would
have been the easiest way to abrade a large nodule
quickly The pores of vesicular basalt and pumice
form natural cutting lsquoteethrsquo comparable to the metal
rasp used by present-day sculptors At Jilat 13 and
Jilat 25 we found broken fragments of vesicular
basalt grinding slabs but not large complete exam-
ples The small fragments suggest two possibilities
either there were large complete slabs at one time
which were then broken worn out and discarded or
only small fragments of these heavy duty grinding
tools were needed
For finer abrasion sandstone grinding slabs might
be expected None were found However small
Figure 11 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic
sites Tile knives or possible saws for bead-
making From Baird 1993 fig 85
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
148 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
handheld abraders made of sandstones with coarse
hard quartz crystals were found at both sites (Fig
15andashb) Sandstone is not local to Wadi Jilat and these
items were imported and probably used extensively
(resulting in the small size)
For even finer abrasion limestone could have been
used Such needs could have been met by the large
bench of Jilat 13 (Fig 14c) which was finely ground
over a very large area (within which the possible
drilling marks were placed)
Some might see the grooved items made of
sandstone (Fig 15a) and limestone (Fig 15c) as
lsquoshaft straightenersrsquo One or two shaft straightener
fragments made of basalt occur at Jilat 13 Like other
basalt shaft straighteners in Neolithic Jilat (eg Jilat
7) (Garrard et al 1994a Wright 1993) the use-
surfaces of these have U-shaped cross-sections By
contrast the cross sections of the use surfaces on the
sandstone and limestone grooved items are not U-
shaped but have sharp angles We see these tools
mainly as abraders for grinding bead facets espe-
cially on barrel beads The widths of the use surfaces
are 11 mm for the sandstone tool and 138 mm for
the limestone one These dimensions correspond to
the average diameter (5 width) of 31 measured green
Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks from Jilat 13 (N 5
31 Mean diameter 5 92 mm standard deviation 5
28) Grooved stones are used in bead grinding in
a
b c
Figure 12 Ground stone artefacts probably for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Cutmarked slab (limestone) Jilat
13 The cutmarks are shallow and are concentrated in the left area running parallel to the main axes of the
slab (b) Cutmarked slab fragment (limestone) Jilat 13 showing deep cutmarks (c) Flaked and ground abra-
sive cutting tool made of limestone Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 149
modern India (Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58) a
grooved sandstone tool was found with an unfinished
bead at Catalhoyuk (Wright and Bains 2007)
Tosi and Vidale (1990) regard failure resulting
from breakage or human error as more common in
the grinding stage than during perforation although
this depends on material and opinion (Kenoyer 2003
18) In some cases it might be more efficient to shape
the bead first before attempting perforation This
may explain why barrel beads tend to be shaped and
abraded prior to perforation
Finished beads were always finely abraded and
sometimes polished to the extent of reflecting light
Ethnographic observations indicate that polishing is
sometimes done by placing beads en masse in a
leather bag along with an abrasive and shaking and
rolling the bags for long periods (Allchin 1979
Kenoyer 2003) This simple method would have been
more likely than the method of rolling beads and
abrasives in a wooden barrel which is also docu-
mented ethnographically (Kenoyer 2003)
However shaking beads in a bag with an abrasive
tends to produce beads with rounded convex edges
(Gwinnett and Gorelick 1989) Some beads at Jilat
have this form but many mdash especially those made of
the hard cherty red Dabba Marble mdash have sharp
edges perpendicular to bead faces indicating that
they were individually polished or polished during
rolling on a string or stick Alternative methods of
polishing can include rubbing with leather or wood
with the addition of fine sand or chalk and water or
with animal hairwool and animal fat (Kenoyer 1986
20) These methods would have been possible with
Jilat technology
Craft Specialization and Comparisons withOther Sites
Technology needs to be studied not only in terms of
materials and techniques but also in terms of social
groups involved in artefact production individual
artisans and skill (Dobres and Hoffmann 1999 2ndash12)
In egalitarian societies craft skill and knowledge of
Figure 13 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic sites Drilling and piercing tools From Baird 1993 fig 82
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
150 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
special materials can enhance the power of an
individual or a group encouraging hierarchy
(Dobres 2000 119ndash20)
These questions force us to reconsider issues of
craft specialization a term often used loosely or in
widely different ways Three concepts of specializa-
tion are considered here individual specialists
specialization between households or domestic
groups within a given site and site specialization
within a regional or social network of craft produc-
tion and exchange
Costin (1991) draws a contrast between indepen-
dent specialization and attached specialization
Independent specialization involves production of
utilitarian goods for nonelites and can be household-
based or based in special workshops Attached
specialization refers to production of prestige goods
under control of elites Whilst Costin notes that
attached specialization can also be based in house-
holds or workshops we often think of attached
specialization in connection with central institutions
and urban or state-level societies It is of considerable
interest that in early urban societies the making of
stone personal ornaments in association with central
institutions figures prominently (Stein 1996 Vidale
1989)
How earlier forms of craft specialization may have
evolved into large-scale attached specialization is
poorly understood Most research has concentrated
on later stages in this process (eg Stein 1996) in
discussions of earlier forms of specialization defini-
tions and criteria for diagnosis could sometimes be
clearer (eg Quintero and Wilke 1998 Rollefson and
Parker 2002 Rosen 1997) If we are dealing with
a
c
b
Figure 14 Ground stone artefacts probably used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Capstone made of limestone
Jilat 25 (b) Handstone probably used as an anvil or hammer Jilat 25 note depression in face and flake scars
at edges (c) Limestone drilling bench Jilat 13 Note evidence of use-wear on the left and widest area of the
bench smooth abraded surface drill marks in the centre-left face small flake scars with negative bulbs of per-
cussion close to the edge of the bench
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 151
specialization in Neolithic societies it is probably
independent specialization Still Neolithic societies
may fall between Costinrsquos two categories Neolithic
groups were clearly producing prestige goods perso-
nal ornaments are not strictly utilitarian and there is
at least a possibility that elites were emerging (Byrd
1994 Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002 Verhoeven
2002)
Individual Specialists
First there is the issue of identifying individual
specialists Some use lsquospecializationrsquo to refer to any
situation in which some artisans have high levels of
skill a view that has been criticized (Rice 1991) We
agree with Rice that identifying a high level of
technical skill in a craft is not on its own sufficient
for a diagnosis of specialization since it robs the
concept of force in discussing long term change (by
this criterion the Upper Palaeolithic was riddled
with craft specialists) However we would argue
that if there are other indications of craft specializa-
tion a search for levels of ability in different
individuals is appropriate mdash if the data permit
Such data would be primary refuse from well-dated
sites of high temporal resolution in which technical
processes (eg errors in chaines operatoires) can
reveal experts vs novices (Pigeot 1990 Stout 2002
Vanzetti and Vidale 1994)
In the case of Jilat 13 and 25 we are dealing with
much primary refuse and two closely dated sites (see
above and Tables 6ndash7) mdash with periodic use of the
sites over a time range on the order of 200 years at
most and possibly much less Jilat 25 yielded activity
areas with clear spatial clusters as do a number of
contexts at Jilat 13 Space does not permit us to
present all details (this awaits the final site report)
but we feel confident that aggregate consideration of
the data from each site allows us to discuss general
questions of individual skills mdash master craftsmen vs
novices
a b
c
Figure 15 Ground stone artefacts possibly used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Grooved sandstone abrading
tool Jilat 13 (b) Sandstone hand-held abrader Jilat 25 (c) Grooved limestone abrading tool Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
152 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
To explore this we analysed unfinished blanks and
the frequency of perforation errors Drilling is a
sensitive moment in bead production when many
things can go wrong (Kenoyer 2003) A low incidence
in perforation errors combined with high numbers of
successfully finished beads and evidence of standar-
dization should be reasonably good indicators of an
artisanrsquos mastery This is the situation seen at Jilat 25
(Fig 7) In all of 93 blanks from Jilat 25 only 2 were
perforation errors a failure rate of only 2
On the other hand a high incidence of perforation
errors would suggest that a beadmaker was a relative
novice Jilat 13 produced more blanks with perfora-
tion errors than Jilat 25 We thought we might find
individual contexts with a high rate of error
suggesting apprentices
The data did not bear this out Of 223 bead blanks
from Jilat 13 (all phases) 22 were perforation errors
mdash a failure rate of 98 All but two errors were on
barrel bead blanks of green Dabba Marble The
others were one pendant blank and one irregular
bead blank These 22 blanks were distributed across
20 different contexts and no more than 2 perforation
errors were found in any one context
A close look at those contexts reveals low error
rates In Context B21 2 green barrel bead blanks
with perforation errors were found with 5 other
blanks The others included green and red barrel and
disc blanks This context also yielded 5 successfully
finished beads including black and red barrel beads
and a green disc Black and green debitage and a
discoidal handstone were also found here In Context
B71 2 blanks with perforation errors were found
along with 9 other blanks and 10 successfully
finished beads including green Dabba Marble barrel
beads but also black and red disc beads Much
debitage was found along with a flaked limestone
cutting tool (cf Fig 12c) and a limestone object with
a drill mark
The higher rate of error at Jilat 13 compared to
Jilat 25 could be because artisans at Jilat 13 were
making more of the larger more complex barrel
beads (as opposed to simple discs see Tables 2ndash3)
which offer greater chances of failure due to the
longer drilling distance However at Jilat 13 the
overall failure rate was still quite low particularly
considering the overall volume of material recovered
(Table 1)
We conclude that the beadmakers at Jilat 13
included few trainees These appear to have been
skilled artisans a small task force composed of
relative experts This raises the question of whether
these beadmakers were examples of lsquoproducer
specialistsrsquo as traditionally defined that is people
involved in
production of a good by a relatively small number of
individuals (compared to the total output and
number of consumers) individuals who are as a
result of this selectivity and the routinization or
repetition of their tasks particularly skilled in
manufacture (Rice 1991 263)
Jilat 13 and 25 do suggest small numbers of
individuals and a certain selectivity in who was
involved in stone bead making The quantity of
debitagedebris relative to (1) the number of finished
beads and (2) the modest sizes of these structures
collectively suggest that these craftsmenwomen
served a larger number of consumers relative to the
number of craftsmen involved here If so who were
these consumers mdash other residents of Jilat or groups
beyond
Intra-site Specialization Between Domestic Groups
Several studies suggest ways of identifying different
forms of craft specialization between domestic groups
in a site For later sites Stein (1996) has explored
spatial data particularly how craft production
facilities are dispersed among domestic units or
located near special (or central) institutions In
Neolithic sites questions about dispersal between
households and possible links between craft produc-
tion and special buildings or special sites have been
underexplored
For specialization Costin (1991) suggests that we
would expect (1) variability between production
units (eg households occupations regions) in
relevant artefacts (2) high densities of craft produc-
tion debris relative to some other generally used
item in some production units (3) high ratios of
unfinished goods to finished goods in some produc-
tion units Kenoyer et alrsquos (1991) ethnoarchaeolo-
gical studies of modern stone bead-making in
Khambat (India) suggest something similar in the
case of households as production units There non-
specialist households engaging in casual opportu-
nistic bead production revealed low quantities of
bead-making debris few unfinished beads and little
standardization in finished beads By contrast
households specializing in bead production were
characterized by stockpiling of large quantities of
raw materials many unfinished beads and more
standardized finished products
In looking at whole occupations (ie phases within
sites) as a unit of observation we argue elsewhere
(Wright and Garrard 2003) that artefact densities and
other data from 13 PPNB and 8 PPNCELN
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 153
occupations in the Jilat-Azraq region suggest that
PPNCELN producers were more specialized than
those of the PPNB mdash at least in the Jilat-Azraq
region Unlike the PPNB sites Jilat 13 and 25 have
very high densities of bead-making debris specialized
tools for drilling and sawing there is an abundance of
unfinished materials relative to finished products
bead-making tools and debris are abundant relative
to normal domestic food processing equipment
(ground stone artefacts) (Wright and Garrard 2003
cf Costin 1991)
That argument is chronological comparing the
PPNB to the PPNCELN occupations and we stand
behind it for the Jilat-Azraq case (different trajec-
tories may apply to south Jordan and the Negev see
below) Still it leaves open the issue of house-to-
house variation within Jilat 25 or Jilat 13 As we have
only one excavated structure per site we cannot on
present evidence argue that each building housed a
group of specialists serving other households within
the same site In fact we have no direct evidence that
there were other structures on each site mdash the ones
excavated were the only ones visible on the surface
There are nuances of material and typological
choices between the Jilat 25 structure (red disc beads)
and the Jilat 13 structure (larger complex green
ornaments) but these nuances are beyond the scope
of this paper
In all we suspect that stone bead production at
Jilat 13 and 25 was geared not for other domestic
units lsquoin camprsquo but for use by these quite mobile
communities themselves mdash as well as export to other
sites within the steppe and beyond (see below) In
Costinrsquos terms (Costin 1991) Jilat 13 and 25 might
each be an example of an independent non-centra-
lized dispersed workshop possibly lsquofamily runrsquo (Rice
1991 262) mdash in which handling of Dabba Marble
was not routinely entrusted to novices
There are hints of house-to-house variations in
bead-making in major villages with larger samples of
domestic structures as in PPNB Beidha At PPNB
Beidha (earlier than Jilat 13 and 25) Building 14
stands out
Other forms of production besides food preparation
were less common Building 14 represented the best
example of artefact production in these basements
A wide range of artefacts was recovered apparently
associated with building 14rsquos basement floor
Particularly widespread were stone polishers bone
tools raw material (including hematite malachite
and magnesium) more than 60 unmodified marine
shells and at least two dozen beads of shell stone
and bone some of which were in various stages of
production Some artifacts lay on stone slabs
indicating that at least some slabs may have
functioned as work surfaces (Byrd 2005 117)
Such hints are intriguing Still macro-artefacts
from house floors are affected by problems of site
formation and house abandonment Micro-artefact
data can help (Rainville 2005) House-by-house
exploration with attention to micro-artefacts is
needed (Wright and Bains 2007)
Site Specialization Within a Regional Network of Craft
Production and Exchange
Both sites and other Neolithic sites in Jilat and
Azraq exhibit resource specialization
the selective use of particular resources in craft
manufacture such as certain clays that are repeat-
edly used (Rice 1991 262)
The Jilat artisans emphasized Dabba Marble from
a wider array of available stone types The Jilat-
Azraq sites collectively show that green Dabba
Marble was a special target This is revealed in both
frequencies and weights (for debris data and weight
data see Wright and Garrard 2003 for frequency
data on beads and blanks see Tables 2 and 3) At
both sites debris is greatly dominated by green
Dabba Marble mdash 80ndash95 of debris by both weight
(grams) and frequency Green Dabba Marble also
dominates blanks in terms of weight at both sites mdash
indicating the use of green for making larger heavier
and more conspicuous ornaments
Turning to frequencies at Jilat 13 about 90 of
blanks are green and only 5 are red However
finished beads include both green and red forms in
comparable percentages (404 and 436 respec-
tively) (Table 3) suggesting that finished red beads
were brought into the building from a place of
manufacture located somewhere else At Jilat 25
blanks of red and green Dabba Marble occur in
comparable proportions (409 green 43 red)
whilst finished beads are predominantly red (588)
(Table 2) If Jilat 13 and 25 were absolute contem-
poraries this could suggest variations in choices and
exchange between residents of different structures
Rice (1991) has defined site specialization as a
situation in which a site is located near a special
resource and the inhabitants emphasize production of
a craft based on that resource Relative to other sites
not so located the range of site functions and
activities would be expected to be more limited
Thus site specialization
involves individual localities or sites having evidence
of limited functions or intensive productive activity
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
154 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
often determined by fortuitous environmental fac-
tors This includes proximity to mineral deposits
and so forth (Rice 1991 262)
Do Jilat 13 and 25 fit this concept In both sites
15 km from the source we have a wealth of evidence
for intensive stone bead production and scanty
evidence for routine food processing tools (Wright
and Garrard 2003) However Jilat 25 may be closer
to the limited function model envisioned by Rice In
Jilat 13 bead-making is clearly intensive but we are
also dealing with a chipped stone assemblage of not
only drills and burins but also projectile points and
other tools Jilat 13 also reveals production of
figurines (of animals phalluses and arrow-shaped
forms) and sculpted pillars (Baird 1993 Garrard
et al 1994a Martin 1999 Wright 1992 1993)
In all Jilat 13 and 25 suggest that we can apply
Ricersquos lsquosite specializationrsquo on the grounds of intensive
productive activity and proximity to source mdash but
with the qualification that this specialization was also
embedded in hunting-herding activities and at Jilat
13 production of other special crafts unique among
the sites of a symbolic nature (figurines pillars)
One possibility is that we are dealing with a camp
of hunter-herder corporate groups mdash part of a wider
regional network mdash engaged in special activities in
remote areas involving art personal ornaments and
ritual Such groups are suggested by other data from
the PPNBndashPPNC time span for example Nahal
Hemar (ornaments masks hunting tools) Dhuweila
(carving of hunters with dress variations)
Catalhoyuk (images of hunters with dress variations
as in the bull hunt mural) and Gobeklitepe (sculpture
production including a quarry wild-animal icono-
graphy hunting) (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988 Betts
1998 Mellaart 1967 Schmidt 2000) In all these data
hint that craft production of special items was
embedded in hunting andor herding activities in
remote areas this may have been a key means by
which exotic materials reached major villages In a
very broad way this supports a sketch outlined by
Bar Yosef (Bar-Yosef 2001) although we do not
necessarily agree with specifics of his model eg the
territories boundaries social groups and mechanisms
which he suggests (cf Asouti 2006) Instead we see
this as one example of diverse strategies of social
networking linking lineages households and commu-
nities in the Neolithic (Wright forthcoming)
Returning to the stone bead data from Jilat 13 and
25 the apparent stockpiling of raw material and
intensive production activity hints at production of
the green material for export (see above and Wright
and Garrard 2003) New data now add weight to this
idea and suggest the following provisional picture of
regional specializations and exchanges in ornaments
(1) Based on typology technology and materials thereappears to be a distinctive eastern Jordanian koine ornetwork of stone bead manufacture and exchangefeaturing Dabba Marble and a probable regionalspecialization in it
Other Neolithic bead production sites are known
from eastern Jordan Indications are that most of the
green bead materials are Dabba Marble probably
from Jilat (further work is needed) In these sites
diversity of materials used seems low with few
imports from beyond the steppe Shells however
testify to wider networks (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989
Cooke and Reese in Betts 1998 Garrard et al 1994a
Reese 1991)
Azraq 31 (PPNB and ELN) is in our suite of study
materials (Baird et al 1992 Garrard et al 1994a
Wright and Garrard 2003) and debris blanks and
beads were found Preliminary XRF analysis of green
samples (by Groom) indicates that the material is
consistent with Jilat Dabba Marble Typology and
technology are also similar and as at Jilat 25 burin
spall drills were closely associated with bead-making
in specific activity areas (Baird 1993 521 Baird et al
1992 25) However the ground stone revealed no
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
(Wright 1992 1993 Wright in Baird et al 1992)
Material used for beads at Dhuweila (PPNB and
ELN) has been called Dabba Marble (Cooke and
Reese in Betts 1998) It is consistent in appearance
with our material although we have no details on
mineralogy or source Typologically these beads are
similar to those of Jilat 13 and 25 The ground stone
is very different from the suite at the Jilat sites
(Wright in Betts 1998) for comparisons of chipped
stone assemblages see Baird (1993)
At Bawwab al-Ghazal (Late PPNB) Rollefson
et al found drills bits on burin spalls tile knives
beads bead blanks and bead debris some of which
they called green Dabba Marble (Rollefson et al
1999 Quintero et al 2004) They argued that there is
a possible source of this material outcropping near
the site mdash lsquoFor the last raw material [green Dabba
Marble] small nodules of the green limestone were
embedded in the local bedrockrsquo (Rollefson et al 1999
3) However as shown in Appendix A the true
Dabba Marble only occurs in a restricted area west of
Wadi Jilat The lsquobedrockrsquo which outcrops near Azraq
31 and Bawwab al-Ghazal is travertine and some of
this formed during the late Pleistocene and Holocene
The nearby Epipalaeolithic site of Azraq 17 was
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 155
found partially embedded in travertine and artefacts
including nodules of imported basalt were found in
the travertine at this site It is possible that the
nodules of green limestone found at Bawwab al-
Ghazal were imported Dabba Marble which subse-
quently became incorporated in a travertine near the
site An alternative possibility is that the local
travertine is infused with green minerals In Wadi
Jilat travertines were noted with traces of green
minerals and in the Siwaqa area to the south-west of
Jilat there are extensive travertines some of which
are infused with pale green minerals including
volkonskoite (Barjous 1986 mdash see also Appendix A)
In eastern Jordan some Neolithic sites are greatly
dominated by burins (lsquoburin sitesrsquo) At a number of
these there is evidence for stone bead-making (eg
Jebel Naja) These lsquoburin sitesrsquo typically reveal few
ground stone tools we know of no examples of
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
from them It was argued that the main role of the
burins was production of spalls for drills used mainly
for beads (Betts 1987 1998 Finlayson and Betts
1990) However burin sites are not universally
associated with stone bead making At Jilat 23 24
and 26 burins were numerous but other evidence for
bead-making is scanty (Baird 1993 520)
Therefore some have questioned whether
burins and burin spalls in such sites were solely or
primarily intended for making drills and beads
noting that other functions are possible (Quintero
et al 2004 209) Given that these sites typically
represent short-term occupations it is possible that
many sites might be spall manufacture sites with
spalls transported to other settings where drill
manufacture and bead manufacture took place such
as Jilat 13 and 25 Rollefson expressed doubt that
either bladelet or burin spall drills would have been
used in bow drills partly because of their fragility and
also because most of them have a pronounced curve
on the long axis which would have made high speed
drilling impossible (Rollefson and Parker 2002) But
Finlayson and Betts (1990) and Berna (1995)
successfully experimented using burin spalls with
bow drills and Kenoyer (personal communication
2007) notes that drills made on burin spalls are the
most common type of drill in diverse prehistoric
stone bead-making sites (in India Pakistan and
elsewhere)
In the case of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 we believe burin-
spall drills were part of the bead-making repertoire
for reasons noted above This does not rule out other
uses of burin spalls Nor does it rule out the use of
other perforating techniques Drills do not have to be
made of stone when soft stones are being perforated
mdash wood bone and abrasives can be used (Foreman
1978)
(2) There are hints of export of Dabba Marble to at leastsome villages in the Levantine corridor However majorNeolithic villages display much diversity in materials andespecially more importing of exotic stones than is seen inthe eastern Jordanian sites
Many writers report Neolithic beads made of
unspecified lsquogreenstonersquo This term is unfortunate
since it can refer to metabasalt and similar altered
igneous rocks (Schumann 1992 248) Some of these
lsquogreenstonesrsquo may be limestone with apatite or other
materials (eg Garfinkel 1987 81ndash82 Hauptmann
2004 Talbot 1983 789) Beads of green limestones
rich in fluorapatite were found at late PPNB Basta in
southern Jordan (Hauptmann 2004) as confirmed by
XRF and XRD Green beads identified as Dabba
Marble were also reported from Ain Ghazal a site
with both PPNB and PPNC occupations (Rollefson
et al 1990 103ndash04) Whether these are Dabba
Marble from the Jilat source (Appendices AndashB) is
not yet fully clear Ongoing research will sort out
these mysteries (eg D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal
communication Hauptmann 2004)
Major villages in the Levantine Corridor reveal
different degrees of emphasis in styles and materials
often we see a certain emphasis on local materials and
preferences However considerable exchange net-
works are indicated in major villages which display
much wider ranges of stone ornament materials
compared to the eastern Jordanian sites (such as
Ain Ghazal Yiftahel Basta Barsquoja Ghuwayr 1
Fidan 1) mdash along with of course shells (Affonso
and Pernicka 2004 Bienert and Gebel 1998 84ndash86
Garfinkel 1987 Hauptmann 2004 Rollefson and
Simmons 1984 1986 Rollefson et al 1990 Simmons
and Najjar 1998 Starck 1988)
As the Neolithic evolved stone bead-making
entailed increasingly diverse techniques and materi-
als One example may be drills In earlymiddle PPNB
sites most drills are made on bladelets In the late
PPNB PPNC and Late Neolithic there may have
been a gradual increase in drills made on burin spalls
although perhaps not in all regions (Jensen 2004
Rollefson and Parker 2002) Underlining increasing
diversity of technological practice between groups
Baird (2001b) pointed out geographic variation in
this technology with spall drills dominating in the
north-eastern Jordanian steppe from MPPNB
through Early Late Neolithic whilst contemporary
sites to west and south use bladelet blanks for their
piercing tools
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
156 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
contextually closely associated with drills and bead-
making debris in occupation fills at Jilat 25 (c 30 of
tools from relevant Jilat 25 contexts were burins) mdash a
situation also seen at Jebel Naja in the Basalt Desert mdash
where both experiments and microwear studies suggest
that drill bits on burin spalls were used for bead-
making (Baird 1993 521 Finlayson and Betts 1990)
Burin spall drills would have had some technolo-
gical advantages over bladelet drills One advantage
is that the triangular or rectangular cross-sections of
burin spall drills make them stronger and less likely
to break during drilling In addition the manner of
their retouch from the same direction on each edge
creates a prismatic cross-section that probably served
to produce a neater hole and to make drilling more
efficient and possibly faster and reduce breakage in
drilling The tips of burin spall drills are blunted
which is an advantage in drilling hard stone (Gorelick
and Gwinnett 1990) Predictability and miniaturiza-
tion of burin spall drills may be relevant to an
Figure 8 Chaines operatoires for disc beads Sequence A refers to a disc bead made on a thin flake Sequence B refers
to a disc bead made on a thick flake Sequence C refers to a disc bead made on a tabular roughout not a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 145
apparent increased standardization in perforation
size observed at Jilat 25 from an early phase to a later
phase (Critchley 2000)
Since we have evidence of rotary drilling from bead
perforations we believe that drill bits were hafted to
sticks (probably made of wood) Drill bits on burin
spalls would have been too small to manipulate
effectively by hand alone
To work efficiently a drill needs to be weighted
and stabilized and there must be some means of
protecting the artisanrsquos hand Ground stone artefacts
support the idea that rotary drilling with drill bits
hafted to drilling sticks was in use They include a
probable capstone made of limestone from Jilat 25
The capstone would have been held in the hand
enabling the beadmaker to manipulate the drilling
stick from the top (Fig 14a) This artefact resembles
a miniature bowl and fits easily into one hand The
interior surface displays use wear circular striations
parallel to the rim and vertical striations perpendi-
cular to the rim The base of the interior converges to
a flat surface about 1 cm in diameter
Some Levantine Neolithic sites have revealed
similar objects with similar wear (Banning 1998
Wright 1992 fig 5ndash15b) and a comparable item
was found at Jarmo (Moholy-Nagy 1983 fig 12913
Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990 30) Capstones are
characteristic of the use of bow drills (Banning
1998 Foreman 1978) but strictly speaking they
are not necessarily diagnostic of the bow drill
(theoretically simpler drilling techniques involving
hafting might have been facilitated by the use of
a capstone) For the moment we can say that
at Jilat 13 and 15 the evidence for rotary drilling
is unequivocal However the evidence for the use
of the bow drill while suggestive is not quite
definitive
Size data considered carefully support a link
between burin-spall drills and beads To interpret
dimensions of drills and perforations we must keep
in mind that stone bead drilling was overwhelmingly
bipolar and converging Thus drills did not have to
penetrate all the way through the full height of the
bead mdash only about half of it Therefore what matters
a b c
d e f
Figure 9 Green Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks and finished beads (a) Hexagonal blank flaked but not abraded (b)
Abraded hexagonal blank (c) Abraded blank not perforated (d) Perforation error on abraded blank (e)
Finished bead broken showing bipolar perforation and hourglass perforation shape (f) Perforated barrel bead
almost finished except for final abrasion to smooth out last surface irregularities
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
146 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
is the very tips of the drill bits mdash the upper few
millimetres mdash not the full length of the drills
Since disc beads are consistently about 25 to
26 mm in height only the upper 15 mm or so of the
drills mdash the most distal ends of the tips mdash had to
have been about 21 mm or less in thickness to
lsquomatchrsquo the perforation diameters of disc beads
(Table 4) In the case of barrel beads since barrel
beads were between 64 and 71 mm in height about
32 to 36 mm of the most distal ends of the drill bits
have to have been about 21 mm or less in thickness
to lsquomatchrsquo the perforations of barrel beads (Table 5)
Measurements of the drill bit tips within these
small uppermost reaches show that the maximal
thicknesses of the drill bitsrsquo distal tips fall within the
range of sizes indicated by the perforations (Fig 13)
Multi-stage Drilling
Sometimes drilling may have been accomplished in
several stages Some beads particularly those made of
harder stones have smooth cylindrical perforations
with parallel walls displaying no hint of the
hourglass shape
One way to achieve this is to create the hourglass
perforation and then to turn it into a perfect
cylindrical perforation via the use of a second drilling
procedure An example of this was cited by Calley
(1989) who proposed that two tools found in
carnelian bead workshops at Early Bronze Age
Kumartepe (Turkey) had complementary functions
a drill bit for making the initial hourglass perforation
and a borer for finishing and smoothing it into a
cylindrical perforation Since both drill bits and
borers were found on the Jilat sites this method of
finishing perforations could have been used
At Jilat 13 and 25 evidence for multi-stage drilling
can be seen in some beads which have a depression on
one or both faces The depression may be a result of
drilling with a larger drill bit first in order to provide
a guide for the final perforation with a finer drill bit
Such a technique is seen in India-Pakistan (Possehl
1981 39 Kenoyer 1992b 73)
a b c
d e f
Figure 10 Green Dabba Marble pendant blanks and finished pendants (a) Tabular roughout flaked into approximately
trapezoidal shape but not abraded (b) Abraded trapezoidal blank with sawing mark at bottom (c) Perforated
asymmetrical triangular pendant blank incompletely abraded (note striations on face) (d) Finished asymmetri-
cal triangular pendant (e) Pendant blank made on a flake unabraded (f) Nearly-finished pendant made on a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 147
Stabilizing Beads Anvils and Drilling Benches
What method was used to stabilize a bead during
drilling The simplest technique is to fix a bead to a
stone anvil with an adhesive Ethnography and
experiments show that such anvils can be small (the
size of handstones) (Foreman 1978 figs 6ndash7) Use of
such an anvil should result in small shallow
depressions a form of use-damage resulting from
force exerted from above Figure 14b shows a small
flat stone from Jilat 25 with a central depression of
the expected size and depth
Figure 14c shows the limestone bench from Jilat 13
(previously discussed) with a number of such pits in
the centre The marks are evenly spaced and are
concentrated in one small well-defined area on the
widest part of the bench this wide area was also
finely abraded
We see this bench as a multifunctional worktable
anvil We suspect that the beadmaker sat on the
narrow part of the bench (straddling it) placed bead
blanks on the pitted work surface fixed them with
adhesive and then drilled them The bench also
displays evidence of other activities including flaking
and grinding
Adhesives for hafting chipped stone tools could
have been adapted for use in fixing beads to anvils
Bitumen would be one candidate In some cultures a
wooden frame with cup-holes is sometimes used for
stabilizing beads (Kenoyer 1986 P Wright 1982)
The holes are filled with beeswax and clay the bead is
inserted into the wax-clay mixture which hardens
holding the bead steady After drilling beads are
released by breaking the wax-clay mixture (Allchin
1979 Stocks 1989) As wood was probably scarce in
Jilat and as there are no indications of the use of
clay we can probably rule out this technique
However stone items with cup-holes are seen in
Neolithic sites (Kirkbride 1966 Wright 1992
fig 527b)
Abrasion
Ground stone artefacts are crucial to bead produc-
tion in traditional technologies (Foreman 1978
Inizan et al 1992 Kenoyer et al 1991 53 Moholy-
Nagy 1983 294 Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58)
Grinding of beads can be achieved by abrading
each bead individually with a hand held abrader or
by rubbing them on a large grinding slab Either
method will produce linear striations of the type we
see on many unfinished beads (cf Figs 7cndashd and 10c)
However final shaping of disc and cylindrical beads
was most likely achieved by stringing them or loading
them on to a thin rod capable of penetrating the
perforation (individually or in groups) and then
rolling them on a grinding slab adding abrasives
(such as sand) and water to produce a smoother finish
(Foreman 1978 Moholy-Nagy 1983 298) Some disc
beads with parallel edges perpendicular to the faces
would probably have been rolled on a flat smooth
stone Other beads with facetted sharply angled or
bevelled edges (eg many barrel beads) suggest that
they were rolled or abraded along a stone with
grooves and slanting sides (eg Fig 15a c)
Abrasion of bead blanks may have been a multi-
stage process involving a number of materials of
different textures and hardness In an early stage
grinding of bead materials on vesicular basalt would
have been the easiest way to abrade a large nodule
quickly The pores of vesicular basalt and pumice
form natural cutting lsquoteethrsquo comparable to the metal
rasp used by present-day sculptors At Jilat 13 and
Jilat 25 we found broken fragments of vesicular
basalt grinding slabs but not large complete exam-
ples The small fragments suggest two possibilities
either there were large complete slabs at one time
which were then broken worn out and discarded or
only small fragments of these heavy duty grinding
tools were needed
For finer abrasion sandstone grinding slabs might
be expected None were found However small
Figure 11 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic
sites Tile knives or possible saws for bead-
making From Baird 1993 fig 85
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
148 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
handheld abraders made of sandstones with coarse
hard quartz crystals were found at both sites (Fig
15andashb) Sandstone is not local to Wadi Jilat and these
items were imported and probably used extensively
(resulting in the small size)
For even finer abrasion limestone could have been
used Such needs could have been met by the large
bench of Jilat 13 (Fig 14c) which was finely ground
over a very large area (within which the possible
drilling marks were placed)
Some might see the grooved items made of
sandstone (Fig 15a) and limestone (Fig 15c) as
lsquoshaft straightenersrsquo One or two shaft straightener
fragments made of basalt occur at Jilat 13 Like other
basalt shaft straighteners in Neolithic Jilat (eg Jilat
7) (Garrard et al 1994a Wright 1993) the use-
surfaces of these have U-shaped cross-sections By
contrast the cross sections of the use surfaces on the
sandstone and limestone grooved items are not U-
shaped but have sharp angles We see these tools
mainly as abraders for grinding bead facets espe-
cially on barrel beads The widths of the use surfaces
are 11 mm for the sandstone tool and 138 mm for
the limestone one These dimensions correspond to
the average diameter (5 width) of 31 measured green
Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks from Jilat 13 (N 5
31 Mean diameter 5 92 mm standard deviation 5
28) Grooved stones are used in bead grinding in
a
b c
Figure 12 Ground stone artefacts probably for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Cutmarked slab (limestone) Jilat
13 The cutmarks are shallow and are concentrated in the left area running parallel to the main axes of the
slab (b) Cutmarked slab fragment (limestone) Jilat 13 showing deep cutmarks (c) Flaked and ground abra-
sive cutting tool made of limestone Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 149
modern India (Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58) a
grooved sandstone tool was found with an unfinished
bead at Catalhoyuk (Wright and Bains 2007)
Tosi and Vidale (1990) regard failure resulting
from breakage or human error as more common in
the grinding stage than during perforation although
this depends on material and opinion (Kenoyer 2003
18) In some cases it might be more efficient to shape
the bead first before attempting perforation This
may explain why barrel beads tend to be shaped and
abraded prior to perforation
Finished beads were always finely abraded and
sometimes polished to the extent of reflecting light
Ethnographic observations indicate that polishing is
sometimes done by placing beads en masse in a
leather bag along with an abrasive and shaking and
rolling the bags for long periods (Allchin 1979
Kenoyer 2003) This simple method would have been
more likely than the method of rolling beads and
abrasives in a wooden barrel which is also docu-
mented ethnographically (Kenoyer 2003)
However shaking beads in a bag with an abrasive
tends to produce beads with rounded convex edges
(Gwinnett and Gorelick 1989) Some beads at Jilat
have this form but many mdash especially those made of
the hard cherty red Dabba Marble mdash have sharp
edges perpendicular to bead faces indicating that
they were individually polished or polished during
rolling on a string or stick Alternative methods of
polishing can include rubbing with leather or wood
with the addition of fine sand or chalk and water or
with animal hairwool and animal fat (Kenoyer 1986
20) These methods would have been possible with
Jilat technology
Craft Specialization and Comparisons withOther Sites
Technology needs to be studied not only in terms of
materials and techniques but also in terms of social
groups involved in artefact production individual
artisans and skill (Dobres and Hoffmann 1999 2ndash12)
In egalitarian societies craft skill and knowledge of
Figure 13 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic sites Drilling and piercing tools From Baird 1993 fig 82
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
150 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
special materials can enhance the power of an
individual or a group encouraging hierarchy
(Dobres 2000 119ndash20)
These questions force us to reconsider issues of
craft specialization a term often used loosely or in
widely different ways Three concepts of specializa-
tion are considered here individual specialists
specialization between households or domestic
groups within a given site and site specialization
within a regional or social network of craft produc-
tion and exchange
Costin (1991) draws a contrast between indepen-
dent specialization and attached specialization
Independent specialization involves production of
utilitarian goods for nonelites and can be household-
based or based in special workshops Attached
specialization refers to production of prestige goods
under control of elites Whilst Costin notes that
attached specialization can also be based in house-
holds or workshops we often think of attached
specialization in connection with central institutions
and urban or state-level societies It is of considerable
interest that in early urban societies the making of
stone personal ornaments in association with central
institutions figures prominently (Stein 1996 Vidale
1989)
How earlier forms of craft specialization may have
evolved into large-scale attached specialization is
poorly understood Most research has concentrated
on later stages in this process (eg Stein 1996) in
discussions of earlier forms of specialization defini-
tions and criteria for diagnosis could sometimes be
clearer (eg Quintero and Wilke 1998 Rollefson and
Parker 2002 Rosen 1997) If we are dealing with
a
c
b
Figure 14 Ground stone artefacts probably used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Capstone made of limestone
Jilat 25 (b) Handstone probably used as an anvil or hammer Jilat 25 note depression in face and flake scars
at edges (c) Limestone drilling bench Jilat 13 Note evidence of use-wear on the left and widest area of the
bench smooth abraded surface drill marks in the centre-left face small flake scars with negative bulbs of per-
cussion close to the edge of the bench
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 151
specialization in Neolithic societies it is probably
independent specialization Still Neolithic societies
may fall between Costinrsquos two categories Neolithic
groups were clearly producing prestige goods perso-
nal ornaments are not strictly utilitarian and there is
at least a possibility that elites were emerging (Byrd
1994 Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002 Verhoeven
2002)
Individual Specialists
First there is the issue of identifying individual
specialists Some use lsquospecializationrsquo to refer to any
situation in which some artisans have high levels of
skill a view that has been criticized (Rice 1991) We
agree with Rice that identifying a high level of
technical skill in a craft is not on its own sufficient
for a diagnosis of specialization since it robs the
concept of force in discussing long term change (by
this criterion the Upper Palaeolithic was riddled
with craft specialists) However we would argue
that if there are other indications of craft specializa-
tion a search for levels of ability in different
individuals is appropriate mdash if the data permit
Such data would be primary refuse from well-dated
sites of high temporal resolution in which technical
processes (eg errors in chaines operatoires) can
reveal experts vs novices (Pigeot 1990 Stout 2002
Vanzetti and Vidale 1994)
In the case of Jilat 13 and 25 we are dealing with
much primary refuse and two closely dated sites (see
above and Tables 6ndash7) mdash with periodic use of the
sites over a time range on the order of 200 years at
most and possibly much less Jilat 25 yielded activity
areas with clear spatial clusters as do a number of
contexts at Jilat 13 Space does not permit us to
present all details (this awaits the final site report)
but we feel confident that aggregate consideration of
the data from each site allows us to discuss general
questions of individual skills mdash master craftsmen vs
novices
a b
c
Figure 15 Ground stone artefacts possibly used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Grooved sandstone abrading
tool Jilat 13 (b) Sandstone hand-held abrader Jilat 25 (c) Grooved limestone abrading tool Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
152 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
To explore this we analysed unfinished blanks and
the frequency of perforation errors Drilling is a
sensitive moment in bead production when many
things can go wrong (Kenoyer 2003) A low incidence
in perforation errors combined with high numbers of
successfully finished beads and evidence of standar-
dization should be reasonably good indicators of an
artisanrsquos mastery This is the situation seen at Jilat 25
(Fig 7) In all of 93 blanks from Jilat 25 only 2 were
perforation errors a failure rate of only 2
On the other hand a high incidence of perforation
errors would suggest that a beadmaker was a relative
novice Jilat 13 produced more blanks with perfora-
tion errors than Jilat 25 We thought we might find
individual contexts with a high rate of error
suggesting apprentices
The data did not bear this out Of 223 bead blanks
from Jilat 13 (all phases) 22 were perforation errors
mdash a failure rate of 98 All but two errors were on
barrel bead blanks of green Dabba Marble The
others were one pendant blank and one irregular
bead blank These 22 blanks were distributed across
20 different contexts and no more than 2 perforation
errors were found in any one context
A close look at those contexts reveals low error
rates In Context B21 2 green barrel bead blanks
with perforation errors were found with 5 other
blanks The others included green and red barrel and
disc blanks This context also yielded 5 successfully
finished beads including black and red barrel beads
and a green disc Black and green debitage and a
discoidal handstone were also found here In Context
B71 2 blanks with perforation errors were found
along with 9 other blanks and 10 successfully
finished beads including green Dabba Marble barrel
beads but also black and red disc beads Much
debitage was found along with a flaked limestone
cutting tool (cf Fig 12c) and a limestone object with
a drill mark
The higher rate of error at Jilat 13 compared to
Jilat 25 could be because artisans at Jilat 13 were
making more of the larger more complex barrel
beads (as opposed to simple discs see Tables 2ndash3)
which offer greater chances of failure due to the
longer drilling distance However at Jilat 13 the
overall failure rate was still quite low particularly
considering the overall volume of material recovered
(Table 1)
We conclude that the beadmakers at Jilat 13
included few trainees These appear to have been
skilled artisans a small task force composed of
relative experts This raises the question of whether
these beadmakers were examples of lsquoproducer
specialistsrsquo as traditionally defined that is people
involved in
production of a good by a relatively small number of
individuals (compared to the total output and
number of consumers) individuals who are as a
result of this selectivity and the routinization or
repetition of their tasks particularly skilled in
manufacture (Rice 1991 263)
Jilat 13 and 25 do suggest small numbers of
individuals and a certain selectivity in who was
involved in stone bead making The quantity of
debitagedebris relative to (1) the number of finished
beads and (2) the modest sizes of these structures
collectively suggest that these craftsmenwomen
served a larger number of consumers relative to the
number of craftsmen involved here If so who were
these consumers mdash other residents of Jilat or groups
beyond
Intra-site Specialization Between Domestic Groups
Several studies suggest ways of identifying different
forms of craft specialization between domestic groups
in a site For later sites Stein (1996) has explored
spatial data particularly how craft production
facilities are dispersed among domestic units or
located near special (or central) institutions In
Neolithic sites questions about dispersal between
households and possible links between craft produc-
tion and special buildings or special sites have been
underexplored
For specialization Costin (1991) suggests that we
would expect (1) variability between production
units (eg households occupations regions) in
relevant artefacts (2) high densities of craft produc-
tion debris relative to some other generally used
item in some production units (3) high ratios of
unfinished goods to finished goods in some produc-
tion units Kenoyer et alrsquos (1991) ethnoarchaeolo-
gical studies of modern stone bead-making in
Khambat (India) suggest something similar in the
case of households as production units There non-
specialist households engaging in casual opportu-
nistic bead production revealed low quantities of
bead-making debris few unfinished beads and little
standardization in finished beads By contrast
households specializing in bead production were
characterized by stockpiling of large quantities of
raw materials many unfinished beads and more
standardized finished products
In looking at whole occupations (ie phases within
sites) as a unit of observation we argue elsewhere
(Wright and Garrard 2003) that artefact densities and
other data from 13 PPNB and 8 PPNCELN
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 153
occupations in the Jilat-Azraq region suggest that
PPNCELN producers were more specialized than
those of the PPNB mdash at least in the Jilat-Azraq
region Unlike the PPNB sites Jilat 13 and 25 have
very high densities of bead-making debris specialized
tools for drilling and sawing there is an abundance of
unfinished materials relative to finished products
bead-making tools and debris are abundant relative
to normal domestic food processing equipment
(ground stone artefacts) (Wright and Garrard 2003
cf Costin 1991)
That argument is chronological comparing the
PPNB to the PPNCELN occupations and we stand
behind it for the Jilat-Azraq case (different trajec-
tories may apply to south Jordan and the Negev see
below) Still it leaves open the issue of house-to-
house variation within Jilat 25 or Jilat 13 As we have
only one excavated structure per site we cannot on
present evidence argue that each building housed a
group of specialists serving other households within
the same site In fact we have no direct evidence that
there were other structures on each site mdash the ones
excavated were the only ones visible on the surface
There are nuances of material and typological
choices between the Jilat 25 structure (red disc beads)
and the Jilat 13 structure (larger complex green
ornaments) but these nuances are beyond the scope
of this paper
In all we suspect that stone bead production at
Jilat 13 and 25 was geared not for other domestic
units lsquoin camprsquo but for use by these quite mobile
communities themselves mdash as well as export to other
sites within the steppe and beyond (see below) In
Costinrsquos terms (Costin 1991) Jilat 13 and 25 might
each be an example of an independent non-centra-
lized dispersed workshop possibly lsquofamily runrsquo (Rice
1991 262) mdash in which handling of Dabba Marble
was not routinely entrusted to novices
There are hints of house-to-house variations in
bead-making in major villages with larger samples of
domestic structures as in PPNB Beidha At PPNB
Beidha (earlier than Jilat 13 and 25) Building 14
stands out
Other forms of production besides food preparation
were less common Building 14 represented the best
example of artefact production in these basements
A wide range of artefacts was recovered apparently
associated with building 14rsquos basement floor
Particularly widespread were stone polishers bone
tools raw material (including hematite malachite
and magnesium) more than 60 unmodified marine
shells and at least two dozen beads of shell stone
and bone some of which were in various stages of
production Some artifacts lay on stone slabs
indicating that at least some slabs may have
functioned as work surfaces (Byrd 2005 117)
Such hints are intriguing Still macro-artefacts
from house floors are affected by problems of site
formation and house abandonment Micro-artefact
data can help (Rainville 2005) House-by-house
exploration with attention to micro-artefacts is
needed (Wright and Bains 2007)
Site Specialization Within a Regional Network of Craft
Production and Exchange
Both sites and other Neolithic sites in Jilat and
Azraq exhibit resource specialization
the selective use of particular resources in craft
manufacture such as certain clays that are repeat-
edly used (Rice 1991 262)
The Jilat artisans emphasized Dabba Marble from
a wider array of available stone types The Jilat-
Azraq sites collectively show that green Dabba
Marble was a special target This is revealed in both
frequencies and weights (for debris data and weight
data see Wright and Garrard 2003 for frequency
data on beads and blanks see Tables 2 and 3) At
both sites debris is greatly dominated by green
Dabba Marble mdash 80ndash95 of debris by both weight
(grams) and frequency Green Dabba Marble also
dominates blanks in terms of weight at both sites mdash
indicating the use of green for making larger heavier
and more conspicuous ornaments
Turning to frequencies at Jilat 13 about 90 of
blanks are green and only 5 are red However
finished beads include both green and red forms in
comparable percentages (404 and 436 respec-
tively) (Table 3) suggesting that finished red beads
were brought into the building from a place of
manufacture located somewhere else At Jilat 25
blanks of red and green Dabba Marble occur in
comparable proportions (409 green 43 red)
whilst finished beads are predominantly red (588)
(Table 2) If Jilat 13 and 25 were absolute contem-
poraries this could suggest variations in choices and
exchange between residents of different structures
Rice (1991) has defined site specialization as a
situation in which a site is located near a special
resource and the inhabitants emphasize production of
a craft based on that resource Relative to other sites
not so located the range of site functions and
activities would be expected to be more limited
Thus site specialization
involves individual localities or sites having evidence
of limited functions or intensive productive activity
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
154 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
often determined by fortuitous environmental fac-
tors This includes proximity to mineral deposits
and so forth (Rice 1991 262)
Do Jilat 13 and 25 fit this concept In both sites
15 km from the source we have a wealth of evidence
for intensive stone bead production and scanty
evidence for routine food processing tools (Wright
and Garrard 2003) However Jilat 25 may be closer
to the limited function model envisioned by Rice In
Jilat 13 bead-making is clearly intensive but we are
also dealing with a chipped stone assemblage of not
only drills and burins but also projectile points and
other tools Jilat 13 also reveals production of
figurines (of animals phalluses and arrow-shaped
forms) and sculpted pillars (Baird 1993 Garrard
et al 1994a Martin 1999 Wright 1992 1993)
In all Jilat 13 and 25 suggest that we can apply
Ricersquos lsquosite specializationrsquo on the grounds of intensive
productive activity and proximity to source mdash but
with the qualification that this specialization was also
embedded in hunting-herding activities and at Jilat
13 production of other special crafts unique among
the sites of a symbolic nature (figurines pillars)
One possibility is that we are dealing with a camp
of hunter-herder corporate groups mdash part of a wider
regional network mdash engaged in special activities in
remote areas involving art personal ornaments and
ritual Such groups are suggested by other data from
the PPNBndashPPNC time span for example Nahal
Hemar (ornaments masks hunting tools) Dhuweila
(carving of hunters with dress variations)
Catalhoyuk (images of hunters with dress variations
as in the bull hunt mural) and Gobeklitepe (sculpture
production including a quarry wild-animal icono-
graphy hunting) (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988 Betts
1998 Mellaart 1967 Schmidt 2000) In all these data
hint that craft production of special items was
embedded in hunting andor herding activities in
remote areas this may have been a key means by
which exotic materials reached major villages In a
very broad way this supports a sketch outlined by
Bar Yosef (Bar-Yosef 2001) although we do not
necessarily agree with specifics of his model eg the
territories boundaries social groups and mechanisms
which he suggests (cf Asouti 2006) Instead we see
this as one example of diverse strategies of social
networking linking lineages households and commu-
nities in the Neolithic (Wright forthcoming)
Returning to the stone bead data from Jilat 13 and
25 the apparent stockpiling of raw material and
intensive production activity hints at production of
the green material for export (see above and Wright
and Garrard 2003) New data now add weight to this
idea and suggest the following provisional picture of
regional specializations and exchanges in ornaments
(1) Based on typology technology and materials thereappears to be a distinctive eastern Jordanian koine ornetwork of stone bead manufacture and exchangefeaturing Dabba Marble and a probable regionalspecialization in it
Other Neolithic bead production sites are known
from eastern Jordan Indications are that most of the
green bead materials are Dabba Marble probably
from Jilat (further work is needed) In these sites
diversity of materials used seems low with few
imports from beyond the steppe Shells however
testify to wider networks (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989
Cooke and Reese in Betts 1998 Garrard et al 1994a
Reese 1991)
Azraq 31 (PPNB and ELN) is in our suite of study
materials (Baird et al 1992 Garrard et al 1994a
Wright and Garrard 2003) and debris blanks and
beads were found Preliminary XRF analysis of green
samples (by Groom) indicates that the material is
consistent with Jilat Dabba Marble Typology and
technology are also similar and as at Jilat 25 burin
spall drills were closely associated with bead-making
in specific activity areas (Baird 1993 521 Baird et al
1992 25) However the ground stone revealed no
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
(Wright 1992 1993 Wright in Baird et al 1992)
Material used for beads at Dhuweila (PPNB and
ELN) has been called Dabba Marble (Cooke and
Reese in Betts 1998) It is consistent in appearance
with our material although we have no details on
mineralogy or source Typologically these beads are
similar to those of Jilat 13 and 25 The ground stone
is very different from the suite at the Jilat sites
(Wright in Betts 1998) for comparisons of chipped
stone assemblages see Baird (1993)
At Bawwab al-Ghazal (Late PPNB) Rollefson
et al found drills bits on burin spalls tile knives
beads bead blanks and bead debris some of which
they called green Dabba Marble (Rollefson et al
1999 Quintero et al 2004) They argued that there is
a possible source of this material outcropping near
the site mdash lsquoFor the last raw material [green Dabba
Marble] small nodules of the green limestone were
embedded in the local bedrockrsquo (Rollefson et al 1999
3) However as shown in Appendix A the true
Dabba Marble only occurs in a restricted area west of
Wadi Jilat The lsquobedrockrsquo which outcrops near Azraq
31 and Bawwab al-Ghazal is travertine and some of
this formed during the late Pleistocene and Holocene
The nearby Epipalaeolithic site of Azraq 17 was
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 155
found partially embedded in travertine and artefacts
including nodules of imported basalt were found in
the travertine at this site It is possible that the
nodules of green limestone found at Bawwab al-
Ghazal were imported Dabba Marble which subse-
quently became incorporated in a travertine near the
site An alternative possibility is that the local
travertine is infused with green minerals In Wadi
Jilat travertines were noted with traces of green
minerals and in the Siwaqa area to the south-west of
Jilat there are extensive travertines some of which
are infused with pale green minerals including
volkonskoite (Barjous 1986 mdash see also Appendix A)
In eastern Jordan some Neolithic sites are greatly
dominated by burins (lsquoburin sitesrsquo) At a number of
these there is evidence for stone bead-making (eg
Jebel Naja) These lsquoburin sitesrsquo typically reveal few
ground stone tools we know of no examples of
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
from them It was argued that the main role of the
burins was production of spalls for drills used mainly
for beads (Betts 1987 1998 Finlayson and Betts
1990) However burin sites are not universally
associated with stone bead making At Jilat 23 24
and 26 burins were numerous but other evidence for
bead-making is scanty (Baird 1993 520)
Therefore some have questioned whether
burins and burin spalls in such sites were solely or
primarily intended for making drills and beads
noting that other functions are possible (Quintero
et al 2004 209) Given that these sites typically
represent short-term occupations it is possible that
many sites might be spall manufacture sites with
spalls transported to other settings where drill
manufacture and bead manufacture took place such
as Jilat 13 and 25 Rollefson expressed doubt that
either bladelet or burin spall drills would have been
used in bow drills partly because of their fragility and
also because most of them have a pronounced curve
on the long axis which would have made high speed
drilling impossible (Rollefson and Parker 2002) But
Finlayson and Betts (1990) and Berna (1995)
successfully experimented using burin spalls with
bow drills and Kenoyer (personal communication
2007) notes that drills made on burin spalls are the
most common type of drill in diverse prehistoric
stone bead-making sites (in India Pakistan and
elsewhere)
In the case of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 we believe burin-
spall drills were part of the bead-making repertoire
for reasons noted above This does not rule out other
uses of burin spalls Nor does it rule out the use of
other perforating techniques Drills do not have to be
made of stone when soft stones are being perforated
mdash wood bone and abrasives can be used (Foreman
1978)
(2) There are hints of export of Dabba Marble to at leastsome villages in the Levantine corridor However majorNeolithic villages display much diversity in materials andespecially more importing of exotic stones than is seen inthe eastern Jordanian sites
Many writers report Neolithic beads made of
unspecified lsquogreenstonersquo This term is unfortunate
since it can refer to metabasalt and similar altered
igneous rocks (Schumann 1992 248) Some of these
lsquogreenstonesrsquo may be limestone with apatite or other
materials (eg Garfinkel 1987 81ndash82 Hauptmann
2004 Talbot 1983 789) Beads of green limestones
rich in fluorapatite were found at late PPNB Basta in
southern Jordan (Hauptmann 2004) as confirmed by
XRF and XRD Green beads identified as Dabba
Marble were also reported from Ain Ghazal a site
with both PPNB and PPNC occupations (Rollefson
et al 1990 103ndash04) Whether these are Dabba
Marble from the Jilat source (Appendices AndashB) is
not yet fully clear Ongoing research will sort out
these mysteries (eg D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal
communication Hauptmann 2004)
Major villages in the Levantine Corridor reveal
different degrees of emphasis in styles and materials
often we see a certain emphasis on local materials and
preferences However considerable exchange net-
works are indicated in major villages which display
much wider ranges of stone ornament materials
compared to the eastern Jordanian sites (such as
Ain Ghazal Yiftahel Basta Barsquoja Ghuwayr 1
Fidan 1) mdash along with of course shells (Affonso
and Pernicka 2004 Bienert and Gebel 1998 84ndash86
Garfinkel 1987 Hauptmann 2004 Rollefson and
Simmons 1984 1986 Rollefson et al 1990 Simmons
and Najjar 1998 Starck 1988)
As the Neolithic evolved stone bead-making
entailed increasingly diverse techniques and materi-
als One example may be drills In earlymiddle PPNB
sites most drills are made on bladelets In the late
PPNB PPNC and Late Neolithic there may have
been a gradual increase in drills made on burin spalls
although perhaps not in all regions (Jensen 2004
Rollefson and Parker 2002) Underlining increasing
diversity of technological practice between groups
Baird (2001b) pointed out geographic variation in
this technology with spall drills dominating in the
north-eastern Jordanian steppe from MPPNB
through Early Late Neolithic whilst contemporary
sites to west and south use bladelet blanks for their
piercing tools
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
156 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
apparent increased standardization in perforation
size observed at Jilat 25 from an early phase to a later
phase (Critchley 2000)
Since we have evidence of rotary drilling from bead
perforations we believe that drill bits were hafted to
sticks (probably made of wood) Drill bits on burin
spalls would have been too small to manipulate
effectively by hand alone
To work efficiently a drill needs to be weighted
and stabilized and there must be some means of
protecting the artisanrsquos hand Ground stone artefacts
support the idea that rotary drilling with drill bits
hafted to drilling sticks was in use They include a
probable capstone made of limestone from Jilat 25
The capstone would have been held in the hand
enabling the beadmaker to manipulate the drilling
stick from the top (Fig 14a) This artefact resembles
a miniature bowl and fits easily into one hand The
interior surface displays use wear circular striations
parallel to the rim and vertical striations perpendi-
cular to the rim The base of the interior converges to
a flat surface about 1 cm in diameter
Some Levantine Neolithic sites have revealed
similar objects with similar wear (Banning 1998
Wright 1992 fig 5ndash15b) and a comparable item
was found at Jarmo (Moholy-Nagy 1983 fig 12913
Gorelick and Gwinnett 1990 30) Capstones are
characteristic of the use of bow drills (Banning
1998 Foreman 1978) but strictly speaking they
are not necessarily diagnostic of the bow drill
(theoretically simpler drilling techniques involving
hafting might have been facilitated by the use of
a capstone) For the moment we can say that
at Jilat 13 and 15 the evidence for rotary drilling
is unequivocal However the evidence for the use
of the bow drill while suggestive is not quite
definitive
Size data considered carefully support a link
between burin-spall drills and beads To interpret
dimensions of drills and perforations we must keep
in mind that stone bead drilling was overwhelmingly
bipolar and converging Thus drills did not have to
penetrate all the way through the full height of the
bead mdash only about half of it Therefore what matters
a b c
d e f
Figure 9 Green Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks and finished beads (a) Hexagonal blank flaked but not abraded (b)
Abraded hexagonal blank (c) Abraded blank not perforated (d) Perforation error on abraded blank (e)
Finished bead broken showing bipolar perforation and hourglass perforation shape (f) Perforated barrel bead
almost finished except for final abrasion to smooth out last surface irregularities
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
146 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
is the very tips of the drill bits mdash the upper few
millimetres mdash not the full length of the drills
Since disc beads are consistently about 25 to
26 mm in height only the upper 15 mm or so of the
drills mdash the most distal ends of the tips mdash had to
have been about 21 mm or less in thickness to
lsquomatchrsquo the perforation diameters of disc beads
(Table 4) In the case of barrel beads since barrel
beads were between 64 and 71 mm in height about
32 to 36 mm of the most distal ends of the drill bits
have to have been about 21 mm or less in thickness
to lsquomatchrsquo the perforations of barrel beads (Table 5)
Measurements of the drill bit tips within these
small uppermost reaches show that the maximal
thicknesses of the drill bitsrsquo distal tips fall within the
range of sizes indicated by the perforations (Fig 13)
Multi-stage Drilling
Sometimes drilling may have been accomplished in
several stages Some beads particularly those made of
harder stones have smooth cylindrical perforations
with parallel walls displaying no hint of the
hourglass shape
One way to achieve this is to create the hourglass
perforation and then to turn it into a perfect
cylindrical perforation via the use of a second drilling
procedure An example of this was cited by Calley
(1989) who proposed that two tools found in
carnelian bead workshops at Early Bronze Age
Kumartepe (Turkey) had complementary functions
a drill bit for making the initial hourglass perforation
and a borer for finishing and smoothing it into a
cylindrical perforation Since both drill bits and
borers were found on the Jilat sites this method of
finishing perforations could have been used
At Jilat 13 and 25 evidence for multi-stage drilling
can be seen in some beads which have a depression on
one or both faces The depression may be a result of
drilling with a larger drill bit first in order to provide
a guide for the final perforation with a finer drill bit
Such a technique is seen in India-Pakistan (Possehl
1981 39 Kenoyer 1992b 73)
a b c
d e f
Figure 10 Green Dabba Marble pendant blanks and finished pendants (a) Tabular roughout flaked into approximately
trapezoidal shape but not abraded (b) Abraded trapezoidal blank with sawing mark at bottom (c) Perforated
asymmetrical triangular pendant blank incompletely abraded (note striations on face) (d) Finished asymmetri-
cal triangular pendant (e) Pendant blank made on a flake unabraded (f) Nearly-finished pendant made on a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 147
Stabilizing Beads Anvils and Drilling Benches
What method was used to stabilize a bead during
drilling The simplest technique is to fix a bead to a
stone anvil with an adhesive Ethnography and
experiments show that such anvils can be small (the
size of handstones) (Foreman 1978 figs 6ndash7) Use of
such an anvil should result in small shallow
depressions a form of use-damage resulting from
force exerted from above Figure 14b shows a small
flat stone from Jilat 25 with a central depression of
the expected size and depth
Figure 14c shows the limestone bench from Jilat 13
(previously discussed) with a number of such pits in
the centre The marks are evenly spaced and are
concentrated in one small well-defined area on the
widest part of the bench this wide area was also
finely abraded
We see this bench as a multifunctional worktable
anvil We suspect that the beadmaker sat on the
narrow part of the bench (straddling it) placed bead
blanks on the pitted work surface fixed them with
adhesive and then drilled them The bench also
displays evidence of other activities including flaking
and grinding
Adhesives for hafting chipped stone tools could
have been adapted for use in fixing beads to anvils
Bitumen would be one candidate In some cultures a
wooden frame with cup-holes is sometimes used for
stabilizing beads (Kenoyer 1986 P Wright 1982)
The holes are filled with beeswax and clay the bead is
inserted into the wax-clay mixture which hardens
holding the bead steady After drilling beads are
released by breaking the wax-clay mixture (Allchin
1979 Stocks 1989) As wood was probably scarce in
Jilat and as there are no indications of the use of
clay we can probably rule out this technique
However stone items with cup-holes are seen in
Neolithic sites (Kirkbride 1966 Wright 1992
fig 527b)
Abrasion
Ground stone artefacts are crucial to bead produc-
tion in traditional technologies (Foreman 1978
Inizan et al 1992 Kenoyer et al 1991 53 Moholy-
Nagy 1983 294 Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58)
Grinding of beads can be achieved by abrading
each bead individually with a hand held abrader or
by rubbing them on a large grinding slab Either
method will produce linear striations of the type we
see on many unfinished beads (cf Figs 7cndashd and 10c)
However final shaping of disc and cylindrical beads
was most likely achieved by stringing them or loading
them on to a thin rod capable of penetrating the
perforation (individually or in groups) and then
rolling them on a grinding slab adding abrasives
(such as sand) and water to produce a smoother finish
(Foreman 1978 Moholy-Nagy 1983 298) Some disc
beads with parallel edges perpendicular to the faces
would probably have been rolled on a flat smooth
stone Other beads with facetted sharply angled or
bevelled edges (eg many barrel beads) suggest that
they were rolled or abraded along a stone with
grooves and slanting sides (eg Fig 15a c)
Abrasion of bead blanks may have been a multi-
stage process involving a number of materials of
different textures and hardness In an early stage
grinding of bead materials on vesicular basalt would
have been the easiest way to abrade a large nodule
quickly The pores of vesicular basalt and pumice
form natural cutting lsquoteethrsquo comparable to the metal
rasp used by present-day sculptors At Jilat 13 and
Jilat 25 we found broken fragments of vesicular
basalt grinding slabs but not large complete exam-
ples The small fragments suggest two possibilities
either there were large complete slabs at one time
which were then broken worn out and discarded or
only small fragments of these heavy duty grinding
tools were needed
For finer abrasion sandstone grinding slabs might
be expected None were found However small
Figure 11 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic
sites Tile knives or possible saws for bead-
making From Baird 1993 fig 85
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
148 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
handheld abraders made of sandstones with coarse
hard quartz crystals were found at both sites (Fig
15andashb) Sandstone is not local to Wadi Jilat and these
items were imported and probably used extensively
(resulting in the small size)
For even finer abrasion limestone could have been
used Such needs could have been met by the large
bench of Jilat 13 (Fig 14c) which was finely ground
over a very large area (within which the possible
drilling marks were placed)
Some might see the grooved items made of
sandstone (Fig 15a) and limestone (Fig 15c) as
lsquoshaft straightenersrsquo One or two shaft straightener
fragments made of basalt occur at Jilat 13 Like other
basalt shaft straighteners in Neolithic Jilat (eg Jilat
7) (Garrard et al 1994a Wright 1993) the use-
surfaces of these have U-shaped cross-sections By
contrast the cross sections of the use surfaces on the
sandstone and limestone grooved items are not U-
shaped but have sharp angles We see these tools
mainly as abraders for grinding bead facets espe-
cially on barrel beads The widths of the use surfaces
are 11 mm for the sandstone tool and 138 mm for
the limestone one These dimensions correspond to
the average diameter (5 width) of 31 measured green
Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks from Jilat 13 (N 5
31 Mean diameter 5 92 mm standard deviation 5
28) Grooved stones are used in bead grinding in
a
b c
Figure 12 Ground stone artefacts probably for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Cutmarked slab (limestone) Jilat
13 The cutmarks are shallow and are concentrated in the left area running parallel to the main axes of the
slab (b) Cutmarked slab fragment (limestone) Jilat 13 showing deep cutmarks (c) Flaked and ground abra-
sive cutting tool made of limestone Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 149
modern India (Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58) a
grooved sandstone tool was found with an unfinished
bead at Catalhoyuk (Wright and Bains 2007)
Tosi and Vidale (1990) regard failure resulting
from breakage or human error as more common in
the grinding stage than during perforation although
this depends on material and opinion (Kenoyer 2003
18) In some cases it might be more efficient to shape
the bead first before attempting perforation This
may explain why barrel beads tend to be shaped and
abraded prior to perforation
Finished beads were always finely abraded and
sometimes polished to the extent of reflecting light
Ethnographic observations indicate that polishing is
sometimes done by placing beads en masse in a
leather bag along with an abrasive and shaking and
rolling the bags for long periods (Allchin 1979
Kenoyer 2003) This simple method would have been
more likely than the method of rolling beads and
abrasives in a wooden barrel which is also docu-
mented ethnographically (Kenoyer 2003)
However shaking beads in a bag with an abrasive
tends to produce beads with rounded convex edges
(Gwinnett and Gorelick 1989) Some beads at Jilat
have this form but many mdash especially those made of
the hard cherty red Dabba Marble mdash have sharp
edges perpendicular to bead faces indicating that
they were individually polished or polished during
rolling on a string or stick Alternative methods of
polishing can include rubbing with leather or wood
with the addition of fine sand or chalk and water or
with animal hairwool and animal fat (Kenoyer 1986
20) These methods would have been possible with
Jilat technology
Craft Specialization and Comparisons withOther Sites
Technology needs to be studied not only in terms of
materials and techniques but also in terms of social
groups involved in artefact production individual
artisans and skill (Dobres and Hoffmann 1999 2ndash12)
In egalitarian societies craft skill and knowledge of
Figure 13 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic sites Drilling and piercing tools From Baird 1993 fig 82
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
150 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
special materials can enhance the power of an
individual or a group encouraging hierarchy
(Dobres 2000 119ndash20)
These questions force us to reconsider issues of
craft specialization a term often used loosely or in
widely different ways Three concepts of specializa-
tion are considered here individual specialists
specialization between households or domestic
groups within a given site and site specialization
within a regional or social network of craft produc-
tion and exchange
Costin (1991) draws a contrast between indepen-
dent specialization and attached specialization
Independent specialization involves production of
utilitarian goods for nonelites and can be household-
based or based in special workshops Attached
specialization refers to production of prestige goods
under control of elites Whilst Costin notes that
attached specialization can also be based in house-
holds or workshops we often think of attached
specialization in connection with central institutions
and urban or state-level societies It is of considerable
interest that in early urban societies the making of
stone personal ornaments in association with central
institutions figures prominently (Stein 1996 Vidale
1989)
How earlier forms of craft specialization may have
evolved into large-scale attached specialization is
poorly understood Most research has concentrated
on later stages in this process (eg Stein 1996) in
discussions of earlier forms of specialization defini-
tions and criteria for diagnosis could sometimes be
clearer (eg Quintero and Wilke 1998 Rollefson and
Parker 2002 Rosen 1997) If we are dealing with
a
c
b
Figure 14 Ground stone artefacts probably used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Capstone made of limestone
Jilat 25 (b) Handstone probably used as an anvil or hammer Jilat 25 note depression in face and flake scars
at edges (c) Limestone drilling bench Jilat 13 Note evidence of use-wear on the left and widest area of the
bench smooth abraded surface drill marks in the centre-left face small flake scars with negative bulbs of per-
cussion close to the edge of the bench
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 151
specialization in Neolithic societies it is probably
independent specialization Still Neolithic societies
may fall between Costinrsquos two categories Neolithic
groups were clearly producing prestige goods perso-
nal ornaments are not strictly utilitarian and there is
at least a possibility that elites were emerging (Byrd
1994 Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002 Verhoeven
2002)
Individual Specialists
First there is the issue of identifying individual
specialists Some use lsquospecializationrsquo to refer to any
situation in which some artisans have high levels of
skill a view that has been criticized (Rice 1991) We
agree with Rice that identifying a high level of
technical skill in a craft is not on its own sufficient
for a diagnosis of specialization since it robs the
concept of force in discussing long term change (by
this criterion the Upper Palaeolithic was riddled
with craft specialists) However we would argue
that if there are other indications of craft specializa-
tion a search for levels of ability in different
individuals is appropriate mdash if the data permit
Such data would be primary refuse from well-dated
sites of high temporal resolution in which technical
processes (eg errors in chaines operatoires) can
reveal experts vs novices (Pigeot 1990 Stout 2002
Vanzetti and Vidale 1994)
In the case of Jilat 13 and 25 we are dealing with
much primary refuse and two closely dated sites (see
above and Tables 6ndash7) mdash with periodic use of the
sites over a time range on the order of 200 years at
most and possibly much less Jilat 25 yielded activity
areas with clear spatial clusters as do a number of
contexts at Jilat 13 Space does not permit us to
present all details (this awaits the final site report)
but we feel confident that aggregate consideration of
the data from each site allows us to discuss general
questions of individual skills mdash master craftsmen vs
novices
a b
c
Figure 15 Ground stone artefacts possibly used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Grooved sandstone abrading
tool Jilat 13 (b) Sandstone hand-held abrader Jilat 25 (c) Grooved limestone abrading tool Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
152 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
To explore this we analysed unfinished blanks and
the frequency of perforation errors Drilling is a
sensitive moment in bead production when many
things can go wrong (Kenoyer 2003) A low incidence
in perforation errors combined with high numbers of
successfully finished beads and evidence of standar-
dization should be reasonably good indicators of an
artisanrsquos mastery This is the situation seen at Jilat 25
(Fig 7) In all of 93 blanks from Jilat 25 only 2 were
perforation errors a failure rate of only 2
On the other hand a high incidence of perforation
errors would suggest that a beadmaker was a relative
novice Jilat 13 produced more blanks with perfora-
tion errors than Jilat 25 We thought we might find
individual contexts with a high rate of error
suggesting apprentices
The data did not bear this out Of 223 bead blanks
from Jilat 13 (all phases) 22 were perforation errors
mdash a failure rate of 98 All but two errors were on
barrel bead blanks of green Dabba Marble The
others were one pendant blank and one irregular
bead blank These 22 blanks were distributed across
20 different contexts and no more than 2 perforation
errors were found in any one context
A close look at those contexts reveals low error
rates In Context B21 2 green barrel bead blanks
with perforation errors were found with 5 other
blanks The others included green and red barrel and
disc blanks This context also yielded 5 successfully
finished beads including black and red barrel beads
and a green disc Black and green debitage and a
discoidal handstone were also found here In Context
B71 2 blanks with perforation errors were found
along with 9 other blanks and 10 successfully
finished beads including green Dabba Marble barrel
beads but also black and red disc beads Much
debitage was found along with a flaked limestone
cutting tool (cf Fig 12c) and a limestone object with
a drill mark
The higher rate of error at Jilat 13 compared to
Jilat 25 could be because artisans at Jilat 13 were
making more of the larger more complex barrel
beads (as opposed to simple discs see Tables 2ndash3)
which offer greater chances of failure due to the
longer drilling distance However at Jilat 13 the
overall failure rate was still quite low particularly
considering the overall volume of material recovered
(Table 1)
We conclude that the beadmakers at Jilat 13
included few trainees These appear to have been
skilled artisans a small task force composed of
relative experts This raises the question of whether
these beadmakers were examples of lsquoproducer
specialistsrsquo as traditionally defined that is people
involved in
production of a good by a relatively small number of
individuals (compared to the total output and
number of consumers) individuals who are as a
result of this selectivity and the routinization or
repetition of their tasks particularly skilled in
manufacture (Rice 1991 263)
Jilat 13 and 25 do suggest small numbers of
individuals and a certain selectivity in who was
involved in stone bead making The quantity of
debitagedebris relative to (1) the number of finished
beads and (2) the modest sizes of these structures
collectively suggest that these craftsmenwomen
served a larger number of consumers relative to the
number of craftsmen involved here If so who were
these consumers mdash other residents of Jilat or groups
beyond
Intra-site Specialization Between Domestic Groups
Several studies suggest ways of identifying different
forms of craft specialization between domestic groups
in a site For later sites Stein (1996) has explored
spatial data particularly how craft production
facilities are dispersed among domestic units or
located near special (or central) institutions In
Neolithic sites questions about dispersal between
households and possible links between craft produc-
tion and special buildings or special sites have been
underexplored
For specialization Costin (1991) suggests that we
would expect (1) variability between production
units (eg households occupations regions) in
relevant artefacts (2) high densities of craft produc-
tion debris relative to some other generally used
item in some production units (3) high ratios of
unfinished goods to finished goods in some produc-
tion units Kenoyer et alrsquos (1991) ethnoarchaeolo-
gical studies of modern stone bead-making in
Khambat (India) suggest something similar in the
case of households as production units There non-
specialist households engaging in casual opportu-
nistic bead production revealed low quantities of
bead-making debris few unfinished beads and little
standardization in finished beads By contrast
households specializing in bead production were
characterized by stockpiling of large quantities of
raw materials many unfinished beads and more
standardized finished products
In looking at whole occupations (ie phases within
sites) as a unit of observation we argue elsewhere
(Wright and Garrard 2003) that artefact densities and
other data from 13 PPNB and 8 PPNCELN
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 153
occupations in the Jilat-Azraq region suggest that
PPNCELN producers were more specialized than
those of the PPNB mdash at least in the Jilat-Azraq
region Unlike the PPNB sites Jilat 13 and 25 have
very high densities of bead-making debris specialized
tools for drilling and sawing there is an abundance of
unfinished materials relative to finished products
bead-making tools and debris are abundant relative
to normal domestic food processing equipment
(ground stone artefacts) (Wright and Garrard 2003
cf Costin 1991)
That argument is chronological comparing the
PPNB to the PPNCELN occupations and we stand
behind it for the Jilat-Azraq case (different trajec-
tories may apply to south Jordan and the Negev see
below) Still it leaves open the issue of house-to-
house variation within Jilat 25 or Jilat 13 As we have
only one excavated structure per site we cannot on
present evidence argue that each building housed a
group of specialists serving other households within
the same site In fact we have no direct evidence that
there were other structures on each site mdash the ones
excavated were the only ones visible on the surface
There are nuances of material and typological
choices between the Jilat 25 structure (red disc beads)
and the Jilat 13 structure (larger complex green
ornaments) but these nuances are beyond the scope
of this paper
In all we suspect that stone bead production at
Jilat 13 and 25 was geared not for other domestic
units lsquoin camprsquo but for use by these quite mobile
communities themselves mdash as well as export to other
sites within the steppe and beyond (see below) In
Costinrsquos terms (Costin 1991) Jilat 13 and 25 might
each be an example of an independent non-centra-
lized dispersed workshop possibly lsquofamily runrsquo (Rice
1991 262) mdash in which handling of Dabba Marble
was not routinely entrusted to novices
There are hints of house-to-house variations in
bead-making in major villages with larger samples of
domestic structures as in PPNB Beidha At PPNB
Beidha (earlier than Jilat 13 and 25) Building 14
stands out
Other forms of production besides food preparation
were less common Building 14 represented the best
example of artefact production in these basements
A wide range of artefacts was recovered apparently
associated with building 14rsquos basement floor
Particularly widespread were stone polishers bone
tools raw material (including hematite malachite
and magnesium) more than 60 unmodified marine
shells and at least two dozen beads of shell stone
and bone some of which were in various stages of
production Some artifacts lay on stone slabs
indicating that at least some slabs may have
functioned as work surfaces (Byrd 2005 117)
Such hints are intriguing Still macro-artefacts
from house floors are affected by problems of site
formation and house abandonment Micro-artefact
data can help (Rainville 2005) House-by-house
exploration with attention to micro-artefacts is
needed (Wright and Bains 2007)
Site Specialization Within a Regional Network of Craft
Production and Exchange
Both sites and other Neolithic sites in Jilat and
Azraq exhibit resource specialization
the selective use of particular resources in craft
manufacture such as certain clays that are repeat-
edly used (Rice 1991 262)
The Jilat artisans emphasized Dabba Marble from
a wider array of available stone types The Jilat-
Azraq sites collectively show that green Dabba
Marble was a special target This is revealed in both
frequencies and weights (for debris data and weight
data see Wright and Garrard 2003 for frequency
data on beads and blanks see Tables 2 and 3) At
both sites debris is greatly dominated by green
Dabba Marble mdash 80ndash95 of debris by both weight
(grams) and frequency Green Dabba Marble also
dominates blanks in terms of weight at both sites mdash
indicating the use of green for making larger heavier
and more conspicuous ornaments
Turning to frequencies at Jilat 13 about 90 of
blanks are green and only 5 are red However
finished beads include both green and red forms in
comparable percentages (404 and 436 respec-
tively) (Table 3) suggesting that finished red beads
were brought into the building from a place of
manufacture located somewhere else At Jilat 25
blanks of red and green Dabba Marble occur in
comparable proportions (409 green 43 red)
whilst finished beads are predominantly red (588)
(Table 2) If Jilat 13 and 25 were absolute contem-
poraries this could suggest variations in choices and
exchange between residents of different structures
Rice (1991) has defined site specialization as a
situation in which a site is located near a special
resource and the inhabitants emphasize production of
a craft based on that resource Relative to other sites
not so located the range of site functions and
activities would be expected to be more limited
Thus site specialization
involves individual localities or sites having evidence
of limited functions or intensive productive activity
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
154 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
often determined by fortuitous environmental fac-
tors This includes proximity to mineral deposits
and so forth (Rice 1991 262)
Do Jilat 13 and 25 fit this concept In both sites
15 km from the source we have a wealth of evidence
for intensive stone bead production and scanty
evidence for routine food processing tools (Wright
and Garrard 2003) However Jilat 25 may be closer
to the limited function model envisioned by Rice In
Jilat 13 bead-making is clearly intensive but we are
also dealing with a chipped stone assemblage of not
only drills and burins but also projectile points and
other tools Jilat 13 also reveals production of
figurines (of animals phalluses and arrow-shaped
forms) and sculpted pillars (Baird 1993 Garrard
et al 1994a Martin 1999 Wright 1992 1993)
In all Jilat 13 and 25 suggest that we can apply
Ricersquos lsquosite specializationrsquo on the grounds of intensive
productive activity and proximity to source mdash but
with the qualification that this specialization was also
embedded in hunting-herding activities and at Jilat
13 production of other special crafts unique among
the sites of a symbolic nature (figurines pillars)
One possibility is that we are dealing with a camp
of hunter-herder corporate groups mdash part of a wider
regional network mdash engaged in special activities in
remote areas involving art personal ornaments and
ritual Such groups are suggested by other data from
the PPNBndashPPNC time span for example Nahal
Hemar (ornaments masks hunting tools) Dhuweila
(carving of hunters with dress variations)
Catalhoyuk (images of hunters with dress variations
as in the bull hunt mural) and Gobeklitepe (sculpture
production including a quarry wild-animal icono-
graphy hunting) (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988 Betts
1998 Mellaart 1967 Schmidt 2000) In all these data
hint that craft production of special items was
embedded in hunting andor herding activities in
remote areas this may have been a key means by
which exotic materials reached major villages In a
very broad way this supports a sketch outlined by
Bar Yosef (Bar-Yosef 2001) although we do not
necessarily agree with specifics of his model eg the
territories boundaries social groups and mechanisms
which he suggests (cf Asouti 2006) Instead we see
this as one example of diverse strategies of social
networking linking lineages households and commu-
nities in the Neolithic (Wright forthcoming)
Returning to the stone bead data from Jilat 13 and
25 the apparent stockpiling of raw material and
intensive production activity hints at production of
the green material for export (see above and Wright
and Garrard 2003) New data now add weight to this
idea and suggest the following provisional picture of
regional specializations and exchanges in ornaments
(1) Based on typology technology and materials thereappears to be a distinctive eastern Jordanian koine ornetwork of stone bead manufacture and exchangefeaturing Dabba Marble and a probable regionalspecialization in it
Other Neolithic bead production sites are known
from eastern Jordan Indications are that most of the
green bead materials are Dabba Marble probably
from Jilat (further work is needed) In these sites
diversity of materials used seems low with few
imports from beyond the steppe Shells however
testify to wider networks (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989
Cooke and Reese in Betts 1998 Garrard et al 1994a
Reese 1991)
Azraq 31 (PPNB and ELN) is in our suite of study
materials (Baird et al 1992 Garrard et al 1994a
Wright and Garrard 2003) and debris blanks and
beads were found Preliminary XRF analysis of green
samples (by Groom) indicates that the material is
consistent with Jilat Dabba Marble Typology and
technology are also similar and as at Jilat 25 burin
spall drills were closely associated with bead-making
in specific activity areas (Baird 1993 521 Baird et al
1992 25) However the ground stone revealed no
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
(Wright 1992 1993 Wright in Baird et al 1992)
Material used for beads at Dhuweila (PPNB and
ELN) has been called Dabba Marble (Cooke and
Reese in Betts 1998) It is consistent in appearance
with our material although we have no details on
mineralogy or source Typologically these beads are
similar to those of Jilat 13 and 25 The ground stone
is very different from the suite at the Jilat sites
(Wright in Betts 1998) for comparisons of chipped
stone assemblages see Baird (1993)
At Bawwab al-Ghazal (Late PPNB) Rollefson
et al found drills bits on burin spalls tile knives
beads bead blanks and bead debris some of which
they called green Dabba Marble (Rollefson et al
1999 Quintero et al 2004) They argued that there is
a possible source of this material outcropping near
the site mdash lsquoFor the last raw material [green Dabba
Marble] small nodules of the green limestone were
embedded in the local bedrockrsquo (Rollefson et al 1999
3) However as shown in Appendix A the true
Dabba Marble only occurs in a restricted area west of
Wadi Jilat The lsquobedrockrsquo which outcrops near Azraq
31 and Bawwab al-Ghazal is travertine and some of
this formed during the late Pleistocene and Holocene
The nearby Epipalaeolithic site of Azraq 17 was
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 155
found partially embedded in travertine and artefacts
including nodules of imported basalt were found in
the travertine at this site It is possible that the
nodules of green limestone found at Bawwab al-
Ghazal were imported Dabba Marble which subse-
quently became incorporated in a travertine near the
site An alternative possibility is that the local
travertine is infused with green minerals In Wadi
Jilat travertines were noted with traces of green
minerals and in the Siwaqa area to the south-west of
Jilat there are extensive travertines some of which
are infused with pale green minerals including
volkonskoite (Barjous 1986 mdash see also Appendix A)
In eastern Jordan some Neolithic sites are greatly
dominated by burins (lsquoburin sitesrsquo) At a number of
these there is evidence for stone bead-making (eg
Jebel Naja) These lsquoburin sitesrsquo typically reveal few
ground stone tools we know of no examples of
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
from them It was argued that the main role of the
burins was production of spalls for drills used mainly
for beads (Betts 1987 1998 Finlayson and Betts
1990) However burin sites are not universally
associated with stone bead making At Jilat 23 24
and 26 burins were numerous but other evidence for
bead-making is scanty (Baird 1993 520)
Therefore some have questioned whether
burins and burin spalls in such sites were solely or
primarily intended for making drills and beads
noting that other functions are possible (Quintero
et al 2004 209) Given that these sites typically
represent short-term occupations it is possible that
many sites might be spall manufacture sites with
spalls transported to other settings where drill
manufacture and bead manufacture took place such
as Jilat 13 and 25 Rollefson expressed doubt that
either bladelet or burin spall drills would have been
used in bow drills partly because of their fragility and
also because most of them have a pronounced curve
on the long axis which would have made high speed
drilling impossible (Rollefson and Parker 2002) But
Finlayson and Betts (1990) and Berna (1995)
successfully experimented using burin spalls with
bow drills and Kenoyer (personal communication
2007) notes that drills made on burin spalls are the
most common type of drill in diverse prehistoric
stone bead-making sites (in India Pakistan and
elsewhere)
In the case of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 we believe burin-
spall drills were part of the bead-making repertoire
for reasons noted above This does not rule out other
uses of burin spalls Nor does it rule out the use of
other perforating techniques Drills do not have to be
made of stone when soft stones are being perforated
mdash wood bone and abrasives can be used (Foreman
1978)
(2) There are hints of export of Dabba Marble to at leastsome villages in the Levantine corridor However majorNeolithic villages display much diversity in materials andespecially more importing of exotic stones than is seen inthe eastern Jordanian sites
Many writers report Neolithic beads made of
unspecified lsquogreenstonersquo This term is unfortunate
since it can refer to metabasalt and similar altered
igneous rocks (Schumann 1992 248) Some of these
lsquogreenstonesrsquo may be limestone with apatite or other
materials (eg Garfinkel 1987 81ndash82 Hauptmann
2004 Talbot 1983 789) Beads of green limestones
rich in fluorapatite were found at late PPNB Basta in
southern Jordan (Hauptmann 2004) as confirmed by
XRF and XRD Green beads identified as Dabba
Marble were also reported from Ain Ghazal a site
with both PPNB and PPNC occupations (Rollefson
et al 1990 103ndash04) Whether these are Dabba
Marble from the Jilat source (Appendices AndashB) is
not yet fully clear Ongoing research will sort out
these mysteries (eg D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal
communication Hauptmann 2004)
Major villages in the Levantine Corridor reveal
different degrees of emphasis in styles and materials
often we see a certain emphasis on local materials and
preferences However considerable exchange net-
works are indicated in major villages which display
much wider ranges of stone ornament materials
compared to the eastern Jordanian sites (such as
Ain Ghazal Yiftahel Basta Barsquoja Ghuwayr 1
Fidan 1) mdash along with of course shells (Affonso
and Pernicka 2004 Bienert and Gebel 1998 84ndash86
Garfinkel 1987 Hauptmann 2004 Rollefson and
Simmons 1984 1986 Rollefson et al 1990 Simmons
and Najjar 1998 Starck 1988)
As the Neolithic evolved stone bead-making
entailed increasingly diverse techniques and materi-
als One example may be drills In earlymiddle PPNB
sites most drills are made on bladelets In the late
PPNB PPNC and Late Neolithic there may have
been a gradual increase in drills made on burin spalls
although perhaps not in all regions (Jensen 2004
Rollefson and Parker 2002) Underlining increasing
diversity of technological practice between groups
Baird (2001b) pointed out geographic variation in
this technology with spall drills dominating in the
north-eastern Jordanian steppe from MPPNB
through Early Late Neolithic whilst contemporary
sites to west and south use bladelet blanks for their
piercing tools
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
156 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
is the very tips of the drill bits mdash the upper few
millimetres mdash not the full length of the drills
Since disc beads are consistently about 25 to
26 mm in height only the upper 15 mm or so of the
drills mdash the most distal ends of the tips mdash had to
have been about 21 mm or less in thickness to
lsquomatchrsquo the perforation diameters of disc beads
(Table 4) In the case of barrel beads since barrel
beads were between 64 and 71 mm in height about
32 to 36 mm of the most distal ends of the drill bits
have to have been about 21 mm or less in thickness
to lsquomatchrsquo the perforations of barrel beads (Table 5)
Measurements of the drill bit tips within these
small uppermost reaches show that the maximal
thicknesses of the drill bitsrsquo distal tips fall within the
range of sizes indicated by the perforations (Fig 13)
Multi-stage Drilling
Sometimes drilling may have been accomplished in
several stages Some beads particularly those made of
harder stones have smooth cylindrical perforations
with parallel walls displaying no hint of the
hourglass shape
One way to achieve this is to create the hourglass
perforation and then to turn it into a perfect
cylindrical perforation via the use of a second drilling
procedure An example of this was cited by Calley
(1989) who proposed that two tools found in
carnelian bead workshops at Early Bronze Age
Kumartepe (Turkey) had complementary functions
a drill bit for making the initial hourglass perforation
and a borer for finishing and smoothing it into a
cylindrical perforation Since both drill bits and
borers were found on the Jilat sites this method of
finishing perforations could have been used
At Jilat 13 and 25 evidence for multi-stage drilling
can be seen in some beads which have a depression on
one or both faces The depression may be a result of
drilling with a larger drill bit first in order to provide
a guide for the final perforation with a finer drill bit
Such a technique is seen in India-Pakistan (Possehl
1981 39 Kenoyer 1992b 73)
a b c
d e f
Figure 10 Green Dabba Marble pendant blanks and finished pendants (a) Tabular roughout flaked into approximately
trapezoidal shape but not abraded (b) Abraded trapezoidal blank with sawing mark at bottom (c) Perforated
asymmetrical triangular pendant blank incompletely abraded (note striations on face) (d) Finished asymmetri-
cal triangular pendant (e) Pendant blank made on a flake unabraded (f) Nearly-finished pendant made on a
flake
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 147
Stabilizing Beads Anvils and Drilling Benches
What method was used to stabilize a bead during
drilling The simplest technique is to fix a bead to a
stone anvil with an adhesive Ethnography and
experiments show that such anvils can be small (the
size of handstones) (Foreman 1978 figs 6ndash7) Use of
such an anvil should result in small shallow
depressions a form of use-damage resulting from
force exerted from above Figure 14b shows a small
flat stone from Jilat 25 with a central depression of
the expected size and depth
Figure 14c shows the limestone bench from Jilat 13
(previously discussed) with a number of such pits in
the centre The marks are evenly spaced and are
concentrated in one small well-defined area on the
widest part of the bench this wide area was also
finely abraded
We see this bench as a multifunctional worktable
anvil We suspect that the beadmaker sat on the
narrow part of the bench (straddling it) placed bead
blanks on the pitted work surface fixed them with
adhesive and then drilled them The bench also
displays evidence of other activities including flaking
and grinding
Adhesives for hafting chipped stone tools could
have been adapted for use in fixing beads to anvils
Bitumen would be one candidate In some cultures a
wooden frame with cup-holes is sometimes used for
stabilizing beads (Kenoyer 1986 P Wright 1982)
The holes are filled with beeswax and clay the bead is
inserted into the wax-clay mixture which hardens
holding the bead steady After drilling beads are
released by breaking the wax-clay mixture (Allchin
1979 Stocks 1989) As wood was probably scarce in
Jilat and as there are no indications of the use of
clay we can probably rule out this technique
However stone items with cup-holes are seen in
Neolithic sites (Kirkbride 1966 Wright 1992
fig 527b)
Abrasion
Ground stone artefacts are crucial to bead produc-
tion in traditional technologies (Foreman 1978
Inizan et al 1992 Kenoyer et al 1991 53 Moholy-
Nagy 1983 294 Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58)
Grinding of beads can be achieved by abrading
each bead individually with a hand held abrader or
by rubbing them on a large grinding slab Either
method will produce linear striations of the type we
see on many unfinished beads (cf Figs 7cndashd and 10c)
However final shaping of disc and cylindrical beads
was most likely achieved by stringing them or loading
them on to a thin rod capable of penetrating the
perforation (individually or in groups) and then
rolling them on a grinding slab adding abrasives
(such as sand) and water to produce a smoother finish
(Foreman 1978 Moholy-Nagy 1983 298) Some disc
beads with parallel edges perpendicular to the faces
would probably have been rolled on a flat smooth
stone Other beads with facetted sharply angled or
bevelled edges (eg many barrel beads) suggest that
they were rolled or abraded along a stone with
grooves and slanting sides (eg Fig 15a c)
Abrasion of bead blanks may have been a multi-
stage process involving a number of materials of
different textures and hardness In an early stage
grinding of bead materials on vesicular basalt would
have been the easiest way to abrade a large nodule
quickly The pores of vesicular basalt and pumice
form natural cutting lsquoteethrsquo comparable to the metal
rasp used by present-day sculptors At Jilat 13 and
Jilat 25 we found broken fragments of vesicular
basalt grinding slabs but not large complete exam-
ples The small fragments suggest two possibilities
either there were large complete slabs at one time
which were then broken worn out and discarded or
only small fragments of these heavy duty grinding
tools were needed
For finer abrasion sandstone grinding slabs might
be expected None were found However small
Figure 11 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic
sites Tile knives or possible saws for bead-
making From Baird 1993 fig 85
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
148 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
handheld abraders made of sandstones with coarse
hard quartz crystals were found at both sites (Fig
15andashb) Sandstone is not local to Wadi Jilat and these
items were imported and probably used extensively
(resulting in the small size)
For even finer abrasion limestone could have been
used Such needs could have been met by the large
bench of Jilat 13 (Fig 14c) which was finely ground
over a very large area (within which the possible
drilling marks were placed)
Some might see the grooved items made of
sandstone (Fig 15a) and limestone (Fig 15c) as
lsquoshaft straightenersrsquo One or two shaft straightener
fragments made of basalt occur at Jilat 13 Like other
basalt shaft straighteners in Neolithic Jilat (eg Jilat
7) (Garrard et al 1994a Wright 1993) the use-
surfaces of these have U-shaped cross-sections By
contrast the cross sections of the use surfaces on the
sandstone and limestone grooved items are not U-
shaped but have sharp angles We see these tools
mainly as abraders for grinding bead facets espe-
cially on barrel beads The widths of the use surfaces
are 11 mm for the sandstone tool and 138 mm for
the limestone one These dimensions correspond to
the average diameter (5 width) of 31 measured green
Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks from Jilat 13 (N 5
31 Mean diameter 5 92 mm standard deviation 5
28) Grooved stones are used in bead grinding in
a
b c
Figure 12 Ground stone artefacts probably for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Cutmarked slab (limestone) Jilat
13 The cutmarks are shallow and are concentrated in the left area running parallel to the main axes of the
slab (b) Cutmarked slab fragment (limestone) Jilat 13 showing deep cutmarks (c) Flaked and ground abra-
sive cutting tool made of limestone Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 149
modern India (Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58) a
grooved sandstone tool was found with an unfinished
bead at Catalhoyuk (Wright and Bains 2007)
Tosi and Vidale (1990) regard failure resulting
from breakage or human error as more common in
the grinding stage than during perforation although
this depends on material and opinion (Kenoyer 2003
18) In some cases it might be more efficient to shape
the bead first before attempting perforation This
may explain why barrel beads tend to be shaped and
abraded prior to perforation
Finished beads were always finely abraded and
sometimes polished to the extent of reflecting light
Ethnographic observations indicate that polishing is
sometimes done by placing beads en masse in a
leather bag along with an abrasive and shaking and
rolling the bags for long periods (Allchin 1979
Kenoyer 2003) This simple method would have been
more likely than the method of rolling beads and
abrasives in a wooden barrel which is also docu-
mented ethnographically (Kenoyer 2003)
However shaking beads in a bag with an abrasive
tends to produce beads with rounded convex edges
(Gwinnett and Gorelick 1989) Some beads at Jilat
have this form but many mdash especially those made of
the hard cherty red Dabba Marble mdash have sharp
edges perpendicular to bead faces indicating that
they were individually polished or polished during
rolling on a string or stick Alternative methods of
polishing can include rubbing with leather or wood
with the addition of fine sand or chalk and water or
with animal hairwool and animal fat (Kenoyer 1986
20) These methods would have been possible with
Jilat technology
Craft Specialization and Comparisons withOther Sites
Technology needs to be studied not only in terms of
materials and techniques but also in terms of social
groups involved in artefact production individual
artisans and skill (Dobres and Hoffmann 1999 2ndash12)
In egalitarian societies craft skill and knowledge of
Figure 13 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic sites Drilling and piercing tools From Baird 1993 fig 82
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
150 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
special materials can enhance the power of an
individual or a group encouraging hierarchy
(Dobres 2000 119ndash20)
These questions force us to reconsider issues of
craft specialization a term often used loosely or in
widely different ways Three concepts of specializa-
tion are considered here individual specialists
specialization between households or domestic
groups within a given site and site specialization
within a regional or social network of craft produc-
tion and exchange
Costin (1991) draws a contrast between indepen-
dent specialization and attached specialization
Independent specialization involves production of
utilitarian goods for nonelites and can be household-
based or based in special workshops Attached
specialization refers to production of prestige goods
under control of elites Whilst Costin notes that
attached specialization can also be based in house-
holds or workshops we often think of attached
specialization in connection with central institutions
and urban or state-level societies It is of considerable
interest that in early urban societies the making of
stone personal ornaments in association with central
institutions figures prominently (Stein 1996 Vidale
1989)
How earlier forms of craft specialization may have
evolved into large-scale attached specialization is
poorly understood Most research has concentrated
on later stages in this process (eg Stein 1996) in
discussions of earlier forms of specialization defini-
tions and criteria for diagnosis could sometimes be
clearer (eg Quintero and Wilke 1998 Rollefson and
Parker 2002 Rosen 1997) If we are dealing with
a
c
b
Figure 14 Ground stone artefacts probably used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Capstone made of limestone
Jilat 25 (b) Handstone probably used as an anvil or hammer Jilat 25 note depression in face and flake scars
at edges (c) Limestone drilling bench Jilat 13 Note evidence of use-wear on the left and widest area of the
bench smooth abraded surface drill marks in the centre-left face small flake scars with negative bulbs of per-
cussion close to the edge of the bench
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 151
specialization in Neolithic societies it is probably
independent specialization Still Neolithic societies
may fall between Costinrsquos two categories Neolithic
groups were clearly producing prestige goods perso-
nal ornaments are not strictly utilitarian and there is
at least a possibility that elites were emerging (Byrd
1994 Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002 Verhoeven
2002)
Individual Specialists
First there is the issue of identifying individual
specialists Some use lsquospecializationrsquo to refer to any
situation in which some artisans have high levels of
skill a view that has been criticized (Rice 1991) We
agree with Rice that identifying a high level of
technical skill in a craft is not on its own sufficient
for a diagnosis of specialization since it robs the
concept of force in discussing long term change (by
this criterion the Upper Palaeolithic was riddled
with craft specialists) However we would argue
that if there are other indications of craft specializa-
tion a search for levels of ability in different
individuals is appropriate mdash if the data permit
Such data would be primary refuse from well-dated
sites of high temporal resolution in which technical
processes (eg errors in chaines operatoires) can
reveal experts vs novices (Pigeot 1990 Stout 2002
Vanzetti and Vidale 1994)
In the case of Jilat 13 and 25 we are dealing with
much primary refuse and two closely dated sites (see
above and Tables 6ndash7) mdash with periodic use of the
sites over a time range on the order of 200 years at
most and possibly much less Jilat 25 yielded activity
areas with clear spatial clusters as do a number of
contexts at Jilat 13 Space does not permit us to
present all details (this awaits the final site report)
but we feel confident that aggregate consideration of
the data from each site allows us to discuss general
questions of individual skills mdash master craftsmen vs
novices
a b
c
Figure 15 Ground stone artefacts possibly used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Grooved sandstone abrading
tool Jilat 13 (b) Sandstone hand-held abrader Jilat 25 (c) Grooved limestone abrading tool Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
152 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
To explore this we analysed unfinished blanks and
the frequency of perforation errors Drilling is a
sensitive moment in bead production when many
things can go wrong (Kenoyer 2003) A low incidence
in perforation errors combined with high numbers of
successfully finished beads and evidence of standar-
dization should be reasonably good indicators of an
artisanrsquos mastery This is the situation seen at Jilat 25
(Fig 7) In all of 93 blanks from Jilat 25 only 2 were
perforation errors a failure rate of only 2
On the other hand a high incidence of perforation
errors would suggest that a beadmaker was a relative
novice Jilat 13 produced more blanks with perfora-
tion errors than Jilat 25 We thought we might find
individual contexts with a high rate of error
suggesting apprentices
The data did not bear this out Of 223 bead blanks
from Jilat 13 (all phases) 22 were perforation errors
mdash a failure rate of 98 All but two errors were on
barrel bead blanks of green Dabba Marble The
others were one pendant blank and one irregular
bead blank These 22 blanks were distributed across
20 different contexts and no more than 2 perforation
errors were found in any one context
A close look at those contexts reveals low error
rates In Context B21 2 green barrel bead blanks
with perforation errors were found with 5 other
blanks The others included green and red barrel and
disc blanks This context also yielded 5 successfully
finished beads including black and red barrel beads
and a green disc Black and green debitage and a
discoidal handstone were also found here In Context
B71 2 blanks with perforation errors were found
along with 9 other blanks and 10 successfully
finished beads including green Dabba Marble barrel
beads but also black and red disc beads Much
debitage was found along with a flaked limestone
cutting tool (cf Fig 12c) and a limestone object with
a drill mark
The higher rate of error at Jilat 13 compared to
Jilat 25 could be because artisans at Jilat 13 were
making more of the larger more complex barrel
beads (as opposed to simple discs see Tables 2ndash3)
which offer greater chances of failure due to the
longer drilling distance However at Jilat 13 the
overall failure rate was still quite low particularly
considering the overall volume of material recovered
(Table 1)
We conclude that the beadmakers at Jilat 13
included few trainees These appear to have been
skilled artisans a small task force composed of
relative experts This raises the question of whether
these beadmakers were examples of lsquoproducer
specialistsrsquo as traditionally defined that is people
involved in
production of a good by a relatively small number of
individuals (compared to the total output and
number of consumers) individuals who are as a
result of this selectivity and the routinization or
repetition of their tasks particularly skilled in
manufacture (Rice 1991 263)
Jilat 13 and 25 do suggest small numbers of
individuals and a certain selectivity in who was
involved in stone bead making The quantity of
debitagedebris relative to (1) the number of finished
beads and (2) the modest sizes of these structures
collectively suggest that these craftsmenwomen
served a larger number of consumers relative to the
number of craftsmen involved here If so who were
these consumers mdash other residents of Jilat or groups
beyond
Intra-site Specialization Between Domestic Groups
Several studies suggest ways of identifying different
forms of craft specialization between domestic groups
in a site For later sites Stein (1996) has explored
spatial data particularly how craft production
facilities are dispersed among domestic units or
located near special (or central) institutions In
Neolithic sites questions about dispersal between
households and possible links between craft produc-
tion and special buildings or special sites have been
underexplored
For specialization Costin (1991) suggests that we
would expect (1) variability between production
units (eg households occupations regions) in
relevant artefacts (2) high densities of craft produc-
tion debris relative to some other generally used
item in some production units (3) high ratios of
unfinished goods to finished goods in some produc-
tion units Kenoyer et alrsquos (1991) ethnoarchaeolo-
gical studies of modern stone bead-making in
Khambat (India) suggest something similar in the
case of households as production units There non-
specialist households engaging in casual opportu-
nistic bead production revealed low quantities of
bead-making debris few unfinished beads and little
standardization in finished beads By contrast
households specializing in bead production were
characterized by stockpiling of large quantities of
raw materials many unfinished beads and more
standardized finished products
In looking at whole occupations (ie phases within
sites) as a unit of observation we argue elsewhere
(Wright and Garrard 2003) that artefact densities and
other data from 13 PPNB and 8 PPNCELN
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 153
occupations in the Jilat-Azraq region suggest that
PPNCELN producers were more specialized than
those of the PPNB mdash at least in the Jilat-Azraq
region Unlike the PPNB sites Jilat 13 and 25 have
very high densities of bead-making debris specialized
tools for drilling and sawing there is an abundance of
unfinished materials relative to finished products
bead-making tools and debris are abundant relative
to normal domestic food processing equipment
(ground stone artefacts) (Wright and Garrard 2003
cf Costin 1991)
That argument is chronological comparing the
PPNB to the PPNCELN occupations and we stand
behind it for the Jilat-Azraq case (different trajec-
tories may apply to south Jordan and the Negev see
below) Still it leaves open the issue of house-to-
house variation within Jilat 25 or Jilat 13 As we have
only one excavated structure per site we cannot on
present evidence argue that each building housed a
group of specialists serving other households within
the same site In fact we have no direct evidence that
there were other structures on each site mdash the ones
excavated were the only ones visible on the surface
There are nuances of material and typological
choices between the Jilat 25 structure (red disc beads)
and the Jilat 13 structure (larger complex green
ornaments) but these nuances are beyond the scope
of this paper
In all we suspect that stone bead production at
Jilat 13 and 25 was geared not for other domestic
units lsquoin camprsquo but for use by these quite mobile
communities themselves mdash as well as export to other
sites within the steppe and beyond (see below) In
Costinrsquos terms (Costin 1991) Jilat 13 and 25 might
each be an example of an independent non-centra-
lized dispersed workshop possibly lsquofamily runrsquo (Rice
1991 262) mdash in which handling of Dabba Marble
was not routinely entrusted to novices
There are hints of house-to-house variations in
bead-making in major villages with larger samples of
domestic structures as in PPNB Beidha At PPNB
Beidha (earlier than Jilat 13 and 25) Building 14
stands out
Other forms of production besides food preparation
were less common Building 14 represented the best
example of artefact production in these basements
A wide range of artefacts was recovered apparently
associated with building 14rsquos basement floor
Particularly widespread were stone polishers bone
tools raw material (including hematite malachite
and magnesium) more than 60 unmodified marine
shells and at least two dozen beads of shell stone
and bone some of which were in various stages of
production Some artifacts lay on stone slabs
indicating that at least some slabs may have
functioned as work surfaces (Byrd 2005 117)
Such hints are intriguing Still macro-artefacts
from house floors are affected by problems of site
formation and house abandonment Micro-artefact
data can help (Rainville 2005) House-by-house
exploration with attention to micro-artefacts is
needed (Wright and Bains 2007)
Site Specialization Within a Regional Network of Craft
Production and Exchange
Both sites and other Neolithic sites in Jilat and
Azraq exhibit resource specialization
the selective use of particular resources in craft
manufacture such as certain clays that are repeat-
edly used (Rice 1991 262)
The Jilat artisans emphasized Dabba Marble from
a wider array of available stone types The Jilat-
Azraq sites collectively show that green Dabba
Marble was a special target This is revealed in both
frequencies and weights (for debris data and weight
data see Wright and Garrard 2003 for frequency
data on beads and blanks see Tables 2 and 3) At
both sites debris is greatly dominated by green
Dabba Marble mdash 80ndash95 of debris by both weight
(grams) and frequency Green Dabba Marble also
dominates blanks in terms of weight at both sites mdash
indicating the use of green for making larger heavier
and more conspicuous ornaments
Turning to frequencies at Jilat 13 about 90 of
blanks are green and only 5 are red However
finished beads include both green and red forms in
comparable percentages (404 and 436 respec-
tively) (Table 3) suggesting that finished red beads
were brought into the building from a place of
manufacture located somewhere else At Jilat 25
blanks of red and green Dabba Marble occur in
comparable proportions (409 green 43 red)
whilst finished beads are predominantly red (588)
(Table 2) If Jilat 13 and 25 were absolute contem-
poraries this could suggest variations in choices and
exchange between residents of different structures
Rice (1991) has defined site specialization as a
situation in which a site is located near a special
resource and the inhabitants emphasize production of
a craft based on that resource Relative to other sites
not so located the range of site functions and
activities would be expected to be more limited
Thus site specialization
involves individual localities or sites having evidence
of limited functions or intensive productive activity
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
154 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
often determined by fortuitous environmental fac-
tors This includes proximity to mineral deposits
and so forth (Rice 1991 262)
Do Jilat 13 and 25 fit this concept In both sites
15 km from the source we have a wealth of evidence
for intensive stone bead production and scanty
evidence for routine food processing tools (Wright
and Garrard 2003) However Jilat 25 may be closer
to the limited function model envisioned by Rice In
Jilat 13 bead-making is clearly intensive but we are
also dealing with a chipped stone assemblage of not
only drills and burins but also projectile points and
other tools Jilat 13 also reveals production of
figurines (of animals phalluses and arrow-shaped
forms) and sculpted pillars (Baird 1993 Garrard
et al 1994a Martin 1999 Wright 1992 1993)
In all Jilat 13 and 25 suggest that we can apply
Ricersquos lsquosite specializationrsquo on the grounds of intensive
productive activity and proximity to source mdash but
with the qualification that this specialization was also
embedded in hunting-herding activities and at Jilat
13 production of other special crafts unique among
the sites of a symbolic nature (figurines pillars)
One possibility is that we are dealing with a camp
of hunter-herder corporate groups mdash part of a wider
regional network mdash engaged in special activities in
remote areas involving art personal ornaments and
ritual Such groups are suggested by other data from
the PPNBndashPPNC time span for example Nahal
Hemar (ornaments masks hunting tools) Dhuweila
(carving of hunters with dress variations)
Catalhoyuk (images of hunters with dress variations
as in the bull hunt mural) and Gobeklitepe (sculpture
production including a quarry wild-animal icono-
graphy hunting) (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988 Betts
1998 Mellaart 1967 Schmidt 2000) In all these data
hint that craft production of special items was
embedded in hunting andor herding activities in
remote areas this may have been a key means by
which exotic materials reached major villages In a
very broad way this supports a sketch outlined by
Bar Yosef (Bar-Yosef 2001) although we do not
necessarily agree with specifics of his model eg the
territories boundaries social groups and mechanisms
which he suggests (cf Asouti 2006) Instead we see
this as one example of diverse strategies of social
networking linking lineages households and commu-
nities in the Neolithic (Wright forthcoming)
Returning to the stone bead data from Jilat 13 and
25 the apparent stockpiling of raw material and
intensive production activity hints at production of
the green material for export (see above and Wright
and Garrard 2003) New data now add weight to this
idea and suggest the following provisional picture of
regional specializations and exchanges in ornaments
(1) Based on typology technology and materials thereappears to be a distinctive eastern Jordanian koine ornetwork of stone bead manufacture and exchangefeaturing Dabba Marble and a probable regionalspecialization in it
Other Neolithic bead production sites are known
from eastern Jordan Indications are that most of the
green bead materials are Dabba Marble probably
from Jilat (further work is needed) In these sites
diversity of materials used seems low with few
imports from beyond the steppe Shells however
testify to wider networks (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989
Cooke and Reese in Betts 1998 Garrard et al 1994a
Reese 1991)
Azraq 31 (PPNB and ELN) is in our suite of study
materials (Baird et al 1992 Garrard et al 1994a
Wright and Garrard 2003) and debris blanks and
beads were found Preliminary XRF analysis of green
samples (by Groom) indicates that the material is
consistent with Jilat Dabba Marble Typology and
technology are also similar and as at Jilat 25 burin
spall drills were closely associated with bead-making
in specific activity areas (Baird 1993 521 Baird et al
1992 25) However the ground stone revealed no
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
(Wright 1992 1993 Wright in Baird et al 1992)
Material used for beads at Dhuweila (PPNB and
ELN) has been called Dabba Marble (Cooke and
Reese in Betts 1998) It is consistent in appearance
with our material although we have no details on
mineralogy or source Typologically these beads are
similar to those of Jilat 13 and 25 The ground stone
is very different from the suite at the Jilat sites
(Wright in Betts 1998) for comparisons of chipped
stone assemblages see Baird (1993)
At Bawwab al-Ghazal (Late PPNB) Rollefson
et al found drills bits on burin spalls tile knives
beads bead blanks and bead debris some of which
they called green Dabba Marble (Rollefson et al
1999 Quintero et al 2004) They argued that there is
a possible source of this material outcropping near
the site mdash lsquoFor the last raw material [green Dabba
Marble] small nodules of the green limestone were
embedded in the local bedrockrsquo (Rollefson et al 1999
3) However as shown in Appendix A the true
Dabba Marble only occurs in a restricted area west of
Wadi Jilat The lsquobedrockrsquo which outcrops near Azraq
31 and Bawwab al-Ghazal is travertine and some of
this formed during the late Pleistocene and Holocene
The nearby Epipalaeolithic site of Azraq 17 was
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 155
found partially embedded in travertine and artefacts
including nodules of imported basalt were found in
the travertine at this site It is possible that the
nodules of green limestone found at Bawwab al-
Ghazal were imported Dabba Marble which subse-
quently became incorporated in a travertine near the
site An alternative possibility is that the local
travertine is infused with green minerals In Wadi
Jilat travertines were noted with traces of green
minerals and in the Siwaqa area to the south-west of
Jilat there are extensive travertines some of which
are infused with pale green minerals including
volkonskoite (Barjous 1986 mdash see also Appendix A)
In eastern Jordan some Neolithic sites are greatly
dominated by burins (lsquoburin sitesrsquo) At a number of
these there is evidence for stone bead-making (eg
Jebel Naja) These lsquoburin sitesrsquo typically reveal few
ground stone tools we know of no examples of
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
from them It was argued that the main role of the
burins was production of spalls for drills used mainly
for beads (Betts 1987 1998 Finlayson and Betts
1990) However burin sites are not universally
associated with stone bead making At Jilat 23 24
and 26 burins were numerous but other evidence for
bead-making is scanty (Baird 1993 520)
Therefore some have questioned whether
burins and burin spalls in such sites were solely or
primarily intended for making drills and beads
noting that other functions are possible (Quintero
et al 2004 209) Given that these sites typically
represent short-term occupations it is possible that
many sites might be spall manufacture sites with
spalls transported to other settings where drill
manufacture and bead manufacture took place such
as Jilat 13 and 25 Rollefson expressed doubt that
either bladelet or burin spall drills would have been
used in bow drills partly because of their fragility and
also because most of them have a pronounced curve
on the long axis which would have made high speed
drilling impossible (Rollefson and Parker 2002) But
Finlayson and Betts (1990) and Berna (1995)
successfully experimented using burin spalls with
bow drills and Kenoyer (personal communication
2007) notes that drills made on burin spalls are the
most common type of drill in diverse prehistoric
stone bead-making sites (in India Pakistan and
elsewhere)
In the case of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 we believe burin-
spall drills were part of the bead-making repertoire
for reasons noted above This does not rule out other
uses of burin spalls Nor does it rule out the use of
other perforating techniques Drills do not have to be
made of stone when soft stones are being perforated
mdash wood bone and abrasives can be used (Foreman
1978)
(2) There are hints of export of Dabba Marble to at leastsome villages in the Levantine corridor However majorNeolithic villages display much diversity in materials andespecially more importing of exotic stones than is seen inthe eastern Jordanian sites
Many writers report Neolithic beads made of
unspecified lsquogreenstonersquo This term is unfortunate
since it can refer to metabasalt and similar altered
igneous rocks (Schumann 1992 248) Some of these
lsquogreenstonesrsquo may be limestone with apatite or other
materials (eg Garfinkel 1987 81ndash82 Hauptmann
2004 Talbot 1983 789) Beads of green limestones
rich in fluorapatite were found at late PPNB Basta in
southern Jordan (Hauptmann 2004) as confirmed by
XRF and XRD Green beads identified as Dabba
Marble were also reported from Ain Ghazal a site
with both PPNB and PPNC occupations (Rollefson
et al 1990 103ndash04) Whether these are Dabba
Marble from the Jilat source (Appendices AndashB) is
not yet fully clear Ongoing research will sort out
these mysteries (eg D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal
communication Hauptmann 2004)
Major villages in the Levantine Corridor reveal
different degrees of emphasis in styles and materials
often we see a certain emphasis on local materials and
preferences However considerable exchange net-
works are indicated in major villages which display
much wider ranges of stone ornament materials
compared to the eastern Jordanian sites (such as
Ain Ghazal Yiftahel Basta Barsquoja Ghuwayr 1
Fidan 1) mdash along with of course shells (Affonso
and Pernicka 2004 Bienert and Gebel 1998 84ndash86
Garfinkel 1987 Hauptmann 2004 Rollefson and
Simmons 1984 1986 Rollefson et al 1990 Simmons
and Najjar 1998 Starck 1988)
As the Neolithic evolved stone bead-making
entailed increasingly diverse techniques and materi-
als One example may be drills In earlymiddle PPNB
sites most drills are made on bladelets In the late
PPNB PPNC and Late Neolithic there may have
been a gradual increase in drills made on burin spalls
although perhaps not in all regions (Jensen 2004
Rollefson and Parker 2002) Underlining increasing
diversity of technological practice between groups
Baird (2001b) pointed out geographic variation in
this technology with spall drills dominating in the
north-eastern Jordanian steppe from MPPNB
through Early Late Neolithic whilst contemporary
sites to west and south use bladelet blanks for their
piercing tools
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
156 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
Stabilizing Beads Anvils and Drilling Benches
What method was used to stabilize a bead during
drilling The simplest technique is to fix a bead to a
stone anvil with an adhesive Ethnography and
experiments show that such anvils can be small (the
size of handstones) (Foreman 1978 figs 6ndash7) Use of
such an anvil should result in small shallow
depressions a form of use-damage resulting from
force exerted from above Figure 14b shows a small
flat stone from Jilat 25 with a central depression of
the expected size and depth
Figure 14c shows the limestone bench from Jilat 13
(previously discussed) with a number of such pits in
the centre The marks are evenly spaced and are
concentrated in one small well-defined area on the
widest part of the bench this wide area was also
finely abraded
We see this bench as a multifunctional worktable
anvil We suspect that the beadmaker sat on the
narrow part of the bench (straddling it) placed bead
blanks on the pitted work surface fixed them with
adhesive and then drilled them The bench also
displays evidence of other activities including flaking
and grinding
Adhesives for hafting chipped stone tools could
have been adapted for use in fixing beads to anvils
Bitumen would be one candidate In some cultures a
wooden frame with cup-holes is sometimes used for
stabilizing beads (Kenoyer 1986 P Wright 1982)
The holes are filled with beeswax and clay the bead is
inserted into the wax-clay mixture which hardens
holding the bead steady After drilling beads are
released by breaking the wax-clay mixture (Allchin
1979 Stocks 1989) As wood was probably scarce in
Jilat and as there are no indications of the use of
clay we can probably rule out this technique
However stone items with cup-holes are seen in
Neolithic sites (Kirkbride 1966 Wright 1992
fig 527b)
Abrasion
Ground stone artefacts are crucial to bead produc-
tion in traditional technologies (Foreman 1978
Inizan et al 1992 Kenoyer et al 1991 53 Moholy-
Nagy 1983 294 Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58)
Grinding of beads can be achieved by abrading
each bead individually with a hand held abrader or
by rubbing them on a large grinding slab Either
method will produce linear striations of the type we
see on many unfinished beads (cf Figs 7cndashd and 10c)
However final shaping of disc and cylindrical beads
was most likely achieved by stringing them or loading
them on to a thin rod capable of penetrating the
perforation (individually or in groups) and then
rolling them on a grinding slab adding abrasives
(such as sand) and water to produce a smoother finish
(Foreman 1978 Moholy-Nagy 1983 298) Some disc
beads with parallel edges perpendicular to the faces
would probably have been rolled on a flat smooth
stone Other beads with facetted sharply angled or
bevelled edges (eg many barrel beads) suggest that
they were rolled or abraded along a stone with
grooves and slanting sides (eg Fig 15a c)
Abrasion of bead blanks may have been a multi-
stage process involving a number of materials of
different textures and hardness In an early stage
grinding of bead materials on vesicular basalt would
have been the easiest way to abrade a large nodule
quickly The pores of vesicular basalt and pumice
form natural cutting lsquoteethrsquo comparable to the metal
rasp used by present-day sculptors At Jilat 13 and
Jilat 25 we found broken fragments of vesicular
basalt grinding slabs but not large complete exam-
ples The small fragments suggest two possibilities
either there were large complete slabs at one time
which were then broken worn out and discarded or
only small fragments of these heavy duty grinding
tools were needed
For finer abrasion sandstone grinding slabs might
be expected None were found However small
Figure 11 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic
sites Tile knives or possible saws for bead-
making From Baird 1993 fig 85
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
148 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
handheld abraders made of sandstones with coarse
hard quartz crystals were found at both sites (Fig
15andashb) Sandstone is not local to Wadi Jilat and these
items were imported and probably used extensively
(resulting in the small size)
For even finer abrasion limestone could have been
used Such needs could have been met by the large
bench of Jilat 13 (Fig 14c) which was finely ground
over a very large area (within which the possible
drilling marks were placed)
Some might see the grooved items made of
sandstone (Fig 15a) and limestone (Fig 15c) as
lsquoshaft straightenersrsquo One or two shaft straightener
fragments made of basalt occur at Jilat 13 Like other
basalt shaft straighteners in Neolithic Jilat (eg Jilat
7) (Garrard et al 1994a Wright 1993) the use-
surfaces of these have U-shaped cross-sections By
contrast the cross sections of the use surfaces on the
sandstone and limestone grooved items are not U-
shaped but have sharp angles We see these tools
mainly as abraders for grinding bead facets espe-
cially on barrel beads The widths of the use surfaces
are 11 mm for the sandstone tool and 138 mm for
the limestone one These dimensions correspond to
the average diameter (5 width) of 31 measured green
Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks from Jilat 13 (N 5
31 Mean diameter 5 92 mm standard deviation 5
28) Grooved stones are used in bead grinding in
a
b c
Figure 12 Ground stone artefacts probably for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Cutmarked slab (limestone) Jilat
13 The cutmarks are shallow and are concentrated in the left area running parallel to the main axes of the
slab (b) Cutmarked slab fragment (limestone) Jilat 13 showing deep cutmarks (c) Flaked and ground abra-
sive cutting tool made of limestone Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 149
modern India (Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58) a
grooved sandstone tool was found with an unfinished
bead at Catalhoyuk (Wright and Bains 2007)
Tosi and Vidale (1990) regard failure resulting
from breakage or human error as more common in
the grinding stage than during perforation although
this depends on material and opinion (Kenoyer 2003
18) In some cases it might be more efficient to shape
the bead first before attempting perforation This
may explain why barrel beads tend to be shaped and
abraded prior to perforation
Finished beads were always finely abraded and
sometimes polished to the extent of reflecting light
Ethnographic observations indicate that polishing is
sometimes done by placing beads en masse in a
leather bag along with an abrasive and shaking and
rolling the bags for long periods (Allchin 1979
Kenoyer 2003) This simple method would have been
more likely than the method of rolling beads and
abrasives in a wooden barrel which is also docu-
mented ethnographically (Kenoyer 2003)
However shaking beads in a bag with an abrasive
tends to produce beads with rounded convex edges
(Gwinnett and Gorelick 1989) Some beads at Jilat
have this form but many mdash especially those made of
the hard cherty red Dabba Marble mdash have sharp
edges perpendicular to bead faces indicating that
they were individually polished or polished during
rolling on a string or stick Alternative methods of
polishing can include rubbing with leather or wood
with the addition of fine sand or chalk and water or
with animal hairwool and animal fat (Kenoyer 1986
20) These methods would have been possible with
Jilat technology
Craft Specialization and Comparisons withOther Sites
Technology needs to be studied not only in terms of
materials and techniques but also in terms of social
groups involved in artefact production individual
artisans and skill (Dobres and Hoffmann 1999 2ndash12)
In egalitarian societies craft skill and knowledge of
Figure 13 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic sites Drilling and piercing tools From Baird 1993 fig 82
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
150 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
special materials can enhance the power of an
individual or a group encouraging hierarchy
(Dobres 2000 119ndash20)
These questions force us to reconsider issues of
craft specialization a term often used loosely or in
widely different ways Three concepts of specializa-
tion are considered here individual specialists
specialization between households or domestic
groups within a given site and site specialization
within a regional or social network of craft produc-
tion and exchange
Costin (1991) draws a contrast between indepen-
dent specialization and attached specialization
Independent specialization involves production of
utilitarian goods for nonelites and can be household-
based or based in special workshops Attached
specialization refers to production of prestige goods
under control of elites Whilst Costin notes that
attached specialization can also be based in house-
holds or workshops we often think of attached
specialization in connection with central institutions
and urban or state-level societies It is of considerable
interest that in early urban societies the making of
stone personal ornaments in association with central
institutions figures prominently (Stein 1996 Vidale
1989)
How earlier forms of craft specialization may have
evolved into large-scale attached specialization is
poorly understood Most research has concentrated
on later stages in this process (eg Stein 1996) in
discussions of earlier forms of specialization defini-
tions and criteria for diagnosis could sometimes be
clearer (eg Quintero and Wilke 1998 Rollefson and
Parker 2002 Rosen 1997) If we are dealing with
a
c
b
Figure 14 Ground stone artefacts probably used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Capstone made of limestone
Jilat 25 (b) Handstone probably used as an anvil or hammer Jilat 25 note depression in face and flake scars
at edges (c) Limestone drilling bench Jilat 13 Note evidence of use-wear on the left and widest area of the
bench smooth abraded surface drill marks in the centre-left face small flake scars with negative bulbs of per-
cussion close to the edge of the bench
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 151
specialization in Neolithic societies it is probably
independent specialization Still Neolithic societies
may fall between Costinrsquos two categories Neolithic
groups were clearly producing prestige goods perso-
nal ornaments are not strictly utilitarian and there is
at least a possibility that elites were emerging (Byrd
1994 Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002 Verhoeven
2002)
Individual Specialists
First there is the issue of identifying individual
specialists Some use lsquospecializationrsquo to refer to any
situation in which some artisans have high levels of
skill a view that has been criticized (Rice 1991) We
agree with Rice that identifying a high level of
technical skill in a craft is not on its own sufficient
for a diagnosis of specialization since it robs the
concept of force in discussing long term change (by
this criterion the Upper Palaeolithic was riddled
with craft specialists) However we would argue
that if there are other indications of craft specializa-
tion a search for levels of ability in different
individuals is appropriate mdash if the data permit
Such data would be primary refuse from well-dated
sites of high temporal resolution in which technical
processes (eg errors in chaines operatoires) can
reveal experts vs novices (Pigeot 1990 Stout 2002
Vanzetti and Vidale 1994)
In the case of Jilat 13 and 25 we are dealing with
much primary refuse and two closely dated sites (see
above and Tables 6ndash7) mdash with periodic use of the
sites over a time range on the order of 200 years at
most and possibly much less Jilat 25 yielded activity
areas with clear spatial clusters as do a number of
contexts at Jilat 13 Space does not permit us to
present all details (this awaits the final site report)
but we feel confident that aggregate consideration of
the data from each site allows us to discuss general
questions of individual skills mdash master craftsmen vs
novices
a b
c
Figure 15 Ground stone artefacts possibly used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Grooved sandstone abrading
tool Jilat 13 (b) Sandstone hand-held abrader Jilat 25 (c) Grooved limestone abrading tool Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
152 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
To explore this we analysed unfinished blanks and
the frequency of perforation errors Drilling is a
sensitive moment in bead production when many
things can go wrong (Kenoyer 2003) A low incidence
in perforation errors combined with high numbers of
successfully finished beads and evidence of standar-
dization should be reasonably good indicators of an
artisanrsquos mastery This is the situation seen at Jilat 25
(Fig 7) In all of 93 blanks from Jilat 25 only 2 were
perforation errors a failure rate of only 2
On the other hand a high incidence of perforation
errors would suggest that a beadmaker was a relative
novice Jilat 13 produced more blanks with perfora-
tion errors than Jilat 25 We thought we might find
individual contexts with a high rate of error
suggesting apprentices
The data did not bear this out Of 223 bead blanks
from Jilat 13 (all phases) 22 were perforation errors
mdash a failure rate of 98 All but two errors were on
barrel bead blanks of green Dabba Marble The
others were one pendant blank and one irregular
bead blank These 22 blanks were distributed across
20 different contexts and no more than 2 perforation
errors were found in any one context
A close look at those contexts reveals low error
rates In Context B21 2 green barrel bead blanks
with perforation errors were found with 5 other
blanks The others included green and red barrel and
disc blanks This context also yielded 5 successfully
finished beads including black and red barrel beads
and a green disc Black and green debitage and a
discoidal handstone were also found here In Context
B71 2 blanks with perforation errors were found
along with 9 other blanks and 10 successfully
finished beads including green Dabba Marble barrel
beads but also black and red disc beads Much
debitage was found along with a flaked limestone
cutting tool (cf Fig 12c) and a limestone object with
a drill mark
The higher rate of error at Jilat 13 compared to
Jilat 25 could be because artisans at Jilat 13 were
making more of the larger more complex barrel
beads (as opposed to simple discs see Tables 2ndash3)
which offer greater chances of failure due to the
longer drilling distance However at Jilat 13 the
overall failure rate was still quite low particularly
considering the overall volume of material recovered
(Table 1)
We conclude that the beadmakers at Jilat 13
included few trainees These appear to have been
skilled artisans a small task force composed of
relative experts This raises the question of whether
these beadmakers were examples of lsquoproducer
specialistsrsquo as traditionally defined that is people
involved in
production of a good by a relatively small number of
individuals (compared to the total output and
number of consumers) individuals who are as a
result of this selectivity and the routinization or
repetition of their tasks particularly skilled in
manufacture (Rice 1991 263)
Jilat 13 and 25 do suggest small numbers of
individuals and a certain selectivity in who was
involved in stone bead making The quantity of
debitagedebris relative to (1) the number of finished
beads and (2) the modest sizes of these structures
collectively suggest that these craftsmenwomen
served a larger number of consumers relative to the
number of craftsmen involved here If so who were
these consumers mdash other residents of Jilat or groups
beyond
Intra-site Specialization Between Domestic Groups
Several studies suggest ways of identifying different
forms of craft specialization between domestic groups
in a site For later sites Stein (1996) has explored
spatial data particularly how craft production
facilities are dispersed among domestic units or
located near special (or central) institutions In
Neolithic sites questions about dispersal between
households and possible links between craft produc-
tion and special buildings or special sites have been
underexplored
For specialization Costin (1991) suggests that we
would expect (1) variability between production
units (eg households occupations regions) in
relevant artefacts (2) high densities of craft produc-
tion debris relative to some other generally used
item in some production units (3) high ratios of
unfinished goods to finished goods in some produc-
tion units Kenoyer et alrsquos (1991) ethnoarchaeolo-
gical studies of modern stone bead-making in
Khambat (India) suggest something similar in the
case of households as production units There non-
specialist households engaging in casual opportu-
nistic bead production revealed low quantities of
bead-making debris few unfinished beads and little
standardization in finished beads By contrast
households specializing in bead production were
characterized by stockpiling of large quantities of
raw materials many unfinished beads and more
standardized finished products
In looking at whole occupations (ie phases within
sites) as a unit of observation we argue elsewhere
(Wright and Garrard 2003) that artefact densities and
other data from 13 PPNB and 8 PPNCELN
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 153
occupations in the Jilat-Azraq region suggest that
PPNCELN producers were more specialized than
those of the PPNB mdash at least in the Jilat-Azraq
region Unlike the PPNB sites Jilat 13 and 25 have
very high densities of bead-making debris specialized
tools for drilling and sawing there is an abundance of
unfinished materials relative to finished products
bead-making tools and debris are abundant relative
to normal domestic food processing equipment
(ground stone artefacts) (Wright and Garrard 2003
cf Costin 1991)
That argument is chronological comparing the
PPNB to the PPNCELN occupations and we stand
behind it for the Jilat-Azraq case (different trajec-
tories may apply to south Jordan and the Negev see
below) Still it leaves open the issue of house-to-
house variation within Jilat 25 or Jilat 13 As we have
only one excavated structure per site we cannot on
present evidence argue that each building housed a
group of specialists serving other households within
the same site In fact we have no direct evidence that
there were other structures on each site mdash the ones
excavated were the only ones visible on the surface
There are nuances of material and typological
choices between the Jilat 25 structure (red disc beads)
and the Jilat 13 structure (larger complex green
ornaments) but these nuances are beyond the scope
of this paper
In all we suspect that stone bead production at
Jilat 13 and 25 was geared not for other domestic
units lsquoin camprsquo but for use by these quite mobile
communities themselves mdash as well as export to other
sites within the steppe and beyond (see below) In
Costinrsquos terms (Costin 1991) Jilat 13 and 25 might
each be an example of an independent non-centra-
lized dispersed workshop possibly lsquofamily runrsquo (Rice
1991 262) mdash in which handling of Dabba Marble
was not routinely entrusted to novices
There are hints of house-to-house variations in
bead-making in major villages with larger samples of
domestic structures as in PPNB Beidha At PPNB
Beidha (earlier than Jilat 13 and 25) Building 14
stands out
Other forms of production besides food preparation
were less common Building 14 represented the best
example of artefact production in these basements
A wide range of artefacts was recovered apparently
associated with building 14rsquos basement floor
Particularly widespread were stone polishers bone
tools raw material (including hematite malachite
and magnesium) more than 60 unmodified marine
shells and at least two dozen beads of shell stone
and bone some of which were in various stages of
production Some artifacts lay on stone slabs
indicating that at least some slabs may have
functioned as work surfaces (Byrd 2005 117)
Such hints are intriguing Still macro-artefacts
from house floors are affected by problems of site
formation and house abandonment Micro-artefact
data can help (Rainville 2005) House-by-house
exploration with attention to micro-artefacts is
needed (Wright and Bains 2007)
Site Specialization Within a Regional Network of Craft
Production and Exchange
Both sites and other Neolithic sites in Jilat and
Azraq exhibit resource specialization
the selective use of particular resources in craft
manufacture such as certain clays that are repeat-
edly used (Rice 1991 262)
The Jilat artisans emphasized Dabba Marble from
a wider array of available stone types The Jilat-
Azraq sites collectively show that green Dabba
Marble was a special target This is revealed in both
frequencies and weights (for debris data and weight
data see Wright and Garrard 2003 for frequency
data on beads and blanks see Tables 2 and 3) At
both sites debris is greatly dominated by green
Dabba Marble mdash 80ndash95 of debris by both weight
(grams) and frequency Green Dabba Marble also
dominates blanks in terms of weight at both sites mdash
indicating the use of green for making larger heavier
and more conspicuous ornaments
Turning to frequencies at Jilat 13 about 90 of
blanks are green and only 5 are red However
finished beads include both green and red forms in
comparable percentages (404 and 436 respec-
tively) (Table 3) suggesting that finished red beads
were brought into the building from a place of
manufacture located somewhere else At Jilat 25
blanks of red and green Dabba Marble occur in
comparable proportions (409 green 43 red)
whilst finished beads are predominantly red (588)
(Table 2) If Jilat 13 and 25 were absolute contem-
poraries this could suggest variations in choices and
exchange between residents of different structures
Rice (1991) has defined site specialization as a
situation in which a site is located near a special
resource and the inhabitants emphasize production of
a craft based on that resource Relative to other sites
not so located the range of site functions and
activities would be expected to be more limited
Thus site specialization
involves individual localities or sites having evidence
of limited functions or intensive productive activity
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
154 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
often determined by fortuitous environmental fac-
tors This includes proximity to mineral deposits
and so forth (Rice 1991 262)
Do Jilat 13 and 25 fit this concept In both sites
15 km from the source we have a wealth of evidence
for intensive stone bead production and scanty
evidence for routine food processing tools (Wright
and Garrard 2003) However Jilat 25 may be closer
to the limited function model envisioned by Rice In
Jilat 13 bead-making is clearly intensive but we are
also dealing with a chipped stone assemblage of not
only drills and burins but also projectile points and
other tools Jilat 13 also reveals production of
figurines (of animals phalluses and arrow-shaped
forms) and sculpted pillars (Baird 1993 Garrard
et al 1994a Martin 1999 Wright 1992 1993)
In all Jilat 13 and 25 suggest that we can apply
Ricersquos lsquosite specializationrsquo on the grounds of intensive
productive activity and proximity to source mdash but
with the qualification that this specialization was also
embedded in hunting-herding activities and at Jilat
13 production of other special crafts unique among
the sites of a symbolic nature (figurines pillars)
One possibility is that we are dealing with a camp
of hunter-herder corporate groups mdash part of a wider
regional network mdash engaged in special activities in
remote areas involving art personal ornaments and
ritual Such groups are suggested by other data from
the PPNBndashPPNC time span for example Nahal
Hemar (ornaments masks hunting tools) Dhuweila
(carving of hunters with dress variations)
Catalhoyuk (images of hunters with dress variations
as in the bull hunt mural) and Gobeklitepe (sculpture
production including a quarry wild-animal icono-
graphy hunting) (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988 Betts
1998 Mellaart 1967 Schmidt 2000) In all these data
hint that craft production of special items was
embedded in hunting andor herding activities in
remote areas this may have been a key means by
which exotic materials reached major villages In a
very broad way this supports a sketch outlined by
Bar Yosef (Bar-Yosef 2001) although we do not
necessarily agree with specifics of his model eg the
territories boundaries social groups and mechanisms
which he suggests (cf Asouti 2006) Instead we see
this as one example of diverse strategies of social
networking linking lineages households and commu-
nities in the Neolithic (Wright forthcoming)
Returning to the stone bead data from Jilat 13 and
25 the apparent stockpiling of raw material and
intensive production activity hints at production of
the green material for export (see above and Wright
and Garrard 2003) New data now add weight to this
idea and suggest the following provisional picture of
regional specializations and exchanges in ornaments
(1) Based on typology technology and materials thereappears to be a distinctive eastern Jordanian koine ornetwork of stone bead manufacture and exchangefeaturing Dabba Marble and a probable regionalspecialization in it
Other Neolithic bead production sites are known
from eastern Jordan Indications are that most of the
green bead materials are Dabba Marble probably
from Jilat (further work is needed) In these sites
diversity of materials used seems low with few
imports from beyond the steppe Shells however
testify to wider networks (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989
Cooke and Reese in Betts 1998 Garrard et al 1994a
Reese 1991)
Azraq 31 (PPNB and ELN) is in our suite of study
materials (Baird et al 1992 Garrard et al 1994a
Wright and Garrard 2003) and debris blanks and
beads were found Preliminary XRF analysis of green
samples (by Groom) indicates that the material is
consistent with Jilat Dabba Marble Typology and
technology are also similar and as at Jilat 25 burin
spall drills were closely associated with bead-making
in specific activity areas (Baird 1993 521 Baird et al
1992 25) However the ground stone revealed no
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
(Wright 1992 1993 Wright in Baird et al 1992)
Material used for beads at Dhuweila (PPNB and
ELN) has been called Dabba Marble (Cooke and
Reese in Betts 1998) It is consistent in appearance
with our material although we have no details on
mineralogy or source Typologically these beads are
similar to those of Jilat 13 and 25 The ground stone
is very different from the suite at the Jilat sites
(Wright in Betts 1998) for comparisons of chipped
stone assemblages see Baird (1993)
At Bawwab al-Ghazal (Late PPNB) Rollefson
et al found drills bits on burin spalls tile knives
beads bead blanks and bead debris some of which
they called green Dabba Marble (Rollefson et al
1999 Quintero et al 2004) They argued that there is
a possible source of this material outcropping near
the site mdash lsquoFor the last raw material [green Dabba
Marble] small nodules of the green limestone were
embedded in the local bedrockrsquo (Rollefson et al 1999
3) However as shown in Appendix A the true
Dabba Marble only occurs in a restricted area west of
Wadi Jilat The lsquobedrockrsquo which outcrops near Azraq
31 and Bawwab al-Ghazal is travertine and some of
this formed during the late Pleistocene and Holocene
The nearby Epipalaeolithic site of Azraq 17 was
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 155
found partially embedded in travertine and artefacts
including nodules of imported basalt were found in
the travertine at this site It is possible that the
nodules of green limestone found at Bawwab al-
Ghazal were imported Dabba Marble which subse-
quently became incorporated in a travertine near the
site An alternative possibility is that the local
travertine is infused with green minerals In Wadi
Jilat travertines were noted with traces of green
minerals and in the Siwaqa area to the south-west of
Jilat there are extensive travertines some of which
are infused with pale green minerals including
volkonskoite (Barjous 1986 mdash see also Appendix A)
In eastern Jordan some Neolithic sites are greatly
dominated by burins (lsquoburin sitesrsquo) At a number of
these there is evidence for stone bead-making (eg
Jebel Naja) These lsquoburin sitesrsquo typically reveal few
ground stone tools we know of no examples of
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
from them It was argued that the main role of the
burins was production of spalls for drills used mainly
for beads (Betts 1987 1998 Finlayson and Betts
1990) However burin sites are not universally
associated with stone bead making At Jilat 23 24
and 26 burins were numerous but other evidence for
bead-making is scanty (Baird 1993 520)
Therefore some have questioned whether
burins and burin spalls in such sites were solely or
primarily intended for making drills and beads
noting that other functions are possible (Quintero
et al 2004 209) Given that these sites typically
represent short-term occupations it is possible that
many sites might be spall manufacture sites with
spalls transported to other settings where drill
manufacture and bead manufacture took place such
as Jilat 13 and 25 Rollefson expressed doubt that
either bladelet or burin spall drills would have been
used in bow drills partly because of their fragility and
also because most of them have a pronounced curve
on the long axis which would have made high speed
drilling impossible (Rollefson and Parker 2002) But
Finlayson and Betts (1990) and Berna (1995)
successfully experimented using burin spalls with
bow drills and Kenoyer (personal communication
2007) notes that drills made on burin spalls are the
most common type of drill in diverse prehistoric
stone bead-making sites (in India Pakistan and
elsewhere)
In the case of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 we believe burin-
spall drills were part of the bead-making repertoire
for reasons noted above This does not rule out other
uses of burin spalls Nor does it rule out the use of
other perforating techniques Drills do not have to be
made of stone when soft stones are being perforated
mdash wood bone and abrasives can be used (Foreman
1978)
(2) There are hints of export of Dabba Marble to at leastsome villages in the Levantine corridor However majorNeolithic villages display much diversity in materials andespecially more importing of exotic stones than is seen inthe eastern Jordanian sites
Many writers report Neolithic beads made of
unspecified lsquogreenstonersquo This term is unfortunate
since it can refer to metabasalt and similar altered
igneous rocks (Schumann 1992 248) Some of these
lsquogreenstonesrsquo may be limestone with apatite or other
materials (eg Garfinkel 1987 81ndash82 Hauptmann
2004 Talbot 1983 789) Beads of green limestones
rich in fluorapatite were found at late PPNB Basta in
southern Jordan (Hauptmann 2004) as confirmed by
XRF and XRD Green beads identified as Dabba
Marble were also reported from Ain Ghazal a site
with both PPNB and PPNC occupations (Rollefson
et al 1990 103ndash04) Whether these are Dabba
Marble from the Jilat source (Appendices AndashB) is
not yet fully clear Ongoing research will sort out
these mysteries (eg D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal
communication Hauptmann 2004)
Major villages in the Levantine Corridor reveal
different degrees of emphasis in styles and materials
often we see a certain emphasis on local materials and
preferences However considerable exchange net-
works are indicated in major villages which display
much wider ranges of stone ornament materials
compared to the eastern Jordanian sites (such as
Ain Ghazal Yiftahel Basta Barsquoja Ghuwayr 1
Fidan 1) mdash along with of course shells (Affonso
and Pernicka 2004 Bienert and Gebel 1998 84ndash86
Garfinkel 1987 Hauptmann 2004 Rollefson and
Simmons 1984 1986 Rollefson et al 1990 Simmons
and Najjar 1998 Starck 1988)
As the Neolithic evolved stone bead-making
entailed increasingly diverse techniques and materi-
als One example may be drills In earlymiddle PPNB
sites most drills are made on bladelets In the late
PPNB PPNC and Late Neolithic there may have
been a gradual increase in drills made on burin spalls
although perhaps not in all regions (Jensen 2004
Rollefson and Parker 2002) Underlining increasing
diversity of technological practice between groups
Baird (2001b) pointed out geographic variation in
this technology with spall drills dominating in the
north-eastern Jordanian steppe from MPPNB
through Early Late Neolithic whilst contemporary
sites to west and south use bladelet blanks for their
piercing tools
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
156 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
handheld abraders made of sandstones with coarse
hard quartz crystals were found at both sites (Fig
15andashb) Sandstone is not local to Wadi Jilat and these
items were imported and probably used extensively
(resulting in the small size)
For even finer abrasion limestone could have been
used Such needs could have been met by the large
bench of Jilat 13 (Fig 14c) which was finely ground
over a very large area (within which the possible
drilling marks were placed)
Some might see the grooved items made of
sandstone (Fig 15a) and limestone (Fig 15c) as
lsquoshaft straightenersrsquo One or two shaft straightener
fragments made of basalt occur at Jilat 13 Like other
basalt shaft straighteners in Neolithic Jilat (eg Jilat
7) (Garrard et al 1994a Wright 1993) the use-
surfaces of these have U-shaped cross-sections By
contrast the cross sections of the use surfaces on the
sandstone and limestone grooved items are not U-
shaped but have sharp angles We see these tools
mainly as abraders for grinding bead facets espe-
cially on barrel beads The widths of the use surfaces
are 11 mm for the sandstone tool and 138 mm for
the limestone one These dimensions correspond to
the average diameter (5 width) of 31 measured green
Dabba Marble barrel bead blanks from Jilat 13 (N 5
31 Mean diameter 5 92 mm standard deviation 5
28) Grooved stones are used in bead grinding in
a
b c
Figure 12 Ground stone artefacts probably for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Cutmarked slab (limestone) Jilat
13 The cutmarks are shallow and are concentrated in the left area running parallel to the main axes of the
slab (b) Cutmarked slab fragment (limestone) Jilat 13 showing deep cutmarks (c) Flaked and ground abra-
sive cutting tool made of limestone Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 149
modern India (Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58) a
grooved sandstone tool was found with an unfinished
bead at Catalhoyuk (Wright and Bains 2007)
Tosi and Vidale (1990) regard failure resulting
from breakage or human error as more common in
the grinding stage than during perforation although
this depends on material and opinion (Kenoyer 2003
18) In some cases it might be more efficient to shape
the bead first before attempting perforation This
may explain why barrel beads tend to be shaped and
abraded prior to perforation
Finished beads were always finely abraded and
sometimes polished to the extent of reflecting light
Ethnographic observations indicate that polishing is
sometimes done by placing beads en masse in a
leather bag along with an abrasive and shaking and
rolling the bags for long periods (Allchin 1979
Kenoyer 2003) This simple method would have been
more likely than the method of rolling beads and
abrasives in a wooden barrel which is also docu-
mented ethnographically (Kenoyer 2003)
However shaking beads in a bag with an abrasive
tends to produce beads with rounded convex edges
(Gwinnett and Gorelick 1989) Some beads at Jilat
have this form but many mdash especially those made of
the hard cherty red Dabba Marble mdash have sharp
edges perpendicular to bead faces indicating that
they were individually polished or polished during
rolling on a string or stick Alternative methods of
polishing can include rubbing with leather or wood
with the addition of fine sand or chalk and water or
with animal hairwool and animal fat (Kenoyer 1986
20) These methods would have been possible with
Jilat technology
Craft Specialization and Comparisons withOther Sites
Technology needs to be studied not only in terms of
materials and techniques but also in terms of social
groups involved in artefact production individual
artisans and skill (Dobres and Hoffmann 1999 2ndash12)
In egalitarian societies craft skill and knowledge of
Figure 13 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic sites Drilling and piercing tools From Baird 1993 fig 82
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
150 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
special materials can enhance the power of an
individual or a group encouraging hierarchy
(Dobres 2000 119ndash20)
These questions force us to reconsider issues of
craft specialization a term often used loosely or in
widely different ways Three concepts of specializa-
tion are considered here individual specialists
specialization between households or domestic
groups within a given site and site specialization
within a regional or social network of craft produc-
tion and exchange
Costin (1991) draws a contrast between indepen-
dent specialization and attached specialization
Independent specialization involves production of
utilitarian goods for nonelites and can be household-
based or based in special workshops Attached
specialization refers to production of prestige goods
under control of elites Whilst Costin notes that
attached specialization can also be based in house-
holds or workshops we often think of attached
specialization in connection with central institutions
and urban or state-level societies It is of considerable
interest that in early urban societies the making of
stone personal ornaments in association with central
institutions figures prominently (Stein 1996 Vidale
1989)
How earlier forms of craft specialization may have
evolved into large-scale attached specialization is
poorly understood Most research has concentrated
on later stages in this process (eg Stein 1996) in
discussions of earlier forms of specialization defini-
tions and criteria for diagnosis could sometimes be
clearer (eg Quintero and Wilke 1998 Rollefson and
Parker 2002 Rosen 1997) If we are dealing with
a
c
b
Figure 14 Ground stone artefacts probably used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Capstone made of limestone
Jilat 25 (b) Handstone probably used as an anvil or hammer Jilat 25 note depression in face and flake scars
at edges (c) Limestone drilling bench Jilat 13 Note evidence of use-wear on the left and widest area of the
bench smooth abraded surface drill marks in the centre-left face small flake scars with negative bulbs of per-
cussion close to the edge of the bench
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 151
specialization in Neolithic societies it is probably
independent specialization Still Neolithic societies
may fall between Costinrsquos two categories Neolithic
groups were clearly producing prestige goods perso-
nal ornaments are not strictly utilitarian and there is
at least a possibility that elites were emerging (Byrd
1994 Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002 Verhoeven
2002)
Individual Specialists
First there is the issue of identifying individual
specialists Some use lsquospecializationrsquo to refer to any
situation in which some artisans have high levels of
skill a view that has been criticized (Rice 1991) We
agree with Rice that identifying a high level of
technical skill in a craft is not on its own sufficient
for a diagnosis of specialization since it robs the
concept of force in discussing long term change (by
this criterion the Upper Palaeolithic was riddled
with craft specialists) However we would argue
that if there are other indications of craft specializa-
tion a search for levels of ability in different
individuals is appropriate mdash if the data permit
Such data would be primary refuse from well-dated
sites of high temporal resolution in which technical
processes (eg errors in chaines operatoires) can
reveal experts vs novices (Pigeot 1990 Stout 2002
Vanzetti and Vidale 1994)
In the case of Jilat 13 and 25 we are dealing with
much primary refuse and two closely dated sites (see
above and Tables 6ndash7) mdash with periodic use of the
sites over a time range on the order of 200 years at
most and possibly much less Jilat 25 yielded activity
areas with clear spatial clusters as do a number of
contexts at Jilat 13 Space does not permit us to
present all details (this awaits the final site report)
but we feel confident that aggregate consideration of
the data from each site allows us to discuss general
questions of individual skills mdash master craftsmen vs
novices
a b
c
Figure 15 Ground stone artefacts possibly used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Grooved sandstone abrading
tool Jilat 13 (b) Sandstone hand-held abrader Jilat 25 (c) Grooved limestone abrading tool Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
152 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
To explore this we analysed unfinished blanks and
the frequency of perforation errors Drilling is a
sensitive moment in bead production when many
things can go wrong (Kenoyer 2003) A low incidence
in perforation errors combined with high numbers of
successfully finished beads and evidence of standar-
dization should be reasonably good indicators of an
artisanrsquos mastery This is the situation seen at Jilat 25
(Fig 7) In all of 93 blanks from Jilat 25 only 2 were
perforation errors a failure rate of only 2
On the other hand a high incidence of perforation
errors would suggest that a beadmaker was a relative
novice Jilat 13 produced more blanks with perfora-
tion errors than Jilat 25 We thought we might find
individual contexts with a high rate of error
suggesting apprentices
The data did not bear this out Of 223 bead blanks
from Jilat 13 (all phases) 22 were perforation errors
mdash a failure rate of 98 All but two errors were on
barrel bead blanks of green Dabba Marble The
others were one pendant blank and one irregular
bead blank These 22 blanks were distributed across
20 different contexts and no more than 2 perforation
errors were found in any one context
A close look at those contexts reveals low error
rates In Context B21 2 green barrel bead blanks
with perforation errors were found with 5 other
blanks The others included green and red barrel and
disc blanks This context also yielded 5 successfully
finished beads including black and red barrel beads
and a green disc Black and green debitage and a
discoidal handstone were also found here In Context
B71 2 blanks with perforation errors were found
along with 9 other blanks and 10 successfully
finished beads including green Dabba Marble barrel
beads but also black and red disc beads Much
debitage was found along with a flaked limestone
cutting tool (cf Fig 12c) and a limestone object with
a drill mark
The higher rate of error at Jilat 13 compared to
Jilat 25 could be because artisans at Jilat 13 were
making more of the larger more complex barrel
beads (as opposed to simple discs see Tables 2ndash3)
which offer greater chances of failure due to the
longer drilling distance However at Jilat 13 the
overall failure rate was still quite low particularly
considering the overall volume of material recovered
(Table 1)
We conclude that the beadmakers at Jilat 13
included few trainees These appear to have been
skilled artisans a small task force composed of
relative experts This raises the question of whether
these beadmakers were examples of lsquoproducer
specialistsrsquo as traditionally defined that is people
involved in
production of a good by a relatively small number of
individuals (compared to the total output and
number of consumers) individuals who are as a
result of this selectivity and the routinization or
repetition of their tasks particularly skilled in
manufacture (Rice 1991 263)
Jilat 13 and 25 do suggest small numbers of
individuals and a certain selectivity in who was
involved in stone bead making The quantity of
debitagedebris relative to (1) the number of finished
beads and (2) the modest sizes of these structures
collectively suggest that these craftsmenwomen
served a larger number of consumers relative to the
number of craftsmen involved here If so who were
these consumers mdash other residents of Jilat or groups
beyond
Intra-site Specialization Between Domestic Groups
Several studies suggest ways of identifying different
forms of craft specialization between domestic groups
in a site For later sites Stein (1996) has explored
spatial data particularly how craft production
facilities are dispersed among domestic units or
located near special (or central) institutions In
Neolithic sites questions about dispersal between
households and possible links between craft produc-
tion and special buildings or special sites have been
underexplored
For specialization Costin (1991) suggests that we
would expect (1) variability between production
units (eg households occupations regions) in
relevant artefacts (2) high densities of craft produc-
tion debris relative to some other generally used
item in some production units (3) high ratios of
unfinished goods to finished goods in some produc-
tion units Kenoyer et alrsquos (1991) ethnoarchaeolo-
gical studies of modern stone bead-making in
Khambat (India) suggest something similar in the
case of households as production units There non-
specialist households engaging in casual opportu-
nistic bead production revealed low quantities of
bead-making debris few unfinished beads and little
standardization in finished beads By contrast
households specializing in bead production were
characterized by stockpiling of large quantities of
raw materials many unfinished beads and more
standardized finished products
In looking at whole occupations (ie phases within
sites) as a unit of observation we argue elsewhere
(Wright and Garrard 2003) that artefact densities and
other data from 13 PPNB and 8 PPNCELN
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 153
occupations in the Jilat-Azraq region suggest that
PPNCELN producers were more specialized than
those of the PPNB mdash at least in the Jilat-Azraq
region Unlike the PPNB sites Jilat 13 and 25 have
very high densities of bead-making debris specialized
tools for drilling and sawing there is an abundance of
unfinished materials relative to finished products
bead-making tools and debris are abundant relative
to normal domestic food processing equipment
(ground stone artefacts) (Wright and Garrard 2003
cf Costin 1991)
That argument is chronological comparing the
PPNB to the PPNCELN occupations and we stand
behind it for the Jilat-Azraq case (different trajec-
tories may apply to south Jordan and the Negev see
below) Still it leaves open the issue of house-to-
house variation within Jilat 25 or Jilat 13 As we have
only one excavated structure per site we cannot on
present evidence argue that each building housed a
group of specialists serving other households within
the same site In fact we have no direct evidence that
there were other structures on each site mdash the ones
excavated were the only ones visible on the surface
There are nuances of material and typological
choices between the Jilat 25 structure (red disc beads)
and the Jilat 13 structure (larger complex green
ornaments) but these nuances are beyond the scope
of this paper
In all we suspect that stone bead production at
Jilat 13 and 25 was geared not for other domestic
units lsquoin camprsquo but for use by these quite mobile
communities themselves mdash as well as export to other
sites within the steppe and beyond (see below) In
Costinrsquos terms (Costin 1991) Jilat 13 and 25 might
each be an example of an independent non-centra-
lized dispersed workshop possibly lsquofamily runrsquo (Rice
1991 262) mdash in which handling of Dabba Marble
was not routinely entrusted to novices
There are hints of house-to-house variations in
bead-making in major villages with larger samples of
domestic structures as in PPNB Beidha At PPNB
Beidha (earlier than Jilat 13 and 25) Building 14
stands out
Other forms of production besides food preparation
were less common Building 14 represented the best
example of artefact production in these basements
A wide range of artefacts was recovered apparently
associated with building 14rsquos basement floor
Particularly widespread were stone polishers bone
tools raw material (including hematite malachite
and magnesium) more than 60 unmodified marine
shells and at least two dozen beads of shell stone
and bone some of which were in various stages of
production Some artifacts lay on stone slabs
indicating that at least some slabs may have
functioned as work surfaces (Byrd 2005 117)
Such hints are intriguing Still macro-artefacts
from house floors are affected by problems of site
formation and house abandonment Micro-artefact
data can help (Rainville 2005) House-by-house
exploration with attention to micro-artefacts is
needed (Wright and Bains 2007)
Site Specialization Within a Regional Network of Craft
Production and Exchange
Both sites and other Neolithic sites in Jilat and
Azraq exhibit resource specialization
the selective use of particular resources in craft
manufacture such as certain clays that are repeat-
edly used (Rice 1991 262)
The Jilat artisans emphasized Dabba Marble from
a wider array of available stone types The Jilat-
Azraq sites collectively show that green Dabba
Marble was a special target This is revealed in both
frequencies and weights (for debris data and weight
data see Wright and Garrard 2003 for frequency
data on beads and blanks see Tables 2 and 3) At
both sites debris is greatly dominated by green
Dabba Marble mdash 80ndash95 of debris by both weight
(grams) and frequency Green Dabba Marble also
dominates blanks in terms of weight at both sites mdash
indicating the use of green for making larger heavier
and more conspicuous ornaments
Turning to frequencies at Jilat 13 about 90 of
blanks are green and only 5 are red However
finished beads include both green and red forms in
comparable percentages (404 and 436 respec-
tively) (Table 3) suggesting that finished red beads
were brought into the building from a place of
manufacture located somewhere else At Jilat 25
blanks of red and green Dabba Marble occur in
comparable proportions (409 green 43 red)
whilst finished beads are predominantly red (588)
(Table 2) If Jilat 13 and 25 were absolute contem-
poraries this could suggest variations in choices and
exchange between residents of different structures
Rice (1991) has defined site specialization as a
situation in which a site is located near a special
resource and the inhabitants emphasize production of
a craft based on that resource Relative to other sites
not so located the range of site functions and
activities would be expected to be more limited
Thus site specialization
involves individual localities or sites having evidence
of limited functions or intensive productive activity
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
154 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
often determined by fortuitous environmental fac-
tors This includes proximity to mineral deposits
and so forth (Rice 1991 262)
Do Jilat 13 and 25 fit this concept In both sites
15 km from the source we have a wealth of evidence
for intensive stone bead production and scanty
evidence for routine food processing tools (Wright
and Garrard 2003) However Jilat 25 may be closer
to the limited function model envisioned by Rice In
Jilat 13 bead-making is clearly intensive but we are
also dealing with a chipped stone assemblage of not
only drills and burins but also projectile points and
other tools Jilat 13 also reveals production of
figurines (of animals phalluses and arrow-shaped
forms) and sculpted pillars (Baird 1993 Garrard
et al 1994a Martin 1999 Wright 1992 1993)
In all Jilat 13 and 25 suggest that we can apply
Ricersquos lsquosite specializationrsquo on the grounds of intensive
productive activity and proximity to source mdash but
with the qualification that this specialization was also
embedded in hunting-herding activities and at Jilat
13 production of other special crafts unique among
the sites of a symbolic nature (figurines pillars)
One possibility is that we are dealing with a camp
of hunter-herder corporate groups mdash part of a wider
regional network mdash engaged in special activities in
remote areas involving art personal ornaments and
ritual Such groups are suggested by other data from
the PPNBndashPPNC time span for example Nahal
Hemar (ornaments masks hunting tools) Dhuweila
(carving of hunters with dress variations)
Catalhoyuk (images of hunters with dress variations
as in the bull hunt mural) and Gobeklitepe (sculpture
production including a quarry wild-animal icono-
graphy hunting) (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988 Betts
1998 Mellaart 1967 Schmidt 2000) In all these data
hint that craft production of special items was
embedded in hunting andor herding activities in
remote areas this may have been a key means by
which exotic materials reached major villages In a
very broad way this supports a sketch outlined by
Bar Yosef (Bar-Yosef 2001) although we do not
necessarily agree with specifics of his model eg the
territories boundaries social groups and mechanisms
which he suggests (cf Asouti 2006) Instead we see
this as one example of diverse strategies of social
networking linking lineages households and commu-
nities in the Neolithic (Wright forthcoming)
Returning to the stone bead data from Jilat 13 and
25 the apparent stockpiling of raw material and
intensive production activity hints at production of
the green material for export (see above and Wright
and Garrard 2003) New data now add weight to this
idea and suggest the following provisional picture of
regional specializations and exchanges in ornaments
(1) Based on typology technology and materials thereappears to be a distinctive eastern Jordanian koine ornetwork of stone bead manufacture and exchangefeaturing Dabba Marble and a probable regionalspecialization in it
Other Neolithic bead production sites are known
from eastern Jordan Indications are that most of the
green bead materials are Dabba Marble probably
from Jilat (further work is needed) In these sites
diversity of materials used seems low with few
imports from beyond the steppe Shells however
testify to wider networks (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989
Cooke and Reese in Betts 1998 Garrard et al 1994a
Reese 1991)
Azraq 31 (PPNB and ELN) is in our suite of study
materials (Baird et al 1992 Garrard et al 1994a
Wright and Garrard 2003) and debris blanks and
beads were found Preliminary XRF analysis of green
samples (by Groom) indicates that the material is
consistent with Jilat Dabba Marble Typology and
technology are also similar and as at Jilat 25 burin
spall drills were closely associated with bead-making
in specific activity areas (Baird 1993 521 Baird et al
1992 25) However the ground stone revealed no
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
(Wright 1992 1993 Wright in Baird et al 1992)
Material used for beads at Dhuweila (PPNB and
ELN) has been called Dabba Marble (Cooke and
Reese in Betts 1998) It is consistent in appearance
with our material although we have no details on
mineralogy or source Typologically these beads are
similar to those of Jilat 13 and 25 The ground stone
is very different from the suite at the Jilat sites
(Wright in Betts 1998) for comparisons of chipped
stone assemblages see Baird (1993)
At Bawwab al-Ghazal (Late PPNB) Rollefson
et al found drills bits on burin spalls tile knives
beads bead blanks and bead debris some of which
they called green Dabba Marble (Rollefson et al
1999 Quintero et al 2004) They argued that there is
a possible source of this material outcropping near
the site mdash lsquoFor the last raw material [green Dabba
Marble] small nodules of the green limestone were
embedded in the local bedrockrsquo (Rollefson et al 1999
3) However as shown in Appendix A the true
Dabba Marble only occurs in a restricted area west of
Wadi Jilat The lsquobedrockrsquo which outcrops near Azraq
31 and Bawwab al-Ghazal is travertine and some of
this formed during the late Pleistocene and Holocene
The nearby Epipalaeolithic site of Azraq 17 was
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 155
found partially embedded in travertine and artefacts
including nodules of imported basalt were found in
the travertine at this site It is possible that the
nodules of green limestone found at Bawwab al-
Ghazal were imported Dabba Marble which subse-
quently became incorporated in a travertine near the
site An alternative possibility is that the local
travertine is infused with green minerals In Wadi
Jilat travertines were noted with traces of green
minerals and in the Siwaqa area to the south-west of
Jilat there are extensive travertines some of which
are infused with pale green minerals including
volkonskoite (Barjous 1986 mdash see also Appendix A)
In eastern Jordan some Neolithic sites are greatly
dominated by burins (lsquoburin sitesrsquo) At a number of
these there is evidence for stone bead-making (eg
Jebel Naja) These lsquoburin sitesrsquo typically reveal few
ground stone tools we know of no examples of
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
from them It was argued that the main role of the
burins was production of spalls for drills used mainly
for beads (Betts 1987 1998 Finlayson and Betts
1990) However burin sites are not universally
associated with stone bead making At Jilat 23 24
and 26 burins were numerous but other evidence for
bead-making is scanty (Baird 1993 520)
Therefore some have questioned whether
burins and burin spalls in such sites were solely or
primarily intended for making drills and beads
noting that other functions are possible (Quintero
et al 2004 209) Given that these sites typically
represent short-term occupations it is possible that
many sites might be spall manufacture sites with
spalls transported to other settings where drill
manufacture and bead manufacture took place such
as Jilat 13 and 25 Rollefson expressed doubt that
either bladelet or burin spall drills would have been
used in bow drills partly because of their fragility and
also because most of them have a pronounced curve
on the long axis which would have made high speed
drilling impossible (Rollefson and Parker 2002) But
Finlayson and Betts (1990) and Berna (1995)
successfully experimented using burin spalls with
bow drills and Kenoyer (personal communication
2007) notes that drills made on burin spalls are the
most common type of drill in diverse prehistoric
stone bead-making sites (in India Pakistan and
elsewhere)
In the case of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 we believe burin-
spall drills were part of the bead-making repertoire
for reasons noted above This does not rule out other
uses of burin spalls Nor does it rule out the use of
other perforating techniques Drills do not have to be
made of stone when soft stones are being perforated
mdash wood bone and abrasives can be used (Foreman
1978)
(2) There are hints of export of Dabba Marble to at leastsome villages in the Levantine corridor However majorNeolithic villages display much diversity in materials andespecially more importing of exotic stones than is seen inthe eastern Jordanian sites
Many writers report Neolithic beads made of
unspecified lsquogreenstonersquo This term is unfortunate
since it can refer to metabasalt and similar altered
igneous rocks (Schumann 1992 248) Some of these
lsquogreenstonesrsquo may be limestone with apatite or other
materials (eg Garfinkel 1987 81ndash82 Hauptmann
2004 Talbot 1983 789) Beads of green limestones
rich in fluorapatite were found at late PPNB Basta in
southern Jordan (Hauptmann 2004) as confirmed by
XRF and XRD Green beads identified as Dabba
Marble were also reported from Ain Ghazal a site
with both PPNB and PPNC occupations (Rollefson
et al 1990 103ndash04) Whether these are Dabba
Marble from the Jilat source (Appendices AndashB) is
not yet fully clear Ongoing research will sort out
these mysteries (eg D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal
communication Hauptmann 2004)
Major villages in the Levantine Corridor reveal
different degrees of emphasis in styles and materials
often we see a certain emphasis on local materials and
preferences However considerable exchange net-
works are indicated in major villages which display
much wider ranges of stone ornament materials
compared to the eastern Jordanian sites (such as
Ain Ghazal Yiftahel Basta Barsquoja Ghuwayr 1
Fidan 1) mdash along with of course shells (Affonso
and Pernicka 2004 Bienert and Gebel 1998 84ndash86
Garfinkel 1987 Hauptmann 2004 Rollefson and
Simmons 1984 1986 Rollefson et al 1990 Simmons
and Najjar 1998 Starck 1988)
As the Neolithic evolved stone bead-making
entailed increasingly diverse techniques and materi-
als One example may be drills In earlymiddle PPNB
sites most drills are made on bladelets In the late
PPNB PPNC and Late Neolithic there may have
been a gradual increase in drills made on burin spalls
although perhaps not in all regions (Jensen 2004
Rollefson and Parker 2002) Underlining increasing
diversity of technological practice between groups
Baird (2001b) pointed out geographic variation in
this technology with spall drills dominating in the
north-eastern Jordanian steppe from MPPNB
through Early Late Neolithic whilst contemporary
sites to west and south use bladelet blanks for their
piercing tools
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
156 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
modern India (Roux and Matarasso 1999 57ndash58) a
grooved sandstone tool was found with an unfinished
bead at Catalhoyuk (Wright and Bains 2007)
Tosi and Vidale (1990) regard failure resulting
from breakage or human error as more common in
the grinding stage than during perforation although
this depends on material and opinion (Kenoyer 2003
18) In some cases it might be more efficient to shape
the bead first before attempting perforation This
may explain why barrel beads tend to be shaped and
abraded prior to perforation
Finished beads were always finely abraded and
sometimes polished to the extent of reflecting light
Ethnographic observations indicate that polishing is
sometimes done by placing beads en masse in a
leather bag along with an abrasive and shaking and
rolling the bags for long periods (Allchin 1979
Kenoyer 2003) This simple method would have been
more likely than the method of rolling beads and
abrasives in a wooden barrel which is also docu-
mented ethnographically (Kenoyer 2003)
However shaking beads in a bag with an abrasive
tends to produce beads with rounded convex edges
(Gwinnett and Gorelick 1989) Some beads at Jilat
have this form but many mdash especially those made of
the hard cherty red Dabba Marble mdash have sharp
edges perpendicular to bead faces indicating that
they were individually polished or polished during
rolling on a string or stick Alternative methods of
polishing can include rubbing with leather or wood
with the addition of fine sand or chalk and water or
with animal hairwool and animal fat (Kenoyer 1986
20) These methods would have been possible with
Jilat technology
Craft Specialization and Comparisons withOther Sites
Technology needs to be studied not only in terms of
materials and techniques but also in terms of social
groups involved in artefact production individual
artisans and skill (Dobres and Hoffmann 1999 2ndash12)
In egalitarian societies craft skill and knowledge of
Figure 13 Chipped stone artefacts from Jilat Neolithic sites Drilling and piercing tools From Baird 1993 fig 82
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
150 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
special materials can enhance the power of an
individual or a group encouraging hierarchy
(Dobres 2000 119ndash20)
These questions force us to reconsider issues of
craft specialization a term often used loosely or in
widely different ways Three concepts of specializa-
tion are considered here individual specialists
specialization between households or domestic
groups within a given site and site specialization
within a regional or social network of craft produc-
tion and exchange
Costin (1991) draws a contrast between indepen-
dent specialization and attached specialization
Independent specialization involves production of
utilitarian goods for nonelites and can be household-
based or based in special workshops Attached
specialization refers to production of prestige goods
under control of elites Whilst Costin notes that
attached specialization can also be based in house-
holds or workshops we often think of attached
specialization in connection with central institutions
and urban or state-level societies It is of considerable
interest that in early urban societies the making of
stone personal ornaments in association with central
institutions figures prominently (Stein 1996 Vidale
1989)
How earlier forms of craft specialization may have
evolved into large-scale attached specialization is
poorly understood Most research has concentrated
on later stages in this process (eg Stein 1996) in
discussions of earlier forms of specialization defini-
tions and criteria for diagnosis could sometimes be
clearer (eg Quintero and Wilke 1998 Rollefson and
Parker 2002 Rosen 1997) If we are dealing with
a
c
b
Figure 14 Ground stone artefacts probably used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Capstone made of limestone
Jilat 25 (b) Handstone probably used as an anvil or hammer Jilat 25 note depression in face and flake scars
at edges (c) Limestone drilling bench Jilat 13 Note evidence of use-wear on the left and widest area of the
bench smooth abraded surface drill marks in the centre-left face small flake scars with negative bulbs of per-
cussion close to the edge of the bench
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 151
specialization in Neolithic societies it is probably
independent specialization Still Neolithic societies
may fall between Costinrsquos two categories Neolithic
groups were clearly producing prestige goods perso-
nal ornaments are not strictly utilitarian and there is
at least a possibility that elites were emerging (Byrd
1994 Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002 Verhoeven
2002)
Individual Specialists
First there is the issue of identifying individual
specialists Some use lsquospecializationrsquo to refer to any
situation in which some artisans have high levels of
skill a view that has been criticized (Rice 1991) We
agree with Rice that identifying a high level of
technical skill in a craft is not on its own sufficient
for a diagnosis of specialization since it robs the
concept of force in discussing long term change (by
this criterion the Upper Palaeolithic was riddled
with craft specialists) However we would argue
that if there are other indications of craft specializa-
tion a search for levels of ability in different
individuals is appropriate mdash if the data permit
Such data would be primary refuse from well-dated
sites of high temporal resolution in which technical
processes (eg errors in chaines operatoires) can
reveal experts vs novices (Pigeot 1990 Stout 2002
Vanzetti and Vidale 1994)
In the case of Jilat 13 and 25 we are dealing with
much primary refuse and two closely dated sites (see
above and Tables 6ndash7) mdash with periodic use of the
sites over a time range on the order of 200 years at
most and possibly much less Jilat 25 yielded activity
areas with clear spatial clusters as do a number of
contexts at Jilat 13 Space does not permit us to
present all details (this awaits the final site report)
but we feel confident that aggregate consideration of
the data from each site allows us to discuss general
questions of individual skills mdash master craftsmen vs
novices
a b
c
Figure 15 Ground stone artefacts possibly used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Grooved sandstone abrading
tool Jilat 13 (b) Sandstone hand-held abrader Jilat 25 (c) Grooved limestone abrading tool Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
152 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
To explore this we analysed unfinished blanks and
the frequency of perforation errors Drilling is a
sensitive moment in bead production when many
things can go wrong (Kenoyer 2003) A low incidence
in perforation errors combined with high numbers of
successfully finished beads and evidence of standar-
dization should be reasonably good indicators of an
artisanrsquos mastery This is the situation seen at Jilat 25
(Fig 7) In all of 93 blanks from Jilat 25 only 2 were
perforation errors a failure rate of only 2
On the other hand a high incidence of perforation
errors would suggest that a beadmaker was a relative
novice Jilat 13 produced more blanks with perfora-
tion errors than Jilat 25 We thought we might find
individual contexts with a high rate of error
suggesting apprentices
The data did not bear this out Of 223 bead blanks
from Jilat 13 (all phases) 22 were perforation errors
mdash a failure rate of 98 All but two errors were on
barrel bead blanks of green Dabba Marble The
others were one pendant blank and one irregular
bead blank These 22 blanks were distributed across
20 different contexts and no more than 2 perforation
errors were found in any one context
A close look at those contexts reveals low error
rates In Context B21 2 green barrel bead blanks
with perforation errors were found with 5 other
blanks The others included green and red barrel and
disc blanks This context also yielded 5 successfully
finished beads including black and red barrel beads
and a green disc Black and green debitage and a
discoidal handstone were also found here In Context
B71 2 blanks with perforation errors were found
along with 9 other blanks and 10 successfully
finished beads including green Dabba Marble barrel
beads but also black and red disc beads Much
debitage was found along with a flaked limestone
cutting tool (cf Fig 12c) and a limestone object with
a drill mark
The higher rate of error at Jilat 13 compared to
Jilat 25 could be because artisans at Jilat 13 were
making more of the larger more complex barrel
beads (as opposed to simple discs see Tables 2ndash3)
which offer greater chances of failure due to the
longer drilling distance However at Jilat 13 the
overall failure rate was still quite low particularly
considering the overall volume of material recovered
(Table 1)
We conclude that the beadmakers at Jilat 13
included few trainees These appear to have been
skilled artisans a small task force composed of
relative experts This raises the question of whether
these beadmakers were examples of lsquoproducer
specialistsrsquo as traditionally defined that is people
involved in
production of a good by a relatively small number of
individuals (compared to the total output and
number of consumers) individuals who are as a
result of this selectivity and the routinization or
repetition of their tasks particularly skilled in
manufacture (Rice 1991 263)
Jilat 13 and 25 do suggest small numbers of
individuals and a certain selectivity in who was
involved in stone bead making The quantity of
debitagedebris relative to (1) the number of finished
beads and (2) the modest sizes of these structures
collectively suggest that these craftsmenwomen
served a larger number of consumers relative to the
number of craftsmen involved here If so who were
these consumers mdash other residents of Jilat or groups
beyond
Intra-site Specialization Between Domestic Groups
Several studies suggest ways of identifying different
forms of craft specialization between domestic groups
in a site For later sites Stein (1996) has explored
spatial data particularly how craft production
facilities are dispersed among domestic units or
located near special (or central) institutions In
Neolithic sites questions about dispersal between
households and possible links between craft produc-
tion and special buildings or special sites have been
underexplored
For specialization Costin (1991) suggests that we
would expect (1) variability between production
units (eg households occupations regions) in
relevant artefacts (2) high densities of craft produc-
tion debris relative to some other generally used
item in some production units (3) high ratios of
unfinished goods to finished goods in some produc-
tion units Kenoyer et alrsquos (1991) ethnoarchaeolo-
gical studies of modern stone bead-making in
Khambat (India) suggest something similar in the
case of households as production units There non-
specialist households engaging in casual opportu-
nistic bead production revealed low quantities of
bead-making debris few unfinished beads and little
standardization in finished beads By contrast
households specializing in bead production were
characterized by stockpiling of large quantities of
raw materials many unfinished beads and more
standardized finished products
In looking at whole occupations (ie phases within
sites) as a unit of observation we argue elsewhere
(Wright and Garrard 2003) that artefact densities and
other data from 13 PPNB and 8 PPNCELN
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 153
occupations in the Jilat-Azraq region suggest that
PPNCELN producers were more specialized than
those of the PPNB mdash at least in the Jilat-Azraq
region Unlike the PPNB sites Jilat 13 and 25 have
very high densities of bead-making debris specialized
tools for drilling and sawing there is an abundance of
unfinished materials relative to finished products
bead-making tools and debris are abundant relative
to normal domestic food processing equipment
(ground stone artefacts) (Wright and Garrard 2003
cf Costin 1991)
That argument is chronological comparing the
PPNB to the PPNCELN occupations and we stand
behind it for the Jilat-Azraq case (different trajec-
tories may apply to south Jordan and the Negev see
below) Still it leaves open the issue of house-to-
house variation within Jilat 25 or Jilat 13 As we have
only one excavated structure per site we cannot on
present evidence argue that each building housed a
group of specialists serving other households within
the same site In fact we have no direct evidence that
there were other structures on each site mdash the ones
excavated were the only ones visible on the surface
There are nuances of material and typological
choices between the Jilat 25 structure (red disc beads)
and the Jilat 13 structure (larger complex green
ornaments) but these nuances are beyond the scope
of this paper
In all we suspect that stone bead production at
Jilat 13 and 25 was geared not for other domestic
units lsquoin camprsquo but for use by these quite mobile
communities themselves mdash as well as export to other
sites within the steppe and beyond (see below) In
Costinrsquos terms (Costin 1991) Jilat 13 and 25 might
each be an example of an independent non-centra-
lized dispersed workshop possibly lsquofamily runrsquo (Rice
1991 262) mdash in which handling of Dabba Marble
was not routinely entrusted to novices
There are hints of house-to-house variations in
bead-making in major villages with larger samples of
domestic structures as in PPNB Beidha At PPNB
Beidha (earlier than Jilat 13 and 25) Building 14
stands out
Other forms of production besides food preparation
were less common Building 14 represented the best
example of artefact production in these basements
A wide range of artefacts was recovered apparently
associated with building 14rsquos basement floor
Particularly widespread were stone polishers bone
tools raw material (including hematite malachite
and magnesium) more than 60 unmodified marine
shells and at least two dozen beads of shell stone
and bone some of which were in various stages of
production Some artifacts lay on stone slabs
indicating that at least some slabs may have
functioned as work surfaces (Byrd 2005 117)
Such hints are intriguing Still macro-artefacts
from house floors are affected by problems of site
formation and house abandonment Micro-artefact
data can help (Rainville 2005) House-by-house
exploration with attention to micro-artefacts is
needed (Wright and Bains 2007)
Site Specialization Within a Regional Network of Craft
Production and Exchange
Both sites and other Neolithic sites in Jilat and
Azraq exhibit resource specialization
the selective use of particular resources in craft
manufacture such as certain clays that are repeat-
edly used (Rice 1991 262)
The Jilat artisans emphasized Dabba Marble from
a wider array of available stone types The Jilat-
Azraq sites collectively show that green Dabba
Marble was a special target This is revealed in both
frequencies and weights (for debris data and weight
data see Wright and Garrard 2003 for frequency
data on beads and blanks see Tables 2 and 3) At
both sites debris is greatly dominated by green
Dabba Marble mdash 80ndash95 of debris by both weight
(grams) and frequency Green Dabba Marble also
dominates blanks in terms of weight at both sites mdash
indicating the use of green for making larger heavier
and more conspicuous ornaments
Turning to frequencies at Jilat 13 about 90 of
blanks are green and only 5 are red However
finished beads include both green and red forms in
comparable percentages (404 and 436 respec-
tively) (Table 3) suggesting that finished red beads
were brought into the building from a place of
manufacture located somewhere else At Jilat 25
blanks of red and green Dabba Marble occur in
comparable proportions (409 green 43 red)
whilst finished beads are predominantly red (588)
(Table 2) If Jilat 13 and 25 were absolute contem-
poraries this could suggest variations in choices and
exchange between residents of different structures
Rice (1991) has defined site specialization as a
situation in which a site is located near a special
resource and the inhabitants emphasize production of
a craft based on that resource Relative to other sites
not so located the range of site functions and
activities would be expected to be more limited
Thus site specialization
involves individual localities or sites having evidence
of limited functions or intensive productive activity
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
154 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
often determined by fortuitous environmental fac-
tors This includes proximity to mineral deposits
and so forth (Rice 1991 262)
Do Jilat 13 and 25 fit this concept In both sites
15 km from the source we have a wealth of evidence
for intensive stone bead production and scanty
evidence for routine food processing tools (Wright
and Garrard 2003) However Jilat 25 may be closer
to the limited function model envisioned by Rice In
Jilat 13 bead-making is clearly intensive but we are
also dealing with a chipped stone assemblage of not
only drills and burins but also projectile points and
other tools Jilat 13 also reveals production of
figurines (of animals phalluses and arrow-shaped
forms) and sculpted pillars (Baird 1993 Garrard
et al 1994a Martin 1999 Wright 1992 1993)
In all Jilat 13 and 25 suggest that we can apply
Ricersquos lsquosite specializationrsquo on the grounds of intensive
productive activity and proximity to source mdash but
with the qualification that this specialization was also
embedded in hunting-herding activities and at Jilat
13 production of other special crafts unique among
the sites of a symbolic nature (figurines pillars)
One possibility is that we are dealing with a camp
of hunter-herder corporate groups mdash part of a wider
regional network mdash engaged in special activities in
remote areas involving art personal ornaments and
ritual Such groups are suggested by other data from
the PPNBndashPPNC time span for example Nahal
Hemar (ornaments masks hunting tools) Dhuweila
(carving of hunters with dress variations)
Catalhoyuk (images of hunters with dress variations
as in the bull hunt mural) and Gobeklitepe (sculpture
production including a quarry wild-animal icono-
graphy hunting) (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988 Betts
1998 Mellaart 1967 Schmidt 2000) In all these data
hint that craft production of special items was
embedded in hunting andor herding activities in
remote areas this may have been a key means by
which exotic materials reached major villages In a
very broad way this supports a sketch outlined by
Bar Yosef (Bar-Yosef 2001) although we do not
necessarily agree with specifics of his model eg the
territories boundaries social groups and mechanisms
which he suggests (cf Asouti 2006) Instead we see
this as one example of diverse strategies of social
networking linking lineages households and commu-
nities in the Neolithic (Wright forthcoming)
Returning to the stone bead data from Jilat 13 and
25 the apparent stockpiling of raw material and
intensive production activity hints at production of
the green material for export (see above and Wright
and Garrard 2003) New data now add weight to this
idea and suggest the following provisional picture of
regional specializations and exchanges in ornaments
(1) Based on typology technology and materials thereappears to be a distinctive eastern Jordanian koine ornetwork of stone bead manufacture and exchangefeaturing Dabba Marble and a probable regionalspecialization in it
Other Neolithic bead production sites are known
from eastern Jordan Indications are that most of the
green bead materials are Dabba Marble probably
from Jilat (further work is needed) In these sites
diversity of materials used seems low with few
imports from beyond the steppe Shells however
testify to wider networks (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989
Cooke and Reese in Betts 1998 Garrard et al 1994a
Reese 1991)
Azraq 31 (PPNB and ELN) is in our suite of study
materials (Baird et al 1992 Garrard et al 1994a
Wright and Garrard 2003) and debris blanks and
beads were found Preliminary XRF analysis of green
samples (by Groom) indicates that the material is
consistent with Jilat Dabba Marble Typology and
technology are also similar and as at Jilat 25 burin
spall drills were closely associated with bead-making
in specific activity areas (Baird 1993 521 Baird et al
1992 25) However the ground stone revealed no
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
(Wright 1992 1993 Wright in Baird et al 1992)
Material used for beads at Dhuweila (PPNB and
ELN) has been called Dabba Marble (Cooke and
Reese in Betts 1998) It is consistent in appearance
with our material although we have no details on
mineralogy or source Typologically these beads are
similar to those of Jilat 13 and 25 The ground stone
is very different from the suite at the Jilat sites
(Wright in Betts 1998) for comparisons of chipped
stone assemblages see Baird (1993)
At Bawwab al-Ghazal (Late PPNB) Rollefson
et al found drills bits on burin spalls tile knives
beads bead blanks and bead debris some of which
they called green Dabba Marble (Rollefson et al
1999 Quintero et al 2004) They argued that there is
a possible source of this material outcropping near
the site mdash lsquoFor the last raw material [green Dabba
Marble] small nodules of the green limestone were
embedded in the local bedrockrsquo (Rollefson et al 1999
3) However as shown in Appendix A the true
Dabba Marble only occurs in a restricted area west of
Wadi Jilat The lsquobedrockrsquo which outcrops near Azraq
31 and Bawwab al-Ghazal is travertine and some of
this formed during the late Pleistocene and Holocene
The nearby Epipalaeolithic site of Azraq 17 was
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 155
found partially embedded in travertine and artefacts
including nodules of imported basalt were found in
the travertine at this site It is possible that the
nodules of green limestone found at Bawwab al-
Ghazal were imported Dabba Marble which subse-
quently became incorporated in a travertine near the
site An alternative possibility is that the local
travertine is infused with green minerals In Wadi
Jilat travertines were noted with traces of green
minerals and in the Siwaqa area to the south-west of
Jilat there are extensive travertines some of which
are infused with pale green minerals including
volkonskoite (Barjous 1986 mdash see also Appendix A)
In eastern Jordan some Neolithic sites are greatly
dominated by burins (lsquoburin sitesrsquo) At a number of
these there is evidence for stone bead-making (eg
Jebel Naja) These lsquoburin sitesrsquo typically reveal few
ground stone tools we know of no examples of
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
from them It was argued that the main role of the
burins was production of spalls for drills used mainly
for beads (Betts 1987 1998 Finlayson and Betts
1990) However burin sites are not universally
associated with stone bead making At Jilat 23 24
and 26 burins were numerous but other evidence for
bead-making is scanty (Baird 1993 520)
Therefore some have questioned whether
burins and burin spalls in such sites were solely or
primarily intended for making drills and beads
noting that other functions are possible (Quintero
et al 2004 209) Given that these sites typically
represent short-term occupations it is possible that
many sites might be spall manufacture sites with
spalls transported to other settings where drill
manufacture and bead manufacture took place such
as Jilat 13 and 25 Rollefson expressed doubt that
either bladelet or burin spall drills would have been
used in bow drills partly because of their fragility and
also because most of them have a pronounced curve
on the long axis which would have made high speed
drilling impossible (Rollefson and Parker 2002) But
Finlayson and Betts (1990) and Berna (1995)
successfully experimented using burin spalls with
bow drills and Kenoyer (personal communication
2007) notes that drills made on burin spalls are the
most common type of drill in diverse prehistoric
stone bead-making sites (in India Pakistan and
elsewhere)
In the case of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 we believe burin-
spall drills were part of the bead-making repertoire
for reasons noted above This does not rule out other
uses of burin spalls Nor does it rule out the use of
other perforating techniques Drills do not have to be
made of stone when soft stones are being perforated
mdash wood bone and abrasives can be used (Foreman
1978)
(2) There are hints of export of Dabba Marble to at leastsome villages in the Levantine corridor However majorNeolithic villages display much diversity in materials andespecially more importing of exotic stones than is seen inthe eastern Jordanian sites
Many writers report Neolithic beads made of
unspecified lsquogreenstonersquo This term is unfortunate
since it can refer to metabasalt and similar altered
igneous rocks (Schumann 1992 248) Some of these
lsquogreenstonesrsquo may be limestone with apatite or other
materials (eg Garfinkel 1987 81ndash82 Hauptmann
2004 Talbot 1983 789) Beads of green limestones
rich in fluorapatite were found at late PPNB Basta in
southern Jordan (Hauptmann 2004) as confirmed by
XRF and XRD Green beads identified as Dabba
Marble were also reported from Ain Ghazal a site
with both PPNB and PPNC occupations (Rollefson
et al 1990 103ndash04) Whether these are Dabba
Marble from the Jilat source (Appendices AndashB) is
not yet fully clear Ongoing research will sort out
these mysteries (eg D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal
communication Hauptmann 2004)
Major villages in the Levantine Corridor reveal
different degrees of emphasis in styles and materials
often we see a certain emphasis on local materials and
preferences However considerable exchange net-
works are indicated in major villages which display
much wider ranges of stone ornament materials
compared to the eastern Jordanian sites (such as
Ain Ghazal Yiftahel Basta Barsquoja Ghuwayr 1
Fidan 1) mdash along with of course shells (Affonso
and Pernicka 2004 Bienert and Gebel 1998 84ndash86
Garfinkel 1987 Hauptmann 2004 Rollefson and
Simmons 1984 1986 Rollefson et al 1990 Simmons
and Najjar 1998 Starck 1988)
As the Neolithic evolved stone bead-making
entailed increasingly diverse techniques and materi-
als One example may be drills In earlymiddle PPNB
sites most drills are made on bladelets In the late
PPNB PPNC and Late Neolithic there may have
been a gradual increase in drills made on burin spalls
although perhaps not in all regions (Jensen 2004
Rollefson and Parker 2002) Underlining increasing
diversity of technological practice between groups
Baird (2001b) pointed out geographic variation in
this technology with spall drills dominating in the
north-eastern Jordanian steppe from MPPNB
through Early Late Neolithic whilst contemporary
sites to west and south use bladelet blanks for their
piercing tools
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
156 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
special materials can enhance the power of an
individual or a group encouraging hierarchy
(Dobres 2000 119ndash20)
These questions force us to reconsider issues of
craft specialization a term often used loosely or in
widely different ways Three concepts of specializa-
tion are considered here individual specialists
specialization between households or domestic
groups within a given site and site specialization
within a regional or social network of craft produc-
tion and exchange
Costin (1991) draws a contrast between indepen-
dent specialization and attached specialization
Independent specialization involves production of
utilitarian goods for nonelites and can be household-
based or based in special workshops Attached
specialization refers to production of prestige goods
under control of elites Whilst Costin notes that
attached specialization can also be based in house-
holds or workshops we often think of attached
specialization in connection with central institutions
and urban or state-level societies It is of considerable
interest that in early urban societies the making of
stone personal ornaments in association with central
institutions figures prominently (Stein 1996 Vidale
1989)
How earlier forms of craft specialization may have
evolved into large-scale attached specialization is
poorly understood Most research has concentrated
on later stages in this process (eg Stein 1996) in
discussions of earlier forms of specialization defini-
tions and criteria for diagnosis could sometimes be
clearer (eg Quintero and Wilke 1998 Rollefson and
Parker 2002 Rosen 1997) If we are dealing with
a
c
b
Figure 14 Ground stone artefacts probably used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Capstone made of limestone
Jilat 25 (b) Handstone probably used as an anvil or hammer Jilat 25 note depression in face and flake scars
at edges (c) Limestone drilling bench Jilat 13 Note evidence of use-wear on the left and widest area of the
bench smooth abraded surface drill marks in the centre-left face small flake scars with negative bulbs of per-
cussion close to the edge of the bench
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 151
specialization in Neolithic societies it is probably
independent specialization Still Neolithic societies
may fall between Costinrsquos two categories Neolithic
groups were clearly producing prestige goods perso-
nal ornaments are not strictly utilitarian and there is
at least a possibility that elites were emerging (Byrd
1994 Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002 Verhoeven
2002)
Individual Specialists
First there is the issue of identifying individual
specialists Some use lsquospecializationrsquo to refer to any
situation in which some artisans have high levels of
skill a view that has been criticized (Rice 1991) We
agree with Rice that identifying a high level of
technical skill in a craft is not on its own sufficient
for a diagnosis of specialization since it robs the
concept of force in discussing long term change (by
this criterion the Upper Palaeolithic was riddled
with craft specialists) However we would argue
that if there are other indications of craft specializa-
tion a search for levels of ability in different
individuals is appropriate mdash if the data permit
Such data would be primary refuse from well-dated
sites of high temporal resolution in which technical
processes (eg errors in chaines operatoires) can
reveal experts vs novices (Pigeot 1990 Stout 2002
Vanzetti and Vidale 1994)
In the case of Jilat 13 and 25 we are dealing with
much primary refuse and two closely dated sites (see
above and Tables 6ndash7) mdash with periodic use of the
sites over a time range on the order of 200 years at
most and possibly much less Jilat 25 yielded activity
areas with clear spatial clusters as do a number of
contexts at Jilat 13 Space does not permit us to
present all details (this awaits the final site report)
but we feel confident that aggregate consideration of
the data from each site allows us to discuss general
questions of individual skills mdash master craftsmen vs
novices
a b
c
Figure 15 Ground stone artefacts possibly used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Grooved sandstone abrading
tool Jilat 13 (b) Sandstone hand-held abrader Jilat 25 (c) Grooved limestone abrading tool Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
152 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
To explore this we analysed unfinished blanks and
the frequency of perforation errors Drilling is a
sensitive moment in bead production when many
things can go wrong (Kenoyer 2003) A low incidence
in perforation errors combined with high numbers of
successfully finished beads and evidence of standar-
dization should be reasonably good indicators of an
artisanrsquos mastery This is the situation seen at Jilat 25
(Fig 7) In all of 93 blanks from Jilat 25 only 2 were
perforation errors a failure rate of only 2
On the other hand a high incidence of perforation
errors would suggest that a beadmaker was a relative
novice Jilat 13 produced more blanks with perfora-
tion errors than Jilat 25 We thought we might find
individual contexts with a high rate of error
suggesting apprentices
The data did not bear this out Of 223 bead blanks
from Jilat 13 (all phases) 22 were perforation errors
mdash a failure rate of 98 All but two errors were on
barrel bead blanks of green Dabba Marble The
others were one pendant blank and one irregular
bead blank These 22 blanks were distributed across
20 different contexts and no more than 2 perforation
errors were found in any one context
A close look at those contexts reveals low error
rates In Context B21 2 green barrel bead blanks
with perforation errors were found with 5 other
blanks The others included green and red barrel and
disc blanks This context also yielded 5 successfully
finished beads including black and red barrel beads
and a green disc Black and green debitage and a
discoidal handstone were also found here In Context
B71 2 blanks with perforation errors were found
along with 9 other blanks and 10 successfully
finished beads including green Dabba Marble barrel
beads but also black and red disc beads Much
debitage was found along with a flaked limestone
cutting tool (cf Fig 12c) and a limestone object with
a drill mark
The higher rate of error at Jilat 13 compared to
Jilat 25 could be because artisans at Jilat 13 were
making more of the larger more complex barrel
beads (as opposed to simple discs see Tables 2ndash3)
which offer greater chances of failure due to the
longer drilling distance However at Jilat 13 the
overall failure rate was still quite low particularly
considering the overall volume of material recovered
(Table 1)
We conclude that the beadmakers at Jilat 13
included few trainees These appear to have been
skilled artisans a small task force composed of
relative experts This raises the question of whether
these beadmakers were examples of lsquoproducer
specialistsrsquo as traditionally defined that is people
involved in
production of a good by a relatively small number of
individuals (compared to the total output and
number of consumers) individuals who are as a
result of this selectivity and the routinization or
repetition of their tasks particularly skilled in
manufacture (Rice 1991 263)
Jilat 13 and 25 do suggest small numbers of
individuals and a certain selectivity in who was
involved in stone bead making The quantity of
debitagedebris relative to (1) the number of finished
beads and (2) the modest sizes of these structures
collectively suggest that these craftsmenwomen
served a larger number of consumers relative to the
number of craftsmen involved here If so who were
these consumers mdash other residents of Jilat or groups
beyond
Intra-site Specialization Between Domestic Groups
Several studies suggest ways of identifying different
forms of craft specialization between domestic groups
in a site For later sites Stein (1996) has explored
spatial data particularly how craft production
facilities are dispersed among domestic units or
located near special (or central) institutions In
Neolithic sites questions about dispersal between
households and possible links between craft produc-
tion and special buildings or special sites have been
underexplored
For specialization Costin (1991) suggests that we
would expect (1) variability between production
units (eg households occupations regions) in
relevant artefacts (2) high densities of craft produc-
tion debris relative to some other generally used
item in some production units (3) high ratios of
unfinished goods to finished goods in some produc-
tion units Kenoyer et alrsquos (1991) ethnoarchaeolo-
gical studies of modern stone bead-making in
Khambat (India) suggest something similar in the
case of households as production units There non-
specialist households engaging in casual opportu-
nistic bead production revealed low quantities of
bead-making debris few unfinished beads and little
standardization in finished beads By contrast
households specializing in bead production were
characterized by stockpiling of large quantities of
raw materials many unfinished beads and more
standardized finished products
In looking at whole occupations (ie phases within
sites) as a unit of observation we argue elsewhere
(Wright and Garrard 2003) that artefact densities and
other data from 13 PPNB and 8 PPNCELN
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 153
occupations in the Jilat-Azraq region suggest that
PPNCELN producers were more specialized than
those of the PPNB mdash at least in the Jilat-Azraq
region Unlike the PPNB sites Jilat 13 and 25 have
very high densities of bead-making debris specialized
tools for drilling and sawing there is an abundance of
unfinished materials relative to finished products
bead-making tools and debris are abundant relative
to normal domestic food processing equipment
(ground stone artefacts) (Wright and Garrard 2003
cf Costin 1991)
That argument is chronological comparing the
PPNB to the PPNCELN occupations and we stand
behind it for the Jilat-Azraq case (different trajec-
tories may apply to south Jordan and the Negev see
below) Still it leaves open the issue of house-to-
house variation within Jilat 25 or Jilat 13 As we have
only one excavated structure per site we cannot on
present evidence argue that each building housed a
group of specialists serving other households within
the same site In fact we have no direct evidence that
there were other structures on each site mdash the ones
excavated were the only ones visible on the surface
There are nuances of material and typological
choices between the Jilat 25 structure (red disc beads)
and the Jilat 13 structure (larger complex green
ornaments) but these nuances are beyond the scope
of this paper
In all we suspect that stone bead production at
Jilat 13 and 25 was geared not for other domestic
units lsquoin camprsquo but for use by these quite mobile
communities themselves mdash as well as export to other
sites within the steppe and beyond (see below) In
Costinrsquos terms (Costin 1991) Jilat 13 and 25 might
each be an example of an independent non-centra-
lized dispersed workshop possibly lsquofamily runrsquo (Rice
1991 262) mdash in which handling of Dabba Marble
was not routinely entrusted to novices
There are hints of house-to-house variations in
bead-making in major villages with larger samples of
domestic structures as in PPNB Beidha At PPNB
Beidha (earlier than Jilat 13 and 25) Building 14
stands out
Other forms of production besides food preparation
were less common Building 14 represented the best
example of artefact production in these basements
A wide range of artefacts was recovered apparently
associated with building 14rsquos basement floor
Particularly widespread were stone polishers bone
tools raw material (including hematite malachite
and magnesium) more than 60 unmodified marine
shells and at least two dozen beads of shell stone
and bone some of which were in various stages of
production Some artifacts lay on stone slabs
indicating that at least some slabs may have
functioned as work surfaces (Byrd 2005 117)
Such hints are intriguing Still macro-artefacts
from house floors are affected by problems of site
formation and house abandonment Micro-artefact
data can help (Rainville 2005) House-by-house
exploration with attention to micro-artefacts is
needed (Wright and Bains 2007)
Site Specialization Within a Regional Network of Craft
Production and Exchange
Both sites and other Neolithic sites in Jilat and
Azraq exhibit resource specialization
the selective use of particular resources in craft
manufacture such as certain clays that are repeat-
edly used (Rice 1991 262)
The Jilat artisans emphasized Dabba Marble from
a wider array of available stone types The Jilat-
Azraq sites collectively show that green Dabba
Marble was a special target This is revealed in both
frequencies and weights (for debris data and weight
data see Wright and Garrard 2003 for frequency
data on beads and blanks see Tables 2 and 3) At
both sites debris is greatly dominated by green
Dabba Marble mdash 80ndash95 of debris by both weight
(grams) and frequency Green Dabba Marble also
dominates blanks in terms of weight at both sites mdash
indicating the use of green for making larger heavier
and more conspicuous ornaments
Turning to frequencies at Jilat 13 about 90 of
blanks are green and only 5 are red However
finished beads include both green and red forms in
comparable percentages (404 and 436 respec-
tively) (Table 3) suggesting that finished red beads
were brought into the building from a place of
manufacture located somewhere else At Jilat 25
blanks of red and green Dabba Marble occur in
comparable proportions (409 green 43 red)
whilst finished beads are predominantly red (588)
(Table 2) If Jilat 13 and 25 were absolute contem-
poraries this could suggest variations in choices and
exchange between residents of different structures
Rice (1991) has defined site specialization as a
situation in which a site is located near a special
resource and the inhabitants emphasize production of
a craft based on that resource Relative to other sites
not so located the range of site functions and
activities would be expected to be more limited
Thus site specialization
involves individual localities or sites having evidence
of limited functions or intensive productive activity
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
154 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
often determined by fortuitous environmental fac-
tors This includes proximity to mineral deposits
and so forth (Rice 1991 262)
Do Jilat 13 and 25 fit this concept In both sites
15 km from the source we have a wealth of evidence
for intensive stone bead production and scanty
evidence for routine food processing tools (Wright
and Garrard 2003) However Jilat 25 may be closer
to the limited function model envisioned by Rice In
Jilat 13 bead-making is clearly intensive but we are
also dealing with a chipped stone assemblage of not
only drills and burins but also projectile points and
other tools Jilat 13 also reveals production of
figurines (of animals phalluses and arrow-shaped
forms) and sculpted pillars (Baird 1993 Garrard
et al 1994a Martin 1999 Wright 1992 1993)
In all Jilat 13 and 25 suggest that we can apply
Ricersquos lsquosite specializationrsquo on the grounds of intensive
productive activity and proximity to source mdash but
with the qualification that this specialization was also
embedded in hunting-herding activities and at Jilat
13 production of other special crafts unique among
the sites of a symbolic nature (figurines pillars)
One possibility is that we are dealing with a camp
of hunter-herder corporate groups mdash part of a wider
regional network mdash engaged in special activities in
remote areas involving art personal ornaments and
ritual Such groups are suggested by other data from
the PPNBndashPPNC time span for example Nahal
Hemar (ornaments masks hunting tools) Dhuweila
(carving of hunters with dress variations)
Catalhoyuk (images of hunters with dress variations
as in the bull hunt mural) and Gobeklitepe (sculpture
production including a quarry wild-animal icono-
graphy hunting) (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988 Betts
1998 Mellaart 1967 Schmidt 2000) In all these data
hint that craft production of special items was
embedded in hunting andor herding activities in
remote areas this may have been a key means by
which exotic materials reached major villages In a
very broad way this supports a sketch outlined by
Bar Yosef (Bar-Yosef 2001) although we do not
necessarily agree with specifics of his model eg the
territories boundaries social groups and mechanisms
which he suggests (cf Asouti 2006) Instead we see
this as one example of diverse strategies of social
networking linking lineages households and commu-
nities in the Neolithic (Wright forthcoming)
Returning to the stone bead data from Jilat 13 and
25 the apparent stockpiling of raw material and
intensive production activity hints at production of
the green material for export (see above and Wright
and Garrard 2003) New data now add weight to this
idea and suggest the following provisional picture of
regional specializations and exchanges in ornaments
(1) Based on typology technology and materials thereappears to be a distinctive eastern Jordanian koine ornetwork of stone bead manufacture and exchangefeaturing Dabba Marble and a probable regionalspecialization in it
Other Neolithic bead production sites are known
from eastern Jordan Indications are that most of the
green bead materials are Dabba Marble probably
from Jilat (further work is needed) In these sites
diversity of materials used seems low with few
imports from beyond the steppe Shells however
testify to wider networks (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989
Cooke and Reese in Betts 1998 Garrard et al 1994a
Reese 1991)
Azraq 31 (PPNB and ELN) is in our suite of study
materials (Baird et al 1992 Garrard et al 1994a
Wright and Garrard 2003) and debris blanks and
beads were found Preliminary XRF analysis of green
samples (by Groom) indicates that the material is
consistent with Jilat Dabba Marble Typology and
technology are also similar and as at Jilat 25 burin
spall drills were closely associated with bead-making
in specific activity areas (Baird 1993 521 Baird et al
1992 25) However the ground stone revealed no
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
(Wright 1992 1993 Wright in Baird et al 1992)
Material used for beads at Dhuweila (PPNB and
ELN) has been called Dabba Marble (Cooke and
Reese in Betts 1998) It is consistent in appearance
with our material although we have no details on
mineralogy or source Typologically these beads are
similar to those of Jilat 13 and 25 The ground stone
is very different from the suite at the Jilat sites
(Wright in Betts 1998) for comparisons of chipped
stone assemblages see Baird (1993)
At Bawwab al-Ghazal (Late PPNB) Rollefson
et al found drills bits on burin spalls tile knives
beads bead blanks and bead debris some of which
they called green Dabba Marble (Rollefson et al
1999 Quintero et al 2004) They argued that there is
a possible source of this material outcropping near
the site mdash lsquoFor the last raw material [green Dabba
Marble] small nodules of the green limestone were
embedded in the local bedrockrsquo (Rollefson et al 1999
3) However as shown in Appendix A the true
Dabba Marble only occurs in a restricted area west of
Wadi Jilat The lsquobedrockrsquo which outcrops near Azraq
31 and Bawwab al-Ghazal is travertine and some of
this formed during the late Pleistocene and Holocene
The nearby Epipalaeolithic site of Azraq 17 was
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 155
found partially embedded in travertine and artefacts
including nodules of imported basalt were found in
the travertine at this site It is possible that the
nodules of green limestone found at Bawwab al-
Ghazal were imported Dabba Marble which subse-
quently became incorporated in a travertine near the
site An alternative possibility is that the local
travertine is infused with green minerals In Wadi
Jilat travertines were noted with traces of green
minerals and in the Siwaqa area to the south-west of
Jilat there are extensive travertines some of which
are infused with pale green minerals including
volkonskoite (Barjous 1986 mdash see also Appendix A)
In eastern Jordan some Neolithic sites are greatly
dominated by burins (lsquoburin sitesrsquo) At a number of
these there is evidence for stone bead-making (eg
Jebel Naja) These lsquoburin sitesrsquo typically reveal few
ground stone tools we know of no examples of
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
from them It was argued that the main role of the
burins was production of spalls for drills used mainly
for beads (Betts 1987 1998 Finlayson and Betts
1990) However burin sites are not universally
associated with stone bead making At Jilat 23 24
and 26 burins were numerous but other evidence for
bead-making is scanty (Baird 1993 520)
Therefore some have questioned whether
burins and burin spalls in such sites were solely or
primarily intended for making drills and beads
noting that other functions are possible (Quintero
et al 2004 209) Given that these sites typically
represent short-term occupations it is possible that
many sites might be spall manufacture sites with
spalls transported to other settings where drill
manufacture and bead manufacture took place such
as Jilat 13 and 25 Rollefson expressed doubt that
either bladelet or burin spall drills would have been
used in bow drills partly because of their fragility and
also because most of them have a pronounced curve
on the long axis which would have made high speed
drilling impossible (Rollefson and Parker 2002) But
Finlayson and Betts (1990) and Berna (1995)
successfully experimented using burin spalls with
bow drills and Kenoyer (personal communication
2007) notes that drills made on burin spalls are the
most common type of drill in diverse prehistoric
stone bead-making sites (in India Pakistan and
elsewhere)
In the case of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 we believe burin-
spall drills were part of the bead-making repertoire
for reasons noted above This does not rule out other
uses of burin spalls Nor does it rule out the use of
other perforating techniques Drills do not have to be
made of stone when soft stones are being perforated
mdash wood bone and abrasives can be used (Foreman
1978)
(2) There are hints of export of Dabba Marble to at leastsome villages in the Levantine corridor However majorNeolithic villages display much diversity in materials andespecially more importing of exotic stones than is seen inthe eastern Jordanian sites
Many writers report Neolithic beads made of
unspecified lsquogreenstonersquo This term is unfortunate
since it can refer to metabasalt and similar altered
igneous rocks (Schumann 1992 248) Some of these
lsquogreenstonesrsquo may be limestone with apatite or other
materials (eg Garfinkel 1987 81ndash82 Hauptmann
2004 Talbot 1983 789) Beads of green limestones
rich in fluorapatite were found at late PPNB Basta in
southern Jordan (Hauptmann 2004) as confirmed by
XRF and XRD Green beads identified as Dabba
Marble were also reported from Ain Ghazal a site
with both PPNB and PPNC occupations (Rollefson
et al 1990 103ndash04) Whether these are Dabba
Marble from the Jilat source (Appendices AndashB) is
not yet fully clear Ongoing research will sort out
these mysteries (eg D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal
communication Hauptmann 2004)
Major villages in the Levantine Corridor reveal
different degrees of emphasis in styles and materials
often we see a certain emphasis on local materials and
preferences However considerable exchange net-
works are indicated in major villages which display
much wider ranges of stone ornament materials
compared to the eastern Jordanian sites (such as
Ain Ghazal Yiftahel Basta Barsquoja Ghuwayr 1
Fidan 1) mdash along with of course shells (Affonso
and Pernicka 2004 Bienert and Gebel 1998 84ndash86
Garfinkel 1987 Hauptmann 2004 Rollefson and
Simmons 1984 1986 Rollefson et al 1990 Simmons
and Najjar 1998 Starck 1988)
As the Neolithic evolved stone bead-making
entailed increasingly diverse techniques and materi-
als One example may be drills In earlymiddle PPNB
sites most drills are made on bladelets In the late
PPNB PPNC and Late Neolithic there may have
been a gradual increase in drills made on burin spalls
although perhaps not in all regions (Jensen 2004
Rollefson and Parker 2002) Underlining increasing
diversity of technological practice between groups
Baird (2001b) pointed out geographic variation in
this technology with spall drills dominating in the
north-eastern Jordanian steppe from MPPNB
through Early Late Neolithic whilst contemporary
sites to west and south use bladelet blanks for their
piercing tools
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
156 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
specialization in Neolithic societies it is probably
independent specialization Still Neolithic societies
may fall between Costinrsquos two categories Neolithic
groups were clearly producing prestige goods perso-
nal ornaments are not strictly utilitarian and there is
at least a possibility that elites were emerging (Byrd
1994 Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002 Verhoeven
2002)
Individual Specialists
First there is the issue of identifying individual
specialists Some use lsquospecializationrsquo to refer to any
situation in which some artisans have high levels of
skill a view that has been criticized (Rice 1991) We
agree with Rice that identifying a high level of
technical skill in a craft is not on its own sufficient
for a diagnosis of specialization since it robs the
concept of force in discussing long term change (by
this criterion the Upper Palaeolithic was riddled
with craft specialists) However we would argue
that if there are other indications of craft specializa-
tion a search for levels of ability in different
individuals is appropriate mdash if the data permit
Such data would be primary refuse from well-dated
sites of high temporal resolution in which technical
processes (eg errors in chaines operatoires) can
reveal experts vs novices (Pigeot 1990 Stout 2002
Vanzetti and Vidale 1994)
In the case of Jilat 13 and 25 we are dealing with
much primary refuse and two closely dated sites (see
above and Tables 6ndash7) mdash with periodic use of the
sites over a time range on the order of 200 years at
most and possibly much less Jilat 25 yielded activity
areas with clear spatial clusters as do a number of
contexts at Jilat 13 Space does not permit us to
present all details (this awaits the final site report)
but we feel confident that aggregate consideration of
the data from each site allows us to discuss general
questions of individual skills mdash master craftsmen vs
novices
a b
c
Figure 15 Ground stone artefacts possibly used for beadmaking in Jilat Neolithic sites (a) Grooved sandstone abrading
tool Jilat 13 (b) Sandstone hand-held abrader Jilat 25 (c) Grooved limestone abrading tool Jilat 13
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
152 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
To explore this we analysed unfinished blanks and
the frequency of perforation errors Drilling is a
sensitive moment in bead production when many
things can go wrong (Kenoyer 2003) A low incidence
in perforation errors combined with high numbers of
successfully finished beads and evidence of standar-
dization should be reasonably good indicators of an
artisanrsquos mastery This is the situation seen at Jilat 25
(Fig 7) In all of 93 blanks from Jilat 25 only 2 were
perforation errors a failure rate of only 2
On the other hand a high incidence of perforation
errors would suggest that a beadmaker was a relative
novice Jilat 13 produced more blanks with perfora-
tion errors than Jilat 25 We thought we might find
individual contexts with a high rate of error
suggesting apprentices
The data did not bear this out Of 223 bead blanks
from Jilat 13 (all phases) 22 were perforation errors
mdash a failure rate of 98 All but two errors were on
barrel bead blanks of green Dabba Marble The
others were one pendant blank and one irregular
bead blank These 22 blanks were distributed across
20 different contexts and no more than 2 perforation
errors were found in any one context
A close look at those contexts reveals low error
rates In Context B21 2 green barrel bead blanks
with perforation errors were found with 5 other
blanks The others included green and red barrel and
disc blanks This context also yielded 5 successfully
finished beads including black and red barrel beads
and a green disc Black and green debitage and a
discoidal handstone were also found here In Context
B71 2 blanks with perforation errors were found
along with 9 other blanks and 10 successfully
finished beads including green Dabba Marble barrel
beads but also black and red disc beads Much
debitage was found along with a flaked limestone
cutting tool (cf Fig 12c) and a limestone object with
a drill mark
The higher rate of error at Jilat 13 compared to
Jilat 25 could be because artisans at Jilat 13 were
making more of the larger more complex barrel
beads (as opposed to simple discs see Tables 2ndash3)
which offer greater chances of failure due to the
longer drilling distance However at Jilat 13 the
overall failure rate was still quite low particularly
considering the overall volume of material recovered
(Table 1)
We conclude that the beadmakers at Jilat 13
included few trainees These appear to have been
skilled artisans a small task force composed of
relative experts This raises the question of whether
these beadmakers were examples of lsquoproducer
specialistsrsquo as traditionally defined that is people
involved in
production of a good by a relatively small number of
individuals (compared to the total output and
number of consumers) individuals who are as a
result of this selectivity and the routinization or
repetition of their tasks particularly skilled in
manufacture (Rice 1991 263)
Jilat 13 and 25 do suggest small numbers of
individuals and a certain selectivity in who was
involved in stone bead making The quantity of
debitagedebris relative to (1) the number of finished
beads and (2) the modest sizes of these structures
collectively suggest that these craftsmenwomen
served a larger number of consumers relative to the
number of craftsmen involved here If so who were
these consumers mdash other residents of Jilat or groups
beyond
Intra-site Specialization Between Domestic Groups
Several studies suggest ways of identifying different
forms of craft specialization between domestic groups
in a site For later sites Stein (1996) has explored
spatial data particularly how craft production
facilities are dispersed among domestic units or
located near special (or central) institutions In
Neolithic sites questions about dispersal between
households and possible links between craft produc-
tion and special buildings or special sites have been
underexplored
For specialization Costin (1991) suggests that we
would expect (1) variability between production
units (eg households occupations regions) in
relevant artefacts (2) high densities of craft produc-
tion debris relative to some other generally used
item in some production units (3) high ratios of
unfinished goods to finished goods in some produc-
tion units Kenoyer et alrsquos (1991) ethnoarchaeolo-
gical studies of modern stone bead-making in
Khambat (India) suggest something similar in the
case of households as production units There non-
specialist households engaging in casual opportu-
nistic bead production revealed low quantities of
bead-making debris few unfinished beads and little
standardization in finished beads By contrast
households specializing in bead production were
characterized by stockpiling of large quantities of
raw materials many unfinished beads and more
standardized finished products
In looking at whole occupations (ie phases within
sites) as a unit of observation we argue elsewhere
(Wright and Garrard 2003) that artefact densities and
other data from 13 PPNB and 8 PPNCELN
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 153
occupations in the Jilat-Azraq region suggest that
PPNCELN producers were more specialized than
those of the PPNB mdash at least in the Jilat-Azraq
region Unlike the PPNB sites Jilat 13 and 25 have
very high densities of bead-making debris specialized
tools for drilling and sawing there is an abundance of
unfinished materials relative to finished products
bead-making tools and debris are abundant relative
to normal domestic food processing equipment
(ground stone artefacts) (Wright and Garrard 2003
cf Costin 1991)
That argument is chronological comparing the
PPNB to the PPNCELN occupations and we stand
behind it for the Jilat-Azraq case (different trajec-
tories may apply to south Jordan and the Negev see
below) Still it leaves open the issue of house-to-
house variation within Jilat 25 or Jilat 13 As we have
only one excavated structure per site we cannot on
present evidence argue that each building housed a
group of specialists serving other households within
the same site In fact we have no direct evidence that
there were other structures on each site mdash the ones
excavated were the only ones visible on the surface
There are nuances of material and typological
choices between the Jilat 25 structure (red disc beads)
and the Jilat 13 structure (larger complex green
ornaments) but these nuances are beyond the scope
of this paper
In all we suspect that stone bead production at
Jilat 13 and 25 was geared not for other domestic
units lsquoin camprsquo but for use by these quite mobile
communities themselves mdash as well as export to other
sites within the steppe and beyond (see below) In
Costinrsquos terms (Costin 1991) Jilat 13 and 25 might
each be an example of an independent non-centra-
lized dispersed workshop possibly lsquofamily runrsquo (Rice
1991 262) mdash in which handling of Dabba Marble
was not routinely entrusted to novices
There are hints of house-to-house variations in
bead-making in major villages with larger samples of
domestic structures as in PPNB Beidha At PPNB
Beidha (earlier than Jilat 13 and 25) Building 14
stands out
Other forms of production besides food preparation
were less common Building 14 represented the best
example of artefact production in these basements
A wide range of artefacts was recovered apparently
associated with building 14rsquos basement floor
Particularly widespread were stone polishers bone
tools raw material (including hematite malachite
and magnesium) more than 60 unmodified marine
shells and at least two dozen beads of shell stone
and bone some of which were in various stages of
production Some artifacts lay on stone slabs
indicating that at least some slabs may have
functioned as work surfaces (Byrd 2005 117)
Such hints are intriguing Still macro-artefacts
from house floors are affected by problems of site
formation and house abandonment Micro-artefact
data can help (Rainville 2005) House-by-house
exploration with attention to micro-artefacts is
needed (Wright and Bains 2007)
Site Specialization Within a Regional Network of Craft
Production and Exchange
Both sites and other Neolithic sites in Jilat and
Azraq exhibit resource specialization
the selective use of particular resources in craft
manufacture such as certain clays that are repeat-
edly used (Rice 1991 262)
The Jilat artisans emphasized Dabba Marble from
a wider array of available stone types The Jilat-
Azraq sites collectively show that green Dabba
Marble was a special target This is revealed in both
frequencies and weights (for debris data and weight
data see Wright and Garrard 2003 for frequency
data on beads and blanks see Tables 2 and 3) At
both sites debris is greatly dominated by green
Dabba Marble mdash 80ndash95 of debris by both weight
(grams) and frequency Green Dabba Marble also
dominates blanks in terms of weight at both sites mdash
indicating the use of green for making larger heavier
and more conspicuous ornaments
Turning to frequencies at Jilat 13 about 90 of
blanks are green and only 5 are red However
finished beads include both green and red forms in
comparable percentages (404 and 436 respec-
tively) (Table 3) suggesting that finished red beads
were brought into the building from a place of
manufacture located somewhere else At Jilat 25
blanks of red and green Dabba Marble occur in
comparable proportions (409 green 43 red)
whilst finished beads are predominantly red (588)
(Table 2) If Jilat 13 and 25 were absolute contem-
poraries this could suggest variations in choices and
exchange between residents of different structures
Rice (1991) has defined site specialization as a
situation in which a site is located near a special
resource and the inhabitants emphasize production of
a craft based on that resource Relative to other sites
not so located the range of site functions and
activities would be expected to be more limited
Thus site specialization
involves individual localities or sites having evidence
of limited functions or intensive productive activity
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
154 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
often determined by fortuitous environmental fac-
tors This includes proximity to mineral deposits
and so forth (Rice 1991 262)
Do Jilat 13 and 25 fit this concept In both sites
15 km from the source we have a wealth of evidence
for intensive stone bead production and scanty
evidence for routine food processing tools (Wright
and Garrard 2003) However Jilat 25 may be closer
to the limited function model envisioned by Rice In
Jilat 13 bead-making is clearly intensive but we are
also dealing with a chipped stone assemblage of not
only drills and burins but also projectile points and
other tools Jilat 13 also reveals production of
figurines (of animals phalluses and arrow-shaped
forms) and sculpted pillars (Baird 1993 Garrard
et al 1994a Martin 1999 Wright 1992 1993)
In all Jilat 13 and 25 suggest that we can apply
Ricersquos lsquosite specializationrsquo on the grounds of intensive
productive activity and proximity to source mdash but
with the qualification that this specialization was also
embedded in hunting-herding activities and at Jilat
13 production of other special crafts unique among
the sites of a symbolic nature (figurines pillars)
One possibility is that we are dealing with a camp
of hunter-herder corporate groups mdash part of a wider
regional network mdash engaged in special activities in
remote areas involving art personal ornaments and
ritual Such groups are suggested by other data from
the PPNBndashPPNC time span for example Nahal
Hemar (ornaments masks hunting tools) Dhuweila
(carving of hunters with dress variations)
Catalhoyuk (images of hunters with dress variations
as in the bull hunt mural) and Gobeklitepe (sculpture
production including a quarry wild-animal icono-
graphy hunting) (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988 Betts
1998 Mellaart 1967 Schmidt 2000) In all these data
hint that craft production of special items was
embedded in hunting andor herding activities in
remote areas this may have been a key means by
which exotic materials reached major villages In a
very broad way this supports a sketch outlined by
Bar Yosef (Bar-Yosef 2001) although we do not
necessarily agree with specifics of his model eg the
territories boundaries social groups and mechanisms
which he suggests (cf Asouti 2006) Instead we see
this as one example of diverse strategies of social
networking linking lineages households and commu-
nities in the Neolithic (Wright forthcoming)
Returning to the stone bead data from Jilat 13 and
25 the apparent stockpiling of raw material and
intensive production activity hints at production of
the green material for export (see above and Wright
and Garrard 2003) New data now add weight to this
idea and suggest the following provisional picture of
regional specializations and exchanges in ornaments
(1) Based on typology technology and materials thereappears to be a distinctive eastern Jordanian koine ornetwork of stone bead manufacture and exchangefeaturing Dabba Marble and a probable regionalspecialization in it
Other Neolithic bead production sites are known
from eastern Jordan Indications are that most of the
green bead materials are Dabba Marble probably
from Jilat (further work is needed) In these sites
diversity of materials used seems low with few
imports from beyond the steppe Shells however
testify to wider networks (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989
Cooke and Reese in Betts 1998 Garrard et al 1994a
Reese 1991)
Azraq 31 (PPNB and ELN) is in our suite of study
materials (Baird et al 1992 Garrard et al 1994a
Wright and Garrard 2003) and debris blanks and
beads were found Preliminary XRF analysis of green
samples (by Groom) indicates that the material is
consistent with Jilat Dabba Marble Typology and
technology are also similar and as at Jilat 25 burin
spall drills were closely associated with bead-making
in specific activity areas (Baird 1993 521 Baird et al
1992 25) However the ground stone revealed no
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
(Wright 1992 1993 Wright in Baird et al 1992)
Material used for beads at Dhuweila (PPNB and
ELN) has been called Dabba Marble (Cooke and
Reese in Betts 1998) It is consistent in appearance
with our material although we have no details on
mineralogy or source Typologically these beads are
similar to those of Jilat 13 and 25 The ground stone
is very different from the suite at the Jilat sites
(Wright in Betts 1998) for comparisons of chipped
stone assemblages see Baird (1993)
At Bawwab al-Ghazal (Late PPNB) Rollefson
et al found drills bits on burin spalls tile knives
beads bead blanks and bead debris some of which
they called green Dabba Marble (Rollefson et al
1999 Quintero et al 2004) They argued that there is
a possible source of this material outcropping near
the site mdash lsquoFor the last raw material [green Dabba
Marble] small nodules of the green limestone were
embedded in the local bedrockrsquo (Rollefson et al 1999
3) However as shown in Appendix A the true
Dabba Marble only occurs in a restricted area west of
Wadi Jilat The lsquobedrockrsquo which outcrops near Azraq
31 and Bawwab al-Ghazal is travertine and some of
this formed during the late Pleistocene and Holocene
The nearby Epipalaeolithic site of Azraq 17 was
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 155
found partially embedded in travertine and artefacts
including nodules of imported basalt were found in
the travertine at this site It is possible that the
nodules of green limestone found at Bawwab al-
Ghazal were imported Dabba Marble which subse-
quently became incorporated in a travertine near the
site An alternative possibility is that the local
travertine is infused with green minerals In Wadi
Jilat travertines were noted with traces of green
minerals and in the Siwaqa area to the south-west of
Jilat there are extensive travertines some of which
are infused with pale green minerals including
volkonskoite (Barjous 1986 mdash see also Appendix A)
In eastern Jordan some Neolithic sites are greatly
dominated by burins (lsquoburin sitesrsquo) At a number of
these there is evidence for stone bead-making (eg
Jebel Naja) These lsquoburin sitesrsquo typically reveal few
ground stone tools we know of no examples of
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
from them It was argued that the main role of the
burins was production of spalls for drills used mainly
for beads (Betts 1987 1998 Finlayson and Betts
1990) However burin sites are not universally
associated with stone bead making At Jilat 23 24
and 26 burins were numerous but other evidence for
bead-making is scanty (Baird 1993 520)
Therefore some have questioned whether
burins and burin spalls in such sites were solely or
primarily intended for making drills and beads
noting that other functions are possible (Quintero
et al 2004 209) Given that these sites typically
represent short-term occupations it is possible that
many sites might be spall manufacture sites with
spalls transported to other settings where drill
manufacture and bead manufacture took place such
as Jilat 13 and 25 Rollefson expressed doubt that
either bladelet or burin spall drills would have been
used in bow drills partly because of their fragility and
also because most of them have a pronounced curve
on the long axis which would have made high speed
drilling impossible (Rollefson and Parker 2002) But
Finlayson and Betts (1990) and Berna (1995)
successfully experimented using burin spalls with
bow drills and Kenoyer (personal communication
2007) notes that drills made on burin spalls are the
most common type of drill in diverse prehistoric
stone bead-making sites (in India Pakistan and
elsewhere)
In the case of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 we believe burin-
spall drills were part of the bead-making repertoire
for reasons noted above This does not rule out other
uses of burin spalls Nor does it rule out the use of
other perforating techniques Drills do not have to be
made of stone when soft stones are being perforated
mdash wood bone and abrasives can be used (Foreman
1978)
(2) There are hints of export of Dabba Marble to at leastsome villages in the Levantine corridor However majorNeolithic villages display much diversity in materials andespecially more importing of exotic stones than is seen inthe eastern Jordanian sites
Many writers report Neolithic beads made of
unspecified lsquogreenstonersquo This term is unfortunate
since it can refer to metabasalt and similar altered
igneous rocks (Schumann 1992 248) Some of these
lsquogreenstonesrsquo may be limestone with apatite or other
materials (eg Garfinkel 1987 81ndash82 Hauptmann
2004 Talbot 1983 789) Beads of green limestones
rich in fluorapatite were found at late PPNB Basta in
southern Jordan (Hauptmann 2004) as confirmed by
XRF and XRD Green beads identified as Dabba
Marble were also reported from Ain Ghazal a site
with both PPNB and PPNC occupations (Rollefson
et al 1990 103ndash04) Whether these are Dabba
Marble from the Jilat source (Appendices AndashB) is
not yet fully clear Ongoing research will sort out
these mysteries (eg D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal
communication Hauptmann 2004)
Major villages in the Levantine Corridor reveal
different degrees of emphasis in styles and materials
often we see a certain emphasis on local materials and
preferences However considerable exchange net-
works are indicated in major villages which display
much wider ranges of stone ornament materials
compared to the eastern Jordanian sites (such as
Ain Ghazal Yiftahel Basta Barsquoja Ghuwayr 1
Fidan 1) mdash along with of course shells (Affonso
and Pernicka 2004 Bienert and Gebel 1998 84ndash86
Garfinkel 1987 Hauptmann 2004 Rollefson and
Simmons 1984 1986 Rollefson et al 1990 Simmons
and Najjar 1998 Starck 1988)
As the Neolithic evolved stone bead-making
entailed increasingly diverse techniques and materi-
als One example may be drills In earlymiddle PPNB
sites most drills are made on bladelets In the late
PPNB PPNC and Late Neolithic there may have
been a gradual increase in drills made on burin spalls
although perhaps not in all regions (Jensen 2004
Rollefson and Parker 2002) Underlining increasing
diversity of technological practice between groups
Baird (2001b) pointed out geographic variation in
this technology with spall drills dominating in the
north-eastern Jordanian steppe from MPPNB
through Early Late Neolithic whilst contemporary
sites to west and south use bladelet blanks for their
piercing tools
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
156 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
To explore this we analysed unfinished blanks and
the frequency of perforation errors Drilling is a
sensitive moment in bead production when many
things can go wrong (Kenoyer 2003) A low incidence
in perforation errors combined with high numbers of
successfully finished beads and evidence of standar-
dization should be reasonably good indicators of an
artisanrsquos mastery This is the situation seen at Jilat 25
(Fig 7) In all of 93 blanks from Jilat 25 only 2 were
perforation errors a failure rate of only 2
On the other hand a high incidence of perforation
errors would suggest that a beadmaker was a relative
novice Jilat 13 produced more blanks with perfora-
tion errors than Jilat 25 We thought we might find
individual contexts with a high rate of error
suggesting apprentices
The data did not bear this out Of 223 bead blanks
from Jilat 13 (all phases) 22 were perforation errors
mdash a failure rate of 98 All but two errors were on
barrel bead blanks of green Dabba Marble The
others were one pendant blank and one irregular
bead blank These 22 blanks were distributed across
20 different contexts and no more than 2 perforation
errors were found in any one context
A close look at those contexts reveals low error
rates In Context B21 2 green barrel bead blanks
with perforation errors were found with 5 other
blanks The others included green and red barrel and
disc blanks This context also yielded 5 successfully
finished beads including black and red barrel beads
and a green disc Black and green debitage and a
discoidal handstone were also found here In Context
B71 2 blanks with perforation errors were found
along with 9 other blanks and 10 successfully
finished beads including green Dabba Marble barrel
beads but also black and red disc beads Much
debitage was found along with a flaked limestone
cutting tool (cf Fig 12c) and a limestone object with
a drill mark
The higher rate of error at Jilat 13 compared to
Jilat 25 could be because artisans at Jilat 13 were
making more of the larger more complex barrel
beads (as opposed to simple discs see Tables 2ndash3)
which offer greater chances of failure due to the
longer drilling distance However at Jilat 13 the
overall failure rate was still quite low particularly
considering the overall volume of material recovered
(Table 1)
We conclude that the beadmakers at Jilat 13
included few trainees These appear to have been
skilled artisans a small task force composed of
relative experts This raises the question of whether
these beadmakers were examples of lsquoproducer
specialistsrsquo as traditionally defined that is people
involved in
production of a good by a relatively small number of
individuals (compared to the total output and
number of consumers) individuals who are as a
result of this selectivity and the routinization or
repetition of their tasks particularly skilled in
manufacture (Rice 1991 263)
Jilat 13 and 25 do suggest small numbers of
individuals and a certain selectivity in who was
involved in stone bead making The quantity of
debitagedebris relative to (1) the number of finished
beads and (2) the modest sizes of these structures
collectively suggest that these craftsmenwomen
served a larger number of consumers relative to the
number of craftsmen involved here If so who were
these consumers mdash other residents of Jilat or groups
beyond
Intra-site Specialization Between Domestic Groups
Several studies suggest ways of identifying different
forms of craft specialization between domestic groups
in a site For later sites Stein (1996) has explored
spatial data particularly how craft production
facilities are dispersed among domestic units or
located near special (or central) institutions In
Neolithic sites questions about dispersal between
households and possible links between craft produc-
tion and special buildings or special sites have been
underexplored
For specialization Costin (1991) suggests that we
would expect (1) variability between production
units (eg households occupations regions) in
relevant artefacts (2) high densities of craft produc-
tion debris relative to some other generally used
item in some production units (3) high ratios of
unfinished goods to finished goods in some produc-
tion units Kenoyer et alrsquos (1991) ethnoarchaeolo-
gical studies of modern stone bead-making in
Khambat (India) suggest something similar in the
case of households as production units There non-
specialist households engaging in casual opportu-
nistic bead production revealed low quantities of
bead-making debris few unfinished beads and little
standardization in finished beads By contrast
households specializing in bead production were
characterized by stockpiling of large quantities of
raw materials many unfinished beads and more
standardized finished products
In looking at whole occupations (ie phases within
sites) as a unit of observation we argue elsewhere
(Wright and Garrard 2003) that artefact densities and
other data from 13 PPNB and 8 PPNCELN
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 153
occupations in the Jilat-Azraq region suggest that
PPNCELN producers were more specialized than
those of the PPNB mdash at least in the Jilat-Azraq
region Unlike the PPNB sites Jilat 13 and 25 have
very high densities of bead-making debris specialized
tools for drilling and sawing there is an abundance of
unfinished materials relative to finished products
bead-making tools and debris are abundant relative
to normal domestic food processing equipment
(ground stone artefacts) (Wright and Garrard 2003
cf Costin 1991)
That argument is chronological comparing the
PPNB to the PPNCELN occupations and we stand
behind it for the Jilat-Azraq case (different trajec-
tories may apply to south Jordan and the Negev see
below) Still it leaves open the issue of house-to-
house variation within Jilat 25 or Jilat 13 As we have
only one excavated structure per site we cannot on
present evidence argue that each building housed a
group of specialists serving other households within
the same site In fact we have no direct evidence that
there were other structures on each site mdash the ones
excavated were the only ones visible on the surface
There are nuances of material and typological
choices between the Jilat 25 structure (red disc beads)
and the Jilat 13 structure (larger complex green
ornaments) but these nuances are beyond the scope
of this paper
In all we suspect that stone bead production at
Jilat 13 and 25 was geared not for other domestic
units lsquoin camprsquo but for use by these quite mobile
communities themselves mdash as well as export to other
sites within the steppe and beyond (see below) In
Costinrsquos terms (Costin 1991) Jilat 13 and 25 might
each be an example of an independent non-centra-
lized dispersed workshop possibly lsquofamily runrsquo (Rice
1991 262) mdash in which handling of Dabba Marble
was not routinely entrusted to novices
There are hints of house-to-house variations in
bead-making in major villages with larger samples of
domestic structures as in PPNB Beidha At PPNB
Beidha (earlier than Jilat 13 and 25) Building 14
stands out
Other forms of production besides food preparation
were less common Building 14 represented the best
example of artefact production in these basements
A wide range of artefacts was recovered apparently
associated with building 14rsquos basement floor
Particularly widespread were stone polishers bone
tools raw material (including hematite malachite
and magnesium) more than 60 unmodified marine
shells and at least two dozen beads of shell stone
and bone some of which were in various stages of
production Some artifacts lay on stone slabs
indicating that at least some slabs may have
functioned as work surfaces (Byrd 2005 117)
Such hints are intriguing Still macro-artefacts
from house floors are affected by problems of site
formation and house abandonment Micro-artefact
data can help (Rainville 2005) House-by-house
exploration with attention to micro-artefacts is
needed (Wright and Bains 2007)
Site Specialization Within a Regional Network of Craft
Production and Exchange
Both sites and other Neolithic sites in Jilat and
Azraq exhibit resource specialization
the selective use of particular resources in craft
manufacture such as certain clays that are repeat-
edly used (Rice 1991 262)
The Jilat artisans emphasized Dabba Marble from
a wider array of available stone types The Jilat-
Azraq sites collectively show that green Dabba
Marble was a special target This is revealed in both
frequencies and weights (for debris data and weight
data see Wright and Garrard 2003 for frequency
data on beads and blanks see Tables 2 and 3) At
both sites debris is greatly dominated by green
Dabba Marble mdash 80ndash95 of debris by both weight
(grams) and frequency Green Dabba Marble also
dominates blanks in terms of weight at both sites mdash
indicating the use of green for making larger heavier
and more conspicuous ornaments
Turning to frequencies at Jilat 13 about 90 of
blanks are green and only 5 are red However
finished beads include both green and red forms in
comparable percentages (404 and 436 respec-
tively) (Table 3) suggesting that finished red beads
were brought into the building from a place of
manufacture located somewhere else At Jilat 25
blanks of red and green Dabba Marble occur in
comparable proportions (409 green 43 red)
whilst finished beads are predominantly red (588)
(Table 2) If Jilat 13 and 25 were absolute contem-
poraries this could suggest variations in choices and
exchange between residents of different structures
Rice (1991) has defined site specialization as a
situation in which a site is located near a special
resource and the inhabitants emphasize production of
a craft based on that resource Relative to other sites
not so located the range of site functions and
activities would be expected to be more limited
Thus site specialization
involves individual localities or sites having evidence
of limited functions or intensive productive activity
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
154 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
often determined by fortuitous environmental fac-
tors This includes proximity to mineral deposits
and so forth (Rice 1991 262)
Do Jilat 13 and 25 fit this concept In both sites
15 km from the source we have a wealth of evidence
for intensive stone bead production and scanty
evidence for routine food processing tools (Wright
and Garrard 2003) However Jilat 25 may be closer
to the limited function model envisioned by Rice In
Jilat 13 bead-making is clearly intensive but we are
also dealing with a chipped stone assemblage of not
only drills and burins but also projectile points and
other tools Jilat 13 also reveals production of
figurines (of animals phalluses and arrow-shaped
forms) and sculpted pillars (Baird 1993 Garrard
et al 1994a Martin 1999 Wright 1992 1993)
In all Jilat 13 and 25 suggest that we can apply
Ricersquos lsquosite specializationrsquo on the grounds of intensive
productive activity and proximity to source mdash but
with the qualification that this specialization was also
embedded in hunting-herding activities and at Jilat
13 production of other special crafts unique among
the sites of a symbolic nature (figurines pillars)
One possibility is that we are dealing with a camp
of hunter-herder corporate groups mdash part of a wider
regional network mdash engaged in special activities in
remote areas involving art personal ornaments and
ritual Such groups are suggested by other data from
the PPNBndashPPNC time span for example Nahal
Hemar (ornaments masks hunting tools) Dhuweila
(carving of hunters with dress variations)
Catalhoyuk (images of hunters with dress variations
as in the bull hunt mural) and Gobeklitepe (sculpture
production including a quarry wild-animal icono-
graphy hunting) (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988 Betts
1998 Mellaart 1967 Schmidt 2000) In all these data
hint that craft production of special items was
embedded in hunting andor herding activities in
remote areas this may have been a key means by
which exotic materials reached major villages In a
very broad way this supports a sketch outlined by
Bar Yosef (Bar-Yosef 2001) although we do not
necessarily agree with specifics of his model eg the
territories boundaries social groups and mechanisms
which he suggests (cf Asouti 2006) Instead we see
this as one example of diverse strategies of social
networking linking lineages households and commu-
nities in the Neolithic (Wright forthcoming)
Returning to the stone bead data from Jilat 13 and
25 the apparent stockpiling of raw material and
intensive production activity hints at production of
the green material for export (see above and Wright
and Garrard 2003) New data now add weight to this
idea and suggest the following provisional picture of
regional specializations and exchanges in ornaments
(1) Based on typology technology and materials thereappears to be a distinctive eastern Jordanian koine ornetwork of stone bead manufacture and exchangefeaturing Dabba Marble and a probable regionalspecialization in it
Other Neolithic bead production sites are known
from eastern Jordan Indications are that most of the
green bead materials are Dabba Marble probably
from Jilat (further work is needed) In these sites
diversity of materials used seems low with few
imports from beyond the steppe Shells however
testify to wider networks (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989
Cooke and Reese in Betts 1998 Garrard et al 1994a
Reese 1991)
Azraq 31 (PPNB and ELN) is in our suite of study
materials (Baird et al 1992 Garrard et al 1994a
Wright and Garrard 2003) and debris blanks and
beads were found Preliminary XRF analysis of green
samples (by Groom) indicates that the material is
consistent with Jilat Dabba Marble Typology and
technology are also similar and as at Jilat 25 burin
spall drills were closely associated with bead-making
in specific activity areas (Baird 1993 521 Baird et al
1992 25) However the ground stone revealed no
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
(Wright 1992 1993 Wright in Baird et al 1992)
Material used for beads at Dhuweila (PPNB and
ELN) has been called Dabba Marble (Cooke and
Reese in Betts 1998) It is consistent in appearance
with our material although we have no details on
mineralogy or source Typologically these beads are
similar to those of Jilat 13 and 25 The ground stone
is very different from the suite at the Jilat sites
(Wright in Betts 1998) for comparisons of chipped
stone assemblages see Baird (1993)
At Bawwab al-Ghazal (Late PPNB) Rollefson
et al found drills bits on burin spalls tile knives
beads bead blanks and bead debris some of which
they called green Dabba Marble (Rollefson et al
1999 Quintero et al 2004) They argued that there is
a possible source of this material outcropping near
the site mdash lsquoFor the last raw material [green Dabba
Marble] small nodules of the green limestone were
embedded in the local bedrockrsquo (Rollefson et al 1999
3) However as shown in Appendix A the true
Dabba Marble only occurs in a restricted area west of
Wadi Jilat The lsquobedrockrsquo which outcrops near Azraq
31 and Bawwab al-Ghazal is travertine and some of
this formed during the late Pleistocene and Holocene
The nearby Epipalaeolithic site of Azraq 17 was
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 155
found partially embedded in travertine and artefacts
including nodules of imported basalt were found in
the travertine at this site It is possible that the
nodules of green limestone found at Bawwab al-
Ghazal were imported Dabba Marble which subse-
quently became incorporated in a travertine near the
site An alternative possibility is that the local
travertine is infused with green minerals In Wadi
Jilat travertines were noted with traces of green
minerals and in the Siwaqa area to the south-west of
Jilat there are extensive travertines some of which
are infused with pale green minerals including
volkonskoite (Barjous 1986 mdash see also Appendix A)
In eastern Jordan some Neolithic sites are greatly
dominated by burins (lsquoburin sitesrsquo) At a number of
these there is evidence for stone bead-making (eg
Jebel Naja) These lsquoburin sitesrsquo typically reveal few
ground stone tools we know of no examples of
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
from them It was argued that the main role of the
burins was production of spalls for drills used mainly
for beads (Betts 1987 1998 Finlayson and Betts
1990) However burin sites are not universally
associated with stone bead making At Jilat 23 24
and 26 burins were numerous but other evidence for
bead-making is scanty (Baird 1993 520)
Therefore some have questioned whether
burins and burin spalls in such sites were solely or
primarily intended for making drills and beads
noting that other functions are possible (Quintero
et al 2004 209) Given that these sites typically
represent short-term occupations it is possible that
many sites might be spall manufacture sites with
spalls transported to other settings where drill
manufacture and bead manufacture took place such
as Jilat 13 and 25 Rollefson expressed doubt that
either bladelet or burin spall drills would have been
used in bow drills partly because of their fragility and
also because most of them have a pronounced curve
on the long axis which would have made high speed
drilling impossible (Rollefson and Parker 2002) But
Finlayson and Betts (1990) and Berna (1995)
successfully experimented using burin spalls with
bow drills and Kenoyer (personal communication
2007) notes that drills made on burin spalls are the
most common type of drill in diverse prehistoric
stone bead-making sites (in India Pakistan and
elsewhere)
In the case of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 we believe burin-
spall drills were part of the bead-making repertoire
for reasons noted above This does not rule out other
uses of burin spalls Nor does it rule out the use of
other perforating techniques Drills do not have to be
made of stone when soft stones are being perforated
mdash wood bone and abrasives can be used (Foreman
1978)
(2) There are hints of export of Dabba Marble to at leastsome villages in the Levantine corridor However majorNeolithic villages display much diversity in materials andespecially more importing of exotic stones than is seen inthe eastern Jordanian sites
Many writers report Neolithic beads made of
unspecified lsquogreenstonersquo This term is unfortunate
since it can refer to metabasalt and similar altered
igneous rocks (Schumann 1992 248) Some of these
lsquogreenstonesrsquo may be limestone with apatite or other
materials (eg Garfinkel 1987 81ndash82 Hauptmann
2004 Talbot 1983 789) Beads of green limestones
rich in fluorapatite were found at late PPNB Basta in
southern Jordan (Hauptmann 2004) as confirmed by
XRF and XRD Green beads identified as Dabba
Marble were also reported from Ain Ghazal a site
with both PPNB and PPNC occupations (Rollefson
et al 1990 103ndash04) Whether these are Dabba
Marble from the Jilat source (Appendices AndashB) is
not yet fully clear Ongoing research will sort out
these mysteries (eg D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal
communication Hauptmann 2004)
Major villages in the Levantine Corridor reveal
different degrees of emphasis in styles and materials
often we see a certain emphasis on local materials and
preferences However considerable exchange net-
works are indicated in major villages which display
much wider ranges of stone ornament materials
compared to the eastern Jordanian sites (such as
Ain Ghazal Yiftahel Basta Barsquoja Ghuwayr 1
Fidan 1) mdash along with of course shells (Affonso
and Pernicka 2004 Bienert and Gebel 1998 84ndash86
Garfinkel 1987 Hauptmann 2004 Rollefson and
Simmons 1984 1986 Rollefson et al 1990 Simmons
and Najjar 1998 Starck 1988)
As the Neolithic evolved stone bead-making
entailed increasingly diverse techniques and materi-
als One example may be drills In earlymiddle PPNB
sites most drills are made on bladelets In the late
PPNB PPNC and Late Neolithic there may have
been a gradual increase in drills made on burin spalls
although perhaps not in all regions (Jensen 2004
Rollefson and Parker 2002) Underlining increasing
diversity of technological practice between groups
Baird (2001b) pointed out geographic variation in
this technology with spall drills dominating in the
north-eastern Jordanian steppe from MPPNB
through Early Late Neolithic whilst contemporary
sites to west and south use bladelet blanks for their
piercing tools
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
156 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
occupations in the Jilat-Azraq region suggest that
PPNCELN producers were more specialized than
those of the PPNB mdash at least in the Jilat-Azraq
region Unlike the PPNB sites Jilat 13 and 25 have
very high densities of bead-making debris specialized
tools for drilling and sawing there is an abundance of
unfinished materials relative to finished products
bead-making tools and debris are abundant relative
to normal domestic food processing equipment
(ground stone artefacts) (Wright and Garrard 2003
cf Costin 1991)
That argument is chronological comparing the
PPNB to the PPNCELN occupations and we stand
behind it for the Jilat-Azraq case (different trajec-
tories may apply to south Jordan and the Negev see
below) Still it leaves open the issue of house-to-
house variation within Jilat 25 or Jilat 13 As we have
only one excavated structure per site we cannot on
present evidence argue that each building housed a
group of specialists serving other households within
the same site In fact we have no direct evidence that
there were other structures on each site mdash the ones
excavated were the only ones visible on the surface
There are nuances of material and typological
choices between the Jilat 25 structure (red disc beads)
and the Jilat 13 structure (larger complex green
ornaments) but these nuances are beyond the scope
of this paper
In all we suspect that stone bead production at
Jilat 13 and 25 was geared not for other domestic
units lsquoin camprsquo but for use by these quite mobile
communities themselves mdash as well as export to other
sites within the steppe and beyond (see below) In
Costinrsquos terms (Costin 1991) Jilat 13 and 25 might
each be an example of an independent non-centra-
lized dispersed workshop possibly lsquofamily runrsquo (Rice
1991 262) mdash in which handling of Dabba Marble
was not routinely entrusted to novices
There are hints of house-to-house variations in
bead-making in major villages with larger samples of
domestic structures as in PPNB Beidha At PPNB
Beidha (earlier than Jilat 13 and 25) Building 14
stands out
Other forms of production besides food preparation
were less common Building 14 represented the best
example of artefact production in these basements
A wide range of artefacts was recovered apparently
associated with building 14rsquos basement floor
Particularly widespread were stone polishers bone
tools raw material (including hematite malachite
and magnesium) more than 60 unmodified marine
shells and at least two dozen beads of shell stone
and bone some of which were in various stages of
production Some artifacts lay on stone slabs
indicating that at least some slabs may have
functioned as work surfaces (Byrd 2005 117)
Such hints are intriguing Still macro-artefacts
from house floors are affected by problems of site
formation and house abandonment Micro-artefact
data can help (Rainville 2005) House-by-house
exploration with attention to micro-artefacts is
needed (Wright and Bains 2007)
Site Specialization Within a Regional Network of Craft
Production and Exchange
Both sites and other Neolithic sites in Jilat and
Azraq exhibit resource specialization
the selective use of particular resources in craft
manufacture such as certain clays that are repeat-
edly used (Rice 1991 262)
The Jilat artisans emphasized Dabba Marble from
a wider array of available stone types The Jilat-
Azraq sites collectively show that green Dabba
Marble was a special target This is revealed in both
frequencies and weights (for debris data and weight
data see Wright and Garrard 2003 for frequency
data on beads and blanks see Tables 2 and 3) At
both sites debris is greatly dominated by green
Dabba Marble mdash 80ndash95 of debris by both weight
(grams) and frequency Green Dabba Marble also
dominates blanks in terms of weight at both sites mdash
indicating the use of green for making larger heavier
and more conspicuous ornaments
Turning to frequencies at Jilat 13 about 90 of
blanks are green and only 5 are red However
finished beads include both green and red forms in
comparable percentages (404 and 436 respec-
tively) (Table 3) suggesting that finished red beads
were brought into the building from a place of
manufacture located somewhere else At Jilat 25
blanks of red and green Dabba Marble occur in
comparable proportions (409 green 43 red)
whilst finished beads are predominantly red (588)
(Table 2) If Jilat 13 and 25 were absolute contem-
poraries this could suggest variations in choices and
exchange between residents of different structures
Rice (1991) has defined site specialization as a
situation in which a site is located near a special
resource and the inhabitants emphasize production of
a craft based on that resource Relative to other sites
not so located the range of site functions and
activities would be expected to be more limited
Thus site specialization
involves individual localities or sites having evidence
of limited functions or intensive productive activity
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
154 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
often determined by fortuitous environmental fac-
tors This includes proximity to mineral deposits
and so forth (Rice 1991 262)
Do Jilat 13 and 25 fit this concept In both sites
15 km from the source we have a wealth of evidence
for intensive stone bead production and scanty
evidence for routine food processing tools (Wright
and Garrard 2003) However Jilat 25 may be closer
to the limited function model envisioned by Rice In
Jilat 13 bead-making is clearly intensive but we are
also dealing with a chipped stone assemblage of not
only drills and burins but also projectile points and
other tools Jilat 13 also reveals production of
figurines (of animals phalluses and arrow-shaped
forms) and sculpted pillars (Baird 1993 Garrard
et al 1994a Martin 1999 Wright 1992 1993)
In all Jilat 13 and 25 suggest that we can apply
Ricersquos lsquosite specializationrsquo on the grounds of intensive
productive activity and proximity to source mdash but
with the qualification that this specialization was also
embedded in hunting-herding activities and at Jilat
13 production of other special crafts unique among
the sites of a symbolic nature (figurines pillars)
One possibility is that we are dealing with a camp
of hunter-herder corporate groups mdash part of a wider
regional network mdash engaged in special activities in
remote areas involving art personal ornaments and
ritual Such groups are suggested by other data from
the PPNBndashPPNC time span for example Nahal
Hemar (ornaments masks hunting tools) Dhuweila
(carving of hunters with dress variations)
Catalhoyuk (images of hunters with dress variations
as in the bull hunt mural) and Gobeklitepe (sculpture
production including a quarry wild-animal icono-
graphy hunting) (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988 Betts
1998 Mellaart 1967 Schmidt 2000) In all these data
hint that craft production of special items was
embedded in hunting andor herding activities in
remote areas this may have been a key means by
which exotic materials reached major villages In a
very broad way this supports a sketch outlined by
Bar Yosef (Bar-Yosef 2001) although we do not
necessarily agree with specifics of his model eg the
territories boundaries social groups and mechanisms
which he suggests (cf Asouti 2006) Instead we see
this as one example of diverse strategies of social
networking linking lineages households and commu-
nities in the Neolithic (Wright forthcoming)
Returning to the stone bead data from Jilat 13 and
25 the apparent stockpiling of raw material and
intensive production activity hints at production of
the green material for export (see above and Wright
and Garrard 2003) New data now add weight to this
idea and suggest the following provisional picture of
regional specializations and exchanges in ornaments
(1) Based on typology technology and materials thereappears to be a distinctive eastern Jordanian koine ornetwork of stone bead manufacture and exchangefeaturing Dabba Marble and a probable regionalspecialization in it
Other Neolithic bead production sites are known
from eastern Jordan Indications are that most of the
green bead materials are Dabba Marble probably
from Jilat (further work is needed) In these sites
diversity of materials used seems low with few
imports from beyond the steppe Shells however
testify to wider networks (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989
Cooke and Reese in Betts 1998 Garrard et al 1994a
Reese 1991)
Azraq 31 (PPNB and ELN) is in our suite of study
materials (Baird et al 1992 Garrard et al 1994a
Wright and Garrard 2003) and debris blanks and
beads were found Preliminary XRF analysis of green
samples (by Groom) indicates that the material is
consistent with Jilat Dabba Marble Typology and
technology are also similar and as at Jilat 25 burin
spall drills were closely associated with bead-making
in specific activity areas (Baird 1993 521 Baird et al
1992 25) However the ground stone revealed no
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
(Wright 1992 1993 Wright in Baird et al 1992)
Material used for beads at Dhuweila (PPNB and
ELN) has been called Dabba Marble (Cooke and
Reese in Betts 1998) It is consistent in appearance
with our material although we have no details on
mineralogy or source Typologically these beads are
similar to those of Jilat 13 and 25 The ground stone
is very different from the suite at the Jilat sites
(Wright in Betts 1998) for comparisons of chipped
stone assemblages see Baird (1993)
At Bawwab al-Ghazal (Late PPNB) Rollefson
et al found drills bits on burin spalls tile knives
beads bead blanks and bead debris some of which
they called green Dabba Marble (Rollefson et al
1999 Quintero et al 2004) They argued that there is
a possible source of this material outcropping near
the site mdash lsquoFor the last raw material [green Dabba
Marble] small nodules of the green limestone were
embedded in the local bedrockrsquo (Rollefson et al 1999
3) However as shown in Appendix A the true
Dabba Marble only occurs in a restricted area west of
Wadi Jilat The lsquobedrockrsquo which outcrops near Azraq
31 and Bawwab al-Ghazal is travertine and some of
this formed during the late Pleistocene and Holocene
The nearby Epipalaeolithic site of Azraq 17 was
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 155
found partially embedded in travertine and artefacts
including nodules of imported basalt were found in
the travertine at this site It is possible that the
nodules of green limestone found at Bawwab al-
Ghazal were imported Dabba Marble which subse-
quently became incorporated in a travertine near the
site An alternative possibility is that the local
travertine is infused with green minerals In Wadi
Jilat travertines were noted with traces of green
minerals and in the Siwaqa area to the south-west of
Jilat there are extensive travertines some of which
are infused with pale green minerals including
volkonskoite (Barjous 1986 mdash see also Appendix A)
In eastern Jordan some Neolithic sites are greatly
dominated by burins (lsquoburin sitesrsquo) At a number of
these there is evidence for stone bead-making (eg
Jebel Naja) These lsquoburin sitesrsquo typically reveal few
ground stone tools we know of no examples of
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
from them It was argued that the main role of the
burins was production of spalls for drills used mainly
for beads (Betts 1987 1998 Finlayson and Betts
1990) However burin sites are not universally
associated with stone bead making At Jilat 23 24
and 26 burins were numerous but other evidence for
bead-making is scanty (Baird 1993 520)
Therefore some have questioned whether
burins and burin spalls in such sites were solely or
primarily intended for making drills and beads
noting that other functions are possible (Quintero
et al 2004 209) Given that these sites typically
represent short-term occupations it is possible that
many sites might be spall manufacture sites with
spalls transported to other settings where drill
manufacture and bead manufacture took place such
as Jilat 13 and 25 Rollefson expressed doubt that
either bladelet or burin spall drills would have been
used in bow drills partly because of their fragility and
also because most of them have a pronounced curve
on the long axis which would have made high speed
drilling impossible (Rollefson and Parker 2002) But
Finlayson and Betts (1990) and Berna (1995)
successfully experimented using burin spalls with
bow drills and Kenoyer (personal communication
2007) notes that drills made on burin spalls are the
most common type of drill in diverse prehistoric
stone bead-making sites (in India Pakistan and
elsewhere)
In the case of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 we believe burin-
spall drills were part of the bead-making repertoire
for reasons noted above This does not rule out other
uses of burin spalls Nor does it rule out the use of
other perforating techniques Drills do not have to be
made of stone when soft stones are being perforated
mdash wood bone and abrasives can be used (Foreman
1978)
(2) There are hints of export of Dabba Marble to at leastsome villages in the Levantine corridor However majorNeolithic villages display much diversity in materials andespecially more importing of exotic stones than is seen inthe eastern Jordanian sites
Many writers report Neolithic beads made of
unspecified lsquogreenstonersquo This term is unfortunate
since it can refer to metabasalt and similar altered
igneous rocks (Schumann 1992 248) Some of these
lsquogreenstonesrsquo may be limestone with apatite or other
materials (eg Garfinkel 1987 81ndash82 Hauptmann
2004 Talbot 1983 789) Beads of green limestones
rich in fluorapatite were found at late PPNB Basta in
southern Jordan (Hauptmann 2004) as confirmed by
XRF and XRD Green beads identified as Dabba
Marble were also reported from Ain Ghazal a site
with both PPNB and PPNC occupations (Rollefson
et al 1990 103ndash04) Whether these are Dabba
Marble from the Jilat source (Appendices AndashB) is
not yet fully clear Ongoing research will sort out
these mysteries (eg D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal
communication Hauptmann 2004)
Major villages in the Levantine Corridor reveal
different degrees of emphasis in styles and materials
often we see a certain emphasis on local materials and
preferences However considerable exchange net-
works are indicated in major villages which display
much wider ranges of stone ornament materials
compared to the eastern Jordanian sites (such as
Ain Ghazal Yiftahel Basta Barsquoja Ghuwayr 1
Fidan 1) mdash along with of course shells (Affonso
and Pernicka 2004 Bienert and Gebel 1998 84ndash86
Garfinkel 1987 Hauptmann 2004 Rollefson and
Simmons 1984 1986 Rollefson et al 1990 Simmons
and Najjar 1998 Starck 1988)
As the Neolithic evolved stone bead-making
entailed increasingly diverse techniques and materi-
als One example may be drills In earlymiddle PPNB
sites most drills are made on bladelets In the late
PPNB PPNC and Late Neolithic there may have
been a gradual increase in drills made on burin spalls
although perhaps not in all regions (Jensen 2004
Rollefson and Parker 2002) Underlining increasing
diversity of technological practice between groups
Baird (2001b) pointed out geographic variation in
this technology with spall drills dominating in the
north-eastern Jordanian steppe from MPPNB
through Early Late Neolithic whilst contemporary
sites to west and south use bladelet blanks for their
piercing tools
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
156 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
often determined by fortuitous environmental fac-
tors This includes proximity to mineral deposits
and so forth (Rice 1991 262)
Do Jilat 13 and 25 fit this concept In both sites
15 km from the source we have a wealth of evidence
for intensive stone bead production and scanty
evidence for routine food processing tools (Wright
and Garrard 2003) However Jilat 25 may be closer
to the limited function model envisioned by Rice In
Jilat 13 bead-making is clearly intensive but we are
also dealing with a chipped stone assemblage of not
only drills and burins but also projectile points and
other tools Jilat 13 also reveals production of
figurines (of animals phalluses and arrow-shaped
forms) and sculpted pillars (Baird 1993 Garrard
et al 1994a Martin 1999 Wright 1992 1993)
In all Jilat 13 and 25 suggest that we can apply
Ricersquos lsquosite specializationrsquo on the grounds of intensive
productive activity and proximity to source mdash but
with the qualification that this specialization was also
embedded in hunting-herding activities and at Jilat
13 production of other special crafts unique among
the sites of a symbolic nature (figurines pillars)
One possibility is that we are dealing with a camp
of hunter-herder corporate groups mdash part of a wider
regional network mdash engaged in special activities in
remote areas involving art personal ornaments and
ritual Such groups are suggested by other data from
the PPNBndashPPNC time span for example Nahal
Hemar (ornaments masks hunting tools) Dhuweila
(carving of hunters with dress variations)
Catalhoyuk (images of hunters with dress variations
as in the bull hunt mural) and Gobeklitepe (sculpture
production including a quarry wild-animal icono-
graphy hunting) (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988 Betts
1998 Mellaart 1967 Schmidt 2000) In all these data
hint that craft production of special items was
embedded in hunting andor herding activities in
remote areas this may have been a key means by
which exotic materials reached major villages In a
very broad way this supports a sketch outlined by
Bar Yosef (Bar-Yosef 2001) although we do not
necessarily agree with specifics of his model eg the
territories boundaries social groups and mechanisms
which he suggests (cf Asouti 2006) Instead we see
this as one example of diverse strategies of social
networking linking lineages households and commu-
nities in the Neolithic (Wright forthcoming)
Returning to the stone bead data from Jilat 13 and
25 the apparent stockpiling of raw material and
intensive production activity hints at production of
the green material for export (see above and Wright
and Garrard 2003) New data now add weight to this
idea and suggest the following provisional picture of
regional specializations and exchanges in ornaments
(1) Based on typology technology and materials thereappears to be a distinctive eastern Jordanian koine ornetwork of stone bead manufacture and exchangefeaturing Dabba Marble and a probable regionalspecialization in it
Other Neolithic bead production sites are known
from eastern Jordan Indications are that most of the
green bead materials are Dabba Marble probably
from Jilat (further work is needed) In these sites
diversity of materials used seems low with few
imports from beyond the steppe Shells however
testify to wider networks (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989
Cooke and Reese in Betts 1998 Garrard et al 1994a
Reese 1991)
Azraq 31 (PPNB and ELN) is in our suite of study
materials (Baird et al 1992 Garrard et al 1994a
Wright and Garrard 2003) and debris blanks and
beads were found Preliminary XRF analysis of green
samples (by Groom) indicates that the material is
consistent with Jilat Dabba Marble Typology and
technology are also similar and as at Jilat 25 burin
spall drills were closely associated with bead-making
in specific activity areas (Baird 1993 521 Baird et al
1992 25) However the ground stone revealed no
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
(Wright 1992 1993 Wright in Baird et al 1992)
Material used for beads at Dhuweila (PPNB and
ELN) has been called Dabba Marble (Cooke and
Reese in Betts 1998) It is consistent in appearance
with our material although we have no details on
mineralogy or source Typologically these beads are
similar to those of Jilat 13 and 25 The ground stone
is very different from the suite at the Jilat sites
(Wright in Betts 1998) for comparisons of chipped
stone assemblages see Baird (1993)
At Bawwab al-Ghazal (Late PPNB) Rollefson
et al found drills bits on burin spalls tile knives
beads bead blanks and bead debris some of which
they called green Dabba Marble (Rollefson et al
1999 Quintero et al 2004) They argued that there is
a possible source of this material outcropping near
the site mdash lsquoFor the last raw material [green Dabba
Marble] small nodules of the green limestone were
embedded in the local bedrockrsquo (Rollefson et al 1999
3) However as shown in Appendix A the true
Dabba Marble only occurs in a restricted area west of
Wadi Jilat The lsquobedrockrsquo which outcrops near Azraq
31 and Bawwab al-Ghazal is travertine and some of
this formed during the late Pleistocene and Holocene
The nearby Epipalaeolithic site of Azraq 17 was
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 155
found partially embedded in travertine and artefacts
including nodules of imported basalt were found in
the travertine at this site It is possible that the
nodules of green limestone found at Bawwab al-
Ghazal were imported Dabba Marble which subse-
quently became incorporated in a travertine near the
site An alternative possibility is that the local
travertine is infused with green minerals In Wadi
Jilat travertines were noted with traces of green
minerals and in the Siwaqa area to the south-west of
Jilat there are extensive travertines some of which
are infused with pale green minerals including
volkonskoite (Barjous 1986 mdash see also Appendix A)
In eastern Jordan some Neolithic sites are greatly
dominated by burins (lsquoburin sitesrsquo) At a number of
these there is evidence for stone bead-making (eg
Jebel Naja) These lsquoburin sitesrsquo typically reveal few
ground stone tools we know of no examples of
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
from them It was argued that the main role of the
burins was production of spalls for drills used mainly
for beads (Betts 1987 1998 Finlayson and Betts
1990) However burin sites are not universally
associated with stone bead making At Jilat 23 24
and 26 burins were numerous but other evidence for
bead-making is scanty (Baird 1993 520)
Therefore some have questioned whether
burins and burin spalls in such sites were solely or
primarily intended for making drills and beads
noting that other functions are possible (Quintero
et al 2004 209) Given that these sites typically
represent short-term occupations it is possible that
many sites might be spall manufacture sites with
spalls transported to other settings where drill
manufacture and bead manufacture took place such
as Jilat 13 and 25 Rollefson expressed doubt that
either bladelet or burin spall drills would have been
used in bow drills partly because of their fragility and
also because most of them have a pronounced curve
on the long axis which would have made high speed
drilling impossible (Rollefson and Parker 2002) But
Finlayson and Betts (1990) and Berna (1995)
successfully experimented using burin spalls with
bow drills and Kenoyer (personal communication
2007) notes that drills made on burin spalls are the
most common type of drill in diverse prehistoric
stone bead-making sites (in India Pakistan and
elsewhere)
In the case of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 we believe burin-
spall drills were part of the bead-making repertoire
for reasons noted above This does not rule out other
uses of burin spalls Nor does it rule out the use of
other perforating techniques Drills do not have to be
made of stone when soft stones are being perforated
mdash wood bone and abrasives can be used (Foreman
1978)
(2) There are hints of export of Dabba Marble to at leastsome villages in the Levantine corridor However majorNeolithic villages display much diversity in materials andespecially more importing of exotic stones than is seen inthe eastern Jordanian sites
Many writers report Neolithic beads made of
unspecified lsquogreenstonersquo This term is unfortunate
since it can refer to metabasalt and similar altered
igneous rocks (Schumann 1992 248) Some of these
lsquogreenstonesrsquo may be limestone with apatite or other
materials (eg Garfinkel 1987 81ndash82 Hauptmann
2004 Talbot 1983 789) Beads of green limestones
rich in fluorapatite were found at late PPNB Basta in
southern Jordan (Hauptmann 2004) as confirmed by
XRF and XRD Green beads identified as Dabba
Marble were also reported from Ain Ghazal a site
with both PPNB and PPNC occupations (Rollefson
et al 1990 103ndash04) Whether these are Dabba
Marble from the Jilat source (Appendices AndashB) is
not yet fully clear Ongoing research will sort out
these mysteries (eg D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal
communication Hauptmann 2004)
Major villages in the Levantine Corridor reveal
different degrees of emphasis in styles and materials
often we see a certain emphasis on local materials and
preferences However considerable exchange net-
works are indicated in major villages which display
much wider ranges of stone ornament materials
compared to the eastern Jordanian sites (such as
Ain Ghazal Yiftahel Basta Barsquoja Ghuwayr 1
Fidan 1) mdash along with of course shells (Affonso
and Pernicka 2004 Bienert and Gebel 1998 84ndash86
Garfinkel 1987 Hauptmann 2004 Rollefson and
Simmons 1984 1986 Rollefson et al 1990 Simmons
and Najjar 1998 Starck 1988)
As the Neolithic evolved stone bead-making
entailed increasingly diverse techniques and materi-
als One example may be drills In earlymiddle PPNB
sites most drills are made on bladelets In the late
PPNB PPNC and Late Neolithic there may have
been a gradual increase in drills made on burin spalls
although perhaps not in all regions (Jensen 2004
Rollefson and Parker 2002) Underlining increasing
diversity of technological practice between groups
Baird (2001b) pointed out geographic variation in
this technology with spall drills dominating in the
north-eastern Jordanian steppe from MPPNB
through Early Late Neolithic whilst contemporary
sites to west and south use bladelet blanks for their
piercing tools
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
156 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
found partially embedded in travertine and artefacts
including nodules of imported basalt were found in
the travertine at this site It is possible that the
nodules of green limestone found at Bawwab al-
Ghazal were imported Dabba Marble which subse-
quently became incorporated in a travertine near the
site An alternative possibility is that the local
travertine is infused with green minerals In Wadi
Jilat travertines were noted with traces of green
minerals and in the Siwaqa area to the south-west of
Jilat there are extensive travertines some of which
are infused with pale green minerals including
volkonskoite (Barjous 1986 mdash see also Appendix A)
In eastern Jordan some Neolithic sites are greatly
dominated by burins (lsquoburin sitesrsquo) At a number of
these there is evidence for stone bead-making (eg
Jebel Naja) These lsquoburin sitesrsquo typically reveal few
ground stone tools we know of no examples of
capstones drilling benches or sandstone abraders
from them It was argued that the main role of the
burins was production of spalls for drills used mainly
for beads (Betts 1987 1998 Finlayson and Betts
1990) However burin sites are not universally
associated with stone bead making At Jilat 23 24
and 26 burins were numerous but other evidence for
bead-making is scanty (Baird 1993 520)
Therefore some have questioned whether
burins and burin spalls in such sites were solely or
primarily intended for making drills and beads
noting that other functions are possible (Quintero
et al 2004 209) Given that these sites typically
represent short-term occupations it is possible that
many sites might be spall manufacture sites with
spalls transported to other settings where drill
manufacture and bead manufacture took place such
as Jilat 13 and 25 Rollefson expressed doubt that
either bladelet or burin spall drills would have been
used in bow drills partly because of their fragility and
also because most of them have a pronounced curve
on the long axis which would have made high speed
drilling impossible (Rollefson and Parker 2002) But
Finlayson and Betts (1990) and Berna (1995)
successfully experimented using burin spalls with
bow drills and Kenoyer (personal communication
2007) notes that drills made on burin spalls are the
most common type of drill in diverse prehistoric
stone bead-making sites (in India Pakistan and
elsewhere)
In the case of Jilat 13 and Jilat 25 we believe burin-
spall drills were part of the bead-making repertoire
for reasons noted above This does not rule out other
uses of burin spalls Nor does it rule out the use of
other perforating techniques Drills do not have to be
made of stone when soft stones are being perforated
mdash wood bone and abrasives can be used (Foreman
1978)
(2) There are hints of export of Dabba Marble to at leastsome villages in the Levantine corridor However majorNeolithic villages display much diversity in materials andespecially more importing of exotic stones than is seen inthe eastern Jordanian sites
Many writers report Neolithic beads made of
unspecified lsquogreenstonersquo This term is unfortunate
since it can refer to metabasalt and similar altered
igneous rocks (Schumann 1992 248) Some of these
lsquogreenstonesrsquo may be limestone with apatite or other
materials (eg Garfinkel 1987 81ndash82 Hauptmann
2004 Talbot 1983 789) Beads of green limestones
rich in fluorapatite were found at late PPNB Basta in
southern Jordan (Hauptmann 2004) as confirmed by
XRF and XRD Green beads identified as Dabba
Marble were also reported from Ain Ghazal a site
with both PPNB and PPNC occupations (Rollefson
et al 1990 103ndash04) Whether these are Dabba
Marble from the Jilat source (Appendices AndashB) is
not yet fully clear Ongoing research will sort out
these mysteries (eg D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal
communication Hauptmann 2004)
Major villages in the Levantine Corridor reveal
different degrees of emphasis in styles and materials
often we see a certain emphasis on local materials and
preferences However considerable exchange net-
works are indicated in major villages which display
much wider ranges of stone ornament materials
compared to the eastern Jordanian sites (such as
Ain Ghazal Yiftahel Basta Barsquoja Ghuwayr 1
Fidan 1) mdash along with of course shells (Affonso
and Pernicka 2004 Bienert and Gebel 1998 84ndash86
Garfinkel 1987 Hauptmann 2004 Rollefson and
Simmons 1984 1986 Rollefson et al 1990 Simmons
and Najjar 1998 Starck 1988)
As the Neolithic evolved stone bead-making
entailed increasingly diverse techniques and materi-
als One example may be drills In earlymiddle PPNB
sites most drills are made on bladelets In the late
PPNB PPNC and Late Neolithic there may have
been a gradual increase in drills made on burin spalls
although perhaps not in all regions (Jensen 2004
Rollefson and Parker 2002) Underlining increasing
diversity of technological practice between groups
Baird (2001b) pointed out geographic variation in
this technology with spall drills dominating in the
north-eastern Jordanian steppe from MPPNB
through Early Late Neolithic whilst contemporary
sites to west and south use bladelet blanks for their
piercing tools
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
156 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
(3) South Jordanian stone bead-making sites involvedvery different materials and different technologies local tothose regions mdash and may reveal a more intensiveexploitation of stone bead resources in the PPNB ieearlier than in eastern Jordan
In south Jordan Jebel Arqa Jebel Rabigh and Jebel
Salaqa revealed Middle PPNB beadmaking sites
Published analyses are based on surface collections
Around huts of upright stone foundations were
found large quantities of amazonite (microcline
Mohs 5 65) debris blanks and finished beads
Thin borers constitute 60ndash80 of the chipped stone
Awls are also numerous as are ground stone tools
(not described) Beads and blanks are dominated by
disc beads made on thin flakes struck from the
tabular material (Fabiano et al 2004 266ndash72
Vianello 1985) Fabiano et al interpret these sites
as seasonal camps exploiting mineral resources in a
somewhat specialized way and that bead production
was geared largely to export (2004 265) Although
materials and technologies differ from the Jilat sites
certain elements (flake-based beads architecture)
broadly mirror the Jilat situation although Jilat
bead-making is modest until the PPNCELN
Jebel Ragref also revealed amazonite bead produc-
tion (Berna 1995) In experiments Berna found that
drills of only 10ndash15 mm in diameter could produce
3 mm diameter perforations in amazonite beads
Berna found that hand-drilling of hard amazonite
was difficult whilst use of an experimental version of
a bow drill made this easier However drill bits
frequently became exhausted and worn out and had
to be replaced Exhausted drill bits mimic different
types of borers raising the possibility that many
borers and drill bits found on sites are in fact
exhausted discarded tools (Fabiano et al 2004 272)
(We wonder if the low frequency of drill bits found in
the Jilat sites is due to careful discard of exhausted
drill bits)
Al Basit Late PPNB site near Petra (Fino 1998)
revealed drills made on bladelets along with lime-
stone and sandstone objects with drilling marks
(Rollefson 2002) Bladelet drills dominate a chipped
stone collection gathered from a spoil heap in one
area the spoil heap also included shell beads and a
possible malachite fragment Rollefson sees the
material from this spoil heap as indicating specializa-
tion in bead-making in contrast to a more general-
ized chipped stone toolkit from an in situ domestic
area (Rollefson 2002 5 Rollefson and Parker 2002
22)
Bead-making debris was found in secondary refuse
(pits middens) at Shkarat Msaied (Middle PPNB)
(Jensen 2004 Kaliszan et al 2002) Borers and green
beads were found in a concentration and grinding
stones not far away The material was provisionally
identified as turquoise and malachite Asymmetrical
drillsborers made on bladelets dominate the chipped
stone although a few drillsborers were also made on
burins and blades
(4) Data from PPNB and ELN sites in the Negev andSinai indicate yet other specialities and a wider array ofimported materials than seems to obtain in easternJordan
Some sites in Negev-Sinai are impressive in the
variety of stone bead materials (eg Nahal Issaron
Negev) (Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983 156) and
specialist shell bead-making sites have been described
in Sinai (Bar-Yosef-Mayer 1989 1997) Nahal
Issaron revealed piercers with long thick bits similar
tools were found at Jilat 13 (Baird 1993 515ndash17)
Conclusions
Much work on early stone beads remains to be
done The Jilat sites illustrate an expansion of stone
bead-making in the PPNCELN and suggest that an
early version of craft specialization emerged at that
time In other regions different processes may have
been at work One question is the role of sheep-goat
herding in procurement of prestige minerals in remote
areas Something like this is seen in the Early Bronze
Age (Rosen 2003) Its roots were earlier though
views vary on timing processes and goods involved
(cf Bar-Yosef- Mayer 1997 Fabiano et al 2004
Garrard et al 1996 Martin 1999 Quintero et al
2004 Rollefson et al 1999) It is worth investigating
whether there was a general expansion of trade
networks in the PPNCELN when herding may also
have become more extensive
Appendix A Distribution Nature and Origins ofDabba Marble
Andrew Garrard
Dabba Marble (also spelled Dabrsquoa Dabrsquoah) occurs in
a restricted area of the Maestrichtian to Paleocene
(late Cretaceousndashearly Tertiary) Muwaqqar Chalk-
Marl (MCM) Formation in central Jordan The
MCM formation outcrops in an arc from Sahab east
of Amman to the Wadi Sirhan east of the El Jafr
Basin in southern Jordan However the marbles
themselves are restricted to a north-westsouth-east
trending fault zone lying to the east of Khan es Zabib
and Siwaqa stations on the former Amman to Marsquoan
Railway line The area covers about 25 km (NW-SE)
by 13 km (SW-NE) and lies between c 36u06rsquondash36u17rsquo
36u22rsquo E and 31u21rsquondash31u34rsquo N (Barjous 1986 Jaser
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 157
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
1986 Powell 2006) The Neolithic sites of Wadi Jilat
13 and 25 lie adjacent to each other at 36u25rsquo E and
31u30rsquo N some 7ndash15 km east of the nearest marble
outcrops (the exact location of the nearest sources
needs to be checked in the field) The modern quarry
source of marble used for comparative analysis lies at
c 36u15rsquo E and 31u29rsquo N
The Dabba Marbles occur within the upper unit of
the MCM Formation which consists of chalky
limestones chalks and micritic limestones inter-
bedded with dark grey to brownish chert (Bender
1974 Jaser 1986 Powell 1988) The MCM
Formation was deposited in moderate to deep water
on the southern margin of the Tethys Sea and
bituminous chalky marls (or oilshales) occur as lenses
in structural depressions within the formation The
marbles formed as a result of metamorphosis and
recrystallization of the parent rocks along cracks and
fissures in this formation and range in colour between
black violet brown red pink green and yellow
(Fig 3) The coloration results from infusion with
bitumen and iron oxides chromites and apatites The
marbles are cross-cut with veins containing diverse
minerals (more than 50 were identified) (Jaser 1986
Nassir and Khoury 1982) At present there are
many small quarries in the marble formations as
the multi-coloured but fractured rocks (particularly
the green apatitic varieties) are popular for setting in
plaster for floor and wall tiles
Much debate surrounds the origins of the marbles
but there are no high level intrusive or volcanic
bodies in the area and thus no possibility of
metamorphism through contact with igneous forma-
tions The marbles appear to have formed during the
late Tertiary mdash a major period of tectonic activity mdash
with the uplift of the Jordanian Plateau and the
formation of the Rift Valley It is thought that the
high temperatures required for their formation was
the result of oxygen reaching bituminous lenses in
the MCM formation through fissures caused by
tectonic movements and that this may have led
to the localized combustion of hydrocarbons
Subsequently a rich array of minerals were circulated
through the faultlines and fissures in hot alkali-rich
ground waters (Jaser 1986 Khoury and Nassir 1982)
There are also extensive travertines in this area
(particularly to the east of Siwaqa) some of which
contain pale green volkonskoite These suggest
hydrothermal activity (Barjous 1986)
Analogous marble formations are known else-
where in the southern Levant They include the
Maqarin Formation in the Yarmouk River Valley
north of Irbid and the Hatrurim Formation
(formerly known as the Mottled Zone) west of the
Rift Valley These are contained in facies containing
bituminous shales which are similar and time-
equivalent with the MCM Formation in central
Jordan In both areas there are localized occurrences
of lightly metamorphosed rocks with a rich array of
minerals resulting from what were probably similar
processes (Gross 1977 Mohrsquod 2000) For the location
of the two main exposures of the Hatrurim
Formation see Fig 1
Appendix B Mineralogy and ChemicalComposition of Dabba Marble
Simon Groom and Roseleen Bains
Six samples of Dabba Marble from a modern quarry
in the heart of the marble zone 15 km to the west of
the Neolithic sites of Jilat 13 and 25 were analysed to
determine mineralchemical composition (Appendix
A and Fig 3) In order to determine if the material
described as Dabba Marble from the prehistoric sites
in Wadi Jilat were from a similar source 5 finished
bead fragments were analysed from the surface levels
at Jilat 13 Surface material was chosen for this pilot
study so as not to damage material from intact levels
As a result of fine grain size and thin laminations
thin section analysis proved problematic Thus X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) and X-Ray diffraction (XRD)
were used in combination for the quarry samples and
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) for the fin-
ished beads
Samples from the Quarry XRF-XRD Analysis(Simon Groom)
Materials
Seven surface nodules were collected by Andrew
Garrard from the scree slope at the modern quarry
(Fig 3) which were regarded as being broadly
representative of the range of marbles exposed in
the quarry-face Six of these were subjected to XRF
and XRD analysis
The quarry samples were categorized into 3 groups
before analysis green (G1-2) red (R1-2) and
laminated green (LG1-3) All but Sample R2 (a
bright red chert clearly composed of silica and iron)
were subjected to XRF and XRD
G1 and G2 are fine grained materials with a similar
green colour but significantly different textures G1 is
a rich green colour with a mottled appearance due to
the presence of fine white and maroon veins G2 is
paler green and more uniform with very little
macroscopic variation
R1 is texturally similar to G2 but pale pink in
colour and relatively uniform R2 is a brecciated
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
158 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
material consisting of large chunks of red chert
trapped inside a buff matrix The macroscopic pitted
appearance of the matrix is sufficiently distinctive to
identify the material as a travertine or tufa The chert
brecciated within this is mottled with a variation
between pale pink and typical white
LG1-3 the laminated green materials are distinctive
commonly showing extremely fine scale parallel layers
of maroon through to a rich green While some layers of
green material are several millimetres thick this
layering is commonly at less than a millimetre scale
All layered samples show non-parallel white veining
Methods
Methods of analysis for quarry samples were as
follows For homogenous samples 20 g of represen-
tative material were removed using a diamond-coated
tile cutter blade and subjected to standard XRF and
XRD sample preparation procedures Large hetero-
geneities such as veins and chert fragments were
ground from the sample surface using a hand sander
The resulting bulk material was crushed using a steel
percussion mortar and pestle then ground to a grain
size of 60 mm using an agate planetary ball mill
For quantitative XRF analysis a sample of the
resulting powder was initially dried then mixed with
a wax binding agent at a ratio of 8 g sample to 09 g
wax This mixture was then pressed in a hydraulic
press and analysed in triplicate using the industrial
standard TurboQuant (TQ0261a) method on a
Spectro X-Lab 2000 (P)ED-XRF Spectrometer
Pure chert samples (eg Sample R2) were analysed
qualitatively as objects in the same instrument for
categorization Due to its qualitative nature these
data are not presented here
XRD analysis was performed on the remaining
powder The instrument used was a Philips 1720
diffractometer fitted with a curved graphite crystal
monochromator Philips PC-APD software (version
16) was used to interpret the data
Results
In terms of major elements the 6 quarry samples are
all composed predominantly of calcium oxides
varying from 48 wt to 58 wt (Table 8) The most
variable component is phosphate with concentra-
tions between 13 wt and 7 wt Minor element
concentrations are present of silica iron oxides and
alumina in the 1 wt to 7 wt range
Within the trace element data (Table 9) the
material shows unusually rich concentrations of
transition metals for a calcium carbonate based unit
in particular chromium nickel zinc and cadmium
Also notable are the low concentrations of alkali and
alkali earth metals for a calcium carbonate based
unit with rubidium potassium sodium and magne-
sium all near the limits of detection
The XRD data show that the samples contain the
major components calcite (CaCO3) and fluoroapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) with the LG1 sample containing traces
of margarite (CaAl2(Al2Si2)O10(OH)2) a less com-
mon member of the mica mineral group The major
components fit exactly with what would be expected
from the chemical data The margarite also fits the
Table 8 Proportional weights of major elements obtained by XRF
Sample Na2O MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 Cl K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3 Sum
Unit
G1 08 0 04 38 1303 0 0 0 556 0052 0006 085 747G2 05 0 0 18 119 0 0 0 577 003 0 014 722LG1 01 03 17 75 399 0 0 0 513 0079 0024 172 669LG2 01 02 06 4 868 0 0 0 563 0049 0005 047 705LG3 04 25 17 76 628 0 0 0 485 0134 0008 167 691R1 09 04 12 64 7 0 04 0 497 0085 0006 117 674
Table 9 Trace elements in parts per million (ppm) obtained by XRF
Sample V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga As Rb Sr Y Zr Cd Sb Ba La Pb Th U
Unit ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
G1 342 1424 5 220 93 1311 2 77 3 1239 112 19 52 10 69 15 11 3 42G2 158 409 5 75 33 644 2 15 1 1422 56 4 63 1 312 6 6 1 9LG1 512 695 35 425 97 2365 2 68 6 1141 29 16 64 9 1084 2 6 3 18LG2 225 810 2 131 105 795 3 44 3 1223 61 5 18 1 158 11 14 2 30LG3 538 1239 22 417 193 1893 2 119 2 1290 108 32 64 10 610 12 10 4 39R1 0 311 10 256 184 2077 3 73 2 953 95 18 210 9 72 18 6 2 28
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 159
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
chemistry and is likely to be the mineral state in
which LG1rsquos slightly elevated alumina and silica
levels are resident
By comparison to the macroscopic variation these
analytical data are unexpectedly simple suggesting
that the material is structurally varied but chemically
very similar The categorization cited in Appendix A
classifying these materials as hydrothermal deposits
and travertines closely fits the composition of the
samples The elevated levels of transition metals are
likely to have been dropped from solution by changing
fluid chemical conditions and suggest that the macro-
scopic variation is structural rather than mineralogical
The rich green colour appears to correlate closely
with increasing proportions of phosphate likely to be
present in the form of fluoroapatite a mineral which
is green in colour The coloration in the red sample is
indicative of the iron oxides present at the 1 range
This sample contains amongst the lowest concentra-
tions of phosphate
Manufactured Beads SEM Analysis (RoseleenBains)
For this pilot study five bead fragments from surface
levels of Jilat 13 were examined using a Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) SEM was used instead
of XRF and XRD because (a) the size of each bead
sample was small and (b) we wanted to do as little
damage as possible to the beads
Materials
The fragments encompass a range of materials as
identified with the naked eye but do not necessarily
represent all variants of Dabba Marble used at Jilat
13 Four beads were green and one was pale pinkred
At a macroscopic level each bead appeared homo-
genous in colour
Methods
The five samples were mounted in epoxy-resin and
polished and coated with carbon to create an
electrically conductive surface They were analysed
under SEM (Model S-3400N Hitachi with a
Backscattered Electron Detector and an Oxford
Instruments Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS)
for semi-quantitative compositional spectrum) using
an accelerating voltage of 20 kV
For each sample images were captured under set
magnifications using the secondary electron detector
and backscattered electron detector to acquire topo-
graphical information on texture surface features and
crystallography The backscattered detector revealed
images in which minerals or compounds with elements
higher in atomic number appeared lighter and brighter
in comparison to the other minerals or compounds also
present in the image helping to differentiate the
minerals for better analysis These data combined
with data from EDS concerning elemental distribu-
tions were used to compare with results obtained by
XRF and XRD on material from the modern quarry
Each sample underwent repeated trials of bulk box
and spot analysis
Results
The four green beads revealed very similar results in
both surface studies and elemental analyses Any
differences in micrographs were the result of varying
degrees of polishing or the type of rock formed by the
similar compounds present We present detailed
results for one green and one red bead below
Sample S6 (Green Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Initial low magnification inspection using a back-
scattered detector reveals two distinct areas one
light and the other darker in shade The darker area is
represented by an anhedral crystal structure and the
lighter area has a hexagonal euhedral lathe crystal
structure The former can be identified as calcium
carbonate (CaCO3) and the latter fluorapatite
(Ca5(PO4)3F) At high magnification we can see that
the fluorapatite is forming bands adjacent to the
fissures in the calcium carbonate (Fig 16) Both
components appear in relatively equivalent ratios As
with the other green bead samples the mineral
fluorapatite has metamorphosed and recrystallized
with the calcium carbonate
Elemental analysis and identification
Trials of box and spot analysis for sample S6
confirmed that the darker shaded area can be
identified as the compound calcium carbonate and
the lighter shaded hexagonal crystal structures as the
Figure 16 Backscattered image of sample S6-S The scale
is 50 microns long
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
160 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
mineral fluorapatite (Table 10) Fluorapatitersquos chem-
istry occurrence and physical and optical properties
as listed in The Handbook of Mineralogy Vol 4
(Anthony 2000) are consistent with those observed in
all the green bead samples
Sample S4 (Red Bead)
SEM and backscattered analysis
Sample S4 was the only red Dabba Marble bead to be
analysed It is a relatively soft stone and was more
difficult to polish during preparation Under lower
magnifications the surface appears to be more
compact and using a backscattered detector two or
more different components become visible once
again represented as lighter crystals within a darker
more compact matrix (Fig 17) The lighter euhedral
crystal habit has formed within an anhedral crystal
structure Both minerals are much more intricately
fused in comparison to the green Dabba samples and
consequently SEM micrographs reveal a finer grain
in contrast to the green samples analysed (Fig 17)
Each of two inclusions (Areas) present in sample
S4 was analysed under SEM and an elemental
spectrum was produced The crystals which appear
lighter (Area 1) are dissimilar to the apatite crystals
which are found in the beads manufactured from the
green Dabba Marble These crystals can be identified
as calcium carbonate with the addition of some
magnesium and silicon (Table 11)
Analysis of Area 2 or the darker anhedral mineral
revealed a mineral with a significant presence of
calcium and silicon and other elements in lesser
quantities such as iron aluminum magnesium and
chlorine (Table 11) In contrast to the samples of
beads made from green Dabba Marble the red beads
have a greater amount of silica The identification on
the basis of these elements is calcium carbonate
within a medium of silica and calcium
Summary
SEM surface studies of the four green beads revealed
two components (1) an euhedral hexagonal prismatic
Figure 17 Backscattered image of sample S4-C0 The scale is 10 microns long
Table 10 Table of elements present in sample S6
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
F Si P SC O Ca I
Calcium carbonate 191 436 370 05 00 00 00 00Fluorapatite 206 303 308 03 40 10 126 03Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 6
Table 11 Table of elements present in sample S4
CompoundMineral
Elemental weight
Si S Cl K Ca FeC O Mg Al
Area 1 - Calcium carbonate 201 463 03 00 04 00 00 00 327 00Area 2 - Matrix 262 335 19 08 97 01 06 02 260 07Number of analyses for each compoundmineral 3
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 161
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
crystal structure within (2) an anhedral crystal
structure The EDS detector later identified these as
(1) the mineral fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3F) and (2) the
compound calcium carbonate (CaCO3) respectively
Topographical studies of the red bead also exposed
two components (1) an euhedral crystal structure
within (2) an anhedral crystal habit Elemental
analyses revealed the euhedral crystal structures to
be calcium carbonate with two additional elements
magnesium and silicon The anhedral crystal habit
was more diverse in regards to the elements present
the major difference being the high silicon and
calcium content and the presence of iron The
minerals comprising the red Dabba Marble can be
identified as calcium carbonate within a silicon-rich
matrix
The green Dabba Marbles used in bead production
were formed as a result of the fluorapatite metamor-
phosing and recrystallizing with the calcium carbo-
nate along cracks and fissures A similar process
could be found in regard to the red Dabba Marble
bead but in this instance it was the calcium
carbonate which formed the euhedral crystalline
structure
Conclusions
The SEM results on the small sample of beads from
Jilat 13 indicate that they are very similar in terms of
mineralogy and geochemistry to the modern quarry
samples obtained from the heart of the Dabba marble
exposures 15 km to the west of the site and are
probably from a source in the same general area
However to tie down possible sources further it
would be useful to obtain samples from a wider range
of outcrops of raw material across the Dabba marble
region Similarly it would be helpful to undertake
SEM studies on a more varied selection of beads from
Neolithic sites in the Wadi Jilat
In the past comparison of stone bead materials
from Levantine prehistoric sites tended to be based
on macroscopic visual examination This is now
changing (D Bar-Yosef Mayer personal communica-
tion Hauptmann 2004) Wider application of such
techniques would be enormously valuable in defining
the range of raw materials used and their likely
sources This in turn would be of great benefit in the
reconstruction of group mobility patterns and of
wider exchange and social interactions in the region
Acknowledgements
For supporting this research we are grateful to the
Department of Antiquities of Jordan the British
Institute at Amman (now Council for British
Research in the Levant) the British Academy and
the Wainwright Fund for Near Eastern
Archaeological Research For photographs of arte-
facts we thank Ken Walton Stuart Laidlaw and
Helena Coffey For help andor useful discussions we
thank Kevin Reeves Dafydd Griffiths Thilo Rehren
James Lankton John Powell and Tobias Richter
Any errors of fact or interpretation are our own
BibliographyAffonso MTC and Pernicka E (2004) Mineralogical analysis of
Late PPNB rings Pp 155ndash67 in H J Nissen M Muheisen and H
G Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology Berlin Ex Oriente
Allchin B (1979) The agate and carnelian industry of Western India
and Pakistan Pp 91ndash105 in JE van Lohuizen de Leeuw (ed)
South Asian Archaeology Papers from the Third International
Congress of the Association of South Asian Archaeology Leiden
ES Brill
Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis
Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Anthony JW (2000) Handbook of Mineralogy Volume 4 Tucson
Arizona Mineral Data Publications
Asouti E (2006) Beyond the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B interaction
sphere Journal of World Prehistory 20 87ndash126
Bains R (forthcoming) Procurement to Production Manufacturing
Technologies of Stone Beads at Catalhoyuk Turkey PhD
dissertation Institute of Archaeology University College London
Baird D (1993) Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Azraq
Basin PhD dissertation Department of Archaeology University
of Edinburgh
mdash (1994) Chipped stone production technology from the Azraq Project
Neolithic sites Pp 525ndash41 in HG Gebel and S K Kozlowski
(eds) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent
Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash (1995) Chipped stone raw material procurement and selection in the
Neolithic Azraq Basin implications for Levantine Neolithic
cultural development Pp 505ndash14 in K rsquoAmr F Zayadine and
M Zaghloul (eds) Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan V Amman Department of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (2001a) Explaining technological change from the 7th to the 6th
millennium BC in the southern Levant Pp 319ndash31 in I Caneva
C Lemorini and D Zampetti (eds) Beyond Tools Berlin Ex
Oriente
mdash (2001b) The analysis of chipped stone in Jordanian Archaeology Pp
693ndash706 in R Adams P Bienkowski and B MacDonald (eds)
The Archaeology of Jordan Sheffield Sheffield Archaeology
Monographs
mdash Garrard AN Martin L and Wright KI (1992) Prehistoric
environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report
on the 1989 excavation season Levant 24 1ndash31
Banning EB (1998) The Neolithic period triumphs of architecture
agriculture and art Near Eastern Archaeology 61 188ndash237
Bar-Yosef O (2001) Lithics and the social geographic configurations
identifying Neolithic tribes in the Levant Pp 437ndash48 in I
Caneva C Lemorini D Zampetti and P Biagi (eds) Beyond
Tools Berlin Ex Oriente
mdash and Alon D (1988) Nahal Hemar Cave Jerusalem Atiqot 18 Israel
Department of Antiquities
Bar-Yosef-Mayer D (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine
shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers Pp 169ndash74 in
CF Hayes (ed) Shell Bead Conference Rochester New York
Rochester Museum and Science Center
mdash (1991) Changes in the selection of marine shells from the Natufian to
the Neolithic Pp 629ndash36 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The
Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
mdash (1997) Neolithic shell bead production in Sinai Journal of
Archaeological Science 24 97ndash111
mdash Porat N Gal Z Shalem D and Smithline H (2004) Steatite
beads at Peqirsquoin long distance trade and pyro-technology during
the Chalcolithic of the Levant Journal of Archaeological Science
31 493ndash502
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
162 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
Barjous MO (1986) The Geology of Siwaqa Map Sheet 3252 IV
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 4
Barnes R and Eicher JB (1992) Dress And Gender Making and
Meaning in Cultural Contexts Oxford Berg
Barthelmy de Saizieu B and Bouquillon A (1994) Steatite working at
Mehrgarh during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods quanti-
tative distribution characterization of material and manufactur-
ing processes Pp 47ndash59 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan Berlin Gebruder Borntraeger
Berna F (1995) La lavarazione dellrsquoamazzonite nel villagio neolitico di
Jebel Ragref (Giordania meridionale) Lrsquoecologia del Quaternario
17 41ndash54
Betts AVG (1987) Recent discoveries relating to the Neolithic
periods in eastern Jordan Pp 225ndash30 in A Hadidi (ed) Studies in
the History and Archaeology of Jordan III Amman Department
of Antiquities of Jordan
mdash (1998) The Harra and the Hamad Sheffield Sheffield Academic
Press
Bienert H and Gebel H (1998) Archaeological investigations at Late
PPNB Barsquoja a preliminary report on the 1997 season Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 75ndash90
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
Byrd BF (1994) Public amp private domestic amp corporate the
emergence of the village in southwest Asia American Antiquity
59 639ndash66
mdash (2005) Early Village Life at Beidha Jordan Neolithic Spatial
Organization and Vernacular Architecture Oxford Oxford
University Press and the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Calley S (1989) Lrsquoatelier de fabrication de perles de Kumartepe
quelques observations technologiques Anatolica 16 157ndash84
Cauvin J (1974) Troisieme campagne de fouilles a Mureybet (Syrie)
1973 rapport preliminaire Annales Archeologiques Arabes
Syriennes 24 47ndash58
Cessford C and Mitrovic S (2005) Heavy residue analysis Pp 45ndash64
in I Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Costin CL (1991) Craft specialization issues in defining document-
ing and explaining the organization of production Archaeological
Method and Theory 3 1ndash56
Critchley P (2000) Stone Bead Production at Wadi Jilat 25 a Neolithic
Site in Eastern Jordan MA dissertation Institute of Archaeology
University College London
mdash (2007) The stone beads In B Finlayson and S Mithen (eds) The
early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan southern Jordan Excavations at
the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site of Wadi Faynan 16 and
Archaeological Survey of Wadis Faynan Ghuweir and al-Bustan
Oxford Oxbow Press for the Council for British Research in the
Levant
Diamanti J (2003) Beads trade and cultural change Pp 8ndash13 in J
Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE
Washington DC The Bead Society of Greater Washington
Dobres MA (2000) Technology and Social Agency Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology Oxford Blackwell
and Hoffmann CR (1999) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Dubin L (1995) The History of Beads 30000 BC to the Present
London Thames and Hudson
Dunnell RC and Stein JK (1989) Theoretical issues in the
interpretation of microartifacts Geoarchaeology 4 31ndash42
Eicher J (1995) Dress and Ethnicity Change Across Space and Time
Oxford Berg
Fabiano M Berna F and Borzatti von Lowenstern E (2004) Pre-
Pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan
Pp 265ndash73 in Secretariat du Congres (ed) Le Neolithique au
Proche-Orient et en Europe The Neolithic in the Near East and
Europe Acts of the XIVth UNESCO International Congress of
Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences 208 September 2001
Universite de Liege Oxford BAR International Series 1303
Archaeopress
Finlayson B and Betts AVG (1990) Functional analysis of chipped
stone artifacts from the Late Neolithic site of Jebel Narsquoja eastern
Jordan Paleorient 162 13ndash20
Fino N (1998) Al-Basit Neolithic site in southern Jordan Annual of
the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 42 103ndash11
Foreman R (1978) Disc beads production by primitive techniques
Bead Journal 3 17ndash22
Garfinkel Y (1987) Bead manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
site of Yiftahel Mitekufat Haeven Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society 20 79ndash90
Garrard AN (1998) Environment and cultural adaptations in the
Azraq Basin 24000ndash7000 BP Pp 139ndash48 in DO Henry (ed)
The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan Oxford BAR
International Series 705
mdash (in preparation) Beyond the Fertile Crescent Late Palaeolithic and
Neolithic Communities of the Jordanian Steppe (4 volumes)
Oxford Council for British Research in the Levant Levant
Supplementary Series Oxbow Books
mdash Baird D Colledge S Martin L and Wright KI (1994a)
Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin an
interim report on the 1987 and 1988 excavation seasons Levant
26 73ndash109
mdash Betts A Byrd BF and Hunt C (1987) Prehistoric environment
and settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1985
excavation season Levant 19 5ndash25
mdash and Byrd BF (1992) New dimensions to the Epipalaeolithic of the
Wadi el-Jilat in Central Jordan Paleorient 181 47ndash62
mdash Byrd BF and Baird D (1994b) The chronological basis and
significance of the late Palaeolithic and Neolithic sequence in the
Azraq Basin Jordan Pp 177ndash200 in O Bar-Yosef and RS Kra
(eds) Late Quaternary Chronology and Palaeoclimates in the
Eastern Mediterranean Tucson Radiocarbon
mdash Byrd BF and Betts A (1986) Prehistoric environment and
settlement in the Azraq Basin an interim report on the 1984
excavation season Levant 18 5ndash24
mdash Colledge S and Martin L (1996) The emergence of cultivation and
pastoralism in the rsquomarginal zonersquo of the southern Levant Pp
204ndash26 in D Harris (ed) The Origins and Spread of Agriculture
and Pastoralism in Eurasia London UCL Press
Gopher A (1997) Ground stone tools and other stone objects from
Netiv Hagdud Pp 151ndash76 in O Bar-Yosef and A Gopher (eds)
An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley Cambridge
Massachusetts Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Harvard University
Gorelick L and Gwinnett AJ (1990) Innovative lapidary craft
techniques in Neolithic Jarmo Archaeomaterials 4 25ndash32
Goring-Morris AN and Gopher A (1983) Nahal Issaron a Neolithic
settlement in the southern Negev Israel Exploration Journal 33
149ndash61
Gross S (1977) The Geology of the Hatrurim Formation Israel
Jerusalem Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 70
Gwinnett AJ and Gorelick L (1989) Evidence for mass production
polishing in ancient bead manufacture Archaeomaterials 3 163ndash
68
mdash (1999) A brief history of drills and drilling Beads Journal of the
Society of Bead Researchers 10ndash11 49ndash56
Hamilton N (2005) The beads Pp 325ndash32 in I Hodder (ed)
Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing Materialities at
Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons Cambridge and
London Monographs of the McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Hauptmann A (2004) rsquoGreenstonesrsquo from Basta their mineralogical
composition and possible provenance Pp 169ndash76 in HJ Nissen
M Muheisen and HG Gebel (eds) Basta I The Human Ecology
Berlin Ex Oriente
Inizan M Jazim M and Mermier F (1992) Lrsquoartisanat de la
cornaline au Yemen premieres donnees Techniques et Culture 20
155ndash74
Jackson B (2005) Bead material identification Pp 373ndash76 in I
Hodder (ed) Excavations at Catalhoyuk Volume 5 Changing
Materialities at Catalhoyuk reports from the 1995ndash1999 seasons
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 163
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
Cambridge and London Monographs of the McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge British
Institute for Archaeology at Ankara
Jaser DA (1986) The Geology of Khan ez-Zabib Map Sheet 3253 III
(150000) Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Bulletin No 3
Jensen CH (2004) Production areas at MPPNB Shkarat Msaied
southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 204 22ndash25
Kaliszan L Hermansen BD Jensen CH Skuldbol T Bille M
Bangsgaard P Ihr A Sorensen ML and Markussen B (2002)
Shaqarat Mazyad the village on the edge Neo-Lithics 102 16ndash19
Kenoyer JM (1986) The Indus bead industry contributions to bead
technology Ornament 10 18ndash21
mdash (1992a) Craft specialization and the question of urban segregation
and stratification Eastern Anthropologist 45 39ndash54
mdash (1992b) Lapis lazuli beadmaking in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Ornament 15 70ndash87
mdash (1994) Experimental studies of Indus Valley technology at Harappa
Pp 345ndash62 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds) South Asian
Archaeology 1993 Volume I Proceedings of the Twelfth
International Conference of the European Association of South
Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993 Helsinki
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
mdash (2003) The technology of stone beads bead and pendant making
techniques Pp 14ndash19 in J Lankton (ed) A Bead Timeline
Volume I Prehistory to 1200 CE Washington DC The Bead
Society of Greater Washington
mdash Vidale M and Bhan K (1991) Contemporary stone beadmaking in
Khambat India patterns of craft specialization and organization
of production as reflected in the archaeological record World
Archaeology 23 44ndash63
Khoury H and Nassir S (1982) A discussion on the origin of Dabarsquo
Marble Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 54ndash66
Kirkbride D (1966) Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of
Beidha in Jordan a summary Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98
5ndash72
Kuijt I and Goring-Morris AN (2002) Foraging farming and social
complexity in the pre-pottery Neolithic of the southern Levant a
review and synthesis Journal of World Prehistory 16 361ndash439
Larson P (1978) Ornamental beads from the Late Natufian of
Southern Israel Journal of Field Archaeology 5 120ndash21
Marechal C (1991) Elements de parure de la fin du Natoufien Pp
589ndash612 in O Bar-Yosef and F Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture
in the Levant Ann Arbor Prehistory Press
Martin L (1999) Mammal remains from the eastern Jordanian
Neolithic and the nature of caprine herding in the steppe
Paleorient 25 (2) 87ndash104
Mellaart J (1967) Catal Huyuk A Neolithic Town in Anatolia London
Thames and Hudson
Meskell L (2001) Archaeologies of identity Pp 187ndash213 in I Hodder
(ed) Archaeological Theory Today Cambridge Polity Press
Mohrsquod BK (2000) The Geology of Irbid and Ash Shuna ash Shamaliyya
(Waqqas) Map Sheets 3155 II and 3155 III (150000) Amman
Jordan Jordan Natural Resources Authority Geology Division
Geological Bulletin 46
Moholy-Nagy H (1983) Jarmo artefacts of pecked and ground stone
and of shell Pp 290ndash346 in L Braidwood (ed) Prehistoric
Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks Chicago University of
Chicago Press Oriental Institute Publications 105
Moore AMT (2000) Stone and other artefacts Pp 165ndash87 in AMT
Moore GC Hillman and A Legge (eds) Village on the
Euphrates From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra Oxford
Oxford University Press
Nassir S and Khoury H (1982) Geology mineralogy and petrology
of Dabarsquo Marble Jordan Dirasaat Engineering Sciences 9 107ndash
40
Pigeot N (1990) Technical amp social actors flintknapping specialists amp
apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles Archaeological Review from
Cambridge 9 126ndash41
Possehl G (1981) Cambay beadmaking an ancient craft in modern
India Expedition 23 39
Powell JH (1988) Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
Rocks in Central and Southern Jordan Part B Kurnub Ajlun and
Belqa Groups Amman Jordan Jordan Natural Resources
Authority Geology Division Geological Bulletin 11
mdash (2006) Personal communication at British Geological Survey
Keyworth Nottingham United Kingdom
Quintero L Rollefson GO and Wilke P (2004) Highland towns and
desert settlements origins of nomadic pastoralism in the
Jordanian Neolithic Pp 201ndash13 in H Bienert H Gebel and R
Neef (eds) Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan Berlin Ex
Oriente
Quintero L and Wilke P (1998) Evolution and economic significance
of naviform core and blade technology in the southern Levant
Paleorient 21 (1) 17ndash33
Rainville L (2005) The Organization of Domestic Activities in Upper
Mesopotamian Households and Neighborhoods during the Early
Bronze Age A Micro-Archaeological and Architectural Approach
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 1368
Reese D (1991) Marine shells in the Levant Upper Palaeolithic
Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic Pp 613ndash28 in O Bar-Yosef and F
Valla (eds) The Natufian Culture in the Levant Ann Arbor
Prehistory Press
Rice P (1991) Specialization standardization and diversity a retro-
spect Pp 257ndash84 in R Bishop and F Lange (eds) The Ceramic
Legacy of Anna O Shepard Boulder University of Colorado
Press
Richter T Colledge S Luddy S Jones D Jones M Maher L
and Kelly R (2008) (in press) Preliminary report on the 2006
season at Epipalaeolithic rsquoAin Qasiyah Azraq esh- Shishan
Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 51
Rollefson GO (2002) Beadmaking tools from LPPNB al-Basit
Jordan Neo-Lithics 202 5ndash7
mdash Kafafi Z and Simmons A (1990) The Neolithic village of Ain
Ghazal Jordan preliminary report on the 1988 season Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 27 95ndash116
mdash and Parker MC (2002) Craft specialization at al-Basit Wadi
Musa southern Jordan Neo-Lithics 102 21ndash23
mdash Quintero L and Wilke P (1999) Bawwab al-Ghazal preliminary
report on the 1998 testing season Neo-Lithics 199 2ndash4
mdash and Simmons A (1984) The 1983 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 28 13ndash30
mdash and Simmons A (1986) The 1985 Season at rsquoAin Ghazal
Preliminary Report Annual of the Department of Antiquities of
Jordan 30 41ndash56
Rosen SA (1997) Lithics after the Stone Age A Handbook of Stone
Tools from the Levant Walnut Creek CA AltaMira Press
mdash (2003) Early multi-resource nomadism excavations at the Camel
Site in the central Negev Antiquity 77 (298) 749ndash60
Roux V Bril B and Dietrich G (1995) Skills and learning difficulties
involved in stoneknapping the case of stone bead knapping in
Khambat India World Archaeology 27 63ndash87
Roux V and Matarasso P (1999) Crafts and the evolution of complex
societies new methodologies for modelling the organization of
production a Harappan example Pp 46ndash70 in MA Dobres and
CR Hoffmann (eds) The Social Dynamics of Technology
Oxford Blackwell
Schmidt K (2000) Gobeklitepe Southeastern Turkey A Preliminary
Report on the 1995ndash1999 Excavations Paleorient 26 45ndash54
Schumann W (1992) Rocks Minerals and Gemstones London
HarperCollins
Sciama LD and Eicher J (1998) Beads and Bead Makers Gender
Material Culture and Meaning Oxford and New York Berg
Simmons A and Najjar M (1998) Al-Ghuwayr 1 a pre-pottery
Neolithic village in WadiFaynan southern Jordan a preliminary
report on the 1996ndash1997 seasons Annual of the Department of
Antiquities of Jordan 42 91ndash102
Sorensen MLS (1997) Reading dress the construction of social
categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe Journal of
European Archaeology 5 93ndash114
Starck J (1988) Stone rings from Baga and Basta geographical and
chronological implications Pp 137ndash73 in A Garrard and H Gebel
(eds) The Prehistory of Jordan The State of Research in 1986
Oxford British Archaeological Reports International Series 396
Stein GJ (1996) Producers patrons and prestige craft specialists and
emergent elites in Mesopotamia from 5500ndash3100 BC In VG
Childe and B Wailes (eds) Craft Specialization and Social
Evolution in Memory of V Gordon Childe Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthroplogy
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
164 Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165
Stocks D (1989) Ancient factory mass-production techniques indica-
tions of large-scale stone bead manufacture during the Egyptian
New Kingdom Period Antiquity 63 526ndash31
Stout D (2002) Skill and cognition in stone tool production a case
study from Irian Jaya Current Anthropology 45 693ndash722
Talbot G (1983) Appendix K beads and pendants from the tell and
tombs Pp 788ndash801 in KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho
V London British School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Tosi M and Vidale M (1990) Fourth millennium BC lapis lazuli
working at Mehrgarh Pakistan Paleorient 162 89ndash99
Treherne P (1995) The warriorrsquos beauty the masculine body and self
identity in Bronze Age Europe Journal of European Archaeology
3 105ndash44
Valla F Khalaily H Valladas H Tinerat-Laborde N Samuelian
N Bocquentin F Rabinovich R Bridault A Simmons T
Dosseur G Miller-Rosen A DuBreuil L Bar-Yosef Mayer
D and Belfer-Cohen A (2004) Les fouilles a Mallaha en 2000 et
2001 troisieme rapport preliminaire Journal of the Israel
Prehistoric Society 34 49ndash244
Vanzetti A and Vidale M (1994) Formation processes of beads
defining different levels of craft skill among the early beadmakers
of Mehrgarh Pp 763ndash76 in A Parpola and P Koskikallio (eds)
South Asian Archaeology 1993 Volume II Proceedings of the
Twelfth International Conference of the European Association of
South Asian Archaeologists Helsinki University 5ndash9 July 1993
Helsinki Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia
Verhoeven M (2002) Transformations of society the changing role of
ritual and symbolism in the PPNB and the PN in the Levant Syria
and southeast Anatolia Paleorient 28 5ndash14
Vianello F (1985) La lavorazione dellrsquoamazzonite a Wadi Hafir
Giordania meridionale Studi per lrsquoEcologia del Quaternario 7 77ndash122
Vidale M (1989) Specialized producers and urban elites on the role of
craft industries in mature Harappan urban centres Pp 171ndash81 in
JM Kenoyer (ed) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia Madison University of Wisconsin
mdash Kenoyer JM and Bhan K (1992) A discussion of the concept of
the chaıne operatoire in the study of complex societies Pp 181ndash94
in A Gallay (ed) Ethnoarcheologie justification problemes
limites Juan-les-Pins
Wheeler M (1983) Appendix J greenstone amulets Pp 781ndash87 in
KM Kenyon and T Holland (eds) Jericho V London British
School of Archaeology Jerusalem
Wright KI (1992) Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and
Subsistence Strategies in the Levant 22000 to 5500 bp PhD
dissertation Department of Anthropology (University Microfilms
International) Yale University
mdash (1993) Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant
Levant 25 93ndash111
mdash (2006) Stone bead technology studies at Catalhoyuk summer 2006
httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2006 Catalhoyuk
Website Archive Reports 2006
mdash (forthcoming) Households lineages and networks a framework for
understanding Near Eastern social organization In KI Wright
(ed) The Ancient Levant A Social Archaeology London in
preparation
mdash (in preparation) Beads and the body ornament technologies of
Building 3 at Catalhoyuk In R Tringham and M Stevanovic
(eds) Catalhoyuk Building 3 the Excavations of the University of
California at Berkeley at Catalhoyuk (BACH) Los Angeles
Monographs of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology University of
California at Los Angeles
mdash and Bains R (2007) Stone bead technology at Catalhoyuk summer
2007 httpwwwcatalhoyukcomarchive_reports2007
Catalhoyuk Website Archive Reports 2007
and Garrard AN (2003) Social identities and the expansion of stone
beadmaking in Neolithic western Asia new evidence from Jordan
Antiquity 77 (296) 267ndash84
Wright P (1982) The bow-drill and the drilling of beads Kabul 1981
Afghan Studies 3ndash4 95ndash101
Wright et al Stone Bead Technologies
Levant 2008 VOL 40 NO 2 165