Tel Bet Yerah

Tel Bet Yerah (Kh. el-Kerak) is a large, archaeological mound formed around a small, natural hill at the south-west corner of the Sea of Galilee. Excavated intermittently since the 1930s, the 25ha mound contains the remains of a large Early Bronze I village that was rebuilt as an Early Bronze II walled town (for a review of earlier excavations, see Greenberg et al. Reference Greenberg, Paz, Wengrow and Iserlis2012). Detailed studies of Early Bronze II architecture and public spaces indicate that, although the town walls and basic plan were established from the outset, the imposition of urban discipline was a gradual process, resulting in a dense grid of streets and houses by the end of the period, c. 2850 BC (Greenberg & Paz Reference Greenberg, Paz and Greenberg2014: 38–39; Paz & Greenberg Reference Paz and Greenberg2016). During Early Bronze III, following a partial depopulation, Bet Yerah was the destination for incoming groups associated with the Kura-Araxes cultural tradition (Sagona Reference Sagona2017: 213–80). Settling in proximity to the local population, these groups left a ceramic legacy that has established Bet Yerah/Khirbet el-Kerak as the type-site for their characteristic ceramic assemblage: Khirbet Kerak Ware. This ware anchors a cultural assemblage that diverges in many notable respects, including those of food production and consumption, from pre-existing local tradition (Greenberg et al. Reference Greenberg, Shimelmitz and Iserlis2014; Greenberg Reference Greenberg2019: 117–22).

A major goal of the Tel Aviv University excavations of 2003–2015 was the retrieval of a detailed dataset on human-environment interactions and on human foodways (not addressed by previous investigations at the site) by means of small-scale (450m²) excavation in and around the previously excavated monumental granary, or ‘Circles Building’, in the northern part of the mound (Figure 1; for interim reports, see Greenberg et al. Reference Greenberg, Rotem and Paz2013, Reference Greenberg, Ashkenazi, Berger, Iserlis, Paz, Rotem, Shimelmitz, Tan and Paz2017; Regev et al. Reference Regev, Paz, Greenberg and Boaretto2020). The fine-screening of approximately half of all sediments excavated over seven seasons provides—alongside extensive assemblages of mammalian fauna, microfauna, plant remains and flint-knapping waste—substantial evidence for the consumption of fish. That the people of Bet Yerah practised fishing was already known, due to the discovery, by every earlier excavation at the site, of numerous stone net-sinkers. This indirect evidence is now augmented by an assemblage of fish remains. The two complementary datasets, concerning consumption (fish bones) and acquisition (fishing gear), are presented below.

Figure 1. Location map of sites mentioned in this paper and general plan of the 2003–2015 excavations at Tel Bet Yerah (courtesy of the Tel Bet Yerah Archaeological Project).

The fish assemblage

The strata sampled were predominantly from areas of domestic occupation and refuse disposal situated to the north and west of the previously excavated Circles Building—a large public structure built in early Early Bronze III (c. 2800 BC; Greenberg et al. Reference Greenberg, Ashkenazi, Berger, Iserlis, Paz, Rotem, Shimelmitz, Tan and Paz2017). The western area of excavation (area SA-S; grid squares L–N/11–15 and N/8-9), provided a contiguous sequence, primarily from the Early Bronze II and III periods, with a few soundings reaching the latest layer of Early Bronze I occupation. The northern area, area SA-M, consisted predominantly of large refuse deposits in an open plaza (grid squares P–T/7–8) associated with an Early Bronze III Khirbet Kerak Ware cultural assemblage and separated from contemporaneous local tradition Early Bronze III occupation deposits by a paved street. Radiocarbon dates (Regev et al. Reference Regev, Paz, Greenberg and Boaretto2020) from Bet Yerah suggest that the late Early Bronze I–II sequence should be bracketed between 3200 and 2850 BC, while the two Early Bronze III communities were contemporaneous, both apparently coexisting in the first half of Early Bronze III (c. 2850–2700 BC). The two areas of excavation thus provide insights into economic change or divergence on both temporal and spatial/cultural axes: from Early Bronze I–III in the local tradition and between deposits associated with the local tradition and those associated with Khirbet Kerak Ware.

In total, 594 fish bones were obtained from secure contexts: 134 associated with the Khirbet Kerak Ware-bearing deposits in the plaza (and from one pit outside of the plaza), 458 in local tradition Early Bronze I–III deposits, and two bones in a Hellenistic pit (c. 250–100 BC). The bones were collected from samples that were either dry-sieved (on a 2mm mesh) or recovered from flotation and placed on stacked 5–0.5mm sieves. The overall state of bone preservation was poor. Most bones were very small and were photographed through a Leica Binocular to facilitate identification. They were identified with the aid of modern fish-reference collections belonging to the first author, and collections of present-day specimens prepared for this project by the second author. Taxonomic nomenclature follows www.fishbase.se. The better preserved identified bones were measured to estimate the sizes of the original fish by comparing with modern fish in the reference collections. Size estimations by this method are subject to a margin of error of roughly 15 per cent, which, while relatively large, we have deemed sufficient for the current purpose. The sizes of fish provided below are therefore approximate and figures are rounded.

Of the total of 594 fish bones (see Table S1 in the online supplementary material (OSM)), the specific skeletal element was identified for 399 bones (67 per cent of the total assemblage); the rest were unidentifiable fragments. There were 326 skeletal elements of the meat-bearing part of the fish—predominantly vertebrae (Figure 2)—and 73 bones of the neuro- and branchiocranium. The most common elements were vertebrae, which comprised 69 and 81 per cent of the identified skeletal elements from areas SA-S and SA-M, respectively.

Figure 2. a) Cyprinidae: anterior vertebra, left lateral view; b) Cichlidae: posterior vertebra, left lateral view; c) Clarias gariepinus: posterior vertebra, left lateral view; d) Serranidae: left dentary, superior view; e) Serranidae: first vertebra, anterior view (photographs by O. Lernau).

Taxonomic identification was achieved for 219 bones (55 per cent of the 399 identified skeletal elements). Six families of fish were identified (Table 1). The low proportion of identifications is due to the small size and relatively poor preservation of the bones. Most identified bones (212) belong to three families of freshwater fish found in the Sea of Galilee: Cyprinidae (carp), Cichlidae (cichlids) and Clariidae (catfish). Among the cyprinid bones, 11 could be further identified to the species: three as Jordan himri (Carasobarbus canis); four as Kinneret bleak (Mirogrex terraesanctae); two as Jordan barbell (Luciobarbus longiceps); and two as Mesopotamian barb (Capoeta damascina).

Table 1. Taxonomic identifications of fish bones (NISP = number of identified specimens).

Among the cichlid bones, four can be identified as mango tilapia (Sarotherodon galilaeus), and one as Jordan St Peter's fish (Oreochromis aureus). All the catfish bones relate to North African catfish (Clarias gariepinus). Measurements of 66 cyprinid bones and 25 cichlid bones yield estimated sizes ranging between 60mm and 0.36m, with averages of 0.14 and 0.16m, respectively (Figure 3). Measurements of four catfish bones provide estimated sizes of 70mm, 0.12, 0.24 and 0.63m, respectively.

Figure 3. Size distribution of cichlids and cyprinids (figure by O. Lernau).

Seven bones relate to three marine families: Sparidae (porgies), Serranidae (groupers) and Mugilidae (mullets). One sparid bone was identified as gilthead seabream (Sparus aurata). All three families originate in the Mediterranean Sea, approximately 50km to the west of Bet Yerah. The same types of marine fish have been recovered in small quantities at several other Early Bronze Age coastal sites, such as Ashkelon-Afridar (Lernau Reference Lernau2004; Early Bronze I) and Megadim (Early Bronze I; unpublished), and from Kabri (Lernau Reference Lernau, Kempinski, Scheftelowitz and Oren2002; Early Bronze I–II), Megiddo (Early Bronze I & III; Lernau Reference Lernau, Finkelstein, Ussishkin and Halpern2006) and Tel Qashish (Early Bronze I–III; Lernau Reference Lernau, Ben-Tor, Bonfil and Zuckerman2003) farther inland; the latter may be attributed to small-scale trade in cured fish. In later periods, especially during the Late Bronze and the Iron Ages, the importation and consumption of fish became more intensive and widespread, encompassing the entire Eastern Mediterranean, with the addition of imported fish from the Bardawil hypersaline lagoon in northern Sinai and from the Nile (van Neer et al. Reference van Neer, Lernau, Friedman, Mumford, Poblome and Waelkens2004; Sisma-Ventura et al. Reference Sisma-Ventura, Tütken, Zohar, Pack, Sivan, Lernau, Gilboa and Bar-Oz2018). To date, Bet Yerah is the farthest site from the Mediterranean to have provided evidence for Early Bronze Age marine fish consumption.

Temporal and cultural distribution of the fish bones

At Bet Yerah the fish-bone assemblage is distributed across the three principal periods of occupation on this part of the mound: late Early Bronze I, Early Bronze II and early Early Bronze III. The fish bones in the deposits west of the Circles Building represent Early Bronze I–III activity associated with domestic occupation and the local ceramic tradition (except for two bones from a Khirbet Kerak Ware pit). The remaining fish bones are all associated with Early Bronze III Khirbet Kerak Ware ceramics. Table 2 shows the identified bones in the domestic, local tradition deposits and in the refuse deposits containing Khirbet Kerak Ware in the plaza. Both areas have yielded the same three types of freshwater fish, with a larger proportion of cyprinids and a lower proportion of clarids in the local tradition contexts. The latter also yielded three types of marine fish, while the Khirbet Kerak Ware contexts yielded only one bone of the marine Sparidae family.

Table 2. Taxonomic identifications by cultural context (NISP = number of identified specimens).

Table 3 shows the relative frequency of fish bones (both identified and unidentified), by period. The frequency is calculated in relation to the total screened volume of material from the relevant contexts, as fish remains were almost exclusively identified in screened sediments (Figure 4). These numbers should be treated with some caution given the probability of residual material and of the different circumstances of deposition for each period (e.g. Early Bronze I and early Early Bronze II deposits in area SA-S, as well as Early Bronze III deposits from SA-M, are primarily from midden contexts, whereas late Early Bronze II and Early Bronze III contexts in area SA-S are predominantly from house floors and mud-brick collapse). The numbers, however, do suggest significant quantitative differences in relative fish consumption, as can be seen in Table 3. From an Early Bronze I maximum of 42.5 bones per 1000 sifted litres of sediment, a fall-off occurs in late Early Bronze II and local-tradition Early Bronze III (approximately 9.2 and 19.5 bones per 1000 litres, respectively). While early Early Bronze II may well be affected by a high proportion of Early Bronze I residual bone, the steep decline in late Early Bronze II correlates with the intensification of urbanisation at Bet Yerah. It should be noted that the late Early Bronze II numbers are skewed due to their peculiar distribution: more than half were recovered from refuse pits that occur in this period alone, suggesting that house floors were periodically swept clean. A second divergence can be seen in the relationship between local tradition and Khirbet Kerak Ware contexts, where the latter demonstrate consistently fewer fish bones (approximately 8.5 bones per 1000 litres). These data suggest that the community producing and using Khirbet Kerak Ware relied less on the exploitation of fish from the Sea of Galilee than their contemporaneous neighbours.

Table 3. Frequency of fish bones in screened sediments; EB = Early Bronze.

Figure 4. Frequency of fish bones in the screened sediments by period (figure by O. Lernau).

Figure 5 shows the distribution of taxonomic identifications along a temporal axis. The proportion of Cyprinidae was highest in the Early Bronze I, but subsequently diminished. The proportions of the fish varieties from the Sea of Galilee were roughly the same for the local Early Bronze III population and their Khirbet Kerak Ware-using neighbours, albeit with a slight increase in Clariidae. Size estimates from the measurement of 97 bones show that the average size of the fish caught in the Sea of Galilee remained constant over time, at approximately 0.15–0.17m (Table 4). This may indicate that fishing techniques were unchanged during the time covered by the assemblage. The seemingly wide range in size in early Early Bronze II is due to one cyprinid vertebra (0.36m) and one from a catfish (0.63m); no other examples in the assemblage exceed an estimated size of 0.23m.

Figure 5. Families of fish (%) by period and culture (figure by O. Lernau).

Table 4. Estimated sizes of fish by period; EB = Early Bronze.

Fishing gear

While only the most recent excavations at Bet Yerah were conducted at a resolution sufficient to recover fish remains, indirect evidence for fish consumption has emerged from earlier excavations at the site in the form of small, carefully notched or grooved stone net-sinkers, found mainly in open courtyards (Getzov Reference Getzov2006: 26–28; Rosenberg & Greenberg Reference Rosenberg, Greenberg and Greenberg2014: 208). Similar artefacts have also been found in the most recent excavations, along with two copper fish hooks—rare finds in the Levant (Figure 6).

Figure 6. Fishing gear from Bet Yerah: a) notched and grooved net-sinkers; b) copper hooks (photographs by P. Shrago, the Tel Bet Yerah Archaeological Project).

Twenty-one of 26 net-sinkers from the recent excavations come from stratified deposits (see Table 5): 14 from Early Bronze I and II contexts and seven from Early Bronze III contexts (including five associated with Khirbet Kerak Ware). Data from the earlier excavations show a pronounced drop in the frequency of stone weights during Early Bronze II, from 48 in Early Bronze I and early Early Bronze II, to seven in late Early Bronze II, to six in Early Bronze III. Together, the numbers indicate a marked decline in the on-site use or maintenance of fishing nets during Early Bronze II. This conclusion is consistent with our observations on the relative quantities of fish remains. Net-sinkers found in Early Bronze III, contexts are therefore most likely residual, and should not be attributed to the continuing use of fish nets by inhabitants of the walled settlement.

Table 5. Distribution of net-sinkers by period; EB = Early Bronze.

¹ Based on Rosenberg and Greenberg (Reference Rosenberg, Greenberg and Greenberg2014) and Getzov (Reference Getzov2006); cultural affiliation of the Early Bronze III finds is unclear.

The two copper hooks, which are remarkably similar in form and proportion, although of different size (Figure 6), were found in association with Khirbet Kerak Ware ceramics. They are both made from round-sectioned copper pins (differing from the common Southern Levantine pins, which are square in section; Ilan & Sebbane Reference Ilan, Sebbane and de Miroschedji1989) that were bent twice from the midpoint of each pin, at 90° angles. The larger hook, 3–4mm in section, has a 37mm-long shank, a width (gap) of 13mm and an 18mm-long barb. The hook appears to preserve mineralised remains of vegetal fibre, presumably belonging to the fishing line. The smaller hook is half the size of its larger counterpart: it is 1mm in section, has a 21mm-long shank, an 8mm gap and a 9mm-long barb. These are the only such hooks so far found in the Southern Levant, and we are yet to identify comparable right-angled copper hooks in the broader West Asian region.

The use of net-sinkers made of notched or grooved pebbles had a long history around the Sea of Galilee and in the Jordan Valley (Nadel & Zaidner Reference Nadel and Zaidner2002; Rosenberg et al. Reference Rosenberg, Agnon and Kaufman2016)—a history that appears to have ended with the onset of Early Bronze Age urbanisation. Cast nets or suspended gill nets (Jawad Reference Jawad2006: 6–8, figs. 2 & 4) were probably used for catching carp and cichlids (these dominated the fish assemblage at nearby Ohalo II; Zohar et al. Reference Zohar, Dayan, Goren, Nadel and Hershkovitz2018). Fishing hooks would probably have been used for targeting catfish, as they are more apt to bite than other species. Unusual as they are, the appearance of hooks and line in the Bet Yerah plaza supports the possibility that the Early Bronze III Khirbet Kerak Ware-using newcomers were unacquainted with the use of nets for fishing in open water. Instead, they preferred to fashion fishing hooks of different sizes and to target catfish, with which they would have been familiar from the rivers and streams in their presumed regions of origin. Given the absence of systematic screening in most excavations, however, the evidence for fishing and fish consumption at Kura-Araxes sites in the Southern Caucasus and other areas of Kura-Araxes presence is scarce. The important Kura-Araxes site of Kvastkhelebi in Georgia, for example, has yielded a single bone fishing hook (Dzhavakhishvili & Glonti Reference Dzhavakhishvili and Glonti1962: fig. IV.424) and only two fish bones from domestic contexts (unpublished). No evidence for fishing is reported at other Kura-Araxes sites, or in the isotopic evidence of human diet in the Southern Caucasus (Herrscher et al. Reference Herrscherin press). Fish are also notably absent in the rich corpus of Kura-Araxes zoomorphic iconography (Sagona Reference Sagona1984).