Measuring Local Diversity in Early Iron Age Animal Economies: A View from Khirbat al-Mudayna al-ʿAliya (Jordan)

Abstract

We use faunal evidence from Khirbat al-Mudayna al-ʿAliya, an agropastoral settlement located in west-central Jordan, to examine early Iron Age subsistence regimes. Analysis of faunal evidence reveals a low-intensity, nonspecialized animal economy dependent on both domesticated and wild species, including freshwater crabs. The subsistence economy of the settlement, we argue, was structured so as to take maximum advantage of its location overlooking the Wadi al-Nukhayla, a perennial water source supporting a relatively verdant floral and faunal array. This diverse and flexible organization made subsistence in this resource-scarce environment more sustainable. When this profile is compared with other early Iron Age southern Levantine communities, the diversity of ways that animal economies were organized during this period is apparent, signaling the need to investigate the local strategies that communities used to adapt to their immediate environmental circumstances, not only ecologically but also socially.

Environmental and Historical Impacts on Long Term Animal Economy: The Southern Levant in the Late Bronze and Iron Ages

“…Regarding the former, the frequency of cattle has been traditionally corre lated with climate conditions: areas characterized by higher rainfall are more suited for raising cattle (Tchemov and Horwitz 1990). We found no such pat tern (see also Sasson 2010:48;Lev-Tov et al 2011 regarding the early Iron Age): sites located in wet areas, in the midst of arable land, such as Tel Dothan in the Late Bronze Age i i b , Tel Dan in early Iron Age 1 and Hazor in late Iron Age i i a (-550 mm of rainfall annually for the latter two) seem to have raised a modest number of cattle, while southern sites such as Lachish (-350 mm rainfall annu ally) in most of the periods and Tel Masos (-150 mm rainfall annually) in the early Iron i i a , raised many cattle. The same holds for patterns of sheep/goat husbandry: there is no clear gradient from more sheep in the wetter north ern areas to more goats in the drier southern areas.…”

“…In order to create as unified a database as possible, we applied sev eral criteria: 1) only reports of well-excavated sites that could be assigned to one of the eight subphases were included; 2) sites with a unique identity, such as cult places, were acknowledged as such; 3) because the retrieval technique may influence the finds and their subsequent analysis, we recorded and com pared only large mammals; it has been proven that their relative frequency is less influenced by sieving (Sapir-Hen 2010; see also Lev-Tov et al 2011).…”

“…One cannot discern clear differences in animal husbandry strategies between these groups. Reviewing the differences between several sites dated to the early Iron Age, Lev-Tov et al (2011) suggest that some of them focused on subsistence security and self-sufficiency, while others aimed at secondary products and exchange. Our study indicates similar results: different sites focus on different species, and the mortality profiles of Megiddo and Beth Shemesh show different foci of exploitation (Fig.…”

Provisioning the Early Bronze Age City of Tell es-Safi/Gath, Israel: Isotopic Analyses of Domestic Livestock Management Patterns

“…First, goats are the more common species (13%), almost double in frequency than sheep (7% of the total assemblage). While this is in contrast to many contemporary EB III sites in the region, where sheep are more common than goats, the relative frequency of sheep and goat is highly variable due to site size and environmental setting (Lev-Tov et al 2011;Sasson 2010). In addition, the primary zooarchaeological analysis reveals that goats are being managed quite differently than sheep at the site.…”

Feeding the Community

“…Physical evidence for this food system is best documented at al-'Aliya, where faunal and botanical data have been collected and analyzed (Lev-Tov et al 2011;Simmons 2000). Faunal analysis determined that the settlement depended mainly on sheep {Ovis arles) and goat {Capra hirctis) for meat, wool and dairy products, with goats being the more favored, likely due to their hardiness in a semi-arid environment.…”