Upper Paleolithic Explorers : The Geographic Sources of Shell Beads in Early Upper Paleolithic Assemblages in Israel

The Upper Paleolithic occupation levels of Kebara and Manot caves (Mt. Carmel and Western Galilee, respectively, both in Israel) contain both Ahmarian and Aurignacian cultural remains, the former being a locally developed culture, and the latter an intrusion from Europe. The molluscan assemblages from the two sites contain both local and foreign elements. The local elements are mostly beads made of Columbella rustica and Tritia gibbosula shells. A comparison of Upper Paleolithic shell bead assemblages of Levantine sites to Aurignacian assemblages in Europe suggests that while most of the shells are Mediterranean species, it is nonetheless possible to distinguish between the local Ahmarian traditions in personal ornaments, and those which were brought or influenced by the Aurignacian traditions. Specifically, a few shell beads such as Tritia mutabilis and Ocinebrina edwardsii, might have been imported from sites in Western Europe, and likewise the scaphopods seem to be present as a result of Aurignacian influences (either brought from Europe or collected along the Levant coast). Furthermore, in a few cases shells were originally collected in distant locations. One Euplica festiva, from the Red Sea Shore found at Kebara Cave may have been collected by Ahmarians and exchanged with Aurignacians. Two others are fossil shells from the Jordan Valley, which were found at both Kebara and Manot. These finds testify to possible connections between Aurignacians and their Ahmarian neighbors, as well as to the explorative nature of these populations. This special issue is guest-edited by Daniella E. Bar-Yosef Mayer (Steinhardt Museum of Natural History and Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University) and Marjolein D. Bosch (McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, University of Cambridge). This is article #6 of 12. INTRODUCTION T dispersal of modern humans within and between Africa and Eurasia during the Upper Paleolithic is part of a trajectory in human evolution (e.g., Bar-Yosef 2017; Mellars 2004). Recent finds in the Levant enhance our understanding of the dispersal of humans (e.g., Belfer-Cohen and Goring-Morris 2003; Goring-Morris and Belfer-Cohen 2006; Hublin 2015; Mellars 2006; Zilhao 2006). Modern humans traveled through this region on their way out of Africa (Hershkovitz et al. 2015), and the material remains they left behind seem to combine old traditions originating in Africa and new ones, which are an adaptation or innovation that developed along their expansion route. The best-known material culture of the Upper Paleolithic (UP) consists primarily of lithic artifacts but includes also a bone industry and shell beads. The lithics and bones were for the most part collected in the vicinity of the sites occupied. Beads could have been made of a large array of materials including organic ones (Balme and O’Connor 2019), but the best preserved and best known are mollusc shell beads that are the focus of this paper. Beads in general and shell beads in particular serve as a means of communication and may have had other symbolic functions broadly discussed in the ethnographic and archaeological literature (Bar-Yosef 1991; Jackson 1917; Kuhn 2014; Vanhaeren 2005). According to Vanhaeren and d’Errico (2006), the combination of specific personal ornaments reflects “ethno-linguistic diversity of human groups”. Is there really a way of deciphering what shell beads mean? Apart from their actual distribution, can we identify specific ethnic groups using shell beads? Surprisingly, by paying attention to specific compositions of shell assemblages in the Levant, we might be able to contribute to this topic, and possibly to identify interactions between two groups that are quintessentially separate, based mostly on their lithic industries, yet they co-existed for approximately three to four millennia during the Upper Paleolithic in the Levant (Bar-Yosef and Belfer-Cohen 2010; Gilead PaleoAnthropology 2019: 105−115. © 2019 PaleoAnthropology Society. All rights reserved. ISSN 1545-0031 doi:10.4207/PA.2019.ART126 DANIELLA E. BAR-YOSEF MAYER The Steinhardt Museum of Natural History and Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 69978, ISRAEL; and, Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA; baryosef@tauex.tau.ac.il submitted: 18 January 2018; accepted 13 October 2018 106 • PaleoAnthropology 2019 as the pertinent literature (Bosch et al. 1995; Milstein et al. 2012; Poppe and Goto 1997). The shells were observed under a binocular microscope (Leica M-80) at up to x60 magnification and measured with a digital caliper (Mitutoyo digimatic). Comparisons to previously published shell assemblages from other Levantine and European sites were based exclusively on published materials.