Full length article
A tale of two hearth sites: Neolithic and intermittent mid to late Holocene occupations in the Jubbah oasis, northern Saudi Arabia

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ara.2021.100278Get rights and content

Abstract

Hearth sites are characteristic of Holocene occupation in the Arabian sand seas but remain mostly unstudied. Excavations of two multi-period hearth sites in the Jebel Oraf palaeolake basin, in the oasis of Jubbah, now substantially increase our knowledge of these sites. In total, 17 of 170 identified hearths were excavated at Jebel Oraf 2 (ORF2), an open-air site on the edge of a palaeolake. In addition, 11 hearths were excavated at the stratified site of Jebel Oraf 115 (ORF115), a rockshelter formed by two boulders. Radiocarbon dating and lithic assemblages indicate that the majority of these hearths were in use in the second half of the 6th millennium BCE, and that both sites were used sporadically until the recent past. All hearths appear to have been extremely short-lived, and faunal remains suggest they may have been used to cook meat from hunted or trapped wildlife, and occasionally from livestock. The frequent use of grinding stones, often broken into fragments and used to cover hearths is also attested. Evidence for the exceptionally early use of metal from dated occupation deposits as well as from rock art, shows that these short-lived sites were well connected to technological innovations in the wider region.

Introduction

The Neolithic in the Fertile Crescent forms the foundation of our understanding of an economic transition that saw mobile hunter-gatherers become sedentary farmers. However, on the fringes of this Neolithic core area, populations in the more arid environments of northern Arabia had to adapt their subsistence strategies in different ways. This resulted in a trajectory where Neolithic hunting and gathering was supplemented with mobile pastoralism; while sedentism and agriculture are predominantly associated with Bronze Age occupation in the oases, following the onset of desertification in the region.

The Neolithic in the southern Levant is heterogeneous and populations in different areas adopted herding at different rates (see for example Martin and Edwards, 2013 and references therein). In the Badia of eastern Jordan, caprine herding and opportunistic agriculture appeared by the Pre-Pottery Neolithic C (PPNC, 6600–6250 BCE), in a complex subsistence strategy combining livestock and hunting that allowed long-term seasonal occupation of marginal environments (Betts et al., 2013; Martin and Edwards, 2013; Miller et al., 2019; Rollefson et al., 2014). In the Jordanian Highlands and the Jordan Valley, sheep and goat herding was practised by the Middle PPNB (8100–7500 BCE) (Makarewicz, 2016; Martin and Edwards, 2013). Evidence from ‘Ain Ghazal, in central Jordan, suggests the emergence of a specialised pastoral economy by the early 7th millennium BCE, after domestic goats were herded from around 8500 BCE, and domestic sheep were introduced around 7500 BCE (Wasse, 2002). Despite apparent regional differences in the timing of subsistence changes, Neolithic sites across the steppe and desert areas of the southern Levant are characterised by remains of substantial curvilinear structures that were used as pens, dwellings, and storage facilities. Even mobile populations are known to have occupied substantial dwellings seasonally (Fujii, 2013a; Fujii, 2013c; Henry et al., 2003; Henry et al., 2017; Rollefson et al., 2014; Rollefson et al., 2016; Rowan et al., 2015).

To date, only a few faunal remains have been reported from Neolithic contexts in northern Saudi Arabia; including the occupation sites of Jebel Oraf and Alshaba, a stone platform in Dumat al Jandal, and a mustatil in the western Nefud (Guagnin et al., 2017b; Scerri et al., 2018; Groucutt et al., 2020; Munoz et al., 2020). Neolithization models therefore have to infer population dynamics and subsistence changes across vast distances. The process underpinning the spread of the Neolithic and in particular the question of whether the use of domesticated livestock spread together with Levantine stone tool technology thus remains unresolved (see also Makarewicz, 2020). Distance and lack of data also cause considerable uncertainties in the terminology used to characterise Arabian sites and lithic technologies. In northern Arabia, characteristics that are typically used to define the Neolithic, such as sedentism, agriculture, and pottery are only known from Bronze Age and later contexts (Magee, 2014). The presence of domesticated livestock is therefore often used to define the pastoralists of the 6th millennium BCE as Neolithic (Crassard and Drechsler, 2013a). In reference to this convention and following Fedele (2008) we use the term ‘Neolithic’ for the period following the introduction of domesticated livestock, and ‘Pre-Neolithic’ to describe the preceding period, prior to the adoption of food production, but in which there are apparent cultural links to contemporaneous Levantine Pre-Pottery Neolithic societies (Guagnin et al., 2020).

Archaeological sites containing faunal remains of early domesticates are extremely rare along the west and in the interior of the Peninsula, with most of our understanding of the Neolithization of Arabia coming from a small but growing number of sites excavated along the Gulf coast and in the very south of the Peninsula. Faunal remains from dated contexts on the Arabian Gulf coast suggest that cattle, sheep, and goat had been introduced from the Levant by the end of the 6th millennium BCE (Crassard and Drechsler, 2013b; Drechsler, 2007; Uerpmann et al., 2000). Technological and typological similarities in lithic assemblages, suggest that connections between the southern Levant and the Gulf were established by the 7th millennium BCE (Drechsler, 2007; Drechsler, 2009). Notably, there appears to be a division between the central Gulf as far south as Qatar with short (<2 cm) winged and tanged arrowheads, similar to those in the Levant, and the southern Gulf around the Musandam peninsula with long (>3 cm) foliate, tanged, or trihedral arrowheads akin to those from Yemen (Charpentier and Crassard, 2013; Maiorano et al., 2020; Spoor, 1997). Northern and central Arabia thus appear to have been influenced by regions to the north, while southern Arabia has more idiosyncratic artefact styles.

Neolithic settlements in the southern Gulf from the 6th and 5th millennium BCE are characterised by structural remains. Round, circular, or D-shaped stone structures were reported from Marawah and Dalma (see for example Beech et al., 2000; Beech et al., 2020), and similar, though less substantial structures were recorded at as-Sabiyah in northern Kuwait (Carter and Crawford, 2003). Numerous post holes were documented at the settlement of Akab in the lagoon of Umm al-Qaiwain (Charpentier and Méry, 2008), although no permanent installations were identified at the broadly contemporary site of Dosariyah (Drechsler, 2011). Remains of boats and of ‘Ubaid pottery show that sites along the Gulf were part of a wide-ranging interaction network. Populations along the Gulf had developed a unique blend of local and introduced elements that allowed the successful establishment of permanent settlements, extensive exploitation of maritime resources, and even pearling (Carter, 2006; Drechsler, 2011; Beech et al., 2020). Of these Gulf sites the closest to Jebel Oraf is as-Sabiyah (730 km), followed by Dosariyah (900 km), and Akab and Marawah (1500 km). The Levant, and in particular the Badia of Eastern Jordan, are considerably closer to Jebel Oraf (500 km), and interaction may have occurred via the interdune corridors of the Nefud Desert (Scerri et al., 2018; Fig. 1). Recent research has identified such interactions at a number sites in the region. At Al Jawf, on the north side of the Nefud, Levantine Neolithic lithic types were being produced using the same techniques as in the Levant (Crassard and Hilbert, 2020), suggesting either they were made by some of the same people, or that there was close enough contact to directly observe artefact manufacture and not merely emulate end-products. Previous research in the Jubbah oasis identified multiple phases of Levantine lithic types (Crassard et al., 2013; Hilbert et al., 2014; Guagnin et al., 2020). Moreover, zooarchaeological evidence suggests cattle herding was introduced from LPPNB settlements in southern Levant, via the Red Sea coast (Makarewicz, 2020).

Recent test excavations of two hearths at Jebel Oraf 2 in the Jubbah oasis have yielded radiocarbon ages between 5200 and 5070 BCE, lithics similar to those typical for the Pottery Neolithic (PN) in the Levant, as well as likely remains of domesticated cattle (Guagnin et al., 2017b). The excavated hearths are unusual in that signs of structural remains are completely absent. A similar hearth site has also recently been excavated at Alshabah in the western Nefud Desert (Fig. 1) (Scerri et al., 2018; see also Breeze et al., 2017) and a number of unexcavated hearth sites were reported from central Saudi Arabia and the Rub al-Khali (Reeler and Al Shaikh, 2015). This type of site appears to be common in the sand seas of the Arabian Peninsula and may perhaps represent an adaptation to marginal arid environments, although the coastal site of Dosariyah appears to have been a settlement with similarly ephemeral activity (Drechsler, 2011). In eastern Jordan, at the oasis of Azraq (Fig. 1), the late Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) site Azraq 31 Area A produced a series of superimposed hearths but no evidence for structures (Baird et al., 1992; Betts, 1989). Hearth sites are not known from the higher rainfall regions of the Levant, despite intensive surveys.

Here we report the results of our excavations of two multi-period hearth sites in the Jebel Oraf basin. At Jebel Oraf 2 (ORF2), on the shores of a palaeolake, 15 hearths were excavated in addition to the two reported in Guagnin et al. (2017b), raising the number of excavated hearths to 17 of 170 identified hearths. A further hearth site, Jebel Oraf 115 (ORF115), was discovered inside a small rockshelter formed by two large boulders on the slopes of Jebel Oraf. The site had recently been partially destroyed by looters, but stratified deposits survive on the southern side of the shelter. Both sites form part of a Neolithic landscape in which earlier dune sites in the form of single phase scatters of lithics, charcoal, and bone, were recorded in elevated positions on the slopes of sand dunes; while hearth sites with evidence of repeated occupation over extended periods were recorded on the shores of the Jebel Oraf palaeolake (the Neolithic landscape of the Jebel Oraf basin is reported in Guagnin et al., 2020). Here we describe the results of our excavations, including the characteristics of hearths and lithic assemblages, and present data from faunal remains and phytolith analysis. This new dataset now allows a comparison with contemporary sites in the Levant and other areas of the Arabian Peninsula, and a first significant characterisation of Neolithic settlement and subsistence patterns in northern Saudi Arabia.

In northern Saudi Arabia, curvilinear structures are known from Neolithic settlements to the north of the Nefud Desert. At Wadi Sharma and al-Aynah, clusters of curvilinear structures were dated to the PPNB (Fujii, 2013a). Reconstruction of landscape use in the region of Wadi Sharma and the Jafr Basin in southern Jordan suggests ephemeral occupation by small, more mobile groups during the Late Neolithic, possibly linked to a period of aridification (Fujii, 2013a; Fujii, 2013b). Further east, multi-roomed domestic structures are also known from Late Neolithic levels at Rasif (Zielhofer et al., 2018). Moreover, Neolithic and Chalcolithic occupation in the Jafr area, at Rasif, and at Qulban Beni Mura in Jordan is associated with water management strategies (Fujii, 2013b; Gebel, 2016; Zielhofer et al., 2018). However, sites from the 6th and 7th millennium BCE remain largely unknown in the area.

In the Jubbah oasis, on the southern edge of the Nefud Desert, surveys in the 1970s recorded 12 possible Neolithic or Chalcolithic sites (Fig. 1). These contained a range of stone tools including tanged arrowheads, blades, and hoes (Garrard et al., 1981; Parr et al., 1978). Recent surveys by the Palaeodeserts Project have identified two further early Holocene sites. At Al-Rabyah, a lithic assemblage with bladelets and geometric microliths akin to the Geometric Kebaran, was attributed to a drier climatic phase around 8000 BCE (Hilbert et al., 2014). At Jebel Qattar 101, El-Khiam and Helwan points similar to those characteristic for the PPN in the Levant (where they occur between 10,200 and 6900 BCE) were associated with a palaeolake that was dated to 7000–6000 BCE (Crassard et al., 2013). However, none of the sites identified in the Jubbah oasis yielded faunal remains, and until the discovery of bone fragments at ORF2 (Guagnin et al., 2017b) the closest sites with domestic fauna remained as far afield as Kuwait, Yemen, and Jordan.

Evidence for Bronze or Iron Age settlements has so far not been identified in Jubbah, likely as a result of the expansion of modern settlement and agriculture. However, Bronze Age motifs have been identified in the rock art and the region is rich in Iron Age imagery and inscriptions (Guagnin et al., 2017a; Guagnin et al., 2020). A shell bead found at a disturbed burial cairn provided a radiocarbon date of 2930–2770 BCE (Guagnin et al., 2017a), and many of the cairns visible on the slopes of the Jebels in Jubbah may date to the Bronze Age (Jennings et al., 2013). The practice of constructing burial cairns seems to have begun both locally and regionally in the late Neolithic (Abu-Azizeh, 2014; Guagnin et al., 2020), becoming widespread in the Bronze Age, perhaps with the emergence of pastoral elites (Newton and Zarins, 2000). In the oasis of Tayma, on the western edge of the Nefud Desert, cairns are common in the Bronze Age and artefacts recovered from graves suggest wide reaching contacts as far as Syria and the Levant. Circular tombs were constructed throughout the Iron Age. Remains of permanent occupation are identifiable in Bronze Age contexts and the oasis appears to have been continuously occupied since at least the Iron Age (Hausleiter and Eichmann, 2018; Hausleiter and Zur, 2016).

In north-western Saudi Arabia, the Neolithic coincided with the Holocene humid period, when an orbitally-driven enhancement of regional insolation caused a northward shift of the African summer monsoon. In the oasis of Jubbah this increase in precipitation led to elevated groundwater levels, which in turn resulted in the formation of a large lake and a number of smaller outlying lakes (Engel et al., 2017; Guagnin et al., 2020; Parton et al., 2015; Parton et al., 2018). At the site of Al Rabyah, an early phase of lake formation was recorded at ca 10,000 BCE. Following a period of lake contraction, a second phase of lake expansion was dated to around 4600 BCE. Molluscs and ostracods recovered from these deposits indicate the presence of a shallow freshwater lake surrounded by vegetation (Hilbert et al., 2014). In addition, a smaller lake dated to between 7000 and 6000 BCE was identified at Jebel Qattar in the east of the Jubbah basin. The small palaeolake at Jebel Oraf appears to have mirrored the situation of the main basin in the Jubbah oasis, and lake marls at ORF2 record a flooding event during the late 6th millennium BCE (Guagnin et al., 2020). Holocene palaeolakes are also known from the oasis of Tayma, on the western side of the Nefud Desert, and from interdune depressions in the western Nefud (Engel et al., 2012; Scerri et al., 2018). This period of climatic amelioration and lake formation and the subsequent return to aridity after 4000 BCE forced a series of adaptive responses across Arabia (Petraglia et al., 2020), which form the backdrop to the occupation deposits presented here. Following the onset of desert conditions, populations of the Bronze Age retreated to oases, forming permanent settlements (Hausleiter and Eichmann, 2018: Table 1). The occupation deposits excavated at Jebel Oraf predominantly date to the 6th and early 5th millennium BCE and coincide with the end of the Holocene humid period. The late Neolithic period is therefore our primary focus here.

Section snippets

Material and methods

In 2015, the site of ORF2 was explored in two test excavations of hearths visible on the surface; these yielded remains of Bos and charcoal dated to the early 5th millennium BCE (Guagnin et al., 2017b). In 2016, ORF2 was targeted for further excavations, designed to document the extent of the site, and to sample a larger number of hearths. The site was initially surveyed by walking transects of 2 m spacing to locate and document all visible hearths, and any artefacts lying on the surface.

ORF2 results

Along the northern edge of the Jebel Oraf lake basin, sand dunes gently rise up to a height of about 40 m. At the base of these dunes the terrain opens out to form a flat terrace (Fig. A1). On the southern edge of this terrace, grey lake marls, deposits of the former palaeolake, are still visible. The hearths recorded at ORF2 all either sit on top of the sand or the lake marl edge of this terrace (Fig. 2).

In total, 17 of the 170 recorded hearths were excavated at ORF2. The excavated hearths can

ORF115 results

The site of ORF115 was discovered during a survey of the rock art along the slopes of Jebel Oraf. Within a cluster of large boulders that is densely covered in rock art, two boulders form a shelter. The shelter had recently been looted, with a large trench dug in what would have been the main occupation area. However, a substantial deposit remained on the southern side of the shelter (Fig. 7). The loose backfill of the robber trench was cleared out and the intact deposit gently cleaned. The

Phytoliths (ORF2 and ORF115)

Despite extensive sieving for macrobotanical remains using a 0.25 mm mesh, no plant seeds were recovered from either ORF2 or ORF115. Only low numbers (<10) of small charcoal pieces (0.5-1 mm in size) were recovered from any of the contexts at either site, including hearth deposits. This is most likely due to poor preservation within the extremely arid environment of Jebel Oraf. While plant material was likely burnt within the hearths excavated at the sites, the lack of macrobotanical remains

Discussion

The radiocarbon dates obtained from ORF2 and ORF115 suggest that the two hearth sites were repeatedly occupied during the second half of the 6th millennium BCE, with more sporadic occupation in later millennia (Figs. A20 and A21). Moreover, a high content of ash and carbon, fragments of charcoal and bone, as well as lithics in the lake marl deposit at ORF2 suggest that numerous additional hearths from the 6th millennium BCE may have been destroyed in flooding events. However, even generous

Conclusion

The hearths sites of ORF2 and ORF115 provide a valuable contribution for our understanding of Neolithic occupation patterns and subsistence strategies. Although there is some evidence of the use of domesticated livestock, the hunting of wildlife, the collection of ostrich eggs, and the trapping of small bird species continued to form an important source of protein in all occupation phases. This is also reflected in the recurrence of arrowheads in Neolithic deposits. Moreover, all faunal remains

Author contributions

M.G. designed the research and wrote the manuscript with contributions from C.S. (lithic analysis), L.M. (faunal analysis), E.K.-B. (botanic analysis), P.B. (mapping and environmental analysis), L.G. (hearth analysis), F.O. (environmental analysis), M.S. (faunal analysis), S.e-D. (rock art). All authors collected data in the field and contributed to data interpretation. A.O. and B.Z. organized logistic support in the field, and A.M.A. co-directed the project with M.P. and facilitated

Declaration of Competing Interest

None.

Acknowledgements

We thank His Royal Highness Prince Sultan bin Salman, former President of the Saudi Commission for Tourism and National Heritage (SCTH), and Prof. Ali Ghabban, former Vice President, for permission to carry out this research. We also thank Mr. Jamal Omar, former Vice President of Antiquities and Museums, and Dr. Abdullah Al-Zahrani for their support and assistance during fieldwork in Jubbah. Financial support was provided by the SCTH, the European Research Council (grant number 295719, to MDP),

References (87)

  • A. Parton et al.

    Orbital-scale climate variability in Arabia as a potential motor for human dispersals

    Quat. Int.

    (2015)
  • A. Parton et al.

    Middle-late Quaternary palaeoclimate variability from lake and wetland deposits in the Nefud Desert, northern Arabia

    Quat. Sci. Rev.

    (2018)
  • P. Shipman et al.

    Burnt bones and teeth: an experimental study of color, morphology, crystal structure and shrinkage

    J. Archaeol. Sci.

    (1984)
  • C. Zielhofer et al.

    Climate forcing and shifts in water management on the northwest Arabian Peninsula (mid-Holocene Rasif wetlands, Saudi Arabia)

    Quat. Int.

    (2018)
  • W. Abu-Azizeh

    The south-eastern Jordan’s Chalcolithic-Early Bronze Age pastoral nomadic complex: patterns of mobility and interaction

    Paléorient

    (2013)
  • W. Abu-Azizeh et al.

    Variability within consistency: cairns and funerary practices of the Late Neolithic/Early Chalcolithic in the Al-Thulaythuwat area, southern Jordan

    Levant

    (2014)
  • D. Baird et al.

    Prehistoric environment and settlement in the Azraq Basin: an interim report on the 1989 excavation season

    Levant

    (1992)
  • R. Barkai et al.

    Stone axes as cultural markers: technological, functional and symbolic changes in bifacial tools during the transition from hunter-gatherers to sedentary agriculturalists in the southern Levant

  • T.M. Barket et al.

    Tabular scrapers: function revisited

    Near Eastern Archaeol.

    (2011)
  • M. Beech et al.

    Reconsidering the ‘Ubaid of the southern Gulf: new results from excavations on Dalma Island, U.A.E

    Proce. Semin. Arabian Stud.

    (2000)
  • M. Beech et al.

    Excavations at MR11 on Marawah Island (Abu Dhabi, UAE): new insight into the architecture and planning of Arabian Neolithic settlements and early evidence for pearling

    Arab. Archaeol. Epigr.

    (2020)
  • A.K. Behrensmeyer

    Taphonomic and ecologic information from bone weathering

    Paleobiology

    (1978)
  • A.V.G. Betts

    The Pre-Pottery Neolithic B period in eastern Jordan

    Paléorient

    (1989)
  • A. Betts et al.

    Background and methodology

  • R. Carter

    Boat remains and maritime trade in the Persian Gulf during the sixth and fifth millennia BC

    Antiquity

    (2006)
  • R. Carter et al.

    The Kuwait-British Archaeological Expedition to as-Sabiyah: report on the fourth Season’s work

    Iraq

    (2003)
  • V. Charpentier et al.

    Back to Fasad... and the PPNB controversy. Questioning a Levantine origin for Arabian Early Holocene projectile points technology

    Arab. Archaeol. Epigr.

    (2013)
  • V. Charpentier et al.

    A Neolithic settlement near the Strait of Hormuz: Akab Island, United Arab Emirates

    Proce. Semin. Arabian Stud.

    (2008)
  • R. Crassard et al.

    Invited editors’ preface

    Arab. Archaeol. Epigr.

    (2013)
  • R. Crassard et al.

    Towards new paradigms: multiple pathways for the Arabian Neolithic

    Arab. Archaeol. Epigr.

    (2013)
  • R. Crassard et al.

    Beyond the Levant: first evidence of a Pre-Pottery Neolithic incursion into the Nefud Desert, Saudi Arabia

    PLoS One

    (2013)
  • R. Crassard et al.

    Bidirectional blade technology on naviform cores from northern Arabia: New evidence of Arabian‐Levantine interactions in the Neolithic

    Arab. Archaeol. Epigr.

    (2020)
  • P. Drechsler

    The Neolithic dispersals into Arabia

    Proce. Semin. Arabian Stud.

    (2007)
  • P. Drechsler

    The dispersal of the Neolithic over the Arabian Peninsula

    (2009)
  • P. Drechsler

    Places of contact, spheres of interaction. The Ubaid phenomenon in the central Gulf area as seen from a first season of reinvestigations at Dosariyah (Dawsāriyyah), Eastern Province, Saudi Arabia

    Proce. Semin. Arabian Stud.

    (2011)
  • F.G. Fedele

    Wādī at-Tayyilah 3, a Neolithic and Pre-Neolithic occupation on the eastern Yemen plateau, and its archaeofaunal information

    Proce. Semin. Arabian Stud.

    (2008)
  • S. Fujii

    Jawf/Tabuk Archaeological Project (JTAP). A brief report of the second field season, 2013. http://jswaa.org/en_expeditions/: School of Humanities, Kanazawa Univversity

    (2013)
  • S. Fujii

    Chronology of the Jafr prehistory and Protohistory: a key to the process of pastoral Nomadization in the southern Levant

    Syria

    (2013)
  • S. Fujii

    Jawf/Tabuk Archaeological Project (JTAP). A brief report of the third field season, 2013. http://jswaa.org/en_expeditions/: College of Human and Social Sciences, Kanazawa University

    (2013)
  • A. Garrard et al.

    Environment and settlement during the Upper Pleistocene and Holocene at Jubba in the great Nefud, northern Arabia

    Atlal

    (1981)
  • H.G.K. Gebel

    The socio-hydraulic foundations of oasis life in NW Arabia: the 5th millennium BCE shepherd environs of Rajajil, Rasif and Qulban Beni Murra

  • D. Gifford-Gonzalez

    Ethnographic analogues for interpreting modified bones: Some cases from East Africa

  • A. Gopher

    Arrowheads of the Neolithic Levant

    (1994)
  • Cited by (7)

    • Coring, profiling, and trenching: Archaeological field strategies for investigating the Pleistocene-Holocene-Anthropocene continuum

      2022, Quaternary International
      Citation Excerpt :

      The CPT approach allowed for the assessment of a large number of archaeological sites, providing critical new insights into human expansions across Arabia during periods of environmental amelioration, while also suggesting gaps and regional abandonments, hypothesized to be a consequence of arid and hyper-arid conditions. Moreover, the scale and extent of long-distance contact evident in Early and Middle Holocene sites across northern Arabia would not have been identified had resources been focused on the large-scale excavation of a single site (Crassard et al., 2013; Guagnin et al., 2021; Hilbert et al., 2014; Scerri et al., 2018). On California's Northern Channel Islands (NCI), a CPT approach has helped address a variety of archaeological and ecological questions (Fig. 6).

    • Life-sized Neolithic camel sculptures in Arabia: A scientific assessment of the craftsmanship and age of the Camel Site reliefs

      2022, Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports
      Citation Excerpt :

      Due to poor preservation of bone collagen in hyper-arid environments, conventional radiocarbon dating was not possible. However, samples from arid environments such as the Arabian Peninsula have good preservation of the mineral fraction of skeletal remains (carbonate hydroxyapatite, or bioapatite), which has been shown to be a reliable material to date skeletal remains (Zazzo and Saliège, 2011) and has been successfully employed in the region (see for example Guagnin et al., 2021; Hausleiter and Zur, 2016; Guagnin et al., 2020). Four samples were chosen for radiocarbon dating, covering a range of different depths in the test excavation, as well as remains of a hearth (Table 4).

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text