Opportunism or aquatic specialization? Evidence of freshwater fish exploitation at Ohalo II- A waterlogged Upper Paleolithic site

Abstract

Analysis of ca. 17,000 fish remains recovered from the late Upper Paleolithic/early Epi-Paleolithic (LGM; 23,000 BP) waterlogged site of Ohalo II (Rift Valley, Israel) provides new insights into the role of wetland habitats and the fish inhabiting them during the evolution of economic strategies prior to the agricultural evolution. Of the current 19 native fish species in Lake Kinneret (Sea of Galilee), eight species were identified at Ohalo II, belonging to two freshwater families: Cyprinidae (carps) and Cichlidae (St. Peter fish). Employing a large set of quantitative and qualitative criteria (NISP, species richness, diversity, skeletal element representation, fragmentation, color, spatial distribution, etc.), we demonstrate that the inhabitants of Ohalo II used their knowledge of the breeding behavior of different species of fish, for year-round intensive exploitation.

The use of ash at Late Lower Paleolithic Qesem Cave, Israel—An integrated study of use-wear and residue analysis

“…As such, Qesem Cave seems to provide the earliest evidence related to the utilization of ash for storing and processing vegetal foods and hide linked to the outstanding preservation properties of ash. If so, the evidence produced in this paper suggests quite an early timeline for these behavioral patterns, which to date have only been associated with much later (Upper Paleolithic, post 45,000 kya) communities in the Levant [ 108 ] and in Europe [ 11 ]. The use of ash for processing, preserving, and storing food and other matters (e.g., hide) as early as 300 kya at the site of Qesem Cave may be perceived as part of a new mode of adaptation characterizing the post- Homo erectus hominins of the AYCC [ 109 ].…”

Fishing for Answers: the rarity of fish and fishhooks in the Late Chalcolithic of the southern Levant and the significance of copper fishhooks

“…Fish are a prominent source of nutrients and proteins, and thus it is not surprising that fish were appreciated by societies as early as the Palaeolithic (e.g. Álvarez‐Fernández, 2015; Zohar et al ., 2018) and are still a prime source of food in many parts of the world (Speedy, 2003: table 1). Fishing involves various technologies that reflect diverse strategies (e.g.…”

“…Discussing fishing strategies in the Levant is complicated as the evidence for fish remains and fishing strategies is fragmentary for various reasons (see however Grigson, 1987; Zohar et al ., 2001; Zohar, 2003; van Neer et al ., 2005; Nadel et al ., 2008; Bar‐Yosef Mayer and Zohar, 2010; Zohar and Biton, 2010; Nadel et al ., 2012; Zohar et al ., 2014; Zohar et al ., 2018), including the difficulty in retrieving the remains (Zohar and Belmaker, 2005). Specific fishing gear such as weights, net‐sinkers, hooks, and harpoons are rare or absent from most sites.…”

“…The first evidence for possible fishing gear in the southern Levant appears around 23,000 years ago at Ohalo II in the form of notched stone fishing weights (Nadel and Zaidner, 2002) alongside signs of strategic and cultural exploitation of specific species based on the fish remains (Zohar et al ., 2018). During the latter parts of the Epipalaeolithic, in the context of the Natufian culture, barbed points, fishhooks, and possible fishing weights appear in small quantities (e.g.…”

Fishing, fish consumption, urbanism and migrants at Tel Bet Yerah, 3200–2700 BC

“…Cast nets or suspended gill nets ( Jawad 2006: 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 2018). Fishing hooks would probably have been used for targeting catfish, as they are more apt to bite than other species.…”