Utilizing Mole-Rat Activity for Archaeological Survey

Abstract

Identifying previously unknown sites is a fundamental goal of the archaeological inquiry. In this article, after reporting the results of our work at Tel ‘Eton (Israel), we propose a new method that can increase the effectiveness of surveys. As part of a study of site formation processes, molehills (mole-rat back-dirt hills) were systematically sifted at Tel ‘Eton and its surroundings. It was apparent that the number and size of sherds in molehills on the mound greatly exceeded those found in its surroundings. The incidental identification of many sherds in molehills northwest of the mound, therefore, led us to suspect that this area was settled. This was tested by transecting the area. The finds, along with discoveries in the wadis cutting the plain, support this suggestion and allowed us to detect the lower city’s boundary. An examination of the site’s environments, moreover, enabled us to identify additional anomalies, like the co-occurrence of concentrations of sherds, red-soiled molehills, and slags, which might indicate an extra-mural workshop. Consequently, we suggest that a systematic examination of rodents’ back-dirt mounds can be an effective method—faster, cheaper, and more efficient than pedestrian surveys or shovel tests—of discovering unknown sites even in regions with good visibility.

The “Governor’s Residency” at Tel ‘Eton, The United Monarchy, and the Impact of the Old-House Effect on Large-Scale Archaeological Reconstructions

“…Occupation expanded in the Iron Age IIA (roughly 10th–9th centuries BCE according to the Modified Conventional Chronology; Mazar 2005, 2011), and the large Iron II city that developed was destroyed by the Assyrian army in the late 8th century BCE (the end of the Iron IIB). Seventh-century remains were identified in the plain northwest of the mound (Sapir and Faust 2016), but settlement on the mound itself was resumed only in the 4th century when a fortified structure, surrounded by additional buildings, was established on its top. This settlement ceased to exist in the 3rd century BCE, and the mound was abandoned (Faust et al 2015).…”

Identifying the Brazil nut effect in archaeological site formation processes

“…The other side of the same coin with regard to SFPs concerns the presence of artifacts from earlier levels in the later levels of multi-period and multi-stratum sites (archaeological tells) (e.g., Villa 1982;Finkelstein and Zimhoni 2000). This well-known phenomenon is usually considered to be related to subsequent construction activities, which utilized materials (such as mud) that introduced earlier artifacts into later strata, to differences in erosion between different parts of the site, or to mole rat activity (Sapir and Faust 2016). This may be so and indeed, there are many additional components that may affect SFPs.…”

“…It should be emphasized that in addition to the BNE phenomenon, there are numerous other soil's activities that can cause lifting or mixing of artifacts in archaeological record (see above). For instance, bioturbation of archaeological remains can occur due to burrowing, particularly by rodents, earthworms, ants or termites (e.g., Stein 1983;Erlandson 1984;Canti 2003;Bueno et al 2013;Araujo 2013;Więckowski et al 2013;Sapir and Faust 2016), as well as to manuring and mixing (Wood and Johnson 1978). Bruder (1982) demonstrated a substantial effect of mole activity on the pedoturbation of objects in soil.…”

Using floristic characteristics of contemporary vegetation for identifying archaeological sites: Tel ‘Eton archaeological site as a test case

“…1B), representing four combinations of topography and archaeological remains. These plots were chosen based on mapping of findings concentrations in molehills (Sapir and Faust 2016).…”

“…On the top of the mound we sampled a large terrace (plot T). In the settlement below the mound we sampled the area near the previously excavated lower city (area F in Faust 2016; see Postscript in Sapir and Faust 2016), where buried architecture was found, and the visible remains exposed in the wadi section (plot F). Northwest of the lower city, where hardly any artifacts were found, we sampled an area consisting of deep soil (plot G).…”