See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228572792
Wood remains from archaeological excavations: A review with a Near Eastern
perspective
Article  in  Israel Journal of Earth Sciences · December 2007
DOI: 10.1560/IJES.56.2-4.139
CITATIONS
23
READS
4,709
1 author:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
defense from herbivory View project
From an eye of a nature explorer View project
Simcha Lev-Yadun
University of Haifa
388 PUBLICATIONS   9,371 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Simcha Lev-Yadun on 16 February 2017.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.
Isr. J. Earth Sci.; 56: 139–162
© 2008 Science From Israel/ LPPLtd.	 0021-2164/07 $4.00
E-mail: levyadun@research.haifa.ac.il
Wood remains from archaeological excavations:
A review with a Near Eastern perspective
Simcha Lev-Yadun
Department of Biology Education, Faculty of Science and Science Education, University of Haifa—Oranim,
Tivon 36006, Israel
(Received 13 February 2008; accepted in revised form 4 June 2008)
ABSTRACT
Lev-Yadun, S. 2007. Wood remains from archaeological excavations: A review
with a Near Eastern perspective. Isr. J. Earth Sci. 56: 139–162.
In this review I describe and discuss the technical issues of identification of archaeological
wood remains from archaeological excavations and the types of data that can
emerge from studying them. I discuss uses of wood; types of wood remains (dry,
charred, waterlogged, sub-fossil, fossilized); crystals from wood; the anatomical
basis for wood identification, including the different anatomies of conifers, monocotyledons,
and dicotyledons; regular and traumatic tissues; endogenous trends of
anatomical changes related to age, size, and position within the plant; and damage
by fungi and insects and their identification. Wood preservation, common microscopic
methods for wood identification, wood anatomical atlases for the Levant and
other relevant regions, and the lack of bark descriptions are all discussed. Wood fiber
identification, statistical characters of wood anatomy, dendrochronology (tree-ring
studies), and the use of stable and radioactive isotopes from wood continue. Possibilities
of identification of the origin of wood by Strontium and ancient DNA and other
molecular studies follow later in the review. The role of floral data emerging from
studies of archaeological wood remains in planning current forests and nature conservation
is discussed. In this context, an example is given of the role of wood remains
in understanding the dominance of Quercus calliprinos (kermes oak) in the Central
Coastal Plain of Israel. Geobotany and the question of identifying climatic changes,
social status as reflected in the types of wood used in Masada (King Herod’s palace
versus Roman siege rampart), wood as an indication of ancient trade, and wood as
reflecting horticulture are also discussed. Woodworking technology, the use of fire,
and dealing with multidisciplinary issues and conclusions end the review. Concerning
archaeological wood remains, it is impossible to exploit all theoretical and technical
abilities in all studies, and scientists involved in any archaeological project have to
decide about priorities. Studying archaeological wood remains is a very complicated
multidisciplinary issue. Archaeological wood identification is commonly conducted
by non-botanists, who have difficulties with the botanical, ecological, and environmental
aspects, while evaluation of the identified plant material by botanists involves
similar difficulties with archaeological and cultural issues. No scientist is able to
master all relevant aspects, and such multidisciplinary issues usually require a wellbalanced
team to deal with them.
140	 Israel Journal of Earth Sciences	Vol. 56, 2007
INTRODUCTION
Wood identification by various anatomical components
and other methods is practiced by botanists,
ecologists, archaeologists, geologists, students of
evolution, foresters, wood and paper technologists,
forensic scientists, students of art, and probably others.
Practicing wood identification can be done at the
technical level, resulting in lists of taxa, but the real
scientific analysis starts in many cases only after the
technical identification (which may sometimes be very
complicated and tedious) is done. There are possibilities
to identify wood by using pictorial wood anatomy
atlases, and standard analytical wood anatomy keys
for identification of some floras also exist. Several
floras have computer-assisted identification packages
(e.g., Gupta et al., 2001). Where the published material
is insufficient, comparative anatomical slides
and photographs of recent relevant material are used.
Here I give an overview of the types of wood and
wood-related finds, the basic methods of their identification,
and the types of data that may emerge from
such studies. I discuss some of the problems related
to interdisciplinary studies of that kind and the geographical,
ecological, and cultural aspects of drawing
conclusions. I give examples from studies conducted
in Israel or elsewhere in the Levant whenever possible.
This review will serve all types of scientists who use
data related to archaeological or other ancient wood
remains, as well as geologists, forensic scientists, and
people working in the wood industry.
DEALING WITH MULTIDISCIPLINARY
ISSUES
There are several possible levels on which archaeological
wood remains can be studied. The purpose of the
study and the available resources for research may significantly
influence, first, the sampling strategy during
excavation, and later, the type of study conducted with
the remains. Exploiting all the theoretical and technical
abilities described above in all studies of wood
remains is not practical, and any team involved in any
given archaeological project has to decide on its priorities.
In certain cases, the technical identification of the
woody species or genera is sufficient. There is a clear
difference between a find of a small number of wood
remains such as charcoals from outdoor fire, cooking
installations, or a burnt house, and an assembly of
hundreds or thousands of well-preserved specimens
that may reflect past floras, technological aspects, local
and international trade, genetic aspects, cultural
aspects, and agricultural or forestry practices. The
geographical location of a site, e.g., within the hearth
of a certain ecology or in a transitional area between
two ecologies, is also important when geobotanical
or ecological aspects are studied. The availability of
previous remains from the region and period, as well
as the type of archaeological site (e.g., rural, state capital,
military post, trade station, port, cult center, etc.)
also has a significant role in deciding how to conduct
a specific study.
Some facts are not easy to digest, but scientists try
to find the truth rather than please the public. In the following
paragraph I deliberately present a provocative
view. This view does not cover all cases of archaeobotany,
but certainly discusses common limitations in this
field. I refrain from discussing many specific studies
because this is primarily a methodological essay and
not a data review and I do not wish to be too apologetic.
As discussed above, studying archaeological
wood remains is a very broad and complicated issue.
A single scientist cannot master all relevant aspects.
I will comment on some of the difficulties related to
such studies. Wood identification is commonly conducted
by non-botanists, who have difficulties understanding
and mastering the botanical and ecological
aspects of the identified plant material. Such studies
end, in certain cases, in naive models that do not fit the
actual complicated ecological situations and relevant
interpretations. Similarly, when botanists identify
such archaeobotanical materials, their cultural interpretations
may be no less problematic. Peer review
of manuscripts usually does not solve the problem, as
the reviewers suffer from the same limitations. While
ecology is terribly complicated when the present is
studied, reconstruction of the past from fragmentary,
and in many cases, out-of-context finds, is even more
difficult. A very important issue of studying archaeobotanical
remains of any type including wood is the
critical local (regional) aspect. For instance, the best
experts of whatever flora are at a disadvantage when
they have to identify plants belonging to other floras,
and I am not referring to the technical issue of correct
identification of species, but to the understanding of
their ecology. A deep knowledge of a certain flora is a
lifetime project. Many years of field days are needed to
get a solid experience with the taxa, ecological factors,
and the relevant local plant/animal/human interactions
of any flora. A Ph.D. or Post-Doctoral experience,
let alone a single or several summer visits to a given
region, are clearly not sufficient to acquire the necessary
knowledge. Moreover, there are usually critical
	 S. Lev-Yadun. Archaeological wood remains	 141
publications published in local languages in relevant
biological and archaeological issues that are not accessible
to foreign visiting scientists. Broad geographical
perspectives are also misleading in certain cases. For
instance, for people from Spain or France, anything
east of Italy may be considered Eastern Mediterranean.
However, for scientists in Israel, Lebanon, Jordan and
Syria, anything west of Crete may be considered
Western Mediterranean. The northern Adriatic, “Eastern
Mediterranean”, for some (see Rossignol-Strick,
1995, and certain citations of this study) is clearly
related to temperate region ecologies and not to true
Eastern Mediterranean (Near-Eastern) ecologies. The
erroneous botanical interpretations from such studies
reflect on other studies, resulting in “paper evolution”
or “paper stratigraphy” of misunderstanding. There are
additional factors that may increase the complications
in interpreting the significance of archaeological wood
remains. Trade of timber and worked items has been
common for the last several millennia. When certain
tree species, e.g., Pinus halepensis, Cupressus sempervirens,
Quercus calliprinos, Olea europaea, are native
in several countries, it is practically impossible to distinguish
between their possible local origin and import
when only regular wood identification is practiced
without using strontium or DNA. Vegetation changes
may result from diseases that eliminate susceptible
species, not less than climatic changes. It is easy to
interpret such changes as a climatic change, while the
change may have had nothing to do with climate.
In many cases, related studies such as palynology,
seed analysis, archaeozoological, sedimentological,
genetic, and historical and technological studies
(plant-related archaeological installations and other
finds) reflect on the interpretation of the wood material.
Only multidisciplinary group efforts can permit
a high level of interpretation in such complicated
studies. For instance, the issue of the role of Pinus
halepensis in the ancient landscape of Israel, which
has been debated for many years, was studied for a
long time under the influence of geobotanical studies
conducted when herding was practiced on a very large
scale everywhere in the Near East (e.g., Zohary, 1959,
1962, 1973). Moreover, all the wealth of archaeobotanical
data that we have today did not exist when
these monographs were written. Because of the largescale
planting of P. halepensis and the simultaneous
dramatic decrease in herding, combined with nature
protection in Israel, we have seen in the last two decades
a strong process of expansion of P. halepensis
from both plantations and natural populations into
areas occupied by oak-dominated forests and maquis
or other types of vegetation that, under the conditions
that prevailed for generations, were unsuitable to such
a process (see Lavi et al., 2005). For the common
archaeobotanist it is hard to be familiar with this type
of data. The difficulties reviewed above have realistic
solutions if awareness of such difficulties exists—an
important goal of this review. When not solved, they
limit the depth and reliability of certain studies.
THE PROBLEM OF OVER-INTERPRETATION
Many scientists who have significant experience with
the fragmentary archaeobotanical record are aware of
its imperfect nature. Sometimes, the results of species
identification are taken at face value. Caution must be
taken because human preference for certain species,
and differences in preservation between taxa, trade,
and chance may significantly influence the finds.
In many cases the number of samples is small, and
statistical bias is a real risk because of sample size. A
positive answer when a species is found is much safer
than speculating on the species that were not found.
In general, a regional picture, emerging from many
archaeological sites and strata, is of a greater significance
than a single find. Therefore, I warn against the
risks of naive or even absurd interpretations, going far
afield from the actual data, when considering analyses
and discussions of archaeological wood remains.
Using the Ockham’s razor approach (using minimal
assumptions for a certain hypothesis) may help lower
such risks.
USES OF WOOD
Wood has many uses, and archaeological evidence of
such uses dates back to very early in human history.
Plant remains on stone tools indicate that wood was
used as raw material probably already almost two million
year ago (Dominguez-Rodrigo et al., 2001). Wood
has been used for firewood for hundreds of thousands
of years. Good evidence of long-lasting massive use
of firewood exists in some ancient cave sites. In Kebara
(southern Mount Carmel) and Hayonim (western
Galilee) caves, the sediments were well preserved
and accumulated for many meters over millennia or
for many tens of thousands of years. They included
many layers rich with silica (phytoliths), reflecting
the burning of huge amounts of wood (Schiegl et al.,
1994, 1996; Albert et al., 2000). Wood was also used
for building and tool-making (e.g., Meiggs, 1982),
142	 Israel Journal of Earth Sciences	Vol. 56, 2007
although in smaller amounts than firewood. In general,
unlike pollen or seeds that may be easily introduced
into the archaeological record by chance because of
their small size and high mobility, wood is not blown
in the wind, does not stick to animal fur, is not brought
in large chunks by animal dung, and does not roll
into sediments. Therefore, in general, wood remains
may represent intentional human activity more than
many other types of archaeological plant remains. In
many cases, specific types of wood were deliberately
brought into archaeological sites because of their suitability
for certain uses.
TYPES OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL WOOD
REMAINS
Wood remains are found in archaeological excavations
in several basic types of preservation that allow direct
identification because of preservation of their “woody
nature”: (1) dry, (2) charred, (3) waterlogged, (4) subfossil,
and (5) fossilized. In all cases, the anatomical
structure of wood is generally preserved, enabling
identification. Sometimes geological conditions result
in pressure that twists the wood, making identification
difficult, limited to genus or family, or even impossible.
Biological degradation of dry and waterlogged
wood by bacteria and fungi is well known at the biological,
chemical, and structural levels (e.g., Blanchette,
2000; Björdal and Nilsson, 2008, and citations
therein). The degree of degradation may significantly
influence the taxonomic level of identification and its
reliability. There are other types of wood remains or
evidence of wood (e.g., crystals, tissue and chemical
remains on tools, use-wear marks on tools, etc.), and
they will be discussed later.
Dry wood is usually found in ancient buildings as
part of the structure, furniture, or equipment, or in archaeological
and natural sites in very arid hot or cold
deserts. Under dry conditions, the structure of the wood
is perfectly preserved, almost as in fresh material, and
it enables easy identification by microscopic examination.
Moreover, dendrochronological studies of the tree
rings (if the wood has annual growth-rings) is commonly
possible with dry wood. In Israel, dry wood in
a form that sometimes even enabled tree-ring studies
was found in old buildings such as Al-Aqsa and Omar
(Dome of the Rock; Qubbat al-Sakhra) mosques on the
Temple Mount (Lev-Yadun et al., 1984; Lev-Yadun,
1992), in Masada (Liphschitz et al., 1981; Liphschitz
and Lev-Yadun, 1989), and in several other sites. Dry
wood in many cases may even preserve its specific
aroma for the genus, which can allow safe identification
by experienced people while sawing the specimens
in the field. For instance, in our region there are
several conifer genera, some of which with have only
one species, e.g., Cedrus libani (cedar of Lebanon) and
Cupressus sempervirens (Italian cypress) with strong
and specific odors that enable their immediate identification.
Two other conifer genera (Pinus and Juniperus)
also have special recognizable odors, but these genera
have more than one species in the region, which limits
the use of odor as a reliable marker only for the genus
and not to the species. Charred, waterlogged, sub-fossil,
and fossil material has no specific odor that can be
used for field identification.
Charred wood is the most common type of wood
remains in archaeological excavations in the Levant.
Charred wood may be preserved as whole logs or in
large chunks, but usually appears as small fragments
ranging in size from a few millimeters to several centimeters.
Charred specimens may maintain their microscopic
structure, enabling their identification. The
charcoals may be hard, and thus easy to handle, or they
may turn into dust when touched, or disintegrate under
the electronic beam if examined under a scanning
electron microscope. When the samples disintegrate, it
is possible to impregnate intact soil blocks that include
such charred tissues in the field with resin and, when
they harden, saw the blocks and study the charcoals
in these petrographic thin sections, usually studied for
sediment composition (Goldberg et al., 1994). This
method was used to study plant remains in the Late
Bronze Age Amarna clay tablets (Lev-Yadun, 2004).
As with dry wood, dendrochronological studies of the
tree rings (if they exist) is possible with wood charcoals
if the remains are large enough to include a long
growth-ring sequence (e.g., Friedrich et al., 2006). The
physical–chemical basis for charcoal preservation and
diagenesis in archaeological sediments is only partly
understood (e.g., Nichols et al., 2000; Cohen-Ofri
et al., 2006), and the level of physics and chemistry
needed to study these processes is usually beyond that
mastered by archaeologists and botanists.
Although waterlogged wood is not common in
our region, some of the most important wood finds in
Israel were waterlogged. Waterlogged wood may be
also charred, as were some of the ca. 23,000-year-old
Epi-Paleolithic site Ohalo II wood remains (Liphschitz
and Nadel, 1997), or sub-fossilized, as in the
780,000-year-old material from the Acheulian site
of Gesher Benot Ya’aqov (Goren-Inbar et al., 2002).
Waterlogged botanical material may be well-preserved
	 S. Lev-Yadun. Archaeological wood remains	 143
because under anaerobic conditions microbial activity
is limited. However, waterlogged wood may sometimes
be very soft, so soft that it is possible to insert
a finger several centimeters into the wood with no effort.
Such water-soaked material must be kept in water
from the moment of excavation to prevent its physical
collapse, shrinkage, and disintegration. Waterlogged
material may be found even in the desert. For instance,
waterlogged juniper wood was found in the bottom
of the Hellenistic well (depth of ca. 70 m) in Be’er
Sheva (Lev-Yadun et al., 1995). Several waterlogged
ships and boats were found in Israel. A magnificent
well-preserved 2,400-year-old ship was found near
the shore at Ma’agan Mikhael (Linder and Kahanov,
2003; Kahanov and Linder, 2004). A 2,000-year-old
boat was found in the Sea of Galilee (Wachsmann,
1990). Wood analysis showed this boat was composed
of seven tree species (Cedrus libani, Pinus halepensis,
Crataegus sp., Quercus sp., Salix sp., Cercis siliquastrum,
Ziziphus spina-christi) (Werker, 1990).
Sub-fossil wood impregnated by aragonite was
found among the waterlogged specimens in Gesher
Benot Ya’aqov (Goren-Inbar et al., 2002). Fully fossilized
wood from various geological periods was
found in several geological formations of the Negev
(Lorch, 1967, 1968), but they are much too early to be
discussed in archaeological contexts.
iNORGANIC CRYSTALS FROM WOOD
Woodmayhavetwocommontypesofcrystals:calcium
oxalate and silica. Both types have several defensive
and physiological functions that are outside the scope
of this review. Calcium oxalate crystals and silica bodies
have an array of shapes, some of which are typical,
enabling their use in identification (Franceschi and
Horner, 1980; Rapp and Mulholland, 1992; Schiegl et
al., 1994, 1996; Meunier and Colin, 2001; Canti, 2003;
Nakata, 2003; Prychild et al., 2004; Franceschi and
Nakata, 2005; Massey and Hartley, 2006). In addition
to the use of specific shapes for identification, typical
numerical relations between various shapes may also
be employed (Albert et al., 2000, 2008; Tsartsidou et
al., 2007, 2008).
STARCH GRAINS
Wood and bark may contain large quantities of starch.
In New Guinea starch extracted from trunks of sago
palms is a food staple (Diamond, 1997). Starch grains
were found on prehistoric stone tools from the humid
Neotropics (Panama), indicating their possible use in
archaeology (Piperno and Holst, 1998; Piperno and
Pearsall, 1998). In our region, prehistoric cereal starch
on stone tools from Upper Palaeolithic Ohalo II has
been identified (Piperno et al., 2004), indicating the
potential for such studies. Starch in eastern Mediterranean
woods has been studied only in relation to
seasonality of wood formation (Psaras and Konsolaki,
1986). A systematic broad study of the morphology
and chemistry of starch grains in Near Eastern woody
and non-woody species (especially tubers) is needed in
order to make progress in this issue.
THE SIGNIFICANCE OF SPECIES VERSUS
GENUS OR FAMILY IDENTIFICATION
In many cases, identification of archaeobotanical
material such as wood, seeds, pollen, or phytoliths
only to the genus or family level has limited significance.
For instance (and this is only one of dozens of
possible examples) in Israel there are four deciduous
oak (Quercus) species: Q. ithaburensis, Q. boissieri,
Q. libani, Q. cerris (Feinbrun-Dothan and Danin,
1991). These four oak species have very different
ecological requirements. Quercus ithaburensis represents
a warm aspect of the region such as the upper
Jordan Valley, the coastal plain, and usually low elevations
but up to ca. 1,000 m asl in the Golan Heights.
Quercus boissieri occupies higher elevations of up to
ca. 1,700 m asl but is common in snow-free habitats
in Israel. Quercus libani and Q. cerris, which are of
northern and colder origin, reach their southern limit at
Mount Hermon in habitats of 1,300–1,900 m asl which
receive snow each year (Zohary, 1973). Identifying
some type of archaeological remains as “deciduous
oak” reflects ecological differences larger than those
found throughout the Pleistocene of Israel in any type
of botanical finds. Non-botanists used such types of
data to propose climatic changes, agricultural issues,
etc., while the data used clearly cannot indicate any of
the proposed situations because of the identification
of the genus rather than the species. The identification
of the species and not just the genus may therefore
frequently be critical.
THE ANATOMICAL BASIS FOR WOOD
IDENTIFICATION
Basic types of wood of the major plant taxa
The aim of this review is to discuss methodological
issues and not to serve as a review of studies on wood
144	 Israel Journal of Earth Sciences	Vol. 56, 2007
identification. Here I describe the principles of wood
anatomy and taxonomy in relation to wood identification.
Descriptions of some types of common deviations
from normal anatomy will follow. There are several
types of primary and secondary wood that must be
known if one wishes to understand or practice wood
identification. Woody vascular land plants belong to
three large groups, commonly known as ferns, gymnosperms,
and angiosperms. Woody ferns have not been
growing in the Near East for many millions of years
so I will not discuss them. Gymnosperms are a group
of ca. 1,000 species of trees and shrubs that have no
flowers, usually reproducing by seeds formed in cones.
In the Near East, the most common gymnosperm type
and a very important component in the archaeological
finds of many sites are the conifers. Angiosperms
comprise two large taxa: monocotyledons and dicotyledons
(broadleaves). Woody monocotyledons may
have only primary wood (made of vascular bundles
that include primary xylem and phloem surrounded by
fibers and embedded in a tissue made of parenchyma
cells) even if they are tree size (e.g., palms). Some
monocotyledons, not found in the native flora of the
Near East (e.g., Aloe, Dracaena), produce a special
type of secondary wood (Philipson et al., 1971). All
gymnosperms and most dicotyledons (including small
annuals) have secondary wood. Secondary wood is a
three-dimensional tissue and its structure is systematically
described by viewing three planes: cross section,
longitudinal tangential, and longitudinal radial. The
description of these three planes allows characterization
and identification of the wood. For certain taxa
with unique anatomical features, one or two planes
may be sufficient for an experienced scientist. To obtain
a reliable description of the anatomical structure,
the wood or charcoal sample should usually be not
smaller from 0.5 cm3
.
Gymnosperms in the Near East belong to two distinct
taxa: conifers (e.g., pines, junipers, cedar, and
cypress, which at maturity are usually trees although
junipers may under unfavorable conditions exist as
large shrubs), and several species of Ephedra that may
be small or large shrubs or huge climbers, covering tall
mature trees or houses (Zohary, 1973). Other groups of
gymnosperms exist (Gifford and Foster, 1989) but not
in the Near East. Dicotyledons may appear as annuals
(e.g., many legumes, Asteraceae), shrubs (e.g., Sarcopoterium
spinosum, Calicotome villosa), or trees (e.g.,
fig, olive, oaks, poplars).
Both conifers and dicotyledons have a lateral meristematic
tissue, the vascular cambium, which produces
secondary xylem and phloem. In many cases, the secondary
xylem (wood) has annual or non-annual (false)
growth rings. These growth rings are the biological
foundation of tree-ring studies, known as dendrochronology
(Fritts, 1976; Baillie, 1982; Lev-Yadun, 1987;
Schweingruber, 1996). The wood of dicotyledons as
seen in cross sections may belong to several general
types: (1) ring porous wood (large vessel members are
formed at the beginning of the growth ring with no
vessel members formed later), (2) semi-ring porous
wood (large vessel members are formed at the beginning
of the growth ring and gradually become smaller
later in the season), (3) diffuse porous wood (vessel
members of the same size classes are distributed
evenly throughout the growth ring), (4) wood with
included phloem, and (5) wood with no clear annual
or non-annual growth rings. There are many subtypes
and combinations of these structures, and in a local
flora with a relatively small number of common trees
or shrubs like in Israel, some of the anatomical characters
described may sometimes characterize only a
single species or genus, helping in identification.
The taxa with secondary xylem (gymnosperms and
dicotyledons) have two well-defined components in
their wood: (1) the axial and (2) the radial systems
known as the vascular rays. The axial system composes
on average 90% of the wood in conifers and ca.
75% in dicotyledons (Lev-Yadun and Aloni, 1995). In
conifers, the axial system is dominated by tracheids,
which when they have a broad lumen, a type produced
usually in the beginning of the growth season (known
as earlywood), serve mostly in water transport, while
towards the end of the season they have smaller lumens
(known as latewood) and function mostly in
mechanical support (Fahn, 1990). Tracheids are dead
cells with no DNA, a factor that influences the ability
to study ancient DNA from conifer wood. The gymnosperm
genus Ephedra produces both axial tracheids
and vessel members (Lev-Yadun, 1994a). Early- and
latewood tracheids may not be the sole component of
the axial system in conifers. Many conifers have, in
addition to their axial tracheids, axial resin ducts that
produce the defensive resin. In certain conifers (e.g.,
the ca. 110 species of the genus Pinus), resin ducts are
formed constitutively, but these and other taxa that
produce no constitutive axial resin ducts in the wood
(e.g., Cedrus) may produce additional traumatic resin
ducts after wounding (Fahn, 1979; Fahn et al., 1979).
Members of the genera Cupressus and Juniperus
have no resin ducts in the secondary wood and have
resin ducts only in the bark, leaves, and reproductive
	 S. Lev-Yadun. Archaeological wood remains	 145
structures. In dicotyledons, the axial system includes
the water-transporting elements (tracheids and vessel
members), the mechanically supporting fiber cells,
and a parenchymatous component that has a major
function in storage and wound healing (Fahn, 1990).
In certain dicotyledon taxa axial gum ducts (the parallel
of resin ducts in conifers) are formed (Fahn, 1979).
Wounding may increase the number of gum ducts in
dicotyledons, similar to resin ducts in conifers. In certain
taxa, common in the deserts of the Near East, including
annuals, shrubs, and small trees of the Chenopodiaceae
(e.g., Suaeda sp., Hammada sp., Haloxylon
sp., Anabasis sp.), islands of axial secondary phloem
(known as included phloem) are typically formed
within the secondary xylem (Fahn et al., 1986).
The radial system (the vascular rays) is usually
composed of parenchyma, although other cell types
such as tracheids, resin and gum ducts, radial phloem,
and radial fibers may infrequently be found in the rays
(Fahn, 1990; Lev-Yadun and Aloni, 1991a, 1995; LevYadun,
1994b). Like the types of ring porosity mentioned
above, the specific structure of the rays— (1)
height in cell number, (2) width in cell number, (3)
having radial resin or gum ducts, (4) having cells of
only the same size and if not, their size variation, (5)
having radial components such as tracheids, fibers,
and phloem, and being of two size categories (huge
and small) as in oaks—is used for identification (e.g.,
Greguss, 1955; Fahn et al., 1986; IAWA, 1989, 2004;
Schweingruber, 1990). Some woody dicotyledons either
never have rays in their secondary wood throughout
their life, or else, as in Suaeda monoica, form rays
only after attaining a certain thickness (Lev-Yadun and
Aloni, 1991a, 1995). In conifers with no axial resin
ducts in the wood, such as Cupressus and Juniperus,
the living parenchyma cells of the rays are a potential
source of ancient DNA.
Variation in wood anatomy related to age and
position in the plant
The general description of secondary wood structure
given above is only a basic one. Considerable, and even
dramatic changes in wood structure occur following
naturally occurring internal changes with both age and
size, with position within the plant, and as a response to
biotic and abiotic external factors. Most of these changes
are not described or discussed in detail in the atlases of
wood anatomy used for identification of archaeological
wood and I will therefore address them briefly.
Roots may differ considerably in structure from
stems or branches. Cell size in roots is usually larger
than that of trunks. Intra-annual (false) growth rings
formed in the trunk may in many cases not be produced
in roots. While in roots the cells are larger than
in trunks, cell size in branches is generally smaller
than the corresponding cells produced at the same time
in the trunk.
A general trend in cell size occurs in the wood of
all plants with cambial activity and secondary growth.
The trend is of increasing tracheid, vessel member,
fiber, and ray size in two axes: (1) the size increases
basipetal from the apex to the base of the trunk, and
(2) along the radius, from the pith towards the outer
layers of the wood (see Mencuccini et al., 2007). This
is called “length-on-age trend” and it must be taken
into consideration in many studies of wood anatomy,
including those of wood from archaeological excavations.
A special and common example of this general
anatomical trend is juvenile wood.
Juvenile wood, or wood formed in the center of
trunks (when they were young and thin), in young
branches, or in young roots differs in structure from
mature trunk, branch, or root wood, respectively. Juvenile
wood has mainly been studied from the perspective
of wood as raw material for the paper industry and
timber with respect to its quality (Zobel and Sprague,
1998). General changes characterizing juvenile wood
that apply to all known woody plants are: (1) the length
of fibers, tracheids, and vessel members is smaller than
in mature wood; (2) the vessel members and tracheids
are narrower in diameter; (3) the rays are narrower and
shorter in terms of cell numbers; (4) in taxa that have
complicated ray structure at maturity (e.g., Ephedra,
Suaeda, Quercus) the rays in juvenile wood are not
only smaller, but much less complicated in structure
(Lev-Yadun and Aloni, 1991a, 1993a, 1995). Description
of the anatomical characteristics of juvenile wood
with respect to identification of archaeological material
is anecdotal. It is probable that many archaeobotanists
are not aware of the dramatic effects of juvenility
on the structure of many woody plants. For instance,
in Melia azedarach, the rays in the juvenile wood
near the pith are 1–2 cells wide, while in mature wood
the rays are 5–6 cells wide, resulting in a completely
different anatomy (Lev-Yadun, unpublished). Using
anatomical keys constructed only for mature wood
without knowing this fact may result in a wrong identification
or no identification at all.
In all plants known to regularly produce secondary
wood (ferns, conifers, and dicotyledons) there
are changes in wood structure at branch junctions
(Lev-Yadun and Aloni, 1990a, 1991b; Rothwell and
146	 Israel Journal of Earth Sciences	Vol. 56, 2007
Lev-Yadun, 2005; Rothwell et al., 2008). The tissues
formed there have circular patterns because of changes
in the patterns of the polar auxin flow in the cambium
(Sachs and Cohen, 1982). For instance, Goren-Inbar
et al. (2002) found such spiral wood of Fraxinus sp. in
the wood remains of the 780,000-year-old wood from
Gesher Benot Ya’aqov.
In dry wood, and also in some samples of waterlogged
wood of mature trees, a specific wood character
is sometimes found. It is known as heartwood, to
distinguish it from sapwood. The heartwood, which is
usually darker than the sapwood (Hillis, 1987), always
occupies the inner (central) parts of the wood, while
the sapwood is found in the outer, more recent parts of
the wood. A well-known case is the Diospyros (ebony)
wood used in Africa for sculptures, in which the dark
heartwood is black, while the sapwood is yellowish. In
the Near East, a wood with dark (purple) heartwood is
Juniperus phoenicea; very clear differences between
its dark heartwood and light-colored sapwood were
found in the remains from Masada (Liphschitz and
Lev-Yadun, 1989). Similarly, the very dark (brown)
heartwood was obvious in Pinus nigra logs from
ancient houses in Safed (Israel), Cyprus, and Turkey
(e.g., Liphschitz et al., 1979a). With the increase in
girth and age of trunks, the proportion of heartwood
increases. In mature trees, over 100 years in age, most
of the trunk is usually composed of heartwood, while
the number of live growth rings that compose the
sapwood is usually 10–30 (Baillie, 1982). Heartwood
is less susceptible to attack by insects and fungi than
sapwood because the heartwood cells are dead (bearing
on ancient DNA studies because the dead cells
usually lost their DNA) and usually impregnated with
defensive secondary metabolites. Ancient carpenters
and builders knew this property, and in many cases
they got rid of the sapwood when handling timber.
Traumatic tissues
A common case of wood that differs from the normal
structure is traumatic wood. Traumas that directly
change the structure of wood or the balance of regulatory
factors that induce further variant anatomical
development may be of biotic or abiotic origins. Common
traumatic factors are fire, snow, wind storms,
landslides, floods, earthquakes, volcanic activity,
insect and large herbivore activity, and many types of
human activities including logging, pruning, pollarding,
resin tapping, chemical pollution (of soil, water,
and air), and in the last century, nuclear radiation as
well (e.g., Schmitt et al., 2000). All aspects of wood
anatomy may be changed and I will give several
common examples. Several monographs give a fuller
description of traumatic wood (Timell, 1986; Larson,
1994; Fink, 1999; Schweingruber et al., 2006). Traumatic
tissues in many conifers are characterized by
traumatic resin ducts. Cedrus libani produces rows of
resin ducts (Fahn et al., 1979), Pinus halepensis forms
additional resin ducts (Fahn and Zamski, 1970; LevYadun
andAloni, 1992; Lev-Yadun, 2000a), and Pinus
pinea also forms additional traumatic resin ducts (LevYadun,
2002). Similar traumatic changes in wood
anatomy were found in Israeli Ephedra (Lev-Yadun,
1994a) and various local native and feral dicotyledons,
e.g., Ailanthus altissima, Ficus sycomorus, Quercus
calliprinos, Q. ithaburensis, Rhamnus alaternus
(Lev-Yadun and Aloni, 1991b, 1992, 1993b; Lev-Yadun,
1994c, 2000ba). The many types of anatomical
changes in the wood induced by traumas may present
difficulties in identification of certain specimens of
archaeological wood remains. However, traumatic
tissues may be used with or without the combination
of dendrochronology to give information on various
environmental changes and human activities (Schweingruber
et al., 2006).
FUNGALAND INSECT DAMAGE AND
IDENTIFICATION
Dry, charred, and waterlogged wood all sometimes
show clear signs of damage by insects and fungi. Most
of the data about such agents in the Levantine archaeobotanical
record were published concerning insects in
cereal and legume grain (e.g., Kislev, 1991; Kislev
and Melamed, 2000; Kislev and Simchoni, 2007).
Fungal and insect damage and the identification of the
pathogenic species is a type of data that may enable the
reconstruction of seasonality, duration of use of certain
wooden objects, geographical origin, and technical
issues such as carpentry practices. For instance, clear
signs of ancient tunneling by insects were found in the
cedar wood from al-Aqsa and Omar mosques on the
Temple Mount. (Lev-Yadun et al., 1984; Lev-Yadun,
1992). Some of the Middle and Late Bronze Age
charred oak wood samples from Tel Nami published
by Lev-Yadun et al. (1996) were infested by fungal
hyphae, indicating that the wood was not fresh when
burnt. The fungal issue was not published, however,
because the fungus was not identified. This issue has
never been studied systematically in the region with
respect to wood remains.
	 S. Lev-Yadun. Archaeological wood remains	 147
SAMPLING WOOD FROM
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SEDIMENTS AND FINDS
There are several methods of extraction of wood
samples from archaeological sediments, buildings, or
items. Small fragments can be simply picked up during
excavations. Dry sieving of excavated sediments
is a very common method. Floatation in water tanks
is done by putting the sediment into a container filled
with water, a process that results in floating of light
plant material (both charred and non-charred). Certain
sediments, pottery, or clay objects may be impregnated
with resin and sectioned in situ. Large wooden beams
or installations may be sampled by sawing, coring
with a hollow borer, or by cutting off small samples.
Delicate items in museums and exhibitions cannot be
sampled in a way that will visually damage them, so
minute thin samples may be sliced off with a sharp
razor blade.
WOOD PRESERVATION
In many cases, some type of wood preservation or
specific treatment is required in order to allow the
technical handling needed for identification and conservation.
Some of the techniques have already been
described above briefly. However, archaeological
wood remains are regularly preserved for non-anatomical
studies or for exhibits. A good handbook that
describes various methods of preservation is Rowell
and Barbour (1990). In Israel, a boat from the Sea
of Galilee (Wachsmann, 1990) and the ship from
Ma’agan Mikhael (Linder and Kahanov, 2003; Kahanov
and Linder, 2004) are examples of archaeological
wood preservation.
COMMON PREPARATION AND
MICROSCOPIC METHODS USED FOR WOOD
IDENTIFICATION
Several common technical methods are used in studies
of wood identification according to its anatomical
features. The basic technique used for dry and waterlogged
wood is preparing fresh sections by hand
with a sharp razor blade. The sections may be studied
immediately, immersed in water, or stained with various
histological stains, and mounted permanently on
glass. Sections may be done with the aid of a sliding
microtome for dry wood (with softening when needed)
or with the aid of freezing for very soft waterlogged
material. Charcoals may be embedded in paraffin and
sectioned with a rotary microtome (Liphschitz, 1999).
Correction fluid may be used for better visualization of
vessel members (Angeles, 2001), and internal microcasting
by various elastomers may help in the study of
delicate anatomical components in both charred and
non-charred wood (André, 2005). Material in sediments
or pottery or other clay artifacts may be embedded
with suitable resins and sectioned in situ. Sections
from these various preparation types are studied under
regular light microscopes using bright-field or polarized
illumination. Charcoals may also be studied on
freshly broken surfaces or on surfaces prepared by a
sharp razor blade under epi-illumination that allows
viewing the cell types and their arrangements. Similarly,
such surfaces may be studied under the Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM), which allows for higher
magnifications of the cells and searching for unique
sub-cellular features such as fringed tori in Cedrus
libani and three-dimensional views of the tissues.
WOOD ANATOMICALATLASES AND
RELATED PUBLICATIONS FOR THE WOODY
FLORA OF THE LEVANT AND OTHER
RELEVANT REGIONS
Several atlases refer to the wood anatomy of species
that may be found in archaeological excavations in the
Levant in general and Israel in particular. The oldest
that describes the wood anatomy of various trees and
shrubs from the Mediterranean region, including European
species, is by Huber and Rouschal (1954). Classic
atlases of conifer and dicotyledon wood were published
by Greguss (1955, 1959, 1972) and include many species
from all over the world. A very useful anatomy
atlas of the wood of many trees and shrubs from Israel
was published by Fahn et al. (1986). Anatomical
descriptions of wood of desert trees and shrubs from
Saudi Arabia, some of which also grow in Israel, are
given in Jagiella and Kürschner (1987). Wood of wild
and domesticated trees from northern Iran is described
in an Iranian atlas (Pajouh and Schweingruber, 1988).
Some wild trees described in this atlas also grow in the
Levant, as do some domesticated fruit trees found in
archaeological excavations in many regions including
Israel. Schweingruber (1990), in a high-quality atlas,
describes the wood anatomy of hundreds of European
species. A small number of these species (e.g., olive,
Aleppo pine) grow in the Levant. Moreover, many European
species of trees that can be found in Levantine
archaeological contexts, e.g., in ships, imported timber,
or various worked wooden goods, are described in that
148	 Israel Journal of Earth Sciences	Vol. 56, 2007
atlas. The need for identification of European woods is
clearly demonstrated by the wood found in the 2,400year-old
Ma’agan Mikhael ship (Liphschitz, 2004).
Neumann et al. (2001) describe the wood anatomy
of many Saharan species, some of which grow in Israel
and in other parts of the Near East. Together, all
these atlases provide a basic description of the wood
anatomy of many wild and domesticated trees and
shrubs from the region. However, none of these gives
systematic data about juvenile and root wood, branch
junctions, or traumatic wood. The influence of relevant
growth conditions, such as forest thinning, flooding,
salinity, etc., on the wood anatomy of the species is
also not given. Moreover, since the critical information
of the distance of the samples from the pith is almost
never given, it is impossible to relate the anatomical
descriptions to size and age or to agricultural practices
such as irrigation.
A detailed wood-anatomical atlas of Levantine
trees and shrubs that provides the full descriptions of
all relevant anatomical variations as discussed above
and that includes both light and SEM pictures is certainly
needed. A critical type of figures needed is low
magnification pictures that allow a general view of the
growth rings or just large areas of the woody tissues.
All atlases suffer from the dominance of microscopic
figures, focusing on small areas of tissue. Since anatomical
variations within the wood are a basic and nondocumented
character, there are repeated difficulties in
using the atlases. In addition to atlases that describe
many species without dealing with variability within
taxa, there are some more specific publications, e.g.,
Grundwag and Werker (1976) for the genus Pistacia.
Such studies may give anatomical details not given in
atlases. Wood descriptions have an internationally accepted
glossary that may assist in using computerized
keys (IAWA, 1989, 2004).
LACK OF BARK DESCRIPTIONS
Wood in intact plants and in certain archaeological
specimens is associated with bark. Bark was used
in many cultures for food, tannery, as a source of
fibers for textiles and cordage, in medicine, housing,
boat construction, as writing material, dyes, source
of poison, condiments, corking, fuel, and making
of containers (Hill, 1952; Turner, 1988; Gottesfeld,
1992; Sandved et al., 1993; Zackrisson et al., 2000;
Sandgathe and Hayden, 2003). Thus, there are many
opportunities of introducing bark into the archaeological
record. Bark remains in considerable amounts
were found in the 780,000-year-old remnants from
Gesher Benot Ya’aqov (Goren-Inbar et al., 2002) and
in smaller amounts in Masada (Liphschitz et al., 1981;
Liphschitz and Lev-Yadun, 1989) and in the 2,400year-old
Ma’agan Mikhael ship (Werker, 2003). There
is no systematic description of the morphology and
anatomy of the barks of trees and shrubs from the Near
East and for most other woody floras of the world.
This lacuna in the anatomical studies of woody plants
results in difficulties in identification of bark remains.
Tropical regions are rich in tree species, and the principles
of bark anatomy in many tropical trees were
studied and described in detail (Roth, 1981). However,
even this detailed monograph cannot serve as a reference
for systematic bark identification. As for wood
anatomy, there are internationally accepted terms for
bark tissues (Trockenbrodt, 1990; Lev-Yadun, 1991).
Like in the secondary wood, there are significant
changes in bark morphology and anatomy with age
(Roth, 1981; Trockenbrodt, 1991; Lev-Yadun, 2001b)
that have been studied to a certain extent only for a
very small number of species in the Near East (e.g.,
Arzee et al., 1970, 1977; Arbel and Arzee, 1976; LevYadun
and Aloni, 1990b) or elsewhere. The dramatic
changes in the morphology and structure of tree barks
that occur with age, size, and according to growth conditions
further complicate bark identification.
WOOD FIBER IDENTIFICATION
There are several cases where wood fiber may be
critical for identification in archaeological contexts.
In very degraded wood, for instance because of fungal
activity, but also in charred material, especially in
hearths, and in waterlogged wood or plant material in
animal dung, wood structure may considerably disintegrate
and only fibers may remain. Plant material
was intentionally added to clay to produce pottery,
and various clay items, or even clay documents. This
added plant material was usually ground into small
tissue fragments before mixing with the clay. Such
fragmented materials are usually very hard to identify,
but certain taxa have unique features that may help in
identification. For several centuries, paper, commonly
made of wood fibers (Hill, 1952) has been part of the
archaeological record. Paper was used not only for
writing and printing, but also for construction, wrapping,
storage, etc. Because of the enormous economic
value of paper, there are handbooks for identification
of paper-making fibers including wood fibers (e.g.,
Ilvessalo-Pfäffli, 1995).
	 S. Lev-Yadun. Archaeological wood remains	 149
When the preservation of wood is bad, the fibers
may allow identifying the archaeological remains only
at a level of “conifer wood”, dicotyledon wood, and
the like (see Lev-Yadun, 2004).
STATISTICAL CHARACTERS OF WOOD
ANATOMY AND ARCHAEOLOGY
Growth conditions and agricultural practices can influence
the anatomical structure of wood. Measurements
of vessel sizes (maximal, minimal, and size class distribution),
their grouping, and other numerical factors
of wood anatomy may provide information about the
conditions under which a tree grew (Carlquist, 1975;
Baas et al., 1983; Carlquist and Hoekman, 1986; Baas
and Schweingruber, 1987; Tyree and Zimmermann,
2002; Wheeler et al., 2007). This principle was used to
study olive domestication, olive orchard management,
and related issues (e.g., Terral and Arnold-Simard,
1996; Terral and Mengüal, 1999; Terral, 2000; Terral
and Durand, 2006). The application of ecological
wood anatomy to archaeology is a great idea, opening
new opportunities in the study of ancient agricultural
and forestry practices. However, internal factors such
as the changes in vessel characters with age and distance
from the pith that were discussed above were not
considered in these pioneering studies. Moreover, in
some of the studies cited here and in others by the Terral
group only the statistical characters of the measurements,
without first presenting the real measurements,
were published, thus not allowing the reader to know
the actual values of cell sizes and to evaluate the meaning
of the finds. A critical type of missing information
is the distance of the samples from the pith. Without
knowing this distance the statistical comparisons are
meaningless or even misleading. This also does not
allow for comparative studies with material from other
sites. When these characters are measured on fragmented
charcoals from archaeological excavations,
usually the fragmentation does not allow measuring
the distance from the pith. Sometimes, if growth-rings
are seen, their curvature may allow an estimation of
the age or distance from the pith of the piece of charcoal.
Young material produced near the pith will be
characterized by strong growth-ring curvature, while a
tissue originating from the outer parts of a thick trunk
will have no curvature. Without knowing at least the
approximate position within the radius, fragmented
charcoals should not be used for statistical analyses.
I also stress that, as discussed above, wounding may
change the anatomical statistics (e.g., Lev-Yadun and
Aloni, 1991b, 1992, 1993b; Lev-Yadun, 1994c, 2000b,
2001a; Fink, 1999). This method does have very good
prospects of illuminating various questions related to
domestication, climatic changes, changes in agricultural
practices, identification of pruning, etc., if the
relevant endogenous anatomical changes are considered
in the process.
DENDROCHRONOLOGY
Dendrochronology (dating with tree-rings) is a very
important method of studying archaeological wood
remains in many regions of the world. Along with
the use of archaeological wood remains, dendrochronology
commonly makes use of live or dead trees
in forests or geological sediments. In general, many
dendrochronological studies are not archaeologically
oriented, but rather ecologically or climatologically.
Space limitations do not allow me to outline the biological
basis for dendrochronology. The same is true
for the achievements of dendrochronology in a global
or a Near Eastern perspective, and I will just mention
some studies briefly. As stated above, annual growthrings
are the biological foundation of dendrochronology
(Fritts, 1976; Baillie, 1982; Lev-Yadun, 1987;
Schweingruber, 1996). Dendrochronology, when there
is a reliable sequence of tree-rings, may help date
archaeological and other events with precision of a
year for millennia-old archaeological sites. Moreover,
under ecological conditions where tree-ring formation
has a precise seasonal rhythm (usually in the temperate
zone), events like building a house and changing its
structure may sometimes be dated to a specific month
even in prehistoric sites (Baillie, 1982; Schweingruber,
1996). In regions like Europe, where wood was a common
building material, and where because of climatic
and soil conditions archaeological wood remains suitable
for dendrochronology are very common, tree-ring
analysis is conducted in many archaeological studies.
In the Near East, with both mud-brick and stone
building traditions and many trees that do not produce
clear annual growth-rings, there are very limited opportunities
to use dendrochronology in archaeological
studies (e.g., Lev-Yadun et al., 1984; Lev-Yadun,
1992). However, in the Aegean and in Anatolia there
are many more well-preserved archaeological wood
remains with clear growth-rings that have the potential
for dating various events (e.g., Kuniholm et al., 1996;
Hughes et al., 2001; Manning et al., 2001; Griggs et
al., 2007). Climatological aspects of tree-rings of Near
Eastern old trees have also been given some attention
150	 Israel Journal of Earth Sciences	Vol. 56, 2007
(Fahn et al., 1963; Liphschitz et al., 1979a, 1979b,
1987a; Lev-Yadun et al., 1981; Yakir et al., 1996;
Touchan and Hughes, 1999; Touchan et al., 1999,
2003, 2005, 2007; Akkemik and Aras, 2005; Akkemik
et al., 2008). Several interesting dendrochronological
studies that also involved wood identification of timber
from 19th and 20th century ce historical buildings
were done to examine historical issues of the last 150
years by Nili Liphschitz and Gideon Biger, but because
of their late period and limitation of space they
will not be reviewed here.
STABLE AND RADIOACTIVE ISOTOPES
Several atoms common in wood (H, C, N, O) have
stable or radioactive isotopes that may give important
information about the ecological conditions under
which the plants grew or may be used for dating. Most
studies with stable isotopes of archaeological wood
were parts of tree-ring studies (e.g., Libby, 1983; Schweingruber,
1996; McCarroll and Loader, 2004). The
most important radioactive isotope in this respect is
14
C, commonly used for absolute dating (e.g., Boareto,
2008, this issue). The whole subject is outside the
scope of this review, and only one study (Yakir et al.,
1994) will be discussed in some detail in the following
section.
STRONTIUM AND THE ORIGIN OF
ARCHAEOLOGICAL WOOD
In certain studies the specific origin of archaeological
wood may have a critical bearing on the interpretation
of the data. For instance, the isotopic composition of
the Tamarix wood from the Roman siege rampart in
Masada clearly indicates that the trees grew under
more humid conditions than those prevailing today in
the vicinity of Masada (Yakir et al., 1994). If the wood
is local, a significant climatic change probably occurred
in the 1st century ce. If, however, the wood was
brought from a more humid region, no climatic change
occurred. Today there are two relevant available methods
of identifying the region of origin of the wood. The
first is to use DNA markers of current populations and
examine which is genetically more similar to the DNA
from the wood (will be discussed later). This method
brought dramatic results in understanding the origin of
individual founder crops of the Neolithic Revolution
(Heun et al., 1997; Ladizinsky, 1999; Özkan et al.,
2002, 2005; Salamini et al., 2002; Morrell and Clegg,
2007) and helped in the identification of the core area
of the origin of agriculture within the Fertile Crescent
in southeastern Turkey (Lev-Yadun et al., 2000) and
in understanding the spread of agriculture from the
core area (Abbo et al., 2006). The second method is
based on the fact that different areas and geologies
have a different level of strontium isotopes and the
ratio 87
Sr/86
Sr in the soil is consequently reflected in
the wood (Diamond, 2001). This method was used to
reveal the specific origin of timber out of several possible
ones in the ca. 1,000-year-old Anasazi buildings
in Chaco Canyon, New Mexico, USA (English et al.,
2001). One or both methods should be used to study
the origin of the Tamarix wood from the Roman siege
rampart in Masada to examine the possibility that the
proposed climatic change (Yakir et al., 1994) is real
or whether the wood was imported, as proposed on
historical grounds (Gichon, 2000). Studies of other important
archaeological timber such as the cedar, oak,
and cypress wood from Al-Aqsa and Omar mosques
on the Temple Mount (Lev-Yadun et al., 1984; LevYadun,
1992) or from other sites will also benefit from
isotopic identification the origin of the wood.
ANCIENT DNA
With the advent of DNA techniques in the last two
decades there are better prospects for using ancient
DNA. As mentioned above, most of the conifer wood
is composed of dead tracheids that have no DNA
and it may be extracted only from living ray cells
or axial resin ducts. Since in old trunks (the major
source of timber) of both conifers and dicotyledons
most of the wood is composed of dead heartwood,
there are difficulties in extracting DNA from wood.
The critical technique for studying ancient DNA is
called PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction), in which
minute amounts of DNA are multiplied many times in
the test-tube. This method is, however, very sensitive
to modern contaminations, and strict lab procedures
and controls are required to conduct reliable ancient
DNA studies (Pääbo et al., 2004). Plants have three
genomes in their live cells (nuclear, mitochondrial,
chloroplastidic) while animals have only two (nuclear,
mitochondrial). It is possible to study ancient DNA of
each of these genomes independently (Schlumbaum
et al., 2008). Concerning ancient DNA, the biggest
problem is its gradual degradation with time and its
quick destruction during burning and charring. An issue
of practical importance is the ability to screen for
archaeological samples in which the DNA is not fully
degraded without passing a large number of samples
	 S. Lev-Yadun. Archaeological wood remains	 151
through the tedious and expensive process. Elbaum et
al. (2006) found that in the woody tissues of olive pits,
DNA preservation is correlated with lignin polymer
preservation as measured by infrared (IR) spectroscopy.
It is therefore possible to screen archaeological
wood remains and select those samples with better
chances of having better-preserved DNA. In any case,
ancient DNA sequences can be amplified from wood
(Deguilloux et al., 2002, 2004). Ancient DNA studies
of archaeological plant remains in general, and of
wood in particular, in the Near East have received very
little attention. In the Near East, DNA has been cloned
to date from two samples of ancient Cedrus libani
wood, the first from the King Midas Tumulus (ca. 100
km west of Ankara, Turkey), and the second from the
Al-Aqsa Mosque (given to the authors by me) (Rogers
and Kaya, 2006). Most attention to archaeological
plant DNA has been given to domesticated plants,
but until the end of the year 2004, only ca. 40 papers
were published on ancient plant DNA (Gugerli et al.,
2005).
OTHER MOLECULAR STUDIES
DNA is not the only molecule that can be identified in
archaeological biological remains. In ancient animals
such as mastodon and Tyrannosaurus rex, proteins are
sometimes preserved. Their sequencing may provide
genetic data in cases where DNA was not preserved
(Asara et al., 2007a). Data obtained from such studies
have inherent problems due to technical difficulties
(Asara et al., 2007b). Proteins and other molecules
can be extracted from archaeological wood remains,
especially from dry and waterlogged material. This issue
has received very little attention in plants and will
probably advance faster in the future.
ARCHAEOLOGICAL WOOD REMAINS—
FORESTRY AND NATURE CONSERVATION
In Israel and other parts of the Mediterranean, human
activity resulted in dramatic degradation of the vegetation,
especially of trees (e.g., Mikesell, 1969; Zohary,
1973, 1983; Thirgood, 1981; Perlin, 1991; Lev-Yadun,
1997; Williams, 2003). In addition to the almost total
deforestation of the Land of Israel during the last
several millennia, several trees disappeared altogether
from certain regions or all of the country. Cupressus
sempervirens wood from ca. 15,000-year-old Natufian
layers in el-Wad Cave indicate that this tree was part
of the natural vegetation of Mount Carmel but disappeared
from that region (Lev-Yadun and WeinsteinEvron,
1993, 1994). Similarly, Juniperus phoenicea
was part of the natural vegetation in the mountains of
the central Negev Desert ca. 10,000 years ago (Baruch
and Goring-Morris, 1997). The knowledge of such
species that disappeared can and should be used while
planning nature protection, forestry projects, and reintroduction
of lost species (as indeed has been done
with birds and mammals).
The role of Pinus halepensis in forestry in Israel
in the last 85 years due to its ease of treatment and its
ability to grow under East Mediterranean conditions is
well known (Bonneh, 2000; Schiller, 2000). Liphschitz
et al. (1987/9), while citing selectively from the references,
proposed that P. halepensis was not native to
Israel and that it arrived in the land in the Late Bronze
Age, ca. 3,500 years ago. However, the finds of archaeological
wood remains published by Liphschitz (1986,
1986/7) indicated that the tree was native although not
a common tree in the landscape, except for specific
habitats and periods (Baruch, 1990; Weinstein-Evron
and Lev-Yadun, 2000; Lev-Yadun and Weinstein-Evron,
2002). The understanding of the native character
of P. halepensis has significant implications on decisions
about its role in forestry and nature protection
and concerning the proposals that all P. halepensis
wood remnants from archaeological excavations are
imported (see below on the wood trade).
DOMINANCE OF QUERCUS CALLIPRINOS
(KERMES OAK) IN THE CENTRAL COASTAL
PLAIN OF ISRAEL
The Central Coastal Plain of Israel was considered to be
a typical habitat of the deciduous Mt. Tabor oak (Quercus
ithaburensis) (Eig, 1934; Zohary, 1962). Analysis
of many archaeological wood samples from several
archaeological sites located in the heart of the territory
showed that the dominant tree there was the evergreen
kermes oak Q. calliprinos, followed by Pistacia palaestina
rather than Q. ithaburensis (Liphschitz et al.,
1987b). Such indicative data for a change in vegetation
and about the primary vegetation in a certain region
is one of the expected types of information emerging
from studying archaeological wood remains.
GEOBOTANY AND THE QUESTION OF
CLIMATIC CHANGES IN THE LIGHT OF
ANCIENT WOOD REMAINS
Finds that include wood remains in considerable numbers
enable us to take a close look back in time. We
152	 Israel Journal of Earth Sciences	Vol. 56, 2007
already have several “wooden” windows that allow us
to look deep into the Pleistocene in Israel: (1) the large
assembly of 780,000-year-old wood from the Acheulian
site of Gesher Benot Ya’aqov (Goren-Inbar et al.,
2002; Werker, 2006); (2) the 30,000–60,000-year-old
Mousterian wood remains from Kebara cave (Baruch
et al., 1992); (3) the 23,000-year-old wood from Ohalo
II (Nadel and Werker, 1999; Nadel et al., 2006); and
(4) the 15,000-year-old Natufian wood remains from
el-Wad Cave (Lev-Yadun and Weinstein-Evron, 1994).
All these significant finds of wood remains clearly
indicate that in the Mediterranean district of Israel
the vegetation in the vicinity of the sites was almost
similar to the current vegetation. A similar conclusion
was reached when Holocene wood remains from dozens
of archaeological excavations all over Israel were
analyzed (Liphschitz, 1986). This general conclusion,
about a Mediterranean climate prevailing in the region
for the last 800,000 years at least, does not exclude
various short or long climatic fluctuations, but points
to the fact that the variations were still within the Mediterranean
scope. Palynological studies documenting
the vegetation in the last several hundreds of thousands
of years, which may be, first, more continuous,
and, second, more sensitive to the climatic fluctuations
than studies of wood remains, also indicate that the
core of the Mediterranean zone in Israel always had
a Mediterranean climate (e.g., Horowitz, 1979, 1992;
Weinstein-Evron, 1983; Baruch and Bottema, 1999).
This view is further supported by the fact that even a
broad dramatic boreal event like the Younger Dryas is
not to be taken as a significal change (if at all) in local
palynological sequences (Bottema, 1995; Lev-Yadun
and Weinstein-Evron, 2005). In the second half of
the Holocene, human activity probably influenced the
vegetation much more than climatic fluctuations (see
Baruch, 1986). Such changes in plant cover must have
influenced geomorphological and hydrological balances,
as happened in many other parts of the world
(Thirgood, 1981; Nir, 1983; Perlin, 1991; Williams,
2003; Diamond, 2005). This very well-known aspect
has not usually been taken into consideration in palaeoecological
studies in our region, especially those
done by non-ecologists.
SOCIAL STATUS IN MASADA: THE KING’S
PALACE VERSUS THE ROMAN SIEGE
RAMPART
Many types of archaeological finds indicate social status
but are outside the scope of this review. Concerning
wood, Masada provides an excellent example of how
differences in social status are reflected in the wood
types. The first detailed study of wood in Masada was
of the wood used by the Roman army to construct the
siege rampart (Liphschitz et al., 1981). The wood used
by the soldiers was dominated by Tamarix, a tree that
grows in more humid habitats (wadis and depressions
that enjoy runoff water) and oases within the desert.
It is not a high-quality timber and the logs were not
worked, but were cut by several blows by a sharp
implement and used with no further manipulation.
The picture emerging from the wood found in King
Herod’s palace and the other part of the royal site of
Masada is of the importing of timber such as Cedrus
libani and Juniperus phoenicea and delicate items
made of oak wood and other non-desert trees (Liphschitz
and Lev-Yadun, 1989). The social and economic
gap between soldiers and royalty is clearly indicated
by the wood finds.
WOOD AS AN INDICATION OF ANCIENT
TRADE
We assume that a significant long-distance trade in
wood did not exist in pre-agricultural periods. This is
not only because of cultural/technological issues, but
also because considerable parts of the Mediterranean
and humid regions of the land were forested, and in
arid regions groups of trees still existed in wadis and
depressions that accumulated runoff water. If some
small items were traded, the anecdotal preservation of
wood from such early periods makes the prospects of
identifying trade in wooden objects extremely low. In
the last 5,500 years (since the Early Bronze Age I), the
critical species used to identify international trade of
timber or items made of wood is Cedrus libani. This
tree grew in Lebanon, Cyprus, and Turkey (Mikesell,
1969; Meheshwari and Biswas, 1970) and its occurrence
in Holocene archaeological contexts in ancient
Israel is an indication of trade. Clear evidence for
trade of wood in the archaeology of Israel emerges in
the Early Bronze Age. Gophna and Liphschitz (1996)
found Cedrus libani wood in Early Bronze Age I Ashkelon.
Liphschitz (1998) reviewed the archaeological
finds of wooden houshold objects from Israel and
gives clear indications of import of various wooden
items made of Buxus sempervirens that never grew in
Israel. Altogether, there is clear direct evidence in the
archaeobotanical record of Israel of international trade
in timber and wooden items. This issue becomes very
complicated when the indigenous character of several
	 S. Lev-Yadun. Archaeological wood remains	 153
tree species is not recognized. For instance because
Pinus halepensis (Liphschitz et al., 1987/9) and Cupressus
sempervirens (Liphschitz and Biger, 1989,
1995) were not considered to be native to Israel, in
spite of clear evidence of their being ancient elements
of the flora (e.g., Lev-Yadun and Weinstein-Evron,
1993, 1994; Weinstein-Evron and Lev-Yadun, 2000),
all their remains in the archaeological record were
considered import (Liphschitz and Biger, 1989, 1995).
There is no reason to assume that high-quality timber
of certain trees that have local populations could not,
in addition to local timber supply, have been traded
from other regions or countries. Sites that were ports
or close to ports along the coast (e.g., Votruba, 2007),
or important sites such as palaces and temples were
more likely to get imported timber of species such as
Cupressus sempervirens that grew both in Israel and
in other Mediterranean countries such as Lebanon
(see Lev-Yadun et al., 1984, 1996), but this does not
automatically turn all finds of this species found inland
to imported items as proposed (Liphschitz and Biger,
1989, 1995). Clear cases of timber or wooden object
trade within ancient Israel are the finds of wood of
various conifers in archaeological sites in the Negev,
where they could not grow (see Liphschitz and Biger,
1989, 1995; Liphschitz and Lev-Yadun, 1989; LevYadun
et al., 1995; Liphschitz, 1996).
WOOD AS REFLECTING HORTICULTURE
Orchards became a significant component of the
agricultural system in the Chalcolithic (Zohary and
Spiegel-Roy, 1975; Zohary and Hopf, 2000). Orchard
trees grow and after some years they must be pruned.
Old orchards suffer from considerable reduction in
productivity and should be cut to the base and regrafted
or re-planted. Some of the orchard tree species
produce high-quality wood that can be used for
specific purposes, and indeed their wood became part
of the archaeological record. Olive wood, being very
hard, is suitable for producing delicate items. In addition,
its pleasant burning odor made it a desired wood
for cooking and heating. The broad scale of olive oil
production and the frequent need to prune olive trees
to keep them productive and not too tall so as to facilitate
olive harvesting is reflected in the frequency
of olive wood remains in the archaeological record
(e.g., Liphschitz et al., 1991). Ficus sycomorus, which
produces edible figs, was also used as a source for
timber (Feliks, 1968; Galil, 1968) and this is reflected
in its occurrence in the archaeological finds (e.g.,
Werker, 1994). The wood of several additional fruit
trees is good for delicate woodworking, as indicated
by the species used to manufacture furniture and other
wooden items in Jericho (Cartwright, 2005).
WOOD TECHNOLOGY
Wood, being perishable, is generally under-represented
in the archaeological record compared to stone
artifacts. Analysis of plant remains on stone tools
indicated woodworking by hominids ca. 2.0 million
years ago (Dominguez-Rodrigo et al., 2001). Sometimes,
because of specific site taphonomical conditions,
wood is preserved for hundreds of thousands of
years. The 780,000-year-old Acheulian Gesher Benot
Ya’aqov wood (Goren-Inbar et al., 2002; Werker,
2006) is such a rare case. Several such unique finds
indicate that delicate woodworking is a very old technique
even predating our species. Among the more
than 1,000 wood finds from Gesher Benot Ya’aqov, a
polished Salix sp. wooden plank was found (Belitzky
et al., 1991). Thieme (1997) found 400,000-year-old
Lower Palaeolithic hunting spears in Schöningen,
Germany. Again, this rare find indicates technological
ability at that early period. Wooden objects from
Ohalo II (23,000 cal BP), Jordan Valley, Israel, also
indicate technical abilities in woodworking (Nadel et
al., 2006).
Special opportunities to study woodworking
techniques and carpentry are the 2,400-year-old waterlogged
ship from Ma’agan Mikhael (Linder and
Kahanov, 2003; Kahanov and Linder, 2004) and the
2,000-year-old boat from the Sea of Galilee (Wachsmann,
1990). The excellent preservation under the anaerobic
conditions of the underwater sediments made it
possible to evaluate the very high level of woodworking
at that time (Steffy, 1990; Kahanov, 2003; Udell,
2003; Hillman and Liphschitz, 2004; Mor, 2004; Sitry,
2004). It should be noted that chemical changes such
as sulfur and iron enrichment may occur under anaerobic
conditions, especially in the outer parts of wood
(Wetherall et al., 2008), which may sometimes appear
as a chemical treatment of the wood.
While all previous cases of woodworking discussed
above were of materials preserved as waterlogged, the
contrasting conditions of the dry desert also provided
well-preserved delicate wooden objects that enabled
studying ancient technologies. The Neolithic Nahal
Hemar cave, because of its very dry conditions, provided
well-preserved delicate items made of wood
(Bar-Yosef, 1985). The wood analysis (Werker, 1988)
154	 Israel Journal of Earth Sciences	Vol. 56, 2007
showed that the finds included items made of conifer
wood (Juniperus), desert trees (Tamarix, Pistacia),
a desert shrub (Retama raetam), annuals (Salsola),
and beads made of monocotyledon wood (it may be
Phoenix or Hyphaene). The Chalcolithic wood finds
from the Cave of the Warrior (west of Jericho) allowed
a good look into various woodworking techniques
(McEwen, 1998; Schick, 1998; Sitry, 1998). Some of
these well-preserved wooden objects were painted or
glued, and the excellent preservation enabled the study
of these woodworking-related techniques (Nissenbaum,
1998; Segal, 1998). Botanical finds in the tombs
of the Second Temple period at ‘En Gedi allowed the
understanding of both woodworking techniques for
coffins and the types of wood used (Hadas, 1994).
The wood remains from Masada were also indicative
of wood technology, as many delicate small wooden
items and furniture parts were found in the Palace and
other buildings (Liphschitz and Lev-Yadun, 1989).
The wooden beams used by the Roman soldiers to
construct the siege rampart in Masada were cut with a
single blow or a small number of blows and were not
sawed (Liphschitz et al., 1981). For detailed discussions
on ancient wood technology in our region see
Sitry (2006).
THE USE OF FIRE
Several types of archaeological wood remains indicate
specific cases of the use of fire. The first and the most
critical is the find of 780,000-year-old charcoals (along
with burnt stones) from Gesher Benot Ya’aqov, indicating
very early use of fire (Goren-Inbar et al., 2004;
Alperson-Afil et al., 2007). Evidence of massive use of
firewood exists in Kebara and Hayonim caves through
thick phytolith layers and other chemical indications
for the use of fire (Schiegl et al., 1994, 1996; Albert et
al., 2000). Wood charcoals give higher temperatures
when burnt than dry wood, especially if air is pumped
into the fire to increase oxygen supply. Charcoals were
used for metal-working (Perlin, 1991; Engel, 1993), a
critical technology for ancient societies. Hearths leave
indicative chemical “fireprints” in the sediments that
sometimes may be indicative of the type of wood used
for fire (Pierce et al., 1998).
A very special and rare archaeological find are
wooden implements used to light fire. Sitry (2006),
who reviewed such finds in Israel, gave details of three
such items (one Chalcolithic from Murabba’at Cave,
an Iron Age II one from Kuntillet ‘Ajrud, and a Roman
one from ‘En Rahel). These items (made of non-burnt
poplar wood) had several holes with charring marks in
them that were the outcome of high-speed turning of a
piece of wood to cause friction and heating.
The use of fire as evident from wood charcoal analysis
is related not only to well-defined archaeological
sites, but also to forest clearing, ecosystem manipulation
for increased productivity, accidental landscape
fires, and arson as part of military or hostile actions
(Clark et al., 1989; Perlin, 1991; Bowman, 1998; Kershaw
et al., 2002; Williams, 2003; Diamond, 2005).
Charcoals in forest floor or in nearby lake sediments
may represent natural forest fires caused by lightning
(Moore, 2000; Scott, 2000), or be the remnants of
charcoal or tar preparation, both critical materials
for ship-building and metal-working (Perlin, 1991;
Outland, 2004) or else may reflect slash-and-burn
agriculture (Diamond, 2005). It is not always easy or
possible to distinguish between natural and man-made
fires outside well-defined archaeological sites (Moore,
2000; Parshall and Foster, 2002).
A very important issue for prehistorians and to a
lesser extent to other archaeologists is the reconstruction
of the patterns of different activities within the
area of archaeological sites. The spatial distribution
of charcoal, phytoliths, burnt stones and bones, and
evidence of past heating measured by TL (thermo
luminescence) help in such reconstructions (Balme
and Beck, 2002; Goren-Inbar et al., 2004; Karkanas
et al., 2007).
WOOD CHARCOALS AND GUNPOWDER
A critical technology that enormously influenced
human history in the last ca. 1,100 years is the invention
of explosives, and the introduction of firearms
to Europe and their gradual development (Gray et
al., 1982; Diamond, 1997). The basis for this is the
production of gunpowder, a product in which powder
made of ground wood charcoals is one of the major
constituents. There are differences among various tree
species in the value of their charcoals for production of
gunpowder (Gray et al., 1982). In Israel and other parts
of the Near East the Mamluks, who ruled the region
more than 500 years ago, began the period of the use of
gunpowder (Partington, 1999). Gunpowder was used
not only for weapons, but also in stone quarries for
building. Home-made or workshop-made traditional
(low quality) gunpowder was produced in the Judea
region till about 30 years ago (Avitsur, 1976). The preferred
wood charcoal for gunpowder production in the
land of Israel was poplar (Populus), second choice was
	 S. Lev-Yadun. Archaeological wood remains	 155
plane tree (Platanus), and other types of wood, and the
least preferred was wood of the thorny shrub prickly
burnet (Sarcopoterium spinosum) (Avitsur, 1976). To
the best of my knowledge, ancient gunpowder was
never studied in the archaeological record of Israel.
Wood fragments from explosives can be used to reveal
their geographical origin in certain criminal investigations
(Dickison, 2000), indicating the possibility to
study the origin of ancient gunpowder when found.
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, during the last several decades, because of the
accumulating data from studying both archaeological
wood remains and related palaeoecological studies, we
are able to better understand the past vegetation and
ecology of the region, the level and role of human impact
on the environment, trade relations, human technology,
and the establishment of agriculture in general
and horticulture in particular. While for the major field
crops of Near Eastern agriculture modern genetics dramatically
solved various burning questions in the last
decade, these modern tools have still had no significant
impact where woody plants are concerned. I hope to
see parallel progress in the next decade or two.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I thank Mina Evron, Susan Lev-Yadun, Avi Gopher,
and an anonymous reviewer for their comments on the
manuscript.
REFERENCES
Abbo, S., Gopher, A., Peleg, Z., Saranga, Y., Fahima, T.,
Salamini, F., Lev-Yadun, S. 2006. The ripples of “the big
(agricultural) bang”: the spread of early wheat cultivation.
Genome 49: 861–863.
Akkemik, Ü., Aras, A. 2005. Reconstruction (1689–1994
ad) of April–August precipitation in the southern part of
central Turkey. Int. J. Climatol. 25: 537–548.
Akkemik, Ü., D’Arrigo, R., Cherubini, P., Köse, N., Jacoby,
G.C. 2008. Tree-ring reconstructions of precipitation and
streamflow for north-western Turkey. Int. J. Climatol.
28: 173–183.
Albert, R.M., Weiner, S., Bar-Yosef, O., Meignen, L. 2000.
Phytoliths in the Middle Palaeolithic deposits of Kebara
Cave, Mt Carmel, Israel: study of the plant materials
used for fuel and other purposes. J. Archaeol. Sci. 27:
931–947.
Albert, R.M., Shahack-Gross, R., Cabanes, D., Gilboa, A.,
Lev-Yadun, S., Portillo, M., Sharon, I., Boaretto, E.,
Weiner, S. 2008. Phytolith-rich layers from the Late
Bronze and Iron Ages at Tel Dor (Israel): mode of formation
and archaeological significance. J. Archaeol. Sci.
35: 57–75.
Alperson-Afil, N., Richter, D., Goren-Inbar, N. 2007. Phantom
hearths and the use of fire at Gesher Benot Ya’aqov,
Israel. PaleoAnthropology 2007: 1–15.
André, J.-P. 2005. Vascular organization of angiosperms.
A new vision. Science Publishers, Inc., Enfield, New
Hampshire.
Angeles, G. 2001. New techniques for the anatomical study
of charcoalified wood. IAWA J. 22: 245–254.
Arbel, E., Arzee, T. 1976. Development of peripheral periderm
from cork strips in Ceratonia siliqua. Can. J. For.
Res. 6: 425–428.
Arzee, T., Waisel, Y., Liphschitz, N. 1970. Periderm development
and phellogen activity in the shoots of Acacia
raddiana Savi. New Phytol. 69: 395–398.
Arzee, T., Arbel, E., Cohen, L. 1977. Ontogeny of periderm
and phellogen activity in Ceratonia siliqua L. Bot. Gaz.
138: 329–333.
Asara, J.M., Schweitzer, M.H., Freimark, L.M., Phillips, M.,
Cantley, L.C. 2007a. Protein sequences from Mastodon
and Tyrannosaurus rex revealed by mass spectrometry.
Science 316: 280–285.
Asara, J.M., Garavelli, J.S., Slatter, D.A., Schweitzer, M.H.,
Freimark, L.M., Phillips, M., Cantley, L.C. 2007b. Interpreting
sequences from mastodon and T. rex. Science
317: 1324–1325.
Avitsur, S. 1976. Man and his work. Historical atlas of tools
& workshops in the Holy Land. Carta, Jerusalem (in
Hebrew).
Baas, P., Schweingruber, F.H. 1987. Ecological trends in
the wood anatomy of trees, shrubs and climbers from
Europe. IAWA Bull. n.s. 8: 245–274.
Baas, P., Werker, E., Fahn, A. 1983. Some ecological trends
in vessel characters. IAWA Bull. n.s. 4: 141–159.
Baillie, M.G.L. 1982. Tree-ring dating and archaeology.
University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Balme, J., Beck, W.E. 2002. Starch and charcoal: useful
measures of activity areas in archaeological rockshelters.
J. Archaeol. Sci. 29: 157–166.
Baruch, U. 1986. The late Holocene vegetational history
of Lake Kinneret (Sea of Galilee), Israel. Paléorient 12:
37–48.
Baruch, U. 1990. Palynological evidence of human impact
on the vegetation as recorded in Late Holocene lake sediments
in Israel. In: Bottema, S., Entjes-Nieborg, G., van
Zeist, W., eds. Man’s role in the shaping of the Eastern
Mediterranean landscape. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp.
283–293.
Baruch, U., Bottema, S. 1999. A new pollen diagram from
lake Hula. In: Kawanabe, H., Coulter, G.W., Roosevelt,
A.C., eds. Ancient lakes: their cultural and biological
diversity. Kenobi Productions, Ghent, pp. 75–86.
Baruch, U., Goring-Morris, N. 1997. The arboreal vegeta-
156	 Israel Journal of Earth Sciences	Vol. 56, 2007
tion of the Central Negev Highlands, at the end of the
Pleistocene: evidence from archaeological charred wood
remains. Veg. Hist. Archaeobot. 6: 249–259.
Baruch, U., Werker, E., Bar-Yosef, O. 1992. Charred wood
remains from Kebara cave, Israel: preliminary results.
Bull. Soc. Bot. Fr. Actual. Bot. 139: 531–538.
Bar-Yosef, O. 1985. A cave in the desert: Nahal Hemar
9,000-year-old-finds. The Israel Museum, Jerusalem.
Belitzky, S., Goren-Inbar, N., Werker, E. 1991. A Middle
Pleistocene wooden plank with man-made polish. J. Human
Evol. 20: 349–353.
Björdal, C.G., Nilsson, T. 2008. Reburial of shipwrecks in
marine sediments: a long-term study on wood degradation.
J. Archaeol. Sci. 35: 862–872.
Blanchette, R.A. 2000. A review of microbial deterioration
found in archaeological wood from different environments.
Int. Biodeterior. Biodegrad. 46: 189–204.
Boareto, E. 2007. Determining the chronology of an archaeological
site using radiocarbon: minimizing uncertainty.
Isr. J. Earth Sci. 56: 207–216, this issue.
Bonneh, O. 2000. Management of planted pine forests in
Israel: past, present and future. In: Ne’eman, G., Trabaud,
L., eds. Ecology, biogeography and management of
Pinus halepensis and Pinus brutia forest ecosystems in
the Mediterranean Basin. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden,
pp. 377–390.
Bottema, S. 1995. The Younger Dryas in the eastern Mediterranean.
Quaternary Sci. Rev. 14: 883–892.
Bowman, D.M.J.S. 1998. The impact of Aboriginal landscape
burning on the Australian biota. New Phytol. 140:
385–410.
Canti, M.G. 2003. Aspects of the chemical and microscopic
characteristics of plant ashes found in archaeological
soils. Catena 54: 339–361.
Carlquist, S. 1975. Ecological strategies of xylem evolution.
University of California Press, Berkeley.
Carlquist, S., Hoekman, D.A. 1986. Ecological wood
anatomy of the woody southern California flora. IAWA
Bull. n.s. 6: 319–347.
Cartwright, C. 2005. The Bronze Age wooden tomb furniture
from Jericho: the microscopical reconstruction of a
distinctive carpentry tradition. P.E.Q. 137: 99–138.
Clark, J.S., Merkt, J., Müller, H. 1989. Post-glacial fire, vegetation,
and human history on the northern alpine forelands,
south-western Germany. J. Ecol. 77: 897–925.
Cohen-Ofri, I., Weiner, L., Boaretto, E., Mintz, G., Weiner,
S. 2006. Modern and fossil charcoal: aspects of structure
and diagenesis. J. Archaeol. Sci. 33: 428–439.
Deguilloux, M.-F., Pemonge, M.-H., Petit, R.J. 2002. Novel
perspectives in wood certification and forensics: dry
wood as a source of DNA. Proc. R. Soc. London B. 269:
1039–1046.
Deguilloux, M.-F., Pemonge, M.-H., Petit, R.J. 2004.
DNA-based control of oak wood geographic origin in
the context of the cooperage industry. Ann. For. Sci. 61:
97–104.
Diamond, J. 1997. Guns, germs, and steel. W. W. Norton &
Company, New York.
Diamond, J. 2001. Tree trail to Chaco Canyon. Nature 413:
687–690.
Diamond, J. 2005. Collapse. How societies choose to fail or
succeed. Viking, New York.
Dickison, W.C. 2000. Integrative plant anatomy. Harcourt
Academic Press, San Diego.
Dominguez-Rodrigo, M., Serrallonga, J., Juan-Tresserras, J.,
Alcala, L., Luque, L. 2001. Woodworking activities by
early humans: a plant residue analysis on both Acheulian
stone tools from Peninj (Tanzania). J. Human Evol. 40:
289–299.
Eig, A. 1934. A historical-phytosociological essay on Palestinian
forests of Quercusaegilops L. ssp. ithaburensis
(Desc.) in past and present. Beih. Bot. Centralbl. 51:
225–272.
Elbaum, R., Melamed-Bessudo, C., Boaretto, E., Galili, E.,
Lev-Yadun, S., Levy, A.A., Weiner, S. 2006. Ancient
olive DNA in pits: preservation, amplification and sequence
analysis. J. Archaeol. Sci. 33: 77–88.
Engel, T. 1993. Charcoal remains from an Iron Age copper
smelting slag heap at Feinan, Wadi Arabah (Jordan).
Veget. Hist. Archaeobot. 2: 205–211.
English, N.B., Betancourt, J.L., Dean, J.S., Quade, J. 2001.
Strontium isotopes reveal distant sources of architectural
timber in Chaco Canyon, New Mexico. Proc. Natl. Acad.
Sci., USA 98: 11891–11896.
Fahn, A. 1979. Secretory tissues in plants. Academic Press,
London.
Fahn, A. 1990. Plant anatomy. 4th ed. Pergamon Press,
Oxford.
Fahn, A., Zamski, E. 1970. The influence of pressure, wind,
wounding and growthsubstances on the rate of resin
duct formation in Pinus halepensis wood. Isr. J. Bot. 19:
429–446.
Fahn, A., Wachs, N., Ginzburg, C. 1963. Dendrochronological
studies in the Negev. I.E.J. 13: 291–299.
Fahn, A., Werker, E., Ben-Tzur, P. 1979. Seasonal effects
of wounding and growth substances on development of
traumatic resin ducts in Cedrus libani. New Phytol. 82:
537–544.
Fahn, A., Werker, E., Baas, P. 1986. Wood anatomy and
identification of trees and shrubs from Israel and adjacent
regions. The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities,
Jerusalem.
Feinbrun-Dothan, N., Danin, A. 1991. Analytical flora of
Eretz-Israel. Cana Publishing House Ltd., Jerusalem (in
Hebrew).
Feliks, J. 1968. Plant world of the Bible. Massada Ltd., Ramat-Gan
(in Hebrew).
Fink, S. 1999. Pathological and regenerative plant anatomy.
Gebrüder Borntraeger, Berlin.
Franceschi, V.R., Horner, H.T.Jr. 1980. Calcium oxalate
crystals in plants. Bot. Rev. 46: 361–427.
Franceschi, V.R., Nakata, P.A. 2005. Calcium oxalate in
	 S. Lev-Yadun. Archaeological wood remains	 157
plants: formation and function. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol.
56: 41–71.
Friedrich, W.L., Kromer, B., Friedrich, M., Heinemeier, J.,
Pfeiffer, T., Talamo, S. 2006. Santorini eruption radiocarbon
dated to 1627–1600 b.c. Science 312: 548.
Fritts, H.C. 1976. Tree rings and climate. Academic Press,
London.
Galil, J. 1968. An ancient technique for ripening sycomore
fruit in east-Mediterranean countries. Econ. Bot. 22:
178–190.
Gichon, M. 2000. The siege of Masada. Les Légiones
de Rome sous le Haut-Empire. Collection du Centre
d’Études Romaines et Gallo-Romaines Nouvelle série
20: 541–554.
Gifford, E.M., Foster, A.S. 1989. Morphology and evolution
of vascular plants. 3rd. ed. W.H. Freeman and Company,
New York.
Goldberg, P., Lev-Yadun, S., Bar-Yosef., O. 1994. Petrographic
thin sections of archaeological sediments: a new
method for palaeobotanical studies. Geoarchaeology 9:
243–257.
Gophna, R., Liphschitz, N. 1996. The Ashkelon trough
settlements in the Early Bronze Age I: new evidence of
maritime trade. Tel Aviv 23: 143–153.
Goren-Inbar, N., Werker, E., Feibel, C.S., 2002. The Acheulian
site of Gesher Benot Ya’aqov, Israel. I. The Wood
Assemblage. Oxbow Books, Oxford.
Goren-Inbar, N., Alperson, N., Kislev, M.E., Simchoni, O.,
Melamed, Y., Ben-Nun, A., Werker, E. 2004. Evidence of
hominin control of fire at Gesher Benot Ya’aqov, Israel.
Science 304: 725–727.
Gottesfeld, L.M.J. 1992. The importance of bark products in
the aboriginal economies of northwestern British Columbia,
Canada. Econ. Bot. 46: 148–157.
Gray, E., Marsh, H., McLaren, M. 1982. A short history of
gunpowder and the role of charcoal in its manufacture. J.
Mater. Sci. 17: 3385–3400.
Greguss, P. 1955. Xylotomische Bestimmung der heute
lebenden Gymnospermen. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest
(in German).
Greguss, P. 1959. Holzanatomie der Europäischen Laubhölzer
und Sträucher. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest (in
German).
Greguss, P. 1972. Xylotomy of the living conifers. Akadémiai
Kiadó, Budapest.
Griggs, C., DeGaetano, A., Kuniholm, P., Newton, M. 2007.
A regional high-frequency reconstruction of May-June
precipitation in the north Aegean from oak tree rings, a.d.
1089–1989. Int. J. Climatol. 27: 1075–1089.
Grundwag, M., Werker, E. 1976. Comparative wood anatomy
as an aid to identification of Pistacia L. species. Isr.
J. Bot. 25: 152–167.
Gugerli, F., Parducci, L., Petit, R.J. 2005. Ancient plant
DNA: review and prospects. New Phytol. 166: 409–418.
Gupta, S., Kulshreshta, S.P., Chauhan, L. 2001. Wood
anatomy information system (WAIS) a computer-assisted
wood identification package from India. IAWA J.
22: 430–431.
Hadas, G. 1994. Nine tombs of the Second Temple period at
“En Gedi. ‘Atiqot 14: 1–65, 1*–8* (in Hebrew, English
summary*).
Heun, M., Schäfer-Pregl, R., Klawan, D., Castagna, R., Accerbi,
M., Borghi, B., Salamini, F. 1997. Site of einkorn
wheat domestication identified by DNA fingerprinting.
Science 278: 1312–1314.
Hill, A.F. 1952. Economic botany. 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill
Book Company, Inc., New York.
Hillis, W.E. 1987. Heartwood and tree exudates. SpringerVerlag,
Berlin.
Hillman, A., Liphschitz, N. 2004. The wood. In: Kahanov,
Y., Linder, E., eds. The Ma’agan Mikhael ship. The recovery
of a 2400-year-old merchantman. Final Report
Vol. II. Israel Exploration Society and University of
Haifa, Jerusalem, pp. 145–155.
Horowitz, A. 1979. The Quaternary of Israel. Academic
Press, New York.
Horowitz, A. 1992. Palynology of arid lands. Elsevier, Am-
sterdam.
Huber, B., Rouschal, C. 1954. Mikrophotographischer Atlas
Mediterraner Hölzer. Fritz Haller Verlag, Berlin (in Ger-
man).
Hughes, M.K., Kuniholm, P.I., Eischeid, J.K., Garfin, G.,
Griggs, C.B., Latini, C. 2001. Aegean tree-ring signature
years explained. Tree-Ring Res. 57: 67-73.
IAWA, 1989. IAWA list of microscopic features for hardwood
identification. IAWA Bull. n.s. 10: 219–332.
IAWA, 2004. IAWA list of microscopic features for softwood
identification. IAWA J. 25: 1–70.
Ilvessalo-Pfäffli, M.-S. 1995. Fiber atlas. Identification of
papermaking fibers. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Jagiella, C., Kürschner, H. 1987.Atlas der Hölzer SaudiArabiens.
Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag, Wiesbaden.
Kahanov, Y. 2003. The hull. In: Linder, E., Kahanov, Y., eds.
The Ma’agan Mikhael ship. The recovery of a 2400-yearold
merchantman. Final Report Vol. I. Israel Exploration
Society and University of Haifa, Jerusalem, pp. 53-129.
Kahanov, Y., Linder, E. 2004. The Ma’agan Mikhael ship.
The recovery of a 2400-year-old merchantman. Final
Report Vol. II. Israel Exploration Society and University
of Haifa, Jerusalem.
Karkanas, P., Shahack-Gross, R., Ayalon, A., Bar-Matthews,
M., Barkai, R., Frumkin, A., Gopher, A., Stiner, M.C.
2007. Evidence for habitual use of fire at the end of the
Lower Paleolithic: Site-formation processes at Qesem
Cave, Israel. J. Human Evol. 53: 197–212.
Kershaw, A.P., Clark, J.S., Gill, A.M., D’costa, D.M. 2002.
A history of fire in Australia. In: Bradstock, R.A., Williams,
J.E., Gill, M.A., eds. Flammable Australia. The
fire regimes and biodiversity of a continent, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, pp. 1–25.
Kislev, M.E. 1991. Archaeobotany and storage archaeoentomology.
In: Renfrew, J.M., ed. New light on early
158	 Israel Journal of Earth Sciences	Vol. 56, 2007
farming: recent developments in palaeoethnobotany.
Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, pp. 121–136.
Kislev, M.E., Melamed, Y. 2000. Ancient infested wheat and
horsebean from Horbat Rosh Zayit. In: Gal, Z., Alexandre,
Y., eds. Horbat Rosh Zayit. An Iron Age storage fort
and village. IAA Reports, no 8. Israel Antiquities Authority,
Jerusalem, pp. 206–220.
Kislev, M., Simchoni, O. 2007. Hygiene and insect damage
of crops and foods at Masada. In: Masada VIII. The
Yigael Yadin Excavations 1963-1965 final reports. Israel
Exploration Society and The Hebrew University of Jerusalem,
Jerusalem, pp. 133–170.
Kuniholm, P.I., Kromer, B., Manning, S.W., Newton, M.,
Latini, C.E., Bruce, M.J. 1996. Anatolian tree rings and
the absolute chronology of the eastern Mediterranean,
2220–718 bc. Nature 381: 780–783.
Ladizinsky, G. 1999. Identification of the lentil’s wild genetic
stock. Genet. Resour. Crop Evol. 46: 115–118.
Larson, P.R. 1994. The vascular cambium. Development and
structure. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Lavi, A., Perevolotsky, A., Kigel, J., Noy-Meir, I. 2005. Invasion
of Pinus halepensis from plantations into adjacent
natural habitats. Appl. Veg. Sci. 8: 85–92.
Lev-Yadun, S. 1987. Dendrochronology and related studies—a
review. Mitekufat Haeven, J. Isr. Prehist. Soc. n.s.
20: 7–36.
Lev-Yadun, S. 1991. Terminology used in bark anatomy: additions
and comments. IAWA Bull. n.s. 12: 207–209.
Lev-Yadun, S. 1992. The origin of the cedar beams from AlAqsa
Mosque: botanical, historical and archaeological
evidence. Levant 24: 201–208.
Lev-Yadun, S. 1994a. Induction of near-vessellessness
in Ephedra campylopoda C. A. Mey. Ann. Bot. 75:
683–687.
Lev-Yadun, S. 1994b. Radial fibres in aggregate rays of
Quercus calliprinos Webb.—evidence for radial signal
flow. New Phytol. 128: 45–48.
Lev-Yadun, S. 1994c. Experimental evidence for the autonomy
of ray differentiation in Ficus sycomorus L. New
Phytol. 126: 499–504.
Lev-Yadun, S. 1997. Flora and climate in Southern Samaria:
past and present. In: Finkelstein, I., Lederman, Z., Bunimovitz,
S., eds. Highlands of many cultures I. The sites.
Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology, Tel
Aviv University, Tel Aviv, pp. 85–102.
Lev-Yadun, S. 2000a. Wood structure and the ecology of
annual growth ring formation in Pinus halepensis and
Pinus brutia. In: Ne’eman, G., Trabaud, L., eds. Ecology,
biogeography and management of Pinus halepensis
and Pinus brutia forest ecosystems in the Mediterranean
Basin. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, pp. 67–78.
Lev-Yadun, S. 2000b. Cellular patterns in dicotyledonous
woods: their regulation. In: Savidge, R., Barnett, J., Napier,
R., eds. Cell & molecular biology of wood formation.
BIOS Scientific Publishers Ltd., Oxford, pp. 315–324.
Lev-Yadun, S. 2001a. Wound effects arrest wave phenomena
in the secondary xylem of Rhamnus alaternus (Rhamnaceae).
IAWA J. 22: 295–300.
Lev-Yadun, S. 2001b. Bark. In: Encyclopedia of life sciences.
Nature Publishing Group, London. http://www.
els.net.
Lev-Yadun, S. 2002. The distance to which wound effects
influence the structure of secondary xylem of decapitated
Pinus pinea. J. Plant Growth Regul. 21: 191–196.
Lev-Yadun, S. 2004. Vegetal remains. In: Goren, Y., Finkelstein,
I., Na’aman, N., eds. Inscribed in clay. Provenance
study of the Amarna tablets and other ancient Near Eastern
texts. Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology,
Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv.
Lev-Yadun, S., Aloni, R. 1990a. Vascular differentiation in
branch junctions of trees: circular patterns and functional
significance. Trees 4: 49–54.
Lev-Yadun, S., Aloni, R. 1990b. Polar patterns of periderm
ontogeny, their relationship to leaves and buds, and the
control of cork formation. IAWA Bull. n.s. 11: 289–300.
Lev-Yadun, S., Aloni, R. 1991a. Polycentric vascular rays
in Suaeda monoica and the control of ray initiation and
spacing. Trees 5: 22–29.
Lev-Yadun, S., Aloni, R. 1991b. Natural and experimentally
induced dispersion of aggregate rays in shoots of Quercus
ithaburensis Decne. and Q. calliprinos Webb. Ann.
Bot. 68: 85–91.
Lev-Yadun, S., Aloni, R. 1992. The role of wounding in the
differentiation of vascular rays. Int. J. Plant Sci. 153:
348–357.
Lev-Yadun, S., Aloni, R. 1993a. Variant secondary growth
in old stems of Ephedra campylopoda C. A. Mey. Bot. J.
Linn. Soc. 112: 51–58.
Lev-Yadun, S., Aloni, R. 1993b. Effect of wounding on the
relations between vascular rays and vessels in Melia azedarach
L. New Phytol. 124: 339–344.
Lev-Yadun, S., Aloni, R. 1995. Differentiation of the ray
system in woody plants. Bot. Rev. 61: 45–88.
Lev-Yadun, S., Weinstein-Evron, M. 1993. Prehistoric wood
remains of Cupressus sempervirens L. from the Natufian
layers of el-Wad Cave, Mount Carmel, Israel. Tel Aviv
20: 125–131.
Lev-Yadun, S., Weinstein-Evron, M. 1994. Late Epipalaeolithic
wood remains from el-Wad Cave, Mount Carmel,
Israel. New Phytol. 127: 391–396.
Lev-Yadun, S., Weinstein-Evron, M. 2002. The role of
Pinus halepensis (Aleppo pine) in the landscape of Early
Bronze Age Megiddo. Tel Aviv 29: 332–343.
Lev-Yadun, S., Weinstein-Evron, M. 2005. Modeling the
influence of wood use by the Natufians of el-Wad on
the forest of Mount Carmel. J. Isr. Prehist. Soc. 35:
285–298.
Lev-Yadun, S., Liphschitz, N., Waisel, Y. 1981. Dendrochronological
investigations in Israel: Pinus halepensis
Mill.—The oldest living pines in Israel. La-Yaaran 31:
1–8, 49–52 (in Hebrew and English).
Lev-Yadun, S., Liphschitz, N., Waisel,Y. 1984. Ring analysis
	 S. Lev-Yadun. Archaeological wood remains	 159
of Cedrus libani beams from the roof of al-Aqsa mosque.
Eretz-Israel 17: 92–96, 4*–5*. The Israel Exploration
Society, Jerusalem (in Hebrew, English* summary).
Lev-Yadun, S., Herzog, Z., Tsuk, T. 1995. Conifer beams of
Juniperus phoenicea found in the well of Tel Beer-Sheba.
Tel Aviv 22: 128–135.
Lev-Yadun, S., Artzy, M., Marcus, E., Stidsing, R. 1996.
Wood remains from Tel Nami, a Middle Bronze IIa and
Late Bronze IIb port, local exploitation of trees and Levantine
cedar trade. Econ. Bot. 50: 310–317.
Lev-Yadun, S., Gopher, A., Abbo, S. 2000. The cradle of
agriculture. Science 288: 1602–1603.
Libby, L.M. 1983. Past climates. Tree thermometers, commodities,
and people. University of Texas Press, Austin.
Linder, E., Kahanov, Y. 2003. The Ma’agan Mikhael ship.
The recovery of a 2400-year-old merchantman. Final
Report Vol. I. Israel Exploration Society and University
of Haifa, Jerusalem.
Liphschitz, N. 1986. The vegetational landscape and the
macroclimate of Israel during prehistoric and protohistoric
periods. Mitekufat Haeven. J. Isr. Prehist. Soc. 19:
80–90.
Liphschitz, N. 1986/7. Ancient vegetation of the Yarkon
basin according to botanical remnants from excavations.
In: Zeevy, R., ed. Israel—people and land. Eretz Israel
Museum Yearbook. Vol 4. New Series, Eretz Israel Museum,
Tel Aviv, pp. 101–104 (in Hebrew).
Liphschitz, N. 1996. The vegetational landscape of the
Negev during antiquity as evident from archaeological
wood remains. Isr. J. Plant Sci. 44: 161–179.
Liphschitz, N. 1998. Timber analysis of household objects in
Israel: a comparative study. I.E.J. 48: 77–90.
Liphschitz, N. 1999. Microscopic examination of wood
remains from archaeological excavations. In: Arzee, T.,
Schwartz, M., eds. Basic microtechniques. Tel Aviv University,
Tel Aviv, pp. 107–110 (in Hebrew).
Liphschitz, N. 2004. Dendroarchaeological investigations.
In: Kahanov, Y., Linder, E., eds. The Ma’agan Mikhael
ship. The recovery of a 2400-year-old merchantman.
Final Report Vol. II. Israel Exploration Society and University
of Haifa, Jerusalem, pp. 156–163.
Liphschitz, N., Biger, G. 1989. Cupressus sempervirens in
Israel during antiquity. Isr. J. Bot. 38: 35–45.
Liphschitz, N., Biger, G. 1995. The timber trade in ancient
Palestine. Tel Aviv 22: 121–127.
Liphschitz, N., Lev-Yadun, S. 1989. The botanical remains
from Masada. Identification of the plant species and the
possible origin of the remnants. BASOR 274: 27–32.
Liphschitz, N., Nadel, D. 1997. Charred wood remains from
Ohalo II (19,000 B.P.), Sea of Galilee, Israel. J. Isr. Prehist.
Soc. 27: 5–18.
Liphschitz, N., Lev-Yadun, S., Waisel, Y. 1979a. Dendrochronological
investigations in the Mediterranean basin—Pinus
nigra of south Anatolia (Turkey). La-Yaaran
29: 3–11, 33–36 (in Hebrew and English).
Liphschitz, N., Waisel, Y., Lev-Yadun, S. 1979b. Dendrochronological
investigations in Iran: Juniperus polycarpos
of West and Central Iran. Tree Ring Bull. 39: 39–45.
Liphschitz, N., Lev-Yadun, S., Waisel, Y. 1981. Dendroarchaeological
investigations in Israel: Masada. I.E.J. 31:
230–234.
Liphschitz, N., Lev-Yadun, S., Waisel, Y. 1987a. A climatic
history of the Sinai peninsula in light of dendrochronological
studies. In: Gvirtzman, G., Shmueli, A., Gradus,
Y., Beit-Arieh, I., Har-El, M., eds. Sinai, Volume 1. Tel
Aviv University, and Ministry of Defence Publishing
House, Tel Aviv, pp. 525–531 (in Hebrew).
Liphschitz, N., Lev-Yadun, S., Gophna, R. 1987b. The
dominance of Quercus calliprinos Webb. (Kermes Oak)
in the Central Coastal Plain of Israel in antiquity. I.E.J.
37: 43–50.
Liphschitz, N., Biger, G., Mendel, Z. 1987/9. Did theAleppo
Pine—“Oren Yerushalaim” (Pinus halepensis)—cover
the mountains of Eretz Israel in the past. In: Zeevy, R., ed.
Israel—people and land. Eretz Israel Museum Yearbook.
Vol. 5–6. New Series, Eretz Israel Museum, Tel Aviv, pp.
141–150 (in Hebrew, English abstr.).
Liphschitz, N., Gophna, R., Hartman, M., Biger, G. 1991.
The beginning of olive (Olea europaea) cultivation in
the Old World: A reassessment. J. Archaeol. Sci. 18:
441–453.
Lorch, J. 1967. A Jurassic flora of Makhtesh Ramon, Israel.
Isr. J. Bot. 16: 131–155, plates 163–180.
Lorch, J. 1968. Some Jurassic conifers from Israel. J. Linn.
Soc., Bot. 61: 177–188.
Manning, S.W., Kromer, B., Kuniholm, P.I., Newton, M.W.
2001. Anatolian tree rings and a new chronology for
the east Mediterranean Bronze-Iron Ages. Science 294:
2532–2535.
Massey, F.P., Hartley, S.E. 2006. Experimental demonstration
of the antiherbivore effects of silica in grasses: impacts
on foliage digestibility and vole growth rates. Proc.
R. Soc. Lond. B 273: 2299–2304.
McCarroll, D., Loader, N.J. 2004. Stable isotopes in tree
rings. Quaternary Sci. Rev. 23: 771–801.
McEwen, E. 1998. The bow. In: The Cave of the Warrior.
A fourth millennium burial in the Judean desert. IAA
Reports no. 5. pp. 45–53.
Meheshwari, P., Biswas, C. 1970. Cedrus. Council of Scientific
& Industrial Research, New Delhi.
Meiggs, R. 1982. Trees and timber in the ancient Mediterranean
world. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Mencuccini, M., Hölttä, T., Petit, G., Magnani, F. 2007.
Sanio’s laws revisited. Size-dependent changes in the
xylem architecture of trees. Ecol. Lett. 10: 1084–1093.
Meunier, J.D., Colin, F., eds. 2001. Phytoliths: application in
earth sciences and human history.A.A. Balkema Publishers,
Lisse.
Mikesell, M.W. 1969. The deforestation of Mount Lebanon.
Geogr. Rev. 59: 1–28.
Moore, J. 2000. Forest fire and human interaction in the
early Holocene woodlands of Britain. Palaeogeography,
160	 Israel Journal of Earth Sciences	Vol. 56, 2007
Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 164: 125–137.
Mor, H. 2004. The carpenters’ tool-marks: their significance
in ancient boatbuilding. In: Kahanov, Y., Linder,
E., eds. The Ma’agan Mikhael ship. The recovery of a
2400-year-old merchantman. Final Report Vol. II. Israel
Exploration Society and University of Haifa, Jerusalem,
pp. 165–181.
Morrell, P.L., Clegg, M.T. 2007. Genetic evidence for a
second domestication of barley (Hordeum vulgare) east
of the Fertile Crescent. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 104:
3289–3294.
Nadel, D., Werker, E. 1999. The oldest ever brush hut plant
remains from Ohalo II, Jordan Valley, Israel (19,000 BP).
Antiquity 73: 755–764.
Nadel, D., Grinberg, U., Boaretto, E., Werker, E. 2006.
Wooden objects from Ohalo II (23,000 cal BP), Jordan
Valley, Israel. J. Human Evol. 50: 644–662.
Nakata, P.A. 2003. Advances in our understanding of calcium
oxalate crystal formation and function in plants.
Plant Sci. 164: 901–909.
Neumann, K., Schoch, W., Détienne, P., Schweingruber, F.H.
2001. Woods of the Sahara and the Sahel. Verlag Paul
Haupt, Bern.
Nichols, G.J., Cripps, J.A., Collinson, M.E., Scott, A.C.
2000. Experiments in waterlogging and sedimentology
of charcoal: results and implications. Palaeogeography,
Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 164: 43–56.
Nir, D. 1983. Man, a geomorphological agent. Keter Publishing
House, Jerusalem; and D. Reidel Publishing
Company, Dordrecht.
Nissenbaum, A. 1998. Chemical analysis of organic matter
associated with the bow. In: The Cave of the Warrior. A
fourth millennium burial in the Judean desert. IAA Reports
no. 5. pp. 107–109.
Outland, R.B. III. 2004. Tapping the pines. The naval stores
industry in the American south. Louisiana State University
Press, Baton Rouge.
Özkan, H., Brandolini, A., Schäfer-Pregl, R., Salamini,
F. 2002. AFLP analysis of a collection of tetraploid
wheats indicates the origin of emmer and hard wheat
domestication in southeast Turkey. Mol. Biol. Evol. 19:
1797–1801.
Özkan, H., Brandolini, A., Pozzi, C., Effgen, S., Wunder, J.,
Salamini, F. 2005. Areconsideration of the domestication
geography of tetraploid wheats. Theor. Appl. Genet. 110:
1052–1060.
Pääbo, S., Poinar, H., Serre, D., Jaenicke-Després, V., Hebler,
J., Rohland, N., Kuch, M., Krause, J., Vigilant, L.,
Hofreiter, M. 2004. Genetic analyses from ancient DNA.
Annu. Rev. Genet. 38: 645–679.
Pajouh, D.P., Schweingruber, F.H. 1988. Atlas des bois du
nord de l’Iran. Tehran University, Tehran (in Persian and
French).
Parshall, T., Foster, D.R. 2002. Fire on the New England
landscape: regional and temporal variation, cultural and
environmental controls. J. Biogeogr. 29: 1305–1317.
Partington, J.R. 1999. A history of Greek fire and gunpowder.
Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
Perlin, J. 1991. A forest journey. The role of wood in the
development of civilization. Harvard University Press,
Cambridge.
Philipson, W.R., Ward, J.M., Butterfield, B.G. 1971. The
vascular cambium. Its development and activity. Chapman
& Hall Ltd., London.
Pierce, C., Adams, K.R., Stewart, J.D. 1998. Determining
the fuel constituents of ancient hearth ash via ICP-AES
analysis. J. Archaeol. Sci. 25: 493–503.
Piperno, D.R., Holst, I. 1998. The presence of starch grains
on prehistoric stone tools from the humid Neotropics:
indications of early tuber use and agriculture in Panama.
J. Archaeol. Sci. 25: 765–776.
Piperno, D.R., Pearsall, D.M. 1998. The origins of agriculture
in the lowland neotropics. Academic Press, San Diego.
Piperno, D.R., Weiss, E., Holst, I., Nadel, D. 2004. Processing
of wild cereal grains in the Upper Palaeolithic
revealed by starch grain analysis. Nature 430: 670–673.
Prychild, C.J., Rudall, P.J., Gregory, M. 2004. Systematics
and biology of silica bodies in Monocotyledons. Bot.
Rev. 69: 377–440.
Psaras, G.K., Konsolaki, M.J. 1986. The annual rhythm of
cambial activity in four subshrubs common in phryganic
formations of Greece. Isr. J. Bot. 35: 35–39.
Rapp, G. Jr., Mulholland, S.C. 1992. Phytolith systematics.
Emerging issues. Plenum Press, New York.
Rogers, S.O., Kaya, Z. 2006. DNA from ancient cedar wood
from King Midas’ tomb, Turkey, and Al Aksa Mosque,
Israel. Silvae Genet. 55: 54–62.
Rossignol-Strick, M. 1995. Sea-land correlation of pollen
records in the Eastern Mediterranean for the Glacial-Interglacial
transition: biostratigraphy versus radiometric
time-scale. Quat. Sci. Rev. 14: 893–915.
Roth, I. 1981. Structural patterns of tropical barks. Gebrüder
Borntraeger, Berlin.
Rothwell, G.W., Lev-Yadun, S. 2005. Evidence of polar
auxin flow in 375 million-year-old fossil wood. Am. J.
Bot. 92: 903–906.
Rothwell, G.W., Sanders, H., Wyatt, S.E., Lev-Yadun, S.
2008. A fossil record for growth regulation: the role of
auxin in wood evolution. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 95:
121–134.
Rowell, R.M., Barbour, R.J. 1990. Archaeological wood
properties, chemistry, and preservation. American Chemical
Society, Washington.
Sachs, T., Cohen, D. 1982. Circular vessels and the control
of vascular differentiation in plants. Differentiation 21:
22–26.
Salamini, F., Özkan, H., Brandolini, A., Schäfer-Pregl, R.,
Martin, W. 2002. Genetics and geography of wild cereal
domestication in the Near East. Nature Rev. Genet. 3:
429–441.
Sandgathe, D.M., Hayden, B. 2003. Did Neanderthals eat
inner bark? Antiquity 77: 709–718.
	 S. Lev-Yadun. Archaeological wood remains	 161
Sandved, K.B., Prance, G.T., Prance, A.E. 1993. Bark. The
formation, characteristics, and uses of bark around the
world. Timber Press, Portland.
Schiegl, S., Lev-Yadun, S., Bar-Yosef, O., El Goresy, A.,
Weiner, S. 1994. Siliceous aggregates from prehistoric
wood ash: a major component of sediments in Kebara and
Hayonim caves (Israel). Isr. J. Earth Sci. 43: 267–278.
Schiegl, S., Goldberg, P., Bar-Yosef, O., Weiner, S. 1996.
Ash deposits in Hayonim and Kebara Caves, Israel: macroscopic,
microscopic and mineralogical observations,
and their archaeological implications. J. Archaeol. Sci.
23: 763–781.
Schick, T. 1998. The arrows. In: The Cave of the Warrior.
A fourth millennium burial in the Judean desert. IAA
Reports no. 5. pp. 30–33.
Schiller, G. 2000. Ecophysiology of Pinus halepensis Mill.
and P. BrutiaTen. In: Ne’eman, G.,Trabaud, L., eds. Ecology,
biogeography and management of Pinus halepensis
and Pinus brutia forest ecosystems in the Mediterranean
Basin. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, pp. 51–65.
Schlumbaum, A., Tensen, M., Jaenicke-Després, V. 2008.
Ancient plant DNA in archaeobotany. Veget. Hist. Archaeobot.
17: 233–244.
Schmitt, U., Grünwald, C., Eckstein, D. 2000. Xylem
structure in pine trees grown near the Chernobyl nuclear
power plant/Ukraine. IAWA J. 21: 379–387.
Schweingruber, F.H. 1990. Anatomy of European woods.
Verlag Paul Haupt, Bern.
Schweingruber, F.H. 1996. Tree rings and environment.
Dendroecology. Paul Haupt Publishers, Berne.
Schweingruber, F.H., Börner, A., Schulze, E.-D. 2006. Atlas
of woody plant stems. Evolution, structure, and environmental
modifications. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Scott, A.C. 2000. The pre-quaternary history of fire. Palaeogeography,
Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 164:
281–329.
Segal, I. 1998. A chemical and mineralogical study of finds.
In: The Cave of the Warrior. A fourth millennium burial
in the Judean desert. IAA Reports no. 5. pp. 97–99.
Sitry, Y. 1998. The wooden bowl. In: The Cave of the Warrior.
A fourth millennium burial in the Judean desert. IAA
Reports no. 5. pp. 54–58.
Sitry, Y. 2004. Unique wooden artifacts: a study of typology
and technology. In: Kahanov, Y., Linder, E., eds. The
Ma’agan Mikhael ship. The recovery of a 2400-year-old
merchantman. Final Report Vol. II. Israel Exploration Society
and University of Haifa, Jerusalem, pp. 183–191.
Sitry, Y. 2006. Wooden objects from Roman sites in the Land
of Israel, a typological and technological study. Ph.D.
thesis, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan (in Hebrew with
English summary).
Steffy, J.R. 1990. The boat: a preliminary study of its construction.
‘Atiqot 19: 29–47.
Terral, J.-F. 2000. Exploitation and management of the olive
tree during prehistoric times in Mediterranean France and
Spain. J. Archaeol. Sci. 27: 127–133.
Terral, J.-F., Arnold-Simard, G. 1996. Beginnings of olive
cultivation in eastern Spain in relation to Holocene bioclimatic
changes. Quaternary Res. 46: 176–185.
Terral, J.-F., Durand, A. 2006. Bio-archaeological evidence
of olive tree (Olea europaea L.) irrigation during the
Middle Ages in Southern France and North Eastern
Spain. J. Archaeol. Sci. 33: 718–724.
Terral, J.-F., Mengüal, X. 1999. Reconstruction of Holocene
climate in southern France and eastern Spain using
quantitative anatomy of olive wood and archaeological
charcoal. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology
153: 71–92.
Thieme, H. 1997. Lower Palaeolithic hunting spears from
Germany. Nature 385: 807–810.
Thirgood, J.V. 1981. Man and the Mediterranean forest. A
history of resource depletion. Academic Press, London.
Timell, T.E. 1986. Compression wood in gymnosperms.
Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Touchan, R., Hughes, M.K. 1999. Dendrochronology in
Jordan. J. Arid Environ. 42: 291–303.
Touchan, R., Meko, D., Hughes, M.K. 1999. A 396-year
reconstruction of precipitation in southern Jordan. J. Am.
Water Resour. Assoc. 35: 49–59.
Touchan, R., Garfin, G.M., Meko, D.M., Funkhouser, G.,
Erkan, N., Hughes, M.K., Wallin, B.S. 2003. Preliminary
reconstructions of spring precipitation in southwestern
Turkey from tree-ring width. Int. J. Climatol. 23:
157–171.
Touchan, R., Xoplaki, E., Funkhouser, G., Luterbacher, J.,
Hughes, M.K., Erkan, N.,Akkemik, Ü., Stephan, J. 2005.
Reconstructions of spring/summer precipitation for the
Eastern Mediterranean from tree-ring widths and its connection
to large-scale atmospheric circulation. Climate
Dyn. 25: 75–98.
Touchan, R., Akkemik, Ü., Hughes, M.K., Erkan, N. 2007.
May-June precipitation reconstruction of southwestern
Anatolia, Turkey during the last 900 years from tree
rings. Quat. Res. 68: 196–202.
Trockenbrodt, M. 1990. Survey and discussion of the terminology
used in bark anatomy. IAWA Bull. n.s. 11:
141–166.
Trockenbrodt, M. 1991. Qualitative structural changes during
bark development in Quercus robur, Ulmus glabra,
Populus tremula and Betula pendula. IAWA Bull. n.s.
12: 5–22.
Tsartsidou, G., Lev-Yadun, S., Albert, R.-M., Miller-Rosen,
A., Efstratiou, N., Weiner, S. 2007. The phytolith archaeological
record: strengths and weaknesses evaluated
based on a quantitative modern reference collection from
Greece. J. Archaeol. Sci. 34: 1262–1275.
Tsartsidou, G., Lev-Yadun, S., Efstratiou, N., Weiner, S.
2008. Ethnoarchaeological study of phytolith assemblages
from an agro-pastoral village in Northern Greece
(Sarakini): development and application of a Phytolith
Difference Index. J. Archaeol. Sci. 35: 600–613.
Turner, N.J. 1988. Ethnobotany of coniferous trees in
162	 Israel Journal of Earth Sciences	Vol. 56, 2007
Thompson and Lillooet interior Salish of British Columbia.
Econ. Bot. 42: 177–194.
Tyree, M.T., Zimmermann, M.H. 2002. Xylem structure and
the ascent of sap. 2nd ed. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Udell, M. 2003. The woodworking tools. In: Linder, E., Kahanov,
Y., eds. The Ma’agan Mikhael ship. The recovery
of a 2400-year-old merchantman. Final Report Vol. I.
Israel Exploration Society and University of Haifa, Jerusalem,
pp. 203–218.
Votruba, G.F. 2007. Imported building materials of Sebastos
harbour, Israel. Int. J. Naut. Archaeol. 36: 325–335.
Wachsmann, S., ed. 1990. The excavations of an ancient
boat in the Sea of Galilee (Lake Kinneret). ‘Atiqot 19:
1–138.
Weinstein-Evron, M. 1983. The paleoecology of the early
Würm in the Hula Basin. Paléorient 9: 5–19.
Weinstein-Evron, M., Lev-Yadun, S. 2000. Palaeoecology of
Pinus halepensis in Israel in the light of archaeobotanical
data. In: Ne’eman, G., Trabaud, L., eds. Ecology, biogeography
and management of Pinus halepensis and Pinus
brutia forest ecosystems in the Mediterranean Basin.
Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, pp. 119–130.
Werker, E. 1988. Botanical identification of worked wood
remains. ‘Atiqot 18: 65–75.
Werker, E. 1990. Identification of the wood. ‘Atiqot 19:
65–75.
Werker, E. 1994. Botanical identification of wood remains
from the ‘En Gedi excavations. ‘Atiqot 24: 69–72, 10*
(in Hebrew, English summary*).
Werker, E. 2003. The wood material. In: Linder, E., Kahanov,
Y., eds. The Ma’agan Mikhael ship. The recovery of
a 2400-year-old merchantman. Final Report Vol. I. Israel
Exploration Society and University of Haifa, Jerusalem,
pp. 241–243.
Werker, W. 2006. 780,000-year-old wood from Gesher
Benot Ya’aqov, Israel. Isr. J. Plant Sci. 54: 291–300.
Wetherall, K.M., Moss, R.M., Jones, A.M., Smith, A.D.,
Skinner, T., Pickup, D.M., Goatham, S.W., Chadwick,
A.V., Newport, R.J. 2008. Sulfur and iron speciation in
recently recovered timbers of the Mary Rose revealed
via X-ray absorption spectroscopy. J. Archaeol. Sci. 35:
1317–1328.
Wheeler, E.A., Baas, P., Rodgers, S. 2007. Variations in dicot
wood anatomy: a global analysis based on the insidewood
database. IAWA J. 28: 229–258.
Williams, M. 2003. Deforesting the earth. From Prehistory
to global crisis. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Yakir, D., Issar, A., Gat, J., Adar, E., Trimborn, P., Lipp, J.
1994. 13
C and 18
O of wood from the Roman siege rampart
in Masada, Israel (ad 70–73): Evidence for a less arid
climate for the region. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 58:
3535–3539.
Yakir, D., Lev-Yadun, S., Zangvil, A. 1996. El Niño and
tree growth near Jerusalem over the last 20 years. Global
Change Biol. 2: 97–101.
Zackrisson, O., Östlund, L., Korhonen, O., Bergman, I.
2000. The ancient use of Pinus sylvestris L. (Scots pine)
inner bark by Sami people in northern Sweden, related
to cultural and ecological factors. Veg. Hist. Archaeobot.
9: 99–109.
Zobel, B.J., Sprague, J.R. 1998. Juvenile wood in forest
trees. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Zohary, M. 1959. Geobotany. 2nd ed. Merhavia (in He-
brew).
Zohary, M. 1962. Plant life of Palestine. Israel and Jordan.
The Ronald Press Company, New York.
Zohary, M. 1973. Geobotanical foundations of the Middle
East. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart.
Zohary, M. 1983. Man and vegetation in the Middle East.
In: Holzner, W., Werger, M.J.A., Ikusima, I., eds. Man’s
impact on vegetation. Dr W Junk Publishers, The Hague,
pp. 287–295.
Zohary, D., Hopf, M. 2000. Domestication of plants in the
Old World. 3rd ed. Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Zohary, D., Spiegel-Roy, P. 1975. Beginnings of fruit growing
in the Old World. Science 187: 319–327.
View publication stats