AMUD
LOCATION
Limestone cave high on the wall of the Wadi Amud,
about 5.5 km from its confluence with the northwestern
shore of Lake Kinneret (“Sea of Gahlee”), Israel.
DISCOVERY
H. Suzuki and colleagues, July 1961 (Amud l), 1964
(Amud 2); Y. Rak, W. Kimbel, and others, 1992
(Amud 7).
MATERIAL
More or less complete but poorly preserved skeleton
of adult, presumed to be male; skull unfortunately
lacks midface and base (Amud 1). Adult maxilla
(Amud 2). Fragmented and incomplete articulated
skeleton of an infant, ca. 10 months (Amud 7). Other
hominids reported from the site are either too frag-
mentary for consideration or are quite recent intrusive
burials.DATING AND STRATIGRAPHIC CONTEXT
Amud 1 came from the top of Level B of the Suzuki
excavation, just below the Middle-Upper Paleolithic
interface; Amud 2 from lower in Level B (Suzuki and
Takai, 1970). Amud 7 was recovered from an underly-
ing level (Rak et al., 1994). Early attempts to date
Level B produced only minimum dates (Suzuki and
Takai, 1970; see discussion in Griin and Stringer,
1991); but preliminary ESR dating on teeth from up-
per Level B produced ages of 42 and 49 Ka, dependingon uptake model (Griin and Stringer, 1991). These
dates fit well with TL dates of 50-60 Ka reported by
Valladas (in Rak et al., 1994) for the lower strati-
graphic unit containing Amud 7.ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONTEXT
An early study characterized the lithics from Level B
as transitional Levalloiso-Mousterian to Upper Pale-
olithic (Watanabe in Suzuki and Takai, 1970); more
recent assessments place them closer to the Tabiin B
variant of the Levantine Mousterian. Amud 1 is re-
ported to have been a contracted burial (Suzuki and
Takai, 1970), principally because of the posture and
articulation of the skeleton; the same claim is made by
Rak et al. (1994) for Amud 7, with the additional de-
tail that a red deer jaw had (deliberately?) been leaned
against the infant’s pelvis.PREVIOUS DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES
According to its describer Suzuki (in Suzuki and
Takai, 1970), Amud 1 is a “Palestinian Nean-
derthaloid” with “certain more progressive features
found in the Upper Palaeolithic man” (p. 421). Rak
et al. (1994) remarked on the “peculiarly eclectic” na-
ture of the specimen as reconstructed. Most authors
have concurred with Trinkaus (1984) that the skele-
ton represents an unusually tall but small-browed
and microdont Neanderthal. Rak et al. (1994) have
shown very clearly that, despite its tender age and
poor condition, the Amud 7 infant is indisputably311