Susan Silbey

Keywords:

Aux origines

I. Elements of Genealogy

Initially, it was law professors in the United States in the 1930s, anxious to improve the efficiency of the legal system, who opened law up to social sciences and caused the sociology of law to emerge. By mobilizing social sciences' empirical methods, sociological jurisprudence and legal realism, which are at the origin of the distinction between law in books and law in action, their aim was to make judicial decisions more predictable and to attempt to reform an excessively dogmatic, formalist legal system.

The Law and Society Association (LSA) was created in 1964, in that spirit, aiming to "fundamentally change the legal education itself, importing within law schools' curricula social sciences' tools and methods." 1 While positioning itself as a research movement, LSA's approach remains instrumental: sociology in the service of the law. This approach aims at giving law a better grip on social matters; it is not meant to enrich the way in which sociology understands law. LSA researchers remain isolated within the American academic field, whether in law or social science faculties, and overall the LSA discipline remains largely dependent on law professors. 2 The late 1970s saw the emergence of a critical current, Critical Legal Studies (Crits), "a current as heterogeneous as ephemeral." 3 The criticism concerns both the positioning of the LSA movement-the accessory role played by legal sociology in relation to law-and the substance of its approach, i.e. a conception of law solely as a dependent variable, neglecting the constitutive dimension that it may have on practices. Thus, it appeared necessary at that time to break up the causal relationship between law and society: Law participates in society, it is part of society. Crits "analyze how law helps to shape the ways in which the social world is perceived and constructed." 4 The Amherst Seminar on Legal Ideology and Legal Process, set up in 1982 by Susan Silbey, Austin Sarat, and Christine Harrington, belongs to the Crits current, whilst differentiating itself by adding to the process an essential empirical dimension. This evolution manifests itself by a shift towards a qualitative sociological approach, even towards anthropology. The various works produced, despite their diversity, converge around the unifying concept of legal consciousness.

After some time, Legal Consciousness Studies (LCS) became exposed to criticism: "such empirical claim would be incompatible with real criticism or real political commitment." 5 Susan Silbey 6 herself deplores the loss "of critical utility and critical 1. Antoine VAUCHEZ, "Entre droit et sciences sociales. Retour sur l'histoire du mouvement Law and Society", Genèses, 45, 2001, p. 134-149.

2. Yves DEZALAY, Austin SARAT and Susan SILBEY, "D'une démarche contestataire à un savoir méritocratique. Éléments pour une histoire sociale de la sociologie juridique américaine", Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales, 78, 1989, p. 79-93. dimension" in many Legal Consciousness works. It is not enough to analyze what those involved think and do, it is also important to highlight the hegemonic strength of the law and the resistance it triggers. She speaks of "domestication" of the concept of legal consciousness: because of the lack of interest for the hegemonic strength of the law, this concept is instrumentalized; it ends up putting law in the service of certain groups of interests. By reviewing various research (quantitative or ethnographic), Susan Silbey found many different views, sometimes even contradictory, on the place and uses of law in people's lives; but none of these views explain how experiences, interpretations, and attitudes cumulate to produce an ideology or a hegemony of law. Thus, she presents The Common Place of Law, Stories of Everyday Life, which she published in 1998 with Patricia Ewick, as answering to these paradoxes and integrating "Attention to and appropriation of the venerable traditions of European social theory" (p. 328).

II. Susan Silbey, Observer and Player

This quick overview of the LCS genealogy is an opportunity, before an epistemological and/or methodological reflection is led by other authors in this issue, to question Susan Silbey on what might be called a "socio-historical analysis" 7 or a "social history" 8 of the American legal sociology her work belongs to. Such questioning involves, in addition to the work produced in the seminar, 9 a reflection led by Susan Silbey herself with Yves Dezalay and Austin Sarat, 10 as well as two French researchers, Antoine Vauchez 11 and Jérôme Pélisse. [START_REF] Jérôme | Les Legal Consciousness Studies : une sociologisation domestiquée des Critical Legal Studies ?[END_REF] The article published in the Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales observes the lack in this field of any socio-analysis approach-a lack, or even a meaningful denial, that the authors seek to remedy. What does this lack manifest? The "ambivalence of sociologists and their fascination with social status and the symbolic dimension of their object." [START_REF]Comme si, en s'identifiant à cet objet sacré, on pouvait espérer accéder à son tour au statut de la noblesse de robe ![END_REF] For the authors, "The unequal alliance between jurists and sociologists, with on the one hand lawyers marginalized in the field of law while enjoying its prestige, and on the other hand sociologists, more or less fascinated and trapped by the social and symbolic status of their object, structures this field of research and always makes its independent development and institutionalization precarious, except when sociopolitical conjuncture reinforces and stabilizes-at least temporarily-this alliance of the dominated."

Multiple questions raised by this introduction can be asked of Susan Silbey on two levels: firstly, as the author of this socio-analysis, and secondly, as "one of those 'passers-on'-jurists converted to the social sciences or social scientists trained later on in the field of law-who offer their trajectory and their disciplinary ubiquity as the prefiguration of a new syncretism of knowledge." 14

III. "A Socio-Political Conjuncture"

Various elements of socio-political context contributed to the consolidation, even the institutionalization, despite its precariousness, of the LSA movement. The assumption of the authors is that the progression of the sociological approach within the law has always matched periods of major social upheaval: crises, rifts, calling a status-quo into question, and triggering scientific, political, or professional progress. Legal realism was born in the New Deal era, both to account for the discrepancy between law and social reality and to try, thanks to the contribution of social science, to improve the law. It was the era of experts at the service of public policy. The creation of the LSA was contemporaneous with a questioning of the political order (the civil rights campaign, the Vietnam War...). Young lawyers proclaimed themselves as spokesmen of disadvantaged people with the creation of legal clinics, class actions, etc. The central theme of the socio-legal work of the time was the one of access to justice. The expansion and remodeling of the academic landscape, the competition that arose between the historic law schools of the East coast and the newcomers were other factors in the reassessment of this research field in the 1960s. 15 The issue of funding, linked to the issue of interest in these matters from new audiences, is also mentioned.

And to conclude: "the investment in the field of legal sociology is directly proportional to the political stakes of the moment" and "the history of legal sociology is that of a series of flows and refluxes which originate in the political history."

Is this equation true today? What is Susan Silbey's view of the status of sociolegal studies in the academic field, but also in the American political field? How do the current political and social issues (Islamic terrorism, the election of Donald Trump, etc.) impact on socio-legal studies: on their nature-expertise and/or criticism, theoretical criticism or emphasis on empiricism-and on the "unequal alliance" between lawyers and sociologists?

IV. "An Alliance of Those Dominated"

The history of socio-legal studies is also the history of personal journeys and strategies, which may be at odds with this form of narrative, or be undermined by it. The socio-analysis carried out by Susan Silbey with Yves Dezalay and Austin Sarat was based on the observation of "the ambivalence of sociologists and the fascination exercised over them." The authors talked about "an alliance of the dominated."

How does Susan Silbey analyze her personal journey? Her role in the university institution? Her relationship with lawyers? With political activism? The importance of her initial training (as a political scientist? as an anthropologist?) in changing her work methodology? She provides her reflections in the response that ends this dossier.

 About the author

Anne Wyvekens is senior researcher at the French National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS), member of the Institute of Social Sciences of Politics (ISP, Cachan). She has been working for a long time on local safety policies. She now works on the relationship between the judiciary and cultural diversity. Among her publications: -"The Place of Cultural Expertise in the Field of Family Justice in Belgium and France" (with Barbara TRUFFIN and Caroline SIMON), in Livia HOLDEN (ed.), Cultural Expertise in Socio-Legal Studies, special issue of Studies in Law, Politics, and Society (SLPS) (forthcoming); -"La justice pénale face à la 'diversité culturelle' : la défense culturelle en questions", Revue de droit pénal et de criminologie, 11, 2017; -"Justice familiale et migration. De la diversité culturelle à la double appartenance", Recherches familiales, 13, 2016.

  3. Antoine VAUCHEZ, "Entre droit et sciences sociales. Retour sur l'histoire du mouvement Law and Society", op. cit. 4. Jérôme PÉLISSE, "A-t-on conscience du droit ? Autour des Legal Consciousness Studies", Genèses, 59, 2005, p. 114-130. 5. David M. TRUBEK and John ESSER, "'Critical Empiricism' in American Legal Studies: Paradox, Program or Pandora's Box?", Law and Social Inquiry, 14 (1), 1989.

  14. Antoine VAUCHEZ, "Entre droit et sciences sociales. Retour sur l'histoire du mouvement Law and Society", op. cit. 15. Ibid. The Historical Roots of Legal Consciousness Studies. Susan Silbey as Observer and Actor ds.hypotheses.org -Droit et Société 100/2018  5


Kolska Liora

Horwitz

Steven A Rosen

Fanny Bocquentin

A Late Neolithic Equid Offering from the Mortuary-Cult Site of Ramat Saharonim in the Central Negev

The lower forelimb (metacarpal) of an equid, identified as that of a very large wild ass (E. africanus africanus) or a small sized wild horse (E. caballus), was recovered during excavations of a tumulus at Ramat Saharonim in the Central Negev. Given its close association with a Late Neolithic (Timnian) human interment, we have interpreted this bone as representing an early example of a grave offering from the Levantine deserts.

INTRODUCTION

Ramat Saharonim is a Late Neolithic ritual complex in Makhtesh Ramon in the central Negev extending over an area of approximately 8 hectares. It comprises a set of four, large open-air shrines aligned with the setting sun of the summer solstice, and 30 large burial tumuli (Fig. 1) [START_REF] Rosen | The Shrines of the setting sun[END_REF][START_REF] Rosen | Investigations at Ramat Saharonim: A desert Neolithic sacred precinct in the Central Negev[END_REF]). Excavations at Shrine 4 and Tumuli 28, 29, and 30 at the southwest edge of the complex have established the contemporaneity of these structures dated to ca. 5000 cal. BC [START_REF] Porat | Dating the Ramat Saharonim Late Neolithic desert cult site[END_REF]. The complex reflects the existence of an elaborate mortuary cult associated with the early phase of the Timnian Culture, the early desert pastoral society in the region (Rosen 2010: 204-206). This report describes an equid metacarpal, discovered in association with human remains in Tumulus 29. It provides new information on mortuary practices in the southern Levantine desert region at this time.

TUMULUS 29

Tumulus 29 (Fig. 1) is large burial cairn located at the far west end of the site. It is preserved to a height of approximately 1.5 m and approximately 4 m across at the base. It consists of a central cist constructed on bedrock, with the tumulus itself constructed of slabs and large blocks of limestone piled around the cist. The blocks were quarried in the immediate vicinity of the site.

Excavation yielded two distinct archaeological levels within the cist, both with human skeletal remains. The upper level (1.68-1.40 m above datum) contained the well-preserved human skeleton of an old adult female (Fig. 2a), apparently interred in a leather sack, dated by radiocarbon and OSL to the late 1st millennium BC [START_REF] Porat | Dating the Ramat Saharonim Late Neolithic desert cult site[END_REF], and perhaps attributable to the Nabateans given the proximity of the Nabatean Spice Road. The lower level (1.02-0.89 m above datum, and slightly above bedrock) contained fragments of long bones of an unsexed adult (Fig. 2b). Sediment from 2cm underneath the lower skeleton was dated by OSL to 7500±700 BP (i.e. the Late Neolithic) and represents the sediment at the [START_REF] Rosen | Investigations at Ramat Saharonim: A desert Neolithic sacred precinct in the Central Negev[END_REF]: Table 2), while the sediment in which the lower skeleton was found (i.e. post-dating its burial), gave an OSL date of 6000±600. The lower skeleton was separated from the upper level by a combination of rock fall and quantities of windblown sediment. A partial and highly fragmented distal metacarpal III of an equid was found in the sediment immediately above the human remains (1.10-1.05 m above datum), cemented by concretions to the lower edge of one of the stones situated immediately above the skeleton. Both the stratigraphic relationship and the poor state of preservation of the metacarpal, identical to that of the underlying human remains, indicate that it is associated with the lower, Late Neolithic burial.

THE EQUID

The Saharonim bone represents a fused, distal metacarpus with a small portion of the shaft preserved (Fig. 3). Given that the proximal end of the shaft has an old green-fracture break, the bone may have been complete when introduced into the tumulus and disintegrated there. The distal epiphysis is fused, such that the animal was older than 1-1.5 years [START_REF] Silver | The aging of domestic animals[END_REF]. The surviving fragment is poorly preserved; the bone is fissured, very friable and its surface 1) in the Saharonim equid and other modern and archaeological specimens. Mean distal breadth measurements is shown to 2± with ±2 SD to give a 95% confidence limit for samples. Samples: Israel horse -modern horses (Horwitz, unpublished data from Arad hyaena den); Egyptian horse -New Kingdom horses (Clutton Brock 1974); Scythian horse [START_REF] Benecke | The horse skeletons from the Scythian royal grave mound at Arzan 2 (Tuva, W. Siberia)[END_REF]; Chalcolithic -Negev sites [START_REF] Grigson | The earliest domestic horses in the Levant? New finds from the fourth millennium of the Negev[END_REF]; Arad -Early Bronze Age, Negev desert [START_REF] Davis | Mammal bones from the Early Bronze Age city of Arad, northern Negev, Israel: some implications concerning human exploitation[END_REF]); Abydos donkey -Early Dynastic Egypt [START_REF] Rossel | Domestication of the donkey: New data on timing, process and indicators[END_REF]; Shams ed-Din -Halafian period, probably onagers [START_REF] Uerpmann | Halafian equid remains from Shams ed-Din Tannira in northern Syria[END_REF]; Tel Brak donkey -Akkadian period (Clutton-Brock and Davies 1993); Modern E. hemionus (Gilbert 1991: Table 9); Modern Somali wild ass, Nubian wild ass, Egypt donkey, Syrian donkey [START_REF] Rossel | Domestication of the donkey: New data on timing, process and indicators[END_REF]; Modern Israeli donkeys [START_REF] Davis | Mammal bones from the Early Bronze Age city of Arad, northern Negev, Israel: some implications concerning human exploitation[END_REF]. exfoliated (Fig. 3). Given the fragmentary nature of this specimen it was not possible to determine the side of the bone element nor could it be examined for cut marks or animal damage.

Identification of the equid species was based on standard biometric measurements. As shown in Table 1, andFigures 4 and5, breadth of the Saharonim distal metacarpal is greater than that of modern and archaeological wild and domestic donkeys as well as onagers. It is also broader than the E. caballus specimens identified from Arad (Early Bronze Age) and other Chalcolithic sites in the Negev. Based on its biometry it falls closest to small Scythian horses and Egyptian New Kingdom horses.

In order to provide additional information, body weight of the Saharonim equid was estimated using [START_REF] Eisenmann | Système de mesures pour les os et les dents d'Equus[END_REF] Using this equation, the rough weight estimate for the Saharonim equid was 184 kgs. Using the same method, weight estimates were calculated for the early Dynastic donkeys from Abydos (Egypt) and a sample of modern free-ranging African wild asses taken from the literature. Both were much lighter than the Saharonim equid; the Abydos donkeys had a mean weight of 124 kgs (range 110-137 kgs) and the modern African wild asses had a mean weight of 133 kgs (range 107-156 kgs). In comparison, average adult body mass of the wild Przewalski horse (14-18 hands 2 in withers height) is 200-300 kgs [START_REF] Bennett | Equus caballus[END_REF], while modern horses (ca. 14 hands high) have weights of 400 kgs and higher; modern ponies (9-13 hands in height) have weights of 200-300 kgs; and modern donkeys (9-13 hands in height) have weights of 150-350 kgs (http//www.saracean-horse-feeds.uk). Unfortunately, no weight estimates could be calculated for the New Kingdom or Scythian horses since neither publication provided measurements of the minimal depth of the metacarpal medial condyle (measurement 13). In conclusion, the Saharonim equid appears to be an adult animal. In terms of size and estimates of body weight, it falls closer in these parameters to ponies and small horses than to wild or domestic asses or onagers.

DISCUSSION

With the exception of suspected E. caballus remains from Wadi Tbeik in Sinai (Bar-Yosef and Tchernov 1982), the Pre-Pottery Neolithic equids from the deserts of the Southern Levant have been identified as either wild ass (E. africanus africanus) or wild onager (E. hemiones) (e.g., [START_REF] Becker | The Analysis of Mammalian bones from Basta, a Pre-Pottery Neolithic site in Jordan: problems and potential[END_REF][START_REF] Driesch | The Late PPNB site of Ba'ja, Jordan: the faunal remains (1997 season)[END_REF]). In subsequent Pottery Neolithic-Chalcolithic contexts in this southern region, equid remains are generally found in small numbers. With the exception of several Northern Negev Chalcolithic specimens identified as domestic horses [START_REF] Davis | Mammal bones from the Early Bronze Age city of Arad, northern Negev, Israel: some implications concerning human exploitation[END_REF][START_REF] Grigson | The earliest domestic horses in the Levant? New finds from the fourth millennium of the Negev[END_REF][START_REF] Grigson | Cattle-keepers of the Northern Negev: Animal remains from the Chalcolithic site of Grar[END_REF][START_REF] Grigson | Farming? Feasting? Herding? Large Mammals from the Chalcolithic of Gilat[END_REF], most specimens have been attributed to domestic donkey (e.g., [START_REF] Ducos | L'Origine des Animaux Domestiques en[END_REF][START_REF] Horwitz | Animal remains from the Pottery Neolithic levels at Tel Dan[END_REF][START_REF] Grigson | Farming? Feasting? Herding? Large Mammals from the Chalcolithic of Gilat[END_REF][START_REF] Ovadia | The domestication of the ass and pack transport by animals: A case of technological change[END_REF][START_REF] Milevski | Early Bronze Age Goods Exchange in the Southern Levant. A Marxist Perspective[END_REF]: Table 10.2). The Saharonim equid is however larger than the Northern Negev Chalcolithic horses and falls outside the 95% confidence range of these specimens (Figs. 4 and5). This raises several possibilities: (i) a large, as yet unidentified species of equid inhabited the Negev in the early Holocene. (ii) in the Late Neolithic-Chalcolithic, wild E. africanus africanus in the Negev was much larger than modern specimens of this species that are used as standards today (see discussion in [START_REF] Horwitz | Faunal remains from Late Chalcolithic-Bronze Age dwelling and burial caves at Shoham (North), Lod Valley[END_REF]). (iii) as implied by the Wadi Tbeik remains (Bar-Yosef and Tchernov 1982), the wild horse (E. caballus) continued to inhabit the Southern Levant and did not became extinct at the end of the Pleistocene, as suggested by [START_REF] Davis | Late Pleistocene and Holocene equid remains from Israel[END_REF]). (iv) as contended by [START_REF] Davis | Mammal bones from the Early Bronze Age city of Arad, northern Negev, Israel: some implications concerning human exploitation[END_REF] and [START_REF] Grigson | The earliest domestic horses in the Levant? New finds from the fourth millennium of the Negev[END_REF][START_REF] Grigson | Cattle-keepers of the Northern Negev: Animal remains from the Chalcolithic site of Grar[END_REF][START_REF] Grigson | Farming? Feasting? Herding? Large Mammals from the Chalcolithic of Gilat[END_REF], by the Chalcolithic-Early Bronze Age domestic horses inhabited the Negev, but if the Saharonim equid is a domestic horse, then they exhibited a wider size range than previously documented. Given that the Saharonim specimen falls in the lower size range of two small-sized later horse populations, the last two possibilities cannot be unequivocally excluded on metrical grounds. However, if option (iv) is accepted then the Saharonim specimen would represent the earliest domestic horse, not only in the Levant but earlier even than those claimed from Central Asia i.e. 4th millennium BC [START_REF] Anthony | The Horse, the Wheel, and Language: How Bronze-Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes Shaped the Modern World[END_REF]. Given our present knowledge of horse domestication, this seems unlikely. In our opinion, options (ii) and (iii) are the most parsimonious explanations, with the bone representing either an extremely large wild E. africanus africanus or a wild E. caballus.

Regardless of the taxonomic status of the Saharonim metacarpal, its intentional interment in a human burial invites speculation concerning the role played by animals in Late Neolithic desert mortuary rituals. The poor preservation of the Late Neolithic human bones in T29 prohibits reconstruction of the actual process of interment, but in the Late Neolithic Tumuli, T28 and T30, both primary and secondary interments are found [START_REF] Rosen | Investigations at Ramat Saharonim: A desert Neolithic sacred precinct in the Central Negev[END_REF]). The interments were placed in the cavity at the base of the tumuli and in the case of T29, an equid bone was placed above the deceased. The bone could not have been introduced into the cavity following the interment without first removing the overlying rock slabs. Furthermore, the bone is unlikely to have fallen down from the upper Nabatean burial given that: (a) rock fall and a quantity of sediment separate the two interments, (b) the state of preservation of the metacarpal was identical to that of the underlying human remains, and differed markedly from the overlying Nabatean skeleton, and (c) no faunal remains were found with the Nabatean skeleton. The slight vertical difference between the equid bone and lower human remains can be explained as the result of movement of material within the grave as the bones settled. It does not reflect a chronological difference. We therefore conclude that the equid bone was intentionally introduced and interred together with the body.

The Saharonim bone may represent a precursor of the isolated equid limbs recovered from Middle Bronze Age II burials and ceremonial contexts at Tell el-Ajjul (Bodenheimer 1960:184). Like these, it probably represents a pars pro toto, with the remainder of the animal maybe consumed elsewhere, either on or off-site, in a ritual feast accompanying the mortuary ritual (e.g., a variant of the 'Bos pit' from Kfar Hahoresh -Goring Morris and Horwitz 2007). Such a scenario would accord well with the social changes in desert society reflected in the construction of large shrines and tumuli indicating communal activities.

Animal remains, interpreted as burial offerings, are known from other Late Neolithic-Chalcolithic desert sites such as the Nawamis in Sinai [START_REF] Bar Yosef | The nawamis near "Ein Huderah[END_REF] and the Late Neolithic cemetery in Eilat (Horwitz and Avner in press). Consequently, the Saharonim equid joins a small but growing corpus of information on this regional phenomenon.

Fig. 1 :

 1 Fig. 1: Outer view of Tumulus T29

Fig. 3 :

 3 Fig. 3: Distal equid metacarpal from Saharonim T29. Photographs: (left) plantar aspect; (centre) dorsal (cranial) aspect; (right) volar (palmar) aspect

Fig. 4 :

 4 Fig.4: Bar plot comparing distal breadth (measurement 10 in Table1) in the Saharonim equid and other modern and archaeological specimens. Mean distal breadth measurements is shown to 2± with ±2 SD to give a 95% confidence limit for samples. Samples: Israel horse -modern horses (Horwitz, unpublished data from Arad hyaena den); Egyptian horse -New Kingdom horses (Clutton Brock 1974); Scythian horse[START_REF] Benecke | The horse skeletons from the Scythian royal grave mound at Arzan 2 (Tuva, W. Siberia)[END_REF]; Chalcolithic -Negev sites[START_REF] Grigson | The earliest domestic horses in the Levant? New finds from the fourth millennium of the Negev[END_REF]; Arad -Early Bronze Age, Negev desert[START_REF] Davis | Mammal bones from the Early Bronze Age city of Arad, northern Negev, Israel: some implications concerning human exploitation[END_REF]); Abydos donkey -Early Dynastic Egypt[START_REF] Rossel | Domestication of the donkey: New data on timing, process and indicators[END_REF]; Shams ed-Din -Halafian period, probably onagers[START_REF] Uerpmann | Halafian equid remains from Shams ed-Din Tannira in northern Syria[END_REF]; Tel Brak donkey -Akkadian period (Clutton-Brock and Davies 1993); Modern E. hemionus(Gilbert 1991: Table 9); Modern Somali wild ass, Nubian wild ass, Egypt donkey, Syrian donkey[START_REF] Rossel | Domestication of the donkey: New data on timing, process and indicators[END_REF]; Modern Israeli donkeys[START_REF] Davis | Mammal bones from the Early Bronze Age city of Arad, northern Negev, Israel: some implications concerning human exploitation[END_REF]).

Fig. 5 :1

 5 Fig. 5: Scattergram showing distal metacarpal breadth (measurement 10) against depth (measurement 12). References for samples are the same as for Fig. 4

Table 1 :

 1 equation for the metacarpal where: Measurements of the distal equid metacarpus III from Saharonim compared to other archaeozoological specimens from the Near East

	Sites	Period	Equid		Measurements
			identification	10	11	12	13	13 bis
			from
			publication
	Ras en-Naq	Natufian	wild ass	42	(40.0±0.5)	32.5	23.7	27.2
	(Jordan) (1)
	Mureybet	Natufian	wild ass/	Mean=37.0
	(Syria) (6)		onager?	SD= 1.17
	(metapodials)
	Saharonim	Late	horse/wild	48.9	(45.2)	(31.6)	(26.2)	(24.8)
	Grar E (2)	Neolithic Chalcolithic ass ass?	41.9
	Ghassul (2)	Chalcolithic ass	40.3
	(metapodial) Grar G (2)	Chalcolithic horse	46.5
	Shiqmim 88 (2)	Chalcolithic horse	44.1
	Shams ed-Din	Chalcolithic	onager	Mean=37.5		Mean=28.2
	Tannira (Syria) (7) Arad (3)	(Halafian) Early Bronze	(n=7) ass	SD=1.17 38.0		SD=1.25
	Arad #2499 (4)	Age Early Bronze	horse	45.0		32.9
	Arad #8672 (4)	Age Early Bronze	horse	45.0		33.3
	Shoham (5)	Age Early Bronze	?horse	47.9
		Age
	Maysar-25	Bronze Age wild ass	39.0	38.0	(29.0±1)	(24.0)	25.0
	(Oman) (1)
	Jenin	Bronze Age large equid	47.3		35.0
	(Palestinian		(?horse)
	Auth.) (8)
	Petrie horse	?New	horse	53.1
	(Egypt) (9)	Kingdom
	Buhen	New	horse	50.7
	(Egypt) (10)	Kingdom
	Thebes	New	horse	50.0
	(Egypt) (10)	Kingdom
	Soleb	New	horse	45.0
	(Egypt) (10) Ajjam (9)	Kingdom Modern	Arab horse	50.3
	Little Joker (9)	Modern	Arab horse	53.7
	(1) Uerpmann 1991 (2) Grigson 1993 (3) Lernau 1978 (4) Davis 1976 (5) Horwitz 2007 (6) Ducos 1986 (7) Uerpmann
	1986 (8

) Al-Zawahra & Ezzughayyar 1998 (9) Clutton-Brock & Burleigh 1979 (10) Clutton-Brock 1974 * All measurements in mm; codes follow Eisenmann (2009): 10=Distal supra-articular breadth; 11=Distal articular breadth; 12=Depth of the sagittal crest; 13=Least depth of the medial condyle; 13bis=Least depth of the lateral condyle. estimated weight = -4.525 + 1.434 (Ln (MC10* MC13)). 1

Table 1

 1

	for location of

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Special thanks to Gali Beiner for her meticulous conservation work without which it would not have been possible to analyse the Saharonim equid and to Charlene Dalbera for information on the human burials. Excavations at Ramat Saharonim were conducted with the support of the National Geographic Society.