A single excavation square (Figs. 2, 3), opened near the eastern bank of Nahal Guvrin, yielded the remains of pits and a depression with finds of the Early Chalcolithic period (4,700–4,500 BCE). An earlier excavation, located a few meters to the southeast, uncovered architectural remains and pits from the Early Chalcolithic period ascribed to the Besorian culture (Nahshoni and Aladjem 2009).
 
Beneath the agricultural topsoil, the ancient surface was uncovered, containing the remains of two circular pits (L105—diam. 1.5 m, depth 0.3 m; L106—diam. 3.5 m, depth 0.55 m) and a shallow depression (L107; depth 0.3 m). A mudbrick surface at the bottom of Pit 105 was covered by an accumulation of light brown soil and ash, which contained a few potsherds and animal bones (Fig. 4). A concentration of pebbles near the pit’s western and southern walls may be traces of a lining or the remains of an installation. Pit 106 extended across most of the excavation square’s western half. It is bell-shaped, and it is larger and deeper than Pit 105. The bottom of the pit was filled with an accumulation of heavy, dark brown soil mixed with small stones, as well as a few potsherds, flint items and animal bones, but no clear habitation level was discerned. Depression 107, which contained an accumulation of brown soil mixed with pottery, may be part of an additional pit.
According to the recovered pottery (below) and flint items (Oron, below), these features date to the Early Chalcolithic period. The topsoil layer produced worn Chalcolithic, Byzantine and Ottoman pottery. The sherds from the latter two periods probably derive from nearby Tel Gishron. The excavation also yielded two stone items (below), animal bones and a shell (Sadiel, below).
 
Pottery and Stone Finds. Most of the pottery assemblage derives from the pits and the depression. It comprises 310 sherds of the Early Chalcolithic period. They were produced of coarse clay with gravel grits and are evidently handmade. Six of the sherds are decorated: three bear plastic ornamentations, and three exhibit traces of red paint. Identified vessel types include small bowls (Fig. 5:1), large bowls (Fig. 5:2), a stand (Fig. 5:3), holemouth jars (Fig. 5:4–6) and jars (Fig. 5:7). Handles comprise approximately 10% of the pottery assemblage, consisting of loop handles, mostly of the strap handle type (Fig. 5:8, 9), handles with an oval cross-section (Fig. 5:10) and two pierced lug handles (Fig. 5:11, 12).
Two stone items were found. One is a small basalt fragment (not drawn) of an unidentifiable object. The other is a flint hammerstone with impact marks (Fig. 5:13).
 
Flint Finds
Maya Oron
 
The excavation yielded 53 well-preserved flint items. Most of them are made of gray flint, which is at times translucent, probably of the Mishash Formation, and a few items are made of light and dark brown flint, possibly of Eocene origin. All the flint at the site was probably obtained as pebbles from nearby Nahal Guvrin. Many items are burnt, apparently by exposure to a fire after they were knapped and used. The assemblage consists mainly of knapping debitage, including primary items, core trimming elements, flakes, blades and bladelets. Only one core—a bipolar bladelet core (Fig. 6:1)—was found. Of the six tools found, three are sickle blades (Fig. 6:2–4), two are retouched blades and one is an end scraper.
The composition of the assemblage is indicative of bladelet production, an industry typical of both the Besorian and the Ghassulian cultures of the Chalcolithic period (Gilead 2007). Furthermore, although the single bladelet core is made of dark brown flint, the bladelets and bladelet core trimming elements are made of a translucent flint, which was used widely in the bladelet industries throughout the Chalcolithic period.
Nevertheless, the assemblage fits well with the Besorian culture, as attested to both by the dominance of sickle blades (Nahshoni et al. 2002) and by their typology: they are rather wide and have an abrupt, curved back (Fabian, Hermon and Goren 2004). Although one sickle blade (Fig. 6:4) is narrower and truncated, none have two truncations on their back—a defining characteristic of the Late Chalcolithic period.
 
Archaeozoology
Tehila Sadiel
 
The excavation yielded a small assemblage of faunal remains, consisting of twelve animal-bone fragments (Table 1): six cattle bones (Bos taurus), three belonging to sheep/goat (Capra/Ovis), two bones of unidentified medium-sized species (sheep or goat) and one bone of a small, unidentified fowl. Additionally, a shell fragment was also identified. Most of bones derive from the Chalcolithic pits (L105—N=1, 8%; L106—N=7, 54%). Three bones bear predator gnawing marks, suggesting that the assemblage’s small size can be attributed to predators removing carcasses from the site.
 
Table 1. Taxonomic Frequencies of the Animal Bones

Locus

Species

L102

L105

L106

L107

L108

Total

Cattle

-

-

5

-

1

6 (46%)

Sheep/goat

1

-

2

-

-

3 (23%)

Medium-sized animals

1

-

-

-

1

2 (15%)

Small fowl

-

1

-

-

-

1 (8%)

Shell

-

-

-

1

-

1 (8%)

Total

2 (15%)

1 (8%)

7 (54%)

1 (8%)

2 (15%)

13 (100%)

 
The distribution of the skeletal parts (Table 2) shows that most of the remains are limb fragments. Of the assemblage, only two teeth are age-diagnostic. One is a cattle molar that, based on its abrasion, comes from an adult individual. The other is a lower mandible sheep/goat molar (M1) that also exhibits wear indicative of an adult individual (Grant 1982).
The assemblage’s meagerness renders any inference about the site occupants’ diet impossible.
 
Table 2. Counts of Skeletal Parts (after Stiner 2002)

Species

Skeletal part

Cattle

Sheep/goat

Fowl

Medium-sized animals

Total

Head

2

1

-

-

3

Limb bones

4

1

1

2

8

Ribs

-

1

-

-

1

Total

6

3

1

2

12

 
The excavation continued to uncover the Early Chalcolithic site (Besorian culture) partially excavated in 2006. It seems that the current excavation was located on the fringes of this site, an indication that it is a small site. Presently, only a few Early Chalcolithic sites are known in this area. The pits and depression did not damage each other, suggesting that they were used simultaneously. Based on the finds, it is impossible to determine what the pits were used for, but the ash in Pit 105 implies that some fire-related activity was performed in it.