Fig 1.
(a) Classification (b) Characterization (photographed by Laurant Davin).
Fig 2.
3D analysis of the perforated pebbles and the perforations.
a) An example of the analysis procedure for perforated stones using the Artifact3-D software of the Computational Archaeological Laboratory, Institute of Archaeology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. b) The designed algorithm for producing a 3D negative of the perforations. Left-to-Right: The 3D mesh of the object, including its detailed scanned hole; The algorithm calculates the convex hull of the artifact’s mesh (black lines) and marks the most distanced points within a defined interval (in purple) to produce a negative 3D model of the perforation. c) The model of the perforation is analyzed using Artifact3-D software.
Fig 3.
Complete shape 3D analysis of the perforated pebbles.
(a) Selected artifacts that present the main weight range (photographed by Laurant Davin) (b) The binding box of a perforated pebble, with the millimetric scale and the centre of mass marked in red. (c) The location of the perforation in relation to the item’s Centre of Mass (red) and Centre of Binding Box (blue).
Fig 4.
(a) direction of drilling, (b) aperture sizes, (c) location of minimal width, (d) shape of minimal width, (e) size of minimal width.
Fig 5.
NEG’s perforated stones characteristics compared to functional interpretations.
(a) beads, (b) fishing weights, (c) loom weights, (d) mace heads, (e) spindle whorls.
Fig 6.
Distribution graph of perforated tools according to their published weight and minimum aperture size.
.Fig 7.
(a) Manual thigh-spinning [64]; (b) Spindle-and-whorl “supported spinning” [68]; (c) “drop spinning” [66]; (d) the experimental spindles and whorls, the 3D scans of the pebbles and their negative perforations. The bottom pictures show Yonit Kristal experimenting spinning fibres with replicas of the perforated pebbles, using supported spinning and drop spinning techniques (photographed by Talia Yashuv).
Fig 8.
Perforated stones and spindle whorls from the Southern Levant.
Left: Counts of all perforated stones, regardless of sub-typologies and morphological variations (light green) and perforated stones with similar morphological characteristics as those from NEG II (dark green): centrally perforated, small (<5 cm). Right: A map with the location of NEG II, and sites with spindle whorls or alike that are mentioned in the text and figures [27, 26, 50, 60, 70–94].
Fig 9.
Rotational technologies: The evolution from ‘wheel-less’ to ‘wheel-based’ rotational technologies.
Insert: centrally perforated small stones and ceramic spindle whorls. Figures based on: UP bone Roundelles [62]; NEG II perforated pebble photographed by Talia Yashuv; Ceramic spindle whorl [95]; Potter’s wheel [96, 97]; Wheeled animal and cart illustration [98, 99]; Golden Chariot [100]; Vitruvius water mill illustration [101]; Spinning wheel illustration [102].