Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 11.

2 (1998) 232-241

Of Tiny Hippos, Large Cows and Early Colonists in Cyprus

Alan H. Simmons

Department of Anthropology, University of Nevada at Las Vegas, Las Vegas, Nevada 89154, USA

Abstract

Throughout the circum-Mediterranean region, human ecological impacts can be documented in the
archaeological record since at least Neolithic times. In Cyprus it has been demonstrated that pre-
Neolithic peoples also made considerable impact, and were largely responsible for the extinction of
endemic fauna, notably the pygmy hippopotamus. Current research on the island now indicates the
presence of cattle, previously undocumented, during the early Neolithic. All these recent investigations
focused on relatively small sites that under earlier research paradigms might have been ignored. These
studies suggest that human and faunal interactions within fragile island ecosystems were far more com-
plex than previously believed, and that to understand fully such interactions requires the investigation
of a full range of site types.

Introduction (e.g. Grayson 1991; Martin and Klein 1984

The considerable impacts that humans make
on the environment are an issue of contem-
porary concern. There is clear evidence that
this is not a new phenomenon, however; peo-
ple have substantially and adversely affected
the environments in which they live for thou-
sands of years. This has been particularly
severe in fragile ecosystems, such as islands or
deserts. Substantial archaeological and histor-
ical evidence, especially from the Pacific
(Anderson 1991; Steadman 1995), demon-
strates that humans have had immediate and
long-lasting affects on islands, including, in
many cases, the extinction of endemic
species. Such extinctions are usually associ-
ated with food-producing, or Neolithic,
economies. Tracing these impacts and extinc-
tion episodes back into the more distant pre-
historic past, however, is a controversial issue
for general discussion; see Burleigh and Clut-
ton-Brock 1980; Sondaar et al. 1991; Vigne
1987; Waldren 1994 for the Mediterranean).
The Mediterranean islands are one region
where human-induced impacts have been
especially harsh from Neolithic times up to
the present (Blondell and Aronson 1995;
Blumler 1993; Goudie 1990). It also has now
been argued that on Cyprus, early Holocene
pre-agriculturalists were at least partially
responsible for the extinction of endemic
Pleistocene fauna, notably the pygmy hip-
popotamus (Phanourious minutus), as docu-
mented at Akrotiri Aetokremnos (Simmons
1999). This note briefly summarizes the now
completed investigations at Aetokremnos, as
well as recent developments related to subse-
quent Neolithic adaptations on the island,
and places these findings within the wider
context of Mediterranean island adaptations.
 Of Tiny Hippos, Large Cows, and Early Colonists in Cyprus
MEDITERRANEAN SEA
CYPRUS
Ais Yiorkis
Shillourokambos
Aetokremnos
Figure 1. Map of Cyprus, showing the approximate locations of Akrotiri Aetokremnos, Kritou Marottou Ais Yiorkis,
and Parekklisha Shillourokambos.
Figure 1 shows the location of the major sites
under discussion.
Akrotiri Aetokremnos
Recent excavations at Akrotiri Aetokremnos,
a collapsed rockshelter on the southern coast
of Cyprus, have demonstrated convincingly
the co-existence of humans and extinct Pleis-
tocene animals, an often claimed but rarely
demonstrated scenario. While the implica-
tions of such an association are significant
from several perspectives, Aetokremnos is also
important from a methodological perspective
because it is a small, limited-activity site of
the type rarely investigated on many of the
Mediterranean islands, where research atten-
tion has tended to focus on more visible and
substantial remains (Simmons 1991b).
Interdisciplinary research at the site has doc-
umented the presence of over 500 pygmy hip-
233
N
10 Km
popotami, as well as numerous other species
(which include dwarf elephants and numerous
birds), in association with over 1,000 chipped
stone artifacts and numerous cultural features.
A series of 31 radiocarbon determinations
dates Aetokremnos to ca. 10,500 Cal BC (Sim-
mons and Wigand 1994). These data clearly
indicate that in Cyprus, at least, humans were
consuming large numbers of pygmy hip-
popotami during the early Holocene, prior to
the establishment of sedentary Neolithic vil-
lages on the island. It is apparent that the
occupants of Aetokremnos were a contributing
factor to the extinction of these unique ani-
mals that once roamed not only Cyprus, but
many of the Mediterranean islands (Simmons
1988; 1991a; 1999; Simmons and Reese 1993).
It is only on Cyprus, however, where a con-
nection between humans and pygmy hip-
popotami has been demonstrated thus far,
although cultural remains have been associ-
234 Simmons
ated with other now extinct endemic species
on other islands (e.g. Burleigh and Clutton-
Brock 1980; Walden 1994).
The Cypriot Neolithic
For many years, researchers maintained that
there were no pre-Neolithic peoples in Cyprus;
indeed, convincing evidence for them on most
of the Mediterranean islands is lacking.
Aetokremnos, however, has documented an
occupation some 2,000 years earlier than the
traditionally recognized Neolithic. This occu-
pation, however, apparently was not ancestral
to the Cypriot Aceramic Neolithic, or Khi-
rokita Culture (Cherry 1990: 154; Held 1989:
147-50, 223-26; Knapp 1994: 404-406). This
culture, appearing around 7,000 Cal BC, con-
tained few Levantine or Anatolian parallels
and in many ways appeared less sophisticated
than its mainland counterparts (LeBrun et al.
1987). Current research, however, suggests
that the Aceramic Neolithic was, in fact, more
complex than originally thought.
One reflection of this complexity was in
economic strategies. Conventional wisdom
held that the Aceramic Neolithic settlers of
the island had a relatively simple, if efficient
economic system. They arrived on an island
with few resources; certainly the endemic
fauna had been all but eradicated before their
arrival. These settlers brought with them an
economic package consisting of domesticated
plants and animals, including caprines and
pigs, and, apparently, wild deer, which they
hunted. They settled at several sites, with
major settlements usually being located
within 10 km of the Mediterranean Sea
(Cherry 1990: 154-57; Held 1992; LeBrun et
al. 1987; Stanley-Price 1977a; 1977b; 1979;
Todd 1987: 186-88). Research attention
accordingly has focused primarily on lowland
village-sites.
One animal conspicuously absent from the
Neolithic economic suite is Bos. It was widely
believed that cattle were not imported to the
island before the Bronze Age (Croft 1991: 63;
Knapp 1994: 418). Recent French excavations
at the relatively small Aceramic Neolithic set-
tlement of Parekklisha Shillourokambos, near
the south-central coast, however, have claimed
the presence of cattle (Guilaine et al. 1995),
and now current studies at Ais Yiorkis have col-
laborated this evidence by clearly document-
ing the presence of Bos through radiocarbon
dating on a bone of that species.
Kritou Marottou Ais Yiorkis
During a two week period in the summer of
1997, archaeologists from the University of
Nevada at Las Vegas conducted a series of
tests on two Aceramic Neolithic sites near
Paphos in the western part of Cyprus. The
sites were originally recorded during the
Canadian Palaipaphos Survey Project (Fox
1987: 19-22; Held 1992: 149; Rupp et al.
1984). These two sites, Kannaviou Kochina
and Kritou Marottou Ais Yiorkis are located
within view of each other. Unlike most other
Aceramic Neolithic sites investigated in
Cyprus, these localities are in an upland envi-
ronment consisting of Aleppo pine, Hermes
oak and wild olive (Held 1992: 149). Kochina
is at an elevation of ca. 340 m, while Ais
Yiorkis sits at ca. 460 m; both overlook the
Ezousas River. While only limited excava-
tions were conducted at both sites, evidence
from Ais Yiorkis, which appears to be a limited
activity area rather than a village, indicates
that the Aceramic Neolithic occupants of
Cyprus had a far more sophisticated economic
base than previously believed, and this
included cattle within their larder.
Although Kochina initially was believed to
represent a fairly substantial settlement, our test
excavations revealed only limited intact
remains. Ais Yirokis, however, proved far more
interesting. The recorders of Ais Yiorkis
believed it to reflect a small ‘hamlet’ site, possi-
 Of Tiny Hippos, Large Cows, and Early Colonists in Cyprus 235

bly related to deer and pig exploitation (Fox
1987: 22, 26). Thus, the site was of particular
interest since it appeared to be a relatively small
and specialized, precisely the type that has been
under-studied in Cyprus. As such, data from Ais
Yiorkis could contribute to a more balanced
understanding of the overall settlement pattern
of Neolithic peoples on the island.
As with Kochina, Ais Yiorkis has been
severely damaged by modern agricultural activ-
ities. The site is located on two adjacent ter-
races, both of which have been farmed in
modern times. The original surveyors recorded
an approximately 60 cm thick buried cultural
horizon and noted the presence of chipped
stone and animal bone in an exposed cut; they
also collected numerous artifacts. These con-
sisted of a technologically well-crafted chipped
stone assemblage, including one obsidian
bladelet sourced to the Çiftlik region in Ana-
tolia, ground stone, three picrolite artifacts,
including a ‘thimble shaped object’, and other
ornamental artifacts. Of particular interest in
the bone was the presence of relatively abun-
dant deer and pig remains (Fox 1987: 20-22).
Since the site was recorded, a large part of it
appears to have been bulldozed. This distur-
bance had the virtue of exposing a large verti-
cal section. In this section, for approximately
30m, there is clearly visible a thick (ca. 0.5 m)
deposit that contains abundant bone and
chipped stone. All of this material appears to
be Aceramic Neolithic.
We conducted a series of ‘surface scrapes’, a
cost-efficient yet thorough method that
involved screening all loose surface matrix.
We collected seven such 5 × 5 m units, all on
the lower terrace. We then cleaned two por-
tions of the exposed sections (‘Sections A and
B’), and excavated a 1m wide section of both.
Section A had a depth of ca. 2.5 m, of which
cultural material and bone occurred through-
out, although it was denser in some portions.
The remnants of a possible wall were also

Table 1. Summary of chipped stone material from Ais Yiorkis.

Class Number % Restricted % (excludes ‘Debris’)

Tools 42 2.1 3.9

Cores 24 1.2 2.2
Debitage—
primary flakes 19 0.9 1.8
secondary flakes 97 4.8 9.0
tertiary flakes 421 20.9 39.2
primary blades 2 0.1 0.2
secondary blades 37 1.8 3.4
tertiary blades 283 14.0 26.4
bladelets 56 2.8 5.2
core trimming elements 11 0.5 1.0
core tablets 1 — 0.1
Microflakes 66 3.3 6.1
Burin Spalls 15 0.7 1.4
Debris 941 46.7 —

Total 2,015 99.8 99.9

236 Simmons

Table 2. Tool typology from Ais Yiorkis.

Type Number Blank %

Scrapers— 21.4
end scraper 4 tertiary flake-2; tertiary blade-2
blunt-nosed end scraper 2 tertiary flake; secondary blade
side scraper 3 tertiary flake-2; tertiary blade-1
Burins— 9.5
straight 3 tertiary blade-3
angle 1 tertiary blade
Tangs 2 tertiary blade-2 4.8
Backed Blades 2 tertiary blade-2 4.8
Denticulates 1 tertiary flake 2.4
Notches 1 secondary flake 2.4
Truncations-straight 2 secondary flake-1; tertiary blade-1 4.8
Perforator fragment 1 tertiary blade 2.4
Retouched Blades 8 tertiary blade-7; core trimming element-1 19.0
Retouched Flakes 5 tertiary flake-5 11.9
Varia— 9.5
‘wedges’ 2 tertiary flake-2
miscellaneous 2 tertiary blade-2
Unidentifiable tool fragment 3 indeterminate 7.1

Total 42 100.0

recorded here. Section B had a depth of ca.
1.65 m, and cultural materials and bone also
were abundant. Towards the bottom of this
section, the possible remnants of another wall
and a floor were located.
We also excavated a 1 × 1 m unit in the
lower terrace. This contained relatively abun-
dant material for over 0.5 m in depth. This
indicated that while the bulldozer cut has
removed much of the site, there also is a con-
siderable amount remaining. Finally, we exca-
vated three small (ca. 5 × 5 m) test probes on
the upper terrace. These suggest that cultural
materials occur about 20 m upslope from the
bulldozer cut, but rapidly thin out.
A total of 2,015 chipped stone artifacts were
recovered during our investigations (Table 1).
Of these materials, tools (Table 2) included
scrapers, burins and two possible ‘tangs’. Cores
were largely nondescript. Of note is the fine
workmanship in much of this assemblage.
Many of the blades and flakes are very thin
and well-crafted. The blades in particular
reflect a high degree of sophistication. While
flakes are more common than blades, the later
are quite abundant; bladelets also are rela-
tively common. The presence of microflakes
suggests final tool preparation and/or resharp-
ening. Specialized production and core rejuve-
nation, as reflected by core trimming elements
and a single core tablet, suggest a technologi-
cally sophisticated blade production strategy.
Interestingly, burin spalls are relatively com-
mon, although only 4 burins were recovered.
Debris, or ‘shatter’, makes up 46.7% of the
chipped stone assemblage.
 Of Tiny Hippos, Large Cows, and Early Colonists in Cyprus 237

In addition to the chipped stone, ground
stone vessel fragments were relatively com-
mon, and a polished axe was also recovered, as
was an incised picrolite ‘thimble’. This tiny
artifact is very similar to the one recorded dur-
ing the survey (Fox 1987: 33, ills. 2-5). Some
worked bone artifacts also were retrieved.
A large amount of bone was also recovered
and analyzed by Paul Croft. Of particular note
is the presence of cattle, which is potentially
very significant and could affect our under-
standing of Neolithic subsistence patterns
substantially. The principal question, of
course, was whether or not the bone was
intrusive.
This dilemma was solved by radiocarbon
dating. We have three determinations, all
from bone, from Ais Yiorkis (Table 3). One
(DRI 3441) was on a Bos metacarpal. All
three determinations are close in time, and
place the site firmly within the Aceramic
Neolithic.
The importance of a well preserved faunal
assemblage at Ais Yirokis should not be under-
estimated, since it indicates that even at a
small site, such economic indicators can be
retrieved. This was perhaps best exemplified
by the huge faunal assemblage from Akrotiri
Aetokremnos, a site even smaller than Ais
Yiorkis.
A total of 340 identifiable pieces were
recovered at Ais Yiorkis, and these are listed by
taxon in Table 4. The faunal assemblage
includes a high proportion of bones of fallow

Table 3. Radiocarbon determinations from Ais Yiorkis.

Laboratory Number Material 14C Age/d13/12C Calibrated Date (95.4%)

DRI 3441 Bos (1 bone) 7,867 + 106 BP/-24.21% 7,007-6,468 BC

DRI 3442 Sus (2 bones) 7,540 + 169 BP/-28.24% 6,704-5984 BC
DRI 3443 Dama (1 bone) 7,658 + 105 BP/-26.49% 6,698-6,673 BC (1%);
6,666-6,212 BC (99%)

Table 4. Ais Yiorkis animal remains.

Taxon N

deer 149
pig 128
caprine 54
cattle 4
cat 3
fox 1
bird 1
Total Identifiable 340
Unidentifiable:
large (cattle-sized) animal 5
medium-small animal 1,511

Total 1,516
238 Simmons
deer (Dama mesopotamica). Expressed as a
percentage of all identified fragments of large-
medium-sized animals (i.e. animals of at least
caprine size), deer account for 44.5% of the
animal remains. Pig bones are somewhat less
abundant (38.2%), while caprine remains
(16.1%) are far less common and cattle bones
(1.2%) are distinctly rare, but clearly present.
According to Croft, the Ais Yiorkis animal
bone assemblage seems to reflect an animal
economy based mainly on a combination of
deer hunting and swineherding, with caprine
herding as a subsidiary activity. Fox and birds
appear occasionally to have been hunted or
trapped, and a small (domestic-sized) cat also
was present. Cattle, it seems, also formed a
small component of the diet.
Thus, in the light of information from
Shillourokambos and now Ais Yiorkis, the pres-
ence of cattle in the Aceramic Neolithic fits a
pattern of an early stage of cattle introduction
in Cyprus. If this is indeed the case, the appar-
ent anomaly of the absence of cattle from Ace-
ramic Neolithic Cyprus ceases to exist, only to
be replaced by the curiosity of the early aban-
donment of cattle keeping, and the evident
absence of cattle from the island during the
subsequent three or four millennia until the
beginning of the Bronze Age (Croft 1996).
Significance and Relationship to Early
Human/Animal Interactions in Cyprus
Some recent archaeological studies in Cyprus
have focused on small, limited activity sites,
types of which were previously under-investi-
gated. Research at such sites has been fruitful,
often providing unanticipated data that have
radically changed pre-existing conceptions of
cultural development on the island. This is
particularly true regarding early, prehistoric
periods. Given the results of such investiga-
tions, it is clear that future research should
pay close attention to these types of sites. By
so doing, we should be able to obtain a more
focused perspective of early adaptations
within the limited confines of an island envi-
ronment.
The significance of Akrotiri Aetokremnos is
two-fold. First, the occupation of this site is
some 1,500-2,000 years earlier than the Ace-
ramic Neolithic, previously thought by most
scholars to represent Cyprus’ initial occupa-
tion. Whether or not the occupants of
Aetokremnos were pre-Neolithic, or repre-
sented an earlier, non-agriculturally based
Neolithic variant is as yet unclear. These peo-
ple, however, undoubtedly had their roots in
the Levantine or Anatolian mainlands, areas
that were undergoing tremendous and tumul-
tuous changes associated with the ‘Neolithic
Revolution’ at the beginning of the Holocene.
The second element of significance at
Aetokremnos is the association of cultural
materials with extinct endemic island fauna.
Prior to the research at the site, such connec-
tions had not been demonstrated, and these
unique beasts were believed to have gone
extinct prior to the arrival of humans on the
islands. This scenario now has to be
rethought, for it is apparent that humans were
in fact a critical element in the extinction
process. Humans as a causal element in Pleis-
tocene extinctions has long been a controver-
sial issue, and Aetokremnos has added fuel to
the fire (e.g. Bunimovitz and Barkai 1996;
Reese 1996; Simmons 1996).
The significance of the findings from Ais
Yiorkis relate to the story they tell of an Ace-
ramic Neolithic adaptation that was more
economically sophisticated than previously
believed and that was not restricted to the
coastal areas of Cyprus, but also exploited the
uplands. For a small site, Ais Yiorkis has a rich
and varied faunal assemblage. That cattle
have now been found at two sites (if the asso-
ciation at Parekklisha Shillourokambos is
secure), and assuming that both of these sites
are not large villages, indicates an economic
dichotomy that apparently selected against
 Of Tiny Hippos, Large Cows, and Early Colonists in Cyprus
keeping cattle in villages. It may have been
that these animals were not compatible with
early Cypriot village life, and that they were
kept only at smaller, specialized sites. What-
ever their significance, however, these data
indicate that the economic parameters of the
Aceramic Neolithic were far broader than
previously documented.
The presence of Bos also has considerable
implications for the sea-faring abilities of these
Neolithic peoples, who must have brought
these animals with them on boats. Although it
is possible that wild cattle, independent of
human intervention, could have swum to the
island, this appears extremely unlikely, since
Bos remains have not been found in paleonto-
logical contexts. Thus, the Neolithic coloniz-
ers of the island must have arrived with
veritable Noah’s arks containing not only
sheep/goat and pigs, but also wild deer, cats
and, now, cattle. Presumably the cattle repre-
sented domesticated animals, as it is unlikely
that wild cattle would have been amenable to
a sea voyage, even a short one. The present
sample of Bos remains, however, is too small to
determine clearly if the cattle were domesti-
cated. As such, the Bos from both Ais Yiorkis
and Parekklisha Shillourokambos appear to be
amongst the earliest evidence, albeit indirect,
of domesticated cattle anywhere.
There is little indication that the Aceramic
Neolithic occupants of Cyprus had a substan-
tial negative impact on the island’s ecology,
despite a consensus view that severe impacts
on a global basis accelerated during the
Neolithic. Certainly this is the case on the
nearby Levantine mainland, where a consid-
erable number of Neolithic ecological
impacts can be documented (Köhler-Rollef-
son 1988; Köhler-Rollefson and Rollefson
1990; Rollefson 1997; Simmons et al. 1988).
It may well be that Neolithic population den-
sities on Cyprus, or any of the Mediterranean
islands, were initially sufficiently low to avoid
such ecological havoc. Certainly the first
239
occupants of Cyprus, as represented by pre-
Neolithic Akrotiri Aetokremnos, had a more
dramatic impact, in that they contributed to
the extinction of the native fauna. As popu-
lations grew in post-Neolithic times, it also
seems clear than the impact of agriculture and
animal husbandry took its toll on the island.
It may well be, however, that the Aceramic
Neolithic offered a brief respite from both
earlier and later ecological deterioration.
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank the Department of
Antiquities of the Republic of Cyprus for
their support of the project. Financial and
logistical support came from Mr. B. Johnson
and Exalt Tours. I also would like to thank the
Cyprus American Archaeological Research
Institute (CAARI) for their assistance, and
Stuart Swiny (SUNY-Albany) for encourag-
ing my research on Cyprus.
About the Author
Alan H. Simmons received his B.A. from the
University of Colorado at Boulder, M.A.s
from the University of Toronto and Southern
Methodist University, and his Ph.D. from
Southern Methodist University. All of his
degrees are in anthropology, and he is cur-
rently a professor of Anthropology at the Uni-
versity of Nevada at Las Vegas. He has
specialized in the study of early food producing
economies in the Levantine Near East, the
Mediterranean and the American Southwest.
Other research interests include small-site
archaeology, cultural heritage management,
archaeological ethics, lithic analyses, and mul-
tidisciplinary research. Current publications
include an article comparing surface and sub-
surface materials in Cyprus, Jordan and the
American Southwest in A.P. Sullivan (ed.),
Surface Archaeology (Albuquerque 1998) and
the forthcoming final report on investigations
240 Simmons
at Akrotiri Aetokremnos, (New York 1999). In
addition to work at Ais Yiorkis, he also is co-
director, with Mohammad Najjar, of excava-
tions at Ghwair I, an Aceramic Neolithic
village in southern Jordan. E-mail address:
simmonsa@nevada.edu
References
Anderson, A.
1991 Prodigious Birds: Moas and Moa Hunting in
Prehistoric New Zealand. Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press.
Blondel, J., and J. Aronson
1995 Biodiversity and ecosystem function in the
Mediterranean Basin: human and non-human
determinants. In G. Davis and D. Richardson
(eds.), Mediterranean-Type Ecosystems: The
Function of Biodiversity, 43-120. Berlin:
Springer-Verlag.
Blumler, M.
1993 Successional pattern and landscape sensitiv-
ity in the Mediterranean and Near East. In D.
Thomas and R. Allison (eds), Landscape Sen-
sitivity, 287-305. New York: John Wiley.
Burleigh, R., and J. Clutton-Brock
1980 The survival of Myotragus balearicus (Bate,
1909) into the Neolithic on Mallorca. Journal
of Archaeological Science 7: 385-88.
Bunimovitz, S., and R. Barkai
1996 Ancient bones and modern myths: ninth mil-
lennium BC hippopotamus hunters at Akrotiri
Aetokremnos, Cyprus? Journal of Mediterranean
Archaeology 9: 85-96.
Cherry, J.F.
1990 The first colonization of the Mediterranean
islands: a review of recent research. Journal of
Mediterranean Archaeology 3: 145-221.
Croft, P.
1991 Man and beast in Chalcolithic Cyprus. Bul-
letin of the American Schools of Oriental
Research 282/283: 63-79.
1996 Animal remains from Marki Alonia. In D.
Frankel and J. Webb (eds.), Marki Alonia: An
Early and Middle Bronze Age Town in Cyprus.
Excavations 1990–1994. Studies in Mediter-
ranean Archaeology 123.1: 217-22. Göte-
borg: Paul Åströms Förlag.
Fox, W.
1987 The Neolithic occupation of western Cyprus.
In D. Rupp (ed.), Western Cyprus Connec-
tions: An Archaeological Symposium. Studies in
Mediterranean Archaeology 77: 19-42. Göte-
borg: Paul Åströms Förlag.
Goudie, A.
1990 The Human Impact on the Natural Environ-
ment. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Grayson, D.
1991 Late Pleistocene mammalian extinctions in
North America: taxonomy, chronology, and
explanations. Journal of World Prehistory 5:
193-231.
Guilaine, J., F. Briois, J. Coularou and I. Carrère
1995 L’établissement néolithique de Shillourokam-
bos (Parekklisha, Chypre). Premiers résultats.
Report of the Department of Antiquities of
Cyprus (1995): 11-32.
Held, S.
1989 Early Prehistoric Island Archaeology in
Cyprus: Configurations of Formative Culture
Growth from the Pleistocene/Holocene
Boundary to the Mid-3rd Millennium B.C.
Unpublished PhD dissertation, Institute of
Archaeology, University College, London.
1992 Pleistocene Fauna and Holocene Humans: A
Gazetteer of Paleontological and Early Archaeo-
logical Sites on Cyprus. Studies in Mediter-
ranean Archaeology 95. Jonsered: Paul
Åströms Förlag.
Knapp, A.B. (with S.O. Held and S.W. Manning)
1994 The prehistory of Cyprus: problems and pros-
pects. Journal of World Prehistory 377: 377-453.
Köhler-Rollefson, I.
1988 The aftermath of the Levantine Neolithic
revolution in light of ecologic and ethno-
graphic evidence. Paléorient 14: 87-93.
Köhler-Rollefson, I., and G. Rollefson
1990 The impact of Neolithic subsistence strate-
gies on the environment: the case of ‘Ain
Ghazal, Jordan. In S. Bottema, G. Entjes-
Nieborg and W. van Zeist (eds.), Man’s Role in
the Shaping of the Eastern Mediterranean Land-
scape, 3-14. Rotterdam: A.A. Balkema.
LeBrun, A., S. Cluzan, S. Davis, J. Hansen and J.
Renault-Miskovsky
1987 Le néolithique précéramique de Chypre.
L’Anthropologie 91: 283-316.
 Of Tiny Hippos, Large Cows, and Early Colonists in Cyprus
Martin, P., and R. Klein (eds.)
1984 Quaternary Extinctions: A Prehistoric Revolu-
tion. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
Reese, D.
1996 Cypriot hippo hunters no myth. Journal of
Mediterranean Archaeology 9: 107-12.
Rollefson, G.
1996 The Neolithic devolution: ecological impact
and cultural compensation at ‘Ain Ghazal,
Jordan. In J. Seger (ed.), Retrieving the Past:
Essays on Archaeological Research and Method-
ology in Honor of Gus W. van Beek, 219-29.
Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns
Rupp, D., L. Sørensen, R. King and W. Fox
1984 Canadian Palaipaphos (Cyprus) survey pro-
ject: second preliminary report, 1980-1982.
Journal of Field Archaeology 11: 133-54.
Simmons, A.
1988 Extinct pygmy hippopotamus and early man
in Cyprus. Nature 333: 554-57.
1991a Humans, island colonization, and Pleistocene
extinctions in the Mediterranean: the view
from Akrotiri Aetokremnos, Cyprus. Antiquity
65: 857-69.
1991b One flew over the hippo’s nest: extinct Pleis-
tocene fauna, early man, and conservative
archaeology in Cyprus. In G. Clark (ed.), Per-
spectives on the Past, 282-304. Philadelphia:
University of Pennsylvania Press.
1996 Whose myth? Archaeological data, interpre-
tations, and implications for the human asso-
ciation with extinct Pleistocene fauna at
Akrotiri Aetokremnos. Journal of Mediter-
ranean Archaeology 9: 97-105.
1999 Faunal Extinctions in an Island Society: Hippo
Hunters of the Akrotiri Peninsula, Cyprus. New
York: Plenum Press.
Simmons, A., and D. Reese
1993 Hippo hunters of Akrotiri. Archaeology 46:
38-43.
Simmons, A., and P. Wigand
1994 Assessing the radiocarbon determinations
from Akrotiri Aetokremnos, Cyprus. In O. Bar-
241
Yosef and R. Kra (eds.), Late Quaternary
Chronology and Paleoclimates of the Eastern
Mediterranean, 247-54. Tucson and Cam-
bridge, Massachusetts: Radiocarbon and Amer-
ican School of Prehistoric Research.
Simmons, A., G. Rollefson, I. Köhler-Rollefson, R.
Mandel and Z. Kafafi
1988 ‘Ain Ghazal: a major Neolithic settlement in
central Jordan. Science 240: 35-9.
Sondaar, P., F. Martini, A. Ulzega and G. Hofmeijer
1991 L’homme pleistocène en Sardaigne. L’Anthro-
pologie 95: 181-200.
Stanley-Price, N.
1977a Colonisation and continuity in the early pre-
history of Cyprus. World Archaeology 9: 27-41.
1977b Khirokitia and the initial settlement of
Cyprus. Levant 9: 66-9.
1979 Early Prehistoric Settlement in Cyprus: A
Review and Gazetteer of Sites, c. 6500-3000
B.C. BAR International Series 65. Oxford:
British Archaeological Reports.
Steadman, D.
1995 Prehistoric extinctions of Pacific island birds:
biodiversity meets zooarchaeology. Science
267: 1123-31.
Todd, I. (ed.)
1987 Vasilikos Valley Project 6: Excavations at Kalava-
sos Tenta 1. Studies in Mediterranean Archae-
ology 71.6. Göteborg: Paul Åströms Förlag.
Vigne, J.
1987 L’extinction holocène du fonds de peuple-
ment mammalien indigène des îles de
Mediterranée occidentale. Mémoires de la
Société Géologique de France n.s. 150: 167-77.
Waldren, W.
1994 Survival and Extinction: Myotragus Balearicus,
an Endemic Pleistocene Antelope from the Island
of Mallorca. DAMARC 27. Oxford: Donald
Baden- Powell Quaternary Research Center,
Pitt Rivers Museum, University of Oxford and
Baleares, Spain: Deìa Archaeological Museum
and Research Centre, Deìa, Mallorca.
242 Simmons