Agro-Pastoralist Colonization of Cyprus in the 10Th Millennium BP: Initial Assessments

Home , Shillourokambos

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/285891107

Agro-pastoralist colonization of Cyprus in the 10th millennium BP: Initial assessments

Article in Antiquity · December 2000 DOI: 10.1017/S0003598X0006049X

CITATIONS READS 100 48

6 authors, including:

Sue Colledge Paul Croft University College London University of Cyprus

67 PUBLICATIONS 3,166 CITATIONS 21 PUBLICATIONS 363 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Carole J. Mccartney University of Cyprus

9 PUBLICATIONS 240 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Chlorakas-Palloures, Leiden University View project

Cultivating Societies: Assessing the Evidence for Agriculture in Neolithic Ireland View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Sue Colledge on 07 December 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. Agro-pastoralist- colonization of Cyprus in the loth millennium BP: initial assessments

EDGARPELTENBURG, SUE COLLEDGE, PAUL CROFT, ADAMJACKSON, CAROLEMCCARTNEY & MARYANNE MURRAY*

Unexpectedly early evidence for the precocious spread of farming has recently emerged in Cyprus. It is argued that the transmission occurred as a result of migration related to ecosystem stress in the Levant. So strong are the connections of the colonists with the mainland that we suggest the term Cypro-Pre-Pottery Neolithic B to describe what has hitherto been a major lacuna in Cypriot prehistory. Consistent dates from key sites and the evolution of material culture indicate that this Cypro-PPNB sequence represents the hitherto elusive ancestry for the Khirokitian.

Key-words: burial, colonization, Cyprus, domestication, Pre-Pottery Neolithic, wells A startling variety of new evidence from Cy- Aetokremnos (Simmons et al. 1999) and the prus demonstrates that the introduction of the 8thhth-millennia BP Khirokitian might be found Neolithic occurred in the loth millennium BP, on low visibility sites that had escaped detec- over a millennium earlier than often assumed tion. Such sites have recently come to light. in studies of Mediterranean island coloniza- The earliest, and currently the most informa- tions (e.g. Stanley Price 1977; Cherry 1990). On tive sites, Kissonerga-Mylouthkia (hereafter the basis of evidence summarized below, we Mylouthkia) and Parekklisha-Shillourokambos propose that the introduction of agro-pastoral- (hereafter Shillourokambos), were founded in ism was by migration rather than a result of the second half of the loth millennium BP (FIG- adaptations by indigenous foragers. The proc- URES 1, 2). ess does not fit the wave of advance model used Mylouthkia is a multi-period coastal site in to account for the spread of farming in Europe the southwest of the island. Lemba Archaeo- (Ammerman & Cavalli-Sforza 1984), nor its logical Project excavations from 1989 to 2000 modification, jump dispersal (Van Andel & revealed five wells, a semi-subterranean struc- Runnels 1995),but is the outcome of regional ture and three pits belonging to the Aceramic environmental change. All dates in this paper Neolithic. Period 1A well 116 has a coherent are uncalibrated BP. set of three later 10th-millennium BP AMS dates from barley and other short-lived cereal grains Low visibility sites of agro-pastoralist (FIGIJRE2). AMS results from charred seeds in colonists Period 1B well 133 date it to the late 9th mil- The origins of the Aceramic Neolithic lennium BP. The wells are thus amongst the Khirokitian culture have long been debated earliest known in the world. Details are reported (Held 1992; LeBrun 1989; Stanley Price 1977; in Peltenburg et al. in press; forthcoming a; Watkins 1973). Cherry (1990: 194) suggested forthcoming b. that relevant evidence belonging to the period Since 1992, Jean Guilaine’s excavations at between the 11th-millennium BP foragers of Shillourokambos have also yielded mainly

* Peltenburg & Jackson, Department of Archaeology, University of Edinburgh, Old High School, Edinburgh EH1 ILT, Scotland. E.PeltenburgQed.ac.uk AjacksonBhsyl.ssc.ed.ac.uk Colledge & Murray, Institute of Archaeology, University College London, 31-34 Gordon Square, London WClH OPY, England. S.ColledgeQucl.ac.uk [email protected] Croft, Leniba Archaeological Research Centre, 8260 Lernba, Paphos District. Cyprus. Pau1croftQcytanet.com.cy McCartney, 8 Metamorphosios, 8574 Kissonerga, Paphos District, Cyprus. CaroleQnautilus.spidernet.net Received 5 April 2000, accepted 31 May 2000, revised 18 July 2000 ANTIQUITY74 (2000): 844-53 AGRO-PASTORALIST COLONIZATION OF CYPRUS IN THE lOTH MILLENNIUM BP 845

Suberde A r *Can Hasan A /j

Arkosyko 0 ? Abu Hureyra 0 A Asprakremnos *A

nny,ou*h~Kalavasos Tenfa rn *A Shillourokambos R @A Site 23@? / MEDITERRANEAN SEA Ghoraife 0 A *Aswad 0 Ramad A 0 250km

FIGLJRE1. Distribution of Pre-Pottery Neolithic B sites in Cyprus and the adjacent Asiatic mainland. negative features including probable wells, pits Shillourokainbos Middle/Late Phase (FIGURE2). and posthole alignments (Briois et al. 1997; Its hierarchically organized settlement plan was Guilaine et al. 1998; 2000). Thirteen charcoal- ultimately derived from PPNA Syria (Todd 1987: derived I4C dates belonging to the loth-9th figure 20; cf. Stordeur 1999: 142, figure 8b). millennium BP point to a long continuity of Other southwest Asiatic introductions, some occupation which the excavators have divided discussed below, concern symbolic behaviour into four periods (FIGURE2 and Vigne et al. in (maceheads, engraved pebbles, figurative art- press). Of particular note are a 76-sq. m enclo- work and skull treatments) and the economic sure defined by palisade trenches and a feline sphere (an unalloyed Neolithic subsistence head sculpted in serpentine. Upstanding cur- package of plants and animals). The integrity vilinear stone architecture appears at least by of what is essentially a PPN economic and cul- the Late Phase, dated to the end of the 9th mil- tural system point strongly to a transfer of EPPNB lennium BP. agro-pastoralists from southwest Asia. There As argued elsewhere (Peltenburg et al. forth- are no signs of restructuring by putative indi- coming b), four other sites shown on FIGURE1 genes to suit their own ideology. may now also be considered as pre-Khirokitian. In order to assess this case for migration, we Kalavasos-Tenta (henceforth Tenta) 'top of site' comment on salient features of the new se- has dates consistent with Mylouthkia 1B and quence: water wells, the chipped stone, mor- 846 PELTENBURG, COLLEDGE, CROFT, JACKSON, MCCARTNEY & MURRAY

Mylouthkia I Shillourokambos Tents LEVANT 9500 I PPNB Early 9300 -----

91 00

Middle 8900 n. rn f 8700 ----- 9 8500

8300 Late

aidp ______-_"-----I------7900

Site Contexts FIGURE2. Radiocarbon I4C determinations (single s.d.1 from sites of the Cypro-Pre-Pottery Neolithic B period, c. 9500-8000 BP. Dates from Guilaine et al. 2000; Peltenburg et al. forthcoming a; Todd 1987. Column on right shows conventional mainland PPNB phase divisions. Note: Relevant dates from four other sites are excluded from this diagram. One Khirokitia date, 88505650 (Ly 47851, may prove significant but its large range does not inspire confidence and it lacks supporting evidence; at a single s.d., two other dates from this site extend into the late 9th niillennium BP. Akrotiri Site 23 produced a date of 8350_+250(UCL-307, shell, uncorrected for reservoir effect); it seems a multi-component, but disturbed site with earlier and later material. At a single s.d., Dhali-Agridhi P-2775, and at two s.d. Ais Yorkis DRI-3441, also extend into the late 9th millennium BP. It should be noted that there are many more relevant dates from Shillourokambos (see Vigne et al. in press]. tuary practices, flora and fauna. To provide a wells 116 and 133, consist of cylindrical shafts framework for discussion, we use the term a minimum of8 and 7 m deep with handlfoot- Cypro-PPNB shown in the proposed chrono- holds cut into unweathered shaft walls to fa- logical scheme of FIGURE3. It emphasizes the cilitate climbing in and out (FIGURE41. In well combined insular and southwest Asiatic char- 133, the 43 preserved examples are systemati- acteristics of the period (cf. Peltenburg et al. cally distributed in fairly vertically aligned, in press). approximately opposed ranges. Both wells are cut into the soft, homogeneous bedrock to tap Wells the flow of small underground watercourses Of the features belonging to the earliest traces (now dry) which flowed in pipe-like channels of Cypriot farming communities, the wells are some 20-40 cm in width towards the seashore most extraordinary. Two Mylouthkia examples, (FIGIJRE5). Subterranean stream channels at least AGRO-PASTORALIST COLONIZATION OF CYPRUS IN THE 10TH MILLENNIUM BP ti47

Stage Phase Dates BP Dates cal BC Populations

Exploration: Akrotiri 10,665' 9703* Hunter-gatherer visitors

Colonisation: Cypro-PPNB Early ?-goo0 ?-8000 First agro-pastoral settlers

Cypro-PPNB Middle 9000-8500 Consolidation: 8000-7500 Establishment of farmers

Adaptation: Cypro-PPNB Late 8500-8000 7500-7000 Distinctive economy Development: Khirokitian 8000-6500 7000/6500-5800/5500 Efflorescence of Aceramic Neolithic

* average of large series of dates (Simmons 1999)

FIC~JKE3. Chronological scheme for the Aceramic Neolithic and Akrotiri phases of Cyprus.

Upper shafl destroyed by quarrying and erosion I I. I - 9235370bp -.

S NE

9315i60bp 8185k55bp 9110t70bp 8025i65bp

Handifootholds on section

Calcareous sediment Calcareous rack :: t: 1' 1' 282 Handnoofholds , proiected onto FIGURE4. Kissonerga- Mylouthkia wells 116 2I' and 133 of the later 331 loth and 9th 364 Unexcavated millennia RP \ D respectively. Profiles - 329 Stream flow channel show hand/footholds, projected onto section major deposits with 15 locations of samples for AMS dates and tapped stream flows. 14. WELL 116 WELL 133 848 PELTENBURG, COLLEDGE. CROFT, JACKSON, MCCARTNEY & MURRAY

WELL 116

Direction of stream channel

- lorn

- Om (presenl sea level)

1OOm I I I I I I I -1 Om

r IWRE 5. uiagmmmnric cross-seczion rnrougn coaslai siie OJ Kisson~rga-iv~yiournKrasnowing relationship of 10th-millennium BP well with present-day shoreline.

8.5 m below the ancient ground surface would Cypro-LPPNB and Khirokitian, Byblos and have presented no surface indications, such as Amuq points show covering pressure retouch vegetative indicators of the presence of water. as on contemporary mainland examples. Well-diggers therefore had to locate their shafts Glossed tools provide a range of mainland with great precision, probably by using water- parallels. Mylouthkia 1A finely denticulated divining above small, underground streams. Pro- glossed blade fragments are parallel to Levantine lific fills include 449 fragments of limestone vessels examples from the EPPNB onwards (Quintero and hammerstones. Shillourokambos also has et al. 1997: 267,279; Cauvin 1983).At Shillouro- deep features that are most likely water wells. kambos Early Phase B, obliquely glossed crescents appear, suggesting ‘archaism’ or closer The chipped stone parallels with Eastern Anatolia (e.g. Rosenberg Assemblages from Mylouthkia, Shillourokambos & Peasnall 1998: 204). Crescents also occur at and Tenta show various links with the Asiatic Tenta in association with microliths and finely PPN (Briois et a]. 1997; McCartriey in press; denticulated glossed blades and bladelets. By Peltenburg et al. in press). This prismatic blade the end of the Cypro-PPNB, glossed tools in industry, while possibly retaining ‘archaic’ thc form of retouched glossed segments and Epipalaeolithic/PPNA traits, is clearly PPNB unretouched glossed blades proliferate at sev- in character and shows a departure from the eral sites. In sum, Cypro-PPNB glossed tools thumbnail scrapers and irregular blades de- betray Levantine and Anatolian origins. To judge scribed at Aetokremnos [Simmons et al. 1999: by the decrease in the occurrence of obsidian, 143,276-ai). and shifts in arrowhead and glossed tool types Byblos points from Mylouthkia 1A follow which follow general patterns evident in the the Syrian EPPNB pattern of flat retouch re- Levant, direct contacts with Anatolia appear strictcd to thc tang. At Shillourokambos, we to have diminished after the Cypro-MPPNB. find more extensive pressure retouch on Byblos Naviform blade core technology, the selec- and Amuq points (cf. Cauvin 1973). By the tion of high-quality chert and occurrence of AGRO-PASTORALIST COLONIZATION OF CYPRUS IN THE 10TH MILLENNIUM BP 849 significant quantities of Anatolian obsidian are indicative of the Cypro-E and MPPNB. The use of naviform cores declined in the Cypro-LPPNB, with less attention paid to core preparation and the use of inore moderate chert types. Bi-di- rectional cores gradually gave way to uni-di- rectional examples and the production of less standardized blanks by the Khirokitian, shifts that also took place in mainland assemblages from c. 8000 BP (Rollefson et al. 1992: 454-9; McCartney 1999).These changes in core technology may reflect the decline in arrowheads produced from thin standardized blade blanks (Gulaine eta]. 2000: 80-81). The later Cypriot industry is defined by large tanged knives, backed blades and the glossed segments which continued to depend on a simplified blade technology within the small-scale agricultural subsistence system. FIGURE6. Top view of Skull 1 from Kissonerga- Human remains Mylouthkia well 133 showing flattening of the Skull caching was diagnostic of the PPN in occipital. southwest Asia (Bienert 1991). There is tenu- ous evidence that the custom may have been rootshbers and many weed taxa (particularly transmitted to Cyprus. One well (7) at wild grasses). Of significance is the identity of Shillourokambos contained a contracted burial the wheat and barley found in the samples. above cranial fragments of other individuals Differentiation between the wild (i.e. progeni- (Guilaine et al. 1998).Five individuals are rep- tor species) and the domestic species of both resented in Mylouthkia well 133. An artificially genera can be problematic because of the simi- deformed skull and portion of the 1st cervical larity in overall morphology of both grains and vertebra of an adult male were recovered from chaff. Distortion caused by charring can fur- its upper fill (FIGURE6). Lower in the fill was a ther hinder accurate identification and the typi- group of three crania and other parts of bodies cally smaller wild taxa can often mimic the larger with a unique macehead of pink conglomer- domestic derivatives. Metrical analyses, for ate. Largely confined to the area between the example relative measurements of length, upper and lower human remains was a discrete breadth and thickness, have been used to aid concentration of 22 originally whole caprine the identification of cereal grains (e.g. van Zeist skeletons deposited as complete, unbutchered & Roller 1991-92 with references). On the ba- carcases. The juxtaposition of these carcases sis of morphological assessments and of com- and purposefully deposited human remains parisons of the grain dimensions (Peltenburg suggests the sort of ritual behaviour seen in et al. forthcoming b) we suggest that domestic southwest Asia during the PPNB (cf. Goring- wheat and barley were present during Periods Morris et al. 1998; Galili & Nir 1993: 267-9). IA and IB at Mylouthkia. Domestic einkorn- (Triticzzmmonococcum) and domestic emmer- Early domesticated plants ( fiiticzm dicoccum) types were identified to- The Mylouthkia wells also contained well-pre- gether with domestic-type hulled barley (Hor- served charred plant remains. Samples from deurn s~tivum).~It appears, therefore, that from Periods 1A and 1B comprise a wide range of taxa, including glume wheats (Triticum spp. 1 The identifications are inevitably based on knowledge - grains and chaff) and hulled barley (Hor- of the morphologies of present-day taxa and, as such, there is bound to be a degree of uncertainty about any classifica- deuni spp. - grains and chaff), lentils (Lens tions assigned to the species level- the 'type' suffix is an sp.),large seeded legumes (LathyrudVicia spp.), acknowledgement of the tentative nature of the identifica- linseedlflax [Linumsp.), pistachio (Pistacia sp.), tions that have been made. 850 PELTENBURG, COLLEDGE, CROFT, JACKSON. MCCARTNEY & MURRAY the earliest PPNB phase at Mylouthkia there is The introduction of cattle, pig, sheep and evidence, in the form of charred grains and chaff, goat in the Cypro-EPPNB of the three ‘founder crop’ cereals (Zohary 1996: It has been generally accepted that the deer, 143-4). pig, sheep and goat regularly present in the Current consensus suggests that the first ce- Khirokitian were deliberately imported to the real domesticates had evolved in the south-cen- island (e.g. Croft 1991: 63-4; Davis 1984: 147). tral Levant (i.e. upper Jordan Valley/Damascus Now there is explicit evidence that, in addi- Basin) and possibly southeast Turkey by the tion to these animals, cattle were also trans- early loth millennium BP (Garrard 1999: 82; ferred to the island by the end of the loth Harris 1998: 8). From this time onwards it ap- millennium BP, over a millennium earlier than pears that there was an increasing dependence the Khirokitian. on domestic crops. These conclusions are based The faunal sample from Early Phase A at partly on genetic studies of modern populations Shillourokambos includes pig, fallow deer and of wild progenitor species, from which it has caprines in the approximate proportions 4:2:1, been possible to suggest probable locations of and also a few cattle bones (Vigne et al. in the earliest ‘domestication events’ (e.g. Harris press). Contemporary Mylouthkia 1A pro- 1996: 5-7; Heun et al. 1997; Zohary 1996; duced caprine and pig remains, sufficient to Valkoun et al. 1998). The chronological frame- indicate that these taxa already enjoyed a work for the evolutionary changes which cul- widespread distribution in the Cypro-EPPNB. minated in the development of the Neolithic The presence of cattle in the loth millen- ‘package’ of crops (Zohary 1996: 156) is based nium BP is very unexpected. Their remains largely on archaeobotanical evidenc.e in the form are most abundant in the Early Phase B phase of accurately identified graindseeds found in at Shillourokambos, comprising 8% of 1110 samples from securely dated sites. The reported identified specimens. Subsequent phases presence (or absence) of taxa, with correctly possess so few that cattle keeping presum- assigned domestic status, has thus formed the ably ceased there around the middle of the basis of our knowledge about the distribution 9th millennium BP. Cattle survived elsewhere of the earliest crops and also of their subse- until the 8th millennium BP (Kritou Marottou- quent dispersion throughout the Levant, and Ais Yiorkis: Croft 1998; Simmons 1998),but beyond. seem to have disappeared by the mature Much scientific debate surrounds the con- Khirokitian. tentious issue of ‘howmany times’ the ‘founder Metrical analysis indicates that the crops’ have undergone domestication. In a re- Aceramic Neolithic pig of Cyprus was some- cent paper, Zohary concluded that there was what smaller than western Asiatic wild boar, probably a single, or at most few ‘domestica- and might therefore already represent a primi- tion events’ (Zohary 1996: 156). To date, the tive domestic breed (cf. Davis 1984: 156). progenitor species of domestic einkorn, emmer Fallow deer remained undomesticated in and hulled barley, (wild einkorn (Triticum western Asia, and elsewhere, in prehistory. boeoticum),wild emmer (Triticum dicoccoides) In a particular insular adaptation, Neolithic and wild barley (Hordeurn spontaneum))have and Chalcolithic Cypriot subsistence econo- not been recorded in archaeobotanical assem- mies relied heavily on this imported species. blages from Cypriot sites. Whereas wild barley It is likely that fallow deer were free-living does grow on the island (Meikle 1985), there animals, subjected to controlled hunting appears to be no evidence to indicate that the within a system of game management (Croft wild wheats were native taxa (Holmboe 1914; 1991). Meikle 1985; Zohary & Hopf 1993).Following As Vigne et al. (in press) conclude, the in- Zohary’s hypothesis of a limited number of ‘do- troduced animals cattle, pig, sheep and goat mestication events’, it would appear that the were probably domesticated, even though mor- Mylouthkia evidence favours the theory that phological evidence is limited, Since some domestic crops were introduced from the main- are only attested as domesticates later on the land during the EPPNB, as opposed to the in- mainland, the Cypriiot evidence implies the digenous development of crop-based subsistence existence of undetected earlier examples in on the island. the Fertile Crescent. AGRO-PASTORALIST COLONIZATION OF CYPRIJS IN THE lOTH MILLENNIUM BP 851 Discussion sources are found in the Levantine Corridor over We have seen that in the later loth/gth millen- 200 km inland (FIGURE1). Nonetheless, it is nium BP, communities with strong Levantine there that we find the closest material culture PPNB affinities existed on Cyprus. Their ex- and economic parallels for the Cypro-PPNB istence raises afresh interlocked issues of early (Guilaine et al. 2000; Peltenburg et al. forth- island colonizations and the spread of farming coming b). practices. Van Andel & Runnels (1995) have dealt with Regarding the latter, Cyprus does not meet the problem of significant spatial gaps in the conditions appropriate to the indigenist model: distribution of early farming communities by a settled Mesolithic population, equivalent late proposing a jump dispersal model in which ag- Mesolithic and early Neolithic population den- ricultural groups moved great distances to new sities and continuity in settlements across a homelands. As they recognize, this model does region (Ammerman 1989: 164). The only site not explain why farmers failed to utilize suit- with earlier occupation is Aetokremnos, a tran- able lands still available closer to home and sitory hunting camp which differs greatly in how they knew about such distant appropri- both subsistence pattern and material culture ate soils. from the Cypro-PPNB. It may have been aban- Another approach contextualizes migration doned a millennium or more before the Cypro- as a social process. One of the most common PPNB. While other sites of that period may exist, characteristics to emerge from systematic studies equivalent population densities and settlement of migrations is that they stream towards known continuity, as required by the above model, are targets with information conveyed by kin or unlikely to be met. Our current understanding co-residents (Anthony 1997).Archaeologically, is that the island lacked a settled population this means we should seek for evidence of prior before the introduction of the Neolithic pack- contacts between the Mediterranean and the age. Hence, the beginnings of the Cypriot Levantine Corridor. Aceramic Neolithic culture that flourished for As early as the PPNA there is evidence of a some three millennia resulted from the migra- network of reciprocal trade linking social groups tion of a PPN groupfs),one of the earliest suc- over large distances. Gopher (1989: 91) proposed cessful overseas migration of farmers. We can that during this period the Levant could be only speculate on how the minimum 69-km viewed as a single cultural system. The Medi- crossing was accomplished. In the similar case terranean littoral also figured in this system since of Crete a millennium later, Broodbank & Strasser Mediterranean shells are found at inland sites (1991) suggest a single crossing. Conversely, like Hallan Cemi (Rosenberg et al. 1998: 31). Vigne suggests numerous return voyages from However, agriculturalists on the coast nearest Cyprus to the parent body (Vigne et al. in press), Cyprus are currently first attested only in the a reconstruction supported by evidence for par- LPPNB, at Ras Shamra VC. This considerably allel major shifts in the chipped stone indus- postdates the existence of EPPNB agricultural try of Cyprus and the mainland. communities now evident in Cyprus. While That parent body remains elusive, even jump dispersal from the Levantine Corridor though it must lie in the PPN interaction sphere could account for this gap, we feel it is unlikely because of the many generic similarities between that such farmers would have had the neces- Cyprus and southwest Asia. Sea currents made sary boat technology, maritime travel expertise the island more accessible from Palestine than and knowledge of their target to establish per- distance alone might suggest, but the late start manent bases on Cyprus. In short, the dynam- of the EPPNB in the southern Levant, low site ics of island colonization in this case imply densities in EPPNB Palestine and pervasive the existence of indigenous PPN coastal agro- similarities with northern Syria make it an pastoralists habituated to overseas enterprises unlikely source (Goring-Morris & Belfer-Cohen and aware of the arable potentials of Cyprus. 1997: 85). To the north, current dates for the The absence of relevant west Syrian sites may Anatolian Aceramic Neolithic are too late. The be due to a scarcity of intensive survey and probable source, western Syria, presents prob- sea-level changes. Marine transgression in this lems, since the nearest attested PPNA-EPPNB area occurred during the period under consid- sites that could have served as population eration. In general the shore-line was -25 m at 852 PELTENBURG, COLLEDGE, CROFT, JACKSON, MCCARTNEY & MURRAY c. 8000 BP and -7 m at 5000 BP (Cherry 1990; tion of farmers to essentially uninhabited is- Held 1992; Goniez & Pease 1992). That settle- lands. In the western Mediterranean, there was ments along the decreasing Levantine coastal greater interaction with indigenous Mesolithic plain had to be abandoned because of inunda- islanders. tion is confirmed by the remarkable PPNC site The agricultural economies of Mylouthkia of Atlit Yam, now c. 8-10 m under water (Galili 1A and Shillourokambos Early Phase A, amongst & Nir 1993).We may infer that Neolithic coastal the earliest in the Near East, indicate that they communities suffered long-term loss of subsist- cannot be far removed from landfall or primary ence resources and ecological stress. One op- settlement dates. The new economy must have tion was local migration to Cyprus. spread rapidly. In contrast to founder princi- Presently available settlement evidence on ple models that predict rapid change, the ad- Cyprus conforms to Schwartz's model of suc- aptation phase was prolonged, perhaps because cessful colonization in which there are sequen- protracted contacts suggested by chipped stone tial stages of exploration, settlement, adaptation developments and obsidian imports re-enforced and development (Schwartz 19701. In this se- conservative tendencies. It is only by the Cypro- quence (FIGURE3), Aetokremnos represents is- LPPNB some 1000 years after the intrusion that land exploration and the generation of the chipped stone industry changes substan- inter-regional and seafaring knowledge. Such tially, that cattle are missing from the background information was a pre-requisite for Shillourokambos economy and that deer con- well-organized, purposive colonization. The stitute a highly significant subsistence element. new Cypro-PPNB dates now allow for more The Khirokitian, therefore, emerged as a truly continuity than is immediately apparent. Colo- independent culture only after long-term, in- nization should therefore be seen as another sular evolution. Our previous ignorance of this episode in a continuum of contacts with the evolution bedevilled attempts to account for island, but one which was qualitatively differ- its origins. These, as we now see, are not at the ent since greater control of subsistence resources start of the Khirokitian (Stanley Price 1977) or permitted permanent occupation. The catalyst pre-Neolithic (Held 1989: 8),but are fully Neo- for wilful colonization may have been specific lithic from the outset of the Cypro-PPNB in the ecosystem stress, but incentives to travel to the loth millennium BP. island existed already. The migration should not be construed as the first step in the forma- Acknowledgements. We are grateful to the British Acad- tion of a maritime voyaging ideology that led emy, Council for British Research in the Levant [BSAJ) and the National Museums of Scotland for their generous sup- to further colonization of the Mediterranean. port of IJniversity of Edinburgh 1,emba Archaeological Later expansion into the Aegean seems uncon- Project excavations at Kissonerga-Mylouthkia. Paul Croft nected. Migration to Mediterranean islands, carried out excavation of the wells. We have benefited from therefore, was not part of an ineviiable expan- discussions with Jean Guilaine and members of his team sive disposition from the early PPN but was and from valued comments of two referees. Jean-Dcnis Vignc kindly allowed us to cite Vigne et al. in press, Sherry C. conditioned by local circumstances. What links Fox supplied comments on the human remains. Drawings: the Cypriot and Cretan examples is the migra- Lindy Crewe.

References AMMERMAN,A. 1989. On the Neolithic transition in Europe: a R. 3991. Migrant farmers and thc comment on Zvelehil & Zvelebil (19881, Antiquity 63: of Crete, Antiquity 6.5: 233-45. 1G2-5. CnuvlN. M.-C. 1973. Outillage lithique et chronologie a Tell AMMERMAN,A. & L. CAVALLI-SFORZA.19X4. The Neolithic traii- Aswad (DamascBne-Syrie), Paleorient 2: 429-38. sition and the genetics ofpopulation in Europe. Princeton 1983. Les faucilles prehistoriques du Proche-Orient. DonnBes (NJ):Princeton [Jniversity Press. morphologiques et fonctionnelles, PolBorient Wl: 63-79. ANTHONY,I). 1997. Prehistoric migration as sucial process, in CHERRY,J. 1990. The first colonization of the Mediterranean J. Chapman & H. Hamerow (ail.), Migrotions arid invrr- Islands: a review of recent research, fourno1 of Mediter. sions in orchoeologirnl explanation: 21-32, Oxford: British rnnean Archurology 3: 14.5-221. Archaeological Reports. International wries S664. CROFT, P. 1991. Man and beast in Chalcolithic Cyprus, Bulle- ALJRENCHE,0.& J. CAUVlN (ed.).1989. Nt;olifhisutions.Oxford: tin (11the Ainrricnn Schools of Oriental Rrsmrr.h 2821 British Archaeological Reports. International series SSl6. 283: 63-79. BIENERT,H.-D. 1991. Skull cult in the Prehiatorii: Near East, 1998. Faunal materials kum Ais Yiorkis, in Simmons 1998: 5-6. Journul o/Prrhistorir Religion 5: 9-23. 1984. Kliirokitia and its mammal remains a Neolithic BRIOIS.F. B. CRA'rIrzs & 1. GIIII.AINC. 1997. Obsidiennes du site Noah's Ark, in A. Le Brun el nl., Fouilles ricentcs a N611lithiquel'r6c6ramique de Shillourokanihos (Chypre), Khirokitio (Ch-ypre) 1977-1 981: 147-62. Paris: ADPF. I'al6oricnt 23: Y5-112. firlitions Recherche stir les Civilisations 41. AGRO-PASTORALIS?' COLONIZATION OF CYPRIJS IN THE 1I)TH MILLENNIUM BP 853

GALILI,E. & Y. NIR.1993. The submerged Pre-pottery Neolithic ~"JENBLJRG, E., S. COLLEDGE,P. CROFT,A. JACKSON, C. water we11 of Atlit-Yam, northern Israel, and its palaeo- MCCAKTNEY& M. MIJRRAY.Forthcoming b. Neolithic: dis- environmental implications, The Holocene 3: 265-70. persals from the Levantine Corridor: a Mediterranean GARRARrl, A. 1999. Charting the emergence of cereal and pulse perspective, Levunt 33. domestication in southwest Asia, Environmental Archae- PELTENBIJRG,E., P. CROFT,A. JACKSON, C. MCCARINEY& M. ology 4: 67-86. MURRAY.In press. Well established colonists: Mylnuthkia GEBEL,H.. Z. KAFAFIPr G. ROLLEFSON(ed.). 1997. The prehis- 1and the Cypro-Pre-Pottery Neolithic B, in S. Swiny [ed.], toryofJordan II, Perspectivesfram 1997. Berlin: ex oriente. The earliest prehistory of Cyprus: from colonization to Studies in Early Near Eastern Production, Subsistence, exploitation. Boston (MA): American Schools of Orien- and Environment 4. tal Research. GOMEZ, B. & P. t'EASE. 1992. Early Holocene Cypriot coastal QUINTERO,L., P. WILKE& J. WAINES.1997. Pragmatic studios of palaeogeography, Report of the Department of Antiqui- Near Eastern Neolithic sickle blades, in Gebel et nl. [ed.): ties, Cyprus: 1-8. 263-86. GOI'FIEK, A. 1989. Diffusion process in the Pre-Pottery Neo- ROLLSFSON,G., A. SIMMONS& Z. KAFAFI.1992. Neolithic Cul- lithic Levant: The case of the Helwan Point. in I. tures at 'Ain Ghazal, Jordan, Journal of Field Archoool- Hershkovitz (ed.),People and culture in change: 91-105. ogy 19: 443-70. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports. International series ROSENRERG,M., R. NESBITT, R. REDDING,B. PEASNALL 1998. Hallan S508(i). Cemi, pig husbandry, and post-Pleistocene adaptations GORINGMORRIS,N. &A.BELVEK-COHEN. 1997. The articulation along the Taurus-Zagros Arc (Turkey), Paleorient 24: 25- of cultural processes and Late Quaternary environmen- 42. tal changes in Cisjordan, Paleorient 22: 71-94. ROSENBEKGM. & B. PEASNALL.1998. A report on soundings as GOKINGMORRISN., R. BURNS,A. DAVIDZON,V. ESIIED,Y. GOREN, Demirkoy Hoyuk: an aceramic Neolithic Site in Eastern I. HEKSHKIVITZ,S. KANGAS & J. KBLECEVIC. 1998. The 1997 Anatolia, Anatolica 24: 195-207. season of excavations at the mortuary site of Kfar Hahoresh, SCHWARTZ,D. 1970. The postmigration culture: a base for ar- Galilee Isreal, Neo-Lithics 98: 1-4. chaeological inference, in W. Longacre (ed.),Reconstructing GLJILAINE.J., F. BRIOIS,J. COIJLAROLI, P. DEVEZB,S. PHILIBERT,J- prehistoric Pueblo societies: 175-93. Albuquerque(NM1: D. VIGNE & I. CARRERE. 1998. La site n6olithique University of New Mexico Press. pr6ceramique de Shillourokambos (Parekklisha, Chypre), SIMMONS,A. 1998. Test excavations at two aceraniic Neolithic Bulletin de Correspondonce HeIIBniqire 122: 603-10. sites on the uplands of Western Cyprus, Report of the GUILAINE,J., F. BRIOIS. J-D. VIGNE,& I. CARK~KE.2000. DBcouverte Deportment of Aiitiqirities, Cypriis: 1-16, d'un Neolithique pr4ceramique ancien chypriote (fin T, SIMMONS,A. & ASSOCIIYI'L~S.1999. Farina1 extinction in a17 is- debut 8" millhaires cal. BC), apparent6 au PPNB an(:- land society: pygmy hippopotamus hunters of C,vpras. ieninioyen du Levant nord. Earth and Planetary Sciences New York (NY): Plenum. 300: 75-82, STANLEYPKICE, N. 1977. Khirokitia and the initial settlement HARRIS.D. 1996. Introduction: themes and concepts in the study of Cyprus, Levant 9: 66-89. of early agriculture, in Harris (ed.1: 1-9. STORDEIJK,D. 1999. Organisation de I'espace construit et or- (Ed.). 1996. The origins and spread of agriculture and pas- ganisation sociale dans le NBolithique de Jerf el Ahmar toralism in Eurasia. London: UCL Press. (Syrie, F-IXmilleiiaire av. J.C.), in F. Braemer, S. Clcuziou 1998. The origins of agriculture in southwest Asia, The Re- & A. Coudart (ed.), Habitat et sociltk: 131-49. Antibes: view of Archoeology 19: 5-11. Editions APDCA. HELD, S. 1989. Colonization cycles on Cyprus 1: The TODD,LA. 1987. Vasilikos Valley Project 6. Excavations at biogeographic and paleontological foundations of early Kalnvossos-Tent0 1. Giiteherg: Astroni. Studies in Merli- prehistoric settlement, Report of the Department of An- terranean Archaeology 71:6. tiquities, Cyprus: 7-28. VALKOUN,J., J. WAINES& J. KONOPKA.1998. Current geographical 1992. Colonization and extinction on Early Prehistoric Cy- distribution and habitat of wild wheats and barley, in A. prus, in P. Astrom (crd.), Acta Cyprus:Acts of an Interna- Daniania, J. Valkoun, G. Willcox 81 C. Qualsct (ed.1, The tional Congress on Cypriote Archaealog,y Held in Goteborg origins of agriculture and crop domestication: 293-99. on 22-24 August 1991: 104-64. Jonsered: Astrom. Stud- Aleppo: ICARDA. ies in Mediterranean Archaeology Pocket-hook 114.2. VAN ANDEL,T. & C. RIINNELS. 1995. Thc earliest farmers in HEUN,M.. R. SCIIAFEK-PREGL,D. KIAWAN,R. CASTAGNA,M. Europe, Antiquity 69: 481-500. ACCEKBI,B. BORGHI& F. SALAMINI.1997. Site of Einkorn VAN ZEIST,W. & G. DE ROLLER.1991-92. The plant husbandry wheat don1estir:ation identified by DNA fingerprinting. of Aceramic: Cayonu, SE Turkey. Palorohistoria 33/34: Science 278: 1312-13. 65-96. HOLMBOE,J. 1914. Studies on the vegetation of Cyprus. Bergens VIGNE,J-D.. I. CAKRBRE,J-F. SALIEGE, A. PERSON, H. BOCHERENS, Museum Skriftcr: AIS John Griegs Boktrykkeri. J. GUILAINE& F. BRIOIS. In press Pred(init:stir: cattle, sheep, LI: BKLIN,A. 1989. La neolithisatiun de Chypre, in 0. Aurenche goat and pig during the late 9th and the 8th millenniuni & J. Cauvin (ed.):95-107. cal. BC on Cyprus: Preliminary results of Shillour~ikamtios MCCI\RI'NI(Y, C. 1999. Opposed platform core technology and (l'arekklisha. Lin~assol),in H. Buitenliaus, M. Mashkour the Cypriot aceramic Neolithic, Neo-Lithics 1: 7-10. & F. Poplin (ed.], Archueozodogv of fhc illror Em1 re In press. The chipped stonc assemblage from Tenta (Cypms), Procct:dings of the 4th Internntionol Syin~7osiornon (ir- cultural and chronological implications. in 1. Caneva (ed.1, chaeology u/ southwosterii Asio aiid adjacent nreos. Beyond tools. Reconsidering definitions, counfing and Groningen: Archaeologic a1 RcsuarLh Pr Cunsu1tanc:y. interpretotion a/' lithic (I mblagcs, Workshop on PPN WATKINS,T. 1973. Some problems of the Neolithic and chipped lithic industries. Vf,iiicp,November 1998. Chalcolithic period in Cyprus, Report afthe Department MEIKLE,R. 1985. The llortr of Cyprus (vol 2). Kew: Royal Bo- of Antiquities, Cyprus: 34-61 tanical Gardens. ZOIIAKY,D. 1996. The mode of domestication of tho fuundnr PELTENBIJRG E. et a]. Forthcoming a. Leinba Archaeological crops of Southwest Asian agrii:ulturc, in Harris (ed,): 142- Project 111.1: Excovations at Kissonerga-Myloiithkia 1977- 58. 1995. Jonsered: Astrom: Studies in Mediterranean Archae- ZOHAKY,D. & M. HOPI;.1993. Domestication ofplants in the ology 70:4. old tvurld. (2nd edition). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

View publication stats