DOCSLIB.ORG

Reingruber Nova.Qxd

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Reingruber Nova.Qxd Documenta Praehistorica XLII (2015) Preceramic, Aceramic or Early Ceramic| The radiocarbon dated beginning of the Neolithic in the Aegean Agathe Reingruber Berlin, DE [email protected] ABSTRACT – The Pre-Pottery-Neolithic refers to a period in the Eastern Mediterranean when ceramic containers were not yet in use (although small objects made of clay were already being created). This concept, which reflects a specific and quite unique stage in the development of human history, was introduced to Aegean prehistory under the term of Preceramic during the 1950’s (e.g., in Argissa- Magoula and Sesklo). Shortly thereafter, a different term, the Aceramic, was applied in the Aegean (e.g., in Knossos) for levels devoid of pottery, although ceramic products were supposedly used in the wider region. In some cases, the thin levels interpreted as Preceramic or as Aceramic contained sherds that were regarded as being intrusive from above (e.g., Argissa-Magoula, Franchthi Cave). The new sequences of radiocarbon dates allow a more precise description of this early period and thereby contribute, not least, also to the clarification of terminological issues. IZVLE∞EK – Predkerami≠ni neolitik ozna≠uje obdobje, ko v vzhodnem Sredozemlju kerami≠ne poso- de ∏e niso bile v uporabi (≠eprav so majhne predmete iz ∫gane gline ∫e izdelovali). Koncept, ki se nana∏a na dolo≠eno in precej posebno stopnjo v na∏em zgodovinskem razvoju, je bil z imenom ‘pred- kerami≠ni’ vpeljan v egejsko prazgodovino v petdesetih letih prej∏njega stoletja (npr. v Argissa-Ma- gouli in Sesklu). Kmalu za tem ga je nadomestil ‘akerami≠ni’ neolitik (npr. v Knossosu), ki je ozna- ≠eval plasti brez kerami≠nih posod, ≠eprav so bile v ∏ir∏i regiji domnevno ∫e poznane. V nekaterih primerih so tanke naselbinske plasti interpretirali kot ‘predkerami≠ne’ ali ‘kerami≠ne’ s fragmenti lon≠enine, ki naj bi vanje pri∏li iz zgornjih plasti (npr. Argissa-Magoula, jama Franchthi). Nove se- kvence radiokarbonskih datumov omogo≠ajo ∏e posebno natan≠ne predstavitve teh zgodnjih obdo- bij, in nenazadnje tudi bolj∏e terminolo∏ke pojasnitve. KEY WORDS – Preceramic; Aceramic; Initial Neolithic; Meso-Neolithic interface; radiocarbon dates; Aegean The terminology: the impacts of Near Eastern and Anatolian research Modern archaeology saw its beginnings around 1950 1947, he provided his Chicago colleague Williard F. with the introduction of natural sciences into archa- Libby with some of the very first ancient samples to eological methodology. In 1947, when Robert and be tested by the new dating method. Soon after, in Linda Braidwood from the University of Chicago 1949, while a professor at the University of Chicago started their interdisciplinary project in Jarmo (North- (1945–1954), Libby then published his revolutionary ern Iraq), for the first time they worked together results on the radiocarbon dating method (Arnold, with a palaeoethnobotanist (Hans Helbaek), a zoolo- Libby 1949; Libby 1952), for which he received the gist (Charles Reed), a geologist (Herbert Wright) and Nobel-prize in 1960. a radiocarbon expert (Fred Matson) (Watson 2006. 10–11). Braidwood was also among the first archa- Again in 1949, Vladimir Miloj≠i≤ published his influ- eologists to learn about the radiocarbon method. In ential book on chronological issues of the Neolithic DOI> 10.4312\dp.42.9 147 Agathe Reingruber in Central and Southeastern Europe, based on com- ready in 1936, John Garstang had noted that the parative stratigraphical observations (Miloj≠i≤ 1949). Early Neolithic was devoid of pottery, but did have Until his untimely death in 1978, Miloj≠i≤ remained a microlithic blade industry (Garstang et al. 1936. the most convinced advocate of this method, which 69). Yet, he did not give this period a specific name. depended on sound knowledge, a sharp observa- Initially, Braidwood (1957.76) rejected the term PPN tional spirit, and on the talent of archaeologists for as meaningless, yet Kenyon justified its usage by identifying interrelations among distant sites and re- the fact that the PPN-layers were separated from the gions, in the end on subjective, qualitative analysis. PN-layers by a long temporal gap (Kenyon 1957a. At first, probably under the influence of Braidwood, 83). In Jericho, 3–4m high levels containing Neoli- Miloj≠i≤ was not completely dismissive of the radio- thic pottery overlay meter-high levels devoid of cera- carbon method. Between 1956 and 1958, he collect- mic containers (Kenyon 1957b). At least when speak- ed several charcoal samples from the sites of Argissa- ing of the ‘Old World’, therefore, the term PPN de- and Otzaki-Magoula, not being shy of costs and ef- fines the time before pottery was produced. In com- forts. In 1959, at the end of his Thessalien-Projekt parison, in the Eastern Asiatic Jōmon culture, pottery and the beginning of his professorship in Heidelberg was in use since at least in the 10th millennium BC, (Hauptmann 1994.531–532), he delivered 12 sam- and in the North Pontic steppe since the 8th millen- ples to the Heidelberg laboratory for radiocarbon nium BC (Piezonka 2014). dating. The results did not support Miloj≠i≤’s chrono- logical assessments, and from that time on, until late As well as the exchange of ideas through the excava- in his life, he became a harsh opponent of the me- tion leaders, the team members also brought new thod (Miloj≠i≤ 1973). However, his critique was not and first-hand knowledge from ongoing investiga- completely unqualified, since, at the very beginning tions in Anatolia to Greece. A good example is Hans of radiocarbon dating, the need for tree-ring calibra- Helbaek, who was initially part of Braidwood’s team, tion was not understood. As Harald Hauptmann re- but later also worked in Hacılar with James Mellaart collects (personal communication, 21.03.2015), it and in Knossos with John D. Evans. Similarly, the was only shortly before Miloj≠i≤’s sudden death at archaeozoologist Sebastian Payne, who defined the the age of 60 that he admitted that 14C-dates could Aceramic levels in Franchthi Cave, initially worked be taken into consideration. Following in the foot- with David French in Can Hasan (1964–1967), but steps of Braidwood, Miloj≠i≤ worked with the zoolo- then with Ian Todd in Asıklı, a site that was identi- gist Joachim Boessneck and the botanist Maria Hopf fied as Aceramic in 1964 (Payne 1973; 1985). Clear- (Miloj≠i≤ 1962). ly, since a precise delimitation between the terms Aceramic used in Central and Southwestern Anato- However not only theoretical and methodological lia as opposed to the PPN used in the Levant and procedures were at issue; Miloj≠i≤ met Braidwood Zagros area had not yet been thoroughly discussed, at least twice in his lifetime: in 1958, at the interna- the two terms were often used interchangeably. Un- tional congress in Hamburg and the year after, when derstandably, therefore, what we observe is that whe- Braidwood visited Miloj≠i≤ in Thessaly during his last ther the two different notions were introduced into excavation campaign in Otzaki (Hauptmann 2008. Greek research strongly depended on the personal re- 3). This direct contact of the two researchers is im- lationships between the archaeologists working in portant, since it resulted not only in an exchange of the Aegean with their specific colleagues, who could ideas, but also in the transfer of the Near Eastern either be active in the Near East (Palestine and Zag- terminology and vocabulary to the Aegean. ros) or in Asia Minor (Central and Western Anatolia). For example, when in 1952 Miloj≠i≤ coined the Ger- Yet the usage of the terms Preceramic and Ace- man word Präkeramikum (Miloj≠i≤ 1952.315), it ramic should not be fortuitous. The Preceramic, in is clear that he was not simply translating some few particular, is tied to a specific concept: it covers a words (e.g., Pre-Pottery-Neolithic, PPN) from English period when ceramic products were not yet in use, into German, but was actually very carefully transfer- and this reflects a certain stage in the development ring the corresponding archaeological notions and of mankind (Nissen 2012.169–170) prior to 7000 concepts from the Near East to the Aegean. The spe- calBC. For Knossos in the Aegean, Evans proposed cific formulation PPN was in fact introduced by that Aceramic should refer to those levels that do Kathleen Kenyon during her excavations at Jericho not contain ceramic containers, even though pottery 1952–1958. To be precise, as a result of his excava- was actually in use in the wider region (Evans 1964; tions at the Tell es Sultan/Jericho layers X–XVII al- Warren et al. 1968.271). 148 Preceramic, Aceramic or Early Ceramic| The radiocarbon dated beginning of the Neolithic in the Aegean In the present paper, we re- spect this distinction, but ar- gue that a more precise defi- nition of relevant words and concepts will strongly rein- force our understanding of the earliest sedentary com- munities in the entire Aegean sphere. Certainly, one could object that the concepts in- volving the production (or not) of ceramic containers co- ver by no means the complete range of social and cultural behaviour during the Meso- Neolithic interface, and indeed that pottery often appears to be more meaningful to prehi- storic archaeologists than it may have done to prehistoric Fig. 1. Sites of the Preceramic, Aceramic, Pre-Pottery-Neolithic, Initial Neo- communities. Nevertheless, lithic and of the Early Pottery Neolithic in the Aegean. given that these terms are so widely applied, it does appear useful to study in de- tual analysis of finds and 14C-dates connected to the tail the historical reasons for their initial introduc- Preceramic levels, compare Reingruber 2008). tion, and also to account for the alternative mean- ings given to these terms by different scholars in dif- At the end of that decade, in 1957–1960, two new ferent regions.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hassuna Samarra Halaf
    arch 1600. archaeologies of the near east joukowsky institute for archaeology and the ancient world spring 2008 Emerging social complexities in Mesopotamia: the Chalcolithic in the Near East. February 20, 2008 Neolithic in the Near East: early sites of socialization “neolithic revolution”: domestication of wheat, barley, sheep, goat: early settled communities (ca 10,000 to 6000 BC) Mudding the world: Clay, mud and the technologies of everyday life in the prehistoric Near East • Pottery: associated with settled life: storage, serving, prestige pots, decorated and undecorated. • Figurines: objects of everyday, magical and cultic use. Ubiquitous for prehistoric societies especially. In clay and in stone. • Mud-brick as architectural material: Leads to more structured architectural constructions, perhaps more rectilinear spaces. • Tokens, hallow clay balls, tablets and early writing technologies: related to development o trade, tools of urban administration, increasing social complexity. • Architectural models: whose function is not quite obvious to us. Maybe apotropaic, maybe for sale purposes? “All objects of pottery… figments of potter’s will, fictions of his memory and imagination.” J. L. Myres 1923, quoted in Wengrow 1998: 783. What is culture in “culture history” (1920s-1960s) ? Archaeological culture = a bounded and binding ethnic/cultural unit within a defined geography and temporal/spatial “horizons”, uniformly and unambigously represented in the material culture, manifested by artifactual assemblage. pots=people? • “Do cultures actually
    [Show full text]
  • ARCL 0141 Mediterranean Prehistory
    INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY ARCL 0141 Mediterranean Prehistory 2019-20, Term 1 - 15 CREDITS Deadlines for coursework: 11th November 2019, 13th January 2020 Coordinator: Dr. Borja Legarra Herrero [email protected] Office 106, tel. (0) 20 7679 1539 Please see the last page of this document for important information about submission and marking procedures, or links to the relevant webpages 1 OVERVIEW Introduction This course reunites the study and analysis of prehistoric societies around the Mediterranean basin into a coherent if diverse exploration. It takes a long-term perspective, ranging from the first modern human occupation in the region to the start of the 1st millennium BCE, and a broad spatial approach, searching for the overall trends and conditions that underlie local phenomena. Opening topics include the glacial Mediterranean and origins of seafaring, early Holocene Levantine-European farming, and Chalcolithic societies. The main body of the course is formed by the multiple transformations of the late 4th, 3rd and 2nd millennium BC, including the environmental ‘mediterraneanisation’ of the basin, the rise of the first complex societies in east and west Mediterranean and the formation of world-system relations at the east Mediterranean. A final session examines the transition to the Iron Age in the context of the emergence of pan-Mediterranean networks, and this also acts as a link to G202. This course is designed to interlock with G206, which explores Mediterranean dynamics from a diachronic and comparative perspective. Equally, it can be taken in conjunction with courses in the prehistory of specific regions, such as the Aegean, Italy, the Levant, Anatolia and Egypt, as well as Europe and Africa.
    [Show full text]
  • The Neolithic of the Balikh Valley, Northern Syria : a First Assessment
    PAt.ÉORIENT, vol. 15/1 19X9 THE NEOLITHIC OF THE BALIKH VALLEY, NORTHERN SYRIA : A FIRST ASSESSMENT P.M.M.G. AKKERMANS ABSTRACT. - This article discusses in short the evidence for Neolithic occupation in the Balikh valley of northern Syria. Recent excavations and surveys in the region have yielded a wealth of new data, allowing a more detailed insight into cultural developments m this little known part of Syria. RESUME - Cet article présente un aperçu des recherches rra-ntrs sur le Néolithique dans la vallée du Balikh (Syrie du Nord) Fouilles et prospections ont livré de nouvelles données qui permettent d'améliorer notre vision île Involution lullurellc de cette région encore mal connue de la Syrie. INTRODUCTION been uncovered (7), but it is expected that future work at the site will yield a continuous sequence of occupation from the 7th into the 6th millennium B.C. In Syrian archaeology, the Balikh valley has A survey undertaken in 1983 gave evidence of a gone unexplored for a long time. In 1938, Mallowan large number of prehistoric sites and suggested a visited the valley and, within a six-week campaign, continuous occupation of the Balikh valley at least laid out trenches at five sites (1). At two of these from the late 8th or early 7th millennium on- mounds, viz. tells Aswad and Ibn es-Shehab, Neoli- wards (8). thic remains were found although at the latter site unfortunately in a disturbed context. Over 30 years This paper intends to give a tentative outline of later, in 1970, Mallowan's Tell Aswad was reexca- Neolithic developments in the Balikh valley vated by J.
    [Show full text]
  • 03 BANEA Vol2.Indd
    This pdf of your paper in Development of Pre-State Communities in the Near East belongs to the publishers Oxbow Books and it is their copyright. As author you are licenced to make up to 50 offprints from it, but beyond that you may not publish it on the World Wide Web until three years from publication (April 2013), unless the site is a limited access intranet (password protected). If you have queries about this please contact the editorial department at Oxbow Books ([email protected]). An offprint from DEVELOPMENT OF Pre-StATE COMMUNITIES IN THE ANCIENT NEAR EAST edited by Diane Bolger and Louise C. Maguire © Oxbow Books 2010 ISBN 978-1-84217-407-4 CONTENTS Editors’ Preface vii List of Contributors ix INTRODUCTION 1 The development of pre-state communities in the ancient Near East 1 Diane Bolger and Louise C. Maguire PART 1: SOCIAL ORGANISATION AND COMPLEXITY IN PRE-STATE COMMUNITIES 2 Social complexity and archaeology: A contextual approach 11 Marc Verhoeven 3 Late Neolithic architectural renewal: The emergence of round houses in the northern Levant, c. 6500–6000 BC 22 Peter M. M. G. Akkermans 4 Abandonment processes and closure ceremonies in prehistoric Cyprus: In search of ritual 29 Demetra Papaconstantinou 5 A different Chalcolithic: A central Cypriot scene 38 David Frankel 6 Thoughts on the function of ‘public buildings’ in the Early Bronze Age southern Levant 46 Hermann Genz PART 2: EARLY URBAN COMMUNITIES AND THE EMERGENCE OF THE STATE 7 The Tell: Social archaeology and territorial space 55 Tony Wilkinson 8 Rethinking Kalopsidha:
    [Show full text]
  • Some Important Aspects of Technology and Craft Production in the Indus Civilization with Specific Reference to Gujarat
    Some Important Aspects of Technology and Craft Production in the Indus Civilization with Specific Reference to Gujarat Kuldeep K. Bhan This paper will briefly review the archaeological record of some of the aspects of the craft production in the Indus Tradition from the point of technology, as reflected in manufacturing cycles, possible workshops / activity areas, stock piling and dumping areas so far identified in the available archaeological record of Gujarat. The data presented here is mostly derived from three recently excavated Indus sites by the Department of Archeology and Ancient History, Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda in combination with the data obtained through ethnoarchaeological studies carried on the stone bead making at Khambhat, Gujarat by Jonathan Mark Kenoyer, Massimo Vidale and myself. With the adaption of rigorous excavations with emphasis on the recovery methods along with ethnoarchaeological studies a lot of fresh useful information regarding the various Indus crafts is beginning to get revealed. The study of the crafts and especially Indus Civilization crafts is growing field of investigation, though some South Asian archeologists still prefer to them as ‘miscellaneous small finds’. This fresh data thus obtained is the highlights of this paper. Keywords: Indus Civilization, Technology, Craft Production, Gujarat, Shell working, Beads, Faience. In this paper, I will be discussing some important aspects various industries, but I will confine myself to certain of the current research on craft production in the selected crafts like stone bead making, shell working Harappan phase of the Indus Tradition that corresponds and faience making, with specific reference to the (c. 2600 to 1900 BC) to the Integration Era (as defined in recent data recovered from the Harappan sites of Kenoyer 1991a).
    [Show full text]
  • Circulation of Raw Materials, Final Products Or
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Revistes Catalanes amb Accés Obert CIRCULATION OF RAW MATERIALS, FINAL PRODUCTS OR IDEAS IN THE NEOLITHIC COMMUNITIES OF SOUTHERN ITALY: THE CONTRIBUTION OF ARCHAEOMETRIC ANALYSES TO THE STUDY OF POTTERY, FLINT AND OBSIDIAN. Italo M. Muntoni* Abstract: This paper offers a brief overview of Neolithic exchange in southern Italy during the Early to Late Neolithic (from 6200 to 4000 BC). There have been a number of archaeometric studies which have focussed on certain ‘core’ materials: pottery, flint and obsidian. Different materials traded by the same communities seem to follow various circulation model(s) for raw materials, final products or ideas. Some positive insights can therefore be gained into the inter- and in - tra-group organization of the many Neolithic communities, who shared so many other common behavioural features. Keywords: Southern Italy, pottery, obsidian, flint, archaeometry. Riassunto: Si presenta una breve panoramica sulla circolazione nel Neolitico dell’Italia meridionale dalle sue fasi iniziali a quelle finali (da ca. 6.200 a 4.000 BC). In questi anni numerosi studi archeometrici si sono concentrati su alcune classi di materiali (ceramica, selce ed ossidiana) per determinarne la provenienza. Materiali differenti scambiati dalle stesse comunità sembrano se - guire distinti modelli di circolazione di materie prime, prodotti finiti o idee. Il confronto tra questi diversi aspetti sembra sugge - rire diverse modalità di organizzazione intra e inter gruppo delle comunità del Neolitico. Parole chiave: Italia meridionale, ceramica, ossidiana, selce, archeometria. Introduction Between the end of the 7 th and the beginning of the 4 th regions are still unknown.
    [Show full text]
  • 23 Contextualising Neolithic Cyrpus: Preliminary
    23 CONTEXTUALISING NEOLITHIC CYRPUS: PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS INTO CONNECTIONS BETWEEN CYPRUS AND THE NEAR EAST IN THE LATER NEOLITHIC Joanne Clarke Introduction that was both internally homogeneous and lacking in any It is widely held that connections between Cyprus and the clear evidence of links with contemporary mainland cultures Levant ceased around 7000 BC when the expansive world (Clarke 2003, 212). My view then was that “the absence of the Pre-pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) contracted and of any evidence for external influences [in the Ceramic dislocated into a number of smaller ‘worlds’ during the later Neolithic period] appears to have been socially prescribed Neolithic period (all dates referred to in this paper are cal rather than any real absence of contact” (Clarke 2003, 215). BC). In northern Syria and upper Mesopotamia, a dynamic As circumstantial evidence for contact between Cyprus and and continuously changing, east/west sphere of influence the mainland subsequent to the PPNB continues to accrue can be documented through the post-PPNB/ Halaf /Ubaid (Clarke 2007; see also Erikh-Rose 2004; McCartney 2007) traditions of the 7th to 5th millennia. Likewise, in the south it seems appropriate to return to the question of how Cyprus a largely disconnected, east/west sphere of influence existed, negotiated its relationships with the outside world and beginning with the Yarmoukian around 6200 BC and con- whether human agency, in the form of social identity, was tinuing into the Wadi Rabah and Chalcolithic traditions of the only factor shaping interaction. the 6th and 5th millennia. Between these two geographically delineated spheres of influence is the less well documented region of the central Levant, comprising the Syrian and Connections: What Connections? Lebanese coastal zone, the Ansariyah, Zawiyah, Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon mountains, the Homs Gap and the Beqa’a In order for connections between Cyprus and the Levant valley (Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • Substantial and Significant Pits in the Mesolithic of Britain and Adjacent Regions
    Substantial and significant pits in the Mesolithic of Britain and adjacent regions Joshua Pollard [email protected] Department of Archaeology, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK) Abstract This paper describes a series of substantial pits of Mesolithic date, notable for their complex fill and recutting sequences, association with burnt and transformed materials, occasional linear arrangement, and connection to the observation of celestial phenomena. While likely tied into regular rounds of movement, it is argued they represent reserved and sacred places where special activities were undertaken which connected cosmic forces. Keywords Mesolithic, pits, alignments, cosmology 1. Mesolithic ‘monuments’ and landscape markers A remarkable record of monument building is associated with earliest (Neolithic) farming communities of Atlantic and Northern Europe, comprising a range of earthen and megalithic tombs, enclosures and menhirs (Scarre 2002; Bradley 2007; Cummings 2008). In contrast, ceremonial architecture belonging to post-glacial (Mesolithic) hunter-gatherers within these regions is slight, or, regionally, non-existent. Cummings and Harris rightly observe that ‘the monuments constructed in the Neolithic are, without question, something very new’ (2014:832). Notwithstanding these very real differences in the record for the two periods, evidence for Mesolithic monumentality has been posited, and deployed to shape narratives of the period which move beyond a long-standing focus on matters economic (eg Pollard 1990; Cummings 2000; Allen & Gardiner 2002; Blinkhorn & Little in press). At best, any definition of what constitutes a ‘monument’ or something ‘monumental’ will be loosely defined, but the terms evoke physical constructs, either humanly-made or natural, that possess size and durability, serve to commemorate or memorialise, and which may afford settings/spaces through which the living can intercede with ancestral and/or supernatural domains (Bradley 1993; Scarre 2011).
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Holocene Humid Period in the Nefud Desert: Hunters and Herders
    The Holocene Humid Period in the Nefud Desert: Hunters and Herders in the Jebel Oraf Palaeolake Basin, Saudi Arabia Maria Guagnina,b, Paul Breezec, Ceri Shiptond, Florian Ottb,e, Mathew Stewartf,g, Mark Batemanh, Louise Martini, Lisa Grahamj, Sarah el-Dossaryk, Eleanor Kingwell- Banhami, Badr Zahranil, Abdulaziz al-Omaril, Abdullah M. Alsharekhm, Michael Petragliab,n,o, a Institute for Geographical Sciences, Freie Universität Berlin, Germany b Department of Archaeology, Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Germany c Department of Geography, King’s College London, UK d Centre of Excellence for Australian Biodiversity and Heritage, Australian National University, Australia e GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, Potsdam, Germany f Palaeontology, Geobiology and Earth Archives Research Centre, School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of New South Wales, Australia g Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology, Jena, Germany h Department of Geography, University of Sheffield, UK i University College London, Institute of Archaeology, UK j Centre for Open Learning, University of Edinburgh, UK k Riyadh Educational Authority, Ministry of Education, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia l Saudi Commission for Tourism and National Heritage, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia m Department of Archaeology, College of Tourism & Archaeology, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia n Department of Anthropology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C., USA o School of Social Science, University of Queensland, Australia Corresponding author: Maria Guagnin, Freie Universität Berlin, Institute for Geographical Sciences, Malteserstrasse 74-100, Building H, 12249 Berlin, Germany. [email protected] Abstract Archaeological surveys and excavations in the Jebel Oraf palaeolake basin, north- western Saudi Arabia, have identified a well-preserved early- to mid-Holocene landscape.
    [Show full text]
  • Identifying the Earliest Neolithic Settlements in the Southeastern
    Identifying the Earliest Neolithic Settlements in the Southeastern Balkans Laurent Lespez, Zoï Tsirtsoni, Pascal Darcque, Dimitra Malamidou, Koukouli-Chrysanthaki Chaido, Arthur Glais To cite this version: Laurent Lespez, Zoï Tsirtsoni, Pascal Darcque, Dimitra Malamidou, Koukouli-Chrysanthaki Chaido, et al.. Identifying the Earliest Neolithic Settlements in the Southeastern Balkans: Methodological Considerations Based on the Recent Geoarchaeological Investigations at Dikili Tash (Greek Eastern Macedonia). Reingruber Agathe; Tsirtsoni Zoï; Nedelcheva Petranka. Going West? The Dissemina- tion of Neolithic Innovations between the Bosporus and the Carpathians, Proceedings of the EAA Conference, Istanbul, 11 September 2014, 3, Routledge, p. 43-55, 2017, Themes in Contemporary Archaeology, 978-1-138-71483-0. hal-02639696 HAL Id: hal-02639696 https://hal.parisnanterre.fr//hal-02639696 Submitted on 28 May 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Going West? The Dissemination of Neolithic Innovations between the Bosporus and the Carpathians Proceedings of the EAA Conference, Istanbul, 11 September 2014 Edited by Agathe Reingruber, Zoї Tsirtsoni, Petranka Nedelcheva Going West? uses the latest data to question how the Neolithic way of life was diffused from the Near East to Europe via Anatolia.
    [Show full text]
  • Durham Research Online
    Durham Research Online Deposited in DRO: 16 August 2017 Version of attached le: Accepted Version Peer-review status of attached le: Peer-reviewed Citation for published item: Chapman, John (2018) 'Climatic and human impact on the environment? : A question of scale.', Quaternary international., 496 . pp. 3-13. Further information on publisher's website: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2017.08.010 Publisher's copyright statement: c 2017 The Author. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Additional information: Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. Durham University Library, Stockton Road, Durham DH1 3LY, United Kingdom Tel : +44 (0)191 334 3042 | Fax : +44 (0)191 334 2971 https://dro.dur.ac.uk 1. Climatic and human impact on the environment?: a question of scale. John Chapman (Durham University, Department of Archaeology, DURHAM DH1 3LE, UK) (e- mail: [email protected]) Abstract: The title of this Special Issue of QI - ‘The Neolithic of Northern Greece and the Balkans.
    [Show full text]
  • Göbekli Tepe (Turkey) No 1572
    Additional information requested and received from the State Party Göbekli Tepe A letter was sent by ICOMOS to the State Party on (Turkey) 21 September 2017 requesting additional information on the ownership, protection and management of the site, No 1572 facilities and infrastructures for visitors, development projects and financial resources. An answer was received on 6 November 2017, and the information provided has been included in this document. Official name as proposed by the State Party An ICOMOS Interim Report was sent to the State Party Göbekli Tepe on 22 December 2017, and the additional information in response to this report was received on Location 26 February 2018 and has been included in the relevant Şanlıurfa Province sections of this report. District of Haliliye Turkey Date of ICOMOS approval of this report 14 March 2018 Brief description Göbekli Tepe lies some 15 km north-east of the modern day town of Şanlıurfa. Round-oval and rectangular monumental megalithic structures, interpreted as 2 The property enclosures, were built by groups of hunter-gatherers in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic period, between 9600 and Description 8200 BC. Distinctive T-shaped pillars with rich carved Göbekli Tepe, in the Germuş Mountains of south-east imagery provide an insight into the world view and belief Anatolia, lies some 15 km north-east of the modern-day systems of prehistoric populations living in Upper town of Şanlıurfa and 2.5 km east of the village of Mesopotamia some 11,500 years ago. Örencik. The site covers an area of 126 ha, and consists of a natural limestone plateau on which stands an Category of property artificial hill (tell).
    [Show full text]