New Data, New Ideas on The Neolithic of Southwest Asia (WAC7; Jordan, January 14th-18th 2013).
Gunes Duru & Mihriban Ozbasaran (Istanbul University, Turkey)
Abstract
The Neolithic, as one of the crucial stages in humanity’s past, commands specific attention in prehistory, and this session invites the participation of researchers working on the Neolithic of Southwest Asia. In the past decade interdisciplinary projects have made major progress in understanding the Neolithic way of life in this part of the world. The session aims to share the recent results of field and laboratory work among the researchers working in different areas in SW Asia and it welcomes synthesis and contextual contributions in any of the following topics:
· Sedentism
· Subsistence
· Technology
· Spatial organisation and settlement patterns
· Behavioural aspects
· Interaction and exchange
PAPERS
Setting the Epi-palaeolithic-Neolithic process in terms of cultural niche construction theory
Trevor Watkins (Edinburg University, Emeritus)
Niche construction theory is a relatively new field within evolutionary theory, and it has recently begun to be applied to hominin evolution in the form of cultural niche construction theory. The social and cultural processes that we can identify in the Epi-palaeolithic and early Neolithic of parts of southwest Asia provide an excellent case study for the application and development of cultural niche construction theory. The paper will briefly introduce the principles of niche construction theory as applied to human culture, and then explore how the application of cultural niche construction theory may provide a framework for understanding the processes at work in the Epi-palaeolithic and early Neolithic periods, and setting them in the context of human social, cognitive and cultural evolution.
The North Aegean Islands: The contribution of the Island of Gökçeada (Imbroz)
Burçin Erdoğu (Trakya University, Edirne)
The Neolithic is the most important behavioral and technological transition for humankind. The Aegean Islands are critically located at the meeting point of Anatolia and the Southeast Europe, and are obviously one of the key regions for understanding the Neolithic transition to Europe. Ongoing excavations in Uğurlu on the island of Gökçeada (Imbroz) in the North Aegean show that the early farming communities were settled the region around 6500 cal. BC.
During the Last Glacial Maximum the island of Gökçeada together with the islands of Samothrace, Limnos, Ayos Evstratious and Bozcaada were connected by the mainland. Recent discoveries from Limnos and Gökçeada show strong evidence on the human occupation between Middle Paleolithic and Epi-Paleolithic/Mesolithic. The rapid rise in the sea level observed during the Early Holocene, and most of these islands were either connected to the mainland or were substantially closer to it.
The earliest Neolithic settlement of Uğurlu was probably founded by the newcomers from Northwest Anatolia. The first settlers were agriculturalists and they introduced domestic sheep, goats, cattle and pigs to the island. This paper presents new field data from the island of Gökçeada aimed at understanding the Neolithic transition to Europe.
Continuity and discontinuity in the transition from foraging to farming in Western Asia
O. Bar-Yosef (Department of Anthropology, Harvard University)
Archaeologists are generally scholars with a positive attitude towards people and cultures. Thus it is not surprising that the socio-economic shift, reasonably well-recorded in the archaeology of ca. 15,000-9,000 cal BP years (ca. 13,000-7,000 cal BC) of southwestern Asia is seen as the continuous changes of subsistence strategies by all hunter-gatherers who become farmers. This model of cultural continuity is based on the same logic of many Paleolithic evolutionary interpretations that accepts similarities of technological and typological traits of stone tools as representing biological continuity. The cultural continuity interpretation is an independent variable standing apart from major changes in the economy and the resultant social structures. The alternative model suggests that following the successful establishment of cultivation of plants that took place among a few groups (a tribe?) of hunter-gatherers, rapid demographic increase within a few centuries, led to the need in expansion of these farmers who continued to hunt and gather. Neighboring groups of foragers were partially absorbed by the expanding farmers populations (individuals females?) who in addition increased their economic power through animal husbandry, or had to retreat to areas of poor quality arable lands. Ancient DNA from Europe hints to the gradual disappearance of Mesolithic foragers who did not adopt the new lifeways. Detailed scrutiny of this critical period in southwestern Asia may reveal the inception of this complex socio-economic process across the region.
Similar but distinct: Neolithisation of Central Anatolia- Mihriban Özbaşaran (Istanbul University)
Neolithisation in Southwest Asia was built on the remarkable results of various researches carried out basically in the Fertile Crescent since the beginning of the 20th century. More new and multi-disciplinary field and lab-work in the recent years continue to contribute that enable to understand the process in a finer scale. The already defined parameters and hypotheses of neolithisation and our own interpretative approaches require to be reconsidered with each new region, project and context. In this sense, neolithisation of Central Anatolia presents a noteworthy example with similar stages of behaviours of the early Neolithic communities, compared to the Northern Mesopotamia, but with a distinct, contextual and even site-based characterisation.
Meanwhile in another region Gunes Duru (Istanbul University)
Research into the emergence of early sedentary settlements has for a long time focused on the essential knowledge, technological developments and domestication of plants and animals in regions with a hunter-gatherer tradition. It has been generally accepted that such regions were where the Neolithisation of the other regions stemmed from. Although some recent data support this view, increased research in varied geographical regions, including Central Anatolia, indicate other independent models. However, the origin of Neolithic communities is not the only issue. Interpretations of the archaeological record in general tend to evaluate the Neolithic way of life as though it developed in identical stages and aspects, as one model. This paper aims to present two Neolithic settlements; Akarçay Tepe, located within the active network of the Pre-Pottery Neolithic interaction sphere and Aşıklı Höyük in Central Anatolia, which was not integrated into the same regional network. The varied approaches to Neolithisation at the two sites will be assessed by examining evidence of the behaviour of the different communities, their material culture, and architectural traditions.
Microscopic analysis of the stone beads from Nahal Hemar Cave
Iris Groman-Yaroslavski, Naomi Porat, and Daniella Bar-Yosef Mayer (University of Haifa)
The site of Nahal Hemar Cave was most likely a cultic site, and could have served to designate a territory of groups living in the Judean Desert during the Pre Pottery Neolithic B period. The site’s location and its environmental conditions enabled an extraordinary preservation of rare objects and organic remains. Those included painted stone masks, decorated bone figurines, human skulls treated with an asphalt-like material, a sickle with flint blades inserted in it, beads of shell, wood and stone, bone tools, flint tools, botanical remains and remains of ropes and twined basketry. The composition of finds indicates that the site served as a refuge for storing these finds which were brought from different locations in their territory, some of them serving as evidence for cultic activities, and others were mundane objects typical for these agricultural societies.
The stone beads were most likely part of beadwork either strung or sewn to fabrics, as evidenced by some of the shell beads with tied knots. They were chosen for micro-analysis in which the main objective was to identify the raw material and the manufacturing process. Identification of the raw materials was done with SEM-EDS and the manufacturing process was studied using the methodology of use-wear analysis, observing microscopic traces (abrasion, edge rounding, polish, striations) produced either from manufacture or use.
Raw materials identified include turquoise, apatite, amazonite and carnelian, obtained from different sources. Microscopic traces on the beads’ exterior surface show variable degrees of abrasion, dependent on the raw material and shape of the bead. The analsis of the perforation was done by injecting silicon to make a cast of the hole. Microscopic traces on the casts of the beads’ holes indicated the various steps of drilling, direction of entry of the drill and some of the characteristics of the drill bits.
Our preliminary results indicate that the stone beads assemblage consists of beads of various shapes and raw materials, and manufacturing methods. This diversity is compatible with the entire composition of the finds from this site, supporting the reconstruction that the site was used for storage of valuable objects. The visitors of the site were engaged in long distance exchange of either raw materials for beads or the finished products, as well as exchange of technological know-how.
