Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

PPNA: Neolithikum oder nicht?Pro-Position: Ja, es war neolithisch

Axel Berger

Institut für Ur- und FrühgeschichteUniversität zu Köln

Seminar: Von den letzten jägerischen zu den frühestenbäuerlichen Gesellschaften des nahen Ostens

Wintersemester 2014/15Dr. Daniel Schyle

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Gliederung

1 Kulturstufen und Chronologie

2 Wichtige Fundplätze

3 Das PPNA als neolithische Kulturstufe

4 Résumé

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Feinchronologie nach Goring-MorrisS196 Current Anthropology Volume 52, Supplement 4, October 2011

Table 1. Chronology of cultural entities in the southern Levant based on available radiometric date ranges

Sociocultural entities

Dates BP Cal Time stratigraphic units Mediterranean zone Steppe and desert zone

24,000–21,750 Early Epipaleolithic Nebekian

24,200–19,250 Masraqan (Late Ahmarian) Masraqan (Late Ahmarian)

21,250–17,575 Kebaran Kebaran

20,200–18,900 Nizzanan Nizzanan

18,000–16,250 Middle Epipaleolithic Geometric Kebaran Geometric Kebaran

17,000–15,500 Classic Mushabian

16,850–14,400 Early Ramonian

14,900–13,700 Late Epipaleolithic Early Natufian Terminal Ramonian Early Natufian

13,500–12,750 Late Natufian Late Natufian

12,500–11,750 Final Natufian Harifian

12,175–11,800 Early Neolithic PPNA Khiamian

11,625–11,000 Sultanian (Final Harifian)

10,950–10,300 Early Neolithic PPNB Early PPNB Early PPNB

10,150–9725 Middle PPNB Middle PPNB

9400–8900 Late PPNB Late PPNB

9050–8450 Final PPNB (PPNC) Final PPNB (PPNC)

8400–7700 Late Neolithic PNA Yarmukian Tuwailan

7750–7450 Jericho IX

7500–6500 Late Neolithic PNB Wadi Raba Qatifian Timnian

Note. There are slight discrepancies between this table and table 1 in Belfer-Cohen and Goring-Morris (2011). PNA p Pottery Neolithic

A; PNB p Pottery Neolithic B; PPNA p Pre-Pottery Neolithic A; PPNB p Pre-Pottery Neolithic B; PPNC p Pre-Pottery Neolithic

C.

Upper Paleolithic patterns (Goring-Morris, Hovers, and Bel-

fer-Cohen 2009).

While, superficially, the observed changes during the earlier

Epipaleolithic appear to have been incremental, gradually

speeding up so that the pace of change eventually became

logarithmic, common sense suggests that changes may more

likely have been quite random, isolated, and independent.

Obviously, we are limited by the very nature of the archae-

ological record. The changes would have involved techno-

logical innovations, differential social interactions, and re-

sponses to extraneous factors. Ultimately, it is the specific

articulations of these various factors, internal (intra- and in-

tergroup) and/or external (climate, carrying capacities, etc.)

that are particularly relevant in terms of the nature and tempo

of cultural change. This is one of the pitfalls of simulation

studies, because they are based on consideration of long

stretches of time and averaging out the data available. Actually,

there are indications that at least at certain points in time,

the course of events is more apt to be described in the mode

of “punctuated equilibrium,” with periods of stasis inter-

spersed by bursts of activity (and see below for specific ex-

amples). This pattern is reported from various parts of the

world in the articles in this issue.

Another caveat concerns the very nature of the archaeo-

logical data as well as research paradigms that influence in-

terpretations. The “rule of thumb” is that what is observed

archaeologically more often than not reflects the end of the

process (from invention to innovation to its wide acceptance),

“solid” enough to be observed.

Considering all of the above, it transpires that the origins

and incipient processes of Neolithization in the Near East

should be traced all the way back to the local Late Upper

Paleolithic/Early Epipaleolithic. This corresponds to a chro-

nological span of some 15,000 years (after calibration) until

the end of the Neolithic, that is, the equivalent of some 500–

600 generations (table 1).

The Geographic Setting

It is vital to define the geographic boundaries in which these

processes occurred. The “Near (or Middle) East” is an am-

biguous term that covers Southwest Asia between the Med-

iterranean and Iran. The region (Western Asia) encompasses

Anatolia, the Levant, Cyprus, Mesopotamia, and Transcau-

casia. Here our primary focus of study is the Levant, its most

distinctive feature being its ecological diversity. In addition,

where pertinent, we relate briefly to adjacent regions (e.g.,

Cyprus and central Anatolia). The Levant is a small region

enclosed between the Taurus and Zagros mountains to the

north, the Mediterranean coastline to the west, the Sinai Pen-

insula to the south, and the Syro-Arabian desert to the east,

ca. 1,000 km north to south by up to 400 km east to west

(fig. 1). The topography of the Levant is characterized by a

north-south longitudinal series of alternating elevated and

low-lying regions: the coastal plain and western piedmont;

the central hill range reaching up to 2,000 m a.s.l.; the Dead

Sea Rift lying below sea level; and the Trans-Jordanian/Syrian

plateau (the central-south Levant), which rises steeply to el-

evations between 800 and 2,000 m a.s.l., followed by a gradual

descent eastward into Saudi Arabia. Today there are relatively

This content downloaded from 134.95.83.181 on Mon, 22 Sep 2014 10:51:07 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Go11

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Chronologie nach Böhner und Schyle

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

11000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

11000

Central-Europe

Greece NW/W-Anatolia

Konya-Plain

Cappadocia/Cilicia

Cyprus SE-Anatolia

Middle-Euphrates

N-Levant S-Levant Sinjar/Zagros

SyrianDesert

SBK

LBK

A t

l a n

t i c

B o

r e

a l

P r

e b

o r

e a

lA

l l e

r ø

d

Sesklo MN

Sesklo FN

Ilipi

nar

Hoca Çesme

?

Fran

chti

Can

hasa

n I

Hac

ilar

Wes

tÇ

atal

höyü

k E

ast

Chalc.Chalc.

PPNAPPNA

PPNCPPNC

PNPN

LL

MM

EE

PPNBPPNB

PPNBPPNB

PPNBPPNB

EpipEpip

El Kowm

El Kowm

Desert Kites

Zawi Chemi

Ear

lyN

atuf

ian

Abu

Hur

eyra

La

teN

atuf

ian

(Final Natufian)

Khiamian?

HalafArjounnne

Ain

Gha

zal

Jarm

o

Has

suna

Basta

Beidha

DhraAsw

adie

nS

ulta

nien

Net

iv H

agdu

dJe

richo

Byb

los

Abu

Thu

ww

ab

Tell

el K

erkh

Tell

Sab

i Aby

ad

Bou

qras

Hal

oula

Jerf

el A

hmar

Mur

eybe

t

Rou

nd

Hal

lan

Cem

i

Akr

otiri

- P

hase

Göb

ekli

Tepe

Gür

cüte

pe Tele

ilat

Nev

ali Ç

ori Caf

er H

.

Asi

kli H

öyük

Çay

önü

Gril

lC

obbl

eC

ell

Cha

nn-

eled

Larg

e-ro

om

IAII

III

IV

Yift

ahel

AB

Nem

rik

Que

rmez

Der

e

M’le

faat

Halaf

Sotira-Stufe

Kal

avas

os-T

entaLPPNB

MPPNB

?

?

?

?

?

?

EPPNB

Khirokitia-Phase

Can-hasan III

Shillouro-kambos

Har

ifian

Abu

Sal

em

Böhner/Schyle 2005

Ökü

zini

Youn

ger

Dry

as

cal. BC

Yarmukian

?

?

?

Natufian

X

BP

11500

11000

10500

10000

9500

9000

8500

8000

7500

7000

6500

6000

PPNB?

Pre-

Sam

arra

Obaid

Dja

’dé

II A

II BII CIII ADFBW

Achilleion

VII

VIII

IX

Kno

ssos

Erb

aba

Yum

ukte

pe

?ECA I ACN

ECA II EPN

ECA III LN

ECA IV ECh

ECA V MCh

Pre-HalafTransit.early HalafIII B

late PPNA

early PPNAP2a

P2b

P1b

P1a

P3a

P3b

P4a

P4b

P4c

P5a

P5b

P5c

Utz Böhner & Daniel Schyle

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Klimaorientierte Chronologie nach Maher, Banning & Chazan

6

Lisa A. Maher, E.B. Banning & Michael Chazan

at 11.6 ka. ‘While correlation is not causation, it is clear, however, that Early Natufian sedentism and then PPNA early village life flourished immediately after rapid improvements in climate initiated by the Bølling and Preboreal events’ (Byrd 2005, 252). He goes on to argue that environmental stress cannot therefore be used to explain these changes, but rather focuses on social and ideological dynamics that took place when climate was benign.

All of the explanations described thus far rely heavily on large-scale climate change as a primary cause of social, technological and economic trans-formation; namely in terms of adaptive responses to periods of stress or abundance. An interesting aspect of all these theories is their presumptions about the quality of the climate inherent in the words we use to describe climate change. Warm and moist are often synonymous in the literature with climatic ameliora-tion, climatic improvement and generally favourable conditions, with the presumption that warm and wet were ideal conditions for cultures to flourish, innovate and, according to some authors, become more com-plex. Conversely, there is a widespread assumption that cool, dry periods impose severe stresses that forced human populations to innovate and intensify or, alternatively, return to ‘simpler’ life ways. The value-lading of these terms and the simplistic models of culture–climate interaction that they imply are top-ics to which we will return later.

Major climatic events of the late Pleistocene/ early Holocene

In order to discuss the validity of linking climate and culture change during the Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic of southwest Asia, we briefly review current reconstructions of the palaeoclimatic record (Table 2). Our dating of the climatic events depends heavily on the GRIP core data. These cores offer extremely high precision because they are dated through actual counting of annual layers defined by regular variation in electrical conductivity, dust, nitrate, calcium and

ammonium ions, which are particularly clear back to the Younger Dryas (Johnsen et al. 2001). Well-dated volcanic eruptions and other tie points were used to anchor this sequence. In general, we follow the most commonly cited dates and standard deviations cited in the GRIP literature. Other proxies are more problematic in their dating. (For a more detailed summary of data from various palaeoclimatic data and reconstructions of changing climatic conditions for the Levant, refer to Enzel et al. (2008), Robinson et al. (2006) or Rosen (2007, 44–80, fig. 4.7).)

Last Glacial Maximum (LGM)Although oscillations in temperature and humidity characterized much of the Pleistocene, our focus here is the impact of these fluctuations at the end of the Pleistocene. Cold and dry conditions of the LGM occurred between 25 and 18 ka cal. bp, reaching a height at c. 22 ka cal. bp. Global records for late Pleistocene climatic conditions derive mainly from ice cores (e.g. Lowe et al. 2008) that document persistent cold and dry conditions until c. 19–17 ka cal. bp. In the Levant, isotopic records from cave speleothems in Soreq Cave show that δ18O values reach a peak at 19 cal. bp and mark very cold conditions (Bar-Matthews et al. 1997; 1999). Several authors have attempted to summarize pollen records from a variety of sites throughout the Mediterranean (Meadows 2005; Rossignol-Strick 1995; 1997; Wright & Thorpe 2003). Where present, pollen from archaeological sites seems to agree generally with other pollen evidence (Leroi-Gourhan & Darmon 1991) regarding a shift from chenopods and other dry, cool species to more forested conditions at the end of the LGM, with a brief return of these arid-adapted plants at the Younger Dryas (Deckers et al. 2009; Rosen 2004; 2007). Geomorphological evidence suggests that a drop in regional water levels accompanying the cool and dry conditions of the LGM resulted in stream inci-sion and downcutting of existing Pleistocene stream terraces (Goldberg 1994; Goodfriend 1987; Goodfriend & Magaritz 1988; Rosen 1986; 2007). Sediments sur-rounding and within the Dead Sea basin indicate the

Table 2. Palaeoclimatic events of the last 25,000 years discussed in the text, with date of onset and associated errors and estimated durations (dates from Alley et al. 1997; 2003; Bar-Matthews et al. 1999; Barber et al. 1999; Bond et al. 1992; Enzel et al. 2008; Lowe et al. 2008; van der Plicht et al. 2004; Severinghaus & Brooks 1999; Severinghaus et al. 1998; Weaver et al. 2003).

Date of onset (cal. bp) Error (±) Name Peak Duration (years)8245 20 8.2 Event 8175 160

11,570 10 Pre-Boreal 11,400 150012,900 120 Younger Dryas N/A 120014,670 35 Bølling-Allerød N/A 180016,800 150 Heinrich 1 Event 16,600 100–50025,000 500 Last Glacial Maximum 22,000 8000

14

Lisa A. Maher, E.B. Banning & Michael Chazan

radiocarbon assay itself was suspect. For example, some samples from Wadi al-Hammeh, where diagnostic lithics were lacking, were assigned to periods solely on the basis of their radiocarbon dates (Edwards et al. 1996; Edwards 2001); consequently, including these dates would be tautological. And, while large statistical errors do not in themselves cause radiocarbon determinations to be inaccurate (contra Byrd 2005, 245) — they have poor precision but not bias — such imprecise dates do not help us arrive at precise estimates of the dates for events of interest. Finally, dates obtained from very old radiocarbon assays, when the radiocarbon method was not as reliable, were omitted (e.g. Jericho). Table 3 shows which dates were rejected and for what reason, as well as the posterior outlier probabilities for the determinations we retained.

We then evaluated all remaining radiocarbon determinations by assigning each a prior probability of 0.05 of being an outlier (or higher for a very few cases that diverged many centuries from expectation). In contrast to rejecting statistical outliers, the BCal soft-ware which we use simply weights the determinations by their outlier probabilities so that a calibrated date with a posterior probability of 0.2 of being an outlier only contributes 80 per cent weight to the analysis.

However, one with a posterior probability of 1.0 of being an outlier is effectively excluded.

It is also important to recognize that the results of Bayesian analyses are always provisional. Different runs of the same model can yield somewhat differ-ent results, and we also expect results to change as new information accumulates, including changes to the calibration curve itself, as mentioned below. In order to ensure that our results are reasonably reproducible, we have run each of the final models at least three separate times, only changing the seed for the random number generator. Although we usually report the results from only one of these runs, we only use results when all of the runs show closely similar results. Despite these precautions, none of the dates on cultural entities provided below should be considered final or definitive; they are only plausible dates in the light of the evidence we used and given the assumptions we made.

Analysis of available dates (Table 3) with the models shown in Figure 2 allows us to estimate the dates of the boundaries between periods (assum-ing abutting periods). The results, with a variety of assumptions, appear in Table 4 and Figure 3. To sim-plify, we round off the calibrated dates to the nearest decade and report the lowest and highest dates for the 68 per cent confidence intervals (ignoring gaps that occur in multi-modal density plots).

Did the Heinrich 1 cold event occur at or slightly before the onset of the Geometric Kebaran? Occurring about 16.8–16.5 ka, the H1 event is pur-ported to coincide with the cultural changes associated with the Geometric Kebaran, in particular the expan-

Start of 8.2 ka Event

Start of Preboreal

Start of Younger Dryas

Start of Bølling-Allerød

Start of Heinrich I

Southern PPNA

Hari�an

Mushabian

Pottery Neolithic

PPNC

Late PPNB

Middle PPNB

PPNA

Late/Final Natu�an

Early Natu�an

Geometric Kebaran

Kebaran

Tim

e

Figure 2. Example model of ‘groups’ of dates used in the analysis, with Kebaran, Geometric Kebaran, Early Natufian, Late Natufian, PPNA, Middle PPNB, Late PPNB, PPNC and Pottery Neolithic (Yarmoukian) abutting, and Mushabian, Harifian and southern PPNA abutting but with no predefined relationships to the other entities in the model. To the right are several ‘floating parameters’ whose relationships to the other entities we tested. Note that dates used for ‘southern PPNA’ are also included within the ‘PPNA’ group.

Table 4. Estimated dates of major transition ‘events’ in the late Pleistocene and early Holocene of the southern Levant. The Early PPNB is not included in this model because of its uncertain status in the southern Levant. The PPNC onset is subjectively estimated because all attempts to run abutting models for the LPPNB/PPNC boundary suffered from high dependence. It cannot be considered a reliable estimate. *The Early/Late Natufian boundary shown is for a model including PPNA, and would be later otherwise.Culture/Period Date of onset

(68% confidence, ka cal. bp)

Date of onset (95% confidence,

ka cal. bp)Wadi Rabah 7.8–7.7 7.9–7.6Yarmoukian 8.45–8.36 8.52–8.3PPNC 9.0–8.7? 9.0–8.7?Late PPNB 9.53–9.45 9.56–9.4Middle PPNB 10.45–10.3 10.54–10.26PPNA 11.9–11.7 12.1–11.6Late Natufian 13.58–13.04* 13.74–12.95*Early Natufian 15.08–14.74 15.37–14.57Geometric Kebaran 17.89–17.66 18.0–17.5

Ma11

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Die Getreideexplosion im Bølling und Allerød

Sa95

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Wadi Hammeh 27, Frühes Natufien (14 ka cal BP)

Ed88, We02

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Wadi Hammeh 27, Grabungsfläche

We02

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Wadi Hammeh 27, Ernährung

Unter- und Oberkiefer der Bestattung Homo 1, adult, mit kaum abgenutz-ten gesunden Zähnen und möglicherweise tödlicher Schädelverletzung[We02, 111].

We02

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Abu Hureyra, Natufien(13.4–12.5 ka cal BP)

Hi01, Mo00

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Abu Hureyra, intensive Nutzung von Grassamen

Mo00

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Abu Hureyra, intensive Nutzung von Grassamen

Mo00

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Abu Hureyra, intensive Nutzung von Grassamen

Mo00

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Abu Hureyra, intensive Nutzung von Grassamen

Mo00

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Abu Hureyra, intensive Nutzung von Grassamen

Mo00

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Abu Hureyra, Datierung der Natufienphasen

Datierung der Natufienphasen von Abu Hureyra in unkalibrierten C14-Jahren bp. Die Phasen 2 und 3 entsprechen der Jüngeren Dryas [Mo00].

Mo00

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Abu Hureyra, Gräser- und Unkrautsamen

Wilder und domestizierter Roggen; Abnahme der Nahrungs- (Getreide, Feder-gras, Gänsefuß) und Zunahme der Unkrautsamen (kleinsamige Hülsenfrüchteund Gräser, Steinsamen) in der Jüngeren Dryas [Hi01]. Hi01

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Iraq ed Dubb, Spätnatufien und PPNA (13.5–10.5 ka cal BP)

Ku04

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Iraq ed Dubb, Grabungsplan

Ku04

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Jericho, durchlaufend Natufien bis Bronzezeit

1: Feige; 2+3: ein Gerstenkorn von zwei Seiten; 4–7: PPNB [Ke83, Tafel 25].Ke83

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Jericho, Proto-Pfeilspitzen

Proto-Pfeilspitzen aus dem Sultanien von Jericho (PPNA) [Ke83, 648].

Ke83

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Der Turm von Jericho

Ke83, FAB

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Quermez Dere, frühes PPNA (11.9–11.3 ka cal BP)

Wa92, Ko09

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Qaramel, Spätnatufien und PPNA (12.9–10.8 ka cal BP)

Ma01, Ma09

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Hallan Çemi, Final Natufian (nach 12.0–11.6 ka cal BP)

Ro98, Ro00

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Hallan Çemi, rezente Eichenwälder

Die Umgebung von Hallan Çemi war auch auf dem Höhepunkt der jüngerenDryas noch bewaldet [Ro98].

Ro98

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Hallan Çemi, Steingefäße und Stößel

Verzierte Steinschalen, Stößel und Szepter aus Hallan Çemi [Ro00].Ro00

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Netiv Hagdud, frühes PPNA (11.5–10.5 ka cal BP)

Ba80, Ba91, Ba97

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Netiv Hagdud, Datierung und Grabungsplan

Ba91, Ba97

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Netiv Hagdud, Herd, Grube und Mörser

Ba97

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Netiv Hagdud, Pfeilspitzen und Hagdud Truncations

Ba97

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Jerf el-Ahmar, mittleres PPNA (11.0 ka cal BP)

St96, Wa10, Wi02

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Jerf el-Ahmar, Gebäudegrundrisse

St96, Wi02

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Jerf el-Ahmar, Getreideverarbeitung

Abgebranntes Sondergebäude zum Einweichen und Mahlen von Getreide, Blickvon Osten [Wi02].

Wi02

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Jerf el-Ahmar, Community Building

Das älteste der drei Community Buildings [Wa10, 626].

Wa10

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Dhra’, mittleres PPNA (11.2 ka cal BP)

Ku09, Ku98

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Dhra’, Speichergebäude

Ku09

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Dhra’, Speichergebäude

Ku09

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Dhra’, Speichergebäude

Ku09

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Dhra’, Die Bauphasen des Speichergebäudes

Ku09

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Dhra’, hoher Anteil an Pfelspitzen im Steininventar

Ku98

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Zahrat adh-Dhra’ 2, mittleres PPNA (10.8 ka cal BP)

Ed02a, Ed02b

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Nemrik, spätes PPNA und PPNB

Am96, Ko90

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Dja’de, PPNA–PPNB (10.9–10.1 ka cal BP)

Google: Dja’de PPNA =⇒

Jade Pena.

Ko09

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Dja’de, PPNA–PPNB (10.9–10.1 ka cal BP)

Google: Dja’de PPNA =⇒ Jade Pena.

Ko09

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Eine Einheit mit dem Natufien

Natufien und PPNA bilden anscheinend ein nach beiden Seitendeutlich abgegrenztes kulturelles Kontinuum.

• Seßhaftigkeit oder ritueller Siedlungsbezug• Feste Rundbauten mit Steinfundament• Intensive Getreidenutzung ohne Domestikation• Siedlungsbestattungen

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Wandel in der Bauweise

Im Hausbau des PPNA zeichnet sich ein deutlicherKulturwandel ab.

• Große Reinlichkeit im Inneren• Lehmziegel• Aufwendiger Kalkestrich• Bestattungen im Haus

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Domestikationsmodell bei Aussaat und Selbstbestäubung

Hi90b

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Domestikationsmodell bei Aussaat und 60 % Verlust

Hi90b

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Keine Domestikation ohne Aussaat

Hi90a

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Keine Domestikation ohne Aussaat

Hi90a

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Intensive Kultivation im PPNA

Wi12

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Zunahme der Korngrößen im PPNA von Jerf el-Ahmar

Jerf el Ahmar that represent only the small grains andthose from Kosak Shamali, which represents only thelarge sized grains.

For barley, the early levels at Jerf el Ahmar producedsmall grains compared to the domesticated grains fromKosak Shamali (Fig. 3 A). The late levels from Jerf elAhmar (Fig. 3 B) show a considerable increase in sizecompared to the early levels and the upper size range iscomparable to that of the domesticated grains fromKosak Shamali. Dja’de (Fig. 3 C) produced a wide sizerange from small grains similar to those from the earlylevels at Jerf el Ahmar and a large size range comparableto Kosak Shamali. Fig. 3D gives the means from all fourarchaeological levels. The most significant is the meanfrom the early levels at Jerf el Ahmar and the mean fromdomesticated grains from Kosak Shamali because thesetwo levels represent single populations.

The measurements of domesticated emmer grainsobtained from Kosak Shamali are slightly larger in sizecompared to the early Neolithic sites (Fig. 4). Data from

Aswad were based on maximum, minimum and average(N=40), given in the published report [16]. Taken as awhole, the size distribution of emmer grains from KosakShamali, Aswad II and Cayonu demonstrate a slightdiachronic increase in size, and as van Zeist noted, theearly levels from Cayonu in eastern Turkey producedsmaller, narrow wild type grains and the upper levelslarger plumper grains ([17], tables 5 and 6 fig. 7.1).

4. Discussion

These measurements indicate a diachronic increase ingrain size for the three taxa. This is clearly demonstratedby the plots of the means for the Neolithic levels and theChalcolithic period. The sites share similar environ-mental conditions being located in the same region. Thisincrease in size of the charred grains could result fromvarious factors, which we will now examine.

Crop processing activities such as the use of sieves toremove weeds would also remove tail grain, and this

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5breadth (mm)

thic

knes

s (m

m)

Kosak Shamali

Jerf el Ahmar (early)

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5breadth (mm)

thic

knes

s (m

m)

Kosak Shamali

Dja'dé

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5breadth (mm)

thic

knes

s (m

m)

Jerf el Ahmar (early)

Jerf el Ahmar (late)

C0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

breadth (mm)

thic

knes

s (m

m)

Jerf el Ahmar early

Kosak Shamali

A B

D

Fig. 2. Scatter diagrams giving plots of grains measured from domesticated two-grained einkorn from Chalcolithic Kosak Shamali (plot A); whereit is compared to the early levels from Jerf el Ahmar, they fall into two distinct clusters. Plot B gives the measurements from the site of Dja’de, whichalso fall into two similar clusters. Plot C compares early and late levels from Jerf el Ahmar where we see the appearance of large grains in the laterlevels comparable in size to domesticated grains from Kosak Shamali. The distinction between wild rye and wild einkorn grains is not possible, thusgrains from Dja’de and Jerf el Ahmar may represent both taxa. Plot D gives the means for the two populations, which are pure.

G. Willcox / Journal of Archaeological Science 31 (2004) 145–150 147

would effect grain size. Thus cleaned grain would haveon average a bigger size range than the residue fromgrain cleaning. This could be an explanation for thepresence of small grains from the earliest Neolithiclevels. However because the samples from the sites ofJerf el Ahmar and Dja’de come from a wide variety ofarchaeological contexts, it is improbable that only tailgrain was recovered from the early levels. The factthat the large size range from the Neolithic levelscorresponds to that of Kosak Shamali is significant.

An alternative explanation for the increase in size isthat growing conditions became more favourable, whichwould increase the frequencies of plump well-formedgrains. This might have happened when cereals werebrought into cultivation for the first time by earlyfarmers who deliberately chose fields where soils hadgood moisture retention. In this case we would expect anincrease in the frequencies of well-formed grains. Butthis is not the case, rather what we see is the appearanceof grains representing a much bigger size range.

The effects of charring on grain size are difficult toassess for the archaeobotanical material. So far exper-imental data has not provided a set of reference datawhich may be used for comparison. Certainly what isclear is that charring will increase size variation throughboth puffing and shrinkage. In order to compare the sizeranges between different levels and different sites wemust assume that conditions of charring were fairlyuniform. This would appear a reasonable assumptionand bearing in mind that the most significant result is thesimilarity in the maximum size range between someNeolithic levels and the domesticated grains from KosakShamali.

This leaves us with the possibility that the increase ingrain size could have a genetic basis. Genetic change atthe population level could result from, (a) consciousselection, (b) unconscious selection or (c) the introduc-tion of plump grained varieties from elsewhere. Little isknown about the process of selection for plump grains,whether unconscious or conscious. The selection process

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5breadth (mm)

thic

knes

s (m

m)

Jerf el Ahmar (early)

Kosak Shamali

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5breadth (mm)

thic

knes

s (m

m)

Jerf el Ahmar (early)

Jerf el Ahmar (late)

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5breadth (mm)

thic

knes

s (m

m)

Kosak Shamali

Dj'ade

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5breadth (mm)

thic

knes

s (m

m)

Kosak Shamali

Dja'dé

Jefr el Ahmar late

Jerf el Ahmar early

A B

C D

Fig. 3. Scatter diagrams comparing measurements of Neolithic barley grains with those from Chalcolithic Kosak Shamali. In plot A, early levelsfrom Jerf el Ahmar show a distinct cluster compared to the domesticated grains from Kosak Shamali. In plot B we can see the clear increase in sizebetween the two Neolithic levels, while in plot C the site of Dja’de shows a mixture. Plot D shows the progressive increase in size of the means fromeach level.

G. Willcox / Journal of Archaeological Science 31 (2004) 145–150148

Wi04

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Zunahme der festen Ährchen bei Gerste und Einkorn

As13

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Kampfspuren in der Kabarahöhle, frühes Natufien

Bo04

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Kampfspuren in der Kabarahöhle, frühes Natufien

Bo04

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Massenhaftes Auftreten der El-Khiam-Spitzen im PPNA

Sind die El-Khiam-Spitzen Bohrer und Schaber [Go01] oder aufwendigeRohlinge [Mu14] oder handelt es sich um Waffen [Wa92]? Abb. aus [Ba91].

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Kultgebäude

Göbekli Tepe, Jerf el-Ahmar und Nevali Çori [Di12, Ko09].Di12, Ko09

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Résumé

Der erhebliche Arbeitseinsatz außerhalb der Ernteund die daraus entstehenden umkämpften Besitzrechtesowie der deutliche Wandel in Kult und Weltanschauungsprechen dafür, das PPNA kulturell als vollwertigeAckerbaugesellschaft anzusprechen.

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Handout und Literatur

Vielen Dank

Das Handout und Literatur liegen auf:www.axel.berger-odenthal.de/work/Referat/

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

LiteraturAm96 Claus Ambos,

Prestige und Prestigegüter im beginnenden vorderasiatischen Neolithikum, Nemrik 9 und Qermez Dere.In: Johannes Müller & Reinhard Bernbeck (Hrsg.),Prestige – Prestigegüter – Sozialstrukturen, Beispiele aus dem europäischen und vorderasiatischen Neolithikum.Archäologische Berichte 6 (Bonn 1996), 47–56.

An91 Patricia C. Anderson,Harvesting of Wild Cereals During the Natufian as seen from Experimental Cultivation and Harvest of Wild EinkornWheat and Microwear Analysis of Stone Tools.In: Ofer Bar-Yosef & François R. Valla (Hrsg.),The Natufian Culture in the Levant.Archaeological Series 1 (Ann Arbor 1991), 521–556.

As13 Eleni Asouti & Dorian Q. Fuller,A Contextual Approach to the Emergence of Agriculture in Southwest Asia, Reconstructing Early Neolithic Plant-FoodProduction.Current Anthropology 54 (2013), 299–345.

Ba80 O. Bar-Yosef, A. Gopher & A. N. Goring-Morris,Netiv Hagdud, A “Sultanian” Mound in the Lower Jordan Valley.Paléorient 6 (1980), i, 201–206.

Ba91 Ofer Bar-Yosef, Avi Gopher, Eitan Tchernov & Mordechai E. Kislev,Netiv Hagdud, An Early Neolithic Village Site in the Jordan Valley.Journal of Field Archaeology 18 (1991), 405–424.

Ba97 Ofer Bar-Yosef & Avi Gopher,The Excavations of Netiv Hagdud, Stratigraphy and Architectural Remains.In: Ofer Bar-Yosef & Avi Gopher (Hrsg.),An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley, Part I: The Archaeology of Netiv Hagdud.American School of Prehistoric Research Bulletin 43 (Cambridge 1997), 41–69.

Bo04 Fanny Bocquentin & Ofer Bar-Yosef,Early Natufian remains: evidence for physical conflict from Mt. Carmel, Israel.Journal of Human Evolution 47 (2004), 19–23.

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Literatur (cont.)Di12 Oliver Dietrich, Manfred Heun, Jens Notroff, Klaus Schmidt & Martin Zarnkow,

The role of cult and feasting in the emergence of Neolithic communities, New evidence from Göbekli Tepe, south-eastern Turkey.Antiquity 86 (2012), 674–695.

Ed02a Phillip C. Edwards, John Meadows, Ghattas Sayej & Mary C. Metzger,Zahrat Adh-Dhra˓ 2, A New Pre-Pottery Neolithic A Site on the Dead Sea Plain in Jordan.Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 327 (2002), 1–15.

Ed02b Phillip C. Edwards, John Meadows, Mary C, Metzger & Ghattas Sayej,Results From the First Season at Zahrat adh-Dhra’ 2, A New Pre-Pottery Neolithic A Site on the Dead Sea Plain inJordan.Neo-Lithics 2002, i, 11–16.

Ed88 Phillip C. Edwards,Natufian settlement in Wadi Al-Hammeh.Paléorient 14 (1988), ii, 309–315.

Go01 Nathan B. Goodale & Sam J. Smith,Pre-Pottery Neolithic A Projectile Points at Dhra’, Jordan, Preliminary Thoughts on Form, Function, and SiteInterpretation.Neo-Lithics 2001, ii, 1–5.

Go11 A. Nigel Goring-Morris & Anna Belfer-Cohen,Neolithization Processes in the Levant, The Outer Envelope.Current Anthropology 52 (2011), Supplement, S195–S208.

Hi01 Gordon Hillman, Robert Hedges, Andrew Moore, Susan Colledge & Paul Pettitt,New evidence of Lateglacial cereal cultivation at Abu Hureyra on the Euphrates.The Holocene 11 (2001), 383–393.

Hi90a Gordon C. Hillman & M. Stuart Davies,Measured Domestication Rates in Wild Wheats and Barley Under Primitive Cultivation, and Their ArchaeologicalImplications.Journal of World Prehistory 4 (1990), 157–222.

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Literatur (cont.)Hi90b Gordon C. Hillman & M. Stuart Davies,

Domestication rates in wild-type wheats and barley under primitive cultivation.Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 39 (1990), 39–78.

Ke83 K. M. Kenyon & T. A. Holland (Hrsg.),Excavations at Jericho, Volume Five: The Pottery Phases of the Tell and Other Finds.(London 1983).

Ko09 Tatiana V. Kornienko,Notes on the cult buildings of northern Mesopotamia in the Aceramic Neolithic Period.Journal of Near Eastern Studies 68 (2009), 81–102.

Ko90 Stefan K. Kozlowski & Andrzej Kempisty,Architecture of the pre-pottery neolithic settlement in Nemrik, Iraq.World Archaeology 21 (1990), 348–362.

Ku04 Ian Kuijt,Pre-Pottery Neolithic A and Late Natufian at ‘Iraq ed-Dubb, Jordan.Journal of Field Archaeology 29 (2004), 291–308.

Ku09 Ian Kuijt & Bill Finlayson,Evidence for food storage and predomestication granaries 11,000 years ago in the Jordan Valley.PNAS 106 (2009), 10966–10970.

Ku98 Ian Kuijt & Hamzeh Mahasneh,Dhra’: An Early Neolithic Village in the Southern Jordan Valley.Journal of Field Archaeology 25 (1998), 153–161.

Ma01 Ryszard F. Mazurowski & Thaer Yartah,Tell Qaramel, Excavations 2001.Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 13 (2001), 295–307.

Ma09 Ryszard F. Mazurowski, Danuta J. Michczynska, Anna Pazdur & Natalia Piotrowska,Chronology of the early Pre-Pottery Neolithic settlement Tell Qaramel, Northern Syria, in the light of radiocarbondating.Radiocarbon 51 (2009), 771–781.

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Literatur (cont.)Ma11 Lisa A. Maher, E. B. Banning & Michael Chazan,

Oasis or Mirage? Assessing the Role of Abrupt Climate Change in the Prehistory of the Southern Levant.Cambridge Archaeological Journal 21 (2011), 1–30.

Mi03 Steven Mithen,After the Ice, A Global Human History, 20 000–5 000 BC.(Cambridge 2006).

Mo00 Andrew M. T. Moore, Gordon C. Hillman & Anthony J. Legge (Hrsg.),Village on the Euphrates, From foraging to farming at Abu Hureyra.(Oxford 2000).

Mu14 Bernd Müller-Neuhof,What did they need arrowheads for? Thoughts About Projectile Points and Hunting Strategies in the SW-Asian PPN.In: B. Finlayson & C. Makarewicz (Hrsg.),Settlement, Survey and Stone, Essays on Near Eastern Prehistory in Honour of Gary Rollefson.(Berlin 2014), 227–233.

Ro00 Michael Rosenberg & Richard W. Redding,Hallan Çemi and Early Village Organization in Eastern Anatolia.In: Ian Kuijt (Hrsg.),Life in Neolithic Farming Communities, Social Organization, Identity, and Differentiation.Fundamental Issues in Archaeology (New York 2002), 39–61.

Ro98 M. Rosenberg, R. Nesbitt, R. W. Redding & B. L. Peasnall,Hallan Çemi, pig husbandry, and post-pleistocene adaptations along the Taurus-Zagros arc (Turkey).Paléorient 24 (1998), i, 25–41.

Sa95 Rowan F. Sage,Was low atmospheric CO2 during the Pleistocene a limiting factor for the origin of agriculture?Global Change Biology 1 (1995), 93–106.

St96 D. Stordeur, B. Jammous, D. Helmer & G. Willcox,Jerf el-Ahmar, A New Mureybetian Site (PPNA) on the Middle Euphrates.Neo-Lithics 1996, ii, 1–2.

Chronologie Wichtige Fundplätze Das PPNA Résumé

Literatur (cont.)

Wa10 Trevor Watkins,New light on Neolithic revolution in south-west Asia.Antiquity 84 (2010), 621–634.

Wa92 T. Watkins,The Beginning of the Neolithic: searching for meaning in material culture change.Paléorient 18 (1992), i, 63–75.

We02 Steven G. Webb & Phillip C. Edwards,The Natufian human skeletal remains from Wadi Hammeh 27 (Jordan).Paléorient 28 (2002), i, 103–123.

We06 Ehud Weiss, Mordechai E. Kislev, Anat Hartmann,Autonomous Cultivation Before Domestication.science 312 (2006), 1608–1610.

Wi02 George Willcox,Charred plant remains from a 10th millennium B.P. kitchen at Jerf el Ahmar (Syria).Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 11 (2002), 55–60.

Wi04 George Willcox,Measuring grain size and identifying Near Eastern cereal domestication, Evidence from the Euphrates valley.Journal of Archaeological Science 31 (2004), 145–150.

Wi12 George Willcox,Searching for the origins of arable weeds in the Near East.Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 21 (2012), 163–167.