Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cc8bf7c57-n7qbj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-11T19:01:54.010Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

80 - The Archaeology of Early Farming in Southeast Turkey

from Part VI: - Humans in the Levant

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 May 2017

By
Mehmet Özdoğan
Edited by
Yehouda Enzel  and
Ofer Bar-Yosef
Yehouda Enzel
Affiliation:
Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Ofer Bar-Yosef
Affiliation:
Harvard University, Massachusetts
Get access

Summary

Recent work in Southeastern Turkey identified formative stage of neolithization markedly different from the Southern Levant. Prior to excavations in the upper Tigris and Euphrates basins, early Neolithic communities were considered simple, egalitarian villages, still living in the insipient stage food-production, striving to survive. Excavations at sites such as Çayönü, Nevali Çori, Körtiktepe and Göbeklitepe, demand re-conceptualizing early Neolithic communities. The new picture now emerging is of a stratified society, high level of craft specialization, complex exchange network of raw materials, commodities and technologies, fully sedentary though still being dependent on hunting and gathering. Astounding are the distinctions between domestic and public buildings, the latter featured by sumptuous monumentality, housing sculptured relics enabling to look into the cult practices and to belief system of these communities. While almost all living beings are depicted, a clear discrepancy between the male and female is apparent in the symbolic world of these communities. The chapter presents a conspectus contextualizing Göbeklitepe within the framework of neolithization.
Type
Chapter
Information
Quaternary of the Levant
Environments, Climate Change, and Humans
 , pp. 723 - 732
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2017

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbo, S., Lev-Yadun, S. & Gopher, A. 2012. Plant domestication and crop evolution in the Near East: On events and processes. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 31: 241–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Astruc, L., Abbes, F., Ibanez-Estevez, J.J. & Urquijo, J.G. 2003. Dépôts, réserves et caches de matériel lithique taillé au Néolithique précéramique au Proche-Orient: quelle gestion de l'outillage? Paléorient 29: 59–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balkan-Atlı, N. 1994. La neolithisation de l'Anatolie. Published Ph.D. thesis, Institut Français d'Etudes Anatoliennes.Google Scholar
Balossi-Restelli, F. 2001. Formation Processes of the First Developed Neolithic Societies in the Zagros and the Northern Mesopotamian Plain. Visceglia: Dipartimento di Scienze Storiche Archeologiche Antropologiche dell' Antichità Università di Roma ‘La Sapienza’.Google Scholar
Balossi Restelli, F. 2006. The Development of ‘Cultural Regions’ in the Neolithic of the Near East. The ‘Dark Faced Burnished Ware Horizon’, BAR International Series 1482. Oxford: Archaeopress.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bar-Yosef, O. 2014a. Southeast Turkish Neolithic: A view from the southern Levant. In The Neolithic in Turkey, Vol. 6. 10500–5200 BC: Environment, Settlement, Flora, Fauna, Dating, Symbols of Belief with views from North, South, East and West, ed. Özdoğan, M., Başgelen, N. & Kuniholm, P.. Istanbul: Archaeology and Art Publication, pp. 293–320.Google Scholar
Bar-Yosef, O. 2014b. Was Göbekli Tepe culture a chiefdom that failed? In Settlement, Survey, and Stone. Essays on Near Eastern Prehistory in Honour of Gary Rollefson, ed. Finlayson, B. & Makarewicz, C.. Berlin: ex oriente, pp. 159–68.Google Scholar
Bartl, K. 2004. Vorratshaltung. Die spätepipaläolithische und frühneolith-ische. Entwicklung im westlichen Vorderasien. Berlin: ex oriente.Google Scholar
Belfer-Cohen, A. & Goring-Morris, N. 2014. North and south – variable trajectories of the Neolithic in the Levant. In Settlement, Survey, and Stone. Essays on Near Eastern Prehistory in Honour of Gary Rollefson, ed. Finlayson, B. & Makarewicz, C.. Berlin: ex oriente, pp. 61–71.Google Scholar
Binder, D. 2008. Technologie lithique et comportement social dans le PPN de Çayönü tepesi (Turquie). Un aperçu à travels l'analyse des matières premières. Paléorient 34: 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braidwood, R.J. 1958. Near Eastern prehistory. Science 127: 1419–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Braidwood, R.J. 1960. The agricultural revolution. Scientific American. Ancient Cities 203: 131–48.Google ScholarPubMed
Braidwood, R.J. & Braidwood, L. 1960. Excavations in the Plain of Antioch I: The Earlier Assemblages Phases A–J, Oriental Institute Publications 61. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Çambel, H. & Braidwood, R.J. 1980. Prehistoric Research in Southeastern Anatolia 1. İstanbul: İstanbul University Press.Google Scholar
Caneva, I., Iovino, M.R., Lemorini, C., Özdoğan, A. & Zampetti, D. 2001. A combined analysis of lithic assemblages from Çayönü. In Beyond Tools. Redefining the PPN Lithic Assemblages of the Levant, eds. Caneva, I., Lemorini, C., Zampetti, D. & Biagi, P.. Berlin: ex oriente, pp. 165–81.Google Scholar
Cappers, R.T.J. & Bottema, S. (ed.) 2002. The Dawn of Farming in the Near East. Berlin: ex oriente.Google Scholar
Cauvin, M.-C. & Balkan, N. 1985. Cafer Höyük: analyse de l'outillage lithique (campagnes 1982–1983). Problèmes typologiques et chronologiques. Cahiers de l'Euphrate 4: 53–85.Google Scholar
Erdal, S.Y. in press. Burial customs in Anatolia from first settlers to complex societies. In The Neolithic in Turkey. Vol. 7, ed. Özdoğan, M., Başgelen, N. & Kuniholm, P.. Istanbul: Archaeology and Art Publication.Google Scholar
Erek, C.M. 2008. Levant-İç Anadolu Arasındaki Prehistorik Bağlantılarda Amik-Maraş Çöküntü Alanının Önemi. OLBA XVI: 1–22.Google Scholar
Erek, C.M. 2011. Kahramanmaraş İli Prehistoryası. In Işın Yalçınkaya'ya Armağan, ed. Taşkıran, H., Kartal, M., Özçelik, K., Kösem, M.B. & Kartal, G.. Ankara: Bilgin Kültür Sanat Yayınları, pp. 113–26.Google Scholar
Garstang, J. 1953. Prehistoric Mersin. Yümük Tepe in Southern Turkey. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Goldman, H. 1956. Excavations at Gözlü Kule, Tarsus, Vol. II. From the Neolithic through the Bronze Age. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Gronenborn, D. 2009. Climate fluctuations and trajectories to complexity in the Neolithic: Towards a theory. Documenta Praehistorica XXXVI: 97–110.Google Scholar
Kozlowski, S.K. 1998. Early ‘Neolithic’ chipped industries of Greater Mesopotamia. In Préhistoire d'Anatolie Genèse de Deux Mondes (Anatolian Prehistory at the Crossroads of Two Worlds), Vol. II, ed. Otte, M.. ERAUL 85. Liège: Université de Liège, Service de Préhistoire, pp. 651–64.Google Scholar
Le Mort, F. 2007. Développements récents dans l’étude des premières populations Néolithiques du Proche-Orient. Bulletin du Centre de Recherche Français à Jérusalem 18: 20–35.Google Scholar
Lichter, C. (ed.) 2007a. Vor 12.000 Jahren in Anatolien. Die ältesten Monu-mente der Menschheit. Karlsruhe: Badisches Landesmuseum.Google Scholar
Lichter, C. 2007b. Geschnitten oder am Stück? Totenritual und Leichenbehandlung im jungsteinzeitlichen Anatolien. In Vor 12.000 Jahren in Anatolien. Die ältesten Monumente der Menschheit, ed. Lichter, C.. Karlsruhe: Badisches Landesmuseum, pp. 246–57.Google Scholar
McBride, A. 2013. Performance and participation: Multi-sensual analysis of Near Eastern Pre-Pottery Neolithic non-domestic architecture. Paléorient 39: 47–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miyake, Y. 2013. Recent progress in the Neolithic investigations of the Anatolian Tigris Valley. In Neolithic Archaeology in the Khabur Valley, Upper Mesopotamia and Beyond, ed. Nishiaki, Y., Kashima, K. & Verhoeven, M.. Berlin: ex oriente, pp. 171–87.Google Scholar
Özdoğan, A. 2011. Çayönü. In The Neolithic in Turkey. New Excavations & New Research, The Tigris Basin, Vol. 1, ed. Özdoğan, M., Başgelen, N. & Kuniholm, P.. Istanbul: Archaeology and Art Publication, pp. 185–269.Google Scholar
Özdoğan, M. 1995. Neolithic in Turkey. The status of research. In Readings in Prehistory. Studies Presented to Halet Çambel, ed. Çambel, H.. İstanbul: Graphis, pp. 41–59.Google Scholar
Özdoğan, M. 2002. Redefining the Neolithic of Anatolia. A critical overview. In The Dawn of Farming in the Near East, ed. Cappers, R.T.J. & Bottema, S.. Berlin: ex oriente, pp. 153–8.Google Scholar
Özdoğan, M. 2009. Earliest use of pottery in Anatolia. In Early Farmers, Late Foragers, and Ceramic Traditions: On the Beginning of Pottery in the Near East and Europe, ed. Gheorghiu, D.. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, pp. 22–43.Google Scholar
Özdoğan, M. 2010. The transition from round-plan to rectangular. In Neolithic and Chalcolithic Architecture in Eurasia. Techniques and Spatial Organisation, ed. Gheorghiu, D.. BAR International Series 2097. Oxford: Archaeopress, pp. 29–34.Google Scholar
Özdoğan, M. 2013. Reconsidering the Late Neolithic Period in southeastern Turkey: A regional perspective. In Interpreting the Late Neolithic of Upper Mesopotamia, ed. Nieuwenhuyse, O.P., Bernbeck, R., Akkermans, P.M.M.G. & Rogasch, J.. Turnhout: Brepols Publishers, pp. 377–86.Google Scholar
Özdoğan, M. 2014a. The Neolithic collapse, or the transition from the Pre-Pottery Neolithic to the Pottery Neolithic. In Settlement, Survey and Stone. Essays on Near Eastern Prehistory in Honour of Gary Rollefson, ed. Finlayson, B. & Makarewicz, C.. Berlin: ex oriente, pp. 169–75.Google Scholar
Özdoğan, M. 2014b. The quest for new criteria in defining the emergence and the dispersal of Neolithic way of life. In La Transition Néolithique en Méditerranée, ed. Mannen, C., Perrin, T. & Guilaine, J.. Arles: Éditions Errance/Archives d’Écologie Préhistorique, pp. 74–89.Google Scholar
Özdoğan, M. & Özdoğan, A. 1990. Çayönü. A conspectus of recent work. In Préhistoire de Levant II, ed. Aurenche, O. & Cauvin, M.C.. Editions du CNRS, Lyon, pp. 387–96.Google Scholar
Özdoğan, M. & Özdoğan, A. 1998. Buildings of cult and the cult of buildings. In Light on Top of the Black Hill: Studies Presented to Halet Çambel, ed. Arsebük, G., Mellink, M. & Schirmer, W.. İstanbul: Ege Yayınları, pp. 581–601.Google Scholar
Özdoğan, M., Başgelen, N. & Kuniholm, P. (ed.) 2011a. The Neolithic in Turkey. New Excavations & New Research, The Tigris Basin, Vol. 1. Istanbul: Archaeology and Art Publication.Google Scholar
Özdoğan, M., Başgelen, N. & Kuniholm, P. (ed.) 2011b. The Neolithic in Turkey. New Excavations & New Research, The Euphrates Basin, Vol. 2. Istanbul: Archaeology and Art Publication.Google Scholar
Peasnall, B. & Rosenberg, M. 2001. A preliminary description of the lithic industry from Demirköy Höyük. In Beyond Tools. Redefining the PPN Lithic Assemblages of the Levant, ed. Caneva, I., Lemorini, C., Zampetti, D. & Biagi, P.. Berlin: ex oriente, pp. 363–87.Google Scholar
Peters, J., Arbuckle, S. & Pöllath, N. 2014. Subsistence and beyond: Animals in Neolithic Anatolia. In The Neolithic in Turkey, Vol. 6. 10500–5200 BC: Environment, Settlement, Flora, Fauna, Dating, Symbols of Belief with Views from North, South, East and West, ed. Özdoğan, M., Başgelen, N. & Kuniholm, P.. Istanbul: Archaeology and Art Publication, pp. 135–203.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, M. 1994. A preliminary description of lithic industry from Hallan Çemi. In Studies in Early Near Eastern Production, Subsistence, and Environment 1. Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent, ed. Gebel, H. G. & Kozlowski, S.K.. Berlin: ex oriente, pp. 223–38.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, M. & Redding, R.W. 2000. Hallan Çemi and early village organ-ization in eastern Anatolia. In Life in Neolithic Farming Communities, Social Organization, Identity, and Differentation, ed. Kuijt, I.. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, pp. 39–61.Google Scholar
Rosenstock, E. 2014. Like a Su Böreği: Settlements and site formation processes in Neolithic Turkey. In The Neolithic in Turkey, Vol. 6. 10500–5200 BC: Environment, Settlement, Flora, Fauna, Dating, Symbols of Belief with Views from North, South, East and West, ed. Özdoğan, M., Başgelen, N. & Kuniholm, P.. Istanbul: Archaeology and Art Publication, pp. 223–63.Google Scholar
Schmidt, K. 1994. The Nevali Çori industry. Status of research. In Studies in Early Near Eastern Production, Subsistence, and Environment 1. Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent, ed. Gebel, H.G. & Kozlowski, S.K.. Berlin: ex oriente., pp. 239–51.Google Scholar
Schmidt, K. 1998. Frühneolithische Silexdolche. In Light on Top of the Black Hill: Studies Presented to Halet Çambel, ed. Arsebük, G., Mellink, M. & Schirmer, W.. İstanbul: Ege Yayınları, pp. 681–92.Google Scholar
Schmidt, K. 2006. Sie bauten die ersten Tempel. Das rätselhafte Heiligtum der Steinzeitjäger. München: C.H. Beck.Google Scholar
Schmidt, K. 2010. Göbekli Tepe – the Stone Age sanctuaries. New results of ongoing excavations with a special focus on sculptures and high reliefs. Documenta Praehistorica XXXVII: 239–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsuneki, A., Arimura, M., Maeda, O., Tanno, K. & Anezaki, T. 2006. The Early PPNB in the north Levant: A new perspective from Tell Ain el-Kerkh, northwest Syria. Paléorient 32: 47–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verhoeven, M. 2002. Ritual and ideology in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B of the Levant and southeast Anatolia. Cambridge Archaeology Journal 12: 233–58.Google Scholar
Waechter, J., Göğüş, S. & Williams, M.V. 1951. The Sakçe Gözü Cave site 1949. Belleten XV: 193–201.Google Scholar
Weninger, B., Clare, L., Rohling, E. et al. 2009. The impact of rapid climate change on prehistoric societies during the Holocene in the eastern Mediterranean. Documenta Praehistorica XXXVI: 7–59.Google Scholar
Willcox, G., Furnite, S. & Herveux, L. 2007. Reconstruction of ancient vegetation and of climate conditions on the Euphrates at the end of the Pleistocene beginning of the Holocene. In MENMED. From the Adoption of Agriculture to the Current Landscape: Long-Term Interaction between Men and Environment in the East Mediterranean Basin, ed. Buxó, R. & Molist, M.. Barcelona: Museu d'Arqueologia de Catalunya, pp. 29–33.Google Scholar
Willcox, G., Buxo, R. & Herveux, L. 2009. Late Pleistocene and early Holocene climate and the beginnings of cultivation in northern Syria. The Holocene 19: 151–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×