Beginnings of Village-Farming Communities in Southeastern Turkey

Braidwood, Robert J.; Çambel, Halet; Redman, Charles L.; Watson, Patty Jo

doi:10.1073/pnas.68.6.1236

Cited by 30 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Ç ayönü Tepesi was located northwest of Diyarbakır province in the vicinity of Hilar village (Özdogan, 2003) in south eastern Anatolia. The excavations started during the1964 field season and continued regularly until 1992 (Braidwood et al, 1971;Özdogan et al, 1995). According to C14 dating (calibrated), the first phase of use was correlated with 10.200-9000 years B.P., corresponding to the Pre-pottery Neolithic A (PPNA) and the last phase of use to 8200-8000 B.P., corresponding to the Pre-pottery Neolithic C (PPNC) of the Levantine period.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Auditory exostoses among the prepottery neolithic inhabitants of Çayönü and Aşıklı, Anatolia; its relation to aquatic activities

Özbek

2012

International Journal of Paleopathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…1). It has been excavated with the aim of investigating the transition from hunting and gathering to farming (Braidwood et al, 1971). Much of the architecture at Ç ayönü involves domestic buildings corresponding to the six prepottery Neolithic subphases.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Auditory exostoses among the prepottery neolithic inhabitants of Çayönü and Aşıklı, Anatolia; its relation to aquatic activities

Özbek

2012

International Journal of Paleopathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The excavators of the site were at first strongly influenced by the traditional model of agricultural development. They expected that a site of this age would demonstrate the transition from hunting and gathering to an agricultural way of life, a conclusion apparently borne out by the results of the early seasons of excavation (Braidwood et al 1971(Braidwood et al :1237. Further study of the plant remains has shown that the economy of the site was based on agriculture from the beginning (van Zeist 1972:9).…”

Section: The New Evidencementioning

confidence: 98%

Agricultural origins in the Near East: A model for the 1980s

Moore

1982

World Archaeology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A model for the development of agriculture and sedentary life in the Near East was proposed a decade ago which has since won general acceptance. It was based on archaeological and other evidence acquired mainly during the 1960s. The model has become enshrined in the textbooks and remains the basis of discussion among archaeologists interested in the question of agricultural origins in the Near East. Ten more years of research have followed, the results of which suggest that the now traditional picture should be substantially modified. The purpose of this article is to show how this fresh evidence has rendered the old model inadequate and to propose a new one which better fits the evidence we now have. This model, in its turn, indicates some new directions of enquiry for future research on the formation of agricultural societies in the Near East.An earlier generation of archaeologists believed that agriculture was first adopted by groups we now describe as Epipalaeolithic. This was the conclusion of Garrod when she summarized her views on the Natufian in 1957. She believed that the elaborate cultural remains and, in particular, the reaping equipment found on Natufian sites indicated that agriculture had already begun (1957:216). She went on to describe the Natufian as a 'Mesolithic with agriculture ' (1957:226).The hypothesis that the people of the Natufian were the first farmers in the Near East was subsequently challenged by others, in particular Perrot. He interpreted the cultural achievement of the Natufian not as a manifestation of early agriculture but, rather, as a late flowering of a Palaeolithic hunter-gatherer way of life (1968: col. 383). He argued that the environment of sites such as Am Mallaha (Fig. 1) would have been rich in game, lacustrine resources and perhaps even wild cereals. There was nothing in the faunal remains from Mallaha or any other Natufian site to suggest that their inhabitants were other than hunters and gatherers. Their sickles, mortars, pestles and other grinding equipment were probably used to harvest and process wild cereals. For Perrot the inhabitants of Ain Mallaha were intensive gatherers and hunters who maintained a sedentary existence based on the abundance of wild food resources in the vicinity of their site (1968: col. 389).

show abstract

“…An example of this, which followed our 1970 season, was our assumption of a five-part stratigraphic succession in the major prehistoric occupation of Cay6nu (3). The these were not all exposed in sequential stratigraphic order in one single trench, but in different trenches and at different depths, the exact correlations are yet to be worked out by interlinking the trenches.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Throughout this fourth digging season, we concentrated on the mound called Cay6nfl, the site of an early village-farming community of about 7000 'B.C. (1). Indeed our project's major research focus has long been the recovery and interpretation of evidence of the cultural and paleoenvironmental conditions within which effective food production was achieved in southwestern Asia (2).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Beginnings of Village-Farming Communities in Southeastern Turkey−1972

Braidwood

Çambel

Lawrence

et al. 1974

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The mound known as Cayonfi Tepesi (380 16' N; 390 43' E) in southeastern Turkey is one of the increasing number of early village sites which, since World War II, have been excavated archeologically in greater southwestern Asia. The evidence recovered in the autumn 1972 campaign of the Joint Istanbul-Chicago Prehistoric Project is briefly described, with.particular attention to Cay5nfi's architectural remains, which are most remarkable, considering the site's date of about 7000 B.C. There was evidence of domesticated food plants from the beginning but animal domesticates were not present (save the dog) until later in the major prehistoric phase of occupation.The Joint Istanbul University-Chicago Oriental Institute Prehistoric Project continued its excavations in southeastern Turkey in the autumn of 1972. Throughout this fourth digging season, we concentrated on the mound called Cay6nfl, the site of an early village-farming community of about 7000 'B.C. (1). Indeed our project's major research focus has long been the recovery and interpretation of evidence of the cultural and paleoenvironmental conditions within which effective food production was achieved in southwestern Asia (2). Without this achievement, mankind's earliest experiment with life in literate urban societies (which subsequently followed on the alluvial plain of southern Mesopotamia) could not have taken place.By the end of our 1972 field season, with deepened older trenches and in newer operations ( Fig. 1), slightly over 5% of the total three-hectare mound area of Cay6nii had been exposed (at least in the upper levels). This is a gratifyingly impressive exposure in proportion to overall site size, as prehistoric excavations go. Nevertheless, the increased yield of evidence which came with this larger exposure makes us now realize that some of our earlier generalizations and interpretations were overly simplistic. these were not all exposed in sequential stratigraphic order in one single trench, but in different trenches and at different depths, the exact correlations are yet to be worked out by interlinking the trenches. It is-for example-possible that the basal pits may have been due to outdoor activity adjacent to the curved-wall or grill-plan buildings and also possible that one or another of the broad-pavement buildings may have been continued in use during the cell-plan sub-phase. Hence we are increasingly reluctant to number the sub-phases consecutively.There do appear to have been levels of rebuilding or renovation within at least the basal-pit, grill-plan, cell-plan, and large-room-plan sub-phases. These levels clearly lie in proper stratigraphic order. A better understanding of the exact stratigraphic nature of the prehistoric occupation remains one of our goals for subsequent work. Clearly, however, the stratification of Cay6nd was not one of layer-cake regularity.Save for the occurrence of simple artifacts of hammered native copper, the impressive element of the Cay6nii inventory is its architecture or-strictly speaking-the st...

show abstract

Beginnings of Village-Farming Communities in Southeastern Turkey

Cited by 30 publications

References 2 publications

Auditory exostoses among the prepottery neolithic inhabitants of Çayönü and Aşıklı, Anatolia; its relation to aquatic activities

Auditory exostoses among the prepottery neolithic inhabitants of Çayönü and Aşıklı, Anatolia; its relation to aquatic activities

Agricultural origins in the Near East: A model for the 1980s

Beginnings of Village-Farming Communities in Southeastern Turkey−1972

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About