‘Far and wide’: Social networking in the Early Neolithic of the Levant

Goring-Morris, A. Nigel; Cohen, Anna Belfer

doi:10.1016/j.anthro.2022.103051

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 85 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…45–34/32 ky cal BP, e.g., Gilead, 1991 ) encompasses both Phases III and IV of the six-phase model, namely, the Early Ahmarian and the Levantine Aurignacian. The Early Ahmarian is best characterized by associated flint industries, which are predominately oriented towards a systematic production of pointed blades from narrow-fronted cores (e.g., Goring-Morris & Davidzon, 2006 ). Tool typology shows that these blades were used for various purposes, primarily as possible hunting points with the application of minor shaping near the edge (el-Wad points) or for other activities, as endscrapers and other informal tools (e.g., Bar-Yosef & Phillips, 1977 ; Bergman, 1988 ; Davidzon & Goring-Morris, 2003 ; Gilead, 1981 ; Gilead & Bar-Yosef, 1993 ; Goring-Morris & Davidzon, 2006 ; Jones et al, 1983 ; Kuhn et al, 2009 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Early Ahmarian is best characterized by associated flint industries, which are predominately oriented towards a systematic production of pointed blades from narrow-fronted cores (e.g., Goring-Morris & Davidzon, 2006 ). Tool typology shows that these blades were used for various purposes, primarily as possible hunting points with the application of minor shaping near the edge (el-Wad points) or for other activities, as endscrapers and other informal tools (e.g., Bar-Yosef & Phillips, 1977 ; Bergman, 1988 ; Davidzon & Goring-Morris, 2003 ; Gilead, 1981 ; Gilead & Bar-Yosef, 1993 ; Goring-Morris & Davidzon, 2006 ; Jones et al, 1983 ; Kuhn et al, 2009 ). The Early Ahmarian flint industry includes two primary facies: A Northern facies, found primarily in the Mediterranean region, which focused on a bi-directional blade reduction technique, and a Southern facies, found in the arid regions of the Levant, characterized by its reliance on uni-directional blade reduction (e.g., Abulafia et al, 2021 ; Bergman, 1988 ; Goring-Morris & Belfer-Cohen, 2018 ; Goring-Morris & Davidzon, 2006 ; Kadowaki et al, 2015 ; Kuhn et al, 2009 ; Marks, 2003 ; Tostevin, 2012 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cultural Dynamics in the Levantine Upper Paleolithic, ca. 40–33 ky BP: Insights Based on Recent Advances in the Study of the Levantine Aurignacian, the Arkov-Divshon, and the Atlitian

Shemer,

Barzilai,

Marder

2024

J Paleo Arch

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The chrono-cultural sequence of the Levantine Upper Paleolithic went through several major revisions during approximately a century of focused research, each revision contributing to shedding light on the mosaic of cultural entities and the complex social and cultural dynamics composing the Levantine Upper Paleolithic. The current state of research suggests the co-inhabitance of two cultural groups: the Early Ahmarian and the Levantine Aurignacian. Two other cultural entities, the Arkov-Divshon and the Atlitian, are regarded as younger manifestations and were tentatively suggested to relate to the Levantine Aurignacian. This paper presents a research synthesis of two case studies: Manot Cave, located in western Galilee, Israel, and Nahal Rahaf 2 Rockshelter in the Judean Desert. The application of high-resolution excavation methods, alongside detailed documentation of the stratigraphy and site-formation processes and wide-scale radiocarbon-based absolute dating, marked these sites as ideal for chrono-cultural study through the analyses of flint industries. The results indicate a clear distinction between the Levantine Aurignacian and the Arkov-Divshon/Atlitian industries and a chronological overlap between the Arkov-Divshon, Levantine Aurignacian, and possibly with the Early Ahmarian. Subsequently, we suggest another revision of the currently accepted chrono-cultural model: not two, but at least three cultural entities co-inhabited the Levant at ca. 40–30 ky cal BP. This study further suggests an evolvement of the Atlitian flint industries from the Arkov-Divshon and stresses the foreign cultural features of the Levantine Aurignacian. These results were used to construct an updated model of migration and possible interaction patterns.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cultural Dynamics in the Levantine Upper Paleolithic, ca. 40–33 ky BP: Insights Based on Recent Advances in the Study of the Levantine Aurignacian, the Arkov-Divshon, and the Atlitian

Shemer,

Barzilai,

Marder

2024

J Paleo Arch

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

In-Field Obsidian XRF Analysis of Sites in the Lion Mountain Area and Gallinas Mountains of West-Central New Mexico

Schaefer

Eckert

Huntley

et al. 2023

Journal of Field Archaeology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Variation in the development of Neolithic societies atop the Central Anatolian Plateau: recent results from Balıklı

Goring-Morris,

Munro,

Özbaşaran

et al. 2024

Antiquity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Regional variation in the historic development of agricultural societies in South-west Asia is increasingly apparent. Recent investigations at the wetland site of Balıklı (c. 8300–7900 BC) provide new insights into the initial processes of sedentism in Central Anatolia and the interaction of early communities within local and larger-scale networks. Located near major obsidian sources, excellent architectural preservation and faunal and botanical records at Balıklı suggest cultural connections to the upper Middle Euphrates region, yet inhabitants of the site do not appear to have participated in the wider South-west Asian obsidian-exchange networks and largely relied on wild resources.

show abstract

‘Far and wide’: Social networking in the Early Neolithic of the Levant

Cited by 3 publications

References 85 publications

Cultural Dynamics in the Levantine Upper Paleolithic, ca. 40–33 ky BP: Insights Based on Recent Advances in the Study of the Levantine Aurignacian, the Arkov-Divshon, and the Atlitian

Cultural Dynamics in the Levantine Upper Paleolithic, ca. 40–33 ky BP: Insights Based on Recent Advances in the Study of the Levantine Aurignacian, the Arkov-Divshon, and the Atlitian

In-Field Obsidian XRF Analysis of Sites in the Lion Mountain Area and Gallinas Mountains of West-Central New Mexico

Variation in the development of Neolithic societies atop the Central Anatolian Plateau: recent results from Balıklı

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About