Regional Perspectives on Neolithic Pit Deposition 2011
DOI: 10.2307/j.ctvh1dkr0.13
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Preservation and the pit problem:

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 0 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The pits themselves contained the by now familiar suite of Early Neolithic material: variable (but sometimes substantial) quantities of flint and pottery together with more limited evidence of crop cultivation/processing (cereal grains and a rubber stone) and animal husbandry, as well as the exploitation of wild resources (represented largely by charred hazelnut shells). No attempt is made to discuss the potential function/role of pits – ideological or practical – given that there is little within the evidence to further a debate which is widely discussed elsewhere (see Garrow 2006; Loveday 2012; Darvill 2012, for examples of the many and varied hypotheses regarding Neolithic pits generally). However, it is clear that material assemblages within the pits were almost certainly derived from surface deposits/‘middens’ with no evidence of structured or selective deposition (cf.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The pits themselves contained the by now familiar suite of Early Neolithic material: variable (but sometimes substantial) quantities of flint and pottery together with more limited evidence of crop cultivation/processing (cereal grains and a rubber stone) and animal husbandry, as well as the exploitation of wild resources (represented largely by charred hazelnut shells). No attempt is made to discuss the potential function/role of pits – ideological or practical – given that there is little within the evidence to further a debate which is widely discussed elsewhere (see Garrow 2006; Loveday 2012; Darvill 2012, for examples of the many and varied hypotheses regarding Neolithic pits generally). However, it is clear that material assemblages within the pits were almost certainly derived from surface deposits/‘middens’ with no evidence of structured or selective deposition (cf.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%