[lollum_dropcap]T[/lollum_dropcap]he Neolithic Era, or Period, from νέος (néos, “new”) and λίθος (líthos, “stone”), or New Stone age, was a period in the development of human technology, beginning about 10,200 BC, according to the ASPRO chronology in some parts of the Middle East, and later in other parts of the world  and ending between 4,500 and 2,000 BC.
Traditionally considered the last part of the Stone Age, the Neolithic followed the terminal Holocene Epipaleolithic period and commenced with the beginning of farming, which produced the “Neolithic Revolution“. It ended when metal tools became widespread (in the Copper Age or Bronze Age; or, in some geographical regions, in the Iron Age). The Neolithic is a progression of behavioral and cultural characteristics and changes, including the use of wild and domestic crops and of domesticated animals.
The beginning of the Neolithic culture is considered to be in the Levant (Jericho, modern-day West Bank) about 10,200–8,800 BC. It developed directly from the Epipaleolithic Natufian culture in the region, whose people pioneered the use of wildcereals, which then evolved into true farming. The Natufian period was between 12,000 and 10,200 BC, and the so-called “proto-neolithic” is now included in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic (PPNA) between 10,200 and 8,800 BC. As the Natufians had become dependent on wild cereals in their diet, and a sedentary way of life had begun among them, the climatic changes associated with the Younger Dryas are thought to have forced people to develop farming. By 10,200–8,800 BC, farming communities arose in the Levant and spread to Asia Minor, North Africa and North Mesopotamia. Early Neolithic farming was limited to a narrow range of plants, both wild and domesticated, which included einkorn wheat, millet and spelt, and the keeping of dogs, sheep and goats. By about 6,900–6,400 BC, it included domesticated cattle and pigs, the establishment of permanently or seasonally inhabited settlements, and the use of pottery.
Not all of these cultural elements characteristic of the Neolithic appeared everywhere in the same order: the earliest farming societies in the Near East did not use pottery. In other parts of the world, such as Africa, South Asia and Southeast Asia, independent domestication events led to their own regionally-distinctive Neolithic cultures that arose completely independent of those in Europe and Southwest Asia. Early Japanese societies used pottery before developing agriculture.
Unlike the Paleolithic, when more than one human species existed, only one human species (Homo sapiens sapiens) reached the Neolithic. Homo floresiensis may have survived right up to the very dawn of the Neolithic, about 12,200 years ago.
Periods by pottery phase
[lollum_dropcap]I[/lollum_dropcap]n the Middle East, cultures identified as Neolithic began appearing by in the 10th millennium BC. Early development occurred in the Levant (e.g. Pre-Pottery Neolithic A and Pre-Pottery Neolithic B) and from there spread eastwards and westwards. Neolithic cultures are also attested in southeastern Anatolia and northern Mesopotamia by c. 8,000 BC.
The prehistoric Beifudi site near Yixian in Hebei Province, China, contains relics of a culture contemporaneous with the Cishan and Xinglongwa cultures of about 5,000–6,000 BC, neolithic cultures east of the Taihang Mountains, filling in an archaeological gap between the two Northern Chinese cultures. The total excavated area is more than 1,200 square yards and the collection of neolithic findings at the site consists of two phases.
Neolithic 1 – Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (PPNA)
[lollum_dropcap]T[/lollum_dropcap]he Neolithic 1 (PPNA) period began roughly 10,000 years ago in the Levant. A temple area in southeastern Turkey at Göbekli Tepe dated to 10,000 BC may be regarded as the beginning of the period. This site was developed by nomadic hunter-gatherer tribes, evidenced by the lack of permanent housing in the vicinity and may be the oldest known human-made place of worship. At least seven stone circles, covering 25 acres (100,000 m2), contain limestone pillars carved with animals, insects and birds. Stone tools were used by perhaps as many as hundreds of people to create the pillars, which may have supported roofs. Other early PPNA sites dating to around 9,500 to 9,000 BC have been found in Jericho,Palestine and Jbeil (Byblos), Lebanon..The start of Neolithic 1 overlaps the Tahunian and Heavy Neolithic periods to some degree.
The major advance of Neolithic 1 was true farming. In the proto-Neolithic Natufian cultures, wild cereals were harvested, and perhaps early seed selection and re-seeding occurred. The grain was ground into flour. Emmer wheat was domesticated, and animals were herded and domesticated (animal husbandry and selective breeding).
In the 21st century, remains of figs were discovered in a house in Jericho dated to 9,400 BC. The figs are of a mutant variety that cannot be pollinated by insects, and therefore the trees can only reproduce from cuttings. This evidence suggests that figs were the first cultivated crop and mark the invention of the technology of farming. This occurred centuries before the first cultivation of grains.
Settlements became more permanent with circular houses, much like those of the Natufians, with single rooms. However, these houses were for the first time made of mudbrick. The settlement had a surrounding stone wall and perhaps a stone tower (as in Jericho). The wall served as protection from nearby groups, as protection from floods, or to keep animals penned. There are also some enclosures that suggest grain and meat storage.
Neolithic 2 – Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB)
[lollum_dropcap]T[/lollum_dropcap]he Neolithic 2 (PPNB) began around 8,800 BC according to the ASPRO chronology in the Levant (Jericho, Palestine). As with the PPNA dates there are two versions from the same laboratories noted above. But this terminological structure is not convenient for southeast Anatolia and settlements of the middle Anatolia basin. This era was before the Mesolithic era.
Settlements have rectangular mudbrick houses where the family lived together in single or multiple rooms. Burial findings suggest an ancestor cult where people preserved skulls of the dead, which were plastered with mud to make facial features. The rest of the corpse may have been left outside the settlement to decay until only the bones were left, then the bones were buried inside the settlement underneath the floor or between houses.
Neolithic 3 – Pottery Neolithic (PN)
[lollum_dropcap]T[/lollum_dropcap]he Neolithic 3 (PN) began around 6,400 BC in the Fertile Crescent. By then distinctive cultures emerged, with pottery like the Halafian (Turkey, Syria, Northern Mesopotamia) and Ubaid (Southern Mesopotamia). This period has been further divided into PNA (Pottery Neolithic A) and PNB (Pottery Neolithic B) at some sites.
The Chalcolithic period began about 4500 BC, then the Bronze Age began about 3500 BC, replacing the Neolithic cultures.
PERIODS BY REGION
[lollum_dropcap]Α[/lollum_dropcap]round 10,200 BC the first fully developed Neolithic cultures belonging to the phase Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (PPNA) appeared in the fertile crescent. Around 10,700 to 9,400 BC a settlement was established in Tell Qaramel, 10 miles north of Aleppo. The settlement included 2 temples dating back to 9,650. Around 9000 BC during the PPNA, the world’s first town, Jericho, appeared in the Levant. It was surrounded by a stone and marble wall and contained a population of 2000–3000 people and a massive stone tower. Around 6,400 BC the Halaf culture appeared in Lebanon, Israel and Palestine, Syria, Anatolia, and Northern Mesopotamia and subsisted on dryland agriculture.
In 1981 a team of researchers from the Maison de l’Orient et de la Méditerranée, including Jacques Cauvin and Oliver Aurenche divided Near East neolithic chronology into ten periods (0 to 9) based on social, economic and cultural characteristics. In 2002 Danielle Stordeur and Frédéric Abbès advanced this system with a division into five periods. Natufian (1) between 12,000 and 10,200 BC, Khiamian (2) between 10,200-8,800 BC, PPNA: Sultanian (Jericho), Mureybetian, early PPNB (PPNB ancien) (3) between 8,800-7,600 BC, middle PPNB (PPNB moyen) 7,600-6,900 BC, late PPNB (PPNB récent) (4) between 7,500 and 7,000 BC and a PPNB (sometimes called PPNC) transitional stage (PPNB final) (5) where Halaf and dark faced burnished ware begin to emerge between 6,900-6,400 BCE. They also advanced the idea of a transitional stage between the PPNA and PPNB between 8,800 and 8,600 BC at sites like Jerf el Ahmar and Tell Aswad.
[lollum_dropcap]D[/lollum_dropcap]omestication of sheep and goats reached Egypt from the Near East possibly as early as 6,000 BC. Graeme Barker states “The first indisputable evidence for domestic plants and animals in the Nile valley is not until the early fifth millennium bc in northern Egypt and a thousand years later further south, in both cases as part of strategies that still relied heavily on fishing, hunting, and the gathering of wild plants” and suggests that these subsistence changes were not due to farmers migrating from the Near East but was an indigenous development, with cereals either indigenous or obtained through exchange. Other scholars argue that the primary stimulus for agriculture and domesticated animals (as well as mud-brick architecture and other Neolithic cultural features) in Egypt was from the Middle East.
[lollum_dropcap]I[/lollum_dropcap]n southeast Europe agrarian societies first appeared in the 7th millennium BC, attested by one of the earliest farming sites of Europe, discovered in Vashtëmi, southeastern Albania and dating back to 6,500 BC. Anthropomorphic figurines have been found in the Balkans from 6000 BC, and in Central Europe by c. 5500 BC. Among the earliest cultural complexes of this area are the Sesklo culture in Thessaly, which later expanded in the Balkans giving rise to Starčevo-Körös (Cris), Linearbandkeramik, and Vinča. Through a combination of cultural diffusion and migration of peoples, the Neolithic traditions spread west and northwards to reach northwestern Europe by around 4500 BC. The Vinča culture may have created the earliest system of writing, the Vinča signs, though archaeologist Shan Winn believes they most likely represented pictograms and ideograms rather than a truly developed form of writing. The Cucuteni-Trypillian culture built enormous settlements in Romania, Moldova and Ukraine from 5300 to 2300 BC. The megalithic temple complexes of Ġgantija on the Mediterranean island of Gozo (in the Maltese archipelago) and of Mnajdra (Malta) are notable for their gigantic Neolithic structures, the oldest of which date back to c. 3600 BC. The Hypogeum of Ħal-Saflieni, Paola, Malta, is a subterranean structure excavated c. 2500 BC; originally a sanctuary, it became a necropolis, the only prehistoric underground temple in the world, and showing a degree of artistry in stone sculpture unique in prehistory to the Maltese islands.
South and East Asia
[lollum_dropcap]T[/lollum_dropcap]he earliest Neolithic site in South Asia is Mehrgarh, dated to 7500 BC, in the Kachi plain of Baluchistan, Pakistan; the site has evidence of farming (wheat and barley) and herding (cattle, sheep and goats).
In South India, the Neolithic began by 3000 BC and lasted until around 1400 BC when the Megalithic transition period began. South Indian Neolithic is characterized by Ashmounds since 2500 BC in Karnataka region, expanded later to Tamil Nadu.
The ‘Neolithic’ (defined in this paragraph as using polished stone implements) remains a living tradition in small and extremely remote and inaccessible pockets of West Papua (Indonesian New Guinea). Polished stone adze and axes are used in the present day (As of 2008 CE) in areas where the availability of metal implements is limited. This is likely to cease altogether in the next few years as the older generation die off and steel blades and chainsaws prevail.
In 2012, news was released about a new farming site discovered in Munam-ri, Goseong, Gangwon Province, South Korea, which may be the earliest farmland known to date in east Asia. “No remains of an agricultural field from the Neolithic period have been found in any East Asian country before, the institute said, adding that the discovery reveals that the history of agricultural cultivation at least began during the period on the Korean Peninsula“. The farm was dated between 3600 and 3000 B.C. Pottery, stone projectile points, and possible houses were also found. “In 2002, researchers discovered prehistoric earthenware, jade earrings, among other items in the area”. The research team will perform Accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) dating to retrieve a more precise date for the site.
[lollum_dropcap]I[/lollum_dropcap]n Mesoamerica, a similar set of events (i.e., crop domestication and sedentary lifestyles) occurred by around 4500 BC, but possibly as early as 11,000–10,000 BC. These cultures are usually not referred to as belonging to the Neolithic; in America different terms are used such as Formative stage instead of mid-late Neolithic, Archaic Era instead of Early Neolithic and Paleo-Indian for the preceding period. The Formative stage is equivalent to the Neolithic Revolution period in Europe, Asia, and Africa. In the Southwestern United States it occurred from 500 to 1200 C.E. when there was a dramatic increase in population and development of large villages supported by agriculture based on dryland farming of maize, and later, beans, squash, and domesticated turkeys. During this period the bow and arrow and ceramic pottery were also introduced.
[lollum_dropcap]D[/lollum_dropcap]uring most of the Neolithic age, people lived in small tribes composed of multiple bands or lineages. There is little scientific evidence of developed social stratification in most Neolithic societies; social stratification is more associated with the later Bronze Age. Although some late Neolithic societies formed complex stratified chiefdoms similar to Polynesian societies such as the Ancient Hawaiians, most Neolithic societies were relatively simple and egalitarian. However, Neolithic societies were noticeably more hierarchical than the Paleolithic cultures that preceded them and hunter-gatherer cultures in general The domestication of animals (8000 BC) resulted in a dramatic increase in social inequality. Possession of livestock allowed competition between households and resulted in inherited inequalities of wealth. Neolithic pastoralists who controlled large herds gradually acquired more livestock, and this made economic inequalities more pronounced. However, evidence of social inequality is still disputed, as settlements such as Catal Huyuk reveal a striking lack of difference in the size of homes and burial sites, suggesting a more egalitarian society with no evidence of the concept of capital, although some homes do appear slightly larger or more elaborately decorated than others.
Families and households were still largely independent economically, and the household was probably the center of life. However, excavations in Central Europe have revealed that early Neolithic Linear Ceramic cultures (“Linearbandkeramik“) were building large arrangements of circular ditches between 4800 BC and 4600 BC. These structures (and their later counterparts such as causewayed enclosures, burial mounds, and henge) required considerable time and labour to construct, which suggests that some influential individuals were able to organise and direct human labour — though non-hierarchical and voluntary work remain strong possibilities.
There is a large body of evidence for fortified settlements at Linearbandkeramik sites along the Rhine, as at least some villages were fortified for some time with a palisade and an outer ditch. Settlements with palisades and weapon-traumatized bones have been discovered, such as at the Talheim Death Pit demonstrates “…systematic violence between groups” and warfare was probably much more common during the Neolithic than in the preceding Paleolithic period. This supplanted an earlier view of the Linear Pottery Culture as living a “peaceful, unfortified lifestyle”.
Control of labour and inter-group conflict is characteristic of corporate-level or ‘tribal’ groups, headed by a charismatic individual; whether a ‘big man‘ or a proto-chief, functioning as a lineage-group head. Whether a non-hierarchical system of organization existed is debatable and there is no evidence that explicitly suggests that Neolithic societies functioned under any dominating class or individual, as was the case in the chiefdoms of the European Early Bronze Age. Theories to explain the apparent implied egalitarianism of Neolithic (and Paleolithic) societies have arisen, notably the Marxist concept of primitive communism.
[lollum_dropcap]T[/lollum_dropcap]he shelter of the early people changed dramatically from the paleolithic to the neolithic era. In the paleolithic, people did not normally live in permanent constructions. In the neolithic, mud brick houses started appearing that were coated with plaster. The growth of agriculture made permanent houses possible. Doorways were made on the roof, with ladders positioned both on the inside and outside of the houses. The roof was supported by beams from the inside. The rough ground was covered by platforms, mats, and skins on which residents slept. Stilt-houses settlements were common in the Alpine and Pianura Padana (Terramare) region. Remains have been found at the Ljubljana Marshes in Slovenia and at the Mondsee and Attersee lakes in Upper Austria, for example.
[lollum_dropcap]Α[/lollum_dropcap] significant and far-reaching shift in human subsistence and lifestyle was to be brought about in areas where crop farming and cultivation were first developed: the previous reliance on an essentially nomadic hunter gatherer subsistence technique or pastoral transhumance was at first supplemented, and then increasingly replaced by, a reliance upon the foods produced from cultivated lands. These developments are also believed to have greatly encouraged the growth of settlements, since it may be supposed that the increased need to spend more time and labor in tending crop fields required more localized dwellings. This trend would continue into the Bronze Age, eventually giving rise to permanently settled farming towns, and later cities and states whose larger populations could be sustained by the increased productivity from cultivated lands.
The profound differences in human interactions and subsistence methods associated with the onset of early agricultural practices in the Neolithic have been called the Neolithic Revolution, a term coined in the 1920s by the Australian archaeologist Vere Gordon Childe.
One potential benefit of the development and increasing sophistication of farming technology was the possibility of producing surplus crop yields, in other words, food supplies in excess of the immediate needs of the community. Surpluses could be stored for later use, or possibly traded for other necessities or luxuries. Agricultural life afforded securities that pastoral life could not, and sedentary farming populations grew faster than nomadic.
However, early farmers were also adversely affected in times of famine, such as may be caused by drought or pests. In instances where agriculture had become the predominant way of life, the sensitivity to these shortages could be particularly acute, affecting agrarian populations to an extent that otherwise may not have been routinely experienced by prior hunter-gatherer communities. Nevertheless, agrarian communities generally proved successful, and their growth and the expansion of territory under cultivation continued.
Another significant change undergone by many of these newly-agrarian communities was one of diet. Pre-agrarian diets varied by region, season, available local plant and animal resources and degree of pastoralism and hunting. Post-agrarian diet was restricted to a limited package of successfully cultivated cereal grains, plants and to a variable extent domesticated animals and animal products. Supplementation of diet by hunting and gathering was to variable degrees precluded by the increase in population above the carrying capacity of the land and a high sedentary local population concentration. In some cultures, there would have been a significant shift toward increased starch and plant protein. The relative nutritional benefits and drawbacks of these dietary changes and their overall impact on early societal development is still debated.
In addition, increased population density, decreased population mobility, increased continuous proximity to domesticated animals, and continuous occupation of comparatively population-dense sites would have altered sanitation needs and patterns of disease.
[lollum_dropcap]T[/lollum_dropcap]he identifying characteristic of Neolithic technology is the use of polished or ground stone tools, in contrast to the flaked stone tools used during the Paleolithic era.
Neolithic people were skilled farmers, manufacturing a range of tools necessary for the tending, harvesting and processing of crops (such as sickle blades and grinding stones) and food production (e.g. pottery, bone implements). They were also skilled manufacturers of a range of other types of stone tools and ornaments, including projectile points, beads, and statuettes. But what allowed forest clearance on a large scale was the polished stone axe above all other tools. Together with the adze, fashioning wood for shelter, structures and canoes for example, this enabled them to exploit their newly-won farmland.
Neolithic peoples in the Levant, Anatolia, Syria, northern Mesopotamia and Central Asia were also accomplished builders, utilizing mud-brick to construct houses and villages. At Çatal höyük, houses were plastered and painted with elaborate scenes of humans and animals. In Europe, long houses built from wattle and daub were constructed. Elaborate tombs were built for the dead. These tombs are particularly numerous in Ireland, where there are many thousand still in existence. Neolithic people in the British Isles built long barrows and chamber tombs for their dead and causewayed camps, henges, flint mines and cursus monuments. It was also important to figure out ways of preserving food for future months, such as fashioning relatively airtight containers, and using substances like salt as preservatives.
The peoples of the Americas and the Pacific mostly retained the Neolithic level of tool technology until the time of European contact. Exceptions include copper hatchets and spearheads in the Great Lakes region.
[lollum_dropcap]M[/lollum_dropcap]ost clothing appears to have been made of animal skins, as indicated by finds of large numbers of bone and antler pins which are ideal for fastening leather. Wool cloth and linen might have become available during the later Neolithic, as suggested by finds of perforated stones which (depending on size) may have served as spindle whorls or loom weights. The clothing worn in the Neolithic Age might be similar to that worn by Ötzi the Iceman, although he was not Neolithic (since he belonged to the later Copper age).
- Neolithic human settlements include: Göbekli Tepe in Turkey, 11000–9000 BC
- Tell Qaramel in Syria, 10700–9400 BC
- Franchthi Cave in Greece, epipalaeolithic (10000 BC) settlement, reoccupied between 7500–6000 BC
- Nanzhuangtou in Hebei, China, 8500-7700 BC
- Jericho in West bank, Neolithic from around 8350 BC, arising from the earlier Epipaleolithic Natufian culture
- Aşıklı Höyük in Central Anatolia, Turkey, an Aceramic Neolithic period settlement, 8200 – 7400 BC, correlating with the E/MPPNB in the Levant.
- Nevali Cori in Turkey, 8000 BC
- Pengtoushan culture in China, 7500 – 6100 BC, rice residues were Carbon-14 dated to 8200-7800 BC in type site
- Çatalhöyük in Turkey, 7500 BC
- ‘Ain Ghazal in Jordan, 7250–5000 BC
- Chogha Bonut in Iran, 7200 BC
- Jhusi in India, 7100 BC
- Ganj Dareh in Iran, 7000 BC
- Lahuradewa in India, 7000 BC
- Jiahu in China, 7000 to 5800 BC
- Mehrgarh in Pakistan, 7000 BC
- Knossus on Crete, 7000 BC
- Karanovo in Bulgaria, 6200 BC
- Sesklo in Greece, 6850 BC (with a ±660 year margin of error)
- Dispilio in Greece, 5500 BC
- Porodin in Republic of Macedonia, 6500 BC
- Vrshnik (Anzabegovo) in Republic of Macedonia, 6500 BC
- Pizzo di Bodio (Varese), Lombardy in Italy, 6320 ±80 BC
- Sammardenchia in Friuli, Italy, 6050 ±90 BC,
- Padah-Lin Caves in Burma, 6000 BC
- Petnica in Serbia, 6000 BC
- Stara Zagora in Bulgaria, 5500 BC
- Cucuteni-Trypillian culture, 5500–2750 BC, in Ukraine, Moldova and Romania first salt works
- Tell Zeidan in northern Syria, from about 5500 to 4000 BC.
- around 2000 settlements of Trypillian culture, 5400 – 2800 BC
- Tabon Cave Complex in Quezon, Palawan, Philippines 5000 – 2000 BC
- Hemudu culture in China, 5000 – 4500 BC, large scale rice plantation
- The Megalithic Temples of Malta, 3600 BC
- Knap of Howar and Skara Brae, Orkney, Scotland, from 3500 BC and 3100 BC respectively
- Brú na Bóinne in Ireland, c. 3500 BC
- Lough Gur in Ireland from around 3000 BC
- Norte Chico civilization, from 3000 – 1700 BC, 30 Aceramic Neolithic period settlements in Northern Coastal Peru
- Tichit Neolithic village on the Tagant Plateau in central southern Mauritania, 2000 – 500 BC
- Oaxaca, state in Southwestern Mexico, by 2000 BC Neolithic sedentary villages had been established in the Central Valleys region of this state.
- Lajia in China, 2000 BC
- Mumun pottery period, Neolithic revolution spreads down the Korean Peninsula and permanent settlements are established 1800 – 1500 BC, Neolithic revolution reaches Japan around 500 – 300 BC
2. Asia Minor
5. Northern Balkans – South East Europe
Eastern Mediterranean Northern Balkans South East Europe
Syria – Palestine
[lollum_dropcap]Τ[/lollum_dropcap]he earliest (Natufian- 9th mill) figures of this region were often unbaked clay naturalistic representations of animals or schematic renderings of humans, found in or around graves. Human figures have no genitalia even in the unique case of a representation of sexual intercourse. Bone pendants with two lobes possibly render male genitalia. These figurines often made of unbaked clay, rarely bear traces of red ochre.
Schematic females found in PPNA (Pre-pottery Neolithic A- 8th mill) levels presage the future emphasis of the buttocks. From PPNB onwards a very schematic femamale figure will appear in Ras Shamra and Tell Ramad.
Characteristic of the PPNB (Pre-pottery Neolithic B- late 8th and 7th mill) is the introduction of male figures (and male symbolisms), which coexist with female and animal ones.
Pebbles in niches, flat sexless figurines, schematic coneheaded figurines of unknown sex with big round eyes made of unbaked clay as well as stick-like standing figurines with round flat faces bearing large clay pellets for the eyes and nose are also characteristic of the period.
In some cases headless figures of natural size have been used as supports for plastered skulls. However big intact figures (with a head) seem to have been used as real statues, while a group of about thirty statues (35 to 90 cm) with impressive coloured decoration and possibly inlayed hair have been found in a pit. It is unknown whether humans or gods were represented by those particular figurines, but the characteristic naturalistic stone masks from the South, were probably apotropaic and made for ritual use.
A series of stone masks unearthed in South Syria/Palestine (Hebron and Nahal Hemar are characteristic to the PPNB period. Their round hollow eyes, their protruding nose and their half-open mouth bearing incised teeth are witnesses of their probably apotropaic character. Side holes were made for their attachment, while traces of a dark sticky substance are witnesses of inlaid hair. A stone necklace from Jericho seems to be a miniature model of such a mask.
From the Early Ceramic Neolithic period (first half of the 6th mill) onwards clay figurines displayed influences from the Hassuna material, hence the modelling of conical or atrophic heads and the virtually breastless bodies.
A distinctive type of the Middle Neolithic levels (mid-5th mill) was the ‘Terrible Mother’, in which the intentional high degree of exaggeration (based on specific rules) resulted in ugly disfigurement creating an apparently demonic character.
Animal representations had secondary importance and followed the Aceramic tradition.
Chalcolithic figurine art of Jordan, of unknown origin, has been influenced by its neighbouring cultures in various periods (i.e. Mesopotamia, Asia Minor, but also Syria/Palestine and possibly the Aegean).
The problem of the use of figurines and the basic interpretational theories
[lollum_dropcap]Τ[/lollum_dropcap]he use of figurines was initially based on the interpretation of Palaeolithic material, especially the so-called ‘Venuses’, which have been considered as a kind of portable shrine of a fertility divinity, as implied by the rendering of voluminous breasts and buttocks. Henceforward, many interpretative attempts have been made, treating figurines as phenomena in a tight geographical or chronological frame. These interpretations are summed up below:
1. EXPRESSION OF RELIGIOUS IDEAS ABOUT FERTILITY (“Mother Goddess”) (Evans 1921, Childe 1925, Crawford 1925,Mylonas 1928, Hawkes 1951 et al.)
2. MULTIFUNCTIONAL OBJECTS a) Dolls b) Instructive objects c) Bearers of sympathetic magic (Pumpelly 1908, Kenyon 1956, Ucko 1968 et al.)
3. OBJECTS SERVING THE DEAD (Hogarth 1927, Myres 1930 et al.)
4. SYMBOLS OF WISHES (Broman 1958, Theocharis 1973)
5. PRIMITIVE MEANS OF SOCIAL COMMUNICATION (Chourmouziadis 1973 et al.)
6. NEOLITHIC PANTHEON RELATED TO THE CYCLE OF LIFE (Parrot 1960, Gimbutas 1974 et al.)
7. PORTRAYALS OF THE DEAD (Karageorghis 1977)
8. SYMBOLS OF IDENTITY AND TOKENS OF A DEAL (Talalay 1983)
9. AMULETS WHOSE POWER IS NOT RELATED TO THE SEX OF THE DIVINITY REPRESENTED (Papachatzis 1987 et al.)
An alternative proposal for the interpretation of neolithic figurines
[lollum_dropcap]M[/lollum_dropcap]eticulous study of Greek figurine material and its comparison to that of its neighbouring areas in the broadest sense, has prompted a reassessment of the scientific approach of figurine art in view of its interpretation. In my opinion, interpretation of figurines should be based on how often a naturalistic or schematic type is repeated along with comparison to figurines of various typologies. I believe that the interpretative approach outlined extensively for the first time in the present volume and which may be called “Theory of Repetition”, is possible to be applied to any figurine material regardless of date, which should no longer be considered a major obstacle in the interpretative process.
SYRIA – PALESTINE
NORTHERN – BALKANS