Visualising the Neolithic (original) (raw)

23 Neolithic Seminar Programe and Abstract Book

Programme and Abstract book Friday 4 th -Saturday 5 th Abstract book References Miloj≠i≤ V. 1949. Chronologie der jüngeren Steinzeit Mittel-und Südosteuropas. . 2015. The end of the affair: formal chronological modelling for the top of the Neolithic tell of Vin≠a-Belo Brdo. Antiquity 89: 1064-1082. Abstract book 23 rd Neolithic Seminar 20 Notes Abstract book 23 rd Neolithic Seminar

The Newsletter of Southwest Asian Neolithic Research

During the past months, we co-editors of Neo-Lithics, together with our senior co-editor Gary Rollefson, were approaching the readers of Neo-Lithics for their advice and suggestions on the future format of the newsletter. By carefully evaluating responses, we were able to take decisions matching well with one of your mottoes: If it's not broken, don't fix it.

Do We Finally Know What the Neolithic Is?

Open Archaeology

Over 20 years ago, an inspiring text by Lech Czerniak (The Neolithic – What’s That?) on understanding the concept of the Neolithic was published. For the present author, the Lech Czerniak’s discourse on the Neolithic was for many years and, to a large extent still is, a conceptual basis for understanding and presenting this issue. This contribution is an examination of the current relevance of Lech Czerniak’s theses. Furthermore, starting from this basis, a subjective attempt will be made to put the topic in some order, since a lack of clarity as to what the Neolithic is and what is not hampers and complicates research activities. Particularly, perhaps a fundamental issue will be assessed whether the concept of Neolithic in any measure reflects the past reality or reflects only our perceptions of that past. Conclusions resulted of the argumentation assume that there were indeed different and real Neolithics in the past. However, these Neolithics had a common denominator, in the form...

The Neolithic in transition — how to complete a paradigm shift

Levant 45(2): 149-158

As archaeologists, we are accustomed to the appearance of lots of new information that constantly requires us to adjust, or change, our understanding of the period, region or subject in which we are interested. But we are much less competent in upgrading or revising the frameworks within which we form those understandings. Here, I take terms like Neolithic, Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (PPNA) and Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB), that were formed as extensions into the southern Levant of Gordon Childe’s mid-20th-century culture-history methodology, and show that they are now outdated and unhelpful; indeed, I argue that they are obstacles to the formation of a general understanding of the complex processes in which we are interested. The culture-history framework was spatial as well as chronological; and too much of the discussion with which our learned journals are clogged derives from the pointless quest to continue the tradition of the spatial mapping of cultures. Here, I argue that we need (a) a simple, continuous chronological sequence whose blocks of time are numbered back from the late 4th millennium BC to at least the Upper Palaeolithic-Epipalaeolithic boundary around 23,000 years ago; and (b) a bottom-up, social network-based mode of investigating and discussing the different levels of socio-cultural networking in which people were engaged, the highest level of which was what we have mistakenly called the archaeological culture.

The Future Neolithic: A New Research Agenda

Citation: J. Robb, 2014. The future Neolithic: a new research agenda. In "Early Farmers: the vew from Archaeology and Science", edited by A. Whittle and P. Bickle, pp. 21-28. Proceedings of the British Academy, 198; Oxford University Press.

Every generation rewrites the Neolithic in a new way. What will the European Neolithic of the next generation look like? This discussion argues that the major change in the research agenda is overcoming the dichotomy between scientific and humanistic views which has beset Neolithic studies (e.g. "diet" vs. "foodways"; "environment" vs. "landscape"; "demography" vs. "social relations". This theme is traced out with regard to classic Neolithic problems such as the beginning of farming, Neolithic social proceses, and the transition to the Bronze Age.