Anatolia and the Balkans: archaeology

7 Pages·0.616 MB·English

by  Ozdogan M.

17
Anatolia and the Balkans:
archaeology
Mehmet Özdogˇan
In recent years, the Anatolian peninsula (Turkey) has become very significant in
debates about the homeland of the Indo-European language family and about some
fundamental developments in the Near Eastern Neolithic. This chapter discusses
some of these archaeological developments, and examines the spread of Neolithic
populations after 7000 bce from Anatolia into southeastern Europe.
The overall picture of Neolithic Anatolia has changed considerably during the last two
decades, with the recovery of early Pre-Pottery Neolithic A assemblages (c.9500–8500
bce) at sites such as Hallan Çemi and Çayönü in southeastern Anatolia, and more
recently at Pınarbaşı and Boncuklu in the Konya basin in central Anatolia. Today, not
only the southeastern parts of Turkey but also a large section of the Central Anatolian
plateau are incorporated into the Near Eastern core area of early agricultural develop-
ment, on a par with developments further south in the Levant. However, until about
two decades ago, the Anatolian peninsula was not considered to be part of the primary
zone of neolithization in western Asia. It was assumed that the Neolithic way of life
was brought to Anatolia from the southern Levant during the late phases of the Pre-
Pottery Neolithic A. Accordingly, during the early 1990s, the earliest Neolithic horizon
in Anatolia was regarded as a result of “secondary neolithization” (Cauvin 1988; Bar
Yosef & Belfer-Cohen 1992).
However, in spite of the current increase in the number of Neolithic excavations in
Anatolia, the question of defining the ultimate origins of the Anatolian Neolithic still
remains unanswered. In the southern Levant, the Final Paleolithic cultural sequence
from the Kebaran to the end of the Natufian (c.21–11.5 kya) clearly indicates that Pre-
Pottery Neolithic cultures developed locally from Paleolithic forebears in that region.
However, in the north, and particularly in Anatolia, evidence of occupation during the
final phases of the Upper Paleolithic, except along the littoral areas of the Mediterra-
nean, is either absent or extremely sparse. This is true even in the most intensively
The Encyclopedia of Global Human Migration, Edited by Immanuel Ness.
© 2013 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Published 2013 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9781444351071.wbeghm817
2 anatolia and the balkans: archaeology
surveyed areas. Pre-Pottery Neolithic settlements appeared in both central and south-
eastern Turkey starting about 12 kya, but so far lack forerunners. Thus, for the time
being, the origin of the Neolithic in Anatolia remains an open question, until further
evidence can be recovered.
In spite of the paucity of data concerning the initial Neolithic phases in Anatolia,
there is now ample evidence to develop an insight into how the Neolithic way of life
was transmitted westwards into Europe. It is now evident that this process was much
more complex than previously envisaged. The development of the Neolithic way of
life in Anatolia was not an instantaneous event, but a process of long duration extend-
ing through several millennia. Moreover, after the primary phases of diffusion and
migration, Neolithic cultures continued evolving to give rise to further migrations,
each bearing the marks of successive cultural phases (Figures 17.1 and 17.2; and see
Özdogˇan 2007; Sagona & Zimansky 2009; Düring 2011).
With Anatolia included, the core or nuclear zone of the Neolithic way of life in
western Asia thus extended from the Levant to the Anatolian plateau, and from the
upper reaches of the Euphrates and Tigris rivers to Cyprus, embracing a diversity of
habitats. This nuclear zone was set apart by its complexity, innovative nature, and high
momentum of cultural change, with its component cultures maintaining intensive
interaction and sharing knowledge. However, within the core area there were also
numerous local cultural variants with distinctive assemblage compositions.
A critical approach to the evidence
At present, discussions about Neolithic expansion westward from Anatolia are based
on evidence from three distinct disciplinary fields: archaeology, biogenetics, and lin-
guistics. Even though the main focus in this chapter is on archaeological data, recent
advances in genetics are already adding a new dimension to our understanding (chapter
18).
Regarding archaeology, in assessing processes of neolithization in Europe, main-
stream debate has focused on data from the Aegean coast and islands and the Balkans,
where many Neolithic sites were extensively excavated in the second half of the 20th
century. Within this region, there is an overall chronological sequence for the Neolithic
from 6000 bce onwards, commencing with a horizon variously termed Sesklo, Kara-
novo I, Kremikovci, Starčevo, Criş and Körös (Bailey 2000; Tringham 2000; Perlès
2001). All through the Balkan peninsula, from the Aegean (Sesklo in Thessaly) to
southern Hungary (Körös), even in the initial phase, there are hundreds of settlements
that share more or less common material elements, such as white-on-red painted
pottery, triangular or rectangular pottery cult vessels, steatopygous female pottery figu-
rines, baked clay decorated stamps (so-called pintaderras), bone spoons, and large flint
blades. What is significant is that, with the exception of sites along the Aegean littoral,
all sites begin with this horizon, without any predecessors. It seems evident that a
rather rapid and massive population movement took place, seemingly initiated from
the Aegean.
anatolia and the balkans: archaeology 3
Danube
LLeeppeennsskkii VViirr
BALKANS
Aegean ANATOLIA
Sea
ÇÇaattaall HHööyyüükkÇÇaayyöönnüü HHaallllaann ÇÇeemmii
HHaaccııllaarr ?
T
Cyprus AN
V
LE ? Tigris
Euphrates
Core: Continuing cultural formation
Periphery: Primary contact zone (selective elements of Neolithic package appearing)
Exterior: Occasional contacts
Other: Clusters of Mesolithic communities unevenly distributed
Intensifying maritime interaction
Initial wave
Figure 17.1 The expansion of Neolithic cultures out of Anatolia towards the Caucasus and the
Balkans, 7300–5700 bce. Developments between 10 000 and 7000 bce (Pre-Pottery Neolithic).
Map production by Education and Multimedia Services, College of Asia and the Pacific, The
Australian National University.
However, there is still no consensus over what happened prior to the appearance of
these settlements, that is when and in what cultural phases the initial migrants arrived.
Previous claims for a Pre-Pottery/Aceramic Neolithic phase in the Balkans, mainly at
sites in Thessaly and at Lepenski Vir on the Danube, have now been negated (Rein-
gruber 2008). On the other hand, there is growing evidence for the presence of a
cultural phase preceding Sesklo, Karanovo I, and Starčevo, termed the Proto-Sesklo in
Greece, Proto-Starčevo in the western Balkans and the Monochrome phase in Bulgaria
(Perlès 2001; Todorova 2003).
During the last two decades, considerable new data have been recovered on the
maritime expansion of the Neolithic way of life. The excavation of Pre-Pottery Neo-
lithic sites in Cyprus dating to the early 9th millennium bce has provided much needed
evidence for the significance of seafaring in the dispersal of early Neolithic populations
in the Mediterranean, as well as in the Black Sea basin (Davidson et al. 2006; Manning
et al. 2010) (see also chapter 20). Assessment of Neolithic assemblages in both main-
land Greece and western Turkey has also confirmed the presence of an active sea route
into the Aegean and the northern Mediterranean that did not involve the interior
4 anatolia and the balkans: archaeology
Danube
Karanovo
Fikirtepe
Sesklo ?
Ulucak
Cyprus
Tigris
? Euphrates
Old core: Newly emerging complex societies
New core: Sustained village life
Old periphery: Becoming core for expanding Neolithic communities
New periphery: Merging Mesolithic and Neolithic communities
Continuing Mesolithic
Rapid and massive movement
Figure 17.2 The expansion of Neolithic cultures out of Anatolia towards the Caucasus and the
Balkans, 7300–5700 bce. Developments during the 7th millennium bce, at the start of the
Pottery Neolithic phase in Anatolia and the Levant.
Anatolian Plateau. The most distinct marker of this expansion is the so-called
“impresso” type of pottery (Özdogˇan 2008).
The commencement of a number of Neolithic excavations in western Turkey has
not only provided the much needed concrete evidence to understand the neolithization
process, but more significantly it has made it possible to consider different models for
Neolithic expansion (Özdogˇan 2007, 2008; Özdogˇan & Başgelen 2007). The diversity
in the regions of Neolithic expansion is best reflected in burial customs. Numerous
sites have revealed Neolithic burials, either in cemeteries or under house floors, dis-
playing a variety of burial practices even in the same site, ranging from simple inhu-
mation to secondary burial or cremation. The fact that some of these practices were
alien to the core area in the east strongly implies that the Neolithic migrants merged
with the local population, even sharing the same settlements.
Whether or not Anatolia was the homeland of many present-day European popula-
tions is a discussion that has been going on since the early years of the last century. As
this subject has been associated with the “identity” of Europe, political or chauvinistic
biases occasionally overrun academic concerns (Özdogˇan 2007). In this respect, the
main issue has been defining the homeland of the Indo-European languages and their
early speakers. Because neither written documents nor archaeological evidence could
help directly with this quest, other parameters such as farming, deification of bulls,
anatolia and the balkans: archaeology 5
and mother-goddess worship were taken to be the indicators of pre-Indo-European
societies, essentially during the Neolithic (Gimbutas 1991). The rediscovery of Çatal
Höyük on the Konya Plain then led to an association of Anatolian Neolithic cultures
with Indo-European ancestors, at least in the views of some, views soon to be sup-
ported by the preliminary results of genetic studies (Renfrew 1987, 2002; Cavalli-Sforza
1996). However, more recent work on Y-chromosomes (Underhill 2002; King et al.
2008) has opened further controversies, and the need for further work has become
evident. Along with the work on human DNA, other researchers have undertaken
biometric analyses (Pinhasi & Cramon-Taubadel 2009), studies of lactose tolerance
(Burger et al. 2007), and DNA analysis of animal domesticates (Bollongino et al. 2006;
Evershed et al. 2008). Even if evidence in support of demic movement from Anatolia
to Europe is accumulating (chapters 18 and 20), there is still no absolute consensus
over its extent or magnitude.
Conclusion
When exactly the westward movement of Neolithic communities into Greece and
the Balkans began is still not clear. However, Neolithic communities were established
as far west as the Aegean coastal strip of western Turkey by 7000 bce, as indicated
by sites such as Ulucak, Ege Gübre and Keçi Çayırı, reached possibly by following
the alluvial valley of the Büyük Menderes stream (Özdogˇan and Başgelen 2007). These
sites are characterized by mud-slab or mud-brick buildings with red plastered floors,
and pressure-flaked lithic tools. Pottery vessels, though present, are rather coarse
and extremely rare; the scarcity of pottery at sites such as Hacılar had previously
been taken to represent an Aceramic phase, perhaps wrongly. As the timing of
this expansion coincided with the so-called “Neolithic collapse” of the Pre-Pottery to
Pottery Neolithic transition in southeastern Turkey and the Levant generally, it seems
possible to surmise that this initial wave of migration westwards was triggered by
ecological problems (Rollefson & Rollefson 1989; Bocquet-Appel & Bar Yosef 2008;
chapter 16, this volume). This is further confirmed by the mixed presence of central
Anatolian and Levantine elements in the areas of initial expansion in western Turkey.
Whether or not this wave extended to the Balkans in its initial phase is not clear; what
is evident is that the westward movement of Neolithic communities was not an instan-
taneous event, but lasted with an increasing pace until about 6400 bce. The parallels
between central Anatolia and western Anatolian sites such as Ulucak and Yeşilova
suggests that there was a continuous migration westwards, especially since the pottery
sequence from dark-colored fine-burnished wares to red or cream slipped wares in
central Anatolia is paralleled in the same chronological order in the newly inhabited
areas. By the final phases, migrant farmers seem to have expanded into the Marmara
region following the valley of the Sakarya River, and also into the northern Balkans,
reaching the Danube, as indicated by sites such as Koprivets. In places where there were
local Mesolithic communities, both groups seem to have merged. In this regard, sites
of the Fikirtepe culture around Istanbul display a clear mixture of local and introduced
elements.
6 anatolia and the balkans: archaeology
At around 6200 bce, there seems to have been another more intensive migratory
movement that originated in the eastern regions of central Anatolia. Possibly, unstable
climatic conditions related to the so-called Labrador/Hudson Bay Climatic Event had
a triggering effect in this movement (Berger & Guillaine 2008). The sites of this new
wave are rarely in the same locations as before (Özdogˇan 2008), yet many maintained
their locations over subsequent millennia, in time developing as major archaeological
mounds. To this new group belong the Karanovo I, Sesklo, and Starčevo cultures
in the Balkans, all associated with new Neolithic elements. The uniform composition
of this secondary Neolithic package over a vast territory implies that the expansion
was rather rapid. During this era, with the exception of peripheral areas such as the
Hungarian plain and western Balkans, there are no further indications of contact with
indigenous Mesolithic communities.
Of course, the reality might have been much more complex than the picture of two
successive migration phases presented here. Even though new evidence is in strong
support of the existence of migration out of Anatolia into Europe during the Neolithic,
it is clear that other kinds of knowledge transfer and acculturation were also underway
(Sherratt 2004; Özdogˇan 2008).
SEE ALSO: 16 Levant and North Africa: archaeology; 18 Europe and western Asia:
genetics and human biology; 19 Europe and western Asia: Indo-European linguistic history;
20 Europe: Neolithic colonization
References
Bailey, D. W. (2000) Balkan Prehistory. London: Routledge.
Bar-Yosef, O. & Belfer-Cohen, A. (1992) From foraging to farming in the Mediterranean Levant.
In A. B. Grebauer & T. D. Price (eds.), Transitions to Agriculture in Prehistory. Wisconsin:
Prehistory Press, pp. 21–48.
Bellwood, P. & Renfrew, C. (eds.) (2002) Examining the Farming/Language Dispersal Hypothesis.
Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.
Berger, J.-F. & Guillaine, J. (2008) The 8200 cal BP abrupt environmental change and the Neo-
lithic transition: a Mediterranean perspective. Quaternary International 200, 31–49.
Bocquet-Appel, J. P. & Bar-Yosef, O. (eds.) (2008) The Neolithic Demographic Transition and its
Consequences. New York: Springer.
Bollongino, R., Edwards, C., Alt, K., et al. (2006) Early history of European domestic cattle as
revealed by ancient DNA. Biology Letters 2, 155–159.
Burger, J., Kirchner, M., Bramanti, B., et al. (2007) Absence of the lactase-persistence-associated
allele in early Neolithic Europeans. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the
USA 104, 3736–3741.
Cauvin, J. (1988) La neolithization de la Turquie du Sud-est dans son contexte Proche-Oriental
[The Neolithization of south-eastern Turkey in the Middle Eastern context]. Anatolica 15,
69–80.
Cavalli-Sforza, L. L. (1996) The spread of agriculture and nomadic pastoralism: insights from
genetics, linguistics and archaeology. In D. R. Harris (ed.), The Origins and Spread of Agri-
culture and Pastoralism in Eurasia. London: UCL Press, pp. 51–69.
anatolia and the balkans: archaeology 7
Davidson, K., Dolukhanov, P., Sarson, G., & Shukurov, A. (2006) The role of waterways in the
spread of the Neolitihic. Journal of Archaeological Science 33, 641–652.
Düring, B. S. (2011) The Prehistory of Asia Minor. From Complex Hunter-Gatherers to Early
Urban Societies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Evershed, R. P., Payne, S., Sherratt, A., et al. (2008) Earliest date for milk use in the Near East
and southeastern Europe linked to cattle herding. Nature 455, 528–531.
Gimbutas, M. (1991) Civilization of the Goddess. The World of Old Europe. San Francisco: Harper.
King, R. J., Özcan, S. S., Carter, T., et al. (2008) Differential Y-chromosome Anatolian influences
on the Greek and Cretan Neolithic. Annals of Human Genetics 72, 205–214.
Manning, S. W., McCartney, C., Kromer, B., & Stewart, S. T. (2010) The earlier Neolithic in
Cyprus: recognition and dating of a Pre-Pottery Neolithic A occupation. Antiquity 84,
693–706.
Özdogˇan, M. (2007) Amidst Mesopotamia-centric and Euro-centric approaches: the changing
role of the Anatolian peninsula between the East and the West. Anatolian Studies 57, 17–24.
Özdogˇan, M. (2008) An alternative approach in tracing changes in demographic composition:
the westward expansion of the Neolithic way of life. In Bocquet-Appel & Bar-Yosef (2008),
pp. 139–178.
Özdogˇan, M. & Başgelen, N. (eds.) (2007) Anadolu’da Uygarlıgˇın Dogˇuşu ve Avrupa’ya Yayılımı.
Türkiye’de Neolitik Dönem: Yeni Kazılar, Yeni Bulgular [Anatolian origins of Neolithic civi-
lization and its dispersal into Europe: the Neolithic in Turkey – new excavations, recent
finds] (2 volumes). Istanbul: Arkeoloji ve Sanat Yayınları.
Perlès, C. (2001) The Early Neolithic in Greece. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pinhasi, R. & von Cramon-Taubadel, N. (2009) Craniometric data support demic diffusion
model for the spread of agriculture into Europe. PLoS ONE 4(8), 1–8.
Reingruber, A. (2008) Die Argissa-Magula. Das Frühe und das Beginnende Mittlere Neolithikum
im Lichte Transägäischer Beziehungen [The Argissa Magula: the Early Neolithic and early
Middle Neolithic in the context of the sphere of Aegean interaction]. Bonn: Dr. Rudolf
Habelt.
Renfrew, C. (1987) Archaeology and Language. London: Jonathan Cape.
Renfrew, C. (2002) “The emerging synthesis”: the archaeogenetics of farming/language disper-
sals and other spread zones. In P. Bellwood & C. Renfrew (2002), pp. 3–16.
Rollefson, G. & Rollefson, K. (1989) The collapse of early Neolithic settlements in the southern
Levant. In I. Hershkovitz (ed.), People and Culture in Change. Oxford: BAR 508,
pp. 73–89.
Sagona, A. & Zimansky, P. (2009) Ancient Turkey. Oxford: Routledge.
Sherratt, A. (2004) Fractal farmers: patterns of Neolithic origin and dispersal. In J. Cherry, C.
Scarre, & S. Shennan (eds.), Explaining Social Change: Studies in Honour of Colin Renfrew.
McDonald Institute Monographs, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 53–63.
Todorova, H. (2003) Neue Angaben zur Neolithisierung der Balkanhalbinsel [New approaches
to the process of neolithization in the Balkan peninsula]. In E. Jerem & P. Raczky (eds.),
Morgenrot der Kulturen. Frühe Etappen der Menschheitsgeschichte in Mittel-und Südost-
europa. Festschrift für Nandor Kalicz [Onset of culture. Initial stages of civilization in
southeastern and central Europe; Festschrift in honor of Nandor Kalicz]. Budapest:
Archaeolingua, pp. 83–88.
Tringham, R. (2000) Southeastern Europe in the transition to agriculture in Europe: bridge,
buffer, or mosaic. In T. D. Price (ed.), Europe’s First Farmers, 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press, pp. 19–56.
Underhill, P. A. (2002) Inference of Neolithic population histories using Y-chromosome haplo-
types. In Bellwood & Renfrew (2002), pp. 65–78.