COLLOQUE ET RECENSIONS Recent Developments in Near Eastem Neolithic Research. Par A. B ELFER-COHEN and N. GORIN G-MORRIS. We have taken this opportunity of reporting on the conference Domesticating Space : Landscapes and Site Structure in the Prehistoric Near East ( 19-20111 of November, 2002), which took place at the Department of Anthropology, University of Toronto, Canada to rai se some questions as regards the current state of research pertaining to va rious issues of the Natufian and Neolithic realms in the Near East. The two day meeting was devoted to the topic of landscapes and site structure in the prehistoric Near East. Ted Banning and Michael Chazan (together with the ir graduate students) are to be congratulated for the efficient organization of this convention '· The focus of the symposium was on the Neolithic and, to a lesser extent, the later Epipalaeolithic in the southern and central Levant. The exceptions were a lecture on supposed symbolic structuring at the late Upper Pa laeolithic site of O ha lo II by D. Nadel and another dealing with human perceptions of the landscape during the 41h and Jrd mi llennia BC by G. Phillip. The main thrust of the indi vidual sessions was ai med towards the concept of space and the response to it by prehistoric groups, from the individual dwel ling - "Around the House : Indoor and Outdoor use of Space" (A.M.T. Moore, discussant), through "Taming the Landscape and Structuring the Region" (E. Z ubrow, discussant) ; special attention was given to society and space - "Arc hitectural Structure and Social Structure" (Z. Kafafi, di scussant), and in particular to aspects of " Ritual a nd the Ideology of Space" (E. B. Banning, discussant). I. The list of participants included the following scholars: D. Baird (Univ. of Liverpool), A. Bel fer-Cohen (Hebrew Univ., Jerusalem), T. Banning (Univ. of Toronto). M. Chazan (Univ. of Toronto). Y. Garfinkel (Hebrew Univ., Jerusalem), I. Gilead (Ben-Gurion Univ., Beer-Sheva), A.N. GoringMorris (Hebrew Univ.. Jerusalem), L. Grosman (Hebrew Univ., Jerusalem), Z. Kafafi (Yannuk Univ.). S. Kadowaki (Univ. of Toronto). S. Kerner (Free Univ. of Berlin), H. Khalaily (I srael Antiquity Authority), S. K. Kozlowski (Warsaw and Lyon Universities). I. Kuij t (Univ. of Notre Dame). A.M.T. Moore (Yale Univ.). D. Nadel (Haifa Univ.). M. aJjar (Jordanian Department of Antiquities). J. Peterson (Marquette Univ.). G. Phillip (Univ. of Durham), G.O. Rollefson (Whitman College). II .B. Schroeder (Univ. of Toronto). 1-1 . Schwartz (McMaster Univ.). A.ll. Simmons (Univ. o f Nevada. Las Vegas), M.P.F. Verhoeven (Holland). T. Watkins (Univ. of Edinburgh). E. Zubrow (Univ at Buffalo. State Univ. of New York). PaiC:orient. ' 01. 28 2. p. 143· 156 c CNRS EDITI ONS 2002 The meeting provided (through the number of participants, the length of sessions, and the introductory talks of the sessions' chairs) an atmosphere that encouraged lengthy and detailed discussions fo llowing the formal presentations. Additionally, the Toronto based scholars kindly provided opportunities to study various collections stored at the University of Toronto . These included the Natufian and PPNA assemblages from Nac harini Cave in the Anti-Lebanese Mounta ins (B. Schroeder; S.R. Rhodes from the excavations by B. Schroeder in the early 1970's); the Geometric Kebaran and Natufian assemblages from Wadi Mataha (J. MacKay; M. Gregg, excavated by J. Janetsky and M. Chazan); and various Epi-Palaeolithic (L. Maher), late Neolithic (Tabaqat a l-Buma) and Chalcolithic (Tubna - K. Gibbs) collections from the investigations in Wadi Ziqlab directed by E.B. Banning. Various Neolithic and Early Bronze collections from Cyprus were a lso displayed (S.T. Stewart). In very general terms it should be stated that with in the framework of the symposium there were few, if any, real new major reve lations in terms of actual raw a rchaeological data. Amongst the most revealing were the stairs/street of Ghwair, at the edge of the Arava Rift (A. Simmons, M. Najar); and the probable we ll at Sha' ar Hagolan in the central Jordan Valley (Y. Garfinkel), which joins several other slightly earlier simila r water installations e lsewhere in the Near East. B. Schroeder examined the implications of the unusual topographic location of the Late N atufian and PPNA seasonal occupations in the cave ofNacharini in the highest reaches of the Anti- Le ba non Mountains. This is perhaps also the place to mention the talk g iven by H. Schwartz (together w ith K. Hallin, M. Schoeninger and T. Levy) concerning possible isotopic evidence on faunal remains for late Quaternary summer rains and the ir replacement by a sole ly winter rainfall regime during the PPNB in the southern Levant, though the evidence fo r it is rather scanty . Various presentations dealt w ith the more prosaic aspects of the external and internal spatial organization ofactivities within sites - such as Z. Kafafi 's description of the Yarmukian installations at Neolithic ' A in Ghazal in central Jordan, M. Najjar's description of spatial organization and access at the medium- 144 sized Middle PPNB s ite of Wadi Ghwair, and S. Kadowak i's presentatio n with regards to the differentia l distributions of groundstone tools from D. Hen ry's renewed excavatio ns at Late PPNB 'A in Abu Nekheileh in the Hisme, southern Jordan. Integrative issues were summarized by J. Pe te rson, w ho di scussed the range of social implicatio ns represented by the architectura l pla ns o f the large PPN B village sites in southcentra l Jordan. Sim ilarly, S. K. Koz lowski presented hi s ideas concerning the in tegrated spatial organizat ion of PPNA hamlets in Iraq, wh ile I. Kuij t expanded on PPNB population aggregation, comm unity size and settlement contexts in the Med iterranean zone ofthe southern Levant. Y. Garfin ke l di sc ussed the defini tion o f social units w ithin a large community as reflected in the Yarmukian site ofSha'ar Hagolan. Besides confronti ng yet again the tric ky question of "why" concerning the beginnings ofsedentism and permanent villages and " how it came about" (issues touched upon by T. Watkins), the overall impressio n from the presentations as well as the di scussions that followed was the growing awareness of the complexities associated w ith incipient and early scdentism. This complexity is reflected in most of the archaeological phenomena observed from the Natufian through the early P ax is. This was a lso acknowledged in those lectures dealing with the atufian. Thus M. Khalaily summarized the evidence concern ing the nature of the Late/ Final Natufian layers from the new round of excavati ons at Mallaha in the Hula Valley, indicating a g reater degree of continued sedentism there than hithe rto described. L. Grosman described the results and interpretation of her excavati ons at the s mall Late Natu fian Hilazon Tachtit cave in western Gali lee, w ith its vari ed array of burial modes primary, intentionally disrupted primary, and secondary interments. Bel fer-Cohe n and Goring-Morris provided an overview of the evidence for the definition of social and, espec ia ll y, symbolic spaces w ithin a nd between Natufian sites. T he outcome of m any of these presentations is that little in the archaeological record can and shou ld be taken for granted, from settlement aggregation and dispersal (as presented by D. Baird w ith specific reference to <;:ata l Hoyi.ik in the Konya basin, Anatolia), to arc hitectural changes re flecting the changed human perception o f their landscape surroundings, as well as the re lationship between humans and natura l features (S. Kerner). This was the time when humans took upo n themselves not o nly the domestication of plants and animals, but a lso the domestication of the landscape - nothing remained " natural" o r immutable anymore. While places w ithin the landscape were most probably also prev io usly imbued with symbolic sig nifi cance, there were now conscious e fforts to tame and/o r (OLLOQUE ET RECE\"SIO\"S infl uence localities wi thin the landscape that were no t necessari ly bene ficia l in terms o f the purely funct ional mechanisms of optimal foraging. Such locales include Gobek li Tepe (at the headwaters of the Ba likh), <;:atal Hoyi.ik, Ke fa r Ha Horcsh (lower Galilee) and perhaps Ba 'ja (Edom, southe rn Jordan )2. Indeed, it is interesting to note that, notw ithstanding it's size, late PPNA/ early PPNB Gobe kli Tepe currently furn ishes no evidence for domesti cated plants or animals. Endeavors were also presented to pry apart a nd identify the constituents and causes of the social complexities accompanying sedentism. Other researchers have been attem pting to recognize the mechanisms that helped to resolve the resulting tensions imposed by sedentism . There is a w ide-ranging consensus that the search for these mechanisms s hould be foc used in particular on the ritual and symbolic aspects of the archaeological record. Matters have thus gone full c ircle, in that such ritual and symbolic aspects a re aga in in vogue ; one simply cannot ignore the changes of m ind that occ urred, minor at first but grow ing to be a rea l turnover from Natutian times o nwards. Indeed, Goring-Mo rri s and Bclfer-Cohcn examined th ese aspects of the Neolithic approach to the landscape, suggesting that ana logies to earl y Greek religious organization and, in particular, the notion of amphictyon ies - i. e. leagues of neighbouring communities associated with sacred loca les may be usefu l in understa nding aspects of the spatial correlates of early eol ithic ritual behaviours. M.P.F. Verhoeven also discussed the spat ia l aspects of ritual behaviour w ith respect to the seemingly intentional burning of at least part of the late Neolithic occupation at Te ll Sabi Abyad, on the Balikh. Today there is a broad consensus of o pinio n that matters were much more complex from the very beginning of the Neolithic, thus genera lly accepting the tenets proposed by Jacques Ca uvin3. Neverthel ess, the terms used, and their immed iate and wider connotatio ns, are a differe nt matter altogether. A lively debate ensued as to whether o ne can use the term " te mple" to describe non-mu ndane Neolith ic structures and installations. G. Roll efson (with regards A in Ghazal) claimed that the important fact is the sheer existence and scale of such remains, while the specific terminology does not matter. On the o ther hand I. Gilead urged caut ion in using a single terminology to describe aspects of the Natufian and eolithic versus C ha lcolithic spiritua l domains. According to him, in using the same terminology a ll along the time stretch encompassing the 2. And see GEBI:.L 2002; GEBEL and BI ENEIH. 1997 : GORJI"G-M ORRIS 2002. eta/ .. 200 1 ; HODDER. 1996: MlLLAART. 1967 : SC'I~DT. 3. CAUV!N. 2000a. b. Palcoricnt. ,oJ. 2M2. p. 143·156' c:--.RS I ~ DITO\"S 2002 1~ COLLOQCE ET RECE\SIO;\S tatufi an, Neolithic. and Chalcolithic phenomena. we arc likely to loose or ignore the developmental aspects of the establishment and canonization of cultic and rel igious institutions. These are indeed murky waters. o one can deny that earl y Holocene populations in the Near East had to deal with relatively rap idly changing circumstances, both external as well as internal. The mechanisms that were available to them to cope with such situations were embedded in the real ms of the sacred and communal, rather than the mundane and indi vidual. It is in connection with this awareness that one shou ld express some regret vis-cl-vis the virtual absence of representati ves of various French and German projects wh ich was rather unfortunate. Although the most notable recent developments in the earl y Neolithic have centred around research in the Middle Euphrates to Upper Tig ris region of the northern Levant, no one discussed in detail the Anatolian data of such sites as Gobekli Tepe, mentioned on ly in passing. The same is true for the spectacular finds from Syrian sites on the Euphrates such as PPNB Halula and the o utstanding PPNA/ PPNB settlement of Jcrf cl-Ahmar to mention but a few4. DISCUSSION As time goes by, researchers ha ve come to realize that the development of complex Neolithic societies was not simply an unavo idable stage that humanity had to pass through in order to become " us". Extraneous e nvironmental changes at the Pleistocene-Holocene bou ndary (the " Younger Dryas", in particular) occurred on a scale that was not previously or subsequently encountered5. Yet, ult imately, the early Neolithic sho uld be vie wed in terms of social processes, th roug h the prism of numerous trials and errors. Some of th ese led to cui-de-sacs, while others were more successful. Besides, the increased changes and complex ities associated with scdentism and larger community sizes placed considerable strains on indi vidual and community memory systems that could only be accommodated through the construction o f new extra-somatic storage faci lities. This is not that simple considering th e biological constrai nts of the human workin g memory6 It seems that 4. M OLJS'J. 1998 : S'JORDI:. UR. 1999. 2000a. 2000b . therein. 7. A:-oO<JLOU. 200 1. 8. FLA:-.1\I: RY. 2002 . 9. /hid. : -121. 10. \\'1:-.·I I: RII ALDJ:R . 1990 in FLA\':-.: I·.RY. 2002. 6. RUPP. 1998 : SCIIACTER. 1996. Palconont. 'ol. 28 2. p. 143- 156 < C\'RS I ~ Dil with the increase in sedenti sm, community size and the additio n of new economic strategies, there was a sharp rise in in format io n pertaining to social relationships and coping wi th the new realities of dai ly existence. In consequence, individual memory and behavioural systems were endangered by the prospect of overload, and va ri ous forms of regulatory mechanisms were vital. Such regulatory systems could in volve the intensification of certain aspects ofprevious behaviours and at the same time the part itioning and/or specializa tio n of various indi vid ua ls to retain specific domains of know ledge. As an example , some scholars consider the Neolithic architectural ac ti vities as such extrasomatic storage faci li ties with structures playing an important role in the negotiat ion of relationships, retention of a hold on certain locales, and th e anchoring of specific groups to particular settings?. We believe that intensification in the performance of ceremonies and repetiti ve rituals likely played a similar ro le. This intensification would also have provided a sense of cohesion and belonging, the sharing of a mutual past and the planning for a common future. The growing tension, evident wi th the rise in the number of community members, is yet another important point to emphas ize. The rise in numbers in volved not only an increase in social info rmat ion but also other issues to be reconciled. Most recently, Flanncry8 among others, considered scalar stress as the principle mechanism to account for the change from communa l sharing to indi vidua l ownership. He stated that the scalar stress had to be relieved but when it was sustained " .. . societies grew so fast, and settlements became so large, that not every fami ly considered itscif closely enough related to its neighbors to be willing to share the risks and rewards ofproduction"9. And indeed, through time, during the course of th e Ncolithic we can observe the growing distinctions within and between pri vate and communal spaces. With agri culture becoming the dominant economy, its pract ice apparentl y encouraged sharing onl y with close relati ves, as pri va te sto rage freed one's fami ly from having to share with less-producti ve neighbors. Also, since the production cycles lasted for months or years, it was diffi cult to monitor those who "cheated" by not contributing as much as they rcceived Hl_ It has been claimed that reduced sharing, more restricted land tenure. and growing pri vatization of storage greatly increased s·tORDH R <'I a/.. 2002 : S"JORDEUR et ABBES. 2002. 5. •100 RE and I J L~ J A'J. 1992: B A R- Y OSI:I . 200 1a. band reference;, i O '.; S 2002 5 146 the economic options of early farmers''· Still, the change in the basic dwelling unit was not a simplistic one of communal versus nuclear and late r extended famiJyl 2 Rather, it has much more to do w ith societies where indiv iduals occupy small huts and storage is shared, as opposed to societies where la rger houses are occupied by whole nuc lear families, and storage is private. We can add here the example o f the massive size and weight of some mortars, which were common in earlier Natufian times and which were replaced by sm a lle r, i.e. individual mortar and querns in the Neolithic assemblages 13. This is the place for a cautionary note since the specific responses to the new options of living were very individualized. Thus we have to bear in mind that quite a lot in the arc haeological record o f Natufian and Neolithic sites has no pa ra lle ls in the recent records of either hunter-gatherers or incipient agriculturalistsi4. As opposed to hunter-gatherer societies, which were exposed for long stretches of time to selection forces, the new beginnings heralded by the Natufians and early Neolithic societies had yet to be selected for or against, and thus there is considerable " background" noise. In consequence some experiments fai led or simply got lost when a particular group did not " make it", or was absorbed by another, larger community, in the process loosing its own particular signs of indi viduality. The ethnographic data as well as the archaeological record provide quite a number of examples where similar conditions brought about completely opposed, very individual ized responses, both on the level of a particular society, as well as on the level of particular indi viduaJsi5. Just as there were a lternative behaviours that left their imprints in the archaeological record, so we also should remember that shi fts back and forth occurred a ll the time : the shift in risk acceptance from group to fa mily, or the shift from permanency and farming to nomadic life-ways and hunting-gathe ring. Sometimes these changes were quite abruptl 6 II. WILLS, 1992 in FLANNERY, 2002. 12. As the basic unit dwelling in hunter-gatherers camp i s not synonymous with a nuclear family, see for example the Hadza - WO ODBUR~. 1972 in FLA N~ERY , 2002 or for that matter the accom modation arrangements of the Dogon - L ANE, 1994. 13. B ELFER-COHEN, in prep. 14. BAR-YOSEF, 200 1a. 15. BAR-YOSEF. 200 1 ; FLANNERY , 2002. 16. And sec the return in the Late Natufian to more nomadic lifeways ( BAR-YOSEF, 2001 ; VALLA , 200 1 ; BELFER-COHEN and BAR-YOSEF, 2000 ; BAR-YOSEF and B ELFR-CO lE~ . 2002 ; GROSMA:-.1 and B ELFER-COHEN , 2002), as with the Fremont groups in the southwestern USA (BRENNER COL· TRAIN and LEA VITI 2002). COLLOQUE ET RECENSIONS Nevertheless, the pressures upon those societies that settled down were not only re lated to sheer numbers or information overload. Most probably there was a rise in the occurrence of previously unknown diseases. This is illustrated by the high morbidity rate of the Dobe San at Kutse, South Africa, who have recently undergone the process of settling down. Notwithstand ing adequate dietary intake, the residents are exposed to new health problems primarily deriving from their transitory status between nomadic to sedentary lifestyles and from a relatively dispersed to an aggregated settlement pattern 17. These changes and the accompanying diseases had an immediate effect on group morale. In this context one can recall how Native Americans responded to the plethora of diseases that were introduced by the Spanish conquistadors. They felt as if their gods had forsaken them1 8 While the Ind ians could choose to embrace the (seemingly more successful) fa ith of their opponents, Near Eastern incipient sedentary, agricultura l societies had to choose novel approaches. Undoubtedly, th is unique situation had some bearings on the changes observed in the archaeological record related to the spiritual domain. Even if there was a" .. . fortu itous coincide nce of the beginnings of sedentism and permanent villages on the one hand and the co-evolution of cognitive and cultural faculties for external symbolic storage on the other hand" l9, one cannot ignore the possib le impetus of sudden calamities in the form of diseases on the transformations observed even be fore the ri se of c learly agricu ltural societies, at the very initial stages of sedentism. TO SUM UP In the new era of early sedentism and farm ing, different groups applied different measures to confront broadly similar cha llenges - and we are prone to make grave mistakes if we interpret all that we observe in the archaeological record as simpl y reflecting those mechanisms and institutions that were to develop subsequently. Undoubtedly some did develop thus and so eventually became those phenomena that were observed in later periods ; yet, some represent cui-de-sacs and endeavours that failed over the long run. During such troubling and unstable times, the most effective regulatory mech17. KENT and DUNN, 1996. 18. LE O~ - POR T IL LA (ed.), 1976. 19. T. Watkins citing both J. Cauvin and D. M erlin in hi s presentation at the T oronto meeting. Paleoricnt. vol. 28/2. p. 143· 156 '\;, CNRS EDITIONS 2002 147 COLLOQUE ET RECE\"SIOKS anisms are likely to be those found within the realms of symbolic behaviours rather than in profane domains, i.e. in ceremonies, rites, c ultic practices, and the like. Though these phenomena are not new within the archaeological record (already appearing by at least the Upper Palaeolithic, if not earlier), it seems that we can observe a particularly striking innovation during the Neolithic (or even late Natufian ?), namely the appearance of sites and localities whose primary functions were not devoted to profane activities associated with daily subsistence per se. Such sites were prominent points in the landscape, beacons that attracted attention and served as focal points for one or more Neolithic communities. It is likely that these were tied to each other through sharing common ancestry and marriage (i. e. kinship) ties, exchange networks, the shared access to non-agricultural land (whether "commons" for grazing or for hunting), etc. Yet at the same time these communities also were affirming their land ownership to the exclusion of the others, as the growing permanency and the high investment in field cultivation dictated clear-cut ownership rights and boundaries. It was this unabated and constant source of tension that was at the heart of sharing the responsibilities of erecting and keeping "alive" the sacred sites that belonged to all, and yet to no one in particular ... Anna BELFER-COHEN and Nigel GORING-MORRIS Institute ofArchaeology Hebrew University Mt. Scopus, Jerusalem 91905 / . ~ra e / BELFER-COH E. A . and BAR- YOSEF 0. 2000 Early Sedentism in the Near E ast - A Bumpy Ride to V illage Life. In : K UIJT I. (ed.), Life in Neolithic Farming Communitie>. Social Organi=ation. Identity. and Diffe rentiation : 1938. New Yo rk: K luwer Academic/Ple num. BRENNER COLTRAIN J . a nd L EAVrrr S. W. 2002 C li mate and Die t in Fremont P rehistory : Econo mic Variability and Abandonment of Maize Agriculture in the Gre at Salt La ke Basin. American Antiquity 67,3 : 4 53-485. CAUVIN J. 2000a Tire Beginnings ofAgriculture in tire Near East :A Symbolic lmerpretation. (Trans lated by T . W ATKI NS). Cambridge : Cambridge Unive rsity Press. 2000b The Symbo lic Foundations of the Neolithic Revolution in the Near East. In : K UIJT I. (ed .), Life m Neolithic Farming Com- munities. Social Organi=ation. ldelllity. and Differe/1/iation : 235-252. New Yo rk: Kluwer Academic/ P lenum. FLANNERY K .V. 2002 The Origins of the Village Revisited: From Nuclear to Extended Househo lds. American Antiquity 67,3 : 417-4 33 . GEBEL H.G .K. 2002 The Neo lithic o f the Near East. An essay on a "polycentric e volution" and o ther c urrent research pro blems. In : HAUSLEITER A ., KERNER S . und M ULLER-N EU HOF B. ( Hrsg.), Material and Memal SiJhere>. Re=eption Archiiologischer denkrichtungen in der Vorderasiatischen Altertumskunde. lnternationales Svmposium fur Hans J. Nissen : 3 13-325. Berli n : Alter Orient und Altes Testament. GEBEL H.G .K. and BIENERT H.D. 1997 Excavating Ba 'ja, Greater Petra Area, Southern Jo rdan. Neo- Lithics 97 .I : 9-1 1. GORING-MORRIS A.N., BOAREHO E. a nd WEI'JER S. 200 I belfer@Jr2.hum.huji.ac.il goring@vms.huji.ac.i/ Rad iom etric Dating the PPNB Mortuary Site of K far HaHoresh, Lower Galilee, Israel : Problems and Preliminary Results. Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society 3 1 : 2 132 18. GROSMAN L. and BELFER-COHEN A. 2002 BIBLIOGRAPHY Zooming onto the " Younger Dryas" . In : CAPPERS R.T.J. and BOTTEMA S . (eds), The Dawn o f Fanning in the Ncar East. SENEPSE 6 : 4 9-54 . Berlin : ex o riente. HODDER I. (ed .) BAR· YOSEF 0. 200 I a 200 I b From s edentary fo ragers to village hierarchies : the e m e rgence o f socia l institutio n s. In : RUNCIMA N G. (ed.), The Origin of Human Socia/ Institutions: 1-38. Oxford : Oxford University Press. 1996 Institute of Archaeology at Ankara. K ENT S . and D u N D. 1996 The W orld a ro und Cyprus : from Epi-paleolithic foragers to the collapse o f the PPNB civilizatio n. In : SWINY S. (ed.), Tire Earliest Prehistory of Cyprus : From Coloni=ation to Exploitation : 129- 164. Bosto n :American Schools of Orien- L ANE P.J. tal Research. 1994 BAR-YOSEF 0 . and B ELFER-COHEN A. 2002 Fac ing Environmental Cris is - Societal a nd C ultural C ha nges at the Transitio n from the Younger Dryas to the Holocene in the Levant. In : CAPPERS R.T.J. a nd HOTIEMA S . (eds). The Dawn of Farming in the Near East. SENEPSE 6 : 55-66. Berlin : ex oriente. Paleorient. vol. 28 2. p. 143- 156 <' C 1RS EDITIONS 2002 On the Swjace: (atallroyiik 1993- 1995. Oxford : B ritish Anemia and the T ransitio n of No madic H unter-Gathe rers to a Sed entary L ife-Sty le : American Joumal of Physical Anthropology 99 : 455-4 72. The Temporal Structuring of Sen lerne nt Space among the Dogon o f M a li : an Ethnoarchaeological Study. In : PI:.ARSON M .P. and RICHARDS C. (ed s l, Architecture and Order. Approaches to Social Space : 196-2 16 . London : Ro ut ledge. L EON- P ORTILLA M. ( ed .) 1976 The Broken Spears . Jerusalem : Hebrew Uni vers ity. ( in Hebrew). 148 COLLOQUE ET RECENSIONS MELLAART J. 1967 STORDEUR D. (:atal Hiiyiik A Neolithic Town in Anatolia. New York : 1999 MacGraw Hill ; London: Thames and Hudson. MOLIST M. 1998 Des representations humaines peintes au tx c Millenaire BP sur le s ite de Tell Halula (Vallee de I'Euphrate, Syrie). Paleorient 24, 1 : 81-87. MOORE A. M. T. and HILLMAN G.C. 1992 The Pleistocene to Holocene transition and human economy in southwestern Asia : the impact of the Younger Dryas. American Antiquity 57: 4 82-494. 2000a 2000b RUPP R. 1998 Committed to Memory. New York: Three Rivers Press. SCIIACTER D.L. 1996 Searching for Memory. New York : Basic Books. SCHMIDT K . 2001 Giibekli Tepe a nd the Early Neolithic sites of the Urfa region : a synops is of new results and current views. NeoLithics I, I : 9-1 I. New discoveries in architecture and symbolism at Jerf elAhmar (Syria), 1997-1 999. Neo-Lithics 00/ I : 1-4 . STORDEUR D. et ABBES F. 2002 Social and Monumental Space in Neolithic Thessaly, Greece. European Journal of Archaeology 4,3 : 303-322. Avant Ia v ille: l' appo n des cultures Neolithiques de Syrie. Bulletin d 'Etudes Orientales LII : 3 1-52. NANOGLOU S. 200 I Organisation de I' espace construit et organisation sociale dans le Neol ithique de Jerf e l-Ahmar (Syrie. xc.Jxc millenaire av. J.-C.). In : BRAEMER F., CLEUZIOU S. and COU· DA RT A., Habitat et Societe : 13 1-149. Ant ibes: Editions APDCA. Du PPNA au PPNB : mise en lumiere d'une phase de transition it Jerf el-Ahmar (Syrie). Bulletin de Ia Societe Prehisto· rique Fran(aise 99,3 : 563-595. STORDEUR D., BRE ET M., DER APRAHA MIAN G. et ROUX J.-C. 200 I Les biit iments communautaires de Jerf el-Ahmar et Mureybet horizon PPNA (Syrie). Paleorient 26, I : 29-44. VALLA F.R. 2001 La sedentarisation au Proc he-Orient : Ia culture natoufienne. In : GUILAINE J. (ed .), Premiers Paysans du Monde. Naissances des Agricultures : 13-30. Paris : Editions Errance (Collection des Hesperides). Consensus and Debate on the Late Neolithic and Chalcolithic of the Southern Levant. Par Edward B. BANNING. Reviews of: BLACKHAM M. 2002. Modeling Time and Transition in Prehistory: The Jordan Valley Chalcolithic (5,5003,500 BC). BAR Inter. Ser. 1027. Oxford : Archaeopress. GARFINKEL Y. and MILLER M.A. 2002. Sha'ar Hagolan, Volume I. Neolithic Art in Context. Oxford: Oxbow Books. KAFAFI Z. 2001. Jebel Abu Thawwab (Er-Rumman), Central Jordan. The Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age I Occupations. Monographs of the Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology 3. B erlin : ex oriente. KERNER S. 2001. Das Chalkolithikum in der siidlichen Levante. Die Entwicklung handwerklicher Spezialisierung und ihre Beziehung zu gesellschaftlicher Komplexitiit. Orient-Archiiologie 8. Rahden/ West[.: Verlag Marie LeidorfGmbH. LOVELL J.L. 2001. The Late Neolithic and Chalcolithic Pr•·iods in the Southern Levant. New data from the site ofTeleilat Ghassul, Jordan. BAR Intern. Ser. 9 74. Monographs ofthe Sydney University Teleilat Ghassul Project I. Oxford: Archaeopress. The recent publication of several books concerning the Late Neolithic and C ha lcolithic in the southern Levant have both augmented our information on this period and rekindled de bates over its chronology and the nature of its sociopolitical organization. These include reports on excavations at two Ya rmoukian sites, Jebel Abu Thawwab by Zeidan Kafafi and Sha'ar Hagolan by Yosef Garfinke l and Mic he le Miller, and synthetic works by Mark Blackham and Susanne Kerner. A book by Jaimie Lovell is really a combination of the two, foc ussing ma inl y on Te le ilat G hassul but in its regional and c hrono logical context . NEW INFORMATION ON ASSEMBLAGES Most of these provide new information on the material c ulture of the Late Neolithic and Cha lcolithi c, while the more synthetic works present new v iews on the analysis and interpretation of Chalcolithic pottery in particular. Kafafi presents some information on artifacts from Jebel Abu Thawwab, but as the pottery was previously published20, provides less new information about ceramics or 20. OBEIDAT. 1995. Paleorient. vol. 28/2. p. 143-1 56 10 CNRS EDITIONS 2002