Rapid Climate Change

In extension of the recently established ‘Rapid Climate Change (RCC) Neolithisation Model’
(Clare 2013), in the present paper we demonstrate the existence of a remarkable coincidence
between the exact (decadel-scale) entry and departure dates of the Neolithic into/from the Aegean
(~6600/6050 calBC) with begin/end of RCC-conditions.

Close examination of the geographic position of Early Neolithic settlements in SE-Europe shows that the oldest sites are almost exclusively situated in some very specific biogeographic areas. These earliest Neolithic settlements are all concentrated in a region that Pavle Cikovac calls the Sub-Mediterranean-Aegean (SMA) biogeographic region. It covers the northern and northwestern edge of the Aegean, including Thessaly, Greek Macedonia and Greek Thrace, and extends further into the Balkans, but only along the valleys of the Vardar (Axios), Struma (Strymon) and Mesta (Nestos) rivers. Surprisingly, although Thrace is the closest landscape to Anatolia, it does not contain any sites of the earliest phase of the Neolithic at all beyond the narrow zone of the northern Marmara. In the present paper we explain this remarkable situation in terms of the natural environment in this particular region of the Southern Balkans. To begin, we propose that the lack of oldest Early Neolithic settlements in Thrace is related to the extreme microclimate of this region. As shown by modern vegetation analogues, Thracian oriental hornbeam-downy oak forests are exposed to stronger continental influence with frosts in the winter and average temperatures during the coldest months that are ca. 2e3 C lower than those in the Central Balkans that have Sub-Mediterranean vegetation. In general terms, what we may expect is that the earliest Neolithic groups would first appear in regions with similarly mild conditions, on a yearly average, to those in the Mediterranean. Such mild conditions are indeed present in the SMA biogeographic region. On the other hand, before moving further to the north along the north-south oriented river systems of the Central Balkans, the Neolithic economy based on agriculture and stockbreeding would first have to be adapted to the relatively harsh winters in the Balkans. In consequence, it would have been possible to apply the new Neolithic lifestyle in the neighbouring areas of Thrace, Walachia, Dobrudzha and the Carpathian Basin only after a certain period of adaptation. Available 14 C-data show that the adaptation period is identical to the time-span of Rapid Climate Change (RCC: 6550-6050 calBC) as defined in previous studies.

5. The 8.2 ka calBP RCC (Time Interval 8600-8000 calBP)
5.0 Definition
5.1 Archaeological Regions
5.1 Possibly Effected Sites
5.2 Rubble Slides
5.3 'Ain Ghazal (Jordan)
5.4 Çatal-Höyük (Anatolia)
5.5 Spread of Early Farming from Anatolia to South-East Europe
6. The 6.0 ka calBP RCC Event (Time Interval 6400-5800 calBP)
6.0 Definition
6.1 Archaeological Period
6.2 Possibly Effected Sites
7. The 3.0 ka calBP RCC Event (Time Interval 3200-2900 calBP)
7.0 Definition
7.1 Archaeological Regions
7.2 Excluded Effects (Earthquake ~ 1200 histBC, Sea People)
7.2 Possibly Effected Sites
7.3 Troia
7.4 Greece
8.
9.
10. Conclusions
11. Acknowledgments
12. Reference
13. Tables
14. Figures

The Mesolithic–Early Neolithic radiocarbon record for the Iron Gates is compared against the regional paleoclimatic record. Well‑marked minima in the frequency of radiocarbon dates at ca. 9.5–9.0 ka, 8.65–8.0 ka and after 7.8 ka cal B.P. coincide with “rapid climate change events” recorded in Greenland ice cores and paleoclimate archives from the Danube catchment. Four possible explanations of the observed radiocarbon discontinuities are considered: dwindling fish resources, changes in the social environment linked to the spread of farming, flood‑induced settlement relocations, and taphonomic effects.

We thank Köhler et al. for their interest in our research and welcome discussions about the methods and possible interpreta- tions involved in Lateglacial climate change research. We respond to each main criticism below, but at the onset briefly point out sig- nificant misunderstandings in the comment. Firstly, Köhler et al. concentrate their criticism on the statistical robustness of one re- cord, while our interpretation of a large fluctuation in CO2 concen- tration (pCO2) at the onset of the Younger Dryas (YD) is based on four distinct and geographically separate stomatal records and a parallel radiocarbon fluctuation. Secondly, the authors are confusing an artificial ocean flushing experiment, which we repeat- edly emphasised was a conceptual study of how much pCO2 the ocean can release if it were severely flushed, with an actual simu- lation of the real event. They pay no attention to the hypothesis of a more realistic ocean flushing scenario that is provided.