In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Chapter 10 The Path to the Present Genesis and Exodus—The Neolithic Experience Throughout this book, I have attempted a narrative expressing the amazing diversity and complexity of the Near Eastern Neolithic. We have examined its genesis during the Natufian, its subsequent development and florescence during the PPNB, and its exodus, the termination of a long and successful adaptation, during the PN. Or was this really the end of the Neolithic? Certainly it set the stage for the development of some of the most sophisticated urban societies in the ancient world. In this final chapter, I address two broad topics. The first is the current and future state of research on the Neolithic, and the second is resource management, preservation, and presentation. Contemporary Neolithic Research: What Do We Know, and What Do We Not Know? Theoretical and Methodological Improvements Archaeological theory evolves. What is trendy in one decade will be passé in another. Research on the Neolithic has gone through a series of theoretical paradigms that generally reflect the discipline as a whole. Initial studies focused on establishing baseline data, the ‘‘nuts and bolts’’ of any archaeological endeavor in establishing a chronological and cultural historic record of a given region. Subsequent research, in many ways first starting with the Braidwoods’ Iraqi work, was more problem-oriented, usually focused on nothing less than finding ‘‘the origins of agriculture’’ or ‘‘the oldest Neolithic settlement.’’ Theory now has become more refined, and several processual perspectives characterize much contemporary research . These include middle-range critical theoretical examinations of site structure, mortuary and ritual practices, regional interaction, house- The Path to the Present 265 hold composition, gender, and artifact analyses. While the social realm is receiving much attention, there is a continuing emphasis on clarifying human and environmental interactions. Much of this has to do with achieving a better understanding of climatic changes and geomorphic positioning on the landscape. Finally, it would be a mistake to omit the more prosaic studies that characterize Neolithic research. These relate to the ever-present detailed analysis of both chipped and ground stone, as well as architectural patterning.These ‘‘pure data’’ elements are now often integrated into explicit theoretical models. The theoretical directions of many contemporary studies have increasingly incorporated postprocessual orientations focusing on social agencyand symbolic issues. As one example, consider Cauvin’s (2000a, b) viewof the Neolithic as nothing less than the birth of religion, or, on a more specific level, his belief that the ubiquitous projectile points were prestige objects (Cauvin 2000a:126). Perhaps the best-known examples are the re-excavations at Çatalhöyük (Hodder 2006). While a broad-ranging spectrum of theoretical orientations characterizes this project, much of the actual on-the-ground excavation is simply good archaeology, with meticulous attention to fine-grained detail to be envied by many projects. For example, single buildings are now often excavated over one season, as opposed to Mellaart’s original research in which over 200 buildings were excavated in four years. While such an approach is laudable, one might wonder whether too much information is being retrieved, which adds to analyses and curation issues, and raises the specter of what constitutes ‘‘relevant data,’’ a tricky issue indeed. Furthermore, on a pragmatic level, such melding of theory with detailed field research is an expensive endeavor requiring resources that not many projects have. Overall, though, postprocessual approaches to the Near Eastern Neolithic have generally been tempered with a healthy respect for carefully retrieved data. Coupled with increased theoretical sophistication, methodological refinements have greatly enhanced our understanding of the Neolithic. Over the past hundred years, many of these have been ones that affected the entire discipline and involve more careful excavation and datarecovery procedures. Advances in other disciplines also have immensely benefited archaeology, confirming the need for true interdisciplinary collaboration . In particular, chronological improvements have allowed for betterdating of specific entities, sites, and even individual artifacts oreco- 266 Chapter 10 facts (such as seeds). The revolution in data recovery has allowed for the retrieval of higher-resolution information. This is particularly significant in relation to plant remains. Residue analysis from ground stone and other artifacts has provided considerable new insights into specific economic and social patterns. Likewise, genetic studies of both floral and faunal remains have allowed for a much more precise understanding of processes involved in domestication. Specifically, DNA studies are opening up exciting new vistas relating to specific domesticates and their spread. Similar genetic...

Share