No abstract

Excavation and systematic surface collection since 1999 have revealed the outlines of a unique site in northern Mesopotamia. Khirbat al-Fakhar is an extensive settlement of 300 hectares, primarily occupied during the LC 1-2 periods (ca. 4400-3800 cal BC). Systematic surface collection, satellite imagery analysis, and targeted excavation allow a preliminary characterization of its settlement, in particular the abundance of evidence for intensive obsidian manufacture. This unexpectedly large and early settlement presents problems of demography, nature of sedentism, permanence of occupation, and obsidian manufacture and trade. In this article we discuss these issues in light of current narratives on the development of societal complexity and urbanism in the region and argue that the site of Khirbat al-Fakhar presents a unique form of settlement that has characteristics of both villages and cities, qualifying it as proto-urban.

The Syrian civil war has resulted in over 250,000 deaths and several million displaced refugees within Syria and abroad. In addition to this human toll, the conflict has resulted in the devastation of the country’s acclaimed cultural heritage sites and the historical fabric that composed the country’s social landscape and the identity of its population. In this article, we consider the reaction of the international heritage community to this moment of crisis. To date, the international heritage community has developed three kinds of projects: site documentation projects; public-awareness-raising projects; and emergency training and mitigation projects. Most of these undertakings have prioritized the collection and dissemination of information about heritage loss. Less attention has been given to emergency interventions to support Syrians inside the country and the at-risk heritage. A significant gap exists between international knowledge about heritage in this crisis and the immediate needs of Syrian heritage professionals. Here, we consider some of the reasons for the divergence between on-the-ground-need and international response, along with the intended and unintended outcomes resulting from the documentation and public-awareness-raising projects. In terms of tangible results, there is no substitute for efforts conducted within a humanitarian framework. The challenge is in encouraging the international heritage community to embrace such an approach.

No abstract

No abstract