Architecture, sedentism, and social complexity at Pre-Pottery Neolithic A WF16, Southern Jordan

Abstract

Recent excavations at Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (PPNA) WF16 in southern Jordan have revealed remarkable evidence of architectural developments in the early Neolithic. This sheds light on both special purpose structures and "domestic" settlement, allowing fresh insights into the development of increasingly sedentary communities and the social systems they supported. The development of sedentary communities is a central part of the Neolithic process in Southwest Asia. Architecture and ideas of homes and households have been important to the debate, although there has also been considerable discussion on the role of communal buildings and the organization of early sedentarizing communities since the discovery of the tower at Jericho. Recently, the focus has been on either northern Levantine PPNA sites, such as Jerf el Ahmar, or the emergence of ritual buildings in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B of the southern Levant. Much of the debate revolves around a division between what is interpreted as domestic space, contrasted with "special purpose" buildings. Our recent evidence allows a fresh examination of the nature of early Neolithic communities.forager-farmer transition | Near East T he Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (PPNA) is the earliest Neolithic in Southwest Asia (circa 11,600 to 10,200 y ago) situated between hunting and gathering and sedentary farming societies. It is generally considered as the key period in the shift to management and production of resources, wherein increasingly sedentary communities start to produce food to extend the period of occupation at a site, with one of the main economic developments in the PPNA being the cultivation of wild cereals. Social changes are as significant as economic ones, enabling communities to both increase in size and live together for longer periods, and, arguably, it is these social changes that drive the economic developments. Architecture is an important facet of the early Neolithic, providing evidence for an increasingly sedentary lifestyle; changing social structures; and, in the growth of communities, a motive for the development of food production.Three basic assumptions tend to be made regarding PPNA settlements: (i) that the presence of stone or mud architecture indicates sedentism; (ii) that most buildings are domestic and can be described as houses forming small permanent villages; and (iii) that any buildings not fitting this pattern are "special," with some communal function, frequently assumed to be ritual as opposed to a domestic norm, including the tower at Jericho (1), monumental stone-pillared structures at Göbekli Tepe (2), and communal buildings at Jerf el Ahmar and Mureybet (3). On the basis of our recent discoveries at WF16, we argue that these normative assumptions must be questioned. Can we really identify basic domestic structures in these early settlements, and do they exist in opposition to the nondomestic? This has profound implications for how we understand PPNA social organization.Strong arguments have been made that the PPNA is part of a long, sl...

Twenty Thousand-Year-Old Huts at a Hunter-Gatherer Settlement in Eastern Jordan

“…Archaeologists have tended to contrast the flimsy, ephemeral, short-term dwellings of the Early and Middle Epipalaeolithic with the more durable, long-lived and solidly-built constructions of the (Early) Natufian [3]. This is further exemplified by reference to earlier Epipalaeolithic structures as ‘huts’ and later Natufian and early Neolithic structures as ‘houses/homes’ (see also discussion in [31]). However, that supposedly more ‘solid’ constructions do not imply more permanent occupation or long-term use has not gone unnoticed by researchers [3], [28], [29].…”

Optimizing Engines: Rational Choice in the Neolithic?

“…As with the transition from a semisedentary mixed economy to one organized around farming, that may have been a slow process. It is possible that grains were stored communally through the whole PPNA, with household storage not central until the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB; Finlayson et al 2009;Kuijt and Finlayson 2009;Belfer-Cohen and Goring-Morris 2011;Kuijt 2011). However, even if fully household economies only date to the PPNB, this transition imposed severe stress on the forager social contract much earlier.…”

Beyond the Levant: First Evidence of a Pre-Pottery Neolithic Incursion into the Nefud Desert, Saudi Arabia

“…Debates have included the defining the origins of agriculture [10]–[15], the origins of animal domestication [16]–[20], the development of sedentism [21], [22], the evolution of proto-urban social systems [23], the demographic expansion of communities [24], [25], the genetic [26] and linguistic diversity [27] of groups, and the development of new beliefs and rituals in association with social changes [8], [28], [29]. A better understanding of the temporal and spatial and variability of early Neolithic cultures should also be viewed as a critical research task for archaeologists.…”