Sedentism and plant cultivation in northeast China emerged during affluent conditions

Abstract

The reasons and processes that led hunter-gatherers to transition into a sedentary and agricultural way of life are a fundamental unresolved question of human history. Here we present results of excavations of two single-occupation early Neolithic sites (dated to 7.9 and 7.4 ka) and two high-resolution archaeological surveys in northeast China, which capture the earliest stages of sedentism and millet cultivation in the second oldest center of domestication in the Old World. The transition to sedentism coincided with a significant transition to wetter conditions in north China, at 8.1–7.9 ka. We suggest that these wetter conditions were an empirical precondition that facilitated the complex transitional process to sedentism and eventually millet domestication in north China. Interestingly, sedentism and plant domestication followed different trajectories. The sedentary way of life and cultural norms evolved rapidly, within a few hundred years, we find complex sedentary villages inhabiting the landscape. However, the process of plant domestication, progressed slowly over several millennia. Our earliest evidence for the beginning of the domestication process appear in the context of an already complex sedentary village (late Xinglongwa culture), a half millennia after the onset of cultivation, and even in this phase domesticated plants and animals were rare, suggesting that the transition to domesticated ( sensu stricto ) plants in affluent areas might have not played a substantial role in the transition to sedentary societies.

Dated phylogeny suggests early Neolithic origin of Sino-Tibetan languages

“…Recent study found a substantial population growth in Neolithic northern China started in the late seventh millennium BCE, which was likely initiated by the onset of millet-based agriculture 29 . Recent palaeoecological studies with high-resolution data also showed that, in North-central China, the transition to warm-wet climate took place at 8100-7900 BP, followed by a rapid development of sedentism and social complexity 33,34 . www.nature.com/scientificreports/ Figure S4 for the reconstructed phylogeny without an outgroup constraint.…”

Neolithic pathways in East Asia: early sedentism on the Mongolian Plateau

“…These dates suggest that the trend towards sedentism was probably facilitated by ecological changes associated with the Holocene Climatic Optimum. Environmental conditions were arguably the primary driver of major contemporaneous shifts in settlement and subsistence patterns on the Mongolian Plateau, and probably across North-east Asia (Popov et al 2014;Janz 2016;Shelach-Lavi et al 2019). These ecological changes differed from region to region.…”

Using the Maximal Entropy Modeling Approach to Analyze the Evolution of Sedentary Agricultural Societies in Northeast China

“…This trajectory spans a period of roughly five thousand years, from c. 6000 BCE to c. 1200 BCE. Our project included systematic regional surveys [ 32 , 35 ] as well as test excavations at sites located during our survey [ 33 , 34 , 36 ]. All the data from the Fuxin regional project is openly available [ 37 ].…”

“…and larger central sites (cities?). It started in the Xiaohexi period (c. 6000–5700 BCE), during which small scale sites with minimal investment in permanent structure may represent the incipient settling down of groups of complex hunter-gatherer societies [ 36 ]. During the ensuing Xinglongwa period (Xinglongwa c. 5700–5200 BCE) we see a rapid transition to relatively large-scale villages, which accompanies the development of agriculture.…”

“…We know that significant climatic changes occurred during the 5000 years period addressed by this paper: the climate improved dramatically (more rain and warmer temperatures) around 5800 BCE, more or less coinciding with the beginning of the Xinglongwa period, and it worsened during the late 4th millennium BCE, more or less coinciding with the decline of the Hongshan society [ 36 ]. While these changes may have affected the development of human society, we argue that they are not very relevant to our understanding of the environment and of human interaction with it.…”