I. Kuijt, Life in Neolithit Farming (chapter 13).pdf

Life inNeolithic

Farming Communities

Social Organization, Identity,

and Differentiation

Edited by

I AN K UIJT

University of Notre Dame

Notre Dame, Indiana

KLUWER ACADEMIC PUBLISHERS

New York Boston Dordrecht London Moscow

eBook ISBN:

0-306-47166-3

Print ISBN:

0-306-46122-6

New York, Boston, Dordrecht, London, Moscow

No part of this eBook may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic,

mechanical, recording, or otherwise, without written consent from the Publisher

Created in the United States of America

Visit Kluwer Online at:

http://www.kluweronline.com

and Kluwer's eBookstore at:

http://www.ebooks.kluweronline.com

Chapter 13

Near Eastern

Neolithic Research

Directions and Trends

I AN K UIJT

SOCIAL PROCESS, SCALE, AND THE NEOLITHIC

Although researchers have long acknowledged that the foraging and farm-

ing transition of the Near Eastern Neolithic was an important economic

event,only recently have studies begun to explore the nature of changesin

social organization over this period and the nature of social organization at

different scales. Building on our understanding of the broader evolutionary

trajectory of this transition, archaeologists are now directing new attention

to the social context of Neolithic life at the household (Byrd 1994,Chapter

4, this volume; Flannery 1972;Voigt Chapter 11,this volume), community

(Hodder 1987, 1990; Goring-Morris Chapter 5 this volume; Kuijt 1996;

Rollefson 1997; Rollefson et al. 1992), and regional scales (Bar-Yosef and

Belfer-Cohen 1991; Cauvin 1994; Moore 1985). Collectively, these studies

offer an alternative perspective on the Neolithic transition by shifting the

point of debate from the questions of how and when did plant and animal

IAN KUIJT Department of Anthropology, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana

46556.

Life in Neolithic Farming Communities: Social Organization, Identity, and Differentiation,

edited by Ian Kuijt. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York, 2000.

311

312

IAN KUIJT

domestication occurto what was the nature of Neolithicsocial organization

throughout this period, and how might these social frameworks be linked

with new systems of food production. This redirection of the discussion

focuses our attentionon different research areas,exploringhow changes in

the scale of communities and the nature of civicleadership and social com-

plexity relect how Neolithic peoples created new ways of living in the

economic context of food production.Fromthis context,therefore, Neolithic

social arrangements cease to be a passive by-product of food production

and become conceptualized as the intellectual cornerstone upon which

food production exists.

Beyond placinga greater emphasis on the complexitiesof socialchange

at different scales in the Neolithic,this approach encourages researchers to

move beyond consideration of a single system of Neolithic social organiza-

tion to explore the nature of, and variations within, Neolithic social rela-

tions through time and space.For example,in the case of the south-central

Levant,researchers are investigatingthe archeological contexts of three very

different, interrelated social processes in the broader Pre-Pottery Neolithic:

(1) the initial founding of early agricultural villages at around 10,000bp

with the emergence of some form of civil and ritual leadership (Byrd 1994,

Chapter 4, this volume; Cauvin 1994,Chapter 10, this volume; Rosenberg

and Redding Chapter 3, this volume); (2) the subsequent consolidation of

villages into large aggregate communities with expanded needs for leader-

ship,probably expressed inritual practices, and increased primary evidence

for social differentiation (Gebel and Bienert 1997;Nissen et al. 1987;Kuijt

1995;Rollefson 1987;Rollefson et al. 1992;Simmons Chapter 9, this vol-

ume>;and (3) the abandonment of the large aggregatecommunitiesataround

8,000 bp (Köhler-Rollefson and Rollefson 1990;Rollefson 1996; Rollefson

and Köhler-Rollefson1989).The conceptualization of these socialevents as

distinct, yet clearly interrelated, social processes encourages us to address

the different social, economic, and political foundations as the context of

these events and moves archaeologists toward the recognition that these

events or processes are likely to have material manifestations. This consid-

eration of the complex social processes of the Neolithic, as well as how

material culture and the built environment may reflect these transitions,

offers an alternative and very productive approach for archaeologists inter-

ested in issues of social complexity and the origins of agriculture.

Coexistence of Hierarchicaland Egalitarian Elements

Recent Neolithic studies suggest that social relations, as well as their mate-

rial manifestations, can be envisioned as amalgamations of social practices

that alternatively serve to highlight elements of social differentiation and

NEAREASTERN NEOLITHIC RESEARCH

313

egalitarianism in communities.This perspective relies on ethnographicand

anthropological research that illustrates three aspects to social relations in

present and past middle-range communities: (1) social inequality is ubiqui-

tous and found inallsocieties (Blanton 1995;Feinman 1995;Hayden 1995a,

b; Kelly 1993; Paynter 1989); (2) “egalitarian” social systems require highly

complex codes of social behavior, codes that are as complex as those seen

within cultural contexts where systems of hereditary power exist (Flanagan

1989;Gerlach and Gerlach 1988;Rayner 1988);and (3) hierarchy and egali-

tarianism are fundamentally interrelated and coexist in many, if not most,

social systems (Berreman 1981; Kan 1989; McKinnon 1991; Myers 1986;

Plog 1995). A number of recent ethnographic studies (Flanagan 1989;

McKinnon 1991;Schiller 1997) have clearly demonstrated that most forms

of governance in small-scaleagricultural or horticultural communities com-

bine hierarchical and egalitarian dimensions,and severalarchaeologists have

applied this framework to explore social relations in different archaeologi-

cal contexts (e.g.,Blanton 1995;Feinman 1995;Plog 1995; Renfrew 1974).

For example, Plog (1995:190) notes that ethnographic accounts from his-

torical periods illustrate egalitarian dimensions in Pueblo society as well as

hierarchical ones, leading him to conclude that “ratherthan trying to char-

acterize Pueblo social relations using a single label, it seems more accurate

to concludedthattherearebothegalitarian and hierarchical aspects of Pueblo

societies,a point that has tended to be under-emphasized, if not overlooked,

during much of the previous discussion in the archaeological literature.”

As with Plog’s recognition of the coexistence of hierarchical and egali-

tarian dimensions in Pueblo societies,the authors in this volume introduce

important implications for how researchers can understand Neolithic social

systems. On one level, adoption of this approach moves discussions be-

yond consideration of the initial appearanceof social differentiation, or,for

that matter, how archaeologists should label Neolithic specific social sys-

tems, to explorations of the nature of social relationships. Second,this per-

spectiveencouragesresearchers to understand variations in Neolithic social

organizations through time and space and at different scales.In the models

we have developed to describe Neolithic social systems,we too oftenfailto

acknowledge variations in time and space, and as a result often produce

highly simplistic and broad formulations of social systems. Such a trend

risks the intellectual homogenization of the Neolithic and the multiple path-

ways to power and authority, ultimately producing monolithic reconstruc-

tions that overlook the subtle,yet significant,differences between different

kinds of Neolithic communities in different places and times. Finally, re-

searchers recognize that internal social relations in Neolithic communities

were more dynamic and complex than most of our models allow. Despite

the rich archaeologicalrecord of the Neolithic of the Near East, remarkably

Plik z chomika:

Inne pliki z tego folderu:

Inne foldery tego chomika: