Le
Néolithique de Chypre. Actes du Colloque International Organisé
par le Départment des Antiquités de Chypre et l´École
Française d´Athènes, Nicosie 17-19 Mai, ed. JEAN
GUILAINE and ALAIN LE BRUN
Ècole Française d´Athène.
2003. 431 pages, 134 figures, ISBN 2-86958-144-0. (£ 75/ $134/
€110)
In the last decade there have been several new archaeological
discoveries in Cyprus that have drastically changed opinion about the
island’s Neolithic occupants. The find of Neolithic sites which
date about two millennia earlier than was already known urged further
investigation about the Neolithic people of the island, as well as the
rewriting of accounts of numerous facets. ‘Le Néolithique
de Chypre’, the proceedings of an international conference in
2001, is a perfect example of this.
The first chapter of this book focuses on site reports
and Guilaine summarises the finds of the Parekklisha-Shillourokambos
site in the 9th until the end of 8th/beginning of 7th millennium BC.
Then, Peltenburg continues with a paper on the 9th and late 8th/early
7th millennium BC wells from Kissonerga-Mylouthkia. These wells
testify to a considerable energy invested in creating a built environment,
typical of sedentary communities. Furthermore, investigation of their
fills suggests the presence of a year-round occupied farming settlement
nearby. Todd then presents a reappraisal of the Kalavasos-Tenta
dating in light of the knowledge gained from the above mentioned sites.
In contrast to previous thought the site’s earliest levels, consisting
of some lightly built structures, date back to approximately 8100 BC.
In fact, the architecture on top of the hill was also probably, much
earlier than was first accepted, pre-dating approximately 7200 BC. Le
Brun and Daune-Le Brun proceed with a summary of Khirokitia and Cape
Andreas-Kastros illustrating a dichotomy in the settlement
pattern. While the first site preserved impressive architectural remains
the latter was little more than a fishing hamlet. Interestingly, Simons
argues in a subsequent paper that the Khirokitia culture settlement
pattern might have been much more complex than this simple two-tiered
pattern. For example, he draws our attention to two sites where no architectural
remains were found. The case for the small Ais Yiorkis
site, with its presence of cattle bones (compare with below) is suggestive
of a small ‘ranching’ site. However, we are left with many
more questions about the architecture-free Kholetria-Ortos
site, which appears to be a permanent occupation on the basis of palaeobotanical
and faunal data. The latter case would benefit from further soil and
sediment micromorphological research before it can be concluded that
this settlement differs largely from Khirokitia.
Moving to the Ceramic Neolithic period section, Flourentzos
examines the site of Paralimni-Nissia. Of note is that he addresses
the site as of ‘Neolithic B period’, a term which has been
superseded by the term Sotira culture or Ceramic Neolithic period since
the eighties by most other researchers. It would have been useful if
all contributors had used the same terminology and that this terminology
had been clarified in the introduction of the volume. In any case, as
the author illustrates, the finds of Paralimni represent the 5th and
early 4th millennium BC. Several figurines are discussed but in the
photographs it is not clear whether these are really figurines. Drawings
of the artefact may have been more convincing. Mantzourani summarises
the findings of the recent excavations at Kantou-Kouphovounos.
Peltenburg subsequently takes a renewing approach and looks back at
the previously excavated site of Ayios Epiktitos-Vrysi, investigating
the ‘death and burial’ of the houses. In contrast to settlements
of the Khirokitian and Early/Middle Bronze Age, the settlement of Vrysi
and other Late Neolithic and Chalcolithic sites retain abundant on-floor
artefact assemblages while houses were planned to be abandoned and rebuilt.
Peltenburg suggests that the death of an occupant may have been the
occasion for the removal of wealth goods from circulation, in a similar
way to grave goods in the Early Neolithic and Early/Middle Bronze Age
on Cyprus. Indeed, it is remarkable that precisely when goods in planned
abandonment’s - i.e. ‘house burials’- appear, grave
goods are generally lacking in Late Neolithic and Chalcolithic graves.
Perhaps Peltenburg’s paper would be better suited in chapter 5
under the topic ‘symbolic behaviour’ (see below).
The second part of the volume deals with papers on
Cypriot Neolithic artefacts. Until recently detailed and systematic
analysis of stone artefacts on Cyprus have not been research priorities.
‘Le Néolithique de Chypre’ certainly makes up for
these arrears. Briois, McCartney, Philibert and Astruc discuss in detail
Cypriot Neolithic lithic industries. Briois and McCartney found that
the earliest assemblages from Shillourokambos, Mylouthkia
and Tenta display obvious parallels to the mainland E/MPPNB
assemblages. They both agree that later PPN periods at those sites show
less mainland affinities. However, interestingly McCartney’s material
indicates that some affinities with the mainland still existed in the
later PPN periods while Briois stresses cultural isolation and independent
Cypriot development. Subsequently, Philibert investigates the use of
the 9th/8th millennium BC lithic artefacts from Shillourokambos
through micro-wear analysis. She mostly found evidence of lithic tools
used for acquiring plant material; however she found little evidence
for animal processing related activities. The latter is an unexpected
finding since there is a lot of evidence at Shillourokambos
that animals were exploited. In a subsequent paper Astruc examines the
7th millennium BC chipped stone industry from Khirokitia. The relative
homogenous lithic production at Khirokitia appears less developed than
the one from Shillourokambos and different from mainland assemblages.
Interestingly, micro-wear analysis indicated that the investigated Khirokitia
sample was mainly used for two kinds of activities; domestic and cereal
harvesting. It has been attested that there was a marked absence of
lithic artefacts related to hunting, wood procurement and larger-scale
activities. The absence of lithic projectiles is very surprising since
archaeozoological evidence indicates the hunting of deer. Perhaps these
projectiles were made of wood? Interestingly, lithic hunting projectiles
have been found at the earlier site of Shillourokambos. However,
the composite sickle from Khirokitia has some similarities
with the earlier Shillourokambos type. Additionally, the presence
of a very small number of obsidian artefacts from Anatolia attests to
mainland contacts. Perrin and Manen in the next two chapters respectively
explore the groundstone industry and stone bowls from Shillourokambos,
mostly in a typological and technical descriptive way. Finally, Clarke
investigates why Cypriot Ceramic Neolithic pottery is so different from
mainland pottery while sporadic contact with the mainland was taking
place. Statistical analysis on ceramic attributes from several sites
on the island marked a great homogeneity in pottery shapes while the
decoration suggests regional variations throughout the island. Homogeneity
in pottery shapes indicates subconscious group cohesion across the island,
while differing regional pottery decoration indicates the presence of
several subconscious regional cohesive groups on the island. Clarke
attempts to further document this subconscious island-wide group cohesion
through the detailing of the life cycle of pottery. However the available
evidence for most stadia is rather poor and needs more research, especially
towards the procurement, cleaning, kneading and firing of the clay as
well as the use of pottery.
The third part of the book is titled ‘Economy
of the first Cypriot farmers’; however it might have been better-titled
‘Archaeobotanical and archaeozoological studies’. In the
first chapter Thiébault reconstructs the vegetation around Shillourokambos
and Khirokithia through the use of anthracology which is praiseworthy
since so little is known about Cyprus’ former vegetation cover.
The investigated sample from Shillourokambos is very small
(870 fragments) and it is not clear from the table or text from how
many and which contexts the diagrams result. Maybe the relatively large
amount of Olea (olive) charcoal fragments at Shillourokambos
is related to the rather small number of samples investigated. A recent
anthracological study from contemporary Mylouthkia did not
record any pieces of Olea in 16 samples consisting of 482 fragments
(Asouti 2003, 75). Thiebault’s larger sample from Khirokitia seems
to better represent the surrounding vegetation. However we may note,
that the Pinus (pine) increase in samples of around 5700 BC
may not be due to the local expansion of Pinus, but rather
an indicator of hardwood depletion around the site and the import of
wood from the Troodos Mountains where softwoods grew. Willcox examines
the origins of Cypriot farming. He states that the forebearers of most
cereals (except for barley) were not native on Cyprus, which implies
that they were imported, probably from NE Anatolia. This took place
very early after the establishing phase of agriculture. His sub-title
‘what plants were introduced to the island at the end of the Xth
millennium’ implies that he considers the sites of Mylouthkia
and Shillourokambos as ‘founder’ sites on Cyprus.
In a later sentence however he mentions that we do not know this. Indeed,
we need to be careful not to repeat a previously made mistake; to subconsciously
think that we now found the oldest Neolithic sites in Cypriot archaeology.
It seems to me that there exist several indications of an earlier colonisation
of Cyprus. In a later paper, Vigne et al. investigated the
ungulates of Shillourokambos and also concluded that domestication
spread very rapidly westward from the Euphrates valley or nearby to
Cyprus. Of note is that evidence of a domestic group of sus
(pig) as well as a wild group were found, the latter implying earlier
importation to Cyprus. Furthermore, the culling pattern of fallow deer
and goat suggests the hunting of feral populations, while cattle and
sheep were probably husbanded. Therefore Vigne et al. conclude that
the domestic status of animals was more unstable than we presently imagine.
Davis in a subsequent chapter tries to answer many intriguing questions
about Neolithic archaeozoology on Cyprus. He suggests that Neolithic
people came to Cyprus because there was pressure on the wildlife in
the Levant. Moreover, he also suggests that the introduction of the
pig on Cyprus might have led to the extinction of the pygmy hippopotami,
since both are ecologically very similar, which is a tantalising idea.
In a later paper Croft treats the archaeozoloogical remains from three
Neolithic sites in the Paphos region from the late 8th until the late
6th millennium BC. Of special interest is his radiocarbon-confirmed
find of cattle bones from 7th millennium BC Ayios Yiorkis.
Finally, Desse and Desse-Berset summarise their results on the fish
remains from Cap Andreas-Kastros, Khirokitia and Shillourokambos.
While at the first mentioned site a relatively broad spectrum of fish
remains were found indicative of a specialisation towards fishing, the
latter two only had a restricted number of fish species indicating that
fishing there was less important.
Chapter 4 on burial customs and anthropology is rather small, containing
only two papers mainly covering the evidence of two Prepottery Neolithic
sites. Crubézy et al. describe a collective burial from
Shillourokambos, dating to about 7500 BC. A parallel for this
type of burial has been found in Cayönü, indicating an Eastern
Anatolian influence. Le Mort mentions in a further paper that Khirokitian
burials are different from those on the mainland, which indicates an
original Cypriot development. Furthermore, she found an abnormally high
infant mortality, probably due to ß-thallassemia. Personally,
I would have loved it had she expanded this theme a little further,
connecting thallassemia with malaria (Greene & Danubio 1997, 1-5)
and malaria with swampy conditions (Russell 1963, 203-214). The presence
of a high thallassemia rate at Khirokitia opens the question to the
palaeoenvironmental conditions of the site.
A fifth, also rather small, chapter deals with symbolic
ideology. Guilaine first treats the ornamental or ‘symbolic objects’
from Shillourokambos mostly by describing them. Of particular
interest is the find of several picrolite objects in layers post-dating
7500 BC when external influences became rarer. Le Brun in a subsequent
paper documents the closure of a building at Aceramic Neolithic Khirokitia
and details a similar ritual closure as Peltenburg.
‘Views to the Near East’ (chapter 6) is
also rather small. This mainly deals with the earliest Neolithic evidence
on Cyprus and looks for parallels with the mainland in order to locate
potential colonisers. Firstly, Stordeur looks for similarities between
architecture and artefacts from the Levant and Cyprus. She mentions
that round houses, so typical for the early prehistory of Cyprus, in
the Levant predate the earliest known occupation evidence on Cyprus.
Moreover, she reports some Cypriot artefacts with mainland PPNA affinities
and some with PPNB similarities and hence states that it is too early
to conclude from where the Cypriot Neolithic originates. To me it seems
most probable that migrants brought the round house tradition with them
before this tradition ceased on the mainland, i.e. before 8500-8000
BC. This would imply that colonists arrived earlier than we have evidence
for at present. In a subsequent chapter Coqueugniot beautifully summarises
the lithic industries of the Near East from the 9th until the 7th millennium
BC. The 9th millennium BC Cypriot lithic industry shows important similarities
with cultures of the Syro-Anatolian region. However, at subsequent Cypriot
sites, the lithic industry rapidly diverges from mainland industries.
Due to these later divergences Coqueugniot holds the opinion that it
cannot be called Cypro-PPNB as some researchers do. He suggests that
we call it Cypro-PPN with phases or with facies or horizons. In my opinion
however, using the prefix ‘Cypro’ with the terminology used
for the Levant, makes it clear that there are some similarities (especially
in the EPPNB), but also that it is different from the mainland sequence
and that the Cypro-LPPNB is a local ‘Cypro’-development
from the Cypro-EPPNB. Perrot’s paper continues with a narrative
summary of the Neolithic developments of the Near East, including the
new evidence from Cyprus. Unfortunately, the article lacks all references
and therefore contains a many statements that cannot be checked.
Overall, the volume is an excellent summary of the
present knowledge of the Neolithic on Cyprus. It covers a variety of
themes and important new data in a trim lay-out and editing. The book
also poses many new questions some of which are mentioned in the concluding
chapter by Guilaine and Le Brun.
Katleen Deckers
University of Tübingen, Germany
References
Asouti, E., 2003. Chapter 8. The Wood Charcoal Macro-Remains: A Preliminary
Report, in E. Peltenburg (ed.), The Colonisation and Settlement of Cyprus.
Investigations at Kissonerga-Mylouthkia, 1976-1996. Sävedalen,
Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology. Vol. LXX:4. 73-75
Greene, L.S. and Danubio, M.E. (eds), 1997. Adaptations to Malaria.
The Interaction of Biology and Culture, Amsterdam
Russell, P.F., West, L.S., Manwell, R.D. and Macdonald, G., 1963. Practical
Malariology. Oxford.
Review Submitted: November 2004
The views expressed in
this review are not necessarily those of the Society or the Reviews
Editor.
|