Post by Admin on Oct 11, 2021 21:10:27 GMT
After the 1960s, increasing number of researchers, following the
lineages of processual archaeology, began to study change toward
sedentism as comprised of processes. In their research regions, they
investigated whether or not residentially mobile hunter-gatherers
a) adopted agriculture and became sedentary, b) adopted logistical foraging,
or c) continued mobile foraging lifeways, (e.g.,
Binford, 1968; Flannery, 1969, 1973; Price and Brown, 1985; Keeley,
1988; Aldenderfer, 1989; Kelly, 1995; Piperno and Pearsall, 1998;
Habu, 2000; Iizuka et al., 2016: 31). Processualists examined artifacts,
features, and behavioral and environmental changes and
made inferences about mechanisms of occurrence of diverse trajectories
toward sedentism. In recent years, our understanding of
Neolithization processes and sedentarization processes have
changed due to developments in scientific analytical techniques,
including AMS dating and discoveries of sites in countries formerly
without easy access. We now know, for example, that, in the Middle
East, it took about/over 10,000 years with inter-regional variability
for behavioral and material elements considered to be Neolithic to
appear (Bar-Yosef, 1998; Zeder, 2009). Grinding stones were used
by hunter-gatherers around 24,000 years ago, and it is likely that
wild plants were tilled and tended for thousands of years before
domestication. Animal domesticates appeared at the Pleistocene-Holocene
boundary, about the same time as plant domesticates.
Pottery making followed. There were varied tendencies toward
increasing sedentism (Zeder, 2009). By contrast, cases from the
Neotropics suggest a dramatic climatic change occurred at the
Pleistocene-Holocene boundary that induced the adoption of
cultivation. By 7000 to 8000 years ago, crops were produced from
slash-and-burn farming (Piperno and Pearsall, 1998; Piperno, 2006,
2011). Grinding stones appeared with the use of cultivated plants
(e.g., Piperno, 2011), but the timing of the adoption of pottery and
inferred timing of sedentism varied (Oyuela-Caycedo and Bonzani,
2005; Iizuka, 2013). It is now clear that the evidence of Neolithiclike
behaviors and materials emerged at different timings across
space and there are variabilities within regions. Therefore, microregional
scale case studies of the appearance of Neolithic behaviors need to be
provided to better comprehend this phenomenon.
Materially, pottery has been considered among the major new
technologies symbolizing the advent of Neolithic. New discoveries
suggest that in the Russian Far East and Eastern Siberia, it was
adopted by the Late Pleistocene mobile hunter-gatherers possibly
to process nuts or fish for fat (Buvit and Terry, 2011); in Panama, it
emerged much later than the advent of agriculture possibly for
cooking (Iizuka, 2013); in the lowland Mexico, the first pottery was
used mainly for display purposes and serving of special beverages
or as a status symbol before it was used for cooking and storage
(Clark and Gosser, 1995; Iizuka, 2016: 1). Varied pottery origins
suggest that no single model can explain the behavioral context of
the adoption of this technology.
This paper focuses on comparing paleoenvironmental changes
with pottery and stone tool changes that occurred between the
Upper Paleolithic and Initial Jomon of southern Kyushu, Japan.
Micro-regional emphasis within the Japanese archipelago was
conducted in order to contribute to the world-wide archaeological
research theme of Neolithization processes. Our ultimate research
goals are to investigate the causality of behavioral changes,
providing thorough explanations. However, in the presented paper,
we first assess the correlations between technological and environmental changes.
lineages of processual archaeology, began to study change toward
sedentism as comprised of processes. In their research regions, they
investigated whether or not residentially mobile hunter-gatherers
a) adopted agriculture and became sedentary, b) adopted logistical foraging,
or c) continued mobile foraging lifeways, (e.g.,
Binford, 1968; Flannery, 1969, 1973; Price and Brown, 1985; Keeley,
1988; Aldenderfer, 1989; Kelly, 1995; Piperno and Pearsall, 1998;
Habu, 2000; Iizuka et al., 2016: 31). Processualists examined artifacts,
features, and behavioral and environmental changes and
made inferences about mechanisms of occurrence of diverse trajectories
toward sedentism. In recent years, our understanding of
Neolithization processes and sedentarization processes have
changed due to developments in scientific analytical techniques,
including AMS dating and discoveries of sites in countries formerly
without easy access. We now know, for example, that, in the Middle
East, it took about/over 10,000 years with inter-regional variability
for behavioral and material elements considered to be Neolithic to
appear (Bar-Yosef, 1998; Zeder, 2009). Grinding stones were used
by hunter-gatherers around 24,000 years ago, and it is likely that
wild plants were tilled and tended for thousands of years before
domestication. Animal domesticates appeared at the Pleistocene-Holocene
boundary, about the same time as plant domesticates.
Pottery making followed. There were varied tendencies toward
increasing sedentism (Zeder, 2009). By contrast, cases from the
Neotropics suggest a dramatic climatic change occurred at the
Pleistocene-Holocene boundary that induced the adoption of
cultivation. By 7000 to 8000 years ago, crops were produced from
slash-and-burn farming (Piperno and Pearsall, 1998; Piperno, 2006,
2011). Grinding stones appeared with the use of cultivated plants
(e.g., Piperno, 2011), but the timing of the adoption of pottery and
inferred timing of sedentism varied (Oyuela-Caycedo and Bonzani,
2005; Iizuka, 2013). It is now clear that the evidence of Neolithiclike
behaviors and materials emerged at different timings across
space and there are variabilities within regions. Therefore, microregional
scale case studies of the appearance of Neolithic behaviors need to be
provided to better comprehend this phenomenon.
Materially, pottery has been considered among the major new
technologies symbolizing the advent of Neolithic. New discoveries
suggest that in the Russian Far East and Eastern Siberia, it was
adopted by the Late Pleistocene mobile hunter-gatherers possibly
to process nuts or fish for fat (Buvit and Terry, 2011); in Panama, it
emerged much later than the advent of agriculture possibly for
cooking (Iizuka, 2013); in the lowland Mexico, the first pottery was
used mainly for display purposes and serving of special beverages
or as a status symbol before it was used for cooking and storage
(Clark and Gosser, 1995; Iizuka, 2016: 1). Varied pottery origins
suggest that no single model can explain the behavioral context of
the adoption of this technology.
This paper focuses on comparing paleoenvironmental changes
with pottery and stone tool changes that occurred between the
Upper Paleolithic and Initial Jomon of southern Kyushu, Japan.
Micro-regional emphasis within the Japanese archipelago was
conducted in order to contribute to the world-wide archaeological
research theme of Neolithization processes. Our ultimate research
goals are to investigate the causality of behavioral changes,
providing thorough explanations. However, in the presented paper,
we first assess the correlations between technological and environmental changes.