Findings Relating to the Manufacture and Use of Stone Beads at Neolithic Boncuklu Höyük
Öz
After five seasons’ work at Boncuklu Höyük it became clear that the site could tell us something about how stone beads were made and used in the early Neolithic. The early date of the site 8200-7700 BC and the social changes that occurred during the incipient stages of permanent sedentary settlement make study of technology and manufacturing practices particularly interesting. The site is unusual in having no easy access to stone sources, the nearest of which is located at a distance of 20km from the site. Archaeological evidence shows that bead manufacture took place at the site, and there are indications that raw material procurement included engagement with a broad area of the surrounding Konya Plain in Central Turkey. There is a wide variety of stone bead forms at Boncuklu, although the majority of the assemblage consists of stone disc beads which vary little in size or form but are made from a variety of stone types.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Technology, Beads, Neolithic, Recycling, craft specialization
Kaynakça
- Altınbilek, Ç. – G. Coşkunsu – Y. Dede – M. Iovino – C. Lemorini – A. Özdoğan 2001 “Drills from Çayönü. A combination of ethnographic, experimen- tal and use-wear analysis”, I. Caneva – C. Lemorini – D. Zampetti – P. Biagi (eds.), Beyond Tools, redefining the PPN lithic assemblages of the Levant, Berlin: 137-144.
- Bains, R. – M. Vasić – D. Bar-Yosef Mayer – N. Russell – K. Wright – C. Doherty 2013 “A technological approach to the study of personal ornamentation and social expression at Çatalhöyük”, I. Hodder (ed.), Substantive techno- logies at Çatalhöyük: reports from the 2000-2008 seasons, Volume 9, London: 331-363.
- Baird, D. – A. Fairbairn – L. Martin – C. Middleton 2012 “The Boncuklu project: the origins of sedentism, cultivation and her- ding in Central Anatolia”, M. Özdoğan – N. Başgelen – P. Kuniholm (eds.), The Neolithic in Turkey Volume 3: Central Turkey, Istanbul: 219-244.
- Bar-Yosef Mayer, D. 2013 “Towards a typology of stone beads in the Neolithic Levant”, Journal of Field Archaeology 38.2: 129-142.
- Baysal, E – B. Erdoğu 2014 “Frog in the pond: Gökçeada (Imbros), an Aegean stepping stone in the use of Spondylus shell”, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 80. Beck, H. 1928 “Classification and nomenclature of beads and pendants”, Archaeologia 77: 1-76.
- Calley, S. – R. Grace 1988 “Technology and function of micro-borers from Kumartepe (Turkey)”, S. Beyries (ed.), Industries lithiques tracéologie et technologie volume 1. Oxford: 69-81.
- Coşkunsu, G. 2008 “Hole-making tools of Mezraa Teleilat with special attention to micro-borers and cylindrical polished drills and bead production”, Neo-Lithics 1/08: 25-36.
- Fabiano, M. – F. Berna – E. Borzatti von Löwenstein 2004 “Pre-pottery Neolithic amazonite bead workshops in southern Jordan”, I. Jadin - A. Hauzeur (eds.), The Neolithic in the Near East and Europe. Acts of the XIVth UISPP Congress, University of Liege, Belgium, 2-8th September 2001, Oxford: 265-273.
- Garfinkel, Y. 1987 “Bead Manufacture on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B site of Yiftahel”, Mitekufat Haeven, Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society 20: 79-90.
- Gurova, M. – C. Bonsall – B. Bradley – E. Anastassova 2013 “Approaching prehistoric skills: experimental drilling in the context of bead manufacturing”, Bulgarian e-Journal of Archaeology 3: 201-221.