Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
2019, Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports
The Hellenistic, Parthian, and Roman site of Dura–Europos (or simply “Dura”), dubbed the “Pompeii of the Syrian Desert” by Yale historian and archaeologist Michael Rostovtzeff, was jointly excavated by Yale University and the French Academy of Inscriptions and Letters from 1928 to 1937. Given the outstanding preservation of art and architecture at Dura, it is not surprising that four obsidian artifacts have escaped attention, despite evidence that stone tools – including obsidian ones – continued to be used into and after the Iron Age in the Eastern Mediterranean. After more than eight decades, the character of Dura's connections to the Classical world remains a matter of debate. Pottery includes not only local ceramic wares but also North African and Aegean ones. Our nondestructive pXRF testing establish that the Dura artifacts match the three most widely used Eastern Anatolian obsidian sources: Nemrut Dağ volcano as well as the Bingöl A and B sources. If indeed obsidian arrived at Dura via long-standing mechanisms of Mesopotamian exchange, these Eastern Anatolian obsidians would be expected. Unfortunately, the artifacts' precise locations at Dura are unclear, the excavations lacked stratigraphic con- straints, and Near Eastern obsidian distribution patterns have been rarely studied beyond the Early Bronze Age. Keeping in mind these limitations, our findings are most consistent with past suggestions regarding the im- portance of local Mesopotamian influences and resources at the site.
Journal of Non-crystalline Solids, 323, 162-166
Provenance of the Jerf el Ahmar (Middle Euphrates Valley, Syria) obsidians2003 •
A provenance study of obsidians collected in the Jerf el Ahmar village dated from 9500 to 8700 BC cal (Middle Euphrates Valley, Syria) was made from geochemical analyses. The elementary composition of 44 obsidian artefacts and of 19 samples from potential obsidian volcanic sources was determined by inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry and -mass spectrometry (ICP-AES/-MS) or particle induced X-ray emission (PIXE) and scanning electron microscope-energy dispersion of X-rays (SEM-EDX). We show that each of these approaches gives reliable source assignment. We found that 42 of the Jerf el Ahmar obsidians came from the Cappadocia (Gollu Dag volcanic massif) and two from the Bingol area in Eastern Anatolia. This information confirms the arrival in the Levant of obsidian from the latter sources during the end of the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A period, most probably in relation with the diffusion of the Neolithic process from the Middle Euphrates Valley towards the Northeast.
Journal of Archaeological Science 40(2):1122-1135
Empires and Resources: Central Anatolian Obsidian at Urkesh (Tell Mozan, Syria) during the Akkadian Period2013 •
Almost all of the obsidian used to craft stone tools in the Near East from the Palaeolithic onward originated from volcanoes in two geographic regions: Central Anatolia and Eastern Anatolia. Five decades of obsidian sourcing has led to the view that Central Anatolian obsidians largely followed the Mediterranean coast and rarely reached farther east than the Middle Euphrates, whereas Eastern Anatolian sources almost exclusively supplied sites east of the Euphrates. This paper discusses the identification of Central Anatolian obsidian artefacts at the Bronze-Age site of Tell Mozan (Urkesh) in northeastern Syria. Most of the obsidians at Tell Mozan (97%) came from the Eastern Anatolian sources, as expected from established distribution models. Artefacts of Central Anatolian obsidian, however, were excavated from one well-constrained context: the deposits on a palace courtyard that date to the height of the Akkadian empire's influence at this third-millennium Hurrian religious and political centre. In particular, the obsidian came from the Kömürcü source of Göllü Dağ. Potential explanations for this exotic obsidian are discussed. This obsidian might have “piggybacked” on the distribution of Central Anatolian metals or arrived at this city as royal gifts or prestige items. Other discussed mechanisms include Akkadian-linked changes in either territoriality involving pastoral nomads responsible for the arrival of Eastern Anatolian obsidians or identity construction of elites based on involvement in Central Anatolian economic and political networks.
Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research
Turkish occurrences of obsidian and use by prehistoric peoples in the Near East from 14,000 to 6000 BP1998 •
2019 •
This paper details an integrated characterisation study of a substantial assemblage of obsid-ian artefacts (n = 519) from the Syrian Neolithic site of Qdeir 1 (El Kowm oasis). The results of the chemical characterisation (using ED-XRF and SEM-EDS) have been coupled with the typo-technological data. Such an approach has allowed us (i) to identify four raw materials in the assemblage, namely Bingöl A and Bingöl B from eastern Anatolia, plus Göllü Da˘ g and Nenezi Da˘ g from central Anatolia, (ii) to specifically source the distinctive green peralkaline obsidian to Bingöl A (rather than 'Bingöl A and/or Nemrut Da˘ g'), (iii) to observe that these four raw materials were consumed in a nigh-identical manner, probably worked locally by specialist craftspeople to produce fine pressure flaked blades, and (iv) to hypothesise that the people of Qdeir 1 may have played a key redistributive role in the circulation of obsidian tools, likely supplying the neighbouring village of El Kowm.
Comptes Rendus Palevol
Obsidian consumption at Qdeir 1, a Final Pre-Pottery Neolithic site in Syria: An integrated characterisation studyThis paper details an integrated characterisation study of a substantial assemblage of obsid-ian artefacts (n = 519) from the Syrian Neolithic site of Qdeir 1 (El Kowm oasis). The results of the chemical characterisation (using ED-XRF and SEM-EDS) have been coupled with the typo-technological data. Such an approach has allowed us (i) to identify four raw materials in the assemblage, namely Bingöl A and Bingöl B from eastern Anatolia, plus Göllü Da˘ g and Nenezi Da˘ g from central Anatolia, (ii) to specifically source the distinctive green peralkaline obsidian to Bingöl A (rather than 'Bingöl A and/or Nemrut Da˘ g'), (iii) to observe that these four raw materials were consumed in a nigh-identical manner, probably worked locally by specialist craftspeople to produce fine pressure flaked blades, and (iv) to hypothesise that the people of Qdeir 1 may have played a key redistributive role in the circulation of obsidian tools, likely supplying the neighbouring village of El Kowm.
The research on obsidian artefacts uncovered at Neolithic or Chalcolithic sites in the Near East have so far concentrated on their provenience as the geological formations of obsidian have a limited distribution in Anatolia and Armenia. This article concentrates on the cultural implications of the obsidian circulation. In order to analyse the obsidian distribution a quantitative approach is used. The number of obsidian items is juxtaposed to the number of flint items from nearly 50 sites from different parts of the Levant. The assemblages are organised chronologically in five units: Pre-Pottery Neolithic A, Pre-Pottery Neolithic B, Pre-Pottery Neolithic C, Pottery Neolithic and Early Chalcolithic. This data indicates that there is a correlation between obsidian distribution and cultural homogeneity in the Near East. In periods when there are strong relationships over large areas, there is also cultural similarity in flint, architecture and a more active network of obsidian circulation. However, a sharp decline in obsidian circulation during the Pottery Neolithic period is noted, a period in which various regional culture co-existed in the southern Levant, namely the Yarmukian, Jericho IX and Nizzanim. In this period the Levant was divided into small territories, each emphasising its identity by different pottery, flint and artistic tradition.
Quaternary International
Global perspectives on obsidian studies in archaeology2020 •
For more than a half-century, obsidian provenancing has underpinned many archaeological investigations of peoples of the past. The pace of obsidian studies in this regard has gathered significantly since around 2007, and we review the literature to gain a sense of where this momentum has come from, and what it heralds. In part, there is a data revolution underway, arising thanks to the capabilities for rapid survey and analysis enabled by field-portable analytical equipment. Obsidian studies are also gaining a stronger foothold in regions of the world where the approach was previously under-exploited. Our survey spans progress made in obsidian studies in the Mediterranean, Central Europe, the Near East, the Caucasus, Northeast Asia and Tibet, the Eurasian Arctic and Alaska, Southeast Asia, the Americas, Oceania, and Africa and Arabia. We also consider methodological issues related to compatibility of differing geochemical analytical techniques, and the state of the art in obsidian geochemical classification. The proliferation of new observations brings opportunities in terms of development of regional and global databases, as well as challenges of calibration and validation of analyses made by different scientists and laboratories employing diverse instrumentation. Obsidian provenancing demonstrates the astonishing ranges of our ancestors' interactions and networks, sometimes exceeding 1000 km and involving maritime transport.
The 8 th-7 th mill. BC site of Musular (Aceramic Neolithic) is situated in Central Anatolia within a volcanic landscape. The obsidian sources of the region which were formed as a result of volcanic activities were exploited intensively during prehistoric times. The proximity of the sources to the sites provided an opportunity to utilize this raw material intensively during the Neolithic era, and the existence of various obsidian types allowed choices about the sort of obsidian to be used. This paper will focus on the selective nature of the obsidian usage at Musular. Résumé. Musular est un site du N*éolithique pré-céramique daté des 8 e-7 e millénaires av. J-C. Il se trouve en Anatolie centrale, dans un environnement volcanique. Pendant les périodes préhistoriques, les sources d'obsidienne, nombreuses dans la région, ont été intensivement exploitées. Pour les sites localisés à proximité des sources, ce matériau constitue une matière première essentielle. Les types d'obsidiennes sont variés et semblent avoir été sélectionnés en fonction des besoins fonctionnels. C'est notamment ce que montre le cas d'étude fourni par le site archéologique de Musular.
Journal of Lithic Studies
Not only a tool-stone: Other ways of using obsidian in the Near East2021 •
Obsidian was used widely in the Near East in prehistoric and early historic times to make tools and other objects. We know quite a lot about its use as a tool-stone, but much less about other objects made from it, although such things in other contexts would be regarded as markers of identity. This apparent duality of use raises the question of whether the object made or obsidian as a raw material was more significant; it also raises questions about whether the same crafts-people were involved in both the production of tools and other objects or whether they were separated. As research progresses, we are increasingly realising that there is much information that is scattered and that more holistic and integrated approaches are needed. This demands in-depth study of individual objects using multi-disciplinary approaches. Significant areas for further study include the use of geochemical analysis to determine the provenance of the obsidian from which the objects were made and so to ev...
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.
2009 •
2009 •
2010 •
Journal of Archaeological Science 40(4):1866-1878
Environment and Collapse: Eastern Anatolian Obsidians at Urkesh (Tell Mozan, Syria) and the Third-Millennium Mesopotamian Urban Crisis2013 •
Quaternary International
Freund, K.P. (2018). A long-term perspective on the exploitation of Lipari obsidian in central Mediterranean prehistory2018 •
Journal of Archaeological Science 39(5): 1435-1444
Distinguishing Nemrut Dağ and Bingöl A Obsidians: Geochemical and Landscape Differences and the Archaeological Implications2012 •
ACS Symposium Series
Geochemical analysis of obsidian and the reconstruction of trade mechanisms in the Early Neolithic period of the western Mediterranean2002 •
2020 •
Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports
On sourcing obsidian assemblages from the Mediterranean area: analytical strategies for their exhaustive geochemical characterisation2017 •