Neolithic in the Near East

. Neolithic Revolution and its causes , c. 6200–5800 BC. Pergamon Museum. The concept of the Neolithic was introduced in 1865 by John Lubbock, alongside the Paleolithic, as an extension of Christian Jürgensen Thomsen's "three-age" system (Stone, Bronze, and Iron Ages). It was originally based on technological criteria, primarily the transition from chipped to polished stone tools. The Neolithic concept gained further definition in the 1920s and 1930s through the work of Australian prehistorian Vere Gordon Childe. In his influential book Man Makes Himself (1936), Childe redefined the Neolithic in economic and social terms, coining the term "Neolithic Revolution." Drawing an analogy with the Industrial Revolution, he framed it as a transformative stage in human history, situated between the control of fire and the emergence of "urban revolution". According to Childe, this period was marked by the development of food-producing village societies. Key features included the cultivation of plants and the domestication of animals, which contributed to population growth, agricultural surpluses, and the establishment of sedentary communities. While Childe viewed these societies as largely self-sufficient, he acknowledged the existence of trade in luxury items. He also emphasized their capacity for collective organization, particularly in agriculture and resource management, and their formation of clan-based political structures reinforced by magical and religious practices. Materially, the Neolithic was characterized by the use of polished stone tools, ceramics, and implements for weaving. Although this model has been revised over time, it remains partially relevant in identifying what is commonly referred to as the "Neolithic package". , the archaeological site of Jericho Research conducted after World War II has contributed to a more nuanced understanding of Neolithic societies, driven by new archaeological discoveries. Excavations of Natufian sites in the 1950s and 1960s demonstrated that sedentism often preceded domestication, challenging earlier assumptions that domestication was a prerequisite for permanent settlement. In the 1950s, Kathleen Kenyon established a chronological framework for the Neolithic in the Levant through her work at Tell es-Sultan in Jericho, identifying distinct phases of a "Pre-Pottery Neolithic." This model remains in use, although it has been critiqued for applying the term "Neolithic" to societies that may not meet all of its defining criteria. Subsequent discoveries have refined the understanding of the Neolithic process. Genetic studies have helped identify multiple centers of domestication, and the excavation of the sanctuary at Göbekli Tepe in southeastern Turkey has illuminated the ritual and symbolic dimensions of early Neolithic societies. Comparative studies with other regions that underwent similar transitions—whether independently or through diffusion—have further informed interpretations of the Neolithic, revealing both commonalities and regional particularities. Ethnographic research has also supported the development of interpretive models rooted in prehistoric archaeological evidence. As a result, the search for underlying causes has often dominated research on the Neolithic, giving rise to a wide range of theories. These explanations have focused primarily on the origins of domestication, but also on the broader process of Neolithization and its various components. Vere Gordon Childe, drawing on ideas previously advanced by Raphael Pumpelly, advocated the "oasis theory": the end of the last Ice Age brought about a drier climate, concentrating humans and animals in river valleys and oases in the Middle East, where wild cereals also grew. This close coexistence in restricted areas was thought to have led to the domestication of plants and animals. In contrast, Robert John Braidwood, through his research in the Zagros Mountains during the 1950s, proposed the "hilly flanks theory," which shifted the emphasis toward social and cultural readiness. He argued that Neolithization occurred because societies had developed the necessary tools and knowledge for agriculture and food processing. From the late 1960s, Lewis Roberts Binford introduced a model combining demographic and environmental factors. He suggested that Epipaleolithic communities in the Levant experienced population growth, which, combined with rising sea levels at the end of the Ice Age, created pressure on food resources. This would have led to migration into less populated marginal zones, where communities began domesticating plants and animals. Similar functionalist models emerged, framing Neolithization as an adaptive response to demographic or environmental pressures, and viewing the transition as a necessary stage driven by external constraints. Neolithization phenomenon The phenomenon of Neolithization is now understood as a long, complex, and non-linear process. It is characterized by the transition from a hunter-gatherer to a farmer-herder economy, but it also involves a range of technical, social, and cognitive transformations that are interrelated through causal dynamics. Contemporary approaches tend to view the Neolithic not as a singular event, but as a gradual process involving multiple changes over an extended periodAccording to Ç. Çilingiroğlu: A. Goring-Morris and A. Belfer-Cohen further elaborate: To define what constitutes a Neolithic society, researchers often refer to the concept of the "Neolithic package," based on the criteria originally outlined by Childe. These characteristics, while somewhat imprecise, typically include indicators such as permanent built structures, domesticated animals, cultivated cereals and legumes, pottery for storage and cooking, polished stone tools for food processing, and axes representing the refinement of lithic technology. As M. Özdoğan and others note, these features collectively represent what is often referred to as the "Neolithic way of life"). However, the specific composition of this material culture varies across regions and periods. Another way to group early Neolithic societies despite regional diversity is through the use of the term koinè, referring to a shared set of traits common to several human groups. This has resulted in a partial deconstruction of the concept of a singular "Neolithic revolution," as many of the traits associated with the Neolithic package have been identified in earlier societies, particularly those of the Final Epipaleolithic. The Neolithic is thus viewed less as a revolutionary rupture and more as the period during which pre-existing elements were fully integrated into a coherent system of social, economic, and cognitive transformation. This approach also acknowledges periods of regression and renewal within the Neolithization process, including phases of experimentation that did not culminate in fully Neolithic societies. == Geography, landscapes and environment ==

Main geographical areas In Neolithic studies, the Near East is understood as a region extending from the Mediterranean Sea to the Zagros Mountains, and from the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf to the Taurus Mountains. The Levant is generally divided into three geographical zones, though sometimes only two are distinguished, following a west–east orientation. • Southern Levant: North of the Sinai and the Negev deserts, this area includes the coastal plain, the Upper Galilee and Judaean mountains, the Jordan Valley (with the Dead Sea and Lake Tiberias), the Arabah plain, and the Transjordanian plateaus to the east. • Central Levant: Sometimes grouped with either the northern or southern Levant, this zone spans from the Damascus oasis in the south to the Homs Gap in the north. It includes the Lebanese coastal plain, Mount Lebanon, the Litani valley and the Bekaa plain, the Anti-Lebanon mountains, and the Ghuta oasis near Damascus. • Jezirah: Known as the "island," this plateau region of Upper Mesopotamia, averaging 250–300 meters in elevation, is dissected by the Tigris, the Euphrates, and their tributaries (the Balikh and Khabur). It is generally divided into a wetter Upper Jezirah to the north-northeast and a drier Lower Jezirah to the south-southwest. • The Bölling-Alleröd interstadial, beginning around 12,700–12,500 BCE and lasting perhaps until 11,000/10,800 BCE, was a warmer and wetter phase. It enabled the expansion of wooded areas in the southern Levant and the development of grassy and humid landscapes, including lakes, in Anatolia; • The Younger Dryas (c. 11,000–9,700 BCE, possibly extending to 9,000 BCE in some estimates) was a cold and dry period; • The Early Holocene brought a general climatic amelioration. Although initially dry, it saw a more rapid shift toward wetter conditions around 8,200–8,000 BCE, with some estimates placing the change around 7,500 BCE. This period marked the wettest climatic phase observed in the Levant and eastern Mediterranean over the last 25,000 years. Although not necessarily the primary cause of Neolithization, climate change is generally regarded as a significant factor that created conditions favorable to its development. The correlation between the onset of the Holocene and the emergence of agriculture—and, more broadly, of the Neolithic—is widely seen as more than coincidental, especially as similar patterns have been observed in other regions of the world. == Phases of the Near Eastern Neolithic ==

Timeline Neolithic periodization in the Near East comprises several systems. During the late Zarzian phase (or "post-Zarzian" or "proto-Neolithic"), associated with the Younger Dryas, a more sedentary lifestyle emerged, particularly in lower-lying areas. Sites like Shanidar and Zawi Chemi reflect this shift, with settlements becoming more concentrated, and a greater focus on plant-based subsistence. Neolithization phases (c. 10000–7000/6500 BC) The Pre-Pottery Neolithic (PPN) marks the first phase of the Near Eastern Neolithic, initially defined by Kathleen Kenyon at Jericho (Tell es-Sultan) and divided into PPNA and PPNB, based on the absence of ceramics—unlike the European Neolithic, where pottery is a defining feature. This framework was later expanded with regional and chronological refinements, including a PPNC phase in the southern Levant. These phases were marked by continued sedentarization, with more significant expansion in the Middle Euphrates than in the south. Villages in this area could reach two to three hectares in size. Habitation structures were initially circular, as in the Natoufian period, but during the second half of the 9th millennium BC, rectangular buildings began to appear, particularly in the Middle Euphrates. Sites like Jerf el Ahmar, Tell Abraq, and Mureybet show this architectural transition and also feature large non-domestic buildings likely used for communal or ritual purposes. The Jericho PPNA "tower," enclosed by a wall, belongs to the same architectural tradition, as does a ritual structure at Wadi Faynan 16. These developments suggest increasingly complex community structures and possibly the emergence of leaders or authority figures. In contrast, the southern Levant saw signs of demographic decline at the end of the PPNA and beginning of the PPNB, with evidence of site abandonments whose causes remain unclear, while the northern Levant experienced greater continuity. These succeeded the Zarzian and are known from a small number of village sites, such as Nemrik, Qermez Dere, and M'lefaat. These sites were composed of circular, semi-subterranean dwellings and were located in diverse ecological zones—highlands more focused on hunting and lowlands more reliant on plant gathering. Animal domestication is initially most prominent in the northern Levant and southeastern Anatolia, though the domestication of goats also appears in the southern Levant and Zagros. Other domesticated animals appear in more southerly regions only after the end of the PPNB. This period saw the establishment of large, permanent villages that served as centers for agro-pastoralist communities. These settlements were typically composed of rectangular houses and featured increasingly sophisticated layouts. In the southern Levant, particularly in inland regions like the Jordan Valley and Transjordan, large sites such as 'Ain Ghazal developed, often exceeding 10 hectares in size. The end of the PPNB around 7000 BC is often seen as a turning point, sometimes described as a "Neolithic collapse" or "Palestinian hiatus" in the southern Levant. Late Neolithic (c. 7000/6400–5300/4500 BC) Situated between the "Neolithic Revolution" and the "Urban Revolution," the later part of the Near Eastern Neolithic—referred to as the "Ceramic" or "Late" Neolithic—has received comparatively less scholarly attention. As the name suggests, and in contrast to earlier phases, the onset of this period is marked by the appearance of ceramics during the first half of the 7th millennium BC, with regional variation in timing. This development is easily identifiable in the archaeological record but did not necessarily correspond to significant changes in the Neolithic way of life. Methodologically, cultures of this period are primarily distinguished by their ceramic types, which are typically named after the sites or regions where they were first identified (e.g., Halaf, Yarmouk). Southern Levant The first ceramic Neolithic phase in the southern Levant displays many continuities with the final stages of the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB Final or PPNC), with the notable exception of the introduction of pottery. Some scholars consider the Neolithic of the southern Levant to have continued until 5000 BC (including the Wadi Rabah) While some site abandonments occurred in the late 7th and early 6th millennia BC, Anatolia Southeastern Anatolia is generally included within the Syro-Mesopotamian cultural horizon. In Central Anatolia, numerous Neolithic sites emerged, including Hacilar and Erbaba in the Pisidian Lakes region, and Süberde and Çatalhöyük in the Konya Plain. Çatalhöyük, which followed sites such as Boncuklu and Aşıklı Höyük, is the most prominent site of the period. It is notable for its richly decorated houses, which featured wall paintings, bucrania (bull skulls), and figurines. These structures are generally not interpreted as temples. The agro-pastoral economy was well established, and the earliest monochrome ceramics likely appeared in the region by the end of the 7th millennium BC. This period marked the consolidation and expansion of the Anatolian Neolithic, extending westward and northwestward, as evidenced by sites along the Aegean and Marmara coasts (associated with the Fikirtepe culture). During the Hassuna period (c. second half of the 7th millennium BC), sites such as Hassuna, Yarim Tepe, and Telul eth-Thalathat exhibit more complex house plans and the introduction of collective granaries. Ultimately, southern Mesopotamia gave rise to two of the most influential Chalcolithic cultural traditions in the Middle East—the Ubaid and Uruk cultures. These played a central role in the development of urbanism and state formation, marking the transition from Prehistory to History. Zagros and Iranian plateau Following the abandonment of earlier sites at the beginning of the 7th millennium BC, a new pattern of settlement emerged in the Zagros region. Several sites illustrate the transition between the pre-ceramic and ceramic Neolithic phases, including Ganj Dareh, Tepe Abdul Hosein, and Tepe Guran in the upper valleys, as well as Chogha Bonut and Chogha Golan in the lower areas. Other sites appear to represent new foundations, such as Jarmo in the Chemchemal Valley (Iraq), Sarab and Siahbid in Mahidasht, and Chogha Mish in Susiana. The expansion of Neolithic lifeways became more pronounced in the 6th millennium BC, with the emergence of numerous sites in areas that had already adopted Neolithic practices, such as Fars and Kerman (e.g., Tal-e Mushki, Tal-e Jari, and later Tepe Yahya), as well as in newly settled regions. These include the Lake Urmia (Hajji Firuz), the central plateau (Tepe Sialk Nord), and the Tehran plain (Cheshmeh Ali). Sites south of the Caspian Sea display cultural affinities with the Jeitun culture of Turkmenistan, the earliest known Neolithic culture of Central Asia. Given the wide geographical distribution of these sites, the ceramics of the Final Iranian Neolithic are highly diverse, although they share a common technological and stylistic foundation, often referred to as the "soft-ware horizon." The Neolithic economy was based on the cultivation of cereals and legumes and the domestication of goats and sheep. However, hunting continued to play a significant role in some areas, as evidenced by remains of gazelle, hemione, and aurochs in Susiana. == Sedentarization, domestication, and technical innovations ==

Settlement and habitat: sedentarization and the first villages Several archaeological indicators point to the presence of sedentary communities: permanent architecture with evidence of reconstruction, storage structures such as silos, heavy furniture, polished stone tools, and the accumulation of material remains. Additional clues include the year-round presence of domesticated or commensal animals (e.g., house mice, sparrows), cemeteries in proximity to settlements, and the seasonal distribution of animal remains suggesting year-round occupation. The definition of sedentism is debated—whether it requires the entire community to reside permanently in one place or whether it is sufficient for the majority to do so, with some members remaining seasonally mobile. In practice, mobility and sedentariness often coexisted, and their boundaries were fluid during these early periods. The beginnings of this transition are visible in the southern Levant during the Early Natufian phase (c. 12,500–11,500 BC), the final stage of the Epipaleolithic. The first seemingly permanent villages emerged, consisting of small, rounded dwellings, as seen at sites such as Mallaha, Hayonim, and Wadi Hammeh 27. However, these groups retained a degree of mobility, continuing to occupy seasonal hunting and gathering camps. During the Late Natufian phase (c. 11,500–10,000 BC), sedentarization declined in the southern Levant but became more established further north, particularly in the Middle Euphrates region (e.g., Mureybet, Abu Hureyra). These fluctuations appear to correlate at least partially with climatic changes: the expansion of sedentism coincided with the warmer Bølling-Allerød period, while its retreat coincided with the cooler Younger Dryas. However, the exact nature of this relationship remains debated. Large-scale settlements are also characteristic of the Ceramic Neolithic. Çatalhöyük in Central Anatolia, for example, covered approximately 13.5 hectares and featured a dense arrangement of houses accessed through the roof. Population estimates for the site vary, ranging from roughly 3,500 to as many as 8,000 inhabitants. In the southern Levant, Sha'ar Hagolan extended over 20 hectares and was organized around a network of streets separating large residential buildings. Domestication: the birth of agriculture and animal husbandry According to G. Willcox, plant cultivation can be defined as “assisting the reproduction and consequent multiplication of plants,” while domestication refers specifically to “the selection of cultivar traits, for example the loss of the dispersal mechanism". D. Helmer defines animal domestication as “the control of an animal population through the isolation of the herd, with the loss of panmixia, the suppression of natural selection, and the application of artificial selection based on particular traits, either behavioral or cultural. Animals become the property of the human group and are dependent on it". The earliest cultivated plants in the Near East, often referred to as the "founder crops," comprise a group of at least nine species. These include cereals—barley, emmer wheat, and einkorn—and legumes—lentils, broad beans, vetches, peas, and chickpeas—as well as flax. Domestication in the Near East took place over a period extending roughly from 9500 to 8500 BC, with unequivocal morphological evidence of domesticated plants and animals becoming clear in the second half of the 9th millennium BC. Earlier indicators—such as an increase in the proportion of later-domesticated plant species consumed, the presence of commensal animals like mice and sparrows, greater quantities of straw, and patterns in the age of slaughtered animals—suggest the beginnings of domestication in prior centuries. These developments have been identified at numerous sites, notably in the northern Levant and southeastern Anatolia, as well as in the southern Levant, the Zagros region, and on Cyprus. Consequently, domestication did not originate from a single center. Before full domestication, humans exploited plants and animals through gathering and hunting, alongside forms of pre-domestic control, as the knowledge and techniques necessary for domestication were already in use by the end of the Palaeolithic. A sedentary or semi-sedentary lifestyle, established during the Epipaleolithic, preceded domestication and is no longer regarded as its result. Climatic changes during the transition from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene coincided with the domestication process and likely influenced it. Agriculture and animal husbandry developed in regions where wild forms of domesticates were naturally present and where other food resources were also abundant. Multiple explanations for the origins of domestication have been proposed, though no single theory has achieved consensus. It is now generally accepted that a combination of factors—climatic conditions, demographic pressures, economic reasoning, biological responses of plants and animals, social dynamics, and changes in symbolic or religious worldviews—must be considered. Early Neolithic agriculture was likely practiced on small plots resembling gardens, where multiple crops were cultivated together. These plots were worked intensively with human-powered tools such as hoes. Most early agriculture was rain-fed (dry farming), but irrigation techniques gradually emerged, enabling the expansion of farming into new areas, notably the Mesopotamian plains where rainfall was insufficient. From the outset, agriculture was closely linked with livestock herding in an agro-pastoral economic system. The development of pastoral nomadism, facilitated by the domestication of animals, played a significant role in shaping mobile lifestyles, particularly in semi-arid regions, where groups moved with large herds of sheep and goats. Industry and technical progress Material production during the Near Eastern Neolithic involved the use of a wide range of raw materials. However, due to the preservation conditions of Middle Eastern sites, perishable materials such as skins, wood, reeds, and plant and animal fibers have generally not survived, making it difficult to study their processing. The surviving materials are primarily stone, plaster, clay, bone, and, to a lesser extent, metal ores. The industries associated with these materials are characterized by distinct workflows, from the extraction of raw materials to the production and use of finished products. Researchers are actively working to reconstruct these processes. • Flintknapping: There was a marked improvement in flintknapping techniques, leading to the production of more sophisticated tools, including elongated blades (notably naviform laminar cutting), arrowheads, and tools to support the emerging agricultural economy, such as sickles, knife blades, and bifacial axes. • Polished stone: Polished stone was used to create a variety of tools, including axes, grinding equipment (such as millstones, mortars, and pestles), as well as stone crockery and ornaments. • Basketry: Basketry was used to make containers, mats, and other items. While few physical remains have survived, impressions of these objects have been preserved in the earth, providing evidence of their use. • Construction Techniques: Early Neolithic construction utilized adobe and cob techniques for superstructures. By the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (PPNA), the use of mud bricks became widespread and continued to evolve, giving rise to regional traditions in construction methods during the Late Neolithic. • Water Management: Advances in water management included the development of various hydraulic installations, such as wells, cisterns, and water retention dams. Irrigation canals were constructed, particularly in Central Mesopotamia, after 6000 BC, to support the expansion of agriculture in arid regions. The transformations that occurred during the Neolithic greatly impacted these industries, leading to the production of increasingly diverse products. These changes were primarily driven by the adaptations necessary for the establishment of agro-pastoral economies. While most production took place in domestic settings by non-specialists, over time, more elaborate production processes emerged, suggesting the rise of "specialized" crafts. The result was the emergence of craftsmen who focused almost exclusively on the production of artisanal goods. These artisans' expertise and products were highly sought after, and their work appears to have been widely distributed, potentially through itinerant artisans who shared their knowledge across various regions. == Visual arts ==

Figurines and statuettes The most widespread category of non-utilitarian objects in the Neolithic Near East consists of small representations of animals or humans. These are referred to as figurines when modeled in materials such as clay, plaster, or lime, and as statuettes when carved from stone. During the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (PPNA), female figures became the dominant motif. These were fashioned as limestone statuettes or clay figurines, some of which were intentionally fired. The forms range from schematic types—such as the T-shaped figurines of the Zagros—to more realistic or volumetric depictions. In the southern Levant, however, the figures are generally flatter. Regardless of style, these figurines clearly indicate the gender of the subject. J. Cauvin interpreted them as divine representations, reflecting what he termed a "symbolic revolution". Some examples consist solely of heads. Male representations appear during the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB), though they are far less common than female ones. Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) statuary is represented by a group of sculptures from Ain Ghazal in Jordan, including busts approximately 50 cm in height and full-length statues up to 1 meter tall. These were recovered from two pits where they had been intentionally buried. The statues were modeled from lime or plaster over a reed framework, with bitumen used to delineate the eyes and pupils, and red slip applied to some of the faces. Fragments of similar statues, including legs, have also been discovered at Jericho. Contemporaneously, in the Southern Levant, plaster and lime modeling was applied to human skulls retrieved from burials. These modeled skulls often featured shell inlays for eyes and were sometimes painted, serving as a kind of postmortem reconstruction. The ritual significance of these practices remains debated. Stone masks from the same period are also associated with statuary and may have held ritual or symbolic functions. == Religion and rituals ==

The social and economic transformations of the Neolithic period are often associated with significant cognitive and symbolic developments, reflecting a broader shift in worldview. These mental and cultural changes are regarded both as causes and consequences of the broader Neolithic transition. Archaeological excavations have uncovered areas believed to be used for ritual purposes, although the precise nature and meaning of these practices remain largely speculative. While ethnographic parallels are sometimes invoked to support interpretations, the unfolding of ritual actions and their significance often eludes definitive explanation. Funerary and ritual practices are more accessible to analysis, while underlying belief systems remain difficult to reconstruct. Artistic expressions, frequently interpreted as mythological in nature, are often considered evidence of ritual activity. The terminology used to describe these aspects of Neolithic life—such as religion, ritual, symbolism, and magic—is complex and often ambiguous. These concepts do not fully overlap: a ritual act may not necessarily be religious, and symbolic meaning can be embedded in everyday objects and actions. Such classifications also imply opposites—profane, pragmatic, or utilitarian spheres—which are often hard to distinguish archaeologically. The boundaries between these domains may not have been meaningful or distinct for Neolithic societies themselves. One key distinction in burial practice is location. During the Pre-Ceramic Neolithic, interments often occurred beneath inhabited structures, reflecting the growing symbolic importance of domestic space. With the emergence of more structured settlements, dedicated cemeteries began to appear on site peripheries. Some burial sites, such as Kfar HaHoresh, were entirely separate from residential areas and appear to have been reserved for ritual use. Cremation, though rare, is attested in the Final PPNB/PPNC at Baysamun, where one individual's body was cremated shortly after death—unlike other cases of charred remains resulting from secondary treatments performed long after death. Most Neolithic burials were individual, though collective graves were also common. The deceased were typically buried in a flexed position, with varying orientations. Secondary burial practices are a hallmark of the period. These involved the exhumation of bodies, followed by reburial, often beneath buildings. In many cases, skulls were removed, modified, and either buried separately or displayed in specific locations, including so-called "houses of the dead," such as those at Çayönü and Dja'de.[2][3] These practices are commonly interpreted as evidence of ancestor veneration or foundation rituals, indicating the symbolic or social significance of certain individuals within the community. Ethnographic parallels have also led to the identification of "men's houses" or "clan houses" used for community rituals, particularly initiation ceremonies. In certain cases, entire sites appear to have held supra-local ritual significance, serving multiple communities. Göbekli Tepe and Kfar HaHoresh, for example, are sometimes described as amphictyonies—ritual centers shared by regional groups. In any case, the assemblages indicating the performance of rituals, whether public or not, are thus found in locations of various types: Göbekli Tepe and the other sanctuaries at southeast Anatolian sites that have yielded vases, statues and human skulls; the circular construction with a deposit of wild goat skulls and raptor wings at ; the Nahal Hemar Cave and its deposit of ritual objects; In the Middle Euphrates region, a number of "community buildings" have been excavated at sites such as Jerf el Ahmar, Mureybet, and Tell 'Abr 3. These structures often feature bucrania (ox skulls), benches, and sculpted bas-reliefs, implying a ritual or ceremonial role. The presence of such elements suggests cultural links with neighboring Anatolian sites like Göbekli Tepe and Çayönü. During the PPNB, evidence for ritual activity becomes more widespread. The Nahal Hemar cave in the Judean Desert yielded a rich assemblage of ritual artifacts, including stone masks, wooden figurines, over-modelled skulls, and intricately made beads and vessels. The site of Kfar HaHoresh, interpreted as a necropolis, features plastered tombs enclosed in rectangular compounds, hearths, and monolith-bordered enclosures. These architectural features point to use for multi-community ceremonial gatherings. A similar enclosure with monoliths was identified at the submerged site of Atlit Yam, off the coast of modern Israel. The "skull cult" One of the main sources for identifying cult practices in the Pre-Ceramic Neolithic is the presence of human skulls found outside primary burials, and more broadly, the circulation and manipulation of human remains for purposes that appear ritual in nature, particularly in the context of secondary burials. These practices, which exhibit wide regional and chronological variation, are attested from at least the Natufian period onward and are found across the Levant, southeastern Anatolia, and northern Mesopotamia. The individuals involved include men and women, as well as adults and children. Skulls were removed from bodies, often showing signs of desiccation, and a minority were subject to further treatment, such as overmodeling, particularly in the Southern Levant. In most cases, it remains unclear whether the individuals died of natural causes or were deliberately killed. Archaeological evidence, such as headless skeletons found beneath houses, suggests that skull removal and secondary burial were deliberate practices. These skulls may have been reburied elsewhere—under residences—or placed on display in buildings, as seen at sites such as Çayönü, Djade, and Tell Aswad. In some instances, human remains are found in association with animal remains. These practices, often described as "skull cults," are generally interpreted as a form of ancestor worship, involving memorial rituals linked to a village community or family group. However, alternative interpretations, such as the collection of war trophies, have also been proposed. These public ceremonies combined ritual acts, belief systems, funerary customs, and the construction of shared memory. They also played a role in social structures, supporting mechanisms of competition, cohesion, and negotiation within growing communities. Drawing on both archaeological evidence and ethnographic comparisons, Sacrificial practices also formed part of these events. At Kfar HaHoresh (PPNB), the so-called "Bos Pit" contained the remains of eight cattle, apparently sacrificed as part of a funerary rite. Stone masks found at sites in both the southern and northern Levant, including Nahal Hemar and Göbekli Tepe, may have been used in public performances. While their weight suggests they may not have been worn, it is possible that lighter, perishable versions also existed. Figurative representations in bas-reliefs and ceramic paintings led Y. Garfinkel to propose that communal dances were significant in Neolithic societies. Beliefs The analysis of Neolithic imagery has led some scholars to move beyond interpretations focused solely on communal, memorial, or ancestral rites, in an effort to explore underlying belief systems and symbolic frameworks. J. Mellaart proposed that the female figures found at Çatal Höyük represent "mother-goddesses" associated with fertility cults. Expanding on this, J. Cauvin suggested that the Neolithic Near East witnessed the emergence of divinities, with the Goddess—represented primarily by terracotta figurines—playing a central role as both a fertility figure and a sovereign entity. He also posited the existence of a male counterpart, the Bull, though not yet anthropomorphized. These ideas draw on parallels with later historical Near Eastern religions, which included both male and female deities. According to Cauvin, the introduction of these divine figures reflects a broader transformation in human thought—a symbolic "revolution" characterized by a perceived divide between divine forces and everyday humanity. This ideological shift is symbolized, for instance, by the raised-arm postures of orant figures depicted in Neolithic and ancient art. However, the commonly asserted link between female figurines and fertility remains debated, as it is not consistently supported by contextual evidence. Interpretations of Neolithic mythologies—or rather, regional mythological systems—are likely more complex and variable than previously suggested. == Social evolution ==

The formation of Neolithic village societies involved the reorganization of social structures at the levels of the family, household, and broader communities, as well as the establishment of relationships with external groups. These transformations are difficult to discern solely from archaeological evidence. However, the general picture that emerges is one of groups composed of several nuclear families, maintaining cohesion and coexistence through various practical or symbolic means. Elements of social distinction, such as differences in wealth or gender, appear to have been limited, and instances of violence were not widespread. Health and living conditions The adoption of the Neolithic lifestyle is generally associated with a decline in human health and stature, a trend observed in various regions through bioarchaeological studies. This deterioration is attributed to increased exposure to stress, a less diverse and lower-quality diet, the rise of infectious diseases resulting from population density and close contact with domestic animals and rodents, and the heightened risk of food shortages due to failed harvests. This would coincide with the introduction of agriculture, and perhaps also with population growth leading to a reduction in per capita resources. Inflammatory diseases also appear to have been less common among mobile hunter-gatherers. By contrast, from the middle PPNB onwards, the situation seems to have improved, no doubt due to the stabilization of the agro-pastoral system: with agriculture under control and the transition to animal husbandry completed (with the introduction of milk in particular), people were better nourished and more resilient. Average height increased and hypoplasia became less marked, but tooth wear remained high, cavities became more common, and tooth loss more frequent. In the long term, there is no significant difference between the Natoufian and Neolithic periods in terms of trauma and pathologies such as arthritis. The Neolithic lifestyle introduced differences between the sexes: men from Natoufian hunter-gatherer groups seem to have died younger than women, due to risks associated with hunting, since this activity was reserved for them; on the other hand, Neolithic men seem to have lived longer because this risk disappeared, while women's life expectancy seems to have decreased due to greater fertility, which increased the risks associated with pregnancy and childbirth. One analysis puts life expectancy at 24.6 years in the Natoufian and 25.5 years in the Neolithic; the average age of death is 31.2 and 32.1 years respectively. Stress indices, on the other hand, seem to be more pronounced in the Final PPNB/PPNC, a period of difficult subsistence and infectious diseases. It is generally believed that the domestication of animals and the resulting proximity between humans and animals led to the emergence of zoonoses, diseases transmitted from animals to humans and vice versa. However, potential evidence of this phenomenon is very limited. A few skeletons from sites in the northern Levant (Dja'de, Tell Aswad), the earliest dated to around 8500 BC, provide the earliest known evidence of tuberculosis in humans. Tuberculosis is a disease of bovine origin, and this is the period during which the domestication of this animal is supposed to have begun or to be in progress. The coincidence is therefore striking, but the possibility of an earlier presence of this disease in humans cannot be ruled out. The Late Neolithic populations of the Levant bear witness to the continuing adjustment to the Neolithic way of life: average life expectancy is around 30, deaths are more numerous between the ages of 30 and 50, and more women are over 40. Population growth Population growth occurred during the Neolithic process, with consequences for social and economic development when demographic thresholds were crossed. However, there is disagreement regarding the starting point: as early as the Natoufian period, during the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (PPNA), or during the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB). In general, it is believed, based on ethnographic observations, that a sedentary lifestyle is potentially conducive to increased fertility. Compared to a mobile lifestyle, the risk of miscarriage is lower in sedentary populations, and the duration of breastfeeding is shorter, which in turn reduces the interval between conceptions duration of breast-feeding is shorter, which in turn reduces the interval between conceptions. The "Neolithic demographic transition" model, now referred to as the "agricultural demographic transition" (J.-P. Bocquet-Appel), proposes that population growth followed the adoption of a sedentary agricultural lifestyle, due to the additional caloric intake it provided. This, combined with a reduction in female energy expenditure resulting from the end of a mobile lifestyle, would have led to increased fertility while mortality remained constant, at least initially. In a second phase, mortality—particularly that of children—increased due to higher housing density, which created less healthy conditions conducive to the spread of disease, and also led to earlier weaning. Eventually, this stabilized as population density decreased. In this model, population growth is both a cause and a consequence of the initial systemic change brought about by the emergence of agriculture. Without questioning the idea of population growth, evidence for higher settlement density remains largely confined to the southern Levant, particularly during the PPNA, when the concentration of sites is relatively high. This pattern is not observed in the northern Levant, where settlements are more widely spaced, either at the beginning of the domestication process in this region Here, residences are often continuously inhabited by the same family, supporting the concept of a "house society" as defined by Claude Lévi-Strauss, where the house serves as a focal point of family organization and heritage. This may explain the symbolic expressions found in such houses, including paintings and ritual furniture. The mobility of groups and their tendency to fragment may also have helped limit the consolidation of central authority and contributed to the maintenance of an egalitarian social structure. Trends in the Ceramic Neolithic suggest that community organization and social interaction entered a new phase. This is reflected in the emergence of collective storage facilities, sealing practices indicating increased control over the distribution of goods, more extensive inter-community exchange, and the appearance of clearer "regional styles" in material culture. However, these styles should not necessarily be interpreted as evidence of ethnic groups or clans. As discussed above, burials and material culture do not provide strong evidence for social differentiation, though some indications exist. In the Early Natoufian, for example, this is seen in funerary goods, such as necklaces made of shell dentals found with approximately 8% of individuals, as well as in potential communal buildings at Mallaha and large mortars carved into bedrock, possibly for use in communal feasting rituals. For the Pre-Ceramic Neolithic, D. Pryce and O. Bar-Yosef argue that the "cult of skulls" was primarily reserved for a limited elite, reflecting a social hierarchy. They reject the idea that mortuary practices aimed at social homogenization, pointing instead to the occasional presence of prestige goods—such as obsidian—in select burials as evidence of higher status.[3] More elaborate tombs, such as those at Ba'ja, do exist, though they remain isolated cases. Even if the presence of an elite overseeing collective endeavors is acknowledged, the application of the term "chieftaincy" to this period is generally contested. The Ceramic Neolithic appears to continue this trajectory of increasing complexity. Nevertheless, a study of the Halaf culture suggests that social stratification remained limited. Housing showed little differentiation, the society was largely semi-sedentary, domestic architecture dominated, burial practices revealed minimal social distinction, and craft production was embedded within domestic settings. This society is generally considered egalitarian, although the presence of chiefs and more defined social divisions has also been proposed. Clearer indications of emerging complex societies, approaching chieftaincy, are most visible in the Mesopotamian region, particularly in the Samarra culture and its continuation in the Ubaid culture of the Chalcolithic period. Historically, two opposing interpretations of gender relations during the Neolithic have been proposed. One presents an optimistic view, portraying the period as one of harmonious coexistence in which women were valued for their maternal and nurturing roles. The other adopts a more pessimistic stance, suggesting that the advent of sedentism and the agricultural economy led to a deterioration in the status of women, due to a stronger division between public and private spheres, relegating women to domestic roles, assigning them more arduous tasks, and reinforcing social inequalities between the sexes. However, archaeological studies increasingly discourage the generalization of such evolutionary models, instead revealing varied situations across different regions. Research in this area is more advanced in the southern and northern Levant than elsewhere. Nonetheless, there is no definitive evidence that women were exclusively involved in domestic work in Neolithic societies of the Near East. Health studies in the southern Levant suggest that women in the Natoufian period lived longer than their Neolithic successors. This may be linked to increased fertility associated with sedentarization and the beginnings of agriculture, as inferred from ethnographic comparisons. For men, the opposite trend is observed, likely reflecting the lower risks associated with the sedentary farming lifestyle compared to that of mobile hunters. No significant differences are observed in trauma between the sexes. Voluptuous female figurines, rather than representing a goddess cult, are increasingly seen as reflecting a male gaze focused on the female body and sexuality. It has been suggested that archaeological interpretation itself may have contributed to a "pacified" image of the Near Eastern Neolithic, as the same clues can support different conclusions. For example, the notion that the organization of Anatolian sites such as Aşıklı Höyük, Çatal Höyük, and Hacilar had a defensive purpose has been contested. Defensive structures may have served other functions, such as protection from flooding—as proposed by O. Bar-Yosef in the case of the PPNA wall at Jericho,—or may have acted as symbolic boundaries or means of controlling movement. Diffusion of the Neolithic way of life The Near Eastern Neolithic, originating from various focal points—primarily the northern and southern Levant, and southeastern Anatolia—spread rapidly to neighboring regions. By the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB), the Neolithic lifestyle had reached from Anatolia to the central Zagros. This expansion continued in multiple directions: eastward across the Iranian plateau, then into Central Asia and the Indian subcontinent; northward into the Caucasus; westward into western Anatolia and Europe; and southward into Arabia and Egypt. This diffusion can be traced by the presence of key Neolithic elements, particularly the cultivation of wheat and barley and the domestication of goats and cattle, whose wild ancestors and early domestication traces are found exclusively in the Near East. There are various interpretations regarding the mechanisms and reasons behind this diffusion. Genetic studies conducted in the mid-2010s offer some insights into the spread of the Neolithic lifestyle. These studies suggest that the movement of Neolithic populations across the Near East involved migration. Populations from the Southern Levant, Central Anatolia, and the Zagros, which were genetically distinct from local hunter-gatherer groups, dispersed in several directions. Over time, these populations intermingled to such an extent that by the Chalcolithic and Bronze Ages, individuals with genetic markers from multiple regions could be identified. Specifically, Southern Levantine populations spread to East Africa, Central Anatolian populations moved into Europe, and Zagros populations expanded into Central Asia and South Asia. Cyprus presents an atypical case, as the island appears to have been uninhabited during the Epipaleolithic. While it was visited by mainland populations during the PPNA, the island's settlement occurred only later, during the PPNB, around 8500 BCE. These settlers likely came from the northern Levant, bringing with them aspects of the Neolithic "package," though it was still in an unfinished state. The lithic industry, art styles, and practices such as ritual skull removal were similar to those of the mainland, though the domesticated plants and animals, including cats, were not yet fully domesticated. The presence of fallow deer also suggests that some animals were introduced to Cyprus in a controlled, semi-domesticated state, with full domestication occurring later. This has led to debate about whether these animals were partially domesticated or introduced at different stages. The reasons behind these Neolithic expansions are often attributed to a combination of climatic factors and demographic pressures. Neolithic groups, believed to have had higher population growth and greater demographic dynamism, may have been compelled to move into non-Neolithic border regions where there was more available land. J. Cauvin proposes that this movement was also driven by a cultural impetus—a form of "messianism" on the part of the settlers, who were potentially seen as more advanced by surrounding hunter-gatherer groups. The Neolithic settlers brought domesticated animals, plants, ceramics, and other technologies, which could have been perceived as superior by those they encountered, even if agriculture was not necessarily more efficient than gathering in sustaining human populations. == See also ==