Hominid Origins

Explanations of the evolutionary process have known an important shift

when Darwin’ Origin of Species evolutionary theory was introduced to the science
debate. The idea that life on Earth evolved through natural means, rather than
separate creation generated a wave of change in the approach used by the
researchers. It is now common knowledge that the appearance of humans was a
process which span for a long time interval, and which was made of a series of
changes which occurred at different times.

Ilustrated of human evolution [after Relethford 2003]

5
 There are several determinant factors that have shaped the human evolution
from apelike to human characteristics. The transition to a vertical posture and
walking is expressed using the notion of bipedality, and the most recent fossil
evidence points that the first known proof dates to about 6 million years ago. This
is approximately the time when the hominids have diverged from the African apes.
Terrestriality is commonly used to express the transition from life in trees to
a life on the ground. Other major changes which can be noticed on the fossils are
the dentition changes, from the U-shaped long mandible with protruding incisors,
separated by the large canines with diastema, thin teeth enamel, to the parabola-
shaped jaw of the modern human, with continuous uninterrupted teeth, vertical
incisors, small canines, no gap in front of canine, thick enamel. The timeframe in
which these have transitioned to human characteristics spans for a few million
years.

Sites in Africa where early hominid have been found [after Relethford 2003]

6
 Encephalization is the transition of the cranial skull to a shape that allowed a
larger brain fit. The first signs of brain size increase are associated to the first use
of stone tools, and are approximated to have occurred. It was only a few hundred
years ago that the brain size got close to the one of today, while the modern shape
of the skull is believed to have occurred in the past hundred thousand years.
Use of tools is believed to be another determinant factor in the transition.
This is also called culture, or civilization.
All the fossils on which the evolution from ape to human is based have lived
in Africa between 6 million and 1 million years ago.
Various scientists have taken different approaches in assuming the order in
which these transitions have occurred. Some believe that bipedalism has occurred
before encephalization, before terrestrialism, and before culture. Others, like Elliot
Smith, thought that encephalization was first, followed by bipedalism, terrestriality,
and culture.
It is difficult to recognize the earliest members of a group, as the fossil
record is fragmentary, and there are few evidences documented. For this reason,
early hominins are very difficult to distinguish from apes.

List of fossil sites for early Hominides [after Relethford 2003]

7
 Most of the early hominini that are easier to distinguish belong to
the Australopithecus genus. Australopithecus means “southern ape”, a term that
was introduced in the ‘20s by Raymond Dart. They have existed between 4.2 and 1
million years ago in central, southern, and eastern Africa, and comprises a few
species of bipedal individuals which had a lot of characteristics common with apes.
The cranial capacity was just a little larger than the chimpanzees, and the cranium
is resembling closely the size and shape of those of apes. Dentition resembles more
the human one, and so is the pelvis; significant sexual dimorphism is noticed. Even
if they were bipedal, it is believed that they spent time in the trees as well as on the
ground. Their main food was fruit from the woodlands and savanna.

Comparison of the cranial capacity of different type of Homo [after Relethford 2003]

8
 Evolution of Australopithecus led to a few distinct lines, one of which was
the A. robustus, a line optimized to have large chewing force. The jaws and teeth
were massive, had very large and flat molars and much smaller incisors and
canines, big cheek bones, and their chewing muscles very powerful. It is believed
that this adaptation was targeted at food that was difficult to chew, even hard to
open, like seeds, nuts, or fruits with a hard shell. Isotope studies have shown that
they ate substantial quantities of animal protein. Around 1 million years ago this
line went extinct.
It is interesting that at the sites where A. robustus was found, there were also
stone tools. But because early Homo were found in the same sites, researchers
suggest that it was Homo who used them, and not the robustus individuals.

Different interpretations of the four key events in human evolution [after Lewin 2005]

9
 Homo erectus Zoukoutien (top) and Indonesian (bottom) [after Lewin 2005]

The first members of Homo are derived from one of the Australopithecus
species, between 2.5-2 Ma, as the fossil record indicates. This is a time when a lot
of changes in the occurrence of mammal species can be seen, and it has been
suggested that this coincides with the periods of greatest variability in the climate.
Genus Homo has smaller teeth, smaller face, increased encephalization, larger
body, and more efficient bipedal adaptations.
Homo erectus appeared about 1.8 million years ago and is the first hominid
to leave the african continent and to move into Europe and Asia. Characteristics are
a visibly increased brain size compared to the early hominids, larger body size,
robust body, thick long limb bones, platymeric femur and platycnemic tibia, and
had a larger body weight than that of the earlier hominids. Individuals were
hunters, used fire, and used stone tools like the hand axe for their daily needs.
In 2000 Pickford and Senut discovered 6 million years old fossils in Kenya,
which they named Orrorin tugenensis after the Tugen Hills where the discovery
was made. Fragments of cranial and postcranial remains from several individuals
were identified, dental remains, arm bone fragments, and multiple femoral

10
fragments. Orrorin tugenensis is believed to be one of the earliest hominins, as the
leg bones indicate a bipedal posture, while the small teeth had thicker enamel. The
arm bone however is an indication that it spent a lot of time in the trees.
Fossilized remains of Ardipithecus ramidus were uncovered in 1994 by an
international team in Ethiopia, near the Red Sea. Even if the difference between Ar.
ramidus and apes is not as pronounced (lack of canine dimorphism, long arms,
skull shape and size), there are signs that it used a bipedal posture at least partially,
which made the scientists include it in the hominid classification.
The most well-known primitive hominids are the Australopithecus afarensis
which also lived in east Africa, between 4 and 2.9 million years ago. In 1974 a
40% complete skeleton of an adult female called Lucy was discovered, and it
exhibited a few remarkable characteristics: it was only a little over a meter in
height, her skull indicated a small brain, but her broad iliac blades together with the
femur angled toward the knee, and the big toe lined with the other toes, all
indicated bipedal walking. At the same time, the tibia has changes that allow it to
support a larger weight. The forearms, even if longer that those of modern humans,
have anatomical indications that were not used for walking, but may have been
used in the trees. The sexual dimorphism is also debated, the largest adults found in
Hadar are almost double Lucy’s size, so some scientists incline towards two
different species instead of two sexes. However, the prevailing opinion is that this
is the sign of a high sexual dimorphism, usually associated with lack of
monogamy.
Perhaps the most distinctive characteristic of Homo are the brain size, which
increased gradually in the past few million years. This determined the second
major feature, the use of cultural behaviours, and increasing stone tools usage.

Comparison of Homo sapiens and Homo erectus [after Lewin 2005]

In the 1960s Mary Leakey conducted fieldwork at Olduvai Gorge, in

Tanzania, where the discoveries led to fossils of what was until recently known as
the earliest Homo, Homo habilis, who date between 2.3 and 1.4 million years ago.
It had a larger brain size compared to the australopithecines, and a cranial capacity
averaging 612 cc. The increased body size suggests that the subsistence strategy

11
became more wide-ranged. The initial fossil finds included a complete that has
obvious structural adaptations that allow making and using tools. In the same site
there were found the oldest known stone tools, and animal bones which appear to
have been brought from elsewhere.

Paleolithic stone tools [after Renfrew, Bahn 1991]

The tools discovered in connection with Homo habilis are commonly known
as the Oldowan tradition, and represent simple chopping tools of obsidian or
quartz created by striking the core with a hammerstone or similar. Each strike takes
off a flake of stone, resulting in a sharp edge that allows cutting of plants, meat,
muscles. The hammer stone itself was used to crack open the bones of large
animals to reach their marrow. The cut marks found on the animal bones suggest

12
that individuals were scavengers of animal remains, and not hunters. Both animal
teeth marks and cuts from sharp-edged tools were identified on the same bones,
with the human-made ones occurring on top of the carnivore tooth, after the meat
was already chewed by the carnivores. Also, most of the marks were found on
bones with little meat, meaning that these were remains left over by the animals.
At the same time with the robust australopithecines, in Africa a new Homo
erectus emerged approximately 1.8 million years ago, as a response to the dramatic
climatic changes. The name comes from the vertical upright position of the body,
and was initially called Pithecanthropus erectus, as at the end of the XIXth century
when the first findings occurred, it was believed to be the oldest evidence of
bipedalism. Homo erectus was the first species that moved out of Africa, remains
of populations being found in Georgia, China, Indonesia, and Europe. It is not yet
known what determined them to move, but the dispersion probability indicates that
small groups of individuals reached new territories.

Flaking by percussion [after Lewin 2005]

Cranial features of H. erectus exhibit a robust and thick-boned brain case,

with a low and flat forehead, prominent brow ridges, large mandible lacking the
chin, shovel-shaped incisors. The skull fragment discoveries were many when

13
compared to the body. The most important body finding was that of the
Nariokotome boy, a nearly complete skeleton of a youth discovered in the 1980s on
the west side of the Turkana lake. A significantly larger brain (cranial capacity
averaging 970 cc) and increased body size (between 48-63 kg) are signs of a better
diet quality.
Only Oldowan tools have been found associated to Homo erectus from the
period between 1.8 and 1.5 million years ago. However, approximately 1.5 Mya an
important change occurred, and since then a different tool technology, the
Acheulean tradition, has been associated to many different species of the genus
Homo. The Oldowan and Acheulean are known together as Lower Paleolithic
outside Africa, or Early Stone Age in Africa.
Acheulean assemblages present characteristic tools that are bifaces, which
means that the sharp cutting edge is formed by removing flakes on both sides of the
stone piece, to obtain a superior tool. Larger tools have been introduced, such as
handaxes (teardrop-shaped, symmetrical), cleavers (broader working end than the
axes) and picks. It is obvious that the stones out of which the tools were made were
carefully selected for their size and weight, as the tools were more and more
standardized, with a uniform appearance. It is remarkable how persistent and
uniform the Acheulean industry has span for such large space and time frames.

Triple tomb of Dolni Vestonice, Czech Republic (Upper Paleolithic)

14
 It is believed that Homo erectus lived in caves, and that they even made their
own temporary shelters when no caves were available. Signs of fire in sites like
Zhoukoudian indicate that it was used for cooking and keeping warm. It has not yet
been proved that they knew how to control fire, and the unequivocal evidence of
hominid-controlled fire can only be traced to middle-Pleistocene.
Another important characteristic is the transition from scavenger to forager.
Because in several sites scientists have found all bones of animals, multiple
hypotheses have been suggested to explain this accumulation of bones and stones
in the same location. Some believe that hominids made caches of stones, and there
they were bringing animal carcass fragments. Others suggest that this accumulation
is explained by clear carnivore activity. In Zhoukoudian, China, are some of the
best-known evidences of Homo erectus hunting habits and fire usage. The “Peking
Man” fossils from this site were lost during the Second World War.

Continents compared [after Lewin 2005]

Fossils from about middle Pleistocene are exhibiting more advanced human
similarities, and have been termed by scientists as “archaic Homo sapiens” to
distinguish them from Homo erectus and from the anatomically modern Homo
sapiens. Homo heidelbergensis named after the city of Heidelberg, Germany, is

15
one of these ancestral species. Archaic human remains were identified in numerous
sites in Asia, Europe, and Africa, spanning between 500 000 and 28 000 years ago.
Recent discoveries from Atapuerca, Spain suggest that the dating should start
further in time, around 650 000 years ago. The individuals have significantly larger
brains (cranial capacity is between 1000 and 1400 cc), have taller bodies, but still
resemble apes because of robust supraorbital tori, large browridges, and presence
of the occipital torus.

Triple tomb of Sungir, Rusia

Later Pleistocene hominins have been informally named Neandertals, after

the Neander Valley in Germany where there were uncovered the first individuals.
At the time, climate latitudinal variance was significant, and it is an important
factor in understanding the evolution of this species. The oldest Neandertal sites
have been dated to approximately 150000 years ago, while the youngest ones are
around 30-40 thousand years ago. Most of the sites are in Western, Central and
Eastern Europe, but remains have also been discovered in Asia, Middle and Near
East, and even Siberia. Most Neandertal fossils were found in caves, which have
aided a lot the preservation of the fossils. Stable isotopes analyses indicate that
their diet contained substantial amounts of meat. They were hunters and gatherers,
probably in small groups, and at their sites a lot of animal bones were found,
including mammoths, bears, but also smaller animals. Some sites show indications
that the hunting happened for the entire year, while in other sites it became
apparent that the archaic humans were migrating along the herds.
Neandertal body remains present several adaptations to the cold, and
evidence suggests that they used animal skins to protect themselves from cold.
Distribution of sites indicates migrating populations, probably also to protect from
low temperatures.

16
 Stone tools are still characteristic of Acheulean assemblages, with a clear
refinement over time. A new manufacturing method was developed as well, which
relied on a better preparation of the code on which the handaxe was made. The first
such assemblages were found in Levallois, in France, and so the technique has
taken the name of the site. Middle Paleolithic includes the stone tool traditions of
archaic humans.
Neanderthals sites were the first ones to expose signs of deliberate burials of
dead individuals. Many discoveries of fully articulated skeletons were identified,
from the Spy skeletons found in Belgium at the end of the XIXth century, to the
small child in Teshik Tash (Uzbekistan), or to the Spanish Atapuerca. Some of
these discoveries present elements that suggest supernatural beliefs, and ritualistic
behaviour.
The term Upper Paleolithic is used to denote specific types of stone tools,
characterised by the development of blades and blade chores. These have first been
dated about 40000 years ago, and include bone tools, as well as hammer
techniques. Burins are small stone tools that were used to cut and mark bones, due
to their very sharp edge.

Epigravetian burial from Arene Candide “Giovane Principe” [after Borello 2004]

17
 Modern humans have appeared about 200000 years ago, and have distinctive
physical characteristics similar to what we look like today. The most used such
features are the rounded skulls, and a prominent chin. The oldest dated skull to
exhibit these characteristics was found in Omo, Ethiopia. Another well-known
discovery is the one from Cro-Magnon, in France, dated around 25000 years ago.
Homo sapiens individuals were exploiting a wide variety of food sources,
which sustained increase of population numbers. They were also using fish,
shellfish, and even tortoises as part of their diet. They lived in caves and used rock
shelters, and manufactured their own shelters of wood and animal bones when no
natural ones were available. Evidence of supporting structures were identified for
such man-made shelters in Mal’ta, Russia, and in Mezhirich, Ukraine. Mammoth
bones were used to provide the structure of the shelter.
Stone tool assemblages of early humans were not very different from the
Neanderthals, but have later developed to finer blades, and generally more refined
tools. Microliths are small flakes that were part of composite tools, attached to
wood or bone. An well-known example of such a microlith is the arrowhead, which
appeared about 10000 years ago. Objects and tools were now not only stone-made,
but also bone, shell, and ivory were preferred materials used to manufacture them.

18
 Cave art and rock carvings (petroglyphs) are dated from 35000 years ago,
and were discovered in Europe, Australia, and Africa. Large animals (deer, horses,
mammoth, bisons) and hunting paintings were executed correctly, with good
anatomical proportions.

Chronology of Cave Art [after Lorbranchet 1997]

Carnivores representations are rare, and so are birds, and plants. On the other
hand, carnivore teeth are very present in body ornaments. There hasn’t been found
a satisfactory explanation of why humans have produced these amazing art
expressions. Some have suggested that the paintings were used to communicate
images and ideas, others thought that the chances of killing animals were increased
as their images were captured on the cave walls. However, it is clear that Homo

19
sapiens was capable of symbolic behaviour, which took him further from the
survival-only approach of life.

Lascaux [after Ruspoli 1998]

Cave art paintings characteristics [after Ruspoli 1998]

20
 Cave art. Rhinos [after Lorbranchet 1997]

Art was present in many ways in everyday life of humans, in portable

objects such as beads, pendants, or ceramic sculptures. Some of the best-known
examples are the so-called Venus figurines found in various parts of Europe, which
represent females with exaggerated body parts. Some scientists believe them to be
fertility totems, but their true meaning has not been yet fully understood.

Venus of Villendorf

21
Figurative statuettes from Aurignacian Vogelherd, Germany [after Porr 2010]

22
 After Palaeolithic, the period between 10000 years ago and the appearance
of agriculture is called Mesolithic. On different continents the changes occurred at
different times, so alternative terms like Epipalaeolithic are used by scientists for
the southern Europe, where the changes were less dramatic than in the other
regions.
The faunal populations have changed pretty significantly, as reindeer moved
to today’s Scandinavian territory around 8000 BC, and in the forests one could now
find deer and pigs. Hunters did not need to follow their prey for long distances, the
forests now contained not just plenty of animal prey, but also plants that were
collected by the younger individuals. The food became much more diversified,
reliable, and available in large quantities. Along the coast, fish were a regular part
of the individuals diet, but also in the continent rivers fish (including migratory
ones like the salmon) were present and were included in the daily diet. It was also
preserved by smoking and consumed at later moments in time.
The tools and weapons were now changing as well, as a result of adaptation
to the new climate conditions. Microliths were used to create composite weapons,
and the materials used became more varied, ranging from stone to animal bones,
for example antler was used for the harpoons. The hunting methods became more
sophisticated as well, various traps of willow and hazel branches allowed for
catching much larger fish than before. In Northern Europe in this period canoes
started to be found, and scientists believe that they then quickly spread and were
used by all the continent. They allowed foragers to travel longer distances from
their homes, and to exploit resources which they could reach by travelling on
waterways, thus allowing them to maintain a notion of home and to benefit from
resources spread on larger surfaces. This contrasted greatly with the hunting habits
of the previous populations.
Ritual habits and even social characteristics were observed when researching
cemeteries at various sites, such as Vedbæk (Denmark), Skateholm (Sweden), or
Oleneostrovskii Mogilnik (Russia). The burial rituals were very detailed, and in a
multitude of cases usage of red ochre was noted. Part of grave goods there were
animal antlers and tools. In some cases, dogs were buried in a similar manner to
that of people, which is an important indicator of the dog contribution to the life of
the Mesolithic man.
A special area with Mesolithic sites is the Iron Gates gorges, on the border
between today’s Romania and Serbia. Lepenski Vir, Padina, Vlasac, Schela
Cladovei, are sites where sedentary hunter-gatherers used small huts as their
shelters, and buried their dead inside the settlement, between the houses. Because
of the closeness of the Danube River, their diet was very rich in fish. Some of the
burials present a specificity, the body was placed in the pit parallel to the river, and
the head was oriented downstream. Another distinctive feature of the settlements in
the Iron Gates is local limestone sculptures with heads similar to humans.

23
 Hunting, harvesting and sedentism
On of the best-preserved and most remarkable site from early
Epipalaeolithic site is Ohalo II, in Israel. Many characteristics of the late
Epipalaeolithic of the southern Levant are found from the early beginning of the
period. wild species of emmer wheat were identified at the site, and scientists have
inferred that people were present in the site for at least a few months each year. By
corroborating the floral fauna information with the faunal one, it became clear that
the site was used for the entire duration of a year. A lot of faunal species were
identified at the site: birds, large animals, fox, fish, tortoise, rabbit.
The burials in neolithic were usually inside the settlement, under the
houses, or among the houses. In Jordan, at ‘Ain Ghazal, there were also found
bodies thrown in trash pits; the Jordan discoveries were dated to 7000-6500 BC. In
Anatolia, at Catal Höyük, there were more burials than houses identified, but only
about half of the population was buried under the houses. There hasn’t been found
an explanation of these different approaches, as no indication was so far identified
beyond the speculative level.

Fertile Crescent [after Lichter 2007]

From 1994, excavations at Göbekli Tepe (South Turkey, close to the Syrian border)
have added more insight in the eurasian neolithic. The site is situated at the top of a
mountain ridge, with panoramic view of the surroundings, and has a diameter of a
few hundred meters. On an area of nine hectares, over the course of millennia a
high number of layers has accumulated. Twenty round structures with diameters of
10-20 meters were identified, only a few of them having actually been excavated.

24
There are no residential buildings, only religious ones, decorated with T-shaped
monolithic pillars. In the center of each circle there is a pair of such monoliths.
Both animal and human bones have been discovered, and their characteristics are
similar: they were broken into small pieces and present evident cut marks. There
are various representations on the T-shaped pillars, including those of snakes, bulls,
boars, spiders, or foxes. It has been speculated that the T-shape is the first known
monumental depiction of gods.

Sites of Fertile Crescent [after Watkins 2010]

Cluster of human skulls with the facial features modelled in clay and coloured
(Tell Aswad, Syria, eighth-millennium BC) [after Watkins 2010]

25
 The beginning of the Neolithic is marked by the transition to agricultural
societies. This has spread rapidly from the Near East towards Europe between 8500
and 4000 BC. It is believed that the main domestication of the plants and animal
species happened in SW Asia, before reaching the European continent.
The shift from a nomadic hunter-gatherer life to a sedentary agricultural one
has led to an increase in the populations sizes. The growth might have been due to
an increase in fertility, a decrease in mortality, or both of them. Traditionally, the
preferred explanation is that of the fertility increase.

Origins of domestication and agriculture [after Relethford 2003]

The intensive mixed farming model

Extensive cultivation refers to exploitation of wide areas and less frequent
cropping, while the intensive cultivation sometimes referred to as “garden
agriculture”, which indicates a more reduced scale of this activity, and probably
more frequent cropping.
The intensive model assumes higher labour inputs, and its smaller scale
makes it fit for the early farmers populations size. By carefully tilling, watering, or
manuring the crops, better results were obtained this way. Manuring required the
farmers to also have small herds around, so that their excrements were used as

26
fertilizers to increase the crop results. Animals milk and wool or hair is also used,
but the main reason for their domestication is to use their meat. Additionally, they
might have been used as traction animals, to lower the amount of human labour.
This model is one that has proven successful in supplying the Neolithic populations
with a sustainable food provision, without them needing to travel long distances.

Natufian, PPNA and PPNB [after Belwood 2005]

Timefrimes for Paleolithic and PPNA-B [Watkins 2010]

27
 a

Stone bowls (a-b) from Körtik Tepe (PPNA) [after Lichter 2007]

28
Jerf el Ahmar, an early aceramic Neolithic settlement in north Syria [Watkins 2010]

Ritual space. Göbekli Tepe, near Urfa, south-east Turkey (PPNA) [Watkins 2010]

29
 Storage of grain. Tel Tsaf (Israel) [after Garfinkel et al. 2009]

Storage of grain-detail. Tel Tsaf (Israel) [after Garfinkel et al. 2009]

30
Map of South and S-E Europe in Prehistory [after Bogucki, Crabtree 2004]

31
Central and Southeastern Europe between 8000-1000 BC [after Bogucki, Crabtree 2004]

32
North and Norhwestern Europe between 8000-1000 BC [after Bogucki, Crabtree 2004]

33
 Crop and animal husbandry in Neolithic Europe
Around 6500 BC in Greece there appeared the first European farmers,
coming from the Near East. Their shelters were built of mud bricks or adobe. They
were raising sheep and goats, and cultivated emmer wheat, einkorn wheat, two-row
barley, peas, rye, flax. Evidence indicates that they were exploiting sheep because
of their easy adaptation to the environment, and that the desired outcome was
mainly their meat, and not the milk. The remains in the Franchthi Cave
(Peloponnese, Greece) indicate the changes in the agricultural habits over time.

Regions of agricultural origin, according to the archaeological record

[after Bellwood, Oxenham 2008]

34
 Most of the LBK sites are found on fertile, fine-grained land named “loess”,
which allowed exploitation for longer periods of time without too much decrease in
fertility. By analyzing evidence found in the LBK sites (around 5500 BC) the
pattern of intensive, small-scale agriculture seems to repeat. Furthermore, there is
little to no evidence that the domesticated cattle were bred with their wild
correspondents.

Reconstruction of Paleolithic shelter [after Grant et al. 2008]

Reconstruction of Paleolithic shelter [after Grant et al. 2008]

35
Site plan with LBK houses [after Bogucki, Crabtree 2004]

36
 The earliest Neolithic culture in Europe [after Bellwood 2005]

A Linienbandkeramik (LBK) Settlement [after Grant et al. 2008]

37
 Neolithic populations have built large-scale constructions (sometimes termed
“enclosures”) that allowed them to defend against human enemies in larger
numbers than their own. This need made fortifications a common finding
throughout Europe. The typical features of such constructions were curtains,
ditches, gates, and bastions. Curtain is a term used to refer to wooden palisades, or
stone or earth-made walls that did not allow access to the most vulnerable routes.
The first fortifications were identified in Early Neolithic sites like Dimini
(Greece), Sesklo (Greece), and Danilo (Croatia). In central-western Europe
fortifications have been associated to the LBK (Linearbandkeramik) culture
farmers which settled in these areas. There are almost 100 fortifications attributed
to the LBK farmers, and a large majority of them were associated to the later
phases of the culture. Their usage pattern seems to be for short-term threats. Some
of the LBK settlements, however, appear to have fortifications with multiple-
phased usage patterns. Schletz-Asparn (Austria), Eisleben, and Köln-Lindenthal
(Germany) are some examples. One, sometimes two ditches were surrounding a
palisade, restricted entrance routes, and sometimes even towers were part of the
fortification disposition. Due to the complex elements and arrangement, some
scientists have suggested the idea that the LBK farmers did not invent these
themselves, but have rather inherited the knowledge of how such defensive works
should have been carried out.

Graphic reconstruction of the Neolithic Sarup enclosure, Denmark

[after Bogucki, Crabtree 2004]

38
 Distribution of enclosed and fortified Neolithic and Bronze Age sites in Europe
[after Parkinson, Duffy 2007]

Metals, origins and chronologies

In the Neolithic, metal usage started with the usage of copper for beads,
pendants and pigments. This was happening in an early stage of the agricultural
transition and evidence to support it were found at Shanidar Cave and Zawi Chemi
in north-eastern Iraq, Hallan Cemi in eastern Turkey and Rosh Horesha in Israel.
Thousands of years later there were the first occurrences of processed metal in
Cayönü Tepesi (Turkey), with evidences of annealing around 8000 BC, which is
the process of applying of heat and determines changes in microstructure of the
metal, causing its properties to change.
Other metals started to be used, lead and iron, and it is believed that the
sources was either meteoritic, or they were obtained as a result of a smelting
process. Copper metals emerged during the 8th millenium outside the eastern
Turkey-northern Iraq initial zone. In Tell Ramad (Syria), Ali Kosh (Iran), Megrarh
(Pakistan) there were found usage patterns of these metals.

39
 In Catal Höyük (Turkey) there were identified crucibles, used to melt
copper, but these devices presence and usage is a subject of great debate among
scientists.
Documented smelting sites appear only a little later, in the beginning of the
5th millenium BC, Tal-i Iblis (Iran) and Belovode (Serbia). It is believed that
copper smelting was discovered in one place (most probably Anatolia)and then the
process quickly spread to Asia and Europe, as an explanation for its sudden
appearance in multiple geographic areas, such as Brixlegg (Austria) or southern
Levant. Anatolia is favoured for explaining this, most probably due to the fact that
copper was already present in the area and was exploited for a long period of time.

The exploitation of copper ores and naturally occurring copper metal (a); the spread of
copper smelting technology (b) [after Roberts et al. 2009]

40
 Weapons used by the Early Neolithic individuals were very limited, the most
common being the bow and arrows, together with spears, axes and adzes. Evidence
has been found to support the idea that they were used as weapons. The arrowheads
and spearpoints had a more triangular shape, that made them difficult to reuse once
they hit their target.

b
Silex artifacts (a), and bone figurines (b) belonging to Eneolithic Gumelniţa culture,
Pietrele, Romania [after Hansen 2013]

41
 There is very little evidence that those populations were hunting, so it is
assumed that most of their weapons were used for warfare with rival nearby
populations. Marks found on human bones, together with the perforated skulls
identified in such sites, tend to support this hypothesis. There are plenty of stone
adzes found in the LBK sites, and the researchers suggest that they were used only
for working with wood. Also, axes are frequently identified as part of grave goods
in burials of adult males.

Precucuteni III Figurines sitting on chairs from Isaiia [after Ursulescu, Tencariu 2006]

42
Set of twelve figurines, Cucuteni A3, Dumeşti, 4200–4050 BC [after Bailey 2010]

Neolithic “sickle god” figurine from the Szegvár-Tüzköves, Tisza culture

43
Anthropomorphic figurine from Orăştie (Turdaş culture) [after Hansen 2007]

Seated goddess on a throne flanked by two lionesses. Çatalhöyük

44
Neolithic Stamp Seals [after Lichter 2005]

45
Prehistoric exploitation of animals [after Grant et al. 2008]

46
 Mortuary practices
As an important part of funerary practices, once the man became aware of
death, the elements of funeral rit and ritual have known various forms, depending
on the period and geographic area. When we refer to the sum of the funeral
practices, generally for prehistory and especially for the Neolithic and Neolithic
period, we find pretty strict rules and a certain rigidity, which denotes a certain
conservative behavior of the people of that time. Nevertheless, the benefits of the
funerary archaeology to the reconstitution of the material and spiritual culture of
the Neolithic communities are evident. Gradually it has been found that the study
of the funeral discoveries offers, most of the time, more valuable and representative
information that the study of the remains of human habitation. As a consequence,
the past decades have witnessed a greater importance of the funeral archaeology.
Next to the anthropological data and the archaeological context, the funeral
inventory reflects, in most researchers' opinion, mainly the status of the deceased
inside the community.

The pattern of Neolithic diffusion of Spondylus artifacts from the

Aegean and Adriatic seas to the English Channel [after Séfériadès 2010]

47
 Spondylus bracelets from Hamangia necropolis, Cernavodă culture (5000–4600 BC),
Romania [after Séfériadès 2010]

Spondylus necklace from Rixheim, Haut-Rhin, France [after Borrelli, Micheli 2004]

Any steps taken into studying, classifying and interpreting burials -starting
from the funerary rite and ritual- are subject to the researcher's subjectivism.
Archaeological research has shown that inhumation was the dominant rite in
neolithic communities' mortuary practices. The inhumation rite has been associated

48
with the fertility and fecundity cult, which is specific to the agricultural societies of
that time.
Thus, inhumation is considered the usual funerary practice of the period,
with the body either in a crouched position or lying on its back, in a necropolis or
part of a settlement. By usual we mean - in the current stage of research - the
normal practice, the most widespread one and the most evidenced by
archaeological research.

LBK Man’s grave 28, from Aiterhöfen-Ödmühle, Germany, with Spondylus beads, bracelet
shell, stone tools, bone and flint artefacts [After Nieszery 1995]

49
 Ötzi the Iceman

Cremation
In the past decades, excavations in Europe have provided irrefutable
evidence of cremation rite practices, even from the Mesolithic. Cremation may
have been chosen because it was a hygienic method of taking care of the dead, or
maybe because the urns could have been placed within more convenient
perimeters, or even to handle space issues. In any case, the use of fire as a
purifying element is a pattern that often comes across in mortuary practices.
Mesolithic cremations from Iron Gates Vlasac (Serbia) are an important part
of secondary mortuary rites.
Many discoveries about cremation practices have been found in the territory
of present-day France. The oldest incineration traces found have been dated to the
mesolithic, at Chaussée-Tirancourt. Another discovery, in the early
neolithic Neuvy-en-Dunois (Eure-et-Loir) site, presents a collective burial, with the
calcined human bone remains of 22-24 individuals, out of which 15 were adults.
Other cremated collective burials from the late neolithic are known at Reichstett-
Mundolsheim, Vaise, Gardon, Peyrolebade.
In Italy, the early Neolithic (Impresso culture) has indications of cremation at
Grotta Continenza, while for the SMP culture (Square Mouthed Pottery) there is a
cremation burial of a woman in Ponte Ghiara.

50
 The oldest cremation evidence in Slovakia is traced to graves of Lužianky
group.
In Hungary, at Aszód (Lengyel culture) mostly inhumation graves were
investigated, but also cremation graves. Two other finds are from Öcsöd-
Kovácshalom (Tisza culture). 72 burials of the 436 graves (16.5% of them) from
the copper age cemetery at Budakalász were cremation burials (scattered cremation
and inurned graves).
An early Neolithic incineration necropolis has been researched at Soufli
Magoula, in Greece. An adult and an adolescent grave were found covered by a
layer of ash in a burial mound in the middle Neolithic site of Chaeroneia. The
evidence indicates that the area was used as a crematorium. For the late
neolithic, we know of the discoveries in Platia Magoula Zarkou (where inurned
graves have been found) and in the Alepotrypa-Diros cave.
The existence of Neolithic incineration practices in the present-day territory
of Romania was viewed with reluctance by some Romanian archaeologists,
supported by a lack of anthropological analyses for some of the discoveries.
The oldest incineration grave is M7 from Gura Baciului (Starčevo-Criş
culture). Until now, it is the only certain discovery for the Carpathian-Danubian
early and middle Neolithic.
The late Neolithic of the Romanian north-western area also presents some
discoveries that show cremation practices. In the past decades, cremation graves
were found at Tăşad, Suplacu de Barcău-Corău I (Bihor County), Zalău-Uroikert,
Zalău-Dealul Lupului and Porţ-Corău (Sălaj County).

Grave goods. “The Thinker” from Cernavodă and female figurine, Hamangia culture
[after Bailey 2010]

51
 Mass graves and cannibalism
Acts of group violence have been proven at Talheim (Germany) and Asparn-
Schletz (Austria), belonging to Linearbandkeramik culture (LBK) and indicate the
execution of a whole community, regardless of sex or age, through surprise attacks,
which created panic and a lack of reaction from the population onto which the
violent acts were directed, probably as a result of the intent to occupy new
territories.
The funerary discovery from Herxheim (Germany) belonging also to LBK
culture has had different interpretations in the last decade: slaughter and war, ritual
centre, or cannibalism.
The structures excavated from Herxheim indicate a village inhabited between
5300 and 4950 BC, Flomborn phase of the Linearbandkeramik culture. After the
last excavations it has been observed that the site is a trapezoid enclosure of 5ha
measuring some 250×230m. What initially was believed to be ditches has proven
to be oblong pits. Investigation of the skeletal remains evidenced discovery of
more than 400 calottes, which were severed following identical procedures in a
peri-mortal stage, even in those cases where separations were incomplete. The
typical treatment of the Herxheim dead is best described by the peri-mortem cut
marks and the post-mortem intentional shaping of the skullcap.
According to Orschiedt and Haidle, the absence of any signs of violent
killing, the fact that no lethal trauma could be identified, as well as the evidence of
systematic manipulation of the human remains, conclude that the function of the
Herxheim enclosure can be seen as as a central place for ritual purpose and a
necropolis. The total numbers of individuals deposited in the Herxheim elongated
pits has been approximated to about 450, coming from a time span of a maximum
of 50 years, about two generations.
The last article which discusses this subject analyzes the context for the
central place of Herxheim, presenting strong evidence that cannibalism played an
important part in this site dedicated to ritual activities. The authors assume that
more than 1000 individuals are in fact involved, by taking into account that on
almost half the enclosure there has already identified about 500 human remains.
Another aspect considered is the high quality of the pottery found in the pits, which
is coming from various ceramic traditions spread over an area of 300 square kms
around the main site.
The conjoining sets of human remains and ceramics from deposit 9 have
been shown to be deposited together, in a single event, unlike the pottery and bones
of the southern end, which are to be considered separately as they are barely
mutilated and still connected partially. There are a lot of human-induced
modifications that indicate strong similarities to typical butchery techniques:
destruction of both the posterior part of the ribs and of the transverse processes on
thoracic vertebrae, skinning technique applied to the skulls, breaking of the skulls,
marks on the lingual surface of the mandible indicating the tongue was cut out.
Moreover, the long bones of the limbs were defleshed and had the marrow cavity

52
exposed. All these lead to the conclusion that the individuals found in deposit 9
have been cannibalised.
Previous cannibalism proofs have been evidenced in relation to the human
remains from Fontbrégoua, where several pits containing human and animal
remains dated around 5000 BC have been discovered. Both the humans and the
animals have been first dismembered, the bones defleshed and broken, using the
same techniques. The human skulls, as opposed to the animal ones, present clear
marks caused by the skinning process applied to them. Evidences of exposure of
the marrow cavity for eating are present in both human and animal remains.

Human remains from Alba Iulia-Lumea Nouă (Romania).

Case study
The Lumea Nouă settlement is part of a “chain” of Neolithic and Eneolithic
sites on the middle Mureş valley, one of the most important sites from
Transylvania. Research from past years has shown that the most intense habitation
belongs to Foeni group, to whom we attribute a distinct funerary complex that has
been the focus of recent excavations.
Excavations in 2003 revealed a pit (G1/2003) 1.50-1.70 m in diameter,
marked by stones placed around its exterior. Inside it a total of 23 human skulls
were found, together with a large number of bone remains, randomly distributed in
the upper levels, with many bones found in a slanting position.

Alba Iulia-Lumea Nouă human remains (2005)

Two years later, in trench III/2005 (square B) an agglomeration of

disarticulated human bones was found, some of which have traces of burning. The
skulls were positioned mainly inside the pit, while the long bones were found
towards the upper part of the pit and at ground level, it. Similar to the G1/2003
discovery, most of the bones were found in a slanting position, indicating that they
were most probably thrown into the pit without much care. Evidence for an intense
fire takes the form of a thick layer of ashes and brick-red coloured traces of fire
53
over the sides and down to the bottom of the pit. Approximately 84-85 human
skulls were discovered in the entire perimeter with other human bone fragments.
The processing of the archaeological material associated with the funerary
discovery allowed for a cultural classification under the Foeni group. The
chronological timeframe given by the AMS dating of the bone material taken from
skeletal remains spans between 4600-4450 calBC.
Of particular interest is the discovery during the excavations of 2003 and
2005 of around 100 disarticulated individuals, mostly represented by cranial
remains consisting of skull caps, some presenting round-shaped bottomed fractures
and abrasion areas. There are no facial bones associated with any of these skull
caps. Additionally, some of the mandibles have regular, oblique cut marks on the
ascending ramus. Most probably, these operations have taken place postmortem.
The fact that the skull caps and mandibles are intentionally detached is one aspect
of the unusual mortuary practices of this settlement.

Alba Iulia-Lumea Nouă human remains (2005)

Osteological analyses have determined the presence of children, male, and

female adults. It is suggested that the human remains were not interred during an
epidemic; moreover, collective death as a result of violence is unlikely since there
are no traces of interpersonal violence such as wounds inflicted by arrows or lithic
weapons. In addition, no arrow tips or axes have been found in connection with
human bone material.

54
 References

Bailey, D. W. (2010): The Figurines of Old Europe, in D. W., Chi, J.

Anthony [Eds.], The Lost World of Old Europe. The Danube Valley, 5000-3500 BC,
Princeton University Press, p. 113-127.
Bailey, D. W. (2000): Balkan Prehistory, London and New York.
Bellwood, P. (2005): First Farmers. The Origins of Agriculturals Societies,
Blackwell Publishing, Oxford.
Bellwood, P., Oxenham, M. (2008): The Expansions of Farming Societies
and the Role of the Neolithic Demographic Transition, in J. P. Bocquet-Appel, O.
Bar-Yosef, The Neolithic Demographic Transition and its Consequences, Springer,
p. 13-34.
Bogaard, A. (2004): Neolithic Farming in Central Europe: An
Archaeobotanical Study of Crop Husbandry Practices, Routledge, London.
Bogaard, A. (2007): ‘Garden agriculture’ and the nature of early farming in
Europe and the Near East, in World Archaeology, 37(2), p. 177-196.
Boghian, D. (2003): Începuturile istoriei omenirii, Ed. Bucovina Istorică,
Suceava.
Bogucki, P., Crabtree, P. J. [Eds] (2004): Ancient Europe 8000 B.C.–A.D.
1000: Encyclopedia of the Barbarian World, vol. I-II, Thomson Gale.
Borrello, M. A. (2004): Le conchiglie nella preistoria e nella protostoria, in
Preistoria Alpina, 40, suppl. 1, p. 19-42.
Borrello, M. A., Micheli, R. (2004): Spondylus gaederopus, gioiello
dell’Europa preistorica, Preistoria Alpina, 40, suppl. 1, p. 71-82.
Bradley, R. (2005): Ritual and Domestic Life in Prehistoric Europe,
Routledge Publishing, London.
Chapman, J. (2000): Fragmentation in archaeology, Routledge, London and
New York.
Chapman, J. (2008): Meet the ancestors: settlement histories in the
Neolithic, in D. W. Bailey, A. Whittle, D. Hofmann (Eds.), Living Well Together?
Settlement and Materiality in the Neolithic of South-East and Central Europe,
Oxbow Books, Oxford, p. 68-80.
Chapman, J., Gaydarska, B., Hardy, K. (2006): Does enclosure make a
difference? A view from the Balkans, in A. Harding, S. Sievers, N. Venclová
[Eds.], Enclosing the Past: inside and outside in prehistory, Sheffield
Archaeological Monographs 15, p. 20-43.
Chirica, V., Boghian, D. (2003): Arheologia preistorică a lumii. Paleolitic-
mezolitic, Ed. Helios, Iaşi.
Cârciumaru, M. (2006): Paleoliticul, epipaleoliticul şi mezoliticul lumii, Ed.
Cetatea de Scaun, Târgovişte.
Cârciumaru, M., Mărgărit, M. (2002): Arta mobilieră şi parietală
paleolitică, Ed. Cetatea de Scaun, Târgovişte.
Collis. J. (2003): The European Iron Age, Routledge, London and New York.

55
 Demoule, J. P. (2009): La révolution néolithique dans le monde, CNRS
Éditions, Paris.
Dimitrijević, V. (2008): Lepenski Vir animal bones: what was left in the
houses, in C. Bonsall, V. Boroneanţ, I. Radovanović (Eds.), The Iron Gates in
Prehistory. New perspectives, BAR (IS), 1893, p. 117-130.
Douglas-Price, T., Feinman, G. M. (2010): Images of the Past, 6th Edition,
McGraw Hill, Boston.
Fuller, D., Willcox, G., Allaby, R. G. (2011): Cultivation and domestication
had multiple origins: arguments against the core area hypothesis for the origins of
agriculture in the Near East, in World Archaeology, 43(4), p. 628-52.
Garfinkel, Y., Ben-Shlomo, D., Kuperman, T. (2009): Large-scale storage of
grain surplus in the sixth millennium BC: the silos of Tel Tsaf, in Antiquity, 83, p.
309–325.
Gimbutas, M. (1989): Cultură şi civilizaţie, Ed. Meridiane, Bucureşti.
Gimbutas, M. (1991): The Civilization of the Goddess, Harper, San
Francisco.
Gligor, M (2009): Aşezarea neolitică şi eneolitică de la Alba Iulia-Lumea
Nouă în lumina noilor cercetări, Ed. Mega, Cluj-Napoca.
Gligor, M. (2010): Funerary discoveries in neolithic settlement from Alba
Iulia-Lumea Nouă (Romania). Multiple burial or ritual centre?. Transylvanian
Review, XIX, suppl. no. 5:1, p. 233-250.
Gligor, M., Roşu, M., Panaitescu, V. (2012): Bioarchaeological Inferences
from Neolithic Human Remains at Alba Iulia-Lumea Nouă (Romania), în R.
Kogălniceanu, R. Curcă, M. Gligor, S. Straton (Eds), „Homines, Funera, Astra”.
Proceedings of the International Symposium on Funerary Anthropology. 5-8 june
2011, ‘1 Decembrie 1918’ University (Alba Iulia, Romania), Oxford, Archaeopress,
BAR International Series 2410, p. 57-70.
Gligor, M., Băcueţ-Crişan, S. (2012): (Un)Usual Neolithic and Eneolithic
Mortuary Practices in Transylvania (Romania), in Ch. Gastgeber, Al. Simon (Eds),
Eastern and Central European Studies Series (IV), Peter Lang Publisher, Wien (in
press).B
Golitko, M., Keeley, L. H. (2007): Beating ploughshares back into
swords: warfare in the Linearbandkeramik, in Antiquity, 81, p. 332–342.
Grant, J., Gorin, S., Fleming, N. (2008): The Archaeology. Coursebook,
Third Edition, Routledge, London and New York.
Gräslund, B. (2005): Early Humans and their World, Routledge, London and
New York.
Guilaine, J., Zammit, J. (2005): The Origins of War. Violence in Prehistory,
Blackwell Publishing.
Guinea, M. A. G. (1979): Altamira and other Cantabrian caves, Silex.
Hansen, S. (2007): Bilder vom Menschen der Steinzeit. Untersuchungen zur
anthropomorphen Plastik der Jungsteinzeit und Kupferzeit in Südosteuropa, Teil I-II,
Verlag Philipp von Zabern, Mainz.

56
 Hansen, S. (2013): Figurinen aus Stein und Bein in der südosteuropäischen
Kupferzeit, in A. Anders, G. Kulcsár (Eds.), Moments in Time. Papers Presented to
Pál Raczky on His 60th Birthday, Budapest, L’Harmattan, p. 539-556.
Harding, A. F. (2000): European Societies in the Bronze Age, Cambridge.
Hodder, I. (1990): The domestication of Europe. Structure and contingency
in Neolithic societies, Blackwell, Oxford.
Hoffecker J. F. (2009): The spread of modern humans in Europe, in
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 106(38), p. 16040–
16045.
Katzenberg, M.A., Saunders, S.R. (2008): Biological Anthropology of the
Human Skeleton, Second Edition, New Jersey, Wiley-Liss.
Kristiansen, K. (1998): Europe before history, Cambridge.
Leakey, R. (1995): Originea omului, Bucureşti.
Leroi-Gourhan, A. (1983): Gestul şi cuvântul, Vol. I-II, Ed. Meridiane,
Bucureşti.
Lewin, R. (2005): Human evolution: an illustrated introduction, Fifth
edition, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford.
Lichter, C. (2001): Untersuchungen zu den Bestattungssitten des
Südosteuropäischen Neolithikums und Chalkolithikums, Heidelberg.
Lichter, C. (2005): Western Anatolia in the Late Neolithic and Early
Chalcolithic: the actual state of research, in C. Lichter (Ed.), How did farming
reach Europe?, BYZAS 2, p. 59–74.
Lichter, Cl. [Ed.] (2007): Vor 12.000 Jahren in Anatolien. Die ältesten
Monumente der Menschheit, Karlsruhe.
Lorblanchet, M. (1997): Höhlenmalerei, Jan Thorbecke Verlag, Sigmaringen.
Masset C. (1993): Les dolmens. Sociétés néolitiques et pratiques funéraires,
Errance, Paris.
Nieszery, N. (1995): Linearbandkeramische Gräberfelder in Bayer,
Internationale Archeologie, 16, Espelkamp, Verlag Marie Leidorf.
Rightmire, G. P. (2009): Middle and later Pleistocene hominins in Africa
and Southwest Asia, in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the
USA, 106(38), p. 16046–16050.
Roberts, B. W., Thornton, C. P., Pigott, V. C. (2009): Development of
metallurgy in Eurasia, in Antiquity, 83, p. 1012-1022.
Rosenstock, E. (2006): Early Neolithic tell settlements of South-East Europe
in their natural setting: A study in distribution and architecture, in I. Gatsov, H.
Schwarzberg [Eds.], Aegean–Marmara–Black Sea: the present state of research on
the early Neolithic, Beier & Beran, Langenweissbach.
Parkinson, W. A., Duffy P. R. (2007): Fortifications and Enclosures in
European Prehistory: A Cross-Cultural Perspective, in Journal of Archaeological
Research, 15, p. 97–141.
Pernicka, E., Begemann, F., Schmitt-Strecker, S., Todorova, H., Kuleff, I.
(1997): Prehistoric copper in Bulgaria, in Eurasia Antiqua, 3, p. 41–180.

57
 Porr, M. (2010): Palaeolithic Art as Cultural Memory: a Case Study of the
Aurignacian Art of Southwest Germany, in Cambridge Archaeological Journal,
20(1), p. 87–108.
Price, N. [Ed.] (2001): The Archaeology of Shamanism, Routledge, London
and New York.
Radovanović, I (2000): Houses and burials at Lepenski Vir, in
European Journal of Archaeology, 3(3), p. 330-349.
Relethford, J H. (2003): Human Species. An Introduction to Biological
Anthropology, The McGraw−Hill Companies.
Roberts, B. W., Thornton, Ch. P., Pigott V. C. (2009): Development of
metallurgy in Eurasia, in Antiquity, 83, p. 1012-1022.
Ruspoli, M. (1998): Höhlenmalerei von Lascaux, Augsburg.
Sainz, C. G., Toca, R. C., Fukazava, T. [Eds.] (2003): The Art of Paleolithic
Hunters in the North of Spain, University of Cantabria.
Scarre, Ch. [Ed.] (2005): World Prehistory and the Development of Human
Societies, Thames & Hudson.
Schmidt, K. (2010): Göbekli Tepe – the Stone Age Sanctuaries. New results
of ongoing excavations with a special focus on sculptures and high reliefs, in
Documenta Praehistorica, XXXVII, p. 239-256.
Séfériadès, M. (2010): Spondylus and Long-Distance Trade in Prehistoric
Europe, in D. W. Anthony, J. Chi [Eds.], The Lost World of Old Europe. The
Danube Valley, 5000-3500 BC, Princeton University Press, p. 179-189.
Stanford, C., Allen, J. S., Anton, S. C. (2013): Biological anthropology: the
natural history of humankind, 3rd Edition, Pearson.
Thomas, J. (2002): Understanding the Neolithic, Routledge, London and
New York.
Tilley, C. (1996): An Ethnography of the Neolithic. Early prehistoric
societies in southern Scandinavia, Cambridge University Press.
Ursulescu, N., Tencariu, F. A. (2006): Religie şi magie la est de Carpaţi.
Tezaurul cu obiecte de cult de la Isaiia, Editura Demiurg, Iaşi.
Watkins, T. (2010): New light on Neolithic revolution in south-west Asia, in
Antiquity, 84(325), p. 621–634.
Wenke, R. J. (1999): Patterns in Prehistory: Humankinds First Three Million
Years, 4th Edition, Oxford University Press.
Whittle, A. (1996): Europe in the Neolithic: The Creation of New Worlds,
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Whittle, A. (2003): The archaeology of people. Dimensions of neolithic life,
Routledge Publishing, London and New York.
Willcox, G., Stordeur, D. (2012): Large-scale cereal processing before
domestication during the tenth millennium calBC in northern Syria, in Antiquity,
86, p. 99–114.

58