FORMATION, TAPHONOMY AND DATING OF THE NEOLITHIC LAYER OF THE CHOKH SETTLEMENT: DATA REVISION

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32653/CH173638-657

Keywords:

Chokh settlement, cultural layer C, microstratigraphy, taphonomy

Abstract

 To date, sixty years have passed since the excavations of V. G. Kotovich at the Chokh settlement and almost forty years after the fieldwork was carried out there by the author. Over these decades, much has changed in the approaches to excavations and to the interpretation of materials obtained from layers with heterogeneous archaeological stratigraphy and complex lithological structure. A new understanding of the Chokh materials leads to the need to revise some of our ideas about the formation, taphonomy and relative chronology of finds and objects of the Neolithic layer of this site. With regard to the Chokh settlement, such an analysis leads to the need to consider the layer C (Neolithic) as a multi-component cultural and geological formation consisting of three or four consecutive microstratigraphic divisions. Based on this, an attempt is made in this paper to correct the ideas concerning the composition of archaeological material belonging specifically to the Neolithic layer. Special attention is paid to the highlighting of the homogeneous part that is related with the “floor” of the cultural layer C, or, in other words, the lowest, initial horizon (layer C, “bottom” or layer C, horizon 3), of which the formation of the Neolithic layer began. The breakdown of the cultural layer C into different living surfaces is carried out by linking the latter to the levels of occurrence of hearths and fire pits. This makes it possible, in particular, to isolate a homogeneous part of the material that is associated with the “floor” of the layer under consideration (layer C, “bottom” or layer C, horizon 3). In this paper, we have tried to isolate from the totality of the archaeological material of Layer C, its various parts, which can be attributed to the Neolithic layer with varying degrees of confidence.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

  • Hizri Amirhanovic Amirhanov, The Institute of Archeology Russian Academy of Sciences
    Bio Statement: : Doctor of History, Professor (Stone Age Archaeology), Full Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Corresponding Member of the German Archaeological Institute, Head of Department (Stone Age Archaeology) of the IA RAS, Deputy Academician-Secretary of the Department of History and Philology of the Russian Academy of Sciences Researcher focus: prehistoric archeology and ancient history of the Caucasus, Southwest Asia, Central and Eastern Europe; problems of cultural genesis and cultural geography of primitive; the initial resettlement of mankind; becoming productive economy; ethnoarcheology; archeolinguistics.

References

Amirkhanov HA. Chokh settlement. Man and his culture in the Mesolithic and Neolithic of the Mountainous Dagestan [Chokhskoye poselenie. Chelovek i yego kul’tura v mezolite i neolite Gornogo Dagestana]. Moscow, Nauka, 1987. (In Russ).

Kotovich VG. The Stone Age of Dagestan [Kamenniy vek Dagestana]. Makhachkala, 1967. (In Russ).

Formozov AA. Review of research on Mesolithic sites in the Caucasus [Obzor issledovaniy mezoliticheskikh stoyanok na Kavkaze]. Soviet archeology. 1963, 4:183-187. (In Russ).

Bader NO. Variants of the culture of the Caucasus at the end of Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic [Varianty kul’tury Kavkaza kontsa verkhnego paleolita i mezolita]. Soviet archeology. 1965, 4:3-16. (In Russ).

Bader NO., Tsereteli LD. Mesolithic of the Caucasus [Mezolit Kavkaza] Archeology of the USSR. Mesolithic of the USSR. Moscow, 1989:93-105. (In Russ).

Nebieridze LD. Neolithic of the Western Transcaucasia [Neolit Zapadnogo Zakavkazya]. Tbilisi, 1972. (In Russ).

Gadzhiev MG. Early agriculture of the North-Eastern Caucasus: the Eneolithic and Early Bronze Age [Rannezemledel’cheskaya kul’tura Severo-Vostochnogo Kavkaza: epokha eneolita i ranney bronzy]. Moscow: Nauka, 1991. (In Russ).

Abramova GA. Palynological analysis of the Quaternary marine terraced complex of the Western Caspian region [Palinologicheskiy analiz chetvertichnogo morskogo terrasovogo kompleksa Zapadnogo Prikaspiya] Pollen analysis in geomorphological studies [Sporovo-pyl’tsevoy analiz pri geomorfologicheskikh issledovaniyakh]. Moscow, 1981: 96-106. (In Russ).

Maev EG. The Phases of the Mangyshlak regression of the Caspian Sea [Fazy mangyshlakskogo regressa Kaspiyskogo morya] Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 5, Geografiya. 2009,1:15-20. (In Russ).

Gadzhiev MG. New data on the southern connections of Dagestan in the IV-III thousand years. BC [Novyye dannyye o yuzhnykh svyazyakh Dagestana v IV-III tys.l. do n.e.] KSIA. 1966, 108:55-61. (In Russ).

Chataigner Christine, Badalyan Ruben, Arimura Makoto. The Neolithic of the Caucasus. Oxford University Press, 2018:1-34.

Published

2021-10-19

Issue

Section

Archeology

How to Cite

1.
Amirhanov HA. FORMATION, TAPHONOMY AND DATING OF THE NEOLITHIC LAYER OF THE CHOKH SETTLEMENT: DATA REVISION. ИАЭК. 2021;17(3):638-657. doi:10.32653/CH173638-657