Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T21:48:41.623Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Frog in the Pond: Gökçeada (Imbros), an Aegean Stepping-stone in the Chalcolithic use of Spondylus Shell

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 December 2014

Emma Baysal  and
Burçin Erdoğu
Emma Baysal
Affiliation:
Arkeoloji Bölümü, Prehistorya Ana Bilim Dalı, Edebiyet Fakültesi, Trakya Üniversitesi Edirne, Türkiye. [email protected]
Burçin Erdoğu
Affiliation:
Department of Archaeology, University of Thrace, Edirne, Turkey. [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The use of marine shells in the manufacture of bracelets and beads is a well-attested phenomenon of the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods of Western Anatolia, the Aegean, and the Balkans. The site of Gökçeada-Uğurlu, located on an island in the Aegean between mainland Europe and Anatolia, shows evidence for the manufacture and use of bracelets and beads from Spondylus and Glycymeris shell. This use of personal ornamentation ties the site into one of the widest material culture production and trade networks of the prehistoric period. This article explores the possible role of, and influences on, an island site within the wider context of long-distance exchange. The life history of shell products is investigated, showing that a bracelet may have gone through processes of transformation in order to remain in use. The article also questions whether there was a relationship between the use of marine shell and white marble from which similar products were manufactured in contemporary contexts. In its conclusions the article addresses the value of materials and of the personal ornaments they were used to make.

Résumé

Une grenouille dans la mare: Gökçeada (Imbros), une pierre de gué égéenne dans l’utilisation du coquillage Spondylus au chalcolithique, de Emma Baysal et Burçin Erdoğu

L’utilisation de coquillages marins dans la fabrication de bracelets et de perles est un phénomène bien attesté des périodes néolithique et chalcolithique de l’Anatolie occidentale, de la mer Egée et des Balkans. Le site de Gökçeada Uğurlu, qui se trouve sur une île de la mer Egée entre le continent européen et l’Anatolie, met en évidence des témoignages de fabrication et d’utilisation de bracelets et de perles en coquillages Spondylus et Glycymeris. Cet usage de parures personnelles rattache ce site à un des plus vastes réseaux de production et et de commerce de culture matérielle. L’article explore les éventuels rôles et influences que peut exercer un site situé sur une île à l’intérieur du contexte plus étendu d’échanges lointains. On examine la biographie des articles en coquillages, démontrant qu’un bracelet peut avoir subi des procédés de transformation afin de rester en usage. L’article pose aussi la question de savoir s’il y avait un lien entre l’utilisation de coquillages marins et le marbre blanc qui entrait dans la fabrication d’articles similaires dans des contextes contemporains. Dans ses conclusions l’article aborde la question de la valeur des matériaux et des parures qu’ils servaient à fabriquer.

Zussamenfassung

Frosch im Teich: Gökçeada (Imbros), ein ägäisches Sprungbrett für die chalkolithische Nutzung von Spondylus, von Emma Baysal und Burçin Erdoğu

Die Nutzung von Meeresschnecken für die Herstellung von Armreifen und Perlen ist ein gut dokumentiertes Phänomen des Neolithikums und Chalkolithikums in Westanatolien, der Ägäis und auf dem Balkan. Der Fundplatz Gökçeada Uğurlu, der auf einer Insel in der Ägäis zwischen dem europäischen Festland und Anatolien liegt, liefert Hinweise auf die Herstellung und Nutzung von Armreifen und Perlen aus Spondylus- und Glycymeris-Muschelschalen. Die Nutzung solchen persönlichen Schmucks bindet den Fundplatz in eines der größten Netzwerke der Produktion und des Austauschs materieller Kultur prähistorischer Epochen ein. Dieser Beitrag untersucht die mögliche Rolle von und die Einflüsse auf eine Insel innerhalb des weiteren Kontexts des Ferntauschs. Die Lebensgeschichte von Muschelprodukten wird erforscht; dies zeigt, dass ein Armreif Transformationsprozesse durchlaufen haben kann um weiter dem Gebrauch dienen zu können. Der Beitrag stellt auch die Frage, ob es eine Beziehung gab zwischen der Nutzung von Meeresschnecken und weißem Marmor, aus dem vergleichbare Produkte in zeitgleichen Kontexten angefertigt wurden. In seinen Schlussfolgerungen befasst sich der Artikel auch mit dem Wert von Materialien und von den persönlichen Schmuckgegenständen, die daraus gemacht wurden.

Resumen

Una rana en el estanque: Gökçeada (Imbros), un peldaño en el uso de la concha de Spondylus en el Calcolítico en el Egeo, por Emma Baysal y Burçin Erdoğu

El uso de conchas marinas en la elaboración de brazaletes y cuentas es un fenómeno bien documentado durante el Neolítico y el Calcolítico en el oeste de Anatolia, el Egeo y los Balcanes. El yacimiento de Gökçeada Uğurlu, situado en una isla del Egeo entre Europa y Anatolia, presenta evidencias de la manufactura y uso de brazaletes y cuentas realizadas en concha de Spondylus y Glycymeris. Este uso de la ornamentación personal relaciona al yacimiento con una de las redes de producción e intercambio de cultura material más amplia de época prehistórica. Este artículo explora el posible rol e influencias del yacimiento insular en un contexto amplio de intercambios a larga distancia. Se analiza la “historia” de los productos en concha, mostrando que un brazalete puede haber sufrido numerosos procesos de transformación para mantenerlo en uso. Este artículo también indaga en la posible relación entre el uso de las conchas marinas y el mármol blanco a partir de los cuáles se elaboraron productos similares en contextos contemporáneos. En sus conclusiones, el artículo aborda el valor de los materiales y de los adornos personales en que fueron transformados.

Keywords

SpondylusGlycymerispersonal ornamentationChalcolithicbraceletsbeadslong-distance exchange
Type
Articles
Information
Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society , Volume 80 , December 2014 , pp. 363 - 378
Copyright
© The Prehistoric Society 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Apostolika, N.K. 2005. Tracing symbols of life and symbols of death in Neolithic archaeological contexts. Documenta Praehistorica 32, 133–144 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ay-Efe, D. 2001. The small finds of Orman Fidanlığı. In T. Efe (ed.), The Salvage Excavations of Orman Fidanlığı, a Chalcolithic Site in Inland Northwestern Anatolia, 127–158. Istanbul: TASK Vakfı Google Scholar
Bajnóczi, B., Schöll-Barna, G., Kalicz, Zsuzsanna Siklósi, N., Hourmouziadis, G.H., Ifantidis, F., Kyparissi-Apostolika, A., Pappa, M., Veropoulidou, R. & Ziota, C. 2013. Tracing the source of Late Neolithic Spondylus shell ornaments by stable isotope geochemistry and cathodoluminescence microscopy. Journal of Archaeological Science 40, 874–882 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bar-Yosef, D. 2005. The exploitation of shells as beads in the Palaeolithic and Neolithic of the Levant. Paléorient 31(1), 176–185 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baysal, E. 2009. The Question, Nature and Significance of Neolithic Craft Specialization in Anatolia. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Liverpool.Google Scholar
Baysal, E. 2013a. Epipalaeolithic marine shell beads at Pınarbaşı: central Anatolia in a wider context. Anatolica 39, 261–276 Google Scholar
Baysal, E. 2013b. A tale of two assemblages: early Neolithic manufacture and use of beads in the Konya Plain. Anatolian Studies 63, 1–15 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baysal, E. 2014. A preliminary typology of the Neolithic and Chalcolithic beads of Barcın Höyük. Anatolia Antiqua 22, 1–11 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baysal, E., Baysal, A., Turkcan, A. & Nazaroff, A. forthcoming. Early specialized craft? A Chalcolithic stone bracelet workshop at Kanlıtaş, Eskişehir, Turkey. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 34(3)Google Scholar
Broodbank, C. 2013. The Making of the Middle Sea, a History of the Mediterranean from the Beginning to the Emergence of the Classical World. London: Thames & Hudson Google Scholar
Chapman, J. 2010. ‘Deviant’ burials in the Neolithic and Chalcolithic of Central and South Eastern Europe. In K. Rebay-Salisbury, M. S. Sorensen, J. Hughes & C. Hughes (eds), Body Parts and Bodies Whole: changing relations and meanings, 30–45. Oxford: Oxbow Books Google Scholar
Chapman, J., Gaydarska, B. & Balen, J. 2012. Spondylus ornaments in the mortuary zone at Neolithic Vukovar on the middle Danube. VAMZ 3(45), 191–210 Google Scholar
Chapman, J., Gaydarska, B., Skafida, E & Souvatzi, S. 2011. Personhood and the life cycle of Spondylus rings: an examples from Late Neolithic Greece. In Ifantidis & Nikolaidou (eds) 2011, 1139–1160 Google Scholar
Chapman, J. & Kostov, R. 2010. The ornaments. In J. Chapman (ed.), From Surface Collection to Prehistoric Lifeways, Making Sense of the Multi-period site of Orlovo, South East Bulgaria, 40–79. Oxford: Oxbow Books Google Scholar
Choyke, A. 2001. Late Neolithic red deer canine beads and their imitations. In A. Choyke & L. Bartosiewicz (eds), Crafting Bone: skeletal technologies through time and space. Proceedings of the 2nd meeting of the Worked Bone Research Group, Budapest, 31 August–5 September 1999, 251–260. Oxford: British Archaeological Report S937 Google Scholar
Dimitrijević, V. & Tripković, B. 2006. Spondylus and Glycymeris bracelets: trade reflections at Neolithic Vinča-Belo Brdo. Documenta Praehistorica 33, 237–252 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dubin, L. 1987. The History of Beads. New York: Abrams Google Scholar
Erdoğu, B. 2011a. A preliminary report from the 2009 and 2010 field seasons at Uğurlu on the island of Gökçeada. Anatolica 37, 45–65 Google Scholar
Erdoğu, B. 2011b. Gökçeada Uğurlu-Zeytinlik Kazısı 2009 Yılı Çalışmaları. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı 32(1), 119–127 Google Scholar
Erdoğu, B. 2012. 2010 Yılı Gökçeada Uğurlu-Zeytinlik Kazı Çalışmaları. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı 33(1), 365–374 Google Scholar
Erdoğu, B. 2013. Uğurlu: a Neolithic settlement on the Aegean island of Gökçeada. In Özdoğan et al. (eds) 2013, 1–33 Google Scholar
Erdoğu, B. & Yücel, N. 2013. Gökçeada Uğurlu-Zeytinlik Kazısı 2011 Yılı Çalışmaları. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı 34(1), 187–194 Google Scholar
Esin, U. 1995. Early copper metallurgy at the pre-pottery site of Aşıklı. Readings in Prehistory . Studies Presented to Halet Çambel, 61–78. Istanbul: Graphis Yayınları Google Scholar
French, D. 2010. Canhasan sites 3, Canhasan I: the small finds. London: The British Institute at Ankara Google Scholar
Garašanin, M.V. 1956. Die Bestatungssitten im balkanisch-anatolischen Komplex der jüngeren Steinzeit. Glasnik Zemaljskog Muzeja Sarajevo 11, 205–236 Google Scholar
Gaydarska, B., Chapman, J. C., Angelova, I., Gurova, M. & Yanev, S. 2004. Breaking, making and trading: the Omurtag Eneolithic Spondylus hoard. Archaeologia Bulgarica 8(2), 11–33 Google Scholar
Gebel, H. K. & Bienert, H.-D. 1997. Ba'ja hidden in the Petra mountains. Preliminary report on the 1997 excavations. In H. K. Gebel, Z. Kafafi & G. Rollefson (eds), The Prehistory of Jordan II. Perspectives from 1997, 221–262. Berlin: Ex Oriente Google Scholar
Gheorghiu, D. 2011. Insignia of exotica: skeuomorphs of Mediterranean shells in Chalcolithic south Eastern Europe. In A. Vianello (ed.), Exotica in the Prehistoric Mediterranean, 13–25. Oxford: Oxbow Books CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerritsen, F., Özbal, R. & Thissen, L. 2013. Barcın Höyük: the beginnings of farming in the Marmara region. In Özdoğan et al. (eds) 2013, 93–112 Google Scholar
Gimbutas, M. 1976. Neolithic Macedonia as Reflected by Excavation at Anza, Southeast Yugoslavia. Los Angeles: Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Monumenta archaeologica 1Google Scholar
Halstead, P. 1993. Spondylus shell ornaments from Late Neolithic Dimini, Greece: specialized manufacture or unequal accumulation? Antiquity 67, 603–609 Google Scholar
Ifantidis, F. 2011. Cosmos in fragments: Spondylus and Glycymeris adornments at Neolithic Dispilio, Greece. In Ifantidis & Nikolaidou (eds) 2011, 123–137 Google Scholar
Ifantidis, F. & Nikolaidou, M. (eds) 2011. Spondylus in Prehistory: new data and approaches. Contributions to the Archaeology of Shell Technologies. Oxford: British Archaeological Report S2216Google Scholar
Ifantidis, F. & Papageorgiou, P. 2011. Sur un anneau Néolithique en marbre fragmenté (Dispilio, Grèce). In F. Wateau (ed.), Profils d’objets. Approches d’anthropologues et d’archéologues, 33–43. Colloques de la Maison René-Ginouvès 7Google Scholar
Ivanova, M. 2012. Perilous waters: early maritime trade along the western coast of the Black Sea (fifth millennium BC). Oxford Journal of Archaeology 31(4), 339–365 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karul, N. & Avcı, M. 2013. Aktopraklık. In Özdoğan et al (eds) 2013, 45–68 Google Scholar
Knappett, C. 2013. Introduction: why networks? In C. Knappett (ed.), Network analysis in archaeology, new approaches to regional interaction, 3–15. Oxford: Oxford University Press CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kogălniceanu, R. 2012a. Adornments from the Hamangia cemetery excavated at Cernovodă – Columbia D. Contextual analysis. In R. Kogălniceanu, R-G. Curcă, M. Gligor & S. Stratton (eds), Homines, Funera, Astra. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Funerary Anthropology 5–8 June 2011 ‘1 Decembrie 1918’ University (Alba Iulia, Romania), 81–95. Oxford: Archaeopress BAR International Series 2410.Google Scholar
Kogălniceanu, R. 2012b. Human remains from the Mesolithic to the Chalcolithic period in southern Romania. An update on the discoveries. Archaeologia Bulgarica 16.3, 1–46 Google Scholar
Miller, M. 2003. Technical aspects of ornament production at Sitagroi. In E.S. Elster & C. Renfrew (eds), Prehistoric Sitagroi: Excavations in Northeast Greece, 1968–70 Vol.2, 369–382. Los Angeles: UCP Google Scholar
Özdoğan, M. 1993. Vinča and Anatolia: a new look at a very old problem. Anatolica 19, 173–193 Google Scholar
Özdoğan, M. 2013. Neolithic sites in the Marmara region. In Özdoğan et al. (eds) 2013, 167–269 Google Scholar
Özdoğan, M., Başgelen, N. & Kuniholm, P. (eds). 2013. The Neolithic in Turkey, Northwestern Turkey and Istanbul. Istanbul: Arkeoloji ve Sanat Yayınları Google Scholar
Reese, D. 1991. Marine shells in the Levant: Upper Palaeolithic, Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic. In O. Bar-Yosef & F. Valla (eds), The Natufian Culture in the Levant, 613–628. Michigan: International Monographs in Prehistory Google Scholar
Russell, N. 2005. Çatalhöyük worked bone. In I. Hodder (ed.), Changing Materialities at Çatalhöyük, 339–367. Cambridge & Ankara: British Institute at Ankara & McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research Google Scholar
Siklósi, Z. & Csengeri, P. 2011. Reconsideration of Spondylus usage in the Middle and Late Neolithic of the Carpathian Basin. In Ifantidis & Nikolaidou (eds) 2011, 48–62 Google Scholar
Souvatzi, S. G. 2008. A Social Archaeology of Households in Neolithic Greece. An Anthropological Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Google Scholar
Sterud, E., Evans, R. & Rasson, J. 1984. Ex Balkanis lux? Recent developments in Neolithic and Chalcolithic research in southeast Europe. American Antiquity 49(4), 713–741 Google Scholar
Tsuneki, A. 1989. The manufacture of Spondylus shell objects at Neolithic Dimini, Greece. Orient 25, 1–21 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittaker, H. 2011. Exotica in Early Mycenaean burials as evidence for the self-representation of the elite. In A. Vianello (ed.), Exotica in the Prehistoric Mediterranean, 137–146. Oxford: Oxbow Books CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yavşan, Ç. 2013. Kalkolitik Smintheion (Gülpınar) kazıları buluntusu deniz kabukları. Çanakkale: ÇOMÜ Matbaası Google Scholar