New evidence on prehistoric trade routes: the obsidian evidence from Gilat, Israel

Citation: Joseph Yellin, Thomas E. Levy, Yorke M. Rowan (1996) New evidence on prehistoric trade routes: the obsidian evidence from Gilat, Israel. Journal of Field Archaeology (RSS)
Internet Archive Scholar (search for fulltext): New evidence on prehistoric trade routes: the obsidian evidence from Gilat, Israel
Download: http://www.maneyonline.com/doi/abs/10.1179/009346996791973873
Tagged: Anthropology (RSS)

Summary

Context: Through the excavations of the Gilat site in the Negev desert of Israel, archaeologists found obsidian pieces and bladelets. Because there are neither sources of obsidian in the region, nor is it found often the authors of this paper sought to trace exchange networks through the sourcing of this material. The site dates to the Chalcolithic period which occurs between 4500-3500 BC.

Methods and Materials: In total, eight obsidian pieces have been found in excavations, throughout multiple strata. They are generally classified as bladelets and endscrapers, though few are complete. Seven of them were used for neutron activation analysis (NAA) in order to obtain data on the elemental makeup of each piece. 24 elements were measured, but only a few of them are reported on. The elemental makeup of the obsidian pieces were then compared to known obsidian sources surrounding the Levant region.

Results: The results of the NAA point to three different sources for the obsidian pieces: Hotamis Dağ, Göllü Dağ, and Nemrut Dağ 1. Hotamis Dağ and Göllü Dağ are located in central Anatolia and Nemrut Dag 1 is located in the Lake Van region of Eastern Anatolia. These sources are different than those that have been identified for Pre-Pottery Neolithic Period. The article also notes that much less obsidian related to the Chalcolithic has been found than the Neolithic. The obsidian found in lower strata is traced to central Anatolia where pieces located higher in the deposit are associated with eastern Anatolia. The authors suggest that at this site, trade relations shifted in geography through time.

Theoretical and Practical Relevance

This paper is similar to Frieman’s (2012) investigation into flint and copper daggers due to its desire to understand past peoples’ relationship to stone use when metal was introduced as a material to use. While Frieman focuses on the familiarity of flint dagger forms and how they could have aided in the acceptance of the new material, Yellin et al. focuses on how the use of material (specifically obsidian) differs during this time. At the Gilat site, trade relationships and the abundance of obsidian (at least based on current findings) changed between the Neolithic and Chalcolithic.