This article was accepted into the corpus but its outbound wikilinks were never NER-processed — typical at the deepest BFS hop or when the run's entity cap was reached. No expansion funnel to show.
| Epipaleolithic | |
|---|---|
| Name | Epipaleolithic |
| Period | Late Upper Paleolithic to Early Neolithic |
| Dates | regional c. 20,000–6,000 BCE |
| Preceding | Upper Paleolithic |
| Following | Neolithic |
| Major sites | Ohalo II, Natufian sites, Aşıklı Höyük, Jericho, Cave of Altamira, Grotte de Cussac, Ksar Akil, Star Carr, Kharaneh IV, Kebara Cave |
Epipaleolithic is a term used by archaeologists to describe hunter-gatherer cultures and assemblages in the final Pleistocene and early Holocene that bridge the Upper Paleolithic and early Neolithic in many regions. Scholars apply the label in discussions of chronology, technology, and the origins of food production in areas such as the Levant, Anatolia, and parts of North Africa and Eurasia. Debates over terminology and regional variation link research on this period to studies of the Natufian, Mesolithic, PPNA, and other formative cultural complexes.
Scholars contrast the term with Mesolithic and Epipaleolithic usage varies between traditions in Europe, the Near East, North Africa, and Central Asia. Regional chronologies reference sequences like Upper Paleolithic → Epipaleolithic → Neolithic in Levantine frameworks and alternatives such as Mesolithic in European frameworks. Chronological markers include Late Glacial episodes such as the Younger Dryas, the onset of the Holocene, and stratigraphic correlations to sites like Ohalo II and Ksar Akil. Key debates cite work by researchers associated with institutions such as the British Museum, Israel Antiquities Authority, CNRS, University of Cambridge, and Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
Regional traditions encompass the Natufian in the Levant, the microlithic industries of North Africa linked to sites like Taforalt, the Late Pleistocene occupations in Anatolia exemplified by Aşıklı Höyük precursors, and Central Asian sequences near Damghan and Zagros Mountains localities. European comparisons draw on assemblages from Star Carr and Iberian caves like Altamira while Siberian and Far Eastern records reference Mal’ta and Denisovan-era research tied to institutions including the Russian Academy of Sciences and Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.
Toolkits typically feature microlithic implements, backed blades, groundstone tools, and varied hafting strategies documented at Kharaneh IV, Ohalo II, Kebara Cave, and Ksar Akil. Faunal and floral evidence from Jericho, Ohalo II, and Taforalt show diverse subsistence including hunting of ungulates like gazelle at Ain Mallaha, intensified gathering of legumes and cereals later evident at PPNA sites, and early forms of resource management described by researchers from Tel Aviv University, University of Oxford, and the Institute of Archaeology, University College London. Isotopic and zooarchaeological studies conducted by teams from National Geographic Society and the Smithsonian Institution inform models of seasonality, mobility, and sedentism.
Portable art, personal ornamentation, and ritual structures attributed to Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene assemblages appear in contexts such as Grotte de Cussac, Taforalt, Ksar Akil, and Natufian loci. Decoration techniques show parallels to items recovered from Cave of Altamira, and symbolic behaviors have been interpreted from carved bone, beads, and mortuary practices investigated by scholars affiliated with University of Jerusalem, École Pratique des Hautes Études, and Harvard University.
Notable field discoveries include the preservation-rich site of Ohalo II, the cemetery and dwellings of the Natufian at Shubayqa and Ain Mallaha, microlith assemblages at Star Carr, seasonal aggregation evidence from Kharaneh IV, and stratified sequences at Kebara Cave and Ksar Akil. Excavations led by teams from Hebrew University of Jerusalem, University of Cambridge, University of Southampton, and the British School at Rome have produced radiocarbon-based chronologies tied to laboratories at Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit and the Leicester Radiocarbon Lab.
The period is central to debates linking mobile foragers to the emergence of agriculture in the Levant, Anatolia, and Fertile Crescent where the sequence toward PPNB communities at sites like Jericho and Aşıklı Höyük is intensively studied. Researchers compare Natufian sedentism and complex foraging to later domestication processes documented by teams from Wageningen University, University of Pennsylvania, University of Copenhagen, and the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History.
Research relies on radiocarbon dating, Bayesian modeling, lithic refitting, micromorphology, and aDNA analysis carried out at facilities including the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Molecular Anthropology Laboratory at the University of Copenhagen, and the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit. Preservation biases, calibration plateaus, and issues with site formation processes at locations like Ohalo II and Kebara Cave complicate chronological resolution, prompting interdisciplinary collaboration with geochronologists from Lamont–Doherty Earth Observatory and specialists at the Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris.
Category:Prehistoric cultures