Holocene (Re-)Occupation of Eastern Arabia

Abstract

Population discontinuities on a micro-scale are familiar phenomena in the archaeological record of many parts of the world, and Western Asia is no exception. Multi-period sites often display stratigraphic features, gaps in ceramic sequences and distances between radiocarbon dates implying breaks in the history of settlement. However, there is often a presumption that if settlement evidence from one period is missing in one trench or set of associated trenches, it may be present elsewhere since not all areas necessarily contain the full stratigraphic record of occupation at any given site. Population discontinuities at a macro-scale, such as a valley system or drainage zone, are equally common in settlement pattern studies, and de-population for periods ranging from centuries to millennia is familiar to most archaeologists who have worked at this scale. There is, however, another aspect of discontinuity which is rarely addressed directly by archaeologists working in Western Asia, even when it is observed, namely the issue of population continuity or discontinuity between the Pleistocene and the Holocene. Specialization in archaeology has had the unintended and unfortunate effect of compartmentalizing Paleolithic archaeology (and cognate fields like Pleistocene climatic and geological studies), turning it into a stand-alone field of study with little or no relationship to the study of later periods (Neolithic, Chalcolithic, Bronze Age, etc.). Similarly, the perspective of scholars who work on the later periods of human history often fails to reach back in time beyond the ‘great’ Pleistocene–Holocene divide. In the present chapter we shall consider the specific case of eastern Arabia, where opinions on the matter of occupational continuity or discontinuity between the Pleistocene and the Holocene have been evolving rapidly in recent years.