Demographic reconstruction of the Halaf culture society on the territory of the Eastern Euphrates

Bobrov Vladimir Vasil'evich ORCID: 0000-0002-3272-0390 Doctor of History Chief Scientific Officer, Institute of Human Ecology, FRC CCC SB RAS; Kemerovo State University 650000, Russia, Kemerovo region, Kemerovo, Sovetsky Ave., 18 bobrov4545@mail.ru

Mazhar Fadel ORCID: 0000-0002-5656-8469 Postgraduate student, Department of Archaeology, Kemerovo State University 650000, Russia, Kemerovo - Kuzbass region, Kemerovo, Krasnaya str., 6 fadel.rf987@gmail.com

IntroductionThe antiquities of Near Asia, as the center of the emergence of the first civilizations, are of particular interest to specialists from different countries.

By 1980, more than fifty foreign expeditions were working in Iraq alone, including the expedition of the Institute of Archaeology of the USSR Academy of Sciences ^{[1, p. 8]}. Despite the fact that Russian archaeology was involved later than other countries in the study of the monuments of the Near Asian region, it made a significant contribution to the knowledge of the pre-written period of history in this space. Considering the century-and-a-half history of studying the antiquities of Mesopotamia, the scale of research and the purposefulness of the Russian archaeological expedition led by R. M. Munchaev, who had an extraordinary gift of a scientist and organizer, is quite obvious. Thanks to the work of this expedition, the oldest complexes and cultures associated with the emergence of agriculture and cattle breeding were identified, a corpus of representative data on the material, spiritual culture and life activity of the population of Northern Mesopotamia before the Ceramic and ceramic Neolithic was formed, and in general, a holistic panorama of historical and cultural processes from the VIII millennium BC to the emergence of civilizations was created ^{[2; 3; 4, etc.]}.

Of particular note is the contribution of Russian archaeology to the study of the Khalaf culture, which, according to experts from different countries, is a unique phenomenon in the pre-written history of the Near East. The history of the study of the Khalaf culture dates back a little more than 120 years, starting with the study under the leadership of Max von Oppeyheim in 1899 of the eponymous monument of Tell Khalaf, located in northern Syria. The area of culture includes the entire territory of Northern Mesopotamia (northwestern Iraq, northeastern Syria and southeastern Turkey). This article presents the results of research on the materials of settlements in the north-east of Syria, therefore, we note that the main study of monuments in this territory is associated with the period after the formation of the Syrian Republic and is represented by expeditions from different countries of Western Europe and America. In the second half of the XX century, the American archaeologist D. Ots conducted work in the Khabur steppe ^{[5, p. 234; 6]}. Almost simultaneously with him, a Dutch expedition led by D. Meyer conducted field research ^{[7; 6, p. 11]}. In the 1980s, along with the research of I. Hajar, J. Monchamber, J. Eidem, D. Warbarton, V. Ball ^{[8, p. 233-237; 9, p. 49-62; 10; 6]}, the expedition of the Institute of Archaeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences launched work in Wadi Khanzir ^{[6, p. 57]}, and in the Khabur steppe investigated Khalaf settlements of Tell Hazna II, Tell Kashkashok I, Tell Umm Xair, etc. ^{[11; 12; 13; 10; 6]}. Settlements such as Khirbet esh-Shenef, Damishliya, Tell Zaidan ^{[14, pp. 6-22; 15, pp. 105-118]} were studied on the Balikh River; Tell Masih, Tell Amarna and Shams–ad-Din ^{[16; 17, pp. 276-282; 18; 14]} on the Euphrates River.

These studies have made it possible to form a fund of sources and data of the Khalaf culture in the north-east of Syria, but from the point of view of representativeness it is unequal. It served as a basis for summarizing the results at the monographic level. Almost simultaneously, a book by James Mellart ^[19] and a monograph by Russian scientists ^[2] were published, which presented knowledge, in particular about the Khalaf culture, formed by the end of the XX century. The new century has provided new knowledge, but also within the framework of different methodological approaches. At this chronological turn of historiography, the works on the Khalaf culture by Sh. N. Amirov ^{[6; 14]}, a follower of the school of R. M. Munchaev and an outstanding team of the Russian expedition of the Institute of Archaeology of the USSR Academy of Sciences in Northern Mesopotamia, have a fundamental character.  

It is this perspective of the history of the study of monuments, in particular the late Neolithic, that allows us to distinguish 2 stages in it: 1st – the end of the XIX century. – 1969/1970. Its content is the formation of sources and archaeological knowledge based on various scientific methods and theoretical approaches by specialists of the Old and New World. As part of the first stage, the period of the 1940s - 1960s is distinguished by the scientific substantiation of Neolithic cultures, trends in their development, a broad discussion of the chronology of Neolithic complexes, as well as paleoeconomics issues; the 2nd stage - 1969/1970 - 2011 or the Russian stage of the study of ancient monuments of Northern Mesopotamia, in particular the cultures of origin and the development of agriculture and cattle breeding. The evidence of the objectivity of the proposed periodization of the history of study is the recognition of the results of the expedition of the Institute of Archaeology of the USSR Academy of Sciences by the world archaeological community ^{[20, p. 14]}.

At present, it can be stated that the scientific interpretation of the sources allowed to form the archaeological content of the cultures of the early farmers and pastoralists of Northern Mesopotamia, despite the controversial nature and unresolved nature of some problems. Against this background, the historical interpretation has been delayed for more than a century. Without referring to the results achieved in this area of research, we note that the social and paleodemographic problems remain poorly studied. This article will present the experience of paleodemographic research of the Khalaf culture society based on the materials of settlements in the north-east of Syria.

The main partIn the theoretical aspect, knowledge about the population makes it possible to understand and evaluate the resilience of society, its activities and structural features.

The study of this problem involves different sources: archaeological, ethnographic, paleoanthropological, as well as various methods, among which paleogenetic ones are of particular importance. But even if we use an interdisciplinary approach, the results of paleodemography will be conditional. This is influenced by many factors and the diversity of the system itself, which is represented by the population. In the field of archaeology, the most important obstacle to the objectivity of demographic reconstructions is the specificity of its sources. Nevertheless, this trend has become widespread in world archaeology at the present stage of development ^{[21, pp. 95-109; 22; 23, pp. 427-489; 24, p. 112-122; 25; 26; 27; 28; et al.]}.

The proposed methods of reconstructions of paleodemographic processes depend on the direction of study of the subject of the study. According to V.A. Shnirelman, it can be focused on the study of statistical or dynamic processes in the field of population ^{[23, p. 428]}. The first approach sets the task of identifying the number of people and population density in the socio-cultural space. Priority in its solution will be methods based on ecological and economic parameters, as well as archaeological data on settlements and dwellings. The second approach should ideally include all aspects of the life of the people, since the development of the population depends on them to one degree or another. Archaeological sources in this case are uninformative. Anthropological research takes priority here. However, in recent decades, the integration of archaeology with natural sciences has significantly expanded its capabilities in paleodemographic research.

Due to the fact that the article is based on the materials of the Neolithic settlements of northeastern Syria, the main place in the work will be occupied by the problems of statistical paleodemography. And the research procedure is based on the methods, first of all, of Russian archaeology, but does not exclude the experience of foreign science.

For more than a century of research on the archaeological sites of Syria, there is not a single one that has been completely excavated. Therefore, the reconstruction of the entire settlement will be relative. Currently, the ancient settlement is a high hill formed as a result of the centuries-old habitation of the population, who erected dwellings on the site of the buildings of the previous settlement. The solution of a complex task – the identification of the construction horizon of one chronological period – depends on the methodology of field research. Archaeological excavations on the monuments of Syria have been carried out for many decades by specialists from different countries, primarily Europe. Moreover, often one monument could become the object of research of different expeditions. Different approaches to fieldwork and archaeological interpretation of data significantly affect the representativeness of sources. Finally, two more important circumstances. There is not enough up-to-date interdisciplinary research on environmental problems, including bioresources necessary for the life support of the population, the territory of the north-east of Syria, in particular, the upper reaches of the Euphrates River. The range of ethnographic data on local groups of the Syrian population is limited (objective reasons). Ethnographic sources are a priority in the field of reconstruction of historical processes, primarily of a sociological nature, ancient chronological periods.

It is generally recognized that the emergence of agriculture and cattle breeding caused an increase in the population and, as a result, its density in the developed space. This is confirmed by both calculations from archaeological sources and ethnographic data on the most archaic peoples of Asia, Oceania, Australia, America and Africa. A detailed analysis is presented in the work of A. G. Kozintsev ^[29]. Despite some inconsistency of calculations due to different methods, it is possible to accept average population densities of specific regions. So for the early farmers of Southwestern Iran, it could be 1-2 people per 1 km ², and with the introduction of irrigation agriculture - 6 people. Similar data were obtained for the Eastern Mediterranean – 1.5 – 10 people per 1 km ². These parameters do not contradict the calculations obtained for the Neolithic cultures of Europe, in particular France [cit. according to: 29, p. 18]. If we take these figures for the Eastern Mediterranean as a basis, then the minimum number of early agricultural population of northeastern Syria will be 8.8 thousand people, with a maximum value of 59 thousand. In our opinion, the norm of 5-6 people per 1 km ² looks more objective, which is relatively correlated with data for early agricultural societies and Neolithic cultures, as well as ethnographic data on ethnoses that have preserved the archaic appearance of culture and the level of productive forms of management in many regions of the world [cit. by: 29]. Calculations based on this indicator allow us to conclude that in the Neolithic era, including its late stage, 29.5 - 35.4 thousand people lived in the north–east of Syria. This data may be quite real. Some Western European experts have indicated that the population density in the Khalaf settlements was up to 5 people per square kilometer, and the number could range from 2,000 to 10,000 people ^{[30; 31, p. 291]}. If we sum up only the large Khalaf settlements, we can get quantitative indicators close to our calculations.

In our opinion, they are confirmed by calculations from the point of view of natural population growth and the corresponding methodology. Thus, according to many experts, primarily anthropologists, the annual natural increase in the Neolithic era was, according to various estimates, 0.08 – 0.25% in the early agricultural areas adjacent to the Middle Eastern hearth of the emergence of the producing economy. "With an annual increase of 0.2%, the period of doubling the population is close to 350 years" ^{[29, p. 16]}. If we assume that by the end of the VIII thousand BC 1000 people lived on the territory of the Eastern Euphrates, then by the end of the VI thousand BC (the time of the emergence of the Khalaf culture) its population will be 32 thousand. Of course, these calculations do not take into account the factors of natural selection (mortality due to biological, environmental and social reasons).

Another methodological version of the calculation is proposed by Ch . By Reed and R. Braidwood. It is given in the work of V.M. Masson devoted to the study of economics and social organization of ancient societies ^{[21, pp. 102-103]}. Using data from a specific region of India and having carried out the corresponding calculations, they proposed an initial density value for early agricultural societies of 1000 people per 100 ^km2. But this coefficient should be taken for an area corresponding to living conditions, in particular in the north-east of Syria, to the valleys of the Balih and Khabur rivers. If we take the area of the provinces where they are located – Hassek – 23300 km ²; Raqqa – 13100 km ², then by the coefficient of H. Reed and R. Braidwood, the Khalaf population will amount to 36,400 people. This indicator is almost identical to the data obtained by calculating the average population density.

How conditional are the calculations of the population according to the indicator – the average density of people / km ² – is evidenced by modern statistical data on the demographic situation in Syria (data up to 2010). The total area of the territory of Syria is 185,180 sq. km, and its population is 20,619,000 people. The average population density is 111.35 people per 1 ^km2. The northeastern part of Syria, or what is called (the Eastern Euphrates region), covers an area of 59,000 square kilometers, which is equivalent to 32% of the area of Syria. The population of the eastern Euphrates according to data up to 2010 was 2,838,000 people, which corresponds to 13.8% of the total population of the country. The total density in this region is 48 people/sq. km. This is more than 2 times less than the average density throughout the territory. There is no balance in this indicator among the four provinces of the Eastern Euphrates. The range is from 34 to 72 people per square kilometer. It should be borne in mind that the northeast of Syria is predominantly an agricultural region. 40.6% of the total area of agricultural land in Syria is located here. It should be taken into account that demographic changes are caused by the outflow of rural residents to cities. It is important that the territory of the north-east of the country retains an agrarian character, a little less than a quarter of farms are concentrated here. The origins of this traditional way of life go back to the historical period of the emergence and development of agriculture here. This circumstance ensures the correctness of the comparison of the phenomena of antiquity and modernity for this territory.

There is another possibility to verify the data obtained on the population in the Khalaf Neolithic period based on the density of inhabitants per unit of territory. It is also related to the study of the population, but based on the calculation of the number of inhabitants of specific ancient settlements. The experience of this approach in the study of demographic processes has been accumulated by the world archaeological science. However, as in the case of population density calculations, it offers different methods that often give contradictory results. We are aware that the results of research in the field of historical reconstructions are conditional.

In this approach, the norm of inhabitants per 1 hectare of an ancient settlement or city seems relatively hypothetical. In relation to the ancient chronological periods, but for the territory of the European Mediterranean, it is established by K. Renfrew. He believes that the most objective indicators for the Neolithic of the Aegean world are 100 people per hectare, and for the early Bronze 300 people, the middle and late bronze are characterized by parameters 450 – 600, respectively ^[32]. If we make an amendment to the Neolithic of the territory where agriculture and cattle breeding originated, up to three hundred people per hectare, then the number of inhabitants of the eight largest settlements of the Khalaf culture will be 35,280 people. The correction is permissible, since the socio-economic level of the Khalaf period and the early Bronze Age of the coasts of the Aegean Sea was presumably identical. The statistics do not take into account the small settlements of the Khalaf culture of the Eastern Euphrates. Their area is much smaller than a hectare (0.15 – 0.4 hectares) and they most likely represented temporary or seasonal parking. In the list of large monuments – Tell Khalafa – 55 hectares. There is no certainty that the khalaf layers occupy the entire tell area. But even if we reduce it by almost 2 times, our calculations will be reduced by only 7000 people. The total amount of the population will be in the range of 29,000. This indicator, as well as the first one, coincide with the calculations given by other methods.

The data obtained are most likely the most objective and reflect the number and density of the population during the existence of the Khalaf culture in the north-east of Syria. In our opinion, this conclusion is confirmed by the approximately restored demographic characteristics of the "Burned Village" on the Tell Sabi Abyad I monument. Its territory consisted of no more than ten rectangular buildings and 5 tolos. Unfortunately, it is still not possible to accurately determine the functional purpose of individual rooms and buildings as a whole. There are reasons to consider tolos as living quarters, although there were also partitions inside them, forming rooms. Interestingly, in all tolos, the rooms averaged about 5 ^m2. Only one tolos was a room with an area of 12.6 ^m2 (building 6.7). The area of another tolos was within four square meters and was divided into 3 compartments. Most likely, this building was not used for housing. If we take the average size of 5 m2 per living space, then more than 30 people, including children, lived in nine rooms of Sabi Abyad I tolos. The calculation is based on the need for two square meters of space per adult, which corresponds to generally accepted demographic indicators for early agricultural societies ^{[21, p. 113]}. Revealed another, but rectangular, building contained 7 rooms arranged in three rows. It was also distinguished by the fact that it was plastered, that is, clearly prepared for housing. The average area of the premises in it is within six square meters. 25-28 people could live in this house. If we make calculations for the remaining nine structures and remove storage and production facilities from them, then we can get the probable number of inhabitants of the "Burned Village" in the range of 200-250 people. If we take into account that the excavated area of the "Burned Village" is almost 0.3 hectares, and the area of the entire monument is 4.1 hectares, then we can assume an approximate total number of its inhabitants. With the allocation of about 0.5 hectares of area for so-called free zones, public buildings and the like, 2500-3000 people lived on the territory of a little more than 3.5 hectares. The proposed variant can be regarded as an independent approach to the paleodemographic reconstruction of the Neolithic societies of Northern Mesopotamia. The result on the number of inhabitants of the settlement of Tell Sabi Abyad is in accordance with the initial demographic calculations for the northeast of Syria.

The study of demographic problems in the aspect of a dynamic approach requires qualitative anthropological data that contain materials of burial complexes. To date, few burials of the Khalaf culture have been excavated and a significant part of them are associated with children, who were mostly buried in dwellings or in a cemetery specially allocated for them. Unfortunately, the sex of the children cannot be determined due to the age and fragmentary nature of the skeleton, and paleogenetic studies that could solve this problem have not been conducted. It was found that their age varied from fetus and newborn to 14 years. But more than two-thirds of children, presumably, died before the age of one year, more often even in the first months of their life ^{[33, p. 232; 34, p. 624]}. This indicates a very high infant mortality rate. Only one third of the children were aged 3 to 4 years at the time of death. The fact recorded archaeologically is a natural phenomenon not only in early agricultural societies, but also in societies with a fairly low level of socio-economic development. The given data on the mortality of children are evidence of natural selection. But if the society had demographic development, therefore, it had a high level of reproduction. According to modern statistics, the birth rate in Syria is 40-50%. With mortality below 10%, the natural increase exceeds 30%.

ConclusionMany problems of Neolithic archaeology of the Eastern Euphrates, such as paleoeconomics, including productivity of economic activities and labor costs in the life support system, human ecology, including paleodiet, gender relations, life expectancy, etc., remain practically unexplored.

This greatly limits the study of a number of demographic factors. The solution of these problems in synthesis with the results of the study in the framework of a statistical approach would allow us to give a more objective characterization of demographic processes in the VI millennium BC in the territory of northeastern Syria.