Dragana Filipović, Glynis Jones, Wiebke Kirleis, Amy Bogaard, Rachel Ballantyne, Michael Charles, Anne de Vareilles, Müge Ergun, Eugenia Gkatzogia, Amy Holguin, Ivanka Hristova, Angeliki Karathanou, Magda Kapcia, Dolores Knežić, Georgia Kotzamani, Pavlos Lathiras, Alexandra Livarda, Elena Marinova, Stavroula Michou, Marine Mosulishvili, Aldona Mueller-Bieniek, Djurdja Obradović, Matthew Padgett, Pelagia Paraskevopoulou, Chryssi Petridou, Haroula Stylianakou, Tanja Zerl, Doris Vidas, Soultana Maria Valamoti
{"title":"Triticum timopheevii s.l.(“新的颖质小麦”)在欧洲南部和东部地区发现,跨越时空","authors":"Dragana Filipović, Glynis Jones, Wiebke Kirleis, Amy Bogaard, Rachel Ballantyne, Michael Charles, Anne de Vareilles, Müge Ergun, Eugenia Gkatzogia, Amy Holguin, Ivanka Hristova, Angeliki Karathanou, Magda Kapcia, Dolores Knežić, Georgia Kotzamani, Pavlos Lathiras, Alexandra Livarda, Elena Marinova, Stavroula Michou, Marine Mosulishvili, Aldona Mueller-Bieniek, Djurdja Obradović, Matthew Padgett, Pelagia Paraskevopoulou, Chryssi Petridou, Haroula Stylianakou, Tanja Zerl, Doris Vidas, Soultana Maria Valamoti","doi":"10.1007/s00334-023-00954-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Triticum timopheevii sensu lato (‘new glume wheat’, NGW) was first recognised as a distinct prehistoric cereal crop through work on archaeobotanical finds from Neolithic and Bronze Age sites in northern Greece. This was later followed by its identification in archaeobotanical assemblages from other parts of Europe. This paper provides an overview of the currently known archaeobotanical finds of Timopheev’s wheat in southeastern and eastern Europe and observes their temporal span and spatial distribution. To date, there are 89 prehistoric sites with these finds, located in different parts of the study region and dated from the Neolithic to the very late Iron Age. Their latest recorded presence in the region is in the last centuries bce . For assemblages from the site as a whole containing at least 30 grain and/or chaff remains of Timopheev’s wheat, we take a brief look at the overall relative proportions of Triticum monococcum (einkorn), T. dicoccum (emmer) and T. timopheevii s.l. (Timopheev’s wheat), the three most common glume wheats in our study region in prehistory. We highlight several sites where the overall proportions of Timopheev’s wheat might be taken to suggest it was a minor component of a mixed crop (maslin), or an unmonitored inclusion in einkorn or emmer fields. At the same sites, however, there are also discrete contexts where this wheat is strongly predominant, pointing to its cultivation as a pure crop. We therefore emphasise the need to evaluate the relative representation of Timopheev’s wheat at the level of individual samples or contexts before making inferences on its cultivation status. We also encourage re-examination of prehistoric and historic cereal assemblages for its remains.","PeriodicalId":23527,"journal":{"name":"Vegetation History and Archaeobotany","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Triticum timopheevii s.l. (‘new glume wheat’) finds in regions of southern and eastern Europe across space and time\",\"authors\":\"Dragana Filipović, Glynis Jones, Wiebke Kirleis, Amy Bogaard, Rachel Ballantyne, Michael Charles, Anne de Vareilles, Müge Ergun, Eugenia Gkatzogia, Amy Holguin, Ivanka Hristova, Angeliki Karathanou, Magda Kapcia, Dolores Knežić, Georgia Kotzamani, Pavlos Lathiras, Alexandra Livarda, Elena Marinova, Stavroula Michou, Marine Mosulishvili, Aldona Mueller-Bieniek, Djurdja Obradović, Matthew Padgett, Pelagia Paraskevopoulou, Chryssi Petridou, Haroula Stylianakou, Tanja Zerl, Doris Vidas, Soultana Maria Valamoti\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00334-023-00954-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Triticum timopheevii sensu lato (‘new glume wheat’, NGW) was first recognised as a distinct prehistoric cereal crop through work on archaeobotanical finds from Neolithic and Bronze Age sites in northern Greece. This was later followed by its identification in archaeobotanical assemblages from other parts of Europe. This paper provides an overview of the currently known archaeobotanical finds of Timopheev’s wheat in southeastern and eastern Europe and observes their temporal span and spatial distribution. To date, there are 89 prehistoric sites with these finds, located in different parts of the study region and dated from the Neolithic to the very late Iron Age. Their latest recorded presence in the region is in the last centuries bce . For assemblages from the site as a whole containing at least 30 grain and/or chaff remains of Timopheev’s wheat, we take a brief look at the overall relative proportions of Triticum monococcum (einkorn), T. dicoccum (emmer) and T. timopheevii s.l. (Timopheev’s wheat), the three most common glume wheats in our study region in prehistory. We highlight several sites where the overall proportions of Timopheev’s wheat might be taken to suggest it was a minor component of a mixed crop (maslin), or an unmonitored inclusion in einkorn or emmer fields. At the same sites, however, there are also discrete contexts where this wheat is strongly predominant, pointing to its cultivation as a pure crop. We therefore emphasise the need to evaluate the relative representation of Timopheev’s wheat at the level of individual samples or contexts before making inferences on its cultivation status. We also encourage re-examination of prehistoric and historic cereal assemblages for its remains.\",\"PeriodicalId\":23527,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vegetation History and Archaeobotany\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vegetation History and Archaeobotany\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00334-023-00954-w\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PALEONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vegetation History and Archaeobotany","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00334-023-00954-w","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PALEONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
通过对希腊北部新石器时代和青铜时代遗址的考古植物学发现,人们首次认识到Triticum timopheevii sensu lato(“新颖小麦”,NGW)是一种独特的史前谷物作物。后来在欧洲其他地区的考古植物组合中发现了它。本文综述了目前在东南欧和东欧发现的季莫菲耶夫小麦的考古植物学发现,并观察了它们的时间跨度和空间分布。迄今为止,共有89个史前遗址发现了这些发现,分布在研究区域的不同地方,时间从新石器时代到铁器时代晚期。他们在该地区的最新记录是在前几个世纪。对于整个遗址中包含至少30粒Timopheev小麦的谷粒和/或糠的组合,我们简要地看了一下Triticum monococum (einkorn), T. dicoccum (emmer)和T. timopheevs .l. (Timopheev小麦)的总体相对比例,这是我们研究区域史前最常见的三种颖质小麦。我们强调了几个地点,在这些地点,季莫菲耶夫的小麦的总体比例可能表明它是混合作物(maslin)的一个次要组成部分,或者是在未监测的情况下包含在玉米或二粒田中。然而,在相同的地点,也有离散的背景,这种小麦是强有力的主导,指出它的种植作为一种纯粹的作物。因此,我们强调有必要在对其种植状况做出推断之前,在单个样本或背景水平上评估季莫菲耶夫小麦的相对代表性。我们也鼓励重新检查史前和历史谷物组合的遗迹。
Triticum timopheevii s.l. (‘new glume wheat’) finds in regions of southern and eastern Europe across space and time
Abstract Triticum timopheevii sensu lato (‘new glume wheat’, NGW) was first recognised as a distinct prehistoric cereal crop through work on archaeobotanical finds from Neolithic and Bronze Age sites in northern Greece. This was later followed by its identification in archaeobotanical assemblages from other parts of Europe. This paper provides an overview of the currently known archaeobotanical finds of Timopheev’s wheat in southeastern and eastern Europe and observes their temporal span and spatial distribution. To date, there are 89 prehistoric sites with these finds, located in different parts of the study region and dated from the Neolithic to the very late Iron Age. Their latest recorded presence in the region is in the last centuries bce . For assemblages from the site as a whole containing at least 30 grain and/or chaff remains of Timopheev’s wheat, we take a brief look at the overall relative proportions of Triticum monococcum (einkorn), T. dicoccum (emmer) and T. timopheevii s.l. (Timopheev’s wheat), the three most common glume wheats in our study region in prehistory. We highlight several sites where the overall proportions of Timopheev’s wheat might be taken to suggest it was a minor component of a mixed crop (maslin), or an unmonitored inclusion in einkorn or emmer fields. At the same sites, however, there are also discrete contexts where this wheat is strongly predominant, pointing to its cultivation as a pure crop. We therefore emphasise the need to evaluate the relative representation of Timopheev’s wheat at the level of individual samples or contexts before making inferences on its cultivation status. We also encourage re-examination of prehistoric and historic cereal assemblages for its remains.
期刊介绍:
Vegetation History and Archaeobotany publishes research papers, review articles and short contributions of high quality from Europe, the Americas and other parts of the world. It covers the entire field of vegetation history – mainly the development of flora and vegetation during the Holocene (but also from the Pleistocene), and including related subjects such as palaeoecology. Of special interest is the human impact upon the natural environment in prehistoric and medieval times; this is reflected in pollen diagrams as well as in plant macroremains from archaeological contexts.