Dolge in kratke revolucije k neolitiku v zahodni Anatoliji in v Egejskem morju

This paper provides an overview of our current knowledge about the transformation towards the Neolithic in western Anatolia and the Aegean, and offers a narrative for their interpretation. Within the longue durée perspective of the long revolution in the Near East, the first millennia of the Holocene of the Aegean and western Anatolia are contrasted with each other. Economic strategies, environmental conditions, technologies, raw material procurement and cultural practices in the Aegean Mesolithic and the Pre-Neolithic times in western Anatolia are analysed to classify potential similarities and differences. The evidence of new cultural and symbolic practices, eco-nomies, and technologies in the seventh millennium is discussed as the paradox of a short revolu-tion embedded in a long-term process of interaction, knowledge-transfer and adaptation, setting the scene for the Neolithic pioneers establishing a new social life.V članku predstavljamo pregled trenutnih podatkov o spremembah, ki so vodile k neolitiku na območju zahodne Anatolije in Egejskega morja, ter ponujamo pripovedi za njihovo interpretacijo. V okviru perspektive dolgoročnih zgodovinskih procesov (fr. longue durée) na Bližnjem Vzhodu, Prvo tisočletje v holocenu je v okviru perspektive dolgoročnih zgodovinskih procesov (fr. longue durée) na Bližnjem Vzhodu potekalo različno na območju Egejskega morja in v zahodni Anatoliji. Za ovrednotenje morebitnih podobnosti in razlik med mezolitikom na območju Egejskega morja in pred-neolitikom na območju zahodne Anatolije smo ovrednotili gospodarske strategije, okoljske pogoje, tehnologije, oskrbo s surovinami in kulturne običaje. V članku nadalje razpravljamo o novih kulturnih in simbolnih običajih, gospodarstvih in tehnologijah v sedmem tisočletju, ki predstavljajo paradoks kratke revolucije, ki je zakoreninjena v dolgoročnih procesih interakcije, prenosa znanj in prilagoditev, kar je omogočilo neolitskim pionirjem vzpostavitev novega družbenega življenja

Marco de trabajo de integración y flujo de trabajo para la visualización virtual del patrimonio cultural. Revisita del montículo Çukuriçi Höyük, Turquía

[EN] This article sets a framework for computer-based visualisations of cultural heritage sites. The project focuses on a workflow for a visualisation illustrated on a specific solution for the site of Çukuriçi Höyük, a tell settlement in Turkey. With the virtual presentation, an interdisciplinary research group tries to offer complex scientific results to the general public as well as to experts. The team utilised data acquisition and communication techniques, interpretative approaches, and dissemination methods. The three-dimensional (3D) outcome is based on a large amount of scientific data, usually available only via analogue or digital publications for a specialised audience. The work focused on constructed and personal authenticity to reach the viewer’s feelings. As an interpretative narrative, the daily lives of the inhabitants were selected. A communication plan was constructed, and a video animation with narration and a musical background was selected as the most appropriate communication tool. The movie was divided into four chapters (Introduction, Neolithic Period, Chalcolithic Period and Early Bronze Age Period). A separate webpage was designed to provide additional information when the video is viewed online. The webpage was divided into tabs that describe each chapter and three additional topics (Visualisation Process, Further Reading, and Credits). The video was shared in different settings, e.g. at public talks and on social media. The process resulted in a complex workflow that consists of several stages: data acquisition, first interpretation, 3D model creation, communication plan, second interpretation, 3D model adjustment, and dissemination output. Each stage of the workflow serves as an example to show the types of nodes these parts can include. The result is a flexible framework with predefined process stages, which can be re-used for similar projects.[ES] Este artículo define un marco de trabajo de visualizaciones por ordenador de sitios patrimoniales. El proyecto se centra en un flujo de trabajo ilustrado por una solución específica de visualización del sitio de Çukuriçi Höyük, un asentamiento sobre un montículo en Turquía. Con la presentación virtual, un grupo de investigación interdisciplinar intenta ofrecer resultados científicos complejos al público en general, así como a los expertos. El equipo utilizó captura de datos y técnicas de comunicación, así como enfoques interpretativos y métodos de difusión. El resultado tridimensional (3D) está basado en una gran cantidad de datos científicos, normalmente disponibles sólo a través de publicaciones analógicas o digitales orientadas a una audiencia especializada. El trabajo se centró en la construcción y la autenticidad personal para alcanzar al espectador a nivel emocional. Como narrativa interpretativa, se seleccionaró la vida diaria de los habitantes. Se construyó un plan de comunicación y se eligió una animación de vídeo con narración y musica de fondo como la herramienta de comunicación más apropiada. La película se dividió en cuatro capítulos (Introducción, Período Neolítico, Período Calcolítico y Período de la Edad de Bronce Temprano). Se diseñó una página web separada para proporcionar información adicional cuando el video se muestra en línea. La página web se dividió en pestañas que describen cada capítulo y tres temas adicionales (Proceso de visualización, Lectura adicional y Créditos). El vídeo se compartió en diferentes entornos, tales como charlas públicas y en redes sociales. El proceso produjo un complejo flujo de trabajo que consta de varias etapas: captura de datos, primera interpretación, creación del modelo 3D, plan de comunicación, segunda interpretación, ajuste del modelo 3D y difusión. Cada etapa del flujo de trabajo sirve de ejemplo para mostrar los tipos de nodos que estas partes pueden incluir. El resultado es un marco de trabajo flexible con etapas de proceso predefinidas, que pueden reutilizarse en proyectos similares.Lužnik-Jancsary, N.; Horejs, B.; Klein, M.; Schwall, C. (2020). Integration and workflow framework for virtual visualisation of cultural heritage. Revisiting the tell of Çukuriçi Höyük, Turkey. Virtual Archaeology Review. 11(23):63-74. https://doi.org/10.4995/var.2020.13086OJS6374112316th General Assembly of ICOMOS. (2008). ICOMOS Charter for the Interpretation and Presentation of Cultural Heritage Sites. International Journal of Cultural Property, 15(4), 377-383. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0940739108080417Andrade, J. G., & Dias, P. (2020). A phygital approach to cultural heritage: augmented reality at Regaleira. Virtual Archaeology Review, 11(22), 15. https://doi.org/10.4995/var.2020.11663Batarda Fernandes, A. (2018). "But will there be visitors?" Public outreach efforts using social media and online presence at the Côa Valley Museum and Archaeological Park (Portugal). Internet Archaeology, 47. https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.47.5Bergner, M., Horejs, B., & Pernicka, E. (2009). Zur Herkunft der Obsidianartefakte vom Çukuriçi Höyük. Studia Troica 18, 249-271. https://doi.org/10.15496/publikation-27955Britsch, C., & Horejs, B. (2014). The role of textile production and fishing in the EBA metallurgical centre of Çukuriçi Höyük (Turkey). In Egypt and the Levant (Vol. 24, pp. 227-240). https://doi.org/10.1553/s227Copeland, T. (2004). Presenting archaeology to the public: constructing insights on-site. In N. Merriman (Ed.), Public Archaeology (pp. 132-144). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203646052Cots, I., Vilà, J., Diloli, J., Ferré, R., & Bricio, L. (2018). Virtual archaeology: From archaeological excavation to the management and diffusion of heritage. Les cases de la catedral (Tortosa) and the protohistorical settlement of la Cella (Salou), Tarragona. Virtual Archaeology Review, 9(19), 102-113. https://doi.org/10.4995/VAR.2018.9754Davis, E. T., Scott, K., Pair, J., Hodges, L. F., & Oliverio, J. (1999). Can Audio Enhance Visual Perception and Performance in a Virtual Environment? Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 43(22), 1197-1201. https://doi.org/10.1177/154193129904302206Denard, H. (Ed.). (2009). The London Charter for the computer-based visualisation of cultural heritage. http://www.londoncharter.org/fileadmin/templates/main/docs/london_charter_2_1_en.pdfDerde, W., & Ludwig, T. (2016). Heritage Interpretation. In G. Tilkin (Ed.), Professional Development in Heritage Interpretation - Manual (pp. 10-20). Landcommanderij Alden Biesen. http://www.interpret-europe.net/fileadmin/Documents/projects/InHerit/Manual-InHerit-EN.pdfFurukawa, Y., Curless, B., Seitz, S. M., & Szeliski, R. (2009). Reconstructing building interiors from images. 2009 IEEE 12th International Conference on Computer Vision, 80-87. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCV.2009.5459145Furukawa, Y., Curless, B., Seitz, S. M., & Szeliski, R. (2010). Towards Internet-scale Multi-view Stereo. 2010 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 1434-1441. https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2010.5539802Galik, A. (2013). Çukuriçi Höyük Zooarchaeology Data. Çukuriçi Höyük Zooarchaeology. https://doi.org/10.6078/M7RF5RZ7Goldstein, A. (1980). Thrills in response to music and other stimuli. Physiological Psychology, 8(1), 126-129. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03326460Ham, S. H., Carter, J., Beck, L., Cable, T., & Ward, C. (2013). Conversations: Tilden's fifth principle. Journal of Interpretation Research, 18(1), 97-104.Hermon, S. (2008). 3D Modelling and Virtual Reality for the Archaeological Research and Museum Communication of Cultural Heritage. In I. Oberländer-Târnoveanu (Ed.), Museum and the Internet. Presenting Cultural Heritage Resources On-line. Selected Papers from the International Summer Course in Buşteni, Romania, 20th - 26th of September, 2004 (pp. 57-72). Arcaeolingua. https://www.academia.edu/285879/3D_Modelling_and_Virtual_Reality_for_the_Archaeological_Research_and_Museum_Communication_of_Cultural_HeritageHermon, S., & Niccoluci, F. (2018). Digital Authenticity and the London Charter principles. In Authenticity and cultural heritage in the age of 3D digital reproductions. (pp. 37-47). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.27029Hill, S., & Cable, T. T. (2006). The Concept of Authenticity: Implications for Interpretation. Journal of Interpretation Research, 11(1), 55-65.Horejs, B. (2017). Çukuriçi Höyük 1. Anatolia and the Aegean from the 7th to the 3rd Millennium BC. In OREA 5. Austrian Academy of Sciences Press.Horejs, B., Galik, A., Thanheiser, U., & Wiesinger, S. (2011). Aktivitäten und Subsistenz in den Siedlungen des Çukuriçi Höyük. Der Forschungsstand nach den Ausgrabungen 2006-2009. Praehistorische Zeitschrift, 86(1), 31-66. https://doi.org/10.1515/pz.2011.003Howard, P. (2003). Heritage : management, interpretation, identity. Continuum International Publishing.Howland, M. D. (2018). 3D Recording in the Field: Style Without Substance? In Cyber-Archaeology and Grand Narratives (Issue 13, pp. 19-33). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65693-9_2Institute for Oriental and European Archaeology (OREA), & 7reasons Medien GmbH. (2016). Çukuriçi Höyük.The World Heritage Site through Time. https://defc.acdh.oeaw.ac.at/cukurici-movie/International Forum of Virtual Archaeology. (2011). Principles of Seville. International Principles of Virtual Archeology (p. 20). http://sevilleprinciples.com/Isenberg, T., Neumann, P., Carpendale, S., Sousa, M. C., & Jorge, J. A. (2006). Non-photorealistic rendering in context. Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on Non-Photorealistic Animation and Rendering - NPAR '06, 115-126. https://doi.org/10.1145/1124728.1124747Jones, S., Jeffrey, S., Maxwell, M., Hale, A., & Jones, C. (2018). 3D heritage visualisation and the negotiation of authenticity: the ACCORD project. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 24(4), 333-353. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2017.1378905Kidd, J. (2011). Enacting engagement online: framing social media use for the museum. Information Technology & People, 24(1), 64-77. https://doi.org/10.1108/09593841111109422Knipping, M., Müllenhoff, M., & Brückner, H. (2008). Human induced landscape changes around Bafa Gölü (western Turkey). Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 17(4), 365-380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00334-007-0132-8Ludwig, T. (2015). The Interpretive Guide - Sharing Heritage with People (M. H. Glen (Ed.); 2nd ed.). Bildungswerk interpretation. http://www.interpret-europe.net/fileadmin/Documents/projects/HeriQ/the_interpretive_guide_2015_en.pdfLunenburg, F. C. (2010). Communication : The Process, Barriers, And Improving Effectiveness. Schooling, 1(1), 1-11. https://www.mcgill.ca/engage/files/engage/communication_lunenburg_2010.pdfLužnik, N., & Klein, M. (2016). Interdisciplinary workflow for Virtual Archaeology. Digital Heritage International Congress, Digital Heritage 2015, 177-180. https://doi.org/10.1109/DigitalHeritage.2015.7419481Lužnik Jancsary, N., Horejs, B., Ostmann, F., Schwall, C., & Klein, M. (2016). Documentation of the movie 'Çukuriçi Höyük. The World Heritage Site Through Time.' http://defc.digital-humanities.at/movie/Macnamara, J. (2009). The 21st Century Media (R)evolution. In The 21st Century Media (R)evolution (2nd ed.). Peter Lang US. https://doi.org/10.3726/b15339Mayer, R. E., & Anderson, R. B. (1992). The instructive animation: Helping students build connections between words and pictures in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(4), 444-452. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.84.4.444Merriam-Webster.com. (2019a). Reconstructing | Definition of Reconstructing by Merriam-Webster. Merriam Webster. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reconstructingMerriam-Webster.com. (2019b). Visualize | Definition of Visualize by Merriam-Webster. Www.Merriam-Webster.Com/Dictionary/Visualize. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/visualizeMiller, P., & Richards, J. (1995). The good, the bad, and the downright misleading: archaeological adoption of computer visualization. In J. Huggett & N. Ryan (Eds.), CAA94. Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology 1994 (BAR International Series 600) (pp. 19-22). Tempus Reparatum.Mori, K., & Iwanaga, M. (2017). Two types of peak emotional responses to music: The psychophysiology of chills and tears. Scientific Reports, 7(46063), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep46063Morris, J., & Boone, M. A. (1998). The Effects of Music on Emotional Response, Brand Attitude, and Purchase Intent in an Emotional Advertising Condition. In J. W. Alba & J. W. Hutchinson (Eds.), NA - Advances in Consumer Research (Vol. 25, Issue 1, pp. 518-526).Quiring, O. (2016). Interactivity. In P. Rössler, C. A. Hoffner, & L. Zoonen (Eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Media Effects (pp. 1-13). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118783764.wbieme0191Reilly, P. (1991). Towards a Virtual Archaeology. In S. Rahtz & K. Lockyear (Eds.), CAA90. Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology 1990 (BAR International Series 565) (pp. 133-139). Tempus Reparatum. http://caaconference.org/proceedings/paper/21_reilly_caa_1990/Roussou, M. (2002). Virtual Heritage: from the research lab to the broad public. In F. Niccolucci (Ed.), Virtual archaeology : proceedings of the VAST Euroconference, Arezzo 24-25 November 2000 (pp. 93-100). Archeopress.Russo, A., Watkins, J., Kelly, L., & Chan, S. (2008). Participatory Communication with Social Media. Curator: The Museum Journal, 51(1), 21-31. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2151-6952.2008.tb00292.xSalselas, I., & Penha, R. (2019). The role of sound in inducing storytelling in immersive environments. Proceedings of the 14th International Audio Mostly Conference: A Journey in Sound on ZZZ - AM'19, 191-198. https://doi.org/10.1145/3356590.3356619Schwall, C. (2018). Çukuriçi Höyük 2. Das 5. und 4. Jahrtausend v. Chr. in Westanatolien und der Ostägäis. OREA 7. Vienna: Austrian Academy of Sciences Press.Sloboda, J. A. (1991). Music Structure and Emotional Response: Some Empirical Findings. Psychology of Music, 19(2), 110-120. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735691192002Statham, N. (2019). Scientific rigour of online platforms for 3D visualization of heritage. Virtual Archaeology Review, 10(20), 1. https://doi.org/10.4995/var.2019.9715Stock, F., Ehlers, L., Horejs, B., Knipping, M., Ladstätter, S., Seren, S., & Brückner, H. (2015). Neolithic settlement sites in Western Turkey - palaeogeographic studies at Çukuriçi Höyük and Arvalya Höyük. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, 4, 565-577. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2015.10.009Tachikawa, T., Kaku, M., Iwasaki, A., Gesch, D., Oimoen, M., Zhang, Z., Danielson, J., Krieger, T., Curtis, B., Haase, J., Abrams, M., Crippen, R., Carabajal, C., & Meyer, D. (2011). ASTER Global Digital Elevation Model Version 2 - Summary of Validation Results. http://www.jspacesystems.or.jp/ersdac/GDEM/ver2Validation/Summary_GDEM2_validation_report_final.pdfTilden, F. (2009). Interpreting our heritage (4th ed.). The University of North Carolina Press. https://doi.org/973.07 TILWarner, J. L. (1994). Elmalı-Karataş 2: The Early Bronze Age Village of Karataş. In Archaeological monographs. Bryn Mawr College.Weinreich, H., Obendorf, H., Herder, E., & Mayer, M. (2008). Not quite the average: An empirical study of Web use. ACM Transactions on the Web, 2(1), 31. https://doi.org/10.1145/1326561.132656

Bioinduced precipitation of barite and celestite in dolomite microbialites Examples from Miocene lacustrine sequences in the Madrid and Duero Basins, Spain

This paper provides an ancient analogue for biologically mediated celestite and barite formation in dolomite precipitating microbial mats developed in lacustrine environments during the Miocene. Barite and celestite occurrences were studied in three temporally and spatially separated sedimentary successions: S1 and S2 in the Madrid Basin and S3 in the Duero Basin. In S1, macrocrystalline selenite gypsum occurs as laterally continuous beds; in the two other successions (S2 and S3), calcite pseudomorphs of lenticular gypsum aggregates are hosted in dolomite beds as evidence for the former presence of this evaporite. In S1, only celestite is associated with dolomite. Celestite crystals occur as both intergrown clusters, concentrated in pockets likely created by the dissolution of intrasedimentary anhydrite precursors, and as single precipitates associated with dolomite masses that replace selenite gypsum. Celestite crystals are nucleated commonly on organic substances that are pervasively associated with them. In S2 and S3, scarce single celestite crystals are restricted to calcite pseudomorphs after gypsum, whereas barite is the sulphate precipitated in the pseudomorphs' surroundings. Barite is commonly present as patchy poikilotopic crystals which include microbial structures and is embedded in organic matter. Additionally, barite is found as a secondary precipitate within Ba-bearing feldspars. Feldspar weathering is, thus, envisaged as amajor source of barium at these sites. Petrographical, isotopic and compositional observations point out that the barite and celestite formation was not caused by abiological processes only. Rather, the patchy distribution of the sulphates, close links to organic matter with biogenic isotope signatures, and inclusion of microbial structures, such as biologically mediated dolomite, provides evidence for the involvement of microbes in the formation of the sulphates. The coprecipitation of barite and celestite with dolomite entails complex interactions between different microorganisms and reinforces the biological formation of dolomite in saline lakes

From near and far: Stone procurement and exchange at Çukuriçi Höyük in Western Anatolia

The focus of this paper are the stone tools of Çukuriçi Höyük, a prehistoric site situated at the central Aegean coast of Anatolia. The settlement was inhabited from the Neolithic, through the Late Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age 1 periods, a period lasting from the early 7th to the early 3rd millennium BCE. A long-term interdisciplinary study of the excavated lithics with different scientific methods on various stone materials (thin section analysis, pXRF, NAA, LA-ICP-MS) offer new primary data about the procurement strategies of prehistoric societies from a diachronic perspective. The results will be presented for the first time with an overview of all source materials and their distinct use through time. The lithic assemblages from Çukuriçi Höyük consist of a considerable variety of small finds, grinding stones and chipped stone tools. The high variability of raw materials within the different categories of tools is remarkable. In addition to stone tools manufactured from sources in the immediate vicinity of the settlement (i.e., mica-schist, limestone, marble, amphibolite, serpentinite), others are of rock types such as chert, which indicate an origin within the broader region. Moreover, volcanic rocks, notably the exceptionally high amount of Melian obsidian found at Çukuriçi Höyük, attest to the supra-regional procurement of distinct rock types. Small stone axes made of jadeite presumably from the Greek island of Syros, also indicate these far-reaching procurement strategies. The systematic and diachronic analyses of the stone tools found at Çukuriçi Höyük has demonstrated that as early as the Neolithic period extensive efforts were made to supply the settlement with carefully selected raw materials or finished goods procured from distinct rock sources.   Erratum:• This article was submitted and initially published with only the following authors listed: Christoph Schwall, Michael Brandl, Tatjana M. Gluhak, Bogdana Milić, Lisa Betina, Lasse Sørensen, Danilo Wolf, and Barbara Horejs. After publication of the article, the authors observed that they had forgotten to include Maria M. Martinez as an author and requested that she be added to the list of authors. The current version of the article includes Maria M. Martinez. She should be considered an author also for earlier versions of the article that might be in circulation. &nbsp

New Muli-disciplinary Data from the Neolithic in Serbia. The 2019 and 2021 Excavations at Svinjarička Čuka

The excavations at Svinjarička Čuka in the South Morava Valley in Serbia are presented with new primary data from the field and related material and scientific analyses. Newly recovered architectural remains from the classical Starčevo period revealed a variety of domestic features, so far belonging to an earlier and later occupation phase at the river terrace dating between 5700/5600 and 5500 BC. Details of the stratigraphy and certain materials are presented for selected domestic contexts, including one potential ‘Starčevo house’. Archaeological and scientific analyses are discussed and contextualised within the Neolithisation process in the chapters on new radiocarbon data and their Bayesian modelling, pottery studies, chipped stones and their raw material analyses, grinding kits, animal remains, archaeobotanical results and charcoal analysis. The later occupation at the site is presented with new results for the Middle and Late Bronze Age and the Early Iron Age, including domestic contexts, radiocarbon data and materials.Der Text bietet einen Überblick zu neuen Ergebnissen der Ausgrabungen und naturwissenschaftlichen Untersuchungen an der Fundstelle Svinjarička Čuka im südlichen Morava-Tal in Serbien. Kürzlich gefundene Architekturreste der klassischen Starčevo Kultur belegen eine Reihe unterschiedlicher Siedlungsbefunde, die sich bislang einer früheren und einer späteren Besiedlungsphase auf der Flussterrasse zuordnen lassen, die absolut zwischen 5700/5600 und 5500 calBC datiert werden kann. Die Stratigraphie und Aspekte des Fundmaterials ausgewählter Kontexte werden vorgestellt, darunter ein potentielles „Starčevo Haus“. Archäologische und naturwissenschaftliche Untersuchungen werden diskutiert und im Rahmen des Neolithisierungsprozesses kontextualisiert, mit Abschnitten zu neuen Radiokarbondatierungen und ihrer Bayesschen Modellierung, Keramikuntersuchungen, der geschlagenen Steinindustrie mit ihren Rohstoffquellen, Reibsteinen, den Faunenresten, den Ergebnissen von archäobotanischen und Holzkohleuntersuchungen. Die späteren Besiedlungsphasen des Fundplatzes werden mit neuen Ergebnissen zu Siedlungskontexten, Radiokarbondatierungen und Fundmaterial der mittleren und späten Bronzezeit und der frühen Eisenzeit vorgestellt

Early farmers from across Europe directly descended from Neolithic Aegeans

Farming and sedentism first appeared in southwestern Asia during the early Holocene and later spread to neighboring regions, including Europe, along multiple dispersal routes. Conspicuous uncertainties remain about the relative roles of migration, cultural diffusion, and admixture with local foragers in the early Neolithization of Europe. Here we present paleogenomic data for five Neolithic individuals from northern Greece and northwestern Turkey spanning the time and region of the earliest spread of farming into Europe. We use a novel approach to recalibrate raw reads and call genotypes from ancient DNA and observe striking genetic similarity both among Aegean early farmers and with those from across Europe. Our study demonstrates a direct genetic link between Mediterranean and Central European early farmers and those of Greece and Anatolia, extending the European Neolithic migratory chain all the way back to southwestern Asia