No General Descriptions provided.
| inferred Absent |
| inferred Absent |
| inferred Absent |
| inferred Absent |
| inferred Absent |
| inferred Absent |
| inferred Absent |
| inferred Absent |
| inferred Absent |
| Year Range | Middle and Late Nok (ni_nok_2) was in: |
|---|
"Although there is an abundance of archaeological remains in the ground of the area where it once spread, there is no indication of agglomerations of people above village level, thus there is no evidence that would warrant the existence of communities of a size that would be necessary to develop social stratification, which is regarded as one of the attributes of social complexity. Numerous excavations and prospections have contributed to the notion that no towns or any kind of urban environments existed. The rather small size of almost all recorded sites and the comparatively small quantities of excavated cultural remains even rule out village communities. Apparently the typical settlement of the Nok Culture which occupied the prehistoric landscape during all phases was either a hamlet or a single compound. What can be concluded from this is that there was no high population density and that Nok communities were small-scaled and organised in locally autonomous groups. Probably these groups consisted of only one or a few extended families or a comparable number of people living together at one site." [1]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 252) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R.
"[T]he Nok Culture can be viewed as a tripartite complex: starting with the onset of farming in the middle of the second millennium BCE, leading to a flourishing period between approximately 900 and 400 BCE with dense occupation, elaborate terracotta art and the advent of iron metallurgy, followed by its sudden decline and ultimate disappearance in the last centuries BCE. The Nok tradition vanishes around the turn of the eras, possibly related to unfavourable environmental changes (Höhn & Neumann 2016). Younger sites, up to historical times, are grouped together artificially as “Post-Nok” sites, in order to separate them from the Nok sites. Besides the complete absence of Nok sculptures, there is also a marked difference in pottery decoration techniques as well as in the chemical composition of the clay used for pottery making (Beck 2015; Franke 2015)." [1]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 244) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R.
"[T]he Nok Culture can be viewed as a tripartite complex: starting with the onset of farming in the middle of the second millennium BCE, leading to a flourishing period between approximately 900 and 400 BCE with dense occupation, elaborate terracotta art and the advent of iron metallurgy, followed by its sudden decline and ultimate disappearance in the last centuries BCE. The Nok tradition vanishes around the turn of the eras, possibly related to unfavourable environmental changes (Höhn & Neumann 2016). Younger sites, up to historical times, are grouped together artificially as “Post-Nok” sites, in order to separate them from the Nok sites. Besides the complete absence of Nok sculptures, there is also a marked difference in pottery decoration techniques as well as in the chemical composition of the clay used for pottery making (Beck 2015; Franke 2015)." [1]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 244) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R.
"As demonstrated by the uniformity of their material culture and their presumed belief system, most prominently reflected by the terracotta sculptures, external contacts within their culture must have existed. However, such a larger social network apparently was not organised and maintained in a way as to infer social inequality, social hierarchies or other signs of internal demarcation traceable by available archaeological data. None of the numerous excavations brought to light architectural remains of specified buildings or the spatial organisation of housing areas that might have been occupied by high-ranking members of the community. Further, among the admittedly few features interpreted as graves there is no evidence of any heterogeneity pointing to a difference between burials of elite members or commoners. Nowhere, an accumulation of valuable objects neither of iron nor any other materials signifying inequality in terms of property or prosperity was found." [1]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 252) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R.
Inhabitants. "Although there is an abundance of archaeological remains in the ground of the area where it once spread, there is no indication of agglomerations of people above village level, thus there is no evidence that would warrant the existence of communities of a size that would be necessary to develop social stratification, which is regarded as one of the attributes of social complexity. Numerous excavations and prospections have contributed to the notion that no towns or any kind of urban environments existed. The rather small size of almost all recorded sites and the comparatively small quantities of excavated cultural remains even rule out village communities. Apparently the typical settlement of the Nok Culture which occupied the prehistoric landscape during all phases was either a hamlet or a single compound. What can be concluded from this is that there was no high population density and that Nok communities were small-scaled and organised in locally autonomous groups. Probably these groups consisted of only one or a few extended families or a comparable number of people living together at one site." [1]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 252) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R.
in squared kilometers. " Other information obtained by examining illicit diggings concerns the average size of Nok sites. Commonly, looters will continue to dig as long as they come across cultural deposits which are an indicator for potentially valuable finds. They cease their efforts once they reach sterile soil, or — although according to local accounts this very rarely happens — a more promising site is discovered nearby. For this reason the extent of the looted area, which is rather unmissable because the pits are usually not backfilled and leave a landscape perforated by hollows (Fig. 5), roughly reflects the distribution of cultural deposits in the ground and thus indicates the size of a site. Naturally, not every recorded illicitly excavated Nok site has been measured in detail to confirm its respective expanse, but if the assumed relation between the visibly looted area and the extent of the site is correct, many Nok sites cover an area of about one to two hectares." [1] Note that "[a]lthough there is an abundance of archaeological remains in the ground of the area where it once spread, there is no indication of agglomerations of people above village level, thus there is no evidence that would warrant the existence of communities of a size that would be necessary to develop social stratification, which is regarded as one of the attributes of social complexity." [2]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 244) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R.
[2]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 252) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R.
Inhabitants. "Although there is an abundance of archaeological remains in the ground of the area where it once spread, there is no indication of agglomerations of people above village level, thus there is no evidence that would warrant the existence of communities of a size that would be necessary to develop social stratification, which is regarded as one of the attributes of social complexity. Numerous excavations and prospections have contributed to the notion that no towns or any kind of urban environments existed. The rather small size of almost all recorded sites and the comparatively small quantities of excavated cultural remains even rule out village communities. Apparently the typical settlement of the Nok Culture which occupied the prehistoric landscape during all phases was either a hamlet or a single compound. What can be concluded from this is that there was no high population density and that Nok communities were small-scaled and organised in locally autonomous groups. Probably these groups consisted of only one or a few extended families or a comparable number of people living together at one site." [1]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 252) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R.
levels. "Although there is an abundance of archaeological remains in the ground of the area where it once spread, there is no indication of agglomerations of people above village level, thus there is no evidence that would warrant the existence of communities of a size that would be necessary to develop social stratification, which is regarded as one of the attributes of social complexity. Numerous excavations and prospections have contributed to the notion that no towns or any kind of urban environments existed. The rather small size of almost all recorded sites and the comparatively small quantities of excavated cultural remains even rule out village communities. Apparently the typical settlement of the Nok Culture which occupied the prehistoric landscape during all phases was either a hamlet or a single compound. What can be concluded from this is that there was no high population density and that Nok communities were small-scaled and organised in locally autonomous groups. Probably these groups consisted of only one or a few extended families or a comparable number of people living together at one site." [1]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 252) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R.
levels. Inferred from the following quote. "As demonstrated by the uniformity of their material culture and their presumed belief system, most prominently reflected by the terracotta sculptures, external contacts within their culture must have existed. However, such a larger social network apparently was not organised and maintained in a way as to infer social inequality, social hierarchies or other signs of internal demarcation traceable by available archaeological data. None of the numerous excavations brought to light architectural remains of specified buildings or the spatial organisation of housing areas that might have been occupied by high-ranking members of the community. Further, among the admittedly few features interpreted as graves there is no evidence of any heterogeneity pointing to a difference between burials of elite members or commoners. Nowhere, an accumulation of valuable objects neither of iron nor any other materials signifying inequality in terms of property or prosperity was found." [1]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 252) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R.
levels. Inferred from the following quote. "As demonstrated by the uniformity of their material culture and their presumed belief system, most prominently reflected by the terracotta sculptures, external contacts within their culture must have existed. However, such a larger social network apparently was not organised and maintained in a way as to infer social inequality, social hierarchies or other signs of internal demarcation traceable by available archaeological data. None of the numerous excavations brought to light architectural remains of specified buildings or the spatial organisation of housing areas that might have been occupied by high-ranking members of the community. Further, among the admittedly few features interpreted as graves there is no evidence of any heterogeneity pointing to a difference between burials of elite members or commoners. Nowhere, an accumulation of valuable objects neither of iron nor any other materials signifying inequality in terms of property or prosperity was found." [1]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 252) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R.
levels. Inferred from the following: "As demonstrated by the uniformity of their material culture and their presumed belief system, most prominently reflected by the terracotta sculptures, external contacts within their culture must have existed. However, such a larger social network apparently was not organised and maintained in a way as to infer social inequality, social hierarchies or other signs of internal demarcation traceable by available archaeological data. None of the numerous excavations brought to light architectural remains of specified buildings or the spatial organisation of housing areas that might have been occupied by high-ranking members of the community. Further, among the admittedly few features interpreted as graves there is no evidence of any heterogeneity pointing to a difference between burials of elite members or commoners. Nowhere, an accumulation of valuable objects neither of iron nor any other materials signifying inequality in terms of property or prosperity was found." [1]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 252) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R.
Inferred from the following quote. "In sum, we have not found unambiguous evidence of social complexity and the often suggested highly advanced social system of the Nok Culture. [...] As demonstrated by the uniformity of their material culture and their presumed belief system, most prominently reflected by the terracotta sculptures, external contacts within their culture must have existed. However, such a larger social network apparently was not organised and maintained in a way as to infer social inequality, social hierarchies or other signs of internal demarcation traceable by available archaeological data. None of the numerous excavations brought to light architectural remains of specified buildings or the spatial organisation of housing areas that might have been occupied by high-ranking members of the community. Further, among the admittedly few features interpreted as graves there is no evidence of any heterogeneity pointing to a difference between burials of elite members or commoners. Nowhere, an accumulation of valuable objects neither of iron nor any other materials signifying inequality in terms of property or prosperity was found." [1]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 252) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R.
Inferred from the following quote. "In sum, we have not found unambiguous evidence of social complexity and the often suggested highly advanced social system of the Nok Culture. [...] As demonstrated by the uniformity of their material culture and their presumed belief system, most prominently reflected by the terracotta sculptures, external contacts within their culture must have existed. However, such a larger social network apparently was not organised and maintained in a way as to infer social inequality, social hierarchies or other signs of internal demarcation traceable by available archaeological data. None of the numerous excavations brought to light architectural remains of specified buildings or the spatial organisation of housing areas that might have been occupied by high-ranking members of the community. Further, among the admittedly few features interpreted as graves there is no evidence of any heterogeneity pointing to a difference between burials of elite members or commoners. Nowhere, an accumulation of valuable objects neither of iron nor any other materials signifying inequality in terms of property or prosperity was found." [1]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 252) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R.
Inferred from the following quote. "In sum, we have not found unambiguous evidence of social complexity and the often suggested highly advanced social system of the Nok Culture. [...] As demonstrated by the uniformity of their material culture and their presumed belief system, most prominently reflected by the terracotta sculptures, external contacts within their culture must have existed. However, such a larger social network apparently was not organised and maintained in a way as to infer social inequality, social hierarchies or other signs of internal demarcation traceable by available archaeological data. None of the numerous excavations brought to light architectural remains of specified buildings or the spatial organisation of housing areas that might have been occupied by high-ranking members of the community. Further, among the admittedly few features interpreted as graves there is no evidence of any heterogeneity pointing to a difference between burials of elite members or commoners. Nowhere, an accumulation of valuable objects neither of iron nor any other materials signifying inequality in terms of property or prosperity was found." [1]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 252) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R.
" There are no indications of far- or middle-distance exchange or trade contacts (apart from a few stone raw materials that do not occur locally and the depiction of a sea shell on the head of a male terracotta sculpture), no signs of communal construction activities, and no preserved facilities to store agricultural surplus. [...] It has to be considered that the preservation of features in Nok sites is generally poor and that the amount of data is not too large and regionally restricted to a rather small key study area." [1]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 253) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R.
"There are [...] no signs of communal construction activities, and no preserved facilities to store agricultural surplus. [...] It has to be considered that the preservation of features in Nok sites is generally poor and that the amount of data is not too large and regionally restricted to a rather small key study area." [1]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 253) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R.
"There are [...] no signs of communal construction activities, and no preserved facilities to store agricultural surplus. [...] It has to be considered that the preservation of features in Nok sites is generally poor and that the amount of data is not too large and regionally restricted to a rather small key study area." [1]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 253) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R.
"There are [...] no signs of communal construction activities, and no preserved facilities to store agricultural surplus. [...] It has to be considered that the preservation of features in Nok sites is generally poor and that the amount of data is not too large and regionally restricted to a rather small key study area." [1]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 253) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R.
"There are [...] no signs of communal construction activities, and no preserved facilities to store agricultural surplus. [...] It has to be considered that the preservation of features in Nok sites is generally poor and that the amount of data is not too large and regionally restricted to a rather small key study area." [1]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 253) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R.
"There are [...] no signs of communal construction activities, and no preserved facilities to store agricultural surplus. [...] It has to be considered that the preservation of features in Nok sites is generally poor and that the amount of data is not too large and regionally restricted to a rather small key study area." [1]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 253) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R.
"There are [...] no signs of communal construction activities, and no preserved facilities to store agricultural surplus. [...] It has to be considered that the preservation of features in Nok sites is generally poor and that the amount of data is not too large and regionally restricted to a rather small key study area." [1]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 253) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R.
"There are [...] no signs of communal construction activities, and no preserved facilities to store agricultural surplus. [...] It has to be considered that the preservation of features in Nok sites is generally poor and that the amount of data is not too large and regionally restricted to a rather small key study area." [1]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 253) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R.
"There are [...] no signs of communal construction activities, and no preserved facilities to store agricultural surplus. [...] It has to be considered that the preservation of features in Nok sites is generally poor and that the amount of data is not too large and regionally restricted to a rather small key study area." [1]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 253) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R.
" There are no indications of far- or middle-distance exchange or trade contacts (apart from a few stone raw materials that do not occur locally and the depiction of a sea shell on the head of a male terracotta sculpture), no signs of communal construction activities, and no preserved facilities to store agricultural surplus. [...] It has to be considered that the preservation of features in Nok sites is generally poor and that the amount of data is not too large and regionally restricted to a rather small key study area." [1]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 253) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R.
"Apart from settlement sites, there are a few sites containing deliberately positioned stone arrangements combined with clay vessels and occasionally terracotta fragments (Rupp 2010: 71). Some of them are suggested to represent burials and are discussed below. Other sites contain large parts of one or more terracotta sculptures which were mostly intentionally deposited. In the case of Utak Kamuan Garaje Kagoro (Rupp 2014b), no settlement site has been found in the vicinity suggesting that ritual sites were located away from inhabited areas in remote and isolated places and are thus rarely discovered." [1]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 249) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R.