Prehistoric communities carried out quarrying activities to obtain raw materials for tool production. These were produced either directly for immediate or later use by the same groups who quarried the stone, or indirectly by distributing the raw material or partially or completely manufactured products to third parties. All these procedures could be performed within a temporal and spatial sequence of variable extent, giving rise to archaeological evidence of very different types (Nelson 1991; Ingold 2012).

Archaeologists worldwide have shown much interest in the origins of metallurgy in China (e.g. Mei 2005; Hanks et al. 2007; Parzinger 2011; Fan et al. 2012). Around 2200–1700 BC, the Seima-Turbino Culture originated in the Altai Mountains of Central Asia and spread across the Eurasian steppes (Chernykh 2004, 2008). The most iconic artefact of this culture is the socketed spearhead with single side hook; these have been found across the Eurasian steppes (Figure 1: 1–2). Two new observations of these spearheads suggest that Seima-Turbino metal-casting technology was responsible for the development of metallurgy in China.

Art and archaeology have always been an important part of my life, and it is only in the last couple of years that I have realised how I can unite them. Let me explain. I am the daughter of Alan Sorrell—an artist best known for his archaeological reconstruction drawings (Perry & Johnson 2014: 323; Figure 1)—and throughout my childhood we visited sites around the country, linking work and holidays. As an artist, my father would gradually gather information to visualise yet another archaeological site while my brothers and I played. In time, I too became an artist fascinated by the abstraction and geometry of the natural world. When awarded the first TravelArt award 2015 by the ACE Foundation, I was asked to produce an exhibition of paintings of Orkney. This unleashed a latent desire to find my own personal interpretation of archaeology.

A recent study of the Quranwala Zone (QZ) of the north-west sub-Himalayas, India, presents evidence for anthropic activity during the Pliocene that includes a number of stone tools found in association with fossil animal bones with cut marks. Based on the date of the Pliocene rock outcrop, the tools and bones are suggested to date from 2.6 Ma (Gaillard et al. 2016). There is, however, a question mark over the context of these tools within an outcrop of Pliocene rocks and, hence, over the date of these tools and the fossil bones. The trench from which they were excavated at Masol 2 (Gaillard et al.2016: fig. 3) lies in a depression at the bottom of a slope; the description provided in section 2 of the paper by Gaillard et al. (2016) suggests that the stone tools may not have been in situ within the Pliocene levels, but had accumulated there and were mixed with the fragments of fossil bone due to geological processes. Moreover, many of the stone tools, such as the ‘simple choppers’ found in association with the fossil animal bones (Gaillard et al.2016: figs 6, 8, 9), are usually found on much more recent sites and are therefore unlikely to date from 2.6 Ma.

Despite the potential importance of southern Iran, and the Persian Gulf area in particular, for discussions on the dispersal of early hominins from Africa into Eurasia during the late Pliocene and early Pleistocene (Bar-Yosef & Belfer-Cohen 2001; Rose 2010), this area has remained almost unexplored until recently. Historically, Palaeolithic survey and excavations in Iran have mainly concentrated in western regions, especially the Zagros Mountains. As a result of recent studies, however, evidence for Palaeolithic sites in the southern regions of Iran, from Fars province to Qeshm Island, has greatly increased (Dashtizade 2009, 2010). Even with this improvement, no sites of Lower Palaeolithic date have yet been reported from the southern coastal areas on one of the proposed early hominin routes into Eurasia. As a result, it has been suggested that the few Lower Palaeolithic sites reported from other parts of Iran, especially in the west (e.g. Biglari & Shidrang 2006), were not populated from the south.

There is a paucity of Palaeolithic art in the southern Levant prior to 15 000 years ago. The Natufian culture (15 000–11 500 BP; Grosman 2013) marks a threshold in the magnitude and diversity of artistic manifestations (Bar-Yosef 1997). Nevertheless, depictions of the human form remain rare—only a few representations of the human face have been reported to date. This article presents a 12 000-year-old example unearthed at the Late Natufian site of Nahal Ein Gev II (NEGII), just east of the Sea of Galilee, Israel (Figure 1). The object provides a glimpse into Natufian conventions of human representation, and opens a rare opportunity for deeper understanding of the Natufian symbolic system.

In 1960, Robert Braidwood discovered, by chance, an Acheulean biface at Gakia, Kermanshah Province, in the Zagros Mountains of western Iran (Braidwood 1960). Since then, only around ten Lower Palaeolithic sites have been identified on the Iranian Plateau, most of which are open-air sites (see Biglari & Shidrang 2006). Despite growing interest in the Palaeolithic of Iran over the past decade, studies generally continue to focus on particular sites and are largely concerned with the technology and typology of raw materials. A major problem for studies of the Lower Palaeolithic, in particular, is the rarity of cave sites, making it very difficult to study the behaviour of the early hominids through excavation. This paper reports the discovery of an Acheulean biface during a survey of the Deh Luran Plain to the south of the plateau, adding to the picture of human dispersal during the Pleistocene.

At the onset of the Iron Age, after c. 1200 BC, Iran was a place of major social transformation. After the collapse of the Bronze Age urban civilisations, the land was inhabited mainly by groups of mobile pastoralists that gradually transitioned from tribal organisation into loose federations, before finally developing into the Median and Persian early states (Potts 2014). This transition is still poorly recognised, as settlement sites from this period are scarce and most evidence is from cemeteries that were excavated many decades ago. Here we report results of excavations at a recently discovered cemetery that may provide new insights into the social complexity and cultural affinities of Iron Age nomads in Iran.

Until about two decades ago, the Neolithic of north-east Iran was known only from a few brief excavation reports: the sites of Yarim Tappeh (Stronach 1972) and Turang Tappeh (Deshayes 1967) on the Gorgan Plain, and preliminary reports of large-scale excavations at the twin mound of Sang-e Chakhmaq in the southern foothills of the eastern Alborz Mountains (e.g. Masuda 1984). In the absence of absolute chronologies, these sites were dated by ceramic assemblages to the sixth millennium BC, and were considered to relate to the so-called ‘Jeitun Culture’ of southern Turkmenistan (Figure 1; Roustaei 2016a).

The Pleistocene archaeological record of South Asia is important for questions relating to the origin and evolution of Palaeolithic cultures, continuity or change in lithic technologies, and the dispersals of humans across Asia. With these issues in mind, the research project presented here has set out to investigate the basin of the Wainganga River of the Deccan Plateau, southern India.

Buddhism spread from northern India throughout the Asian continent from the first century BC onwards. As it spread, it changed and adapted to suit the new peoples and customs with which it came into contact. In recent years, studies have been undertaken on the landscape archaeology of Indian, Central Asian and Southeast Asian Buddhism. By focusing on China, this study represents a preliminary step in attempting to illuminate a new aspect of early Buddhist practice in China. It considers the chronological implications of the way in which the sites are positioned within the landscape. The study is based on survey work and site visits undertaken over the last five years, during the course of which certain patterns began to emerge. Based on these observations, an initial hypothesis was formed which states that the visibility of the locations into which cave sites are carved increases over time. Visibility is taken as the presence or prominence of a site within the physical landscape. This study focuses only on rock-cut cave-temples because they can still be clearly seen within their (nearly) original landscape settings. They can also be dated with relative accuracy on stylistic grounds. The same cannot be said of surface religious structures.

Archaeological fieldwork in the central Helmand Valley of modern-day Afghanistan has been sparse as a result of the region's remoteness and lack of security; the work that has been done suggests that the area has been occupied since prehistoric times. The Central Helmand Archaeological Study (CHAS) is the most recent archaeological field research to be conducted in the valley. It was launched in 2011 with the support of the US Marine Corps and the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, to locate and record archaeological sites in the region and to report any evidence of looting or damage (Abramiuk & Wong 2015). This paper reports on some early findings in the course of continuing analysis and provides a preliminary assessment.

The Late Neolithic houses excavated at Drenovac, Serbia, rank amongst the best-preserved in Europe. In particular, the preservation of collapsed second-storey floors offers unique insights into household and social organisation. The site of Slatina-Turska česma, Drenovac, is located in the Middle Morava Valley of central Serbia (Figure 1). It is a deeply stratified site, with cultural deposits up to 6.5m thick, that spans two main periods of occupation (separated by a hiatus of approximately 700 years): the Early Neolithic Starčevo Culture (6100–5900 BC) and the Late Neolithic Vinča Culture (5300–4700/4500 BC). The site was first recorded in 1966, and the first large-scale excavations undertaken between 1968 and 1971 (Vetnić 1974: 125–39; Perić 2004). In 2004, the Archaeological Institute in Belgrade conducted further excavations to improve understanding of the site's chronology, stratigraphy, formation processes and occupation dynamics (Perić 2009; Perić & Perić 2014). Geomagnetic surveys were carried out in parallel with further excavations undertaken between 2008 and 2011 in cooperation with the Romano–Germanic Commission of the German Archaeological Institute (Perić et al. 2016) and, between 2012 and 2013, with the Viminacium Centre for New Technologies. An extensive geomagnetic survey here offers extraordinary insights into the layout and extent of the Late Neolithic settlement, and has enabled targeted excavations (Figure 1).

Mycenaean monumental architecture has been well studied. Yet the extent to which large-scale building programmes may have contributed to change and crises in Late Bronze Age Greece (c. 1600–1100/1070 BC) has never been investigated using actual field data. The aim of the SETinSTONE project is to assess if and how monumental building activities in Late Bronze Age Greece affected the political and socio-economic structures of Mycenaean polities, and how people may have responded to these changes (Brysbaert 2013).