In the research of early inventions and inventions, \”first\” in technology is the most attention-grabbing, but \”time-consuming\” technologies – situations of rejection and rejection – are clearly more knowledgeable about human behavior in technology. However, cases of technical aberrations are not given much attention in early strategic planning studies, as the lack of solid data makes identification and analysis difficult. Extensive geospatial analysis of more than 4500 gold deposits from the Caucasus, the first gold mining facility, shows a significant decline in 1500 BC in areas with early global evidence of gold mining (c. 3000 BC). Examination of various causal models revealed that social factors, rather than limited resources or human interference, were the main causes of this rejection. These results show that previous forms of rejection and technological losses have underestimated the range of possible scenarios, and have provided strong support for new ideas that reject ideas about technological progress.
The study of new technologies – how innovations are made and why they are spreading – is of great concern to both archeology and social science. The first emergence of large-scale commodities, from plant and animal husbandry to technology such as pottery and clay, has attracted considerable interest, 2,3,4, but over the past decade has shown interest in innovation and development as expanded social and moral processes5, 6,7,8,9. This practice in archeological research has drawn a variety of different research cultures from across social and ethical sciences10,11,12,13. The long-term perspective provided by archeological data has great potential in the field of new research, with a strong focus on innovation, efficiency, and rapid spread. Another common observation from technical anthropology is that technological advances do not always follow the inexplicable sequence of lines from simple to complex, and the spread of new things has never been determined solely by estimates of good performance objectives separated from social context14,15. Technology may be terminated, lost, abandoned, and rejected.
Although interest is widespread in the invention of innovation and in the acceptance of the doctrine of non-compliance with technological change, a systematic analysis of the loss of technology, abandonment, and rejection – especially cases arising after a period of further acquisition – is uncommon16,17. Anecdotal observations of potential cases of technological losses are very common, as are studies of cases of technical resistance and denial of technology among persons prior to acquisition18,19. However, cases of technological abolition – the breakdown of technological systems – teach a great deal about the processes and power of technological change. Research on the loss or rejection of innovation provides tangible details to challenge popular technological ideas such as a linear sequence of complex technologies, leading to each other.
Systematic, robust analysis of technological abolition is hampered by the robustness of the archeological record, making it difficult to identify and investigate. Without a solid archeological database, models reside in untested imagination, and may not accurately capture the range of situations in which such inefficiency occurs. Archaeological work not only expands the scope of new research across communities with large written accounts, but also helps to correct old biases that are accepted in new research into the spread of new 10.10. Recently, large data stocks have proven useful in examining social and technological change models using archaeological data 21,22,23, highlighting the potential of these methods of investigating technology losses.
The Caucasus gold mining case provides a good opportunity to explore why technology is lost or rejected after adoption. Probably from their first appearance in the archaeological record, gold objects have been the hallmarks of status, wealth, culture, and prestige in many complex societies around the world24,25,26. Early gold mining and production required significant expertise, including sophisticated techniques, and involved considerable effort27, coordinating gold production in trade union affairs, technological innovation and social domination. The Caucasus was one of the first places in the world to use gold, with items dating back to the fourth millennium BC28, shortly after halfway through the 5th century BC gold east of the Balkans, across the Black Sea24. The Caucasus is also the site of the first known gold mine, built in c. 3000 BC27. In later times, regional gold was included in Jason\’s Greek mythology, Argonauts, and the Golden Fleece. Archeology has solidified these myths, revealing a remarkable list of bronze and Iron Age gold. Basically, the millennium between c. The 2500s and 1500 BC saw the efficient operation of the gold, which included many manufacturing technologies.
However, at least 700 years after 1500 BC, some of these same sites have seen a dramatic decline in the quantity and hardness of gold. Ironically, Jason\’s voyage, according to the legendary period, falls during a period of limited gold use in the area thought to be Golden Fleece. Even more surprising, this decline in gold performance differs significantly from the copper-alloy metallurgy, which experienced a significant increase during this period29. At a higher level, this controversy is resolved by pointing out that the myth of the Golden Fleece, or at least, its parts that point to the western Caucasus as its territory, must have matured during the first millennium BC the resurgence of the gold mine30. However, there are still big questions: how widespread is this inefficiency, what are the driving factors, and could it be just a matter of archeology and research patterns?
This study presents a complete geospatial analysis of more than 4500 Bronze Age objects and Iron Age objects from the South Caucasus (present-day Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan). It examines the chronological and geographical parameters of these technological suspensions in both measurement and quantity terms. Three descriptive types are tested against the data: restrictions on the acquisition of gold assets, human factors leading to declining technological transfer, and active rejection associated with the middle of the second millennium BC social transformation.
The data strongly suggests that the decline in gold in the Middle Kura area is not an artificial pattern related to the appearance of archeology or ancient depositing practices, but rather a case of technological rejection. The metaphor for the location of gold deposits and the analysis of archeological data contradicts resource constraints and human models, and supports a model of technological rejection in which social factors – particularly the involvement of gold in certain cultural practices emphasizing extreme social governance – played a major role.
The abolition of gold ore in parts of the Southern Caucasus is significant because it occurs during a period of population growth, significant prosperity, and the great invention of other metallurgical technologies. Therefore, it differs from other models of social collapse and technological losses, suggesting that the range of conditions in which technological suspensions are likely to be unknown.
Technology suspension models
Discontinuation of technology is a common term used to refer to the establishment of a technological culture, without implying the magnitude of the objectives (active rejection versus loss of inactivity) or the introduction of value definitions (e.g. “De-innovation”). The terms discontinuance and discontinuity also contain a clear analysis of progressive, straightforward, ambiguous ideas about technological change. This term refers to the preliminary period of partial detection, which separates you from the related, but distinct conditions of non-acceptance or delayed acquisition. In contrast to technical suspensions, non-acquisitions and delays in acquisition — resistance to new technologies during the first encounter — were better documented by archeology5,18,31,32.
Another reason for technology cuts, especially in situations where public interest and technology demand remains high, is the loss of access to essential resources in their operations. Technology that relies on chains to provide long distances and rare items can get into this kind of loss. This can lead to a local or systemic decline in technology, depending on the level of interdependence. On the other hand, operational losses are less likely to have technological advances with adequate local resources. An indirect, but clearly related model is one where long-distance commodity exchanges create the resources needed to fund a particular industry with the support of attached professionals, or by marketing its products. The disintegration of these exchange networks will lead to sector abandonment and loss of technology, perhaps even if the resources themselves are available locally.
Personality traits are the second leading cause of technological losses, with a strong focus on evolutionary approaches to cultural transmission17,33,34,35. Henrich\’s model suggests that when the number of employees is too small, incomplete transfer capabilities often lead to a decrease in technology, eventually diminishing until they eliminate waste33. Complex technology – especially those that take a lot of time to learn – can be very easy to lose under these circumstances. This model has been criticized both in terms of its theoretical foundations, and its application to the most cited case studies, that of contacting Tasmanian natives9,36 earlier. However, census has been suggested as an important factor in some of the archeological developments of delays in innovation32 and loss of technology17. Since gold and metal mining were specialized hands that involved complex thermodynamic and mechanical modifications, it is worth considering whether human change may have contributed to its transmission.
Also falling under the category of drivers of types of people the loss of technology are things like demographic change. People are often sealed with a sign, and the movement of people in, or out of the region can disrupt the vertical transfer of technological traditions to these areas. As the movement of young people into the region can bring in new technologies, technological traditions may disappear in areas where indigenous workers are displaced, killed, or forced to abandon traditional practices. At the same time, it is worth noting that the power of adaptation, persistence, and well-written resistance between Indigenous cultures and technological traditions in the American colonial world19,37,38, suggests that extreme humanitarian pressures are not sufficient conditions for the loss of technology.
The social factors driving the cessation of technology include the melting of social demand and the effective rejection of technological practices. Just as the spread of innovation depends on the social and cultural context, social changes can prevent the transfer of knowledge between generations of technological knowledge and the preservation of technological culture. This is especially true of technologies that are closely linked to certain social and political institutions. Technology produced by attached professionals, controlled or supported by such organizations, may be lost when these institutions collapse or are rejected when the existing social order is destroyed. Indeed, among the archeological examples of technological losses, there is often a strong connection to that social and political turmoil.
It is important to emphasize that resource constraints, human characteristics, and changing social needs are not independent of each other. Indeed, they can grow closer to one another. Lack of social demand can reduce the number of employees, exacerbate human problems through the transfer of technology, and create supply problems. Likewise, the ongoing deterioration of exchange networks could change the nature of social demand, as other materials and technologies grow in popularity, delaying renewal even if it is replaced by supply channels. Human changes, such as the shift in the ranks of the upper castes, can put new social pressure on the use or restriction of certain technologies, especially if those technologies are strongly integrated with the higher forms of authority building.
These various factors affect the archeological record in a practical way through extensive data analysis of spatial and chronological order, resulting in the testing of various types of technological suspensions. In the case of the Caucasus, if supplies were the most important factor in the loss of technology, one would expect to find that the availability of gold deposits differs significantly between regions that have made and have not experienced a decline in gold performance, and that gold consumption declines significantly in remote areas. Demographic changes can be seen in the number of habitats, or evidence (genetic and / or archaeological) of large influx of new groups of people. Indirect loss proxies driven by human pressure include a corresponding decline in metallurgical scales and technologies among other industries, or evidence of population decline, such as a decrease in the number of settlements.
The combined database contains 4555 gold objects from 89 sites, between 4000 and 500 BC (Supplementary Datasets S1 and S2; Supplementary Table S1). Items range from simple paper beads to complex compositions including multi-filigree technology, granulation, repoussé, lost-wax casting, and carnelian inserts, glass and more. Most of the stolen items have some detail details, especially in cemeteries.