In their cautionary assessment, Crassard and Drechsler (2013) evaluated the basic obstacles and fallacies current Arabia’s Neolithic research is concerned with. In an earlier account, Uerpmann, Potts, and Uerpmann (2009) elaborated on the regional complexity for eastern Arabia, illustrating these basic problems from another perspective: Apart from the specific natural detriments (preservation and accessibility of Arabia’s Neolithic sedimentary environments), Neolithic research is mainly handicapped by: (1) hitherto dispersed fragmentary information from regions of different natural conditions; (2) restricted and rather new field research; and (3) persistent preconceptions influenced mainly by perspectives from the Levant and the Neolithic Package model. These issues lead to an underestimation of Neolithic Arabia’s capacities to have undergone their very own trajectories, reduced the chances to identify cultures as developments in their own right; they Received: 17 July 2019 | Revised: 3 October 2019 | Accepted: 3 October 2019 DOI: 10.1111/aae.12146

中文翻译：

---

多元线性入侵和本土适应：阿拉伯半岛的新石器化和可持续定居

Crassard 和 Drechsler (2013) 在他们的警示性评估中评估了当前阿拉伯新石器时代研究所关注的基本障碍和谬误。Uerpmann、Potts 和 Uerpmann (2009) 在较早的一篇文章中详细阐述了阿拉伯东部的区域复杂性，从另一个角度说明了这些基本问题：除了特定的自然危害（阿拉伯新石器时代沉积环境的保存和可达性），新石器时代研究主要障碍在于：（1）迄今为止，来自不同自然条件地区的零散信息；(2) 受限制且较新的领域研究；(3) 主要受黎凡特和新石器时代包裹模型观点影响的持久成见。这些问题导致人们低估了新石器时代阿拉伯经历其自身轨迹的能力，降低了将文化视为自身发展的机会；他们收到：2019 年 7 月 17 日 | 修订日期：2019 年 10 月 3 日 | 接受：2019 年 10 月 3 日 DOI：10.1111/aae.12146