Mesolithic Hunter-Gatherers in the Carpathian Basin and the Spread of Agriculture in Europe By William J. Eichmann .................................................................................. University of Wisconsin, Madison Archaeological Institute of the [email protected] Hungarian Academy of Sciences 1014, Úri u. 49, Budapest Advisers: Dr. Eszter Bánffy and Dr. Róbert Kertész .................................................................................. Seminal research in the 1970’s resulted in the recognition that events in Transdanubia (western Hungary) during the 6th millennium B.C. were pivotal to the spread of agriculture to north central Europe. Two perspectives have figured prominently in the debate: 1) agriculture was directly spread by migrating agricultural populations; and 2) agriculture spread through the adoption of agricultural practices by indigenous hunter- gatherer populations. In Hungary the spread of agriculture has primarily been approached from the perspective of the first farmers (Neolithic). Limited archaeological evidence from Mesolithic hunter-gatherers during the Early Holocene (~10,000-6,000 B.C.) in the Carpathian Basin has made it difficult to consider their role in the entire process. It is argued that the complex process of agricultural spread may be more comprehensible if research is specifically directed toward identifying long term evolutionary trends in Mesolithic hunter-gatherer society. This paper provides a summary of extant evidence from the Mesolithic and Neolithic in Hungary, with an emphasis on Transdanubia, and presents some of the preliminary results of recent research on the Mesolithic. Introduction The prehistoric spread of agriculture B.C. the first agricultural societies was the impetus for one of the most (Neolithic) in Europe appeared in significant reorganizations of human Greece, and by the early 4th millennium society. In the middle 7th millennium B.C. nearly the entire European 161 Student Conference 2004 continent was more or less dependent on the Two basic mechanisms have been enlisted by-products of domestic animals and plants. to explain the spread of agriculture: 1.) The Neolithic is often associated with the Migration – spread of agricultural societies first ceramics and a more sedentary life in through movement of agriculturalists; 2.) villages. Within the past quarter century the Diffusion – indigenous hunter-gatherers Carpathian Basin, and Transdanubia in adopt items, ideas and practices associated particular, has been identified as one of the with agricultural society (domestic plants more important regions for understanding and animals, pottery, etc.). Migration and the Neolithization of Europe. Archaeology, Diffusion represent the ends of a variagated as a discipline, developed in Europe during spectrum of mechanisms, recently summa- the mid to late 19th century (Trigger 1989). rized by Zvelebil (2000), including folk This long research tradition has produced an migration, demic diffusion, elite dominance, unprecedented volume of data for examining community infiltration, leapfrog coloniza- the spread of agriculture in Europe. tion, exchange in frontier zones, and region- V. Gordan Childe, an influential early dis- al exchange. Apart from the slipperiness in cussant, characterized the spread of agricul- defining and distinguishing between hunter- ture as a revolutionary event in which gatherers and farmers during transitional Neolithic societies demographically invigor- stages (e.g. see Gronenborn 2003: 86; Smith ated by a more efficient productive economy 2001), it certainly the case that agriculture spread rapidly across the European conti- spread through a variety of mechanisms with nent from an initial foothold in Southeast- different underlying causes at different times ern Europe (Childe 1929). He considered and places. Determining which mechanism that most important innovations of cultural dominated in particular situations hinges import, and especially agriculture, derived upon the extent to which we can recognize from South West Asia or the Orient and continuity or discontinuity amongst differ- were transmitted throughout Europe along ent categories of archaeological evidence. In the Danube corridor. Childe, an open Marx- order to address the issue of continuity we ist, presented views that were at the time must incorporate a substantial understand- quite novel and contradictory to researchers ing of long-term trends in the cultural evo- who, often with strong nationalist senti- lution of the different peoples involved in ments, advocated local origins for agricul- the process. In the case of the Transdanubia ture in Europe. Subsequent research has this would include both early agricultural- convincingly demonstrated that, as Childe ists, the Early Neolithic Starçevo culture had originally proposed, the earliest center and Middle Neolithic Linearbandkeramik of agricultural origins relevant to Europe culture (LBK), in addition to the indigenous was indeed located in South West Asia (Bar- Late Mesolithic hunter-gather population. Yosef and Meadow 1995; Harris 1996). The An informed examination of the transition basic route of agricultural expansion in to agriculture in the Carpathian Basin Europe was theoretically established from should consider both the long-term evolu- South West Asia, across the Anatolian Pen- tionary trajectories of Mesolithic hunter- ninsula, up the Balkan Peninsula, through gatherers of indigenous origin and Neolith- the Carpathian Basin, and progressing ic agriculturalists of indeterminate indige- northwards unto the North European Plain. nous or exogenous origins. Unfortunately, with rare exceptions (see Kertész 1996b, 162 Mr. William J. Eichmann. Mesolithic Hunter-Gatherers 2002), there is almost no robust evidence Mesolithic Hunter-gatherers and bespeaking the existence of Mesolithic pop- Their Dynamic Environment ulations in Hungary. The beginning of the Mesolithic period, or Strong evidence garnered from genetics of Middle Stone Age, is roughly coeval with modern European populations (Richards the shift from Glacial (Pleistocene) to non- 2003; Richards, et al. 2000) and Glacial (Holocene) climate in Europe, palaeobotony (Schweizer 2001; Sümegi occurring at roughly 10,000 cal. B.C., or 2004) suggest that Mesolithic hunter-gath- 10,000 uncal. B.P. Changes in Climate had erers were present and partook in the significant impacts on European flora and neolithization of the Carpathian Basin and fauna (Roberts 1989), as well as the humans Central Europe. However, minimal direct depending on these resources (Kozlowski archaeological evidence for Mesolithic and Kozlowski 1979). The climatic and veg- hunter-gatherers has often prevented discus- etation changes that are associated with sion from moving beyond hypothetical Pleistocene-Holocene boundary have been statements (e.g. Chapman 1985). This paper well documented throughout Europe and examines the significance of Mesolithic Hungary (e.g. Sümegi, Krolopp, et al. 2002); hunter-gatherers to the spread of agriculture although the environmental changes associ- in the Transdanubian region of Hungary and ated with the Holocene began earlier in Europe in general. The following themes Hungary than the traditionally assigned date are high lighted: 1) the historical context and of 10,000 B.C. Unlike many regions in current status of Mesolithic research in Europe, the volume of archaeological evi- Europe and Hungary, with an emphasis on dence for Mesolithic hunter-gatherers in Transdanubia; 2) background to the origins southeastern Europe, and Carpathian Basin and spread of Early Neolithic societies in in particular, is conspicuously minimal dur- Europe; 3) a more specific treatment of our ing the Late Pleistocene and Early current understanding of Early Neolithic Holocene. societies in the Carpathian Basin, again Understanding the manner in which emphasizing Transdanubia, and their role in hunter-gatherers adapted to dynamic cli- the transmission of agriculture to North matic and environmental change is critical Central Europe; 4) possible directions for to understanding the spread of agriculture. future research into Mesolithic hunter-gath- Traditionally, the long term evolutionary erer research in Hungary; and 5.) prelimi- tendencies of southeastern European nary results from research on the Hungarian Neolithic societies are presented in pain Mesolithic by Róbert Kertész, Tibor Mar- staking detail. In Hungary Mesolithic ton, Eszter Bánffy, and myself. I argue that hunter-gatherers are generally only men- Mesolithic participants in the neolithization tioned when the two worlds collide, and of the Carpathian Basin have been under- even then their behaviors and their very represented for a variety of historical reasons existance have remained primarily within and insufficient research. The situation can the hypothetical realm. best be rectified through research aimed at Research exploring the question of why revision of poorly investigated sites of possi- agriculture may or may not have struck ble Mesolithic origin in conjunction with hunter-gatherers as an attractive subsistence prospecting for new sites. strategy has been explored in other parts of Europe and has significantly improved the 163 Student Conference 2004 character of discussions on the spread of change (Fisher 2002). In response to agriculture (e.g. see Zvelebil and Rowley- changes in resource distribution Mesolithic Conwy 1984). The goal of such research has hunter-gatherers were confronted with two