DOCSLIB.ORG

Burial and Identity in the Late Neolithic And

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Burial and Identity in the Late Neolithic And Burial and identity in the Late Neolithic and Copper Age of south-east Europe Susan Stratton Thesis submitted in candidature for the degree of PhD Cardiff University March 2016 CONTENTS List of figures…………………………………………………………………………7 List of tables………………………………………………………………………….14 Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................ 16 Abstract ............................................................................................................................................... 17 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 18 2 Archaeological study of mortuary practice ........................................................................... 22 2.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 22 2.2 Culture history ................................................................................................................... 22 2.3 Status and hierarchy – the processualist preoccupations ............................................ 26 2.4 Post-processualists and messy human relationships .................................................... 36 2.5 Feminism and the emergence of gender archaeology .................................................. 43 2.6 Personhood, identity and memory ................................................................................. 46 2.7 Recent burial studies in south-east Europe ................................................................... 50 2.8 Where are we now? ........................................................................................................... 55 3 Society, the individual, and the treatment of the dead: towards an approach for the study of burial practice ...................................................................................................................... 57 3.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 57 3.2 The body and identity ....................................................................................................... 58 2 3.2.1 The individual, the body and “being in the world”: the importance of the everyday in creating identity .................................................................................................... 58 3.2.2 The clothed body ...................................................................................................... 59 3.2.3 The role of memory in the creation of identity .................................................... 61 3.2.4 Social memory, community, and traditions ........................................................... 62 3.2.5 Social roles and identities and their material expression ..................................... 65 3.3 In mortuary practice ......................................................................................................... 76 3.3.1 Burial and identity ..................................................................................................... 76 3.3.2 The location of burials ............................................................................................. 78 3.3.3 Commensality and the funerary ritual .................................................................... 79 3.3.4 Continuity and change in mortuary practice ......................................................... 79 3.4 Summary ............................................................................................................................. 82 4 Methodology .............................................................................................................................. 84 4.1 Site selection ....................................................................................................................... 84 4.2 Statistical approaches ........................................................................................................ 85 4.2.1 Univariate analyses .................................................................................................... 86 4.2.2 Correspondence analysis .......................................................................................... 87 4.3 Method and theory ............................................................................................................ 89 4.4 Summary ............................................................................................................................. 90 5 What’s in a name? The culture-historical complexity of south-east Europe ................... 91 5.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 91 5.2 The politics of Balkan archaeology: ethnicity, communism, and nationalism ......... 96 3 5.3 Mesolithic occupation in south-east Europe ...............................................................101 5.4 Early Neolithic (c. 6500–5500 cal BC) .........................................................................103 5.4.1 Agriculture ...............................................................................................................106 5.4.2 Settlements ...............................................................................................................106 5.4.3 Burials .......................................................................................................................107 5.4.4 Beyond the Starčevo-Körös-Çris-Karanovo I complex ....................................107 5.5 Middle Neolithic (c. 5500–4900 cal BC) ......................................................................108 5.5.1 Western Region .......................................................................................................108 5.5.2 Eastern region .........................................................................................................111 5.6 Late Neolithic ..................................................................................................................112 5.6.1 The eastern region (c. 4900–4550 cal BC)...........................................................112 5.6.2 The western region (c. 5100–4500 cal BC) .........................................................116 5.7 Copper Age ......................................................................................................................121 5.7.1 The eastern region (c. 4650–3000 cal. BC)..........................................................122 5.7.2 The western region (4500/4400–2600/2500 cal BC) ........................................124 5.8 Discussion: the reality of cultural (id)entities ..............................................................128 5.9 Summary ...........................................................................................................................131 6 Case studies of the eastern region ........................................................................................132 6.1 Introduction .....................................................................................................................132 6.2 The Early and Middle Neolithic burial record ............................................................133 6.2.1 Cemeteries: a break with tradition? ......................................................................136 6.3 The first extramural cemeteries of the Late Neolithic and Early Copper Age ......138 4 6.4 Cernica ..............................................................................................................................139 6.4.1 Location ....................................................................................................................139 6.4.2 Excavation ...............................................................................................................140 6.4.3 The archive ..............................................................................................................144 6.4.4 Cemetery phasing ....................................................................................................145 6.4.5 The burial data .........................................................................................................148 6.4.6 Grave goods .............................................................................................................153 6.4.7 Correspondence analysis ........................................................................................159 6.4.8 Burial and identity at Cernica ................................................................................165 6.4.9 Summary ...................................................................................................................166 6.5 Durankulak .......................................................................................................................167 6.5.1 Location ....................................................................................................................167 6.5.2 Excavation ...............................................................................................................168 6.5.3 Publication ...............................................................................................................169 6.5.4 Cemetery phasing and development ....................................................................169
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pottery Technology As a Revealer of Cultural And
    Pottery technology as a revealer of cultural and symbolic shifts: Funerary and ritual practices in the Sion ‘Petit-Chasseur’ megalithic necropolis (3100–1600 BC, Western Switzerland) Eve Derenne, Vincent Ard, Marie Besse To cite this version: Eve Derenne, Vincent Ard, Marie Besse. Pottery technology as a revealer of cultural and symbolic shifts: Funerary and ritual practices in the Sion ‘Petit-Chasseur’ megalithic necropolis (3100–1600 BC, Western Switzerland). Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, Elsevier, 2020, 58, pp.101170. 10.1016/j.jaa.2020.101170. hal-03051558 HAL Id: hal-03051558 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03051558 Submitted on 10 Dec 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 58 (2020) 101170 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Anthropological Archaeology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jaa Pottery technology as a revealer of cultural and symbolic shifts: Funerary and ritual practices in the Sion ‘Petit-Chasseur’ megalithic necropolis T (3100–1600 BC,
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Early and Middle Bronze Age in the Balkans Arthur Bankoff
    1 The Early and Middle Bronze Age in the Balkans Arthur Bankoff The earlier part of the Bronze Age in temperate southeastern Europe (c. 2200– 1500 B.C.) presents a confusing picture to the unwary archaeologist. Although over the years more publications have appeared in English, German, and French, many basic site reports and syntheses are only fully available in Hungarian, Romanian, Bulgarian, Serbian, or other indigenous languages. Often the names of apparently identical archaeological cultures change with bewildering abandon as one crosses modern national borders or even moves between regions of the same country. This part of the world has a history (beginning in the mid–nineteenth century) of antiquarian collecting and detailed specialist typological studies, especially of ceramics and metal objects, with far less effort expended on the more mundane aspects of prehistoric life. Only since the 1980s have studies become available that incorporate the analysis of plant and animal material from Bronze Age sites, and these are far from the rule. To some extent, this is due to the nature of the archaeological record, that is, the sites and material that have survived from the Early and Middle Bronze Age. With the exception of habitation mounds (tells) and burial mounds (tumuli), both of which have a limited distribution in the earlier part of the Bronze Age, most sites are shallow, close to the modern ground surface, and easily disturbed. Farming and urban development has been more destructive to these sites than to the more deeply buried sites of earlier periods. The typically more dispersed settlement pattern of the Bronze Age in most of this region results in smaller sites, more vulnerable to the vagaries of history than the more concentrated nucleated sites of the later Neolithic or Eneolithic (sometimes called Copper Age) of the fifth and fourth millennia B.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Interpreting Diachronic Size Variation in Prehistoric Central Asian Cereal Grains
    ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 29 April 2021 doi: 10.3389/fevo.2021.633634 Interpreting Diachronic Size Variation in Prehistoric Central Asian Cereal Grains Giedre Motuzaite Matuzeviciute 1, Basira Mir-Makhamad 1,2* and Robert N. Spengler III 2 1 Department of Archaeology, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania, 2 Department of Archaeology, Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena, Germany The morphology of ancient cereal grains in Central Asia has been heavily discussed as an indicator of specific genetic variants, which are often linked to cultural factors or distinct routes of dispersal. In this paper, we present the largest currently existing database of barley (n = 631) and wheat (n = 349) measurements from Central Asia, obtained from two different periods at the Chap site (ca. 3,500 to 1,000 BC), located in the Tien Shan Mountains of Kyrgyzstan at 2,000 masl. The site is situated at the highest elevation ecocline for successful cereal cultivation and is, therefore, highly susceptible to minor climatic fluctuations that could force gradients up or down in the foothills. We contrast the Chap data with measurements from other second and first millennia BC sites in Edited by: the region. An evident increase in average size over time is likely due to the evolution Gianluca Piovesan, of larger grains or the introduction of larger variants from elsewhere. Additionally, site- or University of Tuscia, Italy region-specific variation is noted, and we discuss potential influences for the formation of Reviewed by: Anna Maria Mercuri, genetic varieties, including possible pleiotropic linkages and/or developmental responses University of Modena and Reggio to external factors, such as environmental fluctuations, climate, irrigation inputs, soil Emilia, Italy Mark Nesbitt, nutrients, pathologies, and seasonality.
    [Show full text]
  • Hassuna Samarra Halaf
    arch 1600. archaeologies of the near east joukowsky institute for archaeology and the ancient world spring 2008 Emerging social complexities in Mesopotamia: the Chalcolithic in the Near East. February 20, 2008 Neolithic in the Near East: early sites of socialization “neolithic revolution”: domestication of wheat, barley, sheep, goat: early settled communities (ca 10,000 to 6000 BC) Mudding the world: Clay, mud and the technologies of everyday life in the prehistoric Near East • Pottery: associated with settled life: storage, serving, prestige pots, decorated and undecorated. • Figurines: objects of everyday, magical and cultic use. Ubiquitous for prehistoric societies especially. In clay and in stone. • Mud-brick as architectural material: Leads to more structured architectural constructions, perhaps more rectilinear spaces. • Tokens, hallow clay balls, tablets and early writing technologies: related to development o trade, tools of urban administration, increasing social complexity. • Architectural models: whose function is not quite obvious to us. Maybe apotropaic, maybe for sale purposes? “All objects of pottery… figments of potter’s will, fictions of his memory and imagination.” J. L. Myres 1923, quoted in Wengrow 1998: 783. What is culture in “culture history” (1920s-1960s) ? Archaeological culture = a bounded and binding ethnic/cultural unit within a defined geography and temporal/spatial “horizons”, uniformly and unambigously represented in the material culture, manifested by artifactual assemblage. pots=people? • “Do cultures actually
    [Show full text]
  • Did Anatolia Contribute to the Neolithization of Southeast Europe?*
    Colloquium Anatolicum IV 2005 17-41 Did Anatolia contribute to the Neolithization of Southeast Europe?* Jak Yakar In the Near East, the process of “Neolithization” highlighted by sedenta- rization or semi-sedentarization could be defined as a slow socio-economic course that evolved parallel to the climatic amelioration with milder temper- atures and increased humidity during the early Holocene. Climatic changes having a certain impact on the local flora would have affected the composi- tion of the local fauna. Shifting migration patterns and feeding zones of animal species hunted for their meat due to environmental changes no doubt neces- sitated certain economic adaptations requiring lesser or more selective mobil- ity on the part of hunter-gatherer communities. Recognizing the archaeologi- cal implications of social changes during the process of sedentarization is a difficult task, in most instances attainable only by way of an interdisciplinary approach. In Anatolia, the chronological sequence of this process indicates an early start in the southeast, gradually spreading to areas of grassland vege- tation in the southern Anatolian plateau. It subsequently reached the Aegean coast and slightly later spread to the more northerly regions of western Anatolia. The question is did the spread of this so-called “Neolithization” involve human agents from a specific geographic source area? Most scholars answer this question in the affirmative despite the fact that ethno-culturally the Neo- lithic society of Anatolia was not a homogenous entity. The society in this sub-continent characterized by its geographical diversity was equally divers ethno-culturally; in certain peripheral habitats having more in common with the prehistoric inhabitants of neighboring lands (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Durham E-Theses
    Durham E-Theses Neolithic and chalcolithic cultures in Turkish Thrace Erdogu, Burcin How to cite: Erdogu, Burcin (2001) Neolithic and chalcolithic cultures in Turkish Thrace, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/3994/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk NEOLITHIC AND CHALCOLITHIC CULTURES IN TURKISH THRACE Burcin Erdogu Thesis Submitted for Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. No quotation from it should be published without his prior written consent and information derived from it should be acknowledged. University of Durham Department of Archaeology 2001 Burcin Erdogu PhD Thesis NeoHthic and ChalcoHthic Cultures in Turkish Thrace ABSTRACT The subject of this thesis are the NeoHthic and ChalcoHthic cultures in Turkish Thrace. Turkish Thrace acts as a land bridge between the Balkans and Anatolia.
    [Show full text]
  • Faunal Remains
    This is a repository copy of Faunal remains. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/169068/ Version: Published Version Book Section: Halstead, P. orcid.org/0000-0002-3347-0637 (2020) Faunal remains. In: Wright, J.C. and Dabney, M.K., (eds.) The Mycenaean Settlement on Tsoungiza Hill. Nemea Valley Archaeological Project (III). American School of Classical Studies at Athens , Princeton, New Jersey , pp. 1077-1158. ISBN 9780876619247 Copyright © 2020 American School of Classical Studies at Athens, originally published in The Mycenaean Settlement on Tsoungiza Hill (Nemea Valley Archaeological Project III), by James C. Wright and Mary K. Dabney. This offprint is supplied for personal, noncommercial use only. Reuse Items deposited in White Rose Research Online are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved unless indicated otherwise. They may be downloaded and/or printed for private study, or other acts as permitted by national copyright laws. The publisher or other rights holders may allow further reproduction and re-use of the full text version. This is indicated by the licence information on the White Rose Research Online record for the item. Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ Copyright © 2020 American School of Classical Studies at Athens, originally published in The Mycenaean Settlement on Tsoungiza Hill (Nemea Valley Archaeological Project III), by James C.
    [Show full text]
  • Researching Stonehenge: Theories Past and Present
    Parker Pearson, M 2013 Researching Stonehenge: Theories Past and Present. Archaeology International, No. 16 (2012-2013): 72-83, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/ai.1601 ARTICLE Researching Stonehenge: Theories Past and Present Mike Parker Pearson* Over the years archaeologists connected with the Institute of Archaeology and UCL have made substantial contributions to the study of Stonehenge, the most enigmatic of all the prehistoric stone circles in Britain. Two of the early researchers were Petrie and Childe. More recently, colleagues in UCL’s Anthropology department – Barbara Bender and Chris Tilley – have also studied and written about the monument in its landscape. Mike Parker Pearson, who joined the Institute in 2012, has been leading a 10-year-long research programme on Stonehenge and, in this paper, he outlines the history and cur- rent state of research. Petrie and Childe on Stonehenge William Flinders Petrie (Fig. 1) worked on Stonehenge between 1874 and 1880, publishing the first accurate plan of the famous stones as a young man yet to start his career in Egypt. His numbering system of the monument’s many sarsens and blue- stones is still used to this day, and his slim book, Stonehenge: Plans, Descriptions, and Theories, sets out theories and observations that were innovative and insightful. Denied the opportunity of excavating Stonehenge, Petrie had relatively little to go on in terms of excavated evidence – the previous dig- gings had yielded few prehistoric finds other than antler picks – but he suggested that four theories could be considered indi- vidually or in combination for explaining Stonehenge’s purpose: sepulchral, religious, astronomical and monumental.
    [Show full text]
  • Bronze Age Tell Communities in Context: an Exploration Into Culture
    Bronze Age Tell Kienlin This study challenges current modelling of Bronze Age tell communities in the Carpathian Basin in terms of the evolution of functionally-differentiated, hierarchical or ‘proto-urban’ society Communities in Context under the influence of Mediterranean palatial centres. It is argued that the narrative strategies employed in mainstream theorising of the ‘Bronze Age’ in terms of inevitable social ‘progress’ sets up an artificial dichotomy with earlier Neolithic groups. The result is a reductionist vision An exploration into culture, society, of the Bronze Age past which denies continuity evident in many aspects of life and reduces our understanding of European Bronze Age communities to some weak reflection of foreign-derived and the study of social types – be they notorious Hawaiian chiefdoms or Mycenaean palatial rule. In order to justify this view, this study looks broadly in two directions: temporal and spatial. First, it is asked European prehistory – Part 1 how Late Neolithic tell sites of the Carpathian Basin compare to Bronze Age ones, and if we are entitled to assume structural difference or rather ‘progress’ between both epochs. Second, it is examined if a Mediterranean ‘centre’ in any way can contribute to our understanding of Bronze Age tell communities on the ‘periphery’. It is argued that current Neo-Diffusionism has us essentialise from much richer and diverse evidence of past social and cultural realities. Tobias L. Kienlin Instead, archaeology is called on to contribute to an understanding of the historically specific expressions of the human condition and human agency, not to reduce past lives to abstract stages on the teleological ladder of social evolution.
    [Show full text]
  • Burials in Caves 167
    BURIALS IN CAVES 167 Eyre, J. 1989. The Ease Gill System: Forty Years of Exploration, Tratman, E.K. (editor) 1969. The Caves of North-west Clare, Ireland, London: BCRA (Speleo History Series 1) Newton Abbot, Devon: David & Charles Railton, C.L. 1953. The Ogof Ffynnon Ddu System, London: Cave Research Group: (CRG Publication No. 6) Further Reading Shaw, T.R. 1992. History of Cave Science: The Exploration and Study of Limestone Caves, to 1900, 2nd edition, Broadway, New South Cullingford, C.H.D. (editor) 1953. British Caving: An Introduction Wales: Sydney Speleological Society to Speleology, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul BURIALS IN CAVES Caves accessible to humans have been used from the Paleolithic Caves were located above a permanent stream, perhaps in rela- to the present. They provide a variety of burial conditions, such tion with a water cult or to signify a route to the realm of the as graves in the ground, body exposure on the floor, coffins dead. At different periods variable artefacts, pottery, and offer- exposed in selected places, storage of bones or pieces of bone in ings were placed besides bodies. jars, and cremation urns. Habits have varied through time, and Comparable habits existed elsewhere in the world. In Viet- also according to the particular people, social status of the de- nam, for instance, a few caves and rock shelters were possibly ceased person, position in the family, age, and cause of death. used for burial during Lower Neolithic Hoabinhian II–III and In Mousterian times, and perhaps before, Homo sapiens nean- three caves, Pho Binh Gia, Khe´o-Phay, and Lang Cuom, re- dertalensis buried their dead in caves and rock shelters such as vealed skulls of people of the Bacsonian culture.
    [Show full text]
  • Neolithic Transition in Europe: Evolutionary Anthropology Study
    3_1_2009.qxp 30.11.2010 13:52 Stránka 185 • XLVII/3 • pp. 185–193 • 2009 EDVARD EHLER, VÁCLAV VANČATA NEOLITHIC TRANSITION IN EUROPE: EVOLUTIONARY ANTHROPOLOGY STUDY ABSTRACT: The Neolithic transition in Europe was investigated. We have focused on the models of this transition already proposed in literature, and confronted them with our data. Our study is based on physical anthropology data that we have divided into five groups according to the economy and ecology of the human populations within. These groups are: hunter- gatherers, first farmers, late farmers, pastorial cultures and Bronze Age. We have documented a sharp dissimilarity between Mesolithic and Early Neolithic populations, but on the other hand a strong resemblance between hunter-gatherers, pastorial and Bronze Age cultures. This phenomenon was probably caused by migration of agricultural populations to Europe in the beginning of Neolithic and consequent absorption of these populations within the more numerous indigenous populations. We have also discovered a marked difference in the body stature between farmer males and females. Higher mobility of females’ genes together with limited admixture of hunter-gatherers and first farmers’ male part of population might possibly be responsible for this feature. KEY WORDS: Neolithic – Mesolithic – Europe – Hunter gatherers – Farmers – Agriculture – Migration – Y chromosome – – Admixture INTRODUCTION archeological data. This allowed us to verify some earlier presented theories about population movements and The discussion about Neolithic transition in Europe and the admixture in European Neolithic, and also to neglect the influence of agriculture on human biology and culture has a others. long tradition in scientific literature (Ammerman, Cavalli- In this article, we use the term Neolithic or farmer Sforza 1979, 1984, Barbujani et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Materials, Productions, Exchange Network and Their Impact on the Societies of Neolithic Europe
    Besse and Guilaine (eds) Materials, Productions, Exchange Network and their Impact on the Societies of Neolithic Europe and their Impact on the Societies Network Exchange Productions, Besse and Guilaine (eds) Materials, Materials, Productions, Exchange Network and their Impact on the Societies of Neolithic Europe Proceedings of the XVII UISPP World Congress (1–7 September 2014, Burgos, Spain) Volume 13/Session A25a Edited by Marie Besse and Jean Guilaine Archaeopress Archaeology www.archaeopress.com Besse and Guilaine covert.indd 1 11/01/2017 13:48:20 Materials, Productions, Exchange Network and their Impact on the Societies of Neolithic Europe Proceedings of the XVII UISPP World Congress (1–7 September 2014, Burgos, Spain) Volume 13/Session A25a Edited by Marie Besse and Jean Guilaine Archaeopress Archaeology Archaeopress Publishing Ltd Gordon House 276 Banbury Road Oxford OX2 7ED www.archaeopress.com ISBN 978 1 78491 524 7 ISBN 978 1 78491 525 4 (e-Pdf) © Archaeopress, UISPP and authors 2017 VOLUME EDITORS: Marie Besse and Jean Guilaine SERIES EDITOR: The board of UISPP CO-EDITORS – Laboratory of Prehistoric Archaeology and Anthropology, Department F.-A. Forel for Environmental and Aquatic Sciences, University of Geneva SERIES PROPERTY: UISPP – International Union of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences Proceedings of the XVII World UISPP Congress, Burgos (Spain) September 1st - 7th 2014 KEY-WORDS IN THIS VOLUME: Neolithic, Europe, Materials, Productions, Exchange Networks UISPP PROCEEDINGS SERIES is a printed on demand and an open access publication, edited by UISPP through Archaeopress BOARD OF UISPP: Jean Bourgeois (President), Luiz Oosterbeek (Secretary-General), François Djindjian (Treasurer), Ya-Mei Hou (Vice President), Marta Arzarello (Deputy Secretary-General).
    [Show full text]