by Chris Fowler
THE BALTIC REGION
Recent research in the Baltic Sea area, particularly Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia, has provided significant insights into the development of Neolithic agriculture (Antanaitis-Jacobs et al. 2009). In the Mesolithic, similar hunter-fisher-gatherer economies persisted around the Baltic, with some regional differentiation in the later Mesolithic. The larger cemetery sites, such as Skateholm, Vedbæk, Zvejnieki, and Oleneostroviskii Mogilnik, appear at this time (Timofeev 1998, 44).
One of the cemeteries, Zvejnieki in Latvia, has recently been investigated in relation to prehistoric diets (Eriksson et al. 2003). The 2,446 tooth pendants recovered indicate that elk dominates, with wild boar, red deer, dog, aurochs, and seal also present. These species are just part of the range of fauna from the Zvejnieki complex, where beaver, marten, badger, wild horse, otter, brown bear, fox, wolf, wild cat, wildfowl, fish, and caprines are all attested. For instance, the settlement produced pike, perch, a range of cyprinids (bream, tench, asp, carp), wels, eel, and some salmon (Eriksson et al. 2003, 5–7). Stable isotope analyses show considerable variability in diets across the late Mesolithic to the end of the middle Neolithic (c. 5600–3500 BC), with an emphasis on terrestrial/freshwater animals (Fig. 21.2). Human isotope values cluster in two groups, one with a diet similar to that of the otters analysed in this study, the other displaying a mixed freshwater fish and hunted animal diet (Eriksson et al. 2003, 12). Overall, Mesolithic and early Neolithic populations consumed more freshwater fish than individuals in later periods.
Antanaitis-Jacobs et al.’s work (2009) reinforces the observation that hunter-fisher-gatherer subsistence strategies persist into the Neolithic, and in general, the only defining Neolithic ‘signature’ in the east Baltic is the appearance of pottery at c. 5600–5400 BC in Lithuania and Latvia (Antanaitis 1999, 89). Domestic cattle, caprines, and pigs are present at middle Neolithic sites in Lithuania and Latvia, although at relatively low levels of c. 6–18% in terms of the number of identified species (Antanaitis-Jacobs et al. 2009). The Lithuanian record indicates that the hunting of elk, red deer, aurochs, boar, marten, and beaver, alongside seal, persisted into the Neolithic (when seal exploitation actually increases) (Antanaitis-Jacobs et al. 2009, 13). Only in the Bronze Age do domesticates begin to dominate faunal and floral assemblages (Antanaitis 1999, 2001).
Evidence for cereals is generally sparse in the east Baltic, although there are single finds of oat, barley, Cerealia, and hemp/hops from middle Neolithic contexts (Rimantienė 1992, 98). Indeed, the first domesticated plant recorded in western Lithuania at c. 3300–2000 BC is hemp (Antanaitis et al. 2000, 49). Overall, the most prolific plants on Mesolithic and Neolithic sites are the ‘ubiquitous’ hazelnuts and water chestnut (Antanaitis-Jacobs et al. 2009, 15). Later Neolithic finds additionally include cultivars such as emmer, barley, and millet. To enhance the resolution of the Lithuanian palaeobotanical record, Antanaitis et al. (2000; Antanaitis and Ogrinc 2000) investigated two habitation sites, Kretuonas in north-eastern Lithuania and Turlojišké, located c. 250 km to the south-west. Both of these sites represent a palimpsest of activity, with habitation and burial features and some partially waterlogged elements. A combination of subsistence strategies is also in evidence (Antanaitis-Jacobs, pers. comm. 2012). There are both Neolithic and Bronze Age contexts at each site, and these predominantly yielded wild species such as raspberry, apple (?), and hazelnuts. Unfortunately, of the 166 samples analysed only one contained evidence for domesticated plants, this being millet from Turlojišké (Antanaitis et al. 2000, 56–57). In general, wetland/aquatic species dominated these assemblages, reflecting the surrounding natural environments, although at least a proportion of the material was likely gathered by the groups occupying these sites (e.g. Nicholas 2007). Whilst the sampling methodology needs further refinement, Antanaitis et al. (2000) note that these data support the late introduction and small-scale exploitation of domesticates in Lithuania.
Whilst palaeoenvironmental research in Estonia continues to develop, the study of early agriculture is still relatively under-developed (Poska and Saarse 2002). However, in north Estonia there is evidence for cereals in pollen records at c. 4500 BP, and barley and wheat were integral to the economy by c. 2300/2200 to 1600/1500 BC (Poska and Saarse 2002, 555). This suggests that ‘primitive’ agriculture occurred on Saaremaa Island as early as c. 4500 BC, at the onset of the Neolithic. In Neolithic inland Estonia, much as in the Mesolithic, elk, wild boar, and aurochs were hunted, whilst at coastal sites marine resources were exploited (Lõugas et al. 1996, 399f). Later Neolithic subsistence practices are mixed, with seal hunting and fishing on the coast, and some use of domestic cattle alongside crop cultivation. The diversity of environmental and ecological characteristics around the Baltic clearly results in a protracted and piecemeal adoption of the agricultural economy across the Neolithic through to the Iron Age period (e.g. Zvelebil 2006).
DISCUSSION
As might be anticipated, many factors influence the rate of spread, integration, and ultimate adoption of domestic animals and plants across Europe as ‘farming’ was disseminated. The evidence presented here reinforces this observation and highlights the fact that even at the intra-regional level, significant variation in Neolithic economies can occur.
To some degree, regional variation in topography, soils, drainage, etc. influenced the choices of domesticates exploited in the earlier Neolithic. However, it is now generally accepted that socio-political aspects and even cultural beliefs and practices came into play when individuals and groups chose to adopt parts of the new farming package. As a consequence of domestication, it appears that animals and plants became integrated into material culture inventories as artefacts. Domestication itself is an artificial process. As such, the choice to ‘opt in to’ a particular combination of species, alongside decisions on how to tend, display, and consume them, reflect the needs, tastes, and aspirations of incipient farmers. However, various cultures also developed their own cognitive, linguistic, and cultural systems to deal with the non-physical world, and these general attitudes would also have impinged on the significance of animals in a given society. These elements tend to be unique, and often virtually impossible to compare due to the diversity of forms of expression, whether this be verbal, behavioural, or concerning material culture. The diversity that is evident in the spread and adoption of farming practices and products is, most probably, embedded in metaphorical connotations that are intangible today.
Overall, however, diversity in subsistence practices unquestionably increased and the material consequences of the choices made need to be documented in a rigorous and scientific manner. Additionally, in order to facilitate a holistic understanding of Neolithic subsistence strategies, detailed regional knowledge is also required. Fortunately, the available literature has expanded considerably in recent years, and researchers can now further develop an inductive overview, as has been attempted here.
Finally, in addition to the increased political opening-up of central and eastern Europe since the 1990s, enhancing international academic exchange, the twenty-first century has also brought a flurry of methodological innovations and analytical techniques, such as serial AMS dating, isotope studies, and DNA analysis (e.g. Ambrose 1993; Bonsall et al. 1997; DeNiro 1985; Lubell et al. 1994; Richards 1998; Schoeninger et al. 1983), which offer new insights into ancient subsistence strategies. Whilst there are still inherent limitations and areas in need of further refinement, it is obvious that integrating multiple strands of evidence will enhance our understanding of past diets through development of a holistic and nuanced perspective on the transition to agriculture throughout Europe.
Acknowledgements
As always, ML would like to thank colleagues in Ukraine and Russia for all their help since 1994, especially Inna Potekhina for continued collaboration on the Ukrainian material. Indre Antanaitis-Jacobs is thanked for access to unpublished material. Vladimir Timofeev and Ken Jacobs both helped me (ML), in varying ways, duri
ng my early research years in eastern Europe. As ever, this paper is dedicated to their memory. In addition, since writing the original draft of this paper Dmitri Telegin and Pavel Dolukhanov have passed away—they were both colleagues, advisors, and friends, and their loss is immeasurable (ML). Pál Raczky and Jörg Schibler contributed valuable critical comments to the section on central Europe, although responsibility for the final version rests with the authors.
NOTES
1.Dates after around 3900 BC in Switzerland are generally based on dendrochronology.
* Received June 2009, updated December 2011.
REFERENCES
Ambros, C. 1986. Tierknochenfunde aus Siedlungen der Lengyeler-Kultur in der Slowakei. In B. Chropovský (ed.), Internationales Symposium über die Lengyel-Kultur, Nové Vozokany 5.-9. November 1984, 11–17. Nitra: Archäologisches Institut der Slowakischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Ambrose, S.H. 1993. Isotopic analysis of palaeodiets: methodological and interpretive considerations. In M.K. Sandford (ed.), Investigations in ancient human tissue: chemical analyses in Anthropology, 59–130. Langhorne, PA: Gordon & Breach Science Publishers.
Antanaitis, I. 1999. Concerning the transition to farming in the East Baltic. Documenta Praehistorica 26, 89–100.
Antanaitis, I. 2001. Eastern Baltic economic and social organization in the late Stone and early Bronze Ages. Unpublished PhD thesis summary, Vilnius University.
Antanaitis, I. and Ogrinc, N. 2000. Chemical analysis of bone: stable isotope evidence of the diet of Neolithic and Bronze Age people in Lithuania. Istorija 45, 3–12.
Antanaitis, I., Riehl, S., Kisieliené, D., and Kelertas, K. 2000. The evolution of the subsistence economy and archaeobotanical research in Lithuania. Lietuvos archeologija 19, 47–67.
Antanaitis-Jacobs, I., Richards, M., Daugnora, L., Jankauskas, R., and Ogrinc, N. 2009. Diet in early Lithuanian prehistory and the new stable isotope evidence. Archaeologia Baltica 12, 12–30.
Anthony, D.W. 2007. Pontic-Caspian Mesolithic and early Neolithic societies at the time of the Black Sea flood: a small audience and small effects. In V. Yanko-Hombach, A.S. Gilbert, N. Panin, and P.M. Dolukhanov (eds), The Black Sea flood question: changes in coastline, climate, and human settlement, 345–370. Dordrecht: Springer.
Balasse, M., Bocherens, H., Tresset, A., Vigne, J-D., and Mariotti, A. 1997. Emergence de la production laitière au Néolithique? Contribution de l’analyse isotopique d’ossements de bovins archéologiques. Comptes rendus de l’Académie des Sciences de Paris. Sciences de la Terre et des Planètes 325, 105–110.
Barker, G. 1985. Prehistoric farming in Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bartosiewicz, L. 2005. Plain talk: animals, environment and culture in the Neolithic of the Carpathian Basin and adjacent areas. In D. Bailey, A. Whittle, and V. Cummings (eds), (Un)settling the Neolithic, 51–63. Oxford: Oxbow.
Bartosiewicz, L. 2006. Mettre le chariot devant le boeuf. Anomalies ostéologiques liées à l’utilisation des boeuf pour la traction. In P. Pétrequin, R.-M. Arbogast, A.-M. Péterquin, S. van Willigen, and M. Bailly (eds), Premiers chariots, premiers araires. La diffusion de la traction animale en Europe pendant les IVe et IIIe millénaires avant notre ère, 259–267. Paris: CNRS Editions.
Bartosiewicz, L. 2007. Fish remains. In A. Whittle (ed.), The early Neolithic on the Great Hungarian Plain: investigations of the Körös culture site of Ecsegfalva 23, County Békés I, 377–394. Budapest: Archaeological Institute.
Behre, K.-E. 2007. Evidence for Mesolithic agriculture in and around central Europe? Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 16, 203–219.
Bickle, P. and Hofmann, D. 2007. Moving on: the contribution of isotope studies to the early Neolithic of central Europe. Antiquity 81, 1029–1041.
Bindea, D. 2008. Archeozoologia Transilvaniei în pre- şi protohistorie (The archaeozoology from Transylvania in pre- and protohistory). Cluj-Napoca: Editura Teognost.
Bogucki, P. 2004. Introduction. In P. Bogucki and P. Crabtree (eds), Ancient Europe. Encyclopedia of the Barbarian world, 8000 BC–AD 1000. Volume 1: The Mesolithic to Copper Age (c. 8000–2000 BC), 201–203. New York: Scribners.
Bogucki, P. and Grygiel, R. 1993. The first farmers of central Europe: a survey article. Journal of Field Archaeology 20, 399–426.
Bökönyi, S. 1961–1963. A lengyeli kultura gerinces faunája (Vertebrate fauna of the Lengyel culture). I-III. Janus Pannonius Múzeum Évkönyve 1960–1962, 85–113; 91–104; 73–101.
Bökönyi, S. 1978. The introduction of sheep breeding to Europe. Ethnozootechnie 21, 65–70.
Bökönyi, S. 1985. Environmental and cultural effects on the faunal assemblages of four large 4th millennium BC sites. A Szekszárdi Béri Balogh Ádám Múzeum Évkönyve (Szekszárd) 13, 69–88.
Bonsall, C., Lennon, R., McSweeney, K., Stewart, C., Harkness, D., Boroneant, V., Bartosiewicz, L., Payton, R., and Chapman, J. 1997. Mesolithic and early Neolithic in the Iron Gates: a palaeodietary perspective. Journal of European Archaeology 5, 50–92.
Bonsall, C., Cook, G.T., Lennon, R., Harkness, D., Scott, M., Bartosiewicz, L., and McSweeney, K. 2000. Stable isotopes, radiocarbon and the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in the Iron Gates. Documenta Praehistorica 27, 119–132.
Budd, C.E., Lillie, M.C., and Potekhina, I.D. In press. Radiocarbon dating and isotope analysis of hunter-fisher-gatherers in Ukraine. In From the Baltic to the Black Sea. Frankfurt: Römisch-Germanische Kommission des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts.
Choyke, A.M. 2001. Late Neolithic red deer canine beads and their imitations. In A.M. Choyke and L. Bartosiewicz (eds), Crafting bone—skeletal technologies through time and space, 251–266. Oxford: BAR.
Choyke, A.M. 2007. Objects for a lifetime—tools for a season: the bone tools from Ecsegfalva 23. In A. Whittle (ed.), The early Neolithic on the Great Hungarian Plain: investigations of the Körös culture site of Ecsegfalva 23, County Békés I, 641–665. Budapest: Archaeological Institute.
Choyke, A.M. and Bartosiewicz, L. 1994. Angling with bone. In W. Van Neer (ed.), Fish exploitation in the past. Koninklijk Museum voor Midden-Afrika, Annalen, Zoologische Wetenschappen 274, 177–182.
Colledge, S., Conolly, J., and Shennan, S. 2004. Archaeobotanical evidence for the spread of farming in the eastern Mediterranean. Current Anthropology 45(S), 35–58.
Colledge, S., Conolly, J., and Shennan, S. 2005. The evolution of Neolithic agriculture: from SW Asian origins to NW European limits. European Journal of Archaeology 8, 137–156.
Conolly, J., Colledge, S., and Shennan, S. 2008. Founder effect, drift, and adaptive change in domestic crop use in early Neolithic Europe. Journal of Archaeological Science 35, 2797–2804.
Cook, G.T., Bonsall, C., Hedges, R.E.M., McSweeney, K., Boroneanţ, V., Bartosiewicz, L., and Pettitt, P. 2002. Problems of dating human bones from the Iron Gates. Antiquity 76, 77–85.
Craig, O.E., Chapman, J., Heron, C., Willis, L.H., Bartosiewicz, L., Taylor, G., Whittle, A., and Collins, M. 2005. Did the first farmers of central and eastern Europe produce dairy foods? Antiquity 79, 882–894.
de Capitani, A., Deschler-Erb, S., Leuzinger, U., Marti-Grädel, E., and Schibler, J. 2002. Die Jungsteinzeitliche Seeufersiedlung Arbon Bleiche 3. Funde. Frauenfeld: Veröffentlichung des Amtes für Archäologie des Kantons Thurgau.
Demoule, J-P. and Perlès, C. 1993. The Greek Neolithic: a new review. Journal of World Prehistory 7, 355–416.
DeNiro, M.J. 1985. Post-mortem preservation and alteration of in vivo bone collagen isotope ratios in relation to paleodietary reconstruction. Nature 317, 806–809.
Dennell, R. 1985. European economic prehistory: a new approach. London: Academic Press.
Dergachev, V., Sherratt, A., and Larina, O. 1991. Recent results of Neolithic research in Moldovia (USSR). Oxford Journal of Archaeology 10, 1–16.
Dimitrijević, V. 2008. Lepenski Vir animal bones. What was left in the houses? In C. Bonsall, V. Boroneanţ, and I. Radovanović (eds), The Iron Gates in
prehistory. New perspectives, 117–130. Oxford: BAR.
Dolukhanov, P.M. 1984. Upper Pleistocene and Holocene cultures of the Russian Plain and Caucasus: ecology, economy and settlement pattern. In F. Wendorf and A.E. Close (eds), Advances in world archaeology. Volume 1, 323–358. New York: Academic Press.
Dolukhanov, P.M. and Shilik, K.K. 2007. Environment, sea-level changes, and human migrations in the northern Pontic area during late Pleistocene and Holocene times. In V. Yanko-Hombach, A.S. Gilbert, N. Panin, and P. Dolukhanov (eds), The Black Sea flood question: changes in coastline, climate, and human settlement, 297–318. Dordrecht: Springer.
Edwards, C., Ceiridwen, J., and Bradley, D.G. 2007. Ancient DNA analysis of aurochsen. In A. Whittle (ed.), The early Neolithic on the Great Hungarian Plain: investigations of the Körös culture site of Ecsegfalva 23, County Békés I, 327–329. Budapest: Archaeological Institute.
Edwards, K.J. and McIntosh, C.J. 1988. Improving the detection rate of cereal-type pollen grains from Ulmus decline and earlier deposits from Scotland. Pollen et Spores 30, 179–188.
El Susi, G. 2007. Archaeozoological records about domestic species farmed by early neolithical communities from Banat and Transilvania. Acta Terrae Septemcastrensis 6, 25.
Eriksson, G. 2006. Stable isotope analysis of human and faunal remains from Zvejnieki. In L. Larsson and I. Zagorska (eds), Back to the origin: new research in the Mesolithic-Neolithic Zvejnieki cemetery and environment, northern Latvia, 183–215. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.
Eriksson, G., Lõugas, L., and Zagorska, I. 2003. Stone age hunter-fisher-gatherers at Zvejnieki, northern Latvia: radiocarbon, stable isotope and archaeozoology data. Before Farming 2003/1, 1–25.