by Chris Fowler
REFERENCES
Bánffy, E. 2004. The 6th millennium BC boundary in western Transdanubia and its role in the central European Neolithic transition (The Szentgyörgyvölgy-Pityerdomb settlement). Budapest: Archaeological Institute of the HAS.
Berkovec, T. and Veselá, B. 2004. Pece na sídlišti kultury s lineární keramikou ve Vedrovicích. Sborník prací filozofické fakulty Brnĕnské Univerzity. Studia Archaeologica Brunensia M 8–9, 7–30.
Biagi, P. 1996. North eastern Italy in the seventh millenium BP: a bridge between the Balkans and the west? In F. Draşovean (ed.), The Vinča culture, its role and cultural connections. International symposium Timişoara, Romania, October 1995, 9–22. Timişoara: Museum of Banat.
Bogucki, P. 1984. Ceramic sieves of the Linear Pottery culture and their economic implications. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 3, 15–30.
Brink-Kloke, H. 1992. Drei Siedlungen der Linienbandkeramik in Niederbayern. Studien zu den Befunden und zur Keramik von Alteglofsheim-Köfering, Landshut-Sallmannsberg und Straubing-Lerchenhaid. Buch am Erlbach: Marie Leidorf.
Čižmář, Z. 1998. Nástin relativní chronologie lineární keramiky na Moravĕ (poznámky k vývoji výzdobného stylu). Acta Musei Moraviae. Scientae Sociales 83, 105–139.
Claßen, E. 2009. Settlement history, land use and social networks of early Neolithic communities in western Germany. In D. Hofmann and P. Bickle (eds), Creating communities. New advances in central European Neolithic research, 95–110. Oxford: Oxbow.
Cladders, M. 2001. Die Tonware der Ältesten Bandkeramik. Untersuchungen zur zeitlichen und räumlichen Gliederung. Bonn: Habelt.
Eisenhauer, U. 2002. Untersuchungen zur Siedlungs- und Kulturgeschichte des Mittelneolithikums in der Wetterau. Bonn: Habelt.
Elburg, R. and Herold, P. 2010. Tiefe Einblicke in die Vergangenheit. Der jungsteinzeitliche Brunnen aus Altscherbitz gibt Aufschluss über das Leben vor 7100 Jahren. Archæo 7, 23–27.
Engelbrecht, T. and Lüning, J. 2005. Die Keramik der Bandkeramiker. In J. Lüning (ed.), Die Bandkeramiker. Erste Steinzeitbauern in Deutschland, 169–176. Rahden: Marie Leidorf.
Franklin, J. 1998. Linear and Stichbandkeramik pottery technology from the Neolithic site of Bylany (Czech Republic). In I. Pavlů (ed.), Bylany Varia 1, 3–16. Praha: Archeologický ústav Praha.
Frirdich, C. 1994. Kulturgeschichtliche Betrachtungen zur Bandkeramik im Merzbachtal. In J. Lüning and P. Stehli (eds), Die Bandkeramik im Merzbachtal auf der Aldenhovener Platte, 207–393. Köln: Rheinland-Verlag.
Höckmann, O. 1972. Andeutungen zu Religion und Kultus in der bandkeramischen Kultur. In F. Jenő (ed.), Die aktuellen Fragen der Bandkeramik. Akten der Pannonia-Konferenzen I, 187–209. Székesfehérvár: István Király Múzeum.
Jeunesse, C. 1994. Le Néolithique du sud de la plaine du Rhin supérieur. Recherches et découvertes récentes. Prähistorische Zeitschrift 69, 1–31.
Jeunesse, C. 1997. Pratiques funéraires au Néolithique ancien. Sépultures et nécropoles danubiennes 5500–4900 av. J.-C. Paris: Éditions Errance.
Jíra, J.A. 1911. Neolithische bemalte Keramik in Böhmen. Mannus 3, 225–354.
Kaufmann, D. and York, K.-H. 1985. Zur Verbreitung des Elster-Saale-Verzierungsstiles der jüngeren Linienbandkeramik. Jahresschrift für mitteldeutsche Vorgeschichte 68, 75–91.
Kerig, T. 2005. Zur relativen Chronologie der westdeutschen Bandkeramik. In J. Lüning, C. Frirdich, and A. Zimmermann (eds), Die Bandkeramik im 21. Jahrhundert. Symposium in der Abtei Brauweiler bei Köln vom 16.9.-19.9.2002, 125–138. Rahden: Marie Leidorf.
Kind, C.-J. 1989. Ulm-Eggingen. Die Ausgrabungen 1982 bis 1985 in der bandkeramischen Siedlung und der mittelalterlichen Wüstung. Stuttgart: Theiss.
Klopfleisch, F. 1883. Die Grabhügel von Leubingen, Sömmerda und Nienstedt. Vorangehend: Allgemeine Einleitung. Charakteristik und Zeitfolge der Keramik Mitteldeutschlands. Halle an der Saale: Hendel.
Kneipp, J. 1998. Bandkeramik zwischen Rhein, Weser und Main. Studien zu Stil und Chronologie der Keramik. Bonn: Habelt.
Krahn, C. 2003. Überlegungen zum Interaktionssystem der bandkeramischen Siedlungen auf der Aldenhovener Platte. In J. Eckert, U. Eisenhauer, and A. Zimmermann (eds), Archäologische Perspektiven. Analysen und Interpretationen im Wandel, 515–527. Rahden: Marie Leidorf.
Kunkel, O. 1955. Die Jungfernhöhle bei Tiefenellern. München: Beck.
Larina, O.V. 2009. The extreme eastern periphery of the Linearbandkeramik: the landscape and geographical contexts. In D. Hofmann and P. Bickle (eds), Creating communities. New advances in central European Neolithic research, 50–70. Oxford: Oxbow.
Link, T. 2014. Die linien- und stichbandkeramische Siedlung von Dresden-Prohlis. Eine Fallstudie zum Kulturwandel in der Region der oberen Elbe um 5000 v. Chr. Dresden: Landesamt für Archäologie.
Lukes, A. 2004. Social perspectives on the constitution of the Linear Pottery culture (LBK). In A. Lukes and M. Zvelebil (eds), LBK dialogues. Studies in the formation of the Linear Pottery culture, 17–33. Oxford: BAR.
Lüning, J., Kloos, U., and Albert, S. 1989. Westliche Nachbarn der bandkeramischen Kultur: La Hoguette und Limburg. Germania 67, 355–393.
Meier-Arendt, W. 1966. Die bandkeramische Kultur im Untermaingebiet. Bonn: Habelt.
Meier-Arendt, W. 1972. Zur Frage der jüngerlinienbandkeramischen Gruppenbildung: Omalien, ‘Plaidter’, ‘Kölner’, ‘Wetterauer’ und ‘Wormser’ Typ; Hinkelstein. In H. Schwabedissen (ed.), Die Anfänge des Neolithikums vom Orient bis Nordeuropa Va, Westliches Mitteleuropa, 85–152. Köln: Böhlau.
Neumair, E. 1992. Ein Haus der älteren Linienbandkeramik bei Murr. Archäologie im Landkreis Freising 3, 8–45.
Nowak, M. 2004. Is ‘pot prehistory’ real prehistory? The case of the early LBK. In A. Lukes and M. Zvelebil (eds), LBK dialogues. Studies in the formation of the Linear Pottery culture, 7–15. Oxford: BAR.
Pavlů, I., Rulf, J., and Zápotocká, M. 1986. Theses on the Neolithic site of Bylany. Památky archeologické 77, 288–412.
Pavlů, I. 1997. Pottery origins. Initial forms, cultural behavior, and decorative styles. Praha: Karolinum.
Pavlů, I. 2000. Life on a Neolithic site. Bylany—situational analysis of artefacts. Praha: Institute of Archaeology Prague.
Pavúk, J. 1969. Chronologie der Želiezovce-Gruppe. Slovenská Archeológia 17, 269–367.
Pavúk, J. 2005. Typologische Geschichte der Linearbandkeramik. In J. Lüning, C. Frirdich, and A. Zimmermann (eds), Die Bandkeramik im 21. Jahrhundert. Symposium in der Abtei Brauweiler bei Köln vom 16.9.-19.9.2002, 17–39. Rahden: Marie Leidorf.
Pechtl, J. 2009a. Stephansposching und sein Umfeld. Studien zum Altneolithikum im bayerischen Donauraum. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Heidelberg.
Pechtl, J. 2009b. Überlegungen zur Historie der ältesten Linienbandkeramik (ÄLBK) im südlichen Bayern. In M. Chytráček, H. Gruber, J. Michálek, R. Sandner and K. Schmotz (eds), Fines Transire 18, 79–115. Rahden: Marie Leidorf.
Quitta, H. 1960. Zur Frage der ältesten Bandkeramik in Mitteleuropa. Prähistorische Zeitschrift 38, 1–38 and 153–188.
Rauba-Bukowska, A. 2009. Bone temper in early Neolithic vessels from southern Poland. Examinations using Scanning Microscopy. In D. Hofmann and P. Bickle (eds), Creating communities. New advances in central European Neolithic research, 235–248. Oxford: Oxbow.
Rottländer, R. 1990. Die Resultate der modernen Fettanalytik und ihre Anwendung auf die prähistorische Forschung. Archaeo-Physika 12, 1–354.
Rulf, J. 1997. Die Elbe-Provinz der Linearbandkeramik. Památky archeologické—Supplementum 9. Praha: Institute of Archaeology Prague.
Salque, M., Radi, G., Tagliacozzo, A., Pino Uria, B., Wolfram, S., Hohle, I., Stäuble, H., Whittle, A., Hofmann, D., Pechtl, J., Schade-Lindig, S., Eisenhauer, U., and Evershed, R.P. 2012. New insights into the Early Neolithic economy and management of animals in Southern and Central Europe revealed using lipid residue analyses of pottery vessels. Anthropozoologica 47, 45–61.
; Shennan, S. and Wilkinson, J. 2001. Ceramic style change and neutral evolution: a case study from Neolithic Europe. American Antiquity 66, 577–593.
Spataro, M. 2003. Pottery technology and manufacture at the Korenovo culture (LBK) site of Male Korenovo (Bjelovar, Croatia). Opuscula Archaeologica 27, 49–61.
Spatz, H. 2003. Hinkelstein: Eine Sekte als Initiator des Mittelneolithikums? In J. Eckert, U. Eisenhauer, and A. Zimmermann (eds), Archäologische Perspektiven. Analysen und Interpretationen im Wandel, 575–587. Rahden: Marie Leidorf.
Sommer, U. 2001. ‘Hear the instruction of thy father, and forsake not the law of thy mother’: change and persistence in the European early Neolithic. Journal of Social Archaeology 1, 244–270.
Stadler, P. 2005. Settlement of the early Linear Ceramic culture at Brunn am Gebirge, Wolfholz site. Documenta Praehistorica 32, 269–278.
Stehli, P. 1994. Chronologie der Bandkeramik im Merzbachtal. In J. Lüning and P. Stehli (eds), Die Bandkeramik im Merzbachtal auf der Aldenhovener Platte, 79–191. Köln: Rheinland-Verlag.
Strien, H.-C. 1989. Ein Importfund württembergischer Bandkeramik in Nordböhmen. In J. Rulf (ed.), Bylany Seminar 1987. Collected papers, 95–98. Prague: Archeologický Ústav ČSAV.
Strien, H.-C. 2005. Familientraditionen in der bandkeramischen Siedlung bei Vaihingen, Enz. In J. Lüning, C. Frirdich, and A. Zimmermann (eds), Die Bandkeramik im 21. Jahrhundert. Symposium in der Abtei Brauweiler bei Köln vom 16.9.-19.9.2002, 189–197. Rahden: Marie Leidorf.
Strien, H.-C. 2009. Die ‘jüngerbandkeramische Gruppenbildung’—ein Requiem. In A. Zeeb-Lanz (ed.), Krisen-Kulturwandel-Kontinuitäten. Zum Ende der Bandkeramik in Mitteleuropa. Beiträge der Internationalen Tagung in Herxheim bei Landau (Pfalz) vom 14.-17.06.2007, 213–217. Rahden: Marie Leidorf.
Strobel, M. 1997. Ein Beitrag zur Gliederung der östlichen Linienbandkeramik. Versuch einer Merkmalsanalyse. In J. Lichardus and F. Stein (eds), Saarbrücker Studien und Materialien zur Altertumskunde 4/5, 9–98. Bonn: Habelt.
Tichý, R. 1961. O používání tuhy v mladší dobĕ kamenné. Památky archeologické 52, 76–84.
van Berg, P.-L. and de Menthen de Horne, P. 1989. Nouvelle identification d´un potier rubané en Hesbaye. Une série de 32 vases. Notae Praehistoricae 9, 69–71.
van der Plas, L. 1986. Die keramische Charakterisierung von unverzierten und verzierten linearbandkeramischen Scherben. Contribution in P.J.R. Modderman, Die neolithische Besiedlung bei Hienheim, Ldkr. Kelheim II, 26–40. Kallmünz: Michael Lassleben.
van de Velde, P. 1979. On Bandkeramik social structure. An analysis of pot decoration and hut distribution from the central European Neolithic communities of Elsloo and Hienheim. Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia 12, 1–242.
Whittle, A. 1996. Europe in the Neolithic. The creation of new worlds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Zeeb-Lanz, A., Arbogast, R.-M., Haack, F., Haidle, M.N., Jeunesse, C., Orschiedt, J., Schimmelpfennig, D., Schmidt, K., and Willingen, V.S. 2006. Die bandkeramische Siedlung mit ‘Grubenanlage’ von Herxheim bei Landau (Pfalz). Erste Ergebnisse des DFG-Projektes. In H.-J. Beier (ed.), Varia Neolithica 4, 63–81. Langenweißbach: Beier & Beran.
* * *
* Received March 2010, updated December 2011.
CHAPTER 30
CERAMICS AND SOCIETY IN NORTHERN EUROPE
JOHANNES MÜLLER AND RICK PETERSON
Southern Scandinavia and Northern Germany
JOHANNES MÜLLER
THE ORIGINS OF POTTERY IN SOUTHERN SCANDINAVIA AND NORTHERN GERMANY
The earliest types of pottery in southern Scandinavia and northern Europe have different origins and histories of development. On typological grounds we are dealing both with pottery in a late Mesolithic context (Ertebølle c. 4800 BC onwards) and pottery associated with Neolithic ways of life (Funnel Beaker societies, starting c. 4100 BC) (Fischer and Kristiansen 2002; Jöns et al. 2009; Klassen 2004). The relation and origin of both is a focus of debate: whilst Ertebølle ceramics were seen traditionally to reflect southern influences from contemporary early horticulturalists on the Nordic Mesolithic foragers, some researchers are modelling different origins for Ertebølle and Funnel Beaker (trichterbecher, or TRB) assemblages. Ertebølle pottery is associated with Mesolithic/Epipalaeolithic pottery traditions, stretching from central Siberia to Brittany (Jordan and Zvelebil 2009; Matiskainen 2011; Andersen 2011; Piezonka 2011). The use of pointed-bottomed vessels is known from foraging societies which integrated some domesticates and cultivates into their economy but did not change their foraging identity. No pottery or other imports imply any kind of innovative southern influences on this development; rather ceramics were an independent innovation. By contrast, Funnel Beaker pottery is associated with changes related to the spread of horticulture into the North European Plain, enhanced by the expansion of an enclosure-building society from the west (early Michelsberg of the Paris Basin and the Rhinelands) and late Lengyel developments within south-eastern horticultural communities (e.g. Gatersleben groups of the Middle-Elbe–Saale region). Funnel Beaker ceramic assemblages are seen as a result of the inter-linkage of Michelsberg, late Lengyel and late Ertebølle (Fig. 30.1) at the southern fringe of later Funnel Beaker distribution (Klassen 2004; Müller 2011a).
FIG. 30.1. The interaction spheres of early Funnel Beaker Societies (after Müller 2011, 295, fig. 30.7. Drawn by Holger Dieterich).
Investigating the origins of pottery in the southern Scandinavian Neolithic often involves questioning the ideological differences between foragers and early horticulturalists: is there a clear separation of forager diets from horticultural diets, from routinely eating fish to scarcely using marine resources? The model of an evolution of early Neolithic pottery shapes out of late Mesolithic pottery is still open to question, for which the different use of ceramics in different societal spheres could be taken into consideration.
REGIONAL AND CHRONOLOGICAL FRAMEWORKS
Since early discussions on the absolute dating of the southern Scandinavian and northern German Neolithic (Hoika 1994), the resolution of chronologies has improved rapidly (Müller et al. 2010). Whilst 20 years ago different regions were still treated as one, recent studies confirm quite different regional shifts in the introduction of new ways of life, and especially of new pottery styles (compare Lübke and Terberger 2005 with Koch 1998). A regional and chronological framework for ceramics has been produced based on ceramic decoration and shape (Fig. 30.2). Whilst spatially bounded and chronologically restricted regional ceramic groups are indicated by specific shapes, techniques, and ornamentation (Andersen 1997; Andersson et al. 2004; Ebbesen 1975, 1978; Hartz and Lübke 2004; Hoika 1987; Hulthen 1977; Koch 1998; Madsen 1994; Malmer 2002; Meurers-Balke and Weninger 1994; Nielsen 1994; Persson 1999), general trends in decoration ratios or the range of vessel shapes are linked to social frameworks of the Funnel Beaker (TRB) North Group.
FIG. 30.2. Schematic chronological table of Funnel Beaker and Single Grave development in south Scandinavia, the Northern European Plain and the Northern Lower Mountain Range (from Müller et al. 2010, fig. 1. Drawn by Ines Reese).
Early Neolithic (EN; 4100–3500 BC)
The earliest Neolithic pottery (Fig. 30.3) in northern Germany and southern Scandinavia is divided into different regional groups (early Neolithic Ia):
•Wangels/Flintbek (southern Jutland and north-eastern Germany, c. 4100–3800 BC), characterized by mostly undecorated simple funnel beakers and plates with some stitched or arcaded rim decoration or applied moulding below the rim;
•Volling group (northern and middle Jutland, c. 3900–3800 cal. BC), decorated with stab-and-drag stitches and other horizontal fields of lines on the rim—Funnel Beakers of Type B are also found;
•Svalekint group (Zealand and Scania, c. 3950–3800 cal. BC), with more stitches than in Volling but otherwise similar.
The most significant differences between these three groups are in shape and ornamentation. Whilst the southernmost ceramics of the TRB North Group i
s more or less undecorated, flat-based, and with some similarities to late Mesolithic ceramics (e.g. lamps), the northernmost ceramics are sometimes highly decorated with complex patterns, possibly derived from Scanian Ertebølle communities. However, Volling pots are round-based and the body has a globular shape, which is similar to western European pottery in northern France and Belgium (Klassen 2004, 189–203). Typologically, Volling pottery has at least some ‘alien’ types of decoration and pot shapes which might be comparable with western Chasséen and early Michelsberg pottery. Such connections are probably also represented in point-necked adzes, which are the earliest adzes of TRB in northern Europe. Beside these considerations a south/north trend in the distribution of TRB pottery is visible, as it appeared in northern Germany c. 4100 BC, 100–200 years earlier than in southern Scandinavia. These societies were characterized by small hamlets and temporary camps.
Around 3800 BC the constitution of these societies gradually changed with the construction of non-megalithic long barrows and the appearance of new pottery types (early Neolithic Ib).
•The Oxie group (concentrated in Zealand and Scania, but also a few sites in Jutland, c. 3800–3500 BC), without ornamentation all over, but sometimes with rim decorations like stitches on the outer rim. This assemblage of generally flat-based funnel beakers includes amphorae, flasks, and spoons. Whilst necks are usually not decorated, rims are ornamented with typical horizontal rows of short vertical lines or impressions (Madsen 1994, 231), and applications of simple stitches and nail impressions on horizontal moulds are also known.