(PDF) Stone Age Borderland Experience

MATERIALHEFTE ZUR UR- UND FRÜHGESCHICHTE NIEDERSACHSENS | BAND 60 Florian Klimscha, Marion Heumüller, Daan C. M. Raemaekers, Hans Peeters and Thomas Terberger Stone Age Borderland Experience: Neolithic and Late Mesolithic Parallel Societies in the North European Plain Florian Klimscha, Marion Heumüller, Daan C. M. Raemaekers, Hans Peeters and Thomas Terberger (Eds.) Stone Age Borderland Experience: Neolithic and Late Mesolithic Parallel Societies in the North European Plain Materialhefte zur Ur- und Frühgeschichte Niedersachsens Begründet von Martin Claus Band 60 Herausgegeben vom Niedersächsischem Landesamt für Denkmalpflege in Zusammenarbeit mit der Archäologischen Kommission für Niedersachsen e. V. durch Henning Hassmann zugleich Veröffentlichungen der archäologischen Sammlungen des Landesmuseums Hannover 54 Herausgegeben vom Niedersächsischem Landesmuseum Hannover durch Florian Klimscha und Daniel Neumann Florian Klimscha, Marion Heumüller, Daan C. M. Raemaekers, Hans Peeters and Thomas Terberger (Eds.) Stone Age Borderland Experience: Neolithic and Late Mesolithic Parallel Societies in the North European Plain In Kommission bei Verlag Marie Leidorf GmbH · Rahden/Westf. 2022 472 Seiten mit 240 Abbildungen Redaktion dieses Bandes Thomas Terberger (NLD, Hannover), Gundula Lidke (Textservice Lidke, Berlin) Gedruckt mit Mitteln des Niedersächsischen Ministeriums Umschlaggestaltung für Wissenschaft und Kultur Vijay Diaz (NLD, Hannover) Karte auf Umschlagrückseite Verwaltungsgrenzen: EuroGraphics; DGM: European Environment Agency; Gewässer: OSM; Grafik: Marion Heumüller (NLD, Hannover) Das Projekt wurde gefördert durch Grafik, Satz und Bildbearbeitung die Volkswagen-Stiftung Vijay Diaz (NLD, Hannover) Pia Lehner, Halle (Saale) Bibliografische Information Abbildungsnachweise bei den jeweiligen Beiträgen. der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek Für den Inhalt der Beiträge und die urheberrechtlichen Angaben Florian Klimscha, Marion Heumüller, sind die Autor*innen verantwortlich. Daan C. M. Raemaekers, Hans Peeters and Thomas Terberger (eds.), Stone Age Borderland Experience: Neolithic and Late Mesolithic Parallel Societies in the North European Plain Alle Rechte vorbehalten Rahden/Westf.; VML, Leidorf 2022 Kein Teil dieses Buches darf in irgendeiner Form (Druck, Foto­ (Materialhefte zur Ur- und Frühgeschichte kopie, CD-ROM, DVD, Internet oder einem anderen Verfahren) Nieder­sachsens; Band 60) ohne schriftliche Genehmigung des Niedersächsischen Landes- amtes für Denkmalpflege reproduziert werden oder unter Ver- wendung elektronischer Systeme verarbeitet, vervielfältigt oder Die Deutsche Bibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation verbreitet werden. in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie. Detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über https://portal.dnb.de abrufbar. © 2022 Niedersächsisches Landesamt für Denkmalpflege Abteilung Archäologie: Scharnhorststraße 1, D-30175 Hannover www.denkmalpflege.niedersachsen.de Niedersächsisches Landesmuseum Hannover Fachbereich Archäologie: Willy-Brandt-Allee 5, D-30169 Hannover www.landesmuseum-hannover.de Gesamtherstellung Verlag Marie Leidorf GmbH, Geschäftsführer: Dr. Bert Wiegel, Stellerloh 65 · D-32369 Rahden/Westf. Titelbild: Tel.: +49/(0)5771/9510-74 · Fax: +49/(0)5771/9510-75 House plans of Medel-De Roeskamp, the Netherlands E-Mail:

(T. J. ten Anscher/S. Knippenberg); wooden trackway Pr 31, Homepage: www.vml.de Lower Saxony (graphics C. Ludwig/NLD; photo: NLD); Gedruckt auf alterungsbeständigem Papier short-necked beakers found across central Europe, southern Druck: Rehms Druck GmbH, Borken/Westf. Scandinavia, and the Low Countries (Ö. Demirci/A. Lucquin/ F. Klimscha/O.E. Craig/D.C.M. Raemaekers) ISSN 0465-2770 Bearbeitung: Vijay Diaz (NLD) ISBN 978-3-89646-953-3 Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 ) 5 Content Foreword – Stone Age parallel societies? 7 Florian Klimscha, Marion Heumüller, Daan C. M. Raemaekers, Hans Peeters and Thomas Terberger Grenzgänger, traders and the last hunter-gatherers of the North European Plain Some remarks on the origin of Mesolithic pottery in northwestern Europe 11 Erwin Cziesla Wetlands settlements and a wooden trackway: Swifterbant sites in the Dümmer basin 25 Marion Heumüller, Mirjam Briel, Florian Klimscha, Andreas Kotula, Hanns Hubert Leuschner, Reinhold Schoon and Tanja Zerl Neolithic colonization of the southwestern Dümmer basin (NW Germany) – evidence from palaeobotanical data 45 Andreas Bauerochse and Hanns Hubert Leuschner Lipid residue analysis of ceramics from Hüde I (Lower Saxony, Germany): New data to understand the transition to farming 61 Özge Demirci, Alexandre Lucquin, Florian Klimscha, Oliver E. Craig and Daan C. M. Raemaekers Two new Swifterbant settlements at Nieuwegein-Het Klooster, the Netherlands: preliminary site interpretation and overview of human remains 85 Helle M. Molthof and Steffen Baetsen Niedernstöcken – a settlement of the Linear Pottery culture beyond the loess border in the land of hunters and gatherers 99 Klaus Gerken, Andreas Kotula, Clemens Ludwig, Hildegard Nelson and Alexandra Philippi Going north . . . The Middle Neolithic settlement of Nottuln-Uphoven (Westphalia) and the start of the neolithisation in the lowlands 123 Christian Hülsebusch and Albrecht Jockenhövel Early and Middle Neolithic hoards in the area of the northern Mesolithic 135 Michael Müller and Michael Schirren Unexpected dimensions of a Swifterbant settlement at Medel-De Roeskamp (the Netherlands) 159 Theo J. ten Anscher and Sebastiaan Knippenberg Swifterbant and the Late Mesolithic in Westphalia 177 Bernhard Stapel Foraging in a changing landscape – the Late Mesolithic in the coastal area of Lower Saxony 185 Svea Mahlstedt, Martina Karle and Jan F. Kegler The Late Mesolithic in Hamburg-Boberg: inter-cultural interactions and impacts 195 Laura Thielen Hunter-gatherer pottery from the Baltic Sea coast – some regional examples from Schleswig-Holstein 211 Sönke Hartz 6 Content Paths of innovation – the site Dąbki, Poland, and the early forager pottery in the Baltic Sea region 225 Andreas Kotula Long distance contacts in the area of the north European plain: The Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic in Poland and its relations to neighbouring cultures 249 Jacek Kabaciński and Agnieszka Czekaj-Zastawny Crosstown traffic: contemplating mobility, interaction and migration among foragers and early farmers 263 Daniela Hofmann, Hans Peeters and Ann-Katrin Meyer Changing Worlds – The Spread of the Neolithic Way of Life in the North A singularity in continuity? The transition to farming in northwest Europe (c. 5,000 – 3,500 calBC) re-examined from the perspective of multiculturalism 297 Daan C. M. Raemaekers A view from Doggerland – interpreting the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in the wetlands of the Rhine-Meuse delta (5,500 – 2,500 calBC) 31 1 Luc Amkreutz Supra-regional contacts and the earliest metallurgy in southern Scandinavia during the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition 327 Anne Birgitte Gebauer and Lasse Sørensen A biological view on neolithisation 343 Walter Dörfler A long lasting transformation: northern Late Mesolithic/Early Neolithic multi-dimensional developments (c. 4,750 – 3,800 BCE) 359 Johannes Müller A longue durée perspective on technical innovations in the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic of the North European Plain 377 Florian Klimscha and Daniel Neumann The Schöningen group and the cultural development around 4,000 calBC 403 Alexandra Philippi Some remarks on the expansion of the Younger Neolithic causewayed enclosure phenomenon towards northern Germany 417 Benedikt Knoche Subsistence change? Diversification of plant economy during the Neolithic in northern Germany 435 Wibke Kirleis Neolithic landscape under the bog – new investigations in the Ahlen-Falkenberger Moor, dist. Cuxhaven, Germany 455 Anja Behrens, Moritz Mennenga, Steffen Wolters and Martina Karle List of authors 469 Foreword 7 Stone Age parallel societies? When we started the preparations for new research The spread of this pottery seems to correlate on the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in the North with an initial adoption of elements of the Neolithic European Plain, the great differences between both economy in the north. modes of life specified by previous research had just This volume sums up the contributions of an been enhanced by exciting results of palaeogene- international conference hosted in Hanover, May tic analysis: The publication of isotope studies and 20 th – 22 nd, 2019 in the State Museum of Lower palaeogenetic data from the Blatter Cave (Blätter- Saxony. The papers follow several lines of thought höhle) in Westfalia suggested seperated communi- and can be divided into two groups. ties for as long as 2,000 years.1 While the spread A first part, Grenzgängers, traders and the of agriculture certainly stops at the loess border, last hunter-gatherers of the North European Plain, contacts between the Linear Pottery culture and its scrutinises the interactions between Mesolithic and successors and Late Mesolithic groups in the north Neolithic communities. New evidence from Hüde I were nevertheless present. and the Swifterbant culture is presented and contras- A key site to comprehend how this communi- ted with the broader picture in the North European cation might be understood in terms of intensity Plain. Papers about the archaeological context of and interactivity is the wetland settlement Hüde I the Hüde I site include those by Marion Heumüller, at Lake Dümmer in Lower Saxony, where the exis- Mirjam Briel, Florian Klimscha, Andreas Kotula, tence of Late Mesolithic as well as Early Neolithic Hanns Hubert Leuschner, Reinhold Schoon and strata suggested the unique possibility to examine Tanja Zerl who introduce new excavation data from the changes which finally led to the neolithisation the Dümmer basin, as well as the one by Andreas of the North Europan Plain and the formation of the Bauerochse and Hanns Hubert Leuschner who Funnelbeaker culture. Key aspects of the excavations examine the same area from a palaeo-botanical point there have never been fully published and, further- of view with a special reference to road building. more, at the time of the excavation in the 1960s Özge Demirci, Alexandre Lucquin, Florian Klim- findings were understood under a paradigm which scha, Oliver E. Craig and Daan C. M. Raemaekers saw Mesolithic pottery in northwest Germany as a present the first results from lipid residue analysis on subgroup of Ertebølle culture ware. some of the Hüde I pottery, while Helle M. Molthof This perspective has been dramatically changed and Steffen Baetsen show the first results from an by groundbreaking new research making clear that exciting new discovery at Nieuwegein-Het Klooster the Hüde I-site needs to be included in the Swifterbant in the Netherlands, where well-preserved Swifter- culture.2 This new interpretation opens up a whole bant graves were excavated in a settlement context. new perspective on the neolithisation of the north, as Theo J. ten Anscher and Sebastiaan Knippenberg new research has made it evident that regular contacts review another Swifterbant settlement and can, for between Swifterbant groups and Danubian farmers the first time, document houseplans resembling those indeed led to an early northern experimentation with from contemporary Danubian villages in the Rhine- animal husbandry and agriculture. While we certainly land. Whereas Bernhard Stapel sums up unexpected see differences in both ways of life, the situation is evidence for Swifterbant sites in Westphalia, Svea much more complex than suggested before; this new Mahlstedt, Martina Karle and Jan F. Kegler scru- research has already made clear that important impul- tinise the Late Mesolithic evidence for the coastal ses for the early Funnelbeaker pottery are visible areas of Lower Saxony. Finally Laura Thielen sums within the Swifterbant ceramic tradition. up new data on Hamburg-Boberg, another key site for understanding the Late Mesolithic. On a larger scale, Erwin Cziesla examines 1  Cf. the paper by Daniela Hoffmann, Hans Peeters and Ann- the distribution of specific microlithic flint types Kathrin Meyer for a more elaborate discussion. to reconstruct Mesolithic territories and the origin 2  Cf. the papers by Bernhard Stapel, Daan Raemaekers and of pottery in hunter-gatherer societies, while Klaus Theo ten Anscher and Sebastiaan Knippenberg. Gerken, Andreas Kotula, Clemens Ludwig, Hildegard 8 Foreword Nelson and Alexandra Philippi present excavation We also want to thank Prof. Dr. Katja Lembke data from the first settlement of the Linear Pottery (Director of the Lower Saxony State Museum) for culture discovered north of the loess border in hosting the conference and assisting its performance. northwestern Germany. Michael Müller and Michael Dr. Henning Hassmann (Director of the Lower Schirren analyse the evidence from hoards along Saxony State Office for Cultural Heritage) greatly the boundaries of Mesolithic and Neolithic groups. helped us by funding the printing of the volume. We A later Danubian expedition into the north is dealt are much obliged to him. with in the paper by Christian Hülsebusch and Members of the Lower Saxony State Society Albrecht Jockenhövel on the Middle Neolithic settle- for Prehistory (Niedersächsischer Landesverein ment of Nottuln-Uphoven. Three other papers study für Urgeschichte) took over the organisation of the contemporary Late Mesolithic evidence in the Baltic conference, the conference office and the catering. Sea area. Sönke Hartz sums up the evidence from Without those honorary helpers it would not have Schleswig-Holstein, while Andreas Kotula as well as been possible to host more than 80 international Jacek Kabaciński and Agnieszka Czekaj-Zastawny participants in Hanover. study northern Poland. Daniela Hofmann, Hans The publication was made possible by helping Peeters and Ann-Katrin Meyer then discuss the hands and funding from both the Lower Saxony evidence and sketch a detailed and complex interac- State Museum and the Lower Saxony State Service tion pattern between foragers and farmers. for Cultural Heritage. Special thanks are also due In the second part of the book, Changing to the District Administrator (Landrat) of Diepholz Worlds: The Spread of the Neolithic Way of Life in district Cord Bockhop. We would also like to thank the North, more general aspects of the neolithisation Vijay Diaz (Lower Saxony State Service for Cultural are collected, starting with Daan C. M. Raemaekers, Heritage) for the graphic editing, and our colleague who argues against agonistic narratives charged with Dr. Ulrike Weller (Collection Manager of the Lower conflict and presents an alternative reading of the Saxony State Museum’s archaeological finds) who imports in the Swifterbant culture. Luc Amkreutz presented original finds to the participants. combines a long-term narrative on the neolithisa- Finally we would like to thank all those who tion with a strictly local perspective focussing on the also presented research results at the conference but Rhine-Meuse delta. Technical innovations are the unfortunately could not contribute to this volume: focus of the papers by Anne Birgitte Gebauer and Ulrich Schmölcke (Kiel), Canan Ҫakirlar, Safoora Lasse Sørensen (metallurgy) and Florian Klimscha Kamjan (Groningen), Johannes Krause (Jena), Erik and Daniel Neumann (arsenic bronze, traction). New Drenth (Amersfoort), Martha Zur-Schaepers (Colo- data on specific regions or archaeological pheno- gne), Harald Lübke (Schleswig), Kenneth Ritchie mena, respectively, are discussed in three papers by (Schleswig), Marcello Mannino (Århus), Harry Alexandra Philippi (Schöningen group), Benedikt Robson (York), Sebastian Lorenz (Greifswald), Knoche (causewayed enclosures) and Anja Behrens, Lisbeth Messiaen, Dimitri Teetaert, Eva Halbrucker Moritz Mennenga, Steffen Wolters and Martina Karle and Philippe Crombé (Gent). (Cuxhaven region), while recapitulary papers by Last but not least, we want to point out that Walter Dörfler, Johannes Müller and Wibke Kirleis the outcomes of this conference did not only result present up to date interpretations on the causes, in the publication of this book, but were also essen- mechanisms and consequences of the neolithisation tial for a special exhibition in the Lower Saxony in northern Europe. State Museum, ‘Invention of Gods. Stone Age in the This volume would not have been possible North’, which will be presented in Hanover from without the help of many people. First and foremost April 1st – August 28th, 2022, and we thank all contri- we want to express our thanks to the Volkswagen butors to this volume for having made this possible. Foundation, who generously funded the project and its publication with a grant in the Forschung Hanover and Groningen, February 24th 2022 in Museen initiative. Michaela Finsel and Linda Florian Klimscha, Marion Heumüller, Delkeskamp were always helpful and gave valuable Daan C. M. Raemaekers, Hans Peeters and advice how to finish the project successfully during Thomas Terberger the Corona pandemic. Grenzgänger, traders and the last hunter-gatherers of the North European Plain Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 , 11  –  24) 11 Some remarks on the origin of Mesolithic pottery in northwestern Europe Erwin Cziesla Abstract This contribution points out different topics. Firstly: ‘neolithisation’ and ‘ceramicisation’ are to be separated from each other. Secondly: it can be shown that the occurrence of Limburg and La Hoguette pottery types is linked with that of dorsoventral base retouched arrowheads. Since 9,000 calBC this arrowhead type is distributed in a limited area in the river- systems of Seine, Sâone and Rhine, called the ‘Se-Sa-Rhe-Traditions-Region’. This area remains stable up to 5,000 calBC. During Late-Mesolithic times these arrowheads’ distribution did extend to the west, reaching the Atlantic coast, similarly to the pottery of La Hoguette type, as shown by a newly discovered vessel from Guibrelow I near Machecoul. Thirdly: the pottery types of Limbourg and La Hoguette might be ‘hunter/gatherers ceramics’, having been developed in the area between Seine, Sâone and Rhine. The neolithisation process was unaffected by this. Keywords Neolithisation, ceramicisation, origin of northwest European pottery, hunter-gatherer ceramics, dorsoventral base retouched arrowheads Zusammenfassung In diesem Beitrag werden zunächst der Neolithisierungs-Prozess und die „Keramikisierung“ voneinander entkoppelt. Anschließend werden die Keramikarten Limburg und La Hoguette mit dem Auftreten dorsoventral-basisretuschier- ter Pfeilspitzen verknüpft. Dieser spezielle Pfeilspitzen-Typ hat seit ca. 9000 v. Chr. eine begrenzte Verbreitung im sogenann- ten „Se-Sa-Rhe-Traditionsraum“, also an Seine, Sâone und Rhein. Dieser Raum bleibt stabil bis mindestens 5000 v. Chr. Wäh- rend des Spätmesolithikums erreichten dorsoventral-basisretuschierte Pfeilspitzen erstmals die Atlantikküste, ebenso auch La Hoguette- Gefäße, wie jüngst in Guibrelow I bei Machecoul nachgewiesen. Offenbar haben wir es bei der La Hoguette und Limburger Ware mit einer Jäger-Sammler-Keramik zu tun, die an Seine, Sâone und Rhein entwickelt wurde. Der Neolithisie- rungs-Prozess bleibt davon unbeeinflusst. Introduction the western European region and marked the end of the distribution there. A map (Fig. 1), published Let us start here with the compelling, immense by the archaeo-zoologist Hans-Peter Uerpmann term ‘Neolithic Revolution’, coined already in the with the title ‘Entstehungsgebiete der bäuerlichen 1930’s by Vere Gordon Childe (*1892, †1957), as Wirtschaftsform und ihre Ausbreitung nach Europa’ well as with the successful excavations in the ‘Fertile (‘Formation regions of the farming economic system Crescent’ which provided a geographical connec- and its spread to Europe’; Uerpmann 1983, fig. 243), tion along the lines of the biblical traditions for an can serve as an example of this kind of comparative ‘archaeological Garden of Eden’ in Mesopotamia1 depiction. Taking a closer look at the map, one can and in the Levant region as the starting points for see two spatially divided events: on the one side there the following processes of ‘neolithisation’. Later, to- is a spread inland, characterised by large houses, wards the end of the 1980’s, these processes – by then technical facilities, such as ovens and wells, and do- generally accepted – were shown on maps, usually mestic cattle. This is a rather slow process of gradual with the help of arrow symbols that all pointed to land gain (‘neolithisation slow and heavy’) (Cziesla 2015b, 230). In addition, one also sees a spread along the coast, likely using small boats without the pos- sibilities for larger transportation. This distribution, 1 Genesis 2: ‘Now a river flowed out of Eden to water the known under the French term ‘cabotage’, ends in the garden. And from there it divided and became four rivers … The Golf du Lion area and continues inland to the north name of the third river is Tigris. It flows east of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates’. and northeast along the river Rhône (‘neolithisation 12 Some remarks on the origin of Mesolithic pottery in northwestern Euro pe Fig. 1 Map of the region of origin and spread of the farming economy and its distribution to Europe (after Uerpmann 1983, fig. 243; text added). Fig. 2 Distribution of the sherd finds of types Limbourg and La Hoguette. The western sites, towards the Atlantic coast, of La Hoguette finds include: 1 Guibrelou I near Machecoul; 2 Fontenay-le-Marmion ‘La Hoguette’; 3 Fontenay-le-Marmion ‘La Grande Piéce’; 4 Fontenay- le-Marmion ‘Grand Champ’; 5 Alizay-Igoville, Eure (map compiled after Cziesla 2015b, 209 ff.; Rousseau et al. 2015, fig. 15; Schauer in press). Erwi n C z i e s l a 13 fast and light’) (Cziesla 2015b, 230). On the one unspoken factors: that on the one hand the indig- hand the ‘neolithisation’ took place in the island enous Mesolithic population hardly played a role in and coastal regions of the Mediterranean, and on these processes, that furthermore the coastal region the other hand across the European mainland. Both of the Atlantic was of no importance, and, finally areas represent topographically favourable regions and most important, that the process of neolithisa- for settlement, and in both cases the pottery sherds, tion was identical with the distribution of ceramics. as cultural witness, ‘paved the way’. Once this model of distribution had been This model, however, of distribution, diffusion worked out, it became the almost sole purpose of and expansion out of the Levant and the Anatolian research, over the last 50 years, to reconstruct and mountains into western Europe assumes for three date the individual sections of the distribution. Fig. 3 Map after Jeunesse et al. 2019, fig. 32, showing western Europe at about 5,100 BC. The ‘Group de Bavans’ only has a distribution in the eastern French and Swiss region (in contrast to Fig. 9), contradicting mappings by Jaccottey et al. 2000; Cziesla 2015b, fig. 99 and Cziesla 2018b, fig. 8. The distribution of the Limbourg and La Hoguette groups is shown as two separate regions, with the La Hoguette sherds only as isolated singular findspots on the Atlantic coast. Fig. 4 Dorsoventral base retouched arrowhead and Limbourg ceramic from ‘Place St.Lambert’, Liège, Layer 2 (after Otte 1984, fig. 11; Rousselle 1984, fig. 7). 14 Some remarks on the origin of Mesolithic pottery in northwestern Euro pe Fig. 5 Dorsoventral base retouched arrowheads and Limbourg ceramic from the site Weiler-la-Tour in Luxembourg (after Jadin 1996, figs. 3; 5; Jadin/Cauwe 1991). Fig. 6 Dorsoventral base retouched arrowhead and La Hoguette ceramic from the site Alzingen-Großfeld in Luxembourg (after Jadin 1996, figs. 8; 12). Erwi n C z i e s l a 15 In 1967, Günter Smolla, former professor of prehis- tion of the beloved neolithisation processes and the tory at Frankfurt/Main University, wrote that the associated spread of the ceramics took no damage, pots and sherds play a large, often even central role everything was confirmed anew. in the research of the Neolithic, as the neolithisation Once this had been presented in the scientific is inextricably linked with the development of the journal ‘Germania’, further sites with sherds could ceramics (Smolla 1967, 92). This colleague would be quickly added to the scheme, with, for example, not believe his eyes when viewing todays’ analytic Claire Manen and Karoline Mazurié de Keroualin results, where – due to the decoration on the ves- providing 72 Limbourg and 51 La Hoguette sites with sel bodies – even marriage rules and relationship sherds (Manen / Mazurié de Keroualin 2003, figs. patterns can be discerned (Gronenborn / Strien 2– 3). Recently, I was able to increase this inventory 2014, 36f). to 93 Limbourg and 83 La Hoguette sites (Fig. 2; Early studies concerned with the complete Cziesla 2015b, fig. 178). In the meantime, further European neolithisation process left no space for old and new finds have been presented (e. g. Van doubt as to the validity of previous interpretations. Wijk et al. 2014). But Christian Jeunesse and Jean Sainty, however, It needs to be highlighted that my own following were able to recover sherds from a building site in considerations are in clear contrast to the depictions Bischoffsheim in Alsace that were comparable to that have been presented and interpreted by Chris- other ceramics, published by Robert Caillaud and tian Jeunesse, who has recently reiterated his view Edouard Lagnel (Caillaud / Lagnel 1972), found together with colleagues (see Fig. 3; Jeunesse et al. under the megalithic tomb at La Hoguette near Fon- 2019, fig. 32). The current comparison of the distribu- tenay-le-Marmion in the Département Calvados. At tion of Limbourg and La Hoguette (Fig. 2, cf. Fig. 3) a conference in Caen (‘Xé colloque interregional sur already shows that Christian Jeunesse, Rose-Marie le Néolithique’) in 1983, Christian Jeunesse was able Arbogast, Michel Mauvilly and Anthony Denaire still to connect four sites on the Upper Rhine and from assume two separate distribution areas, with the La the Doubs valley with this site in Calvados (Jeunesse Hoguette sherds in western France being rated as iso- 1986; Fig. 3). Thus, for the first time, sherds from a lated outliers only. In addition, they see interactions Bandkeramik settlement area were linked to a region of finds materials between the Cardial culture in in which the Bandkeramik – as a culture – was not the south and the Bandkeramik in the north, whilst documented, which raised questions regarding the the space between is exactly filled by the ‘Group of origin of these obviously non-Bandkeramik ceramics. Bavans’. I will come back to this aspect later. In the following year, however, Christian Jeunesse It occurred to me, whilst examining the non- pointed out (Jeunesse 1987) significant similarities Bandkeramik ceramics, that they could be occa- with the pottery from the site of Leucate-Corrège in sionally linked to stone arrowheads. Thus, there southern France, so that the ceramics could be con- were so called ‘Danubian-arrowheads’ (in detail: nected with the Mediterranean Cardial culture. Thus, Cziesla 2015b, 133 – 146) from the Place St. Lam- the popular image of the neolithisation processes bert in Liège (Fig. 4) and the Luxembourg site Wei- (see Fig. 1) was neither damaged nor questioned by ler-la-Tour (Fig. 5) together with Limbourg sherds, the La Hoguette and Limbourg ceramics (see Mod- as well as arrowheads together with La Hoguette derman 1970) as well. On the contrary: apparently sherds (Fig. 6) at the site Alzingen-Großfeld, also in ceramics from the southern French Cardial reached Luxembourg. Bavans-arrowheads were found with central Europe along the river Rhône, which were La Hoguette sherds in Layer 5 of the Bavans-caves then heaped up in (early) Bandkeramik pits. This was (Fig. 7) on the upper reaches of the river Doubs (Aimé an ideal combination of both distribution ways, with 1981) – which, by the way, were also published in the La Hoguette site in Calvados remaining isolated, the Caen conference volume (Aimé / Jeunesse 1986, far away from the important Neolithic development figs. 2 – 3). Luc Jaccottey pointed out that the connec- routes. Additionally, Jens Lüning and colleagues tion between sherds and stone artefacts could play rushed to help by mapping the increasingly grow- an important role in evaluation when he wrote ‘the ing finds material (55 Limbourg and 30 La Hoguette shelter of Bavans shows the association between a sites). Their article was called ‘Westliche Nachbarn mesolithic industry and ceramic’ (Jaccottey 1997, der bandkeramischen Kultur’ (western neighbours of 313). This is a revolutionary idea, in which Mesolithic the Bandkeramik culture), with cultural references, arrowheads are associated with ceramics, and it con- dating results and connections already clearly out- tradicts, for the first time, parts of the general scheme lined in the title (Lüning et al. 1989). The presenta- of the neolithisation processes outlined above. Most 16 Some remarks on the origin of Mesolithic pottery in northwestern Euro pe Fig. 7 Dorsoventral base retouched arrowheads (type Bavans; 11 – 18) and La Hoguette sherds (1 – 10) from Layer 5 of the Bavans Caves (after Aimé 1987, figs. 3 – 4). of these arrowheads have a base retouched from both this results in a clearly defined concentration (Fig. 8), the ventral and the dorsal sides (dorsoventral re- whereas these arrowheads are not present in the touched base) in common. adjoining regions and do not reach the Atlantic. I have, therefore, labelled this region on the rivers Seine, Saône and Rhine, with its boundaries that The dorsoventral base retouching of appear to have been stable over several millennia, arrowheads as the ‘Se-Sa-Rhe-Traditions-Region’. Although this tradition and region also remain In order to understand the importance of these dor- visible in the Late Mesolithic, there are, however, soventral retouched bases, we have to, on the one within this area at least three arrowhead types dis- hand, consider stone arrowheads and, on the other tinguishable that continue to have a dorsoventral hand, the Mesolithic. The dorsoventral base reduc- base retouching: the arrowheads of the types Bavans/ tion, i. e. the retouching of the ventral and dorsal Fléchettes asymétriques, Danubian arrowheads and sides, is an innovation from the early part of the arrowheads of the ‘Rhein-Maas-Schelde’ culture. Mesolithic. Currently, it is indicated that arrowheads Their geographical distribution is shown again in a with this special base appeared at the latest c. 9,000 map (Fig. 9). It is interesting to note that, in principle, calBC in central Europe (Cziesla 1992, 284; 2015a; major spatial areas of distribution are formed: the 2015b, 31 f.; 2016, fig. 2; 2018a, fig. 2). When sites Bavans/Fléchettes arrowheads tend to appear in the with such projectiles from the Early and Middle Me- south with a main focus in Luxembourg as well as solithic (c. 9,000 to 6,500/6,000 calBC) are mapped, Rhineland-Palatinate, Danubian arrowheads are rath- Erwi n C z i e s l a 17 Fig. 8 Distribution of the arrowheads with dorsoventral retouched base in the Early and Middle Mesolithic (c. 9,000 – 6,500 calBC; data after Cziesla 2015b, figs.14; 22; 46). The sites show the distribution of the ‘Se-Sa-Rhe-Traditions-Region’. er distributed in the centre and in the east, while the New finds of the ceramic type arrowheads of the ‘Rhein-Maas-Schelde’ culture tend La Hoguette to appear more to the northwest to the English Chan- nel. The exchange within the ‘Se-Sa-Rhe-Traditions- I have discerned in an extensive study that the dor- Region’ was apparently intense. It is important to note, soventral retouched bases of arrowheads arose in that in the west, during the Late Mesolithic, other central Europe and spread to the Atlantic during the arrowhead types with dorsoventral base reduction Late Mesolithic and, subsequently, continued along appeared that eventually even reached the Atlantic the coast to the south (Cziesla 2015b, 162 fig. 109; coast. These include ‘Pointes de Sonchamps’, ‘Pointes Fig. 11). The dorsoventral base retouched arrowheads de Falaise’, and, finally, ‘Armatures à éperon’ of the can be linked with the ceramic types Limbourg and ‘Retzien-Culture’ (Thévenin 1991, fig. 44; Cziesla La Hoguette (Figs. 5 – 7) and have an identical dis- 2015b, fig. 203; Schauer in press; see Fig. 10). Such tribution area (compare Figs. 2; 10). Now a newly Late Mesolithic arrowheads have been dated to 5,600 discovered find verifies this theory. In 1999, 2007 to 5,200 calBC (Marchand 2014; Séara / Lajoux and 2009 (published in 2015: Rousseau et al. 2015) 2019, fig. 6). As the tradition of base formation of the remains of a vessel were found in Guibrelow I, arrowheads in the ‘Se-Sa-Rhe-Traditions-Region’ has near Machecoul, only a few kilometers distant from its origins around 9,000 calBC (or several centuries the Loire estuary (Fig. 2). The similarity of this pot earlier) in central Europe, it is beyond doubt that this – ovoid, roughly 56 cm high, with a body circumfer- arrowhead tradition extends in a western direction to ence of 45 cm – with a vessel from Alzey-Dautenheim the Atlantic (Cziesla 2015b, fig. 245). This direction is so striking that researchers think it possible that, of distribution is important for the evaluation of the even with a geographical distance of c. 800 km, the ceramic types of Limbourg and La Hoguette. same potter could have been responsible (Rousseau 18 Some remarks on the origin of Mesolithic pottery in northwestern Euro pe Fig. 9 Distribution of the arrowheads with dorsoventral retouched bases of the Late Mesolithic: Bavans-points, Danubian arrowheads, arrowheads of the Rhine-Maas-Schelde culture (after Cziesla 2015b, fig. 101). et al. 2015, 27).2 As numbers of finds have increased While the direction of expansion for dorsoven- in northwestern France in recent years (Fig. 2), with tral base retouched arrowheads from central Europe further finds in the surroundings of ‘La Hoguette’ in towards the Atlantic coast is certain, the direction of Fontenay-le-Marmion also joining them, one should expansion for the ceramics remains, for the time being, not view the ceramics of the La Hoguette type in open. It is possible that the ceramics were transported this region as isolated finds (cf. Fig. 3), but instead out of the ‘Retzien’ to the east, in the opposite direc- assume that their distribution once covered this entire tion of distribution of the dorsoventral base retouched region in northwestern France. The distribution can arrowheads. As I could prove (Cziesla 2015b, fig. meaningfully be explained in combination with the 109), a distribution towards the south apparently took dorsoventral base retouched arrowheads. place along the Atlantic coast (see also Schauer in press), until finally the dorsoventral retouched bases also appeared in southeastern France (Fig. 11), along 2  According to Google Maps it is a distance of even 885 km, with (although not yet associated) sherds of the La needing 182 hours to cover by foot. An experienced traveller, Hoguette type. therefore, would definitely need 2 – 3 weeks to negotiate the rou- te from Guibrelou on the Atlantic to Alzey on the Rhine, provi- It should be noted that the west-east-exchange ded that the groups present in these regions would have allowed appears initially only as an exchange of ceramics and it to happen. If we see the ‘Se-Sa-Rhe-Traditions-Region’ also as a uniform cultural and linguistic region, then the present Me- arrowheads. Whether other elements were subject to solithic groups could have allowed that, perhaps even this exchange and whether this also had to do with welcoming or helping the traveller. Whether he was on the move from Alzey to the coast or in the opposite direction re- the neolithisation processes has to remain open at the mains open in this consideration. moment. The ‘neolithisation’ and the ‘ceramicisation’ Erwi n C z i e s l a 19 Fig. 10 In the west, the distribution of the arrowheads with dorsoventral retouched base from Fig. 9 is c. 5,600/5,200 BC supplemented by arrowheads with dorsoventral base reduction of the types ‘Pointes de Sonchamps’, ‘Pointes de Falaise’ and ‘armatures à éperon’, so that, along with the arrowheads from the ‘Retzien’, the Atlantic coast is reached. are to be separated from each other, when we want western and central Europe have been put into per- to explore and, finally, understand the dynamics and spective. For example the Bandkeramik settlement meaning of both processes. Currently, the traditional reconstruction as ‘yard model’ (‘Hofplatzmodell’) or image (Fig. 1) remains unaffected, with only the ceram- ‘row settlement model’ (‘Zeilensiedlung’) are under ics seeming to play a more complex role, also outside of discussion,3 which will probably even affect the se- the previous picture of distribution. This is not surpris- riation of ceramics from house features, and results ing, however, as the use of ceramics in the environment which started so brilliantly with Peter Stehli’s findings of hunter-gatherers is more the rule than the excep- (Stehli 1988) could become – in particular the assign- tion worldwide (Rice 1999; Jordan / Zvelebil 2009). ment of pits to houses – questionable.4 Likewise the This has recently been proved in northeastern Europe origin of the Bandkeramik house type is no longer as (Piezonka 2015; Ivanova-Biel 2016; Kirschneck in sure as considered before. The theory from Christiane press), but apparently does not go back as far as with Frirdich, that the Bandkeramik house ‘did not have the La Hoguette (maximum) around 5,600 calBC. any mesolithic role models’ (Frirdich 2005, 89) has been put into perspective. Recently, large Mesolithic Everything is under scrutiny 3  Rück 2012; Zimmermann 2012; Lenneis / Schwarzäugel Considering the recent state of research, it is no- 2019, 301 f.; Cziesla 2019b, fig. 3. ticeable that in the past years a number of once 4  Rück 2012, 24 f.; Stäuble / Wolfram 2012, 41 f.; Leuzinger cherished results concerning the Early Neolithic in 2012, 313; Stäuble 2013; Petrasch / Stäuble 2016, 375. 20 Some remarks on the origin of Mesolithic pottery in northwestern Euro pe Fig. 11 Map showing the distribution of arrowheads with dorsoventral retouched base from central Europe to the Atlantic (‘Retzien’) and along the Atlantic coast to the south. Illustration form Cziesla (2015b, fig. 109). I have used the ‘Fléchettes’ and ‘Pointes de Bavans’ arrowheads from the Weidental caves (Cziesla 1992, 130) in this illustration, as the distribution of these arrowheads reaches into the Palatinate to the north (cf. different presentation in Jeunesse et al. 2019, fig. 32; cf. Fig. 3). rectangular ground plans (‘longhouses’) have been found there: while the Mesolithic hunters managed published for the southern German site Siebenlin- the small houses and left behind bones of wild ani- den (Kind et al. 2012) and for the site J­ ühnsdorf 8 in mals, the large houses were the homes of farmers, Brandenburg, eastern Germany (Cziesla 2017). These who apparently preferred to consume domesticated ground plans are c. 4.5 m wide and 6 to 8 m long cattle there (Elburg 1999, Figs. 2 – 3; Hachem 2000, (see also the site Veret´e I: Ošibkina 2007, Abb. 2), 310). Also, we can now prove that Mesolithic arrow- corresponding exactly to values known from small head makers were to be found in Bandkeramik settle- Bandkeramik buildings (‘Kleinbau’; Coolen 2006; in ments, even in individual houses (Cziesla et al. 2014, detail see: Cziesla 2017; 2019a; 2020), the basic model fig. 4), which shows a tradition of dorsoventral base or blueprint of all Bandkeramik houses in western retouched arrowheads into the Bandkeramik culture Europe (Modderman 1970). This has already been (Cziesla 2015b; 2016; 2018a, fig. 3.F). foreseen, by the way, two decades earlier by Claus- Bandkeramik vessels, long seen as unquestion- Joachim Kind (Kind 1998, 18 f.). The architecture of able proof of the complete Neolithic material cul- the small houses is also associated with the waste ture, just served as packaging for completely different Erwi n C z i e s l a 21 products (see Jennbert 1994). The numerous ceramic We have to expect parallel societies over the course proofs have neither been compared with settlements, of centuries, maybe for even up to two millennia. cemeteries or technical facilities (in detail: Cziesla Which ceramics they used in the individual regions, 2010). The newest Bandkeramik sherds, published and where the impulse for ceramics came from still by Klaus Gerken, from the site Niedernstöcken 21, needs to be explored. In the end the Dümmer ceram- which lies far outside the Loess region, are not in ics, which are in the central focus of this conference, question as remnants of a vessel. I have to associate, will likely also be associated with this Mesolithic however, the feature in question (Gerken/Nelson ceramic traditions. 2016, figs. 3; 10) with a perhaps Mesolithic ground plan. Apparently the indigenous Mesolithic groups played an increasingly important role, whereas many References colleagues would still like to deny that they had any knowledge of ceramic production and usage. Aimé 1981: G. Aimé, Les abris sous roche de Bavans (Doubs). It is currently not possible to view the Cardial Société d´Émulation de Montbéliard 77, 1981, 25 – 6 0. and/or Bandkeramik people as the producers of or Aimé 1987: G. Aimé, Les Abris sous roches de Bavans masterminds for the origin of the La Hoguette ceram- (Doubs). Couche 4 et 5. Revue Archéologique de l’Est ics tempered with crushed bones. It is much more et du Centre-Est. Tome 38 No.149/150, 1987, 397 – 4 03. likely that the ‘hunter/gatherer ceramics’5 developed Aimé / Jeunesse 1986: G. Aimé / Chr. Jeunesse, Le niveau in the western European region and influenced in 5 des Abris-sous-Roches de Bavans (Doubs) et la transi- turn both younger ceramic wares (Bandkeramik and tion Mésolithique récent / Néolithique dans la moyenne Cardial). Also, from the geographical perspective, Vallée du Doubs. In: G. Aubin et al. (Redaktion), Actes there are multiple indications for the existence of du Xe Colloque interregional sur le Néolithique. Caen, barriers that would have prevented the quick dis- 30 septembre – 2 octobre 1983. Revue archéologique de tribution of the Mediterranean developments to the l´Ouest, Supplément No.1 (Rennes 1986) 31 – 4 0. north (Rasse 2008; Marchand 2014, fig. 8). If Jens Caillaud / Lagnel 1972: R. Caillaud / E. Lagnel, Le cairn Lüning and his colleagues were to comment again et le crématoire néolithique de la Hoguette à Fontenay- on the phenomenon of ‘Limbourg and La Hoguette’, le-Marmion (Calvados). Gallia Préhistoire15(1), 1972, then certainly not with the term ‘western neighbours’ 137 – 185. in the title of the essay anymore. At the time of their Coolen 2006: J. Coolen, Das Haus 11 von Mold, Niederöster- publication, the ‘neolithisation’ was linked with ‘ce- reich und andere Kleinbauten der Linearbandkeramik. ramicisation’, and there was really only one common Archaeologia Austriaca. Beiträge zur Ur- und Frühge- origin and direction imaginable. This point of view schichte Mitteleuropas 88, 2004 (2006), 67 – 102. is about to change. Cziesla 1992: E. Cziesla, Jäger und Sammler – Die mittlere Steinzeit im Landkreis Pirmasens (Brühl bei Köln 1992). Cziesla 2010: E. Cziesla, Zur bandkeramischen Kultur Conclusion zwischen Elbe und Oder. Germania 86, 2008 (2010), 405 – 4 64. It is assumed, therefore, that the ‘ceramicisation’ Cziesla 2015a: E. Cziesla, An area of common traditions in most of Europe (southern, western and central without foreign contacts – comments on the Mesolithic Europe) was finished by the time the full Neolithic, of north-western Europe. In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / as represented by the Bandkeramik, reached, around D. C. M. Raemaekers / Th. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki 5,300 BC, the Rhine-Valley. Then ‘neolithisation’ Site in Pomeranian and the Neolithisation of the North finally took place. Nevertheless, the hunter-gatherer European Lowlands (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäolo- culture lived on, whether, for example, spaciously gie und Geschichte im Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. as in the north European lowlands or in smaller, 2015) 445 – 452. possibly isolated groups, as so impressively shown Cziesla 2015b: E. Cziesla, Grenzen im Wald – Stabilität by the Blätterhöhle finds (Orschiedt et al. 2012). und Kontinuität während des Mesolithikums in der Mitte Europas. Berliner Archäologische Forschungen 15 (Rahden/Westf. 2015). Cziesla 2016: E. Cziesla, Vier Jahrtausende „Se-Sa-Rhe- 5  Michal Kobusiewicz has proposed the use of the terminolo- Traditionsraum“ (8900 – 4900 calBC) in Mitteleuropa. In: gy ‘Paraneolithic’ for the ‘ceramic Mesolithic’, the ‘Epi-Meso- K. Gerken / D. Groß / St. Hesse (eds.), Neue Forschun- lithic’, ‘Forest Neolithic’ and the ‘Subneolithic’ (Kobusiewicz 1999). Until now, this term has not gained acceptance. gen zum Mesolithikum. Beiträge zur Jahres­t agung der 22 Some remarks on the origin of Mesolithic pottery in northwestern Euro pe Arbeitsgemeinschaft Mesolithikum Rotenburg (Wüm- jenseits der Lössgrenze im Land der Jäger und Samm- me), 19.–22. März 2015. Archäologische Berichte des ler? Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte 85, Landkreises Rotenburg (Wümme) 20, 2016, 37 – 6 8. 2016, 31 – 78. Cziesla 2017: E. Cziesla, Jühnsdorf 8. Haus und Herd im Gronenborn / Strien 2014: D. Gronenborn / H.-Chr. Mesolithikum in Mitteleuropa. Internationale Archäo- Strien, Linienbandkeramik und La Hoguette: Wirt- logie 128 (Rahden/Westf. 2017). schaft und kulturelle Dynamik im 6. Jahrtausend. In: Cziesla 2018a: E. Cziesla, Mapping the Mesolithic. In: Th. Terberger / D. Gronenborn (eds.), Vom Jäger zum P. Valde-Nowak / K. Sobczyk / M. Novak / J. Źrałka Sammler. Die Neolithische Revolution. Archäologie in (eds.), Multas per Gentes et multas per Saecula. Amici Deutschland Sonderheft 5 (Darmstadt 2014) 30 – 38. Magistro et Collegae suo Ioanni Christopho Kozłowski Hachem 2000: L. Hachem, New observations on the Band- dedicant (Kraków 2018) 249 – 2 56. keramik house and social organization. Antiquity 74, Cziesla 2018b: E. Cziesla, Arbeiten zu Alt- und Mittel- 2000, 308 – 312. steinzeit in der Pfalz (1980 – 1992). In: J. Richter (ed.), Ivanova-Biel 2016: M. Ivanova-Biel, Review of: H. Piezonka, 111 Jahre Prähistorische Archäologie in Köln. Kölner Jäger, Fischer, Töpfer. Wildbeuter mit früher Keramik Studien zur prähistorischen Archäologie 9 (Rahden/ in Nordosteuropa im 6. und 5. Jahrtausend v.Chr. Ar- Westf. 2018) 140 – 151. chäologie in Eurasien 30. Habelt-Verlag Bonn 2015, 438 Cziesla 2019a: E. Cziesla, Der runde und der rechtecki- Seiten, 205 Abbildungen, 107 Tafeln. Archaeologica ge Befund – Betrachtungen zur Rekonstruktion von Bulgarica 20(1), 2016, 97 – 100. Behausungen des Mesolithikums in Mitteleuropa. In: Jaccottey 1997: L. Jaccottey, La couche 5 de Bavans M. Baales / Cl. Pasda (eds.), „All der holden Hügel (Doubs) et la fin du Mésolithique en Franche-Comté. ist keiner mir fremd…“. Festschrift für Claus-Joachim In: Chr. Jeunesse (ed.), Le Néolithique Danubien et Kind zum 65.Geburtstag. Universitätsforschungen ses marges entre Rhin et Seine. XXIIé colloque inter- zur Prähistorischen Archäologie 327 (Bonn 2019) régional sur le Néolithique. Strasbourg 27 – 29 octobre 397 – 410. 1995. Cahiers de l’Association pour la Promotion de Cziesla 2019b: E. Cziesla, Archäologie auf der Ortsumfah- la Recherche Archéologique en Alsace. Supplément 3 rung Passow (Lkr. Uckermark, Bundesland Branden- (Strasbourg 1997) 313 – 325. burg). Archäologische Quellen 3 (Kerpen-Loogh 2019). Jaccottey et al. 2000: L. Jaccottey /Dr. Cl. Petit / F. Huet / Cziesla 2020: E. Cziesla, Jühnsdorf 8 und Siebenlinden J. Krzyzanowski / A. Thévenin, Les armatures évo- K-III/3 – Langhäuser aus dem Mesolithikum. In: A. luées (pointes de Bavans et fléchettes asymétriques à Zander / B. Gehlen (eds.), From the Early Preboreal to base concave) de l´Est de la France: définition, réparti- the Subboreal Period – Current Mesolithic research in tion et chronologie. Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Europe. Edition Mesolithikum 5 (Kerpen Loogh 2020) Luxembourgeoise 19, (1997) 2000, 195 – 215. 91 – 109. Jadin 1996: I. Jadin, Le Rubané de la Moselle: trait d´union Cziesla et al. 2014: E. Cziesla /Th. Ibeling / H. Schmitt / entre la Rhénanie et le Bassin parisien ? Questions et O. Ungerath, Nur eine Stunde Fußweg – die benachbar- réponses après deux campagnes de fouilles au Grand- te bandkeramische Siedlung „Merzenich-Valdersweg“. Duché de Luxembourg. In: P. Duhamel (ed.), La Bour- In: E. Cziesla / Th. Ibeling (eds.), Fundplatz der Ex- gogne entre les bassins rhénan, rhodanien et parisien. traklasse. Archäologie unter der neuen Bundesautobahn Carrefour ou frontière? Actes du XVIIIé Colloque inter- A4 bei Arnoldsweiler (Langenweißbach 2014) 193 – 200. régional sur le Néolithique. Dijon, 25 – 27 octobre 1991, Elburg 1999: R. Elburg, Man-animal relationships in the 14é supplément à la Revue archéologique de l´Est (Dijon Early Neolithic of Dresden (Saxony, Germany). In: 1996) 101 – 117. J. W. F. Reumer/J. de Vos (eds.), Elephants have a snor- Jadin / Cauwe 1991: I. Jadin / N. Cauwe, Contribution à kel! Papers in honour of Paul Y. Sondaar. Annual of l’étude du Néolithique ancien de la Moselle: Le village the Natural Museum Rotterdam – Deinsea 7, 1999, rubané de Weiler-La-Tour-Holzdreisch (Grand-Duché 169 – 186. de Luxembourg). Notae Praehistoricae 10, 1991, 61 – 67. Frirdich 2005: Chr. Frirdich, Struktur und Dynamik der band- Jennbert 1994: K. Jennbert, Getreide als Geschenk. Ertebøl- keramischen Landnahme. In: J. Lüning / Chr. Frirdich / lekultur und frühe Trichterbecherkultur. In: J. Hoika / A. Zimmermann (eds.), Die Bandkeramik im 21. Jahr- J. Meurers-Balke (eds.), Beiträge zur frühneolithischen hundert. Symposium in der Abtei Brauweiler bei Köln Trichterbecherkultur im westlichen Ostseegebiet. 1. in- vom 16.9.–19.9.2002. Internationale Archäologie Band ternationales Trichterbechersymposium in Schleswig 7 (Rahden/Westfalen) 81 – 109. vom 4. bis 7. März 1985. Untersuchungen und Materia- Gerken / Nelson 2016: K. Gerken / H. Nelson, Niedern- lien zur Steinzeit in Schleswig-Holstein 1 (Neumünster stöcken 21 – Linienbandkeramisches Expansionsgebiet 1994) 155 – 164. Erwi n C z i e s l a 23 Jeunesse 1986: Ch. Jeunesse, Rapports avec le Néolithique ältere Metallzeiten. Studien und Materialien Band 1 ancien d´Alsace de la céramique “danubienne” de La (Münster 2012) 309 – 317. Hoguette (à Fontenay-le-Marmion, Calvados). In: G. Lüning et al. 1989: J. Lüning / U. Kloos / S. Albert, Westli- Aubin et al. (Red.), Actes du Xe Colloque interrégional che Nachbarn der bandkeramischen Kultur: La Hoguet- sur le Néolithique. Caen 30 septembre – 2 octobre 1983. te und Limburg. Germania 67, 1989, 355 – 420. Revue archéologique de l’Ouest, Supplément 1 (Rennes Manen / Mazurié de Keroualin 2003: Cl. Manen / K. 1986) 41 – 50. Mazurié de Keroualin, Les concepts „La Hoguette“ et Jeunesse 1987: Chr. Jeunesse, La céramique de La Hoguette. „Limbourg“: un bilan des données. In: M. Besse / L.-I. Un nouvel „élément non-rubané“ du Néolithique ancien Stahl Gretsch / Ph. Curdy (eds.), ConstellaSion. Hom- de l´Europe du Nord-Ouest. Cahiers Alsaciens d’Archéo- mage à Alain Gallay. Cahiers d´archéologie romande logie d’Art et d’Histoire 30, 1987, 5 – 33. 95 (Lausanne 2003) 115 – 145. Jeunesse et al. 2019: Chr. Jeunesse / R.-M. Arbogast / M. Marchand 2014: G. Marchand, Préhistoire atlantique. Fonc- Mauvilly / A. Denaire, La couche 5 de Lutter. Le tionnement et évolution des sociétés du Paléolithique second Mésolithique et la transition avec le Néolithique au Néolithique. Collection des Hespérides (Arles 2014). dans la zone Jura – Plateau Suisse (6300 – 4300 av. J.-C.). Modderman 1970: P. J. R. Modderman, Linearbandkeramik In: R.-M. Arbogast / S. Grislin / Chr. Jeunesse / F. Séara aus Elsloo und Stein. Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia (dir.), Le second Mésolithique, des Alpes à l’Atlantique 3 (Leiden 1970). (7é–5é millénaire). Mémoires d´Archéologie du Grand Orschiedt et al. 2012: J. Orschiedt / B. Gehlen / W. Schön / Est 3 (Strasbourg 2019) 55 – 108. F. Gröning, The Neolithic and Mesolithic Cave site Jordan / Zvelebil 2009: P. Jordan / M. Zvelebil (eds.), Ce- «Blätterhöhle» in Westphalia (D). Notae Praehistoricae ramics before farming. The dispersal of pottery among 32, 2012, 73 – 88. Prehistoric Eurasian hunter-gatherers (Walnut Creek Ošibkina 2007: S. V. Ošibkina, Holzartefakte und hölzerne 2009). Konstruktionen des Mesolithikums im Norden Osteu- Kind 1998: C.-J. Kind, Komplexe Wildbeuter und frühe ropas. Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 37, 2007, Ackerbauern. Bemerkungen zur Ausbreitung der Line- 169 – 188 arbandkeramik im südlichen Mitteleuropa. Germania Otte 1984: M. Otte, L’industrie lithique Omalienne. In: M. 76, 1998, 1 – 2 3. Otte (ed.), Les fouilles de la Place Saint-Lambert à Liège Kind et al. 2012: C.-J. Kind / Th. Beutelspacher / E. David / 1. Études et Recherches Archéologiques de l´Université E. Stephan, Das Mesolithikum in der Talaue des de Liège 18 (Liège 1984) 111 – 145. Neckars 2. Die Fundsteuungen von Siebenlinden 3, 4 Petrasch / Stäuble 2016: J. Petrasch / H. Stäuble, Von und 5. Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Früh- Gruben und ihrem Inhalt: Dialog über die Interpreta- geschichte in Baden Württenberg Band 125 (Stuttgart tionen von Befunden und ihrer Verfüllung sowie deren 2012). Aussagemöglichkeit zur zeitlichen und funktionalen Kirschneck (in press): E. Kirschneck, Neue Überlegungen Struktur bandkeramischer Siedlungen. In: T. Kerig / zu La Hoguette. Sitzungsbericht der AG Neolithikum K. Nowak / G. Roth (eds.), Alles was zählt … Festschrift und Bronzezeit. 9. Deutscher Archäologiekongress 2017 für Andreas Zimmermann. Universitätsforschungen in Mainz (in press). zur prähistorischen Archäologie 285 (Bonn 2016) Kobusiewicz 1999: M. Kobusiewicz, Wie lange dauerte das 365 – 378. Mesolithikum? oder: die Frage nach dem Paraneolithi- Piezonka 2015: H. Piezonka, Jäger, Fischer, Töpfer. Wildbeuter kum. In: E. Cziesla/Th. Kersting/St. Pratsch (eds.), Den mit früher Keramik in Nordosteuropa im 6. und 5. Jahr- Bogen spannen. Festschrift für B. Gramsch (Weissbach tausend v.Chr. Archäologie in Eurasien 30 (Bonn 2015). 1999) 327 – 332. Rasse 2008: M. Rasse, La diffusion du Néolithique en Lenneis/Schwarzäugel 2019: E. Lenneis / J. Schwarzäu- Europe (7000 – 5000 av. J.-C.) et sa représentation car- gel, Die bandkeramische Siedlung von Mold bei Horn tographique. M@ppemonde 90 (2008.2), 1 – 2 2. htt:// in Niederösterreich. Teil 2 – Häuser, innere Chronologie mappemonde.mgm.fr/num18/articles/art08205.html und Siedlungsstruktur. Internationale Archäologie 133 (accessed: 22.07.2020) (Rahden/Westf. 2019). Rice 1999: P. Rice, On the origins of pottery. Journal of Ar- Leuzinger 2012: U. Leuzinger, Ziegenkot – Fischbandwurm chaeological Method and Theory 6, 1999, 1 – 54. – getrüffelter Gerstenbrei. Das außerordentliche Infor- Rousseau et al. 2015: J. Rousseau / G. Hamon / J.-N. Chau- mationspotential der neolithischen Feuchtbodenarchäo- vet / Ph. Forré / G. Querré / S. Braguier / N. Jolin, logie. In: R. Gleser / V. Becker (eds.), Mitteleuropa im Un vase de la Hoguette au sud de la Loire (Guibrelou I à 5. Jahrtausend vor Christus. Beiträge zur Internatio- Machecoul, Loire-Atlantique). Préhistoire du sud-ouest nalen Konferenz in Münster 2010. Neolithikum und 23(1), 2015, 17 – 37. 24 Some remarks on the origin of Mesolithic pottery in northwestern Euro pe Rousselle 1984: R. Rousselle, La céramique danubienne. Stäuble / Wolfram 2012: H. Stäuble / S. Wolfram, Ta- In: M. Otte (ed.), Les fouilles de la Place Saint-Lam- phonomie heute: Reanimation erwünscht. Studien zur bert à Liège 1. Études et Recherches Archéologiques de Bandkeramik. In: Th. Link / D. Schimmelpfennig (eds.), l´Université de Liège 18 (Liège 1984) 153 – 170. Taphonomie (nicht nur) im Neolithikum. Fokus Jung- Rück 2012: O. Rück, Vom Hofplatz zur Häuserzeile. Das steinzeit. Berichte der AG Neolithikum 3 (Kerpen-Loogh bandkeramische Dorf – Zeilenstrukturen und befund- 2012) 35 – 55. freie Bereiche offenbaren ein neues Bild der Siedlungs- Stehli 1988: P. Stehli, Zeitliche Gliederung der verzierten strukturen. In: R. Smolnik (ed.), Siedlungsstruktur und Keramik. In: U. Boelicke / D. von Brandt / J. Lüning / Kulturwandel in der Bandkeramik. Arbeits- und For- P. Stehli / A. Zimmermann (eds.), Der bandkeramische schungsberichte zur sächsischen Bodendenkmalpflege Siedlungsplatz Langweiler 8, Gemeinde Aldenhoven, 25, 2012, 20 – 42. Kreis Düren. Rheinische Ausgrabungen 28 (Köln 1988) Schauer in press: M. Schauer, Im Westen was Neues – 441 – 4 82. zur Ausbreitung der La Hoguette-Gruppe entlang der Thévenin 1991: A. Thévenin, Du Dryas III au début de französischen Atlantikküste. Sitzungsbericht der AG l´Atlantique: pour une approche méthodologique des Neolithikum und Bronzezeit. 9. Deutscher Archäolo- industries et des territoires dans l’est de la France giekongress 2017 in Mainz (in press). (2e partie). Revue Archéologie de l‘Est 42, 1991, 3 – 62. Séara / Lajoux 2019: F. Séara / J.-B. Lajoux, Identité tech- Uerpmann 1983: H.-P. Uerpmann, Die Anfänge von Tier- nique et schémas de production lithique du second haltung und Pflanzenbau. In: H. Müller-Beck (ed.), Méso­lithique en Jura Franc-Comtois. In: R.-M. Arbo- Urgeschichte in Baden-Württemberg (Stuttgart 1983) gast / S. Grislin / Chr. Jeunesse / F. Séara (dir.), Le 405 – 428. Second Mésolithique, des Alpes à l’Atlantique (7é–5é Van Wijk et al. 2014: I. van Wijk / L. Amkreutz/P. van de millénaire). Mémoires d´Archéologie du Grand Est 3 Velde, „Vergeten“ Bandkeramiek. Een Odyssee naar (Strasbourg 2019) Complément: 1 – 22. de oudste neolithische bewonng in Nederland (Leiden Smolla 1967: G. Smolla, Epochen der menschlichen Früh- 2014). zeit. Studium Universale (Freiburg/München 1967). Zimmermann 2012: A. Zimmermann, Das Hofplatzmodell Stäuble 2013: H. Stäuble, What you see is what it was? In: – Entwicklung, Probleme, Perspektiven. In: R. Smol- C. Hamon / P. Allard / M. Ilett (eds.), The domestic nik (ed.), Siedlungsstruktur und Kulturwandel in der space in LBK settlements. Internationale Archäologie. Bandkeramik. Arbeits- und Forschungsberichte zur Arbeitsgemeinschaft, Symposium, Tagung Kongress sächsischen Bodendenkmalpflege 25, 2012, 11 – 19. Band 17 (Rahden/Westf. 2013) 231 – 245. Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 , 2 5  – 43) 25 Wetlands settlements and a wooden trackway: Swifterbant sites in the Dümmer basin Marion Heumüller, Mirjam Briel, Florian Klimscha, Andreas Kotula, Hanns Hubert Leuschner, Reinhold Schoon and Tanja Zerl Abstract For a long time the Hüde I site to the south of Lake Dümmer, Diepholz district, was the only known Swifterbant culture site in Lower Saxony. In the meantime, we can add two further sites in the region. An early Neolithic find horizon was discovered in the course of a research excavation at the site Hunte 3 (Damme FSt no. 113). While the flint artefacts indicate Mesolithic traditions, a few decorated ceramic fragments and 14C-data between 4,300 and 4,000 calBC point to the sphere of the Swifterbant culture. The spectrum of animal bones covers both domestic and wild animals; other organic materials like botanical remains were not preserved. Much better preservation conditions were to be found in Campemoor to the east, where from 1992 to 2011 roughly 94 m of the wooden trackway Pr 31 were excavated. Dendrochronological data and ceramic finds suggest it belongs to the early Swifterbant culture. The three sites together suggest that the Dümmer basin and the adjoining Campemoor to the west had a certain attraction to the people of the Swifterbant culture over a period of several hundred years, and that the region, up to now, has presented an underestimated dispersal area of the Swifterbant culture. Keywords Swifterbant, wooden trackway, wetland site, wetland dwelling, Lake Dümmer, Early Neolithic Zusammenfassung Lange Zeit konnte in Niedersachsen nur der südlich des Dümmers gelegene Fundplatz Hüde I, Ldkr. Diepholz, als Fundstelle der Swifterbant-Kultur benannt werden. Mittlerweile können ihm zwei weitere Fundplätze in der Re- gion an die Seite gestellt werden. Am Fundplatz Hunte 3 (Damme FStNr. 113) wurde 2016 und 2017 im Rahmen einer For- schungsgrabung ein frühneolithischer Fundhorizont entdeckt. Während die Flintartefakte noch mesolithische Traditionen erkennen lassen, weisen wenige verzierte Keramikfragmente und 14C-Daten in den Horizont der mittleren Swifterbant-Kultur (ca. 4300 – 4000 calBC). Das Spektrum der Tierknochen umfasst sowohl Haus- als auch Wildtiere. Botanische Reste oder andere organische Funde hatten sich kaum erhalten. Deutlich bessere Erhaltungsbedingungen liegen im östlich gelegenen Campemoor vor, wo in den Jahren 1992 bis 2011 der Moorweg Pr 31 auf ca. 94 m Länge aufgedeckt wurde. Dendrodaten und Keramikfunde weisen ihn in die ältere Swifterbant-Kultur. Die drei Fundstellen zeigen, dass das Dümmerbecken und das west- lich anschließende Campemoor für die Menschen der Swifterbant-Kultur über einen Zeitraum von mehreren hundert Jahren eine gewisse Anziehungskraft hatte und die Region möglicherweise einen bislang unterschätzen Verbreitungsschwerpunkt der Swifterbant-Kultur darstellt. Introduction – Dümmer, Campemoor with Lake Dümmer in the centre, constitute almost and the bordering Lowlands two thirds of the total area (Schneekloth / Schnei- der 1972, 68 – 77). Today Lake Dümmer, extending On the southern extremities of the North German over an area of 15 km 2, is the second largest lake in Plain between the foothills of the central uplands and Lower Saxony. Lake Dümmer, probably formed as the Damme hills, a broad sweep of lowlands consis- a thermokarst lake, had a surface area of more than ting of valley sands stretches out. Here, between the 80 km 2 in postglacial times, perhaps periodically of modern towns of Barnstorf and Bramsche, one of even more than 150 km 2. Sedimentation processes the largest peatbogs in Germany was formed. At the that began as early as the Boreal led to an ever-decrea- time of its largest expanse it covered an area of some sing size of the lake (Dahms 1972, 181). However, until 180 km2 with a maximum length of roughly 45 km. the introduction of man-made embankments in the The bog comprises of a number of merging branches of 1950s, the dimensions of the lake varied considerably which Campemoor in the southwest and Dümmer fen, depending on the time of year, as water quickly spread 26 Wetlands settlements and a wooden trackway: Swifterbant sites in the Dümmer basin Fig. 1 The Dümmer basin and the adjoining Campemoor with the Swifterbant sites mentioned in the text. Mapped are known and more precisely located sites of different Stone Age periods (source: LBEG Bodenübersichtskarte, archaeological data: Adabweb, graphics: M. Heumüller, K. Dietrich/NLD). over the wide plains and could cover an area of up to historic finds from the lake come from the 17th century 100 km2 (Dahms 1972, 196). Pollen analyses indicate (Struckmann 1887, 13 – 14). Large-scale excavations that there was a similar shallow lake near the Campe- took place between 1938 and 1941 under the direction moor site some 30 km to the southeast which silted up of Hans Reinerth, who oversaw the almost complete and became overlaid by peat bog during the Atlantic excavation of the moorland village of Hunte 1 to the period (see Bauerochse / Leuschner this volume). north of Dümmer (Reinerth 1939). Scientific evalu- ation of the finds and findings was not carried out until almost seventy years later by Rainer Kossian Wetland settlements around Lake (Kossian 2007; 2009). According to his assessment Dümmer the area was settled during the early and late Funnel Beaker culture, the early Corded Ware culture and The Dümmer and the surrounding fen areas are the Bell Beaker culture – so in at least four settlement well known beyond the borders of Lower Saxony for phases – between 3,300 and 2,000 BC. their special wetland sites ranging from the Upper According to the published information, ten pre- Palaeolithic, the Mesolithic and the Neolithic to the historic sites are known in the lowland fens along the Bronze Age – and possibly even to the Iron Age and river Hunte and in today’s lake basin (Kossian 2007, up to the early Middle Ages, too. Here, house and 23 fig. 6). However, a glance at the sites archive at the settlement ground plans with preserved construction State Office for Cultural Heritage of Lower Saxony timbers have been documented that are unique in indicates that today there are considerably more prehis- the Neolithic Age of central and northern Europe. toric sites around Lake Dümmer, which have yet to be Other settlements with wetland preservation of the processed or published (Fig. 1). The majority of these North German Plain were mostly located on sites in sites are located in drained areas used as farmland, close proximity to bodies of water so that in saturated which have been re-wetted by nature conservation- milieus only part of the settlement remains are pre- ists since the 1990s. It is uncertain how much of the served (cf. Müller 2012). The earliest reports of pre- potential older organic materials remain preserved. Marion Heumüller, Mirjam Briel, Florian Klimscha, Andreas Kotula, Hanns Hubert Leuschner, Reinhold Schoon and Tanja Zerl 27 The early Neolithic site of Hüde I brated. For this purpose only data was selected that fell within the Mesolithic to Neolithic periods, and An extensive large-scale wetland excavation directed that furthermore came from a secure archaeological by Jürgen Deichmüller took place between 1961 and context, and had a standard deviation of no more than 1967 at the southern end of the lake. An area of some ± 90 (Fig. 2). The new calibration of these 20 datings 1,100 m2 of the site, known as Hüde I, was investigat- indicated four separate settlement phases at the time ed. Although Deichmüller at that time found numerous of the early to middle Swifterbant culture between timbers as well as a number of well-preserved organic 4,700 and 4,000 BC, followed by one or two settlement objects he was unable to discover evidence of house phases during the early Funnel Beaker culture in the features with wooden foundations or fireplaces, like first half of the 4th millennium. those documented in Hunte 1. Instead the excavation Despite the excellent potential of the sites around yielded a wide range of finds from a variety of Stone Lake Dümmer new surveys only took place in 2004 Age cultures. Interdisciplinary analyses were presented at Hunte 2. The excavations have, up to now, yet to in preliminary reports (e.g Deichmüller 1965a; 1968), be entirely published (Drafehn 2006). and some of the outstanding finds were published ­(Deichmüller 1965b; 1974). Evaluation of the ani- mal bones (Bossneck 1978; Deichmüller / Staesche Hunte 3 – A new site of the Swifterbant 1974; Hübner et al. 1988; Hüster 1983) showed a culture clear predominance of wild animals, indicating a sub- sistence based on hunting. Furthermore, antler finds An earlier site known from Reinerth’s preliminary in- (Werning 1983) and man-made stone implements vestigations was chosen to make an exemplary check (Stapel 1991) were investigated. A dissertation on the on the state of preservation of wetland sites in the ceramics (Kampffmeyer 1988) was not published, but Dümmer area. Reinerth himself had investigated three the extensive work was widely circulated in academic other bog sites in addition to Hunte 1, with varying circles. Various groups of finds, such as stone axes and degrees of intensity. The ‘Hunte 3’ site (Damme FStNr. other stone artefacts, remained unprocessed. Unfor- 113; Gde. Damme, Ldkr. Vechta) is located on the now tunately, there was also no systematic evaluation of waterlogged western side of the re-directed bed of the these finds, which is most unsatisfactory especially river Hunte, almost 1.4 km from the embanked Düm- considering the range and, as far as Lower Saxony is mer and roughly 500 m north of Hunte 1. Reinerth concerned, the unique ceramic sequence containing documented here settlement layers with Neolithic elements of the Bischheim, Ertebølle and Swifterbant finds. As the layers were relatively far from the surface as well as the early Funnel Beaker culture. in those days this site was considered most likely to Dutch archaeologists today ascribe most of the offer the best chances for the preservation of organic older components of the find collection to the Swif- materials. terbant culture and consider Hüde I to represent the most eastern extent of this culture which is mostly Discovery and investigation concentrated in the wetlands of the Netherlands (Ten Anscher 2015, 349 – 353; Raemakers 2013). The ori- The site was discovered in October 1934 during survey gins and development of the Swifterbant culture have work. In 1940, Reinerth had studied the sequencing lately been traced back to a long-term influence of the of the various layers from one single trial hole and Danubian cultures of Rössen, Großgartach and Bisch- documented a 30 cm thick ‘cultural layer’ with ‘sherds, heim (Ten Anscher 2015, 346 – 353). At the same bones, charred flint, wood and charcoal’, beginning time, the Swifterbant culture is considered to have at a depth of 70 cm, which was embedded both in transmitted Neolithic innovations into the Ertebølle the alder carr peat and the algal gyttja or ‘liverpeat’ culture or, at least, made their achievements accept- beneath it. An accompanying list of the now lost finds able to a hunter-gather community. Hüde I can thus be describes ceramic fragments, possibly from different seen as a key site for the neolithisation of northwest periods of time, and stone and flint artefacts (Kos- Germany, as it is the only site in Lower Saxony in sian 2007, 41). Below this find layer, Reinerth also which elements of the neighbouring archaeological documented three wooden piles indicating some form cultures from the south, west and north are apparent. of prior building construction (cf. Heumüller et al. In order to get an impression of the absolute 2017, 16 – 17). chronological extent of Hüde I, some of Kampff- In 2016 and 2017 an area of 24 m2 was examined meyer’s (1988, fig. 249) compiled data was re-cali- as part of a research project. During this programme 28 Wetlands settlements and a wooden trackway: Swifterbant sites in the Dümmer basin Fig. 2 Hüde I: Re-calibration of some of the data published by Kampffmeyer (1988, fig. 249) using OxCal 4.3 (graphics OxCal). Marion Heumüller, Mirjam Briel, Florian Klimscha, Andreas Kotula, Hanns Hubert Leuschner, Reinhold Schoon and Tanja Zerl 29 Fig.  3 Overview of the excavated sections and the drillings at Hunte 3. Sections with clusters of finds or a deep black find horizon interspersed with bone, ceramic and flint artefacts are marked yellow. Drillings with evi- dence of a cultural layer are also marked yellow. The marker east of the Hunte river pinpoints the site of surface finds from the 1970s. Togeth- er the completely yellow blocks de- note the minimum extent of the set- tlement (graphics: A. Schwalke-Utku/ NLD). 21 m2 of layers rich in finds were discovered, which there is a 30 cm thick layer of dark grey algal gyttja, were excavated partly by following the archaeological in section 1 on the other hand there is a carr horizon. layers and partly as artificial strata in quarter square Several embedded dark, peaty bands derive from re- metre blocks. The further extent of the cultural layer peated silting up of the area, suggesting that when it was recorded by drillings using a Pürckhauer borer was forming it lay on a flat peripheral zone of the lake. (Fig. 3). While searching for the piles described by Rein- A comparison of the present situation with the erth, a part of the chalky gyttja in sections 1 and 2 documentation made in 1940 shows that at least was excavated to a depth of around 1 m. Parts of tree 30 cm of the covering sediment have been lost to roots found there showed that wood preservation was mineralisation and compaction (cf. Heumüller et al. definitely possible within the chalky gyttja layer, but no 2017, 18 – 21 figs. 5; 8). The actual find horizon, on remains of piles or worked pieces of wood were found. average 5 to 15 cm thick and consisting of strongly In all profiles the layer boundaries were conspicu- decomposed fen peat, was very homogenous, dark to ously undulated. This must have been the result of black in colour from the charcoal and organic ma- drainage or dry phases and the accompanying con- terials and found in sections 2, 6 and 8 and on the traction processes. This is also indicated by the dry perimeter of section 1 at a depth of between 25 and cracks reaching to a depth of up to 1 m, which are 30 cm. The find layer is extensive but not continuous. typical effects of shrinkage and settling processes after The eastern profile of section 2 (Fig. 4) represents de-watering (cf. Chmielsky 2006, 64). The fen peat, in the stratigraphic situation: directly beneath the top which there were find layers with embedded charcoal soil comes the find horizon, which is sometimes in- as well as the algal gyttja found below the find layer terspersed by a light grey band of gyttja. This division were both dated to the Atlantic period by initial pollen suggests that some parts of the already settled find analyses (conducted by Gerfried Caspers, Hannover, horizon were later disturbed by a lake transgression. report from 02.02.2018). The sedimentation sequence Many ceramic, flint and bone finds were recorded, points to a periodically wet milieu on the edge of a but no building structures or organic materials were silting-up lake. discovered. At the moment it is unclear whether these The feature of the find horizon as an almost black have decayed or didn’t exist. Beneath the find layer layer permeated with finds is a typical phenomenon 30 Wetlands settlements and a wooden trackway: Swifterbant sites in the Dümmer basin outline of features topsoil: highly decomposed fen peat light grey mud jarosite iron precipitations and dry cracks find horizon algal gyttja with embedded bands of fen peat lime gyttja Fig. 4 The east profile of section 2 from Hunte 3. The find horizon lay here directly on top of a dark grey algal gyttja (graphics: A. Schwalke-Utku/NLD). of the Swifterbant culture. At the site Swifterbant 4 a round moulding of the base elements. The larger (S 4) such a layer was identified as being a debris ceramic fragments reveal slightly curved profiles; dis- layer which in addition to find material consisted tinctive features are missing. The wall thicknesses vary partly of charred plant materials and which had been between mostly 7 and 10 mm. Tempering particles can re-arranged and re-deposited by flooding processes be identified as macroscopic sand and grit. (Huisman / Raemaekers 2014). Whether the layer at Only nine sherds are decorated and allow closer Hunte 3 is also a re-located, anthropogenic debris inspection (Fig. 5). With one exception (find no. 233) layer or an, at least partially, in situ settlement layer they are fragments of rims, mostly coming from the cannot be determined with certainty at the present carr or lowland peat layers. The sherds are decorated stage of research. below the rim with horizontal, irregularly placed in- dentations in a variety of forms, either rounded pock- The find material marks, short horizontal lines or elongated impressions. At least three of the sherds (find nos. 219, 358 and Ceramics 396) are decorated with two parallel rows of embellish- ments. One fragment (find no. 368) features a notched The mostly undecorated, severely fragmented ceramic rim. Find no. 365 is distinctive for its perforation from has a grey-brown surface; reddish spots derive from the outside of the vessel which could be closed on the iron oxidation. The sherds have to some extent round- inside by a small clay plate. ed edges and have pocked, eroded surfaces; a sign that Such decorations are typical of the Swifterbant at least some of the material was covered by water. culture but also appear in the earliest Funnel Beaker The preserved surfaces are mostly smooth. Profiles or culture or the Pre-Drouwen phase. Swifterbant ceram- dimensions of the vessels could not be reconstructed ics and their development in the Netherlands from due to the severe state of fragmentation, and base 5,000 to 3,400 BC have been recorded mostly in the fragments could not be identified which speaks for studies of D. C. M. Raemaekers and J. P. de Roever (e. g. Marion Heumüller, Mirjam Briel, Florian Klimscha, Andreas Kotula, Hanns Hubert Leuschner, Reinhold Schoon and Tanja Zerl 31 Fig. 5 Nine decorated sherds from Hunte 3 (graphics: A. Michalak/ NLD). Raemaekers / De Roever 2010; Raemaekers 2015) Flint artefacts and T. J. Ten Anscher (e. g. 2015). According to these studies, the ceramics are characterised by more or less Up to now only the first batch of flint artefacts s-shaped profiles and round or pointed base forms and (n = 352) has been evaluated.1 The artefact spectrum, smooth surfaces. The vessels’ diameters lie between 11 dominated by unmodified basic forms and numer- and 37 cm, with wall thicknesses varying between 5 ous typical flint processing wastes, such as trimming and 14 mm (average 7 – 10 mm). Plant-based tempering flakes and preparation debris, proves flint process- particles, depending on local availability, dominate, but ing on site. There are fairly high numbers of blades, tempering particles of sand, grit and grog also exist which together with blade cores indicate a production (Raemaekers / De Roever 2010). Typical embellish- geared towards blade manufacturing. In addition to ments consist of one or a number of horizontal rows short blades with an average length/breadth index of of elongated droplet-shaped or rounded impressions 3 : 1 (but also some of 2 : 1), also micro blades with a on the neck or shoulder of the vessels. Most of the ratio of 4 : 1 were found. Both the blades and micro sherds are very fragile due to the relatively low fir- blades are conspicuously even and with mostly par- ing temperatures of below 600 °C (Raemaekers / De allel edges. Several blades show a clear distal shaft Roever 2010). The transition to the Funnel Beaker retouch on both lateral edges and can be included culture is poorly understood because of the rarity of among the tools. In the site inventory there are also sites between 4,000 and 3,400 BC in the Netherlands present two small burins, a thumbnail scraper and a (Raemaekers 2015, 322 – 323). Recently, ten Anscher blade with clear working traces on one lateral edge. worked out the gradual transition using sequences at Three microliths – a trapeze made from an even-edged site Schokland P14. He defined the early horizon of blade, a transverse arrowhead and a micro point (see the Funnel Beaker culture, the Pre-Douwen phase, as Heumüller et al. 2017 fig. 15) – are interesting as having typical decorative patterns like cord arches, types due to their association on the same site. While zig-zag motifs, neck and belly fringes, grooves and micro points have a very long duration in north central stab and drag lines, together with the appearance of Europe from the Preboreal to about the Middle Atlan- newer ceramic types like collared flasks or clay discs tic period, regular trapezes are more a phenomenon (Ten Anscher 2015, 341). The small find complex of the late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic. at Hunte 3 lacks the corresponding decorative and Cores are proportionally numerous on site. They morphological attributes which suggests it should be are very small (all < 6 cm) and almost exclusively show assigned to the Swifterbant culture. On the basis of a steep knapping angle, almost 90°, with circumferen- the ceramic features in the Netherlands Raemaekers /­ tial, uniform blade negatives. It is striking that – with De Roever (2010, 135) distinguish early, middle and the exception of the micro blade cores – the cores are late phases, with the middle phase covering a relatively predominantly fragments broken out of small flint long period of time from 4,600 to 3,900 BC. Their in- nodules and were mostly knapped from just one side. dicators are the increasing use of decorations and the The striking platforms show slight preparation marks emergence of regional differences (Raemaekers / De Roever 2010). The Hunte 3 finds can be loosely as- sociated here. 1  Analysed by Mirjam Briel (cf. Heumüller et al. 2017, 24 – 25) 32 Wetlands settlements and a wooden trackway: Swifterbant sites in the Dümmer basin NISP the early Funnel Beaker culture (cf. Hartz / Lübke Taxon n % 2012, 641). Cattle. Bos primigenius f. taurus* 30 28.3 Sheep/Goat. Ovis ammon f. aries/Capra aegagrus f. 9 8.5 Animal remains hircus Pig. Sus scrofa f. domestica 8 7.5 Domestic mammals 47 44.3 During the 2016 and 2017 excavation campaigns, Wild horse. Equus ferus 11 10.4 mostly bones of vertebrates were recovered from sec- Aurochs. Bos primigenius 5 4.7 tions 1 and 2 (n = 975), as well as mollusc shells Elk. Alces alces 3 2.8 (n = 41) and human bones (n = 5). Of the available Red deer. Cervus elaphus 10 9.4 archaeozoological remains of vertebrates, 106 pieces Roh deer. Capreolus capreolus 1 0.9 (11 %) were able to be determined by species or tax- Wild boar. Sus scrofa 5 4.7 onomy, 869 fragments (89 %) could not be classified.2 Brown bear. Ursus arctos 1 0.9 The low level of determination reflects on the poor Pine marten?. Martes martes 1 0.9 Beaver. Castor fiber 1 0.9 state of preservation of the bone remains. However, Wild mammals 38 35.9 clear signs of fragmentation usually clearly identify the Elk. Alces alces. or Cattle. Bos primigenius f. taurus 1 0.9 bones as the remains of domestic and wild animals Aurochs. Bos primigenius or Cattle. Bos primigenius 5 4.7 used by the inhabitants for food purposes.3 f. taurus The results of archaezoological analysis suggest Wild boar. Sus scrofa or Pig. Sus scrofa f. domestica 5 4.7 the people living in Hunte 3 kept cattle, small ru- Fox. Vulpes vulpes or Dog. Canis lupus f. familiaris 1 0.9 Wild- or domestic mammals 12 11.3 minants (sheep or goats) and pigs in the household Fish. Pisces 8 7.5 (Table 1). Hunting in the vicinity must have been an Birds. Aves 1 0.9 important sourse of meat as shown by the relatively Other Taxa 9 8.5 broad spectrum of wild animal species. Hunting activ- Total 106 100 ities were directed particularly towards wild horse, aurochs, red deer and wild boar, while roe deer, brown Table 1 Hunte 3. Identified animal remains (vertebrates). NISP = bear and beaver were hunted to a lesser degree. Addi- Number of Identified Specimens; * incl. taxonomically uncertain fragments (n = 4). tionally, fish and game birds supplemented the diet. Due to their unclear taxonomic status, all bones of domestic or wild animals (n = 12) were excluded with slightly convex platform remnants, typical of the from the livestock/wild animal ratio of the mammalia; middle and late Mesolithic in northern Germany. furthermore, the antler pieces of red deer (n = 5) were These characteristics indicate production in punch not taken into account, as they could have come from technique as well as direct (hard) knapping. shed antlers. On the basis of the remaining 80 skeletal The flint materials consist of Baltic flints, which remains there is a ratio of 59 : 41 % (n = 47/33) in are typical of the North German Plain, of moderate favour of livestock animals, which suggests a slightly quality. Even the smaller nodule debris was used for higher food-economic value of slaughter products blade manufacturing which suggests the scant avail- compared to the yields from hunting. ability of raw materials. This relation clearly deviates from the results The flint inventory together with the knapping of the archaeozoological investigations on the ma- techniques are typical features of the Atlantic Meso- terial of the Swifterbant and Funnel Beaker culture lithic in northern Germany. Burins and thumbnail from Hüde I. Of the 6,510 mammal remains in ques- scrapers tend to point towards an earlier period of tion (excluding antler pieces and bones of Bos sp./ the Mesolithic, the association with micro points and Sus sp.), only 4.1 % (n = 264) could be assigned to trapezes in the inventory suggests rather a later phase. slaughter or domestic animals (Hübner et al. 1988, Observations suggest that the site Hunte 3 represents a rather older period between the Mesolithic and the Neolithic, but the association of simple point and 2  Apart from 20 larger bone fragments, in which flint artefacts trapeze in one layer points toward a younger period. were embedded, all bone fragments were analysed by Reinhold Schoon (cf. also Heumüller et al. 2017, 25 – 2 8). All in all, the flint inventory indicates a transitional period between the late Mesolithic und early Neo- 3 In addition to the taxonomic determination of the material, lithic. Typical elements of this transitional period are, the degree of fragmentation of the bones, age characteristics, special features and bone measurements were documented for example, the blades with shaft retouch. The soft (Von den Driesch 1976; Habermehl 1975; Heinrich et al. knapping techniques can also often be observed in 1991; Zietschmann / Krölling 1955). Marion Heumüller, Mirjam Briel, Florian Klimscha, Andreas Kotula, Hanns Hubert Leuschner, Reinhold Schoon and Tanja Zerl 33 37 tab. 1). The significantly greater economic import- Radiocarbon dating ance of domestic animals indicated for Hunte 3 is certainly not statistically valid due to the relatively Charcoal from the lowest planum of Section 1 was small amount of material and has therefore to be used for 14C-dating. Initially animal bones were tried verified with the help of further find complexes from to avoid old wood effects. Radiocarbon measurements the research region. on these, however, proved unsuccessful due to the poor condition of the collagens. The charcoals from Archaeobotanical analyses sample no. 460/3456.00113 – 28 1 (Lab. no. Poz-87927) originate from material taken from a number of square During the archaeological investigations at the meters of planum 4, roughly 30 – 40 cm below the Hunte 3 site a total of 25 soil samples were extract- ground surface, whereas charcoals taken from sam- ed, above all from the charcoal-rich cultural layer de- ples 460/3456.00113 – 28 6.1 (Lab. no. Poz-87928) and scribed above, but also from the carr peat.4 460/3456.00113 – 28 6.2 (Poz-87929) come from sever- Only ten samples contained fruit and seeds al square metres of the lowest level of planum 5, some (n = 51). Identified were fragments of hazelnut shells 40 – 50 cm below the surface. A sample recovered from (Corylus avellana) and a drupelet of raspberry (Rubus planum 4 was dated to 4,228 – 3,963 calBC and thus idaeus), both of which can be considered as forage slightly younger than the two samples from the lowest plants. Besides, diaspores of synanthropic species were level of planum 5, which dates to 4,328 – 4,054 calBC found: fat-hen (Chenopodium album), white dead-/ or 4,331 – 4,057 calBC (95.4 %). This age-range could spotted dead-nettle (Lamium album/maculatum), represent both the latest Swifterbant and the earliest pale persicaria/red shank (Polygonum lapathifolium/ Funnelbeaker culture. persicaria), the caryopsis of a grass (Poaceae), dia- spores of goosefoots, knotweeds and docks or sor- The wooden trackway Pr 31 in rels (Chenopodium spec., Polygonum spec., Rumex spec.) which were not possible to determine in more Campemoor – a Swifterbant timber detail, and a probable seed of cabbage (cf. Brassica construction spec.). The fruit of a branched burr-reed (Sparganium erectum s. l.), a riparian and meadow plant, was also Site, discovery and course of investigations found. Sixteen diaspores could not be identified due to the bad state of preservation (Indeterminatae). Campemoor, southwest of Lake Dümmer, still cov- Most of the remains were subfossil, i. e. un- ered an area of 46 km2 in the 1970s. Towards the east charred, just a hazelnut shell fragment and the fruit it merges seamlessly with Dümmer moor (Schnee­ of the burr-reed were charred. Even though there is kloth / Schneider 1972, 74 – 79). Here the bog, which no evidence of cultivated plants, these charred resi- in other places is up to 7 km wide, narrows to a rough- dues together with the other finds document local ly 3 to 4 km wide bog landscape. anthropogenic activities. For a long time only the Campemoor trackways The modest number of fruits and seeds as well as at the bottleneck to Dümmer moor were known. Here, the low density at 2.8 n/l (remains per liter of sample trackway Pr 25, discovered as early as 1826 during the volume) indicate that for the Hunte 3 site the pres- construction of the causeway between Hunteburg and ervation of subfossil plant remains must be classified Damme, is particularly worth mentioning. It was built as extremely poor. This is most likely the result of a in the late Pre-Roman Iron Age and was used again in considerable drop in groundwater levels in the past the early Roman Imperial Period (Fansa / Schneider decades causing the once continuously moist fen to 1990, 24 – 25; Bauerochse et al. 2012, 138). dry up. However, in October 1991, two more trackways were discovered in Campemoor during peat cutting. Between 1992 and 2011 a variety of rescue excava- 4  Analysed by Tanja Zerl in the Archaeobotanical Laboratory tions took place, during which three other Neolithic of the Department of Prehistoric Archaeology at the University trackways were discovered. The five newly discovered of Cologne. For the analysis of the sample material subsamples of 0.5 l, 1.0 to 2 l, resp. (18 l in total) were divided and processed. trackways all run in a similar northwest to southeast This involved dissolving the subsamples carefully, then rinsing direction and cross each other corresponding to the samples through sieves with mesh sizes of 2 mm, 1 mm, their varying dates and levels. There is a time span of 0,5 mm and 0,25 mm. The fractionated sample material, kept in water, was then examined for plant remains under a stereo 1,600 years between the oldest (Pr 31, dendro-dated magnifier with up to 80x magnification. at 4,629 – 4,538 BC) and the most recent (Pr 32, den- 34 Wetlands settlements and a wooden trackway: Swifterbant sites in the Dümmer basin 1996 1999 2000 1992 Fig. 6 Overview of the course and position of the studied sections of the Neolithic moorland trackway Pr 31 (graphics: C. Ludwig/NLD). drodated at 2,909 – 2,882 BC) trackway, and a differ- determined of only two of the construction woods. The ence in height of around 1 m. After the individual dates measured range from 4,629 to 4,538 BC, so 91 trackways became covered with peat, the previous years, but allowances must be made for the estimated ones were probably no longer recognisable when the final growth rings. During this span of time there were later ones were constructed. The topographic situation several felling phases, probably indicating repair cycles. at the time of building the respective trackways and Accordingly, the trackway was constructed in 4,629 thus their starting points and destinations are largely and, especially in the following 40 years (in 4,614, unknown in the extensive landscape covered by raised 4,590 and 4,538 BC), it was improved or extended. bog. The bog trackways have been presented in vari- Further repair work appears to have taken place in ous preliminary reports (e. g. Metzler 1993; 2003; 4,606, 4,557 and 4,545 BC (cf. Achterberg et al. 2015, Bauerochse et al. 2012), but a complete presentation 25; Bauerochse / Leuschner this volume). of the features and findings is still lacking, as well as an allocation of the determined dating of the wooden Construction of the trackway construction. A synopsis of trackway Pr 31 is now presented here, which, thanks to ceramic fragments Trackway Pr 31 was exposed to a length of some 94 m, and dendro-dating, can clearly be associated to the with minor gaps (Fig. 6). In the southwest and in the Swifterbant culture. northeast of the investigated section, the trackway rests directly on projecting sand ridges. In between Dendrochronological dating it bridges a depression in which a few decimetres of fenland peat had formed. The southwestern end of The excavations were accompanied by palaeoecologi- Pr 31 was possibly reached with the investigations, cal and dendrochronological investigations (most re- at least there were no other structures observed in cently Bauerochse / Leuschner this volume). Hanns the vicinity. To the northeast of the studied area the Hubert Leuschner was able to date 36 oak and pine trackway continues for an unknown distance beneath samples from Pr 31 even though the outermost rings a 3 m thick peat overlay. were mostly not available, due to the poor preservation The state of preservation of the timbers can be of the wood. The exact felling dates could be precisely described as poor; bark and sapwood were mostly Marion Heumüller, Mirjam Briel, Florian Klimscha, Andreas Kotula, Hanns Hubert Leuschner, Reinhold Schoon and Tanja Zerl 35 2011 N 2004 2003 surface of crosswise roots finds trackway support substructure pegs sand dendrodated timber 0 20 m 2009/2010 missing. The best preserved part of the trackway was Trackway Pr 31 is a pile trackway (Pfahlweg), i. e. the northeastern section which was investigated in built of timber that has not been processed to planks 1992 and 1996. Here, the timbers of the superstructure or boards (Hayen 1957, 248), even though the term were packed so tightly that Alf Metzler and his team ‘pile’ may seem inappropriate for horizontal wood. had to excavate it in two layers. The structure consisted The multi-layered, grid-like construction of transverse of pine trunks which had been placed perpendicular upper timbers on longitudinal foundations and, in to the direction of the trackway, some with the slightly some places, further underlaid by transverse timbers thicker base to the right, others to the left. They are corresponds to the conventional designs of bog track- mostly relatively small trunk segments with diameters ways in northern Germany. The grid-like construction between 8 and 15 cm and lengths of 2.5 to 3.5 m. Un- spread the weight of the user over a wider area, gener- usally for wooden trackways, the branches had been ally allowing the constructors to do without vertical trimmed crudely – often stumps of branches up to construction elements. 5 cm long were still protruding (Fig. 7). The track sur- The northern part of the track section studied face rested, in some places, on a substructure of two, provided, however, an unusual and hitherto unknown but mostly of four longitudinal beams that marked the feature. There, beams over 4 m long were discovered route with a width of 1.20 to 2 m. Somewhat more on both sides of the trackway which had been placed solid pinewood was used for these supporting beams, with a roughly 2.5 m gap between them on top of the which were up to 4 m long and 20 cm wide (cf. Metz­ actual transverse track surface (Fig. 8). Pegs, around ler 1993; Bauerochse  / Metzler 2001, 113 – 116). In 50 cm long and partly made of birch, had been driven some places the longitudinal supports were under- vertically through the wood to anchor the longitudinal laid with further birch branches as crosswise support. timbers (Bauerochse / Metzler 2001, 115; see Fig. 9). These were probably used in more waterlogged areas The pincer-like construction was evidently in- that needed to be additionally secured by extra layers tended to secure the superstructure of the trackway. It of wood. Some timbers from the trackway surface was only completely preserved in the section studied were found in secondary positions to the east of the in 1996. The row of pegs continues to the northeast original construction, indicating that there must have (cf. Fig. 8) without the upper longitudinal timbers, been occasional flooding. which do not appear to have survived. When two pegs 36 Wetlands settlements and a wooden trackway: Swifterbant sites in the Dümmer basin Fig. 7 The superstructure of the section of trackway Pr 31 investi- gated in 1992 (photo: NLD) appear opposite each other the distance remains 2.5 from the upper timbers of the trackway. The construc- to 3 m. Significantly, the transverse timbers beneath tion of the western part of the two parallel trackways the upper longitudinal trunks are still in place, while can be dated by two pieces of wooden substructure. in the adjacent section only the pegs remain of the They belong to the more recent construction timbers former upper woods and the transverse timbers have with estimated felling dates of around 4,583 and shifted to the east. The poor state of preservation of 4,577 BC, a time when the path had already existed the longitudinal timbers, with only fibers remaining, for almost 50 years. Conversely, most of the other indicates that details of the woodwork involved or the samples which were dated before 4,600 BC come from kind of perforation could not be observed. the extension of the eastern stretch of the trackway. Corresponding pincer- or clasp-like constructions This suggests a sequence of two building phases or two with anchored longitudinal timbers to secure under- separate tracks. It is striking that the younger, western lying transverse woods were used in ancient bridge track is around 15 m longer than the older, eastern building. Such construction elements of prehistoric one. It can be assumed that almost 50 years after the trackways have been recorded in the bogs of northwest first track was built, an extension became necessary Germany from the Late Bronze Age and Iron Age on due to an increased water level. Presumably, the up- (Hayen 1989, 26), they are also found in southwest per transverse timbers documented in the excavated Germany (Heumüller 2016, 422 – 423). However, this sections during the 1992 and 1996 campaigns as well form of construction of a bog trackway is up to now as the longitudinal trunks anchored by pegs found unique for the late Mesolithic or Neolithic. in 1996 can also be classified as subsequent repair In the adjacent section to the southwest, the track constructions. splits into two parallel paths (Figs. 10 – 11), thus wid- ening to up to 5 m. Based on the stratigraphic condi- The find material tions alone it is difficult to say whether the paths were synchronous and that the trackway was 5 m wide, or 27 finds were discovered at 15 different places in the whether the two paths were built one after the other excavated section, a relatively modest number, but with presumably a time gap in usage. However, the lo- quite usual for a bog trackway. The small assortment calisation of the dendrodated wooden remains suggest included a vessel broken into numerous individual a successive construction of the two track segments. parts, further sherds, a stone axe and 24 flint artefacts. All dated samples come from the more recent The broken vessel (find no. 2003 – 3; Fig. 12) was excavation campaigns of 2004 to 2010 and therefore found on the western edge of the trackway in 2003. from the southwestern part of the studied section. The It is an s-shaped curved vessel with a diameter of dates from individual woods are listed in the detailed 20 cm and a wall thickness of between 6 and 8 mm, drawing (Fig. 10). In two cases wooden substructures made using the ‘U’ technique. The dark grey clay is could be dated, while the rest of the samples derive sand- and grit-tempered, the surface smoothed. The Marion Heumüller, Mirjam Briel, Florian Klimscha, Andreas Kotula, Hanns Hubert Leuschner, Reinhold Schoon and Tanja Zerl 37 N 1996-1 N 0 5m fixed overlaying timbers surface of trackway sand superstructure roots pegs finds crosswise supports dendrodated timber Fig. 8 Detailed drawing of the construction. On the western edge of the trackway Pr 31 the longitudinal beams with anchoring pegs above the trackway surface are still intact. The presence of further pegs and longitudinal beams suggests a similar construction on the eastern edge (drawing: NLD). 38 Wetlands settlements and a wooden trackway: Swifterbant sites in the Dümmer basin blade (Fig. 14).6  The cutting edge is 4.5 cm wide, and the axe has a maximum length of 9 cm and thickness of 2.2 cm, the cross section is oval. Both sides shows clear signs of birch tar used for shafting. According to Brandt’s definitions it is an oval cross-section stone axe. These artefacts are typical in northwest Germany but are very difficult to date (Brandt 1967, map 30). The distribution of axes with oval cross-section (Felsovalbeile) is mutually exclusive from that of the typical ‘Danubian’ stone axes. Regarding their distri- bution, axes with oval cross-section rather seem to be closely related to axes with roundish cross-section (Felsrundbeile). Brandt defined the distribution of the latter as to west and south of the line between the lower Weser and the river Aller (Brandt 2002, 98). Nevertheless, there is also a clear focus west of the Hunte between the rivers Ruhr and Lippe (Brandt Fig. 9 In the section excavated in 1996, the longitudinal beams 2002, 95 fig. 7). Based on this, Brandt concluded that with anchoring pegs above the trackway surface are still intact this axe type had an important role in connecting both (photo: NLD). areas during the neolithisation; he saw them within the context of the Michelsberg culture and its ‘out- only decoration was applied to the tip of the rim, posts’ in the Münster region (cf. Hülsebusch / Jock- whereby some of the impressions were made by a enhövel this volume). So far, these considerations sharp object, others by a rounded one. The base is not have only been based on undated old finds (Brandt preserved. The vessel is typical for the early phase of 2002, 98 – 99). The dating result on the axe from Pr 31 the Swifterbant culture, which is the only phase with represents the first absolute date for stone axes with impressions made on the tip of the rim. The closest oval cross-sections. The date itself, at 4,629 – 4,538 BC, parallels are found more than 200 km to the west at is surprisingly early, and while this strongly argues the Swifterbant site of Hoge Vaart-A27 (Raemaekers / against a Michelsberg connection, it places the axe De Roever 2010, 137 – 138). Raemakers / De Roever securely into an earlier Rössen/Bischheim horizon (cf. (2010, 137 – 138) date this early phase between 5,000 Kreuz et al. 2014, 74 fig. 1). This is an important detail and 4,600 BC, a time span corresponding to the ear- that will allow to re-evaluate the cultural relations of liest construction phase of Pr 31. Trackway Pr 31 is the Swifterbant culture – based on specific stone axe currently the only context in which this vessel type types – in the near future. can be dated by dendrochronology. The flint material consists of 23 pieces with a Dümmer and Campemoor – a central total weight of 165 g.5 The majority are unmodified flint pieces, some of which showed signs of having area of distribution of the Swifterbant been affected by fire (eight pieces), suggesting a link culture to human activities. Only two irregular blades, a flake, a flake core and a transverse arrowhead could be The excavation at Hunte 3 was the first investigation identified (Fig. 13). The artefacts fit into an everyday on a wetland site at Lake Dümmer in a long time. The ad hoc tool production suggested for the Swifterbant state of preservation of the site, which has been known culture (Devriendt 2014). Hereby mostly flakes were for more than 80 years, however, is sobering. Organic obtained from small cores and processed into tools. or botanical finds have not survived, but bones were A pragmatic local production at Pr 31 is underlined preserved. This cannot be taken for granted in Lower by the transverse arrowhead made from a flake, and Saxony with its lime-free sandy soils. The newly recov- a rather poor blade technology. ered material, both pottery and 14C-data, fits in well An important find with a direct link between the with the context of the middle phase of the Swifter- trackway and its dating is a small tongue-shaped axe bant culture, where ceramics are in use from the early 5  Examined by Andreas Kotula. 6  Examined by Florian Klimscha. Marion Heumüller, Mirjam Briel, Florian Klimscha, Andreas Kotula, Hanns Hubert Leuschner, Reinhold Schoon and Tanja Zerl 39 4583 2009-3 N 4620 4629 4613 4620 4637 2010-6 4577 4631 2010-4 2010-5 4601 4592 4604 4545 4602 4562 4559 2010-7 0 5m Fig. 10 A detailed plan of the south-west section of Pr 31. Dendrodated woods are marked in red. The assigned year indicates the last measured growth ring of the sample. Only one timber supplied the last growth ring, and so this one with its exact felling date is printed in bold red figures (4,629 BC). In some cases the end year could be fairly accurately estimated; these are marked in medium bold figures. (graphics: C. Ludwig/NLD) 40 Wetlands settlements and a wooden trackway: Swifterbant sites in the Dümmer basin Fig. 11 Exposing trackway Pr 31 in 2004 (photo: NLD) Fig. 12 A drawn reconstruction of the ceramic find. Scale 1 : 3 (graphics: V. Diaz/NLD). Fig. 13 Flint artefacts from Pr 31: two irregular blades, a trans- verse arrowhead and a flake core (photo: A. Kotula/NLD). Fig. 14 Tongue-shaped axe blade with birch tar on both sides from Pr 31 (photo: Chr. Fuchs/NLD). Marion Heumüller, Mirjam Briel, Florian Klimscha, Andreas Kotula, Hanns Hubert Leuschner, Reinhold Schoon and Tanja Zerl 41 phase c. 5,000 BC onwards (Raemakers / De Roever be found at the base of Campemoor and the wetland 2010, 136). In this culture, evidence of the first do- of the Dümmer lowlands, which seem to offer some mestic animals appears from 4,500 BC (Raemaekers potential as a cultural archive with its numerous settle- 2015, 322 – 323), and from around 4,200 BC the culti- ment or activity areas proven by old and more recent vation of cereals appears to have become widespread discoveries. (Cappers / Raemaekers 2008). Overall, the subsis- tence was based on hunting, gathering and cultiva- Acknowledgements tion (Raemaekers 2015, 325). Other findings from Hunte 3 have parallels with the Swifterbant culture, We have to thank Jamie McIntosh for the translation. particularly the animal bones which mostly represent domesticated animals but also include a wide range of wild animals. References Trackway Pr 31 in Campemoor was investigated between 1991 and 2011, and this oldest wooden track- Achterberg et al. 2015: I. Achterberg / A. Bauerochse / T. way in the world can now be included into the Swift- Giesecke / A. Metzler / H. H. Leuschner, Contempora- erbant sites in the Dümmer region. The dendrodates neousness of Trackway Construction and Environmental and a ceramic find allow to associate it with the early Change: a Dendrochronological Study in Northwest- Swifterbant culture. At the same time, Pr 31 is the only German Mires. Interdisciplinaria Archaeologica VI, known path structure from the Swifterbant culture. I/2015. http://www.iansa.eu/volume_6_issue_1.html. With its advanced construction, it demonstrates a Ten Anscher 2015: T. J. Ten Anscher, Under the radar: technique of wooden construction adapted to damp Swifterbant and the origins of the Funnel Beaker cul- soils, hitherto unknown from subsequent phases of ture. In: J. Kabaciński/S. Hartz/D. C. M. Raemaekers/T. the Neolithic. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and the For a long time, Hüde I south of Lake Dümmer Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands (c. was the only known site in Lower Saxony assigned to 5000 – 3000 cal. BC). Archäologie und Geschichte im the Swifterbant culture. Two further sites can now be Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 335 – 357. placed alongside it – trackway Pr 31 and the wetland Bauerochse et al. 2012: A. Bauerochse / H. H. Leuschner / station Hunte 3. The concentration of sites indicates a A. Metzler, Das Campemoor im Neolithikum. Jahrbuch focal area of Swifterbant activities around Lake Düm- für das Oldenburger Münsterland 61, 2012, 135 – 154. mer with a chronological range from the older to the Bauerochse / Metzler 2001: A. Bauerochse / A. Metzler, middle phase of the Swifterbant culture, a period of Landschaftswandel und Moorwegebau im Neolithikum several centuries. The habitats around the Dümmer in der südwestlichen Dümmer-Region. Telma 31, 2001, and Campemoor correspond very well to wetlands in 103 – 133. the Netherlands, where the main distribution of the Bauerochse / Leuschner, this volume: A. Bauerochse / Swifterbant culture was located. The Swifterbant site H. H. Leuschner, Neolihic Colonisation of the south- of Schokland P14 (Ten Anscher 2015, 337) highlights western Duemmer basin (NW Germany) – Evidence easy accessibility via the river Vechte, and the same from palaeo-botanical data. applies to the sites north and south of Lake Dümmer, Bossneck 1978: J. Bossneck, Die Vogelknochen aus der with the river Hunte providing good connections both Moorsiedlung Hüde I am Dümmer, Kreis Grafschaft to the north and south. Diepholz. Neue Ausgrabungen und Forschungen in The lack of further Swifterbant sites on the dry Niedersachsen 12, 1978, 155 – 169. areas of the Netherlands and Lower Saxony has been Brandt 1967: K. H. Brandt, Studien über steinerne Äxte discussed in several papers, particularly by Raemaek- und Beile der jüngeren Stein- und Stein-Kupferzeit im ers. He blames the fragility of the pottery, which has in Nordwestdeutschland. Münstersche Beiträge zur little chance of preservation on dry sites, and the lack Vorgeschichtsforschung 2 (Hildesheim 1967). of specific features of the flint for this absence of trace- Brandt 2002: K. H. Brandt, Nichtjägerische Elemente im ability (Raemaekers 2013, 116). Further research is nordwestdeutschen Flachland vor der Trichterbecher- needed to answer the question of whether the region kultur. Die Kunde N.F. 53, 2002, 87 – 108. around the Dümmer including Campemoor was not Cappers / Raemaekers 2008: R. T. J. Cappers / D. C. M. only an occasionally used outpost, but possibly be- Raemaekers, Cereal Cultivation at Swifterbant? Neo- longed to a central distribution area of the Swifterbant lithik Wetland Farming on the North European Plain. culture. Suitable sites for this purpose can possibly Current Anthropology 49, 2008, 385 – 4 02. 42 Wetlands settlements and a wooden trackway: Swifterbant sites in the Dümmer basin Chmieleski 2006: J. Chmieleski, Zwischen Niedermoor und zu Handel und Verkehr der vor- und frühgeschichtli- Boden: Pedogenetische Untersuchungen und Klassi- chen Zeit in Mittel- u. Nordeuropa V: Verkehrswege, fikationen von mitteleuropäischen Mudden. Unpubl. Verkehrsmittel, Organisation (Göttingen 1989) 11 – 82. dissertation, Humboldt-University Berlin (Berlin 2006). Heinrich et al. 1991: D. Heinrich / H. Reichstein / K. https://edoc.hu-berlin.de/handle/18452/16269. Schietzel, 25 Jahre Archäologisch-Zoologische Arbeits- Dahms 1972: E. Dahms, Limnologische Untersuchungen im gruppe Schleswig-Kiel. Offa 48, 1991, 9 – 39. Dümmer-Becken im Hinblick auf seine Bedeutung als Heumüller 2016: M. Heumüller, Die vorgeschichtlichen Natur- und Landschaftsschutzgebiet. Unpubl. disserta- Wege des Federseemoores. In: Landesamt für Denk- tion, Universität Berlin (Berlin 1972). malpflege im Regierungspräsidium Stuttgart, Die früh- Deichmüller 1965a: J. Deichmüller, Die neolithische und mittelbronzezeitliche Siedlung „Forschner“ im Moorsiedlung Hüde I am Dümmer, Kreis Grafschaft Federseemoor. Naturwissenschaftliche Untersuchun- Diepholz. Vorläufiger Bericht über die Grabungen gen. Bohlenwege, Einbäume und weitere botanische 1962 – 1964. Neue Ausgrabungen und Forschungen in Beiträge. Siedlungsarchäologie im Alpenvorland XIII. Niedersachsen 2, 1965, 1 – 18. Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Frühgescichte Deichmüller 1965b: J. Deichmüller, Eine Rössener Stil- Baden-Württemberg 128 (Stuttgart 2016) 361 – 4 88. variante am Dümmer. Germania 43, 1965, 334 – 343. Heumüller et al. 2017: M. Heumüller / M. Briel / R. Schoon / Deichmüller 1968: J. Deichmüller, Die neolithische Moor- T. Zerl, Die Fundstelle Hunte 3 am Dümmer, Ldkr. siedlung Hüde I, Kr. Grafschaft Diepholz. Abschluß­ Vechta – ein neuer Fundplatz der Swifterbant-Kultur? bericht. Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte 86, 2017, 37, 1968, 106 – 110. 11 – 33. Deichmüller / Staesche 1974: J. Deichmüller / U. Stae- Hübner et al. 1988: K-D. Hübner / R. Saur / H. Reichstein, sche, Der Mensch und die Tierwelt am Dümmer in Die Säugetierknochen der neolithischen Seeufersiedlung vorgeschichtlicher Zeit. Bericht der Naturhistorischen Hüde I. In: Palynologische und säugetierkundliche Un- Gesellschaft Hannover 118, 1974, 69 – 86. tersuchungen zum Sieldungsplatz Hüde I am Dümmer Devriendt 2014: I. Devriendt, Swifterbant Stones. The Landkreis Diepholz. Göttinger Schriften zur Vor- und Neolithic Stone and Flint Industry at Swifterbant (The Frühgeschichte 23 (Neumünster 1988) 35 – 74. Netherlands): from stone typology and flint technology Hüster 1983: H. Hüster, Die Fischknochen der neolithischen to site function (Groningen 2014). Moorsiedlung Hüde I am Dümmer, Kreis Grafschaft Drafehn 2006: A. Drafehn, Geomagnetische Prospektion Diepholz. Neue Ausgrabungen und Forschungen in und archäologische Ausgrabung am Fundplatz Hunte Niedersachsen 16, 1983, 401 – 4 80. 2, Ldkr. Vechta. Berichte zur Denkmalpflege in Nieder- Huismann / Raemaekers 2014: D. J. Huisman / D. C. M. sachsen 26, 2006, 48 – 50. Raemaekers, Systematic cultivation of the Swifterbant Von den Driesch 1976: A. von den Driesch, Das Vermes- wetlands (The Netherlands). Evidence from Neolithic sen von Tierknochen aus vor- und frühgeschichtlichen tillage marks (c. 4300 – 4 000 cal. BC). Journal of Ar- Siedlungen (München 1976). chaeological Science 49, 2014, 572 – 584. Fansa / Schneider 1990: M. Fansa / R. Schneider, Neue Hülsebusch / Jockenhövel this volume: C. Hülsebusch  / Erkenntnisse über den Bohlenweg XXV (Pr) und den A. Jockenhövel, The middle Neolithic settlement of Pfahlsteg XXX (Pr) zwischen Damme und Hunteburg. Nottuln-Uphoven (Westphalia) and the start of the neo- Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Nordwestdeutschland lithisation in the lowlands. 13, 1990, 17 – 26. Kampffmeyer 1988: U. Kampffmeyer, Die Keramik der Sied- Habermehl 1975: K.-H. Habermehl, Die Altersbestimmung lung Hüde I am Dümmer. Untersuchung zur Neolithi- bei Haus- und Labortieren (Berlin, Hamburg 1975). sierung des nordwestdeutschen Flachlands. Unpubl. Hartz / Lübke 2012: S. Hartz / H. Lübke, Grundformen­ dissertation (Göttingen 1988). erzeugung im Nordischen Endmesolithikum und im Kabaciński et al. 2015: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Nordischen Frühneolithikum. In: H. Floss (ed.), Stein- Raemaekers / T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in artefakte. Vom Altpaläolithikum bis in die Neuzeit Pomerania and the Neolithisation of the North Europe- (Tübingen 2012) 639 – 6 46. an Lowlands (c. 5000 – 3000 cal. BC). Archäologie und Hayen 1957: H. Hayen, Neue Untersuchungen an hölzernen Geschichte im Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015). Moorwegen in nordwestdeutschen Hochmooren. Die Kossian 2007: R. Kossian, Hunte 1. Ein mittel- bis spät- Kunde NF 8, 1957, 242 – 249. neolithischer und frühbronzezeitlicher Siedlungs- Hayen 1989: H. Hayen, Bau und Funktion der hölzernen platz am Dümmer, Ldkr. Diepholz (Niedersachsen). Moorwege: Einige Fakten und Folgerungen. In: H. Jan- Veröffentlichungen der archäologischen Sammlungen kuhn / W. Kimmig / E. Ebel (eds.), Untersuchungen des Landesmuseums Hannover 52 (Kerpen-Loogh 2007). Marion Heumüller, Mirjam Briel, Florian Klimscha, Andreas Kotula, Hanns Hubert Leuschner, Reinhold Schoon and Tanja Zerl 43 Kossian 2009: R. Kossian, Zu den Ausgrabungen des Reichs­ Raemaekers 2015: D. C. M. Raemaekers, Rethinking Swif- amtes für Vorgeschichte am Dümmer, Ldkr. Diepholz, in terbant S3 ceramic variability. Searching for the trans- den Jahren 1938 bis 1940. Die Kunde 60, 2009, 167 – 194. ition to Funnel Beaker culture before 4000 calBC. In: Kotula et al. 2015: A. Kotula / H. Piezonka / T. Terber- J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / T. ger, New pottery dates on the Mesolithic-Neolithic Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and the transition in the north-central European lowlands. In: Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands (c. J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / T. 5000 – 3000 cal. BC). Archäologie und Geschichte im Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and the Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 321 – 334. Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands (c. Raemaekers / De Roever 2010: D. C. M. Raemaekers / 5000 – 3000 cal. BC). Archäologie und Geschichte im J. P. De Roever, The Swifterbant pottery tradition Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 489 – 509. (5000 – 3400 BC). In: B. Vanmontfort / L. L. Kooijmans / Kreuz et al. 2014: A. Kreuz / T. Märkle / E. Marinova / L. Amkreutz / L. Verhart (eds.), Pots, Farmers and J. Meurers-Balke / M. Rösch / E. Schäfer / S. Foragers. Pottery traditions and social interaction in Schamuhn / T. Zerl, The Late Neolithic Michelsberg the earlies Neolithic of the Lower Rhine Area (Leiden culture – just ramparts and ditches? A supraregional 2010) 135 – 149. comparison of agricultural and environmental data. Reinerth 1939: H. Reinerth, Ein Dorf der Großsteingrä- Prähistorische Zeitschrift 89, 2014, 72 – 115. berleute. Die Ausgrabungen des Reichamtes für Vorge- Metzler 1993: A. Metzler, Zwei urgeschichtlichen Wege im schichte am Dümmer. Germanenerbe 4, 1939, 226 – 242. Campemoor, Ldkr. Vechta. Berichte zur Denkmalpflege Schneekloth / Schneider 1972: H. Schneekloth / S. in Niedersachsen 13(3), 1993, 114 – 116. Schneider, Die Moore in Niedersachsen. 3. Teil. Be- Metzler 2003: A. Metzler, Early Neolithic peatland sites reich des Blattes Bielefeld der Geologischen Karte der around lake Dümmer. In: A. Bauerochse / H. Hass- Bundesrepublik Deutschland (1 : 200 000) (Göttingen, mann (eds.), Peatlands. Archaeological sites, archives Hannover 1972). of nature, nature conservation, wise use. Proceedings of Stapel 1991: B. Stapel, Die geschlagenen Steingeräte der the Peatland Conference 2002 in Hannover, Germany Siedlung Hüde I am Dümmer. Veröffentlichungen der (Rahden/Westf. 2003) 62 – 67. Urgeschichtlichen Sammlungen des Landesmuseums Müller 2012: J. Müller, Research on Neolithic and Early zu Hannover 38 (Hildesheim 1991). Bronze Age wetland sites on the north European plain. Struckmann 1887: C. Struckmann, Eine Ansiedlung aus der In: M. S. Midgley / J. Sanders (eds.), Lake Dwellings norddeutschen Rentierzeit am Dümmer-See. Correspon- after Robert Munro. Proceedings from the Munro In- denz-Blatt der deutschen Gesellschaft für Anthropolo- ternational Seminar: The Lake Dwellings of Europe gie, Ethnologie und Urgeschichte 28(2), 1887, 13 – 16. 22nd and 23rd October 2010. University of Edinburgh Werning 1983: J. A. Werning, Die Geweihartefakte der (Leiden 2012) 55 – 91. neolithischen Moorsiedlung Hüde I am Dümmer, Kreis Raemaekers 2013: D. C. M. Raemaekers, Looking for a place Grafschaft Diepholz. Neue Ausgrabungen und For- to stay – Swifterbant and Funnel Beaker settlements in schungen in Niedersachsen 16, 1983, 21 – 187. the northern Netherlands and Lower Saxony. In: Nie- Zietzschmann / Krölling 1955: O. Zietzschmann / O. dersächsisches Institut für historische Küstenforschung Krölling, Lehrbuch der Entwicklungsgeschichte der (ed.), Aktuelle archäologische Forschungen im Küsten- Haustiere (Hamburg, Berlin 1955). raum der südlichen Nordsee: Methoden – Strategien – Projekte. Siedlungs- und Küstenforschung im südlichen Nordseegebiet 36 (Rahden/Westf. 2013) 111 – 129. Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 , 45  – 59) 45 Neolithic colonisation of the southwestern Dümmer basin (NW Germany) – evidence from palaeobotanical data Andreas Bauerochse and Hanns Hubert Leuschner Abstract Dendrochronological, dendroecological, and palaeobotanical investigations have been carried out at Campemoor (southwestern Dümmer basin) to trace early Neolithic colonisation. The analyses of the tree ring sequences of bog pines and trackway timbers document changes in water level and increasing paludification that caused humans to build wooden trackways. Environmental changes in the Dümmer basin are discussed as a part of supra-regional changes, triggered by climate change. Keywords Dümmer basin, wooden trackways, palaeobotanic proxies, Neolithic landscape development, palynology, dendro- chronology Zusammenfassung Um die Entwicklung der neolithischen Besiedlung im Bereich des Campemoors (südwestliche Dümmer- niederung) nachzuzeichnen, wurden dendrochronologische, dendroökologische und paläobotanische Untersuchungen durch- geführt. Analysen an Jahrringen von Kiefern von Moorstandorten und Bauhölzern von Moorwegen belegen einen ansteigenden Moorwasserstand und fortschreitende Vermoorungen in Verbindung mit dem Bau von Moorwegen. Umweltveränderungen in der Dümmerniederung werden im Kontext mit klimainduzierten überregionalen Veränderungen diskutiert. Introduction The understanding of settlement processes is often the subject of archaeological investigations. Therefore, in addition to artefacts, various proxies like palaeo­ botanical data play an important role. Their synthesis allows the processes of settlement to be traced as well as their relationships with changes in the ecosystem and their effects on the environment. This is particu- larly interesting in case of the Dümmer basin, which is one of the most important regions for considering early Neolithic colonisation in northern Germany. The Dümmer-Geest lowland is a shallow basin that is largely paludified, with Lake Dümmer in its south. It is located in southwestern Lower Saxony and famous for its archaeological discoveries (Figs. 1; 9). Its formation is the result of cryo-karst processes during the last postglacial. The northern border of the basin is formed by end moraines of the Weich- selian (c. 115,000 – 12,000 BC; cf. Dienemann 1963; Pfaffenberg / Dienemann 1964; Dahms 1974). In the south it borders the northwest German upland, the Wiehengebirge. To the east and west it is bor- dered by end moraines of the Saalian glaciation (c. 300,000 – 126,000 BC). Its surface is covered by Fig. 1 Situation of research area (graphics: A. Bauerochse). 46 Neol i th i c col on i s ati on of th e s ou thwestern D ümmer basin ( N W G ermany) – evidence f rom palaeobotanic al dat a Fig. 2 Summarised pollen diagram from site Campemoor (after Bauerochse 2003, modified). Trackways (grey bars) are shown in their position. All age data, except the 14C-data of Pr 36, are dendro-data. For the entire pollen diagram and a more detailed description of landscape development, see Bauerochse 2003. A n d re a s B a u e ro c hs e an d Han n s Hu ber t Le u s ch n e r 47 Fig. 3 Section of trackway Pr 31. The track- way, conserved at the basis of the mire, was built when paludification started at Campe- moor at about 4600 BC (excava­tion season 2004; photo: A. Bauer­ochse). glacio-fluvial sands, largely covered by peatlands­ half of the 5th millennium to the beginning of the 3rd (bogs and fens), and with small patches of Saalian millennium BC were excavated (Metzler 2003; 2005; ground moraines (Lüttig 1958; von Drachenfels Bauerochse et al. 2012). Pollen profiles from the ex- 2010; Menning / Hendrich 2016). Today the area cavation site itself and from the surrounding area were is characterised by farmland, areas of peat cutting, analysed (Bauerochse / Metzler 2001; 2003; Bauer­ rewetted peatlands, and nature reserves. ochse 2003), the timbers of the trackways, as well As early as the first half of the 19th century, ar- as trees from subfossil forests conserved in the peat, chaeologists had found many traces of early human were dendrochronologically and dendroecologically activities in this area, most notably wooden track- investigated,3 and large areas south of Lake Dümmer ways.1 Archaeological investigations in the 20th century were subject to archaeological prospection by field revealed the importance of the area for early Neolithic survey (Gerken 2003). colonisation, as they uncovered the remains of settle- ments around Lake Dümmer and at the margin of the peatland.2 Methods In the early 1990s two wooden trackways found in the Campemoor, a raised bog in the southwestern Pollen analysis part of the Dümmer basin (Schneekloth / Schneider 1972), attracted attention. These finds, discovered dur- During the preparation for pollen analysis in the ing peat cutting, focused research in an area about laboratory, the botanical macro-remains were sepa- eight kilometres southwest of Lake Dümmer (Metzler rated. The preparation for pollen analysis followed 1993). Their excavation was also the starting point the caustic potash-acetolysis method after Erdt- for palaeoecological investigations including peat mann (1954). All samples were counted to a total stratigraphy and pollen analysis, as well as dendro- pollen sum of about 1,000 pollen. Stomata are given chronological and dendroecological studies. From this in absolute occurences (for a detailed description of time on, Campemoor became the centre of trackway preparation see Bauerochse 2003, 71). research in Lower Saxony for more than 20 years. Ultimately the remains of five trackways situated close Wood analysis to each other and covering the period from the first For dendrochronological / -ecological investigations a collection of slice sections was obtained encompassing 1  Nieberding 1817; 1840; von Alten 1879; 1888; Prejawa 1894; 1896. 2  Reinerth 1939; Deichmüller 1968; 1975; Kampffmeyer 3  Leuschner et al. 2007; Eckstein et al. 2010; 2011; Bauer­ 1988; Bischop 1997; Kossian 2003; 2007; Selent 2019. ochse et al. 2012. 48 Neol i th i c col on i s ati on of th e s ou thwestern D ümmer basin ( N W G ermany) – evidence f rom palaeobotanic al dat a samples from trees with different morphology. Trees to the early Neolithic. Radiocarbon data spanning the with a diameter of less then 20 cm and stumps were periods 4220 – 4040 calBC (5170 ± 60 BP, Hv 25659), not sampled. All samples were cut with a chain saw. 4040 – 3930 calBC (5310 ± 50 BP, Hv 25660), and The preparation of the samples followed standard 4070 – 3760 calBC (5100 ± 60 BP, Ki 4619) classify procedures (e. g. described by Leuschner 1994; for a the construction (cf. Bauerochse / Metzler 2001, detailed description of the preparation see Leuschner tab. 1; Bauerochse et al. 2012, 150). et al. 2007, 185 – 186). The tree ring series have been Some metres east of Pr 31 and situated in the peat cross-dated and the matches statistically evaluated by about 50 cm above, two more trackways, Pr 34 and calculating the coefficient of parallel variation and Pr 35, were preserved. From its technical features, Pr 34 t-values (Baille / Pilcher 1973). was similar to trackway Pr 31: a wooden construc- tion made of a lengthwise substructure covered by a superstructure made of pine stems laying laterally. For Results stabilisation stems were put longitudinally at the edges At the bottom of the diagram, the presence of pol- of the superstructure, fixed by oak dowels stuck in the len from pine (Pinus sylvestris) and alder (Alnus ground (Fig. 6; Bauerochse / Metzler 2001; Metzler glutinosa) presents a picture of a mosaic of wet de- 2003). All dendrochronological data – all coming from pressions and drier sites poor in nutrients, covered the dowels – show the same felling year: 3798 BC. by pines and species of the mixed oak forest (mainly Next to Pr 34 the remains of Pr 35 were pre- oaks). Increasing pollen of peatland species and the served; a few planks and two rows of oak piles stuck decrease of the pine curve in the course of the lower in the peat in a distance of about 50 cm presumably centimetres of the diagram show increasing wetness formed a narrow footbridge or landing stage (Fig. 6). and paludification (Fig. 2). Almost at the same time Dendrochronological data from the oak piles date its when the first trackway, PR 31 (Fig. 3), was built, construction to 3701 BC (cf. Bauerochse et al. 2012; pollen of herbs and emerging anthropogenic indica- Achterberg et al. 2015). Pollen of floating leaf plants tors (after Behre 1981) mark an increasing human like pondweed (Potamogeton), pond lily (Nuphar), impact in the area. Dendrochronological data from and water lily (Nyphaea) document the temporary the trackway timbers document its construction in expansion of the lake from the beginning of the 4th mil- 4629 BC at the latest, and following maintenance for lennium BC onwards (cf. Fig. 2; Bauerochse / Metz­ at least 100 years (Fig. 4; cf. Achterberg et al. 2015). ler 2001). Pollen samples taken from a core some Partly built directly on the mineral ground, its 200 m north of the excavation site demonstrate the construction reflects the beginning of the paludifica- existence of a lake in the immediate vicinity already tion, showing a number of features indicating soft since the Atlantic period. Probably it was this lake and muddy subsoil. A multilayered substructure and that expanded as a consequence of a rising ground a superstructure – up to about 5 m wide – partly fixed water level and flooded the area. by longitudinal stems put laterally across the construc- Drier conditions during the second half of the 4th tion and pierced with dowels, stabilised its position millennium BC caused the lake to disappear before, at (Fig. 3).4 The timbers were cut in four felling episodes, the transition to the 3rd millennium, pines germinated starting at 4629 BC, 4614 BC, 4590 BC, and 4538 BC, and formed a bog forest (Figs. 2; 8). Buried pines, ex- all of which coincided with times when the trees were cavated when cutting peat, demonstrate this process, characterised by growth depressions (Fig. 4). However, which started about 3050 BC. we have merely 36 timbers dated, out of which only six From about 2930 BC a change in growth patterns were completely preserved to include the waney edge (depressions of the annual growth rings) again displays (Fig. 4; Achterberg et al. 2015), and so we cannot be a change in site conditions. According to the dendro- sure whether our data cover the entire period during datings trackway Pr 32 was built in 2909 BC and was which the trackway was used. maintained subsequently over a period of about 20 The remains of a further trackway, Pr 36, situated years (Fig. 7). For these years distinct growth depres- about 100 m west of Pr 31, demonstrate the presence sions (c. 2885 – 2860 BC), followed by a period without of a second corduroy road conserved at the basis of any evidence of tree growth (c. 2860 – 2850 BC), display the mire (Fig. 5). Like Pr 31, the construction dates a period of wetter conditions (Fig. 8). Approximately at the same time, emerging spores of peat mosses (Sphag- num) indicate initial raised bog growth (Fig. 2). 4  Metzler 1993; 2003; Bauerochse / Metzler 2001; cf. Heu- Only a few years later, in the middle of the 28th müller et al., this volume. century BC, conditions became drier again, and from A n d re a s B a u e ro c hs e an d Han n s Hu ber t Le u s ch n e r 49 Fig. 4 Life spans and annual growth curves of Pr 31 timbers plotted against the mean curve of all Pr 31 timbers and the Lower Saxony bog pine chronology (LSBPC). Each curve displays the life span of a tree and its annual growth rate. The horizontal lines within the growth curves mark the average growth rates. If the curve runs above this line, the annual growth rate is above average, black curve sections in- dicate growth depressions with growth rates below average. The trackway was built in the middle of the 47th century BC and, as reflected by the dying-off / cutting data of the timbers, used over a period of about 100 years. A, B, C, and D mark phases of construction work (tree cuttings). According to the data, last maintenance works were done in 4538 BC. Clear periods of growth depressions indicate a continuing water level increase, which finally can have led to the trackway being abandoned (graphics: H. H. Leuschner). 50 Neol i th i c col on i s ati on of th e s ou thwestern D ümmer basin ( N W G ermany) – evidence f rom palaeobotanic al dat a the river Hunte and around Lake Dümmer (Bischop 1998; Gerken 2003; Kossian 2007, 21). Nearly all of them were situated in fen areas. One spot, a Mesolithic site, was explored in striking distance to the excava- tion site Campemoor (Fig. 9; Bauerochse / Metzler 1999, 146; 2002 fig. 1). Here, in a test trench, where the peat cover was completely removed, and the un- derlaying mineral soil layer uncovered, an Atlantic period surface yielded several flint artefacts. From about 5000 BC the pollen diagram displays human impact over a period of about 2,000 years on a scale more-or-less similar to that of Campemoor today. At that time peat moss became established and raised bog formation started, while the ratio of an- thropogenic indicators clearly decreased (Fig. 2; cf. Bauerochse 2003). Discussion Archaeological investigations show that, already from the Palaeolithic onwards, people were attracted by this area.5 From the beginning of the first half of the 5th millennium BC, when pollen data demonstrate an increasing paludification, people started to build the first wooden trackway (Pr 31; Fig. 2). Like all trackways excavated at Campemoor, Pr 31 ran in a north-south course, starting from the margin of the Wiehengebirge to gain access to the lowland of the Dümmer basin. Like the timbers of the trackway, trees of the former forest are preserved in the peat. Their den- Fig. 5 Remains of trackway Pr 36. The trackway, made of birch drochronological and dendroecological investigations and alder, was preserved at the basis of the mire. The white shreds are remains of birch bark (photo: A. Bauerochse). provide insights into the ecological situation of the times in which they grew. In this context especially the investigation of pines deliver valuable information, about 2840 BC pines expanded again. A forest be- as peatlands form the border zone of this species’ oc- came established, and for the following c. 120 years currence (ecotone). Pines are very sensitive to water large areas of Campemoor were wooded. But from c. level changes, showing wet phases by growth depres- 2770 BC the tree ring evidence again displays chang- sions / dying-off, so they can be used as indicators for ing site conditions. Affected by expanding peat mosses changes in hydrological site conditions.6 and the resulting wetness, growth conditions for pines The annual growth curves of the investigated trees became worse (narrow tree rings). As a consequence, (individual tree curves), the mean curve of all bog pines after a period of about 40 years of suffering, most trees (Fig. 4), and the pollen data (Fig. 2) all demonstrate died (Fig. 8). It was at this time that the ecosystem that the trackway was built in a period of overall wetter finally changed into a raised bog. conditions (Figs. 2; 4). This period marks the begin- Already starting from the end of the 5th millen- ning of colonisation in the area of today’s Campemoor. nium BC, increasing pollen of grasses, anthropogenic indicators, and herbs document the presence of man in the area (cf. Bauerochse / Metzler 2013). But as 5  Schlüter 1994; Bischop 1997; Bauerochse / Metzler several archaeological findings prove, there had al- 1999; Gerken 2003. ready been earlier human activities in the area. Most 6  Kokkonen 1923; Rydin / Jeglum 2006, 139; Eckstein et al. of the artefacts are documented from the riverbanks of 2011; Edvardsson 2016. A n d re a s B a u e ro c hs e an d Han n s Hu ber t Le u s ch n e r 51 Fig. 6 Trackways Pr 34 and Pr 35. Next to each other and on the same level, Pr 34 and Pr 35 were built in a time interval of about 100 years (a). While Pr 34 was a regular trackway (b), Pr 35 was a landing stage or built when rising water level created a lake at this spot (c) (photos: A. Bauerochse). The earliest radiocarbon data document settlement starting at 4629 BC (A) when the trackway was built, at site Hüde at this time (Deichmüller 1968, 1975). and 4614 BC (B), 4590 BC (C), and 4538 BC (D) This spot is situated south of Lake Dümmer, some for maintenance work (Fig. 4). All four phases are eight kilometres east of Campemoor site. characterised by reduced annual growth rates of the Dendrochronological data of the trackway tim- trees, indicating an increased water table (Fig. 4). As bers suggest four phases of increased tree felling: contemporaneously dying-off phases of pines and 52 Neol i th i c col on i s ati on of th e s ou thwestern D ümmer basin ( N W G ermany) – evidence f rom palaeobotanic al dat a oaks from Totes Moor (Steinhuder Meer area, Ha- of an earlier road connection remains open at the nover District [Fig. 10: TOMO 1]; Achterberg et al. moment. Contemporaneous dying-off events of bog 2018), Vehnemoor (Ammerland District), and Huven- pines from Vechtaer Moor (VECMO 1, VECMO 2, hopsmoor (Rotenburg District, Fig. 10: HUVE) docu- about 30 km north of Campemoor) and Totes Moor ment rising water tables, we suggest a more general (TOMO 3, some 70 km east of Campemoor) and the increase and equal annual distribution in precipitation decrease of anthropogenic indicators (Fig. 2) support rather than single significant rainfall events causing the suggestion of increased wetness during this pe- floods. riod (Fig. 10). At this time radiocarbon dates for site For the following centuries, anthropogenic indica- Hunte 3, one of the settlements north of Lake Düm- tors display continuous human impact. Whether the mer, also document colonisation near the lake, some construction of Pr 36 some 500 years later was the 13 km northeast of Campemoor site (Heumüller et al. answer to increasing paludification or the resumption 2017; cf. Heumüller et al., this volume). Some generations later, in 3798 BC, people built trackway Pr 34 about 100 m further to the east (Fig. 6). This happened probably without even knowing about the previous constructions – which were probably already covered by peat at that time – and in a pe- riod for which dendroecological investigations on trees from other north German peatlands suggest in- creased germination of bog pines (Fig. 10: TOMO 2, TOMO 3, VECMO 1, VECMO 2). Initially this seems to be a contradiction. But already a couple of years later, the first of these sites again show dying-off events (Fig. 10: OY, TOMO 3). So we assume that Pr 34 was probably built in a short-term drier phase, and as all timbers examined were cut in the same year and no maintenance work was documented, we assume a short-term use of this trackway. Subsequently a sig- nificant increase in water level, documented on site by pollen of floating leaf plants, created a lake, which then flooded the construction. Pollen samples taken from a core some 200 m north of the excavation site (Bauerochse unpubl.) prove the existence of a lake nearby already since the Atlantic period. Probably it was this lake that expanded. This suggestion of a rising water table is also s upported by dendrochronological data from ­ ­adjacent peatlands like Vechtaer Moor (northern Dümmer-Geest lowland, VECMO 3), Totes Moor (Steinhuder Meer depression, TOMO 2, TOMO 3), and the Oythener Moor (northern Duemmer-Geest lowland, OY). From these sites dying-off events of pines and oaks are documented, starting from the middle of the 38th century BC (Fig. 10; cf. Achter- berg et al. 2018). As the Dümmer basin is a shallow depression, small changes in precipitation (quantity and / or an- nual distribution ratios) had great effects on changes in groundwater levels and flooding. Until Lake Düm- mer was embanked in the 1950s, winter precipitation Fig. 7 Trackway Pr 32. The trackway indicates the end of a pe- and snow melt caused annual floodings of large parts riod characterised by a lowered water table. Built within a bog pine forest, its construction marks the start of raised bog forma- of the Dümmer basin. In his reconstruction of Holo- tion at Campemoor (photo A. Bauerochse). cene lake development Dahms (1974) documented A n d re a s B a u e ro c hs e an d Han n s Hu ber t Le u s ch n e r 53 Fig. 8 Life spans and annual growth curves of Pr 32 trackway timbers plotted against the mean curve of Pr 32 timbers and the Lower Saxony bog pine chronology (LSBPS; graphics: H. H. Leuschner). 54 Neol i th i c col on i s ati on of th e s ou thwestern D ümmer basin ( N W G ermany) – evidence f rom palaeobotanic al dat a Fig.  9 Mesolithic and Neolithic findings and find spots in the southwestern Dümmer basin (data from ADABweb). Beside the sites shown here, there are more archae- ological sites in the area belonging to the discussed period but which have not been finally chronologi- cally allocated so far. Some of them may date to the period under con- sideration (cf. Gerken 2003; Heumül- ler et al. 2017). For a more differen- tiated mapping, see Fig.  1 in Heumüller et al., this volume (graph- ics: A. Bauerochse, after Heumuel- ler, this volume, modified). different lake stages. Reinerth (in Kossian 2007, 21) cal situation of the hinterland, due to the backing up did the same for the Mesolithic, so one can infer how of groundwater. the Dümmer basin would be effected by changes in For the second half of the 4th millennium BC, a water supply. shift in site conditions is documented. The water table In the context of changes in water level, beavers sank and the lake retreated. At the end of this process (Castor fiber) and their activities also have to be taken pines started to spread over the peatland, and large ar- into account as potential causes of flooding (see Coles eas of Campemoor became forested ­(Leuschner et al. 2003). But as we have indications of synchronous 2007). This expansion started from about 3050 BC. It higher water levels from the surrounding peatlands, seems that during this time the peatland could be eas- it is not likely that these animals were responsible for ily crossed for a period of nearly 100 years. Then con- the event at Campemoor. ditions became wetter again, so humans were forced However, a changing water table, expanding to built another corduroy road. This trackway, Pr 32, lakes, and proceeding paludification obviously did not was built within the forest, using pines from the site. prevent humans from staying in the Dümmer basin – It was the time when increasing humidity favoured not even when the lake expanded, as the footbridge, the spread of peat mosses and the dying-off of most of trackway Pr 35, demonstrates. As for Pr 34, there are the bog forest. Even though it was only a short-term no concrete data on how long this construction was deterioration at the beginning of the 29th century BC, used. But, from the occurence of water plant pollen, it had a strong influence on ­human activities in the it seems that the high water table lasted at least for area. Trackway Pr 32 was man’s last attempt to come centuries (Fig. 2). Thus the situation in the Dümmer to terms with the conditions at Campemoor (Fig. 7; basin shows the consequences of wetter conditions cf. Bauerochse 2003; Metzler 2003). When condi- not only reported for northwest Germany for this tions became drier again and the next tree generation period, but also found in other regions of Europe at spread from about 2840 BC, people had already left this time.7 Probably the sea level rise of the North the area. Obviously humans didn’t withstand this dras- Sea, reconstructed for the 4th millennium by Behre tic environmental change, when mineral sites were (2013), may also have had an impact on the hydrologi- constricted by transgrading peat mosses and pastures were narrowed. Pines growing on the trackway prove that it had finally been ­abandoned (Fig. 7). 7  Cf. compilation of Tipping et al. 2012, 11 – 13; see also Magny As well as the events described above, these envi- et al. 2009, 584; Borgmark / Wastegård 2008, fig. 7, graphs C ronmental changes were climate-triggered, as regional and E for south-central Sweden; Zurek et al. 2002 for eastern Poland; cf. also compilation in Bauerochse / Metzler 2001, processes from e. g. the Borsteler Moor (eastern Düm- 122 – 123. mer-Geest lowland, cf. Fig. 10: BOR) and supra-regional A n d re a s B a u e ro c hs e an d Han n s Hu ber t Le u s ch n e r 55 Fig. 10 Lifespans of dendrochronologically dated pines and oaks from northern Germany. Lines combined in groups belong to the same peatland. Subareas within peatlands are distinguished by numbers (e. g. TOMO 1). Grey lines mark dated trackways and the periods in which they were maintained (graphics: H. H. Leuschner). 56 Neol i th i c col on i s ati on of th e s ou thwestern D ümmer basin ( N W G ermany) – evidence f rom palaeobotanic al dat a equivalents in other European regions show. While for a period of about 2,000 years Campemoor has taken instance forestation at Borsteler Moor shows the same key position in the settlement area of the western picture as Campemoor, at other sites wetter conditions, Dümmer basin. raised lake levels, and glacier advances are documented It is also unknown whether it were topographi- in various ways for the transition from the 4th to the 3rd cal or other reasons that caused humans to build the millennium BC; for example, in south-central Sweden trackways in such restricted space. However, it is cer- (Borgmark / Wastegård 2008, 171 fig. 7, graph F), the tain that later builders did not know of the earlier Swiss Jura (Deák et al. 2018), northern and eastern constructions, as they were already covered by peat. To Poland (Zurek et al. 2002, fig. 2, graphs A–B; Lake resolve these questions more archaeological informa- Gościąż), central Poland (Starkel et al. 1988, table tion from the surrounding area is needed. 8.9; cf. Magny 2004), north Scotland (Moir et al. 2010; Moir 2012), and the Alps (e. g. at Schwarzensteinkees, Ziller Valley, Tirol, Austria; Pindur / Heuberger 2008, Conclusion 49 – 50; cf. Wanner et al. 2011, fig. 3b). We only have indirect evidence that it was cli- Evidence suggests that during the Holocene Thermal mate change that prompted humans to leave the area, Maximum the Dümmer basin and its surroundings however. Sociological causes are also conceivable, were settled by human communities, starting from although it is reasonable to assume that the changed the second half of the 5th millennium BC. Artefacts environmental conditions – formation and transgres- and the remains of settlements – especially from the sion of a raised bog – were responsible for the distinct area around Lake Dümmer and the course of the decrease of human impact in the Campemoor area river Hunte9 – as well as trackways (Metzler 2003; (Fig. 2). Thus after a period of more then 2,000 years of Bauerochse et al. 2012), and proxies from pollen10 colonisation, during which neither increasing paludifi- document this process. At Campemoor people built cation nor flooding had driven humans out of the area, trackways for about 2,000 years, adapting to deterio- it seems that the formation of raised bog finally left no rating site conditions (rising water level, proceeding possibility for them to stay (cf. Schneekloth / Schnei- paludification). It must have been the richness in re- der 1972; Diekmann 1998; Bauerochse 2003). sources which attracted humans to this area from such The demography of the Dümmer lowland shows an early date, which also made it worthwhile to build that all trackway constructions at Campemoor infrastructure like trackways to manage the environ- ­correspond to settlement phases of sites Hüde 1 und ment and its changes over millennia. Only when peat Hunte 1. For Hunte 1 colonisation contemporaneous mosses came up and spread, and Campemoor became to trackway constructions is documented for the a raised bog, did people leave the area. ­transition from the 5th to the 4th millennium and the be- Although we have the trackways from Campe- ginning of the 3rd millennium BC.8 For the area south of moor and settlements around Lake Dümmer, we have the lake 14C-dating results of artefacts from site Hüde 1 no evidence on whether the people from the settle- document three or four settlement periods between ments were the same people who built the trackways, 4700 and 3500 BC (Geyh, documented in Deich­ or if these constructions were made by societies com- müller 1975, 46 [newly calibrated by Heumüller et al., ing from other areas of the adjacent mountainous envi- this volume]; cf. Lanting / Van der Plicht 2002, 58). ronment of Wiehengebirge or Dammer Berge. We also But in contrast to Campemoor, where a transgressing do not know if these trackways were built to open the raised bog finally caused strong landscape changes, lowland or to connect the higher areas of Wiehenge- people in the more eastern fen area around the lake birge and Dammer Berge. And finally we cannot be could adapt to the changing hydrological conditions. sure whether people stayed in the area permanently Whether the people from the lake area were also or came only periodically, e. g. for the summer. There- the builders of the corduroy roads at Campemoor, or fore to obtain a better understanding of colonisation whether other societies, coming from the Wiehenge- at one of northwest Germany’s most important early birge, for instance, built these constructions, is not known yet. We also have no idea why so many track- ways accumulated at the Campemoor site. But over 9  Pfaffenberg / Dienemann 1964, 77; Deichmüller 1968; 1974; 1975; Kampffmeyer 1988; Bauerochse / Metzler 1999, 2003; Gerken 2003; Kossian 2003; 2007. 8  Kossian 2003, 83; Grootes 2007; Schmidt 2007; Heumül- 10  Pfaffenberg 1933; Diekmann 1998; Bauerochse / Metz- ler et al. 2017, 29. ler 2001; Bauerochse 2003. A n d re a s B a u e ro c hs e an d Han n s Hu ber t Le u s ch n e r 57 settlement sites, the Dümmer basin, future research Bauerochse / Metzler 1999: A. Bauerochse / A. Metzler, should consider two aspects: (a) its supra-regional Beitrag zur Siedlungs- und Landschaftsentwicklung im role in (early) Neolithic socio-cultural development südwestlichen Dümmer-Gebiet. Berichte zur Denkmal- (meso-level) of northwest Germany / ­Europe, and (b) pflege in Niedersachsen 19(3), 1999, 146 – 147. how people living in the Dümmer basin did respond Bauerochse / Metzler 2001: A. Bauerochse / A. Metz- to environmental changes (micro-level). ler, Landschaftsentwicklung und Moorwegebau im Nevertheless it can be emphasised that the south- Neolithikum in der südwestlichen Dümmer-Region. ern Dümmer basin, and especially the Campemoor Telma 31, 2001, 105 – 133. area, takes a key position in the early Neolithic colo- Bauerochse / Metzler 2002: A. Bauerochse / A. Metzler, nisation of northern Germany. We can learn from Campemoor, Neolithic trackways and environmental the investigations what effort former people made change. In: A. Bauerochse (Koord.), Peatlands, archaeo- to manage and to adapt to different environmental logical sites – archives of nature – nature conservation conditions. Finally, it seems that a strong shift in envi- – wise use. Excursion Guide (Hannover 2002) 15 – 17. ronmental conditions was needed to squeeze people Bauerochse / Metzler 2003: A. Bauerochse / A. Metzler, out of the southwestern Dümmer basin: the formation Moorarchäologie. In: Moorzeiten – 3x Moor im Olden- of a raised bog and its transgression. This may give burger Münsterland. Veröffentlichung des Naturschutz- an idea what effect raised bog development had on und Informationszentrums Goldenstedt = Veröffentli- settlement in northwest Germany, where about 30 % chung des Industrie Museums Lohne = Veröffentlichung of the landscape became peatland – half of it raised des Museums im Zeughaus (Diepholz 2003) 46 – 91. bog – until peatland melioration started from about Bauerochse et al. 2012: A. Bauerochse / H. H. Leuschner /  the 17th century. A. Metzler, Das Campemoor im Neolithikum – Spuren früher Besiedlung in der südlichen Dümmerniederung. Jahrbuch Oldenburger Münsterland 61, 2012, 135 – 153. References Behre 1981: K. E. Behre, The Interpretation of Anthropo- genic Indicators in Pollen Diagrams. Pollen et Spores Achterberg et al. 2015: I. Achterberg / A. Bauerochse /  XXIII(2), 1981, 225 – 245. T. Giesecke / A. Metzler / H. H. Leuschner, Contem- Behre 2013: K. E. Behre, Die Meeresspiegelschwankungen poraneousness of Trackway Construction and Envi- der vergangenen Jahrtausende und deren Bedeutung für ronmental Change: a Dendrochronological Study in das Siedlungsgeschehen an der deutschen Nordseeküste. NW-German Mires. Interdisciplinaria Archaeologica Siedlungs- und Küstenforschung im südlichen Nordsee- VI(1), 2015, 19 – 29. gebiet 36, 2013, 13 – 30. Achterberg et al. 2018: I. Achterberg / J. Eckstein / B. Birk- Bischop 1997: D. Bischop, Die archäologischen Fundstellen holz / A. Bauerochse / H. H. Leuschner, Phase-wise im Landkreis Diepholz. 411 S., o.O. bog expansion documented by dendrochronology-dated Coles 2003: B. Coles, An archaeological approach to the pines from fen-bog transition between c. 6700 BC and study of European beaver and their significance in past c. 3400 BC at a Northwest German site. Climate of the wetland ecosystems. In: A. Bauerochse / H. Haßmann Past 14, 85 – 100; https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-14 – 85 – 2018. (eds.), Peatlands, archaeological sites – archives of na- von Alten 1879: F. Von Alten, Die Bohlenwege (Römer­ ture – nature conservation – wise use. Proceedings of wege) im Herzogtum Oldenburg (Oldenburg 1879). the Peatland Conference 2002 in Hannover, Germany von Alten 1888: F. Von Alten, Die Bohlenwege im Fluss- (Rahden/Westf. 2003) 25 – 35. gebiet der Ems und Weser. Bericht über die Tätigkeit Dahms 1974: E. Dahms, Geologische und limnologische des Oldenburger Landesvereins für Altertumskunde 6 Untersuchungen zur Entstehungs- und Entwicklungs- (Oldenburg 1888). geschichte des Dümmer. Berichte der Naturhistorischen- Baille / Pilcher 1973: M. G. L. Baille / J. R. Pilcher, A Gesellschaft 118, 1974, 7 – 67. simple cross-dating program for tree-ring research. Tree- Deák et al. 2018: J. Deák / M. Magny / S. Wüthrich, Late Ring Bulletin 33, 1973, 7 – 14. Neolithic to Middle Bronze Age (around 4900 – 3100 cal. Bauerochse 2003: A. Bauerochse, Environmental change BP) lake-level fluctuations at Lake Neuchâtel (Switzer- and its influence on trackway construction and settle- land) as reflected by the sediment sequence of the site ment. In: A. Bauerochse / H. Haßmann (eds.), Peatlands, of Colombier / Les Plantées de Rive: Palaeoclimatic and archaeological sites – archives of nature, nature con- archaeological implications. The Holocene 28, 2018, servation, wise use. Proceedings of the Peatland Con- 3 – 18; doi:10.1177/0959683617714598. ference 2002 in Hannover, Germany (Rahden/Westf. Deichmüller 1968: J. Deichmüller, Die neolithische Moor- 2003) 66 – 76. siedlung Hüde I am Dümmer, Kr. Grafschaft Diepholz. 58 Neol i th i c col on i s ati on of th e s ou thwestern D ümmer basin ( N W G ermany) – evidence f rom palaeobotanic al dat a Abschlußbericht. Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Ur- tion – wise use. Proceedings of the Peatland Conference geschichte 37, 1968, 106 – 110. 2002 in Hannover, Germany (Rahden/Westf. 2003) Deichmüller 1974: J. Deichmüller, Der Mensch und die 89 – 94. Tierwelt am Dümmer in vorgeschichtlicher Zeit. Be- Grootes 2007: P. M. Grootes, Ergebnisse der 14C-Datierun- richte Naturhistorische Gesellschaft Hannover 118, gen. In: R. Kossian (eds.), Hunte 1. Ein mittel- bis spät- 1974, 69 – 86. neolithischer und frühbronzezeitlicher Siedlungsplatz Deichmüller 1975: J. Deichmüller, Die jungsteinzeitli- am Dümmer, Ldkr. Diepholz (Niedersachsen). Veröf- che Moorsiedlung Hüde I am Dümmer. Telma 5, 1975, fentlichungen der archäologischen Sammlungen des 43 – 50. Landesmuseums Hannover 52 (Kerpen-Loogh 2007), Diekmann 1998: U. Diekmann, Paläoökologische Untersu- 541 – 543. chungen zur Entwicklung der Natur- und Kulturland- Heumüller et al. 2017: M. Heumüller / M. Briel / R. schaft am Nordrand des Wiehengebirges. Abh. Westf. Schoon / T. Zerl, Die Fundstelle Hunte 3 am Dümmer, Mus. Naturkunde 60(4) (Münster 1998). Ldkr. Vechta – ein neuer Fundplatz der Swifterbant-Kul- Dienemann 1963: W. Dienemann, Zur Entstehung des tur? Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte 86, Steinhuder Meeres und des Dümmers. Neues Archiv 2017, 11 – 33. für Niedersachsen 12, 1963, 230 – 249. Heumüller et al.. this volume: M. Heumüller / M. von Drachenfels 2010: O. von Drachenfels, Überarbei- Briel / F. Klimscha / A. Kotula / H. H. Leuschner / R. tung der naturräumlichen Regionen Niedersachsens. Schoon / T. Zerl, Wetlands settlements and a wooden Informationen für den Naturschutz Niedersachsen trackway: Swifterbant sites in the Dümmer basin. 30(4), 2010, 249 – 2 52. Kampffmeyer 1988: U. Kampffmeyer, Die Keramik der Sied- Eckstein et al. 2009: J. Eckstein / H. H. Leuschner / A. lung Hüde 1 am Dümmer. Untersuchungen zur Neolithi- Bauerochse / U. Sass-Klaasen, Local or large scale sierung des norddeutschen Flachlands. Unpubl. diss., spatial signal? First results and research strategy for Univ. Göttingen (Göttingen1988). the dendroecological evaluation of subfossil bog pine Kokkonen 1923: P. Kokkonen, Beobachtungen über das layers from Lower Saxony. Dendrochronologia 27(2), Wurzelsystem der Kiefer in Moorböden. Acta Forestalia 2009, 129 – 146. Fennica 25, 1923, 3 – 20. Eckstein et al. 2010: J. Eckstein / H. H. Leuschner / T. Gie- Kossian 2003: R. Kossian, The Neolithic settlement site secke / L. Shumilovskikh / A. Bauerochse, Dendro- “Hunte 1” near Lake Dümmer in Diepholz District ecological investigations at Venner Moor (northwest (Lower Saxony, Germany) – a survey. In: A. Bau- Germany) document climate-driven woodland dynamics erochse / H. Haßmann (eds.), Peatlands, archaeological and mire development in the period 2450 – 2050 BC. The sites – archives of nature – nature conservation – wise Holocene 20(2), 2010, 231 – 244. use. Proceedings of the Peatland Conference 2002 in Eckstein et al. 2011: J. Eckstein / H. H. Leuschner / A. Hannover, Germany (Rahden/Westf. 2003) 79 – 94. Bauerochse, Mid-Holocene pine forestation phases Kossian 2007: R. Kossian, Hunte 1. Ein mittel- bis spät- and mire development – a dendroecological contribu- neolithischer und frühbronzezeitlicher Siedlungsplatz tion based on subfossil pines from northwest Germany. am Dümmer, Ldkr. Diepholz (Niedersachsen). Veröf- Journal of Vegetation Science 22, 2011, 781 – 794. fentlichungen der archäologischen Sammlungen des Edvardsson et al. 2012: J. Edvardsson / H. H. ­Leuschner / H. Landesmuseums Hannover 52 (Kerpen-Loogh 2007). Linderson / H. W. Linderholm / D. Hammarlund, Lanting / Van der Plicht 2002: J. Lanting / J. Van der South Swedish bog pines as indicators of Mid-Holo- Plicht, De 14 C-chronologie van de Nederlandse pre- cene climate variability. Dendrochronologia 30, 2012, en protohistorie, III: Neolithicum. Palaeohistoria 41/42, 93 – 103. 2002, 1 – 110. Edvardsson et al. 2016: J. Edvardsson / M. Stoffel / C. Co- Leuschner 1994: H. H. Leuschner, Jahrringanalysen. In: B. rona / L. Bragazza / H. H. Leuschner / D. J. Char- Hermann (ed.), Archäometrie. Naturwissenschaftliche man / S. Helama, Subfossil peatland trees as proxies for Analysen von Sachüberresten (Heidelberg, New York, Holocene palaeohydrology and palaeoclimate. Earth- Berlin 1994) 121 – 136. Science Reviews 163, 2016, 118 – 4 0. Leuschner et al. 2007: H. H. Leuschner / A. Bauerochse / A. Erdtmann 1954: G. Erdtmann, An introduction to pollen Metzler, Environmental change, bog history and analysis (Stockholm 1954). human impact around 2900 B.C. in NW Germany – Gerken 2003: K. Gerken, Improving the picture of prehis- preliminary results from a dendroecological study of toric settlement distribution by systematic prospection. a sub-fossil pine woodland at Campemoor, Duemmer In: A. Bauerochse / H. Haßmann (eds.), Peatlands, ar- Basin. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 16, 2007, chaeological sites – archives of nature – nature conserva- 183 – 195. A n d re a s B a u e ro c hs e an d Han n s Hu ber t Le u s ch n e r 59 Lüttig 1958: G. Lüttig, Heisterbergphase und Vollgliede- Prejawa 1896: H. Prejawa, Die Ergebnisse der Bohlenweg­ rung des Drenthe-Stadiums. Geologisches Jahrbuch 17, untersuchungen in dem Grenzmoor zwischen Olden­ 1958, 419 – 430. burg und Preußen und in Mellinghusen im Kreis Magny 2004: M. Magny, Holocene climate variability as ­Sulingen. Mitteilungen des Vereins für Geschichte und reflected by mid-European lake-level fluctuations and Landeskunde von Osnabrück 21, 1896, 98 – 178. its probable impact on prehistoric human settlements. Reinerth 1939: H. Reinerth, Ein Dorf der Großsteingrab­ Quarternary International 13, 2004, 65 – 79. leute – Die Ausgrabungen des Reichsamtes für Vorge- Menning / Hendrich 2016: M. Menning / A. Hendrich,  schichte am Dümmer. Germanenerbe 4, 1939, 226 – 242. Stratigraphische Tabelle von Deutschland 2016 (Pots- Rydin / Jeglum 2006: H. Rydin / J. Jeglum, The Biology of dam 2016). Peatlands (New York 2006). Metzler 1993: A. Metzler, Zwei urgeschichtliche Wege im Schlüter 1994: W. Schlüter, Ur- und Frühgeschichte. In: H. Campemoor, Ldkr. Vechta. Berichte zur Denkmalpflege Mengelin (ed.), Geologische Karte von Niedersachsen in Niedersachsen 13(3), 1993, 114 – 116. 1 : 25 000. Erläuterungen zu Blatt Nr. 3515 Hunteburg Metzler 2003: A. Metzler, Early neolithic peatland sites (Hannover 1994) 164 – 167. around lake Duemmer. In: A. Bauerochse / H. Haßmann Schmidt 2007: B. Schmidt, Auf den Spuren der ersten ge- (eds.), Peatlands, archaeological sites – archives of na- meinsamen Arbeit von Dendrochronologie und Ar- ture – nature conservation – wise use. Proceedings of chäologie aus den Jahren zwischen 1939 und 1941 in the Peatland Conference 2002 in Hannover, Germany Europa – der neolithische Fundplatz „Huntedorf 1“ am (Rahden/Westf. 2003) 62 – 67. Dümmer. In: R. Kossian (ed.), Hunte 1. Ein mittel- bis Metzler 2005: A. Metzler, Wege auf schwankendem Grund. spätneolithischer und frühbronzezeitlicher Siedlungs- Archäologie in Deutschland 2005(5), 22 – 2 3. platz am Dümmer, Ldkr. Diepholz (Niedersachsen). Moir 2012: A. K. Moir, Development of a Neolithic pine Veröffentlichungen der archäologischen Sammlungen tree-ring chronology for northern Scotland. Journal of des Landesmuseums Hannover 52 (Kerpen-Loogh 2007) Quarternary Science 27(5), 2012, 50 – 508. 545 – 549. Moir et al. 2010: A. K. Moir / S. A. G. Leroy / D. Brown /  Schneekloth / Schneider 1972: H. Schneekloth / S. P. E. F. Collins, Dendrochronological evidence for a Schneider, Die Moore in Niedersachsen – 3. Teil. Be- lower water-table on peatland around 3200 – 3000 BC reich des Blattes Bielefeld der Geologischen Karte der from subfossil pine in northern Scotland. The Holocene Bundesrepublik Deutschland (1 : 200000). Veröffentli- 20(6), 2010, 931 – 942. chungen des Niedersächsischen Instituts für Landes- Nieberding 1817: C. H. Nieberding, Neuentdeckte alte kunde und Landesentwicklung der Univ. Göttingen, Heerwege durch das Moor bei Lohne. Oldenburgische AI 96(3) (Göttingen, Hannover 1972). Blätter VI (Oldenburg 1817). Selent 2019: A. Selent, Neue mesolithische Fundplätze auf Nieberding 1840: C. H. Nieberding, Geschichte des ehema- der NOWAL-Trasse im Landkreis Diepholz. Nachrich- ligen Niederstifts Münster und der angrenzenden Graf- ten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte 88, 2019, 233 – 245. schaft Diepholz, Wildeshausen e.c. Bd. 1 (Vechta 1840). Starkel et al. 1988: L. Starkel / A. Pazdur / M. F. Pazdur /  Pfaffenberg 1993: K. Pfaffenberg, Stratigraphische und B. Wicik / K. Więckowski, Lake-level changes and pa- pollenanalytische Untersuchungen in einigen Mooren laeohydrological reconstructions during the Holocene. nördlich des Wiehengebirges. Jahrbuch der Preußischen In: M. Ralska-Jasiewiczowa / T. Goslar / T. Madeyska / S. Geologischen Landesanstalt zu Berlin 54, 1993, 160 – 193. Starkel (eds.), Lake Gościąż Central Poland. A Mono- Pfaffenberg / Dienemann 1964: K. Pfaffenberg / W. Diene- graphic Study, Part I (Kraków 1988) 225 – 2 51. mann, Das Dümmerbecken. Beiträge zur Geologie und Tipping et al. 2012: R. Tipping / R. Bradley / J. Sanders /  Botanik. Schriften der Wirtschaftswissenschaftlichen R. McCulloch / R. Wilson, Moments of crisis: climate Gesellschaft zum Studiums Niedersachsens, Reihe A,78 change in Scotish prehistory. Proc. Soc. Antiq. Scot. (Göttingen, Hannover 1964). 142, 2012, 9 – 2 5. Pindur / Heuberger 2008: P. Pindur / H. Heuberger, Zur Wanner et al. 2011: H. Wanner / O. Solomina / M. Gros- holozänen Gletschergeschichte im Zemmgrund in den jean / S. P. Ritz / M. Jetel, Structure and origin of Ho- Zillertaler Alpen, Tirol / Österreich (Ostalpen). Zeit- locene cold events. Quarternary Science Review 30, schrift für Gletscherkunde und Glazialgeologie 42(2), 2011, 3109 – 3123. 2008, 21 – 89. Zurek et al. 2002: S. Zurek / D. J. Michzynska / A. Pazdur, Prejawa 1884: H. Prejawa, Die Pontes longi im Aschener Time Record of Palaeohydrologic Changes in the Devel- Moor und in Mellinghausen. – Mitteilungen des Vereins opment of Mires During the Late Glacial and Holocene, für Geschichte und Landeskunde von Osnabrück 19, North Podlasie Lowland. Geochronometria 21, 2002, 1884, 177 – 202. 109 – 118. Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 , 61  – 83) 61 Lipid residue analysis of ceramics from Hüde I (Lower Saxony, Germany): New data to understand the transition to farming Özge Demirci, Alexandre Lucquin, Florian Klimscha, Oliver E. Craig and Daan C. M. Raemaekers Abstract This project is a pilot study aiming to question the use and function of the pottery from Hüde I (4,700 – 3,500 calBC), distr. Diepholz, in Lower Saxony, Germany, through lipid residue analysis. The results from this project not only demonstrate that lipids can be extracted from Hüde I vessels, but also indicate that the vessels were directly associated with food prepara- tion and/or cooking. The results also show a functional variation in pottery use, including processing aquatic (freshwater) resources, terrestrial animals (both ruminant and non-ruminant), and dairy products as well as possibly food plants. Keywords Lipid residue analysis, early pottery use, Mesolithic-Neolithic transition, northern central Europe, Hüde I Zusammenfassung Der Beitrag stellt Ergebnisse einer Pilotstudie zum Gebrauch und zur Funktion der Gefäße der Fundstelle­ Hüde I, Lkr. Diepholz, in Niedersachsen, anhand von Lipidanalysen von Krustenresten an Keramik vor. Die Ergebnisse zeigen nicht nur, dass Lipide aus den Gefäßen von Hüde I extrahiert werden können, sondern belegen die Verwendung der Keramik in der Nahrungszubereitung und/oder beim Kochen. Sie demonstrieren zudem eine funktionale Variabilität im Gefäßgebrauch. Dazu gehören die Verarbeitung von Süßwasser-Ressourcen, Wildtieren, Milchprodukten und vielleicht auch pflanzlicher Nah- rung. Introduction the 5th millennium calBC, hunter-gatherer societies of the Ertebølle culture to the north in southern The site of Hüde I, distr. Diepholz, Lower Saxony, Scandinavia and of the Swifterbant culture to the plays a key role in the discussion about the neolithisa- west in today’s Dutch wetlands, and early farming tion of Europe. It is particularly important in refer- groups such as Linearbandkeramik (LBK) estab- ence to the transition from the Ertebølle culture to lished to the south and east of the river Elbe (Fig. 1; the Funnel Beaker culture in southern Scandina- Terberger et al. 2009; Sørensen / Karg 2014) met via and northern Germany, but also in reference to and interfaced each other. The contacts between the Swifterbant culture chronology that spans the these hunter-gatherer and early farming groups are Mesolithic-Neolithic transition. It maintains this evident by the presence of shared material culture crucial position thanks to its long occupational through exchange, especially of perforated adzes span – on the basis of the discovered ceramic finds, (‘durchlochte Schuhleistenkeile’) and perforated dated 4,700 – 3,500 calBC (Raemaekers 1999, 87), the wedges (‘Breitkeile’).1 pre­servation of bone material, and its location – in- While the earliest Swifterbant pottery appeared between the hunter-gatherer and farming communi- at c. 5,000 calBC (Raemaekers 2011) and was used ties (Fig. 1). More recently, researchers have stressed in a purely hunter-gatherer context, domesticated the need to consider the transition at a regional or sub- animals and cereal cultivation were introduced regional scale, moving away from the grand narra- at around 4,400 – 4,300 calBC (Out 2008; 2009; tives regarding the degree of migration versus au- tochthonous change that have polarised the debate, particularly during the latter half of the 20 th cen- 1  Fischer 1982; Czekaj-Zastawny et al. 2011; Raemaekers tury. In northern Germany, during the majority of 2011; Raemaekers et al. 2011; Verhart 2012; Povlsen 2014. 62 Li pi d re s i du e an al ys i s of ceramic s f rom H üde I: N ew data to understand the transition to farm in g Fig.  1 Hüde I is located between central Europe, southern Scandinavia, and the Low Countries. A Cultural groups identi- fied for the time span 4,800 – 4,500 calBC; B 4,100 – 4,000 calBC; C 3,850 – 3,650 calBC, respectively (based on M üller 2009; map: S. Tiebackx). Çakırlar et al. 2020), probably as a result of inter- Dutch wetlands and the Baltic coastal zone on the action with the adjacent farming groups. In south- one hand, and the central European loess zone on ern Scandinavia, the earliest Ertebølle pottery ap- the other hand. To understand the transition to farm- peared at around 4,800 – 4,600 calBC (Andersen ing and the role of the central European commu- 2010). However, the arrival of the Funnel Beaker nities therein, we are dependent on well-preserved culture (TRB) at around 3,950 calBC (Fischer 2002; sites from the sandy zone. Even some 50 years after Hartz / Lübke 2006) marked the introduction of excavation, Hüde I at lake Dümmer, distr. Diep- domesticated animals and cereals into the region as holz, remains an exceptional ‘steppingstone’ in un- new elements in the subsistence economy. derstanding the expansion of the Neolithic to the The evidence for and the knowledge of the tran- Dutch wetlands, northern Germany, and southern sition from hunter-gatherer to farming communities Scandinavia. in large parts of northern Germany and the Neth- In this paper, we study the role of Hüde I as a erlands is scarce, as the sandy soils of this area do crossroad between hunter-gatherers and early farm- not allow a good preservation or easy detection of ing communities by means of a functional analysis sites (Nösler et al. 2011). This sandy zone (part of of ceramics, through a pilot study of lipid residue the north European plain) is located between the analysis, and aim to address three main questions: Ö zg e D e m i rc i , A l exan dre Lu cqu i n , F l or i an Kl i ms ch a, Oliver E. Craig and D aan C. M. Raemaekers 63 (1) Is the methodology of lipid residue analysis ap- to pottery styles defined elsewhere. The majority of plicable to the ceramics from Hüde I?, the assemblage lacks specific characteristics and is (2) If so, what was the role and function of ceramic therefore difficult to assign to a cultural group based vessels in Hüde I?, and on technological, morphological, or decorative cri- (3) Where do these ceramic vessels fit within the teria. This problem is illustrated by comparing pots discussion of functional variation of pottery from Hüde I to similar pots found in a wider region through the transition from hunter-gatherers and in different cultural settings (Fig. 2). We conclude to early farming communities in Europe? that caution is needed when assigning cultural labels to Hüde I pots without further research focusing on In order to answer these questions, we follow analy- the technology and direct 14C-dates of food crusts, tical procedures combining analysis of lipid biomar- organic temper, and/or organic residues (Casanova kers2 and compound-specific isotopic analyses of the et al. 2020). fatty acids, palmitic (C16 : 0) and stearic (C18 : 0) acids. 3 Available archaeozoological data from Hüde I indicate the exploitation of both wild and domes- ticated animals. About 90 % of the mammal bone Hüde I (c. 4,700 – 3,500 calBC) remains are from wild species, dominated by wild Hüde I is located on the southern edge of lake Düm- boar (Sus scrofa), aurochs (Bos primigenius), deer mer, in Lower Saxony, Germany. It was discovered (Cervidae), beaver (Castor fiber), and otter (Lutra when the area around lake Dümmer was drained lutra; cf. Hübner et al. 1988). The contribution of in 1953. After a test excavation in 1956, large-scale domesticates to the overall faunal spectrum at the excavations were carried out by J. Deichmüller from site is small; these species consist of pig (Sus domesti- 1961 to 1967, resulting in an area of 1,100 m 2, al- cus), cattle (Bos taurus), and sheep/goat (Ovis aries/ most the total site surface, being excavated.4 Hüde I Capra hircus; cf. Hübner et al. 1988, tables 30; 44). was located on a patchy dry terrain in the middle Birds and fish were also present at Hüde I. White- of freshwater marshes separated by small creeks. tailed eagle (Haliaeetus albicilla) and mallard (Anas The site was situated at a low peat elevation, not platyrhynchos) are the main bird species found at much higher than the surrounding environment, the site (Boessneck 1978, cited in Raemaekers 1999, and was connected to the lake through a creek on 91). Hüde I also yielded remains from six fish spe- the northwestern edge of this elevation. During the cies. Five of these are freshwater fish species – pike occupation of the site, this creek was filled with a (Esox lucius), perch (Perca fluviatilis), bream (Abra- sequence of gyttja, alluvium, and brushwood peats mis brama), tench (Tinca tinca), and pope (Acerina as well as archaeological material, resulting in the cernua). The remaining sixth is eel (Anguilla formation of layers of natural and archaeological anguilla), a catadromous fish species (Hüster deposition. 1983, table 24). It is important to note here that the The potential of the site to study the develop- archaeozoological data cannot be associated with ment of the Neolithic is restricted due to the lack of any of the ‘phases’ defined by the pottery subjected a clear stratigraphy. This not only holds true for the to this study. central part of the site (cf. Stapel 1991, 10), but also Regarding the archaeobotanical data from for the neighbouring creek. Younger and older mate- Hüde I, the only evidence for the presence of cereals, rials are found together throughout the creek fill as naked barley (Hordeum vulgare var. nudum) and ein- much as on the site proper (Stapel 1991, cf. various korn wheat (Triticum monococcom), came from the maps on pages 210 – 285; Raemaekers 1999, 74 – 89). impressions of cereals in three sherds, supplemented As a result, the pottery assemblage can be considered by an archaeobotanical study on charred material a catalogue of pots of which some can be attributed (Hopf 1981). These sherds could not be assigned to any specific occupation phase (Kampffmeyer 1991, 312). The carbonised remains of gathered plants in- 2  Hansel et al. 2004; Craig et al. 2007; Regert 2011; Cramp / cluded the shells of hazelnuts (Corylus avellana) as Evershed 2014; Lucquin et al. 2016; 2018. one of the most common fruits, while the fruits and seeds of black alder (Alnus glutinosa) and willow 3  Evershed et al. 1997; 2002a; b; 2008a; b; Copley et al. 2005; Craig et al. 2005; 2007; 2012; Colonese et al. 2017; Pääkkönen (Salix spp.) trees, raspberry (Rubus idaeus), nettle et al. 2020. (Urtica dioica), wild buckwheat (Fallopia convolvu- 4  Deichmüller 1964; 1965a; b; 1968; 1969; Kampffmeyer lus), and some other herbs were also present at the 1991, 35 – 4 0; Stapel 1991, 3. site (Kampffmeyer 1991, 313). 64 Li pi d re s i du e an al ys i s of ceramic s f rom H üde I: N ew data to understand the transition to farm in g Fig. 2 Short-necked beakers found across central Europe, southern Scandinavia, and the Low Countries (after Schwabedissen 1967, fig. 10 [Store Valby, Svinninge Vejle], fig. 24 [Bad Zwischenahn, Hamburg-Boberg, Mayen]; D e R oever 2004, fig. 11a [Swifter- bant-S3]; Raemaekers 2005, fig. 6 [Urk-E4]; map: S. Tiebackx). Material and Methods the use of pottery by morphological and decorative attributes available (Drews 1977; Kampffmeyer 1991). Sampling strategy and material The samples were selected from collections of the Landesmuseum in Hanover, Germany. Prior to actual A total of 37 samples were subjected to lipid residue sampling, form, size, decoration, rim diameter, wall analysis, representing 35 individual vessels. Of all sam- thickness, and temper of each pottery fragment were ples, 21 sherds had carbonised surface remains (food- studied (Table 1). crusts), on interior and/or exterior, indicating that they The selected sherds present two main vessel had been used for cooking. This study was designed forms: S-shaped / carinated vessels and deep bowls. S- as an exploratory research to test the applicability of shaped / carinated vessel fragments (n = 34) consist of the lipid residue analysis on ceramic material of this seventeen rim, six base, and eleven body pieces. While site. The sampling strategy was aimed at comparing the base fragments vary between slightly pointed, Ö zg e D e m i rc i , A l exan dre Lu cqu i n , F l or i an Kl i ms ch a, Oliver E. Craig and D aan C. M. Raemaekers 65 Fig. 3 Drawings of analysed pottery fragments from Hüde I. Scale 1 : 3 (drawings: M. A. Los-Weijns). 66 Li pi d re s i du e an al ys i s of ceramic s f rom H üde I: N ew data to understand the transition to farm in g Fig. 4 Drawings of analysed pottery fragments from Hüde I. Scale 1 : 3 (drawings: M. A. Los-Weijns). Ö zg e D e m i rc i , A l exan dre Lu cqu i n , F l or i an Kl i ms ch a, Oliver E. Craig and D aan C. M. Raemaekers 67 Fig. 5 Drawings of analysed pottery fragments from Hüde I. Scale 1 : 3 (drawings: M. A. Los-Weijns). 68 Li pi d re s i du e an al ys i s of ceramic s f rom H üde I: N ew data to understand the transition to farm in g Fig. 6 Drawings of analysed pottery fragments from Hüde I. Scale 1 : 3 (drawings: M. A. Los-Weijns). Ö zg e D e m i rc i , A l exan dre Lu cqu i n , F l or i an Kl i ms ch a, Oliver E. Craig and D aan C. M. Raemaekers 69 Fig. 7 Drawings of analysed pottery fragments from Hüde I. Scale 1 : 3 (drawings: M. A. Los-Weijns). rounded, and flat bases, two body fragments have of 8 mm; it does not indicate any correlation with the shallow vertical handles, and another three have un- size of the vessel or the decoration. perforated knobs. There are small, medium and large In general, it is not possible to assign the selected size pots, often with everted rims, but straight ones are vessels to specific cultural groups, except for two Rös- also present. Six of the S-shaped / carinated vessels sen culture pots that exhibit clear morphological and are of small size (rim diameter < 20 cm), six are of decorative characteristics (samples HU26 and HU30; middle size (rim diameter between 20 and 25 cm), and see Figs. 3 – 7). These pots are small-sized S-shaped five are larger sized vessels (rim diameter between 26 and carinated vessels with diameters of 17.5 and and 30 cm; see Table 1). The majority of the sampled S- 10 cm (based on drawings in Kampffmeyer 1991, shaped / carinated vessel fragments were undecorated 554 table 5), respectively. They both have burnished (22 out of 37). Within the ones with decoration, the exteriors and double incision decorations covering most common form is represented by spatula impres- their lower neck and upper belly parts, indicating sions on the top of the rim. Two rim fragments show distinctive characteristics for Rössen culture pottery decorations with hollow circular impressions and/or (Bogucki / Grygiel 1993). thumb impressions, right below the rim on the exte- There are three bowls in the selected assem- rior. There are only three fragments with body decora- blage, all with slightly rounded bases. All three bowls tion covering the lower neck and belly sections of the have a diameter of 23 – 24 cm with a wall thickness vessels. These decorations consist of double incisions, of 7 – 9 mm. One of the three bowls is decorated with forming triangles. The wall thickness of these vessel spatula impressions on the top of the rim, while the fragments varies from 5 to 11 mm, with an average remaining two have no decoration. 70 Li pi d re s i du e an al ys i s of ceramic s f rom H üde I: N ew data to understand the transition to farm in g Sample Find number Vessel type Vessel form Vessel Decoration Other Rim diameter Weight Wall thickness Main temper ID part features (cm) (mm) (mm) material HU-01 31206 Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel rim no 20 123.7 10 grit-sand HU-02 31840 (3A) Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel rim no knob 15 87.7 9 sand? HU-03 30655 Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel base no 200.9 8 HU-04 31233 Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel base no 172.2 9 grit-sand //quartz HU-05 31145a Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel rim yes 26 104.5 6 grit (granite) HU-06 31145b Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel base no 101.6 6 grit (granite) HU-07 30984 Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel body no 96.6 7 grit-sand? HU-08 31176 Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel rim no 17.5 107.9 8 grit-sand HU-09 31224/13224 Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel rim yes 28 122.4 11 grit-sand HU-10 31029/31426 Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel rim yes 15 194.8 8 grit HU-11 30996 Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel rim no >20/25 166.4 9 HU-12 30974 Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel rim yes 141.2 8 grit? quartz HU-13 31359 Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel body no handle 45.7 8 grit-sand HU-14 30979c Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel rim yes 30.1 8 grit-sand HU-15 30979a Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel body no 52.3 7 grit-sand HU-16 30985 Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel rim yes 19 56.8 7 flint // granite? HU-17 30972 Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel rim yes 26 274.1 8 grit-sand (granite) HU-18 30997 Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel rim yes handle 31/32 175.7 9 grit-sand HU-19 31157 Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel body no knob 127.7 6 sand? HU-20 31273 Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel body no handle 99.5 5 grit-sand? HU-21 30959 a+b Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel rim no 27 78.6 9 grit (granite) HU-22 9125A Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel body yes knob 19.7 7 grit-sand? HU-23 9258 Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel rim no ~20 179.0 9 grit-sand HU-24 9452 Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel body no 89.5 11 grit (granite) HU-25 4532 Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel body no 161.3 10 HU-26 3002+30352 Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel rim/ yes 17.5 19.0 6 grog? body HU-27 29191 Cooking pot Deep bowl rim yes 23 131.9 8 grog // grit-sand? HU-28 22900 Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel rim no 14-15 61.9 8 grit HU-29 30669 Cooking pot Deep bowl rim yes 11 90.6 9 sand? HU-30 30732 Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel body/ yes 10* 130.1 6 grit-sand base HU-31 30727 Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel base no 84.2 7 sand HU-32 29928 Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel rim yes 29/30 198.0 8 HU-33 28742 Cooking pot Deep bowl rim no >20 225.0 7 grit? quartz HU-34 22522/22552/ Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel rim yes 25 139.9 6 grit 25649 HU-35 30644 Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel body no 89.7 8 grit HU-36 29937 Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel body no 186.2 8 grit-sand HU-37 30733 Cooking pot S-shaped/carinated vessel base no 135.0 7 **The sample selection was based based on on the the morphological morphological and and decorative decorative variability variability of ofthe thepottery potteryfragments fragmentsavailable availabletotous usatatthe thetime timeofofthe theresearch, research,therefore thereforeit itisisnot notrepresentative representative for the whole Hüde II pottery pottery assemblage. assemblage. *Based on the complete complete drawing drawing of of the the pot pot in inKampffmeyer Kampffmeyer 1991: Table 1991: 5 (554). Table 5 (554). Table 1 Sampled pottery information. There is no significant difference between the Lipid extraction fabric of the S-shaped / carinated vessels and the deep bowls. The most common inclusion for all the Lipids were extracted by using the established acidified selected assemblage is grit, although there is also a methanol protocol (Craig et al. 2013; Papakosta et al. rare appearance of sand, flint, and grog. While the 2015). Briefly, an internal standard (alkane C34, 10 S-shaped / carinated vessels present examples of both μL) and 4 mL methanol was added to 1 gr of ceramic extremely coarse pottery with no surface treatment powder. The suspended solution was sonicated for and relatively fine pottery with smoothed, polished, 15 min, then acidified with concentrated sulphuric acid or burnished surface, all three bowls indicate fine (H2SO4, 800 μL) and heated for 4 hours at 70 °C. Lipids pottery with polished or burnished surface treat­- were sequentially extracted with n-hexane (2 mL × 3). ment. The extracts were combined into vials, and copper Ö zg e D e m i rc i , A l exan dre Lu cqu i n , F l or i an Kl i ms ch a, Oliver E. Craig and D aan C. M. Raemaekers 71 sheets were added in order to remove cyclic octaatomic tion, separation of the two phytanic acid diastereomers sulphur that was present in all of the samples. All the (3S,7R,11R,15-phytanic acid or SRR and 3R,7R,11R,15- samples were dried under nitrogen at 35 °C. Finally, an phytanic acid or RRR) was obtained, which enabled the additional internal standard (n-hexatriacontane C36 : 0, calculation of the percentage of SRR in total phytanic 10 μL) was added to all samples prior to their analysis acid (SRR %) by integrating the m/z 101 ion (48). The by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) carrier gas used was helium with a flow rate of 1.5 mL/ and gas chromatography-combustion isotope ratio min. Quantifications for the peak measurements were mass spectrometry (GC-C-IRMS). To control for any calculated by the integration tool on the Agilent Chem- contamination introduced during the sample prepara- Station enhanced data analysis software. tion, a negative control, containing no ceramic powder, was prepared and analysed with each sample batch. Gas Chromatography-Combustion Isotope Ratio Mass Spectrometry (GC-C-IRMS) Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS) All samples (n = 37) were analysed by GC-C-IRMS in duplicates based on the existing protocol (Craig GC-MS analysis was undertaken using an Agilent et al. 2012), in order to measure stable carbon iso- 7890A series Gas Chromatograph coupled to an Agi- tope values of two fatty acid methyl esters, methyl lent 5975C inert XL mass-selective detector equipped palmitate (C16 : 0) and methyl stearate (C18 : 0). Samples with a quadrupole mass analyser (Agilent technolo- were analysed by using Delta V Advantage isotope gies, Cheadle, Cheshire, UK). A split/splitless injector ratio mass spectrometer (Thermo Fisher, Bremen, (used in splitless mode) was maintained at 300 °C. The Germany), linked to a Trace Ultra gas chromatograph column was inserted into the ion source of the mass (Thermo Fisher) with a GC Isolink II interface (Cu/Ni spectrometry directly. Helium was used as the carrier combustion reactor held at 1000 °C; Thermo Fisher). gas, with a constant flow rate at 2 mL/min. The ionisa- All samples were diluted with hexane. Then 1 μL of tion energy was 70 eV, and spectra were obtained by each sample was injected into DB5 ms ultra-inert- scanning between m/z 50 and 800. Samples (n = 37) fused-silica column (60 m × 0.25 mm × 0.25 μm; J&W were analysed by using an Agilent DB-5 ms (5 % phe- Scientific). The temperature was fixed at 50 °C for nyl) methylpolysiloxane column (PN 122 – 5532; 30 m 0.5 min and raised by 25 °C/min to 175 °C, then raised x 250 µm x 0.25 µm; J&W Scientific technologies, by 8 °C/min to 325 °C. The temperature was then held Folsom, CA, USA). The temperature started at 50 ºC at 325 °C for 20 min. Ultra-high-purity-grade helium (for 2 min), increasing by 10 ºC per minute up to 325 was used as the carrier gas with a constant flow rate ºC. The final temperature was maintained for 15 min. at 2 mL/min. Eluted products were ionized in the Compounds were identified by comparing them with mass spectrometer by electron ionization, and the the library of mass spectral data and published data. ion intensities of m/z 44, 45 and 46 were recorded for In order to identify ω-(o-alkylphenyl) alkanoic automatic computation of 13C/12C ratio of each peak acids and isoprenoid fatty acids and to calculate in the extracts (Heron et al. 2015). Isodat software the ratio of phytanic acid diastereomers, all samples (version 3.0; Thermo Fisher) was used for the compu- (n  =  37) were also analysed by using a DB23 ms tation, based on the comparison with a standard refer- (50 %-Cyanopropyl)-methylpolysiloxane column (60 m ence gas (CO2) with known isotopic composition that × 0.250 mm × 0.25 µm; J&W Scientific technologies, was repeatedly measured. The results of the analyses Folsom, CA, USA). Briefly, samples were re-dissolved in were recorded in per mil (‰) relative to an interna- hexane and 1 µL was injected with a splitless injector tional standard, Vienna Pee Dee belemnite (VPDB). at 300 °C. The temperature was set to 50 °C for 2 min. N-alkanoic acid ester standards of known isotopic This was followed by a rise of 4 °C per minute up to composition (Indiana standard F8 – 3) were used to 140 °C, then 0.5 °C per minute up to 160 °C, and then determine the instrument accuracy. The mean ± stan- 20 °C per minute up to 250 °C. The temperature was dard deviation (SD) values of these n-alkanoic acid then held at 250 °C for 10 min. The SIM (Selective ester standards were −29.60 ± 0.21 ‰, and −23.02 ± Ion Monitoring) mode was used in order to target the 0.29 ‰ for the methyl ester of C16 : 0 (reported mean specific markers trimethyltridecanoic acid (TMTD), m/z value vs. VPDB −29.90 ± 0.03 ‰) and C18 : 0 (reported 74, 88, 101, 312 for pristanic acid, m/z 74, 101, 171, mean value vs. VPDB −23.24 ± 0.01 ‰), respectively. 326 for phytanic acid, and m/z 74, 105, 262, 290, 318, Precision was determined on a laboratory standard 346 for the detection of ω-(o-alkylphenyl)alkanoic acids mixture injected regularly between samples (28 mea- of carbon lengths C 16 to C 22 (APAA 16 – 22). In addi- surements). The mean ± SD values of n-alkanoic acid 72 Li pi d re s i du e an al ys i s of ceramic s f rom H üde I: N ew data to understand the transition to farm in g esters were −31.65 ± 0.27 ‰ for the methyl ester of yielded unsaturated fatty acids from C11 : 1 to C26 : 1, do- C16 : 0 and −26.01 ± 0.26 ‰ for the methyl ester of C18 : 0. minated by oleic (C18 : 1) and palmitoleic (C16 : 1) acid, Each sample was measured in replicate (average SD respectively. Branched fatty acids (C11–C29) were also is 0.07 ‰ for C16 : 0 and 0.13 ‰ for C18 : 0). Values were identified in all samples. Dicarboxylic acids are pre- also corrected subsequent to analysis to account for sent in 32 samples, ranging from C9 (azelaic acid) to the methylation of the carboxyl group that occurs C12. A total of 32 samples yielded cholesterol and its during acid extraction. Corrections were based on derivatives, indicating the presence of animal fats. In comparisons with a standard mixture of C16 : 0 and C18 : 0 all samples, traces of plasticizers were found, most li- fatty acids of known isotopic composition processed kely deriving from packing materials. The levels of the- in each batch under identical conditions. se were low; they did not interfere with the analysis. Elemental Analysis Isotope Ratio Mass Evidence of aquatic biomarkers Spectrometry (EA-IRMS) Overall, many of the samples had biomarkers for A total of 21 carbonised surface deposit (foodcrust) aquatic products. Of 37 samples analysed, 20 yielded samples, all coming from individual vessels, were col- ω-(o-alkylphenyl) alkanoic acids (APAAs), with carbon lected and analysed. The samples were collected by atoms ranging from 18 to 22, and isoprenoid fatty scraping the food crust from the surface of the sherd acids which are TMTD (4,8,12-trimethyltridecanoic with a sterilised scalpel at a sterile lab environment acid), pristanic acid (2,6,10,14-tetramethylpentadeca- and were grounded to a homogeneous powder level noic acid), and phytanic acid (3,7,11,15-tetramethyl- weighted out in duplicates into tin capsules (c. 1 mg). hexadecanoic acid; cf. Table 2). The co-occurrence of After the preparation, they were analysed by elemental ω-(o-alkylphenyl) alkanoic acids (APAAs ranging from analysis isotope ratio mass spectrometry. The values 18 to 22) and isoprenoid acids is an established crite- of bulk stable nitrogen (δ15N) and carbon (δ13C) iso- rion for identifying aquatic lipids in ancient pottery.5 topes were measured based on the methods described Since APAAs are formed by heating (> 270 °C, > 17 h) by Craig et al. (2007). Precision of the instrument of mono- and polyunsaturated fatty acids, their pres- on repeated measurement was ±0.2 ‰ (standard er- ence confirms that they are derived from the use of ror of the mean), δ13C, δ15N= [(Rsample/ Rstandard −1)] × the vessels (Hansel et al. 2004; Craig et al. 2007). A 1000, where R = 13C/ 12C and 15N/ 14N. Accuracy was further six samples yielded partial aquatic biomark- determined by measurements of international stan- ers, containing C18 APAA and TMTD (Table 2). This dard reference materials within each analytical run. is also an indication of possible process of aquatic These were IAEA 600 δ13Craw = −27.69±0.02, δ13Ctrue = resources in these vessels (Evershed et al. 2008a; −27.77±0.04, δ15Nraw = 1.49±0.38, δ15Ntrue = 1.0±0.2; Heron / Craig 2015), although not definitive. All IAEA N2 δ15Nra = 20.9±0.33, δ15Ntrue = 20.3±0.2; IA these results confirm that aquatic products were regu- Cane, δ13Craw = −11.76±0.10, δ13Ctrue = −11.64±0.03. larly processed in the majority of Hüde I vessels. Data were normalised to these international standards. Among the isoprenoid fatty acids, which are de- gradation products of phytol originating from phyto- plankton, TMTD is considered more of a characteri- Results and discussion stic of aquatic oils (Ackman / Hooper 1968), whereas pristanic and phytanic acids are present in both aqua- Lipid residue analysis tic and ruminant resources (Ackman / Hooper 1968; Heron / Craig 2015). We calculate the ratio of the two All samples (n = 37) yielded sufficient lipids required diastereomers of phytanic acid (3S,7R,11R,15-phytanic for interpretation (> 5 μg g-1) with a mean value of acid [SRR] and 3R,7R,11R,15-phytanic acid [RRR]) in 374 μg g−1 (ranging from 74 μg g−1 to 956 μg g−1, cf. order to understand the origin of the phytanic acid Table 2). In general, the lipid profiles obtained from found in the samples. The SRR isomer tends to predo- each sample contained saturated fatty acids, ranging minate in aquatic oils (> 75.5 % relative abundance) from C10 : 0 to C30 : 0. The main saturated fatty acids are compared to ruminant fats (Lucquin et al. 2016). Only the lauric (C12 : 0), myristic (C14 : 0), pentadecanoic (C15 : 0), four of our samples meet this criterion. Twenty sam- palmitic (C16 : 0), margaric (C17 : 0), and stearic (C18 : 0) acids, maximising at C16 : 0 and C18 : 0, respectively. The C16 : 0 and C18 : 0 ratios (P/S ratios) of all the samples are 5  Evershed et al. 2008a; Hansel et al. 2004; Craig et al. listed in the Table 2. Thirty-three of all the samples 2007; Cramp / Evershed 2014; Heron et al. 2015. Ö zg e D e m i rc i , A l exan dre Lu cqu i n , F l or i an Kl i ms ch a, Oliver E. Craig and D aan C. M. Raemaekers 73 Sample Lipid _conc. P/S ratios Aquatic biomarkers SRR% Fully Partially ID (ug/g) (C16/C18) δ13C16:0 δ13C18:0 Δ13C aquatic aquatic HU-01 803 1.08 -26.6 -27.1 -0.5 APAA(C16-22), tmtd, phy 88.2 x - SFA(C10:0-30:0), UFA(C15:1,16:1,18:1,26:1), br, chol, campesterol HU-02 597 1.46 -25.7 -26.4 -0.7 APAA(C16-20), tmtd, phy 55.7 x - SFA(C11:0-28:0), UFA(C18:1,22:1,26:1), br, chol, campesterol HU-03 76 1.54 -26.9 -27.8 -0.9 APAA(C18), tmtd(tr), phy 69.3 - x SFA(C12:0-24:0), br, chol, campesterol HU-04 168 1.33 -28.1 -28.6 -0.6 APAA(C18), tmtd, phy 76.2 - x SFA(C12:0-30:0), br, chol, campesterol HU-05 366 1.19 -28.2 -31.7 -3.5 APAA(C16-20), tmtd(tr), phy 51 x - SFA(C11:0-30:0), br, chol, campesterol HU-06 83 1.06 -28.2 -29.0 -0.8 tmtd(tr), phy n/a - - SFA(C12:0-24:0), DA(C9:0), br, chol, cam- pesterol HU-07 738 1.56 -26.2 -26.4 -0.2 n/a n/a - - SFA(C10:0-26:0), UFA(C16:1,18:1), DA(C9:0), br, chol, campesterol HU-08 706 0.69 -28.6 -30.2 -1.6 APAA(C16-20), tmtd, pri(tr), 70.9 x - SFA(C10:0-20:0), UFA(C16:1,18:1), phy DA(C9:0), br, chol, campesterol HU-09 436 1.92 -27.7 -28.0 -0.3 APAA(C16-22), tmtd, pri(tr), 72.2 x - SFA(C10:0-23:0), UFA(C11:1,16:1), DA(C9:0), phy br, chol, campesterol HU-10 724 1.34 -28.8 -28.8 0.1 APAA(C16-20), tmtd, pri(tr), 81.1 x - SFA(C10:0-25:0), UFA(C16:1,18:1,19:1,26:1), phy DA(C9:0,10:0), br, chol, campesterol HU-11 879 0.88 -28.8 -33.3 -4.5 phy 59.2 - - SFA(C10:0-28:0), UFA(C18:1), A(C9:0,11:0), br HU-12 124 1.13 -28.9 -30.9 -2.1 APAA(C16-20), tmtd, pri(tr), 59.8 x - SFA(C12:0-19:0), UFA(C16:1,18:1), phy DA(C9:0,11:0,12:0), br, chol(tr), campesterol HU-13 498 1.12 -28.1 -30.3 -2.3 APAA(C16-18(tr)), phy 29.2 - - SFA(C12:0-30:0), UFA(C16:1,18:1), DA(C9:0,11:0), br, chol, campsterol HU-14 531 1.48 -26.9 -27.0 -0.1 APAA(C18(tr)), tmtd, phy n/a - - SFA(C10:0-21:0), UFA(C16:1,18:1,21:1), DA(C9:0,11:0), br, chol, campesterol HU-15 246 1.82 -28.9 -28.6 0.2 APAA(C16-20), tmtd, phy n/a x - SFA(C12:0-24:0), UFA(C16:1,17:1,18;1), DA(C9:0), br, chol(tr), campesterol HU-16 956 1.49 -26.8 -26.1 0.7 APAA(C16-22), tmtd, pri(tr), 41.1 x - SFA(C10:0-23:0), UFA(C16:1,18:1),DA(C9:0), phy br, chol, campesterol HU-17 130 0.70 -28.4 -30.8 -2.4 APAA(C16-22(tr)), tmtd(tr), 57.3 x - SFA(C10:0-23:0), UFA(C16:1,18:1),DA(C9:0), phy br, chol(tr), campesterol(tr) HU-18 125 0.79 -29.2 -29.1 0.0 phy n/a - - SFA(C12:0-24:0), UFA(C18:1), DA(C9:0), br, chol, campesterol HU-19 108 0.80 -29.5 -34.4 -4.9 APAA(C18), tmtd(tr), phy 49.1 - x SFA(C12:0-30:0), UFA(C18:1), DA(C9:0), br, campesterol HU-20 121 1.75 -25.3 -25.2 0.1 APAA(C18-20), tmtd(tr), phy 67.4 x - SFA(C10:0-23:0), UFA(C16:1,18:1), DA(C9:0,11:0), br, campesterol HU-21 74 0.66 -28.0 -32.0 -4.1 tmtd(tr), pri(tr), phy 55.4 - - SFA(C11:0-24:0), UFA(C16:1,18:1), DA(C9:0,11:0), br, chol(tr), campesterol HU-22 595 0.96 -27.6 -32.0 -4.4 APAA(C16-22(tr)), tmtd, phy 33.5 x - SFA(C10:0-26:0), UFA(C16:1,18:1), DA(C9:0,11:0), br, chol, campesterol, stigmasterol(tr) HU-23 641 0.91 -27.0 -29.7 -2.7 APAA(C16-22(tr)), tmtd, 68.2 x - SFA(C11:0-26:0), UFA(C18:1), pri(tr), phy DA(C9:0,10:0,11:0), br, chol(tr), campesterol HU-24 489 1.15 -28.1 -28.0 0.1 APAA(C16-22), tmtd, pri(tr), 79.3 x - SFA(C11:0-24:0), UFA(C16:1,18:1), phy DA(C9:0,10:0,11:0), br, chol, campesterol HU-25 635 0.81 -27.2 -30.3 -3.2 APAA(C16-22), tmtd, phy n/a x - SFA(C12:0-26:0), UFA(C16:1,18:1), DA(C9:0), br, chol, campesterol HU-26 488 1.06 -27.3 -28.6 -1.3 tmtd(tr), pri(tr), phy n/a - - SFA(C12:0-27:0), UFA(16:1,18:1) , DA(C9:0,10:0), br, chol, campesterol HU-27 442 1.02 -28.3 -32.0 -3.6 APAA(C16-20(tr)), tmtd, pri, 61.6 - x SFA(C12:0-28:0), UFA(16:1,18:1), DA(C9:0), phy br, chol, campestenol HU-28 130 0.69 -28.5 -31.2 -2.7 tmtd(tr), phy n/a - - SFA(C11:0-26:0), UFA(C16:1,18:1), DA(C9:0), br, chol(tr), campesterol, stismasterol(tr) HU-29 386 1.90 -26.6 -28.1 -1.6 APAA(C16-22(tr)), tmtd, pri, 24.9 x - SFA(C10:0-24:0), UFA(C16:1,18:1), phy DA(C9:0,10:0,11:0,12:0), br, chol, campes- terol HU-30 119 0.66 -28.6 -34.0 -5.4 APAA(C16-18), tmtd n/a - x SFA(C10:0-27:0), UFA(C16:1,18:1), DA(9:0,10:0,11:0,12:0), br, campesterol, stigmasterol(tr) HU-31 112 1.68 -28.3 -29.1 -0.9 APAA(C16-18(tr)), tmtd, pri, 25.9 - - SFA(C12:0-26:0), UFA(C16:1,18:1), phy DA(C9:0,10:0,11:0), br, chol, campesterol HU-32 104 0.89 -29.3 -32.7 -3.4 APAA(C16-22), tmtd, pri(tr), 65.6 x - SFA(C12:0-26:0), UFA(C18:1), phy DA(C9:0,10:0,11:0,12:0), br, chol, campes- terol HU-33 110 1.03 -27.5 -32.2 -4.7 APAA(C16-22(tr)), tmtd, phy 66.9 x - SFA(C10:0-24:0), UFA(C16:1,18:1), DA(C9:0,11:0,12:0), br, chol(tr), campesterol, stigmasterol(tr) HU-34 164 1.01 -24.0 -28.0 -4.0 APAA(C16-22), tmtd, phy 61.7 x - SFA(C10:0-26:0), UFA(C16:1,18:1), DA(9:0,11:0,12:0), br, campesterol HU-35 495 1.11 -26.0 -29.3 -3.3 APAA(C16-20), tmtd, phy 59.1 x - SFA(C10:0-26:0), UFA(C16:1,18:1), DA(C9:0,10:0,11:0,12:0), br, chol(tr), cam- pesterol HU-36 221 2.02 -28.3 -27.4 0.9 APAA(C16-18), tmtd, pri, phy n/a - x SFA(C12:0-24:0), UFA(C16:1,18:1), DA(C11:0), br, chol, campesterol HU-37 216 1.27 -26.1 -28.2 -2.2 phy n/a - - SFA(C11:0-21:0), UFA(C16:1,18:1), DA(C9:0,11:0), br, chol(tr), campesterol Cn:x) - carboxilic acids with carbon length n and number of unsaturations x, SFA – saturated fatty acid, UFA – unsaturated fatty acids, DC - α,ω-dicarboxylic acids, APAA - ω-(o-alkylphenyl) alkanoic acids, br -branched chain acids, tmtd - 4,8,12-trimethyltridecanoic acid, pri – pristanic acid, phy – phytanic acid with the percentage contribution of SRR diastereomer in total phytanic acid, chol - cholesterol or derivatives. Table 2 Results of organic residue analysis. 74 Li pi d re s i du e an al ys i s of ceramic s f rom H üde I: N ew data to understand the transition to farm in g Fig. 8 A GC-C-IRMS results showing isotopic values of C16:0 and C18:0 fatty acids of Hüde I samples. S-shaped / carinated vessels (n = 34) are marked yellow, deep bowls (n = 3) blue, and Rössen samples (n = 2) red. 95 % confidence ellipses indicate areas of authen- tic reference values for each group of origins from the western Baltic; B Plot of Δ13C (δ13C18:0− δ13C16:0 values) against δ13C16:0 values of Hüde I pottery, collected from only ceramic matrices. Dotted lines indicate areas of authentic reference values for each group of origins from the western Baltic. Samples with the full set of aquatic biomarkers are shown by filled circles in both plots. ples have a SRR/RRR ratio below 75.5 % (ranging and pope – account for 74 %, 18 %, 5 %, 1 % and between 24.9 % and 72.2 %), falling within both the 0.09 % of total fish remains, respectively (n = 1,075; aquatic and ruminant range, while the remaining 13 Hüster 1983), eel, the only catadromous fish species samples have no available SRR/RRR ratio. found at the site, accounts for only 1 % (Hüster 1983). To further investigate the sources of the lipids, the Catadromous fish species are migratory species which carbon stable isotope values of their palmitic (C16 : 0) and move down freshwater rivers to the sea for spawning. stearic (C18 : 0) acids were examined for each sample If caught at the river mouths before entering the fresh- (n = 37). Palmitic (C16 : 0) and stearic (C18 : 0) fatty acids water river systems, they would be expected to have were used to distinguish lipids derived from ruminant marine carbon isotope signatures (Robson et al. 2012; meat and milk fats, following the approach of Evers- 2016). However, eel bone remains coming from inland hed et al. (2002a; b; 2008b). Dietary sources of these sites, of fish caught in freshwater river systems, proved lipids are distinguished by characteristic δ13C value to indicate carbon isotope values more consistent with ranges defined by δ13C18 : 0 versus δ13C16 : 0 values, as well freshwater residency, or in between freshwater and as the isotopic difference between the two, Δ13C18 : 0−16 : 0. marine carbon ranges (Robson et al. 2012). Therefore, The data from the samples (see Table 2) are plotted processing eel in these pots is also possible. in Figure 8 against the reference ranges which were adapted from authentic modern animal fats collected Evidence of ruminant adipose and ruminant from western Baltic. Overall, the δ13C values of C16 : 0 dairy fats and C18 : 0 fatty acids coming from the samples indicate a mixture of a wide range of foodstuffs including porcine, Based on the molecular analysis, the presence and ruminant, and dairy (Fig. 8A). Of all 37 samples, only the results of the diastereomeric ratio (SRR/RRR three samples plot in the freshwater range. Conside- ratio) of phytanic acid and the presence of branched ring that the majority of the samples have fully aquatic chain C15 and C17 fatty acids found in some of the biomarkers, this may indicate a mixture of aquatic and sherds are indicative of ruminant products (Table 2; ruminant animal fats in the Hüde I vessels. Regert 2011; Lucquin et al. 2016). In addition, fif- The inland location of the site on the border of a teen samples have Δ13C values lower than −1 ‰ freshwater lake supports the argument of these pots (Fig. 8B), values typical for ruminant adipose fats.6 being used for exploitation and processing of freshwa- ter resources. Fish account for ~6 % of the total identi- fied bones at the site (n = 11,299; Hüster 1983). While 6  Dudd et al. 1998; Evershed et al. 2002b; Copley et al. the freshwater fish species – pike, perch, bream, tench, 2003; Craig et al. 2012. Ö zg e D e m i rc i , A l exan dre Lu cqu i n , F l or i an Kl i ms ch a, Oliver E. Craig and D aan C. M. Raemaekers 75 Zooarchaeological records from Hüde I present the mtDNA analysis on a small number of presumed Bos sp. as the most dominant species at the site. It ac- domesticated cattle remains from Rosenhof LA 58, counts for a total of 31 % of identified mammal bones reidentifying them as small individuals of aurochs (n = 10,600; Hübner et al. 1988). This is followed by that were present in northern Germany during the the presence of red deer, elk, and roe deer (4.8 %, Late Mesolithic (Scheu et al. 2008). Regarding the 4.6 %, and 3.8 % of identified mammal bones, respec- presence of sheep/goat, our current knowledge also tively; n = 10,600, excluding antler). Additionally, the does not go beyond the presence of few lower jaw high amount of waste material coming from antler tool fragments identified at the site. As a result, it is not production (Deichmüller 1965a) indicates that deer possible to determine the presence of cattle at the was important to the economy at Hüde I and was used site, and whether these animals were kept for their both for meat and raw material for the manufacture meat or were also exploited for dairy products. Further of artefacts. Moreover, sheep/goats were also present analysis of the zooarchaeological remains with AMS at the site. Sheep and goat were not domesticated lo- 14 C-dating, stable isotope, and palaeogenomic analyses cally, as they are not native to the area (Luikart et al. is needed to address this issue. 2001). Therefore, it is certain that these animals must Interestingly, ten out of the seventeen samples have been introduced to the site from regions to the that plotted in the ruminant adipose range have ful- south, where animal husbandry and agriculture were ly aquatic biomarkers. In addition, two out of five already established (Müller 1964; Piening 1998). samples in the dairy range also have fully aquatic While sheep/goat remains cover a relatively small biomarkers. This may indicate mixing of aquatic re- percentage (0.6 %, n = 10,600) of identified mammal sources (freshwater fish) and ruminant carcass fats bone material at the site, the few mandible fragments as well as dairy fats in these vessels. These results are allow us to identify the presence of at least five indi- consistent with the molecular and single compound vidual specimens (Hübner et al. 1988). isotope results. The lipid residue analysis helps us to understand the role that ruminant animals played in the subsis- Evidence of non-ruminant animal fats tence strategy and the diet at Hüde I. Ruminant meat may have been processed and / or cooked in several The isotope data presented in Figure 8B suggest that different ways, including roasting or grilling meat on 16 of 37 samples yielded δ13C values that match with open fire. However, based on our results of molecu- non-ruminant terrestrial animals (i. e. wild boar/do- lar and isotope analyses, we are able to confirm that mesticated pig). Based on the faunal remains from ceramic vessels were one of the common ways of pro- Hüde I, Sus sp. is among the most abundant terres- cessing and/or cooking ruminant animal products at trial animal species, covering 17.9 % of the identified the site. mammal remains at the site (n = 10,600; Hübner et al. In addition, five of 37 samples have Δ13C values 1988). Hübner et al. (1988) argue that domesticated below −4.3 ‰, the limit for wild ruminant carcass pigs were present and thus subjected to fully developed fats (Craig et al. 2012), meeting the widely accepted pig farming and breeding activities carried out at the criteria for prehistoric dairy fats (Copley et al. 2003; site. We are less certain because the identification of Evershed et al. 2008b; Debono Spiteri et al. 2016). domesticated pig, similar to domesticated cattle, was Reconciling the presence of dairy in the pots with the solely based on the measurements of the few bone zooarchaeological assemblage is currently problem- remains available. atic, due to the issues that come with the high frag- Similar to the samples with ruminant adipose mentation of the remains and the lack of up to date and ruminant dairy fats, samples with heavy porcine zooarchaeological analyses on the bone assemblage. fats indicate a possible mixing with aquatic, mainly Our current knowledge on the presence of domesticat- freshwater fish, resources as seven of them have fully ed cattle and sheep/goat at Hüde I comes from a rela- aquatic biomarkers (Fig. 8B; Table 2). tively detailed but technologically limited osteological analysis (Hübner et al. 1988). Hübner et al. (1988) Evidence of food plant residues attest the presence of domesticated cattle solely based on the smaller size of few bone remains. However, Our analysis based on acid extraction does not in- similar interpretations done at contemporaneous sites dicate a clear evidence of processing food plants in in northern Europe have been disputed (Kabaciński any of the Hüde I vessels. As we have not undertaken et al. 2009; Sørensen / Karg 2014; Schmölcke / further solvent extraction to identify cereal-derived Nikulina 2015). The best-known example to this is lipids in any of our samples from the site, it is difficult 76 Li pi d re s i du e an al ys i s of ceramic s f rom H üde I: N ew data to understand the transition to farm in g to know whether any of the vessels analysed here and nitrogen (δ15N) stable isotope values with the aim were used for processing cereals. However, recent of broadening our understanding of Hüde I pottery. studies done on plant lipids showed that plants con- Bulk stable isotope measurements obtained from tain substantially lower lipid concentrations than ani- carbonised surface deposits from our samples (n = mal products, therefore animal fats may dominate the 21) are plotted in Figure 9 (also see Table 3). lipid extracts where vessels have been used to process The bulk  δ13C isotope values of the Hüde  I both plant and animal products (Colonese et al. samples range from −22.0 ‰ to −27.3 ‰ (mean = 2017; Hammann / Cramp 2018). This makes it very −24.6 ‰), which is considered to represent C3 plants difficult to detect them through lipid residue analysis. and/or animals consuming C3 plants, relatively deplet- Therefore, we cannot exclude a possible food plant ed in 13C. However, it is argued that these values are processing in any of our samples. Although identify- affected and can be altered by loss of proteinaceous ing plant lipids is not straightforward, 36 of the 37 material in the post-depositional environment in vari- samples yielded plant derived lipids such as campes- ous degrees and therefore are difficult to interpret.7 terol (ergost-5-en-3b-ol), of which four of them also Nitrogen stable isotope (δ15N) values of protein that had traces of stigmasterol (stigmasta-5,22-dien-3b-ol; is available in the foodcrusts provides the informa- cf. Table 2) indicating a possible contributions from tion on the trophic level of different organisms pro- food plants. Campesterol and stigmasterol are the cessed in the pottery. δ15N values that are above c. most common steroids (phytosterols) in vascular +7.0/+9.0 ‰ are usually indicative of aquatic resourc- plants (Baker 1982; Bianchi 1995) which is con- es (Craig et al. 2013), whereas lower ones are more sistent with the vegetation at and around the site consistent with terrestrial organisms (Craig et al. (see above). 2007; 2011). The δ15N isotope values of the samples Our knowledge on the cereals present at the discussed in this study range from +5.4 ‰ to +8.7 ‰ site is primarily based on the three sherds with car- (mean = 7.2 ‰), which are consistent with proteins bonised remains of cereals (i. e. naked barley and from terrestrial herbivores, although the presence of einkorn wheat); however, these sherds were not ac- fish, specifically anadromous species based on the low cessible at the time of our research and therefore δ15N isotope values, cannot be ruled out. The results morphological and functional analyses on them were of this analysis are consistent with molecular and not possible. In addition, to our knowledge, no ar- single compound isotope analyses. chaeobotanical analysis of the carbonised remains The C/N ratios may indicate the contribution of has been carried out. The pollen analysis (Schüt- proteins versus lipids and/or other non-nitrogenous rumpf 1988) does not report any human impact on compounds such as carbohydrates. The low C/N the vegetation or evidence for agricultural activities ratios of the Hüde I samples, varying between 5.4 and provides scarce identification of cereal-type pol- and 11.3, suggest that these foodcrusts were formed len at the site. Even if local cultivation was carried from a mixture of low lipid content and protein rich out, this comes as no surprise. In northern Germany, animal (both aquatic and terrestrial) tissues. This is agriculture has been assumed to have started around again consistent with the results of our molecular 4,100 calBC with the arrival of the Funnel Beaker and isotope analyses. culture to the region, but archaeobotanical evidence In addition, the offsets between averaged fatty is reported to be scarce for the first 500 years of acid δ13C values (δ13C16 : 0−18 : 0) and the corresponding the Neolithic, and pollen grains of cereal-type and bulk δ13C values in foodcrusts from the same sherds further evidence for human impact on the environ- (Δ13C16 : 0−18 : 0−bulk δ13C) can be used as a tool to un- ment are only visible after 3,700 calBC (Kirleis et al. derstand the composition of the foodcrusts. Small 2012). Further residue analysis on the pottery, in offsets and high C/N ratios generally indicate that conjunction with Scanning Electron Microscopy the foodcrusts are mainly formed from fatty adipose (SEM) analysis of carbonised surface deposits, is tissues or aquatic oils, as both analytic techniques are required to contribute to this topic. measuring the δ13C value of the lipid component. In contrast, foodcrusts derived from a higher propor- Results of bulk stable isotope analysis by tion of protein-rich tissues, such as muscle tissues, (EA-IRMS) would be expected to have a higher Δ13C16 : 0−18 : 0−bulk Twenty-one carbonised surface deposits (foodcrusts), found only on the S-shaped/carinated vessels, were 7  Craig et al. 2007; 2011; 2013; Heron et al. 2015; Heron / analysed in order to measure the bulk carbon (δ13C) Craig 2015. Ö zg e D e m i rc i , A l exan dre Lu cqu i n , F l or i an Kl i ms ch a, Oliver E. Craig and D aan C. M. Raemaekers 77 Sample Sampling C/N d13C 13 15 ID EA-IRMS location %C δ C sd %N δ N sd ratio offset HU-01 x interior 50.6 -25.0 0.8 8.5 8.1 0.2 6.9 1.87 HU-02 x interior 52.9 -24.1 0.1 8.2 8.0 0.0 7.5 1.91 HU-03 - HU-04 x interior 33.8 -24.1 0.2 6.4 7.8 0.0 6.2 4.23 HU-05 x interior 50.4 -26.6 0.8 5.2 7.5 0.0 11.3 3.33 HU-06 x interior 24.6 -26.5 0.2 3.6 7.1 0.0 8.0 2.16 HU-07 x interior 26.7 -22.0 11.3 5.2 7.0 2.8 6.6 4.29 HU-08 x interior 53.1 -27.3 0.1 5.9 7.1 0.3 10.5 2.09 HU-09 - HU-10 x interior 40.6 -24.9 0.1 7.0 7.4 0.2 6.7 3.89 HU-11 - HU-12 x interior 32.2 -24.6 0.3 7.0 6.3 0.0 5.4 5.34 HU-13 x interior 43.9 -24.0 0.1 7.5 6.1 0.0 6.8 5.22 HU-14 x exterior 42.0 -25.7 0.6 4.8 8.0 0.1 10.2 1.27 HU-15 x interior 45.9 -24.1 0.5 8.5 8.1 0.1 6.3 4.63 HU-16 x interior 43.6 -23.8 0.6 7.8 7.7 0.1 6.5 2.66 HU-17 x interior 38.5 -25.1 0.6 4.1 6.2 0.1 11.1 4.46 HU-18 - HU-19 - HU-20 x interior 48.8 -23.4 0.3 7.7 8.6 0.1 7.4 1.89 HU-21 x interior 47.6 -22.7 0.1 9.0 7.0 0.0 6.2 7.28 HU-22 x interior 42.7 -26.3 0.3 5.9 5.4 0.0 8.5 3.54 HU-23 - HU-24 x interior 49.2 -24.5 0.5 8.4 7.0 0.1 6.8 3.56 HU-25 - HU-26 - HU-27 - HU-28 - HU-29 - HU-30 - HU-31 - HU-32 - HU-33 - HU-34 x interior 45.27 -24.11 0.03 7.17 7.4 0.01 7.4 1.87 HU-35 x interior 36.11 -24.05 0.16 6.08 7.0 0.03 6.9 3.61 HU-36 x interior 30.35 -24.02 0.77 6.26 7.3 0.16 5.7 3.82 HU-37 - Table 3 Results of bulk stable isotope analysis on foodcrust. 78 Li pi d re s i du e an al ys i s of ceramic s f rom H üde I: N ew data to understand the transition to farm in g offset as a result of mixing carbon from protein and weight to the assumption that vessels had a similar fat which have different isotope values. function throughout the site’s occupation span. All 21 of our foodcrust samples yielded a high Regarding the two Rössen pots, our results in­ offset varying between 0.13 and +7.28, C/N ratios dicate that while one of these vessels (HU30) was used between 5.4 and 11.3, and δ15N values between +5.4 processing ruminant meat, the other one (HU26) was and +8.7 (Table 3). These values may indicate that the heavily used for processing dairy products (Fig. 8A–B). foodcrusts consist of both aquatic oils and protein-rich This is consistent with the mixed agricultural practices tissues of animal products and/or plants. Although all of the Rössen culture, in which domesticated animals these samples contained plant biomarkers (Table 2), were part of the main economy and were probably the C/N ratios are too low and the δ15N values are too kept both for their meat and milk (Lüning 2000). high to have a notable plant contribution (Bondetti Whether this also holds true for Hüde I is uncertain, et al. 2019). Therefore, we suggest that our foodcrust due to the limited zooarchaeological analysis. data is indicative of mixing aquatic oil (from freshwa- A recent study done by Cubas et al. (2020) indi- ter fish) and protein-rich tissues of animal products. cated that there is a very clear difference in pottery use This eliminates the oil production as a possible use between the last hunter-gatherers and the first agrarian of these vessels and demonstrates that they were used communities in western Europe, but there is clear for food preparation/cooking activities. continuity across the transition in parts of northern Europe (Craig et al. 2007). However, the early farm- ing pottery from southern and southwestern Europe Conclusion demonstrates a major focus on processing terrestrial animal and dairy products with a total lack of aquatic The lipid residue analyses of Hüde I vessels have resources (Cubas et al. 2020). Interestingly, our results shown that lipid residues are preserved in large quan- contradict this. Two of five dairy samples indicate a tities in the fabric of the vessel fragments studied, mixture of dairy and freshwater fish signals. Hence, and that the origin of these lipids can be identified even though we do not know the phasing of these through the application of our chosen methodology. vessels, we can eliminate the possibility that fishing The results of the lipid residue analyses clearly show was totally replaced with pastoralism in this area as that Hüde I vessels were indeed directly associated in southern and southwestern Europe. with preparation, storing and/or cooking of food- For further clarification concerning the problem stuffs included aquatic (freshwater) resources, ter- of correlating the pottery use to the occupation his- restrial animals (both ruminant and non-ruminant), tory of Hüde I, further methodological work focus- and dairy products as well as possibly food plants, ing on the combination of different analyses such although the latter requires further analysis. This is in as scanning electron microscope (SEM) analysis, agreement with the extensively analysed osteological petrographic analysis, and accelerator mass spec- assemblage from Hüde I, which shows the presence trometry (AMS) 14C-dating is required. SEM analy- of both aquatic and terrestrial animal resources at sis on the carbonised surface deposits is a highly the site. valued methodology to examine the charred plant The results furthermore indicate that there is and cereal residues possibly preserved in the crusts no clear functional differentiation in the sample of through the cooking process (e. g. Raemaekers et al. Hüde I vessels presented here. On the contrary, our 2013). As detecting plant biomarkers through lipid study shows that both S-shaped / carinated vessels residue analysis is challenging due to their low lipid and deep bowls have been used for processing fresh- content, SEM analysis is needed to further advance water and terrestrial products, regardless of vessel our understanding of whether food plants had a role form, size, or decoration. Traces of dairy products in the use of pottery, and if they did, what kind of also appear in both vessel types. It is important plants were processed in the Hüde I vessels. Fur- to note here that the small number of deep bowls thermore, the Hüde I vessels need to be examined sampled in this study may not be representative of through petrographic analysis in order to determine the whole assemblage and therefore should be ad- the origin of these vessels. Although Drews (1977) dressed in a future analytical work on the pottery applied this method to a selection of sherds collected from Hüde I. It is difficult to correlate the use of from Hüde I and its surroundings, the information Hüde I pottery to the occupation history of the site provided is very limited, and the material requires a due to its problematic stratigraphy. However, the con- more detailed analysis. Understanding the origin of sistency of the results of lipid residue analyses lends these vessels would allow us to possibly identify the Ö zg e D e m i rc i , A l exan dre Lu cqu i n , F l or i an Kl i ms ch a, Oliver E. Craig and D aan C. M. Raemaekers 79 Fig. 9 A Bulk δ 13C and δ 15N data; B δ 15N and C/N ratio data of surface residues obtained from carbonised surface residues, col- lected from only S-shaped / carinated vessels of Hüde I. different cultural groups present at Hüde I as well as References to question the human mobility and/or interaction between different groups in the region. Finally, as Ackman / Hooper 1968: R. G. Ackman / N. S. Hooper, there is a clear chronological association between Examination of isoprenoid fatty acids as distinguishing the occupation of the site and the pottery, direct characteristics of specific marine oils with particular 14 C-dates of food crusts and/or organic temper (e. g. reference to whale oils. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 24, moss, see Teetaert et al. 2020) of the pottery would 1968, 549 – 565. allow us to correlate vessels to specific occupational Andersen 2010: S. H. Andersen, The first pottery in South phases of Hüde I. Direct dating of food crusts should Scandinavia. In: B. Vanmontfort / L. P. Louwe Kooij- be targeted on samples without aquatic biomarkers in mans / L. Amkreutz (eds.), Pots, Farmers and Foragers: order to avoid freshwater reservoir effect on the pot- How Pottery Traditions Shed a Light on Social Interac- tery (Fischer / Heinemeier 2003; Philippsen 2013). tion in the Earliest Neolithic of the Lower Rhine Area (Leiden 2010) 167 – 176. Baker 1982: E. A. Baker, Chemistry and morphology of plant Acknowledgements epicuticular waxes. In: D. F. Cutler / K. L. Alvin / C. E. This project is part of a Marie Sklodowska-Curie Price (eds.), The Plant Cuticle. Linn. Soc. Symp. Ser. 10 European Joint Doctoral Training Program, funded (London 1982) 139 – 165. by the European Union’s EU Framework program Bianchi 1995: G. Bianchi, Plant waxes. In: R. J. Hamilton for Research and Innovation Horizon 2020 under (ed.), Waxes: Chemistry, Molecular Biology and Func- the Grant Agreement No. 676154 (ArchSci2020 pro- tions (Dundee 1995) 175 – 222. gram). Special thanks to the staff of the Niedersäch- Boessneck 1978: J. Boessneck, Die Vogelknochen aus der sisches Landesmuseum Hanover for their collabora- neolithischen Moorsiedlung Hüde I am Dümmer, Kreis tion and help during the sample selection stage. We Grafschaft Diepholz. Neue Ausgrabungen und For- would like to thank Sander Tiebackx (Groningen schungen in Niedersachsen 12, 1978, 155 – 169. Institute of Archaeology) who produced the map for Bogucki / Grygiel 1993: P. Bogucki / R. Grygiel, The First Figures 1 – 2 and Miriam A. Los-Weijns (Groningen Farmers of Central Europe: A Survey Article. Journal Institute of Archaeology) for the pottery illustrations of Field Archaeology 20(4), 1993, 399 – 426. in Figures 3 – 7. We thank Helen Talbot and Matthew Bondetti et al. 2019: M. Bondetti / S. Scott / A. Lucquin / von Tersch for their assistance with aspects of labo- J. Meadows / O. Lozovskaya / E. Dolbunova / P. ratory work. Finally, we also thank the European Jordan / O. E. Craig, Fruits, fish and the introduc- Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s tion of pottery in the Eastern European plain: Lipid Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme residue analysis of ceramic vessels from Zamostje (The Innovation, Dispersal and Use of Ceramics in 2. Quaternary International 2019: doi.org/10.1016/ NE Europe, grant agreement no. 695539). j.quaint.2019.05.008. 80 Li pi d re s i du e an al ys i s of ceramic s f rom H üde I: N ew data to understand the transition to farm in g Casanova et al. 2020: E. Casanova / R.-M. Arbogast / D. Jan / M. Diniz / R. Fernandes / R. Fábregas A. Denaire / C. Jeunesse / P. Lefranc / R. P. Evershed, Valcarce / C. Germain-Vallée / L. Juhel / A. de Spatial and temporal disparities in human subsis- Lombera-Hermida / C. Marcigny / S. Mazet / G. tence in the Neolithic Rhineland gateway. Journal of Marchand / C. Neves / R. Ontañón-Peredo / X. P. Archaeological Science 122, 2020: doi.org/10.1016/ Rodriguez Alvarez / T. Simoes / J. Zilhao / O. E. j.jas.2020.105215. Craig, Latitudinal gradient in dairy production with Colonese et al. 2017: A. C. Colonese / A. Lucquin / E. P. the introduction of farming in Atlantic Europe. Nature Guedes / R. Thomas/ J. Best / B. T. Fothergill / N. Communications 11(1), 2020, 2036. Sykes / A. Foster / H. Miller / K. Poole / M. Maltby / Czekaj-Zastawny et al. 2011: A. Czekaj-Zastawny / J. Ka- M. von Tersch / O. E. Craig, The identification of baciński / T. Terberger, Long distance exchange in poultry processing in archaeological ceramic vessels the Central European Neolithic: Hungary to the Baltic. using in-situ isotope references for organic residue analy- Antiquity 85, 2011, 43 – 58. sis. Journal of Archaeological Science 78, 2017, 179 – 192. Çakırlar et al. 2020: C. Çakırlar / R. Breider / F. Kool- Copley et al. 2003: M. S. Copley / R. Berstan / S. N. Dudd / stra / K. M. Cohen / D. C. M. Raemaekers, Dealing G. Docherty / A. J. Mukherjee / V. Straker / S. with domestic animals in the 5th millennium calBC Payne/ R. P. Evershed, Direct chemical evidence for Dutch wetlands: new insights from old Swifterbant as- widespread dairying in prehistoric Britain. Proceedings semblages. In: K. J. Gron / L. Sørensen / P. Rowley-Con- of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States wy (eds.), Farmers at the Frontier: A Pan-European of America 100(4), 2003, 1524 – 1529. Perspective on Neolithisation (Oxford 2020) 263 – 287. Copley et al. 2005: M. S. Copley / R. Berstan / A. J. Muk- Debono Spiteri et al. 2016: C. Debono Spiteri / R. E. Gil- herjee / S. N. Dudd / V. Straker / S. Payne / R. P. lis / M. Roffet-Salque / L. C. Navarro / J. Guilaine / Evershed, Dairying in antiquity III. Evidence from C. Manen / I. M. Muntoni / M. S. Segui / D. Urem- absorbed lipid residues dating to the British Neolithic. Kotsou / H. L. Whelton / O. E. Craig / J. D. Vigne / Journal of Archaeological Science 32(4), 2005, 523 – 546. R. P. Evershed, Regional asynchronicity in dairy pro- Craig et al. 2005: O. E. Craig / G. Taylor / J. Mulville / duction and processing in early farming communities of M. J. Collins / M. Parker Pearson, The identification the northern Mediterranean. Proceedings of the Natio- of prehistoric dairying activities in the Western Isles of nal Academy of Sciences 113(48), 2016, 13,594 – 13,599. Scotland: an integrated biomolecular approach. Journal Deichmüller 1964: J. Deichmüller, Dümmer-Grabung of Archaeological Science 32(1), 2005, 91 – 103. 1963. Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte Craig et al. 2007: O. E. Craig / M. Forster / S. H. Ander- 33, 1964, 69 – 73. sen/ E. Koch / P. Crombé / N. J. Milner / B. Stern / Deichmüller 1965a: J. Deichmüller, Die neolithische G. N. Bailey / C. P. Heron, Molecular and Isotopic Moorsiedlung Hüde I am Dümmer, Kreis Grafschaft Demonstration of the Processing of Aquatic Products in Diepholz. Vorläufiger Bericht über die Grabungen Northern European Prehistoric Pottery. Archaeometry 1962 – 1964. Neue Ausgrabungen und Forschungen in 49(1), 2007, 135 – 152. Niedersachsen 2, 1965, 1 – 18. Craig et al. 2012: O. E. Craig / R. B. Allen / A. Thompson / Deichmüller 1965b: J. Deichmüller, Eine Rössener Stil- R. E. Stevens / V. J. Steele / C. Heron, Distingu- variante am Dümmer. Germania 43, 1965, 334 – 343. ishing wild ruminant lipids by gas chromatography/ Deichmüller 1968: J. Deichmüller, Die neolithische Moor- combustion/isotope ratio mass spectrometry. Rapid siedlung Hüde I. Abschlußbericht. Nachrichten aus Communications in Mass Spectrometry: RCM 26(19), Niedersachsens Urgeschichte 37, 1965, 106 – 110. 2012, 2359 – 2 364. Deichmüller 1969: J. Deichmüller, Die neolithische Moor- Craig et al. 2013: O. E. Craig / H. Saul / A. Lucquin / Y. siedlung Hüde I am Dümmer. Vorläufiger Abschlußbe- Nishida / K. Taché / L. Clarke / A. Thompson / D. T. richt. Neue Ausgrabungen und Forschungen in Nieder- Altoft / J. Uchiyama / M. Ajimoto / K. Gibbs / S. sachsen 4, 1969, 28 – 36. Isaksson / C. P. Heron / P. Jordan, Earliest evidence Drews 1977: G. Drews, Geochemische Klassifizierung und for the use of pottery. Nature 496(7445), 2013, 351 – 354. Lokalisierung keramischer Bodenfunde. Jahrbuch Rö- Cramp / Evershed 2014: L. J. E. Cramp / R. P. Evershed, Re- misch Germanisches Zentralmuseum Mainz 23/24, constructing Aquatic Resource Exploitation in ­Human 1977, 229 – 249. Prehistory Using Lipid Biomarkers and Stable Isotopes. Dudd et al. 1998: S. N. Dudd / M. Regert / R. P. Evershed, In: H. D. Holland / K. K. Turekian (eds.), Treatise on Assessing microbial lipid contributions during laborato- Geochemistry (Oxford 22014) 319 – 339. ry degradations of fats and oils and pure triacylglycerols Cubas et al. 2020: M. Cubas / A. Lucquin / H. K. Robson / absorbed in ceramic potsherds. Org. Geochem. 29(5 – 7), A. C. Colonese / P. Arias / B. Aubry / C. Billard / 1998, 1345 – 1354. Ö zg e D e m i rc i , A l exan dre Lu cqu i n , F l or i an Kl i ms ch a, Oliver E. Craig and D aan C. M. Raemaekers 81 Evershed et al. 1997: R. P. Evershed / H. R. Mottram / S. N. Hartz / Lübke 2006: S. Hartz / H. Lübke, New Evidence for Dudd / S. Charters / A. W. Stott / G. J. Lawrence / a Chronostratigraphic Division of the Ertebølle Culture A. M. Gibson / A. Conner / P. W. Blinkhorn / V. and the Earliest Funnel Beaker Culture on the Southern Reeves, New Criteria for the Identification of Animal Mecklenburg Bay. In: C. J. Kind (ed.), After the Ice Age. Fats Preserved in Archaeological Pottery. Die Natur- Settlement, Subsistence and Social Development in the wissenschaften 84(9), 1997, 402 – 4 06. Mesolithic of Central Europe (Stuttgart 2006) 59 – 74. Evershed et al. 2002a: R. P. Evershed / S. N. Dudd / M. S. Heron / Craig 2015: C. Heron / O. E. Craig, Aquatic Re- Copley / R. Berstan / A. W. Stott / H. Mottram / sources in Foodcrusts: Identification and Implication. S. A. Buckley / Z. Crossman, Chemistry of archaeo- Radiocarbon 57(4), 2015, 707 – 719. logical animal fats. Accounts of Chemical Research Heron et al. 2015: C. Heron / O. E. Craig / A. Luquin / 35(8), 2002, 660 – 6 68. V. J. Steele / A. Thompson / G. Piličiauskas, Cooking Evershed et al. 2002b: R. P. Evershed / S. N. Dudd / M. S. fish and drinking milk? Patterns in pottery use in the Copley / A. J. Mukherjee, Identification of animal fats southeastern Baltic, 3300 – 2400 cal BC. Journal of Ar- via compound specific δ13C values of individual fatty chaeological Science 63, 2015, 33 – 43. acids: assessments of results for reference fats and lipid Hopf 1981: M. Hopf, Die Planzenreste aus Schernau, Ldkr. extracts of archaeological pottery vessels. Documenta Kitzingen. In: J. Lüning (ed.), Eine Siedlung der mit- Praehistorica 21, 2002, 73 – 96. telneolitischen Gruppe Bischheim in Schernau, Ldkr. Evershed et al. 2008a: R. P. Evershed / M. S. Copley / L. Kitzingen, Kallmünz. Materialhefte zur Bayerischen Dickson / F. A. Hansel, Experimental evidence for Vorgeschichte, Reihe A: Fundinventare und Ausgra- the processing of marine animal products and other bungsbefunde 44 (Kallmünz 1981) 152 – 160. commodities containing polyunsaturated fatty acids Hübner et al. 1988: K. O. Hübner / R. Saur / H. Reichstein, in pottery vessels. Archaeometry 50(1), 2008, 101 – 113. Die Säugetierknochen der neolithischen Seeufersiedlung Evershed et al. 2008b: R. P. Evershed / S. Payne / A. G. Hüde I am Dümmer, LKr. Diepholz, Niedersachsen. Sherratt / M. S. Copley / J. Coolidge / D. Urem- In: G. Jacob-Friesen (ed.), Palynologische und säuge- Kotsu / K. Kotsakis / M. Özdoğan / A.  E. Öz- tierkundliche Untersuchungen zum Siedlungsplatz doğan / O. Nieuwenhuyse / P. M. M. G. Akkermans / Hüde I am Dümmer, Lkr. Diepholz. Göttinger Schrif- D. Bailey / R. R.Andeescu / S. Campbell / S. Farid / ten zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 23 (Göttingen 1988) I. Hodder / N. Yalman / M. Özbaşaran / E. Bıçakçı / 35 – 133. Y. Garfinkel / T. Levy / M. M. Burton, Earliest date Hüster 1983: H. Hüster, Die Fischknochen der neolithischen for milk use in the Near East and southeastern Eu- Moorsiedlung Hüde I am Dümmer, Kreis Grafschaft rope linked to cattle herding. Nature 455(7212), 2008, Diepholz. Neue Ausgrabungen und Forschungen in 528 – 531. Niedersachsen 16, 1983, 401 – 4 80. Fischer 1982: A. Fischer, Trade in Danubian Shaft-Hole Kabaciński et al. 2009: J. Kabaciński / D. Heinrich / T. Ter- Axes and the Introduction of Neolithic Economy in berger, Dąbki revisited. New evidence on the question Denmark. Journal of Danish Archaeology 1, 1982, 7 – 12. of earliest cattle use in Pomerania. In: S. McCartan / Fischer 2002: A. Fischer, Food for Feasting? An evaluation R. Schulting / G. Warren / P. Woodman (eds.), Meso- of explanations of the neolithisation of Denmark and lithic Horizons (Oxford 2009) 548 – 555. southern Sweden. In: A. Fischer / K. Kristiansen (eds.), Kampffmeyer 1991: U. Kampffmeyer, Die Keramik der Sied- The Neolithisation of Denmark: 150 Years of Debate lung Hüde I am Dümmer. Untersuchungen zur Neolithi- (Sheffield 2002) 343 – 393. sierung der nordwestdeutschen Flachlands. Dissertation Fischer / Heinemeier 2003: A. Fischer / J. Heinemeier, Göttingen University (Göttingen 1991). Freshwater reservoir effect in 14C dates of food residue Kirleis et al. 2012: W. Kirleis / S. Klooss / H. Kroll / on pottery. Radiocarbon 45, 2003, 449 – 4 66. J. Müller, Crop growing and gathering in the northern Hammann / Cramp 2018: S. Hammann / L. J. E. Cramp, To- German Neolithic: a review supplemented by new re- wards the detection of dietary cereal processing through sults. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 21(3), absorbed lipid biomarkers in archaeological pottery. 2012, 221 – 242. Journal of Archaeological Science 93, 2018, 74 – 81. Lucquin et al. 2016: A. Lucquin / A. C. Colonese / T. F. G. Hansel et al. 2004: F. A. Hansel / M. S. Copley / L. A. S. Farrell / O. E. Craig, Utilising phytanic acid diaste- Madureira / R. P. Evershed, Thermally produced reomers for the characterisation of archaeological lipid ω-(o-alkylphenyl) alkanoic acids provide evidence for residues in pottery samples. Tetrahedron Letters 57(6), the processing of marine products in archaeological 2016, 703 – 707. pottery vessels. Tetrahedron Letters 14(45), 2004, Lucquin et al. 2018: A. Lucquin / H. K. Robson / Y. Eley / 2999 – 3002. S. Shoda / D. Veltcheva / K. Gibbs / C. P. Heron / S. 82 Li pi d re s i du e an al ys i s of ceramic s f rom H üde I: N ew data to understand the transition to farm in g Isaksson / Y. Nishida / Y. Taniguchi / S. Nakajima / Philippsen 2013: B. Philippsen, The freshwater reservoir K. Kobayashi / P. Jordan / S. Kaner / O. E. Craig, effect in radiocarbon dating. Heritage Science 1, 2013, The impact of environmental change on the use of early 24: doi.org/10.1186/2050 – 7445 – 1-24. pottery by East Asian hunter-gatherers. Proceedings of Piening 1998: U. Piening, Die Pflanzenreste aus Gruben der the National Academy of Sciences of the United States Linearbandkeramik und der Rössener Kultur von Dit- of America 115(31), 2018, 7931 – 7936. zingen, Kr. Ludwigsburg. Fundberichte aus Baden-Würt- Luikart et al. 2001: G. Luikart / L. Gielly / L. Excoffier / temberg 22, 1998, 125 – 160. J. D. Vigne / J. Bouvet / P. Taberlet, Multiple maternal Povlsen 2014: K. Povlsen, The introduction of ceramics in origins and weak phylogeographic structure in domestic the Ertebølle Culture. Danish Journal of Archaeology goats. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2(2), 2014, 146 – 163. of the United States of America 98(10), 2001, 5927 – 5932. Raemaekers 1999: D. C. M. Raemaekers, The articulation Lüning 2000: J. Lüning, Steinzeitliche Bauern in Deutsch- of a “New Neolithic”. Dissertation, Leiden University land – die Landwirtschaft im Neolithikum. Universi- (Leiden 1999). tätsforschungen zur prähistorischen Archäologie 58 Raemaekers 2005: D. C. M. Raemaekers, An outline of Late (Bonn 2000). Swifterbant pottery in the Noordoostpolder (province Müller 1964: H. H. Müller, Die Haustiere der mitteldeut- of Flevoland, the Netherlands) and the chronological schen Bandkeramiker. Berliner Schriften für Vor- u. development of the pottery of the Swifterbant culture. Frühgesch. 17 (Berlin 1964). Palaeohistoria 45/46, 2005, 11 – 36. Müller 2009: J. Müller, Die Jungsteinzeit (6000 – 2 000 Raemaekers 2011: D. C. M. Raemaekers, Early Swifter- v.Chr.). In: S. von Schnurbein (ed.), Atlas der Vorge- bant pottery (5000 – 4 600 BC): research history, age, schichte. Europa von den ersten Menschen bis Christi characteristics and the introduction of pottery. Bericht Geburt (Stuttgart 2009) 60 – 107. der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 89, 2011, Nösler et al. 2011: D. Nösler / A. Kramer / H. Jöns / 485 – 500. K. Gerken / F. Bittmann, Aktuelle Forschungen zur Raemaekers et al. 2011: D. C. M. Raemaekers /J. Geuverink / Besiedlung und Landnutzung zur Zeit der Trichterbe- M. Schepers / B. P. Tuin / E. Van de Lagemaat / M. cher- und Einzelgrabkultur in Nordwestdeutschland – Van der Wal, A biography in stone: Typology, age, func- ein Vorbericht zum DFG-SPP “Monumentalität”. Nachr. tion and meaning of Early Neolithic perforated wedges Nieders. Urgeschich. 80, 2011, 23 – 45. in the Netherlands (Groningen 2011). Out 2008: W. A. Out, Growing habits? Delayed introduction Raemaekers et al. 2013: D. C. M. Raemaekers / L. Kubiak- of crop cultivation at marginal Neolithic wetland sites. Martens / T. F. M. Oudemans, New food in old pots Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 17(1), 2008, – charred organic residues in Early Neolithic ceramic 131 – 138. vessels from Swifterbant, the Netherlands (4300 – 4 000 Out 2009: W. A. Out, Sowing the Seed: Human impact and cal BC). Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 43, 2013, plant subsistence in Dutch wetlands during the Late 315 – 334. Mesolithic and Early and Middle Neolithic (5500 – 3400 Regert 2011: M. Regert, Analytical strategies for discrimina- cal BC). Dissertation, Leiden University (Leiden 2009). ting archeological fatty substances from animal origin. Pääkkönen et al. 2020: M. Pääkkönen / R. P. Evershed / Mass Spectrom. Rev. 30, 2011, 177 – 220. H. Asplund, Compound-specific stable carbon isotope Robson et al. 2012: H. K. Robson / S. H. Andersen / O. E. values of fatty acids in modern aquatic and terrestrial Craig / A. Fischer / A. Glykou / S. Hartz / H. Lüb- animals from the Baltic Sea and Finland as an aid to ke / U. Schmölcke / C. Heron, Carbon and nitrogen interpretations of the origins of organic residues pre- isotope signals in eel bone collagen from Mesolithic and served in archaeological pottery. Journal of Nordic Ar- Neolithic sites in northern Europe. Journal of Archaeo- chaeological Science 19, 2020. logical Science 39, 2012, 2003 – 2011. Papakosta et al. 2015: V. Papakosta / R. H. Smittenberg / Robson et al. 2016: H. K. Robson / S. H. Andersen / L. K. Gibbs / P. Jordan / S. Isaksson, Extraction and de- Clarke / O. E. Craig / K. J. Gron / A. K. G. Jones / rivatization of absorbed lipid residues from very small P. Karsten / N. Milner / T. D. Price / K. Ritchie / and very old samples of ceramic potsherds for molecular M. Zabilska-Kunek / C. Heron, Carbon and nitrogen analysis by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC- stable isotope values in freshwater, brackish and ma- MS) and single compound stable carbon isotope analysis rine fish bone collagen from Mesolithic and Neolithic by gas chromatography-combustion-isotope ratio mass sites in central and northern Europe. Environmental spectrometry (GC-C-IRMS). Microchemical Journal, Archaeology 21(2), 2016, 105 – 118. Devoted to the Application of Microtechniques in All De Roever 2004: J. P. de Roever, Swifterbant-aardewerk. Branches of Science 123, 2015, 196 – 200. Een analyse van de neolithische nederzettingen bij Swif- Ö zg e D e m i rc i , A l exan dre Lu cqu i n , F l or i an Kl i ms ch a, Oliver E. Craig and D aan C. M. Raemaekers 83 terbant, 5e millennium voor Chr. Dissertation Gronin- Stapel 1991: B. Stapel, Die geschlagenen Steingeräte der gen University (Groningen 2004). Siedlung Hüde I am Dümmer. Veröffentlichen der Ur- Scheu et al. 2008: A. Scheu / S. Hartz / U. Schmölcke / geschichtlichen Sammlungen des Landesmuseum zu A. Tresset / J. Burger / R. Bollongino, Ancient DNA Hannover 38 (Hannover 1991). provides no evidence for independent domestication Sørensen / Karg 2014: L. Sørensen / S. Karg, The ex- of cattle in Mesolithic Rosenhof, Northern Germa- pansion of agrarian societies towards the north – new ny. Journal of Archaeological Science 35(5), 2008, evidence for agriculture during the Mesolithic/Neolithic 1257 – 1264. transition in Southern Scandinavia. Journal of Archaeo- Schmölcke / Nikulina 2015: U. Schmölcke / E. A. Niku- logical Science 51, 2014, 98 – 114. lina, Mesolithic beaver hunting station or base camp Teetaert et al. 2020: D. Teetaert / M. Boudin / E. Goemaere /  of supra-regional Stone Age fur trade? New archaeo- P. Crombé, Reliability of AMS 14C dates of moss temper zoological and archaeogenetic results from Dąbki 9 preserved in Neolithic pottery from the Scheldt River (Pomerania, Poland). In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / Valley (Belgium). Radiocarbon 62, 2020, 1 – 12. D. C. M. Raemaekers / T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Terberger et al. 2009: T. Terberger / S. Hartz / J. Kaba­ Site in Pomerania and the Neolithisation of the North ciński, Late hunter-gatherer and early farmer contacts European Lowlands (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie in the southern Baltic – a discussion. In: H. Glørstad / des Ostseeraums 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 65 – 86. C. Prescott (eds.), Neolithisation as if history matte- Schütrumpf 1988: R. Schütrumpf, Moorgeologisch- red: process of neolithisation in North-Western Europe pollenanalytische Untersuchungen zu der neolithischen (Uddevalla 2009) 257 – 298. Moorsiedlung Hüde I, Landkreis Diepholz/Nieder­ Verhart 2012: L. B. M. Verhart, Contact in stone: adzes, sachsen. Göttinger Schriften zur Vor- und Frühgeschich- Keile and Spitzhauen in the Lower Rhine Basin: te 23, 1988, 9 – 33. Neolithic stone tools and the transition from Meso- Schwabedissen 1967: H. Schwabedissen, Ein horizontierter lithic to Neolithic in Belgium and the Netherlands, „Breitkeil“ aus Satrup und die mannigfachen Kulturver- 5300 – 4 000 cal BC. Journal of Archaeology in the Low bindungen des beginnenden Neolithikums im Norden Countries 4, 2012, 5 – 35. und Nordwesten. Palaeohistoria 12, 1991, 409 – 4 68. Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 , 8 5   – 97) 85 Two new Swifterbant settlements at Nieuwegein- Het Klooster, the Netherlands: preliminary site ­interpretation and overview of human remains Helle M. Molthof and Steffen Baetsen Abstract In 2017, for the first time in almost twenty years, a site with the remains of multiple individuals from the Swifterbant culture was discovered at Nieuwegein in the Netherlands. Nowadays an industrial area on reclaimed land, the flat green meadows are hiding a former river system of levees and peat-filled channels, which appears to have been intensively used by Neolithic communities. Together with the simultaneous excavations at Tiel-Medel, about 25 km to the southeast, the excavations at Nieuwegein comprise the first large scale Swifterbant research in the central delta area of the Netherlands (Fig. 1). As such, both sites will serve as key links between the known sites of the Swifterbant culture (spanning an area between Antwerp and Hamburg), and the more or less contemporary sites of the Rössen, Bischheim and Michelsberg cultures to the south and east. The remains of at least sixteen human individuals were discovered at Nieuwegein-Het Klooster. Among them were the remains of a baby, found in the arms of a young woman, the oldest burial of this kind ever found in the Netherlands. The analysis of the DNA of both the woman and the baby made clear that the burial concerns a mother and her daughter. Keywords Swifterbant culture, burials Zusammenfassung Im Jahr 2017 ist es nach nahezu zwanzig Jahren erstmals gelungen, in Nieuwegein in den Niederlanden einen Bestattungsplatz der Swifterbant Kultur mit zahlreichen Individuen zu entdecken. In dem heutigen Industriegebiet lassen die grünen Wiesen das dort befindliche, frühere Flusssystem, das im Neolithikum offensichtlich intensiv genutzt wurde, kaum noch erkennen. Gleichzeitig werden auch Ausgrabungen in Tiel-Medel etwa 25 km südwestlich von Nieuwegein durchgeführt und die beiden Fundstellen emöglichen die ersten großflächigen Forschungen zur Swifterbant Kultur im zentralen Deltagebiet der Niederlan- de. Sie sind als Schlüsselfundplätze der Swifterbant Kultur zwischen Antwerpen und Hamburg sowie den mehr oder weniger zeitgleichen Fundstellen der Rössener, Bischheimer und Michelsberger Kultur im Süden und Osten anzusehen. In Nieuwegein-Het Klooster wurden die Überreste von mindestens sechzehn menschlichen Individuen entdeckt. Unter ihnen ist auch ein Baby, das in den Armen einer jungen Frau aufgefunden wurde. Es handelt sich um das älteste Grab dieser Art, das in den Niederlanden entdeckt wurde, und aDNA-Analysen zeigen, dass es sich um die Beisetzung einer Muttter mit ihrer Tochter handelt. Paleogeography and excavation the research area, a smaller river or stream branches off from the main channel. Though this secondary The research at Nieuwegein was fuelled by the devel- stream probably originated as a crevasse when the opment of a large business park, ‘Het Klooster’. An Wiersch broke through its levees, it is likely that it intensive augering survey, consisting of more than developed into a relatively small but permanently 10,000 corings in a close grid, provided a detailed flowing river branch. insight into the palaeogeography (Sprangers 2019). The excavation areas are indicated in red and Dominating the area is the residual channel of the blue. The site denominations derive from the plot river Wiersch, flanked by its levees and the flood- numbers of the future business park. The 2016/2017 plains beyond (Fig. 1 – 2). The Wiersch can be con- campaign, which took place on site 1, yielded a large sidered a predecessor of the Rhine. In the north of settlement area on the western levee of the main 86 Two new Swif terbant settlements at N ieuwegein-H et K looster, the N ether lan ds Fig. 1 Overview of main Swifterbant sites in the Netherlands and adjoining areas (after Raemaekers 1999, fig. 3.1 and Hogestijn / Peeters 2001, fig. 62). channel. The 2018/2019 campaign was carried out of the flint finds from the augering samples could be on site B4/17, on the northern levee of the secondary attributed to a specific period. They date to the Middle stream. On both sites, the levee consists of silty clay, and/or Late Mesolithic, but it is possible that a part of which was gradually covered with peat after the sites the rest of the assemblage dates to the Neolithic (Van were abandoned (Fig. 3). This stratigraphy, combined der Kroft / Molthof in prep.). Though it is unsure with the fact that the find layer lies two metres below whether the conditions on the coversand ridge were dry the surface and permanently under groundwater level, enough for habitation during the Swifterbant period, led to a very good preservation of the remains. it is likely that the area could have been visited and In the northwest, a coversand ridge is visible used by the people who lived at site 1 and site B4/17.1 (Fig. 2, orange), which has been investigated by an au- gering survey (Jansen 2019). According to 14C-dates, peat already covered the lower parts of the ridge by the 1  As these business park plots will be turned into parking lots, end of the Mesolithic, but the higher parts were prob- to prevent damage to the site and avoid the costs of excavation, ably still accessible in the Early Neolithic. Only a few no further research is planned for the coversand ridge. H e l l e M . M o l th o f an d Ste ffe n B aets e n 87 Fig. 2 Palaeogeographic map of the Neolithic river system and location of sites 1 and B4/17 (after Sprangers 2019, fig. 26). Preliminary interpretation at least 50 to 80 m wide, while the levee at site B4/17 only spans c. 20 – 25 m. On both sites, the filling of The analysis of the excavation results is still in prog- the residual channels has yielded hardly any arte- ress, but the current ideas about the types of sites facts, despite sieving of part of the filling. A possible we are dealing with will be presented here. The first explanation can be that erosion of the channel – and impression is that there are similarities as well as maybe also of the levee edges – took place after the differences between the two locations. As explained abandonment of the site. This seems to be the case in the previous section, the landscape setting is very at least at site B4/17. Whatever the cause, the lack of comparable, except for the scale. The levee on site 1 is stratigraphically separated material, combined with 88 Two new Swif terbant settlements at N ieuwegein-H et K looster, the N ether lan ds Fig. 3 Cross-section of levee and residual channel on site B4/17 (photo: RAAP Archeologisch Adviesbureau). Fig. 4 Pointed-bottomed pot with possible traces of black paint (photo: Restauratieatelier Restaura). the fact that both sites yielded only a few features2 there are very few 14C-dates available yet. The major- and no house plans, makes it difficult to interpret ity of the sherds from site 1 are considered to date the nature and sequence of the habitation. to phase Swifterbant (SW) 2, 4,400 – 3,900 cal BC The chronology of the sites is for now based (Ten ­A nscher 2012, 5, 7). They are tempered with on the typology of pottery and flint artefacts, since quartz and plant material (or sometimes sand), they originate from both pointed-bottomed and round- bottomed pots (and one flat-bottomed pot), and show little decoration except for a few spatula impressions, 2  The low number of features might very well be the result of some fingertip impressions, and possible traces of the similarity in colour of the find layer and the underlying le- vee soil. It is not clear whether this is caused by postdeposi- black paint on one pointed-bottomed vessel (Fig. 4). tional processes (e. g. decomposition or washout of humus), or On some pots, the surface is covered with an extra whether there never was much difference at all. The fact that layer of roughened clay, which is also known from the there were no burial pits visible around the inhumations teach- es us to be careful to interpret (absent) features as never having pottery of Medel-De Roeskamp (see Ten Anscher / existed. Knippenberg, this volume) and Swif­terbant-S3 ­(De H e l l e M . M o l th o f an d Ste ffe n B aets e n 89 tively many bones of birds and fish. Also, in the east of site B4/17, there are areas in which the find layer is dotted with specks of ochre. Ochre is often associ- ated with ritual and burial activities, but it may also have been used for preserving hides. One last remarkable difference, one we do not have a satisfactory explanation for yet, is that site B4/17 yielded the remains of at least eleven surface hearths, while these were absent (or not visible) on site 1. Although the assemblage from site 1 is gen- erally more fragmented than that from site B4/17, pointing towards more intensive treading and dis- turbing of the area, one would still expect the surface Fig. 5 Leaf-shaped point made of a basalt-like stone (drawing: M. hearths of the last occupation phase to remain pre- Koeweiden). served. Therefore, it is more likely that the explana- tion lies in differences between the post-depositional processes on each site. Roever 2004, fig. 20). The pottery from site B4/17 is In conclusion, the material from both sites seems similar to that from site 1, except for some sherds that to date to at least the SW2-period, but further ty- are tempered with a relatively large amount of sand. pological analyses and 14C-dates are necessary to The majority of the flint and stone artefacts obtain a more detailed chronology of the sites. At from both sites seem to date to phase SW2 as well, this moment, site 1 is interpreted as a settlement although there are indications for an older phase site with evidence for either year-round habitation (SW1; 4,900 – 4,400 cal BC) to the south of site 1, for or repeated – possibly seasonal – long-term occupa- example the emphasis on blade technology in this tion. On B4/17, we seem to be dealing with a less area, and the absence of relatively ‘late’ elements here intensive (and/or shorter) habitation, and there are (such as fragments of polished flint axes, triangles several clues that this site was used for special ac- with surface retouch, and transverse arrowheads). In tivities. Variations in functionality are known from contrast, the northern part of site 1 yielded several of other Swifterbant sites. Based on, for instance, the these tool types, including a leaf-shaped point made occurrence of structures and/or graves, the faunal out of a basalt-like stone (Fig. 5). As the occurrence assemblage, and the characteristics of the stone and of leaf-shaped points at Swifterbant sites is usually flint industry, many different site types have been interpreted as an influence of the Michelsberg culture identified over the past years. In the Netherlands, (Raemaekers 1999, 142 – 143; Devriendt 2014, 255), the sites of Polderweg and De Bruin have been inter- this indicates that at least a part of the assemblage preted as settlement sites or base camps, the site of in the northern part of site 1 dates specifically to the Hoge Vaart as an accumulation of several small hunt- latter half of SW2. ing camps with evidence for pottery production, and The most striking difference between site 1 the sites of Brandwijk en Hazendonk are interpreted and site B4/17 is that the first has yielded several as hunting and fishing camps (Devriendt 2014, ch. inhumations and scattered human remains (which 6.3.4). The creek system at Swifterbant shows that will be further discussed in the next sections), while this same variety also occurs within a smaller area, on the latter site no human skeletal elements were with site S3 as a main settlement site, S2 and S51 as found. This corresponds with the current idea that special activity sites, and S4 displaying both similari- the broader levee by the main channel was inhabited ties to S3 and distinguishing features like a child’s more permanently and intensively than the smaller grave. The stratigraphy of S4 moreover showed that one in the north, which may have been used only chronological developments in function even occur for special activities. Some other aspects support a within one site, with an alternation between cultiva- functional difference. Site 1 yielded several grinding tion layers and anthropogenic layers (Raemaekers / stones while they are absent on site B4/17; on site De Roever 2020, ch. 10.3; Devriendt 2014, 265). B4/17 there are notable differences in the clustering It is likely that sites 1 and B4/17 at Nieuwegein are of the various materials, while on site 1 they show similar to those at Swifterbant, with respect to the more or less the same distribution patterns, and the existence of functional differences between several faunal remains from site B4/17 seem to contain rela- sites on the same river system. 90 Two new Swif terbant settlements at N ieuwegein-H et K looster, the N ether lan ds Individual Zone Bone and dental elements present Age Sex Notes ID1 2 Skull; no mandible or dental elements 14 – 18 yrs Male 2nd/3rd degree relative of ID5 and ID6 ID2 2 Near-complete skeleton; skull absent 10 – 14 yrs ? ID3 2 Femur, fibula and long bone fragments   6 – 9 yrs ? ID4 2 Near-complete skeleton; feet absent 18 – 20 yrs Female Eight cattle incisor pendants scattered around neck ID5 3 Near-complete skeleton; lower leg bones absent 20 – 25 yrs Female Mother of ID6 ID6 3 Skull-, long bone- and pelvis fragments; dental elements 0 – 3 mths Female Daughter of ID5 ID7 2 Near-complete set of dental elements 25 – 35 yrs Fema- le? ID8 2 Bone- and skull fragments, near-complete set of dental elements 12 – 18 yrs ? ID9 1 Skull fragments and three dental elements 6 – 15 yrs ? ID10 1 Two molars (and possibly two more, found ca. four metres away) 12 – 15 yrs Male? ID11 2 Long bone-fragments and two dental elements 35 – 45 yrs ? ID12 2 One molar 25 – 35 yrs ? Not from ID16 or ID17; overlap in dental elements) ID13 3 One molar and long bone fragments 12 – 18 yrs ? Long bone fragments may not be human ID14 2 Bone fragments and five dental elements 12 – 18 yrs ? Could belong to ID1 or ID2 ID15 2 Two molars 18 – 25 yrs ? Could belong to ID1 ID16 2 One molar 25 – 35 yrs ? Not from ID12 or ID17; overlap in dental elements) ID17 2 Two molars 25 – 35 yrs ? Not from ID12 or ID16; overlap in dental elements) ID18 2 One deciduous molar; three permanent teeth (not fully 2 – 7 yrs ? Could belong to ID3 developed) ID19 2 One deciduous molar; four permanent teeth (slight traces 6 – 12 yrs ? Could belong to ID3 of wear) ID20 1 Three decidous teeth 3 – 6 yrs ? Elements 61, 63 and 64; not lost by shedding Table 1 Overview of the individuals of Het Klooster site 1. Skeletal elements which do not with certainty represent a single individual are noted in italics. The human remains: discovery, grave in another grave in zone 3 (grave 2; ID5 and ID6). goods, and first 14C-results Because of the wet and muddy circumstances, the remains were uncovered just enough to determine As mentioned above, human remains were only the orientation and location of the skeletons. Sub- found on site 1. All human remains are currently sequently, they were lifted en bloc together with the being analysed by Steffen Baetsen. Though this work surrounding clay and transported to a hall for further is still in progress, an overview of the preliminary investigation, to ensure dry and proper research con- results will be presented here. ditions (Fig. 7). In addition to the five individuals in The human remains seem to be confined to three graves, a skull without a mandible was found a few zones within the excavated area: zone 1 is located in metres from grave 1, and was also lifted en bloc (ID1). the north of the site, zone 2 c. 50 m to the south, and The other individuals are represented by human zone 3 is located another 100 m further south (Fig. 6). bone fragments and teeth from the sieving residue The remains belong to at least sixteen, but possibly of a number of sampling units. In two of those cases twenty individuals (Table 1). Five of them were recog- (ID7 and ID8), the assemblage of teeth and skeletal nised as inhumations during fieldwork: three in one elements is too coherent and too complete to be in- grave3 in zone 2 (grave 1; ID2, ID3 and ID4) and two terpreted as just scattered finds. They probably rep- resent burials that unfortunately were not recognised as such during the excavation. Three more individu- 3  We are not entirely sure if ID2, ID3 and ID4 were buried at als (ID9, ID11, ID13) consist of dental elements and the same time, in one pit. However, with regard to their close a few bones only, and five individuals are represented proximity and similar position and orientation, and the fact that only by one to three dental elements from sampling they were removed from the excavation and investigated in one block, this group of three individuals will in this paper be men- tioned as ‘grave 1’. H e l l e M . M o l th o f an d Ste ffe n B aets e n 91 Fig. 6 Location of human remains and jet objects. 92 Two new Swif terbant settlements at N ieuwegein-H et K looster, the N ether lan ds Fig. 7 The process of en bloc lifting of grave 1 (photos: BAAC Archeologie en Bouwhistorie). 543 – 544). This can either be because the sites were often used for a long time (so remains from earlier burials were distributed across the site over time), or because the Swifterbant people dealt with their deceased in a way that easily led to the presence of many loose bones and dental elements. Grave goods were found with only one indi- vidual (ID4); these are eight perforated cattle in- cisors 5 (see ‘Zone 2’ below). Apart from these, no grave goods were found. However, the sampling units yielded three jet objects, a pendant and two beads, which were found in or near areas with hu- man remains. The beads, found near zones 2 and 3, measure c. 6 mm in diameter. The pendant found near the remains of zone 1 measures c. 6 x 6 cm, which makes it the largest prehistoric jet object of the Netherlands so far (Fig. 8). Apart from a perfora- tion that was probably made with a flint tool, there seem to be no alterations to the original piece. It is Fig. 8 Jet pendant with traces of wear on the upper side of the possible that the owner(s) did not want to reduce the perforation (photo: RAAP). size of such an extraordinary chunk of jet by modify- ing or polishing it. The perforation shows traces of wear from hanging on a string, which tells us that units (ID10, ID12, ID16, ID17, ID20).4 The remains it was not just a valuable possession but that it was of these last eight individuals and also the skull near worn as an ornament for a considerable amount of grave 1 possibly represent disturbed graves or partial time. Although these ornaments could not be directly (re)burials. Another explanation might be found in linked to buried individuals or human remains, all the fact that all Swifterbant settlements are charac- terised by the occurrence of stray human remains all through the settlement (Raemaekers et al. 2009, 5  Among the cattle incisors, a wild horse incisor was also found. Skeletal elements of horses are very scarce in the animal bone assemblage of site 1, so it is possible that it concerns an- other grave good. However, the tip of the root – where a perfora- 4  For ID14, ID15, ID18 and ID19, it is not certain whether tion would have been – is missing, so we cannot know for cer- they represent different individuals. tain that it is a modified ornament. H e l l e M . M o l th o f an d Ste ffe n B aets e n 93 three were located near zones with human remains, lying between ID20 and ID9 yielded two molars of while the areas in-between did not yield any jet finds an adolescent of 12 – 15 years (ID10). This individual (Fig. 6). Considering that there is one known case might be a male one, considering the robustness and of a jet ornament as a grave good for the Swifter- size of the molars. Apart from the three individuals bant culture (grave I at site Swifterbant-S22; see mentioned here, zone 3 yielded six more dental ele- Devriendt 2014, 78 – 79), and that there are indica- ments that could not be attributed to either ID9/ID10/ tions that post-depositional processes have disturbed ID20 or a different individual with certainty. the human remains at Nieuwegein,6 it is possible that the jet objects at Nieuwegein were originally Zone 2 deposited as grave goods. So far, five individuals have been sampled for This area yielded by far the majority of the skeletal 14 C-dating, of which four individuals yielded results.7 elements from site 1. The first discovery of human They all date between c. 4,800 and 4,600 cal BC. It is remains on this site was a skull of an adolescent male probable that these dates are biased by a freshwater of 14 – 18 years (ID1), without teeth or a mandible. reservoir effect, making them seem older than they Although broken into several pieces, which had been are. We are dealing with a community that lived crushed by the pressure of the sediment covering it, by a river, there are many fish bones in the faunal it was still obvious that it was in an upright position assemblage, and one pottery sherd has a food crust when found. containing still visible fish scales. Therefore the dates About four metres to the east of the skull, three of the perforated incisors found as grave goods on individuals were discovered together and document- one of the individuals (see below) will be crucial in ed as one burial with regard to their position and determining the age of the burials and indicating the orientation (grave 1), though it is not certain that they deviation of the 14C-dates on human bone. were buried at the same time. They were identified as an adolescent of c. 10 – 14 years (ID2), a 6 – 9 year old child (ID3; too fragmented to determine the burial Sex and age of the individuals per zone8 position), and an adolescent female of c. 18 – 20 years old (ID4). ID2 and ID4 were buried in supine posi- Zone 1 tion (Fig. 9); ID3 was too fragmented to determine the burial position with certainty. The skull of ID2 In an area of c. 20 x 20 m, the remains of at least was absent, but a rather complete set of teeth from three individuals were found, all of which are non- both the upper and lower jaw was scattered around adults. The youngest individual in this zone is a child the body. It seems logical to suppose that the skull of of 3 – 6 years (ID20), represented by three milk teeth. ID1 belongs to ID2. However, the physical features Two of these have roots; the third consists only of a of the skull point towards an older individual than crown, but its edges show that it was not lost due to ID2, which is why it is regarded as representing a shedding either. Since it concerns an incisor, a canine separate individual for the time being. and a first molar, all from the upper left jaw, they are Around the neck of ID4, eight perforated cattle interpreted as belonging to one deceased child. In the incisors (probably domesticated, not aurochs) were westernmost part of zone 3, skull fragments and teeth discovered (Fig. 10). Similar perforated incisors have of another child were found, thought to have died at been found at the site of Swifterbant-S3 (Clason an age of 6 – 15 years (ID9). Finally, a sampling unit 1978). Although it seems likely that they were worn as a necklace, since they were found near the chin of the individual, another possibility is that the pendants 6  For example, the skeleton of ID5 in zone 3 is not anatomi- were fastened to their clothing. When discovered, cally intact. The lower leg bones are missing, some of the verte- they were scattered up to 20 cm away from the neck, brae were located near the knees, and the axis was found be- probably due to postdepositional processes. Their hind the skull. An atlas that probably also belongs to ID5 was found seven metres away from the body. original position and function are consequently lost. Two additional burials in zone 2 which comprise 7 ID1, ID2, ID3, ID4, ID5 were sampled. Only ID4 did not quite complete sets of dental elements from sampling yield a result. units, in one case found together with bone and skull 8 In this paper, the age classification of White et al. 2011 fragments, concern a 25 – 35 year old individual, prob- (p. 384) will be used: infant: 0 – 3 years, child 3 – 12 years, ado- lescent 12 – 2 0 years, young adult 20 – 35 years, middle adult ably a female one considering the small size of the 35 – 50 years, old adult 50+ years. teeth (ID7), and an adolescent of 12 – 18 years (ID8). 94 Two new Swif terbant settlements at N ieuwegein-H et K looster, the N ether lan ds Furthermore, there are scattered dental remains in zone 2 which could not be attributed to the above- mentioned individuals and therefore represent at least four more persons. One of these is the oldest in- dividual from the site, an adult of 35 – 45 years (ID11). The other three are all young adults of c. 25 – 35 years (ID12, ID16 and ID17). Even though they are only represented by one or two dental elements each, the second molar of the upper left jaw (element 27) is present for all. Therefore, we can be sure that there are three separate individuals represented. Finally, some of the sampling units in zone 2 yielded human remains that might either represent new individuals, or belong to one or more of the abovementioned individuals from zone 2. They are documented as ID14, ID15, ID18 and ID19. Zone 3 The only human remains from this area are repre- sented by grave 2 and a molar from a sampling unit. Fig. 9 Adolescent female (ID4) in grave 1 (photo: RAAP). Fig. 10 A few of the perforated cattle incisor pendants found Fig. 11 Grave 2; a young woman with the remains of a baby near the neck of ID4 (photo: RAAP). near her right arm (photo: RAAP). H e l l e M . M o l th o f an d Ste ffe n B aets e n 95 Fig. 12 Bone fragments and teeth of baby (photo: RAAP). Some pieces of long bones were found in the same site elements. Several complete pots were found here, sampling unit as the molar. They are probably human, at least one of which was certainly buried in an upright but were too fragmented to be sure of this. However, position. Also, a relatively high number of antler parts the molar concerns a wisdom tooth that was not yet originate from zone 3, as well as the only feature that fully developed. Therefore, it is likely that it was not contained red ochre (a pit or layer that also contained lost by a living person, but originates from a disturbed charcoal and tiny fragments of burnt bone). It is pos- grave of an adolescent (age c. 12 – 18 years). Consider- sible that this means we should interpret zone 3 as ing the distance of over 100 m to the remains in zone some kind of funeral or ritual area. 2, this molar is interpreted as a separate individual (ID13). Grave 2 was at first thought to contain only the DNA analysis: family ties and genetic remains of a young woman of c. 20 – 25 years (ID5). origin However, her burial position showed a remarkable deviation from the standard supine position with The discovery of the woman and baby naturally rai- stretched arms and legs: her right arm was bent, with sed the question if they were related to each other. the hand resting near the hipbone, and her head was Fortunately, the petrous parts of the temporal bone turned towards the right (Fig. 11). Since there were of both were preserved, and in sufficiently good sta- also other anomalies in the skeletal representation of te to be sampled for DNA analysis. This analysis the woman (a couple of displaced vertebrae, missing is part of a research project on the neolithisation shinbones), the curious position of the right arm and of northwestern Europe, carried out by Harvard the head was at first considered as possibly uninten- Medical School (D. Reich) and the LUMC Human tional or postdepositional. It soon turned out that it Genetics Department (E. Altena). The results of this was not: when removing the clay around the right project, including the individuals from Nieuwegein, arm bone, the deciduous teeth and bone fragments of will be published in a separate paper. Though the ex- an infant were discovered (ID6; Fig. 12). Some of the pected paper will mainly focus on the genetic origin teeth were positioned within jaw fragments. The de- of the Swifterbant people buried in Nieuwegein, data velopment of one of the molars of the infant suggests on sex and family ties – relevant on site interpretation an age of 3 – 9 months, but the shape and size of skull level – are already available to us. fragments seem to point to an age of 0 – 3 months at The DNA analysis revealed that the baby is a girl, the time of death. It seems likely that the infant lived and that the woman and the baby are first degree rela- for a few weeks or even months, but the possibility tives: either parent and child, or full sisters. In regard that it died in the process of childbirth cannot be ruled of the age difference of at least twenty years, the latter out. The attribution of the burial to the Swifterbant option is so unlikely that it is safe to say we are dealing culture makes this the oldest one including an infant with the burial of a mother and her daughter. It is the in the Netherlands. first time for the Stone Age in the Netherlands that we Though there were no obvious grave goods found can take the burial aspect of family ties into account, in grave 2, the area of zone 3 shows some interesting and determine the sex of such a young infant. Another 96 Two new Swif terbant settlements at N ieuwegein-H et K looster, the N ether lan ds They constitute c. 16 % of the burial record. Of these twelve, only five are certainly under ten years of age. Infants younger than two years old do not occur at all in this earlier sample. Of the ten individuals from Nieuwegein that were found in graves or are repre- sented by both skeletal and dental elements, six are individuals under eighteen years. When the individu- als represented only by dental elements are taken into account as well, the ratio of persons older / younger than 18 years on site 1 is 7 / 9. Moreover, only one of the adults documented at Nieuwegein reached an age Fig.  13 Late Mesolithic and Swifterbant inhumations in the of over 35 years (35 – 45), despite the fact that older Netherlands. ages were not uncommon during the Late Mesolithic and in the Swifterbant culture: 19 of the 73 individu- als mentioned above lived to at least 35 years. It is not yet clear how this should be interpreted. piece of information which the DNA analysis brought With regard to the under-represented number of non- to light is that the skull from zone 2 (ID1) concerns a adults in the burial record until now, it has been male individual who is a second or third degree relative suggested that the death of children was subject to of the mother and daughter in zone 3. DNA samples specific funeral practices and did not always lead of the other individuals are still under investigation. to a formal burial (Raemaekers et al. 2009). The high number of children and adolescents present in Nieuwegein, and for example the care with which Implications of the discovery the mother and daughter in grave 2 were laid to rest, may lead to a revision of these notions. However, the Human remains from the Late Mesolithic period / overall record is still relatively small (< 100 individu- Swifterbant culture are only occasionally discov- als) and spans a time period of some 1,000 years, so ered in the Netherlands. Between 1974 and 1998, it is to be expected that the discovery of new burial 70 individuals9 were excavated in 25 years’ time. sites will further influence this research. However, during the next 20 years, only three more individuals were added to this record – in 2005 (Rae- maekers / De Roever 2020) and 2010 (Hamburg Considerations for future research and et al. 2012; see Fig. 13). The recent discovery of site looking across the borders 1 in Nieuwegein is the first time in many years that a burial ground of some extent is excavated, with When the analysis of both site 1 and site B4/17 is ten individuals buried there, plus at least six that in a more final phase, the results will be placed in are represented by dental elements. The discovery is the wider perspective of the Neolithic in the Nether- therefore of great importance and will contribute to lands and interpreted in relation to the neolithisati- the existing data on Swifterbant burial practices, not on process of northwestern Europe. Though this is least because the DNA results add new dimensions already often done for artefact studies like pottery to the interpretations. typologies and flint and stone tools, the comparison One of the first things that stand out when of Swifterbant burials is usually confined to other looking at the remains from Nieuwegein, is the rela- sites within the Dutch borders (as it consequently is tively high number of children and adolescents in in the current paper). The aDNA study of which the the record. Among the 73 individuals from previ- Nieuwegein individuals are part will automatically ously known Late Mesolithic and Swifterbant sites lead to an international view through the research there are just twelve specimen under eighteen years. on the European genetic heritage. It is important that we expand this approach to the developments in burial customs from the Mesolithic to the Neolithic, for the entire area of the northern European plain. 9  This number includes burials as well as loose bones that The publications of Terberger (2006) and Teetaert­ with certainty belong to different individuals. Individuals repre- sented only by dental elements found outside burials are not (2010), for example, with overviews of burial sites included. in northwestern Europe in the Late Mesolithic and H e l l e M . M o l th o f an d Ste ffe n B aets e n 97 Neolithic, provide a good starting point for this Raemaekers 1999: D. C. M. Raemaekers, The articulation research. By means of studying variables like the of a ‘New Neolithic’. The meaning of the Swifterbant presence of grave goods, the occurrence of multiple Culture for the process of Neolithisation in the western burials, and the role of children, we can explore how part of the North-European plain (4900 – 3400 BC). Ar- the human remains from Nieuwegein fit into or alter chaeological Studies Leiden University 3 (Leiden 1999). the existing picture. Raemaekers et al. 2009: D.  C.  M. Raemaekers / H.  M. Molthof / E. Smits, The textbook ‘dealing with death’ from the Neolithic Swifterbant culture (5000 – 3400 BC), References the Nether­lands. Ber. RGK 88, 2009, 479 – 500. Raemaekers / De Roever 2020: D. C. M. Raemaekers / Ten Anscher 2012: T.  J. ten Anscher,  Leven met de J. P. De Roever, Swifterbant S4 (the Netherlands): Vecht. Schokland-P14 en de Noordoostpolder in het Occupation and exploitation of a Neolithic levee site Neolithicum en de Bronstijd (Amsterdam 2012). (c. 4300 – 4000 cal. BC). Groningen Archaeological Stud- Ten Anscher / Knippenberg this volume: T. J. ten An- ies 36 (Groningen 2020). scher / S. Knippenberg, Unexpected dimensions of Van der Kroft / Molthof in prep.: P. van der Kroft / H. M. a Swifterbant settlement at Medel-De Roeskamp (the Molthof, Plangebied ’t Klooster, kavels 15, 23 & 32. Netherlands). RAAP-rapport 4240 (Weesp). Clason 1978: A. T. Clason, Worked bone, antler and teeth. Sprangers 2019: J. Sprangers, Boren in het onbekende: A preliminary report. Helinium 18 (Wetteren 1978). onderzoek naar het paleolandschap en prehistorische De Roever 2004: J. P. de Roever, Swifterbant-aardewerk. bewoning op bedrijvenpark Het Klooster, gemeente Een analyse van de neolithische nederzettingen bij Nieuwegein; archeologisch vooronderzoek: een inven- Swifterbant, 5e millenium voor Christus. Groningen tariserend veldonderzoek (karterend booronderzoek Archaeological Studies 2 (Groningen 2004) met monstername). RAAP-rapport 3306 (Weesp 2019). Devriendt 2014: I. Devriendt, Swifterbant stones: The Teetaert 2010: D. Teetaert, De funeraire behandeling van Neolithic stone and flint industry at Swifterbant (the kinderen tijdens het Mesolithicum van continentaal Netherlands): From stone typology and flint technology Noordwest-Europa en de transitie naar het Neolithicum to site function. Groningen Archaeological Studies 25 (Gent 2010). (Groningen 2014). Terberger 2006: T. Terberger, The Mesolithic Hunter-­ Hamburg et al. 2012: T. Hamburg / A. Müller / B. Quadflieg, Fisherer-Gatherers on the Northern German Plain. With Mesolithisch Swifterbant. Mesolithisch gebruik van een contributions by Sönke Hartz. In: K. Møller Hansen / K. duin ten zuiden van Swifterbant (8300 – 5000 v.Chr.). Een Buck Pedersen (eds.), Across the western Baltic. Procee- archeologische opgraving in het tracé van de N23/N307, dings of the archaeological conference ‘The Prehistory provincie Flevoland (Leiden / Amersfoort 2012). and Early Medieval Period in the Western Baltic’ in Vor- Hogestijn / Peeters 2001: J. W. H. Hogestijn / J. A. M. dingborg, South Zealand, Denmark, March 27th – 29th, Peeters (eds.), De mesolithische en vroeg-neolithische 2003 (Vordingborg 2006) 111 – 184. vindplaats Hoge Vaart-A27 (Flevoland). Rapportage White et al. 2011: T. D. White / M. T. Black / P. A. Folkens, Archeologische Monumentenzorg 79 (Amersfoort 2001). Human osteology: Third edition (Cambridge, Massa- Jansen 2019: B. Jansen, Briefverslag aanvullend karterend / chusetts 2011). waarderend booronderzoek Plangebied ’t Klooster, ­kavels 15, 23 & 32 (Weesp 2019). Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 , 9 9 – 122) 99 Niedernstöcken – a settlement of the Linear Pottery culture beyond the loess border in the land of hunters and gatherers Klaus Gerken, Andreas Kotula, Clemens Ludwig, Hildegard Nelson and Alexandra Philippi Abstract During a rescue excavation, the first settlement of the Linear Pottery culture (LBK) in the north German lowlands was discovered, located about 50 km northwest of the already known LBK settlements in the district of Hildesheim. Due to the relatively small area of excavation, no reliable house layouts were discovered. Numerous pits and post-holes as well as typical artefacts such as adzes, ceramics, flint tools with a glossy lacquer (sickle sheen), and whetstones were documented. The settlement can be dated to the younger Flomborn period. The location of the site raises many questions about the Neo- lithic north of the loess zone and the relationship between LBK farmers and Mesolithic hunter-gatherer groups. The discovery of two adzes on an adjacent piece of arable land in the spring of 2018 led to a geophysical investigation of this area in the summer of the same year and finally to a small research excavation in the summer of 2019. Keywords Linear Pottery, Linienbandkeramik, neolithisation, settlement, younger LBK, younger Flomborn period Zusammenfassung Bei einer Rettungsgrabung wurde ca. 50 km nordwestlich der bisher im Lössgebiet bekannten band­ keramischen Siedlungen des Landkreises Hildesheim überraschend die erste bandkeramische Siedlung in der norddeutschen Tiefebene entdeckt. Aufgrund der relativ kleinen Untersuchungsfläche wurden keine sicheren Hausgrundrisse, jedoch zahl­reiche Gruben und Pfostengruben sowie typische Artefakte wie Dechsel, Keramik, Flintgeräte mit Lackglanz und Schleifsteine entdeckt. Die Siedlung lässt sich der jüngeren Flombornzeit zuweisen. Die exponierte Lage wirft viele Fragen bezüglich der Neolithisierung nördlich der Lösszone und zum Verhältnis der linienbandkeramischen Bauern zu den mesolithischen Wild­beutergruppen auf. Der Fund zweier Dechsel auf einer nördlich anschließenden Ackerfläche im Frühjahr 2018 führte zu einer geophysikalischen Untersuchung im Sommer 2018 in diesem Bereich und schließlich zu einer kleinen Forschungsgrabung im Sommer 2019. Introduction1 University of Göttingen funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG) and with resources from the State A settlement of the Linear Pottery culture (Linearband- Office of Cultural Heritage Preservation for Lower- keramik, LBK) was discovered in 2015 at the northern Saxony (Niedersächsisches Landesdenkmalamt; NLD).2 outskirts of Niedernstöcken (Neustadt am Rübenberge, The site is located on flat terrain of the lower ter- Lower Saxony; Figs. 1; 9), during a rescue excavation race with a soil fertility which is high for this region; on an area of approximately 30 x 60 m under the direc- the soil substrate is loess-like with a high proportion tion of one of the authors (Klaus Gerken). Additional of silt and clay. To the west there is the Leine lowland geomagnetic prospections were carried out in 2015 and at a level of about +29.0 m NN. The current distance 2018. In 2019, it was possible to continue the work to the river Leine is 1,150 m, to the edge of the valley with a short field campaign as part of a project at the meadow approx. 310 m. 1  This paper represents an updated and complemented versi- 2  The work was carried out within the framework of a DFG on of Gerken / Nelson 2016. project headed by T. Terberger (TE/259/17 – 1) and supported by the NLD. We thank both institutions for their financial support. 100 Niedernstöcken – a settlement of the Linear Pottery culture beyond the loess border in the land of hunters and gatherers Fig. 1 Location of the sites Niedernstöcken FStNr. 21 and 24 (red dot) in Lower Saxony (map basis SRTM 3, graphics: A. Niemuth). The paper gives an overview of the features and ration (feature 17) was visible over an area of about finds discovered so far. Furthermore, the location of 100 m2. Only with the second planum did numerous the site significantly north of the previously known pits and posts come to light, and decorated sherds and distribution area of the LBK is discussed. two adzes were found. Since the building depth had already been reached on this level, only some post holes and pits could be cut. Although several post pits Features from the 2015 excavation lay in rows, they cannot be grouped into clear house During the excavation in 2015, numerous pits and plans. Post pits 4, 6, 5, and 41 in the western part post holes as well as characteristic find material were of the investigation area formed a clear WSW-ENE recorded; but definite house plans could not be identi- oriented row, with regular distances of about 2 m. At fied. The findings have already been presented in detail the end of this row was pit feature 3 (225 x 245 cm; (Gerken / Nelson 2016), so that only the results are Fig. 2). Post pits 40 and 7 were located at right angles summarised below. to it. Flint artefacts, a fragment of a hearthstone and After the removal of the topsoil and the upper some fragments of burnt clay suggest a connection brown soil horizon, the first features appeared in the with the LBK, and the feature might have been part of west and south of the investigation area. However, the a Linear Pottery house. A W-E oriented row of posts discolourations were not clearly recognisable in the about 11 m long was formed by post pits 8 – 15. The planum. Only when cut did some of these features cut features contained large amounts of burnt clay and turn out to be post pits, filled with charcoal and burnt suggest a burnt building. At the northern edge of the clay, with a preserved depth of up to 35 cm and a central pit complex, post pits 19 – 21 formed another preserved width of about 25 cm. Somewhat east of WSW-ENE oriented row. At a right angle to this were the centre of the investigation area, a large discolou- the post pits 33 and 34. The area between post pits K l a u s G e rke n , A n dre as Kotu l a, Cl e me n s Lu dwi g, Hi l degard N elson and Alexandra P hilippi 101 Fig. 2 Niedernstöcken FStNr. 21. General plan of the excavation area (graphics: P. Brunkert / K. Gerken / V. König). 21 and 33 was disturbed by pit 28. Post pits 30 and The find material from the 2015 26 may then have been part of the internal layout of excavation a house; they were in line with post pit 33 and ran towards post pit 18. So far, 706 pottery sherds have been assigned to the The majority of the features at Niedernstöcken LBK (418 pieces of coarse ware; 288 pieces of fine addressed as post pits had diameters of less than ware; Figs. 3 – 4). An identification of vessel units is 50 cm and depths of max. 40 cm, which seems quite only possible to a limited extent; therefore, single small compared to other LBK post pits. It is possible sherds often form a vessel unit. There are dome- that not the post pits but only the posts themselves shaped vessels with walls bending inwards (form 2 were recorded here. A reliable reconstruction of the according to Moos 1996; vessel units 1, 4, and 30) supposed house features is not possible; perhaps only and those with vertical walls (form 1 according to the peripheral area of the settlement with smaller Moos 1996; vessel unit 2). Bottles (form 8 accord- outbuildings or fences was recorded. A large propor- ing to Moos 1996; vessel units 32 and 38) and so- tion of the find material (> 190 pottery sherds, > 40 called ‘Zipfelschalen’ (vessel units 42, 47, and 48) flint artefacts, a spindle whorl, burnt clay, and six are detectable. A rim sherd from a wide-mouthed grinding stone fragments) can be assigned to feature vessel (vessel unit 37) shows a single incised line. 17 mentioned above. The majority of the pits had not Furthermore, there is a rim piece decorated with been dug into the sandy soil. They presumably served small finger imprints (vessel unit 45). Unusual is a to extract raw materials and were later backfilled. rim sherd of a small truncated vessel with a mouth 102 Niedernstöcken – a settlement of the Linear Pottery culture beyond the loess border in the land of hunters and gatherers Fig. 3 Niedernstöcken FStNr. 21. Pottery vessel unit 1 – 31. Scale 1 : 3 (drawings: W. Köhne-Wulf). diameter of c. 12 cm (vessel unit 30). The vessel is ranged one below the other are present (band filling decorated with several narrow, unfilled bands. Vessel 46 according to Strien 2010). unit 39 can be reconstructed as a large vessel with The clay colour of the fine ware varies on the a mouth diameter of c. 26 cm. The base of a knob as outside and inside of the vessels between brown-grey, well as a line band with two short incised lines ar- grey, and black-grey; in the fracture it is mostly grey, K l a u s G e rke n , A n dre as Kotu l a, Cl e me n s Lu dwi g, Hi l degard N elson and Alexandra P hilippi 103 Fig. 4 Niedernstöcken FStNr. 21. Pottery vessel unit 32 – 56. Scale 1 : 3 (drawings: W. Köhne-Wulf). rarely reddish. Macroscopically, a grain is hardly vis- punctures as well as finger imprints are documented ible. The fine ware is predominantly decorated. Es- as decoration techniques; rim decorations on the fine pecially the black-grey fine ware is remarkably well pottery are the exception. A bowl rim (vessel unit 27) smoothed. Several times it can be observed that a corresponds to type 12 according to Moos (1996). A thin, fine coating has weathered. Incised lines and rim sherd from a truncated bowl has a rim-parallel line 104 Niedernstöcken – a settlement of the Linear Pottery culture beyond the loess border in the land of hunters and gatherers Fig. 5 Niedernstöcken FStNr. 21. Grindstones and axes. Scale 1 : 2 (drawings: K. Gerken). cut by horizontal punctures (vessel unit 34, probably majority of them are filled with paired punctures / rim decoration 1 according to Strien 2010). scoring lines at larger intervals. The punctures can be Currently only bands formed by two lines are parallel (vessel units 2, 10, 18, 39, 40; band filling 46 documented. The ends of the line bands (Richter / according to Strien 2010), or transverse (according Schwartz-Mackensen 2015, 102 – 104), which are also to pers. comm.: Strien band filling 521, a variant of relevant for typo-chronological considerations, are band filling 46) to the band direction (vessel units 3, only slightly represented in the find material. Straight 5, 18, 22, 41). The combination of longer incised lines (vessel units 3, 31, perhaps 30) and pointed ends occur with one or more punctures occurs on four other (vessel unit 40). Most of the bands are filled, and the vessel units (vessel units 1, 13, 14, 21; band filling 8 K l a u s G e rke n , A n dre as Kotu l a, Cl e me n s Lu dwi g, Hi l degard N elson and Alexandra P hilippi 105 Fig. 6 Niedernstöcken FStNr. 21. Flint artefacts with sickle gloss and traces of use (photos: K. Gerken). according to Strien 2010). The band of vessel unit pottery finds also include a complete double conical 9 is provided with alternating three or four parallel spindle whorl (Fig. 4). band-parallel incisions, followed by an undecorated The coarse ware is mostly yellowish grey and zone. Narrow linear bands occur in five cases, filled reddish grey on the outside, but predominantly grey with more or less paired triangular or roundish punc- on the inside and in the fracture. The old surface is tures over a longer distance (vessel units 17, 20, 23, often eroded. It is exclusively tempered with inor- 31, 34); these pattern corresponds to band filling 10 ganic material. The main material used was iron and according to Strien 2010. Finally, two sherds of a manganese, and to a lesser extent quartz. The coarse vessel are present, with the band (?) filled with dis- ware often shows handles and knobs, but rarely other orderly small punctures (vessel unit 6). According to decorative elements. Moos (1996, 132) this corresponds to band type 52, The other artefacts also correspond to the usual which he considers typical for the younger Flomborn find assemblage of LBK settlements (Gerken / Nelson phase. A vessel fragment from Esbeck also bears a 2016, 47 – 58). Burnt clay was recovered from several similar pattern (Richter / Schwarz-Mackensen 2015, post pits, partly with impressions of wattle, and a small plate 25,11). There is a comparable piece from Itzum number of burnt bones is present as well. The rock available for vessel unit 26 (Wendland 2012, plate artefacts include three adzes and one adze fragment. 11: vessel unit 141). For vessel unit 4 with line bands Among the other artefacts, grindstone fragments of starting from a knob there is an equivalent item from reddish-grey red sandstone are predominant (Fig. 5). Esbeck (Richter / Schwarz-Mackensen 2015, plate In addition, there are fragments of a grindstone and a 13.10). The rim sherd of vessel unit 10 has an analogy grinding ball fragment. The axes are made most likely in a find from Diemarden (Moos 1996, plate 15.1). The of actinolite-hornblende slate, for which the Jizera 106 Niedernstöcken – a settlement of the Linear Pottery culture beyond the loess border in the land of hunters and gatherers Fig. 7 Niedernstöcken FStNr. 21. Flint artefacts: 1 – 8 scrapers; 9 burin; 10 – 13 pieces with retouch and sickle gloss; 14 truncated blad; 15 – 16 blades with sickle gloss; 17 pointed tool; 18 surface retouched point; 19 – 23 blade fragments and flakes/chips with use retouch or partial retouch; 24 pounder. Scale 2 : 3 (drawings: K. Gerken). K l a u s G e rke n , A n dre as Kotu l a, Cl e me n s Lu dwi g, Hi l degard N elson and Alexandra P hilippi 107 mountains in the Sudetes mountains have been sug- that the settlement area also continued to the north. gested as the scource of origin (e. g. Prostředník et al. In November 2018, geomagnetic prospection was also 2005). All three axes show signs of use and can be carried out in this direction (Ludwig / Philippi 2019). ­assigned to types I-III as defined by Moos (1996). One The magnetogram showed numerous anomalies in- of the completely preserved axes (Fig. 5) is remarkably dicating an intensive settlement of the area (Fig. 8). flat and short with a very large width, which is prob- Most of the structures visible in the measurement ably due to reworking (cf. Klimscha 2016, 79 – 102). In image are round to elongated interferences with high the Niedernstöcken inventory there is also a spherical magnetic radiation, which probably originate from pits pounder (Fig. 7,24). or similar findings. They are distributed, sometimes in The composition of the flint artefact inventory clusters, over almost the entire area, but seem to thin from Niedernstöcken 21 largely corresponds to that out towards the north. Several elongated positive struc- of other LBK sites in the Leine valley. Both the pro- tures occur in pairs in the southern part of the survey portion of implements in the flint inventory and the area. These are probably typical wall-accompanying percentage frequency of the individual implement pits of LBK longhouses (e. g. Posselt / Saile 2014, forms lie within the range determined, for example, 137 – 140). The orientation of the presumed house lay- by Weller (2003) for settlements in the Leine valley outs corresponds to the results of the geomagnetic sur- south of Hanover. The 196 flint artefacts consist of vey of 2015. In view of their predominant NW-SE orien- 98 flakes, 48 blades, 28 pieces of debris, and 18 cores tation, the majority of the detected anomalies probably (each including fragments). Ten flakes were modified belong to the LBK settlement of Niedernstöcken, which into tools. Eleven intentionally retouched blades are thus seems to continue to the east and west. present. In addition to the intentional retouching, In August 2019 a short excavation campaign un- traces of use can be seen on the artefacts under a der the direction of A. Kotula took place to test the ex- binocular microscope as well as macroscopically, in tension of the LBK settlement area to the north (FStNr. the form of fractures and polish / varnish (Fig. 6) as 24, Fig. 8; cf. Kotula 2021). In area 1, about 80 m well as pitting (for a closer description of the artefacts, northwest of the known site, the geomagnetic survey see Gerken / Nelson 2016, 49 – 58). The relatively had revealed elongated (pit) structures running NW-SE. high proportion of debris (14 %) can be seen as an Initially, no such features were identified in the planum. indication of a rather poor raw material situation in However, in the western part of the planum a row of the area. Tool forms present are scrapers, pieces with four smaller round pits, running NW-SE, appeared, end retouch, burins, partially retouched pieces, drills/ which can be interpreted as a row of posts. A distinct sharpeners, microliths, surface retouched points, and discolouration was then visible about 0.2 m below the other combined modifications. Scrapers are attested top of the planum, which is interpreted as a long pit on basic forms of both blades and flakes(Fig. 7,1 – 8). according to the geomagnetic picture. Few undecorated Sickle sheen on end-retouched artefacts and two blade pottery finds from this area correspond technologi- fragments suggest use as sickle inserts. (Fig. 7,15 – 16). cally to the known LBK ware of the site. About 150 m A microlith from the site can be addressed as a further north, oval to amorphous settlement pits were trapezoidal point. Such point forms are rather found found in area 2, as well as some smaller features that in Early Mesolithic inventories, e. g. Duvensee 2 and 6 can be interpreted as posts. Most of the features were (Bokelmann 1981). The strongly deviating patination poor in finds, but one pit yielded over 5.5 kg of pottery of this artefact and also of one core speak for an Early material as well as three almost complete adzes. In the Mesolithic context of these finds; this is regionally lower area, the features were interspersed with charcoal significant for the period, also considering the soil and contained bone fragments and a few flint artefacts. milieu (Gerken / Piche in prep.). The pottery largely corresponds to that of site 21. Settlement expansion – geomagnetic The chronological classification of the prospection and verification of results site After the excavation in 2015, a first geomagnetic The pottery corresponds well to material from the site prospection was carried out to the south and west of of Itzum (district of Hildesheim; Wendland 2012), the excavation area on a total of 5,000 m² in order which is dated to phases II and III according to Meier- to locate further features. Two axes picked up during Arendt (1966). Find material from Bründeln (Heege systematic surveys (Gerken / Piche 2020) suggested 1989) also shows similarities with the pottery from 108 Niedernstöcken – a settlement of the Linear Pottery culture beyond the loess border in the land of hunters and gatherers Niedernstöcken. However, since the Bründeln site also type Bf 68 also occurs in the Thuringian phase II. A contains material from the younger LBK, including complete synchronisation of the chronology applicable surface finds or material from undocumented pits, to eastern Thuringia with that for the regions west of the this comparison does not provide any reliable clues Harz mountains has not yet been conclusively achieved. for dating the Niedernstöcken ware. All in all, the majority of the Niedernstöcken pot- In comparing the Niedernstöcken pottery with tery material can be assigned to the younger Flomborn the material from Esbeck (district of Helmstedt), the phase (phase II according to Meier-Arendt 1966, i. e. best analogies are found in ceramic phase 2 (Richter /  style phase 3 according to Moos 1996). A transition Schwarz-Mackensen 2015, 132 – 133). A characteris- into phase III according to Meier-Arendt, i. e. into tic feature, among others, is band type Bf 46. However, the middle LBK according to Hessian terminology, is according to Schwarz-Mackensen 2015, band type possible due to some long-lived band types like 68 and Bf 10, which is relatively common in Niedernstöcken, 79 according to Moos (1996, fig. 38). The Flomborn is said to occur as late as pottery phase 4. Moos (1996, phase in the Rhineland stage is dated to the period 111), however, lists band type Bf 10, which he sub- between 5,300 to 5,150/5,125 calBC (Lüning 2005); sumes into his band type *52, together with *35, as Saile (2009, 43) postulates such a chronological ap- characteristic of his phase 3, which he parallels with proach for the area between Weser and Harz as well. the younger Flomborn phase. Four AMS dates were measured on charcoal sam- Band type Bf 46 or 68 (a), which dominates in Nie- ples from site 21 (Table 1). The sample from feature 39 dernstöcken, is also frequently represented in Thuringia. (Poz-78700) is clearly older than expected, while the According to Einicke (2014, 234 fig. 103), this band date from feature 33 (Poz-82655) is younger than would filling has its maximum occurrence in the early middle have been expected from the typological analyses. The LBK there (stage III a). Occasionally, however, band other two samples are within the expected dating range. Fig. 8 Niedernstöcken FStNr. 21 and 24: Geomagnetic surveys 2015 and 2018 and location of excavation sections 2015 and 2019 according to Gerken / Nelson 2016 and Ludwig / Philippi 2019 (graphics: A. Kotula). K l a u s G e rke n , A n dre as Kotu l a, Cl e me n s Lu dwi g, Hi l degard N elson and Alexandra P hilippi 109 Sample Feature BP calBC in the loess distribution area. In addition, Heege (1989, number cat. no. 352, plate 57,1) lists a site near Pattensen (gravel Poz-78700 pit feature 39 6,940 +/- 40 BP 5,966–5,730 calBC 2σ pit, now Rethen FStNr. 6, Hanover region), which, how- Poz-82654 post feature 21 6,070 +/- 40 BP 5,202–4,844 calBC 2σ ever, only yielded a characteristic sherd with a knobbe, Poz-82655 post feature 33 6,020 +/- 40 BP 5,011–4,799 calBC 2σ the assignment of which to the LBK is not entirely Poz-82656 post feature 34 6,160 +/- 40 BP 5,217–5,000 calBC 2σ certain. However, about 40 unperforated adzes have been documented as single finds in the area between Table 1 14C-data of site Niedernstöcken (FStNr. 21; 24). Calibration Niedernstöcken and the Hildesheim Börde (Fig. 9 and of data: OxCal v4.2.4 (Bronk Ramsey 2013; Reimer et al. 2013). Table 2), which, according to Merkel (1999, 223 – 238), are essentially restricted to the LBK, in contrast to the LBK north of the loess areas perforated ones. The interpretation of these finds as indications of further LBK settlements, as objects left The Niedernstöcken site lies clearly north of the south- behind on LBK exploratory expeditions, or as imple- ern Hanoverian loess area. The nearest LBK settlement ments used in a Mesolithic context is controversially sites at Sarstedt (FStNr. 7 and 35; Heege 1989, cat. no. discussed (cf. e. g. Steinmetz 1985, 317 – 320; in contrast, 139; Weller 2002) and Bründeln (FStNr. 2; Heege among others, Cziesla 2008, esp. 430 – 431). 1989, 85 – 102, cat. no. 228) are about 50 km away as Saile (2007, 45) assumes that the reason for the the crow flies, and are all located east of the river Leine lack of settlements between the LBK density centres in Fig. 9 Distribution of LBK pottery and unperforated adzes outside the LBK’s core area; cf. Table 2 (map basis SRTM 3, graphics: A. Niemuth). 110 Niedernstöcken – a settlement of the Linear Pottery culture beyond the loess border in the land of hunters and gatherers northern Lower Saxony – e. g. in the Calenberger Land these sites were only recognised in the case of mas- – was the exhaustion of the LBK’s expansion power. sive ground interventions, their proportion is probably After the discovery of the Niedernstöcken settlement, underrepresented (Heege 1989, 181). This choice of however, this view may be questioned. Why would the location is not only to be found in the Hildesheim area, LBK settlers have made a 50 km advance to the north, as an example on a low terrace of the Rhine shows but not to the neighbouring other bank of the Leine? (Heinen 2010). In this context, the LBK colonisation Most of the features in Niedernstöcken only ap- far beyond the loess zones to the northeast, especially peared about 0.5 m below the present surface and in the Uckermark, should be recalled, too (cf. Linde- were initially hardly recognisable. Heege (1989, 181) mann 2007; but see also Cziesla 2008). already stated that the LBK settlements in alluvial plains or on level ground can only be recognised with deep ground penetration. The remarkable number of The Late Mesolithic north of the loess 38 LBK settlements newly discovered in lignite mines border in the central lowlands of in the area around Leipzig during the last 15 years Lower Saxony (Stäuble 2011) also shows that LBK settlements are only found with deeper earthworks. The settlement Can we assume that the area north of the loess zone of Minden-Dankersen (North Rhine-Westphalia; Gün- – and thus also the area around the sites Niedern- ther 1988) was discovered on the site of a railway stöcken 21 and 24 – belonged to the foraging area track that had previously been laid up to 3 m (!) deep of Late Mesolithic groups around 5,200 – 5,000 BC? or on the neighbouring deeply ploughed field, respec- Looking at the area north of the loess zone in a tively. It is probably only a matter of time before the radius of about 85 km around the site, to the eastern first LBK settlement remains are also discovered in lowlands near Bremervörde in the north, lake Düm- the Calenberger Land. Further LBK settlements can mer in the west, and the border to Saxony-Anhalt in also be expected in the Leine valley north of Hanover, the east, we can see that only a few sites with Late due to the fact that a clear accumulation of unperfo- Mesolithic features and/or artefacts have been sci- rated adzes has been documented on a narrow strip entifically investigated.4 Beyond that, a large num- of land along the western bank of the Leine, where ber of surface sites is known, which, however, does soil of the same type as in the immediate vicinity of not represent the result of systematic prospections, the Niedernstöcken site can be found. but essentially reflects the different state of research. Presumably, the Niedernstöcken site offered the Schwabedissen (1944) already stated that the discov- LBK farmers good combination of soil workability, ery of ‘pre-pottery age’ sites depends considerably on quite high soil fertility, and remoteness from flood- the activities of local collectors, and this is still true ing, which largely corresponded to the conditions today for Lower Saxony.5 on the loess soils further south. Some time ago, W.-D. The surface sites in the area between the Harz Steinmetz interpreted single finds of adzes and pot- mountains and the river Aller were last comprehen- tery vessels as evidence of settlement attempts by the sively reviewed and presented by Schwarz-Mack- LBK and stated that he would not be surprised ‘if one ensen (1978), those from the district of Gifhorn by day a settlement of the LBK were discovered in the Zeitz (1969). More recent data, apart from the work north German lowlands’3 (Steinmetz 1985, 319 – 320). of Trebess / Eichfeld (2018), are not available. How- Even if the strong connection of the LBK to loess ever, detailed analyses are available from the districts soils is repeatedly emphasised (e. g. Saile 2009), Heege of Rotenburg (Wümme) and Celle (Breest 1993; 1997; (1989) already demonstrated that although Early Neo- Gerken 2001a), although the district of Rotenburg has lithic settlements are located in the loess zone on a only been partially processed. In contrast, only few large scale, other sites were also used on a small scale. data are available from the district of Uelzen (Richter Two of the 14 Early Neolithic settlements mapped by 2002). In the districts of Nienburg, Hameln-Pyrmont, Heege 1989 are located in the floodplain and on the Schaumburg, Diepholz, and the Hanover region, only edge of the floodplain (Algermissen FStNr. 2 and 3, Rössing FStNr. 2, cf. Heege 1989). Due to the fact that 4  Dehnke 1964; Gerken 2009; 2012; 2015a; 2016; 2020; Trebess / Eichfeld 2018. 3  Translated from the German original text: „wenn eines ­Tages eine Siedlung der LBK im Norddeutschen Tiefland ent- 5 Cf. Metzger-Krahe 1977; Breest 1993; 1997; Gerken deckt werden würde“. 2001a; Mahlstedt 2015. K l a u s G e rke n , A n dre as Kotu l a, Cl e me n s Lu dwi g, Hi l degard N elson and Alexandra P hilippi 111 a general survey of Mesolithic sites was carried out.6 tures. Thus, flint artefact scatters detected at Hülsen Most of the find material from the research area is have also been incorrectly assigned chronologically still in private hands or in regional museums and has and not documented accordingly. not yet been evaluated in detail. Thus, no systematic Mesolithic burials have so far remained unrecog- recording of Mesolithic features and finds has yet been nised in the lowlands of Lower Saxony, as the decalci- conducted for the majority of the area under consid- fied sandy soils do not offer any preservation condi- eration here, and it therefore remains an area empty tions for organic material. However, features from the of finds on maps. excavations of Oldendorf (FStNr. 69, Ldkr. Rotenburg) In addition, methodological problems have to were discussed as possible Mesolithic graves due to be taken into account researching Mesolithic sites their shape and red colouration (Gerken et al. 2016). (Gerken 2016). Activity areas with a high number of Similar findings were documented by one of the authors lithic artefacts are detected on the surface, but likewise, (K.G.) in Donstorf, FStNr. 37, in 2011 (unpublished). in the excavations carried out in very large numbers Against this background, a mapping of Late within the framework of the causative principle, Meso- Mesolithic sites can only represent an interim status, lithic find scatters are perceived and documented only whereas the original frequency of Late Mesolithic sites rudimentarily. Mesolithic pits and individual hearths was probably much higher (Fig. 10). On the one hand, are often not recognised as artificial features and rather the mapping reveals the preferred areas of exploration attributed to natural, pedological processes or (fire) by collectors. On the other hand, a regular location of events. Even if such features are recognised that are not Late Mesolithic sites on the dunes and smaller hilltops accompanied by stone artefacts, they are often assigned along rivers can be discerned. These types of sites can to a ceramic period. Erichshagen (FStNr. 91; district also be assumed for regions with similar topographical of Nienburg; Gerken 2020) represents a welcome ex- and ecological conditions that have so far been largely ception; there numerous Mesolithic find scatters, pits, empty of finds. Systematic surveys and the examination and hearth features were recorded, documented and of collections in recent years have revealed, for exam- excavated in the course of pre-construction measures. ple, nine new Late Mesolithic sites in the immediate In Rullstorf (FStNr. 8; district of Lüneburg; Gebers vicinity of the Niedernstöcken 21 site (Fig. 10). Since 2002), Mesolithic find scatters were also identified there are no larger and closed Late Mesolithic inven- during the excavation of younger settlement features. tories from the surroundings of Niedernstöcken so far, On the other hand, at the site Hülsen 1 (district of no statement can be made about their composition. Verden), more than 180 charcoal pits in an Iron Age In the following, Late Mesolithic sites with abso- settlement were initially identified as traces of burnt lute dates from the research area will be considered. posts (Schirnig 1965), later as pits and, in connec- From the site Schwitschen FStNr. 42, district of Roten- tion with a few pottery sherds that had entered them burg (Wümme), only 35  km away (Gerken 2012; through bioturbation, dated as at most ‘Neolithic’ 2015a), seven dates are available. Four dates fall into the (Nowatzyk 1990). Only four 14C-results allowed an early trapezoidal phase with a range from 6,372 to 5,898 assignment to the Late Mesolithic at a later point of calBC (2σ).9 Three further dates prove a younger phase research.7 More recently, large clusters of charcoal with results between 5,719 and 5,330 calBC.10 Both pits have fortunately been assigned to the correct time time phases are also evidenced by significant artefacts. horizon.8 But here, too, dating series are necessary to From Oldendorf FStNr. 52, district of Rotenburg clarify the chronological depth of the numerous fea- (Wümme) (Gerken 2012), 17 dates are available; be- ginning at the transition from the Early to the Late Mesolithic and ending at the onset of the trapezoidal 6  Adameck 1993; Schween 1993; Bischop 1997; Moser 1998; industry (6,420 – 6,110 calBC; Poz-7548: 7,430±50 Stark 2003. BP). Accordingly, trapezoids occur in only a few speci- 7  Dr. Jutta Precht, Kreisarchäologie Verden, is thanked for mens. From Oldendorf FStNr. 69, district of Roten- providing the excavation documentation and the 14C-data. Da- ting results are: Hv-16559: 6,815±65 BP (5,842 – 5,619 calBC); Hv-16560: 6,850±65 BP (5,876  –  5 ,633 calBC); Hv-16688: 6,855±70 BP (5,887 – 5,632 calBC); Hv-16689: 7,005±90 BP (6,046 – 5,721 calBC). 9  All the following dates mentioned in the text indicate age ranges in the 2σ range. 8  E.g. Eversten FStNr. 3, city of Oldenburg (Fries 2011); Stöcken FStNr. 24 (Assendorp 1985); Wohlendorf FStNr. 24 10  ERL-18750 (8,285±56 BP); ERL-18753 (7,550±55 BP); and Ahlden FStNr. 31, both distr. Heidekreis; Erichshagen ERL-18755 (7,512±54 BP); KN-69 (7,430±60 BP); ERL-14453 FStNr. 91 and Holtorf FStNr. 9, both distr. Nienburg/Weser (7,341±55 BP); HV-1348 (7,320±130 BP); ERL-14452 (7,239±69 (Gerken 2016; 2020), and also Eydelstedt FStNr. 68, distr. BP); ERL-14451 (7,148 ± 54 BP); ERL-18751 (6,790±51 BP); Diepholz (Gerken 2016). ERL-18754 (6,724±51 BP); ERL-18752 (6,480±51 BP). 112 Niedernstöcken – a settlement of the Linear Pottery culture beyond the loess border in the land of hunters and gatherers Fig. 10 Distribution of Late Mesolithic sites in central Lower Saxony (black dots). Red dots mark the newly recorded sites in the immediate vicinity of the Niedernstöcken settlement, the circle the location of Niedernstöcken FStNr. 21/24. For sites see Table 3 (map basis SRTM 3, graphics: A. Niemuth). burg (Wümme) (Gerken 2009), 14 dates are avail- So far, there is not a single Mesolithic date from able. The most recent date here falls within the time the area between Dümmer, Oste, the loess border, and frame of 6,370 to 6,070 calBC (Poz-13789: 7,350±50 eastern Lower Saxony that falls within the period of BP), although no trapezoids were recorded from this the LBK settlement of Niedernstöcken. However, it site. Furthermore, various dates are available from would be premature to deduce that the entire area the charcoal pits already mentioned (Gerken 2016; was (largely) devoid of settlements in the late 6th mil- 2020) and other Late Mesolithic hearths, from the lennium calBC. Rather, this reflects the insufficient surroundings of which, however, no datable artefact state of research. inventories were recorded.11 Against this background, our knowledge of the material culture of the Late Mesolithic groups in the central lowlands of Lower Saxony is very limited, especially since organic objects are completely lack- 11  Among these are Lauenbrück FStNr. 21, district of Roten- burg (Wümme) (Neumann 2006), Rehden FStNr. 38 (Gerken / ing. Yet there are topographical situations offering Selent 2019), Rehden FStNr. 52 (Feierabend / Selent 2019), promising starting points for research excavations. Hemsloh FStNr. 33 (Gerken et al. 2019), all district of Diep- holz, as well as Otterstedt FStNr. 1 (Precht 2003), Hülsen FSt- With the current state of research, it is not possible Nr. 1 and Westen FStNr. 7 (Precht 2020), all district of Verden. to make more detailed statements about technologi- A further date is known from Wohlendorf FStNr. 24, district of Heidekreis. The dates from these contexts are also no later than cal differences or influences between Mesolithic and between 5,400 and 5,200 calBC. Neolithic cultural groups or about the neolithisation K l a u s G e rke n , A n dre as Kotu l a, Cl e me n s Lu dwi g, Hi l degard N elson and Alexandra P hilippi 113 process in this area. However, the same applies to the Outlook central and eastern German inland areas (Wechler 1993, 6). According to Cziesla (2008, 408) ‘the over- More than 30 years after an overview of the LBK by all number of Late Mesolithic sites in inland areas Steinmetz (1985), its distribution pattern in Lower is decreasing compared to previous periods’.12 This Saxony has become more distinct and can now be statement cannot be followed as it stands, because extended by 50 km to the north with the Niedern- on the one hand the figures he mentions for the stöcken sites. In this context, the discovery of a LBK Early Mesolithic compared to the Late Mesolithic round-bottomed jar (‘Kumpf’) near Uesen in the dis- refer to a significantly longer period of time. On trict of Verden (Potratz 1941) appears in a new light. the other hand, selected regions are presented here The accumulation of adze finds along the river Leine which cannot be regarded as representative for the between Mandelsloh and Niedernstöcken also indi- Lower Saxon lowlands. Figures from four regions in cates that further LBK settlements are to be expected Lower Saxony were used for comparison.13 On aver- here. In order to better understand the neolithisation age there are 40 % Late Mesolithic sites recorded process in the north German plain, more detailed for Lower Saxony. When the longer time span of the information about the Late Mesolithic development Early Mesolithic is taken into account, there is an in this area is necessary. However, the Neolithic in the increase rather than a decrease of Late Mesolithic area north of Hanover has also been little researched settlement activity. so far. There are no indications of other cultural groups Based on the investigations carried out at Nie- that might have influenced the regional Late Meso- dernstöcken, it is clear that a LBK settlement of the lithic or the neolithisation process from this part of Flomborn horizon extended here over an area of at the lowlands. It must remain open which influences least 250 m in a N-S direction; the E-W extension from which cultural groups played a role in this area cannot yet be estimated. With this size, just a very at a certain time. short-lived settlement should not be assumed. The A pollen diagram from a small bog of a Mesolith- find material from 2019 will help to further outline the ic site 20 km from Niedernstöcken with more than 80 character of the first LBK settlement in the lowlands.14 fire pits (Assendorp 1985; Speier / Helmreich 2005; Gerken 2016), shows cereal pollen only from about 4,000 calBC. This might indicate that in the area ad- References jacent to the north of the LBK settlement, agriculture was only practised from this time onwards. Evidence Adameck 1993: M. Adameck, Katalog der archäologischen that the LBK settlers in Niedernstöcken actually had Fundstellen und Funde des Landkreises Nienburg/ a Neolithic way of life oriented towards agriculture, Weser 1 – 3 (Nienburg/Weser 1993). on the other hand, has yet to be found. Pollen analy- Adrian 1931: W. Adrian, Der mesolithische Fundplatz Kirch- ses of samples from the vicinity of the settlement are dorf bei Uchte i. Hann. Germania 15, 1931, 137 – 147. urgently needed to further outline the early phase of Assendorp 1985: J. J. Assendorp, Ein Fenster in die Vergan- neolithisation in the lowlands of Lower Saxony. genheit. In: K. Wilhelmi (Hrsg.), Berichte zur Denk- Even though there is no evidence of a Late Me- malpflege in Niedersachsen. Ausgrabungen in Nieder- solithic settlement in the area around Niedernstöcken sachsen. Archäologische Denkmalpflege 1979 – 1984 around 5,000 / 5,000 calBC, we believe that this area (Stuttgart 1985) 78 – 80. was used by hunters and gatherers at that time (cf. also Berthold 2014: J. Berthold, Rehburg FStNr. 80, 81, 83 Saile 2007, 46). Ongoing systematic surveys, dating und 85, Gde. Stadt Rehburg-Loccum, Ldkr. Nienburg series and a number of finds have already led to the (Weser), ehem. Reg.Bez. H., Fundchronik Niedersachsen discovery and erudition of numerous Late Mesolithic 2012. Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte, localities not previously assigned to this period (see Beiheft 17, 2014, 126, KatNr. 190. Fig. 10 and Table 3). Berthold 2018: J. Berthold, Ubbendorf FStNr. 2, Gde. Hilger- missen, Ldkr. Nienburg (Weser), Fundchronik Nieder- sachsen 2016. Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urge- schichte, Beiheft 21, 2018, 171, KatNr. 206, Abb. 182. 12  Translated from the original German text: „dass die Zahl der spätmesolithischen Fundstellen im Binnenland gegenüber den vorherigen Zeitabschnitten insgesamt abnimmt“. 14  We sincerely thank M. Heumüller, F. Klimscha and T. Ter- 13  Breest 1993; 1997; Gerken 2001a; Mahlstedt 2015. berger for reviewing the manuscript. 114 Niedernstöcken – a settlement of the Linear Pottery culture beyond the loess border in the land of hunters and gatherers Berthold 2019: J. Berthold, Leese FStNr. 229, Gde. Leese, Breest / Kehrbach 2002: K. Breest / M. Kehrbach, Luttum Ldkr. Nienburg (Weser), Fundchronik Niedersachsen FStNr. 88, Gde. Kirchlinteln, Reg.Bez. Lü., Fundchronik 2017. Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte, Niedersachsen 2001. Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Beiheft 22, 2019, 168 KatNr. 200, Abb.193. Urgeschichte, Beiheft 8, 2002, 9 – 10, KatNr. 1. Berthold / Gerken 2016: J. Berthold / K. Gerken, Hol- Breest et al. 2006: K. Breest / M. Kehrbach / J. Precht, torf FStNr. 9, Gemeinde Stadt Nienburg (Weser), Ldkr. Luttum FStNr. 98, Gde. Kirchlinteln, Ldkr. Verden, Reg. Nienburg (Weser), Fundchronik Niedersachsen 2014. Bez. Lü., Fundchronik Niedersachsen 2005. Nachrich- Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte, Beiheft ten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte, Beiheft 12, 2006, 19, 2016, 123 – 127, KatNr. 174. 171 – 197, KatNr. 213. Berthold / Gerken 2019: J. Berthold / K. Gerken, Winzlar Cosack / König 2001: E. Cosack / V. König, Archäologische FStNr. 3, Gde. Stadt Rehburg-Loccum, Ldkr. Nienburg Funde aus dem Regierungsbezirk Hannover (2001). Ein (Weser), Fundchronik Niedersachsen 2017. Nachrichten Katalog besonderer Objekte. Archäologische Mitteilun- aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte, Beiheft 22, 2019, 185, gen aus Nordwestdeutschland 24, 2001, 5 – 32. KatNr. 229, Abb. 216. Cosack / Zippel 1999: E. Cosack / D. Zippel, Archäologische Bischop 1997: D. Bischop, Die archäologischen Fundstellen Funde aus dem Regierungsbezirk Hannover. Ein Kata- im Landkreis Diepholz. Katalog der archäologischen log besonderer Funde. Die Kunde N.F. 50, 1999, 1 – 16. Bodenurkunden bis 1996 (Diepholz 1997). Cosack / Zippel 2001: E. Cosack / D. Zippel, Archäologische Bokelmann 1981: K. Bokelmann, Eine neue borealzeitliche Funde aus dem Regierungsbezirk Hannover. Ein Kata- Fundstelle in Schleswig-Holstein. Kölner Jahrbuch für log besonderer Objekte. Die Kunde N.F. 52, 2001, 1 – 32. Vor- und Frühgeschichte 15, 1981, 181 – 188. Cziesla 2008: E. Cziesla, Zur bandkeramischen Kultur Brandt 1967: K.-H. Brandt, Studien über steinerne Äxte zwischen Elbe und Oder. Germania 86, 2008, 405 – 464. und Beile der Jüngeren Steinzeit und der Stein- und Dehnke 1964: R. Dehnke, Steinzeitlicher Rastplatz in der Kupferzeit Nordwestdeutschlands (Hildesheim 1967). Gilkenheide, Gemarkung Schwitschen. Rotenburger Brandt 1995: K.-H. Brandt, Donauländische Geräte aus Schriften 20, 1964, 72 – 74. dem Südkreis Soltau-Fallingbostel. Die Kunde N.F. 46, Deichmüller 1968: J. Deichmüller, Schuhleistendepotfunde 1995, 1 – 27. aus Luttum, Kr. Verden/Aller. Nachrichten aus Nieder- Breest 1993: K. Breest, Mittelsteinzeitliche Fundplätze im sachsens Urgeschichte 37 1968, 100 – 102. Landkreis Celle. Veröffentlichungen der urgeschicht­ Einicke 2014: R. Einicke, Die Tonware der Linienbandkera- lichen Sammlungen des Landesmuseums zu Hannover mik im östlichen Thüringen. Alteuropäische Forschun- 42 (Oldenburg 1993). gen 6 (Langenweissbach 2014). Breest 1997: K. Breest, Studien zur Mittleren Steinzeit Feierabend / Selent 2019: B. Feierabend / A. Selent, Reh- in der Elbe-Jeetzel-Niederung (Ldkr. Lüchow-Dan- den FStNr. 52, Gde. Rehden, Ldkr. Diepholz, Fundchro- nenberg). In: Beiträge zur Steinzeit in Niedersachsen. nik Niedersachsen 2017. Nachrichten aus Niedersach- Veröffentlichungen der urgeschichtlichen Sammlungen sens Urgeschichte, Beiheft 22, 2019, 44 – 45, KatNr. 42. des Landesmuseums zu Hannover 47 (Oldenburg 1997) Fries 2011: J. E. Fries, Gruben, Gruben und noch mehr 141 – 389. Gruben. Die mesolithische Fundstelle Eversten 3, Stadt Breest 2002 : K. Breest, Altencelle FStNr. 54 und 69, Gde. Oldenburg (Oldenburg). Die Kunde N. F. 61, 2010 (2011), Stadt Celle, Ldkr. Celle, Reg.Bez. Lü., Fundchronik 21 – 38. Niedersachsen 2001. Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Gebers 2002: W.Gebers, Rullstorf FStNr. 8, Gde. Rullstorf, Urgeschichte, Beiheft 8, 2002, 16; 32, KatNr. 10; 42, Ldkr. Lüneburg, Reg.Bez Lü., Fundchronik Niedersach- Abb. 9; 38. sen 2001. Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschich- Breest 2014: K. Breest, Haimar FStNr. 2, Gde. Sehnde, te, Beiheft 8, 2002, 26 – 28, KatNr. 31. Region Hannover, Fundchronik Niedersachsen 2012. Gerken 2001: K. Gerken, Studien zur jung- und spät­ Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte, Beiheft paläolithischen sowie mesolithischen Besiedlung im 17, 2014, 59, KatNr. 84. Gebiet zwischen Wümme und Oste. Archäologische Breest / Gerken 2003: K. Breest / K. Gerken, Sassenholz Berichte des Landkreises Rotenburg (Wümme) 9 FStNr. 82, Gde. Heeslingen, Ldkr. Rotenburg (Wüm- (Oldenburg 2001). me), Reg.Bez. Lü., Fundchronik Niedersachsen 2002. Gerken 2003: K. Gerken, Improving the picture of prehistoric Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte, Beiheft settlement distribution by systematic prospection. In: A. 9, 2003, 22, KatNr. 34. Bauerochse / H. Haßmann (eds.), Peatlands – archaeo- Breest / Hinsch 1997: K. Breest / D. Hinsch, Ein mesolithi- logical sites – archives of nature – nature conservation – scher Oberflächenfundplatz bei Paulmannshavekost, wise use. Proceedings of the Peatland Conference 2002, Ldkr. Celle. Die Kunde N.F. 48, 1997, 11 – 27. Hannover, Germany (Rahden/Westf. 2003) 89 – 94. K l a u s G e rke n , A n dre as Kotu l a, Cl e me n s Lu dwi g, Hi l degard N elson and Alexandra P hilippi 115 Gerken 2009: K. Gerken, Geophysikalische Prospektions­ Niedersachsens Urgeschichte, Beiheft 21, 2018, 106 – 107, methoden zur Erfassung vorkeramikzeitlicher Befunde KatNr. 108, Abb. 108 – 110. am Beispiel der Fundstelle Oldendorf 69, Ldkr. Roten- Gerken / Piche 2020: K. Gerken / T. Piche, Niedernstöcken burg (Wümme). Archäologische Berichte des Landkrei- FStNr. 24, Gde. Stadt Neustadt a. Rbge., Region Hanno- ses Rotenburg (Wümme) 15, 2009, 273 – 304. ver, Fundchronik 2018. Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Gerken 2011: K. Gerken, Lavenstedt FStNr. 178, Gde. Urgeschichte, Beiheft 23, 2020, 29, KatNr. 179, Abb. 131. Selsingen, Ldkr. Rotenburg (Wümme), ehem. Reg.Bez. Gerken / Piche in prep.: K. Gerken / T. Piche, Das Meso- Lü., Fundchronik Niedersachsen 2008/2009. Nachrich- lithikum im Neustädter Land, Region Hannover. ten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte, Beiheft 14, 2011, Gerken / Precht 2015: K. Gerken / J. Precht, Eissel bei 176 – 178, KatNr. 334. Verden FStNr. 15, Gde. Stadt Verden (Aller), Ldkr. Ver- Gerken 2012: K. Gerken, Schwitschen FStNr. 42 – Die den, Fundchronik Niedersachsen 2013. Nachrichten aus Grabung Dehnke 1962 – 1964. Archäologische Berich- Niedersachsens Urgeschichte, Beiheft 18, 2015, 255, te des Landkreises Rotenburg (Wümme) 17, 2012, KatNr. 373, Abb. 267. 23 – 6 8. Gerken / Selent 2019: K. Gerken / A. Selent, Rehden Gerken 2014: K. Gerken, Otersen FStNr. 101, Gde. Kirch- FStNr. 38, Gde. Rehden, Ldkr. Diepholz, Fundchronik linteln, Ldkr. Verden, ehem. Reg.Bez. Lü., Fundchronik Niedersachsen 2017. Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Niedersachsen 2012. Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte, Beiheft 22, 2019, 42 – 4 4, KatNr. 40. Urgeschichte, Beiheft 17, 2014, 207 – 209, KatNr. 341. Gerken et al. 2016: K. Gerken / D. Gross / M. Wild, Gerken 2015a: K. Gerken, Schwitschen FStNr. 42, Gde. Einsichten zum Spätpaläolithikum und Mesolithikum Stadt Visselhövede, Ldkr. Rotenburg (Wümme), ehem. im Ldkr. Rotenburg (Wümme). Die Exkursion am Reg.Bez. Lü., Fundchronik Niedersachsen 2013. Nach- 22.03.2015. In: K. Gerken / D. Groß / S. Hesse (Hrsg.), richten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte, Beiheft 18, Neue Forschungen zum Mesolithikum. Beiträge zur 2015, 208 – 210, KatNr. 298. Jahrestagung der Arbeitsgemeinschaft Mesolithikum Gerken 2015b : K. Gerken, Brockel FStNr. 54 und 60, Gde. Rotenburg (Wümme), 19.–22. März 2015. Archäolo- Brockel und Hamersen FStNr. 40, Gde. Hamersen. In: gische Berichte des Landkreises Rotenburg (Wümme) S. Hesse (Hrsg.) Fundchronik 2012 – 2014. Archäologi- 20, 2016, 277 – 300. sche Berichte des Landkreises Rotenburg (Wümme) 19, Gerken et al. 2019: K. Gerken / M. Kaulich / A. Selent, 2015, 216 – 217; 220 – 221, 228 – 229. Hemsloh FStNr.33, Gde. Hemsloh, Ldkr. Diepholz, Gerken 2016: K. Gerken, Holtorf 9 – Einige Gedanken zu Fundchronik Niedersachsen 2017. Nachrichten aus Fundstellen mit mesolithischen Feuergruben in Nieder­ Niedersachsens Urgeschichte, Beiheft 22, 2019, 32 – 35, sachsen. In: K. Gerken / D. Groß / S. Hesse (Hrsg.), KatNr. 31. Neue Forschungen zum Mesolithikum. Beiträge zur Günther 1988: K. Günther, Eine Linienbandkeramik- Jahrestagung der Arbeitsgemeinschaft Mesolithikum Siedlung im Wesertal bei Minden. Archäologisches Rotenburg (Wümme), 19.–22. März 2015. Archäolo- Korrespondenzblatt 18, 1988, 237 – 241. gische Berichte des Landkreises Rotenburg (Wümme) Heege 1989: E. Heege, Studien zum Neolithikum in der 20, 2016, 107 – 142. Hildesheimer Börde. Veröffentlichungen der ur­ Gerken 2020: K. Gerken, Erichshagen FStNr. 91, Gde. geschichtlichen Sammlungen des Landesmuseums zu Stadt Nienburg, Ldkr. Nienburg (Weser), Fundchronik Hannover 35 (Hildesheim 1989). Niedersachsen 2018. Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Heinen 2010: M. Heinen, Niederkassel-Uckendorf: Eine Urgeschichte, Beiheft 23, 2018, 186 – 196, KatNr. 233, bandkeramische Pioniersiedlung im Rheinland. In: Abb.  198 – 2 33. D. Gronenborn / J. Petrasch (Hrsg.), Die Neolithisie- Gerken / Linger 1999: K. Gerken / C. Linger, Ein Ober- rung Europas – The Spread of the Neolithic to Central flächenfundplatz der Ahrensburger Kultur im Land- Europe. RGZM-Tagungen 4 (Mainz 2010). kreis Rotenburg (Wümme). Archäologische Berichte Klimscha 2016: F. Klimscha, Pietrele I: Beile und Äxte aus des Landkreises Rotenburg (Wümme) 7, 1999, 1 – 32. Stein. Distinktion und Kommunikation in der Kupfer- Gerken / Nelson 2016: K. Gerken / H. Nelson, Niedern- zeit im östlichen Balkangebiet (5. und 4. Jahrtausend). stöcken 21. Linienbandkeramisches Expansionsgebiet Archäologie in Eurasien 34 (Bonn 2016). jenseits der Lössgrenze im Land der Jäger und Samm- Kotula 2021: A. Kotula, Niedernstöcken 24, Gde. Stadt ler? Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte 85, Neustadt a. Rbge., Region Hannover. Fundchronik 2019. 2016, 31 – 8 4. Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte, Beiheft Gerken / Piche 2018: K. Gerken / T. Piche, Niedernstöcken 24, 2021, 132 – 135, Kat.Nr. 184, Abb. 126 – 130. FStNr. 23, Gde. Stadt Neustadt a. Rbge., Region Hanno- Lindemann 2007: A. Lindemann, Überlegungen zur ver, Fundchronik Niedersachsen 2016. Nachrichten aus Subsistenzwirtschaft der ersten Bauern Brandenburgs. 116 Niedernstöcken – a settlement of the Linear Pottery culture beyond the loess border in the land of hunters and gatherers In: G. H. Jeute / J. Schneeweiß / C. Theune (Hrsg.), Potratz 1941: H. A. Potratz, Die Nordgrenze der Bandkera- aedificatio terrae. Beiträge zur Umwelt- und Sied- mik in Osthannover. Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens lungsarchäologie Mitteleuropas. Festschrift für Eike Urgeschichte 15, 1941, 24 – 72. Gringmuth-Dallmer zum 65. Geburtstag. Internationale Precht 2003: J. Precht, Otterstedt FStNr. 1, Gde. Flecken Archäologie 26 (Rahden/Westf. 2007) 281 – 288. Ottersberg, Ldkr. Verden, Reg.Bez. Lü, Fundchronik Ludwig / Philippi 2019: C. Ludwig / A. Philippi, Niedern- Niedersachsen 2002. Nachrichten aus Niedersach- stöcken 2.0. Geomagnetische Prospektionen an einer sens Urgeschichte, Beiheft 9, 2003, 19 – 20, KatNr. 26, linienbandkeramischen Siedlung jenseits der Löss­ Abb. 23. verbreitung. Archäologie in Niedersachsen 22, 2019, Precht 2020: J. Precht, Westen FStNr. 7, Gde. Dörverden, 115 – 118. Ldkr. Verden, Fundchronik Niedersachsen 2018. Nach- Lüning 2005: J. Lüning, Bandkeramische Hofplätze und die richten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte, Beiheft 23, absolute Chronologie der Bandkeramik. In: J. Lüning / 2018, 297 – 300, KatNr. 405, Abb. 363 – 367. C. Frirdich / A. Zimmermann (Hrsg.), Die Bandkeramik Prostředník et al. 2005 : J. Prostředník / P. Šída / V. Šrein / im 21. Jahrhundert. Symposium in der Abtei Brauweiler B. Šreinová / M. Šťastný, Neolithic quarrying in the bei Köln vom 16.9.–19.9.2002. Internationale Archäo- foothills of the Jizera Mountains and the dating thereof. logie 7 (Rahden/Westf. 2005) 49 – 74. Neolitická těžba v podhůří Jizerských hor a její datování. Mahlstedt 2015: S. Mahlstedt, Das Mesolithikum im west- Arch. Rozhledy 57, 2005, 477 – 492. lichen Niedersachsen. Untersuchungen zur Materiellen Richter 2002: P. Richter, Das neolithische Erdwerk von Kultur und zur Landschaftsnutzung. Frühe Monumen- Walmstorf, Ldkr. Uelzen. Studien zur Besiedlungs- talität und soziale Differenzierung 7 (Bonn 2015). geschichte der Trichterbecherkultur im südlichen Meier-Arendt 1966: W. Meier-Arendt, Die bandkerami- ­Ilmenautal. Veröffentlichungen der urgeschichtlichen sche Kultur im Untermaingebiet. Veröffentlichungen des Sammlungen des Landesmuseums zu Hannover 49 Amtes für Bodendenkmalpflege im Regierungsbezirk (Oldenburg 2002). Darmstadt 3 (Bonn 1966). Richter / Schwarz-Mackensen 2015: P. Richter / G. Merkel 1999: M. Merkel, Überlegungen zur Typologie Schwarz-Mackensen, Bandkeramik an der Peripherie. frühneolithischer Felsgesteingeräte. Ein Beitrag zur Erdwerk und Siedlung von Esbeck I. Materialhefte zur Neolithisierung Norddeutschlands und Südskandina- Ur- und Frühgeschichte Niedersachsens 45 (Rahden/ viens. Offa 56, 1999, 223 – 238. Westf. 2015). Metzger-Krahé 1977: F. Metzger-Krahé, Mesolithikum an Saile 2007: T. Saile, Aspekte der Neolithisierung in der We- der Unterelbe. Das Verhalten des mesolithischen Men- ser-Harz-Region. Germania 85, 2007, 181 – 197. schen zu seiner Umwelt. Offa-Bände, Ergänzungs-Reihe 2 Saile 2009: T. Saile, Siedlungsarchäologische Untersuchun- (Schleswig 1977). gen zum Frühneolithikum im südlichen Niedersachsen. Moos 1996: U. Moos, Der Siedlungsplatz bei Diemarden. In: H.-J. Beier / E. Claßen / T. Doppler / B. Ramminger Studien zur Bandkeramik im Landkreis Göttingen. (Hrsg.), Beiträge zur Ur- und Frühgeschichte Mitteleu- Unpubl. Diss., Universität Göttingen (Göttingen 1996). ropas 56. Varia neolithica VI. Neolithische Monumente Moser 1998: A. Moser, Die archäologischen Fundstellen und neolithische Gesellschaften. Beiträge der Sitzung und Funde im Landkreis Hannover (Hannover 1998). der Arbeitsgemeinschaft Neolithikum während der Neumann 2006: I. Neumann, Lauenbrück FStNr. 21, Gde. Jahrestagung des Nordwestdeutschen Verbandes für Lauenbrück, Ldkr. Rotenburg (Wümme), Reg.Bez. Lü, Altertumsforschung e. V. in Schleswig, 9. – 10. Oktober Fundchronik Niedersachsen 2005. Nachrichten aus 2007 (Langenweißbach 2009) 43 – 53. Niedersachsens Urgeschichte, Beiheft 12, 2006, 57, Schünemann 1979: D. Schünemann, Über einige Fund- KatNr. 82. gruppen der jüngeren Steinzeit im Kreis Verden nebst Nowatzyk 1990: G. Nowatzyk, Kaiserzeitliche Siedlungs- einigen Steingeräten der Metallzeit. Die Kunde N.F. plätze in Hülsen/Westen, Gde. Dörverden, Ldkr. Verden 30, 1979, 37 – 79. – die Ausgrabungen 1989. Ein Vorbericht. Nachrichten Schünemann 1981: D. Schünemann, Die ältere und mittlere aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte 59, 1990, 167 – 176. Steinzeit im Kreis Verden. Urgeschichte des Kreises Posselt / Saile 2014: M.Posselt / T. Saile: Magnetome- Verden Teil I. Die Kunde N.F. 31/32, 1980/1981, 57 – 111. terprospektion auf der bandkeramischen Siedlung Schwabedissen 1944: H. Schwabedissen, Die mittlere Stein- von Zwięczyca. In: M. Dębiec (ed.), Zwięczyca 3. Eine zeit im westlichen Norddeutschland unter besonderer bandkeramische Siedlung am Wisłok (Rzeszów 2014) Berücksichtigung der Feuersteinwerkzeuge. Vor- und 136 – 141. frühgeschichtliche Untersuchungen aus dem Museum Vorgeschichtlicher Altertümer in Kiel N.F. 7 (Neumüns- ter 1944). K l a u s G e rke n , A n dre as Kotu l a, Cl e me n s Lu dwi g, Hi l degard N elson and Alexandra P hilippi 117 Schwarz-Mackensen 1978: G. Schwarz-Mackensen, Trebess / Eichfeld 2018: T. Trebess / I. Eichfeld, Späte Jägerkulturen zwischen Harz und Aller: Oberflächen­ Jäger und Sammler: Die Ausgrabungen am Gemeinde­ fundplätze der älteren und mittleren Steinzeit im Braun- zentrum in Meine. Gifhorner Kreiskalender 2018, schweigischen. Materialhefte zur Ur- und Frühgeschich- 124 – 128. te Niedersachsens 12 (Hildesheim 1978). Wechler 1993: K.-P. Wechler, Mesolithikum – Band- Schween 1993: J. Schween, Die archäologischen Fundstellen keramik – Trichterbecherkultur. Zur Neolithisierung im Landkreis Hameln-Pyrmont. Katalog der archäologi- Mittel- und Ostdeutschlands aufgrund vergleichender schen Bodenurkunden bis 1992 (Hameln 1993). Untersuchungen zum Silexinventar. Beiträge zur Ur- Schirnig 1965: H. Schirnig, Probegrabung auf einer kaiser- und Frühgeschichte Mecklenburg-Vorpommerns 27 zeitlichen Siedlung in Hülsen, Kr. Fallingbostel. Nach- (Lübstorf 1993). richten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte 1965, 96 – 9 9. Weller 2002: U. Weller, Nördlichster Vorposten der ersten Speier / Helmreich 2005: M. Speier / C. Helmreich, Das Bauern im südlichen Niedersachsen – Die bandkerami- bronzezeitliche Hügelgräberfeld von Stöcken, Ldkr, sche Siedlung von Sarstedt, Gde. Stadt Sarstedt, Ldkr. Soltau-Fallingbostel. Vegetationsgeschichtliche Unter- Hildesheim. Die Kunde N.F. 53, 2002, 165 – 180. suchungen zur mesolithischen und bronzezeitlichen Wendland 2012: E. Wendland, Eine Siedlung der Linien- Umwelt in der südlichen Lüneburger Heide. Die Kunde bandkeramik im Innerstetal bei Hildesheim. Unpubl. N.F. 56, 2005, 91 – 106. Magisterarbeit, Universität Göttingen (Göttingen 2012). Stark 2003: J. Stark, Die archäologischen Fundstellen im Wulf 2011: F.-W. Wulf, Archäologische Denkmale und Fund- Landkreis Schaumburg. Katalog der Bodendenkmale stellen im Landkreis Osnabrück 2. Materialhefte zur und Funde (Hannover 2003). Ur- und Frühgeschichte Niedersachsens 43 (Rahden/ Stäuble 2011: H. Stäuble, Die ersten Bauern in Sachsen. Westf. 2011). Archeo 8, 2011, 4 – 13. Zeitz 1969: B. Zeitz, Paläolithische und mesolithische Fun- Steinmetz 1985: W.-D. Steinmetz, Die Verbreitung der de aus dem Kreise Gifhorn. Materialhefte zur Ur- und ­Linienbandkeramik in Niedersachsen. Die Kunde N.F. Frühgeschichte Niedersachsens 2 (Hildesheim 1969). 36, 1985, 305 – 327. Zippel / Dahmlos 1999: D. Zippel / U. Dahmlos, Jeinsen Strien 2010: H.-C. Strien, Merkmalskatalog zur Aufnah- FStNr. 9 – 10 und Schulenburg (Leine) FStNr. 16, Gde. me verzierter Keramik nach den Leitlinien des SAP- Stadt Pattensen, Ldkr. Hannover, Reg.Bez. H. Fund- Projektes: http://www.archaeologie-stiftung.de/de/ chronik Niedersachsen 1998. Nachrichten aus Nieder- wissenschaft/bandkeramik_online/ gebrauchsanleitung/ sachsens Urgeschichte, Beiheft 2, 1999, 82 – 83 und 109, gebrauchsanleitung_1.html (last accessed: 7.7.2020). KatNr. 119 – 120 und 167. 118 Niedernstöcken – a settlement of the Linear Pottery culture beyond the loess border in the land of hunters and gatherers District Municipality Local subdistrict Site no. Object (adze, acc. to References („Gemarkung“) German terminology) Celle Celle Hohnebostel oF 1 flacher SLK Brandt 1967, 167; Breest 1993 KatNr. 17 Gifhorn Gifhorn Gifhorn oF hoher Dechsel Potratz 1941, 30; Brandt 1967, 165 Karte 1 Hannover Burgdorf Otze 7 hoher SLK Moser 1998, 143 KatNr. 1119 Hannover Burgdorf Sorgensen 2 Flachhacke/Breitkeil ? Moser 1998, 150 KatNr. 1170 Hannover Hemmingen Arnum 1 flacher SLK Moser 1998, 284f., KatNr. 2319 Hannover Hemmingen Arnum 4 mittelhoher SLK Moser 1998 284 KatNr. 2318 Hannover Hemmingen Arnum oF flacher SLK Moser 1998 285f., KatNr. 2326 Hannover Laatzen Gleidingen 34 Dechsel Cosack/ Zippel 2001, 2 Kat.Nr. 6 (listed under Koldingen) Hannover Laatzen Gleidingen 35 Dechsel Cosack / Zippel 1999, 2–4 KatNr. 4 Hannover Laatzen Grasdorf 21 hoher SLK Potratz 1941, 32 ; Moser 1998, 290 KatNr. 2357 Hannover Neustadt Brase 8 hoher SLK Moser 1998, 36 KatNr. 156 Hannover Neustadt Brase 22 flacher SLK Moser 1998, 37 KatNr. 158 Hannover Neustadt Brase 41 Dechsel unpubl., collection Schwarzlose Hannover Neustadt Mandelsloh 52 flacher SLK Moser 1998, 32 KatNr. 126 Hannover Neustadt Mandelsloh 54 flacher SLK Moser 1998, 32 KatNr. 125 Hannover Neustadt Neustadt oF flacher SLK Moser 1998, 69 KatNr. 469 Hannover Neustadt Stöckendrebber 7 mittelhoher SLK Moser 1998, 39 KatNr. 183 Hannover Neustadt Welze 16 Dechsel Cosack / König 2001, 6 KatNr. 6 Hannover Neustadt oF hoher SLK Moser 1998, 76 KatNr. 534.28 Hannover Pattensen Jeinsen 2 SLK Moser 1998, 332 KatNr. 2731 Hannover Pattensen Jeinsen 27, formerly 5 5 SLK Moser 1998, 330 KatNr. 2721; Zippel / Dahmlos 1999, 82f., KatNr. 119–120 Hannover Pattensen Schulenburg 16 SLK Zippel / Dahmlos 1999, 109 KatNr. 167 Hannover Ronnenberg Ronnenberg 9 Dechsel Cosack / König 2001, 6 KatNr. 5 Hannover Ronnenberg Weetzen 2 hoher SLK Moser 1998, 277 KatNr. 2259 Hannover Sehnde Haimar 2 Dechsel Breest 2014, 59 KatNr. 84 Hannover Sehnde Wehmingen 8 SLK Moser 1998, 304 KatNr. 2475 Hannover Springe Alferde 2 flacher SLK Moser 1998, 362 KatNr. 3021 Hannover Springe Lüdersen 1 hoher SLK Moser 1998, 348 KatNr. 2881; Krull 1976, 347 Abb. 1. Hannover Uetze Uetze 32 hoher SLK Moser 1998, 158 KatNr.1233 Hannover Wennigsen Bredenbeck 43 Dechsel Moser 1998, 315 KatNr. 2583 Heidekreis Häuslingen Klein Häuslingen 23 hoher SLK Deichmüller 1968, 100–102; Brandt 1995, 4 KatNr. 1 Nienburg Hilgermissen Ubbendorf 2 flacher SLK Berthold 2018, 171 KatNr. 206 Nienburg Leese Leese 229 Dechsel Berthold 2019, 168 KatNr. 200 Nienburg Marklohe Qyle oF flacher SLK Brandt 1967, 168 Schaumburg Bückeburg Bückeburg oF 5 hoher SLK Stark 1998, 47 KatNr. 193 Schaumburg Bückeburg Cammer 4 hoher SLK Stark 1998, 35 KatNr. 141 Schaumburg Lauenau Feggendorf 39 flacher SLK Stark 1998, 83 KatNr. 384 Verden Verden Luttum 92 3 SLK Deichmüller 1968, 101f.; Schünemann 1979, 47 Table 2 Unperforated adzes discovered in the vicinity of the Niedernstöcken site (without excavation finds), outside the known dist- ribution area of the LBK (SLK = “Schuhleistenkeil”; oF = without site no.: cannot be located precisely). K l a u s G e rke n , A n dre as Kotu l a, Cl e me n s Lu dwi g, Hi l degard N elson and Alexandra P hilippi 119 District Municipality Local subdistrict Site no. References („Gemarkung“) Celle Adelheidsdorf Adelheidsdorf 6 Breest 1993, 45 –46 KatNr.10, Taf. 16 Celle Beedenbostel Beedenbostel 11 Breest 1993, 51 – 52 KatNr. 25, Taf. 35 Celle Bergen Diesten 7 Breest 1993, 62 KatNr. 39–40, Taf. 56 Celle Bergen Diesten 37 Breest 1993, 62 Taf. 56 Celle Bergen Eversen 29 Breest 1993, 65 KatNr. 43, Taf. 60 Celle Bergen Eversen 31 Breest 1993, 55 KatNr. 33, Taf. 47 Celle Bergen Eversen 21 Breest 1993, 63 – 64 KatNr. 42, Taf. 56 Celle Bröckel Bröckel 1 Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 97 KatNr. 195 Celle Bröckel Bröckel 2 Breest 1993, 49 KatNr. 20, Taf. 25 Celle Celle Celle 41 Breest 1993, 41 – 42 KatNr. 1, Taf. 5; 7 Celle Celle Altencelle 54 Breest 2002a, 16 KatNr. 10, Abb. 9 Celle Celle Altencelle 69 Breest 2002b, 32 KatNr. 42, Abb. 38 Celle Eicklingen Eicklingen 3 Breest 1993, 46 KatNr. 12, Taf. 19 Celle Eicklingen Eicklingen 9 Breest / Hinsch 1997, 20 – 21 Abb. 13 Celle Eldingen Eldingen 5 Breest 1993, 53 KatNr. 29, Taf. 38 Celle Eschede Eschede 22 Breest 1993, 54 KatNr. 31, Taf. 44 Celle Hambühren Hambühren 1 Breest 1993, 42 – 43 KatNr. 2, Taf. 9, 10,13 Celle Hermannsburg Baven 4 Breest 1993, 67 KatNr. 48, Taf. 68 Celle Hermannsburg Hermannsburg 18 Breest 1993, 67 – 68 KatNr. 50, Taf. 69 Celle Hermannsburg Hermannsburg 12 Breest 1993, 68 KatNr. 51, Taf. 71 Celle Höfer Höfer 9 Breest 1993, 52 – 53 KatNr. 27, Taf. 36 Celle Langlingen Hohnebostel 14 Breest 1993, 47 KatNr. 15, Taf. 22 Celle Langlingen Hohnebostel 11 Breest 1993, 49 KatNr. 19, Taf. 24 Celle Langlingen Hohnebostel 15 Breest 1993, 47 KatNr. 14, Taf. 22 Celle Langlingen Hohnebostel 13 Breest 1993, 47 KatNr. 13, Taf. 21 Celle Langlingen Hohnebostel 12 Breest 1993, 48 KatNr. 16, Taf. 22 Celle Wienhausen Offensen 3 Breest 1993, 46 KatNr. 11, Taf. 18 Celle Winsen (Aller) Stedden 5 Breest 1993, 43 – 44 KatNr. 4, Taf. 14 Diepholz Barnstorf, Flecken Barnstorf 34 Bischop 1997, 194 KatNr. 1175 Diepholz Barnstorf, Flecken Rechtern 28 Bischop 1997, 210 KatNr. 1255 Diepholz Diepholz, Stadt Diepholz- 43 Mahlstedt 2015, 176 KatNr. 83, Taf. 16 Graftlage Diepholz Eydelstedt Düste 8 Bischop 1997, 267 KatNr. 1566 Diepholz Eydelstedt Eydelstedt 26 Bischop 1997, 245 – 247 KatNr. 1465 Diepholz Hemsloh Hemsloh 33 Gerken et al. 2019, 32 Kat.Nr. 31, Abb. 30 Diepholz Lembruch Lembruch 7 Bischop 1997, 388 KatNr. 2386; Mahlstedt 2015, 176 Taf. 17,9 Diepholz Rehden Rehden 38 Gerken / Selent 2019, 42 – 44 Kat.Nr. 40, Abb. 49–50 Diepholz Rehden Rehden 52 Feierabend / Selent 2019, 44 – 45 Kat.Nr. 42, Abb. 52 Gifhorn Didderse Didderse 8? Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 61 KatNr. 69, Taf. 9 Gifhorn Didderse Didderse 5 Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 62 – 63 KatNr. 72, Taf. 10 Gifhorn Didderse Didderse 2? Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 59 KatNr. 68, Taf. 9 Gifhorn Didderse Didderse 4 unpublished Gifhorn Gifhorn Gamsen oF ? Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 83 Taf. 28 Gifhorn Gifhorn, Stadt Gifhorn 49 Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 81 KatNr. 135, Taf. 26 Gifhorn Gifhorn, Stadt Gifhorn 50 Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 80 KatNr. 133, Taf. 26 Gifhorn Gifhorn, Stadt Gifhorn 51 Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 80 KatNr. 131, Taf. 24 Gifhorn Gifhorn, Stadt Gifhorn 52 Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 79 KatNr. 129, Taf. 23–24 Gifhorn Gifhorn Gifhorn 21 Zeitz 1969, 9 KatNr. 2, Taf. 30 Gifhorn Hillerse Hillerse 16 Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 64 Taf. 12 Gifhorn Leiferde Dalldorf 10 Schwarz-Mackensen1978, 64 KatNr. 79, Taf. 12 Gifhorn Leiferde Leiferde 2 Zeitz 1969,14 – 15 Taf. 85 Gifhorn Meine Meine 8 Trebess / Eichfeld 2017 Gifhorn Meine Bechtsbüttel oF ? Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 57 KatNr. 59, Taf. 7 Gifhorn Meinersen Päse oF ? Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 96 KatNr. 193, Taf. 44 Gifhorn Müden (Aller) Flettmar 6 Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 97 KatNr. 196, Taf. 45 Gifhorn Ribbesbüttel Ribbesbüttel 10 Zeitz 1969, 18; Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 68 – 70 KatNr. 92 Gifhorn Ribbesbüttel Vollbüttel 12 Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 74 Taf. 17 Gifhorn Ribbesbüttel Vollbüttel 2 Zeitz 1969, 13; Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 74 KatNr. 102, Taf. 17 Gifhorn Ribbesbüttel Vollbüttel 3? Schwarz-Mackensen1978, 74 KatNr. 101, Taf. 19 Gifhorn Ribbesbüttel Vollbüttel 13 Schwabedissen 1944, Taf. 25 Gifhorn Rötgesbüttel Rötgesbüttel 23 Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 68 KatNr. 90, Taf. 13 Table 3.1 The list and the map are a complemented and updated version of the list published by Gerken / Nelson 2016 (oF = without site no.; cannot be located precisely). 120 Niedernstöcken – a settlement of the Linear Pottery culture beyond the loess border in the land of hunters and gatherers District Municipality Local subdistrict Site no. References („Gemarkung“) Gifhorn Rötgesbüttel Rötgesbüttel 100 Zeitz 1969, 19–20 Taf. 131 – 137; Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 67 KatNr. 87 Gifhorn Rötgesbüttel Rötgesbüttel 7 oder 25 Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 68 KatNr. 91, Taf. 14 Gifhorn Sassenburg Dannenbüttel oF Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 77 KatNr. 116, Taf. 21 Gifhorn Sassenburg Westerbeck 5 Schwabedissen 1944, Taf. 25 Gifhorn Sassenburg Westerbeck 4 Schwabedissen 1944, Taf. 28 Gifhorn Schwülper Lagesbüttel oF ? Schwabedissen 1944, Taf. 35 Gifhorn Schwülper oF ? Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 58; Taf. 8 Hameln- Bad Münder, Stadt Beber 7 Schween 1993, KatNr. 37–39 Pyrmont Hannover Burgwedel, Stadt Wettmar 16 Moser 1998, 93 KatNr. 685 Hannover Hannover Bemerode 12, 89- 95 Moser 1998, 236 KatNr. 1890 Hannover Neustadt a. Rbge., Stadt Amedorf 26 unpublished, systematic survey Hannover Neustadt a. Rbge., Stadt Brase 2 unpublished, systematic survey Hannover Neustadt a. Rbge., Stadt Mandelsloh 71 unpublished, systematic survey Hannover Neustadt a. Rbge., Stadt Niedernstöcken 23 Gerken / Piche 2018, 106f., Kat.Nr. 108, Abb. 108 – 110 Hannover Neustadt a. Rbge., Stadt Vesbeck 18 unpublished, systematic survey Hannover Neustadt a. Rbge., Stadt Wulfelade 29 unpublished, systematic survey Hannover Neustadt a. Rbge., Stadt Vesbeck 7 unpublished, systematic survey Hannover Neustadt a. Rbge., Stadt Brase 24 Moser 1998, 35 KatNr. 150 Hannover Neustadt a. Rbge., Stadt Mardorf 10 Moser 1998, 65 KatNr. 428 Hannover Neustadt a. Rbge., Stadt Niedernstöcken 20 unpublished, systematic survey Hannover Neustadt a. Rbge., Stadt Suttorf 4 Moser 1998, 60 KatNr. 375 Hannover Uetze Dedenhausen 12 Schwabedissen 1944, Taf. 36; Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 85 KatNr. 153, Taf. 31; Moser 1998, 175 KatNr. 1366 Hannover Uetze Dedenhausen 3 Moser 1998, 162 Hannover Uetze Dedenhausen 4 Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 86 – 87 KatNr. 158,Taf. 35; Moser 1998, 175 KatNr. 1361 Hannover Uetze Dedenhausen 5 Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 87 KatNr. 160, Taf. 36; Moser 1998, 174 KatNr. 1360 Hannover Uetze Dedenhausen 1, 8, 9 (?) Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 87 KatNr. 162, Taf. 36–37; Moser 1998, 174 KatNr. 1358 Hannover Uetze Eltze 2 Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 91 – 92 KatNr. 176, Taf. 41; Moser 1998, 172 KatNr. 1344 Hannover Uetze Eltze 39 Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 91 KatNr. 174,Taf. 41; Moser 1998, 167 – 168 KatNr. 1308 Hannover Uetze Eltze 28 Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 95 – 96 KatNr. 190,Taf. 44; Moser 1998, 170 KatNr. 1327 Hannover Uetze Eltze 37 Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 95 KatNr. 189, Taf. 44 Hannover Uetze Eltze 20 Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 91 KatNr. 172, Taf. 40; Moser 1998, 171 KatNr. 1336 Hannover Uetze Katensen 9 Moser 1998, 178 KatNr. 1389 Hannover Uetze Uetze oF Moser 1998, 166 KatNr. 1297 Hannover Uetze Uetze 2 Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 88 KatNr. 163, Taf. 37–38; Moser 1998, 162 KatNr. 1267 Hannover Uetze Uetze 3 Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 88 KatNr. 164, Taf. 38; Moser 1998, 162 KatNr. 1269 Hannover Uetze Uetze 7 Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 88 KatNr. 166,Taf. 39; Moser 1998, 163 KatNr. 1275 Hannover Uetze Uetze 23 Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 92 – 93 KatNr. 179, Taf. 42; Moser 1998, 165 – 166 KatNr. 1291 Hannover Uetze Uetze 31 Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 94 Taf. 43 Hannover Uetze Uetze oF Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 88 Taf. 39 Hannover Wunstorf, Stadt Steinhude 1 Moser 1998, 103 KatNr. 767 Heidekreis Rethem, Stadt Wohlendorf 24 unpublished Nienburg Heemsen Anderten 6 Adameck 1993, 137 – 138 KatNr. 483 Nienburg Nienburg, Stadt Erichshagen 91 Gerken 2020, 186 – 196 KatNr. 233, Abb. 204 Nienburg Nienburg (Weser), Stadt Holtorf 9 Berthold / Gerken 2015, 123 – 127 KatNr. 174, Abb. 130 – 132 Nienburg Raddestorf Huddestorf 21 Adameck 1993, 583 KatNr. 2241 Nienburg Rehburg-Loccum Rehburg 81 Berthold 2014, 126 KatNr. 190, Abb. 164 Nienburg Rehburg-Loccum Rehburg 80 unpublished Nienburg Rehburg-Loccum Winzlar 3 Berthold / Gerken 2019, 185 KatNr. 229, Abb. 216 Nienburg Rehburg-Loccum Winzlar 10 unpublished Nienburg Steyerberg, Flecken Voigtei 2 Adrian 1931; Adameck 1993, 347 KatNr. 1210 Table 3.2 The list and the map are a complemented and updated version of the list published by Gerken / Nelson 2016 (oF = without site no.; cannot be located precisely). K l a u s G e rke n , A n dre as Kotu l a, Cl e me n s Lu dwi g, Hi l degard N elson and Alexandra P hilippi 121 District Municipality Local subdistrict Site no. References („Gemarkung“) Nienburg Steyerberg, Flecken Wellie 26 Adameck 1993, 401 – 402 KatNr. 1487 Osnabrück Bohmte Schwege 73 Wulf 2011, 274 KatNr. 1270; Mahlstedt 2015, 175 KatNr.56, Taf. 12 Osnabrück Bohmte Schwege 76 Wulf 2011, 275 KatNr. 1273; Mahlstedt 2015, 175 KatNr.57, Taf. 12 Osnabrück Bohmte Schwege 114/115 Wulf 2011, 278–279 KatNr. 1311; Mahlstedt 2015, 175 KatNr. 62, Taf. 13 Peine Edemissen Eddesse 31 Schwarz-Mackensen 1978, 86 KatNr. 155, Taf. 33 Rotenburg Breddorf Breddorf 51 Gerken 2001, 68–69 KatNr. 21, Taf. 21 Rotenburg Breddorf Breddorf 50 Gerken 2001, 67–68 KatNr. 20, Taf. 23 Rotenburg Breddorf Breddorf 48 Gerken 2001, 67 KatNr. 19; Taf. 22 Rotenburg Bremervörde, Stadt Elm 81 Metzger-Krahé 1977, 84 KatNr. 79, Taf. 81 Rotenburg Bremervörde, Stadt Minstedt 66 Metzger-Krahé 1977, 101 – 102 KatNr. 106, Taf. 95 Rotenburg Bremervörde, Stadt Minstedt 5 Metzger-Krahé 1977, 100 – 101 KatNr. 105, Taf. 96 Rotenburg Bremervörde, Stadt Schwitschen 42 Gerken 2012, 23 – 68 Abb. 5 – 6; Gerken 2015, 208 – 210 KatNr. 298, Abb. 209 Rotenburg Brockel Brockel 60 Gerken 2015b, 228–229 Abb. 13 Rotenburg Brockel Brockel 54 Gerken 2015b, 220–221 Abb. 5 Rotenburg Bülstedt Bülstedt 108 Gerken 2001, 99 – 101 KatNr. 46, Taf. 77 Rotenburg Gyhum Bockel 7 Gerken 2001, 59 KatNr. 14 Rotenburg Gyhum Bockel 9 Gerken 2001, 60 – 61 KatNr. 16, Taf. 14 Rotenburg Hamersen Hamersen 51 unpublished; collection Maack Rotenburg Hamersen Hamersen 40 Gerken 2015b, 216 – 217 Abb. 1 Rotenburg Hamersen Hamersen 77? Metzger-Krahé 1977, 92 – 93 KatNr. 94, Taf. 90 Rotenburg Hamersen Hamersen oF ? unpublished Rotenburg Heeslingen Heeslingen 224 Schwabedissen 1944, Taf. 51 Nr. 2; Metzger-Krahé 1977, 77 – 78 KatNr. 70, Taf. 109 Rotenburg Heeslingen Heeslingen 185 unpublished; collection Maack Rotenburg Heeslingen Heeslingen 167 unpublished; collection Maack Rotenburg Heeslingen Sassenholz 24 Metzger-Krahé 1977, 112–113 KatNr. 122, Taf. 109 Rotenburg Heeslingen Sassenholz 23 unpublished; Bachmann-Museum Bremervörde Rotenburg Heeslingen Sassenholz 14 unpublished; Bachmann-Museum Bremervörde Rotenburg Heeslingen Sassenholz 67 Metzger-Krahé 1977, 111 KatNr. 121 Rotenburg Heeslingen Sassenholz 82 Breest / Gerken 2003, 22 KatNr. 34, Abb. 30 Rotenburg Heeslingen Weertzen 56(??) Metzger-Krahé 1977, 115 KatNr. 131 Rotenburg Hemsbünde Hastedt 2 Gerken / Linger 1999, 13 – 15 Abb. 11 Rotenburg Horstedt Horstedt 34 Gerken 2001, 106 – 107 KatNr. 53 Taf. 86 Rotenburg Selsingen Lavenstedt 178 Gerken 2011, 176 – 178 KatNr. 334 Rotenburg Lauenbrück Lauenbrück 21 Neumann 2006, 57 KatNr. 82 Rotenburg Oerel Glinde 9 unpublished; Bachmann-Museum Bremervörde Rotenburg Ostereistedt Ostereistedt 79 unpublished; collection Maack Rotenburg Ostereistedt Ostereistedt 77 unpublished; collection Maack Rotenburg Ostereistedt Rockstedt 55 unpublished; collection Müller Rotenburg Scheeßel Abbendorf 22 Metzger-Krahé 1977, 72 – 73 KatNr. 62, Taf. 64 Rotenburg Seedorf Godenstedt 63 unpublished; collection Müller /Maack Rotenburg Seedorf Godenstedt 62 unpublished; collection Maack Rotenburg Seedorf Godenstedt 47 unpublished; collection Maack Rotenburg Seedorf Godenstedt 78 unpublished; collection Müller Rotenburg Seedorf Granstedt 82 unpublished; Bachmann-Museum Bremervörde Rotenburg Selsingen Lavenstedt 135(?) Metzger-Krahé 1977, 97 KatNr. 100, Taf. 94 Rotenburg Selsingen Lavenstedt 130 Metzger-Krahé 1977, 96 KatNr. 98, Taf. 92 Rotenburg Sottrum Sottrum 26 Gerken 2001, 133 – 134 KatNr. 71, Taf. 102 Rotenburg Vorwerk Buchholz 28 Gerken 2001, 94 – 96 KatNr. 41, Taf. 72 Rotenburg Vorwerk Dipshorn 19 Gerken 2001, 103 – 105 KatNr. 49, Taf. 82 Rotenburg Vorwerk Vorwerk 41 Gerken 2001, 136 – 140 KatNr. 77, Taf. 104 Rotenburg Westertimke Westertimke 51 Gerken 2001, 180 – 182 KatNr. 86, Taf. 132 Rotenburg Wohnste Wohnste 22 unpublished; collection Maack Rotenburg Zeven, Stadt Badenstedt 177 Gerken 2001, 57 KatNr. 11, Taf. 11 Rotenburg Zeven, Stadt Brauel 44 unpublished; collection Maack Rotenburg Zeven, Stadt Brümmerhof 23 Gerken 2001, 77 – 78 KatNr. 29, Taf. 36 Rotenburg Zeven, Stadt Brüttendorf 41 Gerken 2001, 89 – 92 KatNr. 38, Taf. 62 Rotenburg Zeven, Stadt Brüttendorf 32 Metzger-Krahé 1977, 78 – 80 KatNr. 74, Taf. 69; Gerken 2001, 79 – 84 KatNr. 31, Taf. 42 Rotenburg Zeven, Stadt Brüttendorf 33 Gerken 2001, 84 – 86 KatNr. 32, Taf. 56 Table 3.3 The list and the map are a complemented and updated version of the list published by Gerken / Nelson 2016 (oF = without site no.; cannot be located precisely). 122 Niedernstöcken – a settlement of the Linear Pottery culture beyond the loess border in the land of hunters and gatherers District Municipality Local subdistrict Site no. References („Gemarkung“) Rotenburg Zeven, Stadt Brüttendorf 35 Gerken 2001, 86 KatNr. 33, Taf. 57 Rotenburg Zeven, Stadt Oldendorf 42 Gerken 2001, 110 – 112 KatNr. 58, Taf. 90 Rotenburg Zeven, Stadt Oldendorf 52 Gerken 2001, 118 – 130 KatNr. 66, Taf. 99 Rotenburg Zeven, Stadt Zeven 34 Metzger-Krahé 1977, 121 KatNr. 137, Taf. 109 Schaumburg Hülsede Hülsede 7 Stark 2003 Schaumburg Hülsede Schmarrie 3 Stark 2003, 88 – 89 KatNr. 421 Schaumburg Rinteln, Stadt Wennenkamp 4 Stark 2003, 144 KatNr. 626 Schaumburg Rodenberg, Stadt Rodenberg 21 Stark 2003, 78 KatNr. 369B Schaumburg Apelern Soldorf 1 Stark 2003, 72 – 73 KatNr. 358 (listed as site Rodenberg) Uelzen Bienenbüttel Hohenbostel 12 Richter 2002, Taf. 54,14.16 Uelzen Bienenbüttel Hohnstorf 15 Richter 2002, Taf. 56,1 – 4 Uelzen Bruchtorf Bruchtorf 52 Richter 2002, Taf. 49,5 Uelzen Emmendorf Emmendorf 29 Richter 2002, Taf. 49,23 Uelzen Jelmstorf Jelmstorf 90 Richter 2002, Taf. 59,11 – 14 Uelzen Schienau Stadorf 32 Richter 2002, Taf. 76,3 Uelzen Uelzen Oldenstadt 57 Richter 2002, Taf. 63,9 Uelzen Wrestedt Stadensen 11 Richter 2002, Taf. 75,2 Uelzen Wrestedt Stederdorf 33 Richter 2002, Taf. 78,7 Vechta Vechta Damme 200 Gerken 2003, 92 Fig. 4; Mahlstedt 2015, 175 KatNr. 64, Taf. 14 Vechta Vechta Damme 63 Mahlstedt 2015, 175 KatNr. 67, Taf.15 Vechta Vechta Damme 223 Mahlstedt 2015, 176 KatNr. 76, Taf. 16 Verden Achim, Stadt Bierden 8 Schünemann 1981, 95 KatNr. 22, Abb. 19 Verden Dörverden Westen 7 Precht 2020, 297 – 300 KatNr. 405 Verden Dörverden Hülsen 1 Nowatzyk 1990 Verden Kirchlinteln Luttum 98 Schünemann 1981, 86 – 89 KatNr. 15, Abb. 18; Breest et al.2006, 171 Abb. 239 Verden Kirchlinteln Luttum 88 Breest / Kehrbach 2002, 9 – 10 KatNr. 1, Abb. 1 Verden Kirchlinteln Otersen 101 Gerken 2014, 207 – 209 KatNr. 341, Abb. 274 Verden Ottersberg, Flecken Otterstedt 73 Schünemann 1981, 100 – 101 KatNr. 32, Abb. 24; Gerken 2001, 51 – 52 KatNr. 7, Taf. 4 Verden Ottersberg, Flecken Otterstedt 1 Precht 2003, 19f., Kat.Nr. 26, Abb. 23 Verden Verden (Aller), Stadt Eissel 15 Gerken / Precht 2015, 255 KatNr. 373, Abb. 267 Table 3.4 The list and the map are a complemented and updated version of the list published by Gerken / Nelson 2016 (oF = without site no.; cannot be located precisely). Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 , 12 3 – 133) 123 Going north . . . The Middle Neolithic settlement of Nottuln-Uphoven (Westphalia) and the start of the neolithisation in the lowlands Christian Hülsebusch and Albrecht Jockenhövel Abstract Excavations from 1983 – 1985 and 2007 – 2008 brought to light a multi-periodic settlement site of the Middle and Late Neolithic (Rössen, Bischheim, Michelsberg, Funnel Beaker cultures) in Nottuln-Uphoven (Coesfeld, Münsterland, Ger- many) on a southern slope of the Baumberge hills. The site is located on a small loess island about 50 – 70 km north of the fertile Hellweg zone (between Dortmund and Soest) in the midst of less fertile sandy areas. Due to profound erosion the Rössen settlement could only be recorded in its lowest lying structures. The pottery shows direct connections with that of the Rössen settlements on the Hellweg. A grinding sandstone probably also originates from this area. This suggests the migration of a small Rössen population to the north, which started around 4,800 calBC. They settled as farmers on the site for several generations. Probably discontinuously, settlements of the Bischheim group, the Michelsberg culture and the Funnel Beaker culture followed. Nottuln-Uphoven represents the earliest expansion from the old settlement landscapes, characterised by full Neolithic farmsteads of the Linear Pottery (Linearbandkeramik) and Rössen culture, into the north. The site of Nottuln- Uphoven is therefore of particular importance for the neolithisation of the northwest German lowlands. Keywords Nottuln-Uphoven (Westphalia), Middle Neolithic settlements (Rössen, Bischheim, Michelsberg, Funnel Beaker culture), earliest farmers north of the Hellweg zone Zusammenfassung Von 1983 – 1985 und 2007 – 2008 wurde bei Nottuln-Uphoven (Kr. Coesfeld, Münsterland) auf einem Süd- hang der Baumberge ein mehrperiodiger Siedlungsplatz des Mittel- und Jungneolithikums (Rössener, Bischheimer, Michels- berger und Trichterbecherkultur) ergraben. Der Fundplatz liegt etwa 50 – 70 km nördlich der fruchtbaren Hellweg-Zone zwi- schen Dortmund und Soest auf einer Lössinsel mitten in einem sonst wenig fruchtbaren Sandgebiet. Aufgrund der Erosion konnten nur noch die untersten Strukturen der Rössener Siedlung erfasst werden. Die Keramik zeigt deutliche Verbindungen zu den Rössener Siedlungen am Hellweg und der Sandstein für einen Mahlstein stammt vermutlich aus dieser Region. Daher wird angenommnen, dass eine kleine Rössener Population vom Hellweg die Siedlung Nottuln um 4800 v.Chr. begründet hat. Die Siedlung hat für mehrere Generationen bestanden. Später folgten – wahrscheinlich jeweils nach einer Unterbrechung – Siedlungsphasen der Bischheimer Gruppe sowie der Michelsberger und der Trichterbecherkultur. Nottuln-Uphoven repräsen- tiert die erste Expansionsphase der Bauern der Linearbandkeramik und Rössener Kultur nach Norden. Der Fundplatz Not­- tuln-Uphoven ist daher von großer Bedeutung für das Verständnis der Neolithisierung der nordwestdeutschen Tiefebene. Introduction finds, pre-differentiated as ‘Mesolithic’ or ‘Neolithic”, are considered under certain aspects or neolithisation According to the current state of research, during the models in various ways. For, if one accepts the model 5th millennium calBC the ‘neolithisation’ takes place of the spread of a Neolithic life-style from the Near in the northwest German lowlands (‘Niederdeutsche East to central Europe, be it by human migration (to- Tiefebene’) north of the fertile loess belt upstream from gether with domesticated animals and plants), transfer the central German uplands (‘Mittelgebirge’). Ongoing of ideas (stimulus diffusion) or by indigenous innova- research regards this transition from acquiring to pro- tion, one has also to assume the existence of more or ducing subsistence strategies as an increasingly com- less stable ‘border situations’ in different regions and at plex process. Mostly temporal and spatial relations of different times: an ‘Agricultural Frontier’, where farm- 124 Going north... The Middle Neolithic settlement of Nottuln-Uphoven (Westphalia) and the start of the neolithisation in the lowlands mains of cultivated crops and bones of domesticated animals). While the expansion of the LBK to central Europe from the Carpathian Basin was accompa- nied by a full ‘Neolithic package’, single elements of the Neolithic productive economy reached the zone north of the Early (LBK) and Middle Neolithic (Stroked Pottery, Bischheim, Rössen, Gatersleben cultures) during a long period from the late 6th to the 4th century calBC. The sites of these cultures (i. e. Hüde I, Hamburg-Boberg; Laux 1986; Thielen 2018), which have been termed ‘Late Mesolithic’, ‘Proto-Neolithic’, ‘Sub-Neolithic’ or ‘Para-Neolithic’, date to the same period as the purely Neolithic and purely Mesolithic settlements in the northwest Ger- man lowlands (Fig. 1). We may perhaps never be able to answer the complex questions by means of generalising processu- al models. On the other hand, we need more knowl- edge based on archaeological and palaeoecological data from recently excavated sites in this decisive region. One important site of the neolithisation pro- cess is the settlement of Nottuln-Uphoven (Coesfeld Fig. 1 The northwest German lowlands during the 5th millennium distr., Westphalia), one of its earliest outposts north BC. Main cultural clusters and important sites mentioned in the of the loess belt in the lowlands. article (with linear distances in km). 1 Hüde I (Dümmer); 2 Ham- burg-Boberg; 3 Nottuln-Uphoven; 4 Deiringsen-Ruploh; 5 Dort- mund-Oespel (map based on the Schweizer Nationalatlas; after Groer 2013b). The mountain range of the Baumberge and the site of Nottuln-Uphoven ers encountered foragers (hunter-gatherers). However, As one of few mountain ranges in the lowland zone the ‘Agricultural Frontier’ or ‘Neolithic Frontier’ has of the northwest European mainland, the mountain not only to be understood as a simply geographical range of the Baumberge, situated c. 20 km west of border but also in a broader cultural sense. The north- the modern city of Münster (Westphalia), offers a western European lowlands (from the northwestern striking change in the landscape (hills of a height of Netherlands to the western Baltic Sea) during the 5th 100 – 190 m above sea level). In the southern part of millennium calBC are such a region for which studies this island-like hilly landscape, small fertile loess sedi- of ‘hither and thither’ seem worthwhile. ments were deposited during the last glacial (Weichsel North of the region characterised by the Lin- glacial). These small loess plots are exceptions from the ear Pottery culture (Linearbandkeramik [LBK]: less fertile sandy soil of the surrounding lowlands (c. Kneipp 1998) archaeological relics from the south- 60 – 70 m a.s.l.). Furthermore, the Baumberge hills are ern central European world (mainly the perforated a formative watershed in the northwestern lowlands “Danubian stone tools”: Brandt 1967; 2002; Narr with the springs of many rivers as tributaries of some 1983; Merkel 1999) are often found together with important streams (Ems; Ijssel; Vechte; Lippe/Rhine). remains from the Mesolithic period. Neolithic pot- The Baumberge region is located c. 50 km north tery is found in Late Mesolithic contexts as well, of the fertile loess-soil-dominated Hellweg zone (be- though only in a few places. During that period, the tween the modern cities of Dortmund and Soest) with Ertebølle culture was spread in the north (northern its Early and Middle Neolithic settlement clusters of Germany, Denmark) and the Swifterbant culture in Linear Pottery, Rössen and Bischheim sites. There- the northwest (northern and western Netherlands). fore it is not surprising that in the 1970 – 1980s ar- Considering their flint industries, both cultures are chaeological research discovered a kind of pioneering rooted in the respective Mesolithic traditions. Both settlement from Middle (Rössen) and Late Neolithic cultures introduced their specific pottery styles prior cultures (Bischheim, Michelsberg, Funnel Beaker; to their respective shift to agriculture (marked by re- Figs. 2 – 4). Ch ri sti a n H ü l s e b u s ch an d A l brecht J ocken h öve l 125 Fig. 3 Nottuln-Uphoven (Kr. Coesfeld). Settlement features: F 1. F 2 Michelsberg enclosure; F 3 – F 7. F 16 – 19. F 30 Rössen pits (after Groer 2013a). initiated several surveys on the site, which finally re- sulted in an excavation project, funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG). Two campaigns of two Fig. 2 Nottuln-Uphoven (Kr. Coesfeld). Location of the site on a months each were undertaken in the years 2007 and southern slope of the Baumberge hills. Excavation areas. A 1983 – 1984 (J. Eckert); B 2007 – 2008 (Ch. Groer / Ch. Grünewald / 2008 (Fig. 2,B). The excavation areas were targeted on A. Jockenhövel). the basis of geomagnetic mapping of the site (Langer / Elbeshausen 2004). The site shows substantial soil erosion due the inclination of the slope and persis- Nottuln-Uphoven – history of research tent agricultural use (Richter 2008). Therefore only the lowest anthropogenic structures (post-holes, pits) The Neolithic settlements of Nottuln-Uphoven were could still be detected during the excavations. On an discovered during a systematic field survey by the am- excavated area of 2,300 m² the causewayed enclosure ateur-archaeologist Wilhelm Tegethoff in 1973. Jörg from the Michelsberg culture was rediscovered, and Eckert then directed two excavation campaigns in the different sections were excavated over a total length of years 1983 and 1984 (Fig. 2,A). A lot of structures of 50 m. While the project was able to add more struc- the early Late Neolithic Michelsberg culture settlement tures and finds from the Michelsberg (gateway of the were detected (remains of a causewayed enclosure, pits, causewayed enclosure) and Funnel Beaker cultures, its post-holes of wooden buildings dated to the Michelsberg focus was the settlement of the Rössen culture (Groer III-period: Eckert 1986; Knoche 2008; see Fig. 4,B). 2008; 2010; 2013a; b; Fig. 3). One single pit (F 8) contained a closed find of pottery of the Bischheim culture (Fig. 4,C) as a successor of the Rössen and a forerunner of the Michelsberg culture. In Settlement structures the upper part of the trenches there was a thin layer with rich finds from the Funnel Beaker West Group, Only a few meters to the west the causewayed en- indicating the latest occupation of this site (Fig. 4,A). closure of the Michelsberg culture superimposed the At that time merely two finds on the surface – a small pit F19 with pottery typical of the Middle Neolithic pottery sherd with typical decoration and a polished and Rössen culture (Fig. 5; 6,E). A total of eight Rössen perforated stone axe – hinted at an earlier Middle Neo- pits were surveyed (F 3–F 7, F 18; F 19; F 30; Fig. 3). lithic settlement of the Rössen culture (Fig. 5,A; 6,B). The Rössen culture finds are currently the earliest Based on the results of these excavations, the settlement traces of Danubian Neolithic cultural groups authors (in cooperation with Christoph Grünewald) both in this region and in the northwest German low- 126 Going north... The Middle Neolithic settlement of Nottuln-Uphoven (Westphalia) and the start of the neolithisation in the lowlands Fig. 4 Nottuln-Uphoven (Kr. Coesfeld). Sequences of the Neolithic settlements (after Eckert 1986, with additions). A Funnel Beaker ­culture; B Michelsberg culture; C Bischheim group [ Pit F 8]; D Rössen culture (after Eckert 1986; Knoche 2008, with additions). Ch ri sti a n H ü l s e b u s ch an d A l brecht J ocken h öve l 127 Fig. 5 Nottuln-Uphoven (Kr. Coesfeld). Rössen culture: A Stray find (after Eckert 1986); B Pit F 5 (after Groer 2013a). 128 Going north... The Middle Neolithic settlement of Nottuln-Uphoven (Westphalia) and the start of the neolithisation in the lowlands Fig. 6 Nottuln-Uphoven (Kr. Coesfeld). Rössen culture: A Pit F 1; B Stray find (after Eckert 1986); C Pit F 5; D Pit F 19; E Pit F 7 (after Groer 2013a). Ch ri sti a n H ü l s e b u s ch an d A l brecht J ocken h öve l 129 Fig. 7 Nottuln-Uphoven (Kr. Coesfeld). Pit F3 (Rössen culture). Grinding stone (fragment) of carbon sandstone with a weight of 13 kg (LWL-Archäologie Münster / J. Gryz). lands in general. Because of the extensive erosion a typi- Stone industry cal trapezoid-shaped longhouse of the Rössen culture could not be ascertained, only some post-pits as the last Silex remains of such post-built structures1 were recorded. About 2,500 artefacts from the Neolithic silex industry were discovered during the campaigns in 2007 and Pottery 2008. Only few typical triangular arrowheads with At Nottuln-Uphoven the Rössen culture is repre- straight bases, scrapers and a blade for a sickle come sented with about 70 decorated and undecorated from Rössen contexts (Fig. 6,C.D). During the Rössen vessels, mainly globular vessels and bowls, often in- period the local Baltic silex of morainic origin origin crusted with a white paste (selection: Figs. 5; 6,E). was almost exclusively used. There are only a handful The composition of the pottery’s decorations and of imported pieces. The Rullen silex variant, however, motives allows its classification as an example of the which is so dominant at the Rössen sites in the Rhine- typical chevron-banded style of the Rössen Rhine- land, is totally absent. This suggests that the Rössen Main cluster which belongs to a younger stage of the settlement had access only to local glacial deposits Rössen style (Dorn-Ihmig 1983). However, despite and no direct connections to the silex resources of the all similarities to the Rhinish Rössen style, some Rhineland, which is a significant contrast to the fol- peculiarities appear at Nottuln-Uphoven. There is lowing period’s settlement of the Michelsberg culture. in the first place the enigmatic decorated bowl from pit F 7, which shows an extension of the decora- Grinding stone tion reaching 3.5 cm horizontally into the vessel’s mouth, a unique feature among vessels from compa- Some fragments of querns and hammerheads are the rable cultural contexts (Groer / Bussmann 2010; only artefacts from rock material found during the Fig. 6,E6; 6a.b) . From the ‘ceramic point of view’ excavations. Polished blades and axes were not found the Rössen settlement of Nottuln-Uphoven has to except from the single find of a perforated axe from be interpreted in every respect as a direct ‘outpost’ the earlier excavation (Fig. 6,B). Concerning the ma- located c. 40 – 70 km distant to the Rössen culture terial for grinding stones it is worth mentioning that border of the Hellweg zone between Dortmund and the totally worn down ‘Unterlieger’ (weight 13 kg; Soest (see also Rörig / Knäpper 2018/2019). reconstructed original weight c. 38 kg; for a grinding stone of the Rössen settlement of Dortmund-Oespel: Graefe 2009, 255 f., Taf. 3; 5) unearthed from the Rössen pit F 3 (Fig. 7), consists of a distinctive variety 1  Cf. Deiringsen-Ruploh: Günther 1976; Soest-‘Rünstert’: of sandstone. This raw material must have been im- Buczka / Pfeffer 2015; Bad Sassendorf-Lohne: Schönfeld / Jörns 2015; Dortmund-Oespel: Brink-Kloke / Meurers-Balke ported from the area of the Hellweg zone; it is totally 2003; Brink-Kloke / Schneider 2013. absent in the glacial region of the Münsterland. In 130 Going north... The Middle Neolithic settlement of Nottuln-Uphoven (Westphalia) and the start of the neolithisation in the lowlands contrast, all Michelsberg querns of Nottuln-Uphoven of the Atlantic and Subboreal periods (unpublished re- were made from local granites of glacial deposits port by U. Tegetmeier / R. Neef, University of Cologne). in the neighborhood. This aspect indicates that the Unfortunately animal bones were not preserved due to Rössen querns were directly brought to that site by the acidic loess soil. Rössen settlements of the Hellweg immigrants who did not yet know or use the natural zone demonstrate the presence of domesticated animals resources in the destination area. (such as cattle, sheep/goat and pig: Günther 1976, 48 – 51; Buczka / Pfeffer 2015, 354). Archaeobotanical and archaeozoological samples Absolute Dating Einkorn (Triticum monococcum) and Emmer (Triticum A total of 14 AMS samples were selected from charred dicoccum) as well as barley (Hordeum vulgare) were grain and hazelnut remains from most Rössen culture grown during both the Rössen and the Michelsberg contexts and from several contexts of the Michelsberg period. Cultivation of legumes has also been detected and Funnel Beaker cultures (Fig. 8). The earlier dates for these two periods due to sporadic charred seeds of indicate a settlement period from about 4,900 calBC to pea and lentil. Hazelnuts were an important dietary about 4,500 calBC for the time of the Rössen culture. supplement at all times. The charcoal finds show no They suggest that we do not simply deal with just an essential differences in the wood species and the tree isolated short-time occupation, but that regarding the fruits available throughout all periods. Oak, ash, lime- Rössen culture there was an extended period of settle- tree, elm, and pome are common in the palaeoclimate ment duration in this area north of the Hellweg zone. Fig. 8 Nottuln-Uphoven (Kr. Coesfeld). AMS dating of Nottuln-Uphoven (2007 – 2008): Rössen results to the left, Michelsberg results to the right. Ch ri sti a n H ü l s e b u s ch an d A l brecht J ocken h öve l 131 Nottuln-Uphoven in the context of The current map of distribution of the polished neolithisation in the northwest German ‘Danubian stone tools’ assigned to the Rössen culture in the area of the Münsterland and the lowland might lowlands possibly treble the evidence known so far (Fig. 9). Regarding the neolithisation it seems that in the case Unfortunately, these axes and adzes are mainly sin- of the Münsterland we have to envisage immigration gle finds without any archaeological context, and it during Rössen times originating from the settlement cannot be definitely said whether their distibution clusters of the Hellweg region c. 50 – 70 km south of represents Neolithic activities, exchange goods of the Baumberge hills (Figs. 1; 9). The shape and decora- local Mesolithic groups, or relics of premodern su- tion of the Rössen pottery can be traced back almost perstition (‘Donnerkeil’). While Nottuln-Uphoven exclusively to examples from inventories of the Rössen is interpreted as an outpost of the Neolithic world, settlements in the region of Soest (Günther 1976). evidence of contacts or coexistence with its Meso- The import of a heavy sandstone quern refers to the lithic neighbours is completely absent. same area of origin. The spectrum of the silex-variet- A natural overland link to the north into the ies is similar to that of Deiringsen-Ruploh and other northwest German lowlands existed via passes in settlements from the Rössen Hellweg cluster. Further- the mountainous Teutoburg Forest and the Wiehen more a direct connection exists between the Rössen mountains along small rivers, mainly the Hunte, to sites of the Hellweg zone and Nottuln-Uphoven via the the Dümmer lake (linear distance from Nottuln- river system of Stever/Lippe, which might have been Uphoven: c. 80 – 100 km). Near the Dümmer lake navigable up to a certain point by logboats or canoes; settlement with its mixture of Mesolithic and Neo- or at least the rivers were simply used for orientation lithic elements (Hüde I) the oldest wooden pathway as landmarks when travelling by land. It is likely that in the lowlands was detected (Campemoor Pr 31: the Neolithic pioneer-farmers of the Rössen culture Metzler 2004), dated to 4,614 – 4,540 denBC. This were able to identify the small plots of fertile loess soil indicates contemporaneous activity with the Rössen in the Baumberge region, for example by a particular settlement of Nottuln-Uphoven! kind of woodland and a different kind of vegetation. At the time of the northbound activities in the The first occupation of the northwest German Early and Middle Neolithic periods southbound lowland by the Middle Neolithic Rössen culture was interactions existed as well. Inside a Rössen settle- not the result of one single expedition. The series of ment in Soest-Rünstert (house V, pit 80) a piece of the AMS-dates confirms a longer period of perma- unprocessed amber was found (Fig. 10; Buczka 2013 nent colonisation at Nottuln-Uphoven over some Abb. 2,3). Most likely amber raw material comes generations (Fig. 8). from local glacial deposits in the lowlands or from farther north (Cimbrian peninsula: Woltermann 2016, 243 ff.; 247 Abb. 184 – 185). The interactions between Early Neolithic farmers and Mesolithic hunter-gatherers were certainly not always peace- ful. Anyhow, the destruction of the LBK-well (well I) of Erkelenz-Kückhoven (Kr. Heinsberg, Rhineland), dated to c. 5,110 denBC, is interpreted as the result of an attack by hunter-gatherers living in the neigh- borhood or farther away: from the bottom of the Fig.  9 Distribution of ‘Danubian stone tools’ (adzes/axes) in Fig. 10 Soest-Rünstert, Rössen settlement: House V, pit 80 (Kr. Westphalia. Star symbol: Nottuln-Uphoven (after Narr 1983, with Soest). Unprocessed piece of amber with a length of 2,8 cm (Stad- additions after Groer 2013a). tarchäologie Soest / Chr. Theopold). 132 Going north... The Middle Neolithic settlement of Nottuln-Uphoven (Westphalia) and the start of the neolithisation in the lowlands well there emerged a Holmegaard-type bow known Buczka / Pfeffer 2015: M. Buczka / I. Pfeffer, Eine Sied- from Mesolithic contexts and a perforated amber lung der Rössener Kultur am westlichen Stadtrand von bead (Weiner 1995; 1998; Woltermann 2016, 85 – 86 Soest. In: T. Otten u. a. (eds.), Revolution Jungsteinzeit. fig. 46; 353 Nr. 586). Ausstellungskatalog Bonn 2015. Schriften zur Boden- denkmalpflege in Nordrhein-Westfalen 11,1 (Darmstadt 2015) 353 – 355. Summary Dohrn-Ihmig 1983: M. Dohrn-Ihmig, Neolithische Sied- Obviously, the Rössen settlement of Nottuln-Up- lungen der Rössener Kultur in der Niederrheinischen hoven with its full ‘Neolithic Package’ is not a site Bucht. Mat. Allgemeine u. Vergleichende Archäologie like Hüde I at Lake Dümmer or Hamburg-Boberg 21 (München 1983). (Laux 1986; Thielen 2018). Nevertheless, during Eckert 1986: J. Eckert, Ein mittel- und jungneolithischer the 5th millennium calBC groups who maintained a Siedlungsplatz bei Nottuln, Kreis Coesfeld. Bericht über purely Neolithic life-style are recorded in the north- die Ausgrabungen 1983 – 1984. Ausgrabungen und Funde west German lowland. However, there were complex in Westfalen-Lippe 4, 1986, 39 – 6 3. hunter-gatherer societies at the same time, pursuing Graefe 2009: J. Graefe, Neolithische Mahlsteine zwischen both an acquiring and producing economy, and even Weserbergland und dem Niederrhein. Zur wirtschafts- some communities existed who apparently main- archäologischen Aussagekraft einer Fundgruppe. Uni- tained a purely foraging way of life. In this regard versitätsforschungen zur Prähistorischen Archäologie the neolithisation as a continuous process has to be 174 (Bonn 2009). questioned in general. Furthermore, differences be- Groer 2008: Ch. Groer, Neue Forschungen zum ältesten tween the find complexes of the Rössen, Bischheim, Neolithikum im Münsterland: Bericht über die archäo- Michelsberg and Funnel Beaker cultures at Nottuln- logischen Ausgrabungen 2007 am jungsteinzeitlichen Uphoven could be ascertained, which exceed the Siedlungsplatz von Nottuln-Uphoven. Geschichtsblätter general cultural specifications (Fig. 1). des Kreises Coesfeld 33, 2008, 1 – 26. Groer 2010: Ch. Groer, Neolithisierung im Münsterland: Neue Forschungsergebnisse zum neolithischen Sied- lungsplatz von Nottuln-Uphoven (Kr. Coesfeld). Archäo- References logie in Westfalen-Lippe 1, 2009, 169 – 172. Groer 2013a: Ch. Groer, Neolithisierungsprozesse in Brandt 1967: K. H. Brandt, Studien über steinerne Äxte Nordwestdeutschland. Tradition, Innovation und und Beile der jüngeren Steinzeit und der Stein-Kupfer- Adaption zwischen 6000 und 3500 v. Chr. (Disserta- zeit Nordwestdeutschlands. Münstersche Beiträge zur tion Phil. Fak. Universität Münster 2010) (online-Pu- Vorgeschichtsforschung 2 (Hildesheim 1967). blikation Münster 2013: https://miami.uni-muenster. Brandt 2002: K. H. Brandt, Nichtjägerische Elemente im de/Record/5d5878d3-8e74-4c92-b319-69b69ed23f82). nordwestdeutschen Flachland vor der Trichterbecher- Accessed 15.02.2021. kultur. Die Kunde N.F. 53, 2002, 87 – 108. Groer 2013b: Ch. Groer, At the back of beyond…? The Brink-Kloke / Meurers-Balke 2003: H. Brink-Kloke / J. Neolithic settlement of Nottuln-Uphoven (Coesfeld, Meurers-Balke, Siedlungen und Gräber am Oespeler Westphalia) and the Neolithisation of the Northwestern Bach (Dortmund) – eine Kulturlandschaft im Wandel mainland. In: R. Gleser / V. Becker (eds.), Mitteleuropa der Zeiten. Germania 81, 2003, 47 – 146. im 5. Jahrtausend v. Chr. – Beiträge zur Internationalen Brink-Kloke / Schneider 2013: H. Brink-Kloke / E. Konferenz in Münster, 6.–8. Oktober 2010. Neolithi- Schneider, Neue Forschungen zu Rössener Häusern kum und Ältere Metallzeiten, Studien und Materialien am Hellweg – die Grundrisse von Dortmund-Oespel, 1 (Münster 2013) 547 – 567. Marten. In: W. Melzer (ed.), Neue Forschungen zum Groer / Bussmann 2010: Ch. Groer / S. Bussmann, Ein Neolithikum in Soest und am Hellweg. Soester Beiträge außergewöhnliches Gefäß der Rössener Kultur aus zur Archäologie 13 (Soest 2013) 101 – 118. Nottuln-Uphoven, Kreis Coesfeld (Nordrhein-West­ Buczka 2013: M. Buczka, Die mittelneolithische Besiedlung falen). Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 40, 2010, im Soester Westen – Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen Am 21 – 28. Ardey/Rüenstert/Am Brinkenkamp. In: W. Melzer (ed.), Günther 1976: K. Günther, Die jungsteinzeitliche Siedlung Neue Forschungen zum Neolithikum in Soest und am Deiringsen/Ruploh in der Soester Börde. Bodenalter- Hellweg. Soester Beiträge zur Archäologie 13 (Soest tümer Westfalens 16 (Münster 1976). 2013) 63 – 98. Ch ri sti a n H ü l s e b u s ch an d A l brecht J ocken h öve l 133 Kneipp 1998: J. Kneipp, Bandkeramik zwischen Rhein, Weser Praxis. Geschichtsblätter des Kreises Coesfeld 33, 2008, und Main. Studien zu Stil und Chronologie der Keramik. 27 – 42. Universitätsforschungen zur Prähistorischen Archäolo- Rörig / Knäpper 2018/2019: M. Rörig / A. Knäpper, Werl gie 47 (Bonn 1998). „Auf dem Klei“ und die Fundstellen der Rössener Kultur Knoche 2008: B. Knoche, Die Erdwerke von Soest (Kr. im Kreis Soest. Ausgrabungen und Funde in Westfa- ­Soest) und Nottuln-Uphoven (Kr. Coesfeld). Studien len-Lippe 14, 2018/2019, 195 – 209. zum Jungneolithikum in Westfalen. Münstersche Bei- Schönfeld / Jörns 2015: P. Schönfeld / I. Jörns, Neue träge zur Ur- und Frühgeschichtlichen Archäologie 3 Ausgrabungen am jungstein- und eisenzeitlichen Sied- (Rahden/Westf. 2008). lungsplatz in Bad Sassendorf, Kreis Soest, Regierungs- Langer / Elbeshausen 2004: S. Langer / D. Elbeshau- bezirk Arnsberg. Ausgrabungen in Westfalen-Lippe sen, Geomagnetische Prospektion des mittel- und 2015, 38 – 41. jungneolithischen Fundplatzes Nottuln-Uphoven [un- Thielen 2018: L. Thielen, Boberger Niederung. Besiedlungs- publ. term-paper, Institute for Geophysics, University dauer der Fundplätze Hamburg Boberg 15, 15-Ost und of Münster 2004]. 20. In: F. Nikulka / D. Hofmann / R. Schumann (eds.), Laux 1986: F. Laux, Die mesolithischen und frühneolithi- Menschen – Dinge – Orte. Aktuelle Forschungen des schen Fundplätze auf den Boberger Dünen bei Hamburg. Instituts für Vor- und Frühgeschichtliche Archäologie Überlegungen zum Beginn des Neolithikums im Nie- der Universität Hamburg (Hamburg 2018) 115 – 122. derelbegebiet. Hammaburg N.F. 7, 1984/85 (1986) 9 – 38. Weiner 1995: J. Weiner, Bogenstab- und Pfeilschaftfrag- Merkel 1999: M. Merkel, Überlegungen zur Typologie der mente aus dem altneolithischen Brunnen von Erkelenz- Felsgesteingeräte. Ein Beitrag zur Neolithisierung Nord- Kückhoven. Ein Beitrag zur Bogenwaffe der Band­ deutschlands und Südskandinaviens. Offa 56, 1999, keramik. Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 25, 223 – 2 38. 1995, 355 – 372. Metzler 2004: A. Metzler, Neolithischer Moorwegebau Weiner 1998: J. Weiner, Drei Brunnenkasten, aber nur zwei in der Dümmerniederung In: M. Fansa / F. Both / H. Brunnen: Eine neue Hypothese zur Baugeschichte des Haßmann (eds.), Archäologie|Land|Niedersachsen. Brunnens von Erkelenz-Kückhoven. In: H. Koschik 400.000 Jahre Geschichte. Archäologische Mitteilun- u. a. (eds.), Brunnen der Jungsteinzeit. Intern. Symp. in gen aus Nordwestdeutschland, Beiheft 43 (Oldenburg Erkelenz 1997. Mat. Bodendenkmalpfl. Rheinland 11 2004) 475 – 479. (Köln 1998) 95 – 112. Narr 1983: K. J. Narr, Die Steinzeit. In: W. Kohl (ed.), West- Woltermann 2016: G. Woltermann, Die prähistorischen fälische Geschichte 1. Von den Anfängen bis zum Ende Bernsteinartefakte aus Deutschland vom Paläolithikum des Alten Reiches (Düsseldorf 1983) 81 – 111. bis zur Bronzezeit. Methodische Forschungen zu Lager- Richter 2008: H. Richter, Bodenkundliche Untersuchun- stättengenese, Distributionsstrukturen und ­s ozio- gen am jungsteinzeitlichen Siedlungsplatz von Nottuln- ökonomischem Kontext. Universitätsforschungen zur Uphoven – Geowissenschaften in der Archäologischen Prähistorischen Archäologie 290 (Bonn 2016). Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 , 135 – 157) 135 Early and Middle Neolithic hoards in the area of the northern Mesolithic1 Michael Müller and Michael Schirren Abstract In 2016 seven shaft-hole axe heads and two adze heads were discovered at Friedefeld in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania (Germany). The discovery was dated to the Middle Neolithic period and interpreted as a hoard. In connection to this hoard, we are discussing here similar finds from the same and earlier periods. By comparing the composition of the dif- ferent hoards and their distribution, we are debating several issues concerning Early and Middle Neolithic (5,500 – 4,400 cal BC) stone tool depositions from central and northern Europe. It will be argued that Neolithic exploration groups were the originators of these stone tool hoards from the territory of today’s northern Germany and Denmark, which were at that time inhabited by Mesolithic hunter-gatherers. The authors furthermore interpret the depositions as spatial markers, which were used by the Neolithic groups to claim newly discovered or to demarcate existing settled areas. Zusammenfassung Im Jahre 2016 wurden bei Friedefeld in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (Deutschland) sieben Axt- und zwei Dechselklingen entdeckt. Der Fund wird von den Autoren als mittelneolithischer Hort interpretiert, welcher im vorliegenden Aufsatz ausführlich besprochen wird. In die Auswertungen werden sowohl zeitgleiche als auch früher datierende Horte ein- bezogen, deren Komposition und Verbreitung miteinander verglichen werden. Des Weiteren werden verschiedene Aspekte der Niederlegungen mit Steingeräten des Früh- und Mittelneolithikums (5500 – 4400 calBC) in Mittel- und Nordeuropa deba- tiert. Es wird argumentiert, dass es neolithische Pioniere waren, die vergleichbare Deponierungen auf dem Gebiet des heutigen Norddeutschlands und Dänemarks niederlegten, welches zu jenem Zeitpunkt von mesolithischen Gruppen bewohnt war. Zudem werden die Deponierungen als Raummarkierungen neolithischer Gruppen interpretiert, die dazu dienten, neue Ge- biete für sich in Anspruch zu nehmen oder bestehende Siedlungsareale abzugrenzen. Introduction All nine artefacts came out at once in one shovel, and no further finds could be made in the vicinity. During an archaeological monitoring 2 in July 2016 Based on these circumstances, it was possible to re- in the district Friedefeld, west of the Pomeranian construct that the objects had been packed together city of Penkun (Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, in the ground, lying partly on top of one another. Germany), a Middle Neolithic stone tool hoard was The stone implements were embedded at about 0.5 m discovered (for location see Figs. 5; 8). The find was below the top soil, in the genuine white-yellow glacial made while digging a 0.4 m wide trench with the aid sand. With the exception of a chipping on the cutting of an excavator. Seven shaft-hole axe heads and two edge of a shaft-hole axe head and small scratches on adze heads (Fig. 1) were scooped up by the excavator, some of them, the objects had not suffered any sig- with no outline of any archaeological feature visible nificant damage. on the surface of the find place. The site is located about 800 m from the eastern edge of the Randow valley. The valley of the River Ran- dow, draining from south to north, is of glacial origin and largely swampy today. The river flows through a relief-rich, Weichselian end moraine landscape of the 1 In this paper we refer to the terminology proposed in Pomeranian phase. The banks of River Randow are Lüning 1996. to a large extent modeled by erosive processes, with 2  The monitoring was carried out by the Landesamt für Kultur jagged slopes of up to 24 m in height. The site itself is und Denkmalpflege (State Office for Culture and Preservation of Monuments) of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania. For more located at the northwestern foot of a distinctive hill- details see Müller et al. in prep. top, which was referred to in the Royal Prussian Land 136 Early and Middle N eolithic hoards in the area of the northern Meso lit h ic Fig. 1 The Middle Neolithic hoard of Friedefeld (Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania) with the stone artefacts in front and side view. Survey (‘Urmesstischblatt’) of 1835 as ‘Hüttenberg’. Pottery culture, in the following Middle Neolithic The frequently detected black soils in the find area (5,000 – 4,400 cal BC) several new pottery decoration and in its immediate surroundings are today mostly styles and tool types emerged. They were connected secondarily relocated and only preserved as colluvi- to cultures 3 named today Hinkelstein, Großgartach, ums (Fischer-Zujkow 1998; 2000; Fischer-Zujkow Stroke-ornamented Pottery, Rössen or Bischheim. et al. 1999). Not only the material culture changed during The Friedefeld hoard is only the most recent the Middle Neolithic, but also the choice of inhab- discovery of several similar Neolithic depositions in ited territories and therewith the soils destined for the region, but also the largest one so far, judging by agriculture and living. For the entire duration of the the number of contained items. Until now, this group Linear Pottery culture, the choice of soils remained of hoards is the northernmost concentration of its rather conservative, the habitation being bound to time and kind, while evidence of Middle Neolithic loess. However, during the Middle Neolithic period an habitations in the same region has been unknown expansion of the living space is visible, as also wet and so far. Moreover, a great number of contemporary forest soils, on clay or sand, were then incorporated.4 finds from Late Mesolithic groups in the area lead It were the fertile soils developing on the loess, to many questions concerning the relation between especially black soils, that attracted the Early Neolithic local hunter-gatherers and Neolithic people. Who settlers. In Germany, the northernmost loess soils ex- of them put those depositions into the ground, and tend approximately until the line Hanover-Magdeburg. how might one interpret them today? Objects of the Early and Middle central 3 It is important to note that with the term ‘culture’ we refer European Neolithic in the area of the here to a distribution of similar artefacts, burial practices and decoration styles of an area, and not to ethnic entities (see northern Mesolithic Lüning 1972; Furholt 2014). 4  Ehrhardt 1994, 67; Lönne 2003. If changing climatic con- While the Early Neolithic (5,500 – 5,000 cal BC) ditions or other reasons are connected with this choice, shall in central Europe was dominated by the Linear not be discussed in this paper. M i c h a e l M ü l l e r a n d M i ch ae l Sch i r ren 137 Fig. 2 Find places in Brandenburg for Early Neolithic (Linear Pottery culture; black dots) and Middle Neolithic (Stroke-ornamented Pottery culture and Rössen culture; red dots). Depositions were not included (modified after Cziesla 2008, 414 fig. 3). During the late 6th and the 5th millennium the uted in the northern Netherlands and northwestern land north of this area was dominated by a Meso- Germany (between the line Antwerpen-Hamburg; see lithic ‘lifestyle’, as southern Scandinavia and parts of Raemaekers 2016, 23), while south of the Mecklen- northern Germany were inhabited by people of the burg lake plateau and in the region of the modern Ertebølle culture. The Swifterbant culture was distrib- federal state of Brandenburg, still insufficiently in- 138 Early and Middle N eolithic hoards in the area of the northern Meso lit h ic Fig. 3 Middle Neolithic stone axe heads with shaft-hole found in Mesolithic habitation layers or as single finds in the Mesolithic occupa- tion area (left side mapped after Verhart / Wansleben 1997, 70 fig. 7; right side mapped after Klassen 2004, 49 fig. 31). vestigated, there was the so-called ‘inland Mesolithic’ shaft-holes were revealed so far and around five times (Cziesla 2008, 408; Terberger et al. 2015). as many as in southern Sweden (Klassen 2004, 22). In the Uckermark region, situated in the north- However, at a closer look we see that only an amount eastern part of Brandenburg, beyond the large loess of around 15 % of these objects was discovered in landscapes, areas with black soils developed on calcare- direct Mesolithic contexts.7 Additionally, it was sug- ous boulder clay.5 It is worth noting that in the same gested that these items came into the ground not region the northernmost settlement area of the late long after reaching the Mesolithic area (Hartz et al. Linear Pottery and the succeeding Stroke-ornamented 2011). Until now, complete shaft-hole axe heads and Pottery cultures is assumed (Fig. 2). This is based on the fragmented ones were found in the Mesolithic area in evidence offered by lithic industry, pottery, elongated a ratio of 2 : 1. Both the complete and the fragmented pits and a few other house features as well as isolated shaft-hole axe heads were connected with Mesolithic graves (Parschau 1988; Wechler 1993, 61; Terberger sites. Nonetheless, the majority of central European et al. 2009, 261). However, palynological evidence has Neolithic items were found either as single finds in so far remained unsatisfactory (cf. Cziesla 2008). the area of the northern Mesolithic or without any Further north, in the area of Mesolithic hunter- available information of their find circumstances. gatherers, no less than a few hundred certainly Neo- In addition to being found within settlements lithic finds are known. This includes shaft-hole axe and as single finds, central European Neolithic heavy heads (Fig. 3a–b) and adze heads of stone as well stone tools occur in hoards in the distribution area as sherds of ceramic vessels assigned to the Linear of the Mesolithic. A dense concentration of Middle Pottery, Stroke-ornamented Pottery and Rössen cul- Neolithic hoards was uncovered in the southeast- tures. Yet, there is no evidence for contemporary ern part of Western Pomerania, in the lower Oder Neolithic settlements in that area. Instead the Neo- region, while two more were discovered on the Dan- lithic objects, particularly axe heads with shaft-hole, ish islands Lolland and Askø (Fig. 5). In all these occur regularly in connection with Mesolithic fea- cases no contemporary Neolithic settlement could tures.6 In Denmark, several dozens of axe heads with be identified until now. 5  Cf. https://mlul.brandenburg.de/Steckbriefe-BB-Boeden/a_ sb_3_1.pdf (accessed: 02. November 2019). 6 General overview: Terberger et al. 2009; Mecklenburg- Western Pomerania: Mertens / Schirren 2000; Lübke at al. 7  This value and the following numbers are based on the in- 2000; Netherlands: Verhart / Wansleeben 1997; northern formation given in the catalogue by Klassen 2004 which in- Germany and southern Scandinavia: Klassen 2004; Poland: volves the territories of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Den- Czekaj-Zastawny et al. 2011. mark and Sweden; see also Hartz et al. 2011, 53. M i c h a e l M ü l l e r a n d M i ch ae l Sch i r ren 139 Neolithic depositions in central and regions.10 The objects occurring most often and most northern Europe widespread are flint axe heads, followed by amber beads, ceramic vessels, copper items and flint blades. The terms ‘hoard’ and ‘deposition’, which we are us- A new study about the whole range of TRB deposi- ing in this article, need perhaps some further explana- tions is in preparation (Müller in prep.). The two- tion. The term ‘deposition’ refers to hoards, which are sided pointed-butted flint axe head is the earliest defined as a minimum of two objects put in the same axe head type of the TRB. It is still not sure how place at the same time, as well as to single object the deposition custom started in the northern Neo- depositions (see Hansen 2002 for further discus- lithic, but there is evidence that the practice was sions on that topic). Both terms describe finds which already established at the very beginning of the are neither grave goods nor settlement finds. First TRB (Müller in prep.). It is rather unlikely to see theories about hoards from prehistoric times were roots of TRB deposition practices coming from the published in 1866 by the Danish archaeologist and preceding Ertebølle culture, due to the quantitative director of the Danish National Museum, J. J. A. Wor- lack of recurring hoards with Ertebølle stone tools, saae (Worsaae 1866). While his examinations were especially flint axe heads. Over the past 15 years, exclusively connected to Bronze Age hoards, Wor- the influences of the western / central European saae’s successor, S. Müller, was among the earliest Michelsberg culture (4,400 – 3,500 cal BC) in the archaeologists mentioning and characterising Neo- formation of the TRB complex were convincingly lithic hoards (Müller 1886). In 1914, K. Schumacher argued (cf. inter alia Klassen 2004; Sørensen 2014). published an article about Neolithic hoards from all In the distribution area of the Michelsberg culture parts of Germany (Schumacher 1914). The presented depositions of two-sided pointed butted axe heads finds come from the entire Neolithic period, start- are also known. These are made of Alpine rocks, ing with the Linear Pottery until the northern Final mostly eclogite, omphacitite and jadeitite, but also Neolithic phase. Early theories about the nature amphibolite and serpentinite, which were exploited and the purpose of hoards varied considerably and from the late 6th millennium BC and were circulating included trade goods, caches, stashes or sacrificial through exchange networks even to the outer fringes offerings.8 of Europe (Pétrequin et al. 2008, 261). Following, Past decades’ studies brought many arguments we will refer to these items as axe heads of Alpine supporting a ritual interpretation for most of the rocks or Alpine axe heads. Neolithic hoards. The recurring selection of objects, Due to the scarcity of finds of heavy stone tools their often extraordinary sizes or surface treatments in Michelsberg graves or settlements (Jeunesse 2010, as well as their arrangements, and the choice of the 51; Ramminger 2010, 198) it was long unclear wheth- places for the depositions suggest they might have er the depositions and single finds with axe heads of served as ritual offerings,9 dedicated to imagined Alpine rocks occurring in the Michelsberg distribu- supernatural beings. Nevertheless, cases exist where tion area can indeed be connected to that culture. evidence strongly suggests that the depositions can Taking all the pieces of evidence together, however, sometimes be seen as left-behind caches, like in the we can only see the people of the Michelsberg culture case of blanks found close to exploitable resources as the actors of those depositions (cf. Kreuz et al. (cf. Becker 1980). 2014, 75; Bérenger 2015, 217). But it must be noted The largest number of depositions for central that even before the emergence of the Michelsberg and northern Europe is known from the time of culture axe heads made of Alpine rocks were of great the Funnelbeaker culture (‘Trichterbecherkultur’, importance to the people at the Gulf of Morbihan in c. 4,100 – 2 ,800 cal BC; hereinafter referred to as Brittany (France) in the first half of the 5th millen- TRB complex); these have been studied for several nium BC. There Alpine axe heads occur in deposi- tions and in very large numbers inside the tumuli of 10  Inter alia for Sweden: Karsten 1994; Denmark: Nielsen 8  See, among others, Kauffmann 1913; Schumacher 1914; 1977; Koch 1998; Ebbesen 1995; the Netherlands: Wentink Petzsch 1928; Aust 1961; Stjernquist 1962/1963; Becker 1952; 2006; Germany and Scandinavia in general: Rech 1979. – The 1976. abbreviation ‘TRB’ comes from the German word ‘Trichter- randbecher’, which is tranlated into English as ‘funnel-necked 9  Inter alia Rech 1979; Ebbesen 1995; Koch 1998; Klimscha beaker’ (after the shape of typical ceramic vessels). It became 2009; Müller in prep. the standard abbreviation also in the English language. 140 Early and Middle N eolithic hoards in the area of the northern Meso lit h ic assumedly high ranking people (Klassen et al. 2011; only one hoard can be dated with certainty to the Pétrequin 2016, 419). Stroke-ornamented Pottery culture, the remaining The depositions of the Michelsberg and espe- two possibly being Early or Middle Neolithic. cially the TRB groups, dating to the Younger Neo- The German terminology – used to charac- lithic (4,400 – 3,500 cal BC), are not the first kind terise the different or even the same types of Early of Neolithic depositions known from Europe. Al- and Middle Neolithic heavy stone tools – became ready in the Early and Middle Neolithic period very confusing over the decades (cf. Brandt 1995; (5,500 – 4,400 cal BC) the people of the Linear Pot- Klassen 2004, 20 – 24). Those respective terms have tery, Stroke-ornamented Pottery and Rössen cul- sometimes little to do with the prehistoric reality, tures showed extensive deposition practices which as they are more often connected with typological involved mostly adze heads and axes with a shaft- determinations, without any prior statistical analy- hole. So far, there has been no coherent elaborate sis.13 Because tool shapes were described in a rather study about the hoards from the Linear Pottery, individual manner, many different terms were formu- Stroke-ornamented Pottery and Rössen cultures, lated. This, of course, is an often discussed aspect, although many regionally focused articles provide and we will not insist on it here. However, we choose detailed catalogues, giving a very good overview. to mention it, as in the following descriptions we will Besides Schumacher’s paper from 1914, especially try to stay as technical as possible. Essentially, the an article by H. Quitta (Quitta 1955) provides a heavy stone tool industry is dominated by three main catalogue in which he included material from Ger- types, namely adze heads, axe heads with shaft-hole many, Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia.11 and axe heads without shaft-hole.14 For the Czech Republic and Germany, S. Vencl During the Early Neolithic Linear Pottery culture, (Vencl 1975) needs to be referred to, while M. Salaš adze heads represent the main heavy tool type, in (Salaš 1986) focused on the Moravian depositions. general, but also within hoards. It can be differentiated The few Stroke-ornamented Pottery / Rössen hoards between flat broad adzes (flat hoes / ‘Flachhacken’) from Poland were mentioned in the catalogue about and narrow adze heads (known as shoe-last celts / Neolithic depositions from Poland by J. Kaflińska ‘Schuhleistenkeile’). The latter type can be further (Kaflińska 2006). divided into variants determined by height.15 None of them have a shaft-hole, which is a general aspect for almost all heavy stone tools of the Linear Pottery Contents, compositions and sites of culture (Biermann 2011, 37). Shaft-hole tools emerge Early and Middle Neolithic depositions only in its latest phase. One example is given by the so- called double-edged adze or double hoe, a perforated The data on which this investigation is based derives tool, made of soft stone, presenting two blunt edges mostly from catalogues as well as other relevant sourc- pointing away from each other (Biermann 2011, 40). es12 and includes finds from the territories of modern The first perforated shoe-last celts can possibly be Germany, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland and connected to the transition period from Early to Mid- Denmark. Some of the finds from northeastern Ger- dle Neolithic. Because their shaft-holes are oriented many and Denmark were personally examined. transverse to their cutting edges, they are technically As mentioned before, the main content of Early only perforated adze heads and not shaft-hole axe and Middle Neolithic hoards in the study area are heads, in which case their shaft-holes would have to heavy stone tools. From the 113 depositions analysed be oriented parallel to their cutting edges (Biermann here, only three do not contain heavy stone tools, but 2011, 40). instead consist only of flint blades. Of these three 13 See Ramminger 2007 as an example of the possibilities for 11  Kaufmann 2012 shows that Quitta’s catalogue still pro- statistical analysis on Early and Middle Neolithic heavy stone vides the actual state of art, at least for central Germany. tools. 12  Mainly the following sources were used for the Czech Re- 14  The differentiation between the last two types is made public: Quitta 1955; Vencl 1975; Salaš 1986; Slowakia: Quit- clearer in the German archaeological terminology: an axe head ta 1955; Vencl 1975; Poland: Kaflińska 2006; Germany: with a shaft-hole is an ‘Axtklinge’, while an axe head without Quitta 1955; Vencl 1975; Rech 1979; Denmark: http://www. shaft-hole is named ‘Beilklinge’. kulturarv.dk/fundogfortidsminder, and personal communica- tion with Dr. Lasse Sørensen (National Museum Copenhagen), 15  This division was also suggested by statistical analyses: whom we kindly thank. Ramminger 2007. M i c h a e l M ü l l e r a n d M i ch ae l Sch i r ren 141 Fig. 4 Distribution of Early Neolithic finds in central Europe (base map with settlements, graves and related features modified after Preuss 1996, map 1). See attached catalogue for the site names and a short description of the depositions. 142 Early and Middle N eolithic hoards in the area of the northern Meso lit h ic At the beginning of the Middle Neolithic, the un- the distribution is rather loose. In northern Germany, perforated shoe-last celts were still in use, but in a de- only two hoards are known, and none in Poland. creasing amount, with the first shaft-hole axe heads The number of objects in the Early Neolithic starting to be in use (Lönne 2003, 176). Yet, these depositions is usually between three and nine. Only are still just perforated adze-shaped tools, only with two hoards from central Germany contained 15 and their shaft-holes oriented parallel to their asymmetri- 16 items, respectively. In Hesse one probable single cal cutting edges. Moreover, the first shaft-hole axe deposition has been identified until now. It contained heads with a pointy triangular shape (so-called broad an adze head (shoe-last celt), which was found under wedges) were employed. Their number increased a stone (site Rockenberg; see Quitta 1955, 45 no. 41). gradually until the time of the Stroke-ornamented Flat adze heads and different variants of shoe-last Pottery culture, while the shaft-hole axe heads rep- celts are the most common items in these deposi- resented by perforated adze heads became fewer in tions. Rarely are flint blades connected with heavy number (Biermann 2011, 41). stone tools. A particular exception is one hoard These changes in tool types, from the Early to from Saxony-Anhalt, containing one club head and the Middle Neolithic, and the introduction of different twelve flint blades, unique in its composition (site hafting methods, go along with new working meth- Naumburg-Kleinjena [Saale]; see Quitta 1955, 33 no. ods and possibilities (e. g. Elburg et al. 2015). Even 12). Preforms of heavy stone tools were found in ten if it was often tried to connect some of the new tools depositions, and half of these were accompanied also exclusively to distinct Middle Neolithic cultures, in by finished items. Blanks were found in four deposi- depth-research suggests that no definite assignment tions, out of which only one contained additionally is possible (Lönne 2003, 177 – 178; 182; Kaufmann finished stone tools. 2012). Furthermore, in nearly all cases, it was so far Concerning the nature of the ground into which impossible to connect scientifically dateable material the hoards were put, this information is available for with the hoards. For this reason, and due to a lack 25 out of the 28 depositions, and in all the 25 cases, of metric studies on the items from Early and Middle it appears to have been dry ground. Out of these, ten Neolithic hoards, we will restrain from making such depositions were found inside and six other nearby a assignments in this paper. Another shortcoming has to Linear Pottery culture settlement. It was mentioned do with the lack of information concerning the stone that hoards, amongst other things, are defined by not tools from some of the hoards, as the items themselves being settlement finds. But the term ‘settlement find’ got lost and the only few available details come from refers only to ordinary left-behinds from settlements, old field reports. Luckily, in many such cases the re- such as house debris, garbage, production waste, and ports mention at least axe heads with shaft-hole, mak- lost or forgotten objects. Hoards on the other hand ing a Middle Neolithic dating possible. represent a recurring specific selection and combi- According to the criteria mentioned so far, 28 nation of items which were left behind on purpose. of the 110 depositions containing heavy stone tools Inside settlements they can be identified due to their included in our study can be dated to the Early Neo- separation from usual garbage, their special arrange- lithic period, which is represented by the Linear ment or unusual placement. Inside the settlements, Pottery culture. The remaining 82 depositions can the depositions were found in pits and, once, in a be assigned to one of the Middle Neolithic groups, ditch. Two of the remaining twelve depositions with where Stroke-ornamented Pottery culture and Rös- no connection to any settlement were each found sen culture make up the biggest part. However, the under a big stone. In another case the items lay in a assignment is not certain in every case, especially semicircle on a ceramic bed. One example is known due to the lack of basic information concerning dis- where the stone objects were placed crosswise one coveries by chance and/or without a proper archaeo- above the other. Finally, for one hoard deposited in logical examination. For this reason, the distribution a settlement a covering with red paint (ochre?) was maps and examinations presented here have to be reported (Kaufmann 2012, 401). considered preliminary until further research has This distribution picture of depositions changes been carried out. in the Middle Neolithic Period, during the 5th mil- The distribution map in Figure 4 displays find lennium BC (Fig. 5). The 82 depositions known for spots of depositions from the second half of the 6th this period show, besides three concentrations in millennium BC, i. e. the Early Neolithic period. Clus- Moravia, Bohemia and central Germany, as in the ters of depositions are visible in Moravia, Bohemia Early Neolithic period, also a dense cluster in north- and in central Germany, while in their surroundings eastern Germany. Additionally, some more hoards M i c h a e l M ü l l e r a n d M i ch ae l Sch i r ren 143 Fig. 5 Distribution of Middle Neolithic finds in central Europe (base map with settlements, graves and related features modified after Preuss 1996, maps 2 – 3). See attached catalogue for the site names and a short description of the depositions. 144 Early and Middle N eolithic hoards in the area of the northern Meso lit h ic Fig. 6 Histogram showing the frequency of certain lengths of Middle Neolithic axe heads found in Mesolithic habitation layers or as single finds in the Mesolithic occupation area. The black line represents the ideal curve of a normal distribution and the red line the actual distribution curve. were found in southwestern Germany, and for the of axe heads with shaft-holes have been discovered in first time finds appear in southern and northern Po- connection to water, for instance from the Elbe River land as well as in southern Denmark. (cf. Klassen 2004, 417). Out of the 52 hoards from Most common is now a number between two dry ground, 13 were found inside a contemporary and nine heavy stone tools in the hoards, although it settlement, and two other hoards in the proximity of is worth mentioning that 50 % (n = 41) of the hoards a settlement. Each out of five depositions not in any contain only two or three items. No certain single connection to contemporary settlements were found deposition could be detected so far, but many single under a big stone. Observations on the arrangement of finds are known, some of which are debatable (see the objects are usually rare and, in most cases, they are below). Only three hoards show between 10 and 17 limited to mentioning that the objects were found lying items, and in the case of one hoard, it may be that close together. In one particular case, it was noted that it contained up to 50 objects (site Číštěves [Czech the objects in the hoard were arranged in a star-like Republic]; see Vencl 1975, 13 – 18). 26 of the deposi- shape (site Wollin [Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, tions consist only of axe heads with shaft-hole, in Germany]; see Quitta 1955, 41 – 42 no. 31). Also no- seven more depositions axe heads with shaft-holes table is a hoard in which the artefacts were put into were combined with axe heads without shaft-holes. the ground standing upright (site Möckern [Saxony- In 15 cases, axe heads with shaft-hole are only com- Anhalt, Germany]; Quitta 1955, 34 – 35 no. 13). bined with flat adze heads or shoe-last celts. Twelve We attempt here to illustrate also the particular hoards contained only flat axe heads and shoe-last case study of the Middle Neolithic axe heads with celts, and could only be dated the Middle Neolithic shaft-holes from the northern Mesolithic distribution period based on their find circumstances. Hoards area. The data used for this examination included set- with a mixture of all the tool types mentioned so far tlement and single finds from southern Scandinavia occur also rarely. Like in the Early Neolithic period, and northeastern Germany, as published by Klassen preforms were put into the hoards. Altogether 19 (2004), as well as shaft-hole axe heads from hoards such cases are known, but only twice they were not from the same region and, additionally, from Bran- combined with any other items. denburg. Histograms, plotting the length of the items, For 57 of these Middle Neolithic hoards with indicate that Middle Neolithic shaft-hole axe heads heavy stone tools the nature of their find place was from settlements as well as single finds show almost a recorded: 52 come from dry ground, and five were normal distribution. The length variety lies between found in connection with wet ground. These wet 7 and 22 cm (Fig. 6). However, notable is a small peak grounds were in three cases bogs or swamp lands, between a length of 22 to 28 cm, caused by one item one time a river, and in the fifth case the items were from the Mesolithic pit at Rosenhof (Hartz et al. found in the direct vicinity of a river. Besides the cer- 2011) and seven single finds. The longest item, of tain depositions discussed here, several single finds 38.5 cm, is a single find from Tützpatz (Mecklenburg- M i c h a e l M ü l l e r a n d M i ch ae l Sch i r ren 145 Fig. 7 Histogram showing the frequency of certain lengths of Middle Neolithic axe heads found in hoards in the Mesolithic occupation area. The black line represents the ideal curve of a normal distribution and the red line the actual distribution curve. Western Pomerania; Klassen 2004, 421 no. 159). tools with the number of items per hoard varying The average size of settlement and single finds is between two and nine objects. Only very rarely were around 16 cm. Looking at the length distribution stone tools combined with other items, like flint blades of axe heads from hoards (Fig. 7), a variety between or sherds of ceramic vessels. This fact indicates that 7.5 and 54 cm can be observed. The average size is these deposition simply represent a deliberate selec- around 29 cm. These results show that, judging by tion of objects among all artefacts available at that size, some of the single finds might have belonged time. There are, nevertheless, also examples of de- to a hoard which was not recognised as such when positions which consist only of flint raw material or found. Besides the long example from the Rosenhof preforms (Biermann 2003, part 2) and others that con- pit, axe heads from northern Mesolithic settlements sist only of ceramic vessels (Wetzel / Babiel 2016). tend to be rather small (see below). These need to be investigated in the future to see how Alongside complete items, many fragmented axe regularly they occur. The importance and value of heads were identified in the area occupied by Meso- heavy stone tools in the central European Neolithic lithic groups. At a closer look, we can see that the has to be seen in connection with the clearing of the amount of broken axe heads from the Mesolithic habi- primeval forest. This additionally provided the users tation layers is larger than the one of intact ones (at a of such tools with the main building material for their ratio of 2 : 1; judging by information in the catalogue impressive long houses, while the opened landscape by Klassen 2004). It is, of course, a question whether offered the necessary space for practicing agriculture. also very small fragments are always correctly identi- Besides these obvious benefits, it became more appar- fied as parts of heavy Neolithic stone tools. ent in the past years that the Neolithic in general was not necessarily a peaceful period, but one which also witnessed aggressive acts between groups of people, Discussion where heavy stone tools were used as weapons (cf. inter alia: Meyer et al. 2015). Finally, the expressions When looking at the material and the find circum- of Neolithic art confirm and add to the symbolic value stances presented so far, two main questions arise: of heavy stone tools (Trogmayer 1990; Zápotocká / what does this picture show, and how do we interpret Zápotocký 2014). what we see? We will try to break down the debate It has been stated that depositions with stone into several parts, starting by discussing the hoards, objects represent hidden trade goods, which were in order to evaluate thereafter why they appear in never recovered (Kaufmann 2012). If so, one should the area of Mesolithic groups. expect depositions preponderantly of raw material or As shown so far, in the Early and Middle Neo- preforms in the vicinity of the exploited resources and lithic, between 5,500 and 4,400 cal BC, most of the along possible trade routes. One of the main stone depositions consisted almost entirely of heavy stone types used to produce the heavy stone tools of the 146 Early and Middle N eolithic hoards in the area of the northern Meso lit h ic Early and Middle Neolithic was actinolite-hornblende Coming back to the picture shown by the inves- schist, an amphibolites’ variation. Mineralogical analy- tigations on the length of the stone tools, we need to sis showed that most objects made of this material include here also the observations regarding the use originate from a quarry near the Bohemian village wear of the axe heads. The functionality of the axe Jistebsko in the Jizera Mountains.16 But, that being heads with shaft-hole is still under discussion. We said, depositions at or near Jistebsko are lacking, and would like to point further to the relation between there are no depositions marking a possible trade the size of the axe head and the size of the shaft- route from or to the quarry, either. On the contrary, hole. An ongoing debate is concerned with the rather as shown, the depositions were found in the vicinity small shaft-holes, especially when it comes to very of settlement areas or inside settlements over central large tool specimens. It was often doubted that these Europe and even in the Mesolithic areas of north- shaft-holes can hold a hafting strong enough not to ern Germany and southern Scandinavia. Moreover, break while chopping trees, which is why the items preforms occur comparatively seldom and, in many were imagined to have been used more like wedges cases, intermixed with completed as well as used and for splitting tree trunks already on the ground, by re-sharpened items. holding the tool with the shaft in place and using a A well investigated case is the hoard from Frie- mallet to drive the shaft-hole axe into the wood (e. g. defeld, containing seven axe heads with shaft-hole Kaufmann 2012, 394). In experiments, the wedge- and two adzes. Seven of the Middle Neolithic items idea was tested without much success, since it was consist of actinolite-hornblende schist from the quar- not possible to drive the tools into the wood. What ry of Jistebsko, which is about 300 km away. One of the experiments rather proved was that the axes can the axe heads was deposited as an unfinished piece, function very well for felling trees (Elburg et al. with only two of its four sides treated with the typi- 2015). However, this could only be demonstrated cal fine grinding, while the other two remained in for smaller specimens. Attempting to fell a tree with a rough state. Additionally, all items from the Frie- a 24 cm long shaft-hole axe blade showed that items defeld hoard, except for this prework, show various of that size are already difficult to handle. It resulted direct and indirect use wear (Müller et al. in prep.). also in the breakage of the axe head after a short time Considering these aspects, it is hard to imagine of usage (Elburg et al. 2015, 74). These observations, lithic trade goods consisting of a combination of used of course, make one wonder about the purpose of the stone tools and preforms. Why should an accumula- very long shaft-hole axe blades with traces of use- tion of tools which had already been used be traded, wear, which were found in hoards. We also believe and why were they combined with objects which it is necessary to examine whether the shorter axe needed additional effort to become usable? And what heads were intentionally produced in that size or might have been the reason to hide a part of these ac- represent repeatedly re-sharpened items. cumulations inside settlement pits, cover them with A few hoards also include fragmented items. Judg- ochre or put them crosswise, upright or star-like? The ing only from the literature, it does not become clear trade hypothesis also cannot explain why the depo- if these objects were already broken when they were sitions were never retrieved by the people who had deposited. It is possible that, at least partly, the shaft- been hiding them. Additionally, it must be suggested hole axes were destroyed only after being deposited, that until today only a very low share of the deposi- for instance due to intensive agricultural activities. tions has been discovered and most of them probably The selection of items which are included in the still remain in the ground. From the combination and hoards represent all length categories, but a predi- state of the items, one might get the impression that lection for very long items is obvious. Especially in a certain moment determined the precise content of the Middle Neolithic hoard cluster from the lower the depositions and that therefore in a limited time Oder region (Fig. 8) some of the longest axe heads span all affordable and dispensable heavy stone tools known were found (hoards of Friedefeld and Wollin; were collected and put into the ground. Rech 1979, 100 no. 57). Nevertheless, there are also hoards (for example Pasewalk [Rech 1979, 100 no. 65] and Waldeshöhe [Hellmundt 1964, 77]) with axe heads of smaller sizes, comparable to the ones found at Mesolithic sites. Even if there is so far no 16 E.g. Nowak 2008; Kaufmann 2012. Besides mining, the proof of contemporary Middle Neolithic houses in use of river boulders, which were washed out of the quarry and might have had a more easily handable size, should also be the area of the lower Oder hoard cluster, it is strik- taken into consideration. ing that these hoards were deposited in a manner M i c h a e l M ü l l e r a n d M i ch ae l Sch i r ren 147 Fig. 8 Middle Neolithic hoards in northern Poland, northern Germany and Denmark (base map with settlements, graves and related features modified after Preuss 1996, maps 2 – 3). See attached catalogue for the site-names and a short description of the depositions. comparable to the main distribution area of Middle 17 cm long, were found within some years at the Neolithic groups. Therefore, it can be suggested, that same spot.18 As far as we know, the Danish islands this was done by Neolithic groups and not Mesolithic were not a place where people with Mesolithic and ones, who were living in the area at the same time.17 Neolithic backgrounds and lifestyles were sharing The same can be assumed for the two north- the land with each other during the 5th millennium ernmost axe head hoards known so far, which were BC, like it was the case in northern Brandenburg discovered on the Danish islands Lolland and Askø. (Terberger et al. 2015, 151). Hence it can be stated Even if they were put in the ground far away from the that these hoards were deposited in Mesolithic terri- known Middle Neolithic settlements and even from tory most likely by Neolithic people, probably travel- the lower Oder hoard cluster, the chosen ground type lers or scouts. It is no surprise that the hoards were for the depositions, the number of objects and their deposited on Lolland and its surroundings, because orchestration fits the established pattern perfectly. the distance between the German island Fehmarn The hoard from Lolland, for instance, consists of and the Danish island Lolland is quite moderate, so two axe heads, each one c. 21 cm in length, and a this destination was easy to reach for travellers seek- pointed-butted axe or adze head of c. 16 cm length ing new lands (Terberger et al. 2009, 263). (Rech 1979, 110 no. 197). It was found on dry ground Summing up the observations, the following at a slope not far from a bog, which back then was picture can be drawn: The 6th and 5th millennia BC most probably still an active water body. The two can be described as a phase of contact between cen- axe heads of the hoard from Askø, between 15 and tral European Neolithic groups and hunter-gatherers 17  Since in the area of the lower Oder no settlements have 18 http://www.kulturarv.dk/fundogfortidsminder/Lokalitet/ been detected so far, a merely temporary stay of the Middle 234254/ (accessed 01. November 2019). Neolithic people should be considered. 148 Early and Middle N eolithic hoards in the area of the northern Meso lit h ic Fig. 9 Middle Neolithic hoards in central Germany (base map with settlements, graves and related features modified after Preuss 1996, maps 2 – 3). See attached catalogue for the site-names and a short description of the depositions. M i c h a e l M ü l l e r a n d M i ch ae l Sch i r ren 149 from northern central Europe and Scandinavia. As effect on the place where the gift is executed. And far as we know, this contact did not have any recog- such an effect is very likely to be the desired one or nisable effects on the Mesolithic economic system (cf. even the necessary one. Following the ideas of M. Verhart / Wansleben 1997, 69; Hartz et al. 2011, Eliade regarding holy space and the sacralisation of 54; Czekaj-Zastawny et al. 2012, 531 – 532, 535). It the world, we can imagine the depositions discussed is impossible to tell how and where these contacts here as a method to bring order into an unknown and between farmers and hunter-gatherers took place. chaotic world. With the sacrifice a fixed point can There are no settlements of farmers known in the be built, which brings the surrounding space into the area of the hunter-gatherers. We know of several real and stands at the same time against an unreal, hundred Neolithic artefacts from the Mesolithic area unknown outer world. Finally, this fixed point creates and hoards with Neolithic heavy stone tools which a connection between the living and the imagined were deposited in the same manner as in the Neo- supernatural beings (Eliade 2008, 15 – 48). Hence, lithic main land. Especially the last fact implies an areas in which people live or plan to live were con- actual presence of Neolithic people in the Mesolithic secrated by the act of deposition, by creating holy area. Before trying to answer what they were possibly places, places where the connection to supernatural doing there, it is perhaps necessary to think about beings became physical. These places, even if not vis- the likely reasons for the depositions. ible in the landscape, existed in people’s minds, the It was shown before why the depositions dis- story of their existence was presumably passed orally, cussed in this paper cannot have represented trading and they were remembered collectively. In order to do goods, which were then never retrieved. It is also very so it is necessary, according to Maurice Halbwachs, clear that they share a comparable composition, were to have common conditions and ideas that exist in arranged in a particular way and placed mostly under the consciousness of the whole community. This does the surface in dry ground. The items for the deposi- not require the actual participation of every single tions were selected in a used, unused or unfinished individual in the entire experience. Due to the collec- state and taken out of an actual or possible active us- tive memory every individual stays connected to the age for good. They were deliberately buried or placed group, and nothing of what happened before his par- under stones not ever to be taken back again. The ticipation is foreign (Halbwachs 1991). In this way deposited items are representations of the effort to get it is imaginable that the sacrificial act by Neolithic the raw material, of the invested time to shape, grind groups or individuals and the (presumed) acceptance or haft them, and of their potential labour. All this of the gifts by the supernatural beings served as a was sacrificed along with them. If we accept imagined legitimation for the inhabitation of any place. supernatural beings as the addressees of these offer- When looking at a close up of the map show- ings, perhaps in an attempt to thank or connect with ing the distribution of depositions and find places them, to claim or to demarcate an area, then we would from the Middle Neolithic period in central Germany have perhaps a better way to explain the depositions. (Fig. 9), we recognise that the depositions are not Offerings are connected to the social institu- randomly distributed and also do not show the same tion of gift exchange, which was first investigated concentrations as the settlements or the burials. The and defined by the French social anthropologist M. depositions seem to lie mostly at the outer or inner Mauss (1872 – 1950). Mauss showed that the gift ex- borders of the inhabited space, and the only con- change is based on three obligations: to give, to take centrations occur at the western and southwestern and to reciprocate (Mauss 1990, 91). Due to these edge of it.19 This picture, which shows only the final obligations all parts of the society are involved and result of a long lasting deposition practice, is at the interconnected. For this reason Mauss called the same time illustrating only a very minor part of all exchange of gifts a ‘total social phenomenon’ (Mauss depositions ever put down into the ground. Neverthe- 1990, 17). In the system of gift exchange with deities, less, it offers an idea about how the landscape was offerings are not done by humans to ask or demand structured during the Neolithic period and shows us from the supranatural beings for something, but to that depositions enclosed the settled areas. In this reciprocate for what was already given by them. Only if humans pay back these gifts, it can be assured that the supernatural beings will give again (Mauss 1990, 19  Cf. also Kaufmann 2012, 395, who could observe a concen- especially 39 – 46; cf. Hansen 2016, 218 – 221). tration of heavy stone tools at the eastern border of the central German Neolithic habitation area towards the Mesolithic habita- A sacrifice does not only connect the two parties tion area. The high amount of stone implements Kaufmann rec- involved in the gift exchange, but has also a certain ognised there might also partly go back to unrecognised hoards. 150 Early and Middle N eolithic hoards in the area of the northern Meso lit h ic manner two things are accomplished at the same 12). In fact, we find here the same pattern which time: The inhabited area is clearly marked by ‘holy’ was already observed for central Germany, only in places as witnesses for the supernatural connection, an even denser cluster. It might be a direct reaction and a border towards the ‘unholy’ places is set. to the presence of Mesolithic groups, who were sur- Comparable observations of a specific place- rounding the Neolithic settlers and were perhaps ment of depositions were made also for other peri- regarded as alien and different. All things considered, ods and regions. The TRB societies, who succeeded perhaps Middle Neolithic people tried nevertheless the northern Mesolithic groups and were the first to reach further north to find new places to settle. fully developed Neolithic societies in the north Eu- In an article published in 1990, David Anthony ropean plain, showed a comparable pattern in their summarises theories about migration movements depositions of flint axe heads and the way these are from neighbouring science areas (Anthony 1990). distributed in space (Müller 2020). In this case, it We will in short present them here: migration, as a has been argued that even if the depositions were not basic human behaviour, is triggered by negative ‘push visible anymore after burying them, the actors who factors’ in the homeland and positive ‘pull factors’ were present at the event of the sacrifice will have at the destination; the knowledge about this desti- spread this knowledge through oral transmission. We nation is gathered by scouts whose purpose is to can also take the Bronze Age hoards from Bohemia explore until they have success and find a promising as an example. T. Vachta was able to show that they place to live; when this place gets populated, slowly, were deposited at specifically chosen locations (i. e. but constantly, in the kind of a lasting stream, the are not randomly distributed), were partly connected new colony appears like an island, isolated from the to water, arranged in an aligned manner and placed homeland and surrounded by the unknown foreign at the edge of the inhabited world (Vachta 2016). land. This jumping over great distances and building It is often not particularly relevant for a society new colonies is known as ‘leapfrogging’. to remember the exact place of a deposition as long Connecting the theories forwarded by Mauss, Eli- as it is known and transmitted to further genera- ade and Anthony, we can imagine Middle Neolithic tions that a certain area was successfully marked, scouts sent north into the Mesolithic territories to find and, assuming the benevolence (cf. Hansen 2016, new land for settling. They could not have known that 220) of imagined supernatural beings, also protected their preferred loess soils and the black soils develop- (Hansen 2016, 222 – 223). ing on them did not exist in that area. But perhaps they were also ready to adapt and try new soils. Their pres- ence so far north becomes visible to us only through Conclusion the depositions they are assumed to have made, even on the Danish isles, with the purpose to conquer a Starting from a recent hoard find containing nine new place, to bring order into it, create a centre, and Middle Neolithic heavy stone tools, found at Frie- build a connection with imagined supernatural beings. defeld (Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania) in the These depositions can be thought of as a necessary lower Oder region, it is suggested that this one and sacrifice before the land could become inhabitable. comparable finds from the same region and further In the end, these scouting activities might have north follow a similar pattern. This pattern consists led to several networks between the Neolithic and the of a specific selection, a specific number and a com- Mesolithic cultures which perhaps favoured, among bination of items, as well as a specific place of their others, a trade of heavy stone tools and pottery inside deposition. Our results suggest that these depositions Mesolithic settlements. But, as far as we can say from were made by Neolithic and not by Mesolithic people. the archaeological material, no Neolithic colonies These assumptions can now be connected with were successfully built inside the Mesolithic territories, the observations made so far both at the edge and far and no shift towards a Neolithic economy resulted inside the territories of Mesolithic groups. J. Parschau from these activities. This was achieved only from already recognised that the Middle Neolithic hoards 4,100 cal BC onwards, with the beginning of the TRB from the lower Oder region trace the limits of the culture under the strong influence of the Michelsberg region settled by the farmers there (Parschau 1988, culture (cf. Klassen 2004; Sørensen 2014). M i c h a e l M ü l l e r a n d M i ch ae l Sch i r ren 151 Acknowledgements Brandt 1995: K. H. Brandt, Donauländische Geräte aus dem Südkreis Soltau-Fallingbostel. Die Kunde N. F. This paper is based on a lecture held at the workshop 46, 1995, 1 – 27. ‘Stone age borderland experience – Neolithic and Czekaj-Zastawny et al. 2011: A. Czekaj-Zastawny / J. Ka- Mesolithic parallel societies in the north European baciński / T. Terberger, Long distance exchange in plain’ which took place from May 20 th to 22nd 2019 the Central European Neolithic: Hungary to the Baltic. at the State Museum of Hanover (Lower Saxony). Antiquity 85, 2011, 43 – 58. We would like to thank Florian Klimscha, Thomas Czekaj-Zastawny et al. 2012: A. Czekaj-Zastawny / J. Ka- Terberger, Marion Heumüller, Daan Raemaekers und baciński / A. Kotula / T. Terberger, Der steinzeitliche Hans Peeters for organising the workshop and for Fundplatz Dąbki, Pommern, und seine überregionalen kindly inviting us to present and publish our results. Beziehungen. In: R. Gleser / V. Becker (eds.), Mittel- Our special thanks go to Mihaela Savu for discussing europa im 5. Jahrtausend vor Christus (Berlin 2012) and proofreading the text. 529 – 546. Cziesla 2008: E. Cziesla, Zur bandkeramischen Kultur zwischen Elbe und Oder. Germania 86, 2008, 405 – 464. References Deichmüller 1968: J. Deichmüller, Schuhleistenkeil-De- potfunde aus Luttum, Kr. Verden/Aller. Nachrichten Anthony 1990: D. Anthony, Migration in Archaeology: The aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte 37, 1968, 100 – 102. Baby and the Bathwater. American Anthropologist, New Dorka 1939: G. Dorka, Urgeschichte des Weizacker-Kreises Series 92,4, 1990, 895 – 914. Pyritz (Stettin 1939). Aust 1961: H. Aust, Jungsteinzeitliche Depotfunde im Gebiet Ebbesen 1995: K. Ebbesen, Die nordischen Bernsteinhorte der Elbe-/Wesermündung. Jahrbuch der Männer vom der Trichterbecherkultur. Prähistorische Zeitschrift Morgenstern 42, 1961, 63 – 70. 70, 1995, 32 – 89. Becker 1952: C. J. Becker, Die Nordschwedischen Flint- Ehrhardt 1994: J. Ehrhardt, Rössener Kultur (RK). In: H.-J. depots. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des Neolithischen Beier / R. Einicke (eds.), Das Neolithikum im Mittelel- Fernhandels in Skandinavien. Acta Archaeologica 23, be-Saale Gebiet und in der Altmark (Wilkau-Hasslau 1952, 31 – 79. 1994) 67 – 77. Becker 1976: C. J. Becker, Beil. II. Formenkunde. A. Neo- Elburg et al. 2015: R. Elburg / W. Hein / A. Probst / P. lithikum im Norden. In: Reallexikon der Germanischen Walter, Field trials in Neolithic woodworking. (Re) Altertumskunde (Berlin / New York 1976) 158 – 161. Learning to use Early Neolithic stone adzes. Exarc Becker 1980: C. J. Becker, Hov, Gem. Sennels, Amt This- Journal 2015/2, 62 – 77. ted, Jütland. In: G. Weisgerber (ed.), 5000 Jahre Feuer- Fischer-Zujkow 1998: U. Fischer-Zujkow, Das „Schwarze steinbergbau. Die Suche nach dem Stahl der Steinzeit Kolluvium“ – Auswirkungen der ur- und frühgeschicht- (Bochum 1980) 457 – 4 64. lichen Landnutzung auf die Umweltbedingungen in der Bérenger 2015: D. Bérenger, Vom Stein und Sein. Impor- Uckermark. In: Römisch-Germanische Kommission des tierte Jadeitbeile und ihre gesellschaftliche Bedeutung. Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts (ed.), Beiträge zum In: T. Otten / J. Kunow /M. M. Rind / M. Trier (eds.), Oder-Projekt 5 (Berlin 1998) 99 – 102. Revolution Jungsteinzeit. Archäologische Landesausstel- Fischer-Zujkow 2000: U. Fischer-Zujkow, Die Schwarzer- lung Nordrhein-Westfalen (Darmstadt 2015) 213 – 219. den Nordostdeutschland – ihre Stellung und Entwick- Berlekamp 1966: H. Berlekamp, Die Einflüsse des donau- lung im holozänen Landschaftswandel. Unpubl. docto- ländischen Kulturkreises der jüngeren Steinzeit auf das ral thesis, Humboldt University of Berlin (Berlin 2000). Odermündungsgebiet. Unpubl. doctoral thesis, Mar- Fischer-Zujkow et al. 1999: U. Fischer-Zujkow / R. Schmidt tin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg (Halle 1966). / A. Brande, Die Schwarzerden Nordostdeutschlands Biermann 2003: E. Biermann, Alt- und Mittelneolithikum und ihre Stellung in der holozänen Landschaftsent- in Mitteleuropa. Untersuchungen zur Verbreitung ver- wicklung. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soils Science schiedener Artefakt- und Materialgruppen und zu Hin- 162, 1999, 443 – 4 49. weisen auf regionale Tradierungen. Part 1 and 2 (Köln Frolík 1981: J. Frolík, Soubor neolitických kamenných 2003): https://independent.academia.edu/EricBiermann nástrojú z plačic. Archeologické rozhledy 23, 1981, (download: 09. November 2019). 413 – 416. Biermann 2011: E. Biermann, Haue + Dechsel x Bohrung Furholt 2014: M. Furholt, What is the Funnel Beaker com- = Axt? In: H.-J. Beier / R. Einicke / E. Biermann (eds.), plex? Persitent troubles with an inconsistent concept. Dechsel, Axt, Beil & Co – Werkzeug, Waffe, Kultgegen- In: M. Furholt / M. Hinz / D. Mischka / G. Noble / D. stand? Varia neolithica VII (Langenweißbach 2011) 37 – 46. Olausson (eds.), Landscapes, histories and societies in 152 Early and Middle N eolithic hoards in the area of the northern Meso lit h ic the Northern European Neolithic. Frühe Monumenta- Koch 1998: E. Koch, Neolithic Bog Pots from Zealand, Møn, lität und soziale Differenzierung 4 (Bonn 2014) 17 – 26. Lolland and Falster (Copenhagen 1998). Halbwachs 1991: M. Halbwachs, Das kollektive Gedächtnis Kreuz et al. 2014: A. Kreuz / T. Märkle / E. Marinova / (Frankfurt a. M. 1991). M. Rösch / E. Schäfer / S. Schamuhn / T. Zerl, The Hansen 2002: S. Hansen, Über bronzezeitliche Depots, Late Neolithic Michelsberg culture – just ramparts and Horte und Einzelfunde: Brauchen wir neue Begriffe? ditches? A supraregional comparison of agricultural and Archäologische Informationen 25(1 – 2), 2002, 91 – 97. environmental data. Prähistorische Zeitschrift 89,1, Hansen 2016: S. Hansen, Gabe und Erinnerung – Heiligtum 2014, 72 – 115. und Opfer. In: S. Hansen / D. Neumann / T. Vachta Kunkel 1926: O. Kunkel, Aus Pommerns Urgeschichte (Ber- (eds.), Raum, Gabe und Erinnerung. Weihgaben und lin 1926). Heiligtümer in prähistorischen und antiken Gesellschaf- Kunkel 1935: O. Kunkel, Urgeschichte. Baltische Studien ten (Berlin 2016) 211 – 2 36. N. F. 37, 1935, 318 – 333. Hartz et al. 2011: S. Hartz / A. J. Kalis / L. Klassen / Küssner / Neumann 2008: M. Küssner / P. Neumann, J. Meurers-Balke, Neue Ausgrabungen zur Ertebøl- Ein jungsteinzeitlicher Verwahrfund von Vollersroda, lekultur in Ostholstein und der Fund von vier strati- Lkr. Weimarer Land. Neue Ausgrabungen und Funde fizierten durchlochten donauländischen Äxten. In: J. in Thüringen 4, 2008, 25 – 30. Meurers-Balke / W. Schön (eds.), Vergangene Zeiten . . . Lichter 2010: C. Lichter (ed.), Jungsteinzeit im Umbruch. LIBER AMICORUM. Gedenkschrift für Jürgen Hoika Die „Michelsberger Kultur“ und Mitteleuropa vor (Heidelberg 2017) 25 – 61. 6000 Jahren (Darmstadt 2010). Hellmundt 1964: A. Hellmundt, Die vor- und frühge- Lička 1981: M. Lička, Hromadný nález neolitické broušené schichtlichen Denkmäler und Funde des Kreises Uecker- industrie (č.1) ze mšena, okr. Mělník. Archeologické münde (Schwerin 1964). rozhledy 23, 1981, 607 – 621. Jeunesse 2010: C. Jeunesse, Die Michelsberger Kultur. In: Lönne 2003: P. Lönne, Das Mittelneolithikum im südlichen Lichter 2010, 46 – 55. Niedersachsen. Untersuchungen zum Kulturenkomplex Kaflińska 2006: M. Kaflińska, Neolityczne depozyty gromad- Großgartach- Planig-Friedberg- Rössen und zur Stich- ne na ziemiach polskich. Materiałyi Sprawozdania Rzes- bandkeramik (Rahden / Westf. 2003). zowskiego Ośrodka Archeologicznego 27, 2006, 5 – 26. Lübke et al. 2000: H. Lübke / T. Terberger / S. Schacht, Karsten 1994: P. Karsten, Att kasta yxan I sjön. En studie Final Mesolithic and Early Neolithic Coastal Settlements over rituell tradition och förändring utifrån skånska on the Island of Rügen and in Northern Vorpommern. In: neolitiska offerfynd (Stockholm 1994). F. Lüth / U. Schoknecht (eds.), Schutz des Kulturerbes Kauffmann 1913: F. Kauffmann, Deutsche Altertumskunde. unter Wasser. Veränderungen europäischer Lebenskultur Erste Hälfte – Von der Urzeit bis zur Völkerwanderung durch Fluß- und Seehandel (Lübstorf 2000) 439 – 4 49. (München 1913). Lüning 1972: J. Lüning, Zum Kulturbegriff im Neolithikum. Kaufmann 2012: D. Kaufmann, Rössenzeitliche Amphibo- Prähistorische Zeitschrift 47, 1972, 145 – 173. litgeräte aus Mitteldeutschland. In: R. Gleser / V. Be- Lüning 1996: J. Lüning, Erneute Gedanken zur Benen- cker (eds.), Mitteleuropa im 5. Jahrtausend vor Christus nung der neolithischen Perioden. Germania 74, 1996, (Münster 2012) 389 – 4 08. 233 – 247. Klassen 2004: L. Klassen, Jade und Kupfer. Untersuchungen Marschalleck 1944: K. H. Marschalleck, Urgeschichte zum Neolithisierungsprozess im westlichen Ostseeraum des Kreises Luckau (Kirchhain 1944). unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Kulturentwick- Mauss 1990: M. Mauss, Die Gabe. Form und Funktion des lung Europas 5500 – 3500 BC (Århus 2004). Austauschs in archaischen Gesellschaften (Frankfurt Klassen et al. 2011: L. Klassen / P. Pétrequin / S. Cassen, a. M. 1990). The power of attraction … Zur Akkumulation sozial Mertens / Schirren 2000: E.-M. Mertens / M. Schirren, wertbesetzter alpiner Artefakte im Neolithikum Nord- Bandkeramik und Stichbandkeramik an der Küste Vor- und Westeuropas. In: S.Hansen / J. Müller 2007 (eds.), pommerns. In: F. Lüth / U. Schoknecht (eds.), Schutz Sozialarchäologische Perspektiven: Gesellschaftlicher des Kulturerbes unter Wasser. Veränderungen europäi- Wandel 5000 – 1500 v.Chr. zwischen Atlantik und Kau- scher Lebenskultur durch Fluß- und Seehandel (Lüb- kasus(Mainz 2011) 13 – 4 0. storf 2000) 451 – 456. Klimscha 2009: F. Klimscha, Das Opfer und das Geopferte. Meyer et al. 2015: C. Meyer / C. Lohr / D. Gronenborn / Versuch einer kontextuellen Deutung der reinen Beilhor- K. W. Alt, The massacre mass grave of Schöneck-Kili- te und der hölzernen Beilschäftungen in neolithischen anstädten reveals new insights into collective violence Horten der Trichterbecherkultur. Archäologische In- in Early Neolithic Europe. Proceedings of the National formationen 32(1 – 2), 2009, 119 – 129. Academy of Sciences 112(36), 2015, 11,217 – 11,222. M i c h a e l M ü l l e r a n d M i ch ae l Sch i r ren 153 Müller 1886: S. Müller, Votivfund fra Sten- og Bronzeal- Raemaekers 2016: D. Raemaekers, De Swifterbantcul- deren. Aarbøger 1886, 216 – 308. tur. Een onzichtbare wereld op de kaartgezet. In: W. Müller 2020: M. Müller, Were TRB Depositions Boundary Prummel/J. P. de Roever/A. F. L. van Holk, Swifterbant. Markers in the Neolithic Landscape? In: C. Horn / Pionieren in Flevoland 6500 jaargeleden (Eelde 2016) G. Wollentz / G. Di Maida / A. Haug (eds.), Places of 23 – 33. Memory. Spatialised practices of remembrance from Ramminger 2007: B. Ramminger, Wirtschaftsarchäologi- prehistory to today (Oxford 2020) 61 – 70. sche Untersuchungen zu alt- und mittelneolithischen Müller in prep.: M. Müller, Die Deponierungen der Trich- Felsgesteingeräten in Mittel- und Nordhessen (Rahden/ terbecherkultur. Doctoral thesis Free University Berlin Westf. 2007). (in prep.). Ramminger 2010: B. Ramminger, Kommunikationsanzei- Müller et al. in prep.: M. Müller / B. Ramminger / M. gende Netzwerke. Beile und Äxte. In: Lichter 2010, Schirren, Vom Zentrum in die Peripherie. Das früh- 198 – 202. neolithische Gerätedepot von Friedefeld, Lkr. Vorpom- Rech 1979: M. Rech, Studien zu Depotfunden der Trichter- mern-Rügen. Jahrbuch Bodendenkmalpflege in Meck- becher- und Einzelgrabkultur des Nordens (Neumünster lenburg-Vorpommern (in prep.). 1979). Nielsen 1977: P. O. Nielsen, Die Flintbeile der frühen Trich- Romanow 1977: J. Romanow, Trapezowate budowle naziemne terbecherkultur in Dänemark. Acta Archaeologica 48, ludności kultury ceramiki wstęgowej kłutej na dolnym 1977, 62 – 138. śląsku. Silesia Antiqua 19, 1977, 27 – 53. Nowak 2008: K. Nowak, Zur räumlichen Verteilung von Salaš 1986: M. Salaš, Hromadné nálezy neolitické broušené Dechselklingen aus Aktinolith-Hornblendeschiefer in industrie na Moravě / Die Hortfunde neolithischen ge- der Linearbandkeramik. Archäologische Informationen schliffenen Steingeräts in Mähren. Časopis Moravského 31, 2008, 25 – 32. Muzea, Vědyspolečenké 71, 1986, 19 – 58. Parschau 1987: J. Parschau, Die neolithische Besiedlung der Schoknecht 1967: U. Schoknecht, Kurze Fundberichte. Gemarkung Bagemühl, Kreis Pasewalk. Mitteilungen Jahrbuch Bodendenkmalpflege in Mecklenburg 14/1966, des Bezirksfachausschusses für Ur- und Frühgeschichte 1967, 311 – 313. Neubrandenburg 34, 1987, 17 – 30. Schumacher 1914: K. Schumacher, Neolithische Depot- Parschau 1988: J. Parschau, Die Uckermärkische Band- funde im westlichen Deutschland. Prähistorische Zeit- keramik. Mitteilungen des Bezirksfachausschusses für schrift 6, 1914, 29 – 56. Ur- und Frühgeschichte 35, 1988, 5 – 14. Schumann 1888: H. Schumann, Depotfunde von Steinwerk- Pétrequin et al. 2008: P. Pétrequin / A. Sheridan / S. Cas- zeugen im Randow-Thal. Zeitschrift für Ethnologie 20, sen / M. Errera / E. Gauthier / L. Klassen / N. Le 1888, 117 – 121. Maux / Y. Pailler, Neolithic Alpine axeheads, from Schumann 1895: H. Schumann, Zwei Depotfunde von the Continent to Great Britain, the Isle of Man and ‘Steinpflügen’ aus der Umgebung des Randowthales. Ireland. In: H. Fokkens / B. J. Coles / A. L. van Gijn Zeitschrift für Ethnologie 27, 1895, 328 – 332. / J. P. Klejne / H. H. Ponjee / C. G. Slappendel (eds.), Sørensen 2014: L. Sørensen, From hunter to farmer in Between Foraging and Farming (Leiden 2008) 262 – 279. northern Europe. Migration and adaption during the Pétrequin 2016: P. Pétrequin, Westliches Netzwerk. Beile Neolithic and Bronze Age (Copenhagen 2014). aus alpiner Jade. In: 4.000 Jahre Pfahlbauten (Ostfildern Spurný 1964: V. Spurný, Hromadný nález polotvarú kopy- 2016) 418 – 421. tovitých klínú z Bezměrova. Archeologické Studijní Petzsch 1928: W. Petzsch, Die Steinzeit Rügens. (Greifs- Materiály 1, 1964, 38 – 42. wald 1928). Stein 1979: F. Stein, Katalog der vorgeschichtlichen Hort- Preuss 1996: J. Preuss (ed.), Das Neolithikum in Mit- funde in Süddeutschland (Bonn 1979). teleuropa. Kulturen – Wirtschaft – Umwelt vom 6. bis Stjernquist 1962/1963: B. Stjernquist, Präliminarien zu 3. Jahrtausend v.u.Z (Wilkau-Hasslau 1996). einer Untersuchung von Opferfunden. Begriffsbestim- Quitta 1955: H. Quitta, Ein Verwahrfund aus der band- mung und Theoriebildung. Meddelanden från Lunds keramischen Siedlung in der Harth bei Zwenkau. In: Universitets Historiska Museum, 1962/1963, 5 – 6 4. Leipziger Beiträge zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte. Fest- Stubenrauch 1904: A. Stubenrauch, Die Maaßsche Samm- schrift zum 70.Geburtstag von Professor Dr. Friedrich lung im Museum der Gesellschaft für Pommersche Ge- Behn, Leipzig (Leipzig 1955) 20 – 59. schichte und Altertumskunde. Baltische Studien N. F. Raddatz 1957: K. Raddatz, Vernichtete ur- und frühge- 8, 1904, 96 – 129. schichtliche Funde aus der Uckermark. Jahrbuch Bo- Terberger et al. 2009: T. Terberger / S. Hartz / J. Ka- dendenmalpflege in Mecklenburg 5, 1957, 203 – 271. baciński, Late hunter-gatherer and early farmer 154 Early and Middle N eolithic hoards in the area of the northern Meso lit h ic contacts in the southern Baltic – a discussion. In: H. Wechler 1993: K.-P. Wechler, Mesolithikum – Bandkera- Glørstad / C. Prescott (eds.), As if history mattered. mik – Trichterbecherkultur. Zur Neolithisierung Mittel- Processes of neolithisation in north-western Europe und Ostdeutschlands aufgrund vergleichender Untersu- (Lindome 2009) 257 – 297. chungen zum Silexinventar (Lübstorf 1993). Terberger et al. 2015: T. Terberger / A. Kotula / S. Lo- Wentink 2006: K. Wentink, Ceci n’est pas une hache. renz / M. Schult / J. Burger / B. Jungklaus, Standing Neolithic Depositions in the Northern Netherlands upright to all eternity – The Mesolithic burial site at (Leiden 2006). Groß Fredenwalde, Brandenburg (NE Germany). Quar- Wetzel / Babiel 2016: G. Wetzel / K. Babiel, Der Rösse- tär 62, 2015, 133 – 153. ner Brunnen von Dyrotz 37, Lkr. Havelland, und sein Trogmayer 1990: O. Trogmayer, Der Gott mit Axt. Gedan- Umfeld. Veröffentlichungen der brandenburgischen ken zu einem neuen Statuettenfund (Statuette V). In: W. Landesarchäologie 47, 2016, 79 – 108. Meier-Arendt (ed.), Alltag und Religion. Jungsteinzeit in Wiślański 1984: T. Wiślański, Znalezisko gromadne Ost-Ungarn (Frankfurt a. M. 1990) 66 – 69. (“skarb”) narzędzi kamiennych młodszych kultur,,nad- Vachta 2016: T. Vachta, Bronzezeitliche Hortfunde und ihre dunajskich“ z Plemiąt. In: T. Wiślański (ed.), Neolit I Fundorte in Böhmen (Berlin 2016). początki epoki brązu na ziemi chełmińskiej (Toruń Vencl 1975: S. Vencl, Hromadné nálezy neolitické broušené 1987) 83 – 88. industrie z Čech. Die Hortfunde neolithischen geschlif- Worsaae 1866: J. J. A. Worsaae, Om nogle mosefund fra fenen Steingeräts aus Böhmen. Památky Archeologické Broncealder. Aarbøger 1866, 313 – 326. 66, 1975, 12 – 73. Zápotocká / Zápotocký 2014: M. Zápotocká / M. Zápotocký, Verhart / Wansleben 1997: L. B. M. Verhart / M. Wans- Axtförmige Scherbenanhänger der böhmischen Stichband- leben, Waste and prestige; the Mesolithic-Neolithic keramik. In: I. Husty / W. Irlinger / J. Pechtl (eds.), „…und transition in the Netherlands from social perspective. es hat doch was gebracht!“ Festschrift für Karl Schmotz Analecta Praehistoria Leidensia 29, 1997, 65 – 73. zum 65. Geburtstag (Rahden/Westf. 2014) 79 – 90. M i c h a e l M ü l l e r a n d M i ch ae l Sch i r ren 155 Catalogue a brief overview of the content of each hoard, since we were not able to examine most of the respective objects The following catalogue of Early and Middle Neolithic in person. However, we underline once again that these depositions was compiled mainly based on information details might not always be fully correct, which is why collected from publications. We will offer for now only we think it is necessary to reinvestigate the material. depot country site content source no. 1 Germany Rockenberg II 1 adze head (shoe-last celt) Quitta 1955, 45 no. 41; Stein 1979, 18 no. 17 2 Germany Abtlöbnitz 5 differently shaped raw material pieces, 1 flat axe Quitta 1955, 28 no. 1 head-prework 3 Germany Behringen 2 adze heads (shoe-last celts), 1 axe head-prework, Quitta 1955, 29 no. 2 2 flat axe head-preworks 4 Germany Heldrungen-Braunsroda 7 raw material pieces of different shape Quitta 1955, 29 no. 3 5 Germany Buchheim 9–15 flint blades (10–15 cm long) Quitta 1955, 29 no. 4 6 Germany Naumburg-Kleinjena 12 flint blades, 1 unperforated mace-head Quitta 1955, 33 no. 12 (Saale) 7 Germany Naumburg (Saale) 1 hoe, 1 adze head (shoe-last celt), 1 shoe-last celt- Quitta 1955, 35–36 no. 15 prework, 3 hoe-preworks, 2 hoe- or axe head-preworks, 1 undetermined raw material piece 8 Germany Ballenstedt-Radisleben 2 flat hoes, 2 adze heads (shoe-last celts) Quitta 1955, 36 – 37 no. 17 9 Germany Rositz 8 axe head- or hoe-like tools as well as 8 flint tools and Quitta 1955, 37 – 38 no. 19 flakes, ceramic sherds from LBK pottery 10 Germany Sandersdorf-Brehna 4 adze heads (shoe-last celts) Quitta 1955, 38 no. 20 11 Germany Kassel-Kirchditmold 2 adze heads (shoe-last celts), 2 adze heads-preworks Quitta 1955, 43 no. 35; Stein 1979, 18 no. 15; Ramminger 2007, 28 12 Germany Köln-Lindenthal 2 adze heads (shoe-last celts); 6 flint blades Quitta 1955, 44 no. 37 13 Germany Ortenberg 1 hoe or axe head-like tool, 2 adze heads (1 shoe-last Quitta 1955, 44 no. 40; Stein 1979, 18 no. 16; celt, 1 shoe-last-like celt) Ramminger 2007, 26 – 28, 512 no. 1344 14 Germany Aumund I 1 adze head (shoe-last celt), 1 axe head Rech 1979, 100 no. 68 15 Germany Rockenberg I 9 flint blades Quitta 1955, 45 no. 41; Stein 1979, 18 no. 17 16 Germany Grenzach-Wyhle 5–6 axe heads Stein 1979, 15 no. 2 17 Germany Prenden 2 adze head (1 shoe-last celt), fragment of 1 double hoe Berlekamp 1966, 82 18 Germany Apolda 3 preworks, 2 completed tools, 2 small diabase plates Vencl 1975, 51 19 Germany Dresden-Nickern I 1 adze head (shoe-last celt), 5 flat axe heads, 1 Vencl 1975, 51 shaft-hole axe head, 1 prework 20 Germany Dresden-Nickern II 2 adze heads (shoe-last celts), 1 flat axe head Vencl 1975, 51 21 Slovakia Veľký Grob 6 preworks of hoe- or axe head- like tools Quitta 1955, 46 no. 47; Vencl 1975, 50 – 51 22 Czech Polabec 9 preworks of hoe- or axe head- like tools Quitta 1955, 45 no. 45; Vencl 1975, 38 – 39 Republic 23 Czech Troubsko 4 adze heads (shoe-last celts), 1 hoe-like tool Quitta 1955, 45–46 no. 46; Vencl 1975, 50; Republic SALAŠ 1986, 31 – 34 24 Czech Republic Liteň 3 adze heads (shoe-last celts) Vencl 1975, 31 – 32 25 Czech Republic Praha-Bubeneč 3 adze heads (shoe-last celts), 1 prework Vencl 1975, 39–40 26 Czech Republic Bezměrov 4 preworks for adze heads (shoe-last celts) as well as Spurný 1964; Vencl 1975, 49; Salaš 1986, 20 ceramic sherds 27 Czech Republic Bohušice 4 preworks Vencl 1975, 49; Salaš 1986, 20 28 Czech Republic Dolní Věstonice 2 adze heads (shoe-last celts), 1 fragmented bone awl Vencl 1975, 50; Salaš 1986, 24 29 Czech Republic Moravičany 3 adze heads-preworks Vencl 1975, 50; Salaš 1986, 27 30 Czech Republic Lovosice 5 adze heads (shoe-last celts) Quitta 1955, 45 no. 44 31 Dänemark Askø By 2 shaft-hole axe heads (perforated shoe-last celts) http://www.kulturarv.dk/fundogfortidsminder/ Lokalitet/234254/ [accessed 01. December 2019] 32 Dänemark Udstolpe 2 shaft-hole axe heads, 1 axe head Rech 1979, 110 no. 197; http://www.kulturarv. dk/fundogfortidsminder/Lokalitet/4271/[accessed 01. December 2019] 33 Germany Gau-Algesheim I 1 shaft-hole axe head (perforated shoe-last celt), 2 hoe Quitta 1955, 43 no. 34; Stein 1979, 20 no. 24 or axe head-like tools 34 Germany Tangermünde-Hämerten 1 shaft-hole axe head (perforated shoe-last celt), 1 flat Quitta 1955, 31 no. 8 axe head, 1 similar tool 35 Germany Leipzig-Hänichen 1 shaft-hole axe head (perforated shoe-last celt), 1 adze Quitta 1955, 31 no. 9 head (shoe-last celt), 2 flat axe heads 156 Early and Middle N eolithic hoards in the area of the northern Meso lit h ic depot country site content source no. 36 Germany Heldrungen 2 shaft-hole axe heads (thereof 1 perforated shoe-last Quitta 1955, 32 no. 10 celt), 1 flat axe head, 1 shoe-last celt-prework 37 Germany Holleben 1 shaft-hole axe head (perforated shoe-last celt), 3 adze Quitta 1955, 32–33 no. 11 heads (shoe-last celts), 1 shoe-last celt-prework, 1 flat axe head-prework, 2 celt-shaped preworks 38 Germany Möckern 4 shaft-hole axe heads, 7 similar tools Quitta 1955, 34 – 35 no. 13 39 Germany Mose 3 shaft-hole axe heads Quitta 1955, 35 no. 14 40 Germany Reuden 3 shaft-hole axe heads Quitta 1955, 36 – 37 no. 18 41 Germany Tantow 2 shaft-hole axe heads (perforated shoe-last celts) Berlekamp 1966, 79 42 Germany Zwenkau 1 undetermined prework, 1 adze head-prework, 1 hoe- Quitta 1955, 39 no. 22 or axe head-prework, 1 adze head (shoe-last celt) 43 Germany Schkeuditz-Dölzig 1 shaft-hole axe head (perforated shoe-last celt), 4 Quitta 1955, 29 – 30 no. 5 preworks of other tools 44 Germany Gau-Algesheim II 1 shaft-hole axe head (perforated shoe-last celt), 1 adze Quitta 1955, 43 no. 34; Stein 1979, 20 no. 25 head (shoe-last celt), 1 hoe or axe head-like tool 45 Germany Kloster Wald 1 hoe or axe head-like tool, 1 shaft hole axe head Quitta 1955, 43 no. 36; Stein 1979, 16 no. 7 (perforated shoe-last celt) 46 Germany Neckarsulm-Oberei- 2 shaft-hole axe heads Quitta 1955, 44 no. 38; Stein 1979, 16 no. 5 senheim 47 Germany Oedheim 2 shaft-hole axe heads (unperforated shoe-last celts), 1 Quitta 1955, 44 no. 39; Stein 1979, 16 no. 6 adze head (shoe-last celt), 2 hoe- or axe head-like tools 48 Germany Bagemühl 3 shaft-hole axe heads; 3 axe heads, 1 chisel head Schumann 1888, 117 – 121; Schumacher 1914, 40; Quitta 1955, 39 no. 23; Raddatz 1957, 206; Berlekamp 1966, 58; Rech 1979, 99 no. 55; Parschau 1987, 28 49 Germany Prenzlau-Schönwerder 1 shaft-hole axe head, 1 fragment of a shaft-hole axe Berlekamp 1966, 70 head, 1 adze head 50 Germany Wolmirstedt 1 shaft-hole axe head, 1 hoe or axe head, 2 adze heads Quitta 1955, 38 no. 21 (shoe-last celts) 51 Germany Groß Polzin 1 shaft-hole axe head, 3 axe heads Schoknecht 1967, 311 52 Germany Trampe 2 shaft-hole axe heads Schumann 1895, 330 – 332; Berlekamp 1966, 60; Rech 1979, 199 – 100 no. 56 53 Germany Wollin I 4 shaft-hole axe heads Schumann 1895, 328 – 330; Quitta 1955, 41 – 42 no. 31; Berlekamp 1966, 67; Rech 1979, 100 no. 57 54 Germany Pasewalk I 4 adze heads (shoe-last celts), 1 shaft-hole axe head, Kunkel 1935, 324; Hoika 1955, 41 no. 29; Hellmundt 2 axe heads 1964, 55 – 56; Rech 1979, 100 no. 65 55 Germany Altentreptow I 1 shaft-hole axe head and at least 1 similar tool Stubenrauch 1904, 111; Kunkel 1926, 34; Berlekamp 1966, 51 – 52 56 Germany Penkun or Brüssow 1 shaft-hole axe head (and probably more items) Stubenrauch 1904, 111 57 Germany Luttum 3 axe heads, 1 shaft-hole axe head Deichmüller 1968; Vencl 1975, 51 58 Germany Ludwigsburg 3 shaft-hole axe heads Files at Museum für Vor- und Frühgeschichte Berlin; Quitta 1955, 40 no. 27; Berlekamp 1966, 69 59 Germany Schkeuditz-Freiroda 4 heavy stone tools, amongst them 1 shoe-last celt, Quitta 1955, 31 no. 7 1 axe head 60 Germany Golßen 2 axe heads Marschalleck 1944, 248 61 Germany Edersleben 4 shaft-hole axe heads Quitta 1955, 30 no. 6 62 Germany Erkner 1 axe head, 6 heavy stone tools Files at Museum für Vor- und Frühgeschichte Berlin 63 Germany Penkun-Friedefeld 2 axe heads, 6 shaft-hole axe heads, 1 shaft-hole axe Müller et al. in prep. head-prework 64 Germany “Beeskow-Storkow” 3 shaft-hole axe heads Quitta 1955, 39 – 40 no. 24; Berlekamp 1966, 86 65 Germany Deetz (Havel) 4 shaft-hole(?) axe heads, 1 shaft-hole axe head-pre- Quitta 1955, 40 no. 25 work 66 Germany Werder (Havel)-Glindow 3 shaft-hole axe heads, 1 axe head (hoe) Quitta 1955, 40 no. 26 67 Germany Havelberg 2 shaft-hole axe heads Quitta 1955, 41 no. 28 68 Germany Zollchow 2 shaft-hole axe heads Berlekamp 1966, 72 69 Germany Waldeshöhe 2 axe heads Hellmundt 1964, 77 70 Germany Mühlhausen / Thüringen, 2 adze heads (shoe-last celts), 1 hoe, 2 preworks, 1 Vencl 1975, 51 Grabe undetermined tool 71 Germany Hanau-Steinheim 1 shaft-hole axe head (perforated shoe-last celt), 3 adze Stein 1979, 19 no. 19 heads (shoe-last celts, of which 1 is fragmented) 72 Germany Schladen 1 shaft-hole axe head, 1 shaft-hole axe head-prework, Lönne 2003, 173 – 174 1 adze head 73 Germany Hedersleben 4 shaft-hole axe heads, 1 prework Vencl 1975, 51 M i c h a e l M ü l l e r a n d M i ch ae l Sch i r ren 157 depot country site content source no. 74 Germany Südliches Anhalt- 4 shaft-hole axe heads Vencl 1975, 52 Scheuder 75 Germany Mülverstedt 2 shaft-hole axe heads (perforated shoe-last celts) Vencl 1975, 51 – 52 76 Germany Gotha-Sundhausen 2 shaft-hole axe heads (perforated shoe-last celts) Vencl 1975, 52 77 Germany Vollersroda 2 shoe-last celt-preworks, 1 axe head Küssner / Neumann 2008 78 Germany Sandersdorf-Brehna-Z- 1 adze head (shoe-last celt), 1 shaft-hole axe head Vencl 1975, 52 scherndorf (perforated shoe-last celt) 79 Germany Ducherow 2 shaft-hole axe heads (perforated shoe-last celts) Berlekamp 1966, 52. 80 Germany Magdeburg-Prester 2 adze heads (of which 1 shoe-last celt), 2 flat axe heads Vencl 1975, 51 81 Germany Wettin-Löbejün-Gimritz 1 adze head (shoe-last celt), 1 prework Vencl 1975, 51 82 Germany Bösdorf 1 adze head (shoe-last celt), 1 flat axe head, 1 shaft-hole Vencl 1975, 51 axe head 83 Germany Eschenbergen 3 adze heads (shoe-last celts), 3 flat axe heads, 1 Vencl 1975, 51 shaft-hole axe head 84 Germany Bitterfeld-Wolfen 1 shaft-hole axe head (perforated shoe-last celt), 1 adze Vencl 1975, 51 head (shoe-last celt) 85 Germany Frankfurt (Oder) 1 copper shaft-hole axe head (type Gorica), 2 shaft-hole Berlekamp 1966, 122 axe heads 86 Germany Seebergen 1 adze head (shoe-last celt), 1 flat axe head, 1 shaft-hole Vencl 1975, 52 axe head (perforated shoe-last celt) 87 Poland Grzędzice (Seefeld) 2 shaft-hole axe heads Berlekamp 1966, 103 88 Poland Żalęcino (Sallentin) 1 shaft-hole axe head, 2 axe heads Kunkel 1935, 324; Dorka 1939, 187; Quitta 1955, 42 no. 32; Berlekamp 1966, 102; Rech 1979, 100 no. 58; Kaflińska 2006, 15 no. 62 89 Poland Sulechowo (Soltikow) 3 adze heads? (“hoes”) Kaflińska 2006, 15 no. 46a 90 Poland Plemięta 3 adze heads (“hoes”) Wiślański 1984; Kaflińska 2006, 14 no. 39 91 Poland Maciejowice (Matzwitz) originally 10–15 heavy stone tools; preserved are 2 Schumacher 1914, 42 no. 1; Quitta 1955, 42 no. shaft-hole axe heads (of which 1 perforated shoe-last 33; Kaflińska 2006, 14 no. 31 celt), 1 shaft-hole axe head-prework,1 adze head (unper- forated shoe-last celt), 2 flat axe heads 92 Poland Stary Zamek 1 shaft-hole axe head (perforated shoe-last celt), 2 adze Romanow 1977; Lička 1981, 619; Rech 1995, heads (shoe-last celts), 2 adze head-preworks (shoe-last 25 – 26 celts) 93 Czech Republic Štěnovice 1 adze head (shoe-last celt), 1 axe head Vencl 1975, 40 – 42 94 Czech Republic Plačice 2 shaft-hole axe heads (of which 1 perforated shoe-last Frolík 1981 celt), 2 adze heads (of which 1 shoe-last celt), 1 flint blade 95 Czech Republic Mšeno II ground heavy stone tools Lička 1981 96 Czech Republic Mšeno I 2 shaft-hole axe heads, 2 adze heads (shoe-last celts) Lička 1981 97 Czech Republic Troubsko some shaft-hole axe heads Salaš 1986, 34 98 Czech Republic Sudice 5 shaft-hole axe heads Quitta 1955, 55; Vencl 1975, 50; Salaš 1986, 31 99 Czech Republic Soběchleby 2 adze heads (shoe-last celts?) Salaš 1986, 27 – 31 100 Czech Republic Brno-Žebětín 3 adze heads (2 shoe-last celts, 1 flat axe head) Salaš 1986, 24 101 Czech Republic Jaroměřice nad 6 four-sided preworks Vencl 1975, 50; Salaš 1986, 27 Rokytnou 102 Czech Republic Vitiněves II 8 adze heads (shoe-last celts), 1 flat axe head-like tool Quitta 1955, 46 no. 48 103 Czech Republic Litoměrice 5 flint blades Quitta 1955, 45 no. 43 104 Czech Republic Kovanice 4 adze heads (shoe-last celts), 5 hoe-like tools Quitta 1955, 45 no. 42; Vencl 1975, 26 – 30 105 Czech Republic Jeřice 4 adze heads (shoe-last celts), 1 axe head Vencl 1975, 24–26 106 Czech Republic Blšany-Malá Černoc 2 adze heads (shoe-last celts), 1 prework, flint, bones Vencl 1975, 33 – 37 107 Czech Republic Vitiněves I 5 adze heads (shoe-last celts), 1 shaft-hole axe head, Vencl 1975, 44 – 46 1 prework 108 Czech Republic Křinec 1 shaft-hole axe head, 1 adze head (shoe-last celt), 1 Vencl 1975, 30 prework 109 Czech Republic Číštěves probably up to 50 artefacts, of which 5 shaft-hole axe Vencl 1975, 13 – 18 heads, 2 adze heads (shoe-last celts), 3 preworks are still preserved 110 Czech Republic nový Bydžov-Chudonice 15 adze heads (shoe-last celts), 2 preworks Vencl 1975, 18 – 24 111 Czech Republic Lípa unknown number of shaft-hole axe heads and adze Vencl 1975, 30 – 31 heads 112 Czech Republic Břeclav 6 shaft-hole axe head-preworks Vencl 1975, 49 – 50; Salaš 1986, 24 113 Czech Republic Dřevnovice 2 shaft-hole axe heads Salaš 1986, 27 Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 , 159 – 176) 159 Unexpected dimensions of a Swifterbant settle- ment at Medel-De Roeskamp (the Netherlands) Theo J. ten Anscher and Sebastiaan Knippenberg Abstract Large scale excavations at Medel-De Roeskamp near the city of Tiel in the Dutch river area have almost complete- ly uncovered a Swifterbant settlement site dating around 4,300 – 4,000 calBC. This site stands apart for its large size, its ex- tended broad-spectrum subsistence economy primarily based on domesticates, and the presence of about 25 house plans, pleading against residential mobility. The character of the find assemblage is indicative of a permanent settlement too. The emphasis on pig herding and cereal cultivation, with a grain spectrum consisting of four different species, processed and probably grown locally, is very similar to that found in some contemporaneous Bischheim and Michelsberg sites to the south- east and south. Medel stone artefact imports and the Medel ceramics also point to contacts with the Danubian tradition, Bischheim in particular. The Medel house plans bear general resemblances with the small house plans found in epi-Rössen contexts, and possess close parallels in the house plans from Bischheim sites in the German Rhineland. Medel-De Roeskamp is a clear example of a settlement fully adapted to a sedentary Neolithic way of life in the western parts of the North Euro- pean Plain, where fishing, hunting and gathering continued to play a role in daily life well into the Bronze Age. In Medel-De Roeskamp, in the Dutch river area, the neolithisation process had reached a mature stage, characterised by site permanency, already in the period 4,300 – 4,000 calBC. Keywords Neolithisation, Swifterbant culture, houses, permanent settlement, pig herding, cereal cultivation Zusammenfassung In Medel-De Roeskamp ist eine Siedlung der Swifterbant-Kultur (c. 4300 – 4000 calBC) nahezu vollstän- dig ausgegraben worden. Diese Siedlung ist aufgrund ihrer Ausdehnung, der Wirtschaftsweise, die neben Fischfang, Jagd und Sammeln vor allem auf Viehhaltung – besonders Schweinezucht – und Gartenbau basiert, sowie der mehr als 25 nachgewie- senen Hausgrundrisse einzigartig. Neben der Dimension der Siedlung sprechen auch die Funde für eine sesshafte Lebensweise. Einige Steingeräte und die Keramik weisen auf Kontakte mit den Nachfolgern der Linearbandkeramik hin. Die Hausgrundrisse von Medel ähneln epi-Rössener Beispielen und besonders einigen Bischheimer Häusern aus dem Rheinland. Der Fundplatz Medel ist ein wichtiges Beispiel für eine Siedlung mit einer sesshaften Lebensweise im westlichen Bereich der nordwesteu- ropäischen Tiefebene, wo Fischfang, Jagd und Sammeln bis in die Bronzezeit eine bedeutende Rolle für die Subsistenz spielten. In Medel-De Roeskamp im holländischen Rhein-Maas-Gebiet zeigt sich so in der Zeit von 4300 – 4000 calBC schon eine fort- geschrittene Phase der Neolithisierung mit permanent bewohnten Siedlungen. Introduction: a broad outline of the the descendants of the Linear Band Pottery culture Swifterbant culture (Linearbandkeramik, or LBK) in adjacent southern and eastern areas (Raemaekers 1999). It started with Swifterbant is an indigenous early Neolithic culture the introduction of ceramics (c. 5000 calBC), followed occurring between the Scheldt area in Flanders and at by the adaption of domestic animals/husbandry (c. least the Weser area in Lower Saxony. Its territory may 4,700 – 4,450 calBC) and later by the adaption of ce- have reached as far as the river Elbe near Hamburg. real cultivation (c. 4,300 – 4,000 calBC), leading to Its Mesolithic roots are attested in the reliance on an extended broad spectrum economy, in which the hunting, gathering and fishing, in its lithic industry and domestic element only gradually gained more im- in the manner of burying the dead: extended on their portance, but before c. 4,000 calBC never seemed back. The neolithisation of the Swifterbant culture is to become predominant (Raemaekers 1999; 2019). pictured as a slow (incomplete) ‘step by step’ process Around 4,000 calBC or somewhat later cattle bones that took a long time, evolving from contacts with increasingly outnumber pig/wild boar bones, point- 160 Un ex pe cted di mensions of a Swif terbant settlement at Medel-D e Roeskamp ( the N etherlan ds) ing to a structural shift in the subsistence economy (Kampffmeyer 1991).4 This is quite understandable (Gehasse 1995). There is an echo of this development since back then publications on the Swifterbant cul- in the ritual depositions. Already in the earliest phase ture were scarce, preliminary and based on just a few of the Swifterbant culture pot offerings are attested, sites, all dating to SW2 (e. g. De Roever 1979). It took as are offerings of red deer antlers and aurochs skulls another two decades to reach a better understanding from bulls, whereas the oldest 14C dated depositions of the width and depth of this culture. Hüde I has a of domestic cattle horns, again from bulls, occurred close western counterpart in Schokland-P14, located much later.1 on a large sand ridge on a substrate of boulder clay Residential mobility is considered to be the pre- bordering the Overijsselse Vecht (Ten Anscher 2012; vailing settlement system, with hardly any exception 2015). In particular, the ceramics are very similar.5 (Raemaekers 1999). Swifterbant sites are usually Schokland-P14 has a more reliable chronostratigraphy situated in gradient rich wetland zones near (small) though its dating is based on 14C-dates from charred streams. The duration of the habitation varied, depend- food crusts on pottery sherds. If the crusts contained ing on the possibilities of the location in question. fish remains (whether this is the case is unknown), Some sites like Bergschenhoek, on a flat shore, are the dates might be too old due to the reservoir effect.6 thought to have been inhabited very shortly: just a few Schokland-P14 at least provides an impression of days or a week at most (Louwe Kooijmans 1985). The the characteristics of the ceramics and worked flints majority of Swifterbant sites, however, are located on in subsequent stages that could offer a typological elevated grounds, and seem to have been periodically key for a new interpretation of the Hüde I phasing. used for tens of years to a few centuries, such as for Schokland-P14 has yielded several house plans, argu- instance the river dune sites Hardinxveld-Giesendam- ing for logistic mobility rather than residential mobili- Polderweg, Hardinxveld-Giesendam-De Bruin and ty.7 However, it is not clear whether they belong to Hoge Vaart-A27 (all belonging to phase Swifterbant SW2 or to the next phase, the Pre-Drouwen phase of 1 [SW1] which is dated between c. 5,000 – 4,400 cal- the West group of the Funnelbeaker culture (Trichter- BC), the levee site Swifterbant-S3/S5 and other sites becherkultur, or TRB). In the Pre-Drouwen phase (c. on levees and sand dunes around Swifterbant, and 3,900 – 3,400 calBC), the Swifterbant (ceramic) tradi- the river dune site Hazendonk-1 (all dating to phase tion lived on, alongside new elements that are typical SW2: c. 4,400 – 3,900 cal BC).2 The discovery of adze for the early TRB, partly derived from the Michels- marks pointing to an arable field on a clayey levee at berg culture, partly indigenous developments (Ten Swifterbant-S4, and subsequently the identification of Anscher 2012; 2015). The view that the Swifterbant tilled soils in thin sections arguing for arable fields at culture could have ignited the TRB North group as other nearby sites as well, ended the discussion about grain being imported or cultivated locally at wetland sites in favour of the latter option.3 4  Kampffmeyer’s interpretations and suggested periodisation, A few sites were situated on locations that con- relying heavily on the developments within the TRB North tinued to be easily accessible and inhabitable for a Group, are no longer tenable, also because his periodisation very long time. They span the complete duration of was not only hampered by the inadequate knowledge of the Swifterbant culture at the time, but was also affected by his the Swifterbant culture and beyond. Hüde I (Lower assigning the same sherds to different phases. See Ten Anscher Saxony, Germany), a palimpsest with a problem- 2012, 585 – 589 for an extensive comment on the developmental atic stratigraphy on a higher ground bordering lake model presented in Kampffmeyer 1991. See also Ten Anscher 2015, 349 – 353. Still, Kampffmeyer’s ‘Anhang B: Tafeln’, con- Dümmer, is a well known example. At the time the taining hundreds of drawings of sherds, many so similar to the Hüde ceramics and features were published in full, its sherds from for instance Schokland-P14, is a treasure of lasting Swifterbant component was heavily underestimated value. 5 Compare Ten Anscher 2012 fig. 5.1, 5.16, 5.19 and 7.4 with Kampffmeyer 1991, ‘Anhang B: Tafeln’. 1  Kroezenga et al. 1991; Prummel / Van der Sanden 1995; 6 It should be noted that the 14C-dates of the Swifterbant oc- Ufkes 1997; Raemaekers 2019. cupation of Medel-De Roeskamp, which on the basis of the ty- pological characteristics of both its ceramics and its worked 2  Louwe Kooijmans 2001a; 2001b; Hogestijn / Peeters flint must have been by and large contemporaneous with Layer 2001; Peeters 2007; De Roever 2004; Raemaekers 1999. – B from P14-Schokland, tally with the dates from Schokland-P14 Phasing based on ceramic characteristics according to Ten and confirm the global validity of the dates proposed for Layers Anscher 2012, 127 – 129. A–C at Schokland-P14 (Ten Anscher 2012, 58 – 62). 3  Cappers / Raemaekers 2008; Huisman et al. 2009; Huis- 7  The Overijsselse Vecht (German: Vechte) originates in Ger- man / Raemaekers 2014; Schepers 2014. man Rhine-Westphalia. Th e o J. te n A n s c h er an d Sebasti aan Kn i ppen be rg 161 well is rebutted.8 Nevertheless, from c. 3,900 calBC cupying more or less the same areas as Hazendonk onwards, an increase in contacts between the Swift- did before.11 Vlaardingen is contemporaneous with erbant/Pre-Drouwen region and TRB North group the classic stages of the TRB West group and beyond, communities is probable, as similarities in pot decora- thereby continuing a cultural separation between the tion suggest, eventually leading to the incorporation communities in the Dutch river and dune area and the of, among other things, the megalithic tradition in the central and northeastern regions of the Netherlands, classic phases of the TRB West group. Schokland-P14 that started around 3,800 calBC. and Hüde I are the main sites representing the Pre- The Swifterbant culture has long been seen as Douwen phase of the TRB West group, both sites being closely related to, or even as a Dutch variety of the used during the classic phases of the TRB West group Ertebølle culture (De Roever 1979). The alleged affini- as well. In the Scheldt area, the Swifterbant culture ties have been fueled by the occasional occurrence of ended abruptly around 4,000 calBC, being replaced knob-type bases in Swifterbant ceramics. In fact, the by, or integrated into the Michelsberg culture (e. g. similarities are far outweighed by the differences (Ten Vanmontfort 2004; Crombé et al. 2011; Teetaert Anscher 2012, 132 – 134; 2015, 346). For instance, the et al. 2020). basic concept of what a pot should look like differed Around 3,800 calBC, the Michelsberg influence considerably between the two groups. Ertebølle pots manifested itself more strongly in the Dutch river area have their maximum diameter very low on the pot. too, leading to a seemingly swift development into the SW-pots, on the contrary, certainly from c. 4,300 calBC Hazendonk group (c. 3,800 – 3,400 calBC).9 Just as onwards, have their maximum diameter much higher Pre-Drouwen, the Hazendonk group is regarded as on the pot. The differences are not restricted to pot- an offshoot of the Swifterbant culture (Raemaekers tery either. Contacts between these adjacent cultures 1999; Louwe Kooijmans 2007). Whereas Swifter- are not unlikely, but they certainly are not pivotal bant is generally viewed as a not fully or truly Neo- for the crucial developments within the Swifterbant lithic society,10 the Hazendonk dune settlement site culture. Unlike in Ertebølle, the key notion in the Schipluiden is presented as the earliest example of Swifterbant culture is neolithisation, and the basic a fully developed broad-spectrum Neolithic way of underlying mechanism is the continuous contact with life in the Netherlands outside the loess zone in the the southern and eastern regions and its subsequent south (with its former LBK occupation), because at offshoots, the Danubian tradition from Großgartach, Schipluiden the evidence for animal husbandry and Planig-Friedberg, Rössen and Bischheim to Michels- cereal cultivation dominates over the evidence for berg. The Swifterbant pots mirror to some degree the hunting, gathering and fishing (Louwe Kooijmans / subsequent southern fashions in forms and techniques. Jongste 2006). The generally accepted, but some- They could be viewed as local copies of a selection what problematic view is that the Hazendonk group of the ceramic repertoire of the Danubian tradition, eventually evolved into the Vlaardingen group, oc- in particular the Rössen/Bischheim ‘Vorratsgefäße’, ‘Vorratstöpfe’ and ‘Kugel-’ and ‘Ösenbecher’, though keeping their distinct own Swifterbant signature. The Michelsberg influence occurs late, first perhaps dis- 8 See Ten Anscher 2012 and 2015 for the alleged role of Swifterbant in the formation of the TRB North Group, by now cernable in the occurrence of pots with a roughened refuted, see e. g. Sørensen 2015. surface, more angular pot profiles, flat and pointed bases and, slightly later, attested by ‘Arkadenränder’. 9 E.g. Louwe Kooijmans 1980; Raemaekers 1999; Louwe Kooijmans 2007; Koot et al. 2008. Some pottery sherds and the Hazendonk flint assemblages do show Michelsberg influences. The Hazendonk burial practices are at variance with the Swift- erbant burial tradition. Though the flexed positions of the Ha- zendonk dead certainly betray allegiance to the southern ‘old 11  Transitional sites are unknown. It should be noted that the Neolithic’, similar flat grave cemeteries are not found in Mi- Vlaardingen pottery (S-shaped pots with a row of perforations chelsberg either. below the rim, baking plates and collared flasks) has more in common with the Pre-Drouwen ceramic tradition than with the 10 E.g. Amkreutz 2013; Out 2009. Raemaekers 2003, how- carinated bowls and barrel shaped vessels typical of Hazen- ever, using the availability model (Zvelebil 1986) as a methodi- donk. Neither does the Vlaardingen burial practice relate well cal framework, has expressed his reservations about the validity to the Hazendonk cemeteries (or to the graves of Pre-Drouwen of the underlying concept of a long transition model, stating that or classic TRB for that matter). Quite a few Vlaardingen sites the Dutch data do not rule out the possibility of a (relatively) have been excavated, but no graves have been discovered yet, short transition model, thereby implying that already in Swifter- except for a single cremation pointing to a possibly crouched bant the neolithisation might have reached the consolidation position, and apart from a suggestive reconstruction of an ex- phase instead of the substitution phase. See also Raemaekers carnation platform (Louwe Kooijmans 1985; Verhart 2010; 2019. Louwe Kooijmans et al. 2016). 162 Un ex pe cted di mensions of a Swif terbant settlement at Medel-D e Roeskamp ( the N etherlan ds) Fig. 1 Location of Medel-De Roeskamp (red star). Of course, all the other Neolithic elements that tion (Van Gijn et al. 2001a; 2001b). All this attests to subsequently entered the Swifterbant culture derived long term relationships between the Swifterbant culture from the Danubian tradition too, simply because there and its farmer neighbours in the south and the south- is no alternative source: the perforated shoe-last adzes east. Medel-De Roeskamp illustrates this again and (‘hohe durchlochte Schuhleistenkeile’), the perforated in even more aspects than already pointed out above. broad wedges (‘durchlochte Breitkeile’), the cattle, sheep and goats, the cereal species, leaf-shaped ar- rowheads, ‘Walzenbeile’, and the polished axes.12 In The Medel sites the Dutch river area, already from the very beginning, Swifterbant people obtained part of their flint from Medel is a hamlet near the city of Tiel in the Dutch sources well within the territory of the Danubian tradi- river area (Fig. 1). Preceding the construction of a large business park, extensive archaeological investi- gations were carried out over the last 15 years. They resulted in the discovery of many sites dating from 12 See Ten Anscher 2012 for references. English translations for ‘hohe durchlochte Schuhleistenkeile’ and (Rössener) ‘durch- the Early Neolithic to the Middle Ages. The prehis- lochte Breitkeile’ according to Raemaekers et al. 2011. toric sites of Medel-De Roeskamp (named after a de- Th e o J. te n A n s c h er an d Sebasti aan Kn i ppen be rg 163 molished local farmyard) were detected by coring in each other and from the large Swifterbant site, the 2012 by the archaeological firm RAAP (Boshoven subject of the remainder of this paper. 2012). Subsequent test-trenches excavated in 2014 by Due to the huge number of finds (c. 950,000) a combined team of RAAP and ACVU-HBS yielded from the combined Medel sites, the site report is not additional information: a site of the Swifterbant cul- finished yet. Although all finds that were selected ture covering about 1 ha, situated below an extensive for further research (about half a million) have been Bronze Age settlement associated with at least two analysed by now, at this moment only a preliminary burial mounds. In between both archaeological strata impression of the results of Medel-De Roeskamp, the there were scattered finds of a then unknown age most significant Swifterbant residential site excavated (Norde / Van Renswoude 2014). yet, can be presented. The developer of the business park, Industrie­schap Medel, an organisation established by the municipali- ties of Tiel and Neder-Betuwe, decided on a time span Excavation strategy of at most one year for these sites to be excavated.13 Between November 2016 and September 2017 employ- The considerable depth of the Swifterbant occupation ees of four Dutch archaeological firms (RAAP, Archol, levels at 1.0 – 1.5 m below the present-day surface and ADC and BAAC), working together in a joint venture, the high groundwater table provided a challenge. For- excavated the sites of Medel-De Roeskamp almost com- tunately it proved possible to excavate the Swifterbant pletely. The Bronze Age settlement includes several site without having to rely on costly drainage by filter successive house plans, dating to the youngest phase wells. This was accomplished by not opening up more of the Early Bronze Age in the Dutch river area (early than the area that could be fully documented during WKD3, c. 1,900 – 1,800 calBC).14 The largest and young- a single day. Typically, the day after each excavation est Early Bronze Age multi-phase house plan is also unit was inundated. However, in order to obtain long the most complete one; it is accompanied by several and deeper cross sections, and for the investigation of small granary-type structures with four or six posts. some archaeological layers in the channel adjacent to The house site was covered by a particularly rich find the site, for a limited period a well point system was layer with more than 150,000 finds (including a lot of indispensable.15 loam weights which are among the oldest found in the Given these limitations, and also keeping in mind Netherlands). The burial mounds, two large monuments the maximum field-work period of twelve months for and one small one, contained almost fifty graves, both a large site, one had to compromise. Extensive excava- inhumations and cremations, dating from the Early tion, for instance by sieving or trowelling the complete Bronze Age until well into the Middle Bronze Age archeological layer, would imply that only a small part and possibly even the Iron Age. This settlement was of the settlement area could have been investigated preceded by late Bell Beaker (c. 2,200 – 2,000 calBC) fully. Instead, the goal was to get a general overview and Early Bronze Age inhabitation (phases WKD1 – 2, of the ‘entire’ Swifterbant settlement, making use of c. 2,000 – 1,900 calBC), of which mostly eroded sherds the rare opportunity offered at Medel. The standard were recognised as well as a few features, of which a excavation procedure was to sieve about one of every flat grave cemetery with inhumations is most striking. eight square meters of the settlement layer (sandy clay) It contains some single interments, a double grave and using a 5 mm and sometimes a 2 mm mesh-screen, a remarkable collective burial with the remains of more while many 10 liter samples of the settlement layer than ten adults and children. A small Middle Neolithic were taken for future sieving using finer meshes. The settlement belonging to the Hazendonk group (with finds from the other 87.5 % of the settlement layer 14 C-dates around 3,700 – 3,500 calBC) was uncovered were collected during opening up using a mechanical too. These sites were stratigraphically separated from shovel, thereby losing an estimated 97 % of the finds. Even so the number of recovered finds is staggering. 13  The main element of the tender was a design and construct brief largely drawn up by the excavating companies. Contrary to common practice in Dutch contract archeology, the contract 15 In a clayey environment filter wells hardly ensure dry wor- was won on the basis of quality rather than lowest price. king circumstances. The main reason for the installation of filter wells was that by lowering the high groundwater level the 14  Early Bronze Age phasing according to Ten Anscher upward force of the ground water and therefore the risk of 2012, 239 – 271. WKD is the abbreviation of ‘Wikkeldraad’ = abrupt flooding (piping) of a trench was reduced. At Medel the barbed wire = ‘Stacheldraht’, named after the dominant type of drainage had the unexpected negative effect of reducing the decoration on the ceramics. visibility of features like postholes. 164 Un ex pe cted di mensions of a Swif terbant settlement at Medel-D e Roeskamp ( the N etherlan ds) Fig. 2 Natural setting of the Swifterbant site Medel-De Roeskamp. Natural setting 0.75 – 1.0 m or even less. Near Medel the alluvial valley of the Rhine-Meuse system is several kilometers wide, Sandy outcrops, river dunes and levees are the famil- pressed between ice-pushed ridges in the north and iar landscape elements on which Swifterbant sites are the extensive higher grounds of the coversand area of usually found. The Medel settlement is situated on a Noord-Brabant in the south, reaching well into Belgium. 50 m wide sandy clay levee along one of the branches Based on two 14C-dates the levee was formed after of a channel network belonging to the Rhine system c. 4,700 – 4,500 calBC.17 Though regularly flooded, the (Fig. 2).16 The levee may have had a height of just surrounding flood plain, characterised by small chan- nels (crevasses) and marshy pockets, with tree stands 16 Information on the natural environment has been provided by our physical geographer Nico Willemse (RAAP). 17  14 C samples taken from wood fragments/twigs; 2 sigma range. Th e o J. te n A n s c h er an d Sebasti aan Kn i ppen be rg 165 consisting mainly of alder and oak, in general provided ing/feeding ground for cattle and pigs, or as a burial a rather dry environment, accessible by foot and by ground – contrary to expectations no graves were canoe. The Swifterbant occupation started when the found on the western levee. So it should be realised channel was already silted up to a considerable degree, that part of the puzzle is missing. Although a large though still connected to the active river system. By tract of the settlement area was excavated and the find then, the prevailing calm conditions made the levee abundance was dwindling towards the south and the a convenient location for a settlement, at least for a north where the levee was sloping down, it cannot be considerable time. However, regular flooding led to the excluded that it continued beyond the excavated area, silting up of the surrounding flood plain, ultimately cov- again on higher parts of the western levee, perhaps ering the levee. This meant that in the long run the levee constituting a chain of sites. ceased to be a relatively high and mostly dry element, The southern concentration of finds and features thereby losing its suitability for use as a dwelling place. covers about 11,000 m2, the northern concentration measures around 1,500 m2. For easy reference, they are called the southern and the northern site though Duration of habitation and settlement they belong to the same settlement, subdivided by a size natural depression in the surface of the levee. The northern site lies several decimeters lower than the Eleven 14C dates (from burnt bone, charred hazel southern site. Presumably, both sites were largely con- nutshell, charred and uncharred seeds, charred temporaneous, though the occupation of the much grain kernels and charcoal) belong to the period larger and higher southern site may have lasted a 4,325/4,225 – 4,000 calBC, and two more (from burnt century or so longer. bone and charred hazel nutshell) attest to a relatively For a Swifterbant settlement the size of Medel-De late use during 4,065 – 3,965 calBC. So Medel is firmly Roeskamp is astonishing. It is twice the size of all the ex- dated in phase SW2, its occupation spanning presum- cavated Swifterbant sites in the Netherlands combined ably around 200 – 300 years and some 350 years at most. (except for Nieuwegein that is made up of several much Situated outside the provisional boundaries of the smaller sites; see Molthof / Baetsen, this volume). business park, the eastern counterpart of the excavated levee remains unknown. There is a chance that it has Finds been largely eroded already, perhaps even before the Swifterbant inhabitation of the western levee started. The overwhelming majority of finds – some 600,000 On the other hand, the eastern levee potentially could belong to the Swifterbant period – comes from the have played an important role in the Medel settlement settlement layer in the top of the levee. In the channel, system, for example as a nearby arable field, a graz- several thin layers with refuse were discovered. These Fig. 3a Identified animal species: all mammals subdived into different groups (for numbers see Fig. 3b). 166 Un ex pe cted di mensions of a Swif terbant settlement at Medel-D e Roeskamp ( the N etherlan ds) class species NISP activity. Anadromous species such as twait shad and mammals pig 11 allis shad were caught too. wild boar 18 Hundreds of charred kernels from naked barley, pig / wild boar 4,793 einkorn and emmer wheat were found. Especially cattle 1,552 noteworthy are charred rachis remains of durum aurochs 25 cattle / aurochs 24 wheat, a novelty in Swifterbant context. The charred sheep / goat 126 grains of naked wheat found in Medel most likely dog 100 belong also to the durum wheat. Chaff remains of horse 29 naked barley and durum wheat indicate that thresh- deer (antler excl) 433 ing of both cereals would have taken place at the site. beaver 28 fur animals 34 Chaff remains of einkorn and emmer – spikelet forks birds 102 and glume bases – suggest that dehusking (but likely fish 4,571 also threshing) of these hulled wheats took place at reptiles European pond turtle 1 Medel too. Nearby arable fields are to be expected. So total 11,847 cereal cultivation probably played a significant role in the local subsistence economy. There is no evidence Fig. 3b Identified animal species (NISP: Number of Identified for growing oil plants or pulses from the Swifterbant Specimen). context in Medel. Antler adzes and flint sickle blades may be associated with these agricultural activities. layers had a limited extension of about 10 – 30 m2 each, There is ample evidence of activities related to the and didn’t yield many finds. The same holds true for gathering of food plants, such as loads of charred ha- two subsequent refuse layers to the south of the north- zelnut shells and some charred remains of sloe plum, ern site. hawthorn and crab apple, as well as water chestnut.19 Animal bones constitute the most abundant find Ceramics constitute the second most abundant category. The 340,000 pieces of mammal bone typi- find category. From over 85,000 fragments of pottery cally are poorly preserved, showing a high degree of the 18,500 sherds larger than 2 cm2 were selected for fragmentation also caused by extensive sieving. From analysis. As is indicative of SW2 ceramics in general, only 2 % of the mammal bones the species could be the predominant temper type at Medel is a combina- determined (Fig. 3a–b).18 The proportion of wild ani- tion of plant material, presumably moss, and crushed mals (wild boar/pigs excluded), mainly deer, is strik- stone, in particular quartz. The Medel pottery is unusu- ingly low compared to other Swifterbant sites. Note- ally well made, the joints of the clay rolls (U-joints as worthy too is the paucity of beaver bones, elsewhere well as Hb-joints) being seldom recognisable. On the ubiquitous. In addition to a dominance of swine (wild whole the Medel pottery is rather thin walled (mean: boar/pigs) bones, a high percentage of domesticated 8 mm, one third is thinner than 7 mm). Neck sherds animals, predominantly cattle, is seen. On the basis with a thickness of 3 – 4 mm are not uncommon. Typi- of the dimensions of their molars (M2), it seems that cal is the two-staged construction of quite a lot of rela- a large majority of the swine bones belongs to pigs tively thick walled pots (Fig. 4: 17549). After being set instead of wild boars. In that case the Swifterbant aside to dry for a while, a fresh clay layer of 2 – 6 mm people from Medel have been swineherds first and thickness was applied on the outer surface of the pot. foremost, with cattle farming taking second place. The applied layer is often easily recognisable in the Animal husbandry seems to have been much more pot profile and prone to erosion. The pots usually are important than hunting at Medel, and more so than S-shaped, like the Rössen or Bischheim ‘Vorratsgefäße’ at any other known Swifterbant site. (16151). Sometimes the shape is somewhat angular Due to the sampling method, fish bones are un- (17497) or globular, resembling ‘Kugelbecher’ (6620) derrepresented and biased in favour of larger species. or ‘Kugeltöpfe’ (17009). A few bowls have been rec- Still, fish bones are found in high numbers. Similar ognised. Pointed and rounded bases were common. to many Swifterbant sites, pike fishing was a major Bases with modest knobs and flat bases are rarely encountered. Occasionally lugs (‘Ösen’) are found 18  The information concerning the mammal bones has been provided by archaeozoological specialists, Kinie Esser and Joy- ce van Dijk (Archeoplan Eco), the information on fish bones is 19  All the archaeobotanical information has been provided by based on the analysis of Wim Van Neer (Royal Belgian Institu- archaeobotanical specialist Lucy Kubiak-Martens (BIAX te of Natural Sciences, Brussels). Consult). Th e o J. te n A n s c h er an d Sebasti aan Kn i ppen be rg 167 Fig. 4 A selection of pottery sherds, see text. 168 Un ex pe cted di mensions of a Swif terbant settlement at Medel-D e Roeskamp ( the N etherlan ds) a b c d Fig. 5 A selection of lithic artefacts: a) edge flake from a jadeitite axe; b) fragment of an amphibolite perforated broad wedge; c) active grinder made from quartzite; d) quern fragments made from gabbro (left) and sandstone (right). (17009). One of them has been turned into a longi- decoration in fields and the two-staged construction tudinal knob by inserting a plug in the perforation being characteristic for the Swifterbant communities (15010). It has an asymmetrical section with a convex in the Dutch river area.20 Several sherd concentrations and a concave long side, and it is covered with rows of belong to just one pot each and may represent buried round impressions on top and on the convex side, but pot offerings (16151). not on the concave side, suggesting that it has been The lithic assemblage, comprising about 8,000 one of a pair, placed closely to each other. pieces of worked and utilised stone, for the large ma- The usual SW decoration types like a row of verti- jority consists of river cobbles and pebbles in addi- cal elongated, oval or round impressions below the rim tion to a smaller portion of moraine rocks.21 These are present, sometimes with ‘Lochbuckel’ on the in- probably had been collected from nearby outcrops side of the rim. This type of decoration is mainly found of coarse river sediments being part of the ice-pushed on larger pots (8529; 17231). Especially characteristic ridges and slopes near Rhenen, where perifluvioglacial for Medel are impressions, round or otherwise, ar- activity also brought in moraine stones. ranged in fields on the shoulder or near the maximum A few individual artefacs attest to external con- diameter (6620; 16761; 17243; 17497; 17765). This tacts. The most definite examples are a re-worked type of decoration is typical for smaller pots (17472). fragment of a perforated broad wedge made from am- Some larger pots possessed a roughened surface cov- ered with fingertip impressions (17549) similar to pots found in late Bischheim and Michelsberg. Half of the rim sherds have ‘Randkerbung’ or a less conspicuous 20  The ceramics have been analysed by Theo ten Anscher type of rim impressions (8529; 17231). (RAAP). The characteristics of the Medel ceramics seem 21  The stone artefacts have been analysed by Sebastiaan to indicate regional variation in SW2, the emphasis on Knippenberg (Archol). Th e o J. te n A n s c h er an d Sebasti aan Kn i ppen be rg 169 phibolite22 and an edge flake as well as a very small Among the 20,000 pieces of flint, the large majority fragment of a ground axe, both made from jadeite, consists of nearby obtained flints. A small portion, how- preferably named jadeitite (Fig. 5a–b).23 The amphibo- ever, is brought in from southern regions: from south- lite may have originated from northern Bohemia in ern Dutch Limburg and possibly the Hesbaye region the Czech Republic,24 whereas the rare jadeitite most in Belgium. The number of arrowheads is remarkably probably came from the Italian Alps around Mount low. The toolkit predominantly consists of scrapers. Viso and Mount Beigua (Pétréquin et al. 2012). Most Together with the presence of sickle blades and the likely, these objects were obtained through inter-com- abundant evidence of tool re-use, they all are aspects munity exchange with neighbouring sites in the Neo- one would expect in a permanent settlement site, with lithic hinterland. an emphasis on agricultural and domestic activities.26 The stone tool assemblage provides additional evidence for (grain) food processing and permanent settlement. A predominance of hand-held stones ac- Features tively used for food grinding (Fig. 5c) is noticed, with only a few flat quern counterparts, mostly fragmented The notion of a domestic settlement site at Medel is and worn down (Fig. 5d). The presence of these tools further supported by the spatial analysis of the fea- is taken as an indication of the processing of cereals tures.27 Postholes are by far the predominant feature and/or other food plants.25 type. Over a thousand postholes, many of considerable A recurrent feature of many tools is their multi- depth of up to 0.8 – 1.0 m and with diameters around functional usage, particularly among the hand-held 0.25 – 0.3 m have been uncovered. Exceptional cases tools, being used as active hammers, grinders, and in which the actual post-fill could be distinguished pounding stones, as well as anvils, and sometimes within the larger posthole suggest postdiameters of c. even querns. This has been attested at other Swifter- 0.15 – 0.20 m, pointing to firmly built structures. Most bant sites as well (Devriendt 2014; see also Peeters / postholes had very light-coloured fills, making them Devriendt 2016), and it suggests an integrated part hard to distinguish from the natural subsoil. It is likely of the Swifterbant stone industry. that therefore some went unnoticed, as the interrupted Another recurrent tool type is the hammer stone. patterns in several adjacent trenches illustrate. Ground stone in the form of axes occur in very small The careful study of the posthole clusters enabled numbers and are without exception fragmented, with the identification of house plans at the southern site. often only (edge) flakes remaining. The Medel inhabit- So far about 25 house plans have been reconstructed ants also used stone to adorn themselves, exemplified (Fig. 6). More houses must have been present, given by the finding of a small number of pendants and a the considerable number of postholes that could not single bead. The pendants generally consist of flat be assigned to any plans. small water-worn pebbles with a biconical perforation Despite the variation in size, the plans show a at one end, although an artificially ground and shaped remarkable consistency in post configurations. Based example possessing two perforations has also been rec- on the most complete plans, the following general ognised. The presence of a number of pre-forms sug- observations can be made (Fig. 7). All are two-aisled gests that these items had been manufactured locally. structures. It is noteworthy that the postholes within each row are in almost perfect alignment, suggesting the main constructing axis had been along the longi- tudal direction. The central postholes are the deepest 22 It is rock rich in amphibole and high-Ca plagioclase, based and are placed at more or less regular intervals. They on non-destructive analysis by Hanco Zwaan, Museum of Na- constituted the longest posts. tural History (Naturalis), Leiden, using micro-Raman spec- Wall postholes exhibit more variation in their troscopy and X-ray fluorescence (ED-XRF). dephs and intervals. The variation in the latter aspect 23  Based on high Na contents, these are relatively pure jadeite may be partly due to a bias in visibility, as the wall rocks with low omphacite presence. The artefact has been ana- lysed non-destructively by Hanco Zwaan, Museum of Natural History (Naturalis), Leiden, using micro-Raman spectroscopy and X-ray fluorescence (ED-XRF); see Harlow et al. 2014 for terminology. 26  The information on the flints has been provided by Paul van der Kroft (RAAP) who together with Jeroen Mendelts MA 24  Bernardini et al. 2012; Christensen et al. 2006; Schwarz- (RAAP) carried out the analysis of the flint material. Mackensen / Schneider 1986; Šída / Kachlík 2009. 27  All features from the Neolithic period have been analysed 25 Use-wear analysis is currently being performed. by Sebastiaan Knippenberg (Archol). 170 Un ex pe cted di mensions of a Swif terbant settlement at Medel-D e Roeskamp ( the N etherlan ds) Fig. 6 The southern site showing the features with the location of identified house plans (H) and rows of posts plotted on the density (in g) of animal bone remains, with RPN = northern row of posts; RPS = southern row of posts. postholes are generally lighter in colour, and therefore Some of the larger houses suggest they had been could have been missed more easily. The house size divided into different compartments, as certain parts of varies, but exhibits a continuum between the smallest the plan exhibit slightly different post configurations, one being around 9 m long and almost 5 m wide and which is also associated with a difference in posthole the longest one having a length of 18.5 m, whereas the size and depth (Fig. 8). In some, these compartments widest house, which is not the longest, measures 7 m. can be viewed as being part of the house, suggesting The general plan form is rectangular, with a number of it was divided into different segments or rooms. In house plans slightly tapering toward the western end. exceptional cases, for example house 6 (Fig. 8), it may Th e o J. te n A n s c h er an d Sebasti aan Kn i ppen be rg 171 Fig. 7 A selection of the most complete house plans at Medel-De Roeskamp. be argued that it relates to a later addition, although equilateral as well as isosceles triangles have been this will be difficult to prove. identified, with post distances of circa 1.5 to 2.4 m. A structural internal element found in almost A clue for their interpretation may be provided by all house plans is the presence of a pair of deeply their postfills. All three generally contain much more dug posts situated at regular distances at each side charcoal. This may indicate they had been situated of the central axis. Many of these pairs are situated adjacent to hearths. at the western end of the house, but more centrally The high number of identified house plans re- located ones also occur. These pairs always form flects a long lived permanent settlement. In some regular triangles with one of the central posts. Both cases, houses have been rebuilt at the same location Fig. 8 The same house plans as in Figure 7, showing the division into different compartments and the location of the triangle configura- tions of deep postholes. 172 Un ex pe cted di mensions of a Swif terbant settlement at Medel-D e Roeskamp ( the N etherlan ds) or were slightly moved, supporting continuous use of How to interpret these rows? They do not sur- the southern site. The larger number of structures in its round the site, their length is too short and the post northern part indicates that this part must have been intervals are too wide for a protective fence or wall. occupied the longest. The slightly different orientation So a defensive function seems unlikely. It couldn’t of some southern plans, including the outlier house 1 have served as a protection against the wind, con- with a perpendicular orientation, may point to a slight sidering that west/northwest is the prevailing wind shifting of the settlement to the south. The overlap in direction. Since the northern row seems to have in- house plans and differences in orientation indicate corporated trees that had survived the formation of that the house plans represent several phases, each the levee, it is likely that it belonged to the earliest accounting for perhaps three to five houses. Getting habitation. Unsuitable as a defensive structure, the to grips with the phasing will be a challenging task, exceptional post sizes suggest a ritual role rather than considering the problems connected with a palimpsest a practical one, perhaps associated with the founding situation and a notorious plateau in the 14C calibra- or structuring of the initial settlement. The parallel tion curve. orientation to the houses would be in agreement The other types of features at Medel are much with this idea. Whether the southern row of paired less frequent. They include shallow pits and hearths. postholes is associated with the assumed younger Pits have been identified on the basis of their larger southern shift of the settlement mentioned before, diameter and flat to slightly bowl-shaped bottom. They is a tempting thought but again difficult to prove. often had not been dug in much deeper than the top- The northern site is much smaller and does not soil layer, so originally they must have had a depth have the high density of posthole features. Their pres- of around 0.3 – 0.4 m. Pits are both situated inside as ence, however, attests to the erection of one or more well as outside the house plans. Within house 2 or 3 structures there too. Unfortunately this cannot be a pit was found containing a large part of a ‘Vorrats- supported by the identification of a clear house plan. gefäß’ (Fig. 4: 16151). It is hard to prove whether these The preservation in this site is a lot better, probably are the remains of an intentional house offering (as due to less intensive and shorter use, resulting in less found in for instance Funnelbeaker [TRB] houses). trampling. This is exemplified by the presence of two They might relate to some functional use as well. It shallow hearths yielding a wealth of macrobotanical is noteworthy that the overall number of pits at the remains and other finds. site is small and that deep ones (> 0.6 m) are absent, indicating that pits were not used for food storage. A conspicious element is formed by a row of very Settlement structure and houseplans large postholes centrally located in the settlement in context perpendicular to the gully. The postholes were around 0.5 – 0.6 m wide and up to 2.0 m deep. They contained Though lacking the defensive palisades, Medel-De the remaining lower parts of seven massive oak posts Roeskamp has a village structure that recalls the ar- and one made of alder, all showing cutting marks of rangements encountered a few centuries earlier in stone axes. In alignment with these posts the upright settlements of the Rössen culture of the Niederrhe- trunks of two alder trees were uncovered. The fact that inische Bucht.28 This resemblance could very well be these trees were rooted in a layer below the levee signi- the accidental outcome of repeatedly rebuilding and fies that they already existed before the formation of moving of the house location within a confined area. the levee, and their alignment with the oak posts sug- A difference, however, is seen in the choice of a new gests that they were still visible when the latter were location when re-building a house. Within Rössen sites, erected. It must have been an impressive structure, houses were almost always moved to another location, presumably with a substantial height. The oak posts whereas houses at Medel were sometimes re-build on did produce tree ring series of considerable length the same spot. (about 120 years), but they could not be matched to The village arrangement at Medel is probably not the regional dendrochronological curve. Another row unique for Swifterbant. Whilst at Medel many more had been placed around 50 m to the south. Its length houses could be identified than the two or four houses and orientation, as well as its distance to the gully, are at Schokland-P14, large tracts of Schokland-P14 that very similar to that of the northern one, though the southern row consists of paired postholes, less deep and wide, and not deep enough for the posts to be 28  Rössen sites near Hambach, Inden and Aldenhoven, see for preserved. instance Dohrn-Ihmig 1983. Th e o J. te n A n s c h er an d Sebasti aan Kn i ppen be rg 173 might yield many more house plans have not been ex- rectangular, and two-aisled plan is very similar to the cavated yet. In size and post configurations the house larger Medel houses. The presence of a configuration plans found at Schokland-P14 exhibit similarity with of posts at its northern short end, quite comparable the small house plans of Medel. At P14 the additional with the triangular configuration found in the Medel pair of posts that subdivides the stuctures is present house plans is also striking. The proximity in time and too (Ten Anscher 2012, 373 – 383). The P14 house space as well as the close similarities in house plans plans might be slightly younger, perhaps arguing for make it therefore quite likely that the Swifterbant a tendency towards smaller houses in Swifterbant. house tradition harks back to Bischheim sources.31 Though the Medel houses are clearly not related The Swifterbant houses, in turn, could have served as to the Rössen longhouses, the partitioned two-aisled, a link to Hazendonk and TRB house types.32 slightly tapering plans do somewhat resemble the smaller Rössen houses with lenghts around 20 m. By contrast, small rectangular and sometimes tapering Conclusion two-aisled houses that have a general resemblance to the plans found at Medel-De Roeskamp and Schok- Large scale excavations at Medel-De Roeskamp near land P14 are the norm in Epi-Rössen offshoots.29 Good the city of Tiel in the Dutch river area have almost parallels, however, have been excavated not too far completely uncovered a Swifterbant settlement site away in several sites near Jüchen-Garzweiler in the dating around 4,300 – 4,000 calBC. This site is ex- German Rhineland, spanning an occupation period ceptional due to its large size, its extended broad- from around 4,500 – 4,200 calBC.30 The oldest house spectrum subsistence economy primarily based on plan FR 98/28 still resembles Rössen types, although domesticates as well as a large number of house plans, it already represents a transition toward the more pleading against residential mobility. The character simple two-aisled forms found at Medel. Neverthe- of the find assemblage is indicative of a permanent less, its small rows each consisting of three internal settlement too. Presumably, Medel was the long lived posts perpendicular to the long sides are lacking permanently inhabitated core of a territory that was in the Swifterbant houses. The two tapering house exploited also by means of numerous short lived spe- plans associated with the Bischheim middle phase, cial purpose camps scattered in the surrounding areas. FR 98/251 and FR 2001/103, consist of a central The emphasis at Medel on pig herding and cereal row and two side rows, each made up of four or five cultivation, with a grain spectrum consisting of four postholes at regular intervals. Although conspiciously different species, processed and probably grown lo- wide, they have more in common with the P14 houses cally, is very similar to that found in some contempo- than with the Medel house plans which only seldom raneous sites to the southeast and south, notably the show side posts perpendicular to the central posts. Rhineland Bischheim sites near Jüchen-Garzweiler and The youngest house plan, FR 138, however, with its the Flemish Michelsberg site Spiere-De Hel (Arora / Zerl 2003; Vanmontfort 2004). Medel imports such as the two fragments of jadeitite axes and a perforated broad wedge, and the Medel ceramics also point to 29  For the term Epi-Rössen see Gleser 1992; 2012. See for instance the Goldberg-house plans published by Bersu 1936. contacts with the Danubian tradition, in particular Rös- See Ten Anscher 2012, 383 for a discussion of the cultural sen/Bischheim. The Medel house plans bear general context of the Swifterbant or Pre-Drouwen house plans from resemblances with the house plans found in Epi-Rössen Schokland-P14, which applies to the house plans of Medel-De Roeskamp as well. The house plans from Jüchen-Garzweiler contexts, and possess close parallels in the house plans were not known to Ten Anscher at that time. from Bischheim sites in the German Rhineland. 30  Arora 2000; 2001; 2004; Arora / Zerl 2003; 2004. House plan FR 98/28 (19 × 4 – 8 m; tapering), charred grain from a post­ hole 14 C-dated 4,455 ± 85 calBC; house plan FR 98/251 31  A Michelsberg source is unlikely since permanent dwelling (19 × 10 – 12,5 m; tapering); house plan FR 2001/103 (15 × 6 – 9 m; structures are hardly found in Michelsberg contexts. tapering), charred grain form a nearby pit 14C-dated 4,290 ± 45 calBC; house plan FR 138 (18 × 5,5 – 6 m; rectangular), no asso- 32  Hazendonk group: see the house plan from Wateringen 4 ciated 14C-dates. Arora 2004 linked FR 98/28 to early Bisch- (Raemaekers 1997) and Ypenburg-Locatie 4 house plans 2 and heim, FR 98/251 and FR 2001/103 to its middle phase and FR 3 (Houkes / Bruning 2008); TRB: see e. g. Müller 2017, 22 – 2 3: 138 to late Bischheim, also taking the characteristics of the house type Dagstorp (TRB North group), for instance the house associated ceramics into account. Interestingly, about 12 m to from Rastorf, and house type Flögeln (TRB West group), for the northeast, parallel to house plan FR 138, an 8 m long pali- instance Pennigbüttel house B. See also Drenth et al. 2014: the sade was found, consisting of ten postholes with diameters TRB West group hut from Slootdorp-Bouwlust, quite similar to around 0.25  m. Though less sturdy, it recalls the palisades the Swifterbant hut plan found at Swifterbant-S3 (De Roever found at Medel. 2004, appendix 1). 174 Un ex pe cted di mensions of a Swif terbant settlement at Medel-D e Roeskamp ( the N etherlan ds) Medel-De Roeskamp sheds new light on the neo- Arora / Zerl 2003: S.-K. Arora / T. Zerl, Jüchen, Rhein- lithisation of the western part of the North European Kreis Neuss. Bischheimer Siedlungen – archäobotani- Plain, with site permanency in SW2 being arguably sche Ergebnisse und ein fraglicher Perlenfund. Archäo- the final outcome of the neolithisation process. Medel- logie im Rheinland 2003, 48 – 50. De Roeskamp is a clear example of a settlement fully Arora / Zerl 2004: S.-K. Arora / T. Zerl, Jüchen, Rhein- adapted to a sedentary Neolithic way of life in the Kreis Neuss. Modell eines Bischheimer Hofplatzes. western parts of the North European Plain, where fish- Archäologie im Rheinland 2004, 47 – 49. ing, hunting and gathering continued to play a role in Bernardini et al. 2012: F. Bernardini / A. de Min / D. daily life well into the Bronze Age. In the Dutch river Lenaz / P. Šída / C. Tuniz / E. Montagnari Kokelj, area, the neolithisation process had thus reached a Shaft-hole axes from Caput Adriae made from amphi- mature stage already in the period 4,300 – 4,000 calBC. bole-rich metabasites: evidence of connections between northeastern Italy and central Europe during fifth mil- lennium BC. Archaeometry 54, 2012, 427 – 4 41. Acknowledgements Bersu 1936: G. Bersu, Rössener Wohnhäuser vom Goldberg, We are much obliged to the Industrieschap Medel for O. A. Neresheim, Württemberg, Germania 20, 1936, financing the archaeological investigations at Medel- 229 – 243. De Roeskamp and in particular to Ilse Schuuring Boshoven 2012: E. H. Boshoven, Plangebied Medel 2 te Ech- (Municipality of Tiel) who with great tenacity put teld; gemeente Neder-Betuwe; archeologisch vooronder- the archaeology of Medel on the map. We thank the zoek: een inventariserend veldonderzoek (verkennend organisation board of the workshop ‘Stone Age bor- en karterend booronderzoek). RAAP-rapport 2551 derland experience – Neolithic and Mesolithic parallel (Weesp 2012). societies in the North European Plain’ (20 to 22 May Cappers / Raemaekers 2008: R. T. J. Cappers / D. C. M. 2019, Landesmuseum Hannover) for the opportunity Raemaekers, Cereal cultivation at Swifterbant? Neo- to attend and to present our paper. Many thanks to lithic Wetland Farming on the North European Plain. Erik Drenth for his critical remarks on the text. Current Anthropology 49(3), 2008, 385 – 4 02. Christensen et al. 2006: A. M. Christensen / P. M. Holm / U. Schuessler / J. Petrasch, Indications of a major References Neolithic trade route – anarchaeometric geochemical and Sr, Pb isotope study on amphibolitic raw material Amkreutz 2013: L. W. S. W. Amkreutz, Persistent traditions. from present day Europe. Applied Geochemistry 21, A long-term perspective on communities in the process 2006, 1635 – 55. of Neolithisation in the Lower Rhine Area (5500 – 2 500 Crombé et al. 2011: P. Crombé / M. Boudin / M. van Stry- cal BC). PhD thesis, University of Leiden (Leiden 2013). donck, Swifterbant pottery in the Scheldt Basin and the Ten Anscher 2012: T. J. ten Anscher, Leven met de Vecht. emergence of the earliest indigenous pottery in the sandy Schokland-P14 en de Noordoostpolder in het Neolithi- lowlands of Belgium. In: S. Hartz / F.Lüth / T. Terberger cum en de Bronstijd. PhD thesis, University of Amster- (eds.), Early Pottery in the Baltic – Dating, Origin and dam (Zutphen 2012). Social Context. International Workshop at Schleswig Ten Anscher 2015: T. J. ten Anscher, Under the radar: Swift- from 20 th to 21th October 2006. Bericht der Römisch- erbant and the origins of the Funnel Beaker culture. Germanischen Kommision 89, 2008 (2011), 467 – 4 83. In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / Devriendt 2014: I. Devriendt, Swifterbant Stones, The T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and Neolithic stone and flint industry at Swifterbant (the the Neolithisation of the Northern European Lowlands Netherlands. Groningen Archaeological Studies 25. (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im PhD thesis, University of Groningen (Groningen 2014). Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 335 – 357. Dohrn-Ihmig 1983: M. Dohrn-Ihmig, Neolithische Sied- Arora 2000: S.-K. Arora, Jüchen, Kreis Neuss. Die ersten lungen der Rössener Kultur in der Niederrheinischen Großbauten der Bischheimer Kultur bei Garzweiler Bucht. Materialien zur Allgemeinen und Vergleichenden entdeckt. Archäologie im Rheinland 2000, 35 – 37. Archäologie 21 (München 1983). Arora 2001: S.-K. Arora, Jüchen-Garzweiler, Kreis Neuss. Drenth et al. 2014: E. Drenth / T. J. ten Anscher / J. C. G. Ein weiterer Bischheimer Grossbau bei Garzweiler ent- van Kampen / G. R. Nobles / P. J. A. Stokkel, Huis- deckt. Archäologie im Rheinland 2001, 31 – 33. plattegronden uit het Laat- en Midden-Neolithicum in Arora 2004: S.-K. Arora, Jüchen, Rhein-Kreis Neuss. Hof- Nederland. In: A. G. Lange / E. M. Theunissen / J. H. plätze der Bischheimer Kultur im Tagebau Garzweiler. C. Deeben / J. van Doesburg / J. Bouwmeester / T. de Archäologie im Rheinland 2004, 45 – 47. Th e o J. te n A n s c h er an d Sebasti aan Kn i ppen be rg 175 Groot (eds.), Huisplattegronden in Nederland. Archeo- Kampffmeyer 1991: U. Kampffmeyer, Die Keramik der Sied- logische sporen van het huis (Amersfoort 2014) 61 – 96. lung Hüde I am Dümmer. Untersuchungen zur Neolithi- Gehasse 1995: E. F. Gehasse, Ecologisch-archeologisch on- sierung des nordwestdeutschen Flachlands, I–IV. PhD derzoek van het Neolithicum en de Vroege Bronstijd in thesis, University of Göttingen (Göttingen 1991). de Noordoostpolder met de nadruk op vindplaats P14 Koot et al. 2008: J. M. Koot / L. Bruning / R. A. Houkes gevolgd door een overzicht van de bewoningsgeschiedenis (eds.), Ypenburg-Locatie 4. Een nederzetting met graf- van de bestaanseconomie binnen de Holocene Delta. veld uit het midden-neolithicum in het West-Nederland- PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam (Amsterdam 1995). se kustgebied (Leiden 2008). Van Gijn et al. 2001a: A. L. van Gijn / Y. Lammers-Keijsers / Kroezenga et al. 1991: P. Kroezenga / J. N. Lanting / R. J. R. Houkes, Vuursteen. In L. P. Louwe Kooijmans (ed.), Kosters / W. Prummel / J. P. de Roever, Vondsten van Hardinxveld-Giessendam Polderweg. Een mesolithisch de Swifterbantcultuur uit het Voorste Diep bij Bronne- jachtkamp in het rivierengebied (5500 – 5000 v. Chr.). ger (Dr.). Paleo-Aktueel 2, 1991, 32 – 36. Rapportage Archeologische Monumentenzorg 83 Louwe Kooijmans 1980: L. P. Louwe Kooijmans, De midden- (Amersfoort 2001). neolithische vondstgroep van het Vormer bij Wychen en Van Gijn et al. 2001b: A. L. van Gijn / V. Beugnier / Y. het cultuurpatroon rond de zuidelijke Noordzee circa Lammers-Keijsers, Vuursteen. In: L. P. Louwe Kooi- 3000 v.Chr. Oudheidkundige mededelingen uit het Rijks­ jmans (ed.), Hardinxveld-Giessendam De Bruin, Een museum van Oudheden te Leiden 61, 1980, 113 – 208. kampplaats uit het Laat-Mesolithicum en het begin van Louwe Kooijmans 1985: L. P. Louwe Kooijmans, Sporen de Swifterbant-cultuur (5500 – 4 450 v. Chr.). Rapportage in het land. De Nederlandse delta in de prehistorie Archeologische Monumentenzorg 88 (Amersfoort 2001). (Amsterdam 1985). Gleser 1992: R. Gleser, Bischheim und Schwieberdingen im Louwe Kooijmans 2001a: L. P. Louwe Kooijmans (ed.), mittleren Neckarraum. Ein Beitrag zur Chronologie und Hardinxveld-Giessendam Polderweg. Een mesolithisch stilistischen Entwicklung der Epi-Rössener Keramik. jachtkamp in het rivierengebied (5500 – 5000 v. Chr.). Saarbrücker Studien und Materialien zur Altertumskun- Rapportage Archeologische Monumentenzorg 83 de 1, 1992, 17 – 59. (Amersfoort 2001). Gleser 2012: R. Gleser, Zeitskalen, stilistische Tendenzen Louwe Kooijmans 2001b: L. P. Louwe Kooijmans (ed.), Har- und Regionalität des 5.Jahrtausends in den Altsiedel- dinxveld-Giessendam De Bruin, Een kampplaats uit het landschaften zwischen Mosel und Morava. In: R. Gle- Laat-Mesolithicum en het begin van de Swifterbant-cul- ser / V. Becker (eds.), Mitteleuropa im 5. Jahrtausend tuur (5500 – 4 450 v. Chr.). Rapportage Archeologische vor Christus: Beiträge zur internationalen Konferenz Monumentenzorg 88 (Amersfoort 2001). in Münster 2010 (Berlin 2012) 35 – 104. Louwe Kooijmans 2007: L. P. Louwe Kooijmans, Nogmaals Harlow et al. 2014: G. E. Harlow / S. S. Sorensen / V. B. ‘Hazendonk’. In: J. H. M. Bloemers (ed.), Tussen D26 Sisson, Jade. In: L. A. Groat (ed.), The Geology of Gem en P14: Jan Albert Bakker 65 jaar (Amsterdam 2007) Deposits. Short Course Handbook Series 44. Minera- 147 – 180. logical Association of Canada (Quebec 2014) 305 – 374. Louwe Kooijmans / Jongste 2006: L. P. Louwe Kooijmans / Hogestijn / Peeters 2001: J. W. H. Hogestijn / J. H. M. P. F. B. Jongste (eds.), Schipluiden. A neolithic settle- Peeters (eds.), De mesolithische en vroeg-neolithische ment on the Dutch North Sea caoast c. 3500 cal BC, vindplaats Hoge Vaart-A27 (Flevoland). Rapportage Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia 37/38 (Leiden 2006). Archeologische Monumentenzorg 79 (Amersfoort 2001). Louwe Kooijmans et al. 2016: L. P. Louwe Kooijmans / Houkes / Bruning 2008: R. A. Houkes / L. Bruning, Grond- T. Hamburg / L. Smits, Burial and non-burial at Late sporen en structuren. In: J. M. Koot / L. Bruning / R. A. Mesolithic Hardinxveld (NL). In: J. Grünberg / B. Houkes (eds.), Ypenburg-Locatie 4. Een nederzetting Gramsch / J. Orschiedt (eds.), Mesolithic burials – ­R ites, met grafveld uit het midden-neolithicum in het West– symbols and social organisation of early postglacial Nederlandse kustgebied (Leiden 2008) 79 – 110 communities. Tagungen des Landesmuseums für Vor- Huisman et al. 2009: D. J. Huisman / A. G. Jongmans / D. C. geschichte Halle 13 (Halle 2016) 593 – 6 07. M. Raemaekers, Investigating Neolithic land use in Molthof / Baetsen this volume: H. M. Molthof / S. Baet- Swifterbant (NL) using micromorphological techniques. sen, Two new settlements at Nieuwegein-Het Klooster, Catena 78, 2009, 185 – 197. the Netherlands: preliminary site interpretation and Huisman / Raemaekers 2014: D. J. Huisman / D. C. M. overview of human remains. Raemaekers, Systematic cultivation of the Swifterbant Müller 2017: J. Müller, Großsteingräber – Grabenwerke – wetlands (The Netherlands). Evidence from Neolithic Langhügel. Frühe Monumentalbauten Mitteleuropas. tillage marks (c. 4300 – 4000 cal BC). Journal of Archaeo- Sonderheft Archäologie in Deutschland (Darmstadt logical Science 49, 2014, 572 – 584. 2017). 176 Un ex pe cted di mensions of a Swif terbant settlement at Medel-D e Roeskamp ( the N etherlan ds) Norde / Van Renswoude 2014: E. H. L. D. Norde / J. van M. van der Wal, A biography in stone. Typology, age, Renswoude, Van grafheuvel tot boerenerf. Plangebied function and meaning of Early Neolithic perforated Medel 2, gemeente Tiel. Archeologisch onderzoek: pro- wedges in the Netherlands. Groningen Archaeological efsleuven. RAAP-rapport 2897 (Weesp 2014). Studies 14 (Groningen 2011). Out 2009: W. A. Out, Sowing the seed? Human impact and De Roever 1979: J. P. de Roever, The pottery from Swifter- plant subsistence in Dutch wetlands during the Late Me- bant – Dutch Ertebølle? (Swifterbant Contributions 11), solithic an de Early and Middle Neolithic (5500 – 3400 Helinium 19, 1979, 13 – 36. cal BC). Archaeological Series Leiden University 18. De Roever 2004: J. P. de Roever, Swifterbant-aardewerk. PhD thesis, University of Leiden (Leiden 2009). Een analyse van de neolithische nederzettingen bij Peeters 2007: J. H. M. Peeters, Hoge Vaart-A27 in con- Swifterbant, 5e millenium voor Christus. PhD thesis, text: towards a model of mesolithic-neolithic land use University of Groningen. Groningen Archaeological dynamics as a framework for archaeological heritage Studies 2 (Groningen 2004). management. PhD-thesis, University of Amsterdam Schepers 2014: M. Schepers, Wet wealthy worlds: The (Amersfoort 2007). environment of the Swifterbant ń system during the Peeters / Devriendt 2016: J. H. M. Peeters / I. Devriendt, Neolithic occupation (4300 – 4 000 cal BC). Journal of Swifterbant-cultuur. In: L. W. S. W. Amkreutz / F. Brou- Archaeolgy in the Low Countries 5, 2014, 79 – 105. nen / J. Deeben / R. Machiels / M. F. van Oorsouw / B. Schwarz-Mackensen / Schneider 1986: G. Schwarz- Smit (eds.), Vuursteen verzameld. Over het zoeken en Mackensen / W. Schneider, Petrographie und Her- onderzoeken van steentijdvondsten en -vindplaatsen. kunft des Rohmaterials neolithischer Steinbeile und Nederlandse Archeologische Rapporten 50 (Amersfoort -äxte im nördlichen Harzvorland, Archäologisches 2016) 150 – 155. Korrespondenzblatt 16, 1986, 29 – 4 4. Pétrequin et al. 2012: P. Pétrequin / S. Cassen / M. Errera / Šída / Kachlík 2009: P. Šída / V. Kachlík, Geological L. Klassen / A. Sheridan / A.-M. Pétrequin, JADE. setting, petrology and mineralogy of metabasites in a Grandes haches alpines du Néolithique européen, Ve au thermal aureole of Tanvald granite (northern Bohemia) IVe millénaires av. J.-C. Cahiers de la MSHE Ledoux 17. used for the manufacture of Neolithic tools, Journal of Dynamiques territoriales 6 (Besançon 2012). Geosciences 54, 2009, 269 – 87. Prummel / Van der Sanden 1995: W. Prummel / W. A. B. Sørensen 2015: L. Sørensen, Hunters and farmers in the van der Sanden, Runderhoorns uit de Drentse venen. North – the transformation of pottery traditions and Nieuwe Drentse Volksalmanak 112, 1995, 8 – 55. distribution patterns of key artefacts during the Meso- Raemaekers 1997: D. C. M. Raemaekers, Features. In: D. C. lithic and Neolithic transition in southern Scandinavia. M. Raemaekers / C. C. Bakels / B. Beerenhout / A. L. In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / T. van Gijn / K. Hänninen / S. Molenaar / D. Paalman / Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and the M. Verbruggen / C. Vermeeren, Wateringen 4: A Sett- Neolithisation of the Northern European Lowlands lement of the Middle Neolithic Hazendonk 3 Group (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im in the Dutch Coastal Area. Analaecta Praehistorica Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 385 – 432. Leidensia 29, 1997, 146 – 151. Teetaert et al. 2020: D. Teetaert / M. Boudin / E. Goemae- Raemaekers 1999: D. C. M. Raemaekers, The Articulation re / P. Crombé, Reliability of AMS 14 C dates of moss of a ‘New Neolithic’. The meaning of the Swifterbant temper preserved in Neolithic pottery from the Scheldt Culture for the process of neolithisation in the western river valley (Belgium). Radiocarbon 2020, 1 – 12. part of the North European plain (4900 – 3400 BC). PhD Ufkes 1997: A. Ufkes, Edelhertgewei uit natte context in thesis, University of Leiden. Archaeological Studies Drenthe. Nieuwe Drentse Volksalmanak 114, 1997, Leiden University 3 (Leiden 1999). 28 – 56. Raemaekers 2003: D. C. M. Raemaekers, Cutting a long Vanmontfort 2004: B. Vanmontfort, Converging Worlds. story short? The process of neolithization in the Dutch The Neolithisation of the Scheldt basin during the late delta re-examined. Antiquity 77, 2003, 740 – 748. fifth and early fourth millenium cal BC. PhD thesis, Raemaekers 2019: D.  C. M. Raemaekers, Taboo? The Catholic university of Leuven (Leuven 2004). process of neolithisation in the Dutch wetlands re-exa- Verhart 2010: L. B. M. Verhart, De geur van veen. Vlaar- mined (5000 – 3400 cal BC). In: M. Gleser / D. Hofmann dingen en de ontdekking van de Vlaardingen-cultuur (eds), Contacts, Boundaries & Innovation. Exploring (Utrecht 2010). developed Neolithic societies in central Europe and Zvelebil 1986: M. Zvelebil, Mesolithic prelude and beyond (Leiden 2019), 91 – 102. Neolithic revolution. In: M. Zvelebil (ed.), Hunters in Raemaekers et al. 2011: D. C. M. Raemaekers / J. Geuverink / transition. Mesolithic societies of temperate Eurasia M. Schepers / B. P. Tuin / E. van der Lagemaat / and their transition to farming (Cambridge 1986) 5 – 16. Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 , 177 – 184) 177 Swifterbant and the Late Mesolithic in Westphalia Bernhard Stapel Abstract While the Westphalian loess belt was already settled by farmers of the Linear Pottery culture by the 6th millennium calBC, the introduction of a Neolithic way of living in the area north of the river Lippe was significantly delayed. First Final Mesolithic sites indicate the presence of contemporaneous hunter-gatherers. In the 5th and 4th millennia calBC a few isolated finds from the Muenster Embayment show contacts to cultures of the adjacent northern lowlands. Keywords Final Mesolithic of northern Westphalia, neolithisation of the Muenster Embayment Zusammenfassung Ab dem 6. Jahrtausend calBC wurden die westfälischen Lössbörden bereits von den Bauern der Linear- bandkeramik besiedelt. Dagegen erfolgte nördlich der Lippe die Einführung der neolithischen Lebensweise deutlich verzögert. Zunächst zeigen endmesolithische Fundplätze in diesem Raum ein Weiterleben von Jäger-/Sammler-Gruppen an. Im 5. und 4. Jahrtausend calBC deuten einige wenige Einzelfunde aus der Münsterländer Tieflandbucht Verbindungen zu Kulturen des nördlich anschließenden Flachlandgebiets an. Introduction from surface collections. Excavations on Westpha- lian Mesolithic sites have been rather the excep- Westphalia is situated at the southern fringe of the tion so far. The main areas of distribution are in north European plain. Large areas in the south and the southwest of the area and along the river Ems. east are part of the German central upland. Only But the picture is surely determined by activities of the Muenster Embayment in the northwest and the amateur archaeologists and might not correspond to foothills of the Wiehengebirge are to be attributed prehistoric reality. A decline in the number of Late to the northern lowlands. Mesolithic sites compared with that of the earlier Since the 6th millennium calBC the loess belt in Mesolithic period cannot be observed. the Hellweg region and east Westphalia had been set- One of the few excavations has been conducted tled by farmers of the Linear Pottery culture (LBK) in Vreden-Stadtlohner Straße (Kreis Borken), in the and later of Middle Neolithic cultures of Danubian west of the Münsterland, near the Dutch-German tradition. At first glance, the presence of contempo- border (Fig. 1; Stapel 2013a, 220 – 2 21). A small raneous Final Mesolithic hunter-gatherers in West- test trench excavated in 2001 and 2002 yielded a phalia seems to be doubtful. However, there are a layer containing Mesolithic artefacts at the base of handful of hints pointing to the presence of such a Plaggen soil. The assemblage consists of approxi- groups in the northern Münsterland region. This mately 1,100 pieces of flint (Fig. 2). The artefacts are scanty evidence is represented by a few stray finds usually of limited size. Significant components of from sandpits and older excavations, which reveal the assemblage are regular blades and blade cores. connections to the northern lowlands. Modified tools are rare, and include a few retouched and utilized blades and flakes, a scraper, and three microliths of which one is a symmetrical trapeze.1 Late and Final Mesolithic sites At first glance it seems to be a quite ‘normal’ Late in northwestern Westphalia Mesolithic material. Surprisingly, the AMS-dating of (7,100– 5,300/4,750 BC) two charred hazelnut shells found together with the In the northwestern part of Westphalia there are about 90 Late Mesolithic sites represented by the 1 In general, there are similarities to the Swifterbant assem- presence of trapeze microliths (Stapel 2013a, 219 blage of Hüde I, Dümmer, Lower Saxony (Stapel 1991, Abb. 279). The majority of our information comes 153 – 155). The micro point is an exception to this. 178 Swif terbant and the L ate Mesolithic in Westp h alia Fig. 1 Map of main sites discussed in the text. 1 Vreden-Stadtlohner Straße; 2 Greven-Sandgrube Schencking; 3 Rosendahl-Osterwick; 4 Nottuln-Uphoven; 5 Oerlinghausen-Lipperreihe Heisterbrink; 6 Petershagen-Hävern; 7 Hagen Blätterhöhle (graphics: M. Kloss, draft B. Stapel). artefacts revealed unexpectedly late results, pointing on blades. Microliths are represented by trapezes, to an occupation of the site at about 4,900 calBC (GrA micro points, and micro burins. A few blades with 21396: 6000 ± 50 BP, 4897 ± 62 calBC), some 400 oblique retouched end and some scrapers should also years after the start of the Neolithic in Westphalia. be mentioned (Gehlen et  al. 2017, 20 – 21 Abb.  7 – 8). But Vreden is not the only Late Mesolithic site Similarities to Vreden can be noted above all in the of such an age. Birgit Gehlen has been examining microliths, in the manufacturing technique, and in materials from east Westphalia as part of her research the small dimensions of the artefacts (Gehlen et al. project on Mesolithic sites in North Rhine-Westpha- 2017, 26). An AMS dating of charcoal confirmed a lia. One of the surveyed sites is Oerlinghausen-Lip- Final Mesolithic age of about 5,000 BC (Col 2190.1: perreihe Heisterbrink (Kreis Lippe; Gehlen et al. 6080 ± 47 BP, 5005 ± 67 calBC). 2 2017, 16 – 29). In October 1927 this location had been excavated by amateur archaeologists. Their report described two artefact scatters or concentrations sur- rounding a pit with charcoal filling, possibly a hearth. 2 In east Westphalia there are a few Mesolithic sites with even The assemblage consists of over 860 silex arte- later radiocarbon dates (Banghard / Gehlen 2013, 211). The facts of small dimension. The silex industry is based reliability of these dates is under discussion. B e rn h a rd Sta p e l 179 Fig. 2 Vreden-Stadtlohner Straße. Flint artefacts: 1 – 3 microliths; 4 – 6 blade fragments; 7 – 8 scapers; 9 core (drawings: J. Piesniewski and P. Altevers). The two sites probably reveal a Final Meso- T-shaped antler axes in Westphalia lithic cluster in the Muenster Embayment. These hunter-gatherers lived in northern Westphalia at T-shaped antler axes represent an artefact category a time when agricultural communities of the LBK often discussed concerning the transition from Fi- and early Rössen cultures were settled in the loess nal Mesolithic to Neolithic in northwestern Europe. zone of the Hellweg region and east Westphalia, Over 20 specimens from twelve sites are known from which is situated 80 – 100 km further south (Poll- Westphalia (Stapel 2013b, 228 – 231 Abb. 290). These mann et al. in prep.). During the later Middle Neo- all are single finds dredged from river sediments of lithic (4,750 – 4,400 calBC) the settlement area of the Ems, Lippe, and Weser rivers. Radiocarbon dates the cultures of Danubian tradition was extended to for Westphalian specimens show a range from 5,000 the north, with Nottuln-Uphoven (Kreis Coesfeld) to 3,500 calBC. This corresponds to previous dating forming the first Neolithic outpost in the lowlands results, e. g. from Belgium (Crombé et al. 1999, 116 of northwestern Germany (Groer 2010; 2013). table 2). 180 Swif terbant and the L ate Mesolithic in Westp h alia Because T-shaped antler axes were used both by Final Mesolithic hunter-gatherers and Neolithic farmers, an unambiguous cultural assignment is only exceptionally possible. 3 This is perhaps true for an antler axe from Greven-Sandgrube Schencking (Kreis Steinfurt; Stapel 2013b, 229 Abb. 291). The sand pit exploiting Holocene and Pleistocene sand is located in the Ems floodplain. Since the 1970s, a bulk of archaeological finds dating from the Middle Palaeolithic to the late Middle Ages has been recov- ered there by amateur archaeologists, including this object. The dating of the T-shaped antler-axe from Greven (MAMS 11799: 6027 ± 30 BP, 4898 ± 42 calBC) is very similar to the results from Vreden and Heisterbrink. Since the item is older than the begin- ning of the Rössen settlement in Nottuln-Uphoven, it should probably be attributed to Final Mesolithic groups. Swifterbant in Westphalia? The northwestern European lowlands seem to have been settled by cultures of hunter-gatherer descent until the end of the 5th millennium calBC or even later; represented by the Swifterbant culture west of the river Elbe (Louwe Kooijmans 2007, 306), and the Ertebølle culture north and east (Hartz et al. 2007, 574 fig. 4). With late radiocarbon dates for Westphalian Mesolithic assemblages it may be possible to detect influences from the north or west Fig. 3 Greven-Sandgrube Schencking. Scapula with circular cu- touts (photo: S. Brentführer). in this region. Two recently found artefacts from Greven-Sandgrube Schencking have initiated a new discussion on this issue. 1994/1995, 36 – 38 fig. 20a/b). There it was possible In 2013, the operator of the sand pit handed over to prove that these scapulae are waste products of an unexpected piece of worked bone to the amateur bone ring production. Further roughouts for disc or archaeologist Gregor Laufer. It is a 47.5 cm long and rings and waste pieces have also been published for 24 cm wide scapula of an aurochs (Fig. 3). Two cir- sites with Swifterbant material, e. g. Hüde I, Dümmer cular discs with a diameter of 7.3 cm and 8.8 cm (Landkreis Diepholz; Deichmüller 1969, 32 – 33 have been cut out of the bone. At the damaged end Abb. 2,1.5). there are signs that a third disc has been obtained, We owe the study by Lutz Klassen on the transi- too (Stapel / Schlösser 2014, 46 – 49). A 14C-dating tion from the Mesolithic to the Neolithic in south- yielded an age of 4,345 ± 9 calBC (MAMS 18466: ern Scandinavia a distribution map of this artefact 5488 ± 24 BP). Comparable scapulae with circular group, which is based on preliminary work by Dan- cuts were not known from Westphalia before. ish colleagues (Klassen 2004, 126 – 128 Abb. 96; cf. However, there are good parallels from the Vang Petersen 1984, fig. 13). This type of bone ring distribution area of the north German and Danish production, which can be seen in the scapulae with Ertebølle culture, e. g. a scapula with three cutouts circular cuts, seems to be closely linked to Final from the site Ringkloster in Jutland, DK (Andersen Mesolithic groups, whose subsistence was based on hunting, fishing, and gathering. In contrast, no comparable finds are known from contemporaneous west and south German Neolithic farming cultures. 3 It is perhaps possible to distinguish between Mesolithic and Neolithic T-shaped antler axes on the basis of aspects of the The Greven specimen is the most southern find of manufacturing process (David 2019, 479). its type so far (Fig. 4). B e rn h a rd Sta p e l 181 Fig. 4 Distribution map of scapulae with cutouts. Greven-Sandgrube Schencking is marked in red (graphics M. Kloss, after Klassen 2004, Abb. 96). Furthermore, a ceramic fragment in the collec- tion of archaeological remains discovered in the sand pit over the past decades might belong to a similar cultural context. It had already been picked up a few years ago by another amateur archaeologist, Man- fred Schlösser. The characteristics of this sherd differ markedly from those of the Iron Age ceramics oth- erwise found there. The rim sherd has a decoration with fingertip and fingernail impressions on both the Fig.  5 Greven-Sandgrube Schencking. Decorated rim sherd outside and the interior of the rim (Fig. 5). A food (photo: P. Altevers). crust offered the possibility of radiocarbon dating. The result pointed to the 43rd century calBC (Col 2679,1,2: 5,395 ± 40 BP).4 Therefore it seems quite possible to The shoulder blade is a waste product and can look for parallels in the Swifterbant culture. therefore hardly be interpreted as an import find from the north in a region otherwise dominated by Neolithic cultures such as the Rössen culture. There seems to be much to suggest that Final Mesolithic 4  Radiocarbon dating in cooperation with B. Gehlen and J. Rethemeyer, University of Cologne. We are still waiting for hunters of the Swifterbant culture lived here along the results of an isotopic evaluation concerning the reliability the river Ems. of the date. A correction for reservoir effects is possible. 182 Swif terbant and the L ate Mesolithic in Westp h alia Fig. 6 Rosendahl-Osterwick. Sherds with cord impressions (photo: S. Brentführer). In the assemblage of Hüde I there are pottery by Daan Raemaekers in his analysis of the late Swift- vessels with a decoration on the inside and outside erbant remains of Wetsingermaar (Raemaekers et al. of the rim (Kampffmeyer 1991, Taf. 7,691; 22,3810; 2011/2012, 9 – 10 fig. 8) or by Theo ten Anscher (Ten 36,9114; 57,27238; 64,30147). Position and technique Anscher 2012, 123) for Schokland-P14. Of course, of the decoration vary, so that these are similar, but some examples from Hüde I (Kampffmeyer 1991, not identically decorated potsherds. Nevertheless, Taf. 58,27412) and Schokland-P14 (Ten Anscher it seems possible to connect the Greven rim sherd 2012, 117 fig. 5.19,2 – 4) show a great similarity to with this material. the Osterwick pottery. On the sites Swifterbant S3 and S61 (De Roever For his publication of the causewayed camps 2004, 90 fig. 19a; 95 fig. 24i) as well as Schokland- of Soest and Nottuln, Benedikt Knoche prepared P14 (Ten Anscher 2012, 71 fig. 5.1,149) we can see a map showing the distribution of this pottery with pottery similar to the Westphalian ceramic fragment. cord impressions (Knoche 2008, 148 – 149 Abb. 5.20). Decoration on the interior of the rim is certainly He discussed this material in the wider frame of the to be noted for the Swifterbant culture. Not least Early Neolithic of the north European plain. because of the radiometric dating an assignment to However, I consider it justified to assign it to the Swifterbant culture seems plausible. the late Swifterbant culture or, according to the ter- However, it should not be concealed that decora- minology for Schokland-P14 by Theo ten Anscher, tion of the outer and inner rim also occurs at Rössen the Pre-Drouwen phase (Ten Anscher 2012, 121). sites, such as Soest-Deiringsen/Ruploh (Kreis Soest; Thus, at a second site, indications of contact with Günther 1976, Taf. 11,19). groups from the northwestern lowlands, or perhaps A second site with affinities to population even the presence of such groups in the Münsterland, groups in the north European plain has certainly might be suggested. been known for quite some time: Rosendahl-Oster­ Moreover, in Osterwick relationships are also wick (Kreis Coesfeld). Rescue excavations were car- visible that point further northeast. One such item is ried out there from 1968 to 1972. During this time a vessel that Willms (1982, 10 – 11 Taf. 18 F.253) as- remains of a Michelsberg III phase settlement site signed to the Michelsberg settlement. Klassen (2004, were documented. Christoph Willms published the 186 – 187 Abb. 119 A) interprets it as a funnel necked material (Willms 1982). However, a small number beaker of his Siggeneben Süd/Stengade II group. of ceramics present at this site did not fit into the Mi- This would suggest connections to the Early Funnel chelsberg III spectrum due to their texture; these he Beaker culture in Schleswig-Holstein and Denmark. assigned to the Early Funnel Beaker culture (Willms Klassen proposed a similar interpretation for a frag- 1982, 21). ment from a sandpit in Petershagen-Hävern (Kreis Concerning our question, the important part Minden-Lübbecke), near the River Weser (Klassen of the assemblage is a number of sherds with cord 2004, 186 – 187 Abb. 119D). impressions, which were recovered as stray finds If one maps the few hints for contact with the (Fig. 6). This material has been discussed earlier, e. g. Swifterbant culture in northern Westphalia together B e rn h a rd Sta p e l 183 with the also documented settlements of the Rössen, hunter-gatherers of the north European plain and the Bischheim, and Michelsberg cultures of the 5th and Neolithic farmers established in the loess belt. 4th millennia calBC, a picture emerges that suggests a close coexistence of the different groups (Stapel / Schlösser 2014, 48 Abb. 5). For example, the sand References pit in Greven-Sandgrube Schencking is barely 30 km away from the settlement site of Neolithic farmers in Andersen 1994/1995: S. H. Andersen, Ringkloster. Ertebølle Nottuln-Uphoven. However, evidence is very limited. trappers and wild boar hunters in eastern Jutland. A In this respect, a second possibility may be conceiv- survey. Journal of Danish Archaeology 12, 1994/1995, able. If the chronology of the Nottuln-Uphoven site 13 – 59. based on 19 14C-dates is examined in detail, a hiatus Ten Anscher 2012: T.  J. Ten Anscher, Leven met de can be observed between the Rössen-Bischheim and Vecht. Schokland-P14 en de Noordoostpolder in het the Michelberg III phases (Groer 2013, 145 Abb. 21). Neolithicum en de Bronstijd (Zutphen 2012). The dated Swifterbant finds of Greven-Sandgrube Banghard / Gehlen 2013: K. Banghard / B. Gehlen, Das Schencking fall into this period. Mesolithikum in Ostwestfalen-Lippe. In: M. Baales / It is also possible that the frontier between the H.-O. Pollmann / B. Stapel, Westfalen in der Alt- und descendants of the Mesolithic hunter-gatherers and Mittelsteinzeit (Münster 2013) 207 – 213. the Neolithic farmers might have shifted again and Crombé et al. 1999: P. Crombé /M. Van Strydonck / V. Hen- again. So, at one time representatives of the Rössen dirx, AMS-Datings of Antler Mattocks from the Schelde and later the Michelsberg culture moved into the River in Northern Belgium. Notae Praehistoricae 19, Muenster Embayment, but after the abandonment of 1999, 111 – 119. these settlements, descendants of Mesolithic hunters David 2019: É. David, Inquiry into Mesolithic Hafting-Techno- returned to this area. logy – An Exceptional Miniature “T-shaped” Axe from Concerning Mesolithic/Neolithic parallel soci- Friesack, Brandenburg. In: M. Baales / C. Pasda (eds.), eties in Westphalia, recently the Blätterhöhle near “All der holden Hügel ist keiner mir fremd…” Festschrift Hagen has been brought to the fore. During the Late zum 65. Geburtstag von Claus-Joachim Kind. Universi- Neolithic the cave was used for funerals. Based on tätsforschungen zur prähistorischen Archäologie 327 isotope and palaeogenetic analyses, it was possible (Bonn 2019) 479 – 484. to differentiate two groups within this population, Deichmüller 1969: J. Deichmüller, Die neolithische Moor- which buried their dead there together: one group siedlung Hüde I am Dümmer, Kr. Grafschaft Diepholz. that used agricultural products and can be geneti- Vorläufiger Abschlußbericht. Neue Ausgrabungen und cally assigned to Neolithic farmers, and a second Forschungen in Niedersachsen 4, 1969, 28 – 36. group that lived mainly by fishing and can be ad- De Roever 2004: J.P. De Roever, Swifterbant-aardewerk. Een dressed as descendants of Mesolithic hunter-gather- analyse van de neolithische nederzettingen bij Swifter- ers (Orschiedt et al. 2014, 44). The latter population bant, 5e millenium voor Christus. Groningen Archeolo- is so far archaeologically completely invisible. Cur- gische Studies 2 (Groningen 2004). rently it cannot be clarified whether these people are Gehlen et al. 2017: B. Gehlen / W. Schön / K. Banghard / the descendants of local hunter-gatherers, or whether H.-D. Zutz, Ein endmesolithisch-neolithischer Fundplatz this group had immigrated from the north European auf dem Heisterbrink in der Senne im ehemaligen Amt plain (Orschiedt et al. in prep., 206). Maybe they Brackwede. Archäologie in Ostwestfalen 13, 2017, 16 – 29. were the descendants of the hunter-gatherers who Groer 2010: C. Groer, Neolithisierung im Münsterland: Neu- left their bone artefacts on the river Ems. es zum Siedlungsplatz von Nottuln- Uphoven. Archäolo- gie in Westfalen-Lippe 2009 (2010), 169 – 172. Groer 2013: C. Groer, Neolithisierungsprozesse in Nord- Conclusions westdeutschland. Tradition, Innovation und Adaptati- There is so far no excavated site of the Swifterbant on zwischen 6000 und 3500 v. Chr. PhD thesis, Univ. culture in Westphalia. However, there are indications Münster (Münster 2013): http://miami.uni-muenster.de/ for contacts with the north European plain, even for Record/5d5878d3 – 8e74 – 4c92-b319 – 69b69ed23f82 (last the presence of descendants of Mesolithic hunter- accessed: 16.08.2019). gatherers in the northern part of this region. Northern Günther 1976: K. Günther, Die jungsteinzeitliche Siedlung Westphalia might have been a contact zone for the Deiringsen/Ruploh in der Soester Börde. Bodenaltertü- exchange of information between the descendants of mer Westfalen 16 (Münster 1976). 184 Swif terbant and the L ate Mesolithic in Westp h alia Hartz et al. 2007: S. Hartz / H. Lübke / T. Terberger, From Pollmann et al. in prep.: H.-O. Pollmann / M. Baales / B. fish and seal to sheep and cattle: new research into the Stapel, Die ersten Bauern in Mitteleuropa – Die Line- process of neolithisation in northern Germany. In: A. arbandkeramik (LBK). In: M. Baales / H.-O. Pollmann / Whittle / V. Cummings (eds.), Going Over. The Meso- B. Stapel (Bearb.), Westfalen in der Jungsteinzeit. (in lithic-Neolithic Transition in North-West Europe. Procee- prep.) 51 – 56. dings of the British Academy 144 (Oxford 2007) 287 – 309. Raemaekers et al. 2011/2012: D. C. M. Raemaekers / Y. I. Aal- Louwe Kooijmans 2007: L. P. Louwe Kooijmans, The gra- ders / S. M. Beckermann / D. C. Brinkhuizen / I. De- dual transition to farming in the Lower Rhine Basin. viendt / H. Huismann / M. De Jong / H. M. Molthof / In: A. Whittle / V. Cummings (eds.), Going Over. The W. Prummel / M. J. L. T. Niekus / M. Van de Wal, The Mesolithic-Neolithic Transition in North-West Europe. submerged pre-Drouwen TRB settlement site Wetsin- Proceedings of the British Academy 144 (Oxford 2007) germaar, c. 3500 cal. BC (province of Groningen, the 567 – 594. Netherlands). Palaeohistoria 53/54, 2011/2012, 1 – 24. Kampffmeyer 1991: U. Kampffmeyer, Die Keramik der Sied- Stapel 1991: B. Stapel, Die geschlagenen Steingeräte der lung Hüde I am Dümmer. Untersuchungen zur Neolithi- Siedlung Hüde I am Dümmer. Veröffentlichungen der sierung des nordwestdeutschen Flachlands. Unpubl. PhD urgeschichtlichen Sammlungen des Landesmuseums zu thesis, Univ. Göttingen (Göttingen 1991). Hannover 38 (Hildesheim 1991). Klassen 2004: L. Klassen, Jade und Kupfer. Untersuchungen Stapel 2013a: B. Stapel, Spätmesolithikum im Münsterland zum Neolithisierungsprozess im westlichen Ostseeraum – Vreden „Stadtlohner Straße“. In: M. Baales / H.-O. unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Kulturentwick- Pollmann / B. Stapel, Westfalen in der Alt- und Mittel- lung Europas 5500 – 3500 BC (Moesgard 2004). steinzeit (Münster 2013) 219 – 221. Knoche 2008: B. Knoche, Die Erdwerke von Soest (Kr. ­Soest) Stapel 2013b: B. Stapel, Ausblick: Nachfahren der letzten und Nottuln-Uphoven (Kr. Coesfeld). Studien zum Jung- Jäger, Sammlerinnen und Fischer in Westfalen. In: M. neolithikum in Westfalen. Münstersche Beiträge zur Baales / H.-O. Pollmann / B. Stapel, Westfalen in der Ur- und Frühgeschichtlichen Archäologie 3 (Rahden/ Alt- und Mittelsteinzeit (Münster 2013) 228 – 231. Westfalen 2008). Stapel / Schlösser 2014: B. Stapel / M. Schlösser, Zwei Orschiedt et al. 2014: J. Orschiedt / R. Bollongino / O. datierte mesolithische Knochenartefakte aus Greven. Nehlich / J. Burger, Parallelgesellschaften? Die letzten Archäologie in Westfalen-Lippe 2013 (2014), 46 – 49. Jäger und Sammler Mitteleuropas aus der Blätterhöhle. Vang Petersen 1984: P. Vang Petersen, Chronological und Archäologie in Westfalen-Lippe 2013 (2014), 43 – 45. Regional Variation in the Late Mesolithic of Eastern Orschiedt et al. in prep.: J. Orschiedt / R. Bollongino / O. Denmark. Journal of Danish Archaeology 3, 1984, 7 – 18. Nehlich / J. Burger, Jäger-Sammler-Fischer im Neolithi- Willms 1982: C. Willms, Zwei Fundplätze der Michelsberger kum. Die Blätterhöhle in Hagen. In: M. Baales / H.-O. Kultur aus dem westlichen Münsterland, gleichzeitig ein Pollmann /B. Stapel (Bearb.), Westfalen in der Jungstein- Beitrag zum neolithischen Silexhandel in Mitteleuropa. zeit. (in prep.) 204 – 208. Münstersche Beiträge zur Ur- und Frühgeschichte 12 (Hildesheim 1982). Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 , 18 5 – 193) 185 Foraging in a changing landscape – the Late Mesolithic in the coastal area of Lower Saxony Svea Mahlstedt, Martina Karle and Jan F. Kegler Abstract In the coastal area of Lower Saxony, Germany, archaeological research on the late Mesolithic is closely interrelated with a detailed landscape reconstruction, due to the major changes the area has undergone since the early Holocene. In this paper the coastal and landscape development of the 7th to 5th millennium calBC is introduced with a special focus on inundation, sedimentation, and peat growth concerning the region of the East Frisian Peninsula, situated between the e­ stuaries of the rivers Weser and Ems. The state of research on Mesolithic sites is quite fragmentary due to large areas being covered by marine clay or peat. Most finds are stray finds from the sandy uplands and therefore difficult to date directly, and as there is a lack of organic remains, there is no detailed typochronology. Some finds were made on the beaches, where they were washed ashore, having been uncovered by erosion in tidal channels. Some new finds of human bones from late Mesolithic and early Neolithic times are presented here as well as an antler axe that was expected to be of Mesolithic age. Now, recent radio- carbon dating has shown that it dates into the transitional horizon between the Late Neolithic Single Grave culture and the Early Bronze Age. Finally, a range of recent projects on early Holocene landscape reconstruction and archaeological survey on- and off-shore is presented. Keywords Holocene sea level rise, Mesolithic, Neolithic, East Frisia, human mandibles, antler axe Zusammenfassung Aufgrund der starken Landschaftsveränderungen seit dem frühen Holozän ist die archäologische For- schung zum späten Mesolithikum in der Küstenregion Niedersachsens besonders stark mit einer detaillierten Landschaftsre- konstruktion verbunden. In diesem Artikel liegt daher ein besonderer Focus auf der Küstenentwicklung der Ostfriesischen Halbinsel zwischen den Mündungsbereichen von Weser und Ems im siebten bis fünften Jahrtausends cal. BC im Hinblick auf Meeresspiegelanstieg, Sedimentation und Moorwachstum. Der Forschungsstand zum Mesolithikum der Region ist noch sehr lückenhaft. Die meisten Funde stammen von Oberflächenfundplätzen der küstennahen Geestregion. Sie sind innerhalb des Mesolithikums kaum ge- nauer chronologisch einzuordnen, da datierbare organische Funde ebenso fehlen wie eine detaillierte Typochronologie. Einige Funde stammen direkt von der Küste. Sie wurden in tiefen Prielen erodiert und an Land gespült. Hier werden zwei neue Funde menschlicher Knochen aus dem späten Mesolithikum und dem Neolithikum vorgestellt sowie eine Geweihaxt, die lan- ge Zeit als mesolithisch angesprochen worden war. Nun konnte eine Radiokarbondatierung zeigen, dass sie zeitlich aus dem Übergangshorizont zwischen der spätneolithischen Einzelgrabkultur und der frühen Bronzezeit stammt. Der Forschungsprozess zur mesolithischen und neolithischen Besiedlung der heutigen Küstenregion Ostfriesland ist noch längst nicht abgeschlossen; dies zeigen auch verschiedene Projekte, die sich mit Landschaftsrekonstruktion, predictive mo- delling und archäologischem Survey zur fraglichen Epoche beschäftigen und hier abschließend kurz vorgestellt werden. Introduction late hunter-gatherers in the north and farmers to the south (Klassen 2004), and there are ideas about The transition to a fully Neolithic economy seems to early farmers or horticulturists in the area of the have happened later in northern central Europe than modern Netherlands influencing developments along elsewhere on the continent. A better understanding the Baltic coast (Ten Anscher 2015). Meanwhile, of this period in the region has developed during the the area of northwestern Germany remains surpris- last decades, with some hotspots of research along ingly empty on archaeological maps of the period, the Baltic Sea coast, in the Dutch lowlands and the only illuminated by the somewhat enigmatic site of Rhine estuary. We know about contacts between Hüde 1 at the former shore of Lake Dümmer, where 186 Foragi n g i n a changing landsc ape – the late Mesolithic in the coastal area of Lower S a xo ny there seems to be a more direct connection to early and saltmarsh deposits as well as freshwater peat, the farmers in the south (Raemaekers 1999). latter’s growth being induced by a rising groundwater This paper focusses on the area between Lake level due to sea level rise. This so-called basal peat was Dümmer and the North Sea coast, especially the East radiocarbon dated to max. 6,000 calBC, giving evidence Frisian peninsula. Preservation and visibility of sites in for the position of the former coastline close to that of this area are highly influenced by Holocene landscape the present-day barrier islands during that time. development driven by the postglacial sea level rise, re- Fen peat and raised bog peat locally occur at the sulting in sediment accumulation and peat formation. base of the clastic sediments as well as intercalated In coastal areas human occupation is closely within or on top of them indicating the formation of tied to changes in regional water levels, the loca- fenland in the coastal flats and therefore a repeated tions of waterways resulting from this, and the active lateral shift of the coastline. On the landward part of coastal zone. Therefore, landscape evolution and hu- the Holocene deposits the individual layers of basal, man occupation of coastal zones are closely related, intercalated and overlying peat merge into thicker units and evidence of the latter may provide information or into a continuous peat sequence close to the Pleisto- on regional coastline displacement. The tidal range cene hinterland. On this adjacent moraine area raised and the extent of tidal inundation as well as the shap- bog peat started growing due to a more humid climate ing force of storm events are the most relevant factors in the first half of the Holocene (Petzelberger et al. in coastal landscape transformation, the preservation 1999). Tree stubs on the bottom of the peat bogs as well of past cultural traces and landscape archaeology. as the basal peat show that this development led to a Thus we will give an introduction to landscape massive deforestation through time, which must have development first before an overview on the cur- influenced the life of the late hunter-gatherers in the rent state of research on the Mesolithic in the area area. From an archaeological perspective the peat cover is presented. Finally, some recent projects and new has sealed large areas of the former surface, burying all data are introduced and discussed. remains of human activity beneath. Marine sedimentation around 5,000 calBC is limit- ed to the channel structures of the palaeovalleys (Fig. 1). The coastal area – landscape develop- Thus, former river-dominated valleys were transformed ment during Mesolithic times into estuaries and narrow tidal basins (Karle / Gold- hammer 2017). Until approx. 4,000 calBC channel infill The coastal plain of Lower Saxony is part of the low- took place with local peat erosion on channel flanks. lands bordering the coast of the southern North Sea. With an ongoing rise in sea level, sheltered tidal flats The low-lying area (below +3 m a.s.l. [NHN in Ger- developed in the coastal plain above -9 m below sea man]) is bordered to the south by shallow uplands of level (bsl). Lateral erosion of tidal channels with an Pleistocene deposits. During and after the last glacial erosion depth of only a few decimetres in the landward maximum, when the sea level was up to 130 m lower part, but up to several metres close to the tidal inlets than today, large tracts of presently submerged areas between the barrier islands resulted in erosional loss of in the North Sea basin were dry land and used by hu- former mainland areas. Therefore, artefacts may have mans. The pre-Holocene land surface along the east been eroded and relocated within the tidal system, so Frisian peninsula was shaped by drainage patterns of that find sites often do not relate to the original find numerous natural watercourses. These palaeovalleys context, depending on transport distance and energy. were incised up to 20 m deep into the glacial deposits by surface discharge during times of low sea level. They created a landscape relief that was much more lively Current state of research during the early Holocene than today. The melting of the continental ice sheets since the end of the last gla- The coastal marshes and adjacent areas have under- ciation caused a global sea level rise and consequently gone massive changes since Mesolithic times due to a continuous coastline displacement within the North the accumulation of marine deposits and peat for- Sea basin (Streif 1990; 2004; Behre 2007), covering mation as well as natural erosional processes, both former terrestrial areas with marine deposits. These induced by Holocene coastline displacement. In ad- Holocene deposits covering the Pleistocene basement dition, there is a massive human impact on landscape are up to 20 m thick and are evidence of a complex en- development in later times due to land reclamation vironmental history during the last 7,000 years. The Ho- and peat extraction on the moraine area during the locene sediments are composed of siliciclastic intertidal last 800 years. Therefore, Mesolithic sites were cover- Sve a M a h l ste d t, Mar ti n a Kar l e an d J an F. Ke gl er 187 Fig. 1 East Frisia – reconstruction of landscape and sea-level between 6,000 and 5,000 calBC. Grey line: present day coast line; red dots: sites mentioned in the paper. 1 Juist; 2 Baltrum; 3 Spiekeroog; 4 Osteel; 5 Coldinne (map: M. Karle). ed and recovered again by both natural and anth- in East Frisia can be separated into two to three dif- ropogenic influences. ferent types of sites. First, there are surface sites that On the East Frisian peninsula Mesolithic settle- have been surveyed more or less intensively. Here only ment sites have not so far been the object of focused lithic material has been found. The second main type archaeological research or excavation. On the con- of sites may be described as pit sites, where several pits trary, most sites were discovered by accident or dur- filled with charcoal and partly burned cobblestones ing long-term surveys by volunteers (Kitz 1988, 25). (cooking stones) have been discovered in each case. Clusters of sites often correspond to the research There is an ongoing debate on the anthropogenic areas of volunteers. Additionally, all surface sites are origin of such Mesolithic pits especially in the Nether- situated on the sandy uplands of East Frisia. In the lands and Belgium (see Huismann et al. 2020). Quite coastal marshes, Mesolithic finds are rare, due to the similar to comparable structures in the Netherlands covering with late Holocene deposits. Consequently, and Belgium, lithic material was rarely observed in they are only discovered during construction activi- the pits in East Frisia, but radiocarbon dates allow ties. Mesolithic objects from the Wadden Sea have assigning the sites to the Mesolithic period.1­ so far always been relocated stray finds (see below). Finally, a small number of sites have not only Within the last thirty years, two main publica- provided lithic material but also features like fire- tions have summarised the state of research, using places, sometimes with charcoal preserved. They two different approaches. W. Schwarz presented form a possible third type of sites. Considering what a more technical description of lithic assemblages happened in East Frisia during the time of settle- (Schwarz 1990), whereas one of the authors of this ment of the Hüde 1 site at Lake Dümmer, all three paper discussed chronological and functional aspects types of sites from the East Frisian dry lands provide as well as aspects of landscape use by Mesolithic some hints to synchronous late Mesolithic activity people in several sample areas of Lower Saxony in the area. Nine of the pit sites are radiocarbon (Mahlstedt 2015). dated; most of them show activities during the Boreal Apart from single finds from the Wadden Sea period, prior to 6,600 calBC. Only two sites docu- area – the original find spots of which are unknown, except that their original layers are located near an erosion channel recently created in the Wadden Sea 1  Bärenfänger 1997, 37; Fries et al. 2013; Helms / Schwarz area (and thereby destroyed by it) – Mesolithic sites 2008, 40 – 41. 188 Foragi n g i n a changing landsc ape – the late Mesolithic in the coastal area of Lower S a xo ny ment a later Mesolithic habitation. One of them is a sites were considered in her study. They differ in size, single pit with charcoal discovered during the build- age and topographical situation. In other sampling ing of a pipeline close to the village of Osteel (com- areas of western Lower Saxony, sites from the second mune Brookmerland / district Aurich; Heun 1994; half of the Mesolithic after 6,600 calBC containing see Fig. 1,4). It was dug into the Pleistocene sands trapezes are quite often situated in lower and wetter and later covered by basal peat and marine sedi- positions than the earlier ones. For East Frisia, the ments. The surrounding area was not investigated overall impression is that most of the lower situated by excavations. The other site with a late Mesolithic and possibly younger sites along the coast may have structure is situated close to the village of Coldinne been covered by swamp sediments, or as a result of (commune Großheide / district Aurich; Fig. 1,5) and flood events, or by peat growth. was excavated in the 1980s by a group of amateur archaeologists (Kitz 1986). The find layer was dam- aged by modern ploughing. Only a single fire pit was Valuable stray finds and some new preserved together with a quantity of flint artefacts dating results and charcoal remains found in mixed sediments. It cannot be distinguished whether the site residues are While Mesolithic sites from the East Frisian penin- the result of one or more settlement events. A single sula show an enormous overweight in flint surface radiocarbon date has provided an age between 5,625 scatters compared to all other site types, there are and 5,480 calBC (Table 1). nearly no Mesolithic flint objects among the stray The most difficult task is to obtain chronological finds from the Wadden Sea. Not least, this can be references for the surface sites. They can be recog- traced back to material properties. Finds are eroded nised as Mesolithic by the appearance of microliths as from deeper findlayers offshore and washed onto the well as small blade cores and sometimes flaked core beaches, where they can be collected from the surface axes. As in the neighbouring areas, there is a tendency at low tide. To undergo such a process successfully among the stone tools from East Frisia for micro- a find must have a certain low specific weight. That points and triangular microliths to already appear might explain at least partly why most Mesolithic during the first half of the Mesolithic (Boreal), thus finds from the Wadden Sea are of bone and antler. prior to approximately 6,600 calBC (Newell 1973; In 2016 the Archaeological Heritage Manage- Niekus 2006). They stay in use, while trapeze-shaped ment of the ‘Ostfriesische Landschaft’ received a microliths appear during the Atlantic, which in East human mandible which was found at the northern Frisia is contemporary with the second half of the shore of the island of Spiekeroog (Figs. 1,3; 3). It Mesolithic. Up to now it is not clear what happened had a dark to black colour, due to a covering of iron in East Frisia at the end of the Mesolithic, whether sulphate. Surprisingly, in 2018 a second human man- there was a transitional period to the Neolithic like dible was discovered at the island of Baltrum (Figs. in the later phases of the Swifterbant culture in the 1,2; 3). Both objects showed similar anthropologi- Netherlands and possibly in the Dümmer area. There cal characteristics and were classified as ‘archaic’ seems to be an ongoing flint tradition in the late Me- (Kegler / Grefen-Peters 2019a; b). solithic around the time when the Swifterbant culture The Spiekeroog mandible was not complete: The develops. The best example is the typical microlith arched lower jaw is preserved, but not the lower jaw type of the late Mesolithic, the trapeze-shaped mi- branches. The molars are strongly abraded. The lat- crolith. Trapezes can be found in the context of late erally bulging corpus and V-shaped dental arch, as Mesolithic / Swifterbant sites in the Netherlands well as the low profile of the chin, suggest archaic (Raemaekers / Niekus 2009, 719). The situation was features. The mandible must have belonged to a very likely quite similar in East Frisia, where surface sites sturdy male (branch angle approx. 140°). The ad- cannot be distinguished to belong to one or the other vanced abrasion of the dentition makes an age of the period. It is only in the course of the Swifterbant individual of at least 40 years very likely. period that trapezes seem to become broader and The Baltrum mandible can probably also be at- are thus recognisable as Swifterbant culture items, tributed to a male individual because of its robust- as shown for the Netherlands (Niekus 2008, 59 – 60). ness. However, we do not exclude a female attribution In her evaluation of surface sites from north- because of the large branch angle. The abrasion of western Germany one of the authors has been able the teeth makes a time of death between 20 and 50 to identify some characteristics of the Mesolithic use years of age likely. The AMS-dates of both mandibles of the landscape (Mahlstedt 2015). 35 East Frisian point to a Stone Age context. The Spiekeroog man- Sve a M a h l ste d t, Mar ti n a Kar l e an d J an F. Ke gl er 189 site material lab.no. age BP +/- age cal BC probability Δ13C in ‰ Δ15N in ‰ Baltrum mandible Poz-103000 4905 30 3761-3640 95.40 14,7 15,7 Spiekeroog mandible Poz-103001 6510 40 5546-5374 95.40 13,4 16,1 Juist antler axe MAMS-43969 3751 24 2278-2042 95.40 – – Osteel charcoal Hv-19605 6560 280 6025-4852 95.39 – – Coldinne charcoal Hv-12322 6605 55 5625-5480 95.40 – – Zwischenahn T-Axe, new find Poz-82825 4880 35 3759-3541 95.39 – – Zwischenahn T-Axe, old find Poz-73450 5570 40 4486-4342 95.40 – – Zwischenahn base axe Poz-73451 7300 50 6251-6050 95.40 – – Table 1 Radiocarbon dates of sites and finds mentioned in this paper. dible dates to c. 5,400 calBC (Table 1), while the In any case it seems justified to assume that the Baltrum mandible dates to c. 3,700 calBC (Table 1). Spiekeroog individual lived during the time when Stable isotopes (13C and 15N) were also measured the first farmers of the Linear Pottery culture ar- (Table 1). In northwestern Europe there are no com- rived at the northern fringe of the loess belt. By that parable values for the two stable isotope results as time the coastline was situated already close to its yet. Nevertheless, according to increased 13C- and modern position. The habitat of Mesolithic hunter- 15 N-values it is obvious that both humans had a very gatherers would have been a heterogeneous landscape high proportion of marine food in their diet. On with sandy, possibly wooded areas, bogs and salt- this background, the dating may have been affected marshes. by the marine reservoir effect (Fischer et al. 2007). The Baltrum individual dated to 3700 calBC Typically, affected radiocarbon dates appear up to c. lived in the transitional time period between the 400 14C years older than they would be if unaffected late Swifterbant period in northwestern Europe and (Ibid., 2142). According to the high grade of abrasion the beginning of the Funnel Beaker culture or – of the teeth, both individuals must have consumed taking into account the influence of the reservoir ef- terrestrial food as well. fect – even in the fully Neolithic Funnelbeaker period Fig. 2 Antler axe from Juist-Kalfamertgat (photo: R. Kiepe) 190 Foragi n g i n a changing landsc ape – the late Mesolithic in the coastal area of Lower S a xo ny Fig. 3 Mandibles from Spiekeroog and Baltrum (photo: I. Reese / Ostfriesische Landschaft) Brindley 1/2 about 200 to 400 years later. In the later growing close to the shore. There, farming might not case it would either give another example of early have been easy if possible at all. farmers living on marine diet as already shown for One of the earliest finds that has for a long time other parts of northern central Europe by Terberger­ been attributed to the Mesolithic is an antler axe et al. (2018). Or this individuum belonged to the last found in 1980. It was collected from the surface c. hunter-gatherers, who maintained the old way of life 100 m east of the shoreline of the island of Juist. The in the salt marshes, which were not of interest for the object was discovered on the western border of the first farmers. Taking into account the environment so-called Kalfamergat, a straight between the islands that can be reconstructed for that period of time in of Juist and Norderney (Fig. 1,1). The approximatley the area of the recent Wadden Sea the later interpreta- 20 cm long axe was worked from an antler branch. tion might be preferred: saltmarshes and tidal creeks It is obviously not a T-shaped antler axe. The cutting reaching deep into the country behind the present edge is damaged, and the butt is rounded, possibly day shoreline and a few areas where the bogs kept due to surface damage by reworking in the sea, so Sve a M a h l ste d t, Mar ti n a Kar l e an d J an F. Ke gl er 191 that its former shape cannot be reconstructed. Thus, In order to expand the knowledge of the Holo- a clear typological distinction is not possible. A re- cene landscape history along the German North Sea cent 14C-dating gave a result of c. 2,278 – 2,042 calBC coast, the WASA research project (The Wadden Sea as (Fig. 2; Table 1), which would be contemporary with an archive of landscape evolution, climate change and the transitional horizon between the Late Neolithic settlement history) was established in 2015. During Single Grave culture and the Early Bronze Age on a four–year research period the intertidal and shal- the North Sea coast. This goes well together with low subtidal zones of the barrier islands Spiekeroog the dates of antler axes with a rounded base from and Norderney were investigated to reconstruct the the Scheld area in Belgium (Crombé et al. 2018), dynamic state of palaeolandscapes in the Wadden Sea and shows that this is no Mesolithic find at all. But region as a basis for predictive modelling of human at least it is a witness of human inhabitation also at settlement patterns and their possible impact on the times when most of the dry land in the area of the environment since the last glacial period. This com- recent Wadden Sea had likely vanished already. plex set of relevant data is necessary for predictive Unfortunately, analogies in form of further ant- modelling, using natural proxies as well as archaeo- ler axes are rare in East Frisia. There is only a single logical features to determine the archaeological per- undated find that was dug up by a dredge in the river spectives of unsurveyed areas. Ems in the western corner of the peninsula. Concerning the dry land area of East Frisia, one In the southern neighbourhood of East Frisia an of the problems with the Mesolithic sites there is that accumulation of antler axes is known from the area we are either dealing with more or less destroyed sur- of the Zwischenahner Meer, a freshwater lake. Here, face sites, or sites hidden by peat and marsh layers. For swimmers occasionally found antler axes (Zoller this reason a survey strategy to identify well-preserved 1958). Most of these finds can be described as sites more systematically is the topic of a project that T-shaped antler axes, but there is at least one axe started in 2019. An important discovery in this context made of the basal section of a red deer antler, dating is the fact that a good number of known surface sites to the time between 6,251 and 6,050 calBC. This axe in East Frisia are situated on the edge of so-called pin- as well as one of the T-axes of the stray finds and a go scars (Mahlstedt et al. 2018b), landscape features new find from recent underwater excavations on the that had been small lakes in the early Holocene. Today site were directly dated (Mahlstedt et al. 2018a). The most such lakes have become small kettle bogs. The T-shaped piece of the old finds dates to the middle of position of some sites on their ramparts affords a good the 5th millennium calBC, the new find is dated to the opportunity to detect find layers on the inner slope first half of the 4th millenium calBC (Table 1). These that were partly covered and thus protected by peat. objects appear to have been in use for longer in this In a first survey eleven sites were tested for preserva- area than in Scandinavia, as mentioned earlier (Dell- tion conditions by field survey and coring. Other sites brügge 2002, 44 – 45). In the Netherlands, Belgium, are situated on the edge of the sandy uplands, close and at Hüde I, antler axes appear in Swifterbant and to an area with basal peat under marine sediments. contemporary contexts very regularly (Crombé et al. Both positions in the landscape therefore have the 1999, Deichmüller 1969; Werning 1983). potential for a preserved paleo-surface below the peat. In some cases, stone tools, charcoal samples and even hazelnut shells were found by sampling with hand cor- Ongoing research ers that bring up a larger amount of sediment, which is sieved and sampled directly in the field. Small test The current state of research in the Wadden Sea trenches have been investigated recently (Mahlstedt suggests a potential of finding Mesolithic sites. 2 The et al. 2021). For the next years a second survey area is research project ‘Settlement and cultural history of planned in the Elbe-Weser area to detect Mesolithic the Lower Saxony Wadden Sea Area’, however, dis- sites with organic preservation. covered only medieval to modern surface sites close to the recent dyke; the oldest burials and settlement remains are dated to the Roman Iron Age (Nieder- Final remarks höfer 2016). Bringing together the reconstruction of the coastal landscape development with dated finds of human 2  Jöns et al. 2012/2013; Goldhammer / Karle 2015; Nieder- bones has given a first glimpse of possible insights höfer 2016; Karle / Goldhammer 2017. into the late Mesolithic and early Neolithic periods 192 Foragi n g i n a changing landsc ape – the late Mesolithic in the coastal area of Lower S a xo ny in East Frisia. Do the isotope values of the Baltrum and Neolithic: Evidence from stable isotope values of mandible indicate a late hunter-gatherer way of life humans and dogs. Journal of Archaeological Science at the edge of the European mainland? And can we 34(12), 2007, 2125 – 2150. expect the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition to have Fries et al. 2013: J. E. Fries / D. Jansen / M. Niekus, Fire in a happened in the same mode in East Frisia as in the hole! First results of the Oldenburg-Eversten excavation neighbouring Netherlands, just because we have the and some notes on Mesolithic hearth pits and hearth- same kind of flint stray finds and quite similar da- pit sites. Siedlungs- und Küstenforschung im südlichen tings for a few antler axes? Nordseegebiet 36, 2013, 99 – 110. Mesolithic sites are assumedly hidden below Goldhammer / Karle 2015: J. Goldhammer / M. Karle, thick layers of marine sediments on the shoreline and Geoarchaeological research in the Wadden Sea area below peat on the sandy uplands. A range of projects of Lower Saxony. Siedlungs- und Küstenforschung im on landscape reconstruction, survey and predictive südlichen Nordseegebiet 38, 2015, 59 – 70. modelling have started research to answer the ques- Helms / Schwarz 2008: T. Helms / W.Schwarz, Vier ur- tions outlined above; now it depends on how they geschichtliche Siedlungsareale im Overledingerland, are going to develop in the near future. Landkreis Leer. Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Ur- geschichte 77, 2008, 21 – 89. Heun 1994: S. Heun, Osteel, Gde. Osteel Fst.Nr. 2409/5 : 6. References Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte 63, 1994, 205 – 206. Ten Anscher 2015: T. J. Ten Anscher, Under the radar: Huismann et al 2020: H. Huisman / M.J.L.Th / Niekus, Swifterbant and the origins of the Funnel Beaker cul- H. Peeters / R.C.A Geerts / A. Müller, Arguments ture. In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaek- in favour of an anthropogenic origin of Mesolithic pit ers / T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki site in Pomerania hearths. A reply to Crombé and Langohr (2020). Journal and the neolithisation of the North European Lowlands of Archaeological Science 119, 2020, 105 – 144. DOI: (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im 0.1016/j.jas.2020.105144. Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 335 – 358. Jöns et al. 2012/2013: H. Jöns / M. Karle / S. Kleingärt- Bärenfänger 1997: R. Bärenfänger, Aus der Geschichte ner, Das Nordseebecken und der Wattenmeerraum als der Wüstung “Kloster Barthe”, Landkreis Leer, Ostfries- Forschungsgebiet. Offa 69/70, 2012/2013, 71 – 80. land: Ergebnisse der archäologischen Untersuchungen Karle / Goldhammer 2017: M. Karle / J. Goldhammer, in den Jahren 1988 bis 1992. Probleme der Küstenfor- The Wadden Sea of North-West Germany. In: G. N. schung im südlichen Nordseegebiet 24, 1997, 9 – 2 52. Bailey / J. Harff / D. Sakellariou (eds.), Under the Sea: Behre 2007: K.-E. Behre, A new Holocene sea-level curve Archaeology and Palaeolandscapes of the Continental for the southern North Sea. Boreas 36, 2007, 82 – 102. Shelf. Coastal Research Library (Cham 2017) 223 – 2 31. Crombé et al. 1999: P. Crombé / M. van Strydonck / V. Kegler / Grefen-Peters 2019a: J. F. Kegler / S. Grefen-Pe- Hendrix, AMS-dating of antler mattocks from the ters, Meermänner – Anthropologische Spülsaumfunde Schelde river in northern Belgium. Notae Prehistoricae von Spiekeroog und Baltrum. Archäologie in Nieder- 19, 1999, 111 – 119. sachsen 22, 2019, 110 – 114. Crombé 2016: P. Crombé, Forest fire dynamics during the Kegler / Grefen-Peters 2019b: J. F. Kegler / S. Grefen-Pe- early and middle Holocene along the southern North ters, Männer aus dem Meer. Archäologie in Deutsch- Sea basin as shown by charcoal evidence from burnt land 2019(2), 59. ant nests. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany volu- Kitz 1986: W. Kitz, Die Fundstelle 13 bei Coldinne, Ldkr. me 25, 2016, 311 – 321. Aurich. Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Nordwest- Deichmüller 1969: J. Deichmüller, Die neolithische Moor- deutschland 9, 1986, 1 – 10. siedlung Hüde I am Dümmer, Kreis Grafschaft Diep- Kitz 1988: W. Kitz, Die Steinzeit in Ostfriesland. Einzel- holz. Vorläufiger Abschlußbericht. Neue Ausgrabungen schriften Ostfriesische Landschaft 27 (Aurich 1988). und Forschungen in Niedersachsen 4, 1969, 28 – 36. Klassen 2004: L. Klassen, Jade und Kupfer. Untersuchungen Dellbrügge 2002: S.  B. Dellbrügge, Steinzeitliche zum Neolithisierungsprozess im westlichen Ostseeraum Knochen- und Geweihfunde im nördlichen Schles- unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Kulturentwick- wig-Holstein. Universitätsforschungen zu prähistori- lung Europas 5500 – 3500 BC (Aarhus 2004). schen Archäologie 83 (Bonn 2002). Mahlstedt 2015: S. Mahlstedt, Das Mesolithikum im west- Fischer et al 2007: J. Fischer / J. Olsen / M. Richards / lichen Niedersachsen. Frühe Monumentalität und so- A. E. Sveinbjörnsdottir / P. Bennike / J. Heinemeier, ziale Differenzierung 7 (Bonn 2015). Coast-inland mobility and diet in the Danish Mesolithic Sve a M a h l ste d t, Mar ti n a Kar l e an d J an F. Ke gl er 193 Mahlstedt et al. 2018a: S. Mahlstedt / S. Wolters / D. und Ausbreitung der Hochmoore in Nordwestdeutsch- Enters / D. Heinrich / A. Siegmüller / I. Brandt, land – Erste Ergebnisse eines neuen Projektes. TELMA Im Trüben gefischt – Steinzeitliche Spuren am Zwische- 29, 1999, 21 – 38. nahner Meer, Ldkr. Ammerland. Siedlungs- und Küsten- Raemaekers 1999: D. C. M. Raemaekers, The articulation forschung im südlichen Nordseegebiet 41, 2018, 9 – 4 0. of a “New Neolithic”. Archaeological studies Leiden Mahlstedt et al. 2018b: S. Mahlstedt / J. F. Kegler / A. University 3 (Leiden 1999). Hüser, Mesolithic Settlement sites on the East Frisian Raemaekers / Niekus 2009: D. Raemaekers / M. Niekus, Peninsula. Landscape history and development with re- Developments in the Dutch Late Mesolithic. In: P. gard to pingo scars as preferred settlement sites. Quartär Crombé / M. van Strydonck / J. Sergant / M. Boudin / 65, 2018, 115 – 127. M. Bats (eds.), Chronology and Evolution within the Mahlstedt et al. 2021: S. Mahlstedt / A. Siegmüller / S. Mesolithic of North-West Europe (Newcastle upon Tyne Wolters, Die mesolithischen Birkenrindenfunde von 2009) 709 – 725. Osteel, Ldkr. Aurich. Siedlungs- und Küstenforschung Schwarz 1990: W. Schwarz, Besiedlung Ostfrieslands in im südlichen Nordseegebiet 44, 2021, 9 – 24. ur- und frühgeschichtlicher Zeit. Klassifikation des Newell 1973: R. R. Newell, The post-glacial adaptations of Feuersteinmaterials von Oberflächenfundplätzen. Ab- the indigenous population of the northwest European handlungen und Vorträge zur Geschichte Ostfrieslands Plain. In: K. S. Kozlowski (ed.), The Mesolithic in Eu- 71. (Aurich 1990). rope (Warsaw 1973) 399 – 4 40. Streif 1990: H. Streif, Das ostfriesische Küstengebiet. Niederhöfer 2016: K. Niederhöfer, Archäologische Fund- Sammlung geologischer Führer 57 (Berlin 1990). stellen im ostfriesischen Wattenmeer. Beiträge zur Ar- Streif 2004: H. Streif, Sedimentary record of Pleistocene chäologie in Niedersachsen 18 (Rahden/Westf. 2016). and Holocene marine inundations along the North Sea Niekus 2006: M. J. L. T. Niekus, A geographically referenced coast of Lower Saxony, Germany. Quatern. Internat. 14 C database for the Mesolithic and the early phase of 112, 2004, 3 – 28. the Swifterbant Culture in the Northern Netherlands. Werning 1983: J. Werning, Die Geweihartefakte der Palaeohistoria 47/48, 2006, 41 – 9 9. neolithischen Moorsiedlung Hüde 1 am Dümmer, Niekus 2008: M. J. L. T. Niekus, Een studie naar de ontwikke- Kreis Grafschaft Diepholz. Neue Ausgrabungen und ling von trapeziumvormige pijlbewapening tussen 8100 Forschungen in Niedersachsen 16, 1983, 21 – 187. en 4100 BP. Paleo-Aktueel 19, 2008, 56 – 6 5. Zoller 1958: D. Zoller, Urgeschichtliche Funde aus Petzelberger et al. 1999: B.E.M. Pretzelberger / K.-E. dem Zwischenahner Meer. Die Kunde N.F. 1, 1958, Behre / M.A. Geyh, Beginn der Hochmoorentwicklung 27 – 33. Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 , 195 – 209) 195 The late Mesolithic in Hamburg-Boberg: inter-cultural interactions and impacts Laura Thielen Abstract The sites Boberg 15, 15 East, and 20 were settled by people from the Ertebølle culture during the final Mesolithic and by people from the Funnel Beaker culture during the early Neolithic. Vessel finds illustrate contacts to Neolithic as well as final Mesolithic groups during the final Mesolithic and thus an intra- und inter-cultural network. According to archaeo- metrical analysis it is confirmed that culturally ‘foreign’ pottery was imported as well as produced at the Boberg sites, indicat- ing a mutual interaction as well as a transfer of knowledge. Different impulses and influences on the local production are recognisable. Rössen and Stroke-ornamented ware pottery were produced at the sites, but did not influence the local vessel tradition significantly. In contrast, the establishment of vessels with overall fingernail impressions on the surface and flat bot- tom at Boberg can be connected to interactions between Boberg settlers and people from the Swifterbant as well as Gatersle- ben groups; it illustrates impulses and the adaptation of specific elements from different cultures, resulting in the formation of the so-called Friesack-Boberg group located in the inland of northern Germany. The fusion of inter-cultural elements, supported by the dating results of the Friesack-Boberg pottery to the transition between final Mesolithic and Neolithic, might also imply the beginning of the neolithisation in northern Germany. Keywords Hamburg-Boberg, Ertebølle culture, early pottery, cultural interactions Zusammenfassung Die von der endmesolithischen Ertebølle- und frühneolithischen Trichterbecherkultur besiedelten Fund- plätze Hamburg-Boberg 15, 15 Ost und 20 zeigen durch Gefäße, die als Kontaktanzeiger zu endmesolithischen und neolithi- schen Gruppen zu werten sind, ein intra- und interkulturelles Netzwerk im Endmesolithikum an. Durch archäometrische Ana- lysen konnte nachgewiesen werden, dass die kontaktanzeigenden Gefäße nicht nur importiert, sondern teils auch in der Boberger Niederung hergestellt worden sind. Dies deutet gleichsam ein gemeinsames Interagieren unter den Beteiligten und eine Vermittlung des kultureigenen Keramikhandwerks an, wenn sich auch unterschiedliche Einflussebenen erkennen lassen. Demnach wirkten sich Kontakte zwischen der auf den Boberger Plätzen siedelnden Gruppe der Ertebølle-Kultur und Gemein- schaften der neolithischen Rössener Kultur und Stichbandkeramik nicht maßgeblich auf das lokale Töpferhandwerk aus. Im Gegensatz dazu haben nachgewiesene Kontakte zu Gruppen der Swifterbant- und Gaterslebener Kultur maßgeblich an der Entstehung von flachbodigen Gefäßen mit flächigem Fingernageldekor mitgewirkt, die der im norddeutschen Binnenland siedelnden Friesack-Boberger Gruppe zugeschrieben werden können. Letztlich können die Fusion interkultureller Einflüsse sowie die Datierung der Friesack-Boberg Keramik in den Übergangshorizont zwischen dem Endmesolithikum und Neolithikum den Beginn der Neolithisierung in Norddeutschland anzeigen. Introduction ysis of the archaeological remains were conducted1, and thus the project ‘The Neolithisation process of The sites Boberg 15, 15 East and 20 have been well northernmost Germany: with particular reference to known since their excavations in the 1950s and the final Mesolithic and Neolithic sites of Hamburg- 1960s and have caused a discussion regarding the Boberg’, funded by the German Research Foundation pottery found there that was interpreted as imported (see below); they are seen as key sites for the origin of the Funnel Beaker culture in northern Germany (Schwabedissen 1994, 378). During and after the ex- 1  With the exception of the Boberg 15 East flint artefacts: see cavations no comprehensive documentation and anal- Lübke 2000, 326 – 340. 196 Th e late Mesolithic in H amburg-Boberg: inter-c ultural interactions and im pact s (DFG)2, aimed at putting the entire assemblage of a branched river system consisting of many small rivers the excavated pottery into perspective. Archaeologi- and brooks running through the depressions between cal recording was supplemented by archaeometric the sites. On the other side of the inland dunes the analysis, which also contributes a deeper insight into higher elevation of the geest extends from southeast the technological production of the pottery. to northwest alongside the glacial valley of the river This paper assumes that the Boberg pottery can Elbe (Miehlich 1986, 100 – 102; 1999, 199 – 201; see shed light on communication processes and the way of also Ehlers 1990, 138 – 14; 1991, 46 – 60; 2011, 48 – 53, interactions and relationships between intra- and inter- 136; Schröder 1988, 42 – 74), and springs drained from cultural groups. In this context it is supposed that com- the ground moraine, resulting in the formation of lakes munication goes beyond unilateral transportation of and ponds (Köpke et al. 1999, 129; Miehlich 1986, information between emitter and recipient. It is rather 100; Ulmer 2002, 197). Here a permeable layer overlies suggested that people talking to each other in face-to- a waterproof layer (for example loam and clay), and face interactions transport knowledge, ideas, and much the water drained off in between the inclining layers more into a communicative space, and thereby each (Murawski / Meyer 1998, 174 fig. 53a). Today, the participant has the opportunity to react and respond landscape of the foreland of the dunes is characterised to the topics of conversation. In consequence, it is as- by the Elbe wetlands. sumed that communication contributions are based on The site of Boberg 15 was first investigated in one another, resulting in constructive communication 1951 by opening a test trench. As Neolithic finds and active dialogue, where each participant has the came to light, further excavations were carried out in opportunity to adapt this transported information in 1952, 1953, 1954 and 1960. An additional investiga- full or in part. It is also suspected that social values and tion in 1959 aimed to define the extent of the site and lifestyle might influence the amount of adaptation of resulted in the discovery of the separate prehistoric information, which depends on mental or social con- site of Boberg 15 East. Further investigations were nections between participants and groups. carried out at Boberg 20. A first trench opened in Contacts between the Boberg settlers and in- 1956 led to follow-up excavations in 1959 and 19643. tra- and inter cultural groups are illustrated through A recent excavation was conducted at site 20 in 19914. pottery and raise the question of interaction pro- After the excavations in the 1950s and 1960s cesses resulting in the adaptation of communicated various articles about the chronological setting of the information. Thus typological as well as technologi- Boberg sites with respect to a selection of pottery were cal pottery manufacturing traditions of the Boberg presented. While R. Schindler discussed a continuous settlers as well as communication processes with settlement of Boberg 15 from Ertebølle-Ellerbek times intra- and inter-cultural groups are of special interest. to the early Neolithic and late early Neolithic after H. Furthermore, the amount of adaptation of specific Schwabedissen (Schwabedissen 1957/1958), he sup- typological and technological attributes might illus- posed an occupation of Boberg 20 from the Ertebølle- trate different exertions of influences of intra- and Ellerbek phase to the early Neolithic. A re-evaluation inter-cultural groups on the Boberg settlers and show was carried out by F. Laux in accordance with J. Lich- different levels of impacts and rejections. ardus’ chronology (Lichardus 1976). Although Laux based his typo-chronological classification mainly on the archaeological artefacts illustrated by Schindler, Excavations and chronological setting he postulated a larger timespan of settlement of Bo- of the sites berg 15 and also did not agree with a continuous settlement view. Although he also connected the site The archaeological sites of Hamburg-Boberg 15, 15 to the final Mesolithic Ertebølle culture, he argued for East, and 20 are located southeast of the city of Ham- a reoccupation in the late early Neolithic. In addition, burg, in northern Germany (Fig. 1). During the final a settlement of the late Neolithic Single Grave culture, Mesolithic and Neolithic the settlement sites were influenced by the Bell Beaker culture, is mentioned, situated on small sandy elevations in the Elbe palaeo- valley in front of large ancient inland dunes. The ac- cumulation of supra-littoral sediments indicates that 3  Documentation and reports on Boberg 15, 15 East, 20, during settlement, the landscape was characterised by Archaeological Museum of Hamburg. 4  The excavation was part of the DFG-funded project ‘The Neolithisation of Schleswig-Holstein’; cf. Lübke 1992, 49; 2  Project leader: B. Ramminger, University of Hamburg. 2000, 326 f. La u ra Th i e l e n 197 Fig. 1 Excavations of the Hamburg-Boberg sites. 1 yellow: inland dunes; blue: water; green: sandy elevations; red: excavation areas (drawing: B. Ramminger); 2 Location of the sites Boberg 15, 15 East, and 20 as well as Boberg 21 on the recent Elbe wetlands (photo: Google Earth; sites added). 198 Th e late Mesolithic in H amburg-Boberg: inter-c ultural interactions and im pact s Fig. 2 Boberg. 1 – 9 pointed bases; 10 pointed base with impressions; 11 – 13 rim sherds with impressions on top of the rim; 14 – 15 lamps. Scale 1 : 4. but without any further comment. Also his interpre- (Fig. 2.14 – 15). Two vessels built in U-technique deco- tation of Boberg 20 differs, as Laux connected both rated with impressions on the exterior, interior and Boberg 20 and 15 East to the Ertebølle culture, settled on top of the rim (Fig. 5.1 – 2), as well as a decorated for just one single summer. In contrast, according pointed base from Boberg 20, are exceptions (Fig. 2.10). to an analysis of the flint artefacts from Boberg 15 An occupation of the Boberg sites in the early Neolithic East, H. Lübke expected an occupation of the site by the Funnel Beaker culture is demonstrated by rim by the final Mesolithic Ertebølle and early Neolithic sherds decorated with arcades or punctures from the Funnel Beaker culture (Lübke 2000, 326 – 340) after outside, which result in a bossel on the inside (‘Loch- Schwabedissen (1966). buckel’). A significant difference to the final Mesolithic In contrast, the evaluation of the complete en- pottery is indicated by the general use of N-technique semble of excavated pottery demonstrates for Boberg for manufacturing the Neolithic vessels. A continuous 15, 15 East, and 20 a settlement of the sites during settlement of the sites within the early Neolithic (EN II) the final Mesolithic, indicated by both pointed bases is shown by collared flasks and sherds ornamented with in different types, such as bases with a pronounced vertical incisions, including scratched lines, twisted cord pointed end, pointed bottoms with a triangular and impressions, and plastic ridges, implying a settlement conical shape as well as rounded bottoms (Fig. 2.1 – 9), of the Boberg sites until the middle Neolithic Funnel and vessels built in U-technique5. Most ceramics built Beaker culture. In addition, rim sherds decorated with in U-technique (Hulthén 1977, 35 fig. 15; Stilborg horizontal lines and cord impressions bear resemblance / Bergenstråhle 2000, 31 – 33 fig. 5) show no deco- to pottery of the Single Grave culture7. ration at all, and the decoration is mainly limited to Of special note are the S-shaped vessels from impressions on top of the rim (Fig. 2.11 – 13), with affin- Boberg, built in N-technique with small flat bases ity to pottery of the final Mesolithic Ertebølle culture and decoration with overall fingernail impressions in northern Germany (cf. Glykou 2010, 181, 183 fig. allover (Fig. 5.4 – 6). These vessels are only present at 6, 12; Grohmann 2010, 415 pl. 4,7; Lübke 2009, fig. site Boberg 15, and the debate about the chronology 83.8,1.3). Also, the excavated lamps imply a settlement and creation of this pottery started immediately after of the Boberg sites by persons of the Ertebølle culture6 the excavations. For example, Schindler suggested a 5  Due to the high fragmentation of the Boberg vessels it was not possible to connect sherds built in N-technique to the final 7 It should be noted that the frequency of typo-chronologically Mesolithic. However, some pointed bases from Boberg demon- relevant pottery differs between the Boberg sites, which might be strate that N-technique was used. For the difference of building affected by the areas excavated in the 1950 s and 1960s. Where- a vessel in N-technique in the final Mesolithic and Neolithic see as at Boberg 15 (1,490 m²) and Boberg 20 (964 m²) larger trench- Koch-Nielsen 1986, 111 f. fig. 6; Koch 1998, 125 f. fig. 96. es were opened, the excavation area of site 15 East was limited 6  See for example Glykou 2010,185 fig. 17; 2016, 134 – 137 fig. 110, to 156 m². Moreover, according to the documented profiles obvi- pl. 10 – 11; Goldhammer 2008, 62 pl. 8,7 – 12; Schwabedissen ously just the upper surface of the elevations of the Boberg sites 1994, pl. 17,5 – 8. It should be noted that in northern Germany was excavated, and not the whole occupation layers. Regarding lamps are also present from the early Neolithic Funnel Beaker the distribution of typo-chronologically relevant pottery, differ- site Siggeneben-Süd LA 12, dist. Ostholstein; see Meurers-Balke ent settlement areas of both sites Boberg 15 and 20 are recogni- 1983, pl. 38, 6 – 10. Regarding lamps from Boberg (n = 11), a dating sable, and in consequence the different frequencies cannot be to the final Mesolithic as well as early Neolithic seems possible. interpreted impartially as indicators for site abandonment. La u ra Th i e l e n 199 development from pointed-bottomed Ertebølle pots technology, as well as analyses of the clays used in and dated the pottery to the Neolithic transition manufacturing the pottery, play a significant part. (Schindler 1953, 11 – 15). Laux also mentioned a A local production of pottery at the sites is con- typological evolution from pointed-bottomed ves- firmed by archaeometrical analysis. Diatoms (Me- sels, but also a relation to the Pitted Ware culture. ridion circulare, Aulacoseira crenulata; determina- In addition, impulses for the decoration technique tion after Hofmann et al. 2011) were identified that are also identifiable in the Ertebølle culture, initially can be linked to clay deposits in the littoral zone influenced by the Rössen culture, while the ornamen- of lakes and ponds fed by contact springs, match- tation all over the surface of the vessels is connected ing the local landscape8. In addition, a comparative to the Stroke-ornamented ware culture (Laux 1986, petrographic thin-section analysis9 recognised a set 23 – 29). On the other hand, J. Lichardus suggested of dark minerals in the pottery from Boberg 15, 15 a chronological relationship with his Rössen III East and 20 as well as in the locally produced grey phase, or Funnel Beaker A after Becker (Becker ware of the 13th/14th century from the neighbouring 1947; modified by Lichardus 1976) and proposed kiln site Boberg 21 (Spallek 2015, 65 – 78; cf. Keller- impulses originating from Poland, resulting in an mann 1950/1951, 34 – 42; see Fig. 1). Across the whole adaptation of the decoration pattern (Lichardus pottery history of the Boberg sites, including final 1976, 173 com. 335). On the basis of the decorated Mesolithic and flat-bottomed vessels with fingernail pottery from Friesack 4, dist. Havelland, and Boberg, impressions covering the whole surface, both types of G. Wetzel defined the ‘Friesack-Boberg group’ as a clay were used regularly for manufacturing, and this local facies. Similar ornamentations also appear on indicates a repeated exploitation of local resources. ceramics from Rhinow 30, dist. Havelland, and it is Regarding the distance between the sites, located on thought that the Friesack-Boberg group represents small sandy islands and surrounded by the river Elbe, an inland community established during the tran- there is about 100 m between the sites Boberg 15 sitional horizon between final Mesolithic and early and 15 East and about 200 m between sites 15 East Neolithic (Wetzel 2015, 516 – 522 fig. 6,1; 11,1.4; cf. and 20, so the sites are immediately adjacent and Beran 2012, 511 – 513, 523). Analogies in a north- intervisible. A ‘social relationship’ between the sites western direction were identified between Boberg thus seems plausible, especially because the rights to pottery and Swifterbant culture (De Roever 1979, exploit local resources would have had to be equal. 23; Ten Anscher 2012, 591; van der Waals 1972, Otherwise, competition and situations of conflict 167), as well as Hazendonk-I (Louwe-Kooijmans might be expected, which might have provoked the 1976, 269) vessels. In addition, the pottery with over- abandonment of one or more sites. all fingernail impressions is seen as an indicator that The technological handcraft of Ertebølle pot- the Swifterbant culture contributed to the neolithisa- tery built in U-technique shows granite temper in tion process between the rivers Rhine and Oder in medium and high quantities10, with mean grain northern Germany (Kotula et al. 2015, 502 f.). sizes of 2.93  mm (standard deviation: 0.79  mm); To study the establishment of the flat-bottomed mean wall thickness is 9.6 mm (standard deviation: pottery covered with fingernail impressions from site 1.58 mm). The flat-bottomed pottery, decorated with Boberg 15 it is important to shed light on the local fingernail impressions built in N-technique, also handcraft tradition of both final Mesolithic pottery contains granite temper. High quantities are more and vessels with fingernail impression. On this basis, common than medium quantities, with mean grain pottery indicating communication and interaction sizes of 2.64  mm (standard deviation: 0.56  mm). between Boberg settlers and other final Mesolithic Mean wall thickness is 9.4 mm (standard deviation: as well as Neolithic societies is of special interest 1.93 mm). The technology of both vessels built in in identifying similarities and differences as well as U-technique and pottery with fingernail impressions possible influences. Boberg: Pottery tradition 8  Analysis conducted by Th. Hübener, Institut für Biowissen- schaften, University of Rostock. To identify inter-cultural contacts and interactions at 9  Analysis conducted by O. Stilborg, SKEA Keramikanalys, the Boberg sites which might have influenced the es- Schweden. tablishment and development of pottery with horizon- 10  Quantities were defined as low ≤10 %, medium ≥10 % tal rows of fingernail impressions that cover the whole ≤20 %, high > 20 %. This differs from generally used values after vessel body, the local handcraft tradition, including Hulthén 1974, 36: low < 15 %, medium ≥15 % ≤25 %, high > 25 %. 200 Th e late Mesolithic in H amburg-Boberg: inter-c ultural interactions and im pact s Fig. 3 Boberg. 1 – 2 Globular beaker; 3 vessel with rounded knob handle; 4 sherd with rectangular impressions (photos: T. Weise, Ar- chaeological Museum of Hamburg). Scale 1 : 4. seems comparable, especially the temper, grain size ing of grog temper seems possible (see below). Fur- and wall thickness11. ther intra-cultural contacts are indicated by a pointed The confirmed pottery traditions of the Boberg base decorated with rounded impressions (Fig. 2.10). sites and the use of local clays also enable the identi- There are no analogies to Ertebølle pots in northern fication of imported vessels, which illustrate contacts Germany, but complete decorated vessels are present, between Boberg settlers and other cultural groups. for example, at Löddesborg (Jennbert 1984, 53 f., 58 These diverse interactions also affected local pro- fig. 41,48,8; 1994, 158 f., 162 fig. 8) and Soldattorpet duction, an aspect which can be studied through a (Stilborg / Holm 2009, 335 fig. 11.6) in southern comparison of manufacturing processes. Thereby, Sweden. Although their decorations are not exactly the imports’ similarities and dissimilarities to the the same, they provide the closest match. local handcraft tradition of pottery were determined. Pottery indicating contacts to Neolithic cultures is illustrated by the well-known globular beaker from Boberg 20, with similar beakers appearing during the Contacts and interactions middle and late Rössen culture in southern Lower At Boberg, pottery showing intra- and inter-cultural Saxony (see Lönne 2003, 211, 218 f.; Fig. 3.1). An interactions and communications during the final Me- additional rim sherd decorated with oval impressions solithic is present. With respect to the specific manu- can be associated with globular beakers, but the ab- facturing of ceramics, possible influences on the local sence of a specific decoration does not allow the de- handcraft tradition are of special interest, and the pe- termination of a geographical origin (Fig. 3.2). The trographic thin-section analysis contributes a deeper archaeometrical analysis of the rim sherd detected insight into the technological production. two different types of grog temper. Thus, for temper- Contact within the Ertebølle culture is indi- ing this grog-tempered vessel, previous generations of cated by a lamp (Fig. 2.14) built with non-local clay grog tempered ware as well as (remains of) a vessel and tempered with granite. Bearing in mind that in tempered with granite were crushed (Fig. 4.1). The northern Germany lamps are more common at coastal temper amount is 16 %; the grain size is 1.1 mm. The sites (cf. Glykou 2010,185 fig. 17; 2016, 134 – 137 fig. raw clay used for manufacturing this vessel clearly 110, pl. 10 – 11; Goldhammer 2008, 62 pl. 8.7 – 12; differs from the local clays and illustrates that the Schwabedissen 1994, pl. 17.5 – 8), this might illustrate globular beaker was imported to the Boberg sites. contacts between coastal and inland groups. Equally Interactions with the Rössen culture are also rep- notable is another lamp which, according to its thin- resented by a small pot with a rounded knob handle section, was produced with local clay and tempered (Fig. 3.3; see also Laux 1986, 1 fig. 9,6; Schindler 1961, with granite-tempered grog (Fig. 2.15; 4.3). The grog 15 fig. 4,1). Schindler (1961, 14; 1962, 253) already temper differs from the mainly used granite temper in drew an analogy to Rössen pottery, which was also final Mesolithic pottery from Boberg, and interaction supported by Laux (1986, 15 com. 18)12. Regarding the with persons knowledgeable about the manufactur- technology with 17 % temper amount, and 1.5 mm grain size, the small vessel shows similarities to the globular beaker and its grog temper as well as the composition 11  The technological tradition is also consisent with continuity­ in clay preparations within the typological turnaround of the early Neolithic Funnel Beaker pottery from the Boberg sites. The middle Neolithic Funnel Beaker pottery with vertical inci- 12  Laux highlighted a typological parallel with a vessel from sions also indicates a trajectory of successive change, while the Wahlitz, dist. Burg (Behrens 1973, 57 fig. 19c), but the bowl pottery of the Single Grave culture demonstrates, in contrast, shape of the vessel from Wahlitz is not conclusive; see also a significant and pronounced change in technology. Klassen 2004, 77. La u ra Th i e l e n 201 Fig. 4 Boberg. Grog temper. 1 globular beaker; 2 vessel with rounded knob handle; 3 lamp. A grog and granite; B grog (photos: O. Stilborg, SKEA Keramikanalys). of grog and granite, indicating that two different types Saxony, Bavaria, and Bohemia (Czech Republic) (e. g. of vessels were crushed for tempering (Fig. 4.2). In con- Kaufmann 1976, pl. 25,4, 26,4.9.11 – 12; Klassen 2004, trast, the archaeometrical analysis makes clear that in 81). The Stroke-ornamented vessel from Boberg differs this case local clay was used and that the vessel with the from local wares in its low amount of temper (7 %) and rounded knob handle was produced at the Boberg sites. its small grain size of 1.3 mm, whereas the granite tem- The manufacturing processes of both are very similar, per was also frequently used for the production of local as demonstrated by different types of grog temper. Yet vessels at Boberg. The analysed raw clay demonstrates for both samples, the production techniques as revealed that the vessel with rectangular impressions was made by the grain sizes and, in particular, the grog temper with local clay. The difference of the technological tradi- tradition, differ from the contemporary final Mesolithic tion, especially concerning temper amount and grain pottery as well as from the flat-bottomed vessels with size, exemplifies that the vessel was not produced as a fingernail impressions from the Boberg sites. Thus it copy by locals, but rather manufactured by a potter who seems possible that persons from the Rössen culture had the special knowledge of manufacturing Stroke- manufactured pottery at Boberg. ornamented ware pottery. Interaction with the Stroke-ornamented ware cul- Inter-cultural interaction between Boberg settlers ture at Boberg is indicated by one piece ornamented and Gatersleben people is indicated by a flat-bottomed with rectangular impressions (Fig. 3.4). Similar decora- vessel decorated with rounded impressions covering the tion occurs during the middle Neolithic Stroke-orna- shoulder (Fig. 5.3). According to L. Klassen a connec- mented ware culture of the middle Elbe-Saale region, tion of the vessel to the Gatersleben culture is illustrated Fig. 5 Boberg. 1 – 2 rim sherds with impressions on the exterior, interior and on top of the rim; 3 flat bottomed vessel with rounded impressions covering the shoulder; 4 – 6 vessels with fingernail impressions (3 – 6 photos: T. Weise, Archaeological Museum of Hamburg). 1 – 2; 4 – 6 scale 1 : 6; 3 scale 1 : 4. 202 Th e late Mesolithic in H amburg-Boberg: inter-c ultural interactions and im pact s by comparable vessels from the site Schenkenberg, of temper (9 %), which is not common in the local pots, dist. Delitzsch (Kroitzsch 1973, pl. 14 f.). In addition, implying that the vessel was produced by a person of the it is suggested that this ornamentation succeeded the Swifterbant culture (Northern Group). The decorations decoration of the Rössen culture and, consequently, the of the vessels with fingernail impressions also indicate Boberg vessel could be dated to the early Gatersleben a connection to the Swifterbant culture. The archaeo- culture (4,400 – 4,200 BC) of the middle Elbe-Saale re- metric analysis mainly identified the use of local clay gion (Klassen 2004, 79 f.; see also Laux 1986, 27 f. fig. for manufacturing (Fig. 5.5 – 6), except one sample with 19,4). The clay of the vessel has a general similarity to non-local clay, illustrating contacts to Swifterbant com- the local clay, so that it is not possible to decide if the munities (Fig. 5.4). However, regarding the high amount vessel was locally produced or imported. However, the of granite temper (29 %) and the grain size (3.2 mm), technology differs from the final Mesolithic pottery as the technology does not really differ from the local tra- well as the vessels covered with fingernail impressions. dition. Contacts and interactions with the Swifterbant This vessel is tempered with a crushed rock containing culture are obvious for both vessels with combined only quartz and feldspar, and the common local granite impressions at different positions, as well as the pottery could not be determined with certainty. In addition, es- with overall fingernail impression from Boberg. Taking pecially the grain size (1.1 mm) and quantity of temper the geographical distribution of ornamentation types (15 %) seem comparable to the Rössen technology from into account, it becomes apparent that the rim decora- pottery of the Boberg sites. Therefore, even this vessel tion is more often present in the Swifterbant Northern may have been produced by a person of the Gatersle- Group (Netherlands and northwest Germany), whereas ben culture, instead of a local individual copying a overall fingertip impressions are more frequent in the Gatersleben vessel. Swifterbant Southern Group, close to the river Scheldt Two vessels from Boberg built in U-technique in Belgium (Raemaekers 1999, 111 f.). Also, the use are decorated with impressions on the inside, top and of temper indicates a differentiation. Whereas both outside on the rim (Fig. 5.1 – 2). Even though Ertebølle groups used organic temper, crushed quartz/granite pointed-based vessels with rim decoration, including im- occurs more often in the Northern Group. On the pressions on top of the rim as well as rounded impres- other hand, grog temper seems to be more frequent sions on the outside, are present in northern Germany in pottery of the Southern Group14. Given the current at the sites Timmendorf Nordmole I, dist. northwest stage of research, it is not possible to decide if the bea- Mecklenburg (Lübke 2003, 637 fig. 79,5 : 1; 2009, fig. ker made with non-local clay illustrates inter-cultural 38.8,2), Rosenhof, dist. Ostholstein (Schwabedissen contacts to the Northern or Southern Group of the 1994, pl. 17.1) and Schlamersdorf LA 05, dist. Stor- Swifterbant culture, but inter-cultural influences by marn (Hartz 1996, 376 f. fig. 4.7), the decoration on the Swifterbant culture resulting in the development the inside of the rim is absent there. Decoration on of the Boberg pottery decorated overall with fingernail the inside of the rim occurs occasionally in Ertebølle impressions seems obvious. Furthermore, the pottery pottery, e. g. at Löddesborg in southern Sweden (Jenn­ built in U-technique with decoration on the inside of bert 2011, 93; see also Brinch Petersen 2011, 223). the rim indicates contacts which might have influenced In contrast, impressions on the inside of the rim are the final Mesolithic local handcraft. a significant element of decoration of pottery of the Swifterbant culture (Northern Group) in its Middle Contact zones and relationships Phase (4,600 – 3,900/3,800 calBC; cf. Raemaekers 1999, 108 – 112, 165; Raemaekers / De Roever 2010, 135), The analyses results indicate inter-cultural contacts with and the two pieces of Boberg might therefore illustrate final Mesolithic and Neolithic groups and highlight that contacts with the Northern Group of the Swifterbant these relationships went beyond a simple ‘give and take’ culture, Middle Phase. The manufacturing of both ves- of specific goods. Pottery can have been manufactured sels indicates similarities to the local pottery, as there during mutual interactions when communication and is granite temper as well as grain sizes of 2 – 3 mm. The knowledge transfer took place, and diverse effects on archaeometrically examined vessel (Fig. 5.1) shows the the local productions are recognisable. use of local clay13. A difference exists in the low amount 14 See Constantin 2010, 132 f.; Crombé 2009, 486 – 4 89; 13 In that case, a comparison of the clays used for the two Crombé et al. 2008, 466 – 470; Raemaekers 1999, 109, 111 table possible Swifterbant vessels is necessary to determine if both 3.46; 2008, 495 f. table 2; Raemaekers / De Roever 2010, have been produced at the Boberg sites. 141 – 143; Ten Anscher 2012, 91 f. fig. 5.3; 2015, 340 f. fig. 7. La u ra Th i e l e n 203 The manufacturing of the Rössen and Stroke- by people of the Swifterbant culture. Although no clear ornamented ware pottery at Boberg deviates from influence on the decoration patterns is recognisable, the final Mesolithic tradition in terms of typology and the interactions between Boberg and Swifterbant might technology. Especially the grog temper of both the have had a lasting effect on the local tradition. First globular beaker and the small vessel with knob handle of all, it is remarkable that the Boberg pottery is built differ from Ertebølle pottery and vessels covered with in U-technique which is familiar from Ertebølle and fingernail impressions from the Boberg sites. The small Swifterbant manufacturing. One difference between vessel with grog and grog-granite temper, manufac- both cultures is the H-technique in pottery production, tured with local clay, exemplifies that the potter had to which is only known from the Ertebølle culture16. H- know about Rössen manufacturing traditions. Also, the and U-technique both use coils, but differ as coils in difference concerning grain size and the low amount the H-technique are fixed by pressing vertically down of temper of the Stroke-ornamented ware vessel sup- with the fingertips. For vessels built in U-technique, ports the idea that the vessel was created by a cultur- coils were smoothed down on the inside and out- ally foreign potter at the Boberg sites, and this opens side (Hulthén 1977, 35 fig. 15; Koch-Nielsen 1986, up the possibility of a communication of manufactur- 109 – 112; Stilborg / Bergenstråhle 2000, 31 – 33 ing techniques to the locals. Furthermore, both vessels fig. 5). As a result, the H-technique produces thicker made with local clay imply a production by Rössen vessel walls compared to the U-technique (Stilborg and Stroke-ornamented ware potters and indicate an / Bergenståhle 2000, 30 f.; see also Andersen 2011, integration of Neolithic people into the society settled 199 f.). Regarding heat resistance (cf. Rice 1987, 229; at the Boberg sites. Although the contacts to Neolithic 2015; Tite 1999, 220) in particular, the reduction of groups did not influence the final Mesolithic typology wall thickness improves the quality of the vessel and significantly, influences by way of knowledge transfer can imply skill development. According to the exca- by Rössen potters could be illustrated, as seen by the vation findings at Ringkloster, Denmark, the coiling use of grog temper, specifically in the lamp produced techniques succeeded each other. At the beginning with local clay and tempered with grog-granite15. Con- both H- and U-technique are present, then there are tacts between final Mesolithic locals and the Rössen only the U-technique and an oblique version of the and Stroke-ornamented ware cultures exemplify that U-technique, to be eventually complemented by the societies with different economies and cultural tradi- N-technique17. However, as pottery build in the H-tech- tions interacted, but the continuation of Mesolithic nique is not present at Boberg, a cultural proximity to pottery traditions indicates no demonstrable major the Swifterbant culture seems possible. Furthermore, impacts by the Neolithic cultures. This also implies the coiling technique can have had an effect on the that people of both Rössen and Stroke-ornamented shape of vessels, bottoms included. For example, H- ware culture were not fixedly settled down, and (at technique and solid pointed bases are predominant in times) established themselves at the Boberg sites. the eastern part of southern Scandinavia, whereas bases The two vessels from Boberg built in U-technique with pronounced pointed ends occur frequently in the and decorated on the inside, top and outside of the rim western part (Hulthén 1977, 39 fig. 19; Stilborg / correspond with decorated pottery from the Northern Bergenståhle 2000, 31). Moreover, there are regional Group of the Swifterbant culture. The closest paral- differences within the Danish Ertebølle culture. Pottery lels are found in the Middle Phase (4,600 – 3,900/3,800 in northern Jutland has cylindrical vessel shapes with calBC; Raemaekers 1999, 108 – 112, 165; Raemaekers / thick walls, built in H-technique, and the bases have De Roever 2010, 135), particularly with regard to the precisely shaped points, while in the west-southwest impressions on the inside of the rim. The archaeometri- region U- and oblique U-technique occur more often, cal analysis on one sample indicates that the vessel was and vessels are S-shaped, with more conical bases produced with local clay, but the ornamentation on ­(Andersen 2011, 196 – 199, 203 figs. 4; 8; 10). the inside was not manufactured repeatedly by Boberg potters. Therefore, the decoration does not represent a feature of final Mesolithic pottery at the Boberg sites and rather indicates that the vessels were manufactured 16 See Andersen 2011, 199, 202 Fig. 9,a; 2010, 170; De Roever 2004, 46 f.; Hulthén 1977, 35 Fig. 15; Koch-Nielsen 1986, 110; Raemaekers 1999, 195; Stilborg / Bergenstråhle 2000, 30 f. 17  Andersen 2011, 199, 202 fig. 9a. – In contrast, radiocarbon 15  Thin-sections indicating lamps tempered with grog, quartz dates on pottery from Neustadt LA 156, dist. Ostholstein, indi- and feldspar are also present for example at site Rosenhof in cate that H-, U- and N-technique were in use at the same time: northern Germany: Hulthén 1977, 43, 45 fig. 24. Glykou 2016, 48 – 57, 164 f. 204 Th e late Mesolithic in H amburg-Boberg: inter-c ultural interactions and im pact s Site Lab.-no. C14 age BP C14 age calBC 1s C14 age calBC 2s δ13C Friesack 4 AAR-15046 5419±27 4289±30 4336–4241 -34.51±0.05 Rhinow 30 AAR-18757 5250±30 4073±72 4229–3977 -28.95±0.05 Rhinow 30 AAR-18758 5138±36 3923±65 4038–3804 -28.83±0.05 Boberg 15 LuS 11578 5820±55 4767–4600 4799–4539 — Boberg 15 LuS 11658 5300±60 4231–4046 4317–3985 — Boberg 15 LuS 11577 5000±60 3932–3706 3984–3661 — Table 1 Radiocarbon dates of pottery from sites Friesack 4 and Rhinow 30, dist. Haveland (after Kotula et al. 2015, 495, table 1). Various distributions of specific bottom shapes though more frequent in the Southern Group. If the are also mentioned in the context of the Swifterbant Swifterbant culture, distributed in the southern region, culture (Raemaekers 1999, 112). In comparison, influenced the development of the pottery with finger- Ertebølle and Swifterbant ceramics show similari- nail impressions covering the whole surface, a knowl- ties especially concerning bases with a pronounced edge transfer of grog temper can also be discussed. pointed end, but the pointed bottoms with triangu- Nonetheless, it must be noted that grog temper has not lar and conical shape of Ertebølle vessels differ. It is been identified in pottery with fingernail impressions worth noting that all types of bottoms are preserved from Boberg. In contrast, the vessel shape, particu- at Boberg (see Fig. 2.1 – 9). In sum, the final Meso- larly the flat bottom, shows that Neolithic cultures lithic pottery from Boberg resembles both Ertebølle also played an active part during the development of and Swifterbant manufacturing in terms of building the local pottery. Inter-cultural interaction between technique and bottom shapes. Therefore, interactions Boberg settlers and Gatersleben people is indicated with groups of the Swifterbant culture might have by the flat-bottomed vessel decorated with rounded influenced local pottery production. Concerning the impressions covering the shoulder. In sum, the pot- potential chronological succession of the building tery with overall fingernail impression from Boberg techniques, the predominant use of U-technique at illustrates inter-cultural interactions and impulses from the Boberg sites might also depend on the chrono- final Mesolithic and Neolithic societies, resulting in logical setting. The various types of bottoms might an adaptation and combination of specific elements, also reflect functional dimensions instead of cultural including shape and ornamentation. Indeed the tech- backgrounds. However, lamps are a clear exception, nology of both vessels built in U-technique and pottery because they are only represented in the Ertebølle with overall fingernail impressions seems comparable, culture, and the imported sample indicates intra-cul- especially the temper, grain size and wall thickness. tural contact, as does the pointed base decorated with The perpetuation of the final Mesolithic technological rounded impressions. In sum, the resemblance to both tradition as well as the use of local clay indicates that Ertebølle and Swifterbant pottery makes it possible the Boberg settlers were involved and, in consequence, that impacts from Ertebølle and Swifterbant groups an expulsion of the locals seems improbable. resulted in the fusion of techniques at the Boberg In this context it is notable that pointed bases and sites and therefore both influenced the local pottery lamps from Friesack 4 also indicate a settlement of this tradition. In this context, a permanent stay of persons site during the final Mesolithic and moreover represent of the Swifterbant culture at the Boberg sites can also material of the southernmost archaeological site of the be discussed. The interaction between the Ertebølle Ertebølle culture in inland eastern Germany (Kotula settlers from Boberg with Swifterbant groups and their et al. 2015, 494, 499 – 501; Wetzel 2015, 518, 523). The influence might indicate a fundamental difference settlement of Boberg and Friesack by final Mesolithic from the interactions with persons of the Neolithic groups of the Ertebølle culture, together with the radio- Rössen and Stroke-ornamented ware culture, perhaps carbon dates of the decorated pottery, imply that both due to a higher sense of association and proximity vessel types were produced at the same time (Table 1). between Mesolithic communities. A completely decorated vessel from Friesack 4 yielded Such a higher sense of association and proxim- a final Mesolithic date (Tab. 1; AAR-15046). Similar ity can also have had an effect on the development of dates are associated with two samples from Rhinow the Boberg pottery with horizontal rows of fingernail 30 (Tab. 1; AAR-18757; AAR-18758; cf. Kotula et al. impressions that cover the whole vessel body. As men- 2015, 495 table 1; Wetzel 2015, 516). The range of tioned above, potential influences of the Swifterbant the radiocarbon dates of pottery from Friesack 4 and culture are obvious, as ornamentation covering the Rhinow 30 indicates a dating of the pottery with finger- whole or a large part of the vessel is common, even nail impressions that cover the vessel body to the final La u ra Th i e l e n 205 Fig. 6 Boberg. Interaction network. No scale. Mesolithic. Keeping in mind that the early Neolithic alongside the river Elbe are conspicuous, as is the Funnel Beaker culture starts around 4,100/4,000 BC, dating. Both seem to support the term ‘Friesack-Bo- especially the Rhinow 30 dates also support a posi- berg group’, defined after Wetzel (2015). However, it tion in the transition horizon between final Mesolithic should be emphasised that inter-cultural interaction and early Neolithic (cf. Kotula et al. 2015, 500 – 503; and impacts, which can be connected to the Swifter- Wetzel 2015, 519). Concerning the chronological set- bant culture as well as the Gatersleben culture, played ting of the pottery, the radiocarbon dates of completely a significant part for the establishment of the overall decorated vessels from Boberg 15 also seem to support decorated pottery at the Boberg sites. In addition, a dating in the final Mesolithic as well as in the transi- regarding the adaptation of flat bottoms, influence tion horizon (Table 1; LuS 11578, 11658, LuS 1157718). by the Brześć Kujawski-/Lengyel culture can be dis- Regarding a possible reservoir-effect, the settlements cussed for the sites Friesack 4 and Rhinow 30 (Wetzel are situated near water and thus the use of aquatic 2015, 528 fig. 17), which might indicate that different resources might have adversely ­affected the radiocar- Neolithic cultures influenced the development of the bon dating results. In this context, the missing carbon flat-bottomed pottery in the north. values of the Boberg pottery as well as the low carbon Furthermore, the pottery with overall fingernail values of the Friesack and Rhinow dates urge caution impressions stands out due to its distribution at the (cf. Kotula et al. 2015, 500 – 502; Wetzel 2015, 523), Boberg sites. Final Mesolithic pottery and early Neo- and further radiocarbon dates are necessary to confirm lithic vessels decorated with arcades and punctures the dating in the transition from final Mesolithic to from the outside, resulting in a bossel on the inside early Neolithic. (‘Lochbuckel’), occur at Boberg 15, 15 East, and 20, In sum, the geographical distribution of flat-bot- and indicate that all sites were settled by groups of the tomed pottery with fingernail impressions and the Ertebølle and early Funnel Beaker culture. In con- restricted settlement region in northern Germany trast, the pottery with overall fingernail impressions is only present at Boberg 15. As mentioned above, a social relationship between the sites is presumed, and 18  The analysis was conducted by Anders Lindahl, The Labo- the limited incidence of vessels might indicate that ratory of ceramic research, Lund University, Schweden. the Friesack-Boberg pottery had a special function as 206 Th e late Mesolithic in H amburg-Boberg: inter-c ultural interactions and im pact s well as social significance, and was thus symbolically the Swifterbant people, shows connections to the Rös- charged. sen as well as the Ertebølle culture. Also, site Dąbki Furthermore, the predominant use of N-technique 9 in northern Poland should not go unmentioned, for manufacturing the vessels with fingernail impres- where pottery illustrates contacts to the Linear Pot- sions as well as the flat bottoms indicate a proximity tery culture, Stroke-ornamented ware culture, Brześć to Neolithic pottery, and the interconnection of cul- Kujawski group, and Lengyel, Bodrogkeresztúr as well tural impulses and influences might also show that as Ertebølle culture (Czekaj-Zastawny 2015). In the the Friesack-Boberg group was crucial for the process end, the great significance of special places and ‘meet- of neolithisation in the north. The adaptation might ing points’ in the final Mesolithic becomes apparent illustrate the beginning of (social) conformity, which and underscores that groups were not isolated, but further increased until the formation of early Neolithic rather open to contacts and interactions. In such a Funnel beaker pottery around 4,100 BC. Bearing in setting, increased tolerance towards different socio- mind that the development of Funnel beakers also indi- cultural as well as economic practices is required, cates the fusion of impulses from different cultures (cf. and therefore it should also be discussed whether Klassen 2004, 166 f., 288 – 290; Müller 2011, 293 – 296 inter-cultural contacts were performed by a specialised fig. 7), the Friesack-Boberg group perhaps highlights an subset of the population which consequently played intensified network of different cultures which played a key role. Assuming that contacts took place repeat- a significant part in the neolithisation process. edly, it might be possible that these people had easier access to each other and more knowledge of cultural diversity, helping to dissolve boundaries and limita- Conclusion: network and mobility tions between other actors. The various intra- and inter-cultural contacts at the Boberg sites highlight the contact network of archaeo- Acknowledgements logical cultures and, therefore, a high level of mobility to interact with different groups. Furthermore, influ- Special thanks go to B. Ramminger and D. Hofmann ences might also illustrate migrations of culturally as well as O. Stilborg for all the helpful discussions. foreign persons to the Boberg sites (Fig. 6). It is thus Not least I wish to express my gratitude to the Ar- clear that during the final Mesolithic long distances chaeological Museum of Hamburg for granting access were travelled to keep in contact. In particular, the to the artefacts. location of sites along the river Elbe implies that river courses were an advantageous means for making con- tact and interacting, and will have played a crucial References role. Moreover, using waterways enables people to cover long distances in a rather short time, and thus Andersen 2011: S. H. Andersen, Kitchen middens and the the river Elbe likely was an artery for contacts in the early pottery of Denmark. In: S. Hartz / F. Lüth / Th. final Mesolithic. The locally produced ‘foreign’ pottery Terberger (eds.), Frühe Keramik im Ostseeraum – Datie- illustrates the integration of inter-cultural persons in rung und Sozialer Kontext. Internationaler Workshop the local society, with different levels of impact and re- in Schleswig vom 20. bis 21. Oktober 2006. Bericht der jection. While the local technology remained basically Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 89, 2008 (2011), unchanged, there were interactions with Rössen and 193 – 215. Stroke-ornamented ware groups, and the development Andersen 2010: S.  H. Andersen, The first pottery in of the Friesack-Boberg group demonstrates culturally South Scandinavia. In: B. Vanmontfort / L. Louwe diverse impacts. It seems that foreigners visited the Kooijmans/L. Amkreutz/L. Verhart (eds.), Pots, Farm- Boberg sites intentionally, and for social meetings in- ers and Foragers. Pottery traditions and social interac- stead of displacing the original inhabitants. Clearly, tion in the earliest Neolithic of the Lower Rhine Area. people from the Boberg sites were open to inter- and Archaeological Studies Leiden University 20 (Leiden intra-cultural interactions. With regard to the imported 2010) 167 – 176. vessels, it is emphasised that they can likely have been Ten Anscher 2012: T.  J. ten Anscher, Leven met de brought to the Boberg sites by foreigners as well as Vecht. Schokland-P14 en de Noordoostpolder in het locals who had visited faraway regions. However, the Neolithicum en de Bronstijd (Zutphen 2012). Boberg sites are not a single phenomenon in the final Ten Anscher 2015: T. J. ten Anscher, Under the radar: Swift- Mesolithic. For example, in northwestern Germany, erbant and the origins of the Funnel Beaker culture. pottery from site Hüde 1, dist. Diepholz, settled by In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / La u ra Th i e l e n 207 Th. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and Ehlers 1990: J. Ehlers, Untersuchungen zur Morphodyna- the Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands mik der Vereisungen Norddeutschlands unter Berück- (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im sichtigung benachbarter Gebiete. Bremer Beiträge zur Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 335 – 357. Geographie und Raumplanung 19 (Bremen 1990). Becker 1947: C. J. Becker, Mosefundne Lekar Fra Yngre Ehlers 1991: J. Ehlers, Geologische Karten von Hamburg – Stenalder. Studier Over Tragtbægerkulturen i Dan- Blatt 2527: Bergedorf 1 : 25000 (Hamburg 1991). mark. Aarbøger for nordisk Oldkyndighed og Historie Ehlers 2011: J. Ehlers, Das Eiszeitalter (Heidelberg 2011). 40 (København 1947). Glykou 2010: A. Glykou, Technological and typological Behrens 1973: H. Behrens, Die Jungsteinzeit im Mittelelbe- analysis of Ertebølle and early Funnel Beaker pottery Saale-Gebiet. Veröffentlichungen des Landesmuseums from Neustadt LA 156 and contemporary sites in north- für Vor- und Frühgeschichte in Halle 27 (Berlin 1973). ern Germany. In: B. Vanmontfort / L. Louwe Kooijans / Beran 2012: J. Beran, Spitzhauen, Schöningen und Swifter- L. Amkreutz / L. Verhart (eds.), Pots, Farmers and For- bant – Überlegungen zu Endmesolithikum und begin- agers. Pottery traditions and social interaction in the nendem Jungneolithikum im Nordostdeutschen Binnen- earliest Neolithic of the Lower Rhine Area. Archaeologi- land. In: R. Gleser / V. Becker (eds.), Mitteleuropa im cal Studies Leiden University 20 (Leiden 2010) 177 – 188. 5. Jahrtausend vor Christus. Beiträge zur Internationa- Glykou 2016: A. Glykou, Neustadt LA 156. Ein Submariner len Konferenz in Münster 2010 (Berlin 2012) 509 – 527. Fundplatz des späten Mesolithikums und des frühesten Brinch Petersen 2011: E. Brinch Petersen, Hundred and Neolithikums in Schleswig-Holstein. Untersuchungen fifty years of Ertebølle ceramics in the western Baltic. zur Subsistenzstrategie der letzten Jäger, Sammler und In: S. Hartz / F. Lüth / Th. Terberger (eds.), Frühe Kera- Fischer an der norddeutschen Ostseeküste. Untersuchun- mik im Ostseeraum – Datierung und Sozialer Kontext. gen und Materialien zur Steinzeit in Schleswig-Holstein Internationaler Workshop in Schleswig vom 20. bis 21. und im Ostseeraum 7 (Kiel / Hamburg 2016). Oktober 2006. Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Goldhammer 2008: J. Goldhammer, Untersuchungen zur Kommission 89, 2008 (2011), 217 – 2 39. Stratigraphie, Fundverteilung und zum Fundspektrum Constantin 2010: C. Constantin, Fine plant temper and der mittleren Ertebøllekultur in Ostholstein. Die Nach- origin of the Swifterbant culture. In: B. Vanmontfort / grabungen in Grube Rosenhof aus den Jahren 2001 und L. Louwe Kooijmans / L. Amkreutz / L. Verhart (eds.), 2002. Universitätsforschungen zur Prähistorischen Ar- Pots, Farmers and Foragers. Pottery traditions and so- chäologie 163 (Bonn 2008). cial interaction in the earliest Neolithic of the Lower Grohmann 2010: I.  M. Grohmann, Die Ertebølle- und Rhine Area. Archaeological Studies Leiden University frühtrichterbecherzeitliche Keramik aus Wangels, Kr. 20 (Leiden 2010) 131 – 134. Ostholstein. Ein Beitrag zur Neolithisierung Schles- Crombé 2009: Ph. Crombé, Early Pottery in Hunter-Gatherer wig-Holsteins. In: D. Gronenborn / J. Petrasch (eds.), Die Societies of Western Europe. In: P. Jordan / M. Zvelebil Neolithisierung Mitteleuropas. Internationale Tagung, (eds.), Ceramics before Farming. The Dispersal of Pot- Mainz 24. bis 26. Juni 2005. RGZM–Tagungen 4 (Mainz tery Among Prehistoric Eurasian Hunter-Gatherers 2010) 407 – 424. (Walnut Creek/California 2009) 477 – 498. Hartz 1996: S. Hartz, Travenbrück (-Schlamersdorf) LA 5, Crombé et al. 2008: Ph. Crombé / M. Boudin / M. van Stry- Kr. Stormarn. Offa-Zeitschrift 53, 1996 (1999), 374 – 378. donck, Swifterbant pottery in the Scheldt Basin and Hofmann et al. 2011: G. Hofmann / M. Werum / H. Lan- the emergence of the earliest indigenous pottery in the ge-Bertalot, Diatomeen im Süßwasser-Benthos von sandy lowlands of Belgium. In: S. Hartz / F. Lüth / Th. Mitteleuropa (Rugell 2011). Terberger (eds.), Frühe Keramik im Ostseeraum – Dat- Hulthén 1974: B. Hulthén, On documentation of pottery. ierung und Sozialer Kontext. Internationaler Workshop Acta Archaeologica Lundensia Series in 8° Minore: N° in Schleswig vom 20. bis 21. Oktober 2006. Bericht der 3 (Bonn 1974). Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 89, 2008 (2011), Hulthén 1977: B. Hulthén, On Ceramic Technology du- 465 – 4 83. ring the Scanian Neolithic and Bronze Age. Theses and Czekaj-Zastawny 2015: A. Czekaj-Zastawny, Imported Papers in North-European Archaeology 6 (Stockholm Danubian pottery in the Late Mesolithic context in 1977). Dąbki. In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaek- Jennbert 1984: K. Jennbert, Den produktiva gåvan. Tradition ers / Th. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania och innovation i Sydskandinavien för omkring 5300 and the Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands år sedan. The Fertile Gift. Tradition and Innovation (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im in Southern Scandinavia Some 5,300 Years Ago. Acta Ostseeraum 8. Archaeology and History of the Baltic Archaeologica Lundensia (Lund 1984). 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 219 – 2 31. 208 Th e late Mesolithic in H amburg-Boberg: inter-c ultural interactions and im pact s Jennbert 1994: K. Jennbert, Getreide als Geschenk. Ertebøl- Laux 1986: F. Laux, Die mesolithischen und frühneolithi- lekultur und frühneolithische Trichterbecherkultur. In: schen Fundplätze auf den Boberger Dünen bei Ham- J. Hoika / J. Meurers-Balke (eds.), Beiträge zur früh- burg. Hammaburg N. F. 7, 1984/1985 (1986), 9 – 38. neolithischen Trichterbecherkultur im westlichen Ost- Lichardus 1976: J. Lichardus, Rössen – Gatersleben – Baal- seegebiet. 1. Internationales Trichterbechersymposium berge. Ein Beitrag zur Chronologie des mitteldeutschen in Schleswig vom 4. bis 7. März 1985. Untersuchungen Neolithikums und zur Entstehung der Trichterbe- und Materialien zur Steinzeit in Schleswig-Holstein 1 cher-Kulturen. Saarbrücker Beiträge zur Altertumskun- (Neumünster 1994) 155 – 164. de 17 (Bonn 1976). Jennbert 2011: K. Jennbert, Ertebølle pottery in southern Lönne 2003: P. Lönne, Das Mittelneolithikum im südlichen Sweden – a question of handicraft, networks and creoliz- Niedersachsen. Materialhefte zur Ur- und Frühgeschich- ation in a period of neolithisation. In: S. Hartz / F. Lüth / te Niedersachsens 31 (Rahden/Westf. 2003). Th. Terberger (eds.), Frühe Keramik im Ostseeraum Louwe Kooijmans 1976: L. P. Louwe Kooijmans, Local De- – Datierung und Sozialer Kontext. Internationaler velopments in a Borderland. A Survey of the Neolithic Workshop in Schleswig vom 20. bis 21. Oktober 2006. at the Lower Rhine. Oudgeidkundige Mededelingen Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 89, uit het Rijksmuseum van Oudheden te Leiden 57, 1976 2008 (2011), 89 – 110. (1977), 227 – 297. Kaufmann 1976: D. Kaufmann, Wirtschaft und Kultur der Lübke 1992: H. Lübke, Neue Ausgrabungen in Boberg. Ar- Stichbandkeramiker im Saalegebiet. Veröffentlichun- chäologie in Deutschland 1, 1992, 49. gen des Landesmuseums für Vorgeschichte in Halle Lübke 2000: H. Lübke, Die steinzeitlichen Fundplätze Beben- 30 (Berlin 1976). see LA 26 und LA 76, Kreis Segeberg. Die Steinartefakte. Kellermann 1950/1951: V. Kellermann, Die mittelalter- Technologisch-ergologische Studien zum Nordischen liche Töpferei an der Boberger Furt. Hammaburg 2,4, Frühneolithikum. Untersuchungen und Materialien zur 1950/1951, 37 – 42. Steinzeit in Schleswig-Holstein 3 (Neumünster 2000). Klassen 2004: L. Klassen, Jade und Kupfer. Untersuchungen Lübke 2003, H. Lübke, New Investigations on the Submarine zum Neolithisierungsprozess im westlichen Ostseeraum Stone Age Settlements in the Wismar Bay Area. In: L. unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Kulturentwick- Larsson / H. Kindgren / K. Knutsson / D. Loeffler / lung Europas 5500 – 3500 BC. Jutland Archaeological A. Åkerlund (eds.), Mesolithic on the Move. Papers pre- Society 47 (Ǻrhus 2004). sented at the Sixth International Conference on the Koch 1998: E. Koch, Neolithic Bog Pots from Zealand, Møn, Mesolithic in Europe, Stockholm 2002 (Oxford 2003) Lolland and Falster. Nordiske Fortidsminder B 16 (Kop- 633 – 6 42. penhagen 1998). Lübke 2009: H. Lübke, Hunters and fishers in a changing Koch-Nielsen 1986: E. Koch-Nielsen, Ertebølle and Fun- world. Investigations on submerged Stone Ange sites nel Beaker Pots as Tools. On Traces of Production off the Baltic coast of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Ger- Techniques and Use. Acta Archaeologica 57, 1987, many. In: S. McCartan / R. Schulting / G. Warren / P. 107 – 120. Woodmann (eds.), Mesolithic Horizons. Papers pre- Köpke et al. 1999: A. Köpke / K. Pump / D. Thannheiser, sented at the Seventh International Conference on the Das Naturschutzgebiet Boberger Niederung. In: A. Mesolithic in Europe, Belfast 2005, Vol. II (Oxford u. a. Köpke / D. Thannheiser (eds.), Grüne Oasen in Ham- 2009) 556 – 563. burg. Ausgewählte Naturschutzgebiete Hamburgs Teil 2. Miehlich 1986: G. Miehlich, Tour I. Freshwater-marsh of Naturwacht-Informationen 2 (Hamburg 1999) 127 – 136. the Elbe river. Guidebook for a tour of landscapes, soils Kotula et al. 2015: A. Kotula / H. Piezonka / Th. Terber- and land use in the Federal Republic of Germany. 13th ger, New pottery dates on the Mesolithic-Neolithic Congress International Society of Soil Science Ham- transition in the north-central European lowlands. In: burg, Germany August 1986. Mitteilungen der Deut- J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / Th. schen Bodenkundlichen Gesellschaft 51, 1986, 99 – 128. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and the Miehlich 1999: G. Miehlich, Böden und Bodenkultur der Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands (c. Vier- und Marschlande – Segen und Last einer Flußmar- 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im schenlandschaft. Hamburger Geographische Studien Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 489 – 509. 48, 1999, 199 – 224. Kroitzsch 1973: K. Kroitzsch, Die Gaterslebener Gruppe Müller 2011: J. Müller, Early pottery in the North – a und ihre Stellung im Neolithikum des Elb-Saale-Rau- southern perspective. In: S. Hartz / F. Lüth / Th. Ter- mes. Neolithische Studien II. Wissenschaftliche Bei- berger (eds.), Frühe Keramik im Ostseeraum – Datie- träge der Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg rung und Sozialer Kontext. Internationaler Workshop (Berlin 1973). in Schleswig vom 20. bis 21. Oktober 2006. Bericht der La u ra Th i e l e n 209 Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 89, 2008 (2011), Schwabedissen 1966: H. Schwabedissen, Ein horizontierter 287 – 296. „Breitkeil“ aus Satrup und die mannigfachen Kulturver- Murawski / Meyer 1998: H. Murawski / W. Meyer, Geo- bindungen des beginnenden Neolithikums in Norden logisches Wörterbuch (Stuttgart 1998). und Nordwesten. In: Neolithic Studies in Atlantic Eu- Raemaekers 1999: D. C. M. Raemaekers, The Articulation rope. Proceedings of the Second Altantic Colloquium. of a ‘New Neolithic’. The meaning of the Swifterbant Groningen, 6 – 11 April 1964. Palaeohistoria 12, 1966 Culture for the process of neolithisation in the western (1967), 409 – 4 68. part of the North European Plain (4900 – 3400 BC). Ar- Schwabedissen 1994: H. Schwabedissen, Die Ellerbek-Kul- chaeological Studies Leiden University 3 (Leiden 1999). tur in Schleswig-Holstein und das Vordringen des Raemaekers 2011: D. C. M. Raemaekers, Early Swifter- Neolithikums über die Elbe nach Norden. In: J. Hoika / bant pottery (5000 – 4600 cal BC): Research history, age, J. Meurers-Balke (eds.), Beiträge zur frühneolithischen characteristics and the introduction of pottery. In: S. Trichterbecherkultur im westlichen Ostseegebiet. 1. In- Hartz / F. Lüth / Th. Terberger (eds.), Frühe Keramik im ternationales Trichterbechersymposium in Schleswig Ostseeraum – Datierung und Sozialer Kontext. Interna- vom 4. bis 7. März 1985. Untersuchungen und Materia- tionaler Workshop in Schleswig vom 20. bis 21. Oktober lien zur Steinzeit in Schleswig-Holstein 1 (Neumünster 2006. Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 1994) 361 – 4 01. 89, 2008 (2011), 485 – 500. Spallek 2015: C. Spallek, Hamburg-Boberg Fundplatz 21. Raemaekers / De Roever 2010: D. C. M. Raemaekers / Die Keramik zweier Töpferöfen. Erste Hälfte 13. bis J.  P. de Roever, The Swifterbant pottery tradition zweite Hälfte 14. Jahrhundert. Jahrbuch für den Kreis (5000 – 3400 BC). Matters of fact and matters of interest. Stormarn 2016, 2015, 65 – 78. In: B. Vanmontfort / L. Louwe Kooijans / L. Amkreutz / Stilborg / Bergenstråhle 2000: O. Stilborg / I. Bergen- L. Verhart (eds.), Pots, Farmers and Foragers. Pottery stråhle, Traditions in Transition. A Comparative Study traditions and social interaction in the earliest Neolithic of the Patterns of Ertebølle Lithic and Pottery Changes of the Lower Rhine Area. Archaeological Studies Leiden in the Late Mesolithic Ceramic Phase at Skateholm I, University 20 (Leiden 2010) 135 – 149. III and Soldattorpet in Scania, Sweden. Lund Archaeo- Rice 1987: P. M. Rice, Pottery Analysis. A Sourcebook (Chi- logical Review 6, 2000, 23 – 41. cago 1987). Stilborg / Holm 2009: O. Stilborg / L. Holm, Ceramics as Rice 2015: P. M. Rice, Pottery Analysis. A Sourcebook, Sec- a Novelty in Northern and Southern Sweden. In: P. Jor- ond Edition (Chicago / London 2015). dan / M. Zvelebil (eds.), Ceramics before Farming. The De Roever 1979: J. P. de Roever, The Pottery from Swifter- Dispersal of Pottery Among Prehistoric Eurasian Hun- bant – Dutch Ertebølle? Swifterband contribution 11. ter-Gatherers (Walnut Creek/California 2009) 319 – 345. Helinium 19, 1979, 13 – 36. Tite 1999: M. S. Tite, Pottery Production, Distribution, De Roever 2004: J. P. de Roever, Swifterbant-aardwerk: and Consumption – The Contribution of the Physical een analyse van de neolithische nederzettingen bij Sciences. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory Swifterbant, 5e millennium voor Christus. Groningen 6, 1999, 181 – 2 33. Archaeological Studies (Eelde u. a. 2004). Ulmer 2002: T. Ulmer, Die Boberger Niederung. In: A. Köpke Schindler 1953: R. Schindler, Die Entdeckung zweier / D. Thannheiser (eds.), Grüne Oasen in Hamburg. Aus- jungsteinzeitlicher Wohnplätze unter dem Marschen­ gewählte Naturschutzgebiete Hamburgs Teil 2. Natur- schlick im Vorgelände der Boberger Dünen und ihre wacht-Informationen 2 (Hamburg 1999) 174 – 212. Bedeutung für die Steinzeitforschung Nordwestdeutsch- Van der Waals 1972: J. D. van der Waals, Die durchlochten lands. Hammaburg 4/9, 1953, 1 – 17. Rössener Keile und das frühe Neolithikum in Belgien Schindler 1961: R. Schindler, Rössener Elemente im Früh- und in den Niederlanden. Die Anfänge des Neolithi- neolithikum von Boberg. Hammaburg 7/13, 1961, 9 – 29. kums vom Orient bis Nordeuropa. Fundamenta A 3, Schindler 1962: R. Schindler, Rössener Elemente im Bober- 1972, 153 – 184. ger Neolithikum. Germania 40, 1962, 245 – 2 55. Wetzel 2015: G. Wetzel, Frühneolithische Funde von Frie- Schröder 1988: P. Schröder, Aufbau und Untergliederung sack 4, Lkr. Havelland (Land Brandenburg), und Uhyst des Niederterrassenkörpers der Unterelbe. Mitteilungen 13, Lkr. Görlitz (Freistaat Sachsen), und ihr kulturelles aus dem Geologischen Institut der Universität Hannover Umfeld. In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemae- 27 (Hannover 1988). kers / Th. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania Schwabedissen 1957/1958: H. Schwabedissen, Die Ausgra- and the Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands bungen im Satruper Moor. Zur Frage nach Ursprung und (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im frühester Entwicklung des nordischen Neolithikums. Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 511 – 536. Offa-Zeitschrift 16, 1957/58 (1960), 5 – 28. Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 , 2 11  – 224) 211 Hunter-gatherer pottery from the Baltic Sea coast – some regional examples from Schleswig-Holstein Sönke Hartz Abstract The present study deals with Ertebølle pottery from the modern districts of Schleswig-Holstein, including sherds from three submerged coastal sites. In Schleswig-Holstein, sherds from pointed-bottomed vessels were found in the 1880s in Kiel harbor, but excavated and stratified material did not appear before 1970. Since early pottery was associated from the start with the terminal Mesolithic Ertebølle culture (ERT) and the neolithisation process, new investigations were conducted between 1985 and 2006 both on inland and coastal sites of the ERT. The finds presented here come from coastal sites on the Baltic Sea coast, since the variety and number of sherds from submerged sites with good preservation is obvious. The finds should to some extend contribute to the understanding of the emergence, dispersal and disappearance of terminal Meso- lithic pottery in the western Baltic. Keywords Schleswig-Holstein, Ertebølle culture, coastal sites, early pottery tradition Zusammenfassung In Schleswig-Holstein wurden seit Beginn der 1980er Jahre Ausgrabungen auf Küstensiedlungsplätzen der endmesolithischen Ertebølle- und frühesten Trichterbecherkultur durchgeführt. Drei überregional bedeutende Fundstellen liegen im östlichen Holstein in der Niederung des Oldenburger Grabens (Grube-Rosenhof LA 58, Wangels LA 505) und in der Neustädter Bucht (Neustadt LA 156). Die auf diesen Fundplätzen geborgenen stratifizierten Tonscherben geben Einblicke in die frühen Keramiktraditionen des Nordens. Zahlreiche gut erhaltene spitzbodige Gefäßfragmente und Tonscherben von ovalen Lampen aus der späten Ertebølle-Kultur stellen die Grundlage für Analysen zur Entstehung, Nutzung und Herstellungstechnik der ältesten Keramikproduktion dar. Darüber hinaus lässt sich erforschen, wann die Ablösung der spitzbodigen Ware durch die Bechergefäße der frühneolithischen Trichterbecherkultur stattfand. Introduction The material is presented here to illuminate ceramic technology and the use of pottery in late hunter- Early ceramic traditions have been given a central role gatherer societies. It will be discussed what types of in understanding cultural contacts and technological vessels were produced, when pottery emerged, and transfer among terminal Mesolithic hunter-gatherer when it was replaced by funnel-shaped beakers at the societies of the western Baltic region. These traditi- onset of the early Neolithic Funnel Beaker culture ons are characterised by a pointed-bottomed pottery (Trichterbecherkultur, TRB). The aim is to contrib- connected to an economy based primarily on hunting, ute to a better understanding of the emergence and gathering and fishing. Settlements are predominantly dispersal of late Mesolithic ceramic traditions and found on the Baltic Sea coast, whereas sites in the in- their connection to the southern Scandinavian and land and on the North Sea coast are very rare. Pottery eastern Baltic regions. is a common constituent of those coastal settlements especially on sites in the modern districts of Schles- wig-Holstein, and on Jutland and Fyn. Appearance of early ceramics in the In this article ceramics from three of the oldest north pottery-bearing coastal sites in Schleswig-Holstein are discussed. In this region, ceramics associated To present-day it is generally accepted in Schles- with the Ertebølle culture pre-date the first evidence wig-Holstein that according to radiocarbon dates for agriculture by at least 500 radiocarbon years. pottery production started at the Baltic Sea coast in 212 Hu nter-gath ere r potte r y f rom the B altic Sea coast – some regional examples f rom Sc hleswig-H olste in Fig. 1 Ertebølle sites mentioned in the text. eastern Holstein c. 4,700 to 4,600 calBC on sites like (Jäckelberg and Rosenfelde phase) and the younger Grube-Rosenhof LA 58, Wangels LA 505 and Neustadt Ertebølle culture (Jarbock and Timmendorf phase) LA 156 (Fig. 1). However, ceramics appear more or less in the region around Mecklenburg Bay. contemporaneously in the geographical area encom- In contrast to sites on mineral soils the preserva- passing Denmark, Scania (southern Sweden), Schles- tion of potsherds in marine/brackish gyttja layers is wig-Holstein and Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania in generally excellent, and sometimes larger pieces to northeast Germany.1 On the island of Rügen Terminal the size of half pots or even fully preserved vessels Mesolithic pottery has been absent so far, but only a occur (Fig. 2). However, the sites of Wangels LA 505 few sites with good preservation were investigated and Neustadt LA 156 yielded early Neolithic (EN I) (Hirsch et al. 2008; Lübke / Terberger 2004). Much sherds as well, and these settlements are discussed older dates from inland sites like Schlamersdorf LA 5 as transitional sites, where Ertebølle ceramic is as- and Kayhude LA 8 (Meyer 2016) seem very problema- sociated alongside a set of new pottery types from tic, since they were measured from charred remains the early Funnel Beaker culture. However, observa- attached to the inner parts of the vessel. These samples tions from sherds from waterlogged sediments could could be contaminated by the hardwater reservoir elucidate the dating and use of early pottery craft in effect in view of the contribution of fresh water fish in late forager societies in Schleswig-Holstein. the diet (Philippsen 2013; Philippsen / Heinemeier It seems very likely that hunter-gatherers of 2013). the early ERT already had container technology Ceramic vessels from coastal sites are associated for gathering and storage, and therefore the ques- with the younger ERT and appeared some centuries tion needs to be specified to what reason pottery before the introduction of domesticated fauna and flo- was introduced into the material culture of such ra. Pottery seems of special importance in the Meso- complex societies. Various authors prefer the idea lithic record as it is one indicator of cultural contacts that ceramic containers may be understood as the and developments between northern Germany and need for pots for new (prestige) food preparation the neighbouring regions. Culturally, the first appear- modes, and that the vessels were associated with ance of pottery marks the border between the older ritual uses (Jennbert 1984; Fischer 2002; Povlsen 2013). However, currently no clear variation in the subsistence pattern or fundamental changes in the 1  Andersen 2010; 2011; Lübke 2004; Prangsgaard 2013; material culture (stone, bone/antler and wooden ar- Sørensen 2015; Terberger 2006. tefacts) is observed at the shift from the older to the S ö n ke H a rtz 213 Fig. 2 Pointed-bottomed vessels. 1 Rüde LA 2; 2 Wangels LA 505; 3 Grube-Rosenhof LA 58; 4 Neustadt LA 156. younger ERT in Schleswig-Holstein. The economy As mentioned before, in Schleswig-Holstein both was constantly based on highly specialised hunting, types occur stratigraphically simultaneous (Hartz fishing and foraging with a large marine component 2011) and display the same geographical distribu- (Schmölcke 2004; Glykou 2016). In contrast to this, tion along the northern German coast. However, the the whole of marine and terrestrial food stuff must radiocarbon ages of lamps in some cases are several have been prepared without the use of ceramic con- hundred years older than expected from other kinds tainers before. The ERT-inventories reveal pots from of evidence. This age offset may be due to the marine small drinking cups up to large cooking pots made reservoir effect (Fischer / Heinemeier 2003) when in various coil building techniques from the onset. dating extant carbonised surface residues, probably Only little technological progress emerged during marine animal fat like seal tran, but further inves- the younger ERT (Glykou 2016; Tranekjer 2015). tigations will have to prove this for the material in There is evidence that vessels were used for cook- question (Robson et al. in prep). Since the emerg- ing marine resources (Craig et al. 2011) or plant ing ERT, and throughout the younger ERT, pointed- food preparation (Saul et al. 2012) which show no bottomed pottery in Schleswig-Holstein seems very leftovers in the archaeological context. variable regarding shape, size and coil-building tech- nique (Glykou 2010; 2016). This observation sup- ports the impression that the knowledge of ceramic Ertebølle pottery: pointed-bottomed manufacture was not a local invention but was in- vessels and oblong bowls troduced from outside into the Ertebølle province in Schleswig-Holstein as a fully developed package after Throughout Denmark, Scania, northwest Poland a period of routine production (see chapter below). and northern Germany the early indigenous pottery consists of two predominant types: the pointed-based vessels with slightly S-shaped profile and more or less Coastal sites with Ertebølle inventories extended rim, and the oblong bowls or clay lamps. 2 Site context of Grube-Rosenhof LA 58 The site Grube-Rosenhof LA 58 is located in the 2  Huthén 1977; Prangsgaard 1992; 2013; Andersen 2011; Van Diest 1981; Glykou 2016; Heron et al. 2012; Robson et al. eastern part of the Oldenburger Graben valley and in prep; Galiňski 2012; Kotula 2017. was discovered in 1969; it was partially investigated 214 Hu nter-gath ere r potte r y f rom the B altic Sea coast – some regional examples f rom Sc hleswig-H olste in between 1970 and 1980 under the direction of H. pipfruit, but pieces of hazel, dog wood, ash and elm Schwabedissen (Schwabedissen 1994). C. 330 m² are found as well. The wooden implements further were excavated systematically, some further 300 m² consist of four paddle fragments with blades of round were opened for trial trenches to document the find to oval and elongated shapes. layers. The find layers are very rich and more than By the results from the old excavation, where 4,000 potsherds were recovered (Nydahl in prep.), cultural layers to a thickness of 0.6 m were recovered, which make Rosenhof one of the richest sites con- and the high frequency of lithic tools and pottery cerning pottery along the western Baltic coast. sherds, Grube-Rosenhof LA 58 is suggested as a base- Early conventional 14C dates suggested that the camp settlement. There is evidence from the animal settlement was inhabited from c. 5,000 until 3,800 bone material that the site was inhabited throughout calBC, however, in spite of the large excavation area, the year with both summer and winter hunting activi- there were doubts whether the earliest layers already ties (D. Heinrich, pers. comm.). The adaptation of contained pottery or not. The follow-up investiga- refined excavation techniques has revealed almost tions in 2001 and 2002 (Grube-Rosenhof LA 58, area 4,000 fish remains, with a high proportion of marine A), which were to answer this open questions, were species. From the re-excavation six radiocarbon dates restricted to the refuse layers of the settlement on an are available. They indicate a habitation from 4,800 area of c. 60 m². The complete inventory has been to 4,600 calBC (Goldhammer 2008). presented by J. Goldhammer (Goldhammer 2008), therefore, only a short summary of the results will Site context of Wangels LA 505 be given here. The material from area A comprises approxi- The site Wangels LA 505 is situated in the western mately 350 pottery fragments of which c. 310 belong part of the Oldenburg Graben valley on the northern to thick-walled, coarsely tempered pointed-based edge of an isolated sandy peninsular. The excavation vessels, and 40 to oval lamps. The number of lithic was conducted from 1996 – 1999, covering an area of artefacts totals c. 5,500 pieces, 2 % of which have approximately 300 m². Cultural layers were observed at been identified as tools (Hartz 2004; Goldhammer depths of up to 1.5 m beneath the surface, which is 2.3 2008). Soft-hammered blades with parallel edges are to 2.5 m below present sea level. They consist of grey the dominating type, corresponding cores and reduc- medium to coarse-grained gravel containing numer- tion waste from the preparation of striking platforms ous molluscs. The excavation demonstrated that, after appear as well. Among the 130 flint tools, axes are the an initial occupation phase between 4,300 and 3,700 most prominent group. They are represented in al- calBC, the site was resettled by Neolithic farmers of most equal shares by oblong-oval (‘flake-axe like’) core the late Funnel Beaker culture (Middle Neolithic V) adzes and by oblong-oval and trapezoidal, flat-trimmed between 2,900 and 2,700 calBC (Hartz 1997/1998). flake axes. The third most common group of lithic The terminal Mesolithic inventory from Wan- artefacts are transverse arrowheads. These projectiles gels encompasses a number of find categories which were made from blades and, in terms of size and form, are typical of waterlogged sites. These are large do not form a uniform group. The remaining tools potsherds, implements of bone and antler (T-axes, consist of blade scrapers with a partially asymmetric punches, bone points) as well as wooden artefacts, front, concave and straight-truncated blades, thick mammal and bird bones, fish remains, molluscs core borers, various edge-retouched pieces and ham- and plant remains (Hartz 1997/1998; Heinrich mer stones. The single occurrence of an angle burin 1997/1998). The flint tools inventory comprises c. illustrates the relative insignificance of this implement 350 flat trimmed trapezoidal flake axes and c. 250 in the Ertebølle culture of East Holstein. transverse arrowheads as well as borers, scrapers A group of antler and bone implements com- and flint knives (Faasch 2016). Special attention pletes the tool inventory. T-shaped axes and punches is paid to stone axes which were produced of non- with distinctive wear traces were made from red local amphibolith, suggesting contacts with farming deer antlers. Slender points used for leisters and two communities south and east of the river Elbe. More needle-like awls along a heavy chisel were made from than 201 wooden artefacts were recovered from the bones. From the re-excavations 134 wooden arte- settlement layers (Klooss 2010), among these are facts were recovered, among these are leister prongs, 45 leister prongs, mainly made of pipfruit and ha- paddles, fragments of spears, net floats, fragments zel. Other wooden implements are paddles, spears, of a bow and pointed hazel sticks. The majority of pointed sticks, and there are also antler tools like T- the leister prongs were made from the core wood of axes, punches and polished shafts with crafted ends. S ö n ke H a rtz 215 Fig. 3 In situ-sherds of a fragmented pointed-bottomed vessel from Wangels LA 505. In the pottery assemblage from the initial oc- stadt LA 156 was used as a base-camp settlement, cupation (ERT phase) phase around 4,300 calBC comparable to Grube-Rosenhof LA 58 some 25 km sherds from pointed-bottomed vessels (Fig. 3) and north. oval lamps occur. The material comprises approxi- Altogether more than 40,000 flint artefacts were mately 200 sherds from eight thick-walled, pointed- excavated (excluding chips), 1 % of which have been based vessels, and 19 sherds from oblong lamps. An defined as tools (Hartz 2004). This group is dominated analysis and stratigraphic classification of the ceram- by 750 transverse arrowheads, which were fabricated ics is discussed by Grohmann (2010). Some charred from blades and flakes in almost equal shares. The food remains on pottery fragments and samples from second group comprises c. 260 flat trimmed trapezoidal other organic artefacts were dated by radiocarbon flake axes, followed by c. 100 blade scrapers. The blade method. The 31 dates indicate that the settlement implements also comprise concavely and obliquely existed between 4,300 and 3,700 calBC, but with an truncated tools, borers as well as edge-retouched and emphasis on the early Funnel Beaker culture (Early denticulated pieces. Burins, however, are very rare, Neolithic I; Hartz 2004). which is similar to other coastal sites of the terminal ERT in Schleswig-Holstein. Site context of Neustadt LA 156 The non-flint stone tools comprise hammerstones of quartzite or quartzite sandstone, round-butted axes The submerged site Neustadt LA 156 is located (‘Walzenbeile’) and two Danubian shaft hole axes, 3.5 – 4.0 m below the present sea level. It was discov- which underline the special role of East Holstein in ered in 1999 and excavated from 2000 until 2006 the distribution of imported amphibolite axes from by divers (Hartz / Glykou 2008; Glykou 2016). the south. Around 110 m 2 were investigated. However, only c. Among the bone implements, simple bone points, 10 m 2 of this area belong to the proper occupation awls, a slender bone chisel, a spatula-shaped tool with area. In the refuse area, the find layer merges into a denticulated end and several ulna daggers have to be brackish gyttja/peat with molluscs which provides mentioned. T-shaped axes, harpoon heads, punches and excellent preservation conditions. a small chisel were made from antler. From the layers with high proportions of organic Among the wooden tools are leister prongs, dug- components, not only sharp-edged flint artefacts and out canoe fragments, paddles, spears, angled handle ceramic finds were retrieved, but also plant remains, shafts for axes, fragments of a bow and arrows, a net animal bones, antler implements, charcoal as well float made of bark, textile net remains, several frag- as worked and charred wood. The high proportion ments of wicker work fish traps, pointed sticks and of finds and the thick find layers suggest that Neu­ poles. 216 Hu nter-gath ere r potte r y f rom the B altic Sea coast – some regional examples f rom Sc hleswig-H olste in Fig. 4 Sketch of Ertebølle vessel sizes (after Andersen 2010, fig. 7). The animal bones, bone and antler implements more cylindrical ones are found only on two smaller and pottery were analysed by Glykou (2016). Neu­ cups from Grube-Rosenhof LA 58 (old excavation) stadt differs from the other two sites in its focus on and Ecklak (Hartz 2011). The unpronounced low marine resources. The fish bone assemblage with its rounded belly breaks (carination) are generally lo- approximately 13,000 pieces and the list of fish spe- cated in the middle to lower part of the vessel. cies are clearly dominated by marine species. More- The bases vary from heavy and markedly dis- over, most of the mammal remains also come from tinct forms to narrow pointed ones and more round- marine species such as seals and dolphins (Phocoena ed ends (Fig. 5). Two main construction techniques phocoena, and Delphinus). have been observed: the most common one involves Within the ceramic finds, c. 2,500 coarsely tem- formation of the base by pressing a lump of clay into pered, thick and thin walled sherds from pointed- a cone. The vessel is subsequently built up by laying bottomed vessels appear along with c. 110 remnants clay coils in rings around the opening of the cone of oblong lamps. (Koch 1998; Glykou 2010). According to another The chronological frame is set by more than 35 technique, the pointed base was made by one or more AMS-dates, which cover the period between 4,500 clay coils arranged in a small spiral. Following this and 3,800 calBC. Thus, the site belongs to the young- process, the upper part of the pot was manufactured er (ceramic) stage of the ERT (Timmendorf phase) using clay coils. Observations on how these coils and the earliest phase of the Funnel Beaker culture are treated in order to shape the pot has led to the (Wangels phase), and is more or less contemporane- recognition of three different techniques, the U-, ous with Wangels LA 505. H- and N- techniques (Hulthén 1977) which ap- pear in variations and intermediate forms (Glykou 2016). For example, in Neustadt LA 156 and Grube- Terminal Mesolithic pottery Rosenhof LA 58 (area A), the H-techniques domi- nates with more than 50 % of the sherds, followed Pointed-bottomed vessels by U- and N-technique (Glykou 2016; Goldhammer 2008), whereas the U-technique is the most frequent From all three sites mentioned above the same gener- construction type in Wangels (Glykou 2010). So al type of pointed-bottomed vessel with smoothed to far there is no tendency towards a change of tech- slightly sharp concave neck and everted rims exists. niques as a chronological indicator, as it appears in Straight rims or even incurving ones have not been Denmark (Andersen 2011). The general thickness observed so far, and any kinds of applications like of the Ertebølle pottery sherds from coastal sites in handles, lugs or knobs are lacking. There is consider- Schleswig-Holstein built in U- and H-technique var- able variation to be seen in the size, the profiles, the ies from 8 – 12 mm with a mean value of 10 mm on all shape of the pointed bases, the wall thickness and three sites, while sherds constructed in N-technique the decoration of the pots. The most common type is are slightly thinner (mean of 8 mm). the medium sized vessel (3 – 8 litres capacity), whilst The raw clay for pointed-based vessels is primar- small cups (< 3 litres) and larger pots (> 10 litres; ily tempered by burnt and crushed granite with red Fig. 4) are rare. Vessel shoulders are almost conical, feldspar and white quartz. Up to 8 mm large and S ö n ke H a rtz 217 Fig. 5 Variety of pointed bottoms from Neustadt LA 156. sharp feldspar grains are often visible in thick-walled was the result of a longer ceramic manufacturing belly sherds (Fig. 6). Granite rocks are easily acces- process. However, the extremely rare presence of sible on the Baltic coast and were used as cooking organic temper suggests that plant remains were stones throughout the whole Stone Age and later probably accidentally mixed in the clay. periods. In the case of thin-walled wall sherds, fine There is only sparse decoration on pointed- sand was mixed into the raw clay as well (Glykou based pots from northern Germany, and the typical 2010), while chamotte and organic temper (charred ornamentation is mostly limited to the top of the rim. plant remains) were recorded only in thin sections Ornamentation is restricted to finger and/or finger- from Neustadt, indicating that the Ertebølle pottery nail imprints, but few cases of circular impressions 218 Hu nter-gath ere r potte r y f rom the B altic Sea coast – some regional examples f rom Sc hleswig-H olste in centrated to the belly region (61 %), while bases (3 %) and rim sherds (3 %) only rarely show surface coat- ings. The fact that charred remains are not limited to pots of specific size, that they are often thick and built up in thin layers, indicates that pointed-based vessels were made for domestic purposes as effective cooking pots, probably for long term use (Glykou et al. 2012). The black soot as a sign for boiling over direct heat, large spallings on bases and belly sherds, and drilled holes as evidence of repair support the Fig. 6 Ertebølle sherd from Wangels LA 505 with large feldspat assumption that Ertebølle vessels were constructed tempering particles. more for cooking then for storage. The cooking pro- cedure made marine and vegetable food resources made with bone stamps are known as well (Fig. 7). In palatable that otherwise are indigestible, at the same contrast to some Danish sites (Prangsgaard 1992), time preserving all nutrients in the food. However, belly decoration is extremely rare and occurs only new methods of analysing starch from food crusts as stab impressions on two wall sherds from Grube- reveal exciting potential to discuss different uses of Rosenhof LA 58 (old excavation; Hartz 2011) and these vessels as well (Saul et al. 2012). Neustadt LA 156 (Glykou 2010). The function of pointed-based vessels is dis- Shallow oblong clay bowls (‘blubber lamps’) cussed due to charred remains on the surface. No pots or larger base-fragments from coastal sites in The second diagnostic vessel type of the Ertebølle Schleswig-Holstein were preserved in situ on habita- culture in Schleswig-Holstein is an oblong bowl with tion areas since these were affected by heavy erosion slightly pointed ends and a rounded bottom (Fig. 8). during transgression. Both inner and outer parts of Lamps may differ in size and wall thickness, but are the vessels show indications for the use of cooking always oval to oblong in shape. Lamp fragments are or direct fire exposure in the form of charred surface few on Ertebølle sites in northern parts of Denmark, deposits. While the inner part is often covered with but appear in greater numbers towards the south on up to 3 mm thick adherence (‘food crusts’), the outer the isle of Fyn and on the northern German coast of part is usually soot-blackened with a glossy surface. Schleswig-Holstein (Andersen 2010; Robson et al. in In Neustadt, for example, more than 50 % of the prep). During the Grube-Rosenhof LA 58 excavation charred remains are deposited on the inner part of (old excavation) more than 50 diagnostic sherds from the potsherds, while 20 % occur outside, and 25 % lamps were recovered (Van Diest 1981; Nydahl in on both of the inner and outer vessel parts (Glykou prep.), measuring between 15 to 25 cm in length and 2016). At the inner part the charred remains are con- 7 to 11 cm in width, which seems to be quite large Fig. 7 Ertebølle rim sherds from Neustadt LA 156 with nail and stab impressions. S ö n ke H a rtz 219 Fig. 8 Large Ertebølle lamps. 1 Neustadt LA 156; 2 Wangels LA 505. compared to those found on Danish sites (Prangs- lamps from Tybrind Vig (Prangsgaard 2013) are gaard 1992). The sherds from Neustadt add up to 85 more rounded and significantly smaller in size. pieces and resemble the Grube-Rosenhof LA 58 ones In principle, the lamps from Schleswig-Holstein in size and shape; one fully reconstructed lamp mea- were produced in two construction techniques (Van sures c. 30 cm in length and 11 cm in width (Fig. 8.1; Diest 1981). The first one (coiling technique) starts Hartz 2011; Glykou 2010). There is good agreement with pinching a lump of clay into the desired shape to in the shape of the lamps between those from the build up the rounded bottom. Subsequently the coils northern German sites and vessels found in Ronæs were put onto each other by oblique U-technique to Skov and Gudsø Vig (Andersen 2009), whereas the build up the wall and finally the rim. The second Fig. 9 Examples of ornamented lamps from Grube-Rosenhof LA 58 (1 – 2) and Wangels LA 505 (3 – 4). 220 Hu nter-gath ere r potte r y f rom the B altic Sea coast – some regional examples f rom Sc hleswig-H olste in technique (layer technique) consists of putting thin teresting fact that early ceramics on coastal sites does layers of clay on top of each other and then carefully not consist of imported vessels, and it seems obvious working out the wall until the rim is finished. In that the knowledge of technology was taken over Neustadt the layer technique is the most frequent and then transferred into locally produced pointed- one, accounting for up to 75 % of the 85 lamp frag- based containers. ments (Glykou 2016). The appearance and use of Ertebølle pottery In most cases the raw clay for lamp manufac- was not, as has been previously thought, triggered turing is finely tempered with sand, followed by a by influences from Neolithic farming communities more coarse tempering with crushed granite with (Bandkeramik or post- Bandkeramik cultures) fur- red feldspar, usually observed in fresh fractures as ther south or southeast, neither was it an inspiration 1 – 2 mm small grains in the thicker walled vessels. from or due to social contacts to foragers from the Chamotte and quarzite was used in a few cases in Swifterbant culture in the southwest, where pottery Grube-Rosenhof LA 58 and Wangels LA 505 (Van emerged c. 5,000 calBC (Raemaekers 2011). More- Diest 1981 and personal observations), while plant over, the duplicity of pointed-based pots with oblong remains in sherds from Grube-Rosenhof LA 58 were lamps displays great similarities in the contempora- probably accidentally mixed into the clay and do not neous late Mesolithic Narva culture of the eastern represent primary tempering materials. Baltic.4 However, some differences can be observed Decoration was only occasionally applied and in the shape, ornamentation and tempering between consists of parallel or slightly transverse fingernail (Scanian) Ertebølle and Narva vessels (Dumpe et al. imprints on the rim, although stabbing, finger(tip) 2011). It seems convincing that social networks and imprints or simple notches (Fig. 9) are known as well contacts existed along the southern Baltic coastline (Hartz 2011). In Neustadt, c. 14 % of the lamp sherds which led to technological influences regarding the are decorated, and approximately the same value ap- knowledge of pottery making in the Ertebølle prov- plies for Grube-Rosenhof LA 58, whereas in Wangels ince around 4,600 calBC (Andersen 2010). LA 505 only two of the 19 pieces show rim decoration. Detailed stratigraphical observations on sherds Judging from ethnografic parallels, the shape from Grube-Rosenhof LA 58 indicate that from older of the clay vessels, analyses of charred remains, and to younger find layers a gradual reduction from a from experiments performed with replicated oblong coarse, thick-walled pointed-based pottery (> 1 cm bowls filled with marine animal fat, 3 it seems likely wall thickness) to a finer, thin-walled pottery (< 1 cm that the oblong bowls were used as lamps, probably wall thickness) took place. A more subtile change in for heating, lighting and fishing. pottery construction techniques and vessel forms was also observed between regional groups of the Erte- bølle culture (Andersen 2010; 2011; Glykou 2016). Origin of Ertebølle ceramic tradition However, in Schleswig-Holstein potsherds built in N-, U- und H-techniques are always associated with Since there is no knowledge of pottery production lamps (Hartz 2004; 2011). Thus, for the period be- in the early Ertebølle culture (Jäckelberg and Rosen- tween 4,600 and 4,100 calBC it seems possible to dis- felde phases) as shown on sites like Grube-Rosenfel- tinguish Ertebølle pottery on technological grounds, de LA 83 and Strande LA 163 (Schmütz 2018; cf. but it is likely to assume that pointed-bottomed pots Goldhammer / Hartz 2013), this technology must and oblong bowls were adopted as a package. have been acquired from outside, most probably by cultural transmission from other ceramic-using hunt- er-gatherers. The oldest pointed-based sherds were Disappearance of pointed-based recovered at Grube-Rosenhof LA 58 and Neustadt ceramic tradition LA 156, where they are dated to c. 4,600 or 4,400 calBC, respectively. Thus, in the western Baltic, pot- There is a large data base of direct radiocarbon tery appears c. 500 – 600 radiocarbon years before dates from sherds from Wangels and Neustadt which the first evidence of domesticated animals (cows and demonstrate that pointed-based vessels disappear sheep/goat) and cereals (Sørensen 2014). It is an in- c. 4,100/4,000 calBC (Glykou 2016; Hartz 2004). 3  Mathiassen 1935; Hulthén 1980; Van Diest 1981; Heron 4  Timofeev 1998; Hallgren 2004; Klassen 2004; Terberger et al. 2012. et al. 2009; Piezonka 2008. S ö n ke H a rtz 221 From now on they are replaced by a wider set of ves- Craig et al. 2011: O. E. Craig / V. J. Steele / A. Fischer / S. sels like narrow funnel beakers, wide bowls, lugged Hartz / S. H. Andersen / P. Donohoe / A. Glykou / H. beakers, flasks and amphorae, which typologically Saul / D. M. Jones / E. Koch / C. P. Heron, Ancient lipids characterise the early Funnel Beaker culture (Koch reveal continuity in culinary practices across the transi- 1998; Grohmann 2010; Sørensen 2014). These regu- tion to agriculture in Northern Europe. Proceedings of the lar thin-walled pots are produced in N-technique National Academy of Sciences 108, 2011, 17910 – 17915. and have always slightly rounded to flat bottoms Dumpe et al. 2011: B. Dumpe / V. Berzins / O. Stilborg, (Kotula et al. 2015; Sørensen 2015). At the same A dialogue across the Baltic on Narva and Ertebølle time domesticates, cereal pollen and grains appear pottery. In: S. Hartz / F. Lüth / T. Terberger (eds.), Early in small quantities which are typical markers for the pottery in the Baltic – Dating Origin and Social Context. onset of the Neolithic in the north. 5 Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 89, Comparable to the formation in Denmark there 2008 (2011), 409 – 4 41. is a gradual change from more coarse grained thick- Faasch 2016: F. Faasch, Das Flintmaterial des Fundplatzes walled pointed-based pots to thin-walled funnel bea- Wangels LA 505, Kreis Ostholstein. Neue Forschungen kers. However, the varied vessel types of the early zum Mesolithikum. Archäologische Berichte des Land- Funnel Beaker culture have knobs and lugs and the kreises Rotenburg (Wümme) 20, 2016, 91 – 106. beakers are ornamented on the outer part of the rim. Feeser / Dörfler 2015: I. Feeser / W. Dörfler, The Early In Schleswig-Holstein transitional forms like the Neolithic in pollen diagrams from eastern Schleswig- Type 0 vessel (Koch 1998) with a S-formed profile Holstein and western Mecklenburg – evidence for a and a slightly pointed base appear on settlements 1000 years cultural adaptive cycle? In: J. Kabaciński / with longer duration of occupation (‘transitional S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / T. Terberger (eds.), sites’) as well (Glykou 2016). The observation from The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and the Neolithisation of Denmark that new pottery types were adopted in a the North European Lowlands (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). relatively short time span on coastal and inland sites Archäologie und Geschichte im Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/ around 4,100/4,000 calBC,6 can be confirmed for the Westf. 2015) 291 – 306. area of eastern Schleswig-Holstein as well. Fischer 2002: A. Fischer, Food for Feasting? An evaluation of explanations of the Neolithisation of Denmark and southern Sweden. In: A. Fischer / K. Kristiansen (eds.), The Neolithisation of Denmark. 150 years of debate References (Sheffield 2002) 343 – 393. Fischer / Heinemeier 2003: A. Fischer / J. Heinemeier, Andersen 2009: S. H. Andersen, Ronæs Skov. Marinarkæo- Freshwater reservoir effect in 14C-dates of food residue logiske undersøgelser af Kystboplads fra Ertebølletid. on pottery. Radiocarbon 45/3, 2003, 449 – 4 66. Jysk Arkæologisk Selskabs Skrifter 64 (Moesgaard Galiński 2012: T. Galiński, Kultura protoneolityczna na 2009). Pomorzu w świetle najnowszych badań w Tanowie. Andersen 2010: S. H. Andersen, The first Pottery in South Archeologia Polski 57, 2012, 79 – 112. Scandinavia. In: B. Vanmontfort / L. Louwe-Kooijmans / Glykou 2010: A. Glykou, Technological and typological ana- L. Armkreutz / L. Verhart, Pots, farmers and Foragers. lysis of Ertebølle and early Funnel Beaker pottery from Pottery traditions and social interaction in the earliest Neustadt LA 156 and contemporary sites in northern Neolithic of the Lower Rhine Area. Archaeological Stu- Germany. Archaeological Studies Leiden University 20 dies Leiden University 20 (Leiden 2010). (2010) 177 – 188. Andersen 2011: S. H. Andersen, Kitchen middens and the Glykou 2016: A. Glykou, Neustadt LA 156. Ein subma- early pottery of Denmark. In: S. Hartz / F. Lüth / T. Ter- riner Fundplatz des späten Mesolithikums- und des berger (eds.), Early pottery in the Baltic – Dating Origin frühesten Neolithikums in Schleswig-Holstein. Unter- and Social Context. Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen suchungen zur Subsistenzstrategie der letzten Jäger, Kommission 89, (2008) 2011, 193 – 215. Sammler und Fischer an der norddeutschen Ostsee- küste. Untersuchungen und Materialien zur Steinzeit in Schleswig-Holstein und an der Ostseeküste 7 (Kiel/ Hamburg 2016). 5  Kalis/Meurers-Balke 1998; Kirleis et al. 2012; Sørensen/ Glykou et al. 2012: A. Glykou / B. Philippsen / H. Paulsen, Karg 2014; Feeser/Dörfler 2015; Gron/Sørensen 2018. Kochversuche mit spitzbodigen Gefäßen der Ertebøl- lekultur und der Hartwassereffekt. Experimentelle Ar- 6  Fischer 2002; Klassen 2004; Johansen 2006; Andersen 2010. chäologie in Europa, Bilanz 2012, 33 – 4 8. 222 Hu nter-gath ere r potte r y f rom the B altic Sea coast – some regional examples f rom Sc hleswig-H olste in Goldhammer 2008: J. Goldhammer, Untersuchungen zur ber” lamps in Northern Europe. Antiquity 87, 2013, Stratigraphie, Fundverteilung und zum Fundspektrum 178 – 188. der mittleren Ertebøllekultur in Ostholstein. Die Nach- Hirsch et al. 2008: K. Hirsch / S. Klooss / R. Klooss, Der grabungen in Grube-Rosenhof aus den Jahren 2001 und endmesolithisch-neolithische Küstensiedlungsplatz bei 2002.Universitätsforschungen zur Prähistorischen Ar- Baabe im Südosten der Insel Rügen. Jahrbuch Boden- chäologie 163 (Bonn 2008). denkmalpflege in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern 55, 2007 Grohmann 2010: I.  M. Grohmann, Die Ertebølle- und (2008), 11 – 51. frühtrichterbecherzeitliche Keramik aus Wangels, Kr. Hulthén 1977: B. Hulthén, On Ceramic Technology during Ostholstein. Ein Beitrag zur Neolithisierung Schles- the Scania Neolithic and Bronze Age. Theses and Papers wig-Holsteins. In: D. Gronenborn / J. Petrasch (eds.), in North-European Archaeology 6 (Stockholm 1977). Die Neolithisierung Mitteleuropas – The Spread of the Hulthén 1980: B. Hulthén, Ertebøllekulturens lampor. Åle Neolithic to Central Europe. RGZM-Tagungen 4 (Mainz 4, 1980, 1 – 5. 2010) 407 – 424. Jennbert 1984: K. Jennbert, Den productiva gåvan. Tra- Goldhammer / Hartz 2013: J. Goldhammer / S. Hartz, dition och innovation i Sydskandinavien för omkring Versunkene Steinzeit – Endmesolithische Funde aus 5300 år sedan. Acta Arch. Lundensia Ser. 4° 16 (Bonn/ der Ostsee vor der Steilküste von Stohl. Jahrbuch der Lund 1984). Heimatgemeinschaft Eckernförde 71, 2013, 1 – 12. Johansen 2006: K. L. Johansen, Settlement and Land Use Gron / Sørensen 2018: K. J. Gron / L. Sørensen, Cultural at the Mesolithic-Neolithic Transition in Southern and economic negotiation: a new perspective on the Scandinavia. Journal of Danish Archaeology 14, 2006, Neolithic Transition of Southern Scandinavia. Antiquity 201 – 223. 92, 2018, 958 – 974. Kalis / Meurers-Balke 1998: A. J. Kalis / J. Meurers-Bal- Hallgren 2004: F. Hallgren, The introduction of ceramic ke, Die „Landnam“-Modelle von Iversen und Troels- technology around the Baltic Sea in the 6th millennium. Smith zur Neolithisierung des westlichen Ostseegebie- In: H. Knutsson (ed.), Coast to Coast – Arrival. Results tes – ein Versuch ihrer Aktualisierung. Praehistorische and Reflections (Uppsala 2004) 123 – 142. Zeitschrift 73, 1998, 1 – 24. Hartz 1997/1998: S. Hartz, Frühbäuerliche Küstensied- Kirleis et al. 2012: W. Kirleis / S. Klooss / H. Kroll / J. lung im westlichen Teil der Oldenburger Grabennie- Müller, Crop growing and gathering in the northern derung (Wangels LA 505). Ein Vorbericht. Offa 54/55, German Neolithic: a review supplemented by new re- 1997/1998, 9 – 41. sults. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 21,3, 2012, Hartz 2004: S. Hartz, Aktuelle Forschungen zur Chrono- 221 – 242. logie und Siedlungsweise der Ertebølle- und frühesten Klassen 2004: L. Klassen, Jade und Kupfer. Untersuchungen Trichterbecherkultur in Schleswig-Holstein. Beiträge zum Neolithisierungsprozess im westlichen Ostseeraum zur 46. Jahrestagung der Hugo-Obermaier-Gesellschaft unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Kulturentwick- zur Erforschung des Eiszeitalters und der Steinzeit e. V. lung Europas 5500 – 3500 BC. Jutland Archaeological Jahrbuch Bodendenkmalpflege in Mecklenburg-Vorpom- Society 47 (Aarhus 2004). mern 52, 2004, 61 – 81. Klooss 2010: S. Klooss, Holzartefakte von endmesolithi- Hartz / Glykou 2008: S. Hartz / A. Glykou, Neues aus schen und frühneolithischen Küstensiedlungen an der Neustadt. Ausgrabungen zur Ertebølle- und frühen südwestlichen Ostseeküste. PhD-Thesis, Kiel University Trichterbecher-Kultur in Schleswig Holstein. Archäo- (Kiel 2010). logische Nachrichten aus Schleswig-Holstein 14, 2008, Koch 1998: E. Koch, Neolithic Bog Pots from Zealand, 17 – 20. Møn, Lolland and Falster. Nordiske Fortidsminder B Hartz 2011: S. Hartz, From pointed bottom to round 16 (København 1998). and flat bottom – tracking early pottery from Schles- Kotula et al. 2015: A. Kotula / H. Piezonka / T. Terber- wig-Holstein. In: S. Hartz/F. Lüth/T. Terberger (eds.), ger, New pottery dates on the Mesolithic-Neolithic Early pottery in the Baltic – Dating Origin and Social transition in the north-central European lowlands. In: Context. Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommis- J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / T. sion 89, 2008 (2011), 241 – 276. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and the Heinrich 1997/1998: D. Heinrich, Die Tierknochen des Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands (c. frühneolithischen Wohnplatzes Wangels LA 505. Ein 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im Vorbericht. Offa 54/55, 1997/1998, 43 – 4 8. Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 489 – 510. Heron et al. 2012: C. Heron / S. H. Andersen / A. Fischer / Kotula 2017: A. Kotula, Der steinzeitliche Seeuferplatz A. Glykou / S. Hartz / H. Saul / V. Steel / O. Craig, Dąbki, Pommern (Polen) – Fundplatzstruktur und Illuminating the Mesolithic: residue analysis of “blub- mesolithische Keramik im nordmitteleuropäischen S ö n ke H a rtz 223 Kontext. Ungedruckte Dissertation zur Erlangung des Saul et al. 2012: H. Saul / J. Wilson / C. P. Heron / A. Gly- philosophischen Doktorgrades an der Philosophischen kou / S. Hartz / O. E. Craig, A systematic approach to Fakultät der Georg-August-Universität Göttingen (Göt- the recovery and identification of starches from carbo- tingen 2017). nised deposits on ceramic vessels. Journal of Archaeo- Lübke 2004: H. Lübke, Spät- und endmesolithische Küsten- logical Science, 39, 2012, 3483 – 3492. siedlungsplätze in der Wismarbucht - Neue Grabungser- Schmölcke 2004: U. Schmölcke, Neue archäozoologische gebnisse zur Chronologie und Siedlungsweise. Jahrbuch Untersuchungen zur Mecklenburger Bucht und zum Bodendenkmalpflege in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern 52, Jasmunder Bodden. Jahrbuch Bodendenkmalpflege in 2004, 52, 83 – 110. Mecklenburg-Vorpommern 52, 2004, 145 – 153. Lübke / Terberger 2004: H. Lübke / T. Terberger, Das Schmütz 2018: I.-I. Schmütz, Grube-Rosenfelde LA 83, Kreis Endmesolithikum in Vorpommern und auf Rügen im Ostholstein – Ein Funktionsplatz der akeramischen Lichte neuer Daten. Jahrbuch Bodendenkmalpflege Ertebølle-Kultur in Schleswig-Holstein. Offa 71/72, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern 52, 2004, 243 – 2 55. 2014/2015 (2018), 5 – 56. Mathiassen 1935: T. Mathiassen, Blubber lamps in the Schwabedissen 1994: H. Schwabedissen, Die Ellerbek- Ertebølle Culture? Acta Archaeologica 6, 1935, 139 – 152. Kultur in Schleswig-Holstein und das Vordringen Meyer 2016: A.-K. Meyer, Die binnenländische Station des Neolithikums über die Elbe nach Norden. In: Schlamersdorf LA 5, Kreis Stormarn. Neue Forschun- J. Hoika / J. Meurers-Balke (eds.), Untersuchungen gen zum Mesolithikum. Archäologische Berichte des und Materialien zur Steinzeit in Schleswig-Holstein 1 Landkreises Rotenburg (Wümme) 20, 2016, 187 – 220. (Neumünster 1994) 361 – 4 01. Nydahl in prep: L. Nydahl, Die endmesolithische Keramik Sørensen 2014: L. Sørensen, From Hunter to Farmer in von Grube-Rosenhof LA 58. Masterarbeit Universität northern Europe. Migration and Adaption during the Kiel (in prep.). Neolithic and Bronze Age. Acta Archaeologica 85,1 Philippsen 2013: B. Philippsen, The freshwater reservoir ef- (Oxford 2014). fect in radiocarbon dating. Heritage Science 1, 2013, 24. Sørensen 2015: L. Sørensen, Hunters and farmers in the Philippsen / Heinemeier 2013: B. Philippsen / J. Heinemei- North – the transformation of pottery traditions and er, Freshwater reservoir effect variability in Northern distribution patterns of key artefacts during the Meso- Germany, Radiocarbon, 55, 2013,1085 – 1101. lithic and Neolithic transition in southern Scandinavia. Piezonka 2008 H. Piezonka, Neue AMS-Daten zur früh- In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / neolithischen Keramikentwicklung in der nordosteuro- T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and päischen Waldzone. Estonian Journal of Archaeology the Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands 12/2, 2008, 67 – 113. (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im Povlsen 2013: K. Povlsen, The indroduction of ceramics in Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 385 – 432. the Ertebølle Culture. Journal of Danish Archaeology Sørensen / Karg 2014: L. Sørensen / S. Karg, The ex- 2, 2013, 146 – 163. pansion of agrarian societies towards the north – new Prangsgaard 1992: K. Prangsgaard, Introduktion af kera- evidence for agriculture during the Mesolithic/Neolithic mik in den yngre Ertebøllekultur i Sydskandinavien. transition in Southern Scandinavia, Journal of Archaeo- Lag 3, Kulturlaget 1992, 29 – 52. logical Science 51, 2014, 98 – 114. Prangsgaard 2013: K. Prangsgaard, Pottery. In: S.H. An- Terberger 2006: T. Terberger, The Mesolithic Hunter- dersen, Tybrind Vig. Submerged Mesolithic Settlements Fisher-Gatherers on the Northern German Plain. In: K. in Denmark. Jutland Archaeological Society (Moesgaard Moeller Hansen / K. Buck Pedersen (eds.), Across the 2013) 277 – 292. western Baltic. Symposium Vordingborg 2003. Sydsjæl- Raemaekers 2011: D. C. M. Raemaekers, Early Swifterbant lands Museums Publikationer 1 (Odense 2006) 111 – 184. pottery (5000 – 4 600 BC): research history, age, charac- Terberger et al. 2009: T. Terberger / S. Hartz / J. Ka- teristics and the introduction of pottery. Berichte der baciński, Late hunter-gatherer and early farmer contacts Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 89, 2008 (2011), in the southern Baltic – a discussion. In: H. Glørstad / 485 – 500. C. Prescott (eds.), Neolithisation as if History mattered. Robson et al. in prep: H. K. Robson / E. Oras / S. Hartz / Processes of Neolithisation in North-Western Europe J. Kabaciński / A. Lucquin / V. Steele / S. H. An- (Lindome 2009) 257 – 297. dersen / L. Thielen / A. Kotula / O. E. Craig / C. Timofeev 1998: V.  I. Timofeev, The Beginning of the Heron, ­Illuminating the prehistory of northern Europe Neolithic in the Eastern Baltic. In: M. Zvelebil et al. through lipid residue analysis of putative oil lamps. 1998, 225 – 2 36. 224 Hu nter-gath ere r potte r y f rom the B altic Sea coast – some regional examples f rom Sc hleswig-H olste in Tranekjer 2015: L. D. Tranekjer, Danish Ertebølle Cera- Van Diest 1981: H. van Diest, Zur Frage der „Lampen“ nach mics – more than a pointed bottom. In: J. Kabaciński / den Ausgrabungsfunden von Rosenhof (Ostholstein). S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / T. Terberger (eds.), Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 11, 1981, 301 – 314. The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and the Neolithisation of Zvelebil et al. 1998: M. Zvelebil / R. Dennell / L. Domans- the North European Lowlands (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). ka (eds.), Harvesting the Sea, Farming the Forest. The Archäologie und Geschichte im Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/ Emergence of Neolithic Societies in the Baltic Region. Westf. 2015) 433 – 4 44. Sheffield Archaeological Monographs 10 (Sheffield 1998). Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 , 2 2 5 – 247) 225 Paths of innovation – the site Dąbki, Poland, and the early forager pottery in the Baltic Sea region Andreas Kotula Abstract The site Dąbki, Poland, is one of the most important hunter-gatherer settlement sites to shed light on the introduc- tion of pottery into the western Baltic Ertebølle culture in the 5th millennium calBC. This lakeshore environment site was settled from c. 5,200 – 3,600 calBC, and bog excavations revealed find material in excellent preservation conditions. The pottery ­assemblage consists of local pointed-bottom pottery and lamps as well as Funnel Beaker pottery. Additionally, numerous fragments of non-local Neolithic ware from communities to the south were uncovered. The pointed-bottom ware was analysed and compared to pottery from neighbouring hunter-gatherer complexes of the 5th millennium calBC. The results show that the pottery from Dąbki displays clear similarities to the western Baltic Ertebølle ware, but some typological traits indicate eastern connections, too. Based on this, possible scenarios for the introduction of pottery into the western Baltic sea area are discussed. Keywords Ertebølle culture, hunter-gatherer pottery, eastern influences Zusammenfassung Der Fundplatz Dąbki ist einer der bedeutendsten Siedlungsplätze später Jäger-Sammler für die Diskussion der Einführung von Keramik in die Ertebøllekultur im westlichen Ostseeraum im 5. Jahrtausend v. Chr. Der Seeuferfundplatz war zwischen ca. 5200 und 3600 v. Chr. besiedelt, und die Ausgrabungen in den vermoorten Uferschichten ergaben Fund­ material mit hervorragender Erhaltung. Die lokale Keramik besteht aus früher Spitzbodenware und Lampen sowie Trichter­ becherkeramik; darüber hinaus ergab der Fundplatz eine Vielzahl nicht-lokaler Keramikfunde aus südlich gelegenen neolithischen Gemeinschaften. Die Analyse der frühen Spitzbodenware und der Vergleich mit Keramik benachbart gelegener Jäger-Sammler Kulturen im Ostseeraum ergab deutliche Ähnlichkeiten der Dąbki-Keramik mit der Ware der Ertebøllekultur; typologische ähnlich sind jedoch auch Gefäße östlicher Kulturgruppen. Die Ergebnisse der Analyse dienen als Basis für die Diskussion möglicher Szenarien der Einführung von Keramik in den westlichen Ostseeraum. Introduction In northern Germany, research at the site Rosenhof was of major importance, and on the ba- The invention of pottery vessels was one of the most sis of supposed early farming activities there as well crucial developments in prehistory, leading to mas- as supposed cattle and pig domesticates an earliest sive advances in food preparation, consumption, Neolithic phase with pointed-bottom pottery was transport and storage (Orton / Hughes 2013). The postulated (e. g. Schwabedissen 1994), but evidence invention and production of pottery vessels was tradi- of cereals and domestic animals was later rejected tionally connected with Neolithic farming societies, (Scheu et al. 2008; Krause-Kyora et al. 2013; Fees- starting in the Near East (cf. e. g. Arnold 1985). er / Dörfler 2015). H. Schwabedissen elaborated Accordingly, the introduction of pottery into the late the idea of Neolithic influence on the pottery produc- Mesolithic Ertebølle culture (ERT) in the southern tion of semi-sedentary groups in northern Germany and western Baltic Sea area was traced in the in- especially with evidence from the Hamburg-Boberg fluence by early Neolithic communities expanding sites, were early Neolithic as well as pointed-bottom through central Europe into the northern European pottery was uncovered (Schwabedissen 1994). His lowlands in the late 6th millenium calBC (e. g. Ber- hypotheses were in general agreement with western lekamp 1977). This was supported by technological European research postulating Neolithic influence analyses highlighting similarities between ERT and on early pottery in forager groups (cf. Klassen 2004, Linear Band pottery (LBK) vessels (Hulthén 1977). 110 – 111). 226 Path s of i n n ovati on – the site D ąbki, Poland, and the early forager pottery in the B altic Sea re gio n However, in eastern Europe and Russia, forager occupation (Fig. 1; Lampe 2015). On the most promis- groups with pottery had been known for a long time, ing site, Dąbki 9, excavations were first carried out and in the Russian Far East and Japan, sites with between 1979 and 1985. A mixed cultural layer was early pottery dating to the Pleistocene had been docu- uncovered at the elevated sandy settlement area, but mented since the 1960s. Successively, forager sites the adjacent bog area proved to be especially rich in with pottery and 14C-data much older than early farm- finds with excellent preservation conditions of organic ing communities in the Near East were found to be materials. On the basis of 14C-data from different lay- widespread in Eurasia, and since the 1990s attempts ers of the bog sediments a chrono-stratigraphical se- have been made by western archaeologists to bring quence was postulated, providing early datings for the together the evidence, assuming that the innovation presence of forager pottery and domestic animals and of forager pottery spread from East Asia moving forming a close parallel to the results from the Rosen- westward ultimately into Europe (Van Berg 1990; hof site, as they were presented at that time (Ilkiewicz 1997; Hommel 2009). This idea has been popularised 1989; Schwabedissen 1994). The ceramic material and further developed since the 2000 s (e. g. Klassen comprised of a Late Mesolithic ensemble exhibiting 2004; Piezonka 2015). Modelling of early pottery 14C- parallels to the Ertebølle culture of the western Baltic, data indicates a diffusion of hunter-gatherer pottery with additional sherds supposedly originating from or from east to west in Eurasia, starting with Pleistocene being influenced by southern Neolithic communities dates in China, Japan, and the Russian Far East, with (Ilkiewicz 1989). The pottery as well as supposedly gaps especially in Russia (Jordan et al. 2016). early domestic cattle bones were key points in the In western Russia this innovation is known from discussion of the neolithisation in the Baltic Sea area, the 7th millennium calBC, reaching the area east of while the decoration of the pointed-bottom vessels the Baltic Sea in the 6th millennium calBC (Piezon- was discussed as influence from the eastern European ka 2015). The start of pottery production at coastal Neman culture (Timofeev 1998). Ertebølle sites in the western Baltic is then dated to New research on the site has been carried out c. 4,600 calBC (Andersen 2008; Hartz 2008), and since 2004 (Kabaciński et al. 2015). Taphonomical this fits well with the idea of this innovation spread- analyses pointed out a complex and disturbed bog ing from east to west in northern central Europe. An stratigraphy with the intermixing of the Stone Age important part of the discussion on the introduction material by human and natural impact factors like of early pottery and neolithisation in the Baltic Sea trampling and floodings (Kotula et al. 2015; 2018). area is the site Dąbki in northern Poland (Ilkiewicz Additionally, new archaeozoological and genetic ex- 1989; Timofeev 1998; Kabaciński et al. 2015) with aminations of the Bos spp. remains rejected the pres- an occupational phase between c. 5,200 – 3,600 calBC ence of domestic animals at the site (Kabaciński et al. and an extensive early pottery ensemble. Since its 2009; Schmölcke / Nikulina 2015). New excavations discovery in the 1970s, long-going research has been enlarged the knowledge of find material and site struc- undertaken, and new analyses of the pottery ensemble ture considerably and uncovered Stone Age settlement provide insight into cultural affiliation of the ceramic features on land c. 80 m south of the main bog excava- ware (Kotula 2015; cf. Czekaj-Zastawny 2015; Cze- tion area (Dąbki 10), pointing out that the settlement kaj-Zastawny / Kabaciński 2015). In this paper, the was much larger than previously thought (Kabaciński early local pointed-bottom pottery will be discussed / Terberger 2015). Numerous new 14C-dates attribute in the supraregional context of the Baltic Sea area. the Stone Age occupation to the timespan between c. 5,200 calBC and 3,600 calBC (see below). The artefact types exhibit general parallels to Site and significance the western Baltic ERT (Kotula in press). Among organic tool types, T-axes are predominating, which The site Dąbki is located in northern Poland in are often considered a typical tool type of the ERT, the centre of the southern Baltic Sea area between but T-axes are also broadly distributed among Neo- ­Szczecin and Gdańsk, south of the present-day Baltic lithic societies (Kabaciński et al. 2014). Other tool Sea coast. Several Stone Age sites were detected dur- types like ulna-daggers and perforated shoulder ing systematic prospections in the 1970s on a sandy blades also have parallels in the ERT (Kabaciński / elevation in a periglacial tunnel valley, nowadays sur- Terberger 2015). The flint artefact production is rounded by bogs (Dębowska 1978). Geographical based on a l­ocal Mesolithic tradition, but similarities analyses and topographical data could verify an island to the ERT can be traced, too (Sobkowiak-Tabaka situation in a freshwater lake at the time of Stone Age 2015). A large truncated blade can be connected to A n d re a s Ko tu l a 227 Fig. 1 Location of the site Dąbki and reconstruction of the island situation. exchange with more western ERT groups, probably Band pottery (SBK), and especially numerous Brześć on Rügen island, and two blades of chocolate flint Kujawski ware (c. 4,600 – 4,000 calBC; after Grygiel point to interactions with southern Neolithic LBK 2008; contra: Czerniak et al. 2016). They indicate communities (Sobkowiak-Tabaka 2015). The pottery long lasting exchange networks to Neolithic societies ensemble was especially targeted for new systematic in the south, especially Kujawy. Some sherds of an analyses, as the variability of the assemblage and extremely well-made and richly ornamented ware possible influences from southern Neolithic commu- could be identified as Bodrogkeresztūr culture pot- nities had been pointed out before (Ilkiewicz 1989). tery from Hungary, dating to the late 5th millennium The early local vessel types comprise of pointed- calBC (Czekaj-Zastawny 2015). Additionally, a per- bottom pots and oval bowls (lamps). With the new forated amphibolite axe was also found which pos- examination it was also possible to uncover round- sibly originates from a late SBK context (Terberger and flat-based funnel beakers in the material. With et al. 2009). The overall evidence of the non-local the rejection of remains of domestic animals and ware highlights long lasting and far reaching contact plants, the introduction of Funnel Beaker culture networks to farming societies, indicating that the (TRB) vessels confirmedly was not accompanied by site was an important place of Mesolithic-Neolithic a change in economy at the site. Additionally, many exchange networks in the southern Baltic area. sherds could be identified as non-local ware from dif- Some finds from the assemblage might have ferent Neolithic societies. Some LBK fragments show acted as exchange goods. Amber pieces, which occur the influx of foreign ware starting during an early oc- regularly at Dąbki, both processed and unprocessed, cupational phase c. 4,900 calBC, followed by Stroke represent a raw material of probable importance to 228 Path s of i n n ovati on – the site D ąbki, Poland, and the early forager pottery in the B altic Sea re gio n Neolithic groups (e. g. Kabaciński / Terberger 2015; within the time frame of the 5th millennium calBC. cf. Gronenborn 2010). The analyses of the animal The oldest date is an outlier in the sequence with remains further pointed out possible trading goods 4,937±60 calBC (Poz-41583: 6,040±40 BP; Table 1). (Schmölcke / Nikulina 2015): With more than 60 % More numerous evidence starts from c. 4,770 calBC beaver bones dominate the mammal remains from (Poz-10436: 5,900±40 BP; Poz-18654: 5,890±50 BP; the site. While this is extremely unusual in the con- KIA-26386: 5,880±37 BP; KIA-26385: 5,831±28 BP) text of the Late Mesolithic in the southern Baltic Sea throughout the 5th millennium calBC. The young- area (beaver bones on Ertebølle sites generally only est date 4,082±75 calBC (Poz-27401: 5,250±40 BP) averaging around 0.1 %), a dominance of beaver re- fits well into a transitional context to the North- mains can be found in Mesolithic and Neolithic sites ern group of the TRB culture (e. g. Hartz / Lübke especially in northeastern Europe (Schmölcke / 2004; Kotula et. al 2015; Glykou 2016). One vessel Nikulina 2015). The overall number of remains unit was dated several times, including one sherd from fur bearing animals distinctly surpasses the dated twice (Poz-41580: 5,740±40 BP; Poz-18609: estimated local demand, and it is thus suggested that 5,660±40 BP) as well as another non-refitting sherd the exchange of furs was an important part of the (KIA-26386: 5,880±37 BP). The results diverge, only extra-local network (Schmölcke / Nikulina 2015; partly overlapping in the 1 and 2 ƍ range, and a Kotula in press). The overall evidence indicates that minimum reservoir effect of c. 100/250 years can Dąbki was integrated within the exchange networks be stated for this vessel. It remains unclear, if and of the Baltic Sea area, with close similarities to the to what extent the youngest date is also affected by Ertebølle culture of the western Baltic and strong reservoir effect. A recent extensive study of lipids network connections with Neolithic communities from forager pottery crusts around the Baltic Sea to the south. area pointed out a higher component of aquatic lipid markers (APAAs) in the Dąbki sample compared to Ertebølle, Narva and other sampled sites, making Chronology: site occupation and reservoir effect in food crust dates generally likely pottery here (Courel et al. 2020). However, the existing data from pointed-bottom pottery does agree with the More than 70 14C-dates have been obtained from dif- general time frame of the introduction of hunter- ferent materials in the bog (Table 1). They confirm gatherer ceramics in the central and western Baltic settlement activities on the site between c. 5,200 area c. 4,600 calBC (Hartz 2008). calBC and 3,600 calBC. The oldest date stems from 14 C-data were also obtained from Funnel Bea- charcoal in feature 28 on the sandy settlement site ker pottery in Dąbki, and results show remarkable (Poz-52527: 6,240±40 BP). Hazel tree trunks, some differences between typo-chronology and 14C-ages of them with cut marks, from the bottom of the bog (Kotula et al. 2015). Dates start as early as 5,039±88 stratigraphy confirm human activities before the calBC (Table 1; Poz-41578: 6,100±50 BP), c. 1,000 water level rose in connection with the Littorina years earlier than usually expected for an early fun- transgression (Poz-27402: 6,220±50 BP; Poz-10437: nel beaker in northern Europe (Hartz / Lübke 2004; 6,140±40 BP; Gd-3127: 6,250±40 BP) and the envi- Glykou 2016), and most TRB dates from Dąbki are ronment became an island. A series of datings from older than expected. The huge age discrepancy is different materials confirm regular and intensive in accordance with observations from other sites settlement activities throughout the 5th millennium (e. g. Hartz et al. 2012; Philippsen / Meadows calBC and the early 4th millennium calBC, with the 2014; Philippsen 2015). At the northern German latest dates around 3,600/3,500 calBC (food resi- Ertebølle site Schlamersdorf, dating results of inner due on pottery Poz-27412: 4,920±40 BP; horse bone and outer crust of an Ertebølle sherd differ by 1,500 KIA-10330 A: 4,787±33 BP), before the settlement years. 14C-datings of TRB pottery from Bebensee was abandoned, probably due to the development of also resulted in ages c. 1,000 older than expected unfavourable environmental conditions in the area (Philippsen / Meadows 2014). For the northern Ger- (Kalis et al. 2015). man inland site Friesack freshwater reservoir age was Numerous direct dates from crusts of pottery estimated at c. 1,200 years (Meadows et al. 2018). sherds have been obtained, and reservoir effect has Unfortunately, isotopes were only measured for few to be taken into consideration here (cf. e. g. Fischer / sherds from Dąbki (Fig. 2). Most of the TRB sherds Heinemeier 2003; Philippsen 2015). All datings fall into the isotope range of inland Ertebølle and from pointed-bottom ware and one lamp date fall TRB pottery, and this suggests a mixture of terres- A n d re a s Ko tu l a 229 Identifica- Lab-no. C14 age BP C14 calBC C14 calBC δ13C (‰) δ15N (‰) Material Description tion-no. (2σ) (μ) 70–2/2011 Poz-52527 6240±40 5311-5066 5209±72 charcoal charcoal (feat. 28) tree stump- Poz-27402 6220±50 5308-5048 5174±77 wood tree stump, probably hasel-nut 1/2008 99–2/2004 Poz-10437 6140±40 5215-4981 5099±70 plant remains large tree trunk, probably cutted 163–1/2007 Poz-41578 6100±50 5210-4856 5039±88 pottery residue Funnel Beaker pottery 426–1/2008 AAR-17986 6065±35 5057-4848 4973±59 -27,61 ± 0,22 7,75 ± 0,18 pottery residue Funnel Beaker pottery 530–1/2005 Poz-41583 6040±40 5047-4836 4937±60 pottery residue pointed-bottom pottery 509–1/2009 Poz-41582 6000±40 4995-4792 4891±53 pottery residue Funnel Beaker pottery 22–2/2004 KiA-26388 5960±32 4939-4743 4843±47 -19,52 ± 0,29 animal remains wild boar, burnt bone 527–1/2009 AAR-17981 5916±35 4896-4711 4788±44 -27,48 ± 0,14 7,53 ± 0,17 pottery residue Funnel Beaker pottery 176–1/2004 Poz-41579 5915±35 4895-4711 4786±44 pottery residue Funnel Beaker pottery 249–II/83 KIA-10331 5999 ± 34 4989-4796 4890±50 -22,04 ± 0,11 animal remains horse bone 352–1/2005 Poz-18654 5890±50 4901-4615 4764±61 pottery residue pointed-bottom pottery 109–1/2004 KiA-26386 5880±37 4842-4685 4753±42 -27,55 ± 0,64 pottery residue pointed-bottom pottery 129–1/2004 KiA-26385 5831±28 4781-4610 4693±45 -28,51 ± 0,13 pottery residue pointed-bottom pottery 110–III/81 KiA-26389 5816±30 4769-4557 4670±46 -18,9 ± 0,17 animal remains T-shaped antler axe 241–1/2008 Poz-27400 5780±40 4722-4534 4630±52 animal remains T-shaped antler axe 191–1/2010 AAR-17983 5760±50 4721-4491 4611±62 -25,95 ± 0,14 8,2 ± 0,29 pottery residue Funnel Beaker pottery 18–2/2004 Poz-10438 5750±40 4701-4501 4603±55 pottery residue lamp fragment 192–1/2004 Poz-41580 5740±40 4696-4491 4592±56 pottery residue pointed-bottom pottery 102–II/81 AAR-17982 5707±35 4678-4459 4548±52 -27,72 ± 0,13 6,33 ± 0,1 pottery residue Funnel Beaker pottery 192–1/2004 Poz-18609 5660±40 4592-4370 4492±50 pottery residue pointed-bottom pottery 460–1/2008 AAR-17984 5638±30 4541-4371 4466±41 -27,95 ± 0,22 7,47 ± 0,18 pottery residue Funnel Beaker pottery 401–II/81 KIA-10332 5632 ± 34 4541-4362 4460±50 -21,64 ± 0,23 animal remains horse bone 98–I/79 Poz-41584 5630±40 4538-4365 4455±49 pottery residue pointed-bottom pottery 190–1/2005 Poz-18610 5610±35 4516-4357 4431±42 pottery residue imported pottery (Ertebølle) 719–1/2008 Poz-27397 5600±40 4504-4351 4425±42 animal remains metapodial bone chisel 408–II/81 Poz-18607 5550±40 4458-4338 4398±36 pottery residue Funnel Beaker pottery 91–1/2009 AAR-17125 5567±29 4407 4404±31 -26,84 ± 0,12 pottery residue Funnel Beaker pottery 118–1/2004 KiA-26384 5477±28 4366-4261 4325±32 -24,68 ± 0,85 pottery residue pointed-bottom pottery 265–II/83 Poz-18608 5440±35 4349-4241 4295±34 pottery residue Funnel Beaker pottery 71–2/2011 Poz-52528 5410±40 4348-4076 4269±57 charcoal charcoal (feat. 38) 170–2/2007 Poz-27396 5380±40 4335-4060 4228±76 animal remains T-shaped antler axe 6–2/2004 KiA-26387 5339±29 4313-4052 4163±65 -21,78 ± 0,09 animal remains wild boar tooth 546–1/2008 Poz-27401 5250±40 4230-3973 4082±75 pottery residue pointed-bottom pottery 55–2/2011 Poz-49886 5250±40 4230-3973 4082±75 charcoal charcoal„glued” to piece of pottery (feat. 38) 407–1/2006 Poz-18612 5195±35 4147-3951 4007±42 animal remains T-shaped antler axe 199–1/2004 Poz-10434 5160±40 4046-3806 3962±63 animal remains large antler 520–2/2005 Poz-18613 4955±35 3798-3652 3733±48 pottery residue Funnel Beaker pottery 10–2/2004 Poz-27412 4920±40 3779-3642 3703±42 pottery residue Funnel Beaker pottery 95–II/81 KIA-10330 A 4787 ± 33 3642-3519 3580±40 -23,8 ± 0,12 animal remains horse bone Table 1 14C-data from Dąbki: food residue dates from local pottery ware and selected plant and faunal data. trial and freshwater sources prepared in the vessels cautious with the data. We consider only few TRB (Philippsen 2015). High 15N- and low 13C-values are dates from Dąbki reliable and to be in accordance considered to be connected with high 14C-ages, and with the later occupation at the site (Kotula et al. the dates from Dąbki may thus well be influenced 2015). Feature 38 provided indirect evidence to date by reservoir effect. However, the small sample size the transition from pointed-bottom to Funnel Beaker inhibits further conclusions, and isotope variability ware in Dąbki. In this pit early Funnel Beaker sherds has been pointed out for different samples from the as well as pointed-bottom pottery were uncovered, same vessel (Philippsen 2015). 13C-values were also and a charcoal from a non-diagnostic sherd dating measured for vessels: here, too, it is suggested to be to 4,082±75 calBC (Poz-49886: 5,250±40) provides 230 Path s of i n n ovati on – the site D ąbki, Poland, and the early forager pottery in the B altic Sea re gio n Fig. 2 Stable isotope values of Dąbki pottery food crusts against the background of experimental and archaeological food crusts (supplemented after Philippsen 2015). Big blue stars: TRB food crusts; vertical lines: only 13C-values measured (blue = TRB ware; red = pointed-bottom ware). Fig. 3 Projection of pottery types and 14C-data calBC (distance <1 m) on the southern profile Trench I/80 square X 113 – 116. 14C-dates from left to right: KIA-26387: 5,339±29 BP; Poz-10438: 5,750±40 BP; Poz-27412: 4,920±40 BP; Poz-10437: 6,140±40 BP; KIA-26388: 5,960±32 B P. Stratigraphy: 1 detritus gyttja, 2 shell gyttja, 3 detritus gyttja, 4 decomposed reed peat with wood, 5 alluvial sands, 6 moss peat with wood detritus. A n d re a s Ko tu l a 231 Fig. 4 14C-data of pottery food residue against 14C-data from other organic non-pottery sources from the sites Dąbki and two northern German ERT sites (Wangels, Neustadt) with especially numerous available 14C-data. a background for the transition between the types. The 14 C-dates from pointed-bottom pottery It also has a similar age as the youngest date from a suggest a start of local pottery production around pointed-bottom vessel (see above). This is in overall 4,850/4,700 calBC, thus dating slightly earlier than in accordance with the earliest datings of the Northern the Western Baltic coastal area at c. 4,600 calBC (e. g. TRB group from around 4,200/4,100 calBC (Kotula Hartz 2008). While the pottery data advise caution et al. 2015; cf. Hartz/Lübke 2004; Glykou 2016). due to a possibly high reservoir effect, as displayed The stratigraphy of the bog area provides only in the TRB dates, some indications support an early limited additional information, as large parts of the pointed-bottom pottery production in Dąbki: former shore zone were exposed to anthropogenic and natural disturbances, resulting in a mixed cul- (1) No systematic shift towards older ages is observ- tural layer (Kotula et al. 2015; 2018). While most able in the pointed-bottom pottery data against parts of the bog trenches cannot provide reliable the other 14C-data, and both categories are repre- chrono-stratigraphical evidence, the deepest part of sented by numerous dates (Fig. 4). An intensive the trenches show a better stratigraphical resolution occupation evidently starts already in the first with few finds and correct chrono-stratigraphical half of the 5th millennium calBC, and in general, order (Fig. 3). In the lowest part of the gyttja and the assemblage is characterised by a high simi- peat layer sequence a tree stump was dated to c. 5,100 larity and connection to the Ertebølle culture calBC. In the overlying gyttja layer pointed-bottom in morphology and technology (see below). It is pottery and lamps accompanied by non-local Brześć thus likely that pottery production in Dąbki was Kujawski pottery are situated. A residue from a lamp part of a broadly contemporary introduction of sherd (Poz-10438: 5,750±40 BP) and a wild boar bone pottery at the southern Baltic coastal sites in (KIA-26388: 5,960±32 BP) from this sediment layer the first half of the 5th millennium calBC. date to between c. 4,860 and 4,600 calBC. TRB pot- (2) The concept of pottery vessels was known in tery is then found markedly higher in the overlying Dąbki even before local production through peat sediment, together with pointed-bottom pottery non-local Neolithic ceramic ware, starting in as well as Brześć Kujawski pottery, 14C-dated to be- late LBK times in the earliest 5th millennium tween c. 4,300 (wild boar bone KIA-26387: 5,339±29 calBC, and upheld contacts are confirmed by BP) and 3,600 calBC (TRB food crust KIA-27412: many Neolithic vessels from different cultures 4,920±40 BP), which indicates a compact sedimen- throughout the 5th millennium calBC. Insight tation or slight disturbance in the upper part of the into the convenience of pottery vessels was thus stratigraphy. present early at the site, and has possibly facili- tated an early local ceramic production. 232 Path s of i n n ovati on – the site D ąbki, Poland, and the early forager pottery in the B altic Sea re gio n ed small vessel with full profile. This results in the estimation of a MNI of 52 pointed-bottom vessels. Despite problematic profile reconstruction, the ves- sels can be generally characterised as S-shaped with round inflections and a presumably conical lower body form (Fig. 5). The pointed-bottom ware was admixed with mineral components, mostly crushed granite. If more than one material was observed, the second admixture was predominantly sand. The local clay, which was used for the production of pottery (pers. comm. A. Czekaj-Zastawny), contains in parts sand, and it can thus not be differentiated between artificially added or natural sand components. The wall thickness of the vessels averages at 11 mm, and the coil joins could be mostly identified as N- and rarely U-joins. The surface was smoothed or simply flattened, and the outside surface was prepared more carefully than the inside. The vessel openings vary between 10 and 33 cm, averaging at around 19 cm. Fig. 5 Schematic drawing of pointed-bottom vessel from Dąbki (drawing: J. Ożóg). The rim section is short (averaging at 19 mm height), and almost 90 % of the rims are bent outwards with rounded inflection points. Most of the vessels (96 %) (3) The reliable stratigraphical evidence shows a exhibit decorations, although almost exclusively in marked vertical gap between the lowest found the rim section. Typically, the rim is decorated with pointed-bottom pottery/lamps and TRB pot- ‘Randkerben’ (rim cuts) and a horizontal row of tery in the stratigraphy, indicating a clear time round impressions/perforations below the end of difference between the appearance of both the rim, with perforations predominating (Fig. 6.1 – 4). types. The impressions/perforations were carried out from the outside as well as from the inside with no appar- Summing up evidence, we assume it likely that ent predominance. One vessel unit shows a belly around the mid of the 5th millennium calBC local decoration with vertical impressions, and another ceramic production was fully established in Dąbki, vessel was decorated with vertical rows of small im- approximately contemporaneous with the introduc- pressions from the rim to the shoulder. The bottoms tion of pottery production in the western Baltic are massive and drop-shaped or conical (Fig. 6.5 – 6). Ertebølle culture. The 14C-data suggest an earlier Overall 87 fragments could be assigned to lamps, start of pottery production in Dąbki, but this cannot of which 44 were combined to 29 vessel units. They be reliably confirmed due to an uncertain amount represent a more finely made ware than the pointed- of reservoir effect in the pointed-bottom pottery bottom vessels, but exhibit similar technical traits. food residues. While wall thickness is at average around 9 mm, the bottoms are more massive with 11 mm. The clay is better mixed than in the pointed-bottom ware, and The early local pottery from Dąbki: while the same mineralic admixture was added, a summary of characteristics particles were more finely grained. The lamps were formed out of lumps of clay, but in some cases only A detailed analysis was undertaken for the point- the bottom was formed in this way and the walls ed-bottom pottery and lamps from the excavation were then added with N-joined coils. While rims were campaigns 1979 – 2010. The pointed-bottom ware carefully smoothed, much less effort was given to the consists of 146 sherds, from which 64 vessel units majority of bottoms. Typically, rims are very dark grey were combined. Unfortunately, small fragment sizes coloured, while bottoms are much brighter, which and very limited decorations made the combination points to the use of these vessels as containers to burn of full profiles almost impossible, thus vessel units substances containing fat (cf. Van Diest 1981). The are separated into 51 rim units, 11 bottom units and overall forms are oval with rounded or pointed ends. one belly unit (with decoration) plus one reconstruct- The length varies mostly between 12 and 15 cm, but A n d re a s Ko tu l a 233 Fig. 6 Dąbki. Pointed-bottom pottery. 1 – 4 rims, 5 – 6 pointed bottoms, 7 – 8 lamps. Scale 1 : 2 (drawing: J. Ożóg). 234 Path s of i n n ovati on – the site D ąbki, Poland, and the early forager pottery in the B altic Sea re gio n fragments of one extremely large specimen indicate a Close to the Oder estuary the Tanowo sites are possible size > 30 cm long. The height could be mea- situated on a moraine hill at a palaeolake, resem- sured on two lamps with 3 and 5.2 cm, respectively. bling the environmental situation of Dąbki (e. g. Approximately 50 % of the lamps are decorated, Galiński 2016). The settlement duration is esti- mostly with cuts on the rim (Fig. 6.7), but some also mated between c. 5,000 calBC and 3,800 calBC exhibit a horizontal row of impressions or perfora- (Galiński 2016), and, according to the excavator, tions, similar to pointed-bottom vessels. Two lamps early local pointed-bottom pottery is present at the have a different decoration with a horizontal row of site from the beginning. The sites Tanowo 2 and 3 small vertical impressions below the end of the rim provided a large collection of forager pottery with c. (Fig. 6.8); in one case this ornament is repeated on 4,000 fragments, combined to c. 300 reconstructed the vessel inside. The best parallels for this ornament vessel units by the excavator, including pointed- can be found in the eastern Baltic Narva culture, e. g. bottom vessels, lamps and Funnel Beaker vessels. at the Šventoji site (e. g. Rimantienė 2005). While pointed-bottom pottery is technologically mostly quite similar to the Dąbki ware, the coiling technique is dominated by U-joins and therewith Early forager pottery in the northern leaning more towards the western Baltic Ertebølle Polish lowland culture, where U-technique is very common (e. g. Prangsgaard 1992). The decoration on the other The Polish lowland is a crucial area to study contact hand shows rows of impressions/perforations and and networks of the 5th millennium calBC between rim cuts closely resembling Dąbki and other early large cultural complexes of the western (Ertebølle forager pottery from the Polish plain. culture) and eastern Baltic (Narva culture) and eastern Lastly, at the inland site Chobienice close to Europe (Dubičiai type). Only few sites in northern Poznań, few fragments of pottery with Late Meso- Poland provide evidence of forager groups with early lithic characteristics were uncovered (Kobusiewicz / pottery. C. 23 km south of Dąbki the site Koszalin- Kabaciński 1998). Rim fragments closely resemble Dzierżęcino is situated, with a find spectrum covering Dąbki and Rzucewo ware with impressions below the a time span from the Mesolithic to the Middle Ages rim and rim cuts. The impressions were carried out (Ilkiewicz 1998). The forager pottery there consists with a rectangular tool. The site also yielded Brześć of mostly small fragments, with similar characteri- Kujawski pottery, and it is still a matter of discussion stics to that of Dąbki, with rim sherds displaying the whether occupational phases of groups with different same decorational features (rim cuts and a horizontal economies or a Neolithic group receiving forager ves- row of impressions/perforations). Sherds from lamps sels by contact are to be postulated (Kobusiewicz / were also uncovered. A particular interesting find is Kabaciński 1998; Kabaciński 2016). a pointed-bottom vessel with a sharp double-conical Overall, the early forager pottery in the 5th mil- profile and decoration on rim and shoulder. It differs lennium calBC from the different sites in northern technically from the Dąbki pottery and the local ware, Poland displays significant similarities, with paral- and typological parallels can be found in the Dnepr- lels in technical characteristics and especially deco- Donec circle (Piezonka 2015). C. 150 km east of Dąb- rational features. Except Chobienice, all sites were ki, the site of Rzucewo is situated. Besides finds of the situated in close vicinity of the southern Baltic Sea, Rzucewo culture (a local branch of the Corded Ware and the similar typo-technology implies a regional in- complex), a late Mesolithic pottery phase and TRB teraction and knowledge exchange network, probably pottery were also detected (Król 1997; Kabaciński connected via waterways. et al. 2008). The late Mesolithic pottery closely resem- bles the Dąbki ware, with technical and typological similarities (Czekaj-Zastawny / Kabaciński 2018). Comparative pottery analyses in It can be mentioned, however, that impressions/per- supraregional perspective: sites and forations below the rim end have a rectangular shape cultures and the decorations are more variable than in Dąbki. Three direct datings have been carried out on food In the western and eastern Baltic Sea environments, crusts from some of the sherds (Kabaciński et al. large hunter-gatherer techno-complexes with early 2008). The dates between c. 4,400 calBC and 4,150 pottery existed in the 5th millennium calBC. To ex- calBC confirm a Late Mesolithic forager ware in the amine the cultural affiliations of the ceramics of second half of the 5th millennium calBC. northern Poland a supraregional comparison was A n d re a s Ko tu l a 235 Fig. 7 Sites included into pottery analysis. carried out for the pointed-bottom pottery from Ertebølle culture Dąbki with roughly contemporaneous wares from sites of the Ertebølle culture (site Neustadt LA 156, The Late Mesolithic Ertebølle culture of the western Schleswig-Holstein, Germany), Narva culture (sites Baltic is one of the best-studied Stone Age cultures in Žemaitiške 3 and Žeimenio ežero 1, Lithuania, and northern Europe. Sites are mainly known from Den- Kääpa, Estonia) and Dubičiai type of the Neman mark, northern Germany and southern Sweden. The culture (Dubičiai 2 and Varėnė 2, Lithuania).1 Ad- Polish forager sites with early pottery are sometimes ditionally, one vessel unit from the Polish inland site generally included into the Ertebølle culture (Czer- Chobienice was included (Fig. 7). Further early pot- niak / Kabaciński 1997; cf. Hartz et al. 2007, fig. 2), tery in hunter-gatherer contexts in the 5th millennium but regularly discussed separately (e. g. Courel et al. calBC is known from sites of the Zedmar culture 2020). In the Ertebølle culture pointed-bottom pots in eastern Poland and Kaliningrad district, and the and oval bowls (lamps) are known. The introduction Friesack-Boberg group in northern Germany. These of early pottery in Denmark and northern Germany pottery types are however considered later than the is dated to c. 4,600 calBC by 14C-evidence (Andersen aforementioned wares and are thus not discussed 2008; Hartz 2011). However, the oldest pottery food here (Gumiński 2020; Kotula et al. 2015). crust dates with ages between 5,500 and 4,950 calBC originate from the inland sites Kayhude and Schlam- ersdorf in northern Germany (Hartz 2011), but res- ervoir effect has been pointed out for these sites (e. g. 1 I am grateful to Aikaterini Glykou and Henny Piezonka for Philippsen 2015). However, a single plant date from providing me with text and data of their then unpublished PhD-theses. the ceramic matrix of a sherd from Schlamersdorf 236 Path s of i n n ovati on – the site D ąbki, Poland, and the early forager pottery in the B altic Sea re gio n Fig. 8 Pottery of the western (1 – 5) and eastern (6 – 10) Ertebølle culture. 1 Braband, Denmark; 2 Gudsø Vig, Denmark; 3, 5 Ringkloster, Denmark; 4 Timmendorf-Nordmole, Germany; 6 – 7, 9 – 10 Löddesborg, Sweden; 8 Soldattorpet, Sweden. 1 scale 1 : 3, 2 – 8 scale 1 : 4; 9 – 10 scale 1 : 2 (after Andersen 2008; Brinch Petersen 2011; Glykou 2010; Jennbert 2008). dates to 4,875±65 calBC (AAR-11483: 5,985±50 BP; Ertebølle to the early TRB, confirmed by 14C-data Philippsen 2012; Philippsen / Heinemeier 2013), between c. 4,550 and 3,720 calBC. 105 pointed-bot- highlighting a possible older age of pottery from this tom vessel units from Neustadt were included in the site. As yet, this date has not been supported by other comparative pottery analysis. data. Ertebølle pottery rarely carries decoration more complex than rim cuts, but in the eastern Ertebølle Narva culture culture in southern Sweden more elaborate decora- tion is common (Fig. 8; Prangsgaard 1992). From In the eastern Baltic, sites of the Narva culture are around 4,200/4,100 calBC Funnel Beaker pottery distributed widely over a large area in the present replaces the Ertebølle ware in northern Germany day countries Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, and Be- and the northern European plain, slightly later also larus as well as western Russia (Rimantienė 2005). in Scandinavia around 4,000 calBC. 2 Pottery from The earliest 14C-datings from this hunter-gatherer the submerged Ertebølle site Neustadt LA 156, culture with pottery date to the older half of the Schleswig-Holstein, was integrated into the com- 6th millennium calBC and originate from sites in parative analysis. The site was recently targeted for the northeastern part of the area. In the inland of an extensive pottery analysis (Glykou 2016). Situated Lithuania, the oldest dates are confirmed before the in the Lübeck bay, the site was a coastal settlement middle of the 5th millennium calBC, and sites from at the time of Stone Age occupation from the late the eastern Baltic Sea area date around c. 4,000 calBC (Piezonka 2015). The pottery set consists of pointed-bottom pots and lamps. While the oldest ves- 2  Hartz 2011; Sørensen 2014; Kotula et al. 2015; Glykou 2016. sels are rarely decorated, ornamentation increases in A n d re a s Ko tu l a 237 Fig. 9 Pottery of the early Narva culture. 1 – 2 Osa, Latvia; 3 – 7 Zvidze, Latvia. 1 – 2 scale 1 : 5; 3 – 7 not to scale (after Dumpe et al. 2008; Loze 1992). later phases (Fig. 9). From Narva context three sites Dubičiai type of Neman culture were included in the comparative analysis (Piezonka 2015). The site Žemaitiške 3, Lithuania, is one of In the area south of the Narva cultural complex, many Stone Age sites situated at lake Kretuonas in sites of the Dubičiai type (recently regularly denoted a bog environment. Horizon B from this site is con- as Prypjat-Neman culture; cf. Tkachou 2018) are nected with an early Narva phase dating c. 4,650 located. This complex is interpreted as the earli- to 3,950 calBC, and pointed-bottom pottery from est phase of the Neman culture or as a preceding this layer was included (25 vessel units). Another separate cultural unit, respectively. Sites are found ensemble originates from the site Žeimenio ežero in southeastern Lithuania, Belarus, Ukraine and 1, situated at lake Žeimenis, only 2 km west of lake northeastern Poland. Due to preservation issues and Kretuonas, with material typologically dated to the mixed stratigraphies on sandy settlement sites, in- middle Narva culture (12 vessel units included). An formation is limited (Piezonka 2015). The existing important Narva site in Estonia is Kääpa, providing data indicate that this ware represents an established 14 C-data starting from the middle of the 6th millen- tradition around the mid of the 6th millennium calBC nium calBC. The find layer can be connected to the (Piezonka 2015; Tkachou 2018). The only known oldest phase of the Narva culture (69 vessel units vessel type is the pointed-bottom pot. A decoration included). with a horizontal row of impressions below the 238 Path s of i n n ovati on – the site D ąbki, Poland, and the early forager pottery in the B altic Sea re gio n Fig. 10 Pottery of the Dubičiai type of the Neman culture. 1 – 3 Woźna Wieś, Poland; 4 Dręstwo, Poland; 5 Kašėtos, Lithuania; 6 Varėnė, Lithuania; 7 – 8 Rusakovo, Belarus. 1 scale 1 : 3; 2 – 6 scale 1 : 2; 7 – 8 scale 1 : 3 (after Kempisty / Sulgostowska 1991; Piličiauskas 2002; Józwiak 2003). rim can be considered typical, but the vessel body on the site (Kobusiewicz / Kabaciński 1998). The is also frequently decorated (Fig. 10). The type site older inventory comprises of Late Mesolithic flint Dubičiai, Lithuania, yielded material mostly con- artefacts and some sherds as well as fragments of sidered to be type Dubičiai, but some sherds were Brześć Kujawski ware. A few fragments belong to also interpreted as belonging to a younger Neman a Late Mesolithic ware with impressions below the phase due to unsecure stratigraphical context (15 rim, and parallels are drawn to the coastal Mesolithic vessel units included). At another Lithuanian site, pottery (Fig. 11; Kabaciński 2016). Varėnė 2, there are several occupational phases with- out clear stratigraphical division, but some vessels could clearly be connected with the Dubičiai type Method of analysis (4 vessel units included). All in all, three systems of pottery analysis were Late forager pottery from the Polish lowland adapted to each other, technological and typological characteristics were compared and a multivariate cor- In addition to the Dąbki ware it was possible to ex- respondence analysis was carried out for the pointed- amine one vessel unit from Chobienice. This site bottom vessels (Piezonka 2015; Glykou 2016; Kotu- west of Poznań yielded c. 100 pottery fragments from la 2017). In the correspondence analysis (CA), only two cultural phases connected with different zones vessel units with rim preservation were included, as A n d re a s Ko tu l a 239 of admixture was added to the clay, but 90 % of Dubičiai vessels contained more than one admixture. The western and central Baltic pottery was almost exclusively admixed with mineralic additions, espe- cially crushed granite and to a lesser extent sand and quartz. Narva and Dubičiai vessels show admixture in much higher quantities and different components. Dubičiai pottery is characterised by a combination of plant and mineralic admixture, while plant or shell admixture without other additives is typical for Nar- va ware. The surface treatment also exhibits a clear distinction between eastern and more western types. The outer and inner surface of Neustadt, Dąbki and Chobienice vessels is smoothed, but less carefully on the inside. Brushed surfaces are especially typical for Dubičiai vessels, but also appear on Narva ware. Narva vessels on the other hand are often scraped Fig. 11 Chobienice. Pointed-bottom pottery. Rim sherds (after Czerniak / Kabaciński 1997). Scale 1 : 2. on the outer and inner surface, and slip was added on the outside in many cases. The wall-building technique is rather indifferent among the respec- the very differing preservation states did not allow an tive cultures. N- and U-technique are common in the informative comparison of vessel bodies. The techno- whole study area. N-technique is especially typical logical characteristics integrated into the CA were wall for Dąbki, while Neustadt Ertebølle vessels were thickness, admixture, (outer) surface treatment and built with H- and U-technique. Examination of wall wall-building technique. Typologically, rim diameter technique was more problematic on Dubičiai and and shape of rim were included; decorational features Narva vessels, but N-technique is confirmed for both were separated into decoration of the end of the rim, types, and in the Narva culture also U-technique rim decoration and rim-body decoration (Fig. 12). is rather common. The shape of Neustadt, Dąbki, While nominal characteristics like admixture could and Chobienice vessels is very similar, exhibiting an easily be included, a separational value was chosen for metrical variables on the basis of typical characte- Variable CA Pottery characteristic ristics observed in the Dąbki pointed-bottom material. wall > = 10 wall thickness 10 mm or higher These features were separated into 24 characteristics wall < 10 wall thickness lower than 10 mm admMine mineralic admixture for the occurrence matrix to display in the 1. and 2. admPlant plant admixture principal axes. All in all, 160 vessel units of the eight admShell shell admixture different sites were analysed in the CA. admLow low-middle amount of admixture admHigh high amount of admixture surfSmoRaw simple smoothing of surface surfSmoFine fine smoothing of surface Results surfBrush brushed surface surfScrape scraped surface The main result of the analysis by techno-typologi- surfSlip slipped surface cal characteristics is a clear separation between an wallN wall coiling technique with N-joins wallU wall coiling technique with U-joins eastern group with Narva and Dubičiai on the one wallH wall coiling technique with H-joins hand and a western group of Ertebølle vessels and wallOth wall technique other the material from the Polish sites on the other hand rimDm > = 25 rim diameter 25 cm or larger (Fig. 13). It becomes clear that the eastern and west- rimDm < 25 rim diameter below 25 cm ern types are especially distinctive in their technol- rimInw inward curved rim rimOutw outward curved rim ogy. The average wall thickness of Dąbki (11.1 mm) rimStraig straight rim and Neustadt (11.8 mm) vessels as well as that of decoRimE decoration on end of rim (e.g. rim cuts) the vessel from Chobienice (12 mm) is distinctively decoRim decoration of rim area higher than that of the Dubičiai (9 mm) and espe- decoRBody decoration of rim and body cially Narva vessels (8.4 mm). In most vessels from Neustadt, Dąbki,and the Narva culture just one type Fig. 12 Variables of the correspondence analysis. 240 Path s of i n n ovati on – the site D ąbki, Poland, and the early forager pottery in the B altic Sea re gio n Fig. 13 Correspondence analysis of technical and typological pottery characteristics from the different sites. 1. against 2. principal axis (inertia 22,4 % and 10,1 %). Top: objects, bottom: variables. s-shaped profile with rounded inflection points and forms are less standardised, featuring rims curved rims curved mostly outwards. Narva and Dubičiai inwards and outwards as well as straight ones. The vessels on the other hand are more often bulbous, pointed bottoms from Ertebølle ware differ by region, cylindrical or conical in overall shape, and their rim and Neustadt pots exhibit rather thin, rounded bot- A n d re a s Ko tu l a 241 toms, while in Dąbki the shape is massive pointed or curved rim form as well as some technological cor- conical. They display similarities to the tap-shaped responding features like thicker walls and mineralic bottoms of the eastern Ertebølle circle in southern admixture. While the affiliation to the Dubičiai type Sweden and on Bornholm (cf. e. g. Jennbert 1984; has been questioned in one case due to the techni- Vang Petersen 2015). Simple rounded or pointed cal features (Piezonka 2015), these vessels show bottoms are common amongst Narva and Dubičiai a correlation in typo-technology to Ertebølle and vessels, sometimes slightly tap-shaped, but not as Polish sites. massive as the Dąbki bottoms. Most of the vessels The Polish sites and Neustadt show some separa- from all sites were decorated, with the exception of tion, too. While wall thickness of > 10 mm, mineralic Neustadt where almost half of the pots are undeco- admixture, small quantities of admixed particles and rated (47 %), and decoration on pottery is restricted rims curved outward are indifferent characteristics to the rim area here. In Dąbki, vessel decoration common in all wares, N-technique and rim decora- is very standardised, and almost all rims display tion in particular are typical only for the material decoration with a combination of rim cuts and a from the Polish sites and act as especially separat- horizontal row of impressions/perforations on the ing variables. Additionally, smaller rim diameters rim. While Neustadt pottery is only decorated on the and less carefully smoothed surfaces can also be end of the rim, mostly with cuts, Dąbki ware exhib- accounted for these sites. Typical characteristics in its rim cuts and a row of impressions/perforations the Neustadt inventory on the other hand are U- and around the rim, and in single cases, decoration was H-technique, large rim diameters and overall more also observed on the body. The Chobienice vessel has carefully smoothed surfaces. However, it becomes decoration similar to the Dąbki material. The Neus- clear in the supraregional perspective that the Pol- tadt pottery corresponds to the sparsely decorated ish sites and Neustadt follow a similar technological ware of the western Ertebølle culture, while eastern tradition. Ertebølle vessels are more varied in decoration, and a Narva culture influence has been pointed out for southern Sweden (e. g. Hallgren 2004). Dubičiai Discussion and Narva vessels have more varied decoration in general and can be adorned in the rim area and all The typo-technological analysis shows that the pot- over the body. Dubičiai vessels are decorated mostly tery from Dąbki and Chobienice is very similar to on the rim and in the upper body section. A single that from the Ertebølle site Neustadt in Holstein, horizontal row of impressions on the rim is very char- northern Germany. In the correspondence analysis, acteristic for this type, exhibiting a parallel to Dąbki these sites from the western and central southern ware (cf. e. g. Józwiak 2003). Narva and Dubičiai ves- Baltic area form a cluster opposite the eastern wares sel ornamentation is more often arranged in simple of the Dubičiai and Narva types, which display a geometric patterns and thus more complex than that wide range of characteristics resulting in a broad dis- on the Polish and German ware. tribution. On the other hand, rim decoration exhibits While the vessels from the Ertebølle site Neus- some parallels between Dubičiai type vessels and pot- tadt and the Polish sites form a rather dense cluster tery from the Polish sites. However, it becomes clear in the CA, the ones from the eastern cultures are that the pottery from Dąbki is very closely connected broadly distributed, indicating heterogenous char- with Ertebølle ware. This is in accordance with the acteristics. This is especially true for Narva sites: other find material from the site, which can mostly be the wares from Žeimenio ežero and Žemaitiške are paralleled with artefact types common in Ertebølle clearly separated, and the Kääpa material is broadly context. On the other hand the abundance of beaver distributed, mainly separated by the variable shell remains in the faunal assemblage is unique in central admixture. Brushed surfaces and plant admixture Europe but finds parallels in northeastern Europe. on the other hand are typical for Dubičiai type sites The Ertebølle culture can be understood as a and for the Narva site Žeimenio ežero (cf. Piezonka phenomenon of synchronous Late Mesolithic settle- 2015). The big complexes Narva/Dubičiai and Erte- ments in the western and central Baltic Sea area with bølle/Polish sites show almost no intersection, but a more or less similar material culture, neighbouring some Dubičiai vessels are more separated from the early farming communities to the south and eventually eastern circle and closer to the western types. They undergoing the process of neolithisation towards the show some typological similarities to Dąbki and Funnel Beaker culture (cf. Czerniak / Kabaciński Chobienice, especially rim decoration and outward 1997). This large cultural complex is not a homog- 242 Path s of i n n ovati on – the site D ąbki, Poland, and the early forager pottery in the B altic Sea re gio n Fig. 14 Late Mesolithic sites with pottery in northern central Europe. The sites Schlamersdorf and Dąbki with potential early evidence discussed in the text are highlighted. enous entity, and regional differences exist e. g. on to c. 4,875 calBC (see above). Nethertheless, there is the basis of local flint technology substrates. Based no conclusive indication that Ertebølle pottery at the on the pottery analysis and overall similarities in the Schleswig-Holstein inland sites appeared earlier than find material, the site Dąbki can be described as part mid 5th millennium calBC and thus predates coastal of the Ertebølle culture with some regional charac- Ertebølle pottery (Philippsen / Meadows 2014). Rath- teristics. The early pottery in the Polish lowlands in er undisputed early evidence comes from a food crust general shows high degrees of similarity, and this is date from Rosenhof with c. 4,600 calBC (Hartz 2011) especially displayed in comparable decorations. On from a consistent stratigraphical context (Goldham- the basis of their economy, geographical location and mer 2008). Looking for influences on the early pot- pottery characteristics these sites can be attributed to tery evidence in Schleswig-Holstein, the Swifterbant an eastern regional variation of the Ertebølle culture. culture in the western lowlands might have provided East and west of the Ertebølle area, hunter-gath- inspiration here. Starting from 5,000 calBC, the emer- erer communities with pottery may have acted as in- gence of this culture was influenced by a zone south spirational agents for the emergence of pottery in the of the western lowlands in the 6th millennium calBC, Ertebølle culture (Fig. 14). To the south, farming com- where pottery finds besides LBK ware indicate the munities were also integrated in contact networks with presence of other groups with pottery, possibly with Mesolithic groups, as illustrated by Neolithic pottery forager background (La Hoguette, Limburg, ‘Beglei- from some Mesolithic settlement sites, with Dąbki as tkeramik’), and some finds indicate the presence of the most outstanding example, exhibiting long-lasting these groups north of the loess belt (Louwe Kooijmans networks between hunter-gatherer groups and Neo- 2008). Impulses from this area most probably led to lithic farmers. Different scenarios for the introduction the emergence of some characteristics of the Swift- of pointed-bottom pots into the area of the western erbant culture, with pottery amongst them (e. g. Ten Baltic Ertebølle culture can thus be discussed. Anscher 2015). Pointed- and rounded-bottom vessels The earliest direct 14C-evidence from Ertebølle are known in the Swifterbant culture, but no lamps. pottery originates from Schlamersdorf and Kayhude, While this type is otherwise widely distributed in the northwestern Germany. For these dates reservoir ef- Ertebølle area, lamps are also missing at the northern fect could be confirmed (Hartz 2011; Philippsen / German inland sites like Kayhude and Schlamersdorf Heinemeier 2013), but a plant sample, however, dates (Hartz 2011). Functional aspects of inland sites were A n d re a s Ko tu l a 243 put forward for that (e. g. Hartz 2011), but new evi- dating the local production, provide another possible dence points out the use of lamps in the inland in other explanation: Especially sherds from SBK and Brześć regions ­(Kotula et al. 2015). The absence of this vessel Kujawski ware display technological similarities to the type in the Swifterbant culture and at the northern local pointed-bottom pottery, like mineralic admixture, German inland Ertebølle sites indicates a possible smoothed surface and N-coil technique, and the for- connection and may point to influence coming from eign Neolithic ware may have acted as a technological the west into the Ertebølle culture. Additionally, new blueprint for local production. It is thus possible that research could verify some technological differences the emergence of Ertebølle pointed-bottom pottery between Ertebølle coastal and inland pointed-bottom was a ‘creolisation’ of eastern influences and Neolithic ware in Schleswig-Holstein (Meyer 2017), while some impact in the Polish lowland (cf. Povlsen 2013). parallel developments in the pottery of Swifterbant The Ertebølle groups were based on local sub- and Ertebølle are suggested (Glykou 2016). However, strate in each different area, and it has to be con- a recent lipid study was able to point out that Swift- sidered that they responded differently to external erbant vessels were used in more specialised ways influences respective to their geographical location than Ertebølle ware (Demirci et al. 2020). There is and network situation. It cannot be ruled out that no conclusive evidence for a western inspiration on successive waves of influence from the west and east, Ertebølle pottery yet, and the northwestern German respectively, inspired pottery production in the dif- inland remains a crucial region for the further study of ferent Ertebølle regions. Dąbki was a well-integrat- possible influences (e. g. Ten Anscher 2015). ed and innovative part of the Baltic Sea Ertebølle Dąbki is an important site for the discussion of the networks, and the Polish sites can be described as introduction of pottery into the Ertebølle culture by in- an eastern branch of the Ertebølle phenomenon. fluence from the east (e. g. Povlsen 2013). It has been While 14C-data are not conclusive, there are clear discussed that the early pottery in the southern Baltic indications for eastern European influences on the was inspired by eastern European groups with ear- innovation of Ertebølle ceramics. lier pottery traditions (e. g. Van Berg 1997; Timofeev 1998; Klassen 2004), and 14C-data provide general support for this (Jordan / Zvelebil 2009; Piezonka References 2015; Jordan et al. 2016). For the southern Swedish Ertebølle culture, typological parallels to Narva pot- Andersen 2008: S. H. Andersen, Kitchen middens and the tery have been pointed out (Hallgren 2004). The early pottery of Denmark. In: S. Hartz / F. Lüth / T. pointed-bottom ware from the Polish central southern Terberger (eds.), Early pottery in the Baltic – Dating, Baltic displays typological similarities to Dubičiai type Origin and Social Context. International Workshop at pottery. The beginning of the Dubičiai type is estimated Schleswig from 20 th to 21th October 2006. Bericht der around the second half of the 6th millennium calBC Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 89, 2008 (2011), (Tkachou 2018). 14C-dates from Dąbki pointed-bottom 193 – 215. ware around 4,850/4,700 calBC point to a slightly Ten Anscher 2015: T. Ten Anscher, Under the radar: Swift- earlier introduction of ceramic technology than in the erbant and the origins oft he Funnel Beaker culture. western Baltic Ertebølle culture, but due to uncertain In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / reservoir effect, the data is not conclusive. The idea of T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and eastern influence is supported, though, by the appear- the Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands ance of lamps, which are unknown to western lowland (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im foragers, and thus most likely were brought into the Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 335 – 357. western Baltic from the eastern Narva culture. This Arnold 1985: D. E. Arnold, Ceramic Theory and Cultural is underlined by typological parallels between lamps Process (Cambridge 1985). from Dąbki and Narva culture. It is well possible that Van Berg 1990: P. L. Van Berg, La Céramique Néolithique the general inspiration for the pointed-bottom vessel Ancienne Non Rubanée Dans Le Nord-Ouest De type and the usability of ceramic containers in forager L’Europe. Bulletin de le Societé Préhistorique Luxem- context came from the east into the central Baltic. The bourgeoise 12, 1990, 107 – 124. comparison of pottery characteristics, however, high- Van Berg 1997: P. L. Van Berg, La céramique et son décor en lights technological differences. While it may be pos- Eurasie. In: C. Jeunesse (eds.), Le Néolithique danubien sible that an eastern inspiration was accompanied by et ses marges entre Rhin et Seine. Actes du 22éme col- an autochthonous technological development, numer- loque interregional sur le Néolithique, Strasbourg 27 – 29 ous non-local Neolithic vessels in Dąbki, in parts pre- octobre 1995. Supplément aux Cahiers de l’Association 244 Path s of i n n ovati on – the site D ąbki, Poland, and the early forager pottery in the B altic Sea re gio n pour la Promotion de le Recherche Archéologique en development at Racot during the 5th millennium cal b.c. Alsace, 223 – 264. in the Polish lowlands. Journal of Field Archaeology, Berlekamp 1977: H. D. Berlekamp, Spätmesolithikum oder 2016. doi: 10.1080/00934690.2016.1215723. Altneolithikum? In: J. Herrmann (ed.), Archäologie als Demirci et al. 2020: Ö. Demirci / A. Lucquin / O. E. Craig / Geschichtswissenschaft. Schriften zur Ur- und Frühge- D. C. M. Raemaekers, First lipid residue analysis of schichte 30 (Berlin 1977) 87 – 9 9. Early Neolithic pottery from Swifterbant (the Nether- Brinch Petersen 2011: E. Brinch Petersen, Hundred and lands, ca. 4300 – 4000 BC). Archaeol. Anthropol. Sci. 12, fifty years of Ertebølle ceramics in the western Baltic. In: 2020, 105. doi: 10.1007/s12520 – 020 – 01062-w. S. Hartz / F. Lüth / T. Terberger (eds.), Early Pottery in Dębowska 1978: J. Dębowska, Wyniki badań archeologic- the Baltic – Dating, Origin and Social Context. Interna- znych w rejonie Dąbek, gmina Darłowo, w 1977 roku. tional Workshop at Schleswig from 20 th to 21th October Koszalińskie zeszyty muzealne 8, 1978, 3 – 15. 2006. Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission Van Diest 1981: H. Van Diest, Zur Frage der ‘Lam- 89, 2008 (2011), 217 – 2 39. pen’ nach den Ausgrabungsfunden von Rosenhof Courel et al. 2020: B. Courel / H. K. Robson / A. Luc- (Ostholstein). Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 11, quin et al., Organic residue analysis shows sub-regional 1981, 301 – 314. patterns in the use of pottery by Northern European Dumpe et al. 2008: B. Dumpe / V. Bērziņš / O. Stilborg, A hunter–gatherers. R. Soc. Open Sci. 7: 192016. http:// dialogue across the Baltic on Narva and Ertebølle pot- dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.192016. tery. In: S. Hartz / F. Lüth / T. Terberger (eds.), Early Czekaj-Zastawny 2015: A. Czekaj-Zastawny, Imported Pottery in the Baltic – Dating, Origin and Social Con- Danubian pottery in the Late Mesolithic context in text. International Workshop at Schleswig from 20th to Dąbki. In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaek- 21th October 2006. Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen ers / T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania Kommission 89, 2008 (2011), 409 – 4 41. and the Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands Feeser / Dörfler 2015: I. Feeser / W. Dörfler, The Early (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im Neolithic in pollen diagrams from eastern Schleswig- Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 219 – 2 32. Holstein and western Mecklenburg – evidence for a Czekaj-Zastawny / Kabaciński 2015: A. Czekaj-Zastawny / 1000 year cultural adaptive cycle? In: J. Kabaciński / J. Kabaciński, The early Funnel Beaker culture at S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / T. Terberger (eds.), Dąbki. In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaek- The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and the Neolithisation of ers / T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania the North European Lowlands (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). and the Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands Archäologie und Geschichte im Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/ (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im Westf. 2015) 291 – 306. Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 203 – 217. Fischer / Heinemeier 2003: A. Fischer / J. Heinemeier, Czekaj-Zastawny / Kabaciński 2018: A. Czekaj-Zastawny / Freshwater Reservoir effect in ¹⁴C-dates of food residue J. Kabaciński, Początki Osadnictwa. In: D. Król (ed.), on pottery. Radiocarbon 45(3), 2003, 449 – 4 66. Zespół osadniczy z epoki kamienia – Rzucewo, gmina Galiński 2016: T. Galiński, Protoneolit. Obozowiska Puck, stanowisko 1. Fontes Commentationesque ad Res łowieckie ze schyłku okresu atlantyckiego w Tanowie Gestas Gedani et Pomeraniae 7 (Gdańsk 2018) 60 – 82. na Pomorzu Zachodnim (Warzawa 2016). Czekaj-Zastawny et al. 2013: A. Czekaj-Zastawny / J. Glykou 2010: A. Glykou, Technological and typological anal- Kabaciński / T. Terberger, The Origin of the Funnel ysis of Ertebølle and early Funnel Beaker pottery from Beaker Culture from a southern Baltic coast perspective. Neustadt LA 156 and contemporary sites in northern In: S. Kadrow / P. Włodarczak (eds.), Environment and Germany. In: B. Vanmontfort / L. Louwe Kooijmans / subsistence – forty years after Janusz Kruk’s „Settlement L. Armkreutz / L. Verhart (eds.), Pots, Farmers and studies…”. Studien zur Archäologie in Ostmitteleuropa/ Foragers. Pottery traditions and social interaction in Studia nad Pradziejami Europy Środkowej 11 (Rzeszów/ the earliest Neolithic of the Lower Rhine Area. Archae- Bonn 2013) 409 – 428. ological Studies Leiden University 20 (Leiden 2010) Czerniak / Kabaciński 1997: L. Czerniak / J. Kabaciński, 177 – 188. The Ertebølle Culture in the Southern Baltic Coast. In: Glykou 2016: A. Glykou, Neustadt LA 156. Ein submariner D. Król (ed.), The Built Environment of Coast Areas Fundplatz des späten Mesolithikums und des frühesten during the Stone Age. The Baltic Sea-Coast Landscapes Neolithikums in Schleswig-Holstein. Untersuchungen Seminar Session No. 1 (Gdańsk 1997) 70 – 79. zur Subsistenzstrategie der letzten Jäger, Sammler Czerniak et al. 2016: L. Czerniak / A. Marciniak / C. B. und Fischer an der norddeutschen Ostseeküste. Unter­ Ramsey / E. Dunbar / T. Goslar / A. Barclay / A. suchungen und Materialien zur Steinzeit in Schleswig- Bayliss / A. Whittle, House time: Neolithic settlement Holstein und im Ostseeraum 7 (Kiel/Hamburg 2016). A n d re a s Ko tu l a 245 Goldhammer 2008: J. Goldhammer, Untersuchungen zur Ilkiewicz 1989: J. Ilkiewicz, From studies on cultures of Stratigraphie, Fundverteilung und zum Fundspektrum the 4th millenium B.C. in the central part of the Polish der mittleren Ertebøllekultur in Ostholstein. Die Nach- coastal area. Przegląd Archeologiczny 36, 1989, 17 – 55. grabungen in Grube-Rosenhof aus den Jahren 2001 und Ilkiewicz 1998: J. Ilkiewicz, Osiedla proto- i wczesnoneoli- 2002. Universitätsforschungen zur prähistorischen tyczne na stanowisku 7 w Koszalinie-Dzierżęcinie. Archäologie 163 (Bonn 2008). In: M. Dworaczyk / P. Krajewski / E. Wilgocki (eds.), Gronenborn 2010: D. Gronenborn, Fernkontakte aus dem XII Sesja Pomorzoznawcza. Acta Archaeologica nördlichen Europa während der Bandkeramischen Pomoranica I (Szczecin 1998) 43 – 51. Kultur. In: J. Šuteková / P. Pavúk / P. Kalábková / B. Jennbert 1984: K. Jennbert, Den Produktiva Gåvan. Tra- Kovár (eds.), Panta Rhei. Studies in Chronology and dition och innovation i Sydskandinavien för 5300 år cultural Development of South-Eastern and Central sedan. Acta Archaeologica Lundensia, Series 4,16 (Lund Europe in Earlier Prehistory presented to Juraj Pavúk 1984). on the Occasion of his 75 Birthday (Bratislava 2010) th Jennbert 2008: K. Jennbert, Sweden – a question of handi- 561 – 574. craft, networks and creolisation in a period of neolithisa- Grygiel 2008: R. Grygiel, Neolit i początki epoki brązu w re- tion. In: S. Hartz / F. Lüth / T. Terberger (eds.), Early jonie Brześcia Kujawskiego i Osłonek, vol. II (Łódź 2008). Pottery in the Baltic – Dating, Origin and Social Con- Gumiński 2020: W. Gumiński, The oldest pottery of the text. International Workshop at Schleswig from 20 th to Para-Neolithic Zedmar culture at the site Szczepanki, 21th October 2006. Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Masuria, NE-Poland. Documenta Praehistorica XLVII, Kommission 89, 2008 (2011), 89 – 110. 2020, 126 – 154. Jordan / Zvelebil 2009: P. Jordan / M. Zvelebil, Ceramics Hallgren 2004: F. Hallgren, The introduction of ceramic Before Farming. The Dispersal of Pottery Among Prehis- technology around the Baltic Sea in the 6th millennium. toric Eurasian Hunter-Gatherers (Walnut Creek 2009). In: H. Knutsson (ed.), Coast to coast – Arrival. Coast to Jordan et al. 2016: P. Jordan / K. Gibbs / P. Hommel / H. coast: arrival, results and reflections. Proceedings of the Piezonka / F. Silva / J. Steele, Modelling the diffu- final Coast to Coast Conference 1 – 5 October 2002 in sion of pottery technologies across Afro-Eurasia: emerg- Falköping, Sweden. Coast to Coast 10 (Uppsala 2004) ing insights and future research. Antiquity 90, 2016, 123 – 142. 590 – 6 03. Hartz 2011: S. Hartz, From pointed bottom to round and Józwiak 2003: B. Józwiak, Społeczności subneolitu wschod- flat bottom – tracking early pottery from Schleswig-Hol- nioeuropejskiego na Niżu Polskim w międzyrzeczu stein. In: S. Hartz / F. Lüth / T. Terberger (eds.), Early Odry i Wisły. Materiały do syntezy pradziejów Kujaw pottery in the Baltic – Dating, Origin and Social Con- 11 (Poznań 2003). text. International Workshop at Schleswig from 20 th to Kabaciński 2016: J. Kabaciński, Chobienice stanowisko 8. 21th October 2006. Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen In: M. Kobusiewicz (ed.), Region Wojnowo. Arkadia Kommission 89, 2008 (2011), 241 – 276. łowcow i zbieraczy (Poznań 2016) 439 – 453. Hartz / Lübke 2004: S. Hartz / H. Lübke, Zur chro- Kabaciński / Terberger 2015: J. Kabaciński / T. Terberger, nostratigraphischen Gliederung der Ertebølle-Kultur Features and finds of the Stone Age sites Dąbki 9 and und frühesten Trichterbecherkultur in der südlichen 10. In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / Mecklenburger Bucht. Jahrbuch Bodendenkmalpflege T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern 52, 2004, 119 – 143. the Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands Hartz et al. 2012: S. Hartz / E. Kostyleva / H. Piezonka / (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im T. Terberger / N. Tsydenova / M. G. Zhilin, Hunter- Ostseeraum 8/Archaeology and History of the Baltic 8 Gatherer Pottery and charred Residue Dating: New (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 137 – 155. Results on early Ceramics in the north Eurasian Forest Kabaciński et al. 2008: J. Kabaciński / D. Król / T. Ter- Zone. Radiocarbon 54(3 – 4), 2012, 1033 – 1048. berger, Early pottery from the coastal site Rzucewo, Hommel 2009: P. Hommel, Hunter-Gatherer Pottery: An Gulf of Gdańsk (Poland). In: S. Hartz / F. Lüth / Th. Emerging 14C Chronology. In: P. Jordan / M. Zvelebil Terberger (eds.), Early Pottery in the Baltic – Dating, (eds.), Ceramics Before Farming. The Dispersal of Pot- Origin and Social Context. International Workshop at tery Among Prehistoric Eurasian Hunter-Gatherers Schleswig from 20 thto 21st October 2006. Bericht der (Walnut Creek 2009) 561 – 569. Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 89, 2008 (2011) Hulthén 1977: B. Hulthén, On Ceramic Technology dur- 393 – 4 07. ing the Scanian Neolithic and Bronze Age (Stockholm Kabaciński et al. 2009: J. Kabaciński / D. Heinrich / T. Ter- 1977). berger, Dąbki revisited – new evidence on the question of earliest cattle use in Pomerania. In: S. McCartan / 246 Path s of i n n ovati on – the site D ąbki, Poland, and the early forager pottery in the B altic Sea re gio n R. Schulting / G. Warren / P. Woodman (eds.) Meso- Kotula et al. 2015: A. Kotula / H. Piezonka / T. Terberger, lithic horizons: papers presented at the 7th International New pottery dates on the Mesolithic-Neolithic tran- Conference on the Mesolithic in Europe, Belfast 2005 sition in the north-central European lowlands. In: (Oxford 2009) 548 – 555. J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / T. Kabaciński et al. 2014: J. Kabaciński / I. Sobkowiak- Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and the Tabaka / E. David / M. Osypińska / T. Terberger / M. Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands (c. Winiarska-Kabacińska, The chronology of T-shaped 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im axes in the Polish Lowland. Sprawozdania Archeolo­ Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 489 – 509. giczne 66, 2014, 89 – 116. Kotula et al. 2018: A. Kotula / A. Czekaj-Zastawny / J. Kabaciński et al. 2015: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Kabaciński / T. Terberger, Fishing and disposing? The Raemaekers / T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Use of a Lake Shore Zone at the Stone Age Site Dąbki, Pomerania and the Neolithisation of the North Euro- Poland. Skyllis 18, 2018, 203 – 211. pean Lowlands (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Kotula in press: A. Kotula, Connecting regions – The site Geschichte im Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015). Dąbki and its role in Late Mesolithic and Neolithic Kalis et al. 2015: A. J. Kalis / L. Kubiak-Martens / J. Meu- Networks in the 5th millennium BC. EAA-Workshop: rers-Balke, Archäobotanische Untersuchungen am Frontiers or Interaction Zones? Borderlands as areas of mesolithischen Fundplatz Dąbki 9. In: J. Kabaciński / communication and mobility 28.02.–02.03.2019 Bern S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / T. Terberger (eds.), (in press). The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and the Neolithisation of Krause-Kyora et al. 2013: B. Krause-Kyora / C. Makarewic / the North European Lowlands (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). A. Evin / L. G. Flink / K. Dobney / G. Larson / S. Archäologie und Geschichte im Ostseeraum 8/Archaeol- Hartz / S. Schreiber / C. von Carnap-Bornheim / N. ogy and History of the Baltic 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) von Wurmb-Schwark / A. Nebel, Use of domesticated 31 – 50. pigs by Mesolithic hunter-gatherers in northwestern Kempisty / Sulgostowska 1991: E. Kempisty / S. Sulgos- Europe. Nature communications 4 : 2348. doi: 10.1038/ towska, Osadnictwo paleolityczne, mezolityczne i para- ncomms3348. neolityczne w rejonie Woźnej Wsi, woj. łomżyńskie. Król 1997: D. Król, Excerpts from Archaeological Research Polskie Badania Archeologiczne 30 (Warszawa 1991). at Rzucewo, Puck Region. In: D. Król (ed.), The Built Klassen 2004: L. Klassen, Jade und Kupfer. Untersuchungen Environment of Coast Areas during the Stone Age. zum Neolithisierungsprozess im westlichen Ostseeraum The Baltic Sea-Coast Landscapes Seminar Session 1 unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Kulturentwick- (Gdańsk 1997) 135 – 150. lung Europas 5500 – 3500 BC. Jutland Archaeological Lampe 2015: R. Lampe, Geoscientific investigations related Society Publ. 47 (Aarhus 2004). to the stone-age site Dąbki 9. In: J. Kabaciński / S. Kobusiewicz / K abaciński 1998: M. Kobusiewicz / Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / T. Terberger (eds.), The J. Kabaciński, Some Aspects of the Mesolithic-Neolithic Dąbki Site in Pomerania and the Neolithisation of Transition in the Western Part of the Polish Lowlands. the North European Lowlands (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). In: M. Zvelebil / R. Dennell / L. Domanska (eds.), Archäologie und Geschichte im Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/ Harvesting the Sea, Farming the Forest. The Emer- Westf. 2015) 21 – 24. gence of Neolithic Societies in the Baltic Region. Shef- Loze 1992: I. Loze, The Early Neolithic in Latvia: The Narva field Archaeological Monographs 10 (Sheffield 1998) Culture. Acta Archaeologica 63, 1992, 119 – 140. 95 – 102. Louwe Kooijmans 2008: L. Louwe Kooijmans, The earliest Kotula 2015: A. Kotula, Contact and adaptation – the early pottery in the western part of the North German Plain local pottery at Dąbki and its relations to neighbouring and its inspiration. In: S. Hartz / F. Lüth / T. Terberger hunter-gatherer ceramics. In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / (eds.), Early pottery in the Baltic – Dating, Origin and D. C. M. Raemaekers / T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Social Context. International Workshop at Schleswig Site in Pomerania and the Neolithisation of the North from 20th to 21th October 2006. Bericht der Römisch- European Lowlands (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäolo- Germanischen Kommission 89, 2008 (2011), 443 – 4 60. gie und Geschichte im Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. Meadows et al. 2018: J. Meadows / H. K Robson / D. Gross / 2015) 175 – 202. C. Hegge / H. Lübke / U. Schmölcke / T. Terberger / Kotula 2017: A. Kotula, Der steinzeitliche Seeuferplatz B. Gramsch, How Fishy was the Inland Mesolithic? Dąbki, Pommern (Polen) – Fundplatzstruktur und meso- New Data from Friesack, Brandenburg, Germany. Ra- lithische Keramik im nordmitteleuropäischen Kontext. diocarbon, 2018, 1 – 16. Unpubl. PhD Thesis, Göttingen University (Göttingen Orton / Hughes 2013: C. Orton / M. Hughes, Pottery in 2017). Archaeology. Second Edition (Cambridge 2013). A n d re a s Ko tu l a 247 Philippsen 2015: B. Philippsen, Isotopic analyses of food the Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands crusts on pottery: implications for dating and palaeo- (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im cuisine reconstructions. In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 65 – 86. D. C. M. Raemaekers / T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Schwabedissen 1994: H. Schwabedissen, Die Ellerbek- Site in Pomerania and the Neolithisation of the North Kultur in Schleswig-Holstein und das Vordringen des European Lowlands (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäolo- Neolithikums über die Elbe nach Norden. In: J. Hoika / gie und Geschichte im Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. J. Meurers-Balke (eds.), Beiträge zur frühneolithischen 2015) 307 – 320. Trichtebecherkultur im westlichen Ostseegebiet 1. Inter- Philippsen / Heinemeier 2013: B. Philippsen / J. Heine- nationales Trichterbechersymposium in Schleswig vom meier, Freshwater reservoir effect variability in North- 4. Bis 7. März 1985. Untersuchungen und Materialien ern Germany. Radiocarbon 55(3 – 4), 2013, 1085 – 1101. zur Steinzeit in Schleswig-Holstein aus dem Archäolo- Philippsen / Meadows 2014: B. Philippsen / J. Meadows, gischen Landesmuseum der Christian-Albrechts-Uni- Inland Ertebølle Culture: the importance of aquatic versität 1 (Neumünster 1994) 361 – 4 01. resources and the freshwater reservoir effect in radiocar- Sobkowiak-Tabaka 2015: I. Sobkowiak-Tabaka, Lithic in- bon dates from pottery food crusts. In: R. Fernandes / J. dustry of the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic com- Meadows (eds.), Human Exploitation of Aquatic Land- munities from Dąbki sites 9 and 10. In: J. Kabaciński / scapes. Internet Archaeology 37, 2014. doi: 10.11141/ S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / T. Terberger (eds.), ia.37.9. The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and the Neolithisation of Piezonka 2015: H. Piezonka, Jäger, Fischer, Töpfer. Wild- the North European Lowlands (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). beutergruppen mit früher Keramik in Nordosteuropa Archäologie und Geschichte im Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/ im 6. und 5. Jahrtausend v. Chr. Archäologie in Eurasien Westf. 2015) 233 – 272. 30 (Bonn 2015). Terberger et al. 2009: T. Terberger / S. Hartz / J. Piličiauskas 2002: G. Piličiauskas, Dubičių tipo gyvenvietės Kabaciński, Late hunter-gatherer and early farmer ir neolitinė Nemuno Kultūra pietų Lietuvoje. Lietuvos contacts in the southern Baltic – a discussion. In: H. Archeologija 23, 2002, 107 – 136. Glørstad / Ch. Prescott (eds.), Neolithisation as if His- Povlsen 2013: K. Povlsen, The introduction of ceramics in tory Mattered (Uddevalla 2009) 257 – 298. the Ertebølle Culture. Danish Journal of Archaeology Timofeev 1998: V. I. Timofeev, The beginning of the Neo- 2/2, 2013, 146 – 163. lithic in the eastern Baltic. In: M. Zvelebil / R. Dennell / Prangsgaard 1992: K. Prangsgaard, Introduktion af L. Domanska (eds.), Harvesting the Sea, Farming the keramik i den yngre Ertebøllekultur i Sydskandinavien. Forest. The Emergence of Neolithic Societies in the LAG 3, 1992, 29 – 52. Baltic Region. Sheffield Archaeological Monographs Rimantienė 2005: R. Rimantenė, Die Steinzeitfischer an 10 (Sheffield 1998) 225 – 2 36. der Ostseelagune in Litauen. Forschungen in Šventoji Tkachou 2018: A. Tkachou, Early Neolithic pottery from und Būtingė (Vilnius 2005). Western Belarus. Archaeologia Baltica 25, 2018, 82 – 99. Scheu et al. 2008: A. Scheu / S. Hartz / U. Schmölcke / A. Vang Petersen 1984: P. Vang Petersen, Chronological Tresset / J. Burger / R. Bollongino, Ancient DNA and Regional Variation in the Late Mesolithic of provides no evidence for independent domestication Eastern Denmark. Journal of Danish Archaeology 3, of cattle in Mesolithic Rosenhof, Northern Germany. 1984, 7 – 18. Journal of Archaeological Science 35, 2008, 1257 – 1264. Vang Petersen 2015: P. Vang Petersen, An Ertebølle site Schmölcke / Nikulina 2015: U. Schmölcke / E. Nikulina, with pottery at Grisby, Bornholm. In: J. Kabaciński / Mesolithic beaver hunting station or base camp of S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / T. Terberger (eds.), supra-regional Stone Age fur trade? New archaeo- The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and the Neolithisation of zoological and archaeogenetic results from Dąbki 9. the North European Lowlands (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz/ D. C. M. Raemaekers / Archäologie und Geschichte im Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/ T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and Westf. 2015) 367 – 384. Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 , 249 – 261) 249 Long distance contacts in the area of the north European plain: The Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic in Poland and its relations to neighbouring cultures Jacek Kabaciński and Agnieszka Czekaj-Zastawny Abstract This paper discusses the relatively scarce evidence of contacts between last hunter-gatherer-fisher groups and dif- ferent farming societies known from the Polish lowlands. It points out different forms and scales of their relations. Two pos- sible ways of interactions between the two so different cultural systems are suggested. The first one is a gradual transformation from a hunter-gatherer to a farming way of life. As the Mesolithic economic system at that time was optimal and very effective, it can be supposed that non-economic reasons played a substantial role in that transition. An example of such a transformation is visible in the aggregation of sites at Dąbki in Polish Pomerania. The second way of interaction resulted in an integration of both systems. Bilateral exchange contacts led to closer inter-human relations that also resulted in physical incorporation of hunter-gatherer individuals or groups into the Neolithic society. They brought with them strong beliefs and customs that were for some reasons and to some extent accepted by Danubian farmers, and the phenomenon resulted in the emergence of a unique entity in the lowlands: the Brześć Kujawski group of the Lengyel culture that included and integrated different traditions. Keywords Late hunter-gatherers, early farmers, contacts, system transformation Zusammenfassung Der Beitrag diskutiert die Kontakte zwischen den späten Jäger-Sammler-Fischern und verschiedenen bäuerlichen Gemeinschaften in der polnischen Tiefebene, die unterschiedliche Intensitäten solcher Beziehungen widerspiegeln. Es werden zwei Formen der Interaktion zwischen den so unterschiedlichen kulturellen Systemen diskutiert. Die erste ist ein gradueller Übergang von einer Lebensweise als Jäger-Sammler-Fischer hin zur bäuerlichen Wirtschaftsweise. Aufgrund des effektiven mesolithischen Ökonomiesystems zu dieser Zeit können wir annehmen, dass ökonomische Gründe für den Über- gang keine entscheidende Rolle spielten. Der zweite Weg der Interaktion führte zu einer Integration beider Systeme: Bilatera- le Tauschkontakte hatten engere menschliche Beziehungen und die Eingliederung erster Jäger-Sammler-Individuen in die neolithischen Gemeinschaften zur Folge. Sie brachten ihren Glauben und ihre Gewohnheiten mit, die in gewissem Maß von den donauländischen Bauerngemeinschaften akzeptiert wurden. Dieser Vorgang führte zu einem einzigartigen Phänomen in der Tiefebene: der Brześć–Kujawski-Gruppe der Lengyel Kultur, die verschiedene Traditionen integrierte. Introduction process documented all over Europe from c. 7,000 calBC; this process – which certainly had different The middle of the 6th millennium calBC was a crucial faces in different areas – was and still is a subject of time for the hunter-gatherer societies who had inhab- discussions and different concepts,1 concerning also ited the territory of today’s Poland for the preceding the role played by Mesolithic groups.2 half a million years of human occupation (Kabaciński 2016c). The first farmers who had crossed the moun- tain ridges of the Carpathians and Sudetes from the 1  Childe 1925; 1951; Ammerman / Cavalli-Sforza 1971; south brought a whole set of innovations, not only 1984; Zvelebil 1986; 1998; Kozłowski 1994; 1998; 1999; in the sphere of economy (like agriculture and hus- Gronenborn / Petrasch 2010; Kozłowski / Nowak 2019. bandry), but also in ideology. This is sometimes called 2  Bánffy 2000; 2003; Whittle 1996; Gronenborn 1997; the ‘Neolithic package’ (Gronenborn 1997). The Jeunesse 1997; Pavúk 2002; 2004; Lenneis 2007; Czekaj- neolithisation of Poland was a part of a much wider Zastawny / Przybyła 2012; Terberger et al. 2018. 250 Lon g di stan ce contacts i n th e are a of the north European plain: The Late Mesolithic and Early N eolithic in Po lan d Fig. 1 The cultural situation in Poland from the middle of the 6th to the middle of the 4th millennium calBC (drawing: J. Kabaciński). The spread of the earliest Neolithic groups in cultures, during the 5th millennium calBC (Kadrow Poland – Linear Band Pottery culture (Linearband- 2016). Finally, Funnel Beaker culture groups, consid- keramik: LBK) – was gradual, but, according to radio- ered as the first native farmers, settled most of the carbon dates, relatively fast, and between c. 5,500 and Polish territory during the 4th and 3rd millennia calBC 5,300/ 5,200 calBC LBK settlements appeared within (Nowak 2016). The continuously growing presence of the majority of the most fertile areas of Poland from farmers in the originally hunter-gatherers’ world led Lesser Poland and Silesia to the south, through cen- to different forms of contacts, which are interpreted tral Polish Kuyavia up to the northern fringes (Fig. 1; as results of exchange, but which in some cases had Czekaj-Zastawny / Kabaciński 2016). Even if from also wider socio-cultural implications. a large-scale perspective the dispersal of the earliest Neolithic occupations had ‘island’ character, it was certainly an important moment, as for the first time The evidence of contacts ever intercultural relations between hunter-gatherers and farmers were possible on Polish territory. Observing the general dispersion of the Mesolithic The Neolithic settlement in Poland, initially spa- and early Neolithic settlements (Fig. 1) and taking tially limited, expanded in the course of time, fed by into account at least 1,500 years of spatial coexistence population growth and supplied by further waves of in a more distant or closer vicinity, the scale of con- immigrants from the south, of so-called late Danubian tacts should have been substantial. However, it is not J a ce k Ka b a c i ń s k i an d Agn i e szka Cze kaj-Zastawny 251 Fig. 2 Dąbki. Pottery of the Linear Band Pottery culture (drawings: J. Ożóg). Fig. 3 Dąbki. Pottery of the Stroke Band Pottery culture (drawings: J. Ożóg). 252 Lon g di stan ce contacts i n th e are a of the north European plain: The Late Mesolithic and Early N eolithic in Po lan d Fig. 4 A Poznań-Dębiec, fragment of red deer antler T-axe; B Brześć Kujawski, amber figurine (drawings: J. Ożóg). reflected by an amount of direct evidence in the form the Stroke Pottery culture (SPC). What characterised of easily identifiable objects exchanged in the course these people, as well as their successors – the so called of such contacts (Klassen 2004). On the Polish terri- Brześć Kujawski group of the Lengyel culture (BKG) tory a direct record of relations is encountered both in the 2nd half of the 5th millennium calBC – was a in Neolithic and Mesolithic contexts, and it increases much more flexible economic system, allowing them over the course of time. to penetrate and settle sandy areas of the plain never Extremely scarce are finds from the period of occupied by the LBK (Czerniak 1980; 1994). In a potential first contacts between Mesolithic and LBK natural way they were exploring territories that were groups. On LBK settlements in Ludwinowo (Kuyavia, a primary ecumene for hunter-gatherers. In the case central Poland) and in Modlnica (Lesser Poland) single of the SPC such evidence is known from Dąbki (pot- objects of amber were found (Czekaj-Zastawny 2011; tery vessels, Fig. 3; Czekaj-Zastawny 2015) and from Czerniak 2010), most probably of Baltic area origin, the site Poznań-Dębiec, where a T-shaped axe made and exchanged from foragers. On the other side, frag- of red deer antler was found in one of the features ments of LBK ceramic vessels were discovered at the (Smoczyńska 1953; Fig. 4A). This kind of tool was Mesolithic settlement in Dąbki (Fig. 2; Czekaj-Zastaw- most popular within Mesolithic populations inhabiting ny 2015). That long-lasting aggregation of settlements the coastal zone of the Baltic (Kabaciński et al. 2014). on the island in Dąbki lake might have served as a trad- The most mobile of all the Danubian societies ing post where different goods like beaver furs, amber, were BKG groups, who, for instance, entered as the ceramic vessels, bone and antler tools, and food were first Neolithic groups deep into Pomerania, a territory exchanged between foragers and farmers (Kabaciński densely inhabited by Mesolithic people. This is proven et al. 2015a; 2015b; Schmölcke / Nikulina 2015). by numerous BKG stone tools found out of settlement It seems the intensity of contacts increased as context (Siuchiński 1972). Dozens of BKG clay ves- new populations of Danubian origin appeared in Po- sels found in Dąbki (Fig. 5; Czekaj-Zastawny 2015) land in the 1st half of the 5th millennium calBC, espe- and Szczepanki in northeast Poland (Gumiński 2011) cially in the Polish lowlands. These groups represent show the growing intensity of interactions between J a ce k Ka b a c i ń s k i an d Agn i e szka Cze kaj-Zastawny 253 Fig. 5 Dąbki. Pottery of the Brześć Kujawski group (drawings: J. Ożóg). the Mesolithic world and farming communities at that as well as adzes made of metapodial bones found on time. For the first time ever we have also the evidence the BGK sites (Bogucki 2008). These last mentioned of Mesolithic pottery discovered in the context of a tools had already been produced by Maglemosian Neolithic settlement. One such site is Chobienice 8 communities since the beginning of the 8th millen- (Fig. 6; cf. Czerniak / Kabaciński 1997; Kobusie- nium calBC, and numerous adzes of this type were wicz / Kabaciński 1998; Kabaciński 2016b), the recorded at an early Mesolithic site in Krzyż Wielko- other one is Brześć Kujawski, site 3, where besides polski (Kabaciński 2009) and also in Dąbki, where pottery also an amber figurine (bear?) was found they are dated to the middle of the 5th millennium (Fig. 4B; cf. Cyrek et al. 1983; Grygiel 2008). calBC (Fig. 8; Kabaciński et al. 2014; 2015a). In our opinion a clear influence or at least an The above-mentioned evidence of relations be- inspiration of Mesolithic groups is also visible in the tween hunter-gatherers and early farmers is generally production of red deer antler T-shaped axes – tools very rare and does not reflect a potential scale of commonly produced in the northern Mesolithic as interaction. The finds also don’t answer a basic ques- well as in the BKG (Fig. 7; Kabaciński et al. 2014) – tion: what happened to the hunter-gatherers in the 254 Lon g di stan ce contacts i n th e are a of the north European plain: The Late Mesolithic and Early N eolithic in Po lan d Fig.  6 Chobienice. Mesolithic pottery (drawings: J. Sawicka). Fig. 7 Red deer antler T-axes: A Dąbki; B Bodzia (BGK) (photo: A – J.Kabaciński, B – E. David). J a ce k Ka b a c i ń s k i an d Agn i e szka Cze kaj-Zastawny 255 Fig. 8 Adzes from metapodial bones: A Osłonki; B Krzyż Wielkopolski; C Dąbki (A – after Bogucki 2008, B-C – photo: J. Kabaciński). course of the Neolithic expansion? What was the fate was inhabited by technologically advanced hunter- of the advanced Mesolithic populations, as there is gatherer-fisher societies who optimally exploited the almost no evidence for their existence on the Polish rich terrestrial and freshwater environment. On one plain during the late 4th and 3rd millennia calBC?3 The side they were rooted in the local Late Mesolithic archaeological record is especially lacking any kind of the so called post-Maglemosian tradition, on the of evidence of aggression or trauma (Sulgostowska other one they belonged to the circum-Baltic cultural 2016). Below we present two cases that may be con- zone (Kabaciński 2001). Two such sites have been sidered as exemplifications of different interactions excavated so far in Poland, Dąbki and Rzucewo,4 of that took place at the edges of these two worlds. these, the first one is much better recognised. An aggregation of sites, including the main site Dąbki 9/10, was situated on an island of today’s Dąbki and the North Group of the silted up Dąbki lake, a few kilometers away from Funnel Beaker culture: transformation the former Baltic coast. More than twenty years of of the system excavations have exposed the remains of a long- lasting Late Mesolithic occupation dated between During the 5th millennium calBC the coastal zone of the end of the 6th and the end of the 5th millennium Pomerania, the very northern part of today’s Poland, calBC, including numerous settlement pits and huts, 3  Bagniewski 1987; Kobusiewicz / K abaciński 1993; 4  Kabaciński / Terberger 2009; Terberger et al. 2009; Kaba­ ­K abaciński 2016a; Kozłowski / Nowak 2019. ciński et al. 2011; Czekaj-Zastawny / Kabaciński 2018; Król 2018. 256 Lon g di stan ce contacts i n th e are a of the north European plain: The Late Mesolithic and Early N eolithic in Po lan d A B Fig. 9 Dąbki. A Mesolithic pointed-bottom pottery; B imported Bodrogkeresztur vessel (A – photo: A. Czekaj-Zastawny, J. Kabaciński; B – drawings: J. Ożóg). an amber workshop, and rich collections of faunal There are technological and stylistic arguments remains, flint artefacts, locally produced pointed- that this new pottery is rooted in the proceeding bottom clay vessels as well as imported Neolithic pointed-bottom ware, including some typical forms pottery (Fig. 9; Czekaj-Zastawny et al. 2011; 2013; of Mesolithic vessels decorated with ornamentation Kabaciński et al. 2015b). known from the FBC (Fig. 10; Czekaj-Zastawny / Around 4,200 – 4,000 calBC an important change Kabaciński 2015). Due to problems with dating and in pottery production is recorded, namely the appear- reservoir effect it is not completely clear whether ance of the earliest Funnel Beaker culture (FBC) pointed-bottom vessels were still produced at the turn pottery, typical of the North group of that culture. from the 5th to the 4th millennium calBC parallel to J a ce k Ka b a c i ń s k i an d Agn i e szka Cze kaj-Zastawny 257 nied by cattle husbandry and less frequently sheep / goats and pigs (Czerniak 1980; Grygiel 2008). Hun- ting played a minor role in the economy. This cul- tural group is also known for building long wooden houses and using copper. The BKG, dated to the 5th millennium calBC, is the youngest group of the LC, and, contrary to other groups recognised in southern Poland, it occupied almost exclusively the lowlands; there is no doubt that as far as subsistence is concer- A ned it was a society characterised by an advanced and stable Neolithic economy. However, a surprising number of elements characteristic for this culture can be directly linked with a Mesolithic heritage (Czerniak 1994; Czerniak / Kabaciński 1997). Typically for the BKG, like all cultures of Danu- bian origin, the deceased were buried in pits within the settlements in a flexed position on the side. Before B burial, dead individuals were adorned with richly ornamented armlets and bracelets made of animal ribs, with hip-belts with hundreds of beads made of small shells, necklaces of animal teeth, and equipped with T-shaped axes made of red deer antler (Fig. 11). Either domesticated or wild animal bones could be used for manufacturing armlets and bracelets, but the ornamentation has close analogies in the Maglemo- sian world (Czerniak / Kabaciński 1997; Płonka C 2003; Bogucki 2008). Also necklaces and pendants made of teeth of wild animals or beads produced of Fig. 10 Dąbki. A Mesolithic lamp decorated with Funnel Beaker fish bones may be accounted as reflections of hunter- culture ornamentation; B–C Early funnel beakers (drawings: gatherer roots. J. Ożóg, photo: J. Kabaciński). T-axes, made of red deer antlers, were popu- lar tools manufactured by BKG people, and in our opinion the idea of their production derived from stylistically new pots, or whether they were replaced the circum-Baltic Mesolithic area (Kabaciński et al. by funnel beakers. But certainly, according to results 2014). Such tools are only rarely discovered in the of paleoenvironmental studies (Kalis et al. 2015) the context of other LC groups, representing contacts societies inhabiting the Dąbki island until around between different societies of the same origin. The 3,700 calBC were hunter-gatherers, and only after most intriguing fact is that numerous T-shaped axes that date the first signs of agriculture are recognisable were recorded as grave goods. in this area. Therefore the change from Mesolithic Burial customs belong to the sacred zone and to early FBC at its initial stage was nothing but a reflect traditions deeply rooted in the society, repe- stylistic change in pottery production. Summing up, senting an integral component of each cultural sys- what we observed in the case of Dąbki is a gradual tem, the BKG in this case. The evidently Mesolithic transformation of hunter-gatherers resulting finally in roots of the BKG burial tradition present within a the adoption of some elements of farming economy. fully developed agricultural society might point to a syncretic nature of the BKG – a result of a specific integration of the Danubian population inhabiting The Brześć Kujawski group of the the Polish lowlands with local foragers. Those Meso- Lengyel culture: integration of systems lithic elements that are visible in the burial rites are particularly important, given their overall role in the The Brześć Kujawski group of the Lengyel culture entire social life. And from that perspective the wide- (LC) displays a fully developed agricultural system spread and intensive social contacts of the BKG with based on cultivation of wheat and barley, accompa- the Mesolithic world should not come as a surprise. 258 Lon g di stan ce contacts i n th e are a of the north European plain: The Late Mesolithic and Early N eolithic in Po lan d Fig. 11 Burial of the Brześć Kujawski group from Brześć Kujawski (after Jażdżewski 1938). In Dąbki the approximate number of imported BKG eral skeletons from the Kujavian BKG sites Osłonki vessels is as high as the number of locally produced 1, Konary 1, and Konary 1a exhibit a clear 9 % share pointed-bottom Mesolithic pots (Czekaj-Zastawny of the U5a haplogroup, distinctive for indigenous 2015). Thick food crusts on the walls of these vessels hunter-gatherers (Lorkiewicz et al. 2015). Studies of suggest they were used for everyday activities, con- mtDNA carried out for younger farming populations trary to SPC or Bodrogkeresztur culture pots. This rooted in the Danubian world and living in central means that the BKG pottery lost the uniqueness of Germany also confirmed increased values of hunter- the former Neolithic pottery and became an integral gatherer genetic components in the second half of the part of everyday house equipment. 5th millennium calBC (Brandt et al. 2013). There is also a palaeogenetic set of data support- The above-mentioned paleogenetic data com- ing the thesis of the integration of hunter-gatherers’ bined with clearly Mesolithic elements in burial rites and early farmers’ systems. According to palaeoge- suggest a substantial degree of integration on popula- netic studies there is a distinct genetic difference tion as well as cultural level. We may only suppose between Danubian farmers and local Mesolithic that the beginning of that process, the mechanism societies. For European Late Palaeolithic and Me- of which is difficult to recognise, occurred around solithic groups U-clades (especially U5a, U5b, and 4,600 calBC, when the first appearance of the BKG U4 subclades) are typical, while for the first farmers on the lowlands is recorded. the N1a-clade predominates, followed by other less frequent ones. What is of crucial importance, there are no U5- or U4-clades recorded in LBK samples, Conclusions and, vice versa, neither N1a- nor H-types were found in hunter-gatherer samples (Bramanti et al. 2009). The paper presents an overview of the evidence Results achieved from a research on mtDNA of sev- concerning contacts between hunter-gatherers and J a ce k Ka b a c i ń s k i an d Agn i e szka Cze kaj-Zastawny 259 early farmers on Polish territory. Direct evidence of Matsumura / P. Forster / J. Burger, Genetic Discon- exchange relations is scarce and archaeologically tinuity Between Local Hunter-Gatherers and Central difficult to record. Europe’s First Farmers. Science 326, 2009, 137 – 140. Two possible ways of interactions between the Brandt et al. 2013: G. Brandt / W. Haak / C. J. Adler / two so different cultural systems are suggested. The C. Roth / A. Szécsényi-Nagy / S. Karimnia / S. Möl- first one is a gradual transformation from a hunter- ler-Rieker / H. Meller / R. Ganslmeier / S. Frie- gatherer to a farming way of life. As the Mesolithic derich / V. Dresely / N. Nicklisch / J. K. Pickrell economic system at that time was optimally estab- / F. Sirocko / D. Reich / A. Cooper / K. W. Alt / lished and very effective, it can be supposed that The Genographic Consortium, Ancient DNA Re- non-economic factors ‘played a substantial role in veals Key ­Stages in the Formation of Central European that transition. Mitochondrial Genetic Diversity. Science 342 (6155), The second way possible was an integration 2013, 257 – 261. doi: 10.1126/science.1241844. of both systems. Bilateral exchange contacts led to Childe 1925: G. Childe, The Dawn of European Civilisation closer inter-human relations that resulted in physi- (London 1925). cal incorporation of hunter-gatherer individuals Childe 1951: G. Childe, Man Makes Himself (New York or groups into the Neolithic society. They brought 1951). with them strong beliefs and customs that were for Cyrek et al. 1983: K. Cyrek / R. Grygiel / K. Nowak, some reasons and to some extent accepted by Danu- Podstawy wydzielenia mezolitu ceramicznego na Niżu bian farmers, and this phenomenon resulted in the Polskim. In: T. Malinowski (ed.), Problemy epoki kamie- emergence of a unique entity on the lowlands that nia na Pomorzu (Słupsk 1983) 85 – 110. included and integrated different traditions. Czekaj-Zastawny 2011: A. Czekaj-Zastawny, Ludwinowo, stan. 6 (AUT 110), gm. Włocławek. Kultura ceramiki wstęgowej rytej. Manuscript, IAE Poznań (Poznań 2011). Acknowledgements Czekaj-Zastawny 2015: A. Czekaj-Zastawny, Imported Da- This research was financed by the National Science nubian pottery in the Late Mesolithic context in Dąbki. Centre, Poland, grant no. 2017/27/B/HS3/00478. In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki site in Pomerania and the Neolithisation of the North European Lowland (c. References 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/ Westf. 2015) 219 – 2 31. Ammerman / Cavalli-Sforza 1971: A. J. Ammerman / L. L. Czekaj-Zastawny / Kabaciński 2015: A. Czekaj-Zastawny / Cavalli-Sforza, Measuring the rate of spread of early J. Kabaciński, Early Funnel Beaker Culture at Dąbki. farming in Europe. Man 6, 1971, 674 – 6 88. In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / Ammerman / Cavalli-Sforza 1984: A. J. Ammerman / L. L. T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki site in Pomerania and Cavalli-Sforza, The Neolithic Transition and the Gene- the Neolithisation of the North European Lowland (c. tics of Populations in Europe (Princeton 1984). 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im Bagniewski 1987: Z. Bagniewski, Mezolityczne społeczności Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/ Westf. 2015) 203 – 217. myśliwsko-rybackie południowej części Pojezierza Kas- Czekaj-Zastawny / Kabaciński 2016: A. Czekaj-Zastawny / zubskiego (Wrocław 1987). J. Kabaciński, Hunter-gatherers and the first farmers. Bánffy 2000: E. Bánffy, The late Starcevo and the Earliest In: P. Włodarczak (ed.), The Past Societies. Polish lands Linear Pottery Groups in Western Transdanubia. Docu- from the first evidence of human presence to the Early menta Praehistorica 27, 2000, 173 – 185. Middle Ages 2: 5500 – 2000 BC (Warsaw 2016) 107 – 124. Bánffy 2003: E. Bánffy, Szentgyörgyvölgy-Pityerdomb: data Czekaj-Zastawny / Kabaciński 2018: A. Czekaj-Zastawny / to the contact zone between Mesolithic and Starčevo J. Kabaciński, Początki osadnictwa. In: D. Król (ed.), groups in Transdanubia. Acta Archaeologica Carpathica Zespół osadniczy z epoki kamienia: Rzucewo, Gmina 38, 2003, 5 – 2 5. Puck, stanowisko 1. Muzeum Archeologiczne w Gdańs- Bogucki 2008: P. Bogucki, The Danubian-Baltic Borderland: ku (Gdańsk 2018) 60 – 82. Northern Poland in the fifth millennium BC. Analecta Czekaj-Zastawny / Przybyła 2012: A. Czekaj-Zastawny / Praehistorica Leidensia 40, 2008, 51 – 6 5. M. Przybyła, Modlniczka 2, powiat krakowski – cmen- Bramanti et al. 2009: B. Bramanti / M. G. Thomas / W. tarzysko kultury ceramiki wstęgowej rytej i osady neo- Haak / M. Unterlaender / P. Jores / K. Tambets / I. lityczne. Via Archaeologica. Źródła z badań wykopali- Antanaitis-Jacobs / M. N. Haidle / R. Jankauskas / skowych na trasie autostrady A4 w Małopolsce (Kraków C.-J. Kind / F. Lueth / T. Terberger / J. Hiller / S. 2012). 260 Lon g di stan ce contacts i n th e are a of the north European plain: The Late Mesolithic and Early N eolithic in Po lan d Czekaj-Zastawny et al. 2011: A. Czekaj-Zastawny / J. Ka- Kabaciński 2016a: J. Kabaciński, Chwalim, stanowisko 1. baciński / T. Terberger, Long distance exchange in In: M. Kobusiewicz (ed.), Region Wojnowo. Arkadia the Central European Neolithic: Hungary to the Baltic. łowców-zbieraczy (2016) 383 – 425. Antiquity 85, 2011, 43 – 58. Kabaciński 2016b: J. Kabaciński, Chobienice, stanowisko Czekaj-Zastawny et al. 2013: A. Czekaj-Zastawny/ J. Ka- 8. In: M. Kobusiewicz (ed.), Region Wojnowo. Arkadia baciński/ T. Terberger / J. Ilkiewicz, Relations of łowców-zbieraczy (2016) 427 – 4 41. Mesolithic hunter-gatherers of Pomerania (Poland) with Kabaciński 2016c: J. Kabaciński, The Past Societies. Polish Neolithic cultures of central Europe. Journal of Field lands from the first evidence of human presence to the Archaeology 38(3), 2013, 195 – 209. Early Middle Ages, vol. 1, 500,000 – 5,500 BC (Warszawa Czerniak 1980: L. Czerniak, Rozwój społeczeństw kultury 2016). późnej ceramiki wstęgowej na Kujawach (Poznań 1980). Kabaciński / Terberger 2009: J. Kabaciński / T. Terber- Czerniak 1994: L. Czerniak, Wczesny i środkowy okres ger, From late hunter-fishers to early farmers on the neolitu na Kujawach. 5400 – 3650 p.n.e. (Poznań 1994). Pomeranian coast. New research at Dąbki 9, Koszalin Czerniak 2010: L. Czerniak (ed.), Osady kultury ceramiki District. In: J. M. Burdukiewicz / K. Cyrek / P. Dyczek / wstęgowej rytej w Modlnicy, gm. Wielka Wieś, woj. K. Szymczak (eds.), Understanding the Past. Papers offe- małopolskie, stanowisko 5 (AUT 4). Manuscript KZdBA red to Stefan K. Kozłowski (Warszawa 2009) 165 – 184. (Kraków 2010). Kabaciński et al. 2011: J. Kabaciński / D. Król / T. Ter- Czerniak / Kabaciński 1997: L. Czerniak / J. Kabaciński, berger, Early Pottery from the Coastal Site Rzucewo, The Ertebølle Culture in the Southern Baltic Coast. In: Gulf of Gdańsk (Poland). In: S. Hartz/ F. Lüth / T. D. Król (ed.), The Built Environment of Coastal Areas Terberger (eds.), Early Pottery in the Baltic – Dating, During the Stone Age (Gdańsk 1997) 70 – 86. Origin and Social Context. Bericht der RGK 89, 2008 Gronenborn 1997: D. Gronenborn, Silexartefakte der äl- (2011), 393 – 4 07. testbandkeramischen Kultur. Universitätsforschungen Kabaciński et al. 2014: J. Kabaciński / I. Sobkowiak-Tabaka / zur Prähistorischen Archäologie 37 (Bonn 1997). E. David / M. Osypińska / T. Terberger / M. Wini- Gronenborn / Petrasch 2010: D. Gronenborn / J. Pe- arska-Kabacińska, The chronology of T-shaped axes in trasch (eds), Die Neolithisierung Mitteleuropas. The the Polish Lowland [Chronologia toporów T-kształtnych spread of the Neolithic to Central Europe. RGZM-Ta- na Niżu Polskim]. Sprawozdania Archeologiczne 66, gungen 4 (Mainz 2010). 2014, 29 – 56. Grygiel 2008: R. Grygiel, Neolit i początki epoki brązu w Kabaciński et al. 2015a: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. rejonie Brześcia Kujawskiego i Osłonek, t. II, cz. 1 – 3, Raemaekers / T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki site in Środkowy neolit. Grupa brzesko-kujawska kultury lend- Pomerania and the Neolithisation of the North Europe- zielskiej (Łódź 2008). an Lowland (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Gumiński 2011: W. Gumiński, Importy i naśladownictwa Geschichte im Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/ Westf. 2015). ceramiki kultury brzesko-kujawskiej i kultury pucharów Kabaciński et al. 2015b: J. Kabaciński / T. Terberger / A. lejkowatych na paraneolitycznym stanowisku kultury Czekaj-Zastawny / A. Kotula, Fur trappers, fishers Zedmar – Szczepanki na mazurach. In: U. Stankiewicz/ and traders in Dąbki – some conclusions. In: J. Ka- A. Wawrusiewicz (eds.), Na rubieży kultur. Badania nad baciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / T. Terberger okresem neolitu i wczesną epoką brązu (Białystok 2011) (eds.), The Dąbki site in Pomerania and the Neolithi- 149 – 160. sation of the North European Lowland (c. 5000 – 3000 Jażdżewski 1938: K. Jażdżewski, Cmentarzyska kultury calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im Ostseeraum 8 ceramiki wstęgowej i związane z nimi ślady osadnictwa (Rahden/ Westf. 2015) 285 – 290. w Brześciu Kujawskim. Wiadomości Archeologiczne Kadrow 2016: S. Kadrow, The Danubian world and the dawn 15, 1938, 1 – 105. of the metal ages. In: P. Włodarczak (ed.), The Past So- Jeunesse 1997: Ch. Jeunesse, Pratiques funéraires au cieties. Polish lands from the first evidence of human néolithique ancien. Sépultures et nécropoles danubien- presence to the Early Middle Ages 2, 5500 – 2000 BC nes 5500 – 4900 av. J.-C. (Paris 1997). (Warsaw 2016) 63 – 106. Kabaciński 2001: J. Kabaciński, The Mesolithic-Neolithic Kalis et al. 2015: A. J. Kalis / I. Kubiak-Martens / J. Meu­ transition in the southern Baltic Coastlands, Fontes rers-Balke, Archäobotanische Untersuchungen am Archaeologici Posnanienses 39, 2001, 129 – 161. mesolithischen Fundplatz Dąbki 9. In: J. Kabaciński / Kabaciński 2009: J. Kabaciński, Quarrying the antler adzes – S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / T. Terberger (eds.), a new Mesolithic site of the Boreal period at Krzyż Wiel- The Dąbki site in Pomerania and the Neolithisation of kopolski, western Poland. Quartär 56, 2009, 119 – 130. the North European Lowland (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). J a ce k Ka b a c i ń s k i an d Agn i e szka Cze kaj-Zastawny 261 Archäologie und Geschichte im Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/ Pavúk 2004: J. Pavúk, Early Linear Pottery Culture in Westf. 2015) 31 – 49. Slovakia and the Neolithisation of Central Europe. In: Klassen 2004: L. Klassen, Jade und Kupfer. Untersuchungen A. Lukes / M. Zvelebil (eds.), LBK Dialogues. Studies in zum Neolithisierungsprozess im westlichen Ostseeraum the formation of the Linear Pottery Culture. BAR Int. unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Kulturentwick- Ser. 1304 (Oxford 2004) 71 – 82. lung Europas 5500 – 3500 BC (Moesgård 2004). Płonka 2003: T. Płonka, The portable art of Mesolithic Kobusiewicz / Kabaciński 1993: M. Kobusiewicz / J. Ka- Europe (Wrocław 2003). baciński, Chwalim. Subboreal hunter-gatherers of the Schmölcke / Nikulina 2015: U. Schmölcke / E. Nikuli- Polish Plain (Poznań 1993). na, Mesolithic beaver hunting station or base camp Kobusiewicz / Kabaciński 1998: M. Kobusiewicz / J. Ka- of supra-regional Stone Age fur trade? New archaeo- baciński, Some Aspects of the Mesolithic-Neolithic zoological and archaeogenetic results from Dąbki 9. Transition in the Western Part of the Polish Lowland. In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / In: M. Zvelebil / R. Dennell / L. Domańska (eds.), Har- T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki site in Pomerania and vesting the Sea, Farming the Forest. The Emergence the Neolithisation of the North European Lowland (c. of Neolithic Societies in the Baltic Region (Sheffield 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im 1998) 95 – 102. Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/ Westf. 2015) 65 – 86. Kozłowski 1994: J. K. Kozłowski, Bałkańsko-dunajski mo- Siuchiński 1972: K. Siuchiński, Klasyfikacja czasowo-pr- del neolityzacji. In: L. Czerniak (ed.), Neolit i początki zestrzenna kultur neolitycznych na Pomorzu Zachod- brązu na Ziemi Chełmińskiej (Grudziądz 1994) 21 – 36. nim, cz. II, Opracowanie analityczne (Szczecin 1972). Kozłowski 1998: J. K. Kozłowski, Neolityzacja Europy: Smoczyńska 1953: Ł. Smoczyńska, Kultura ceramiki wstęgo- pojawienie się rolnictwa i hodowli. In: J. K. Kozłowski wej w Wielkopolsce. Fontes Archaeologici Posnanienses / P. Kaczanowski (eds.), Wielka Historia Polski 1. Na- 3, 1953, 1 – 8 4. jdawniejsze dzieje ziem polskich (do VII w.) (Kraków Sulgostowska 2016: Z. Sulgostowska, The mutual influ- 1998) 99 – 114. ence and intergroup contacts of hunting and gathering Kozłowski 1999: J.  K. Kozłowski, Rozprzestrzenianie communities in Polish territory between 14,000 and się gospodarki wytwórczej z pierwotnych centrów 6,000 cal BP. In: J. Kabaciński (ed.), The Past Societies. neolityzacji obszaru Starego Świata i jej adaptacja do Polish lands from the first evidence of human presence warunków środowiskowych umiarkowanej strefy w to the Early Middle Ages 1, 500,000 – 5,500 BC (Warsza- Eurazji. In: J. K. Kozłowski (ed.), Encyklopedia histo- wa 2016) 229 – 248. ryczna Świata I: Prehistoria (Kraków 1999) 151 – 172. Terberger et al. 2009: T. Terberger / S. Hartz / J. Ka- Kozłowski / Nowak 2019: S. K. Kozłowski / M. Nowak, baciński, Late hunter-gatherer and early farmer contacts I przyszli ludzie zza Gór Wysokich. Ziemie polskie od in the southern Baltic – a discussion. In: H. Glørstad / VI do IV tysiąclecia BC (Rzeszów, Warszawa 2019). Ch. Prescott (eds), Neolithisation as if History Mattered Król 2018: D. Król (ed.), Zespół osadniczy z epoki kamienia (Uddevalla 2009) 257 – 298. – Rzucewo, gmina Puck, stanowisko 1 (Gdańsk 2018). Terberger et al. 2018: T. Terberger / J. Burger / F. Lüth / Lenneis 2007: E. Lenneis, Mesolithic heritage in early J. Müller / H. Piezonka, Step by step – The neolithi- Neolithic burial rituals and personal adornments. Docu- sation of Northern Central Europe in the light of stable menta Praehistorica 34, 2007, 129 – 137. isotope analyses. Journal of Archaeological Science 99, Lorkiewicz et al. 2015: W. Lorkiewicz / T. Płoszaj / K. 2018, 66 – 86. Jędrychowska-Dańska / E. Żądzińska / D. Strapagiel / Whittle 1996: A. Whittle, Europe in the Neolithic. The E. Haduch / A. Szczepanek / R. Grygiel / H. W. Wi- Creation of New Worlds (Cambridge 1996). tas, Between the Baltic and Danubian Worlds: The Ge- Zvelebil 1986: M. Zvelebil, Mesolithic prelude and neolithic netic Affinities of a Middle Neolithic Population from revolution. In: M. Zvelebil (ed.), Hunters in Transition Central Poland. PLoS ONE 10(2), 2015: e0118316. doi: (Cambridge 1986) 5 – 15. 10.1371/journal.pone.0118316. Zvelebil 1998: M. Zvelebil, Agricultural Frontiers, Neo­- Nowak 2016: M. Nowak, Ubiquitous settlers, consequent lithic Origins, and the Transition to Farming in the farmers, and monument builders. In: P. Włodarczak Baltic Basin. In: M. Zvelebil / R. Dennell / L. Domańs- (ed.), The Past Societies. Polish lands from the first evi- ka (eds), Harvesting the Sea, Farming the Forest. The dence of human presence to the Early Middle Ages 2, Emergence of Neolithic Societies in the Baltic Region 5500 – 2000 BC (Warsaw 2016) 125 – 170. (Sheffield 1998) 9 – 28. Pavúk 2002: J. Pavúk, Early LBK in Slovakia. In: Abstracts Book of 8th European Association of Archaeologists’ Annual Meeting (Thessaloniki 2002) 242. Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 , 263 – 294) 263 Crosstown traffic: contemplating mobility, interaction and migration among foragers and early farmers Daniela Hofmann, Hans Peeters and Ann-Katrin Meyer Abstract Migration is definitely back on the agenda, but so far archaeological contextualisations have lagged behind the ac- cumulation of archaeogenetic data, leading to relatively simple ‘either/or’-scenarios. From the perspective of diversity in social interaction between ‘receiving’ and ‘incoming’ (groups of) individuals, we explore three different situations in which migration played a role in the uptake of the Neolithic in order to tease out the social processes and complexities hidden under the blanket term ‘migration’. In the case of the Linearbandkeramik (LBK), potentials for forager-farmer interaction differed strongly between earlier and later phases and across regions, a pattern connected to changing landscape use and mobility regimes within the LBK, as well as the changing utilisation of material culture in identity creation. In the Low Countries, it is much harder to draw a definite line between foragers and farmers based on mobility or environmental impact, and foragers had been used to deal- ing with population movements. There is thus far less difference between the actors, and a concomitantly greater involvement of both in shaping the Neolithic. In contrast, in southern Scandinavia and northern Germany there is the perennial question of whether the ‘complex’ Ertebølle hunter-gatherers eventually fell for the lures of Neolithic luxury goods, or should be credited in resisting long enough to drive a Neolithisation on their own terms. However, societies here are more internally diverse than is generally appreciated, pointing to different interaction mechanisms inland and on the coast. Overall, several interaction scenarios succeed each other in time and/or space, in each of our regions. This paper hence also calls for maintaining an ar- chaeological style of enquiry that allows for indeterminacy and open-endedness in the study of human interactions. Keywords Hunter-gatherers, early farmers, mobility, migration, social interaction, acculturation, Linearbandkeramik, north- west European lowlands, southern Scandinavia Zusammenfassung Migrationsmodelle konnten sich in der jüngsten archäologischen Forschung (erneut) etablieren, jedoch bleibt die archäologische Kontextualisierung bisher hinter den verfügbaren Daten der Archäogenetik zurück, sodass häufig recht simple und einseitig geprägte Szenarien und Erklärungsmuster die Diskussion prägen. Vor dem Hintergrund der vielfäl- tigen sozialen Interaktionsmöglichkeiten zwischen „aufnehmenden“ und „ankommenden“ (Gruppen von) Individuen untersu- chen wir drei verschiedene Szenarien, in denen Migration eine Rolle im Neolithisierungsprozess spielte, um so soziale Prozes- se und Zusammenhänge herauszustellen, die sich unter dem Oberbegriff „Migration“ verbergen können. Im Falle der Linearbandkeramik (LBK) unterscheiden sich die Interaktionsmöglichkeiten von Jäger-Sammler- und Bauerngruppen in den frühen und späten Phasen sowie zwischen verschiedenen Regionen. Dies hängt mit Veränderungen in der Landschaftsnutzung und variierenden Mobilitätsstrategien innerhalb der LBK zusammen, ebenso wie mit der sich verändernden Rolle materieller Kultur in der Herausbildung von Identitäten. In den Niederlanden ist es dagegen viel schwieriger, Wildbeutergruppen und frühe Bauern anhand der Kriterien Mobilität oder Einflussnahme auf die Umwelt zu unterscheiden. Zudem waren den Jägern und Sammlern größere Bevölkerungsverschiebungen nicht fremd. In diesem Fall gibt es daher deutlich geringere Unterschie- de zwischen verschiedenen Akteuren und damit einhergehend eine stärkere Beteiligung beider Gruppen an der Gestaltung des Neolithikums. Gegensätzlich dazu stellt sich für Südskandinavien und Norddeutschland die Frage, ob die „komplexen“ Jäger-Sammler-Gruppen der Ertebølle-Kultur (EBK) letztendlich der Versuchung neolithischer (Luxus-)Güter erlagen oder den Neolithisierungsprozess unter anderen Bedingungen vorantrieben, nachdem sich das Sozial- und Subsistenzgefüge dem neolithischen Einfluss aus dem Süden über Jahrhunderte „widersetzt“ hatte. In jedem Fall waren die Gesellschaften der EBK von einer größeren internen Vielfalt geprägt als gemeinhin angenommen, was auf unterschiedliche Interaktionsmechanismen im Binnenland und im Küstenraum hinweist. Generell folgen in jeder unserer Beispielregionen mehrere Interaktionsszenarien zeitlich und/oder räumlich aufeinander. Dieser Artikel fordert daher auch eine offene Herangehensweise an archäologische Analysen, die Unbestimmtheiten und Variationen in der Untersuchung zwischenmenschlicher Interaktionen zulässt. 264 Crosstown traffi c: contemplating mobility, interaction and migration among foragers and early farm e rs Introduction highly restricted – women move for the sake of male politics, i. e. in ‘marriage’ or as captives, and seemingly The history of research of the Mesolithic-Neolithic without any agency of their own. This grossly over- transition has always been plagued by the predict- simplifies the range of behaviours actually observed ably dichotomous thinking that tends to crystallise ethnographically, even in patrilocal societies (Bickle around period boundaries. In this particular case, 2020; Frieman et al. 2020), quite apart from decades this initially seemed warranted because an incoming of work in gender archaeology. Also, where the causes (Neolithic, sedentary) population could be opposed to of migration are alluded to, narratives often tend to an indigenous (Mesolithic, at least seasonally mobile) fall back on stereotypical push factors, such as climate one. These narratives were subsequently critiqued, or overpopulation. In these accounts, migration only and mobility seen as a crucial factor in both social happens when the self-evidently preferred solution settings (e. g. Whittle 1996, 160 – 162; Barker 2006, of staying put no longer works, rendering migration 361 – 363; Finlayson / Warren 2010; Watkins 2013). a ‘crisis’ behaviour – notwithstanding that this can be However, such readings were tied to theoretical posi- a driving factor – rather than affording it the central tions which assumed a leading, or at least very large place it could now take in our accounts. role of the Mesolithic population in the adoption of In this paper, however, our main issue is with agriculture. This was also the interpretive framework another aspect that has so far barely been addressed: for initial isotopic data, showing personal mobility how the migration behaviours of different societies over a lifetime (e. g. Price et al. 2001, 601; Zvelebil/ shaped both the trajectory and eventual outcome of in- Pettitt 2008, 199). In contrast, aDNA analyses have teraction. This topic has been comparatively neglected returned the issue of migration to the fore, providing in central Europe, because Early Neolithic popula- a wealth of data, with the Early Neolithic of central tions have been shown to mix very little with resident Europe as one of the main case studies. As a result, hunter-gatherers, at least in the first few centuries (e. g. the many nuanced accounts on the complexities of Lipson et al. 2017). This means that while there is identity formation, the selective uptake of innovations evidence for the continuous possible survival of hunt- and the role of mobility in farming societies are now ing and gathering groups in non-loess territories (see largely ignored in the newer literature. Consequently, below), the question how contact and connections migration narratives have remained undertheorised may have looked has been relatively side-lined. This (this is also a problem for subsequent migrations, see also applies to interactions between Neolithic societ- e. g. Furholt 2018). In this paper, we focus primarily ies in central Europe and the hunting and gathering on migration, defined as the long-term or permanent societies of the north European Plain, where at last change of residence of individuals or groups, whereby another 1,000 – 1,500 years were to pass before food they must either cross a significant cultural boundary production came to dominate more widely. So far, the or be so far removed from their origin community as main focus has been on the evidence for ‘imports’ or to make regular travel back too onerous. In contrast, ‘contact finds’ between these societies (e. g. Klassen mobility is a more general term which also covers 2004, 301 – 338; Gronenborn 2009; Verhart 2012), routine (e. g. seasonal) or shorter-term changes in resi- but this has barely extended to other aspects of social dence, as well as travel and exploration. life. Instead, the neolithisation scenario once again The gap between the (pre-)historic importance works with the idea of incoming farmers and largely of migration events and archaeologists’ reluctance parallel societies for a time (e. g. Gron / Sørensen to systematically think about how migrations actu- 2018). ally worked was already noted in the 1990s, most In this article, we argue that we must move the famously by David Anthony (Anthony 1990). He did, study of migration away from a fascination with the for instance, point out that archaeologists tended to fact that it has happened (a question often addressed think of migrations as involving one-off movement at a large, continental or at least culture-wide scale), in one direction only, when in fact there was signifi- to exploring how it unfolded as a distinct historical cant cross-cultural evidence for return migration, and phenomenon, enacted by particular people and at a groups who had migrated once were also more likely very specific place and time. In short, if migration is to to do so again. Yet this is not the only way in which be appreciated in social terms, then identifying push our narratives have lagged behind the theoretical and and pull factors is an important first step, but hardly interpretative advances already made in the 1990s the end of the story. Both the modalities and conse- and early 2000s. For instance, the way in which we quences of migrations will also differ based on the conceptualise female mobility in the Neolithic remains expectations, strategies and habituated actions of those D a n i e l a H o f m a n n , Han s Pe ete rs an d A n n -Katr i n M eye r 265 involved. Our main aim is to show the complexities of such processes, and the range of factors that need to be taken into account in order to provide alternative interpretative starting points. For instance, if mobility and migration were embedded at several social scales in both farmer and hunter-gatherer societies, then we could attenuate our views of migration happening in ‘waves’, with colonisers irrevocably changing the social structures of the colonised, while remaining unaffected themselves. Instead, we could investigate more closely how the forms of mobility and migra- tion embedded in both societies could interleave, and where in turn they provided potential for conflict. This requires us to think through migration and its poten- tial counterpart, territoriality and boundaries. After all, both farmer and hunter-gatherer societies were Fig. 1 Various boundary models can be defined in connection dynamic. Not only were they integrated in long- to territoriality and interaction (after Whitley 2010). Crisp bound­ aries refer to explicit territories, maintained and protected by distance networks which constantly provided new ­various groups. The fuzzy interface model refers to a situation potentials for change, but they also developed their where territories can partially overlap, but are acknowledged by the groups. As such, the overlap area consists of ‘communal’ own internal social trajectories. The kinds of interac- ground, and ‘belongs’ to both groups. tion possible at the beginning of forager-farmer in- teraction may therefore not characterise its further development. tance of mutual differences, conflict, or some form of assimilation. The power relationships involved are key here, with interactions both in a frontier situation and Mobility, migration and social interaction afterwards having a strong effect on whether ethnic distinctions are maintained or not (e. g. Hu 2013). This In order to illustrate these points, we will first discuss will also have an impact on how strongly any groups a simple framework of how processes of accultura- will want to mark remaining distinctions in material tion are connected to social appreciation – how well culture, and in what contexts we may expect to find does one get along with others – and related inter- them (see for example a short discussion of various active attitudes. People, either as individuals or in models in Högberg 2015). groups, have been moving around to variable degrees Part of the problem is also concerned with ter- and for many different reasons. In doing so, they will minology – it is very difficult to talk about something have repeatedly entered or crossed ‘occupied’ land, we perceive to be in a constant state of change (such territories belonging to others who had already lived as ‘culture’) without implying essentialised categories there for a longer time (Fig. 1), having made it their (e. g. Sheller / Urry 2006, 212; Greenblatt 2010). ‘home(land)’, just as they will have crossed ‘empty’ Many of our terms, such as assimilation, accultura- land, parts of landscapes where no people lived at all tion, hybridity and so on, either make unwarranted (or at least parts of landscapes bearing no traces of assumptions about the possibilities of action for vari- human presence). But how do ‘insiders’ react towards ous participants, or quickly become so watered down ‘outsiders’ or ‘incomers’? What will be the nature of that they lose any analytical sharpness (e. g. Silliman the emerging interaction? This is strongly dependent 2015). Nevertheless, in a recent contribution Matthew of the socio-cultural distance between the individu- Liebmann (Liebmann 2013) has also argued that the als involved, the intentions of incoming (groups of) consistent use of different terms can help sharpen our individuals, as well as the openness/closedness of notions of contact situations, even though it remains the resident group towards outsiders. hard to define in specific instances when a phase like The literature on how interaction can unfold in ‘contact’ or ‘influence’ begins, and indeed, when it contact situations is vast. In Figure 2 we have tried to ends to be replaced by a new ‘norm’ – in itself open to summarise (in a vastly simplified way) some potential challenges and change. In Liebmann’s definitions for trajectories, formulating expectations of when either different kinds of cultural interaction (Liebmann 2013, any incoming groups, or the local societies involved, 41), for example, ‘hybridity’ should be used where or indeed both, may react to contact with either accep- there is a clear power differential between the groups 266 Crosstown traffi c: contemplating mobility, interaction and migration among foragers and early farm e rs Fig. 2 Schematic representation of acculturation models (cf. Berry 1997) and related tendencies of social appreciation and interactive attitudes. involved, and aims to stress the capacity for resistance ‘separation’ or ‘segregation’ occurs when incomers ac- or ambivalence in the adoption of new and perhaps tively maintain contact with their own group/lineage dominant culture traits, for example in colonial set- and are not participating in the receiving group. Now, tings. In contrast, ‘mestizaje’ (a term originally coined the incomers will be seen as outcasts, and interaction in a Spanish colonial setting of ethnic intermixing) is generally aggressive, easily turning into conflict. focuses on the generative and creative aspects of en- The above framework is, of course, very general, counters, and ‘creolization’ (a term borrowed from but just how the dynamics involved will work out linguistics) should be reserved for diaspora contexts in the distribution of culture traits at a population in which new forms of existence are being created level, or indeed the further evolution of a society with from a common basis. multiple roots, is another question. This is a complex Bearing the above in mind, we have tried to con- issue to address from a purely archaeological per- nect frequently used terminology of acculturation (cf. spective, despite the fact that archaeology is (at least Berry 1997) to social appreciation and interactive partly) concerned with the understanding of cultural attitudes – in both directions – of the (groups of) in- dynamics. Some recent work addresses this from a dividuals involved (Fig. 2). These are linked to the computational modelling perspective (Drost / Vander preservation of cultural traits of the incoming group Linden 2018; Erten et al. 2018), partly inspired by (outsiders) and the adaptation (i. e. participation) of the pioneering work of the political scientist Rob- the incomers to the habits of the receiving or resident ert Axelrod (Axelrod 1997). Based on their explicit group. In a case of ‘assimilation’, incomers accept to model of acculturation, Erten et al. (2018) suggest abandon their own cultural values, and turn to a high that resident and immigrant cultures are more likely degree of participation in the cultural habits of the to stably coexist if residents are more conservative receiving group. The incomers will be looked upon than incomers. Whilst there still is active engagement as full members (‘family/relative’) of the receiving in cross-cultural interactions, these do not necessarily group and interaction is based on intimacy; incom- lead to the continuous spatial dissemination of culture ers’ contacts with members of their own group are traits, as the structure of the interactive environment not based on origin/lineage. ‘Integration’ involves is complex and returns non-linear dynamics (Axel- a situation where incomers maintain active contact rod 1997; Drost / Vander Linden 2018). It is, for with their own group/lineage, but show a high de- instance, well possible that, within a process of in- gree of participation in the habits of the receiving creasing homogenisation of culture traits, ‘pockets’ of group. The incomers will be looked upon as friends/ groups maintain a strong degree of cultural difference. acquaintances of the receiving group, and interaction Such pockets get isolated, which ultimately can lead is based on trust. In contrast, when incomers main- to marginalisation or separation/segregation. tain no/little contact with their own group/lineage, With the above outline of an initial reflective and also exhibit no/little participation in the habits of framework, we can start to think differently about the receiving group, ‘marginalisation’ will occur. The how cross-cultural migrations and mobility may have incomers will be seen as strangers or outsiders, and influenced the dynamics of interaction both between interaction is based on suspicion. In a fourth scenario, hunter-gatherers and farmers, and within these coar- D a n i e l a H o f m a n n , Han s Pe ete rs an d A n n -Katr i n M eye r 267 Fig. 3 Simplified map of the spread of agriculture in western Eurasia . The Linearbandkeramik is shown in green (image by D. Gronen- born / B. Horejs / M. Börner / M. Ober 2019 [RGZM/OREA], Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License). sely defined categories. In the following sections we Movement and migration in the LBK: a constant investigate the roles of mobility and migration in the ‘sedentary’ Neolithic communities of the LBK, and in As we now know, the Earliest and Early LBK cul- two forager scenarios set in very different ecological ture expanded rather rapidly across Europe (Fig. 3), and landscape settings, southern Scandinavia and the although the precise date for its arrival in various northwest European lowlands. regions remains debated (Jakucz et al. 2016; Strien 2017a; Bánffy et al. 2018). While the so-called ‘Neo- lithic Demographic Transition’ could have fuelled Migration and mobility in the LBK this expansion (Bocquet-Appel 2008; Shennan 2018), the reasons why settlers moved remain un- As has been forcefully driven home by recent genetic clear. Given the large spatial gaps between Earliest evidence (e. g. Haak et al. 2010), the initial expansion LBK settlements, a largely prestige-driven migration of the LBK apparently did not involve substantial bio- is often argued for, in which those offspring not in logical input from foragers (although there are a few line to inherit the farmstead were sent on costly and individuals, see e. g. Nikitin et al. 2019). However, risky colonisation ventures, potentially taking place in the context of the present discussion, two facets in a climate of competition between descent groups. 2 of LBK society deserve to be drawn out. One is the It is likely that forager populations could have per- potential for continuous mobility even in this alleg- sisted in the resulting large gaps, in particular if they edly ‘sedentary’ Neolithic society, more fully devel- used areas of the landscape which were not the prime oped elsewhere (Hofmann 2016a; 2020). The other is targets of LBK settlers, for example river floodplains, how these mobility regimes and the permanent sites uplands, or sandy or boggy areas. Indeed, the Late impacted the foragers with which LBK communities Mesolithic economy may have increasingly relied on must in some way have come into contact.1 fishing (Gehlen et al. 2017, 56 – 57). 1  For an excellent introduction to the forager background in 2  See e. g. Zimmermann et al. 2005; Frirdich 2005; Fiedel /  central Europe, see Gronenborn 1999. Anthony 2003; Strien 2017b. 268 Crosstown traffi c: contemplating mobility, interaction and migration among foragers and early farm e rs Fig. 4 Map of sites mentioned in the text. 1 Neustadt; 2 Schlamersdorf; 3 Kayhude; 4 Boberg; 5 Łoniowa; 6 Harting; 7 Marktbergel; 8 Vaihingen; 9 Herxheim; 10 Blätterhöhle; 11 Arnoldsweiler; 12 Cuiry-lès-Chaudardes; 13 Epse-Olthof; 14 Kampen-Reevediep / Hanzelijn- Hattemerbroek; 15 Dronten-N23; 16 Swifterbant; 17 Hoge Vaart-A27; 18 Baarn-Drie Eiken; 19 Soest-Staringlaan; 20 Hardinxveld-Giessen- dam; 21 Howick; 22 East Barns; 23 Mount Sandel. In subsequent LBK phases, changes in domestic for what must have been entire communities settling architecture and the appearance of cemeteries may in lower mountain ranges and sourcing a majority of have acted as alternative arenas for social competition their diets on non-loess soils (Nehlich et al. 2009; (e. g. Sommer 2001; Cladders / Stäuble 2003). In ad- Turck 2019). Other LBK sites were located on small dition, isotopic evidence connecting local origins and loess patches at higher altitudes (e. g. Knipper et al. the possession of polished stone adzes in male graves 2010; summary in Zeeb-Lanz 2019, 458 – 460) or may across the LBK (Hedges at al. 2013), as well as differ- have made use of upland locations for pasture (e. g. ences in the intensity of care for agricultural plots at Valde-Nowak 2009; Beigl 2020). If this is shown to the site of Vaihingen in Baden-Württemberg (Bogaard be a more general pattern, it could have made it more et al. 2011; Fig. 4) have been linked into one model difficult for hunter-gatherers in some environments suggesting unequal access to land as a major factor to survive alongside LBK communities. Still, there is in status competition. In other words, the importance evidence for such survival. of territoriality may have increased. Yet there are also indications that not everyone did, in fact, stay put. Rela- Forager-farmer interaction tively routine relocations of household groups could for instance be indicated by the fluctuating number of Genetically speaking, foragers did not make up a so-called ‘yards’ over the duration of longer-lasting and large part of the initial Earliest LBK settlers, with a well-excavated sites (Fig. 5). Recent work at Arnolds- larger proportion of European hunter-gatherer DNA weiler (Balkowski 2017) has even identified a general only reappearing later in the Neolithic (e. g. Beau settlement hiatus, while ups and downs in household et al. 2017; Lipson et al. 2017). This also applies to numbers are evident across the Merzbach valley se- the isotopic non-locals at Herxheim (Blöcher et al. quence and elsewhere (e. g. summarised in Hofmann 2019), so that LBK upland use is not connected to 2016a). New sites continued to be established whenever Mesolithic ancestry. However, our evidence may still the opportunity arose (see e. g. Pechtl 2011). be biased. Large areas, particularly in the western Such sites could even be founded in areas which part of the LBK (notably the Rhineland), where there did not correspond to the classically chosen loess are stronger archaeological reasons for presupposing lowlands. Instead, there is increasing isotopic evidence hunter-farmer contacts, suffer from bad conditions D a n i e l a H o f m a n n , Han s Pe ete rs an d A n n -Katr i n M eye r 269 Fig. 5 Merzbach valley: Number of yards on sites in the middle Merzbach valley in phases V, VIII and XII. Location of houses is sche- matic. LW = Langweiler; LB = Laurenzberg; NM = Niedermerz (after data and base map in Stehli 1994, with corrections by Münch 2009). for bone preservation, so that no genetic data are including amber beads, harpoon heads and hunting available. Identifying potential hunter-gatherer survi- bows. Even bearing in mind that much interaction may val must thus rely on either the persistence of forager have involved organic ‘forest products’, the number sites, or on artefactual evidence for contact. of items is surprisingly low. Similarly, there is some Beginning with possible persistence, interesting evidence for LBK objects travelling beyond the loess data have come to light. While the isotopic indicators into the north European Plain (e. g. Klassen 2004, for a hunter-gatherer-fisher lifestyle reported for the 100 – 102, 105 – 108; Verhart 2012), but this increases Blätterhöhle in western Germany (Bollongino et al. substantially only after the LBK. Also, it is still being 2013) post-date the LBK, and thus need not refer debated whether at least some such items may not to the continuous presence of people of Mesolithic actually represent forays by LBK people beyond the descent in the area, these findings lend new impetus loess, rather than farmer-forager contact. to an on-going discussion centred on artefactual evi- Studies of stone tool production sequences, in dence. In the Rhineland, for instance, Mesolithic-style contrast, show that hunter-gatherer flint knapping tra- lithic and bone artefacts associated with ‘Neolithic’ ditions persist into the LBK in some areas (e. g. Löhr absolute dates show that hunter-gatherers did per- 1994; Mateiciucová 2008; Cziesla 2015, 237 – 260), sist for several generations after initial neolithisation where the lateralisation and degree of symmetry of (Banghard / Gehlen 2014). Similarly, burials in a arrowheads show consistent preferences between Late Mesolithic tradition, but with Neolithic 14C dates are Mesolithic and Early Neolithic (although there are known from Saxony (Stäuble / Wolfram 2013), while otherwise large changes in the toolkit, see e. g. Allard in the Czech Republic there are environmental indica- 2005, 237 – 239). Yet, even here it has been pointed out tors for continuities in landscape exploitation from that the various ‘Mesolithic’ and ‘Neolithic’ indica- Mesolithic into Neolithic times (Pokorný et al. 2010). tors (lateralisation, knapping technique, raw material Mesolithic societies also continued to coexist beyond preferences, etc.) do not co-vary in such a way as to the southern margins of the LBK for several centuries, create two clearly defined, mutually distinct traditions and their networks were considerably impacted by the (Crombé 2010; Robinson et al. 2010; 2013). Because spread of the LBK (Jeunesse et al. 2019, 93 – 99). Yet the signal is essentially ‘mixed’, it has been difficult to evidence for sustained contact with LBK communi- find a coherent interpretation. ties is very low. Gronenborn (2009) lists artefacts of The persistence of hunting as an economic strat- possible hunter-gatherer origin found on LBK sites, egy, most extensively documented in the Paris Basin, 270 Crosstown traffi c: contemplating mobility, interaction and migration among foragers and early farm e rs Fig. 6  The La Hoguette vessel from Choisey. This site lies outside the LBK distribution, but similar vessels have been found throughout the La Hoguette area (after Pétrequin et al. 2009, fig. 3; reproduced with kind permission of P. Pétrequin). could be a further argument for ‘Mesolithic’ survivors. 2020; 2021; cf. also Cziesla this volume),3 but it al- At Cuiry-lès-Chaudardes, shorter houses are correlated ready seems possible that the makers of both LBK with a higher incidence of hunted animals, notably and non-LBK pottery styles might have lived side by wild boar, while longer houses are associated with side in the same settlements (Fig. 7), with non-LBK the herding of caprines or cattle. This distinction per- wares particularly frequent around some houses (e. g. sists over several generations; interestingly, the shorter Gomart / Burnez-Lanotte 2012; Maletschek 2010). houses also have fewer cereal grinding stones, but a Yet the fate of non-LBK ceramics also differed over wider range of technological choices in pottery pro- time. Initially, co-existence was short-lived: in areas duction (Gomart et al. 2015; Hachem 2018). They are east of the Rhine, such pottery is limited to Earliest thus overall somewhat less conformist. However, it is LBK sites and quickly disappears. In contrast, west also evident that herding of domesticated animals and of the Rhine it remains present throughout the LBK agriculture did play a substantial role in all houses, and sequence, diversifying over time and potentially even the analysts explicitly reject the idea that there may be contributing some technological innovations to LBK ‘Mesolithic’ residents at Cuiry. Instead, they point to pottery making, such as the use of new tempers (Hof- the importance of various animal species in negotiat- mann 2016b; Kirschneck 2020; 2021). ing group, age or gender identity within the LBK itself (Gomart et al. 2015, 244 – 45; Hachem 2018). Again, Contacts across (internal) borders? then, it seems impossible to attach a straightforward ‘Mesolithic’ label to any axis of variation. The evidence accumulated in recent years has not In contrast, non-LBK pottery found on LBK sites, made it easier to understand forager-farmer inter­ most famously La Hoguette, Limburg and ‘Begleit- action in the LBK area. Genetically, there was little keramik’, is generally interpreted as being of forager admixture, certainly in the central and eastern areas origin, as it is also found outside the LBK distribu- which have so far been most extensively sampled. This tion (see e. g. summaries in Manen / Mazurié de means that behaviours which we classically would Keroualin 2003; Hofmann 2016b). The production sequence, vessel shapes and decorative motifs all dif- fer from LBK wares (Fig. 6), further underscoring its 3 In addition, a PhD centred on the portable XRF study of divergent pedigree. The La Hoguette phenomenon La Hoguette ceramics is under way at Ludwig-Maximilians- is currently undergoing re-evaluation (Kirschneck University Munich (Michaela Schauer). D a n i e l a H o f m a n n , Han s Pe ete rs an d A n n -Katr i n M eye r 271 Fig. 7 Distribution of La Hoguette sherds around houses in Bruchenbrücken (after Maletschek 2010, 91 fig. 11). have termed ‘Mesolithic’, and which have now been have been actively suppressed to stress group cohe- increasingly documented in LBK society – most no- sion (see also Sommer 2001), so that any makers of tably considerable mobility at various social scales non-LBK pottery east of the Rhine soon gave up their and a tendency to economic diversification – must be own traditions if they settled on LBK sites. Later on, understood as related to the internal dynamics of these when LBK pottery was increasingly used to signal a early farming societies in the course of expansion and variety of identities from personal to household and consolidation. In many of these central and eastern regional, there was social room for non-LBK pottery to areas, it would have been possible for hunter-gatherers persist, and for some limited fusion phenomena. The to survive alongside the LBK, and the evidence is production sequences of Mesolithic-style arrowheads slowly being collected. However, interaction appears may have been less affected by these trends and are to have been reduced and was perhaps dominated variable from the start. It is difficult to see how either mainly by suspicion. There may also have been more of these patterns could have emerged without any potential for conflict once LBK farmers increasingly direct contact between LBK and forager communities, used non-loess areas for their own needs, although even if this did not result in large-scale interbreeding. this requires more concerted comparisons especially In sum, the trajectories of hunter-farmer interac- of Late Mesolithic exploitation patterns. Evidence tion in the LBK differed over time and regionally, as from the LBK is also not unanimous here, with ec- is to be expected in a situation in which very unlike, onomic diversity apparently decreasing at Paris Basin but dynamically evolving societies come into con- sites over time (Gomart et al. 2015, 241), while the tact. Especially in central and eastern areas there is Herxheim isotopes (Turck 2019) indicate sustained relatively little evidence for sustained acculturation use of uplands in the locally latest LBK phase. Still, if from either side; instead, parallel societies and mutual the later Neolithic resurgence of hunter-gatherer genes circumspection may have been the order of the day in really is mainly fuelled by new population movements a context in which demographically dominant LBK from western Europe (see Beau et al. 2017; Lipson communities tolerated little deviation in their own et al. 2017), then the local central European hunter- settlements. Further west, changing LBK dynamics gatherers were perhaps ultimately squeezed out. perhaps allowed the persistence of forager ways of The evidence from artefacts nuances this story. doing things, albeit within an economic framework Persistent traditions in stone tool production and es- dominated by farming. This similarly did not proceed pecially pottery manufacture indicate that there was on an even footing, but makes it more difficult (and coexistence, but that it varied chronologically. In the indeed perhaps inappropriate) to draw up mutually initial and rather more conservative expansion phases exclusive and binary categories of identity, which of the Earliest LBK, difference in pottery styles may would for example see all ceramics as emblematic 272 Crosstown traffi c: contemplating mobility, interaction and migration among foragers and early farm e rs of ‘Neolithic’ and all hunting activities as related to resources. Clearly, animals are variably distributed ‘Mesolithic’ identities. in a landscape, having variable degrees of mobility This model will need refining once more detailed and group behaviour. But also plants are variably studies are available for other LBK areas, and espe- distributed and occur in variable density, depending cially once chronological resolution in particular of on a range of factors related to, for instance, climate post-neolithisation hunter-gatherer sites, within and conditions and the influence of animals, as well as hu- beyond the LBK territory, is improved. But sharpening mans. It is the symbiotic relationships between these our theoretical models for interaction is undoubtedly ‘agents’ which will have characterised the qualitative also one of the biggest research challenges for the and quantitative structure of the environment, and coming years. This in turn will require much more mobility is one strategy to monitor the situation which detailed knowledge of the historically situated ways in does not come as a given state of being. which hunter-gatherers inhabited and moved through As prehistoric foragers are generally portrayed landscapes, not only along the putative frontier itself, to have had little influence on the environment, and but also across and behind it on either side. This di- as having been dependent on it, they are believed to versity is explored in the sections that follow. have been living in more uncertainty than farming communities. This appears questionable, however, from several perspectives. There is ample ethnographic Migration and mobility in the as well as increasing archaeological evidence for the Mesolithic Low Countries manipulation of the environment by foragers through deliberate firing of vegetation zones.4 It is a form of Mesolithic hunter-gatherers in northwestern Europe environmental management in which the manipula- are still generally portrayed as ‘whole-time food see- tion of vegetation serves the purpose of managing kers’, dependent on what the environment had to animal and plant communities, and requires intensive offer, and therefore organised in small and mobile cooperation between group members (Bliege Bird groups (Zvelebil / Moore 2006). Holocene sea-level et al. 2016). Clearing land through burning is advan- rise would have caused the loss of previously inha- tageous for the regenerative capacity of the environ- bitable land, followed by an increase of regionally ment, thus increasing predictability and decreasing variable population densities, increased sedentism uncertainty for its users. However, were access rights due to a growing dependency on stable marine resour- equally distributed, in other words, was there a degree ces, territoriality and social complexity (Waddington of ‘ownership’? And what would happen if incom- 2007). Together, these factors are believed to have ing groups would want to use such land, for instance paved the path for the adoption of farming outside to settle and grow crops? After all, the burning of the LBK zone (but see Amkreutz 2013 for a far more vegetation is also advantageous to improve soil fertil- nuanced model). One can, however, question whether ity. Interactive attitudes may have been variable, and this simplified one-directional cause-and-effect scena- strongly dependent on how much room is given by rio fits the complexities of hunter-gatherer lifeways resident groups to incoming groups to ‘do their stuff’. and their connection to the land. And as argued in Crop cultivation attracts game, and could therefore the preceding section, one can question whether early also form a basis for social integration of farmers in a farming communities were as sedentary and stuck to forager-dominant landscape, or vice versa, integration cultivated resources as many tend to believe. of foragers in a farmer-dominant landscape. The scale at which such practices occur – and Subsistence and wandering foragers? might have occurred – is quite variable, however, ranging from small localised patches to vast areas. Food is as critical to foragers as it is to early farmers – ­Simmons (1996) argues for an anthropogenic drive in in fact to any living organism – and the main challenge the creation of moorland landscapes in England and was probably how to balance certainty and uncertainty Wales. However, evidence from Mesolithic northwest- in its supply. This will have been strongly related to the ern Europe suggests that such ‘fire ecology’ was mainly degree to which seasonal and annual availability was of a local nature, and too short-term to support struc- predictable (dependent on longer-term fluctuations), tural (i. e. measurable) changes in the vegetation on a a factor foragers, as well as early farmers, had to deal with. In order to cope with uncertainty regarding food acquisition, foragers had to collect information about 4  See e. g. Mellars 1976; Simmons 1996; Bos / Janssen 1996; the distribution and presence of animal and plant Dark 1998; Bos / Urz 2003; Bird et al. 2016; Sevink et al. 2018. D a n i e l a H o f m a n n , Han s Pe ete rs an d A n n -Katr i n M eye r 273 Fig. 8 A: Plane view of the tilled horizon at Swifterbant-S4. The pat- terning of dark- and light-grey pat- ches is interpreted as tillage marks made with some sort of hand tool. B: Photograph showing a more or less regular pattern of tillage marks that become increasingly vague towards the left of photograph. The dark layer on top is the lower part of a midden deposit. Square indica- tes image C. C: Detail of B, with tool marks indicated by triangles (after Huisman / Raemaekers 2014). regional scale.5 But even when ‘swapping’ from one cal timescale, if you like. It is therefore perfectly imag- place to another, the repetitive occurrence of burning inable that firing practices by foragers, and clearing events suggests that hunter-gatherers did influence of plots by farming groups occurred simultaneously the environment on a structural basis. In fact, the within given parts of the landscape. It might involve small scale at which this appears to have occurred a context of integration, not necessarily assimilation. is not that different from what we see for wetland As a whole, the representation of subsistence horticultural practices in the Neolithic Swifterbant strategies among Mesolithic foragers – and early culture. Palynological evidence for cereal cultivation farmers – in northwestern Europe is arguably over- is sparse (Bakker 2003; Out 2009; Talebi et al. 2019), simplistic, and based on coarse-grained ethnographic despite the fact that emmer and naked barley appear models and assumptions with respect to the determin- to have been cultivated on a regular basis on clayey ing role of the environment. Stable isotope data from levees in the Netherlands, as shown by the presence Mesolithic and Neolithic human remains from the of charred grains at the majority of Swifterbant sites southern North Sea and the Netherlands, for instance, (Cappers / Raemaekers 2008), and indeed the fields demonstrate that fresh water resources (notably fish) themselves (Fig. 8; cf. Huisman / Raemaekers 2014).6 provided a major part of the diet, and this remained Apparently, the palynological signal is diffuse and lo- the case even when dwelling sites were on or very calised, suggesting repetitive, but rather short-lived close to the sea shore (Smits / Van der Plicht 2009; cultivation on small plots – ‘events’ on the archaeologi- Van der Plicht et al. 2016). Indeed, zooarchaeologi- cal evidence for the exploitation and consumption of fully marine resources is sparse at best, and only really 5  Bos / Janssen 1996; Bos / Urz 2003; Peeters et al. 2017; shows up in the archaeological record in the region’s ­Sevink et al. 2018. Late Neolithic (3rd millennium cal. BC) – agricultural 6  There is, however, growing evidence from micromorpholo- practices were firmly in place by then, but paired with gical research that crop cultivation in the Swifterbant culture hunting and gathering – with evidence for the fishing was common in various parts of the Dutch wetlands. Just how this should exactly be understood, also in the light of palynolo- of cod longer than 1 m and other large marine fish gical evidence, is a topic of current research (pers. comm. Prof. species such as haddock (Zeiler / Brinkhuizen 2013). H. J. Huisman, 13.12.2019). 274 Crosstown traffi c: contemplating mobility, interaction and migration among foragers and early farm e rs This possibly reflects a rather late change in techno- bon years.7 Clearly, this does not involve continuous logical choices, where the tradition of trapping fish by occupation, but rather a repetitive, short-term use of means of funnels and weirs remained dominant. In- such locations for various activities over many genera- deed, several strategies may have been in place simul- tions. The AMS record actually represents a sequence taneously. For the exploitation of staple food resourc- of ‘events’. What is important here is that the record es, confirmed (‘Cartesian’; cf. McGlade / ­McGlade always shows continuity and discontinuity of activi- 1989) strategies were applied to ensure a reliable ties over this long-term scale (Peeters 2009). There supply, whereas the exploitation of uncertain or new will be time windows when activities associated with resources – marine? – may have required more risk- flint knapping are ‘synchronous’ with the use of pit taking (‘stochastic’; cf. McGlade / McGlade 1989) hearths – a phenomenon particularly known from strategies. In sum, the sea did not play an important the northern Netherlands and adjacent parts of Ger- role in the adoption of farming here, and the contrast many (Niekus 2006; Peeters/Niekus 2017; Peeters between lifeways is much reduced compared to the et al. 2017) – followed by a time window in which LBK. This diminished gap combined with important only the use of pit hearths seems to occur. There are degrees of mobility likely had a big influence on his- indications that some geographical differentiation is torical trajectories here. present. In the eastern Netherlands, activity of Early and Middle Mesolithic foragers is well represented in Mobility as a social factor the archaeological record, both in radiocarbon dates and flint technology. However, the Late Mesolithic and The gathering of information about food resources Early Neolithic in this region is only sporadically rep- can be considered crucial for foragers. To achieve resented by flint artefacts (isolated trapeze points and this, movement (mobility) is of great importance. De- punched blades), whilst radiocarbon dates of anthro- spite the fact that mobility is a central and traditional pogenic phenomena (pit hearths; worked wood and aspect in hunter-gatherer studies, archaeologically antler; small pits which might result from the extrac- we know very little about this as yet. Ethnographic tion of aquatic tubers/plant roots) suggest continued insights demonstrate that the spatial scale of mo- presence of hunter-gatherers (Peeters et al. 2017). vement and hence knowledge about the environment Elsewhere, in the Swifterbant region for instance, Late can be vast. Indigenous people in southern Labrador, Mesolithic and Early Neolithic flint technology is far for instance, have knowledge about terrain as big as better represented. Apparently, some shifts in where southeastern England, the southern North Sea, the in the landscape certain behaviours were carried out Low Countries, and northwestern Germany taken may have occurred at a regional and long-term scale together (Fig. 9; Lovis / Donahue 2011). In northern (Peeters 2007; 2009), which may have implications Quebec, equally large swathes of land are viewed for mobility patterns. as their ‘home’ by the indigenous Cree (Carlson The patterning in the archaeological evidence 2008). In fact, movement or travelling is essential to indicates highly structured forager landscapes, in collect information and to ‘be home’ (Aporta 2009; which places and landscape zones were connected 2016). Mobility forms the basis for knowledge, while through networks of trails. Their distribution was not at the same time it creates and maintains historical random, although initially the emergence of spatial ties with the land, ties which are anchored within a structures may have been driven by random self-or- community through the sharing of knowledge and ganising processes (Mlekúz 2014). The choices made story-telling (Minc 1986). by individuals and groups of hunter-gatherers were Indications for long-lasting spatial structures in driven by experience and shared knowledge. Hunter- the Dutch part of the Mesolithic landscape are found gatherers did not assess landscapes from a ‘helicopter’ in the centennial to millennial time-depth of hunter- perspective, sorting out the optimal conditions for gatherer visits to particular places (Peeters 2007). At the exploitation of those landscapes. But also and vast sites like Dronten-N23, Hanzelijn-Hattemerbroek, maybe more importantly, mobility occurred within Kampen-Reevediep, Epse-Olthof and Hoge Vaart-A27, a particular socio-cultural setting. This does not just chronological evidence based on hundreds of AMS- include the co-presence of people and animals, but dates points to hunter-gatherer activity covering time- also deep, mythological ties to the land. Many rules spans of several hundred to three thousand radiocar- 7  Peeters 2007; Lohof et al. 2011; Hamburg et al. 2012; Hermsen et al. 2015; Geerts et al. 2019. D a n i e l a H o f m a n n , Han s Pe ete rs an d A n n -Katr i n M eye r 275 a a a b Schaal 1:3.000.000 Afb. 7.9. Kaart van Zuidoost-Labrador in Canada. Het weergegeven gebied is ongeveer zoSchaal groot als b 1:3.000.000 Afb. 7.9. Kaart van Zuidoost-Labrador in Canada. Het weergegeven gebied is ongeveer zo groot als Fig. 9 Map of southeastern Labrador, Canada (after Lovis / Donahue 2011). The depicted area is about as big as eastern England, theb southern North Sea, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxemburg and bordering parts of western Germany together. Top: System of rivers and lakes drawn by native American Mathieu Medicabo. It demonstrates the mental structuring of knowledge about landscape in connection to waterborne travels. Bottom: Geographically corrected map of the same area. 276 Crosstown traffi c: contemplating mobility, interaction and migration among foragers and early farm e rs of spatial behaviour are linked to beliefs about how the socio-cultural sphere, possibly due to newly estab- the world of the living is influenced by spirits in the lished relationships with the landscape and altering underworld, associated with death, and the upper mobility patterns as well as interaction with other world, associated with birth (see e. g. various papers groups. Changes in interaction might have involved in Jordan 2011). contacts between groups who did not have any previ- The connection between people and land will ous relationships, or altering relationships between have been strong and decisive for what socially was groups who already were in contact. done and not done. The question, then, is what hap- pens when such a connection is under stress, per- Dwellings, mobility and contacts turbed or disrupted? Climate-driven change, which is often referred to as a major drive behind behav- The drowning of Doggerland is also said to have ioural change during the postglacial period, did have caused a decrease in mobility and social change an influence on the composition and distribution of (Waddington 2007). This hypothesis is largely ba- food and other resources, and this affected exploita- sed on the absence of punched-blade technology and tion strategies and technology. Yet one can wonder the occurrence of heavily built dwelling structures whether this also impacted the relationships between discovered on the British side of the North Sea, people and the land. Great importance may particu- e. g. at Howick, East Barns and Mount Sandel, all larly have pertained to those changes which occurred pre-dating the 8.4 – 8.1 ka cal BP time window. In rapidly, within an individual’s lifespan or within two the Netherlands three comparable structures are to three generations. For the Mesolithic of the Low known to date from Baarn-Drie Eiken, Soest-Sta- Countries, the drowning of Doggerland is a factor ringlaan and Kampen-Reevediep, also pre-dating to bear in mind, although much of it involves slow the 8.4 – 8.1 ka cal BP time window (Peeters 2007; long-term change (Sturt et al. 2013). However, the ar- Geerts et al. 2019). This suggests that at least for chaeological record from the Netherlands shows some some time before the major impacts in the North patterns which might relate to more abrupt environ- Sea basin, sturdy dwelling structures were built by mental impact in the 8.4 – 8.1 ka cal BP window, during foragers. But whether this corresponds to a more se- which several events occurred within a short time. dentary life remains the question, also because such The Storegga landslide triggered a tsunami, which structures may have been common in earlier phases had some impact on the Dutch Mesolithic coast, but of the Mesolithic as well, but may be victims of the a rather restricted one compared to eastern Scotland data gap in the southern North Sea area, which is and England (Weninger et al. 2008). More or less hiding large swathes of the Early and Middle Meso- around the same time, a sea-level jump, related to the lithic landscape (Peeters / Momber 2014). drainage of Lake Agassiz in the Hudson Bay region, The idea that Mesolithic hunter-gatherers were led to a sudden – possibly even within a couple of exclusively living in lightly built dwelling structures months – increase of the mean sea-level in the order may thus be nothing more than a conceptual fal- of 1.5 m to 2 m, on top of the structural sea-level rise lacy. Heavily built dwelling structures may well also of about 2 m taking place in this time window of about have been common in the forager landscape, and two centuries (Hijma / Cohen 2019). At exactly this integrated in a mobility system covering vast regions. point, a hiatus seems to be present (Peeters et al. Similar structures dating to the Neolithic are in con- 2015) in the body of radiocarbon dates available for trast easily equated with permanency and sedentary the Rhine-Meuse estuary. Several sites (Dronten-N23; lifeways. However, in later Neolithic times ‘houses’ Kampen-Reevediep; Hanzelijn-Hattemerbroek) further are often quite flimsy, most certainly in the Dutch inland also appear to show a corresponding ‘break’ wetlands (Nobles 2016). But what do we actually in just that time window. Whether this is related to know about mobility among Neolithic groups? Why temporary migration of forager groups is not clear, do we find scattered distributions of artefacts we as- but it is possible that these patterns echo some sort of sociate with the Neolithic without evidence for dwell- disruption, e. g. with regard to historical ties between ing structures? Without dismissing the possibility of people and the land due to changing geographies, differential preservation, could it be that Neolithic thus affecting what hunter-gatherer groups considered groups were in fact more mobile than we assume? to be their ‘home’ (compare e. g. Leary 2015). After Movement, after all, is essential for the establishment this phase, flint technology is typically dominated by and maintenance of contacts between individuals large punched blades – a novelty – and broad trapeze- and groups. shaped points. Something seems to have changed in D a n i e l a H o f m a n n , Han s Pe ete rs an d A n n -Katr i n M eye r 277 Fig. 10 Flint artefacts from the early Swifterbant context of the site Hoge Vaart-A27. These artefacts stand out from the flint assemblage counting over 30,000 pieces > 1 cm. (a, b) Large flakes of banded Falster flint. Falster flint is otherwise lacking in the assemblage, and the cortex shows weathering which is untypical for oc- currences in Saalian till deposits in the Netherlands. (c) Medial part of an exceptionally reg- ular and long blade (remaining length 48 mm) made out of fine-grained Scan- dinavian flint. The blade derives from a highly controlled process focussed on the production of long, regular blades and use is made of high-quality flint. In the Netherlands there exists no evi- dence for the production of such long blades, and this is the only one found in the entire assemblage. (d) Broken blade (remaining length 50 mm) of banded Scandinavian flint. Although this type of flint occurs more often in the assemblage, no further pieces have been found showing the distict transparent band. Typically, the occurrence of isolated ‘Neolithic Obviously, contacts between foragers and farmers artefacts’ at ‘Mesolithic sites’ – notably at Hardinxveld- did exist in the Low Countries, as elsewhere, but just Giessendam De Bruin, Swifterbant, and a range of how this led to new socio-cultural structures is an issue Mesolithic sites with containing incidental ‘Michels- that needs to be approached from a social perspective. berg items’ – is easily interpreted in terms of contact Hunter-gatherers and early farmers were part of a between Neolithic farmers and hunter-gatherers (Ver- world more integrated than we (still) tend to assume. hart 2000; Louwe Kooijmans 2001). Isolated ‘Meso- People with (partly) different lifeways knew each oth- lithic artefacts’ at ‘Neolithic sites’, however, are mostly er, and maintained social relationships in one way or interpreted as background noise, merely representing another. The nature of these relationships, and the scraps of earlier occupations. Why could such finds, attitudes and interactions involved, will have gradually both on Mesolithic and Neolithic sites (Fig. 10), not changed, potentially leading to ‘social flow’ and per- echo established social relationships, which might mitted experimenting with, and acceptance or rejec- very well have developed variable forms of cultural tion of novelties in both directions. Amkreutz (2013) coexistence? has expressed this process in a model of ‘attunement’, 278 Crosstown traffi c: contemplating mobility, interaction and migration among foragers and early farm e rs which involves the implementation of new (Neolithic) groups (see e. g. Skoglund et al. 2012; Brotherton elements in existing structures through acquaintance et al. 2013; Malmström et al. 2015). and integration. The embedding of novelties, such as In one influential model, neolithisation in north- cereal cultivation and animal husbandry in the Dutch ern Germany and southern Scandinavia was explained wetlands, did not necessarily imply the full change of through a 3-stage-process of contact/availability, ad- habits. In fact, the archaeological evidence strongly aptation/substitution and consolidation based on the suggests that many aspects of ‘traditional’ lifeways contact situation between Ertebølle and the neigh- persisted throughout the greatest part of what we bouring farming groups. These contacts are supposed call the Neolithic, and most certainly with regard to to have made the diffusion of ‘Neolithic’ ideas and the food economy (see e. g. Louwe Kooijmans 2007; technologies possible and led to the adoption of a 2009). Other aspects changed, such as the abandon- Neolithic mode of subsistence (Hartz et al. 2007, ment of pit-hearth technology, which chronologically 587 – 588, adapting Zvelebil / Rowley-Conwy 1984). coincides with the appearance of ceramic vessels at The picture presented by Gron / Sørensen (2018) the Mesolithic/Neolithic chronological boundary. is also one of varying stages of contact, negotiation Other changes involve a shift from blade-based to and homogenisation between foragers and farmers, but flake-based flint technology and corresponding shift relies more heavily on the influx of migrating settlers. from trapeze-shaped to transversal points in the Late In this model, hunter-gatherers play the dominant role Swifterbant / Pre-Drouwen / Funnel Beaker (Trich- in taking up new practices established by incoming terbecher, TRB) phase, the shift from small-scale to settlers in a process of learning how to farm. The (somewhat) larger and associated technology in the model allows for different regional developments and TRB/Corded Ware, as well as fishing in fully marine alternating patterns of continuity and change, but still environments by people of the Corded Ware. But none remains generative by focussing on process outcomes, of this will have come without a continuous flow of instead of the actual mechanisms of interaction. Ef- interaction between individuals who most probably fectively, this is about incoming farmers ‘teaching’ just partly shared cultural traits and beliefs. In the end, apparently willing foragers new practices, and thus all this depends on the extent groups want to preserve represents yet another top-down way of thinking. De- their culture, and wish (and/or are allowed) to actively spite attempting an overall explanation of the situation participate in the practices of the other. at the beginning of the northern Neolithic, the model argues from a distinctively southern Scandinavian perspective, whereas the first contact between hunter- gatherers and farmers might well have occurred in Migration and mobility in the Ertebølle the southernmost areas of the Ertebølle region, in culture northern Germany. As will be shown below, the north- ern German Ertebølle differs slightly from its Danish In contrast to the Low Countries, late foragers in counterparts, which is an important consideration southern Scandinavia and northern Germany are when assessing the mechanisms behind contact and generally thought to have been much more sedentary. migration. Also, to better understand how Ertebølle This development is linked to the consolidation of people may have been coping with an influx of (pos- the Baltic coast during the last centuries of the Me- sible) strangers, and why they may have been willing solithic, which produced varied coastal landscapes to interact, one has to take a look at the last centuries rich in stable resources (Schmölcke et al. 2006). before as well as after the Neolithic turning point. Despite evidence for contact with LBK and later farmers, the northern hunter-gatherers did not lea- The last hunter-gatherers and the first farmers: ve a visible biological imprint within the following contact, exchange, movement? populations, so migration as a driving factor behind the neolithisation process has recently retaken the The youngest Ertebølle culture is supposed to be stage (Gron / Sørensen 2018). There are not many an exceptionally stable phenomenon, which, in the genetic studies directly involving Ertebølle human re- form of a ‘complex’ society, shares certain traits with mains, but analyses of individuals from later periods its Neolithic neighbours. Here we supposedly have in Scandinavia and the overall palaeogenetic picture (semi-)sedentary hunter-fisher-gatherers on the Baltic confirm that the development of the Neolithic can coastlines, who are highly territorial and hierarchical, be attributed at least partly to migration from the employ elaborate fishing and hunting technologies, south and movement between different population produce pottery and know how to store food and D a n i e l a H o f m a n n , Han s Pe ete rs an d A n n -Katr i n M eye r 279 manage resources (Klassen 2004; Andersen 2010; things which come from afar are exotic and special, as Hartz / Schmölcke 2013; Klooss 2015). Ambi- well as selective ethnographic analogies. Considering guously, these characteristics are said to have created the Ertebølle culture, most of the imports are single a certain ‘resistance’ against ‘Neolithic’ influences, and/or surface finds, so their context remains unknown, whilst at the same time presenting the preconditions but they are not, for instance, associated with particular for the development into a fully Neolithic society individuals or buildings. Klassen (2004) still favours an (Rowley-Conwy 2001, 56 – 58, 62; Finlayson / War- interpretation as prestige objects, although some of the ren 2010, 84 – 85, 94 – 97). In any case, Ertebølle was imported axes show traces of heavy wear and intensive not an isolated phenomenon – from the start, contacts use (Klassen 2004, 258 – 259). Looking at the Ertebølle with other regions are visible (Hartz et al. 2007, culture in general, there seem to be few indicators of 578 – 579, 587). These increase over time, which is pronounced social inequality. The motives behind the suggested by the rising number of ‘Neolithic’ objects in increasing demand for Neolithic ‘prestige’ objects (if Ertebølle contexts (see Klassen 2004 for a summary). they are such) therefore remain somewhat in the dark, Contact with the regions from which subsequent mi- as do the reasons why apparently only Neolithic stone grating settlers presumably came was therefore esta- objects reached the North in larger quantities. It is pos- blished well before the first incoming individuals can sible, of course, that as the most durable goods were be traced in the archaeological record. stone tools, other kinds of exchange goods are simply The question remains in how far mobility was not preserved. As yet, we cannot judge whether the an accepted and/or a common strategy within the increasing numbers of foreign objects represent an al- Ertebølle context and what form it took, apart from ready intensified influx of migrating people or simply (probably common, see below) seasonal movements intensified exchange on both sides. In this context it is between different resource areas. Apparently, ‘for- equally possible to think of hunter-gatherers travelling eign’ objects reached northern Germany and south- south, east, or west to obtain the desired objects, either ern Scandinavia, but did (foreign) people travel with for social or practical reasons. them as well? Klassen (2004, 262 – 267) explains the Another question is whether the eventual incom- presence of such objects as down-the-line exchange, ing settlers found a densely and permanently populated but even then Ertebølle people must have come in area or (seasonally) empty forests. Widely known settle- contact with other, non-hunter-gatherer individuals ment models by Andersen (1995; 1994/1995) and at their immediate periphery. A similar situation may Fischer (2003) suggest that there were more or less have pertained between forager groups, considering permanent (sedentary) settlements along the Baltic that pottery in the Late Mesolithic in the southwest- shores, whereas the hinterland and interior regions ern Baltic points to contacts with the eastern Baltic were only exploited temporarily and seasonally in the (Povlsen 2013; Piezonka 2015). form of short and specialised occupations. These mod- Overall, then, Ertebølle communities may have els have recently been reworked by Johansen (2006), been generally open to innovations or exotic items, who argues for a cyclical rotation between different and individuals may have travelled quite far to obtain settlement areas, during which large coastal camps them, thereby establishing social relations beyond and smaller sites of varying functions were used re- their own sphere. While Sørensen (2013, 12 – 13, peatedly. A recent re-evaluation by Andersen (2013) 15 – 16) argues in favour of a cultural dualism during also argues for a semi-sedentary lifestyle (cf. Bergs- the earliest Neolithic and implies that some (if not vik 2001), where hunter-gatherers stay put for several most) imported objects were brought to the North by months and return to that location over the course of actual immigrants, it seems well possible that Meso- several years (Fig. 11). At least for Denmark, the most lithic hunter-gatherers travelled longer distances into intensively settled areas were on the eastern shores, ‘farming country’ to establish and maintain contact fjords and bays. and trading networks. This helps us break up the top- In contrast, for northern Germany, a high degree down approaches, which see hunter-gatherer groups of sedentism seems debatable. Several large settlements as simple ‘receivers’ of Neolithic goods and ideas. are known on the eastern coast of Schleswig-Holstein The increasing number of ‘imported’ items is in- (see e. g. Hartz 1999; Grohmann 2010; Glykou 2016) terpreted as a rising demand for status display (e. g. by and Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (see Lübke 2005 for Klassen 2004) as well as intensified contacts. Alto- an overview). In addition, the inland areas of the Trave gether, the interpretation of foreign objects as symbols and Alster river valleys, as well as the Hamburg re- of prestige or status (see also Verhart 2000) tends to be gion, seem to have been much more intensively settled highly influenced by our modern-day western view that (Fig. 12) than the Danish interior, where we encounter 280 Crosstown traffi c: contemplating mobility, interaction and migration among foragers and early farm e rs Fig. 11 Illustration of different settlement models. Andersen (1994/1995; 1995) and Fischer (2003) argue for more or less permanent settle- ment base camps along the coastlines which are complemented by functional (seasonal) resource extraction camps in the interior and hin- terlands (illustration on the bottom). This model applies mainly to the Danish coastlines. Johansen (2006) favours a model of cyclical rotation between different settlement localities which can be used repeatedly over several years (illustration on the top). In the case of Schleswig- Holstein, this explanation seems reasonable, but it remains unclear if there were solely inland based settlement systems of this type as well. D a n i e l a H o f m a n n , Han s Pe ete rs an d A n n -Katr i n M eye r 281 Fig. 12 This map depicts all known (and suspected) sites and single finds of Ertebølle character in Schleswig-Holstein (data provided by the Archaeological Museum of Schleswig-Holstein / Schloss Gottorf). The density of find spots in eastern Schleswig-Holstein is in stark contrast to the western regions, from which there is only little evidence for a Late Mesolithic occupation. Additionally, there are surpris- ingly many sites in the eastern interior and hinterland where finds cluster along the (former) lake and river systems. mainly the small and short-lived functional camps an- One has to ask how long even rich and stable coast- ticipated by Andersen (1994/1995). Examples for a al resources can actually support a large Mesolithic medium-intensity and even repeated use are provided group before they become depleted.8 If we take the by the sites of Schla­mersdorf LA 05 (Meyer 2017), existence of possible social territories into consider- Schlamersdorf LA 15 (Meyer in prep.), Kayhude LA ation as well, it is likely that groups occupying the 08 (Clausen 2007; Meyer in prep.) and the Hamburg- southern ‘borderlands’ spent most or all of their time Boberg complex (Thielen 2017). These sites do not inland. Here, a certain ‘permanent mobility’ is implied, reach the extent of the coastal ones, but they also have rather than fixed semi-sedentary habitation areas, also only little in common with the small flint scatters of given the nature of inland resources which are usually the Jutland coastal and interior functional camps. considered less rich or stable than coastal resources The evidence in Schleswig-Holstein suggests a (e. g. Bailey / Milner 2002/2003). In this respect the settlement pattern in which small groups of people extensive research on complex hunter-gatherers and moved frequently along the lakes, and inhabited their shores for rather lengthy periods of time to make wide use of the available resources. As yet, it remains un- 8  These considerations naturally depend on group size. Unfor- clear if they travelled between the coast and the lakes tunately, information on this remains vague – Andersen (2001, (in short-distance cases this seems very likely), or re- 69 – 70) proposes a total number of 5,000 individuals for Denmark tained an inland settlement cycle among the eastern during the Final Mesolithic (with no specification for either the Early or Late Ertebølle period), while assuming increasing group lakes, or between those and the interior further south. sizes in the Late Ertebølle period (Andersen 1995, 48). Kars- It has to be taken into account that, unlike the situa- ten / Knarrström (2003, 212) propose a population density of 0.2 tion in Denmark, the German coast was not always individuals per km² in Final Mesolithic southern Sweden. The correlation between population growth rates and depletion of re- easily reached. In general, the main problem seems sources is an important factor when considering how long a sing- to be with the term ‘permanent settlement’ in itself. le location can support a group of varying size. 282 Crosstown traffi c: contemplating mobility, interaction and migration among foragers and early farm e rs coastal resources might have led to a generalised ex- as well as new settlement types and locations, and pectation of ’sedentariness’ in these contexts. In case probably a slow shift towards more terrestrial food of the Ertebølle culture this clouds the view so that resources (Hartz et al. 2000, 132; 2007, 585 – 586; settlement dynamics as well as habitation areas away Gron / Sørensen 2018, 959 – 963). from the coast are often overlooked. Even if Gron / Sørensen (2018) divide the neo- It can thus be concluded that the degree of mobil- lithisation process into four stages (contact, intro- ity within an existing settlement and subsistence pat- duction, negotiation, homogenisation), the question tern varied within the Ertebølle region. And although remains how people actually acted and reacted in we can trace in which way landscapes and different what appears to be a more or less slow process of mu- environments might have been exploited, we can only tual acculturation from which a new entity eventually speculate about the significance of territories (which emerged. Since contact between possible incoming might be equivalent to resource control and access) individuals and the receiving groups was established and the way people moved across social or natural before (see above), the crucial stages must have been borders. It even remains unclear who was involved the ‘introduction’ and ‘negotiation’ phases. Possible in moving (men? women? whole groups?) or if there strategies for coping might be classified into the overall was indeed any long-distance travel. The numbers of categories of acceptance vs. rejection, leading either to foreign objects do increase remarkably during the assimilation and/or integration (of strangers within the last centuries of the Ertebølle culture, and at least for receiving group), or to separation and/or aggression Denmark this may go hand in hand with the develop- and confrontation (Fig. 2). ment of semi-sedentariness, territoriality or tethered Another strategy might be avoidance or retreat. mobility patterns (see Andersen 1995; Klassen 2004). A strategy of retreat is almost impossible to prove, but However, as the case studies above have shown, there it is at least possible that Ertebølle settlers might have is no such thing as a truly ‘sedentary’ society, so it is chosen to go north or northeast within the overall highly likely that the Ertebølle population was in- Ertebølle region when confronted with larger groups volved in trading and contact networks which reached of immigrants. Strong regional connection and/or far across the land and varied both regionally and territorial boundaries might have hampered such a chronologically. To see either ‘sedentism’ or ‘foreign process, and will have led to confrontation between objects’ solely as indications of an emerging Neolithic newcomers and residents, as well as between resi- lifeway is thus unwarranted. dents. However, since the burial record of the youngest Ertebølle culture is small, we are lacking evidence The arrival of the Neolithic: how did it work? for increasing physical violence. Altogether it seems unlikely that hunter-gatherers with possible resource While not all foreign objects within the Ertebølle re- ownership systems and well established territorial ties gion must necessarily reflect travelling or migrating would simply retreat and give up their homelands. individuals, possible evidence of ‘strangers’ within the Considering an acceptance strategy, and given Ertebølle region comes from a pit near Flintbek in the existing evidence for well-established contact, northern Germany, filled with pottery and flint tools incoming settlers could instead either have been as- which do not conform to the local technological tra- similated or integrated into the existing social and ditions, and dated to 4,233 – 3,969 cal BC. Its close economic pattern, or were tolerated in a way which resemblance to material from the Michelsberg culture allowed them to practice ‘their’ lifestyle in formerly is taken as proof for immigrant settlers (Hartz et al. Ertebølle territory. In this case, the existence of trading 2002, 324; Mischka et al. 2015). and exchange relationships between parties in differ- In other ways, the picture for the centuries be- ent regions might have led to the formation of social tween the Final Mesolithic and the ‘established Neo- ties between individuals of different cultural contexts lithic’ is ambiguous. The earliest Funnel Beaker period which can lead to the acceptance of strangers into the in northern Germany and Denmark shows clear con- receiving societies. It is probably hard to prove this tinuities to the latest Ertebølle, and subsistence prac- in terms of the archaeological evidence, but maybe tices change only slowly for at least 300 years. Within the highly diverse ceramic assemblage of Hamburg- the material culture repertoire, especially in the flint Boberg can be explained in this way. Here, Ertebølle industry, ongoing developments and continuities are vessels appear together with Neolithic forms, some obvious, but the ceramic assemblages change rather of which were apparently produced with local clays abruptly and new vessel forms appear. New forms (Thielen 2017). If those do not represent copies made of symbolic or ritual behaviour are also established, by Ertebølle individuals, then it is likely they were D a n i e l a H o f m a n n , Han s Pe ete rs an d A n n -Katr i n M eye r 283 made by ‘outsiders’ within a local ceramic production a point made by Gron / Sørensen (2018), but instead sequence, as is in some cases suggested by Thielen’s of only focusing on the role of immigrants as ‘teachers’ (2017) technological analysis. we need to expand our horizon to include the ‘pupils’ It must remain unclear whether different settle- as driving factors (see below). ment behaviours, e. g. seasonal or year-round seden- In general, the ambiguous character of sites in tariness, influenced the acceptance of immigrants. northern Germany (see above) and the continuity Increased settlement permanency, together with fixed observed in the material repertoire, together with new territories, might have facilitated the establishment pottery styles (which might reflect a demand for the of contacts – e. g. trading partners could be sought in processing of new resources), seem to illustrate some known places –, but might also have presented an ob- degree of mingling with incoming settlers and/or ob- stacle towards migration, with people defending their jects, innovations and trends, or at least a willingness home areas and preventing the settlement of new- for cooperation. The Ertebølle people’s demand for comers. Especially in the inland regions of Schleswig- foreign goods seems to reflect an open-mindedness Holstein and Hamburg, which possibly represented to new things and, possibly, to other people. Their attractive land to farmers as well, people might have contact with Neolithic societies beyond their borders rejected newcomers and rather sought confrontation might have made migration processes easier, prob- in order to maintain their resource areas. ably best reflected in the concentration of imported As mentioned above it seems unlikely that people items in the area of Hamburg and southern Schleswig- would retreat easily in a situation like this, unless faced Holstein. It is also possible that resource management with a major threat or repression by incoming settlers. and semi-sedentariness (sometimes seen as signs of It is possible, however, that a retreat strategy involved a ‘complex’ society) made the ‘Neolithic way’ more movement to the coasts and re-centring the settlement attractive, which might explain the quick change in focus of smaller groups. Possibly this was underway particular to cattle herding. In this respect, the abrupt in the Younger Ertebølle phases already, with a strong introduction of new pottery types may be linked to the focus on Baltic marine resources. At least in Denmark processing of new resources such as dairy. the number and sizes of sites at the coast increase over However, if as many people came to settle the time (Andersen 1995). An inland-based population Ertebølle region as suggested by Gron / Sørensen persisted at sites such as Hamburg-Boberg (Thielen (2018), the continuity in material culture is rather 2017). Yet even here, the likelihood of threats would astounding. The only abrupt changes are within the be at least partly reduced if newcomers sought out ceramic assemblages (and here mainly in form and different environments, i. e. suitable for farming rather possibly function, rather than in technological aspects; than hunting. If ‘native’ residents then expressed an see also Thielen this volume). Therefore, it is likely interest in new resources such as cattle and grain, that incoming settlers underwent an acculturation this might have acted in favour of the newcomers process as well. Sites such as Neustadt LA 156, where as well. pointed-bottom vessels and funnel beakers were in Given the varied nature of the Ertebølle region(s), use simultaneously over at least a century (Glykou we must assume that all of the above-mentioned reac- 2016, 152 – 165, 355 – 363), might point to a distinctive tions towards migrating settlers might have happened. integration of local and foreign practices. Possible im- The southern Ertebølle culture differs slightly from its migrants might have brought a new ceramic tradition ‘classical’ better-known northern counterpart, and in (perhaps linked to new resources such as dairy) which addition there are different regional core areas with was attractive enough for the Mesolithic population to high concentrations of imported objects, and thus, quickly give up their own pottery repertoire, but oth- possibly, with varying levels of contacts with Neo- erwise practices and traditions changed much more lithic regions (Klassen 2004). It is likely that there slowly. We thus seem to witness the creation of a new, was a similarly varied range of reactions towards new mixed identity of ‘Mesolithic’ and ‘Neolithic’ practices ideas and technologies, as well as people. Of course, which eventually became established in the form of it also made a difference in the neolithisation process the developed Early Neolithic of northern Germany if there were ‘only’ new objects and ideas coming in, and southern Scandinavia. The processes and driving or migrating settlers as well. If late foragers actively factors behind this development are far too complex approached farmers to learn farming techniques from to be explained by a single model, and the formation them, this is a very different (and faster?) process of of the Funnel Beaker phenomenon itself is still under­ introducing new technologies than the trial-and-error going extensive research (see e.g Czekaj-Zastawny method carried out by hunter-gatherers alone. This is et al. 2013; Furholt 2014; Hinz 2014). 284 Crosstown traffi c: contemplating mobility, interaction and migration among foragers and early farm e rs Assuming the idea put forward by Gron / Sø- was a large cultural distance between incoming farm- rensen (2018) is correct and the Final Mesolithic ers and resident hunter-gatherers, and in the interior population of the Ertebølle region was motivated of central Europe at least this was also paired with to take up farming and cattle herding by migrating a large demographic imbalance. How the transition settlers from the south, then the southern Ertebølle worked from the hunter-gatherer perspective was thus ‘borderlands’ must have played an important role as strongly dependent on how the LBK developed. Cur- a contact or negotiation corridor through which mi- rently, it seems likely that the Earliest LBK expansion grating individuals must have passed. Genetic data was characterised by a relatively greater pressure to- from Ertebølle and Early Funnel Beaker contexts wards conformity and assimilation within LBK society, from northern Germany could help sharpen the pic- making any more balanced integration rather difficult, ture, but so far most of the genetic evidence comes but leaving reasonable opportunities for foragers to from Denmark or Sweden and stems from later peri- continue relatively undisturbed in other parts of the ods (Skoglund et al. 2012; Brotherton et al. 2013; landscape. Yet this (perhaps uneasy) truce was not to Malmström et al. 2015). It is interesting that the data last. As LBK settlers occupied more and more niches, indicate little interbreeding. In this respect the observ- remaining forager communities may have been re- able continuity between the Final Mesolithic and Early duced to a kind of ‘home diaspora’, living in increas- Neolithic (see above) hints at a more complicated ingly circumscribed areas and with their accustomed scenario in which hunter-gatherers and their willing- movement patterns disrupted. At this point, we can ness to take up new technologies and ideas played a start to discuss whether such groups should be consid- more important role in the diffusion of innovations ered marginalised, and whether they managed to sur- than migratory processes by Neolithic settlers alone vive for any length of time. At the same time, continu- could explain. ing westward expansion by mobile LBK groups may Furthermore, the model by Gron / Sørensen have involved settlers from different settlements who (2018) leaves important questions: How many in- underwent a process of acculturation, mixing their coming settlers are we talking about in a year, or in traditions to create a new, shared one. In these settings, the course of several years? Why did they come in there was also more room for interaction with hunter- the first place? The complexity of the neolithisation gatherers, as the pottery in particular shows. Here, a process is perhaps better understood by asking why a more balanced reciprocity was achieved, although Neolithic mode of subsistence was attractive to well- creolisation may still be an appropriate term if we as- established hunter-gatherer-fishers. What influenced sume an imbalance in power relations – something that their decisions to try out new technologies and sub- needs to be researched further. Households on LBK sistence practices and to welcome migrating settlers sites continued to produce non-LBK styles of pottery, with a different cultural and economic background? and there are signs of mutual interaction. In time, a Although no final conclusion is as yet possible, it is new, fusion identity developed, perhaps fundamental always important to consider both sides, that of the for creating some of the LBK successor cultures, such mover and that of the recipient (of either new ideas, as the Villeneuve-Saint-Germain (e.g Jeunesse et al. technologies or migrating settlers), and to acknowl- 2019, 98 – 99). Overall, as LBK and forager societies edge that we are dealing with many different scales of changed, so did possible patterns of contact. perspective as well as variable inter- and intra-group In contrast, both in the Low Countries and in the dynamics. The new data for migration should certainly Ertebølle case, the differences between farmers and not tempt us to flip our narratives by 180 degrees, and foragers were less marked, but have on occasion been to allocate all the agency to incoming farmers instead overstated due to our own disciplinary propensity for of hunter-gatherers. Instead, existing Ertebølle patterns categorisation. In the Low Countries, there has been of relatedness and of living in the landscape would a tendency to interpret contact finds, sturdily built have been crucial to the outcome of any Neolithic houses and so on differently, depending on whether colonisation venture, and this Ertebølle background they turn up on a ‘hunter’ or a ‘farmer’ site. However, was in itself very varied. foragers and farmers both enacted their relationship to territory through practices which combined a range of economic strategies, and therefore both societies Discussion and conclusions shared a degree of mobility. In addition, the forager Our three case studies show a range of possible in- landscape had long been dynamic and changing, both teraction patterns when foragers and farmers meet. as a result of technological adaptations and environ- Referring back to our Figure 2, in the LBK case, there mental change. In such a context, a new and broad- D a n i e l a H o f m a n n , Han s Pe ete rs an d A n n -Katr i n M eye r 285 spectrum Neolithic presence may have represented terns, clear dichotomous labels, unilinear trends and more a source of innovations than an absolute and confident dividing lines on maps. Scenarios of admix- fearsome contrast. We therefore see a situation in ture and integration are difficult to conceptualise with which new economic practices and worldviews are these starting points, as is the sense of indeterminacy incorporated piecemeal, and not necessarily in a linear that must have prevailed at the time. People did not and geographically coherent way. Scenarios of integra- know how their stories would end. tion come closest to describing this sort of situation, The contrast between top down and bottom up with all the social groups involved operating within in itself has a long tradition, but with the third sci- broadly similar social structures and comparable de- ence revolution now being ushered in (Kristiansen grees of mobility. 2014) we must be wary of simply reverting to big data Finally, in the Ertebølle case there has been a ­narratives working at very large scales. These narra- strong tendency to stress how these ‘complex’ foragers tives are not in themselves wrong, but they lend them- in essence already fulfilled most of the prerequisites selves very much to just one kind of story. They are for a ‘Neolithic’ society. Yet this may not be the best not suitable for appreciating that our confident culture way for understanding the dynamics involved. Erte- maps and chronological divisions were neither static bølle communities were adapted rather variably to dif- within, nor impermeable. There is inevitable seepage ferent landscapes, creating different preconditions for at the edges. To address this, we will of course have to potential new settlers. In addition, innovations such keep accumulating more data – better chronological as pottery or exotic goods had been circulating for resolution, better genetic coverage, better environmen- centuries without causing dramatic social breakdown. tal evidence. But new data will only tell us new stories The Neolithic way of life was thus not self-evidently if we explicitly allow for indeterminacy in our models. superior; indeed, in many ways, Ertebølle communities seem in a stronger position than incoming farmers. The conundrum thus is how the Neolithic came to References be introduced in the first place. Perhaps the existing connections to the south made it easier for migrating Allard 2005: P. Allard, L’industrie lithique des populations farmers to gain access to Ertebølle territory, and once rubanées du Nord-Est de la France et de la Belgique there the material culture seems to provide ample (Rahden 2005). evidence for technological and economic integration Amkreutz 2013: L. W. S. W. Amkreutz, Persistent traditions. between the two population groups, together creat- A long-term perspective on communities in the process ing the archaeological entity now known as Funnel of Neolithisation in the Lower Rhine Area (5500 – 2 500 Beaker culture. Yet in spite of the potential open- cal BC) (Leiden 2013). ness especially of more southern Ertebølle groups, Andersen 1994/1995: S. H. Andersen, Ringkloster. Ertebølle this society could have remained internally divided, trappers and wild boar hunters in Eastern Jutland. A with mostly people of farmer ancestry being buried Survey. Journal of Danish Archaeology 12, 1994/1995, in megalithic tombs. 13 – 59. On closer inspection, then, all of our case studies Andersen 1995: S. H. Andersen, Coastal adaption and ma- fragment – migration events and mobility patterns are rine exploitation in Late Mesolithic Denmark – with chronologically dynamic and regionally diverse, and special emphasis on the Limfjord region. In: A. Fischer in no case was there ‘the’ answer of how interaction (ed.), Man and sea in the Mesolithic. Coastal settlement worked. Several of the scenarios we outlined at the above and below present sea level. Proceedings of the start seem possible, or succeed each other in time, in International Symposium, Kalundborg, Denmark 1993 each of our regions. The classification system in Fig- (Exeter 1995) 41 – 6 6. ure 2 is primarily meant as a ‘tool’ to think differently Andersen 2001: S. H. Andersen, Oldtiden i Danmark. Jæger- about socio-cultural interactions and must hence be stenalderen (Højbjerg 2001). seen as dynamic, with communities moving between Andersen 2010: S.H. Andersen, The first pottery in South squares in the course of their varied interactions with Scandinavia. In: B. Vanmontfort / L. Louwe Kooijmans / each other. In all of our examples, the application of  L. Armkreutz / L. Verhart (eds.), Pots, farmers and for- more fine-grained vocabulary, of ‘hybridisation’, ‘mes- agers. Pottery traditions and social interactions in the tizaje’ and so on, will most likely be possible only at earliest Neolithic of the Lower Rhine Area. Archaeologi- a local or at most micro-regional level. In either case, cal Studies Leiden University 20 (Leiden 2010) 167 – 176. these sorts of narratives challenge the propensity to Andersen 2013: S.H. Andersen, Tybrind Vig. Submerged look for answers from the top down, using coarse pat- Mesolithic Settlements in Denmark (Gylling 2013). 286 Crosstown traffi c: contemplating mobility, interaction and migration among foragers and early farm e rs Anthony 1990: D. Anthony, Migration in archaeology: the Berry 1997: J. W. Berry, Immigration, acculturation, and baby and the bathwater. American Anthropologist 92, adaptation. Applied Psychology: An International Re- 1990, 895 – 914. view 46, 1997, 5 – 6 8. Aporta 2009: C. Aporta, The trail as home: Inuit and their Bergsvik 2001: K.  A. Bergsvik, Sedentary and mobile pan-Arctic network of routes. Human Ecology 37, 2009, hunter-fishers in Stone Age western Norway. Arctic 131 – 146. Anthropology 38(1), 2001, 2 – 26. Aporta 2016: C. Aporta, Markers in space and time. Re- Bickle 2020: P. Bickle, Thinking gender differently: new flections on the nature of place names as events in the approaches to identity difference in the central Euro- Inuit approach to the territory. In: W. Lovis / R. Whallon pean Neolithic. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 30, (eds.), Marking the land. Hunter-gatherer creation of 2020: 201 – 218. meaning in their environment (London 2016) 67 – 88. Binford 1980: L. R. Binford, Willow smoke and dog’s Axelrod 1997: R. Axelrod, The dissemination of culture: a tails: hunter-gatherer settlement systems and archaeo- model with local convergence and global polarization. logical site formation. American Antiquity 45(1), 1980, The Journal of Conflict Resolution 41, 1997, 203 – 226. 4 – 20. Bailey / Milner 2002: G. Bailey / N. Milner, Coastal hunter- Bird et al. 2016: D. W. Bird / R. Bliege Bird / B. F. Codding /  gatherers and social evolution. Marginal or central? N. Taylor, A landscape architecture of fire. Cultural Before Farming 3/4, 2002, 1 – 22. emergence and ecological pyrodiversity in Australia’s Bakker 2003: R. Bakker, The emergence of agriculture on western desert. Current Anthropology 57, S13, 2016, the Drenthe Plateau. A palaeobotanical study supported 65 – 79. by high-resolution 14C dating (Bonn 2003). Bliege Bird et al. 2016: R. Bliege Bird / B. F. Codding / D. W. Balkowski 2017: N. Balkowski, From Merzbachtal to the Bird, Economic, social and ecological contexts of hunt- Graetheide? Mobility at the end of the Linear Pottery ing, sharing and fire in the western desert of Australia. Culture. In: S. Scharl / B. Gehlen (eds.), Mobility in pre- In: B. F. Codding / K. Kramer (eds.), Why Forage? 21st historic sedentary societies. Kölner Studien zur Prähis- Century hunting and gathering (Santa Fe 2016) 213 – 230. torischen Archäolgie 8 (Rahden 2017) 119 – 128. Blöcher et al. 2019: J. Blöcher / S. Figarska / J. Burger, Banffy et al. 2018: E. Banffy / A. Bayliss / A. Denaire / B. Genomic analysis of Early Neolithic samples from Gaydarska / D. Hofmann / P. Lefranc / J. Jakucs / M. Herxheim, Germany. In: A. Zeeb-Lanz (ed.), Ritualised Marić / K. Oross / N. Tasić / A. Whittle, Seeking the destruction in the Early Neolithic — the exceptional Holy Grail. Robust chronologies from archaeology and site of Herxheim (Palatinate, Germany), vol. 2 (Speyer radiocarbon dating combined. Documenta Praehistorica 2019) 305 – 312. 45, 2018, 120 – 137. Bocquet-Appel 2008: J.-P. Bocquet-Appel, Explaining the Banghard / Gehlen 2014: K. Banghard / B. Gehlen, Das Neolithic demographic transition. In: J. P. Bocquet- Mesolithikum in Ostwestfalen-Lippe. In: M. Baales / H.- Appel / O. Bar-Yosef (eds.), The Neolithic demographic O. Pollmann / B. Stapel (eds.), Westfalen in der Alt- und transition and its consequences (New York 2008) 35 – 55. Mittelsteinzeit (Mainz 2014) 207 – 214. Bogaard et al. 2011: A. Bogaard / R. Krause / H.-C. Strien, Barker 2006: G. Barker, The agricultural revolution in Towards a social geography of cultivation and plant prehistory. Why did foragers become farmers? (Oxford use in an early farming community: Vaihingen an der 2006). Enz, south-west Germany. Antiquity 85, 2011, 395 – 416. Beau et al. 2017: A. Beau / M. Rivollat / H. Réveillas / M.-H. Bogaard et al. 2016: A. Bogaard / R.-M. Arbogast / R. Pemonge / F. Mendisco / Y. Thomas / P. Lefranc / M.-F. Ebersbach / R. A. Fraser / C. Knipper / C. Krahn / M. Deguilloux, Multi-scale ancient DNA analyses confirm Schäfer / A. Styring / R. Krause, The Bandkeramik the western origin of Michelsberg farmers and docu- settlement of Vaihingen an der Enz, Kreis Ludwigsburg ment probable practices of human sacrifice. PLOS one (Baden-Württemberg): an integrated perspective on 12, 2017, e0179742. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. land use, economy and diet. Germania 94, 2016, 1 – 6 0. pone.0179742. Bollongino et al. 2013: R. Bollongino / O. Nehlich / M. P. Beigl 2020: R. Beigl, Die Linearbandkeramik im Gipskarst Richards / J. Orschiedt / M. G. Thomas / C. Sell / Z. in der Windsheimer Bucht, Lkr. Neustadt a.d. Aisch-Bad Fajkošová / A. Powell / J. Burger, 2000 years of paral- Windesheim. In: L. Husty / T. Link / J. Pechtl (eds.), Neue lel societies in Stone Age central Europe. Science 342, Materialien des Bayerischen Neolithikums 3. Tagung 2013, 479 – 4 81. im Kloster Windberg vom 16. bis 18. November 2018. Bos / Janssen 1996: J. A. A. Bos / R. Janssen, Local impact (Würzburg 2020). of Palaeolithic Man on the environment during the end of the Last Glacial in the Netherlands. Journal of Archaeological Science 23, 1996, 731 – 739. D a n i e l a H o f m a n n , Han s Pe ete rs an d A n n -Katr i n M eye r 287 Bos / Urz 2003: J. A. A. Bos / R. Urz, Late Glacial and Early of simple simulation models for assessing variability in Holocene environment in the middle Lahn river valley the archaeological record. Journal of Archaeological (Hessen, central-west Germany) and the local impact Method and Theory 25, 2018, 1087 – 1108. of Early Mesolithic man — pollen and macrofossil Erten et al. 2018: E. Y. Erten / P. Van den Berg / F. J. Weiss- evidence. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 12, ing, Acculturation orientations affect the evolution of 2003, 19 – 36. a multicultural society. Nature Communications, 2018: Brotherton et al. 2013: P. Brotherton / W. Haak / J. doi 10.1038/s41467-017-02513-0. Temple­t on / G. Brandt / J. Soubrier / C. J. Adler / S. M. Fiedel / Anthony 2003: S. Fiedel / D. Anthony, Deerslay- Richards / C. Der Sarkissian / R. Ganslmeier / S. Frie- ers, pathfinders and Icemen. Origins of the European derich / V. Dresely / M. van Oven / R. Kenyon / M. B. Neolithic as seen from the frontier. In: M. Rockman / J. van der Hoek / J. Korlach / K. Luong / S. Y. W. Ho / L. Steele (eds.), Colonization of unfamiliar landscapes: Quintana-Murci / D. M. Behar / H. Meller / K. W. the archaeology of adaptation (London 2003) 144 – 168. Alt / A. Cooper / The Genographic Consortium, Finlayson / Warren 2010: B. Finlayson / G. M. Warren, Neolithic mitochondrial haplogroup H genomes and Changing natures. Hunter-gatherers, first farmers and the genetic origins of Europeans. Nature Communica- the modern world (London 2010). tions 4, 2013, 17 – 6 4. Fischer 2003: A. Fischer, Trapping up the rivers and trad- Cappers / Raemaekers 2008: R. T. J. Cappers/ D. C. M. Rae- ing across the sea – steps towards the neolithisation of maekers, Cereal cultivation at Swifterbant? Neolithic Denmark. In: L. Larsson / H. Kindgren / K. Knutsson / D. wetland farming on the North European Plain. Current Loeffler  / A. Akerlund (eds.), Mesolithic on the move. Anthropology 49, 2008, 385 – 4 02. Papers presented at the Sixth International Conference Carlson 2008: H.M. Carlson, Home is the hunter: the James on the Mesolithic in Europe, Stockholm 2000 (Oxford Bay Cree and their land (Vancouver 2008). 2003) 405 – 413. Cladders / Stäuble 2003: M. Cladders / H. Stäuble, Das Frirdich 2005: C. Frirdich, Struktur und Dynamik der 53. Jahrhundert v. Chr.: Aufbruch und Wandel. In: J. bandkeramischen Landnahme. In: J. Lüning / C. Eckert / U. Eisenhauer / A. Zimmermann (eds.), Archäol- Frirdich / A. Zimmermann (eds.), Die Bandkeramik im ogische Perspektiven. Analysen und Interpretationen im 21. Jahrhundert. Symposium in der Abtei Brauweiler Wandel. Festschrift für Jens Lüning zum 65. Geburtstag bei Köln vom 16.9.–19.9.2002 (Rahden 2005) 81 – 109. (Rahden 2003) 491 – 503. Frieman et al. 2019: C. Frieman / A. Teather / C. Morgan, Clausen 2007: I. Clausen, Steinzeitliches Alstervergnügen. Bodies in motion. Narratives and counter-narratives of Archäologie in Deutschland 2007(2), 54. gendered mobility in European later prehistory. Norwe- Crombé 2010: P. Crombé, Contact and interaction between gian Archaeological Review 52, 148 – 169. early farmers and late hunter-gatherers in Belgium dur- Furholt 2014: M. Furholt, What is the Funnel Beaker com- ing the 6th and 5th millennium cal BC. In: D. Gronen- plex? Persistent troubles with an inconsistent concept. born / J. Petrasch (eds.), Die Neolithisierung Mitteleu- In: M. Furholt / M. Hinz / D. Mischka / G. Noble / D. ropas/ The spread of the Neolithic to central Europe. Olausson (eds.), Landscapes, histories and societies in Internationale Tagung Mainz, 24.–26. Juni 2005. RGZM- the Northern European Neolithic. Frühe Monumental- Tagungen 4.2. (Mainz 2010) 551 – 566. ität und soziale Differenzierung 4 (Bonn 2014) 17 – 28. Cziesla 2015: E. Cziesla, Grenzen im Wald. Stabilität und Furholt 2018: M. Furholt, Massive migrations? The impact Kontinuität während des Mesolithikums in der Mitte of recent aDNA studies on our view of third millen- Europas (Rahden 2015). nium Europe. European Journal of Archaeology 21, Cziesla this volume: E. Cziesla, Some remarks on the origin 2018, 159 – 191. of Mesolithic pottery in northwestern Europe. Geerts et al. 2019: R. C. A. Geerts / A. Müller / M. J. L. Th. Dark 1998: P. Dark, Interpretation of the lake-edge sequenc- Niekus / F. J. Vermue, Mesolithische kampen onder de es. In: P. Mellars / P. Dark (eds.), Star Carr in context: oever van het Reevediep (Amersfoort 2019). new archaeological and palaeoecological investigations Gehlen et al. 2017: B. Gehlen / A. L. Fischer / I. Koch / T. at the Early Mesolithic site of Star Carr, North Yorkshire Richter / N. Schneid / W. Schön / K. Vogl / M. Zickel, (Oxford 1998) 153 – 161. Foragers and farmers during the Neolithic transition Devriendt 2013: I. I. J. A. L. M. Devriendt, Swifterbant in western central Europe: searching for evidence of stones. The Neolithic flint and stone industry at Swift- mobility and intercultural networks. In: S. Scharl / B. erbant (the Netherlands): from stone typology and flint Gehlen (eds.), Mobility in prehistoric sedentary societ- technology to site function (Groningen 2013). ies. Kölner Studien zur Prähistorischen Archäolgie 8 Drost / Vander Linden 2018: C. J. Drost / M. Vander Lin- (Rahden 2017) 39 – 73. den, Toy Story: homophily, transmission and the use 288 Crosstown traffi c: contemplating mobility, interaction and migration among foragers and early farm e rs Glykou 2016: A. Glykou, Neustadt LA 156 – ein submariner Hamburg et al. 2013: T. Hamburg / A. Müller / B. Quad- Fundplatz des späten Mesolithikums und des frühesten flieg, Mesolithisch Swifterbant. Mesolithisch gebruik Neolithikums in Schleswig-Holstein: Untersuchungen van een duin ten zuiden van Swifterbant (8300 – 5000 v. zur Subsistenzstrategie der letzten Jäger, Sammler Chr.). Een archeologische opgraving in het tracé van de und Fischer an der norddeutschen Ostseeküste. Unter­ N23/N307, provincie Flevoland (Leiden 2013). suchungen und Materialien zur Steinzeit in Schleswig- Hartz 1999: S. Hartz, Die Steinartefakte des endmeso- Holstein und im Ostseeraum 7 (Kiel 2016). lithischen Fundplatzes Grube-Rosenhof. Studien an Gomart / Burnez-Lanotte 2012: L. Gomart / L. Burnez- Flintinventaren aus der Zeit der Neolithisierung in Lanot te, Techniques de façonnage, production Schleswig-Holstein und Südskandinavien. Untersuchun- céramique et identité de potiers: une approche tech- gen und Materialien zur Steinzeit in Schleswig-Holstein nologique de la ceramique de style non-Rubané du site 2 (Neumünster 1999). du Staberg à Rosmeer (Limbourg, Belgique). Bulletin de Hartz / Schmölcke 2013: S. Hartz / U. Schmölcke, From la Société Préhistorique Française 109, 2012, 231 – 2 50. the Mesolithic to the Neolithic – Hunting strategies in Gomart et al. 2015: L. Gomart / L. Hachem / C. Hamon / F. the south-western Baltic Sea area. In: O. Grimm / U. Giligny / M. Ilett, Household integration in Neolithic Schmölcke (eds.), Hunting in northern Europe until ­villages: a new model for the Linear Pottery culture in 1500 AD. Old traditions and regional developments, west central Europe. Journal of Anthropological Archaeo­ continental sources and continental influences (Neu- logy 40, 2015, 230 – 249. münster 2013) 21 – 4 0. Greenblatt 2010: S. Greenblatt, Cultural mobility: an Hartz et al. 2000: S. Hartz / D. Heinrich / H. Lübke, Frühe introduction. In: S. Greenblatt (ed.), Cultural mobility. Bauern an der Küste. Neue 14C-Daten und aktuelle As- A manifesto (Cambridge 2010) 1 – 2 3. pekte zum Neolithisierungsprozess im norddeutschen Grohmann 2010: I. Grohmann, Die Ertebølle- und Früh- Ostseeküstengebiet. Prähistorische Zeitschrift 75, 2000, trichterbecherzeitliche Keramik aus Wangels LA505, Kr. 129 – 152. Ostholstein: Ein Beitrag zur Neolithisierung Schleswig- Hartz et al. 2002: S. Hartz / D. Heinrich / H. Lübke, Coastal Holsteins. In: D. Gronenborn / J. Petrasch (eds.), Die farmers – the Neolithisation of northernmost Germany. Neolithisierung Mitteleuropas / The spread of the Neo- In: A. Fischer / K. Kristiansen (eds.), The Neolithisation of lithic to central Europe. Internationale Tagung Mainz, Denmark. 150 years of debate (Sheffield 2002) 321 – 340. 24.–26. Juni 2005. RGZM-Tagungen 4.2. (Mainz 2010) Hartz et al. 2007: S. Hartz / H. Lübke / T. Terberger, From 407 – 422. fish and seal to sheep and cattle: new research into Gron / Sørensen 2018: K. J. Gron / L. Sørensen, Cultural the process of Neolithisation in northern Germany. and economic negotiation: a new perspective on the In: A. Whittle / V. Cummings (eds.), Going over. The Neolithisation of southern Scandinavia. Antiquity 92, Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in north-west Europe 2018, 958 – 974. (Oxford 2007) 567 – 594. Gronenborn 1999: D. Gronenborn, A variation on a basic Hedges et al. 2013: R. E. M. Hedges / R. A. Bentley / P. Bick- theme: the transition to farming in southern central le / P. Cullen / C. Dale / L. Fibiger / J. Hamilton / D. Europe. Journal of World Prehistory 13, 1999, 123 – 210. Hofmann / G. Nowell / A. Whittle, The supra-regional Gronenborn 2009: D. Gronenborn, Transregional culture perspective. In: P. Bickle / A. Whittle (eds.), The first contacts and the Neolithization process in northern farmers of central Europe. Diversity in LBK lifeways central Europe. In: P. Jordan / M. Zvelebil (eds.), Ce- (Oxford 2013) 343 – 384. ramics before farming: the dispersal of pottery among Hermsen et al. 2015: I. Hermsen / M. van der Wal / H. prehistoric Eurasian hunter-gatherers (Walnut Creek Peeters, Afslag Olthof. Archeologisch onderzoek naar 2009) 527 – 550. de vroegprehistorische vindplaatsen op locaties Olthof- Haak et al. 2010: W. Haak / O. Balanovsky / J. J. Sanchez / S. Noord en Olthof-Zuid in Epse-Noord (Deventer 2015). Koshe / V. Zaporozhchenko / C. J. Adler / C. S. I. Der Hijma / Cohen 2019: M. P. Hijma / K. M. Cohen, Holocene Sarkissian / G. Brandt / C. Schwarz / N. Nicklisch / V. sea-level database for the Rhine-Meuse Delta, the Neth- Dreseley / B. Fritsch / E. Balanovska / R. Villems / H. erlands: implications for the pre-8.2 ka sea-level jump. Meller / K. W. Alt / A. Cooper / The Genographic Quaternary Science Reviews 214, 2019, 68 – 86. Consortium, Ancient DNA from European Early Hinz 2014: M. Hinz, Same but different? Neolithic econom- Neolithic farmers reveals their Near Eastern affinities. ic and cultural change in northern Germany. In: M. Public Library of Science Biology 8, 2010, pe1000536. Furholt / M. Hinz / D. Mischka / G. Noble / D. Olausson Hachem 2018: L. Hachem, Animals in LBK society: identity (eds.), Landscapes, histories and societies in the North- and gender markers. Journal of Archaeological Science: ern European Neolithic. Frühe Monumentalität und Reports 20, 2018, 910 – 921. soziale Differenzierung 4 (Bonn 2014) 207 – 218. D a n i e l a H o f m a n n , Han s Pe ete rs an d A n n -Katr i n M eye r 289 Hofmann 2016a: D. Hofmann, Keep on walking: the role Kontakte zwischen Zentral- und Westeuropa. Varia of migration in Linearbandkeramik life. Documenta Neolitica X (Langenweißbach 2020) 15 – 24. Praehistorica 43, 2016, 235 – 2 51. Kirschneck, 2021: E Kirschneck, The phenomena La Hofmann 2016b: D. Hofmann, The changing role of La Hoguette and Limburg – technological aspects. Open Hoguette pottery in an LBK context. In: L. Amkreutz / F. Archaeology 7, 2021, 1295 – 1344. Haack / D. Hofmann / I. van Wijk (eds.), Something out Klassen 2004: L. Klassen, Jade und Kupfer. Untersuchungen of the ordinary? Interpreting diversity in the Early Neo- zum Neolithisierungsprozess im westlichen Ostseeraum lithic Linearbandkeramik and beyond (Newcastle 2016) unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Kulturentwick- 191 – 224. lung Europas 5500 – 3500 BC (Aarhus 2004). Hofmann 2020: D. Hofmann, Not going anywhere? Mi- Klooss 2015: S. Klooss, Mit Einbaum und Paddel zum gration as a social practice in the Early Neolithic Lin- Fischfang. Holzartefakte von endmesolithischen und earbandkeramik. Quaternary International 560/561, frühneolithischen Küstensiedlungen an der südwestli- 228 – 2 39. chen Ostseeküste. Untersuchungen und Materialien zur Högberg 2015: A. Högberg, The cultural encounters of Neo- Steinzeit in Schleswig-Holstein und im Ostseeraum 6 lithization processes. A discussion of different ways to (Kiel/Hamburg 2015). understand plurality. In: K. Brink / S. Hyden / K. Jenn- Knipper et al. 2005: C. Knipper / S. Harris / L. Fisher / R. bert / L. Larsson / D. Olausson (eds.), Neolithic diversi- Schreg / J. Giesler / E. Nocerino, The Neolithic settle- ties. Perspectives from a conference in Lund, Sweden ment landscape of the southeastern Swabian Alb (Ger- (Lund 2015) 52 – 57. many). www.jungsteinsite.de, accessed 23rd June 2010. Hu 2013: D. Hu, Approaches to the archaeology of ethno- Kristiansen 2014: K. Kristiansen, Toward a new paradigm: genesis: past and emergent perspectives. Journal of Ar- the third science revolution and its possible consequenc- chaeological Research 21, 2013, 371 – 4 02. es in Archaeology. Current Swedish Archaeology 22, Huisman / Raemaekers 2014: D. J. Huisman / D. C. M. Rae- 2014, 11 – 34. maekers, Systematic cultivation of the Swifterbant wet- Leary 2015: J. Leary, The remembered land. Surviving sea- lands (The Netherlands). Evidence from Neolithic tillage level rise after the last Ice Age (London 2015). marks (c. 4300 – 4000 cal. BC). Journal of Archaeological Liebmann 2013: M. Liebmann, Parsing hybridity: archae- Science 49, 2014, 572 – 584. ologies of amalgamation in seventeenth-century New Jakucs et al. 2016: J. Jakucs / E. Bánffy / K. Oross / V. Vo- Mexico. In: J. Card (ed.), The archaeology of hybrid icsek / C. Bronk Ramsey / E. Dunbar / B. Kromer / A. material culture (Carbondale 2013) 25 – 4 8. Bayliss / D. Hofmann / P. Marshall / A. Whittle, Lipson et al. 2017: M. Lipson / A. Szécsényi-Nagy / S. Mallick /  Between the Vinča and Linearbandkeramik worlds: A. Pósa / B. Stégmár / V. Keerl / N. Rohland / K. the diversity of practices and identities in the 54th–53rd Stewardson / M. Ferry / M. Michel / J. Oppen-heimer /  centuries cal BC in southwest Hungary and beyond. N. Broomandkhoshbacht / E. Harney / S. Norden- Journal of World Prehistory 29, 2016, 267 – 336. felt / B. Llamas / B. G. Mende / K. Köhler / K. Oross /  Jeunesse et al. 2019: C. Jeunesse / R.-M. Arbogast / M. Mau- M. Bondár / T. Marton / A. Osztás / J. Jakucs / T. Paluch /  villy / A. Denaire, La couche 5 de Lutter. Le second F. Horváth / P. Csengeri / J. Koós / K. Sebők / A. An- Mésolithique et la transition avec le Néolithique dans ders / P. Raczky / J. Regenye / J. P. Barna / Sz. Fábián /  la zone Jura – Plateau suisse (6300 – 4300 av. J.-C.). In: G. Serlegi / Z. Toldi / E. Gyöngyvér Nagy / J. Dani / E. R.-M. Arbogast / S. Griselin / C. Jeunesse / F. Séara (eds.), Molnár / G. Pálfi / L. Márk / B. Melegh / Zs. Bán- Le second Mésolithique des Alpes à l’Atlantique (7e–5e fai / L. Domboróczki / J. Fernández-Eraso / J.  A. millénnaire). Table ronde internationale Strasbourg, les Mujika-Alustiza / C. Alonso Fernández / J. Jimé- 3 et 4 novembre 2015 (Strasbourg 2019) 55 – 108. nez Echevarría / R. Bollongino / J. Orschiedt / K. Johansen 2006 : K. L. Johansen, Settlement and land use Schierhold / H. Meller / A. Cooper / J. Burger / E. at the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in southern Bánffy / K. W. Alt / C. Lalueza-Fox / W. Haak / D. Scandinavia. Journal of Danish Archaeology 14, 2006, Reich, Parallel genomic transects reveal complex ge- 201 – 223. netic history of early European farmers. Nature 551, Jordan 2011: P. D. Jordan (ed.), Landscape and culture in 2017, 368 – 372. northern Eurasia (Walnut Creek 2011). Lohof et al. 2011: E. Lohof / T. Hamburg / J. Flamman (red.), Karsten / Knarrström 2003: P. Karsten / B. Knarrström, Steentijd opgespoord. Archeologisch onderzoek in het tracé The Tågerup excavations (Lund 2003). van de Hanzelijn-Oude Land (Leiden/Amersfoort 2011). Kirschneck 2020: E. Kirschneck, Neue Überlegungen zu La Löhr 1994: H. Löhr, Linksflügler und Rechtsflügler in Mit- Hoguette. In: V. Becker / J.-H. Bunnefeld / A. O’Neill / tel- und Westeuropa: Der Fortbestand der Verbreitungs- G. Woltermann / H.-J. Beier / R. Einicke (eds.), Go West! gebiete asymmetrischer Pfeilspitzenformen als Konti- 290 Crosstown traffi c: contemplating mobility, interaction and migration among foragers and early farm e rs nuitätsbeleg zwischen Mesolithikum und Neolithikum. A closer look at the process of innovation (London 1989) Trierer Zeitschrift 57, 1994, 9 – 127. 281 – 299. Louwe Kooijmans 2001: L. P. Louwe Kooijmans, Synthese. Mellars 1976: P. Mellars, Fire ecology, animal populations In: L. P. Louwe Kooijmans (ed.), Hardinxveld-Giessend- and man: a study of some ecological relationships in am De Bruin: een kampplaats uit het Laat-Mesolithicum prehistory. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 42, en het begin van de Swifterbant-cultuur (5500 – 4 450 v. 1976, 15 – 45. Chr.) (Amersfoort 2001) 499 – 528. Meyer 2017: A.-K. Meyer, Die binnenländische Station Louwe Kooijmans 2007: L. P. Louwe Kooijmans, The grad- Schla­mersdorf LA 05, Kr. Stormarn. Untersuchungen ual transition to farming in the Lower Rhine Basin. zum Keramik- und Steingeräteinventar des Endmeso- In: A. Whittle / V. Cummings (eds.), Going over: the lithikums und Frühen Neolithikums. In: D. Hofmann /  Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in North-West Europe B. Ramminger (eds.), Studien zur Jungsteinzeit in Nord- (Cardiff 2007) 287 – 309. deutschland II. Universitätsforschungen zur Prähisto- Louwe Kooijmans 2009: L. P. Louwe Kooijmans, The agency rischen Archäologie 296 (Bonn 2017) 1 – 111. factor in the process of Neolithisation – a Dutch case Minc 1986: L. D. Minc, Scarcity and survival: the role of study. Journal of the Archaeology of the Low Countries oral tradition in mediating subsistence crises. Journal 1, 2009, 27 – 54. of Anthropological Archaeology 5, 1986, 39 – 113. Lovis / Donahue 2011: W. A. Lovis / R. E. Donahue, Space, Mischka et al. 2015: D. Mischka / G. Roth / K. Struckmeyer, information, and knowledge: ethnocartography and Michelsberg and Oxie in contact next to the Baltic North American boreal forest hunter-gatherers. In: R. Sea. In: J. Kabacinski / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers /  Whallon / W. A. Lovis / R. K. Hitchcock (eds.), Informa- T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki site in Pomerania and tion and its role in hunter-gatherer bands (Los Angeles the Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands 2011) 59 – 8 4. (ca. 5000 – 3 000 calBC) (Rahden/Westfalen 2015) Lübke 2005: H. Lübke, Spät- und endmesolithische Küs- 465 – 478. tensiedlungsplätze in der Wismarbucht – Neue Mlekuz 2015: D. Mlekuz, Exploring the topography of Grabungs­ergebnisse zur Chronologie und Siedlungs- movement. In: S. Polla / Ph. Verhagen (eds.), Com- weise. Jahr­buch Bodendenkmalpflege in Mecklenburg- putational approaches to the study of movement in Vorpommern 52, 2004 (2005), 83 – 109. archaeology. Theory, practice and interpretation of Maletschek 2010: T. Maletschek, Not just bits of bone and factors and effects of long term landscape formation shades of red. Bruchenbrücken (Hesse, Germany) and and transformation (Berlin 2015) 5 – 2 2. https://doi. its La Hoguette pottery. In: B. Vanmontfort / L. Louwe org/10.1515/9783110288384.5 Kooijmans / L. Amkreutz / L. Verhart (eds.), Pots, farm- Münch 2009: U. Münch, Zur Siedlungsstruktur der Flom- ers and foragers. Pottery traditions and social interac- bornzeit auf der Aldenhovener Platte. In: A. Zimmer- tion in the earliest Neolithic of the Lower Rhine Area mann (ed.), Studien zum Alt- und Mittelneolithikum im (Leiden 2010) 83 – 94. rheinischen Braunkohlerevier (Rahden 2009) 1 – 101. Malmström et al. 2015: H. Malmström / A. Linderholm / P. Nehlich et al. 2009: O. Nehlich / J. Montgomery / J. Evans /  Skoglund / J. Stora / P. Sjödin / M. T. P. Gilbert / G. S. Schade-Lindig / S. L. Pichler / M. P. Richards / K. W. Holmlund / E. Willerslev / M. Jakobsson / K. Li- Alt, Mobility or migration: a case study from the Neo- dén / A. Götherström, Ancient mitochondrial DNA lithic settlement of Nieder-Mörlen (Hessen, Germany). from the northern fringe of the Neolithic farming ex- Journal of Archaeological Science 36, 2009, 1791 – 1799. pansion in Europe sheds light on the dispersion pro- Niekus 2006: M. J. L. Th. Niekus, A geographically refer- cess. Philosophical transactions R. Soc. B 370, 2015, enced  14C database for the Mesolithic and the early 20130373. phase of the Swifterbant culture in the northern Neth- Manen / Mazurié de Keroualin 2003: C. Manen / K. Mazur- erlands. Palaeohistoria 47/48, 2006, 41 – 9 9. ié de Keroualin, Les concepts „La Hoguette“ et „Lim- Nikitin et al. 2019: A. G. Nikitin / P. Stadler / N. Kotova / M. bourg“: un bilan des données. Cahiers d’Archéologie Teschler-Nicola / T. D. Price / J. Hoover / D. J. Ken- Romande 95, 2003, 115 – 145. nett / I. Lazaridis / N. Rohland / M. Lipson / D. Reich, Mateiciucová 2008: I. Mateiciucová, Talking stones: the Interactions between Earliest Linearbandkeramik farm- chipped stone industry in Lower Austria and Moravia ers and central European hunter-gatherers at the dawn and the beginnings of the Neolithic in central Europe of European Neolithization. BioRxiv pre-print, 2019, (LBK), 5700 – 4900 BC (Brno 2008). https://doi.org/10.1101/741900. McGlade / McGlade 1989: J. McGlade / J. M. McGlade, Nobles 2016: G. R. Nobles, Dwelling on the edge of the Modelling the innovative component of social change. Neolithic: investigating human behaviour through the In: S. E. van der Leeuw / R. Torrence (eds.), What’s new? spatial analysis of Corded Ware settlement material in D a n i e l a H o f m a n n , Han s Pe ete rs an d A n n -Katr i n M eye r 291 the Dutch coastal wetlands, 2900 – 2 300 cal. BC (Gron- niques et insertion régionale. Bulletin de la Société ingen 2016). Préhistorique Française 106, 2009, 491 – 515. Out 2009: W.A. Out, Sowing the seed? Human impact and Piezonka 2015: H. Piezonka, Jäger, Fischer, Töpfer: Wild- plant subsistence in Dutch wetlands during the Late beutergruppen mit früher Keramik in Nordosteuropa Mesolithic and Early and Middle Neolithic, 5500 – 3400 im 6. und 5. Jahrtausend v. Chr. Archäologie in Eurasien cal. BC (Leiden 2009). 30 (Bonn 2015). Pechtl 2011: J. Pechtl, Am Rande des Machbaren: zwei Pokorný et al. 2010: P. Pokorný / P. Šida / O. Chvojka / P. gescheiterte linienbandkeramische Kolonisationswellen Žáčková / P. Kuneš / I. Světlík / J. Veselý, Palaeoenvi- im Lechtal. In: T. Doppler / B. Ramminger / D. Schim- ronmental research of the Schwarzenberg Lake, South- melpfennig (eds.), Grenzen und Grenzräume? Beispiele ern Bohemia, and exploratory excavations of this key aus Neolithikum und Bronzezeit (Kerpen-Loogh 2011) Mesolithic archaeological area. Památky Archeologické 37 – 51. 101, 2010, 5 – 38. Peeters 2007: J. H. M. Peeters, Hoge Vaart-A27 in con- Povlsen 2013: K. Povlsen, Research report. The introduction text: towards a model of Mesolithic-Neolithic land use of ceramics in the Ertebølle culture. Danish Journal of dynamics as a framework for archaeological heritage Archaeology 2, 2013, 146 – 163. management (Amersfoort 2007). Price et al. 2001: T. D. Price / R. A. Bentley / J. Lüning / D. Peeters 2009: J. H. M. Peeters, ‘Occupation continuity’ Gronenborn / J. Wahl, Prehistoric human migration and ‘behavioural discontinuity’: abrupt changes in for- in the Linearbandkeramik of central Europe. Antiquity ager land use at the Mid/Late Atlantic boundary in the 75, 2001, 593 – 6 03. Flevoland polders (the Netherlands). In: Ph. Crombé / M. Robinson et al. 2010: E. Robinson / I. Jadin / D. Bosquet, van Strydonck (eds.), Chronology and evolution in the Inter-site analysis of armatures from five Linearband- Mesolithic of N(W) Europe (Cambridge 2009) 721 – 736. keramik settlements in the Hesbaye region. Notae Prae- Peeters / Momber 2014: J. H. M. Peeters / G. Momber, The historicae 30, 2010, 19 – 33. southern North Sea and the human occupation of NW Robinson et al. 2013: E. Robinson / J. Sergant / P. Crombé, Europe after the Last Glacial Maximum. Netherlands Late Mesolithic armature variability in the southern Journal of Geosciences 93, 2014, 55 – 70. North Sea basin: implications for forager–Linearband- Peeters / Niekus 2017: J. H. M. Peeters / M. J. L. Th. Niekus, keramik contact models of the transition to agriculture Mesolithic pit hearths in the northern Netherlands: in Belgium and the Southern Netherlands. European function, time-depth, and behavioural context. In: Journal of Archaeology 16, 2013, 3 – 20. N. Achard-Corompt / E. Ghesquière / V. Riquier (dir.), Rowley-Conwy 2001: P. Rowley-Conwy, Time, change and Creuser au Mésolithique/Digging in the Mesolithic. the archaeology of hunter-gatherers: how original is the Actes de la séance de la Société préhistorique française ‘Original Affluent Society’? In: C. Panter-Brick / R. H. de Châlons-en-Champagne (29 – 30 mars 2016), (Paris Layton / P. Rowley-Conwy, Hunter-gatherers: an inter- 2017) 225 – 2 39. disciplinary perspective (Cambridge 2001) 39 – 72. Peeters et al. 2015: J. H. M. Peeters / D. C. Brinkhuizen /  Schmölcke et al. 2006: U. Schmölcke / E. Endtmann / S. K. M. Cohen / L. I. Kooistra / L. Kubiak-Martens /  Klooss / M. Meyer / D. Michaelis / H. B. Rickert / D. J. M. Moree / M. J. L. Th. Niekus / D. E. A. Schiltmans / Rössler, Changes of sea-level, landscape and culture:  A. Verbaas / F. Verbruggen / P. C. Vos / J. T. Zeiler, a review of the south-western Baltic area between 8800 Synthesis. In: J. M. Moree / M. M. Sier (eds.), Interdis- and 4000 BC. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, ciplinary archaeological research programme Maas- Palaeoecology 240, 2006, 423 – 438. vlakte 2, Rotterdam. Part 1: Twenty metres deep! Sevink et al. 2018: J. Sevink / B. van Geel / B. Jansen /  The Mesolithic period at the Yangtze harbour site – J. Wallinga, Early Holocene forest fires, drift sands, Rotterdam Maasvlakte, the Netherlands (Rotterdam and Usselo-type paleosols in the Laarder Wasmeren 2015) 287 – 317. area near Hilversum, the Netherlands: implications Peeters et al. 2017: J. H. M. Peeters / D. C. M. Raemaekers /  for the history of sand landscapes and the poten- I. I. J. A. L. M. Devriendt / P. W. Hoebe / M. J. L. Th. tial role of Mesolithic land use. Catena 165, 2018, Niekus / G. R. Nobles / M. Schepers, Paradise Lost? 286 – 298. Insights into the early prehistory of the Netherlands Skoglund et al. 2012: P. Skoglund / H. Malmström / M. from development-led archaeology (Amersfoort 2017). Raghavan / J. Storå / P. Hall / E. Willerslev / M. T. P. Pétrequin et al. 2009: P. Pétrequin / R. Martineau / P. Gilbert / A. Götherström / M. Jakobsson, Origins and Nowicki / E. Gauthier / C. Schaal, La poterie Hoguette genetic legacy of Neolithic farmers and hunter-gatherers de Choisey (Jura), les Champins. Observations tech- in Europe. Science 336, 2012, 466 – 4 69. 292 Crosstown traffi c: contemplating mobility, interaction and migration among foragers and early farm e rs Sheller / Urry 2006: M. Sheller / J. Urry, The new mobili- Talebi et al. 2019: T. Talebi / D. C. M. Raemaekers / A. ties paradigm. Environment and Planning A: Economy Maurer, Palynologisch onderzoek aan de pingo-ruïne and Space 38, 2006, 207 – 226. FRCP2 – 9, Hurdegaryp; gemeente Tytsjerksteradiel; pro- Shennan 2018: S. Shennan, The first farmers of Europe. An vincie Frieslân (Groningen 2019). evolutionary perspective (Cambridge 2018). Thielen 2017: L. Thielen, Studien zum Neolithisierungs­ Silliman 2015: S. Silliman, A requiem for hybridity? The pro­zess in Norddeutschland am Beispiel der endmeso- problem with Frankensteins, purées, and mules. Journal lithischen und neolithischen Fundplätze in Hamburg of Social Archaeology 15, 2015, 277 – 298. Boberg. Dissertation, Universität Hamburg (Hamburg Simmons 1996: I. G. Simmons, The environmental impact 2017). of Later Mesolithic cultures: the creation of moorland Thielen this volume: B. Thielen, The late Mesolithic in Ham- landscape in England and Wales (Edinburgh 1996). burg-Boberg: inter-cultural interactions and impacts. Smits / van der Plicht 2009: L. Smits / J. van der Plicht, Trauernicht et al. 2015: C. Trauernicht / B. W. Brook / B. P. Mesolithic and Neolithic human remains in the Neth- Murphy / G. J. Williamson / D. M. J. S. Bowman, Local erlands: physical anthropological and stable isotope and global pyrogeographic evidence that indigenous investigations. Journal of Archaeology in the Low Coun- fire management creates pyrodiversity. Ecology and tries 1, 2009, 58 – 8 5. Evolution 5, 2015, 1908 – 1918. Sommer 2001: U. Sommer, ‘Hear the instructions of thy fa- Turck 2019: R. Turck, Where did the Herxheim dead come ther, and forsake not the law of thy mother’. Change and from? Isotope analyses of human individuals from the persistence in the European Early Neolithic. Journal of finds concentrations in the ditches. In: A. Zeeb-Lanz Social Archaeology 1, 2001, 244 – 270. (ed.), Ritualised destruction in the Early Neolithic — the Stäuble / Wolfram 2013: H. Stäuble / S. Wolfram, Band- exceptional site of Herxheim (Palatinate, Germany), Vol. keramik und Mesolithikum: Abfolge oder Koexistenz. 2 (Speyer 2019) 313 – 421. In: S. Hansen / M. Meyer (eds.), Parallele Raumkonzepte Valde-Nowak 2009: P. Valde-Nowak, Early farming ad- (Berlin 2013) 105 – 134. aptation in the Wiśnicz foothills in the Carpathians. Stehli 1994: P. Stehli, Chronologie der Bandkeramik im Settlements at Łoniowa and Żerków. Recherches Merzbachtal. In: J. Lüning / P. Stehli (eds.), Die Band- ­A rchéologiques Nouvelle Serie 1, 2009, 15 – 35. keramik im Merzbachtal auf der Aldenhovener Platte Van der Plicht et al. 2016: J. van der Plicht / L. W. S. W. (Köln 1994) 79 – 191. Amkreutz / M. J. L. Th. Niekus / J. H. M. Peeters / B. I. Strien 2017a: H.-C. Strien, Discrepancies between archaeo- Smit, Surf’n turf in Doggerland: dating, stable isotopes logical and 14C-based chronologies: problems and pos- and diet of Mesolithic human remains from the southern sible solutions. Documenta Praehistorica 44, 2017, North Sea. Journal of Archaeological Science Reports 272 – 281. 10, 2016, 110 – 118. Strien 2017b: H.-C. Strien, Occupation and settlement of Verhart 2000: L. B. M. Verhart, Times fade away. The Neo- land in the Linear Pottery culture: reflections on the lithization of the southern Netherlands in an anthro- organisation and logistics. In: S. Scharl / B. Gehlen pological and geographical perspective (Leiden 2000). (eds.), Mobility in prehistoric sedentary societies. Köl- Verhart 2012: L. B. M. Verhart, Contact in stone: adzes, ner Studien zur Prähistorischen Archäolgie 8 (Rahden Keile, and Spitzhauen in the Lower Rhine basin. Neo- 2017) 129 – 133. lithic stone tools and the transition from Mesolithic to Sturt et al. 2013: F. Sturt / D. Garrow / S. Bradley, New Neolithic in Belgium and the Netherlands, 5300 – 4 000 models of North West European Holocene palaeogeog- cal BC. Journal of Archaeology in the Low Countries raphy and inundation. Journal of Archaeological Sci- 4, 2012, 5 – 35. ence 40, 2013, 3963 – 3976. Waddington 2007: C. Waddington, Mesolithic settlement in Sørensen 2013: L. Sørensen, Farming new land in the north: the North Sea basin: a case study from Howick, north- the expansion of agrarian societies during the Early east England (Oxford 2007). Neolithic in southern Scandinavia. In: M. Larsson / J. Watkins 2013: T. Watkins, The Neolithic in transition – Debert (eds.), NW Europe in transition. The Early Neo- how to complete a paradigm shift. Levant 45/2, 2013, lithic in Britain and south Sweden. BAR International 149 – 158. Series 2475 (Oxford 2013) 9 – 20. Weninger et al. 2008: B. Weninger / R. Schulting / M. Sørensen / Karg 2012: L. Sørensen / S. Karg, The expansion Bradtmöller / L. Clare / M. Collard / K. Edinbor- of agragrian societies towards the north – new evidence ough / J. Hilpert / O. Jöris / M. Niekus / E.  J. Roh- for agriculture during the Mesolithic/Neolithic transi- ling / B. Wagner, The catastrophic flooding of Dog- tion in Southern Scandinavia. Journal of Archaeological gerland by the Storegga Slide tsunami. Documenta Science 2012, 1 – 17. Praehistorica 35, 2008, 1 – 24. D a n i e l a H o f m a n n , Han s Pe ete rs an d A n n -Katr i n M eye r 293 Whitley 2010: T. G. Whitley, On the frontier: looking at Zvelebil / Moore 2006: M. Zvelebil / J. Moore, Assessment boundaries, territoriality and social distance with GIS. and representation: the information value of Mesolithic In: F. Niccolucci / S. Hermon (eds.), Beyond the artifact. landscapes. In: E. Rensink / H. Peeters (eds.), Preserving Digital interpretation of the past (Budapest 2010) 41 – 46. the early past. Investigation, selection and preserva- Whittle 1996: A. Whittle, Europe in the Neolithic. The tion of Palaeolithic and Mesolithic sites and landscapes creation of new worlds (Cambridge 1996). (Amersfoort 2006) 151 – 165. Zeeb-Lanz 2019: A. Zeeb-Lanz, The Herxheim ritual en- Zvelebil / Pettitt 2008: M. Zvelebil / P. Pettitt, Human closure. A synthesis of results and interpretative ap- condition, life and death at an Early Neolithic settle- proaches. In: A. Zeeb-Lanz (ed.), Ritualised destruction ment. Bioarchaeological analyses of the Vedrovice cem- in the Early Neolithic – the exceptional site of Herxheim etery and their biosocial implications for the spread of (Palatinate, Germany), Vol. 2 (Speyer 2019) 423 – 4 82. agriculture in central Europe. Anthropologie 46, 2008, Zeiler / Brinkhuizen 2013: J. T. Zeiler /D. C. Brinkhuizen, 195 – 218. 2013 Faunal remains. In: J. P. Kleijne / O. Brinkkemper / Zvelebil / Rowley-Conwy 1984: M. Zvelebil / P. Rowley- R. C. G. M. Lauwerier / B. I. Smit / E. M. Theunissen Conwy, Transition to farming in northern Europe: a (eds.), A matter of life and death at Mienakker (The hunter-gatherer perspective. Norwegian Archaeological Netherlands). Late Neolithic behavioural variability Review 17(2), 1984, 104 – 128. in a dynamic landscape (Amersfoort 2013) 249 – 2 59. Zimmermann et al. 2005: A. Zimmermann / J. Meurers- Balke / A. Kalis, Das Neolithikum im Rheinland. Bonner Jahrbücher 205, 2005, 1 – 6 3. Changing Worlds – The Spread of the Neolithic Way of Life in the North Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 , 2 97 – 310) 297 A singularity in continuity? The transition to farming in northwest Europe (c. 5,000 – 3,500 calBC) reexamined from the perspective of multiculturalism Daan Raemaekers Abstract Thanks to isotopic and especially aDNA analyses we now conclude that the movement of people was quite common in the prehistory of Europe, especially in relation to the spread of agriculture across the continent. The case study area of the Dutch wetlands (c. 5,000 – 3,500 calBC) seems to be a last stand against the renewed evidence of the role of incoming people in the transition to farming. This paper reconsiders the transition to farming in this area and discusses the evidence for incom- ing people and their role in the transition to farming. Throughout the 5th millennium non-local people contributed to the ar- chaeological record, with human bones and material culture. Their influence on the indigenous groups may have been re- stricted, and one may interpret this as a multicultural society. In contrast, in the final centuries of this millennium, changes in material culture and the introduction of cereal cultivation and consumption seem to correlate, at least at Swifterbant S3. One might propose that the non-local people present at this time played a crucial role in the introduction of this new subsistence strategy, thanks to their cultural background in the Michelsberg culture. The role of newcomers, with new notions about burial, material culture, and subsistence, cannot be underestimated in this process of neolithisation. The outcome of this process is seen in the first half of the 4th millennium, in the Hazendonk group. This regional group can be seen as the outcome of cultural bricolage, with the Swifterbant culture and the Michelsberg culture as sources of its burial characteristics and material culture, and with a subsistence strategy in which cattle were of prime importance. Keywords Neolithisation, Swifterbant culture, multicultural past Zusammenfassung Dank Isotopen- und vor allem aDNA-Analysen wissen wir heute, dass Mobilität von Menschen in der Vorgeschichte Europas tatsächlich häufig vorkam, insbesondere im Zusammenhang mit der Ausbreitung der Landwirtschaft. Die Fallstudie der niederländischen Feuchtgebiete (ca. 5000 – 3500 v. Chr.) scheint eine letzte Bastion gegen die wiederholten Belege für die Rolle einwandernder Menschen beim Übergang zur Landwirtschaft darzustellen. In diesem Beitrag wird die Neolithisierung dieses Gebietes neu betrachtet, und die Belege für die Einwanderung von Menschen und ihre Rolle beim Übergang zur Landwirtschaft werden diskutiert. Während des fünften Jahrtausends trugen nicht-einheimische Menschen mit ihren Überresten und ihrer materiellen Kultur zu den heute bekannten archäologischen Nachweisen bei. Ihr Einfluss auf die lokalen Gruppen scheint begrenzt gewesen sein, und man kann die Situation als eine multikulturelle Gesellschaft interpretieren. Im Gegensatz dazu scheinen in den letzten Jahrhunderten des fünften Jahrtausends Veränderungen in der materiellen Kultur und die Einführung von Getreideanbau und -konsum, zumindest an der Fundstelle Swifterbant S3, zu korrelieren. Die zu die- ser Zeit anwesenden Fremden, deren kultureller Hintergrund der Michelsberger Kultur zuzuordnen ist, könnten eine entschei- dende Rolle bei der Einführung der neuen Subsistenzstrategie gespielt haben. Die Rolle der Neuankömmlinge mit ihren neuar- tigen Vorstellungen von Bestattung, materieller Kultur und Subsistenz sollten in diesem Prozess der Neolithisierung nicht unterschätzt werden. Die regionale Hazendonk-Gruppe in der ersten Hälfte des vierten Jahrtausends kann als Ergebnis einer kulturellen Vermischung gesehen werden, bei der Swifterbant-Kultur und Michelsberger Kultur als Quellen für ihre Bestat- tungsmerkmale, ihre materielle Kultur und ihre unter anderem auf Rindern basierende Subsistenzstrategie dienten. Introduction aDNA analyses of prehistoric human populations across the European continent. When the first iso- Archaeology is in the middle of a major transforma- topic analyses with evidence of long distance human tion, thanks to the impact of isotopic and especially movement were published, it was still possible to 298 A singularity in continuity? The transition to farming in northwest Europe re-examined from the perspective of multiculturalism consider these as either freak observations or the poorly defined use of the term migration (a critique result of a limited baseline dataset. To be honest, that worded more often, e. g. Hofmann 2015; this volume; is how I interpreted the Amesbury Archer – a burial Furholt 2019). Does it entail the movement of indi- dated c. 2,300 calBC, found near Stonehenge, but viduals (e. g. as part of marriage or trade networks, with isotopic values implying a background in the or transhumance), of households, or of larger social Alps (Fitzpatrick 2011). Ever since, an avalanche groups? In the near endless centuries and millennia of more and more publications has brought us to the of prehistoric Europe all these different modes of point where we have to conclude that the movement movement may have led to substantial changes in the of people in the prehistory of Europe was quite com- genetic characteristics of a population over due time. mon. Over the last few years especially aDNA studies There are two routes to get a better understand- have made a major contribution to this field (e. g. ing of the social processes that resulted in the major Olalde et al. 2018; Nikitin et al. 2019). It is the end genetic shifts across prehistoric Europe. In theory, an of a long research tradition in which the combination increase in the number of aDNA analyses may provide of cultural continuity and contacts was the driving a more detailed picture. It is my impression that this force to understand cultural change. route is being followed already and a substantial part While no aDNA of Mesolithic and Early Neolith- of available human remains will be analysed in the ic human populations from the Swifterbant culture coming years. This route will probably find a dead and subsequent Hazendonk group in northwest Eu- end: the relatively course-grained chronological resolu- rope has been published yet, in this area the narrative tion of prehistoric Europe will make it very difficult to of cultural continuity provides a last stand against the decide which social processes resulted in the genetic renewed evidence of the role of incoming popula- transformation of human populations in a given region. tions in the transition to farming. The case study area The second route is far more promising: it creates seems to stand alone in the sweeping and convincing an explicit connection between aDNA and archaeo- synthesis of the neolithisation of Europe, as presented logical studies. In case study areas such as ours, with recently by S. Shennan (2019, 152). This paper will re- a grand narrative of cultural continuity across the consider the transition to farming in this area, starting Mesolithic-Neolithic transition (e. g. Louwe­ Kooij- from the assumption that it was no singular exception mans 1993; Raemaekers 1999; Amkreutz 2013; see in the new grand narrative of human mobility. What below), we need to develop a vocabulary that will help evidence is there for incoming people? And what role us understand the modes of movement (see Hofmann did they have in the transition to farming? et al. this volume for a similar exercise). To this end, I turn to linguistics for inspiration (see Table 1). Languages change. They do that in isolation Theoretical consideration of the role (without outside influence), but also when new peo- of newcomers ple with different languages start to interact with local language speakers. The degree of impact of There is a large number of papers that advocate that the newcomers’ language can differ strongly. The migration was a major factor in the population his- first option is that the newcomers and local language tory of Europe. In many of these papers the con- speakers both maintain their own language, and a tribution of archaeologists is limited, leading to a multicultural community develops in which people Table 1 Modes of linguistic and cultural changes compared. The triangle indicates the degree of influence between the two linguistic or cultural groups. D a a n R a e m a e ke rs 299 may command both languages and use them accord- (cf. Haanen / Hogestijn 2001; Raemaekers­2001a; ing to the social setting in which they operate. Multi- 2011). The end of the Swifterbant culture has tradi- lingualism thus correlates to multiculturalism. That tionally been set around 3,400 calBC, the supposed is a term archaeologists can work with. We would start of the construction of TRB megalithic tombs expect an archaeological record in which two dis- in the Netherlands. 2 This has been challenged, most tinct subsets can be found. A second linguistic set-up explicitly by Ten Anscher (2012, 142 – 143; 2015), is one in which the two languages do influence one who stresses the continuity in ceramic characteristics another, but not to similar degrees. The dominant between younger Swifterbant and TRB wares. To this language will develop as a lingua franca in an area, end, he coined the term pre-Drouwen TRB to describe and language changes will result from contact with the ceramics from the first half of the 4th millennium the other language. As archaeologists we might see calBC. Pre-Drouwen can be seen as both the final changes in material culture and / or behavioural stage of the Swifterbant ceramic tradition and the change within a long term history of cultural con- start of the TRB culture in our area. On the basis of tinuity. The third linguistic set-up presented here is Ten Anscher’s pioneering work, Raemaekers (2015) that of the development of a pidgin language: the re-analysed the Swifterbant S3 ceramic assemblage mixing of two (or more) languages and the creation (dated c. 4,300 – 4,000 calBC) and concluded that the of a new language. This can be translated to cultural onset of Pre-Drouwen TRB can be found there as bricolage, where characteristics of material culture well: the start of the TRB culture in the Netherlands and / or behaviour from one period are mixed and must have been one with deep roots. The southern turned into a new cultural pattern. half of the Netherlands takes a different route. The The most promising setting in which these op- archaeological record of the first half of the 4th mil- tions of cultural interaction may be analysed are in- lennium is here labelled ‘Hazendonk group’. Its sites humations: here we can study the correlation between are mostly restricted to the Dutch coastal and riverine skeletal data (diet, mobility, DNA), burial ritual, and wetlands of the Rhine-Meuse delta. grave goods. Another archaeological correlate can The transition from Mesolithic to Neolithic in be found in a multi-disciplinary analysis of material this area spans the entire 5th millennium calBC, and we culture, including specialist research like petrographic, see many lines of evidence that indicate that cultural lipid or use wear analysis. By combining various types continuity is the backbone of the development in this of analysis we can determine whether specific artefacts period. Flint technology, typology, and raw materials or artefact types were used for specific goals. Both indicate the continuation of traditions (Deckers 1982; types of analysis may represent input for an interpre- Niekus 2009; Devriendt 2013). The Swifterbant pot- tation of the archaeological record in terms of the tery tradition starts c. 5,000 calBC and reveals little presence and role of newcomers in an area. changes throughout these 1,000 years (Raemaekers / De Roever 2010). The burial record also spans the millennium, with burials at Hardinxveld-Giessend- Time and place am Polderweg (Smits / Louwe Kooijmans 2001a), Hardinxveld-Giessendam De Bruin (Smits / Louwe Sites of the Swifterbant culture are found across a Kooijmans 2001b) and Swifterbant S2 (Meiklejohn broad zone in northwest Europe, from the Scheldt / Constandse-Westermann 1978), yielding identical valley in Belgium via the riverine wetlands of the datasets of inhumations in flexed positions (see also Netherlands into northern Germany.1 The type site is below). located in the Flevoland polders in the central part of The one thing that does change – of course – the Netherlands. The start of the Swifterbant culture is the subsistence strategy within the Swifterbant is defined by the start of pottery production in Swift- culture, albeit the changes are perceived to be so erbant style around 5,000 calBC. It concerns the sites limited that Louwe Kooijmans (1993) coined the Hoge Vaart and Hardinxveld-Giessendam Polderweg term ‘extended broad spectrum economy’ to describe the additive nature of animal husbandry and cereal cultivation to the Late Mesolithic broad spectrum 1  This volume presents several papers with relevant detailed economy. What is the evidence of farming activi- information on specific sites: Thielen (this volume) discusses Swifterbant ceramics at Hamburg-Boberg; Molthof / Baetsen (this volume) present the new Swifterbant site of Nieuwegein. Ten Anscher / Knippenberg (this volume) present the new 2  Waterbolk 1985; Fokkens 1998, 96 – 9 7; Raemaekers Swifterbant site of Tiel-Medel. 1999, 166; Lanting / Van der Plicht 1999/2000, 76 – 77. 300 A singularity in continuity? The transition to farming in northwest Europe re-examined from the perspective of multiculturalism Diet U haplogroup H and J haplogroups BLA2 Terrestrial diet BLA19 8800 – 8600 cal. BC BLA20 BLA1 3800 – 3400 cal. BC BLA8 BLA9 BLA11 Fresh water fish BLA12 BLA14 BLA15 BLA21 BLA24 BLA17 BLA5 BLA25 BLA10 BLA27 BLA13 BLA16 Herbivores 3900 – 3400 cal. BC 3500 – 3000 cal. BC BLA17 BLA23 BLA28 BLA29 Table 2 The human remains from the Blätterhöhle. Combination of isotopic analysis (‘diet’), genetic analysis (‘haplogroups’), and general 14C dates for each of the four groups (based on Bollongino et al. 2013, table 1). ties in the 5th millennium? The introduction date and naked barley. 3 Moreover buried cultivated fields of animal husbandry is safely set by the few bones were recovered at three sites in the Swifterbant re- from sheep at Hardinxveld-Giessendam De Bruin, gion (Huisman et al. 2009; Huisman / Raemaekers directly dated at 4,520 – 4,356 calBC (Çakırlar 2014; Raemaekers / De Roever 2020). et al. 2020, table 13.5). Because there are no wild After 4,000 calBC animal husbandry is well- sheep or goat in the area, it is certain that these documented. Recent zooarchaeological analysis animals were introduced to the site. More difficult of Schipluiden material (Hazendonk group, c. are the bones from pig and cattle from the same as- 3,900 – 3,500 calBC) makes clear that at that stage semblage: their interpretation as domestic is based cattle husbandry was of great importance (Kamjan purely on their relatively small size. Mitochondrial et al. 2020), providing an end date for the transition to aDNA analysis has so far been restricted to four pig farming (contra Dusseldorp / Amkreutz 2020). Cattle bones from Swifterbant S4 (c. 4,300 – 4,000 calBC; bones dominate the bone spectrum, and the kill-off Kranenburg / Prummel 2020). One bone analysed pattern indicates that these animals were kept both was from a ‘domestic pig’, one from a ‘wild boar’ for meat and dairy consumption. The importance of and two from ‘domestic pig / wild boar’. All four dairy is also clear from the animals’ extended birthing had maternal ancestry in the European wild boar season, which would have facilitated a longer period population (ANC-A and ANC-C). The state of ani- of milk production and hence human consumption. mal husbandry in the 5th millennium is difficult to determine, as noted by Rowley-Conwy (2013; for an extensive discussion of the dataset: Çakirlar et al. The Blätterhöhle cave 2020). The 2020 – 2022 project ‘Early Domesticated Animals in the Netherlands (EDAN)’ will address We start this analysis by a most intriguing site, albeit this dataset; it comprises high-resolution dating and located outside the area of the Swifterbant culture. statistical modelling as well as isotopic and aDNA analysis. The start of cereal cultivation is more clear. All sites dated before 4,300 calBC lack any evidence of cereal cultivation (Brinkkemper et al. 1999), all 3  See Out 2009, table 9.2, for a comprehensive overview. Swifterbant S4 (Schepers / Bottema-Mac Gillavry 2020), sites on the 4,300 – 4,000 calBC plateau in the cali- Nieuwegein (unpublished) and Tiel-Medel (unpublished) can bration curve yielded the remains of emmer wheat now be added to her overview. D a a n R a e m a e ke rs 301 The Blätterhöhle cave is located about 10 km south The burial record of Dortmund (Germany), in the border zone bet- ween the central European mountainous area and The physical anthropology of the burials from the the north European plain. It is close to the Ruhr period 5,000 – 3,500 calBC has been published in area, a contributory river to the Meuse – its geogra- detail.4 Where the Blätterhöhle burials yielded 14C phic location between different landscape zones is dates, aDNA, and isotopes, but the burial ritual is reminiscent of Hüde I. unpublished, the burials from our case study area The Blätterhöhle cave holds a large number of hold a different subset of data: 14C dates, isotopes, human remains dated to the period 9,210 – 3,020 cal- and burial ritual. The 5th millennium dataset is rather BC, from the Early Mesolithic far into the Neolithic uniform in terms of body posture (all buried on their period. Most relevant is the combination of 14C dating, back) and grave goods (limited to a small number of analysis of carbon, nitrogen and sulphur isotopes, and beads or pendants from amber, jet, or animal teeth). mitochondrial DNA analysis (Table 2; cf. Bollongi- The burials from the Hazendonk group (sites Schi- no et al. 2013). The analyses made clear that these pluiden and Ypenburg) are more varied in terms of variables correlate to a strong degree. The first group body posture. Most were buried on their side in a (Bollongino et al. 2013: isotopic group 1) holds three flexed position, but some were buried in ‘traditional’ individuals of Mesolithic age (c. 8,800 – 8,600 calBC) fashion on their backs. Burial goods remained sparse with mitochondrial DNA typical for European hunt- and limited to beads and pendants from amber and er-gatherers (U-haplogroup) and a terrestrial diet. The jet. Schipluiden provides an unique spatial pattern as second group (Bollongino et al. 2013: isotopic group well: the settlement seems to comprise four contem- 3) comprises nine individuals dated c. 3,800 – 3,400 poraneously occupied yards, where all burials were calBC, again within the U-haplogroup. Their isotopic found at the westernmost yard. It suggests that burial signals suggest a high intake of freshwater fish. For ritual may have been variable on household level. individual 8 of this group the genetic build-up was Isotopic analyses of strontium and oxygen have analysed in more detail, indicating that 72.6 % of been carried out for ten individuals from Swifterbant its genetic background stem from European hunter- and seven from Schipluiden (see Fig. 1) – it allows gatherers (Lipson et al. 2017, extended data table us to identify three individuals with deviant values, 1). A third group (Bollongino et al. 2013: isotopic one from Swifterbant and two from Schipluiden, to group 2) has a similar date (c. 3,900 – 3,400 calBC) be interpreted as non-local individuals. Intriguingly, and genetics, but these three individuals have isoto- two of these three also had different carbon and ni- pic signals that suggest that their diet depended on trogen values (Fig. 2), suggesting a diet deviant from herbivores, most likely domesticated animals. The the majority, and they are represented in the burial contemporaneity of groups 2 and 3 indicates that record with single molars only. The authors conclude for a period of some 400 years people with similar ‘it is notable that three of the identified immigrants genetic backgrounds made use of the cave for their (SWH10, SCH6, and SCH7) are represented by iso- burials, while in daily life they may have functioned lated molars only, and two of these individuals had rather separately, judging from the dietary signals. a diet lower in fish than others at these sites. The A fourth group (Bollongino et al. 2013: isotopic sample size is very small, but, as these individuals are group 2) appears in the second half of the 4th millen- not of local origin, this does raise the possibility that nium (c. 3,500 – 3,000 calBC) – these people had a dif- differences in both diet and attitude towards burial ferent maternal genetic build-up, if one considers the were associated with cultural identity’ (Smits et al. haplogroups. In contrast, their paternal ancestry must 2010, 24). Figure 2 also shows one individual from have included hunter-gatherer forebears, because for Polderweg with a deviant low δ15N signal – again this three of the eight individuals in this group the genetic individual is represented by a single bone and is not background from European hunter-gatherer popula- one of the formal burials. These correlating results tions has been calculated between 39.5 % and 51.9 % (origin, diet, and burial ritual) indicate that we need to (Lipson et al. 2017, extended data table 1). These re- reckon with cultural diversity in this period and time. sults indicate a strong mixing of people with different background at this time. The Blätterhöhle data reveal a complex interplay between genetics and diet. The 4 See Raemaekers et al. 2009 for an overview of the 5th question is how unique this dataset is: what evidence ­m illennium calBC and references to the primary publications. See Molthof / Baetsen (this volume) for the burials from is there of genetic and isotopic variation in the period ­Nieuwegein. An overview of the burial record of the 4th millen- and area under study here? nium cal. BC is provided by Raemaekers 2018. 302 A singularity in continuity? The transition to farming in northwest Europe re-examined from the perspective of multiculturalism Fig. 1 Results of the analyses of strontium (Sr) and oxygen (O) on individuals from Swifterbant (c. 4,300 – 4,000 calBC) and Schipluiden (c. 3,630 – 3,380 calBC). Arrows indicate individuals with deviant values, interpreted by the authors as immigrants (after Smits / van der Plicht 2009, fig. 10). Fig. 2 Results of the analyses of carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) on individuals from Hardinxveld-Giessendam (c. 5,500 – 4,500 calBC), Swifterbant (c. 4,300 – 4,000 calBC) and Schipluiden (c. 3,630 – 3,380 calBC; after Smits / van der Plicht 2009, fig. 11). D a a n R a e m a e ke rs 303 Material culture one is that of a palimpsest. In most circumstances the resolution of our dataset does not allow us to de- One of the characteristics of ‘normal science’ (Kuhn termine whether a site has been repeatedly occupied 1962) – when a discipline works within an unques- during a century by groups with different material tioned paradigm – is that we are unaware that the culture. This observation makes clear that the use of terminology we use is embedded in our theoretical the term ‘contact find’ is indeed part of our paradigm: framework and is considered to be descriptive in- it fits the general theory so well that equally valid stead of interpretative. In the preparation of this alternatives are hardly considered. paper I came to realise that the term ‘contact find’ A second alternative interpretation is one in – used to describe parts of an assemblage consid- which the temporal coherence of an assemblage is ered to be of non-local origin – is such a term. The maintained, but material culture of supposed non- theoretical loading of this term is that it does not local origin is interpreted as evidence of the con- only describe a part of an assemblage, but it also temporaneous presence of people with a different determines the process that led to its occurrence cultural background. Here I focus on presenting a in this assemblage. The ‘contact find’ is the result series of examples that might be interpreted as such. of interaction, exchange, or mobility of the ‘true’ In the conclusion I will connect these observations inhabitants of the site under study. to the different modes of movement presented above. When one is aware of this interpretative aspect The first example is the presence of Blicquy- of the term ‘contact find’, there are other interpreta- ceramics at Hardinxveld-Giessendam De Bruin tions to be considered for the presence of two distinc- ­(Raemaekers 2001b) and Brandwijk (Raemaekers tive subsets of material culture at one site. The first 1999, fig. 3.7 top), dated to c. 4,600 calBC (Fig. 3). Fig. 3 Blicquy ceramics from Hardinxveld-Giessendam De Bruin (top and middle row: after Raemaekers 2001, figs. 5.4 and 5.5) and Brandwijk, scale 1 : 2 (bottom row: after Raemaekers 1999, fig. 3.7). 304 A singularity in continuity? The transition to farming in northwest Europe re-examined from the perspective of multiculturalism Fig. 4 Fragments of a perforated wedge (left) and a local reproduction (right) from Swifterbant S3 (after Devriendt 2013, fig. 4.8). Scale 1 : 2. These ceramics stand out from the Swifterbant ce- the same site yielded one sherd with typical Swift- ramics on the basis of their fine grit and bone temper, erbant characteristics tempered with amphibolite relative high quality, and decoration carried out with (unpublished; analysis by O. Stilborg). Perforated a forked spatula in fields. All these characteristics are wedges are commonly found in central Europe, but confined to a specific subset of the assemblage – there their distribution includes the Low Countries as well are no sherds which combine Blicquy and Swifter- (Raemaekers et al. 2011; Verhart 2013). bant characteristics. Blicquy ceramics are generally A third example is the presence of flint tools from found more to the south (Belgium, northern France); non-local flint sources at Brandwijk (4,300 – 3,900 cal- the two Dutch examples are the northernmost sites BC). It concerns a distinctive subset of the assemblage in their distribution (Hauzeur / van Berg 2005). in terms of flint source, tool type and use wear (Fig. 5). A second example is the presence of two frag- These tools are explicitly interpreted within the normal ments of one perforated wedge (‘Breitkeil’) at Swift- science paradigm: ‘it is reasonable to assume that the erbant S3, dated to 4,300 – 4,000 calBC (Fig. 4; Michelsberg implements were brought to the coastal Devriendt 2013, 68 and fig. 4.8 top left). Here the wetlands, not so much to be used as actual tools, but distinction between two different sets of material as a trophy or token of a special relationship with a culture is less clear-cut: there are also two perforated person or social group far away’ (van Gijn 2010, 123). axes made of locally available stone material; their It would be equally valid to interpret these finds as perforation has a hour-glass shape instead of the evidence of the presence of people with their own set cylindrical one found on the perforated wedge. They of flint tools, carrying out their own specific activities, are proposed to be local reproductions (Devriendt while other people used a different set of flint tools and 2013, 72), which may be true. Here we conclude that carried out distinctively different activities. if these are reproductions, it indicates that the use The fourth example has already been highlight- (and meaning) of perforated wedges was not restrict- ed in great detail elsewhere (Raemaekers 2015). It ed to the people that had access to this one artefact. concerns the gradual change of ceramic character- Moreover, a petrographic analysis of ceramics from istics at Swifterbant S3 (c. 4,300 – 4,000 calBC), in D a a n R a e m a e ke rs 305 Fig. 5 Flint tools from Brandwijk L50 (c. 4220 – 3940 calBC). These tools were produced of non-local flints. Their morphology and tech- nology sets them apart from the remainder of the assemblages, as does their specific use (after van Gijn 2010, fig. 6.4). Scale 1 : 1. 306 A singularity in continuity? The transition to farming in northwest Europe re-examined from the perspective of multiculturalism conjunction with the incorporation of cereal culti- its distinct technological and stylistic characteris- vation and consumption by its occupants. The out- tics, adds to the binary character of the sites under come of this process of ceramic change is that the study. And so does the non-local flint at Brandwijk, youngest set of S3 comprises two distinct subsets. with its special use-wear restricted to these specific One is the traditional Swifterbant coarse ware; the tools. All these patterns are interpreted here as first other is a newly developed thin-walled high-quality evidence of multicultural occupation of these sites. In grit-tempered ware, in morphological and techno- the final centuries of this millennium, the introduc- logical terms similar to Early Neolithic TRB ware tion of cereal cultivation and consumption seems to from northern Germany. It is this second subset that be related to a major change in ceramics, with the exclusively holds cereals. earliest TRB ceramics as outcome of this process, A final example comes from Schipluiden before 4,000 calBC. This process may be interpreted (c. 3,630 – 3,380 calBC). The large flint assemblage as evidence of cultural change wherein newcomers there is dominated by flint material collected in the – evidenced by their human remains – influenced region, but also holds various categories of non-local traditional material culture practices. flint types. ‘There is also a small quantity (5.2 %) of The outcome of this cultural change is evidenced non-local, “exotic” flint types, deriving directly from in the first half of the 4th millennium calBC: Whereas the south Belgian Cretaceous zone. The artefacts the developments in the northern part of the case concerned are predominantly finished products of study area are part of the TRB cultural tradition a size larger than the rolled pebbles […], and include (Ten Anscher 2012; 2015; Raemaekers 2015), the no cores, core-preparation or rejuvenation pieces southern part developed into what archaeologists […]. Some of this material may have been imported have labelled Hazendonk group. The Hazendonk in the form of polished axes’ (van Gijn et al. 2006, group can be interpreted as the outcome of cultural 133 – 135). As such, this dataset and its interpretation bricolage – with the Swifterbant culture and the Mi- are very similar to that from Brandwijk. At Brand- chelsberg culture as sources of the Hazendonk burial wijk, pointed blades were exclusively of non-local characteristics and material culture. The dominant flint and showed exclusive use wear. At Schipluiden, tradition of burials on their side in a flexed position pointed blades were found in larger numbers (n = is new to the area, but is better known in the adjacent 31), of which 22 could be related to the flint sources areas of central Europe (e. g. Alterauge 2013). At of which they were produced (van Gijn et al. 2006, the same sites, the traditional practice of burials on table 7.3). Of these, twelve were produced of locally their backs continued, too. The same re-ordering can collected flint and ten of non-local flint. This suggests be seen in the material culture. The practice of using that the absolute separation between two sub-assem- local and non-local flint sources was continued, but blages of flint artefacts at Brandwijk had decreased. now we see that the exclusive relation between flint sources and typology has been abandoned. The in- termediate position of Hazendonk ceramics between Conclusions Swifterbant and Michelsberg has been proposed al- ready a long time ago (Raemaekers 1999, 161). The narrative of cultural continuity across the Meso- This paper focused on the archaeological evi- lithic-Neolithic transition in the Dutch wetlands has dence of the contemporaneous presence of people been questioned here. It has been made clear that on with different cultural repertoires in the Dutch wet- many sites there is evidence for non-local residents lands, across the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition. (human bones) and / or non-local material culture. This evidence suggests that throughout the 5th mil- How can we relate this to the modes of movement, lennium calBC non-local people contributed to the as presented in Table 1? archaeological record, with their bones and material Throughout the 5th millennium calBC, the evi- culture. Their influence on the indigenous groups dence presented here seems to have a binary charac- may have been restricted, and one may interpret this ter. The assemblages are dominated by burial remains as a multicultural society. In the final centuries of and material culture we interpret as being typical for this millennium, changes in material culture and the Swifterbant culture. At the same time, there are the introduction of cereal cultivation and consump- individuals at Polderweg and Swifterbant that have tion seem to correlate, at least at Swifterbant S3. In deviant isotopic signals, and these individuals were contrast to the grand narrative of cultural continuity not buried in the customary way. The presence of in this area, one might propose that the non-local Blicquy ceramics at De Bruin and Brandwijk, with people present at this time played a crucial role in D a a n R a e m a e ke rs 307 the introduction of this new subsistence strategy – Brinkkemper et al. 1999: O. Brinkkemper / W. J. Hogestijn / if we could make sure that their non-local isotopic H. Peeters / D. Visser / C. Whitton, The Early signals relate to areas in which farming was already Neolithic site at Hoge Vaart, Almere, the Netherlands, established. The flint sources and tool types at Brand- with particular refrence to non-diffusion of crop plants, wijk L50 do suggest that this is the case: they point and the significance of site function and sample location. to the area of the Michelsberg culture. As such, this Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 8, 1999, 79 – 86. paper underlines the importance of the Michelsberg Cakirlar et al. 2020: C. Cakirlar / R. Breider / F. Koolstra / culture to understand the introduction of cereal cul- K. M. Cohen / D. C. M. Raemaekers, Dealing with do- tivation in the western part of the north European mestic animals in the fifth millennium calBC Dutch wet- plain (e. g. Kreuz et al. 2014). This spatial expansion lands: new insights from old Swifterbant assemblages. of the Neolithic coincides with the plateau in the In: K. J. Gron / L. Sørensen / P. Rowley-Conwy (eds.), calibration curve to which sites like Swifterbant S3 Farmers at the Frontier. A Pan-European Perspective are dated. The role of these newcomers, with new on Neolithisation (Oxford 2020) 263 – 287. notions about burial ritual, material culture, and Deckers 1982: P. H. Deckers, Preliminary notes on the subsistence, cannot be underestimated. After 4,000 neolithic flint material from Swifterbant. Swifterbant calBC, in the Hazendonk group, a full Neolithic had Contribution 13. Helinium 22, 1982, 33 – 39. developed, with cultural (and genetic?) roots in both Devriendt 2013: I. Devriendt, Swifterbant Stones. The the Swifterbant and Michelsberg cultures. Neolithic Stone and Flint Industry at Swifterbant (the Netherlands): from stone typology and flint technology to site function (Groningen 2013). References Dusseldorp / Amkreutz 2020: G. L. Dusseldorp / L. W. S. W. Amkreutz, A long slow goodbye – Re-examining the Alterauge 2013: A. Alterauge, Silobestattungen aus unbe- Mesolthic-Neolithic transition (5500 – 2500 BCE) in the festigten Siedlungen der Michelsberger Kultur in Süd- Dutch delta. Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia 50, 2006, und Südwestdeutschland – Versuch einer Annäherung. 121 – 142. In: N. Müller-Scheeßel (ed.), Irreguläre Bestattungen in Fitzpatrick 2011: A. P. Fitzpatrick, The Amesbury Archer der Urgeschichte: Norm, Ritual, Strafe …? Akten der and the Boscombe Bowmen: Bell Beaker burials at Internationalen Tagung in Frankfurt am Maine, 3 – 5 Boscombe Down, Amesbury, Wiltshire, Wessex Ar- February 2012. Kolloquien zur Vor-und Frühgeschichte chaeology 27 (Salisbury 2011). 19 (Bonn 2013) 185 – 196. Fokkens 1998: H. Fokkens, Drowned landscape. The Oc- Amkreutz 2013: L. W. S. W. Amkreutz, Persistent Traditions. cupation of the Western Part of the Frisian-Drentian A long-term perspective on communities in the process Plateau, 4400 BC–AD 500 (Assen 1998). of Neolithisation in the Lower Rhine Area (5500 – 2 500 Furholt 2019: M. Furholt, Re-integrating Archaeology: A cal BC) (Leiden 2013). Contribution to aDNA Studies and the Migration Dis- Ten Anscher 2012: T.  J. Ten Anscher, Leven met de course on the 3rd Millennium BC in Europe. Proceedings Vecht. Schokland-P14 en de Noordoostpolder in het of the Prehistoric Society 85, 2019, 115 – 129. Neolithicum en de Bronstijd (Amsterdam 2012). Van Gijn et al. 2006: A. L. van Gijn / V. van Betuw / A. Ver- Ten Anscher 2015: T. J. Ten Anscher, Under the radar: baas / K. Wentink, Flint, procurement and use. In: L. P. Swifterbant and the origins of the Funnel Beaker cul- Louwe Kooijmans / P. F. B. Jongste (eds.), Schipluiden. ture. In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / A neolithic settlement on the Dutch North Sea Coast, T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and c. 3500 cal BC. Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia 37/38 the Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands (Leiden 2006) 129 – 166. (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im Van Gijn 2010: A. L. Van Gijn, Flint in focus. Lithic Biogra- Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 335 – 357. phies in the Neolithic and Bronze Age (Leiden 2010). Ten Anscher / Knippenberg this volume: T. J. ten An- Haanen / Hogestijn 2001: P. L. P. Haanen / J. W. H. Hogestijn, scher / S. Knippenberg, Unexpected dimensions of Aardewerk: morfologische en technologische aspecten. a Swifterbant settlement at Medel-De Roeskamp (the In: J. W. H. Hogestijn / J. H. M. Peeters (eds.), De meso- Netherlands). lithische en vroeg-neolithische vindplaats Hoge Vaart- Bollongino et al. 2013: R. Bollongino / O. Nehlich / M. P. A27 (Flevoland), part 17 (Amersfoort 2001). Richards / J. Orschiedt / M. G. Thomas / C. Sell / Hauzeur / van Berg 2005: A. Hauzeur / P. L. van Berg, Südli- Z. Fajkosova / A. Powell / J. Burger, 2000 Years of che Einflüsse in der Blicquy-Villeneuve-Saint-Germain Parallel Societies in Stone Age Central Europe. Science Kultur. In: C. Dobiat / K. Leidorf (eds.,), Die Bandkeramik 342, 2013, 479 – 4 81. im 21. Jahrhundert (Rahden/Westf. 2005) 147 – 177. 308 A singularity in continuity? The transition to farming in northwest Europe re-examined from the perspective of multiculturalism Hofmann 2015: D. Hofmann, What have genetics ever done J. Burger / E. Bánffy / K. W. Alt / C. Lalueza-Fox / W. for us? The implications of aDNA Data for interpreting Haak / D. Reich, Parallel palaeogenomic transects reveal identity in Early Neolithic Central Europe. European complex genetic history of early European farmers. Nature Journal of Archaeology 18(3), 2015, 454 – 476 551, 2017, 368 – 372. Hofmann et al. this volume: D. Hofmann / H. Peeters / A.-K. Louwe Kooijmans 1993: L. P. Louwe Kooijmans, Wetland Meyer, Crosstown traffic: contemplating mobility, inter- Exploitation and Upland Relations of Prehistoric Com- action and migration among foragers and early farmers. munities in the Netherlands. In: J. Gardiner (ed.), Flat- Huisman et al. 2009: D. J. Huisman / A. G. Jongmans / lands & Wetlands. Current Themes in East Anglian D. C. M. Raemaekers, Investigating Neolithic land use Archaeology (Norwich 1993) 71 – 116. in Swifterbant (NL) using micromorphological tech- Meiklejohn / Constandse-Westermann 1978: C. Meiklejohn / niques. Catena 78, 2009, 185 – 197. T. S. Constandse-Westermann, The human skeletal mate- Huisman / Raemaekers 2014: D. J. Huisman / D. C. M. Rae- rial from Swifterbant, Earlier Neolithic of the Northern maekers, Systematic cultivation of the Swifterbant wet- Netherlands I. Inventory and demography. Final Reports lands (The Netherlands). Evidence from Neolithic tillage on Swifterbant I. Palaeohistoria 20, 1978, 39 – 89. marks (c. 4300 – 4000 cal. BC). Journal of Archaeological Molthof / Baetsen this volume: H. M. Molthof / S. Baetsen, Science 49, 2014, 572 – 584. Two new Swifterbant settlements at Nieuwegein-Het Kamjan et al. 2020: S. Kamjan / R. E. Gilli / C. Ҫakirlar / Klooster, the Netherlands: preliminary site interpreta- D. C. M. Raemaekers, Specialized cattle farming in tion and overview of human remains. the Neolithic Dutch delta: results from zooarchaeo- Niekus 2009: M. J. L. Th. Niekus, Trapeze shaped flint tips logical and stable isotope (δ18O, δ13C, δ15N) analyses. as proxy data for occupation during the Late Mesolithic PLoS ONE 15(10): e0240464. doi.org/10.1371/journal. and the Early to Middle Neolithic in the northern part pone.0240464. of the Netherlands. Journal of Archaeological Science Kranenburg / Prummel 2020: H. Kranenburg / W. Prummel, 36, 2009, 236 – 247. The use of domestic and wild animals. In: D. C. M. Nikitin et al. 2019: A. G. Nikitin / P. Stadler / N. Kotova / Raemaekers / J. P. de Roever (eds.,), Swifterbant S4 M. Teschler-Nicola / T. D. Price / J. Hoover / D. J. (the Netherlands). Occupation and exploitation of a Kennett / I. Lazaridis / N. Rohland / M. Lipson / Neolithic levee site (c. 4300 – 4 000 cal. BC) (Groningen D. Reich, Interactions between earliest Linearband- 2020) 76 – 94. keramik farmers and central european hunter gatherers at Kreuz et al. 2014: A. Kreuz / T. Märkle / E. Marinova / the dawn of european Neolithization. Scientific Reports M. Rösch / E. Schäfer / S. Schamuhn / T. Zerl, The 9, 2019, 19544. (Paper / Supplementary Materials / PM- Late Neolithic Michelsberg culture – just ramparts and CID: PMC6925266). ditches? A supraregional comparison of agricultural and Olalde et al. 2018: I. Oldade / S. Brace / M. E. Allentoft / I. environmental data. Prähistorische Zeitschrift 89(1), Armit / K. Kristiansen / T. Booth / N. Rohland / S. Mallick / 2014, 72 – 115. A. Szécsényi-Nagy / A. Mittnik / E. Altena / M. Lipson / Kuhn 1962: T. S. Kuhn, The structure of Scientific Revolu- I. Lazaridis / T. K. Harper / N. Patterson / N. Broomandk- tion (Chicago 1962). hoshbacht / Y. Diekmann / Z. Faltyskova / D. Fernandes / Lanting / van der Plicht 1999/2000: J. N. Lanting / J. van M. Ferry / E. Harney /P. de Knijff / M. Michel / J. der Plicht, De 14 C-chronologie van de Nederlandse Oppenheimer / K. Stewardson / A. Barclay / K. W. Alt / pre- en protohistorie. III: Neolithicum, Palaeohistoria C. Liesau / P. Ríos / C. Blasco / J. V. Miguel / R. M. 41/42, 1999/2000, 1 – 110. García / A. A. Fernández / E. Bánffy / M. Bernabò-Brea / Lipson et al. 2017: M. Lipson / A. Szécsényi-Nagy /  S. Mal- D. Billoin / C. Bonsall / L. Bonsall / T. Allen / L. lick / A. Pósa / B. Stégmár / V. Keerl / N. Rohland / K. Büster / S. Carver / L. C. Navarro /O. E. Craig / G. T. Stewardson / M. Ferry / M. Michel / J. Oppenheimer / Cook / B. Cunliffe / A. Denaire /K. E. Dinwiddy / N. N. Broomandkhoshbacht / E. Harney / S. Nordenfelt / Dodwell / M. Ernée / C. Evans / M. Kucharík / J. F. B. Llamas / B. G. Mende / K. Köhler / K. Oross / M. Farré / C. Fowler / M. Gazenbeek / R. G. Pena / M. Bondár / T. Marton / A. Osztás / J. Jakucs / T. Paluch / Haber-Uriarte / E. Haduch / G. Hey / N. Jowett / T. F. Horváth / P. Csengeri / J. Koós / K. Sebök / A. An- Knowles / K. Massy / S. Pfrengle / P. Lefranc / O. ders / P. Raczky / J. Regenye / J. P. Barna / S. Fábián / Lemercier / A. Lefebvre / Ch. Martínez / V. G. Olmo / G. Serlegi / Z. Toldi / E. G. Nagy / J. Dani / E. Molnár / A. B. Ramírez / J. L. Maurandi / T. Majó / J. I. McKinley / G. Pálfi / L. Márk / B. Melegh / Z. Bánfai / L. Dombo- K. McSweeney / B. G. Mende / A. Mod / G. Kulcsár / róczki / J. Fernández-Eraso / J. A. Mujika-Alustiza / C. V. Kiss / A. Czene / R. Patay / A. Endrodi / K. Köhler / Alonso Fernández / J. J. Echevarría / R. Bollongino / T. Hajdu / T. Szeniczey / J. Dani / Z. Bernert / M. J. Orschiedt / K. Schierhold / H. Meller / A. Cooper / Hoole / O. Cheronet / D. Keating / P. Velemínský / D a a n R a e m a e ke rs 309 M. Dobeš / F. Candilio / F. Brown / R. F. Fernández / Halle (Saale). Tagungen des Landesmuseums für Vorge- A. M. Herrero-Corral / S. Tusa / E. Carnieri / L. Lentini / schichte Halle 16 (Halle 2018) 487 – 498. A. Valenti / A. Zanini / C. Waddington / G. Delibes / Raemaekers / de Roever 2010: D. C. M. Raemaekers / J. P. E. Guerra-Doce / B. Neil / M. Brittain / M. Luke / R. de Roever, The Swifterbant pottery tradition (5000 – 3400 Mortimer / J. Desideri / M. Besse / G. Brücken / M. Fur- BC): matters of fact and matters of interest. In: B. Van- manek / A. Hałuszko / M. Mackiewicz / A. Rapinski / montfort / L. Louwe Kooijmans / L. Amkreutz / L. Ver- S. Leach / I. Soriano / K. T. Lillios / J. L. Cardoso / hart (eds.), Pots, farmers and foragers. Pottery traditions M. P. Pearson / P. Włodarczak / T. D. Price / P. Pilar and social interaction in the earliest Neolithic of the Prieto / P. J. Rey / R. Risch / M. A. Rojo Guerra / A. Lower Rhine Area (Leiden 2010) 135 – 149. Schmitt / J. Serralongue / A. M. Silva / V. Smrcka / Raemaekers / de Roever 2020: D. C. M. Raemaekers / J. P. L. Vergnaud / J. Zilhão / D. Caramelli / T. Higham / De Roever, Conclusions. In: D. C. M. Raemaekers / M. G. Thomas / D. J. Kennett / H. Fokkens / V. Heyd / J. P. de Roever (eds.), Swifterbant S4 (the Netherlands). A. Sheridan / K. G. Sjögren / P. W. Stockhammer / J. Occupation and exploitation of a Neolithic levee site (c. Krause / R. Pinhasi / W. Haak / I. Barnes / C. Lalueza- 4300 – 4 000 cal. BC) (Groningen 2020) 107 – 113. Fox / D. Reich, The Beaker phenomenon and the genomic Raemaekers et al. 2009: D. C. M. Raemaekers / H. M. transformation of northwest Europe. Nature 555, 2018, Molthof / E. Smits, The textbook ‘dealing with death’ 190 – 196. (Paper / Supplementary Materials / PMCID: from the Neolithic Swifterbant culture (5000 – 3400 BC), PMC5973796) the Netherlands, Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Out 2009: W. A. Out, Sowing the seed? Human impact and Kommission 88, 2007 (2009), 479 – 500. plant subsistence in Dutch wetlands during the Late Raemaekers et al. 2011: D. C. M. Raemaekers / J. Geuverink / Mesolthic and Early and Middle Neolithic (5500 – 3400 M. Schepers / B. P. Tuin / E. van de Lagemaat / M. cal BC) (Leiden 2009). van der Wal, A biography in stone. Typology, age, func- Raemaekers 1999: D. C. M. Raemaekers, The Articulation tion and meaning of Early Neolithic perforated wedges of a ‘New Neolithic’. The meaning of the Swifterbant in the Netherlands (Groningen 2011). Culture for the process of Neolithisation in the western Rowley-Conwy 2013: P. Rowley-Conwy, North of the frontier: part of the North European Plain (Leiden 1999). early domestic animals in northern Europe. In: S. Colledge Raemaekers 2001a: D.  C.  M. Raemaekers, Aardewerk / J. Conolly / K. Dobney / K. Manning / S. Shennan (eds.), en verbrande klei. In: L. P. Louwe Kooijmans (ed.), The Origins and Spread of Domestic Animals in Southwest Hardinxveld-Polderweg: een woonplaats uit het Late Asia and Europe (Walnut Creek 2013) 283 – 311. mesolithicum in de Rijn/Maas-delta, 5500 – 5000 v. C. Schepers / Bottema-Mac Gillavry 2020: M. Schepers / (Amersfoort 2001) 105 – 117. N. Bottema-Mac Gillavry, The vegetation and exploi- Raemaekers 2001b: D. C. M. Raemaekers, Aardewerk en tation of plant resources. In: D. C. M. Raemaekers / verbrande klei. In: L. P. Louwe Kooijmans (ed.), Hardinx- J. P. de ­Roever (eds.), Swifterbant S4 (the Netherlands). veld-De Bruin: een kampplaats uit het Late mesolithicum ­Occupation and exploitation of a Neolithic levee site (c. en de vroege Swifterbant-cultuur in de Rijn/Maas-delta, 4300 – 4000 cal. BC) (Groningen 2020) 51 – 75. 5500 – 4 450 v. C. (Amersfoort 2001) 117 – 152. Shennan 2019: S. Shennan, The first farmers of Europe. An Raemaekers 2011: D. C. M. Raemaekers, Early Swifterbant evolutionary perspective (Cambridge 2019). pottery (5000 – 4600 BC): research history, age, character- Smits / Louwe Kooijmans 2001a: E. Smits / L. P. Louwe istics and the introduction of pottery. Bericht der Römisch- Kooijmans, Menselijke skeletresten. In: L. P. Louwe Germanischen Kommission 89, 2008 (2011), 485 – 500. Kooijmans (ed.), Hardinxveld-Giessendam Polderweg. Raemaekers 2015: D. C. M. Raemaekers, Rethinking Swift- Een mesolithisch jachtkamp in het rivierengebied erbant S3 ceramic variability. Searching for the transi- (5500 – 5000 v. Chr.) (Amersfoort 2001) 419 – 4 40. tion to the Funnel Beaker culture before 4000 calBC. Smits / Louwe Kooijmans 2001b: E. Smits / L. P. Louwe In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / Kooijmans, Menselijke skeletresten. In: L. P. Louwe T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and Kooijmans (ed.), Hardinxveld-De Bruin: een kamp- the Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands plaats uit het Laat-Mesolithicum en het begin van de (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte des Swifterbant-cultuur (5500 – 4 450 v. Chr.) (Amersfoort Ostseeraums 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 321 – 334. 2001) 479 – 498. Raemaekers 2018: D. C. M. Raemaekers, A Neolithic back- Smits / van der Plicht 2009: L. Smits / H. van der Plicht, water? Dutch developments in the 4th millennium BC. Mesolithic and Neolithic human remains in the Nether- In: H. Meller / S. Friedrich (eds.), Salzmünde – Regel lands: physical anthropological and stable isotope inves- oder Ausnahme? / Salzmünde – rule or exception? In- tigations. Journal of Archaeology in the Low Countries ternationale Tagung vom 18. bis 20. Oktober 2012 in 1(1), 2009, 55 – 8 5. 310 A singularity in continuity? The transition to farming in northwest Europe re-examined from the perspective of multiculturalism Thielen this volume: L. Thielen, The late Mesolithic in Ham- Waterbolk 1985: H. T. Waterbolk, The Mesolithic and Early burg-Boberg: inter-cultural interactions and impacts. Neolithic settlement of the Northern Netherlands in Verhart 2013: L. B. M. Verhart, Contact in stone: adzes, Keile the light of radiocarbon evidence. In: R. Fellmann / G. and Spitzhauen in the Lower Rhine Basin: Neolithic stone Germann / K. Zimmermann (eds.), Jagen und Sammeln. tools and the transition from Mesolithic to Neolithic in Festschrift für Hans-Georgi Bandi zum 65. Geburtstag. Belgium and the Netherlands, 5300 – 4000 cal BC. Journal Jahrbuch des Bernischen Historischen Museum 63/64, of Archaeology in the Low Countries 4, 2013, 5 – 35. 1985, 273 – 281. Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 , 3 11 – 326) 311 A view from Doggerland – interpreting the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in the wetlands of the Rhine-Meuse delta (5,500 – 2,500 calBC) Luc Amkreutz Abstract The transition to agriculture is one of the most important developments in recent human history. There is evidence that this process was importantly driven by migration in large parts of Europe, but appears to have then come to a long standstill on the Atlantic margins of the Low Countries. In this elaborate wetland environment, there is evidence for a very gradual transition. Importantly some scholars, however, argue that there also appear to be indications for a quick consolidation of the transition by the end of the 5th millennium calBC. This paper argues that it is beneficial to not only study this period from an economic perspective using proxies that are both rooted in our ideas of what neolithisation entails and that suffer from severe taphomic biases. Instead, taking the developments in Mesolithic Doggerland as an example it is argued that a better understanding may be derived from a more ‘indigenous’ approach. Contextualising the transition to agriculture within the framework of regional communities inhabiting a living landscape leads to an increased understanding of the different pathways characterising neolithisation in this region. This eventually indicates that overall we are dealing with a very long-term process that does not end with the first sedentary agricultural sites in the wetlands. Keywords Neolithisation, wetland, Swifterbant, Mesolithic, Doggerland, agriculture Zusammenfassung Der Übergang zu Ackerbau und Viehzucht ist die bedeutendste Entwicklung der jüngeren Geschichte der Menschheit. Dieser Prozess wurde in weiten Teilen Europas vor allem durch Migration ausgelöst, doch am Rand der nordwest­ europäischen Tiefebene scheint er zu einem längeren Stillstand gekommen zu sein. In dieser ausgedehnten Feuchtbodenland- schaft erfolgte der Übergang zur neuen Wirtschaftsweise in einem graduellen Prozess. Einige Forscher sehen allerdings An- zeichen für eine rasche Konsolidierung der Neolithisierung zum Ende des 5. Jahrtausends v. Chr. In diesem Beitrag wird vorgeschlagen, die Neolithisierung nicht nur aus einer ökonomischen Perpektive zu betrachten, der aus heutiger Sicht wich- tige Merkmale der Neolithisierung zugrunde liegen, die zudem erheblich von taphonomischen Faktoren beeinflusst werden. Vielmehr wird hier am Beispiel der Entwicklungen in Doggerland vorgeschlagen, eine ‘indigene’, mesolithische Perspektive einzunehmen. Die Kontextualisierung des Übergangs im Rahmen einer regionalen Gesellschaft innerhalb ihrer spezifischen Landschaft ermöglicht ein besseres Verständnis der Neolithisierung dieser Region. Es wird deutlich, dass die Neolithisierung dieses Gebietes wahrscheinlich ein langfristiger Prozess war, der nicht mit der Etablierung der ersten permanent genutzten bäuerlichen Siedlungen in diesem Feutbodengebiet beendet war. Introduction and Michelsberg cultures into the Late Neolithic Stein group and Corded Ware. This is flanked by a The transition to agriculture in the Lower Rhine area development taking place in the extensive wetland has been hallmarked as a very gradual process that areas between the rivers Scheldt and Elbe. Culturally may have taken over a millennium (e. g. Louwe Kooij- this is characterised by a development that is firmly mans 1987) or more (Amkreutz 2013a) to complete. rooted in the local Late Mesolithic which develops Basically, there is a coarse scale subdivision into two into the Swifterbant culture, Hazendonk group and trajectories (cf. also Louwe Kooijmans 2007). A ‘ter- Vlaardingen culture and culminates in the late Neo- restrial’ development starting with the advent of the lithic Corded Ware. Over time different perspectives Linearbandkeramik (LBK) in the south on the loess have dealt with this transition and tried to explain and coversand soils and developing over the Rössen its stages and development resulting in shorter or 312 A view from Dogge r l an d – i nte r preti n g the Mesolithic-N eolithic transition in the wetlands of the Rhine-Meuse de lt a Fig. 1 Abstract geological map of the Lower Rhine Area. Indicated are LBK settlement areas (open rectangles) and some of the sites that feature in the text, notably 10 Hardinxveld, 11 Hazendonk, 13 Hekelingen, 14 Vlaardingen, 15 Schipluiden, 16 Ypenburg, 21 Swifterbant (adapted from Raemaekers 1999; Dusseldorp / Amkreutz 2015, fig. 1). longer chronologies (cf. Raemaekers 2003, 744 – 745; Some aspects of the theoretical debate Amkreutz 2013a). At the core of the debate is the on agriculture and the Neolithic question when agriculture came to dominate the sub- sistence economy, but also to what extent this way of The scientific debate regarding the process of neolithisa- life became part of the worldview of these communi- tion has for a long time been coloured by a search for ties (Dusseldorp / Amkreutz 2020). Clearly this is a defining turning point. At what moments are enough a dicussion where both quantitative and qualitative elements of the ‘Neolithic package’ (e. g. Thomas 1999) arguments are involved that to some extent appear present to define communities as Neolithic? Already irreconcilable. This contribution hopes to demon- in 1984 Zvelebil and Rowley-Conwy (Zvelebil / Row- strate that a different perspective and a wider scope ley-Conwy 1984; see also Zvelebil / Lillie 2000) in altogether may be more fruitful. their ‘availability model’ placed the emphasis distinctly Lu c A m k re u tz 313 within the economic realm which historically has re- niak (1998, 30 – 31) already referred to the pitfalls of ceived most attention (Amkreutz 2013a, 54). Whenever universalism, rationality and progress. We are dealing domesticates and cultigens would take up more than with a true mosaic of transitions (Tringham 2000, 53; 50 %, the transition to agriculture has arrived in the Graeber / Wengrow 2021), and our insight only grows consolidation phase, following availability and substitu- when we try to understand that from meaningful and tion, effectively ending this process. Although clearly useful perspectives. In any case this would advocate us- meant as a model it has two important fallacies. The ing alternative theoretical perepectives that function in first one is the primacy of (domesticated) subsistence, a complementary manner to the economic approach. which is hampered by taphonomically induced vari- ability (e. g. Raemaekers 1999, 13), but also offers a mono-thetic view on the past. It argues that culturally The transition to agriculture in the defined groups are economically, socially and ideo- Lowlands: a complex affair logically coherent, that their level of transition can be quantified and extrapolated. The second fallacy in Here we focus largely on the process of neolithisation relation to this is the direction of the model and the of the indigenous communities in the Lower Rhine lack of historicity and a contextual approach. Czer- Area (LRA) wetlands and their margins (Fig. 1). While Fig. 2 Spatiotemporal perspective of the Mesolithic and subsequent Neolithic cultures in the Lower Rhine Area (based on and adapted from Louwe Kooijmans 2007; Amkreutz 2013a). 314 A view from Dogge r l an d – i nte r preti n g the Mesolithic-N eolithic transition in the wetlands of the Rhine-Meuse de lt a colonisation played an important part in the early stages It should be noted that the style and execution fit of neolithisation, particularly with respect to the LBK, it well in the wider boreal zone of pottery producing may be assumed that the ensuing process also involved hunter-gatherer groups, so that this connection the local Mesolithic communities (e. g. Verhart 2000). should be included in its appearance as well. Unfortunately the sites on the loess and acidic sandy —— Domesticated animals first appear at Swifter- soils hamper analysis of their actual contribition. bant sites between 4,700 and 4,500 calBC at the For the wetlands it may be stated that the produc- sites of Brandwijk and Hardinxveld-De Bruin tivity of the environment perhaps limited the inclina- (Raemaekers 1999; Louwe Kooijmans 2007; cf. tion to adopt farming. Also, in tandem with the broad also Dusseldorp / Amkreutz 2016). As argued spectrum of resources a large part of this area is at by Raemaekers (2019, 94, and references) this or near the groundwater table and formed a dynamic early date is to be questioned as it interferes wetland that in places was also flooded. It is question- with the more widely known dates around 4,000 able to what extent early farming strategies and crops calBC for the British Isles and Scandinavia. The characteristic to the valley-water-loess niche, would numbers of bones from domestic cattle, sheep/ have worked and thrived here, whereas the higher and goat and pig are small, so it is difficult to es- dryer places such as the dunes and ‘donken’ (elevated timate whether this early livestock represents pleistocene dunes in the marshlands) may have pro- herded or individual animals, or perhaps meat vided insufficient space for any large-scale agriculture either as import from farming communities or as (Bakels 1986; Out 2008; 2009). Furthermore the loca- part of (taphonomically invisible) seasonal herd- tion of the LRA wetlands and their margins at least ing activities practiced by these communities in in the early 5th millennium was situated far from the the coversand area (Dusseldorp / Amkreutz ‘agricultural frontier’. In any case the developments 2015). Over time the contribution of domestic that took place are based on a few datapoints that animals will have become more substantial, in demonstrate an overall gradual and diverse take-up general it ranges in between 3 and 39 % (Dussel­ (see also Fig. 2 for a spatio-chronological background). dorp / Amkreutz 2015). Game continues to be In general the following scenario may be sketched: well represented also and it appears that live- —— Evidence of contacts is present from the arrival stock was added to an already existing way of of LBK farmers on the southern loess soils, most life, rather than replacing that. Herding may likely even predating the first LBK settlements have increased the reliability of food supply. in the Netherlands. At Hardinxveld-Polderweg —— Between 4,300 and 4,100 calBC the area wit- a LBK-arrowhead and southern flint was found nesses the introduction of cereals (Out 2009), dating to phase 1 (5,500 – 5,300 calBC; cf. Lou- including grains, small-scale clearings visible in we Kooijmans 2007). Rituals such as deposition pollen diagrams, quern stones and horticultural practices may have been further inspired by these fields at levee sites (Huisman / Raemaekers contacts, and in any case there is clear evidence 2014; Raemaekers 2019). At the same time com- of the acquisition of what could be perceived as munities appear to have remained residentially prestige items or ritual objects, such as the adzes mobile (Amkreutz 2013a). Previously it was and ‘Breitkeile’.1 thought that the area was too wet for farming —— A second stage may be the indigenous production and the locations too small (Bakels 1986), but of pottery from around 5,000 calBC. This Swift- this appears not to have been the case, and erbant pottery predates Ertebølle ware, and the ethnographic data demonstrate that residen- inspiration or incentive for its development may tial mobility can be combined with agriculture have been the southern contacts with LBK farm- (e. g. Gregg 1988; Politis 1996; Barlow 2006). ers. The brittle and fragile, low-fired vessels were Again there appears to be no wholesale conver- used for cooking (among others, meat, fish and sion. Gathered plant foods and wild game, as starch-rich plants: cf. Raemaekers et al. 2013) and well as sites functioning in a system of residen- probably storage, and their execution is similar tial mobility, remain important. to that of local basketry indicating a distinctive —— Some researchers argue for a final stage to be indigenous style (Louwe Kooijmans 2007, 297). represented by those sites where there is con- vincing evidence for intensive husbandry and crop cultivation. In particular the site of Schiplu- 1  Verhart 2000; Louwe Kooijmans 2003; 2007; Peeters iden, a post-Swifterbant period Hazendonk 2007; Amkreutz 2013a. group site, has been interpreted as such (Louwe Lu c A m k re u tz 315 Kooijmans 2007). Such a site is considered to with different temper, wall thickness and and quality be an endpoint in the process of neolithisation. was developed that appears to be connected to the growing and consumption of cereals. This correlat- Culturally (Figs. 2 – 3) the transition to an agricultural ing set of changes would then make the centuries existence can be envisaged as follows according to around 4,000 calBC a crucial time during which the availability scheme, with an availability phase domesticates and cultigens had taken centre stage. that covers the Late Mesolithic and early part of the It is argued that this more social perspective centred Swifterbant culture, a long substitution phase within on notions of taboo provides a different and perhaps the Swifterbant culture and a distinct consolidation more suitable perspective on neolithisation compared around the time of the Hazendonk group or subse- to the mechanical availability model (Raemaekers quent Vlaardingen culture. 2019, 100). Also it would align the developments in the ‘Swifterbant-world’ more with the transition in Great Britain and southern Scandinavia (Raemae­ An earlier consolidation? kers 2019, 100). Although it is clear that dividing the process of neolithisation into different phases may help our Criticism of the availability model understanding, it also creates a simplified version of what happened. On the one hand there are distinct It is interesting that it is difficult to pinpoint the chronological problems due to radiocarbon calibra- ‘arrival of the Neolithic’ for the LRA-wetlands. The tion plateaus and taphonomic biases. Raemaekers question is whether the specific situation here, both (2003; 2019) indeed argued that the transgression regarding landscape and indigenous communities, is of the coastal area in the 5th millennium may have suited for the application of something as abstract as obscured a whole group of Swifterbant sites that an availability model (Fig. 3). Clearly, the model was might have been much more agricultural in nature intended as such, as a means of mapping a period than the sites further inland would indicate. A con- of transition, but there are some serious flaws that solidation phase with sites where domesticates and question whether its variables are suitable for this cultigens would make up more than 50 % would then task. I have discussed these earlier (cf. Amkreutz have arrived even sooner. The main point of this 2013a, 355 – 357; see also Dusseldorp / Amkreutz argument, however, is the fact that for the coastal 2020) and briefly summarise them here again. area the domestic faunal attribution and the evidence —— The original model argues there can only be a for sedentism and cultivation during the Hazendonk short substitution phase due to man power and period indicate that the consolidation phase may scheduling issues. The situation in the LRA in- have to be placed in or even before that period. This dicates that this phase may have been distinctly would imply that previous research has missed fin- longer. ding a preceding stage, which, in turn, could be well —— The model is distinctly economic and quantita- imagined to have been in the coastal area. The fact tive, focusing only on faunal composition. Al- that faunal assemblages differ more with respect to though it is clear that that this has been done landscape (coastal, freshwater wetland, salt marsh) because it is one of the few comparable vari- than over time is seen as substantiating this perspec- ables, it does not do justice to the potential set of tive (Raemaekers 2003, 744 – 746). changes the neolithisation encompasses. Similar Recently Raemaekers (2019, 99 – 100) also to how hunter-gatherers have been framed in added another, more social dimension to this dis- ecological terms this demeans the first farmers cussion with the anthropological notion of taboo. to operatives in an essentially economic and ho- Arguing that the transition to farming is in essence mogenous framework. Change or lack of change a subsistence change, it is reasoned that there are in other areas is not included. indications for avoidance and incorporation. For —— The model lacks the resolution to deal with spa- instance bone tools were made both from wild and tio-temporal variability, whereas the process of domesticated animal bones at the S3 Swifterbant neolithisation has correctly been described as a site, while depositions of cattle horns from 4,000 mosaic (e. g. Tringham 2000, 21). It is therefore calBC onwards further indicate a change in percep- only suited to study the process across large tion towards livestock contrasting with the period regions and timeframes, which begs the ques- before. Also around this time a new type of pottery tion whether that is the level at which it should 316 A view from Dogge r l an d – i nte r preti n g the Mesolithic-N eolithic transition in the wetlands of the Rhine-Meuse de lt a Fig. 3 The availability model (adapted from Zvelebil 1986; 1998; after Amkreutz 2013a, fig. 3.7). be studied (eventually we all became farmers). donk group (Raemaekers 2003, 743 – 744; Louwe There is therefore a need to zoom in on regional Kooijmans 2007). It is questionable to what ex- developments that are culturally meaningful and tent this underlies the differences in faunal com- coherent yet geographically broad enough to position between sites observed and wether it is understand the multitude of factors in play and not a relict from a final point of critique: the effects of interaction, contact and exchange. —— That the model is read from left to right and This also means acknowledging ‘historicity’, therefore has a distinct teleological character. Our the notion that things developed differently at western studies of this period have been distinctly different places. coloured by our aim to define a moment at which —— In relation to this and opposing Zvelebil (1998, hunter-gatherers became farmers, and ultimately 11) this makes it questionable to what extent this and the vocabulary we use for this (e. g. fron- the contribution of domesticates may be distin- tier, transition, process, availability, substitution; guished for a cultural unit, based on single sites. cf. also Whittle / Cummings 2007, 2) are rooted Raemaekers (1999, 13) argued that presence / in the antiquarian perspective of the superiority absence rather than proportional data may be of agriculture (Graeber / Wengrow 2021). used, as sites fit in a settlement system and the subsistence base could basically be gathered from It is thus questionable whether the diverse landscape the most agricultural sites. For instance it is ar- of sites and faunal compositions in the LRA wetland gued that real agrarian settlements are distinctly lends itself easily for an economic perspective based present within the Vlaardingen culture in the on progress but studied primarily through a quantita- coastal area (including house plans, many bones tive analysis of faunal remains at single sites that stand from domestic animals and evidence for cereal for cultural phases. The social perspective offered by cultivation in pollen diagrams). It is argued that Raemaekers (2019) through a diachronic model of the main sites (‘base camps’) were therefore lo- taboo in this respect offers a welcome alternative. In cated in the (intra-)coastal area, while it is sug- any case, it tries to understand the developments tak- gested that the sites with a more ‘wild’ signature, ing place not by focusing on a taphonomically flawed situated in the freshwater marshes, would have category of faunal remains, but from the perspective of functioned in a subordinate position in this settle- the inhabitants themselves and their actions in relation ment system (Raemaekers 2003, 743 – 744). It is to changes taking place. These patterns, although for also suggested that this system may already have now based on a limited number of cases, document been in place during the period of the Hazen- distinct and meaningful actions. At the same time the Lu c A m k re u tz 317 trouble is that they may be interpreted differently as last Ice Age this area witnessed sea levels that were well: (producing) bone tools may have been something about 70 m lower. This vast region in the southern to which little meaning was attached. Offering domes- North Sea area was a rich and diverse landscape, ticated cattle horns might be related to issues of avail- ideal for Mesolithic hunter-gatherers (Gaffney et al. ability, and a change in pottery production to suit new 2009). Over time this landscape drowned, which was food types may be equally pragmatic. While I would usually gradual, on average about 2 m per century, advocate further case-studies in this direction, I would but at times may have been dramatic and eventful, also argue that more or additional insight into the devel- such as during the draining of Lake Agassiz and the opments taking place in the whole wetland region and Storrega slide (Hijma / Cohen 2010; 2011; Peeters / the characteristics of the process of neolithisation may Momber 2014). In any case it was something that was come from a better understanding of that region and witnessed over the generations. the mutual interaction between it and its inhabitants. Gradually our knowledge of this area is increas- Crucial here is to acquire a more fundamental notion ing through both on- and off-shore investigations of how communities over time interacted with their (Peeters et al. 2019), including near-shore excava- environment. Some inspiration for this may be drawn tions of Mesolithic sites as at Bouldnor cliff or at the from a case study of Mesolithic Doggerland. Rotterdam Yangtze harbour (Moree / Sier 2015). The major source of information though are the numerous finds that surface mainly due to beach nourishment Surviving Doggerland and, at least for the Dutch situation, the large infra- structural projects of the Maasvlakte 2 extension of The area in front of the Dutch coast and extending to Rotterdam harbour and the Zandmotor suppletion Denmark, northwestern Germany and Great Britain area near The Hague (Peeters et al. 2019; Peeters / is known as Doggerland (Coles 1998; Amkreutz / Amkreutz 2020). The number of Palaeolithic and Me- Van der Vaart-Verschoof 2021). At the end of the solithic finds from this area reaches many hundreds Fig. 4 Bone and antler arrowheads from the North Sea area in front of the Dutch coast and Maasvlakte 1 (photo: Rijksmuseum van Oudheden). 318 A view from Dogge r l an d – i nte r preti n g the Mesolithic-N eolithic transition in the wetlands of the Rhine-Meuse de lt a Fig.  5 A number of skeletal remains dating to the Mesolithic that yielded iso- topic information on diet (photo: Rijks- museum van Oudheden). these days and includes lithics, faunal remains with aquatic over time. Therefore the older dates are more cut marks, as well as bone and antler tools (e. g. Am- in line with an inland signal as the coast was not yet kreutz / Spithoven 2019; see Fig. 4). Among these are close, while the younger dates are clearly wetland also numerous human remains that potentially date oriented. These people made use of the extensive to the Mesolithic (Fig. 5). These types of secondary freshwater wetlands and their resources that arose in surface finds have often been accused of having little front of the encroaching coastline. This development scientific value due to the absence of contextual infor- indicates that the Doggerland inhabitants were very mation. While this is partly true, their often excellent capable of dealing with changing circumstances by preservation and quantitative numbers make them shifting their diet to aquatic resources. The dynamics valuable research material. In a recent study (Van der of the landscape and its changes appear to have been Plicht et al. 2016), the human remains from beaches embraced by the occupants (Nicholas 2007, 116). For were combined with those that mainly derived from Neolithic purposes this also nuanced the well-known fishing nets and all were studied for their isotopes, debate of there being a distinct shift from marine to both 14C and the stable isotope ratios of carbon σ13C terrestrial sources with the onset of the Neolithic (e. g. and nitrogen σ15N. This C/N value is informative as a Schulting 2011). It rather appears that there is a proxy for the (palaeo) diet of individuals in roughly strong tendency to make use of freshwater wetland the last decade of their life. It points out both the tro- environment and that there is a flexible disposition phic level and the aquatic component of freshwater, among these hunter-gatherers to make the most of or marine resources in the diet. The information is changing circumstances and resources. therefore indicative of the environment, the diet and behavioural changes therein. The study comprised 55 specimens, of which 32 Living in a dynamic landscape had a Mesolithic date. The overall composition of the C/N ratio indicated that most individuals fell into It is difficult to establish to which extent the wetland the terrestrial / freshwater regime, with only a few hunter-gatherers of the 7th and 6th millennium BC are coastal dwellers and a few with an ‘inland’ terrestrial the actual ancestors of the Mesolithic communities signal (Van der Plicht et al. 2016, 115). This aquatic living in the LRA wetlands before and during the signature is readily comparable to that of the Late process of neolithisation. While some have suggested Mesolithic wetland site of Hardinxveld (Smits / Van an inland relocation of hunter-gatherer groups (e. g. der Plicht 2009) and contrasts with Mesolithic in- Newell 1973), it is up to future aDNA research to land sites such as those in a study of the Meuse valley actually establish these connections (Amkreutz et al. (Bocherens et al. 2007). While we cannot estimate the 2017). Nonetheless it is plausible that the wetland effects of differential preservation it is clear that there landscape and its dynamics are comparable to a cer- is much emphasis on a freshwater aquatic diet, which tain extent. The wetland zone where the sequence ethnographically is one of the richest environments of cultural groups from the Late Mesolithic to the for hunter-gatherers (Nicholas 2007). Moreover, the Vlaardingen culture may be situated lies roughly be- study also mapped the diet signals over time. While tween the rivers Scheldt and Elbe (Raemaekers 2019, the reservoir effect prevents calculating the dates to 93; see Fig. 1). The Meuse and several Rhine channels absolute ones, the relative pattern demonstrates that run east to west, and the area was under continuous the diet of the Doggerland inhabitants became more influence from the rising sea level. The coastal envi- Lu c A m k re u tz 319 ronment in the west did not stabilise until the start of If we review the characteristics of the communi- the 4th millennium calBC. East of this zone there was ties in the LRA wetlands between c. 5,000 and 3,000 an area with tidal flats, salt marshes and low dunes. calBC, focussing on the human-environment relation- This area knew both brackish and freshwater envi- ship, then many aspects of their habitation and liveli- ronments that shifted over time. Further east in the hood (cf. Whittle 2003) can be connected to such a riverine area and the Scheldt basin further south the flexible disposition and interaction with the environ- freshwater wetlands consisted of peat swamps, lakes ment. While this has been elaborately discussed else- and streams where Pleistocene river dunes – ‘donken’ where (Amkreutz 2013a, ch. 8 and 9) I will underline – formed dry inhabitable patches. In the Ijsselmeer some of the major points. basin and around Swifterbant there also largely was a freshwater environment with habitation on levees and Subsistence river dunes (Dusseldorp / Amkreutz 2020, and refer- ences). While this wetland landscape geographically Food procurement offers an essential insight into may be characterised as diverse it moreover changed community-environment relationships. The rich wet- over time. The transgression of the sea until c. 4,000 land landscape offered many resources to its inhab- calBC resulted in peat growth and an eastward shift of itants. As such there was little incentive to quickly the system of beach barriers, lagunas and peat marsh, adopt agriculture also in view of the fact that many while later on, after the drop in sea level rise, there locations were likely unsuitable for large scale crop was an outwards extension of the beach barriers (Vos farming or husbandry. Instead the new Neolithic ele- / Kiden 2005; Dusseldorp / Amkreutz 2020). The ments were incorporated in what has been termed an many shifts over time also will have had their effects ‘extended broad spectrum economy’, broadening the on the vegetation and wildlife, while marine incur- range of available resources (cf. Louwe Kooijmans sions and peat growth at times made certain areas 1998; 2007). At the same time while domesticates uninhabitable. In conclusion it may be stated that this and cultigens increasingly contributed to subsis- landscape was never stable and always in flux. In turn, tence, the practices and native knowledge of hunt- its occupants, while benefiting from the riches of a ing, gathering and fishing also remained important wetland environment could only do so by operating in (Amkreutz 2013a, 427; see Fig. 6). If we take the a flexible and pragmatic manner – although the latter faunal remains as an indicator of neolithisation then is more of a modern research frame. these primarily reflect the natural exploitation pos- Fig. 6 Faunal spectra documented at a number of wetland and wetland margin sites between 5,500 and 2,500 calBC. Clearly visible is the continued importance of wild faunal resources until well into the Late Neolithic (adapted from Dusseldorp/Amkreutz 2015, fig. 3). 320 A view from Dogge r l an d – i nte r preti n g the Mesolithic-N eolithic transition in the wetlands of the Rhine-Meuse de lt a sibilities of the environment, both regarding hunting habitants indicated that marine foods actually ac- and farming (e. g. Amkreutz 2013, 427; cf. also Rae- counted for a large proportion of the diet (Smits / maekers 1999; 2003). As such the predominance of Van der Plicht 2009). Recently it has been suggested domesticated fauna is mainly a feature of coastal and that this signal may also derive from the consump- potentially wetland margin sites from the Hazendonk tion of (for instance) meat from cattle grazing on group onwards, however, as late as the Vlaardingen the salt marsh as indicated by their isotopic values. culture there are distinctly different domestic sites, It is likely that both strategies were going on as the such as Hekelingen 3. These sites have a more varied authors conclude (Kamjan et al. 2020, 15), and the faunal composition, and their records show that wild puzzle remains difficult to entangle. Also evidence resources (at Hekelingen 3 over 50 %) remained an postdating Schipluiden indicates that one site should important aspect of subsistence (Amkreutz 2013a, not be interpreted as the norm. 427). The contribution of crop cultivation is more dif- In conclusion it appears that adopting produc- ficult to establish (Out 2009, 445), but also appears ing modes of food procurement did not always have to have been of greater importance in the coastal the repercussions we assume they do, based on our areas, while there is positive information for small- often used Neolithic perspective (Whittle / Cum- scale cultivation, for instance around the Swifterbant mings 2007). The flexibility and independent choices sites (Huisman / Raemaekers 2014). This indicates of the communities involved are also emphasised by that well into the late Neolithic there is a range of the Delfland case-study (Louwe Kooijmans 2009), different wetland ‘livelihoods’ existing side by side. where largely contemporaneous Hazendonk-group Moreover, the supposed agricultural character of sites such as Schipluiden, Ypenburg and Rijswijk, sites such as Schipluiden is also to be seen more which are situated in close proximity and within nuanced. Hallowed as the the first site that yield- comparable geographical and ecological contexts, ed convincing evidence for a complete ‘Neolithic’, display distinctly different choices in subsistence including crop agriculture, animal husbandry and procurement, settlement layout and occupation dy- year-round occupation (Louwe Kooijmans 2006), namics over time. All of this speaks of a range of the stable isotope analysis of the skeletons of its in- pursued strategies, the use of which is sometimes Fig. 7 Cartogram of the hypothetical range of site relationships for the Late Neolithic Vlaardingen culture based on the economic, struc- tural and seasonal information of excavated Vlaardingen sites (cf. Amkreutz 2013a, ch. 8). Site relations are hypothetical, but the evidence allows for multiple systems instead of one focused on permanent settlement and subordinate site relations (after Amkreutz 2013a, fig. 8.9). Lu c A m k re u tz 321 rather experimental or haphazard even (Amkreutz Louwe Kooijmans 2009). Even until the Vlaardingen 2013a, 431), much in line with the flexible disposition culture occupation there is evidence for year-round that occupants of a dynamic wetland environment permanency and an agricultural subsistence base, benefit from. predominantly in the coastal areas, while the fresh- water tidal and peat marsh areas continue to offer op- Seasonality, mobility and investment portunities for logistical mobility and non-permanent residential sites (Amkreutz 2013a, 431). How all The flexibility indicated by the subsistence mode these sites function in relation to one another will is mirrored in site-use, mobility and the settlement be a task for future research, but to group them in a system in general for this period and region. It is subordinate system when the first permanent settle- argued (Amkreutz 2013a, 428) that while activities ments develop is too easy a scenario that does not sit were seasonally specific, the freshwater wetlands well with the diversity of data available. were also always residentially inhabited (Fig. 7). This domestic occupation continues into the Vlaardingen culture as demonstrated by sites such as Hekelin- Human-environment interaction and gen, Vlaardingen, Hellevoetsluis and Hazerswoude. integrative strategies Here there is a substantially wild component in the economy, combined with sites that may not have Our perspectives on the long process of neolithisation been occupied permanently, but at least seasonally may benefit from new ideas on human-environment as residential sites (Amkreutz 2013a, 428). Both interaction. This demands that we overcome seeing these locations, but also sites such as Schipluiden the landscape as an economic backdrop and instead in the coastal area, are moreover characterised by perceive it as an important agent in the structuring an architecture of often rebuilt houses or huts, often of its inhabitants. There is a profuse amount of eth- constructed of alder posts with a small diameter and nographic and archaeological literature on the way short use life (Amkreutz 2013a). in which landscape shapes its occupants over time2 – It may be argued that from the Hazendonk peri- and it is likely that, much in line with the Doggerland od onwards there is increasing evidence that a signifi- example above, the dynamics of the LRA wetland cant contribution of agriculture also changed aspects environment will have shaped the inhabitation and of the settlement systems. Overall there appears to therewith the character of the communities occupy- be a trend from seasonal residential moves, com- ing it. Reasoning from Ingold’s dwelling perspective bined with logistical mobility in the Late Mesolithic (Ingold 2000), there is a distinct interwoveness be- and Early Swiferbant period, towards permanent tween people, places, and environment. Landscape settlement combined with logistical mobility from and environment have certain structural conditions, the Hazendonk period onwards. Although in this but also have a distinct structuring agency (Barrett perspective permanent agricultural settlements such 2000). For the LRA wetlands the internal dynamics as Schipluiden may take on a ‘fixed’ position they of this environment would have been an important do not determine the system. There remains a range factor and people will have dealt with these. Pro- of viable options in which seasonal occupation of cesses of flooding, peat growth, waterlogging and semi-agrarian to non-agrarian residential settlements changing compositions of resources, routes, networks can be determined until well into the Vlaardingen and inhabitable places would have been part of these culture. For instance the freshwater wetland site of dynamics. As most of these were gradual, they were Hazendonk during the Vlaardingen phase 1b forms the stuff of generations, much like the drowning of a good example (Louwe Kooijmans / Verbruggen Doggerland, but at times changes were also swift, 2011): there the presence of a palisade and evidence unexpected and dramatic. Instead of perceiving these of (semi-)permanent occupation is combined with as misfortunes or even catastrophes (Leary 2009), much terrestrial hunting (cf. Amkreutz 2013a, 400). it is more likely that the long-term relationship of Mobility and seasonality remained important, per- these communities with their wetland environment manent occupation was part of a range of options made them something natural and expected. The and probably co-existed alongside and interacted fluidity of the environment over time again promoted with other systems. There appears to be a distinct sense of group agency that allows for the operation of different types of settlement systems and even dif- 2 E. g. De Coppet 1985; Ingold 2000; Harrison 2004; Van ferent choices within the same ecological zone (cf. de Noort/O’Sullivan 2006; Leary 2009. 322 A view from Dogge r l an d – i nte r preti n g the Mesolithic-N eolithic transition in the wetlands of the Rhine-Meuse de lt a flexibility of the communities inhabiting it. A good spectrum economy to a perspective that actually example of this is the fact that some sites such as investigates its operationalisation over time. This Hazendonk were used over long periods of many means moving from economy to strategies including centuries. Rather than abandoning these places they mobility, symbiosis, interdependence, group interac- assumed new roles and became persistent places tion and exchange within resource networks. Un- within continuing settlement systems (Amkreutz derstanding wetland communities by studying these 2013b; 2013c). integrative strategies (Amkreutz 2013a, 430) – which Taking this into account it is perhaps good to cannot be detached from the wetland environment – review the introduction of new resources within the is more beneficial for understanding their position in process of neolithisation. It appears that people were the process of neolithisation than merely focusing on not dominated by environmental change (Van de subsistence and economics (often through the lens Noort / O’Sullivan 2006, 25), but rather adjusted of faunal remains’ composition). aspects of their way-of-life without fundamental change (Amkreutz 2013a, 429). This attunement to a changing environment in space and time sits well A long transition and a model of with the development of an extended broad spectrum attunement base as proposed by Louwe Kooijmans (1998). The incorporation of new resources, agricultural products It is clear that the choice between a short or long and eventually practices alongside existing ones may transition towards agriculture for the LRA wetland have offered many benefits for dealing with or buff- communities is strongly dependent upon the accents ering against shortages. At the same time it appears one places with food procurement, the settlement that these new resources at no point were really seen system and the presence or absence of indicators. It as something extraordinary, and while over time is telling that different research groups focusing on an increasing investment in crop cultivation and the same area and process argue partly in favour of husbandry will have changed the existing rhythms, a long transition (Crombé et al. 2020, 11; Dussel­ these new practices very much also became part of dorp / Amkreutz 2020) and a long substitution a very flexible habitus. It is therefore wise to move phase, while others placing different accents argue from the economic perspective of the extended broad for a more rapid introduction and turnover at the end Fig. 8 A ‘new’ availablity model, focusing on ‘attunement’ and abandoning Neolithic directionality (after Amkreutz 2013a, fig. 10.2). Lu c A m k re u tz 323 of the fifth millennium calBC (Çakirlar et al. 2020; The phase of attunement would see the temporary Kamjan et al. 2020). In a way this perhaps already acceptance of a new actor in the network whereby demonstrates that the area of the Low Countries was implementation depends on the degree to which the home to different processes and that it is not pos- new elements are disruptive. Group consensus and sible to capture just one sequence of events. There- the way in which the ‘identity ‘of the new actor may fore, looking at the communities and their practices be transformed are crucial here. And a final phase as a whole, there is a strong element of continuity would be integration in which the new actor is ac- that stretches across millennia and that points out cepted. This phase would be characterised by the that new knowledge, products and practices did not acculturated local implementation of the new actor lead to any sudden or swift changes. The exciting and the degree of continuity in the existing socio- aspect of this rather is the way different resources cultural moral network (Amkreutz 2013a, 449 – 450). and strategies were used in and between regions, As argued earlier (Amkreutz 2013a, 451) this than the composition of the food economy at cer- ‘new’ model is mainly a semantic rephrasing of the tain sites (Amkreutz 2013a, 535). By reasoning from availability model, but it places a different emphasis the human / non-human relationships in a certain by not foregrounding economic aspects, but a much environment, an idea of a community mindset or wider body of novelties and elements, and by accen- mentalité may be identified (e. g. Descola / Pálsson tuating not quantitative contribution, but the way 1996; Whittle 2003) for these wetland inhabitants. new elements are integrated in communities while They should be studied as ‘total phenomena’: specific at the same time preserving their existing structures types of socio-cultural systems that historically have and mentalité. interacted in finite and comprehensible ways with As such the model does not support the idea that parts of the biosphere (Balée 1998, 24). the first use of domesticates and cultigens involved Reasoning from this perspective it is arguable a new conception of the relationship between hu- that this system which roots in the Mesolithic pre- man beings, their environment and time (Bradley vails until well into the Late Neolithic in the LRA 2004, 112), and it questions the degree to which do- wetlands. From this point of view a (very) long tran- mesticates and cultigens should take centre stage in sition would be the most plausible characterisation. studies on neolithisation (Amkreutz 2013a, 451). It This also allows us to reconsider the much used may be much more realistic, reasoning from a hunter- and criticised availability system. At the base of this gatherer perspective, that they were less alien and should be the human-environment relationships disruptive than we expect. and the general idea that among hunter-gatherers there is a sense of ‘a giving environment’ (cf. Bird- David 1992a; b), where there exist equal relation- Conclusion ships between people and their environment and where there is no particular distinction between The foregoing remarks have been an exercise in view- nature and culture. As such new elements that oc- points. Taking inspiration from Doggerland and the cur with the advent of the Neolithic may be seen dynamic implications for its inhabitants, the aim was as new actors in this giving environment. Actor to offer a new perspective on the process of neolithisa- Network Theory (ANT; e. g. Callon 1986; Latour tion in the wetland area of the LRA. While the discus- 2004) offers a means to study this as new actors sion on the economic composition of sites over time in a network, which in this case could be anything and their position in the transition to agriculture is from polished axes to cows, and from migrating farm- of distinct importance, it is argued here that it may ers to knowledge of cultivation practices. They are be more useful, or at least insightful, to adopt a dif- accepted in a number of stages that allow a new ferent perspective as well. This perspective should be actor to settle in existing structures without seri- grounded in the notion that there exists a long-term ously disrupting them. Drawing inspiration from and meaningful relationship between communities this theory the model of availability, substitution and and their landscape and environment. In the case of consolidation (cf. Zvelebil 1986) may be replaced by the LRA wetlands this relationship is characterised one of ‘acquaintance’, ‘attunement’ and ‘integration’ by environmental dynamics and by a resulting com- (Amkreutz 2013a, 449 – 450; see Fig. 8). The phase munity mindset or mentalité that benefits from a flex- of acquaintance would involve the existing actors ible attitude towards change and from integrating a to become aware of a new element in the network, variety of strategies. As such it argues there is more to and certain elements may be in favour or against it. be learned from studying these communities against 324 A view from Dogge r l an d – i nte r preti n g the Mesolithic-N eolithic transition in the wetlands of the Rhine-Meuse de lt a the background of the process of neolithisation, then Barlow 2006: K. R. Barlow, A formal model for predicting the other way around. Furthermore this enables us agriculture among the Fremont. In: D. J. Kennett / B. to look at neolithisation from the perspective of the Winterhalder (eds.), Behavioral ecology and the transi- communities and processes involved whereby new tion to agriculture (Los Angeles 2006) 87 – 102. elements are attuned to existing rhythms and practices, Barrett 2000: J.C. Barrett, A thesis on agency. In: M. A. and where there is room for flexibility, change and Dobres / J. E. Robb (eds.), Agency in archaeology (Lon- dynamic interaction. It is less the question of when, don 2000) 61 – 6 8. where and why we became Neolithic and more of Bird-David 1992a: N. Bird-David, Beyond ‘the original how communities negotiated the process we define affluent society’: a culturalist reformulation. Current as neolithisation while (also) remaining themselves. Anthropology 33(1), 1992, 25 – 47. Bird-David 1992b: N. Bird-David, Beyond ‘the hunting and gathering mode of subsistence’: culturesensitive observa- References tions on the Nayaka and other modern hunter-gatherers. Man 27, 1992, 19 – 4 4. Amkreutz 2013a: L. W. S. W. Amkreutz, Persistent tradi- Bocherens et al. 2007: H. Bocherens / C. Polet / M. Toussaint, tions: a long-term perspective on communities in the Palaeodiet of Mesolithic and Neolithic populations of process of Neolithisation in the Lower Rhine Area Meuse basin (Belgium): evidence from stable isotopes. (5500 – 2 500 cal BC) (Leiden 2013). Journal of Archaeological Science 34(1), 2007, 10 – 27. Amkreutz 2013b: L. W. S. W. Amkreutz, Home is when you Bradley 2004: R. Bradley, Domestication, sedentism, build it. Characteristics of building and occupation in property and time: materiality and the beginnings of the Lower Rhine Area wetlands (5500 – 2 500 cal BC). agriculture in Northern Europe. In: E. Demarrais / C. In: D. Hofmann / J. Smyth (eds.), Tracking the Neolithic Gosden / C. Renfrew (eds.), Rethinking materiality. The house in Europe. Sedentism, architecture and practice engagement of mind with the material world (Cambridge (New York 2013) 229 – 260. 2004) 107 – 115. Amkreutz 2013c: L. W. S. W. Amkreutz, Memorious monu- Çakırlar et al. 2020: C. Çakırlar / R. Breider / F. Kools- ments. Place persistency, mortuary practice and mem- tra / K. Cohen / D. Raemaekers, Dealing with domes- ory in the Lower Rhine Area wetlands (5500 – 2 500 cal tic animals in the fifth millennium cal BC Dutch wet- BC). In: D. Fontijn / A. Louwen / S. van der Vaart / lands: new insights from old Swifterbant assemblages. K. Wentink (eds.), Beyond barrows. Current research In: K. J. Gron / L. Sørensen / P. Rowley-Conwy (eds.), on the structuration and perception of the prehistoric Farmers at the frontier. A pan-European Perspective on landscape through monuments (Leiden 2013) 43 – 80. Neolithisation (Oxford 2020) 264 – 287. Amkreutz / Spithoven 2019: L. W. S. W. Amkreutz / M. Callon 1986: M. Callon, Some elements of a sociology of Spithoven, Hunting beneath the waves. Bone and antler translation: domestication of the scallops and the fisher- points from the North sea Doggerland off the Dutch men of St Brieuc Bay. In: J. Law (ed.), Power, action and coast. In: D. Groß / H. Lübke / J. Meadows / D. Jantzen belief: a new sociology of knowledge? (London 1986) (eds.), Working at the sharp end: from bone and antler to 196 – 223. Early Mesolithic life in Northern Europe. Untersuchun- Coles 1998: B. Coles, Doggerland: a speculative survey. gen und Materialien zur Steinzeit in Schleswig-Holstein Proc. Prehist. Soc. 64, 1998, 45 – 81. und im Ostseeraum 10 (Kiel/ Hamburg 2019) 383 – 404. Crombé et al. 2020: P. Crombé / K. Aluwé / M. Boudin / Amkreutz / Van der Vaart-Verschoof 2021: L. Amkreutz / C. Snoeck / L. Messiaen / D. Teeteart, New evidence S. Van der Vaart-Verschoof (eds.), Doggerland. Verd- on the earliest domesticated animals and possible small- wenen wereldin de Noordzee. (Leiden 2021). scale husbandry in Atlantic NW Europe. Scientific Amkreutz et al. 2017: L. W. S. W. Amkreutz / M. Niekus / Reports 10,2020: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020- D. Schiltmans / B. Smit, Meer dan bijvangst! De prehis- 77002-4. torische archeologie van de Noordzee. Cranium 34(1), Czerniak 1998: L. Czerniak, The Neolithic – what’s that? 2017, 34 – 47. In: M. Zvelebil / R. Dennell / L. Domańska (eds.), Bakels 1986: C. C. Bakels, Akkerbouw in het moeras? In: ­Harvesting the sea, farming the forest: the emergence M. C. van Trierum / H. E. Henkes (eds.), Rotterdam of Neolithic societies in the Baltic region (Sheffield Papers V, a contribution to prehistoric, Roman and me- 1998) 29 – 31. dieval archaeology (Rotterdam 1986) 1 – 6. De Coppet 1985: D. De Coppet, Land owns people. In: R. H. Balée 1998: W. Balée, Historical ecology: premises and Barnes / D. de Coppet / R. J. Parkin (eds.), In contexts postulates. In: W. Balée (ed.), Advances in historical and levels: anthropological essays on hierarchy (Oxford ecology (New York 1998) 13 – 29. 1985) 78 – 9 0. Lu c A m k re u tz 325 Descola / Pálsson 1996: P. Descola / G. Pálsson, Introduc- Louwe Kooijmans 1998: L. P. Louwe Kooijmans, Under- tion. In: P. Descola / G. Pálsson (eds.), Nature and society. standing the Meso-/Neolithic Frontier in the Lower Anthropological perspectives (New York 1996) 1 – 21. Rhine Basin, 5300 – 4300 cal BC. In: M. Edmonds / Dusseldorp / Amkreutz 2015: G.  L. Dusseldorp / C. Richards (eds.), Social life and social change: The L. W. S. W. Amkreutz, Foraging for farmers? An evo- Neolithic of North-Western Europe (Glasgow 1998) lutionary perspective on the process of Neolithisation 407 – 427. in NW Europe – A case study from the Low Countries. Louwe Kooijmans 2003: L.  P. Louwe Kooijmans, The Prähistorische Zeitschrift 90, 2015, 20 – 4 4. Hardinxveld sites in the Rhine/Meuse Delta, the Neth- Dusseldorp / Amkreutz 2020: G. L. Dusseldorp / L. W. S. erlands, 5500 – 4500 cal BC. In: L. Larsson / H. Kind- W. Amkreutz, A long slow goodbye – re-examining the gren / K. Knutsson / D. Loeffler / A. Åkerlund (eds.), Mesolithic-Neolithic transition (5500 – 2 500 BCE) in Mesolithic on the move. Papers presented at the sixth the Dutch delta. Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia 50 international conference on the Mesolithic in Europe, (Leiden 2020) 121 – 142. Stockholm 2000 (Oxford 2003) 608 – 624. Gaffney et al. 2009: V. Gaffney / S. Fitch / D. Smith, Eu- Louwe Kooijmans 2006: L. P. Louwe Kooijmans, Schiplu- rope’s lost world, the rediscovery of Doggerland. CBA iden: a synthetic view. In: L. P. Louwe Kooijmans / research report 160 (York 2009). P. F. B. Jongste (eds.), Schipluiden, A Neolithic settle- Graeber / Wengrow 2021: D. Graeber / D. Wengrow, ment on the Dutch North Sea coast c. 3500 cal BC. The dawn of everything. A new history of humanity Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia 37/38, 2006, 485 – 516. (London 2021). Louwe Kooijmans 2007: L. P. Louwe Kooijmans, The grad- Gregg 1988: S. A. Gregg, Foragers and farmers. Population ual transition to farming in the Lower Rhine Basin. interaction and agricultural expansion in prehistoric In: A. Whittle / V. Cummings (eds.), Going Over: The Europe (Chicago 1988). Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in North-West Europe. Harrison 2004: S. Harrison, Forgetful and memorious Proceedings of the British Academy 144 (Cardiff 2007) landscapes. Social Anthropology 12(2), 2004, 135 – 151. 287 – 309. Hijma / Cohen 2010: M. P. Hijma / K. M. Cohen, Timing Louwe Kooijmans 2009: L. P. Louwe Kooijmans, The agency and magnitude of the sea-level jump preluding the 8200 factor in the process of Neolithisation – a Dutch case year event. Geology 38, 2010, 275 – 278. study. Journal of Archaeology in the Low Countries Hijma / Cohen 2011: M. P. Hijma / K. M. Cohen, Holocene 1(1), 2009, 27 – 54. transgression of the Rhine river mouth area. Sedimen- Louwe Kooijmans / Verbruggen 2011: L. P. Louwe Kooij- tology 58, 2011, 1435 – 1485. mans / M. Verbruggen, Donken door de eeuwen heen. Huisman / Raemaekers 2014: D. Huisman / D. C. M. Rae- Westerheem 60, 2011, 274 – 287. maekers, Systematic cultivation of the Swifterbant wet- Moree / Sier 2015: J. M. Moree / M. M. Sier (eds.), Inter­ lands (The Netherlands). Evidence from Neolithic tillage disciplinary Archaeological Research Programme marks (c. 4300 – 4000 cal. BC). Journal of Archaoelogical Maasvlakte 2, Rotterdam. BOOR Report No. 566. Part Science 49(1), 2014, 572 – 584. 1: Twenty Meters Deep! The Mesolithic Period at the Ingold 2000: T. Ingold, The perception of the environment. Yangtze Harbour Site – Rotterdam Maasvlakte, the Essays in livelihood, dwelling and skill (London 2000). Netherland. BOORrapporten 566 (Rotterdam 2015). Kamjan et al. 2020: S. Kamjan / R. E. Gillis / C. Çakırlar / Newell 1973: R. R. Newell, The Post-glacial adaptations D. C. M. Raemaekers, Specialized cattle farming in the of the indigenous people of the Northwest European Neolithic Rhine-Meuse Delta: Results from zooarchaeo- Plain. In: S. K. Kozlowski (ed.), The Mesolithic in Europe logical and stable isotope (δ 18O, δ 13C, δ 15N) analyses. (Warsaw 1973) 399 – 4 40. PLoS ONE 15(10): e0240464. https://doi.org/10.1371/ Nicholas 2007: G. P. Nicholas, Prehistoric hunter-gatherers journal. pone.0240464. in wetland environments: theoretical issues, economic Latour 2004: B. Latour, Politics of nature: how to bring organisation and resource management strategies. In: the sciences into democracy (Cambridge [MA] 2004). M. Lillie / S. Ellis (eds.), Wetland archaeology and envi- Leary 2009: J. Leary, Perceptions of and responses to the ronments. Regional issues, global perspectives (Oxford Holocene flooding of the North Sea lowlands. Oxford 2007) 46 – 6 4. Journal of Archaeology 28(3), 2009, 227 – 2 37. Out 2008: W. A. Out, Neolithisation at the site Brandwijk- Louwe Kooijmans 1987: L. P. Louwe Kooijmans, Neolithic Kerkhof, the Netherlands. Vegetation History and Ar- settlement and subsistence in the wetlands of the Rhine/ chaeobotany 17, 2008, 25 – 39. Meuse delta of the Netherlands. In: J. M. Coles / A. J. Out 2009: W. A. Out, Sowing the seed? Human impact and Lawson (eds.), European wetlands in prehistory (Oxford plant subsistence in Dutch wetlands during the Late 1987) 227 – 2 51. Mesolithic and Early and Middle Neolithic (5500 – 3400 326 A view from Dogge r l an d – i nte r preti n g the Mesolithic-N eolithic transition in the wetlands of the Rhine-Meuse de lt a cal BC). Archaeological Studies Leiden University 18 Smits / Van der Plicht 2009: E. Smits / J. Van der Plicht, (Leiden 2009). Mesolithic and Neolithic human remains in the Nether- Peeters 2007: J. H. M. Peeters, Hoge Vaart-A27 in con- lands: physical anthropological and stable isotope inves- text: towards a model of mesolithic–neolithic land use tigations. Journal of Archaeology in the Low Countries dynamics as a framework for archaeological heritage 1, 2009, 55 – 8 5. management (Amersfoort 2007). Thomas 1999: J. Thomas, Understanding the Neolithic (Lon- Peeters / Amkreutz 2020: J. H. M. Peeters / L. W. S. W. don 1999). Amkreutz, The Netherlands: Probing into the Sub- Tringham 2000: R. Tringham, Southeastern Europe in the merged Landscapes, Archaeology and Palaeontology transition to agriculture in Europe: bridge, buffer or of the Dutch Continental Shelf. In: G. Bailey, N. Galani- mosaic. In: T. D. Price (ed.), Europe’s first farmers (Cam- dou, H. Peeters, H. Jöns and M. Mennenga (eds.), The bridge 2000) 19 – 56. Archaeology of Europe’s Drowned Landscapes. Coastal Van de Noort / O’Sullivan 2006: R. Van de Noort/A. Research Library 35 (2020) https://doi.org/10.1007/978- O’Sullivan, Rethinking wetland archaeology (London 3-030-37367  –  2 _8. 2006). Peeters / Momber 2014: J. H. M. Peeters / G. Momber, Van der Plicht et al. 2016: J. Van der Plicht / L. W. S. W. The southern North Sea and the human occupation of Amkreutz / M. J. L. Th. Niekus / J. H. M. Peeters / northwestern Europe after the Last Glacial Maximum. B. I. Smit, Surf’n turf in Doggerland: dating, stable iso- Neth. J. Geosci. 93, 2014, 55 – 70. topes and diet of Mesolithic human remains from the Peeters et. al. 2019: J. H. M. Peeters / L. W. S. W. Amkreutz / southern North Sea. Journal of Archaeological Science K. M. Cohen / M. P. Hijma, North Sea Prehistory Re- Reports 10, 2016, 110 – 118. search and Management Framework (NSPRMF) 2019. Verhart 2000: L. B. M. Verhart, Times fade away. The Retuning the research and management agenda for pre- Neolithization of the Southern Netherlands in an anth- historic landscapes and archaeology in the Dutch sector ropological and geographical perspective. Archaeologi- of the continental shelf. Nederlandse Archeologische cal Studies Leiden University 6 (Leiden 2000). Rapporten 63 (Amersfoort 2019). Vos / Kiden 2005: P.C. Vos / P. Kiden, De landschapsvor- Politis 1996: G. Politis, Moving to produce: Nukak mobility ming tijdens de steentijd. In: J. Deeben / E. Drenth / and settlement patterns in Amazonia. World Archaeol- M.-F. van Oorsouw / L.B. M. Verhart (eds.), De steentijd ogy 27(3), 1996, 492 – 511. van Nederland. Archeologie 11/12 (Zutphen 2005) 7 – 38. Raemaekers 1999: D. C. M. Raemaekers, The articulation Whittle 2003: A. Whittle, The Archaeology of People: Di- of a ‘new Neolithic’: The meaning of the Swifterbant mensions of Neolithic Life (London 2003). culture for the process of neolithisation in the western Whittle / Cummings 2007: A. Whittle / V. Cummings, part of the North European Plain (4900 – 3400 BC). Ar- Introduction: transitions and transformations. In: A. chaeological Studies Leiden University 3 (Leiden 1999). Whittle / V. Cummings (eds.), Going Over: the Me- Raemaekers 2003: D. C. M. Raemaekers, Cutting a long solithic-Neolithic Transition in North-West Europe. story short? The process of neolithisation in the Dutch Proceedings of the British Academy 144 (Cardiff 2007) Delta re-examined. Antiquity 77, 2003, 780 – 789. 1 – 4. Raemaekers 2019: D.  C.  M. Raemaekers, Taboo? The Zvelebil 1986: M. Zvelebil, Mesolithic prelude and Neolithic process of Neolthisation in the Dutch wetlands re-exa- revolution. In: M. Zvelebil (ed.), Hunters in transition. mined (5000 – 3400 cal BC). In: D. Hofmann / R. Gleser Mesolithic societies of Eurasia and their transition to (eds.), Contacts, boundaries and innovation in the fifth farming (Cambridge 1986) 5 – 15. millennium. Exploring developed Neolithic societies Zvelebil 1998: M. Zvelebil, Agricultural frontiers, Neolithic in central Europe and beyond (Leiden 2019) 91 – 102. origins, and the transition to farming in the Baltic Ba- Raemaekers et al. 2013: D. C. M. Raemaekers / L. Kubiak- sin. In: M. Zvelebil / R. Dennell / L. Dománska (eds.), Martens / T. F. M. Oudemans, New food in old pots. Harvesting the sea, farming the forest. The emergence Charred organic residues in Early NEolithic creamic of Neolithic societies in the Baltic Region (Sheffield vessels from Swifterbant, The Netherlands (4300 – 4000 1998) 9 – 28. cla BC). Archäologisches Korrespondenzblat 43, 2013, Zvelebil / Lillie 2000: M. Zvelebil / M. Lillie, Transition 315 – 334. to agriculture in Eastern Europe. In: T. D. Price (ed.), Schulting 2011: R.  J. Schulting, Mesolithic-Neolithic Europe’s first farmers (Cambridge 2000) 57 – 92. Transitions: An isotopic tour through Europe. In: R. Zvelebil / Rowley-Conwy 1984: M. Zvelebil / P. Rowley- Pinhasi / J. T. Stock (eds.), Human Bioarchaeology of Conwy, Transition to farming in Northern Europe: a the Transition to Agriculture (New York 2011) 17 – 41. hunter-gatherer perspective. Norwegian Archaeology Review 17(2), 1984, 104 – 127. Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 , 327  – 341) 327 Supra-regional contacts and the earliest metallurgy in southern Scandinavia during the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition Anne Birgitte Gebauer and Lasse Sørensen Abstract During the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in Europe and the Near East, four exotic materials (obsidian, amphibolite, jadeite, and copper) were acquired from distant regions through complex networks of interaction, in addition to the domes- ticates. In this paper we focus on the network emerging by investigations of the distribution of amphibolite, jadeite, and copper, as objects made from these raw materials are interpreted as important items connected to the introduction of the Neolithic/agrarian lifestyle and ideology in southern Scandinavia. Keywords Network, raw materials, South Scandinavia, neolithisation, ideology Zusammenfassung Während des Übergangs vom Mesolithikum zum Neolithikum in Europa und im Nahen Osten wurden neben Haustieren auch vier exotische Rohmaterialien (Obsidian, Amphibolit, Jadeit und Kupfer) aus weit entfernten Regionen über komplexe Kontaktnetzwerke bezogen. Der Aufsatz setzt sich auf Basis der Untersuchung von Amphibolit, Jadeit und Kupfer mit der Verbreitung solcher Funde und den aufkommenden Netzwerken auseinander. Nach der Interpretation der Autoren waren Objekte aus diesen exotischen Rohstoffen für die Menschen wichtig und spielten daher eine Rolle für die Ein- führung der neuen neolithischen Wirtschaftsweise sowie die Ideologie dieser Zeit in Südskandinavien. Introduction adoption of adaptations. The risks associated with the newly limited mobility connected to the farm- Already during the Upper Palaeolithic period, net- ing lifestyle were countered by the intensification of works of varying demographic size and geographic the exchange networks that enabled the sharing of scale were operating, and by sharing and exchanging resources, information, and genes, but also the emer- exotic materials and objects, people extended and gence of monopolisation and secrecy (Ibáñez et al. intensified their networks, which led to an elaboration 2016). Exchange may also have played a role as a of material culture (Gamble 1998, 432, 442). People means of establishing mutual social relations and realised that their extensive networks consisted of commitments of future collaboration in order to re- many people who they might never meet and/or get duce risks related to resource shortages (Wiessner to know. 1982). In addition, a shared cultural background cre- The intensification of exchange networks marks ated by exchange relationships may have suppressed a significant change at the beginning of the Neolith- tendencies towards suspicion and hostility towards ic. According to Watkins (2008, 165; in prep.), the others in case of inter-communal conflict (Ibáñez et al. first large-scale human communities emerging at the 2016, 21). Epipalaeolithic-Neolithic transformation in the Near East engaged in intensive networking with extensive ‘super-communities’. The super-communities during Actor Network Theory the Neolithic were much larger than the extended net- works of the Upper Palaeolithic and included larger, A network is traditionally associated with a group or permanently settled, local communities (Watkins system of interconnected humans, but recent inves- 2017). The benefits of participation in these expanded tigations have argued with the proposal of the Actor networks included a diversification of culture and the Network Theory that all entities of both human or capacity for innovations with rapid evaluation and non-humankind can act within one or several network 328 Supra-regional contacts and the earliest metallurgy in southern Scandinavia during the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition Fig.  1 A small world network (shown in the middle) processes connections between both remote localities and neighbouring com- munities, thus contributing to high global as well as local network effi- ciencies. Properties of small world networks are intermediate be- tween those of the lattice and the random network as they are highly clustered like the former yet have small path lenghts like the latter. (after Zhao et al. 2015, fig. 2. Open access available by license CC BY 4.0). connections, depending on the different relations and centre. ‘Directional trade’ on the other hand refers to contexts (Latour 1996). As a result, knowledge and a redistribution at central places and an allocation of ideas can be transmitted by both humans and, more commodities by authorities in control of those central importantly, non-human agents. The Actor Network places (Renfrew 1975). The fall-off pattern of the Theory operates with two different types of concepts exchanged goods would then be irregular, with com- regarding the exchange of information. Intermediaries modities concentrating at sites with preferential access are entities which transport information to another to materials being exchanged. A systemic relationship entity without any transformation. Mediators on the between the two models of exchange and social forms other hand are entities which multiply differences or has been proposed, with Neolithic egalitarian societies imitations such as material objects that may be in- being associated with the down-the-line exchange and vestigated in the archaeological material. Behind the more advanced ranked societies with directional ex- exchange of mediators lies a whole range of traditions, change (Renfrew et al. 1966; 1968; Renfrew / Dixon routinized practices, or obligations connected with 1976). However, the simple transfer of goods between social interactions between human beings. Mediators neighbouring sites implied in the down-the-line model may be exchanged directly between people as gifts. has been questioned based on both archaeological and If, however, a mediator changes hands several times ethnographic data (Hodder 1974; Wiessner 1982; ending up in more marginal areas of a network, the Ibáñez et al. 2015, 10). original meaning and ideas associated with this object On the contrary, Ibáñez et al. (2016, 23) suggest may change to something different or a hybrid of infor- that complex networks can emerge without any spe- mation depending on the context (Wobst 1977). The cific agents controlling the interaction – mentioning hybrids of objects, ideas, and knowledge can in turn Wikipedia as a modern example. Such ‘small-world create new networks and result in the disappearance networks’ are characterised by a combination of regu- of other networks. Using the Actor Network Theory lar and short interaction links joining neighbouring in archaeological research makes sense, as cultures, agents, in addition to some sporadic links between styles, depositional practices, and technologies can be distant agents. The model has been used in a recent associated with networks of contact expressed through analysis of obsidian exchange (Watts / Strogatz objects, burials, and structures. 1998; Ortega et al. 2014; 2016; Ibáñez 2016, 19; see Fig. 1). In practical terms, sporadic but substantial and distant exchange may have taken place through Documentation of networks in visiting trade expeditions as well as exchange associ- archaeological context? ated with feasting at various occasions or seasonal movement related to subsistence. Also, several tribes Beyond the scale of networks as a phenomenon, might have met and bartered at designated sites or the character of their operation has been widely dis- middlemen may have mediated in exchange affairs cussed within cultural historical contexts. The model (Ibáñez et al. 2016, 20). of ‘down-the-line exchange’ is based on reciprocity between regularly interconnected sites each playing Exchange objects and their role? the same role in the network. This wealth produces a pattern of even fall-off in the amount of exchanged Considerable efforts were invested by prehistoric com- goods depending on the distance from the production munities in exchanging certain objects within large Anne Birgitte Gebauer and Lasse Sørensen 329 Fig. 2 Distribution of shoe-last axes in agrarian and hunter-gatherer societies in Europe. Ertebølle (red) and Swifterbant (green) cultures, with the primary source of amphibolite in northern Bohemia marked by a star (after Klassen 2004; Raemaekers et al. 2011; Bernardini et al. 2012; Verhart 2012). scale networks lasting for centuries.1 The raw materials ite amphibolite, and copper were chosen because of are all exotic ones, procured at specific or limited plac- the properties of the various materials. Obsidian with es, and easily recognizable through their colour. The its recognisable black glass colour is also the sharp- objects thus acted as visible symbols and mediators est lithic material available for making cutting tools. within specific exchange patterns and networks. Raw Jadeitite and amphibolite are some of the toughest materials such as obsidian, jadeitite, nephrite, eclog- metamorphic rocks prehistoric people could exploit for making axes or adzes, both materials requiring a long time to grind and polish. Besides its reddish 1  Radivojević et al. 2010; Bernardini et al. 2012; Pétrequin golden colour, the metal copper can not only be re- et al. 2012; Milić 2014; 2016. sharpened but also re-melted and transformed into 330 Supra-regional contacts and the earliest metallurgy in southern Scandinavia during the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition new objects. These functional advantages, together ley 1990; Klassen 2004). From 4,600 calBC shoe-last with such objects’ rarity and visual quality, raise the axes came to southern Scandinavia from the Neolithic question whether they might be characterised as a Rössen culture, where the majority of these objects primitive form of currency, perhaps with a symbolic date from 4,300 to 4,000 calBC (Klassen 2004). The role within Neolithic societies? Such qualities may lack of local imitations of shoe-last axes within late explain the surprising resilience of these exchange net- Ertebølle or Swifterbant contexts suggests that any works (Pétrequin et al. 2008, 264; Ibanez 2016, 23). ideas behind the axes as a mediator of agrarian ideas Furthermore, the appearance of complex networks of and ideology may have been lost in hunter-gatherer interaction may have played a role in the origin of the communities. Neolithic by enabling a rapid and efficient spread of Alpine jade axes were produced from raw ma- innovations across the Near East.2 terials found in the western Italian Alps between 5,200 – 4,700 calBC and circulated for several hundreds of years over vast areas in western Europe, with a Southern Scandinavia on the periphery limited number of axes reaching southeastern Europe of four trans-European networks (Klassen 2004, 83; Pétrequin et al. 2008, 264; Sø- rensen 2014, 142; see Fig. 3). Even earlier green stone During the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in Europe axes were exchanged between the jadeitite sources and the Near East, four exotic materials (obsidian, found on the Greek island of Syros and some of the amphibolite, jadeite, and copper) were acquired earliest farming communities in Anatolia dating back from distant regions through complex networks of to 6,500 calBC (Sørensen et al. 2017). The occur- interaction, in addition to domesticates. The scale of rence of Alpine jade axes of the late Puy type seems Neolithic networking was first explored by Renfrew to correlate in part with the opening of the flint mines and his collaborators through quantitative analysis of in the Paris basin, Normandy, and Belgium around the obsidian distribution in the Near East (Renfrew 4,300 – 4,200 calBC. The transfer of Alpine axe heads et al. 1968, 328; Watkins 2008, 155). Obsidian was to Britain may correspond to the initial neolithisation acquired in central and eastern Anatolia as well as on of the British Isles around 4,000 calBC (Pétrequin a few Mediterranean islands and circulated over dis- et al. 2008, 276). tances of several hundred kilometers in the Near East About ten large Alpine jade axes reached Den- and the Mediterranean area during several millennia mark; most of them seem to have been distributed between c. 10,000 – 3,600 calBC (Ibáñez et al. 2016; from secondary centres in the Paris basin or Morbi- Milić 2016). In addition, obsidian from the Carpath- han, where they had been re-polished and re-shaped ian area was used in southeast Europe and also in (Petrequin 2013, 91). The dating of these Alpine jade Poland, but never spread further north to southern axes is uncertain, because most of them are stray finds, Scandinavia (Williams-Thorpe et al. 1984). and because of their extended circulation time (Klas- The amphibolite used for the shoe-last axes sen 2004, 83; Sørensen 2012, 82). Nevertheless, local (‘Schuhleistenkeile’) derived from outcrops located imitations of the alpine jade axes made of flint, local in the Czech Republic or Slovakia. Shoe-last axes were rock types, and copper suggest a dating to the early distributed in central Europe via the major rivers, such Neolithic period of the northern Funnel Beaker cul- as the Elbe, Saale, and Oder from c. 5,000 to 4,000 ture (Klassen 2004, 84, 89; 2010, 40, 42; 2012, 86; calBC by a large Neolithic network that also included Sørensen 2014, 154 fig. V.90 – 91). As in Britain, these hunter-gatherer groups from the Ertebølle and Swifter- Alpine jade axes have been interpreted as a kind of bant cultures in the north3 (Fig. 2). Besides being used mediator of agrarian ideology, perhaps even associ- for heavy wood-working (such as the construction of ated with pioneering farmers (Sørensen 2012, 84). large trapezoidal longhouses), the shoe-last axes also The fourth major network involved the use of had an important symbolic meaning to some of the copper and the spread of this metal in the Near East earliest central European agrarian cultures, and have and Europe. From the 9th millennium calBC onwards been found in burials, hoards, and at settlements (Lu- native copper, malachite, and azurite were extracted in small quantities in the Near East (Yalcin 2000; Rosenstock et al. 2016, 68). The copper was pro- 2  Bar-Yosef / Belfer-Cohen 1989; Watkins 2008; Price / cessed by cold hammering and annealing into beads, Bar-Yosef 2010; Ibáñez et al. 2016, 24. pendants, and sheet ornaments (Hansen 2013, 137). 3  Fischer 1982; Klassen 2004; Raemaekers et al. 2011; Ber- While the aesthetic allure of these copper ornaments nardini et al. 2012; Verhart 2012; Přichystal 2013, 192. may first have been associated with the ‘Neolithic Anne Birgitte Gebauer and Lasse Sørensen 331 Fig. 3 Distribution of the Alpine jade axes of type Bégude (green) and heavy copper implements (red) from the late 5th millennium. Southern Scandinavia and a part of southeast Europe are the only areas where the two trans-European networks meet (after Klassen et al. 2012, 1281 fig. 1). package’ originating in the Near East, both Europe the Caparthian basin (4,200 – 4,000 calBC) and the and the Near East developed the pyro-technological Slovakian-Moravian region (4,000 – 3,400 calBC). knowledge necessary for the smelting and casting of Thus, between 6,000 – 3,400 calBC the distribution of copper around the turn of the 5th and 6th millennium.4 early copper shows a dynamic interaction between From the late 6th to the middle 5th millennium southeastern and central Europe, while western Eu- the earliest evidence of metallurgy is associated with rope is barely involved and the connection to northern the Vinca culture in the central Balkans, while later Europe is unclear (Fig. 3). centres of metallurgical activity changed from the The earliest evidence of metallurgy in central Bulgarian west Pontic area (4,600 – 4,200 calBC) to Europe in the form of crucibles and slag has been found at a few settlements in Austria dating from the late 5th and early 4th millennium (Brixlegg, Bisamberg- Hochfeld, and Keutschacher See) and at Makotrasy 4  Boric 2009, 237; Roberts et al. 2009, 1014; Radivojevic et al. 2010, 2778; Bartelheim 2013; Garfinkel et al. 2014; in Bohemia (Turck 2010, 19 – 33; Bartelheim 2013). Hansen 2017, 144. Copper production took place in the northern Alpine 332 Supra-regional contacts and the earliest metallurgy in southern Scandinavia during the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition region in the Pfyn-Cortaillod and Mondsee groups bone combs, bone rings and T-shaped antler axes, as between 3,830 – 3,500 calBC (Matuschik 2016, 57; well as examples of Rössen-like pottery decorations Rosenstock et al. 2016, 88). (Andersen 1973, 33; 1975, 62; Klassen 2004, 109). North of the Alps, a number of stray finds of Likewise, a common notion in the manufacture and copper flat axes and burials furnished with copper use of small jewellery in the form of white beads, so- trinkets have been found in central Germany, dating called double buttons, is seen across Europe, ranging from 4,000 – 3,600 calBC, but evidence of metallurgy from late Mesolithic Ertebølle communities in the has not been found yet (Müller 2011, 296; Strahm north, to Neolithic and Copper Age groups further et al. 2013, 72; Rosenstock et al. 2016, note 263). In south during the 5th and early 4th millenium (Ander- contrast, local metallurgy was apparently practiced in sen 2008, 5; Heumüller 2012, 369, Sakalauskaite southern Scandinavia, where a considerable number et al. 2019). of copper objects date from 4,000 – 3,300 calBC (Klas- During the early Neolithic period of the northern sen 2000; 283; Gebauer et al. 2021; see also below). Funnel Beaker culture (4,000 – 3,300 calBC), more Metallurgy also spread towards the Ukraine (Tripolje) than 135 copper objects, including 30 pieces of jewel- around 4,000 calBC and south towards northern Italy lery made of sheet metal, 103 flat axes, a halberd, a during the third quarter of the 5th millennium calBC, polygonal battle axe, and two adzes, are known from with a possible independent development at Cerro southern Scandinavia (Klassen 2000, fig. 111; Price / Virtud, Almeria, in Spain, during the first half of the Gebauer 2017; Sørensen 2014, 159; see Fig. 4). The 5th millennium.5 jewellery tends to be found in funerary contexts, while The earliest European copper was mined in the other objects have been found singly as stray finds or Balkans. Extraction at Rudna Glava, Serbia, related in hoards (Tilley 1996). According to Klassen (2000, to the Vinča culture, began c. 5,400 – 5,200 calBC and 235), the influx of copper into Scandinavia took place peaked between 5,000 – 4,700 calBC. The site of Ai Bu- in three phases. During the first phase, between the nar, Bulgaria, related to the Kodzadermen-Gumelnita- second half of the 5th millennium and the beginning Karanovo VI complex, dates from the middle of the 5th of the 4th millennium, imports of a few heavy copper millennium (Roberts et al. 2009; Rosenstock et al. axes reached the late Mesolithic communities from 2016, 77). The first evidence of metallurgy was found southeast Europe. Around 4,000 calBC flat axes of at the Vinca site of Belovode in Serbia (5,000 – 4,650 type Kaka copper were exported from the Bohemian/ calBC; cf. Radivojevic et al. 2010, 2776). southeast German area, and the first thin and wide flat axes reached Scandinavia, possibly from the east Alpine area. Early Metallurgy in southern Scandinavia During the second phase, between 3,800 – 3,500 calBC, a limited import of trapezoidal flat axes from While southern Scandinavia represents the most dis- the Mondsee, Altheim, or Pfyn groups reached Scan- tant extension of the copper exchange networks, the dinavia, and locally produced trinkets made of cop- quantity of copper in terms of weight nevertheless per sheets were used as grave goods. The third phase exceeds that found in the north Alpine region and the (3,500 – 3,300 calBC) included by far the majority of areas in between Scandinavia and the Alps (Klassen the copper, in the form of flat axes, trinkets, and one 2014a, 228; see Fig. 4). All the copper was imported dagger/halberd. The copper was mainly of east-Alpine from the continent, as local sources of metal were origin, but there are also a few examples from other not available at this time (Klassen 2000, 212, 217; sources, possibly in west Slovakia, the central Alps, Gebauer et al. 2021). and southeast Europe (Klassen 2000, 235 – 238). In Already during the late Mesolithic, rare imports addition, several items were made of Riesebusch cop- of copper axes dating from 4,400 calBC are asso- per, most likely a variety of the so-called ‘Mondsee ciated with the Ertebølle culture, at the same time copper’, but these are only distributed in the western as the already mentioned imports of amphibolite Baltic area (Klassen 2000, 176; Klassen / Stürup ‘Schuhleistenkeile’ (Klassen 2000, 111; Turck 2010, 2001). According to Klassen (2000, 225) this regional 33). Connections to the south are also apparent in type of copper, together with 58 flat axes with local Ertebølle artefacts made of bone and antler, such as typological features unknown in the Alpine region, is evidence of an independent Scandinavian metallurgy around the middle of the 4th millennium. 5  Dolfini 2013, 43; Hansen 2013, 148; Bartelheim / Pear- The recent find of a crucible at Lønt on the east ce 2015, 694; Rosenstock et al. 2016, 148. coast of southern Jutland, Denmark, provides the final Anne Birgitte Gebauer and Lasse Sørensen 333 Fig. 4 Distribution of artefacts made with Mondsee copper in central and northern Europe (after Gebauer et al. 2021, fig. 1). proof for Klassen’s hypothesis regarding local Scandi- the Pfyn and the Mondsee groups alongside the more navian metal work (Gebauer et al. 2021; see Fig. 5). common spoon-shaped crucibles and date from the The crucible was found in a cultural layer together same time period: c. 3,800 – 3,600 calBC (Altorfer / with pottery dating from EN I (3,800 – 3,500 calBC), Conscience 2005, 72; Altorfer 2010, 128; Matu­ while pottery from EN II (3,500 – 3,300 calBC) was schik 2016, 59). Copper residues and studies of heat distributed further east within the same layer. The impact show that bathtub-shaped crucibles were in- cultural layer was sealed by a series of four megalithic deed used as crucibles, but perhaps as a special kind chambers embedded in a long dolmen, with the oldest of casting crucibles (Fasnacht 2006, 147). chamber dating from the beginning of period MN I The copper in the crucible from Lønt is a type of of the northern Funnel Beaker Culture, i. e. c. 3,300 arsenical copper commonly used in central Europe calBC. The crucible has been dated to 3,800 – 3,500 in the first half of the 4th millennium. Arsenic copper calBC (Gebauer et al. 2021). has been labelled ‘Mondsee copper’, but the concept The fragmented crucible from Lønt was once is misleading as several regional varieties of arseni- probably oblong, oval in shape with a rounded rim cal copper exist, with the so-called ‘Mondsee copper’ edge and a heavy base, but without a handle or spout. being only one variety (Lefranc et al. 2012, 718). In Similar bathtub-shaped crucibles were used in both general, different varieties of arsenical copper were 334 Supra-regional contacts and the earliest metallurgy in southern Scandinavia during the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition Fig.  5 The nine crucible frag- ments from Lønt. The largest and best-preserved fragment (A), is depicted with views of the interior with a whitish burnt area with cop- per residue at the bottom, a cross- section, and the exterior showing its coating with a fine-grained slurry. The piece is lightly curved along the outer perimeter (9.1 cm long, 6.4 cm high, 0.7 cm thick at the rim and 3.6 cm thick toward the bottom of the object). The second- largest fragment (B) has a stronger curvature (5.7 cm, long, 5.7 cm high, 0.8 cm thick at the rim, maxi- mum thickness 3.5 cm). The outer surface is only preserved on frag- ments A and B. Three matching fragments – B, C, and D – form a 10-cm-long curved piece (photos J. Lee, drawing F. Oldenburg, layout M. L. Bendtsen, National Museum of Denmark). used in the eastern and western Alpine region, prob- the 5th and 4th millennium, people in southern Scan- ably reflecting different sources of supply (Lefranc dinavia engaged in both the southeast European cop- et al. 2018, 33). The bipolar distribution of sites with per network and the central and western European evidence of metallurgy in the Alpine area, combined exchanges of amphibolite shoe-last axes and Alpine with differences in the shape and weight of the flat jade axes, while the trade in obsidian was limited to axes, suggest the existence of two independent areas of the Near East and southern Europe (Figs. 2 – 3). The copper production in the Pfyn-Cortaillod and Mond- willingness to accept objects and influences from see groups (Matuschik 2016; Lefranc et al. 2018, distant regions reflects a dynamic and open-minded 30). The origin of the copper in the Lønt crucible society with resources to integrate innovations and is unknown, but a connection to the eastern Alpine reciprocate exchange partners. Agricultural intensifi- group might be more likely, considering the greater cation following the introduction of the ard c. 3,640 degree of heterogeneity of the copper in the Pfyn calBC increased the overall productivity and contrib- group (Klassen 2000, 227). Presently, the source of uted to new notions of territoriality, landownership the east Alpine copper is thought to be located further and user-rights, and probably inheritance and marital towards the east and not in the immediate Mondsee systems as well (Beck 2013, 102; Johannsen 2017, area (Klassen 2014, 228). 125 and 130). New ideas about communication with higher powers likely evolved in connection with ritual depositions in bogs and in the form of hoards as well Discussion as prestigious burial rites in monumental tombs. A segment of the population developed an increasing Melting pot of four trans-European networks interest in prestige goods and the exchange of these items (Klassen 2004, 330). In addition, the availability Although positioned geographically at the northern of amber and high-quality flint as exchange objects margins of the trans-European networks operating in probably facilitated the acquisition of exotic goods Anne Birgitte Gebauer and Lasse Sørensen 335 Fig.  6 The Bygholm hoard, placed in a funnel beaker contain- ing three large copper spirals, four copper flat axes (of which only the smallest one was an Alpine import) and a copper halberd (cf. Brøndsted 1957, 188; Klassen 2000, 20 Abb. 2; Tilley 1996, 103) (photo: National Museum of Denmark). (Klassen 2000, 277; Klassen / Nielsen 2010, 34). ties and hunter-gatherer groups towards the north. In Considering the sparse and uneven distribution of contrast, the inclusion of copper items appears to have amphibolite shoe-last axes, Alpine jade axes and cop- been regulated by cultural and social norms rather per in northern Europe, conditions in southern Scan- than accessibility north of the production centres in dinavia and the adjacent areas of northern Germany central Europe (Bogucki 1988, 190). A regular fall-off must have been especially favourable for engaging pattern is not observed in the distribution of either in far-reaching networks. The dense concentration copper or Alpine jade axes (Klassen 2004, 269 fig. of megalithic tombs is likewise a testimony to the 145). Long distance routes may have provided con- wealth of resources in this area, and to the ability to nections between Scandinavia and central Europe, absorb innovations communicated through the trans- where intermediate sites are scarce or non-existent, European networks (Fritsch et al. 2010, 2; Ebbesen as in the case of the distribution of Cucuteni type 2011 preface; Klassen 2014b, 207). daggers, tetraploid naked wheat, or polygonal battle axes made of copper (Klassen 1999, 30; 2014, fig. 141, Organisation of networks 132; Turck 2010, 58; Sørensen 2014, 200 fig. 147). Areas in central Europe may also have served as It is a challenge for archaeologists to chart different ‘middlemen’ in the interaction between Scandinavia kinds and degrees of mobility – not just of people, and more distant regions. The east Alpine Mondsee but also of things. Distribution maps may reflect in- area may have facilitated further contacts to southeast tentional deposition patterns in the past and thus pro- Europe as suggested by the distribution of Cucuteni vide an inaccurate picture of the availability of certain type daggers, polygonal battle axes and thin-butted objects (Klimscha 2017, 154). In the case of copper, axes made of copper as well as flint (Zapotocky 1992; the majority of the metal may have been recirculated Klimscha 2007, 24; 2011; Sørensen 2014, 175). The in later periods (Hansen 2013, 139). Nonetheless, Elbe-Saale area may have served as a mediator be- the distribution of a few objects gives an idea of the tween the eastern Alpine region and southern Scan- complexity of the networks at play in providing links dinavia in case of flat axes of type Kaka, flat axes with to distant settlements. hexagonal cross-section, and spiral rings (Klassen The distribution of shoe-last axes in northern Eu- 2000, 242; Turck 2010, 58). As mentioned above, rope becomes less dense in the Netherlands and south- ­certain Alpine jade axes were reshaped in the Paris ba- ern Scandinavia and may therefore be interpreted as sin or the Morbihan area before reaching Scandinavia a classic ‘down-the-line’ exchange, implying a more (Pétrequin 2013, 91). The type Zug axes produced in indirect type of contact between farming communi- Switzerland were imitations of the Morbihan Alpine 336 Supra-regional contacts and the earliest metallurgy in southern Scandinavia during the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition jade axes of Tumiac type and inspired production of However, if an artefact is exchanged indirectly perforated pointed-butted stones axes in Scandinavia several times and reaches marginal regions of a net- (Klassen 2014b; Sørensen 2016, 224). work, then the original meaning behind the object may The concept of networks is just a spatial meta- be lost and change to something different – as it may phor for the flow of objects that can be traded or have been the case with the shoe-last axes (Latour exchanged even without people or cultural knowledge 1996). Ertebølle hunter-gatherers imported these am- moving with them. Only when practice is involved is it phibolite axes for specific purposes, such as the prepa- possible to deduce the mobility of cultural knowledge ration of dug-out canoes and large hut constructions, and perhaps also people (Van Oyen 2017, 56 – 57). which explains the significant use-wear and damage to The introduction of metallurgy to Scandinavia is an the neck of many shoe-last axes found in the north.6 example of knowledge transfer that would require the A purely functional role in society may also be sup- mobility of people. In contrast to the Vinča culture ported by the lack of imitations in local raw materi- with its advanced pottery production, experience with als. On the other hand, some of the unused shoe-last high-temperature firing was not available locally in the axes might have been associated with prestige. The north (Hansen 2017, 138 – 140; cf. also Koch 1998, Ertebølle hunter-gatherers probably had their own 128). Either Scandinavians worked as ‘apprentices’ at preferences regarding when and why certain objects the production centres in the north Alpine region, or were associated with prestige and status, which may travelling craftsmen from the south at times performed have differed from the perceptions within agrarian their work in Scandinavia (Wrobel Nørgård 2014, societies in central Europe (Vang Petersen 1984; 49). According to Klassen (2000, 276) direct trading Klassen 2004; Sørensen 2012). expeditions, perhaps shrouded within a religious pur- In contrast, countless flint copies or other imita- pose, may be responsible for the movement of copper tions of imported Alpine jade and copper axes reveal to Scandinavia. Sporadic periods of apprenticeship in the desirability and high status of these objects, even the Alps have been suggested as a means of acquir- if some connotations of their original meaning may ing Riesebusch copper (Klassen / Stürup 2001). A have been ‘lost in translation’. The imitations include mould, practically identical to the smallest flat axe in exact copies of alpine jade axes as well as a number the Bygholm hoard (Fig. 6), seems to demonstrate a of stone axes adapted to the shape of a certain type direct link between metal work at Mondsee in the Alps of Alpine jade axe, most notably the pointed-butted and copper consumption in Scandinavia, although flint axes (Klassen 1999, 41; 2004, 89 and 211; Sø- personal mobility may not have been involved in this rensen 2014, 22). On the other hand, the prototypes transfer (Klassen 2000, 160 fig. 70). of the thin-butted, four-sided flint axes were copper axes in the Gumelnita culture at the lower Danube in Role of imports in early Neolithic Scandinavian northeast Bulgaria. The four-sided flint axes spread society further north via the Cucuteni-Tripolje culture and the southeastern Funnel Beaker groups in Poland to Objects may move in and out of shifting value systems, the Baltic area (Klimscha 2007, 24 fig. 10; Sørensen and in particular back and forth between the statuses 2014, 175). Alternatively, the thin-butted, four-sided of gift or status symbol and commodity (Van Oyen flint axes have been interpreted as a local Scandina- 2017, 56). In contrast to these observations, the gen- vian imitation of imported copper flat axes of type eral assumption is sometimes that imported objects Kaka (Klassen 2004, 215). Certain green stone axes belong in the ritual sphere of society, and that their combine features of both copper and Alpine jade axes meaning and significance will have remained stable (Klassen 2004, 258; 2014b; Sørensen 2014, 175). The throughout their journey across the trans-European numerous amber beads might represent local Scandi- networks (Pétrequin 2012, 89). Seen as true objects navian adaptations of copper trinkets.7 of power, axes of Alpine jade were – according to this way of thinking – connected with specific ritual be- liefs, which circulated along with the axes throughout 6  Christensen 1990; Grøn 2003; Klassen 2004; Raemae- Europe (Klassen 2012, 88). Likewise, the practice of kers et al. 2011. metallurgy has been associated with leaders of society 7  Larsson 2001, 68; for a general discussion of the effect of and the ritual sphere, as also seen in ethnographic imported objects on local material culture, see Klassen 2004, studies (Eliade 1978, 93; Klassen 2010, 40). 258; Sørensen 2014, 126; Price / Gebauer 2017, 145. Anne Birgitte Gebauer and Lasse Sørensen 337 The imported artefacts and a number of their imi- Europe were established by the exchange of copper, tations became prestige objects indicating an increas- amphibolite, and Alpine jade, with the use of these ma- ing degree of social inequality during the early Neo- terials and objects being part of an ideological ‘package’ lithic period (Price / Gebauer 2017, 145; Nielsen / associated with the introduction of a Neolithic lifestyle Sørensen 2018, 23). Participation in new forms of and ideology (Klassen 2000, 251 fig. 116; Pétrequin social and economic organisation, fostered by the in- et al. 2008, 276; Sørensen 2012, 84). In addition to tensification of agriculture, gave rise to hierarchical the supra-regional networks, a high degree of interac- leadership in societies that used prestigious objects tion at the regional level was spurred by large scale to signal their social status. production of flint axes in association with flint mines, While a number of imported items retained their and at the local level by a degree of craft specialisation role as prestige objects, the imported copper axes may among local communities (Price et al. 1996). Both over time have changed status to a commodity, simi- regular local and more sporadic distant communica- lar to the mass-produced ‘Ösenringe’ in the Bronze tions were required in the social integration process of Age, which are basically considered as ingots (Wro- the innovations that enabled the Neolithic way of life. bel Nørgaard et al. 2019, 17). According to Klassen (2000, 225), more than half of the flat axes found in Scandinavia (58 trapezoidal and tongue-shaped flat References axes), five large spiral rings and a number of trinkets were produced within the area of the northern Funnel Altorfer 2010: K. Altorfer, Die prähistorischen Feucht- Beaker group using east Alpine copper. The most likely bodensiedlungen an Südrand des Pfäffikersees. Eine source of metal for this production would be re-melted archäologische Bestandaufnahme der Stationen Wet- flat axes imported from the Alps. Nevertheless, the zikon-Robenhausen und Wetzikon-Himmerich. Mono- innovation of metallurgy was never fully adopted by graphien der Kantonsarchäeologie Zürich 41 (Zürich/ the northern society and disappeared again around Egg 2010). 3,300 calBC. Everyday items like awls and fishhooks Altorfer / Conscience 2005: K. Altorfer / A.-C. Con- were never produced in copper, only larger replicas science, Meilen-Schellen. Die neolitischen und spät- of the imported flat axes and jewellery were made. As bronzezeitlichen Funde und Befunde der Untersuchun- mentioned by Ottaway (2001, 88 – 89) a decisive inno- gen 1934 – 1996. Züricher Archäologie 18 (Zürich/Egg vation is social rather than technical. Innovation is also 2005). a social integration process which failed in terms of Andersen 1973: S. H. Andersen, Overgangen fra ældre til metallurgy during the early Neolithic in Scandinavia. yngre stenalder i Sydskandinavien set fra en Mesolitisk synsvinkel. In: P. Simonsen / G. S. Munch (eds.), Bonde- Role of networks at the transition to the Veidemann, Bofast-Ikke Bofast i Nordisk Forhistorie. Neolithic Tromsø Museums Skrifter XIV (Tromsø 1973) 26 – 4 4. Andersen 1975: S. H. Andersen, Ringkloster. En jysk ind- The complex supra-regional networks of interaction landsboplads med Ertebøllekultur. Kuml 1973/1974, associated with exchange of objects made of obsid- 11 – 108. ian, amphibolite, alpine jade, and copper may have Andersen 2008: S. H. Andersen, A report on recent ex- played a role in the origin and spread of the Neolithic cavations at the shell midden of Havnø in Denmark. across the Near East and Europe by enabling a rapid Mesolithic Miscellany 19(1), 2008, 3 – 6. and efficient spread of innovations.8 As mentioned by Bar-Yosef / Belfer-Cohen 1989: O. Bar-Yosef / A. Belfer- Renfrew et al. (1966, 55) the obsidian trade provided Cohen, The Levantine “PPNB” Interaction Sphere. In: ‘evidence of widespread and early traffic in ideas and I. Hershkovitz (ed.), People and Culture in Change. BAR commodities, of which obsidian was by no means the Int. Ser. 508 (Oxford 1989) 59 – 72. most important’. The transmission of know-how was Bartelheim 2013: M. Bartelheim, Innovation and Traditi- fuelled by the mobility of materials, styles, things, and on: The Structure of the Early Metal Production in the persons because of an increased interaction among North Alpine Region. In: St. Burmeister / S. Hansen / people near and far. Links across eastern and western M. Kunst / N. Müller-Scheeßel (eds.), Metal Matters. In- novative Technologies and Social Change in Prehistory and Antiquity, Menschen – Kulturen – Traditionen. Stu- 8  Watkins 2008; Bar-Yosef / Belfer-Cohen 1989; Klassen dien aus den Forschungsclustern des Deutschen Archäo- 2004; Ibáñez et al. 2016, 24; Sørensen 2016. logischen Instituts 12 (Rahden/Westf. 2013) 169 – 180. 338 Supra-regional contacts and the earliest metallurgy in southern Scandinavia during the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition Bartelheim / Pearce 2015: M. Bartelheim / M. Pearce, Europe: An Early Neolithic crucible and a possible tuyè- Early Metallurgy in Iberia and the Eastern Mediterra- re from Lønt, Denmark. European Journal of Archaeo- nean. In: C. Fowler / J. Harding / D. Hofmann (eds.), logy 24, 2021, 27 – 47. The Oxford Handbook of Neolithic Europe (Oxford Grøn 2003: O. Grøn, Mesolithic dwelling places in south 2015) 693 – 709. Scandinavia: their definition and social interpretation. Beck 2013: M. R. Beck, Højenvej Høj 7 – en tidligneolitisk Antiquity 77, 2003, 685 – 708. langhøj med flere faser. Årbøger for nordisk Oldkyn- Hansen 2013: S. Hansen, Innovative metals: copper, gold dighed og Historie 2011 – 2012 (2013), 33 – 95. and silver in the Black Sea Region and the Carpathian Bernardini et al. 2012: F. Bernardini / A. De Min / D. Basin during the 5th and 4th millennium BC. In: S. Bur- Lenaz / P. Sida / C. Tuniz / E. Montagnari Kokelj, meister / S. Hansen / M. Kunst / N. Müller- Scheeßel Shaft-hole axes from Caput Adriae made from amphib- (eds.), Metal Matters. Innovative technologies and Social ole-rich metabasites: Evidence of connections between Change in Prehistory and Antiquity (Rahden/Westf. northeastern Italy and Central Europe during the fifth 2013) 137 – 167. millennium BC. Archaeometry 54(3), 2012, 427 – 4 41. Hansen 2017: S. Hansen, Key Techniques in the Production Bogucki 1988: P. I. Bogucki, Forest Farmers and Stockher- of Metals in the 6th and 5th Millennia BCE: Prerequisi- ders. Early Agriculture and its Consequences in North- tes, Preconditions and Consequences. In: P. W. Stock- Central Europe (Cambridge 1988). hammer / J. Maran (eds.), Appropriating Innovations: Christensen 1990: C. Christensen, Stone Age Dug-Out Entangled knowledge in Eurasia, 5000 – 1500 BCE (Ox- Boats in Denmark: Occurence, Age, Form and Recons- ford 2017) 136 – 148. truction. In: D. E. Robinson (ed.), Experimentation and Heumüller 2012: M. Heumüller, Schmuck als Zeichen weit Reconstruction in Environmental Archaeology. Oxbow gespannter und lang andauernder Kommunikationsräu- Monograph 5 (Oxford 1990) 119 – 141. me im 5. und frühen 4. Jahrtausend. In: R. Gleser / V. Dolfini 2013: A. Dolfini, The Emergence of Metallurgy Becker (eds.), Mitteleuropa im 5. Jahrtausend v. Chr. in the Central Mediterranean Region: A New Model. Beiträge zur Internationalen Konferenz in Münster 2010 European Journal of Archaeology 16(1), 2013, 21 – 62. (Berlin 2012) 359 – 387. Ebbesen 2011: K. Ebbesen, Danmarks Megalitgrave 1.1 & Hodder 1974: I. Hodder, Regression analysis of some trade 1.2 (København 2011). and marketing patterns. World Archaeology 6(2), 1974, Eliade 1978: M. Eliade, A History of Religious Ideas I. From 172 – 189. the Stone Age to the Eleusinian Mysteries (Chicago Ibáñez et al. 2015: J. J. Ibáñez / D. Ortega / D. Campos / 1978). L. Khalidi / V. Méndez, Testing complex networks of Fasnacht 2006: W. Fasnacht, Die Tiegel von Niederwil. In: interaction at the onset of the Near Eastern Neolithic A. Hasenfratz (ed.), Niederwil, eine Siedlung der Pfyner using modelling of obsidian exchange. Journal of Kultur (Frauenfeld 2006) 137 – 148. The Royal Society Interface 12, 2015. DOI: 10.1098/ Fischer 1982: A. Fischer, Trade in Danubian Shaft-hole axes rsif.2015.0210. and the Introduction of Neolithic Economy. Journal of Ibáñez et al. 2016: J. J. Ibáñez / D. Ortega / D. Campos / L. Danish Archaeology 1, 1982, 7 – 12. Khalidi / V. Méndez / L. Teira, Developing a complex Fritsch et al. 2010: B. Fritsch / M. Furholt / M. Hinz / L. network model of obsidian exchange in the Neolithic Lorenz / H. Nelson / G. Schafferer / S. Schiesberg / Near East: Linear regressions, ethnographic models K.-G. Sjögren, Dichtezentren und lokale Gruppierun- and archaeological data. Paléorient 42(2), 2016, 9 – 32. gen – Eine Karte zu den Grosssteingräbern Mittel- und Johannsen 2017: N. N. Johannsen, Appropriating Draught Nordeuropas. www.Jungsteinzeit.de. Artikel vom 20 Cattle Technology in Southern Scandinavia: Roles, Oktober 2010: accessed: 18.10.2021. Context and Consequences. In: P. W. Stockhammer / Gamble 1998: C. Gamble, Palaeolithic Society and the J. Maran (eds.) Appropriating Innovations. Entangled Release from Proximity: A Network Approach to In- Knowledge in Eurasia, 5000 – 1500 BCE (Oxford 2017) timate Relations. World Archaeology Feb. 1998. DOI: 122 – 135. 10.1080/00438243.1998.9980389. Klassen 1999: L. Klassen, Prestigeøkser af sjældne alpine Garfinkel et al. 2014: Y. Garfinkel / F. Klimscha / A. bjergarter. En glemt og overset fundgruppe fra ældre Shalev / D. Rosenberg, The Beginning of Metallurgy stenalders slutning i Danmark. Kuml 1999, 11 – 51. in the southern Levant: A Copper Awl from a Late 6 th Klassen 2000: L. Klassen, Frühes Kupfer im Norden: Un- Millennium CalBC Tel Tsaf, Israel. PLoS One. DOI: tersuchungen zu Chronologie, Herkunft und Bedeutung 10.1371/journal.pone.0092591. der Kupferfunde der Nordgruppe der Trichterbecher- Gebauer et al. 2021: A. B. Gebauer / L. V. Sørensen / M. kultur (Århus 2000). Taube /D. K. P. Wielandt, First Metallurgy in Northern Anne Birgitte Gebauer and Lasse Sørensen 339 Klassen 2004: L. Klassen, Jade und Kupfer: Untersuchungen Larsson 2001: L. Larsson, The Sun from the Sea – Amber zum Neolithisierungsprozess im westlichen Ostseeraum in the Mesolithic and Neolithic of Southern Scandina- unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Kulturentwick- via. In: A. Butrimas (ed.), Baltic Amber. Proceedings of lung Europas 5500 – 3500 BC (Århus 2004). the International Interdisciplinary Conference: Baltic Klassen 2010: L. Klassen, Kobberøksen fra Bedegadegård Amber in Natural Sciences, Archaeology and Applied på Bornholm. In: M. Andersen / P. O. Nielsen, Danefæ. Arts. Acta Academiae Artium Vilnensis 21 (Vilnius Skatte fra den danske muld (København 2010) 39 – 43. 2001) 65 – 75. Klassen 2012: L. Klassen, Axes of Alpine jade from southern Latour 1996: B. Latour, On Actor Network Theory: A few Scandinavia and Germany. Danish Journal of Archaeolo- Clarifications. Soziale Welt 47, 1996, 369 – 381. gy 1, 2012, 86 – 89. DOI: 10.1080/21662282.2013.805904. Lefranc et al. 2012: P. Lefranc / R.-M. Arbogast / F. Chen- Klassen et al. 2012: L. Klassen / S. Cassen / P. Pétrequin, al / E. Hildbrand / E. Merkl / C. Strahm/ S. van Alpine axes and early metallurgy. In: P. Pétrequin / S. Willigen / M. Wörle, Inhumations, dépots d’animaux Cassen / M. Errera / L. Klassen / A. Sheridan / A.-M. et perles en cuivre du IVe millénaire sur site Néolithic Pétrequin (eds.), JADE. Grandes haches alpines du récent de Colmar “Aérodrome” (Haut-Rhin). Bull. Soc. Néolithique européen. Ve et IVe millénaires av J.-C. Tome Préhist. Francaise 109, 2012, 689 – 730. 2: 1280-1309. Presses universitaires de Franche-Comté Lefranc et al. 2018: P. Lefranc / C. Strahm / S. van Wil- et Centre de Recherche Archéologique de la Vallée de ligen / C. Féliu / M. Wörle-Soares / E. Hildbrand l‘Ain, Besançon. / V. Hubert, Neue Metallurgiebelege im Jungneoliti- Klassen 2014a: L. Klassen, Along the Road. Aspects of Cau- kum in der Oberrheinebene: Die Funde von Colmar sewayed Enclosures in South Scandinavia and Beyond “Aérodrome” und Eckwersheim ”Burgweg”. Germania (Aarhus 2014). 96, 2018, 1 – 43. Klassen 2014b: L. Klassen, South Scandinavian Neolithic Luley 1990: H. Luley, Die Rekonstruktion eines Hauses green stone axes with perforated butt. In: R.-M. Arbo- der Rössener Kultur im archäologischen Freilichtmuse- gast / A. Greffier-Richard (eds.), Entre archéologie et um Oerlinghausen. Oldenburg: Arch. Mitt. Nordwest- écologie, une Préhistoire de tous les milieux. Mélanges deutschl. Beiheft 4 (Oldenburg 1990) 31 – 4 4. offets a Pierre Pétrequin. Environnement, sociétes et Matuschik 2016: I. Matuschik, Neufunde von Gusstiegeln archéologie 18 (Besancon 2014) 199 – 212. aus Sipplingen am Bodensee. Ein Beitrag zum Einsetzen Klassen / Nielsen 2011: L. Klassen / P. O. Nielsen, En der “Gusstiegelmetallurgie“ im nördlichen Alpenvorland skolæstøkse fra Åmosen. In: M. Andersen / P. O. Niel- und zur Frage nach der Herkunft des genutzten Kupfers. sen, Danefæ. Skatte fra den danske muld (København In: G. Körlin / M. Prange / T. Stöllner / Ü. Yalcin, From 2010) 34 – 38. Bright Ores to Shining Metal. Festschrift für Andreas Klassen / Stürup 2001: L. Klassen / S. Stürup, Decoding Hauptmann on the Occasion of 40 Years Research in Ar- the Riesebusch-Copper: Lead-Isotope Analysis Applied chaeometallurgy and Archaeometry. Der ANSCHNITT, to Early Neolithic Copper Finds from South Scandina- Beiheft 29 (Bochum 2016) 49 – 6 8. via. Prähistorische Zeitschrift 76, 2001, 55 – 73. Milić 2014: M. Milić, PXRF characterization of obsidian Klimscha 2007: F. Klimscha, Die Verbreitung und Datierung from central Anatolia, the Aegean and central Europe. kupferzeitlicher Silexbeile in Südosteuropa. Fernbezie- Journal of Archaeological Science 41, 2014, 285 – 296. hungen neolitischer Gesellschaften im 5. und 4. Jarh- Milić 2016: M. Milić, A Question of Scale? Connecting Com- tausend v. Chr. Germania 85, 2007, 1 – 32. munities through Obsidian Exchange in the Neolithic Klimscha 2011: F. Klimscha, Flint axes, ground stone axes Aegean, Anatolia and Balkans. In: B. P. C. Molloy (ed.), and “battle axes” of the Copper Age in the Eastern Bal- Of Odysseys and Oddities. Scales and modes of interac- kans (Romania, Bulgaria). In: V. Davids / M. Edmonds tion between prehistoric Aegean societies and their (eds.), Stone Axe Studies III (Oxford 2011) 361 – 382. neighbours. Sheffield studies in Aegean Archaeology Klimscha 2017: F. Klimscha, The diffusion of Know-How (Oxford 2016) 97 – 122. within Spheres of Interaction: Modelling Prehistoric Müller 2011: J. Müller, Early Pottery in the North – A Innovation Processes between South-West Asia and Southern Perspective. Berichte der Römisch-Germani- Central Europe in the 5th and 4th Millennia BC. In: P. W. schen Kommission 89, 2008 (2011), 287 – 299. Stockhammer / J. Maran (eds.), Appropriating Innovati- Nielsen / Sørensen 2018: P. O. Nielsen / L. Sørensen, ons: Entangled knowledge in Eurasia, 5000 – 1500 BCE The formation of social rank in the early Neolithic of (Oxford 2017) 149 – 160. northern Europe. Acta Archaeologica 89, 2018, 15 – 29. Koch 1998: E. Koch, Neolithic Bog Pots from Zealand, Møn, Ortega et al. 2014: D. Ortega / J. J. Ibáñez / L. Khalidi / Lolland and Falster (København 1998). V. Méndez / D. Campos / L. Teira, Towards a Multi- Agent-Based Modelling of Obsidian Exchange in the 340 Supra-regional contacts and the earliest metallurgy in southern Scandinavia during the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition Neolithic Near East. Journal of Archaeological Method origins of extractive metallurgy: new evidence from and Theory 21(2), 461 – 8 5. Europe. Journal of Archaeological Science 37, 2010, Ortega et al. 2016: D. Ortega /J. J. Ibáñez / D. Campos / 2775 – 2787. L. Khalidi / V. Mendez / L. Teira, Systems of Interac- Raemaekers et al. 2011: D. C. M. Raemaekers / J. Geuverink / tion between the First Sedentary Villages in the Near M. Schepers / B. P. Tuin / E. van der Lagemaat / East Exposed Using Agent-Based Modelling of Obsidian M. van der Wal, A biography in stone. Typology, age, Exchange. System 4, 2016, 18. function and meaning of Early Neolithic perforated Ottaway 2001: B. S. Ottaway, Innovation, Production and wedges in the Netherlands (Groningen 2011). Specialization in Early Prehistoric Copper Metallur- Renfrew 1975: C. Renfrew, Trade as Action at a Distance: gy. European Journal of Archaeology 4, 2001, 87 – 112. Questions of Integration and Communication. In: J. A. DOI: 10.1177/146195710100400103. Sabbloff / C. C. Lamberg-Karlowsky (eds.), Ancient Van Oyen 2017: A. van Oyen, Material culture and mobility: ­C ivilization and Trade (Albuquerque 1975) 1 – 59. A brief history of archaeological thought. In: C Heitz / Renfrew / Dixon 1976: C. Renfrew / J. E. Dixon, Obsidian R. Stapfer (eds.), Mobility and Pottery Production. Ar- in West Asia: A review. In: G. de Giberne Sieveking / chaeological and Anthropological Perspectives (Bern I. H. Longworth / K. E. Wilson (eds.), Problems in ec- 2017) 53 – 6 5. onomic and social archaeology (London 1976) 137 – 150. Pétrequin 2013: P. Pétrequin, Axes of Alpine jade in Renfrew et al. 1966: C. Renfrew /J. E. Dixon /E. R. Cann, Denmark: the point of view of an alpine prehistorian. Obsidian and early cultural contact in the Near East. Danish Journal of Archaeology 1, 2013, 90 – 91. DOI Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 32, 1966, 30 – 72. 10.1080/21662282.2013.805905. Renfrew et al. 1968: C. Renfrew / J. E. Dixon / E. R. Cann, Pétrequin et al. 2008: P. Pétrequin / A. Sheridan / S. Cas- Further analyses of Near Eastern obsidians. Proceedings sen / M. Errera / E. Gauthier / L. Klassen, N. Le of the Prehistoric Society 34, 1968, 319 – 331. Maux / Y. Pailler, Neolithic Alpine Axeheads, from the Roberts et al. 2009: B. W. Roberts / C. Thornton / V. C. Pi- Continent to Great Britain, the Isle of Man and Ireland. gott, Development of Metallurgy in Eurasia. Antiquity In: H. Fokkens / B. Coles / A. van Gijn / J. Kleijne / H. 83, 2009, 1012 – 1022. Pomjee / C. Slappendel (eds.), Between Foraging and Rosenstock et al. 2016: E. Rosenstock / S. Scharl / W. Farming. Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia 40 (Leiden Schier, Ex oriente lux? – Ein Diskussionsbeitrag zur 2008) 261 – 280. Stellung der frühen Kupfermetallurgie Südosteuropas. Pétrequin et al. 2012: P. Pétrequin / S. Cassen / M. Er- In: M. Bartelheim / B. Horejs / R. Krauss (eds.), Von rera / L. Klassen / A. Sheridan / A.-M. Pétrequin Baden bis Troia. Ressourcennutzung, Metallurgie und (eds.), JADE. Grandes haches alpines du Néolithique Wissenstranfer. Jubiläumsschrift für Ernst Pernicka. européen. Ve et IVe millénaires av J.-C. Tome 1 and 2 Oriental and European Arcaheology 3 (Rahden/Westf. (Besançon 2012). 2016) 59 – 122. Price / Bar-Yosef 2010: T. D. Price /O. Bar-Yosef, Traces Sakalauskaite et al. 2019: J. Sakalauskaite / S. H. Ander- of inequality at the origins of agriculture in the an- sen / P. Biagi / M. A. Borello / T. Cocquerez / A. C. cient Near East. In: T. D. Price / G. M. Feinman (eds.), Colonese / F. D. Bello / A. Girod / M. Heumüller / Path­ways to Power. New Perspectives on the Origins of H. Koon / G. Mandili / C. Medana / K. E. H. Penkman Social Inequality (New York 2010) 147 – 168. / L. Plassraud / H. Schlichtherle / S. Taylor / C. Price / Gebauer 2017: T. D. Price /A. B. Gebauer, The Tokarski / J. Thomas / J. Wilson / F. Marin / B. De- Emergence of Social Inequality in the context of the marchi, ‚Palaeoshellomics’ reveals the use of freshwa- Early Neolithic of Northern Europe. In: S. Hansen / J. ter mother-of-pearl in prehistory. eLife 2019;8:e45644. Müller (eds.), Rebellion and Inequality in Archaeology DOI: 10.7554/eLife.45644. (Bonn 2017) 135 – 152. Strahm et al. 2013: C. Strahm / R. Wiermann / N. Müller- Price et al. 1996: T. D. Price /A. B. Gebauer /L. H. Keeley, Scheessel, Salzmünde – Kupfer: erst Prestige, dann The spread of farming into Europe north of the Alps. In: Technologie. In: H. Meller (ed.), 3300 BC – Mysteriöse T. D. Price / A. B. Gebauer (eds.), Last Hunters – First Steinzeittote und ihre Welt (Mainz 2013) 71 – 77. Farmers: New Perspectives on the Prehistoric Transition Sørensen 2012: L. Sørensen, A critical approach to jade axes to Agriculture (Santa Fe 1996) 95 – 126.  in southern Scandinavia. Danish Journal of Archaeology Přichystal 2013: A. Přichystal, Lithic Raw Materials in 1, 2012, 82 – 8 5. DOI 10.1080/21662282.2013.805906. Prehistoric Times of Eastern Central Europe (Brno Sørensen 2014: L. Sørensen, From Hunter to Farmer in 2013). Northern Europe. Migration and Adaptation during Radivojević et al. 2010: M. Radivojević / T. Rehren / E. the Neolithic and Bronze Age. Acta Archaeologica Pernicka / D. Šljivar / M. Brauns / D. Borić, On the 85(I–III), 2014. Anne Birgitte Gebauer and Lasse Sørensen 341 Sørensen 2016: L. Sørensen, New theoretical discourses in Wiessner 1982: P. Wiessner, Risk, reciprocity and social the discussion of the Neolithisation process in South influences on !Kung San economics. In: E. Leacock / Scandinavia during the late 5th and early 4th millennium R. Lee (eds.), Politics and history in band societies (Paris BC – an identification of learning processes, communi- 1982) 61 – 8 4. ties of practices and migrations. Documenta Praehistoca Williams-Thorpe et al. 1984: O. Williams-Thorpe / S. E. 43, 2016, 209 – 2 34. DOI: 10.4312/dp.43.10. Warren / J. G. Nandris, The distribution and prove- Sørensen et al. 2017: L. Sørensen / P. Pétrequin / A.-M. nance of archaeological obsidian in central and eastern Pétrequin / M. Errera / B. Horejs / F. Herbaut, Les Europe. Journal of Archaeological Science 11, 1984, limites sud-orientales des jades alpins (Grèce et Turquie). 183 – 212. DOI 10.1016/0305 – 4 403(84)90001 – 3. In: P. Pétrequin / E. Gauthier /A.-M. Pétrequin (eds.), Wobst 1977: M. Wobst, Stylistic Behavior and Information JADE Objets-signes et interprétations sociales des jades Exchange. In: C. E. Cleland (ed.), For the Director: Re- alpins dans l’Europe néolithique 3 (Ain 2017) 491 – 520. search Essays in Honor of James B. Griffin. Anthropo- Tilley 1996: C. Tilley, An Ethnography of the Neolithic. logical Papers 61 (Michigan 1977) 317 – 342. Early prehistoric societies in southern Scandinavia Wrobel Nørgaard 2014: H. Wrobel Nørgaard, Are Valued (Oxford 1996). Craftsmen as Important as Prestige Goods? Ideas about Turck 2010: R. Turck, Die Metalle zur Zeit des Jungneolithi- Itinerant Craftsmanship in the Nordic Bronze Age. In: kums in Mitteleuropa. Eine sozialarchäologische Unter- S. Reiter / H. Wrobel Nørgaard / Z. Kölcze / C. Rass- suchung. Universitätsforschungen zur Prähistorischen mann (eds.), Rooted in Movement: Aspects of Mobility Archäologie 185 (Bonn 2010). in Bronze Age Europe. Jutland Archaeological Society Vang Petersen 1984: P. Vang Petersen, Chronological and Publications 83 (Aarhus 2014) 37 – 52. Regional variation in the Late Mesolithic of Eastern Wrobel Nørgaard et al. 2019: H. Wrobel Nørgård / E. Denmark. Journal of Danish Archaeology 3, 1984, 7 – 18. Pernicka / H. Vandkilde, On the Trail of Scandina- Verhart 2012: L. Verhart, Contact in stone: Adzes, Keile via’s early metallurgy: Provenance, transfer and mixing. and Spitzhauen in the Lower Rhine Basin. Journal of PLOS ONE 2019. DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0219574. Archaeology in the Low Countries 4(1), 2012, 1 – 35. Yalçin 2000: Ü. Yalçin, Anfänge der Metallverwendung Watkins 2008: T. Watkins, Supra-regional Networks in the in Anatolien. In: Ü. Yalçin (ed.), Anatolian Metal 1. Neolithic of Southwest Asia. Journal of World Prehis- Deutsches Bergbaumuseum (Bochum) 17 – 30. tory 21, 2008, 139 – 171. Zapotocky 1992: M. Zapotocky, Streitäxte des mitteleuro- Watkins 2017: T. Watkins, From Pleistocene to Holocene: päischen Äneolithikums. Quellen und Forschungen zur the prehistory of southwest Asia in evolutionary con- prähistorischen und provinzialrömischen Archäologie text. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 39, 6 (Weinheim 1992). 2017, 22 – 37. Zhao et al. 2015: L. Zhao / M. Guan / X. Zhu / S. Karama / Watkins in prep.: T. Watkins, Monumentality in Neolithic B. Khundrakpam / M. Wang / M. Dong / W. Qin / Southwest Asia: making memory in time and space. In: J. Tian / A. C. Evans / D. Shi, Aberrant Topological A. B. Gebauer / L. Sørensen / A. Teather / A. de Valera Patterns of Structural Cortical Networks in Psychogenic (eds.), Monumentalising life in the early Neolithic. Narra­- Erectile Dysfunction. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 9, 2015, tives of change and continuity. 675. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00675. Watts / Strogatz 1998: D. J. Watts / S. H. Strogatz, Col- lective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks. Nature 393, 1998, 440 – 4 42. DOI 10.1038/30918.  Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 , 3 43 – 357) 343 A biological view on neolithisation Walter Dörfler Abstract A model calculation of the possible game density in the forest of the late Atlantic period shows the potential share of game in the diet of hunters, gatherers and fishermen from the Ertebølle era. It could be shown that a relatively small population of 0.11 people per km² already reached the limits of growth, even with a balanced use of terrestrial and aquatic resources. A significantly larger population could only have been realised with the acquirement of new food resources. The keeping of domestic animals in the Neolithic since approx. 4,100 calBC, with the possibility to feed branches and leaves, made it possible to create food stores for the winter and to use the domestic animals as a living stock to improve one’s own food supply. This ensured a significant improvement in security of supply. A further step in this development was the expansion of agriculture in the form of larger fields from approx. 3,700 calBC. Grain as an easily storable food was another way of overcom- ing the winter food shortage and stabilising population growth. The same area that had previously been forested with only a small usable biomass thus became a usable cultural landscape that could feed significantly more people. As the Mesolithic population size and growth might have been limited by natural resource availability, the new subsistence strategy widened the horizon of possibilities and enabled a population growth that followed the Darwinian rule of reproductive success. This process was not reversible without a great loss of people. Keywords Northern Germany, horizon of possibilities, woodland density, game density, population density, Mesolithic, Neolithic Zusammenfassung Eine Modellberechnung der möglichen Wilddichte im Wald des ausgehenden Atlantikums zeigt den po- tenziellen Anteil des Wildes an der Ernährung von Jägern, Sammlern und Fischern für die Ertebølle-Zeit. Es ist festzustellen, dass eine relativ kleine Bevölkerung von 0,11 Personen pro km² bei einer ausgewogenen Nutzung der terrestrischen und aquatischen Ressourcen bereits an die Grenzen des Wachstums stieß. Ein Bevölkerungswachstum konnte nur durch das Er- schließen neuer Nahrungsressourcen realisiert werden. Mit der Haltung von Haustieren im Neolithikum seit ca. 4100 calBC (unter Nutzung der Möglichkeit, diese mit Zweigen und Blättern zu füttern), konnten Vorräte für den Winter eingelagert und Haustiere als lebender Bestand zur Absicherung der eigenen Lebensmittelversorgung genutzt werden. Dies sorgte für eine deutliche Verbesserung der Versorgungssicherheit. Ein weiterer Schritt in dieser Entwicklung war die Ausweitung der Land- wirtschaft in Form größerer Felder ab ca. 3700 calBC. Getreide als leicht lagerfähiges Lebensmittel war ein weiteres Mittel, um die Nahrungsmittelknappheit im Winter zu überwinden und ein Bevölkerungswachstum zu stabilisieren. Das gleiche Gebiet, das zuvor bewaldet war und nur eine geringe für den Menschen nutzbare Biomasse aufwies, wurde so zu einer ergiebigen Kulturlandschaft, die deutlich mehr Menschen ernähren konnte. Da die Bevölkerungszahl und das Wachstum im Mesolithikum offenbar durch die Verfügbarkeit natürlicher Ressourcen begrenzt waren, erweiterte die neue Subsistenzstrategie den „Hori- zont der Möglichkeiten“ und führte zu einem Bevölkerungswachstum, das der darwinischen Regel des Fortpflanzungserfolgs folgte. Dieser Prozess war ohne großen Bevölkerungsverlust nicht umkehrbar. Introduction Germany at the transition from the Ertebølle to the Funnel Beaker culture will be observed from the point If we want to describe the neolithisation from a bio- of view of this concept. The focus will be on the subsis- logical point of view, we cannot avoid Charles Darwin. tence strategies and energy balances. Chronologically In Darwin’s sense (Darwin 1859), life is an evolution- this regards the Final Mesolithic and Early Neolithic ary process based on variance and selection. This (Müller et al. 2012), i. e. the period between 4,500 and selection leads to adaptation or optimal adjustment to 3,500 calBC, geographically the north German plain. changing conditions of the environmental setting. In According to the Darwinian concept, human the following, the neolithisation process in northern beings, like any biological species, aim to maximize 344 A biologic al view on neolithisat io n social pollution extreme innovation climatic shift event physical and ecological frame horizont of possibilities bottleneck situation climatic improvement technological innovation ideology, taboos knowledge expansion Time - process of adaptation and failure over- exploitation Fig. 1 Model for the temporal development of the horizon of possibilities, which determines the range of possible subsistence strategies (variance). their reproductive fitness. The term ‘survival of the together form the culture of a population or group. fittest’ is not understood here as a fight for survival As long as these forms do not go beyond the biologi­ as interpreted by Social Darwinism. In modern so- cal-physical framework, they can develop further, i. e. ciobiology it is understood as the selection advan- develop variance in the Darwinian sense. Internal tage for the best adapted (Voland 2009). Fitness and external processes can shift this frame. For ex- is not physical fitness in this sense, but describes ample, climate change can force a change in economy the reproductive success of one’s own and closely or migration. The framework can be expanded by related genes. This implies that population growth is climate improvements (usually warmer and drier a natural process that is also a driving force behind conditions in northern Germany) or narrowed by economic, social and cultural decisions. God’s call climate deterioration (usually cooler and wetter). ‘Be fruitful and multiply’ was not only meant for sea Extreme events, such as large volcanic eruptions, animals and birds, but also for humans (Gen 1 : 28). earthquakes, storms or heavy rain and high tides can All biological systems follow this premise, mostly lead to bottleneck situations. These have a direct im- until population growth is ended by resource scarcity­ pact on the population in the form of crop failures, or ‘repression by the end product’. The diagram in famines or epidemics, but they also have a selective ef- Figure 1 shows such a model, which displays the wide fect on economic, social or cultural strategies that are range of possible subsistence strategies (variance), adaptive or maladaptive for this situation. Accordingly, but which have been ‘checked’ and ‘put in the limits’ populations or groups as carriers of such strategies in the course of history by external or internal fac­- are more or less resilient or vulnerable to changes tors (selection). Survival is based on the fulfillment in the external framework. Innovative strategies may of elementary basic needs, which can be outlined have been particularly successful but also risky. On the by the terms nutrition, clothing, housing and social other side of the pendulum, conservative behaviour interaction. The fulfillment of these basic needs sets may have prevented adaptation and thus increased the biological-physical frame of human existence, vulnerability. Through contacts between groups, com- they form the so-called biological imperative. Within binations and hybridisations of different subsistence this framework, which Harari (2013) calls ‘Horizon strategies will always have occurred. of Opportunities’, there is a multitude of economic, The exciting question of which factors have li- social and mystical-religious manifestations, which mited the growth of the species Homo sapiens in the Wa l te r D ö rf l e r 345 various phases of human history remains unanswe- In such environments there is a better overview and red. On the one hand, there are health aspects, such more understorey as well. For hunters there are cor- as child mortality or childbed fever, the occurrence respondingly better chances of encountering game. of epidemics or the high risk of infection from simple The limited amount of plant biomass available injuries that limit the growth of population. On the in a closed forest implies a low carrying capacity for other hand, it is limited by the carrying capacity of a wild animals and a low game population density ac- landscape and by technological aspects, such as those cordingly, as Iversen stated already in 1949 (Iversen relating to food production, storage, food prepara- 1949). This applies particularly to large herbivores, tion, or tools and devices that make it more efficient such as red deer, roe deer, aurochs, bison or elk, and to meet basic needs (factor ‘time’, see Kerig 2010). the omnivorous wild boar. Realistic estimates for natu- But social aspects such as specific marriage rules or ral or near-natural values for the population density the uneven distribution of resources can also have a of those animals still living in our modern forests are regulating effect on population growth. In addition, almost impossible to get. Today’s game density values the reliability of the climate comes into play as an are artificially regulated and are based on a balance external factor: Extreme weather or climate change of interests between forestry, agriculture and hunting. pose threats, but can also offer opportunities. Soil Game is fed in winter, salt licks are offered to ensure depletion or the consequences of other natural haz- mineral supply, and it can provide itself with addi- ards can also have a negative impact. Most of the tional food on fields, meadows and pastures during time, these different factors cannot be completely the growing season. The forestry and hunting literature separated, e. g. the impact of epidemics or famines differentiate between economically viable and bioti- very much depends on the general state of health and cally viable game density (Ueckermann 1960; 1986). the distribution of resources within a population. The biotically viable game density is not exceeded as Extreme weather events can also trigger famines long as the body and antler quality of the game does and in turn lead to epidemics. The following model not deteriorate and as long as no epidemic diseases calculations will focus on the role of food supply in occur – regardless of the condition of the forest. In the transition from the Mesolithic to the Neolithic. terms of economic viability, it must be possible to ‘eco- nomically ward off game damage that occurs with the tools currently available’ (Ueckermann 1960, transla- Game density as an aspect of tion by W. D.). The recommended values can also be Mesolithic subsistence seen as a compromise between hunting and forestry. The available aids include, for example, fencing as a Mesolithic life was very well adapted to the environ- protection for the rejuvenation of the tree population. ment. However, the resources available to hunting, The values for the economically viable game density gathering and fishing communities were not unlimited. vary, depending on the quality of the soil and the The greatest variety of these resources existed at the amount of undergrowth in the forest. transition areas between different ecotopes. At the coast, at river banks and lakesides, access to both aquatic and terrestrial sources was provided. Accord- ingly, Mesolithic sites are found mostly in river valleys and at lake and sea shores (Hinz 2018). In addition to mineral raw materials (e. g. flint, amber or pyrite), resources are primarily understood as biogenic raw materials in the form of wood, leaves or fruits as well as meat, fat, feathers, fur, etc. Quantitatively, most of the biomass in the inland is bound in the wood, the roots and the leaves of the trees. These are difficult to use for many terrestrial animals and are also difficult to reach. Since the sunlight is filtered by the tree cover, the herb and shrub layer does not form high amounts of biomass. However, this varies considerably depend- ing on the plant society (see below). Inland, clearings and river and lake shores were attractive locations for Fig. 2 Regeneration cycle (Mosaic-cycle) of a central European game and thus also for hunters (Gross et al. 2019). woodland (after Remmert 1991). 346 A biologic al view on neolithisat io n When we try to reconstruct wild population tions include areas along the coasts and inland salt densities for prehistoric times, we first have to esti- springs, fens and raised bogs, and debris heaps in mate the supply of grazing. Two components must the highlands (Ellenberg 1986). All other locations be taken into account here: firstly, the proportion in central Europe are occupied by forests which, of clearings in the forest, secondly, the degree of depending on the moisture and soil quality, belong shading that is responsible for the formation of the to different plant communities (see below). The pro- herb and shrub layer. portion of open clearings in these forests depends on the maximum age of the trees and whether trees have been killed by plant pests, by lightning or by How much light was available to form storm. Each individual tree has a natural life cycle. a herb layer in the forest? In sum this creates a mosaic of stocks of different age groups. This begins with the pioneer phases I and Closed forests form the natural vegetation in cen- II, which are followed by a thickening phase. This tral Europe – with a few exceptions. These excep- passes into a final forest phase with a subsequent ag- Table 1 Properties of central Euro­pean tree species important for competitive­ ness, sorted by shadow production (modified according to Ellenberg 1986, table 9). Wa l te r D ö rf l e r 347 Fig.  3 Ecogram of the potential pre- historic vegetation of the late Atlantic period (after Feeser in Knitter et al. 2019, changed). ing and death phase. The circle closes with a clearing proportion of clearings and light stocks is approx. phase with perennials and grassy vegetation, which 15 % (Dörfler 2017). then again passes into the pioneer phase I. Figure 2 The degree of shading in the final woodland shows the percentage of the individual phases ac- phase varies with the composition of the forest, as the cording to their duration as listed in Remmert (1989; trees allow different amounts of light to pass through 1991). According to this concept, there is about 4 % to the forest floor. For this, Ellenberg has determined open grass-rich vegetation in a natural woodland. values that range from 0 to 5 for the degree to which If we add the light pioneer phase and a relatively they produce shadow (Ellenberg 1986, 82). Table 1 light dying-off phase, we get 10 to 15 % light spots shows these values for the central European forest compared to 85 to 90 % dense forest cover due to trees. An average value for the degree of shading can closed stands of trees of different ages. be derived from the share of the individual trees in A comparison with pollen diagrams confirms the forest composition. these values: In the late Atlantic, about 95 % tree As there are no recent comparisons for the com- pollen contrasts with 5 % grasses and herbs. Due position of the deciduous forests of the late Atlantic to the differences in pollen production and pollen (5,000 to 3,800 calBC), we postulate potential pre- distribution, these values have to be transferred to historic plant communities in analogy to modern area estimates. When we use a calibration with the plant communities. Ellenberg (1986, 106) created REVEALS program according to Sugita (2007), the an ecogram of modern plant communities for the vari- Average values of a Late-Atlantic Mixed Oak-forest ( Lake Belau 5000 to 4000 BC) Quercus Tilia Ulmus Fraxinus Pinus Betula Alnus Average value in the pollen diagram [percent landplants] 22 6 9 4 5 12 25 Average value in the pollen diagram [percent arboreal pollen] 27 7 11 5 6 14 30 PPE (S-Sweden) 7.6 1.3 0.8 0.7 5.7 8.9 4.2 Percent values/PPE 2.9 4.6 11.3 5.7 0.9 1.3 6 Calculated area share 8.9 14.1 34.4 17.5 2.7 4.1 18.2 Shadow value according to Ellenberg 1986. Tab. 9 3 4 4 3 1 1 3 Shadow value * area share 0.27 0.56 1.38 0.52 0.03 0.04 0.55 Mean shade number for the woodland in the Lake Belau area 3.34 Table 2 Conversion of the pollen percentages (average values for the time between 5,000 and 4,000 calBC) into the degree of covera- ge and determination of a value for the mean shade number. 348 A biologic al view on neolithisat io n Fig. 4 Conversion of pollen per- centage values into the degree of coverage in the catch­ment area of Lake Belau during the late Atlantic period. ous soil conditions from acidic to alkaline, and from but it applies to the growing season only, i. e. from dry to very wet. In Figure 3, an allocation was made spring to autumn. The actual bottleneck of food sup- analogously to this, which corresponds to the location ply is the winter, for wildlife as well as for humans. requirements and competitive properties of the tree In addition to the food supply, what factors de- species of the late Atlantic. termine the population density of game? A regional pollen diagram, such as the one from In a landscape without humans, the wild ani- Lake Belau (Wiethold 1998; Dörfler et al. 2012), mal population of prey will be in balance with the shows the mix of all these different plant communi- population of predators, i. e. wolf, lynx, wildcat, and ties. The proportion of their area in the landscape bear. If the population of the game increased, for in the catchment of a pollen diagram depends on example due to a mild winter, the predator popula- the spatial distribution and quantity of the respective tion would also increase and accordingly lead to a soil conditions. With the help of pollen productivity reduction in the former. Humans also have to fit into estimates (PPEs) we can convert the frequency of the this balance if they want to make a sustainable use individual pollen taxa to the degree of coverage from of wildlife. Overuse would require larger hunting a pollen diagram for the time in the late Atlantic. The areas and thus a much higher hunting effort. In this corresponding values of such a calculation are sum- situation, humans compete with other predators, so marised in Table 2. Values from southern Sweden were they have to ‘share’ the prey with them. used as PPEs (Broström et al. 2008). Figure 4 shows the first step of this calculation, from the percentage values to the projected area share. According to this How high was the population density calculation, 14 % of the catchment area of Lake Belau of red deer, roe deer, wild boar, consisted of limewood, 9 % of oak, 34 % of elm, and aurochs, and elk? 18 % of ash. The pine reaches 3 %, but its share in the pollen diagram is probably due to long-distance From a modern hunter’s point of view, the artificially pollen flight; the hazel is excluded from this view as high population densities of wild game are quite ac- a plant of the shrub layer. ceptable. Foresters would vehemently contradict. Reju- As shown in Table 2, a degree of shading can be venation by nature through tree seedlings is nowadays determined from these values. The landscape occupied mostly only possible in protected plantations, and in by different forest communities in the catchment area snow-rich winters the tree population suffers from deer of Lake Belau would therefore have had an average peeling bark as an emergency food. Other mechanical shading value of 3.34. In comparison, a pure beech damage, such as sweeping the antlers, is negligible. forest has a value of 5 on a scale from 0 to 5. Thus it The species of hoofed game are listed in Germany becomes clear that the forest in the Atlantic in its herb under the title ‘Forstschädlinge Europas’ (Forest pests layer was able to offer more food for the game dur- in Europe; translation W. D.), although it is emphasised ing the vegetation period than, for example, modern that deer, roe deer and wild boar belong to the forest beech (5) or spruce (4) forests. in an appropriate density and only become pests if the This information has consequences for the food population density is too high (Ueckermann 1986). supply for wild fauna in the Atlantic deciduous forest, A biotically portable population density of game that Wa l te r D ö rf l e r 349 Red deer Roe deer Wild boar Aurochs Elk Food ecology Intermediate type Selector Omnivore Rough forager Selector Economic viable density/ km2 1.5 5 2 (0.1) 0.7 Animals per 500 km² 750 2500 1000 50 350 Table 3 Food ecology and economically viable population density of hoofed game species in northern central Europe. today’s hunters might strive for would thus in the long roe deer and wild boar, and from Lavsund et al. (2003) run lead to a degradation and clearing of the forests. for elk. There is no information for aurochs because As could be shown, we see in the pollen diagrams for this species has died out. Therefore, values for bison the Atlantic a largely closed forest with a proportion of were taken from Ueckermann (1986), because the clearings that corresponds to natural tree regeneration. bison is supposed to cover a food spectrum similar to Accordingly, the forest-destroying effect of herbivores that of the aurochs (Table 3, values in brackets). can have been only slight, which suggests a maximum game density in the order of magnitude of the modern assumed economic viability. As this modern calcula- How many animals can be hunted tion for the potential game density is calculated for without endangering a stable a modern landscape with many possibilities for wild population? animals to feed from fields and meadows we take this aspect as compensation for the better light conditions The answer to this question depends on the repro- in the forests of the Atlantic (see above). duction rate of the respective species. For example, The information on the food ecology of hoofed red deer females (‘Alttiere’ and ‘Schmaltiere’) usually game in Table 3 shows how far the species compete breed one fawn per year. With roe deer there are one with each other. As an omnivore, the wild boar hardly to two, rarely three fawns, and with wild boar there competes with the pure herbivores. Selectors, such as are four to six piglets. These numbers affect the age deer and elk, selectively pick nutrient-rich grazing. structure of a population and the rate of regenera- Due to the different body heights and the fact that tion after severe losses. Wild boars are therefore on elk also feed on aquatic plants near the shore, there is the scale between K strategists (low reproduction hardly any competition between these species, which rate, pronounced parental care, long life span) and R are also known as concentrate selectors (Wokac 1997). strategists (high reproduction rate, low parental care, The other extreme is the aurochs as a rough forage short life span) less strong K strategists than red deer. eater (‘Rauhfutterverwerter’). Its gastrointestinal tract Since we only have information on the age struc- is adapted to nutrient-poor, fiber- and cellulose-rich ture of the hunting prey of Mesolithic hunters in food. Red deer is considered to be an intermediate exceptional cases, for the sake of simplicity, it will type, which can adapt to different food offerings be assumed here that a game population may not be relatively flexibly. Thus we assume that all these decimated by more than 30 % of its previous year’s game animals can live together with little competitive number. Even in today’s hunting grounds, shooting stress. rates of at most 30 % of the stock are sought to pre- The data on the population density of the game in serve the wild population (Ueckermann 1986). The Table 3 come from Ueckermann (1986) for red deer, potential maximum hunting yield would therefore Red deer Roe deer Wild boar Aurochs Elk Economic portable density 1.5 5 2 0.1 0.7 Maximum rate of prey 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 Rate of prey for other predatores 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 Rate of prey for humans 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 Potential prey for humans per km² 0.15 0.50 0.20 0.01 0.07 Potential prey per 500 km² 74.3 247.5 99.0 5.0 34.7 Table 4 Potential hunting prey based on the economically viable game density. 350 A biologic al view on neolithisat io n be just under a third of the game population of the these variables, I determined a value of 2,400 kcal / previous year. day per person (Dörfler 2012). Certain phases can Presuming that humans compete with other also be endured with less, others – like pregnancy predators, i. e. wolf, lynx, wildcat, and bear, we can and strenuous physical activity – only with higher further assume that about a third of the potential values. prey falls on humans. Table 4 shows the potential The nutritional value of game meat depends hunting prey of a hypothetical area of 500 km² based heavily on the fat content of the animals and on the on these specifications. meat batch used. The fat content of game is signifi- Mellars (1975) made a comparable calculation cantly lower than that of domestic animals, and also for the yield from wild animal populations; however, fluctuates seasonally. The weight of an eviscerated he assumes that the potential wild animal popula- roe deer body is 8 to 13 kg for a young animal, 12 tions are significantly higher. The historical data he to 16 kg for a 1-year-old one, and 14 to 21 kg for an gives relate, at least for central Europe, to a biotic older animal. The values thus range from 8 kg to rather than an economically viable wild density and 21 kg including the bones. If one takes into account to times when non-human predators had already a significant proportion of younger pieces in the total been eradicated. prey, the average is 12.5 kg (Kujawski 2016). The same applies to red deer. A red deer, for example, is to be considered as an adult at 4 to 5 years and then Game population density as basis for a reaches 95 % of its maximum weight. For red deer potential population density of hunters the information from Ueckermann (1986) was used, which on the one hand gives average values for the In order to calculate the nutrition of hunters in the weight of the prey of gender-specific age groups and next step, it is necessary on the one hand to record the on the other hand recommended shooting rates for energy content of the respective animal species and a normal age structure of a herd. The initial values on the other hand to determine the energy require- are between 33.5 kg for (female) calves and 109.4 kg ment. How much kcal does a red deer, roe deer, wild for adult deer. The value determined from the recom- boar, auroch / wisent, or elk provide, to name only mended launch rate is 51 kg. These calculations were the large hoofed game species? Table 5 summarises also used for the other wild animals, which explains values from Ueckermann (1986), Souci et al. (2008) the relatively large difference between the maximum and Kujawski (2016) for red deer, roe deer and wild life weight and the slaughter weight. However, the boar. Values of aurochs and wisents are given in anal- zoo-archaeological investigations of material from ogy to domestic cattle and therefore put in brackets, the early Mesolithic site Friesack 4 (Schmölcke values for elk are taken from Holm (1991). These are 2019) show that these recommended shooting rates not the maximum weights, but average values, which is were not always met in the Mesolithic. why they are also shown in brackets. The meat weight In wild boar, the weight of the male pieces var- was averaged between adult and juvenile animals. ies between 50 and 175 kg, that of the female ones Human energy requirements depend on age, gen- between 55 and 150 kg. Average values for boars (2 der and physical exertion; they vary therefore con- years old and older) are 55.5 kg, for 1-year-old ani- siderably within a population. As an average for all mals 34.6 kg, and for piglets (up to 1 year) 20.2 kg. Red deer Roe deer Wild boar Aurochs Elk Food ecology Intermediate type Selector Omnivore Rough forager Selector Maximum life weight [kg] 100 – 150 11 – 34 150 – 200 700 – 1000 225 – 385 Weight broken up without innards [kg] 51 12.5 34.2. (?) (?) Meat share without bones 47 % 49 % 37 % (50 %) (50 %) Average meat weight per animal [kg] 24 6.1 12.7 (300) (160) Fat content In g per 100 g 3.34 3.55 9.3 (5) (1.9) Energy content In kcal/100 g 114 122 162 (150) (146) Average energy content per animal [kcal] 27,326 7,440 20,500 (450,000) (233,600) Table 5 Live and slaughter weight of the most common wild animals. Wa l te r D ö rf l e r 351 Fig. 5 The potential caloric intake from wild game according to the variables of the model calculation (30 % of the economically viable game density, 1/3 of the prey by human hunters and 2/3 by other predators). The corresponding values for female animals are for aurochs, as it is not a domestic cattle breed. Elk 46.5 kg, 32 kg and 18.5 kg. For a ‘normal’ prey struc- data refer to Swedish animals listed in Holm (1991). ture, the average value is 34.2 kg for broken-up ani- Individuals of this species can reach a significantly mals (Ueckermann 1986). higher maximum live weight with up to 800 kg. The The game density fluctuates very much in wild data are mean values for female animals, male animals, boar, and it depends heavily on food supply and con- and calves. This listing shows the nutritional potential servation measures. In the recent past, the stocks for the different hunting prey of Mesolithic people. have increased enormously due to the intensification If a human population wants to survive long-term of maize cultivation. Data from the 1970s assume hunting and gathering in a region, a balance between values from 1.5 to 2.5 animals / km² (Ueckermann hunters and prey must be maintained, as mentioned 1986, 192). A value of 2 animals / km² is therefore above. The game population cannot be reduced in size, chosen for the calculation, in assumption that mod- and there must be sufficiently large areas as hunting ern humans – in the form of hunters and motorists grounds to allow the game stocks to recover. Winter –, will take a number of prey similar to that wolves, is a time of food shortage for both game and humans. lynxes, wildcats, and bears took in historical and That is why a focus on seasonal food can be assumed: prehistoric times. bird hunting, fishing, hunting for game, collecting eggs, When determining the calorific value of meat, mussels and snails, as well as gathering berries and the information also varies considerably – depending nuts and other food plants are seasonally confined and on body part and season and thus the food supply will have been performed during the year at different (possibility of grazing and browsing, see above). The intensities. From ethnological comparisons, Binford fat content is greatest at the beginning of winter. The (2001) determined an average balance of terrestrial values from Kujawski (2016) were adopted for the wild animals, terrestrial plants and aquatic resources of one animals. Souci et al. (2008) give values of 109 kcal / third each. Accordingly, it is assumed for this calcula- 100 g for muscle, 130 kcal for shoulder and 200 kcal tion that Mesolithic people met one third of caloric for breast meat. In analogy to this, the mean value for requirements through hunting for red deer, roe deer, the model calculation was therefore set at 150 kcal wild boar, elk, and aurochs. for the meat of an aurochs. Modern cattle breeds for Accordingly, this would mean a demand for game meat production are based on a proportion of 50 to meat of on average 800 kcal per person and day (one 65 % of meat in slaughter weight (Bayerische Lande- third of 2,400 kcal) or of 292,000 kcal / person and sanstalt für Landwirtschaft 2020). In comparison year. This means that a maximum of approx. 56 people to other wild animals, a value of 50 % was chosen in an area of 500 km² could feed on a third of the 352 A biologic al view on neolithisat io n Red deer Roe deer Wild boar Aurochs Elk Potential prey per 500 km² 74.3 247.5 99.0 5.0 34.7 Average energy content per animal [kcal] 27,326 7,440 20,500 450,000 233,600 Potential energy per 500 km² [kcal] 2,028,956 1,841,400 2,029,500 2,227,500 8,094,240 Potential share in nutrition [%] 12.5 11.4 12.5 13.7 49.9 Sum of potential energy: 16,221,596 kcal Table 6 Available calories as combination of Tables 4 and 5. hunting yield. With no other food available, this num- mestic animals on the one hand through targeted ber would drop to 18 individuals. This corresponds clearing and, on the other hand, through the cutting to values of 0.11 people / km² or 0.04 people / km². of branches and twigs. By climbing into the crowns of These values are of the same scale as those given by trees and cutting there, people can open up resources Zimmermann (1996) or Müller (2013) for Mesolithic to cattle that are not available to the game, and they societies. The distribution of the number of calories do not have to share the yield of their stock with among the potential game according to this calcula- other predators (with exceptions). Ongoing grazing tion is shown in Figure 5 and Table 6. of areas close to settlements may also have prevented These values for potential human population the natural regeneration of the forest, so that a semi- densities by no means show absolute numbers, but open pasture landscape with grazed and browsed they describe the order of magnitude that can be forests will gradually have developed in these areas. determined on the basis of the specifications and In particular, however, the storage of winter fodder assumptions made. As a consequence, the population in the form of leaf hay will have helped to overcome density is limited by the carrying capacity in form of the food shortage in winter (Dörfler 2017). The the available food resources. Supply shortages due to cattle, in turn, formed a living stock that could sig- extreme weather events, climate changes or animal nificantly increase the security of supply for people. diseases would have a direct impact on human popu- Because of the cutting, the clearing and the storage lations. Switching to other nutrition strategies or to of animal feed, significantly larger food resources other territories was probably only possible to a very can be tapped from the same area. This process of limited extent in Mesolithic hunting, gathering and neolithisation is connected to the Funnel Beaker fishing societies. The use of resources in neighbour- societies. In northern Germany it began around 4,100 ing areas will have led to competitive situations and calBC (Müller et al. 2012). Pollen diagrams show a conflicts with the neighbours. A further growth of first opening of the forest, which can be seen above the population, in accordance with the Darwinian all by an increase in the values of the hazel as a shrub concept of an increased reproductive success, could in need of light (Feeser et al. 2012). Also, the pollen only have been made possible by acquiring new re- production of trees is initially increased by the small sources. For the growth of human populations and openings and a general thinning (Feeser / Dörfler a higher population density as recorded e. g. by Hinz 2014). It is only gradually that herbs and grasses be- et al. (2012), an improvement of the area yield of the come more common in this early stage when cereal used landscape and the increase of the security of cultivation was practiced in an intensive way but on supply would have been a prerequisite. a small scale in garden-like areas. In a second phase around 3,700 calBC land use is extensified with grain cultivation in open areas (Feeser et al. 2012; Kirleis New resources due to a Neolithic this volume). At the latest about 3,600 calBC also subsistence strategy the plow was introduced (Klimascha / Neumann this volume). Another source of food is opened up Both conditions can be met by the Neolithic econo- with the cereals, which, due to their good storability, my. Since domestic animals, unlike wild animals, no again increase the security of supply, especially in longer have an escape reflex they can be protected the winter months. In combination with ceramics and cared for in a controlled manner. Additionally, as a means of acquiring nutrients through cooking, feeding also ties the cattle to humans. In the forest, cereals represent a significant improvement in the people can improve the range of fodder for their do- food supply. Ceramics, however, were already used Wa l te r D ö rf l e r 353 during the Final Mesolithic (cf. Müller this volume) Based on the investigations at the British site Star Carr and are certainly an innovation that had strongly and on the basis of ethnological analogies to historical improved the living and nutritional conditions of North American hunters and gatherers, he postulates the Mesolithic population. For the consumption of an average group size of 25 people. Based on model cereals the Late Mesolithic invention of ceramics can calculations by Braidwood and Reed (1957), he con- be understood as a predisposition or preadaptation. cludes that there is a population density of 13 people The innovations mentioned made a significantly per 100 square miles, corresponding to 0.05 people larger population possible through higher area yields, per square kilometer. This results in an activity area overcoming the winter food shortage, and increasing of 500 km² for a group of 25 people. This area cor- supply security. Hinz and Müller (2015) estimate responds to a circle with a radius of 12.6 km or, in a population density of 2.5 to 7.5 people / km² for the case of a coastal or shore settlement, a semicircle Schleswig-Holstein for the time between 3,700 and with a radius of 17.8 km. With a diet based primarily 3,200 calBC. But the new larger population also cre- on red deer, he assumes a requirement of 50 animals ated new dependencies. Cattle epidemics and crop per year for a group of 25 people. With a postulated failures created new risks that could only be buffered game population of 6.6 animals per km², which is to a limited extent by stockpiling. As a consequence, certainly a much too high starting value, he sees no boom and bust phases represent the human popula- limitation in population size in the food procurement. tion development in the following centuries (Feeser The calculations above show, however, that if the cor- et al. 2019). This path in general, however, was dif- responding information is given, a comparable value ficult, if not impossible, to reverse, since a return to for the human population density is reached, but this hunting and gathering would have presupposed sig- is already at the limit of the area’s carrying capacity nificantly smaller population numbers. with a nutrition based to one third on game hunting. How could such a population growth have worked out? According to Volk and Atkinson (2013) Frequency of furred game in the bone population growth can have various causes. One spectrum of Mesolithic sites aspect is a reduced infant and child mortality rate. However, this rate does not appear to have changed Friesack 4, a well-researched inland Mesolithic site, significantly during the transition from hunting, gath- will be used here for an evaluation. Extensive ar- ering and fishing to agriculture. According to them, in chaeozoological studies (Schmölcke 2016; 2019) hunters and gatherers as well as in historical agricul- show that roe deer predominate in the number of tural societies on average 26.9 % of babies die in the bones identified (between 29.3 % and 41.1 %) in the first year of life, and 46.2 % of children before they prey. This affects all three phases from the middle reach puberty. However, an improved nutritional situ- Preboreal to the Boreal. Red deer (23,2 % to 28,3 %) ation can shorten the period between two births and ranks second in terms of bone numbers, followed by thus allow a higher number of births. A sedentary way wild boar (11 % to 17.2 %), elk (4.4 % to 6.9 %) and of life can favour the care for the offspring and thus aurochs (0.3 % to 1.9 %). This order changes when ensure higher chances of survival. Whether a woman the bone weight is taken as a basis, which would be gives birth to four children, two of whom reach sexual proportional to the meat weight if all parts of the maturity and will have children themselves, or whether skeleton were preserved representatively. With values she gives birth to eight children, four of whom in turn between 32.2 % and 43.5 %, red deer comes first in produce offspring of their own is very important. In the bone weight. Due to its high body weight, the elk one case the population remains stable, in the other follows with values between 20.2 % and 28.4 %. This case it grows exponentially: if each woman gave birth is followed by wild boar (14.1 % to 25.2 %), roe deer every second year between her 16th and 32th year of (14.1 % to 16.6 %) and aurochs (2.4 % to 8.3 %). The life, which corresponds to an average generation pe- game population in the late Atlantic may not have riod of 24 years, the population would have increased been identical to that in the early Holocene, but these eightfold after 96 years. values will be compared below with the potential population density of game. According to the above model calculations, about 50 % of the calorie require- Discussion ment could have been covered by elk. On the one hand, this suggests that the population density data The above-mentioned value of 500 km² for a home for elk, which originate from modern Sweden, prob- range is derived from estimates by Piggott (1972, 67). ably cannot be transferred to the middle Holocene 354 A biologic al view on neolithisat io n in northern central Europe. On the other hand, the Conwy 1998). There is therefore no uniform pattern data from Friesack 4 show that a considerable part at the various Mesolithic sites, but rather a typical of the hunting prey consisted of elk. The quarry, es- variance in the subsistence strategy. pecially large and heavy animals, was broken up at the place of a successful hunt and therefore reached Nutrition of Mesolithic hunter-gatherer- the settlement in parts. In this way, only selected fishermen after isotope measurements parts of the carcass may have reached the settlement on skeletal material site. So Schmölcke (2016, 83) writes (translation by W. D.): ‘Similar to the roe deer, certain parts of Fischer et al. (2007) have examined extensive skel- the body [of the red deer], especially the back, seem etal material from Denmark’s Mesolithic and Neo- to have been reserved for the hunters who ate them lithic sites. The portions of the carbon isotope 13C away from the settlement site, perhaps already at and the nitrogen isotope 15N are enriched in the food the place of the successful hunt’. He also notes a chain by isotope fractionation. As the limnic and selection of bones (originally representing certain marine food chains are longer than the terrestrial body parts) brought into the settlement for the elk. ones, the proportion of fish and mussels in the diet Accordingly, it is difficult to compare the data from can be estimated under favourable circumstances. the Mesolithic site Friesack 4 with the calculation With a supply based on the terrestrial food chain, above. But both show the great importance of the the proportion of meat in comparison to plant com- large ungulates elk and red deer. ponents can be estimated (Fernandez et al. 2015). Goldhammer (2008) summarised the archaeo- The Danish isotope measurements indicate a high zoological investigations of the Ertebølle site at Gru- proportion of fish in the diet, both inland and on be-Rosenhof (analyses carried out by U. Schmölcke the coast. Since both humans and dogs with high as well). Subsequently, fish with 3,846 bones contrast values indicating marine nutrition occur inland, the to 290 bones from mammals. This exceptionally high authors assume seasonal mobility. This contradicts number of fish residues is mainly due to the fact that the alternative hypothesis that there would have been the samples from this coastal place were intensively separate inland and coastal populations with typical washed and sieved during the excavation. Red deer subsistence. dominates among mammals with a bone count of Terberger et al. (2018) carried out compa- 116 (40 %). This is followed by the wild boar with rable isotope measurements on skeletal material 56 (19.3 %), aurochs with 29 (10 %) and roe deer from northern Germany in order to reconstruct the with 27 (9,3 %). Elk has not been reported from nutrition of Palaeolithic, Mesolithic and Neolithic this Late Mesolithic site. Since no information has communities. Due to the small number of graves or yet been given on the bone weights or minimum human bones found in other contexts, the sample individual numbers, only a rough estimate of the for Mesolithic individuals is relatively small. For importance of the individual wild animal species for the late Atlantic, i. e. the Late Mesolithic, there are nutrition can be made. Red deer clearly dominates two samples from the site Criewen 4, which show in front of the aurochs, which, as a large game, will a high proportion of fresh water components in the have had a higher share in the diet than the number food (Terberger et al. 2018). Older finds from the of bones suggests. Wild boar is also strongly repre- early and middle Atlantic have similarly high δ15N sented, while the light-weight roe deer, with a share values, which indicate high proportions of fish and of 9.3 % in the number of bones, may have had only mussels in the diet. In contrast, the values of Neo- a small share in the nutrition at the Late Mesolithic lithic individuals show a wide spectrum between site Grube-Rosenhof. predominantly terrestrial and varying limnic and In comparison, one can look at the well-re- marine food proportions. In the sample, the tran- searched Danish Erbebølle inland site of Ringk- sition from strongly marine to predominantly ter- loster, which, however, has a different calculation restrial food dates back to the first centuries of the basis for the given bone numbers (Rowley-Conwy 4th millennium, i. e. the early Neolithic Ia and Ib of 1998). Here, wild boar dominates clearly before red the Funnel Beaker communities. Very limited data deer and aurochs. Here, too, is a comparatively low is available from Late Mesolithic sites, so that little evidence of roe deer, and elk is also found to a small can be said about the subsistence of these mobile extent only. Due to the indicators of seasonality, this communities from this point of view. The authors place is interpreted as a winter place that had been interpret the data in the way that three strategies visited again and again over many years (Rowley- can generally be distinguished for Mesolithic hunt- Wa l te r D ö rf l e r 355 ers, gatherers and fishermen: specialised hunting of by the availability of natural resources, the new sub- large mammals, specialised development of fresh sistence strategy widened the horizon of possibilities water resources, and a mixed economy with a high and enabled a population growth that followed the proportion of gathering (Terberger et al. 2018, 81). Darwinian rule of reproductive success. This process It remains open whether these strategies were re- was not reversible without a great loss of people. served for individual groups exclusively or whether they only gradually changed in importance for the seasonal cycle in the nutrition of a population. The References latter is proposed for the well-investigated Danish Erbebølle inland area of Ringkloster, where bones Bayerische Landesanstalt für Landwirtschaft 2020: of marine vertebrates and oysters were regularly de- Vergleich von Mast-, Schlachtleistung und Fleischqual- tected (Rowley-Conwy 1998). ität von Absetzern aus der Mutterkuhhaltung (https:// A clear separation into one or the other food www.lfl.bayern.de/itz/rind/041738/index.php, accessed strategy would contradict the observed strategy of 24.3.2020). the ‘one third proportion’ of hunting, collecting and Binford 2001: L. R: Binford, Constructing Frames of Refer- the use of limnic and marine resources, as it is found ence (Berkeley/Los Angeles/London 2001). in numerous ethnological examples and postulated Braidwood / Reed 1957: R. J. Braidwood / C. A. Reed, The for the Mesolithic (Binford 2001). The strategies achievement and early consequences of food production. seem to vary according to regional conditions and do Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology not follow any trend over time. Neolithic populations 22, 1957,19 – 31. differ significantly in the sharply decreasing share Broström et al. 2008: A. Broström / A. B. Nielsen / M.-J. Gail- of hunting and fishing in favour of plant-based food lard / K. Hjelle / F. Mazier / H. Binney / J. Bunting / sources (Terberger et al. 2018). R. Fyfe / V. Meltsov / A. Poska / S. Räsänen / W. Soepboer / H. von Stedingk/ H. Suutari/ S. Sugita, Pollen productivity estimates of key European plant Summary taxa for quantitative reconstruction of past vegetation: a review. Vegetation. History Archaeobotany 17(5), 2008, The model calculation of the possible game density in 461 – 478. the forest of the late Atlantic presented here showed Darwin 1859: C. Darwin, On the Origin of Species by means the potential share of game in the diet of hunters, of natural selection (reprint: Auckland 2009). gatherers and fishermen from the Ertebølle era. It Dörfler 2012: W. Dörfler, Salz als ein bestimmender Fak- was shown that a relatively small population of 0.11 tor für das Bevölkerungswachstum und die Agraröko- people per km² would already have reached the limits nomie vorgeschichtlicher Bauern. In: A. Stobbe / U. of growth even with a balanced use of terrestrial and Tegtmeier (eds.), Verzweigungen – Eine Würdigung für aquatic resources. A significantly larger population A. J. Kalis und J. Meurers-Balke. Frankfurter Archäolo- could thus only be realised with the acquirement of gische Schriften 18 (Bonn 2012) 91 – 103. new food resources. With the keeping of domestic Dörfler 2017: W. Dörfler, Von der Dichte des naturnahen animals in the Neolithic since approx. 4,100 calBC Waldes und den „Flaschenhälsen“ der Wildpopulationen. there was the possibility to feed them branches and In: J. Lechterbeck / E. Fischer (eds.), Kontrapunkte – leaves, to create food stores for the winter, and to Festschrift Manfred Rösch. Universitätsforschungen zur use the domestic animals as a living stock to improve prähistorischen Archäologie 300 (Bonn 2017) 95 – 113. one‘s own food supply. This ensured a significant Dörfler et al. 2012: W. Dörfler / I. Feeser / C. van den improvement in security of supply. A further step in Bogaard / S. Dreibrodt / H. Erlenkeuser / A. Klein- this development was the expansion of agriculture mann / J. Merkt / J. Wiethold, A high-quality annu- in the form of larger fields from 3,700 calBC and ally laminated sequence from Lake Belau, Northern ploughing from 3,600 calBC at the latest. Grain as an Germany: Revised chronology and its implications for easily storable food was another way of overcoming palynological and tephrochronological studies. The the winter food shortage and stabilising population Holocene 22/12, 2012, 1413 – 1426. growth. The same area that was previously forested Ellenberg 1986: H. Ellenberg, Vegetation Mitteleuropas and presented only a small usable biomass had by mit den Alpen (Stuttgart 1986). then become a usable cultural landscape that could Feeser / Dörfler 2014: I. Feeser / W. Dörfler, The glade feed significantly more people. As the Mesolithic effect: Vegetation openness and structure and their influ- population size and growth might have been limited ences on arboreal pollen production and the reconstruc- 356 A biologic al view on neolithisat io n tion of anthropogenic forest opening. Anthropocene 8, Hinz et al. 2012: M. Hinz / I. Feeser / K.-G. Sjögren / 2014, 92 – 100. J. Müller, Demography and the intensity of cultural Feeser et al. 2012: I. Feeser / W. Dörfler / F.-R. Aver­ activities: an evaluation of Funnel Beaker Societies dieck / J. Wiethold, New insight into regional and local (4200 – 2 800 cal BC). Journal of Archaeologiocal Sci- land-use and vegetation patterns in eastern Schleswig- ence 39(10), 2012, 3331 – 3340. Holstein during the Neolithic. In: M. Hinz / J. Müller Holm 1991: L. Holm, The Use of Stone and Hunting of Rein- (eds.), Siedlung, Grabenwerk, Großsteingrab – Studien deer. Archaeology and Environment 12 (Umeå 1991). zur Gesellschaft, Wirtschaft und Umwelt der Trich- Iversen 1949: J. Iversen, The influence of prehistoric man terbechergruppen im nördlichen Mitteleuropa. Frühe on vegetation. Danmarks Geologiske Undersøgelse IV, Monumentalität und soziale Differenzierung 2 (Bonn Raekke 3(6), 1949, 5 – 2 3. 2012) 159 – 190. Kerig 2010: T. Kerig, Der Faktor Arbeit im Neolithikum. Feeser et al. 2019: I. Feeser / W. Dörfler / J. Kneisel / M. Steinbearbeitung, Feldbestellung, Schwertransport. In: Hinz / S. Dreibrodt, Human impact and population C. Lichter (red.), Jungsteinzeit im Umbruch. Die „Mi- dynamics in the Neolithic and Bronze Age: Multi-proxy chelsberger Kultur” und Mitteleuropa vor 6000 Jahren evidence from north-western Central Europe. The Ho- (Karlsruhe 2010) 236 – 243. locene 29/10, 2019, 1596 – 1606. Kirleis this volume: W. Kirleis, Subsistence Change? Diver- Fernandez et al. 2015: R. Fernandez / P. Grootes / M.-J. sification of Plant Economy in the Neolithic in Northern Nadeau / O. Nehlich, Quantitative diet reconstruc- Germany. tion of a neolithic population using a bayesian mixing Klimascha / Neumann this volume: F. Klimscha / D. Neu- model (FRUITS): the case study of Ostorf (Germany). mann, All Quiet on the Eastern Front? A longue durée American Journal of Physical Anthropology 158, 2015, Perspective on Technical Innovations in the Late Meso- 325 – 340. lithic and Early Neolithic of the North European Plain. Fischer et al. 2007: A. Fischer / J. Olsen / M. Richards / J. Knitter et al. 2019: D. Knitter / J. P. Brozio / W. Dörfler Heinemeier / A. E. Sveinbjörnsdottir / P. Bennike, / R. Duttmann / I. Feeser / W. Hamer / W. Kirleis Coast-Inland mobility and diet in the Danish Mesolithic / J. Müller / O. Nakoinz, Transforming landscapes: and Neolithic: evidence from stable isotope values of Modeling land-use patterns of environmental border- humans and dogs. Journal of Archaeological Science lands. The Holocene 29/10, 2019, 1572 – 1586. 34, 2007, 2125 – 2150. Kujawski 2016: O. G. Kujawski, Wild und Wilderzeugnisse. Goldhammer 2008: J. Goldhammer, Untersuchungen zur Aid Infodienst Ernährung, Landwirtschaft, Verbrauch- Stratigraphie, Fundverteilung und zum Fundspektrum erschutz e. V. (Bonn 2016). der mittleren Ertebøllekultur in Ostholstein. Univer- Lavsund et al. 2003: S. Lavsund / T. Nygren / E. J. Solberg, sitätsforschungen zur Prähistorischen Archäologie 163 Status of Moose Populations and Challenges to Moose (Bonn 2008). Management in Fennoscandia. Alces 39, 2003, 109 – 130. Gross et al. 2019: D. Gross / H. Piezonka / E. Cor- Mellars 1975: P. Mellars, Ungulate populations, economic radini / U. Schmölcke / M. Zanon / W. Dörfler / patterns, and the Mesolithic landscape. In: J. G. Evans / S. Dreibrodt / I. Feeser / S. Krüger / H. Lübke / D. S. Limbrey / H. Cleere (eds.), The effect of man on the Panning / D. Wilken, Adaptations and transforma- landscape: the Highland Zone. CBA Research Report tions of hunter-gatherers in forest environments: New 11 (Oxford 1975) 49 – 56. archaeological and anthropological insights. The Ho- Müller 2013: J. Müller, Demographic Traces of Technologi- locene 29/10, 2019, 1531 – 1544. cal Innovation, Social Change and Mobility: From 1 to Harari 2013: Y. N. Harari, Eine kurze Geschichte der Men- 8 Million Europeans (6000 – 2000 BCE). In: S. Kadrow/ schheit (München 2013). P. Włodarczak (eds.),. Environment and Subsistence – Hinz 2018: M. Hinz, From Hunting to Herding? Aspects of Forty Years after Janusz Kruk’s “Settlement studies . . .”. the Social and Animal Landscape during the South- Studien zur Archäologie in Ostmitteleuropa / Studia nad ern Scandinavian Neolithic. In: A. Haug / L. Käppel / Pradziejami Europy Środkowej 11 (Bonn 2013) 1 – 14. J. Müller (eds.), Past Landscapes – The Dynamics of Müller this volume: J. Müller, A long lasting transforma- Interaction between Society, Landscape, and Culture tion: northern Late Mesolithic/Early Neolithic multi- (Leiden 2018) 207 – 2 33. dimensional developments (c. 4,750 – 3,800 BCE). Hinz / Müller 2015: M. Hinz /J. Müller, Wie viele waren Müller et al. 2012: J. Müller / J. P. Brozio / D. Demnick sie? In: W. Dörfler / W. Kirleis / J. Müller (eds.), MEGA- / H. Dibbern / B. Fritsch / M. Furholt / F. Hage / LITHsite CAU – Ein Großsteingrab zum Anfassen (Kiel M. Hinz / L. Lorenz / D. Mischka / C. Rinne, Peri- 2015) 48 – 51. odisierung der Trichterbecher-Gesellschaften. Ein Ar- beitsentwurf. In: M. Hinz / J. Müller (eds.), Siedlung, Wa l te r D ö rf l e r 357 Grabenwerk, Großsteingrab. Studien zu Gesellschaft, Terberger et al. 2018: T. Terberger / J. Burger / F. Lüth / Wirtschaft und Umwelt der Trichterbechergruppen im J. Müller / H. Piezonka, Step by step – The neolithisa- nördlichen Mitteleuropa. Frühe Monumentalität und tion of Northern Central Europe in the light of stable soziale Differenzierung 2 (Bonn 2012) 29 – 33. isotope analyses. Journal of Archaeological Science Piggott 1972: S. Piggott, Vorgeschichte Europas: Vom No- 99, 2018, 66 – 86. madentum zur Hochkultur (München 1972). Ueckermann 1960: E. Ueckermann, Wildstandsbewirtschaf- Remmert 1989: H. Remmert, Ökologie: ein Lehrbuch (Ber- tung und Wildschadenverhütung beim Rotwild : ein lin / Heidelberg et al. 1989). Leitfaden für die erfolgreiche Rotwildhege (Berlin / Remmert 1991: H. Remmert, Das Mosaik-Zyklus-Konzept Hamburg 1960). und seine Bedeutung für den Naturschutz. Laufener Ueckermann 1986: E. Ueckermann, Ordnungsgruppe Ungu- Seminarbeiträge 5, 1991, 5 – 15. lata, Huftiere. In: W. Schwenke, Wirbeltiere. Die Forst- Rowley-Conwy 1998: P. Rowley-Conwy, Meat, Furs and schädlinge Europas 5 (Hamburg / Berlin 1986) 141 – 294. Skins: Mesolithic Animal Bones from Ringkloster, a Voland 2009: E. Voland, Soziobiologie – Die Evolution Seasonal Hunting Camp in Jutland. Journal of Danish von Kooperation und Konkurrenz (Heidelberg 2009). Archaeology 12, 1998, 87 – 98. Volk / Atkinson 2013: A. A. Volk / J. A. Atkinson, Infant Schmölcke 2016: U. Schmölcke, Die Säugetierfunde vom and child death in the human environment of evolu- präboreal- und borealzeitlichen Fundplatz Friesack 4 in tionary adaptation. Evolution and Human Behaviour Brandenburg. In: N. Benecke / B. Gramsch / S. Jahns 34, 2013, 182 – 192. (eds.), Subsistenz und Umwelt der Feuchtbodenstation Wiethold 1998: J. Wiethold, Studien zur jüngeren post- Friesack 4 im Havelland. Ergebnisse der naturwissen- glazialen Vegetations- und Siedlungsgeschichte im schaftlichen Untersuchungen. Arbeitsberichte zur Bo- östlichen Schleswig-Holstein (mit einem Beitrag von dendenkmalpflege in Brandenburg 29 (Wünstorf 2016) H. Erlenkeuser). Universitätsforschungen zur prähis- 45 – 116. torischen Archäologie 45 (Bonn 1998). Schmölcke 2019: U. Schmölcke, Early Mesolithic hunting Wokac 1997: R. M. Wokac, Zur Nahrungsökologie rezenter strategies for red deer, roe deer and wild boar at Frie- und vorzeitlicher Pflanzenfresser. In: K. Hochegger / sack 4, a three-stage Preboreal and Boreal site in north- W. Holzner (eds.), Kulturlandschaft – Natur in Men- ern Germany. In: D. Groß / H. Lübke / J. Meadows / schenhand. Grüne Reihe des Lebensministeriums 11 D. Jantzen (eds.), Working at the Sharp End: From Bone (Wien 1997) 155 – 218. and Antler to Early Mesolithic Life in Northern Ger- Zimmermann 1996: A. Zimmermann, Zur Bevölkerungsdich- many. Untersuchungen und Materialien zur Steinzeit te in der Urgeschichte Mitteleuropas. In: I. Campen / in Schleswig-Holstein und im Ostseeraum 10 (Kiel / J. Hahn / M. Uerpmann (eds.), Spuren der Jagd – Die Hamburg 2019) 239 – 2 54. Jagd nach Spuren. Festschrift für Hansjürgen Müller- Souci et al. 2008: S. W. Souci / W. Fachmann / H. Kraut, Beck. Tübinger Monographien für Urgeschichte 11 Die Zusammensetzung der Lebensmittel, Nährwert- (Tübingen 1996) 49 – 62. Tabellen (Stuttgart 2008). Sugita 2007: S. Sugita, Theory of quantitative reconstruc- tion of vegetation I: pollen from large sites REVEALS regional vegetation composition. The Holocene 17/2, 2007, 229 – 241. Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 , 359 – 375) 359 A long lasting transformation: northern Late Mesolithic/Early Neolithic multi-dimensional developments (c. 4,750 – 3,800 BCE) Johannes Müller Abstract During the last decades, a large amount of new data on the Late Mesolithic and the Early Neolithic in northern Germany has been collected. Both detailed dating procedures and taphonomic processes at different sites have been dis- cussed. With the help of vertical stratigraphy and absolute chronological dating, it is possible to newly describe the pottery sequence of the Middle and Younger Ertebølle and the Early Funnel Beaker (TRB) ceramic societies from c. 4,750 – 3,800 BCE. It becomes clear that the development of the ceramics reflects societies for which the simple differentiation between Meso- lithic and Neolithic terminology does not go far enough. The information from the south Cimbrian Peninsula suggests a mosaic-like habitus, which integrated ‘foraging’, ‘pastoral’ and ‘horticultural’ practices differently. A long-lasting transformation process becomes visible, which begins during the 43rd cen- tury BCE with the introduction of first flat-bottomed funnel beaker ceramics and first domestic animals. Accelerated by a period of climatic stress, the new way of life asserted itself in the 41st century BCE with horticultural subsistence practices and a new ceramic style, among other things. However, for at least three centuries, the Ertebølle ceramic style and the aquatic subsistence remained intact at sites near water, while in other places non-megalithic long mounds were already being built as an expression of the new ideology. Keywords Ertebølle pottery, Funnel Beaker societies, transformation processes, ceramic typology and chronology Zusammenfassung Während der letzten Jahrzehnte wurden neue Daten zum Spätmesolithikum und Frühneolithikum in Norddeutschland gesammelt. Sowohl detaillierte Datierungsverfahren als auch taphonomische Prozesse an verschiedenen Fundstellen wurden diskutiert. Mit Hilfe vertikalstratigraphischer Befunde und absolutchronologischer Datierungen ist es mög- lich, die Keramikabfolge der mittleren und jüngeren Ertebølle- und der frühen Trichterbecherkeramik-Gesellschaften (TRB) von ca. 4750 – 3800 v. Chr. neu zu beschreiben. Es wird deutlich, dass die Entwicklung der Keramik Gesellschaften widerspie- gelt, für die die Unterscheidung zwischen mesolithischer und neolithischer Terminologie nicht weit genug greift. Die Informationen von der südkimbrischen Halbinsel deuten auf einen mosaikartigen Habitus hin, der die Praktiken „Wildbeu- ter“, „Viehhaltung“ und „Bodenbau“ unterschiedlich integrierte. Es wird ein lang anhaltender Transformationsprozess sichtbar, der ab dem 43. Jahrhundert v. Chr. mit der Einführung der ersten Trichterbecherkeramik mit flachen Böden und den ersten Haustieren beginnt. Beschleunigt durch eine klimatische Stressperiode, setzte sich die neue Lebensweise im 41. Jahrhundert v. Chr. u. a. mit einfachem Bodenbau und dem neuen Keramikstil durch. Mindestens drei Jahrhunderte lang blieben jedoch der Keramikstil von Ertebølle und die aquatische Subsistenz an wassernahen Standorten intakt, während an anderen Orten bereits nicht-megalithische Langhügel als Ausdruck der neuen Ideologie errichtet wurden. Introduction 4,750 – 3,800 BCE. In most cases, we know of numer- ous individual studies, in which typo-chronological Besides the terminological use of the terms ‘Final discussions about the spatial and chronological distri- Mesolithic’ or ‘Early Neolithic’, which partially con- bution of key types have been conducted, which usu- ceal the similarities in the archaeological and palaeo- ally can be traced back to the typological discourses ecological archives between the mentioned periods, before the possibility of scientific dating. This often there have been various attempts thus far to better results in spatial-temporal groupings, which mostly determine the corresponding period between about originate from the identification of these key types. 360 A l on g l asti n g tran sfor mati on: northern Late Mesolithic / Early N eolithic multi-dimensional developm e nt s Fig. 1 The location of the discussed sites in the western Baltic area. The spatial differentiation on the south Cimbrian Peninsula from c. 4,100–3,800 BCE is displayed. Only in the rarest cases are efforts made to compare data difficult and have not inspired sometimes neces- not only individual types, but also the quantitative sary typological discourses about Ertebølle pottery composition of these types and to test correspond- (Philippsen 2010; Fernandes et al. 2014; Meyer ing typological similarities with scientific dating for 2017). In this respect, an attempt will be made in the their chronological relevance (Hartz 2004; Sørensen following to use dates that do not involve reservoir 2014; Mischka et al. 2015). In analysing various im- problems. This also includes, for example, indirect portant sites, we also recognise the basic tendency of palynological dating of ceramic objects in the analy- the researchers not to compare closed or relatively sis (cf. Meurers-Balke / Kalis 2011). closed inventories with each other, but instead to dis- Irrespective of these remarks, in the meantime, cuss the entire inventory of a site as one assemblage. after the publication of intensive site evaluations1 Furthermore, the attempt to classify individual vessels in absolute chronological order by means of food crust dating has led to considerable difficulties. 1 Cf. Goldhammer 2008; Glykou 2016; Hage 2016; Faasch The reservoir effects have made the discussion of the 2017; Meyer 2017. Johannes Müller 361 new vertical stratigraphic observations as well as lysed by Arie Kalis and Jutta Meurers-Balke 2008 new dates are available. In light of the current state (Meurers-Balke / Kalis 2011) and re-excavated of research, we can determine the basic lines of typo- from 2001 – 2002 by Sönke Hartz and analysed by chronological development for the period of interest Julia Goldhammer (Goldhammer 2008); with the aid of six south Cimbrian sites. The results •• Wangels LA 505: excavated by Sönke Hartz from support the chronological model of S. Hartz and H. 1996 – 1997 (Hartz 2002/2003), with ceramic Lübke (Hartz / Lübke 2004), which was primarily analyses by Ines Maria Grohmann (Grohmann based on silex assemblages from the Mecklenburg 2010), silex analyses by Felicitas Faasch (Faasch Bay, not ceramics. 2017) and a stratigraphical reanalysis by Arie Accordingly, the following questions are asked: Kalis and Jutta Meurers-Balke (Meurers-Balke / Can chronological differences in Ertebølle pottery be Kalis 2011); typologically identified? Can we record the transition •• Neustadt LA 156: excavated by Sönke Hartz from to Funnel Beaker pottery? Is it possible to identify 2000 – 2006 and analysed by Aikaterini Glykou the variety of regional developments spatially with (Glykou 2016); a model based on the new approach? How can the •• Flintbek LA 48: a pit excavated by Dieter Stolten­ new results of the Late Mesolithic/Early Neolithic berg in 1984 and analysed by Doris Mischka transformation process be interpreted in terms of (Mischka et al. 2015); economic and ideological changes? •• Borgstedt LA 28: a burial ground excavated from 1973 – 1994 by the Landesdenkmalamt Schleswig- Holstein (Hage 2016); South Cimbrian Peninsula: •• Büdelsdorf LA 1: a Neolithic enclosure excavated Chronological development of pottery from 1969 – 1974 mainly by Wolfgang Bauch and from 2014 – 2015 by Franziska Hage (Hage 2016). The chronological development of the south Cimbri- an Peninsula can be reconstructed by the integration The site of Schlamersdorf, which has been intensively of information from newly researched sites (Neu­ discussed, in particular due to its relatively early 14C stadt, Büdelsdorf, Borgstedt, Wangels, Oldenburg- values for pottery, displays a mixed inventory accord- Dannau LA77, Albersdorf-Dieksknöll, Albersdorf- ing to the features and finds (Meyer 2017). In most Brutkamp; Fig. 1) with 14C dates and stratigraphical cases, the numerous radiometric determinations can- information, which add information to other, already not be used to date artefacts because of the mixed known and diversely discussed sites such as Satrup contexts and reservoir effects (Meyer 2017, 72 – 75). and Siggenben-Süd (cf. Klassen 2004, 109 – 222). Nevertheless, this is an extremely important site that provides information on domestic aspects of the Erte- bølle communities. The transition from Late Mesolithic to Within the presentation and discussion of the Early Neolithic ceramic assemblages chronological differentiation within each site and the 4,700 – 3,800 BCE cultural and spatial links, primarily the overall distribu- tion of artefact types within each site played a central The LM/EN keysites: Neustadt LA 156, role. Furthermore, the stratigraphical analyses now Wangels LA 505, Grube-Rosenhof LA 58, enable an in-site and a comparative interpretation. Flintbek LA 48, Borgstedt 1, Büdeldorf LA1 From a chronological point of view, three method- ological approaches allowed a detailed differentiation Due to excavations and re-analyses of assemblages of phases and sub-phases: and contexts, six key sites are identified for the south Cimbrian Peninsula, which are of relevance to re- •• For Neustadt LA 156, vertical stratigraphy and construct the chronological development within the radiometric dating allowed the chronological inter- transitional phase from Ertebølle to Funnel Beaker pretation of a correspondence analysis of ceramic societies, thus from the Final Mesolithic to the Early types (Glykou 2016, 152 – 165). The association of Neolithic. These are: radiometric dating with phases enabled an abso- lute-chronological differentiation of the site. •• Grube-Rosenhof LA 58: first excavated by Hermann •• For Grube-Rosenhof LA 58 and Wangels LA 505, Schwabedissen in the 1960 s and 1970 s (Hartz an indirect dating method was applied (Meurers- 1999a; 1999b; Schwabedissen 1972; 1979), reana- Balke / Kalis 2011) to overcome the limited strati- 362 A l on g l asti n g tran sfor mati on: northern Late Mesolithic / Early N eolithic multi-dimensional developm e nt s Fig. 2 The synchronisation of the phases of individual sites. The phases of individual sites are related to archaeological groups and periods. graphical information: Pollen samples that were lo- The chronological model cated with ceramics were analysed and categorised according to vegetation-processes, which are abso- A chronological model derived from the key sites lutely dated within main pollen sequences (Meurers- of the south Cimbrian Peninsula is also visualised Balke / Kalis 2011, 43 table 1). As single pots could by a correspondence analysis (Fig. 3). Within the be associated with absolute time-markers, a general chronological terminology, the difference between chronological positioning of the Ertebølle layers chronologically defined phases (cf. ‘Final Mesolithic’) (Goldhammer 2008, 88 – 90) could be divided into and the material practises (cf. ‘Middle Ertebølle’) different sub-phases. should be taken into account. •• For Flintbek LA 48, radiometric dating was applied FM (Final Mesolithic), south Cimbrian Middle on samples without reservoir effects. The dating could Ertebølle (4,700 – 4,200/4,100 BCE, sites: Rosenhof be verified by typological analyses, which placed the 1 / Neustadt 1): Both in Rosenhof 1 (Fig. 4) and in assemblage in an absolute dated general sequence Neustadt 1 (Figs. 5 – 6), lamps and pointed-bottomed (Mischka et al. 2015, 466 – 474). The same applies vessels indicate the earliest ceramic Mesolithic phase. to Büdelsdorf LA 1 and Borgstedt LA 1/28 (Hage At Neustadt, a division into an early phase – Neustadt 2016, 128 – 199). 1a with pointed-bottomed beakers – and a later one – Neustadt 1b with both lamps and pointed-bottomed In result, we can distinguish five phases in Neustadt, beakers (from 4,400 BCE onwards) – is possible. The five phases in Grube-Rosenhof, four phases in Wan- lamps from Wangels 1 (Fig. 7) probably also belong gels and one phase in Flintbek (Fig. 2). The earliest to this phase. For the Mecklenburg Bay, the earlier phase of the non-megalithic and megalithic cemetery part was defined by Sönke Hartz and Harald Lübke at Borgstedt (Hage 2016) was also considered. On the (Hartz / Lübke 2004, 126 – 128) as the Jarbock-Phase one hand, the temporal correlation of these phases by (c. 4,750 – 4,450 BCE), the later part as the Timmen- absolute dating displays similarities of the assemblages dorf-Phase (c. 4,450 – 4,100 BCE).2 It is obviously not and, on the other hand, some differences. The mosaic of communities that already built non-megalithic long mounds, and those who were still mainly engaged in 2  But in our study, we exclude the later part of the Timmendorf- foraging activities becomes visible. Phase with N-technique. Johannes Müller 363 Fig. 3 Correspondence analyses of Final Mesolithic and Early Neolithic sites (CAPCA. Eigenvectors 1 – 2 [45 % explanation]). 364 A l on g l asti n g tran sfor mati on: northern Late Mesolithic / Early N eolithic multi-dimensional developm e nt s Phase 5: Phase 4: 3900 – 3700 3700 – 3400 Flasks/amphorae Phase 3: 4050 – 3900 N-technique Phase 2: ? – 4050 Pointed bottom pots Phase 1: 4700 – ? Lamps Rosenhof Fig. 4 The dated assemblages from Grube LA 58 (Rosenhof). The phasing and dating is based on Meurers-Balke / Kalis (2011, 35 – 38 figs. 6 – 7). The overall duration of the site is partly in line with the 14C-values from the site (Hartz/Lübke 2005, 137 – 138 table 1; Goldhammer 2008, 41 – 43), even if the reservoir effect has to be considered. possible to differentiate only on the basis of the ce- From a typological point of view, apart from ramic inventories. Ertebølle pottery assemblages with first TRB ele- FM/EN (Early Neolithic) Ia, south Cimbrian Late ments at the east Holstein Baltic coast, we observe Ertebølle/Early TRB Ia 1 (4,200 – 4,050 BCE, sites: Michelsberg II/III pottery and early TRB Koch 0 Neustadt 2 / Flintbek): In Neustadt 2 (4,200 – 4,100 vessels at the inland Flintbek site (Fig. 8). BCE) and in Rosenhof 2 (4,300/4,200 – 4,050 BCE), EN Ia, south Cimbrian Early TRB Ia 2 not only ceramics with pointed-bottomed vessels and (4,050 – 3,900 BCE, sites: Wangels 2 / Neustadt 3 / lamps but also funnel rim vessels, funnel bowls and Rosenhof 3): At Neustadt 3 (Fig. 6) and Rosenhof 3 lugged beakers (‘Trichterrandgefäße’, ‘Trichterschalen’, (Fig. 4), in addition to lamps and pointed-bottomed bea- ‘Ösenbecher’), funnel beakers of Koch type 0 (Neus- kers, we also observe funnel beakers of Koch type K0 tadt 2) and rim sherds with N-technique (probably of and K1 with flat bases and a probable scoop. While first funnel-shaped vessels; Rosenhof 2) are identified as TRB elements are further indicated here, at Wangels first Funnel Beaker ceramics (Figs. 4 – 5). In Flintbek, in 2 only pointed-bottomed pottery is observed (Fig. 7). addition to funnel beakers of Koch type 0, tulip beakers EN Ia, south Cimbrian Early TRB Ia 3 of Höhn type Kw3 were also identified (Mischka et al. (3,900 – 3,700 BCE, sites: Wangels 3 / Neustadt 4 / 2015, 469; see Fig. 8). Such a Michelsberg beaker is Rosenhof 4 / Borgstedt 1): Around 3,900 BCE, also known from Neustadt 2 (Glykou 2016, 518 plate pointed-bottomed beakers disappear from the as- 18, N2449; see Fig. 5). semblages, while lamps are still in use. Now, Funnel Johannes Müller 365 Fig. 5 The dated assemblages from Neustadt LA 156, phases 1 – 2. The phasing and dating is based on Glykou (2016). Beaker pottery becomes a major player with both EN Ib, south Cimbrian Early TRB Ib (3,700 – 3,500 lugged amphorae, flasks, and cannelur-like vertical BCE, sites: Wangels 4 / Rosenhof 5 / Büdelsdorf 1a): stripes within the assemblages. Decorated rims with In all east Holstein assemblages, TRB pottery with plastic stripes are known from Wangels 3 (Fig. 7). flat-based bowls, funnel beakers with punctures below The ceramic inventories of the Borgstedt I phase the rim or plastic rims dominate. A lamp is still only (3,950 – 3,740 BCE) (Fig. 9), including arcade rims, known from Rosenhof (Fig. 4). In the north, the inven- plastic ridges and finger imprints (Hage 2016, 241 tory of Büdelsdorf 1 displays further elements, such fig. 284; cf. arcade rims of Klassen 6 type, LA 27 as vertical rips, but also plastic and band decoration GE1 [ibid. 284 pl. 1,7] and GE10 [ibid. 285 pl. 2,4] (Hage 2016, 233 fig. 275). and arcade rims of Klassen 8 type, LA 28 GE72 From a terminological point of view, Wangels 3 [ibid. 286 pl. 3,1] and LA 32 GE7 [ibid. 310 pl. 27,7]), and 4 are the assemblages that form Sönke Hartz’s could be associated with the ceramic finds, e. g., from ‘Wangels Group’ (Hartz 2004). In principle, it is Wangels 3 (Fig. 7). mainly associated with late Wangels ceramics. In 366 A l on g l asti n g tran sfor mati on: northern Late Mesolithic / Early N eolithic multi-dimensional developm e nt s Fig. 6 The dated assemblages from Neustadt LA 156, phases 3 – 4. The phasing and dating is based on Glykou (2016, 155 – 165 and plates). Johannes Müller 367 Fig. 7 The dated assemblages from Wangels LA 505. The phasing and dating is based on Meurers-Balke/Kalis (2011, 38 – 42 figs. 8 – 9). The overall duration of the site is in line with the 14C-values from the site (Faasch 2017, 137 table 1). Fig. 8 The assemblage from Flintbek LA 48 (after Mischka et al. 2015, 467 – 468 figs. 2 – 3). 368 A l on g l asti n g tran sfor mati on: northern Late Mesolithic / Early N eolithic multi-dimensional developm e nt s Fig. 9 The assemblage from Borgstedt I (after Hage 2016, 240 – 241; 284 pl. 1,7; 285 pl. 2,4; 286 pl. 3,1; 310 pl. 27,7) and contemporary assemblages (cf. fig. 4;6 – 7 in this contribution; TRB FN IA3). contrast to Oxie ceramics, the presence of amphorae In conclusion, there are three sub-phases of the ENIa and elaborated flasks is obvious. 3 (Fig. 10): Principally, for Borgstedt 1, Neustadt 3 and Wangels we observe an Early Neolithic phase, which, •• Sub-phase ENIa1 (only in the south): with first on the one hand, corresponds to Jutland’s Oxie type, TRB ceramics including funnel beakers of Koch but assumes, on the other hand, a more independent type 0 and rim decorations; typological character via arcade rims. The inventory •• Sub-phase ENIa2: with rip-decorated funnel bea- of Flintbek LA 48 should be included here. In this kers, flasks, etc., as Oxie ceramics in the north and respect, an early beginning is to be distinguished as Wangels ceramics with arcade edges in the south; from a later development, which, however, ends on •• Sub-phase ENIa3: with late Oxie and Wangels ce- the entire Cimbrian Peninsula around 3,800 BCE ramics now also displaying overturned ledges and and leads to a new phase, which is characterised by sack-shaped bottles with two handles. the Volling style. Remarks on the style transformation from Ertebølle to TRB 3  Wangels Group after Sönke Hartz (Hartz 2004; Hartz / Earliest appearance of TRB pottery Lübke 2004, 133). – Ceramics: wide-mouthed funnel beakers with punctures below the rim or folded arcade rims, funnel bowls, lugged beakers, lugged corononay amphorae with dented At the Neustadt site after a phase with pointed- handles, thin-walled bowls, bottles, clay discs; antlers/stone bottomed beakers (1a) and pointed-bottomed bea- implements: No differences in antler and bone industry to Tim- kers and lamps (1b), we observe a phase around mendorf phase, also for stone implements with soft, regular blades; large implements: trapezoidal disc axes, new: core axes 4,100 BCE (Neustadt 2) that still exhibits pointed- with specialised cutting edge preparation, small ground rock bottomed beakers and lamps, but also includes funnel axes. Difference to Oxie: amphorae, bottles. The Oxie Group rim vessels, funnel bowls and lugged beakers (‘Trich- ceramics consist mainly of undecorated funnel beakers of type 0 and I, lugged beakers with funnels at the top of the belly, terrandgefäße’, ‘Trichterschalen’, ‘Ösenbecher’). They large storage vessels with funnel-shaped rims, spherical bowls, demarcate the earliest TRB-like pottery on the Baltic lugs and lugged rim bottles, clay discs and clay spoons (see e. g. Klassen 2004, 242). In rare cases, simple incisions, abraded coast, followed by Neustadt 3 (until probably 3,800 edges or smooth marginal ridges can occur on the edge or neck. BCE) with funnel beakers of Koch type 0 and 1. Johannes Müller 369 Fig. 10 The chronological model of the ceramic development. At Stralsund 225, ENIa is represented by a site and clay spoons. While clear differences between the with canoes. Pottery there comprises funnel bea- earlier Flintbek LA 48 assemblage and Neustadt 2, kers and a funnel neck vessel of Koch 1 or Koch 3 which exhibits a much poorer assemblage and the type. The radiometric dating (4,000 – 3,700 BCE) can presence of pointed-bottomed beakers and lamps, be traced, since a freshwater effect can be excluded are obvious, the later Wangels assemblage and the via the stratigraphic position (Kaute et al. 2004, Lübeck assemblage (Hartz 2015) are comparable 234 – 237 fig. 14; Lübke 2004, 259 – 260). with Danish Oxie assemblages. In principle, a chronological division between Spatial differences of typological elements sites with Koch 0 and Koch 1 types is plausible, if the evidence from Bornholm is translated into the While so-called arcade rims are not present at either western Baltic area (Nielsen 2009, 15 table 1) and Neustadt 2 or Neustadt 3, these are observed at Flint- by considering the dating from other Scandinavian bek LA 48 and Wangels within the early ceramic sites. assemblages. They are mostly unornamented with horizontal rows of simple impressions, mostly from Conclusion: a mosaic of contemporaneous style fingers, and arcade rims beneath the rim. While at elements Flintbek clear influences, such as tulip beakers of Micheslberg II/III, are visible in the assemblage, the In conclusion, an early sub-phase with Michelsberg Wangels assemblage seems to indicate a slightly later influences on the southwest Cimbrian Peninsula and appearance with beaker forms that are also known with Ertebølle types in the southeast is followed by from many different Oxie sites in other areas of the an Oxie-Wangels sub-phase that already includes Cimbrian Peninsula and the Danish Isles, but with- Koch 1 type beakers and other features in the inland out tulip elements. Typical in this respect are Koch and similar assemblages still exhibiting lamps and 0 and 1 type beakers (usually coarse and variable in pointed-bottomed beakers at the coast or bigger in- size, but always with a short neck), lugged beakers land lakes. From a typochronological point of view, of similar type (but with lugs placed on the upper there is no reason for a north-south division of the part of the body), lugged jars and flasks, clay discs whole Cimbrian peninsula with the exception that 370 A l on g l asti n g tran sfor mati on: northern Late Mesolithic / Early N eolithic multi-dimensional developm e nt s Fig. 11 Neustadt LA 156. Quantitative distribution of ceramic types and domesticated animals from 4,700–3,650 BCE based on Glykou (2016, 157 table 10). the development started some generations earlier lithic (cf. Hartz 2011).4 The use of the mostly point- on the south Cimbrian Peninsula: from Flinbek LA ed-bottomed Ertebølle pottery, which due to its varia- 48 around 4,200 – 4,000 BCE (Mischka et al. 2015, tion enables a typological differentiation into smaller 466 – 467) to Wangels around 4,100 BCE and then to regions for sites from Jutland, the Sund Islands and early northern Oxie sites, such as Kongemosen and Scania, is known until about 3,800/3,700 BCE. Bjørnsholm, with type 0 beakers around 4,070 – 3,800 From the southern distribution area of the men- BCE (Koch 1998, 83 ff.), whereby a slight shift in tioned overall region, the Neustadt site is the location chronological terms is visible. where a vertical stratigraphic differentiation of the Most important: From a typological point of view ceramic inventories can be traced. In the Neustadt Ia with respect to ceramic assemblages, the latest similar phase, which is older than 4,400 BCE, the first point- ceramic forms with pure decoration were used around ed-bottomed beakers are known. In the Neustadt Ib 3,950 BCE all over the western Baltic. The division phase, which dates from about 4,400 – 4,200 BCE, of groups is mainly visible with respect to the use of ceramic lamps are added to the pointed-bottomed long-known pottery types, such as lamps and pointed- vessels (cf. Glykou 2016, 157 table 10; Fig. 11). In bottomed beakers, at coastal or inner aquatic sites the Neustadt 2 phase, which begins around 4,200 in contrast to such with flat-bottomed and tulip-like BCE, Funnel Beaker ceramics in the form of funnel beakers. rim vessels, funnel bowls and lugged beakers (‘Trich- terrandgefäße’, ‘Trichterschalen’, ‘Ösenbecher’) are Interpretation: From the Mesolithic to the Neolithic – the invention of ceramics 4  For Schlamersdorf, A.-K. Meyer was able to show that it is In the western Baltic, we can postulate the use of highly probable that the pottery there was not deposited before ceramics from about 4,800 BCE for the Final Meso- ca. 4,700 BCE (Meyer 2017, 60 – 6 4). Johannes Müller 371 found next to the two typical Ertebølle ceramic types. 4,000 BCE so that a temporal difference to the chron- First funnel beakers of Koch 0 type are known from ological position of Neustadt 2, Flintbek and Wangels c. 4,100 BCE from Neustadt 2 or even a little earlier becomes clear. The evolving inventory of the Oxie from Flintbek LA 48 (from approx. 4,200 BCE). In Group mainly includes undecorated funnel beakers fact, until Neustadt 3 (c. 4,100 – 3,800 BCE), the point- of type 0 and I, lugged beakers with lugs at the top ed-bottomed ceramics still predominate alongside of the belly, large storage vessels with funnel-shaped the TRB beaker types Koch 0 and I. TRB ceramics rims, spherical bowls, lugged and lugged coronary make up the majority of the assemblage at Neustadt flasks, clay discs and clay spoons (see e. g. Klassen only from approx. 3,800 BCE onwards, when beaker 2004, 242). In rare cases, simple incisions, arcade type Koch 0 is no longer used, but rather the beaker rims or smooth rim bar applications (‘Randleisten’) types Koch I and II. occur on the rims or necks. This means that we record Funnel Beaker ce- In principle, there are no major differences be- ramics from about 4,200 BCE in the southern dis- tween Wangels and Oxie ceramics, while in Flintbek tribution area of the TRB North Group (‘Trichter- the Michelsberg influences are typologically more becher-Nordgruppe’) and from about 4,000/3,950 obvious. A continuous duration of Oxie ceramics BCE in the northern distribution area of Funnel after 3,800 BCE in Danish Amose and on the Swed- Beaker ceramics, which is characterised by funnel ish Öresund coast is indicated by Klassen (2004, bowls, lugged beakers and beakers of Koch 0 type 242 fig. 134). Primarily, we should distinguish an (‘Trichterschalen’, ‘Ösenbecher’, ‘Becher Typ Koch early Oxie phase with Koch type 0 beakers from 0’). This is also the time in which domesticated ani- a younger Oxie phase with Koch type I pottery. In mals are increasingly detectable for the first time Jutland, the Volling Group replaces the early Oxie (Glykou 2016, 310 – 321), unless the pig bones from Group around 3,800 BCE. Overall, however, the du- approx. 4,800 BCE are also to be evaluated as evi- ration of the Oxie Group until approx. 3,500 BCE, dence of domestication processes (Krause-Kyora as also indicated by Klassen (2004, 244), appears et al. 2013). With a certain chronological emphasis, to be considerably too long. we can assume the development of the EN ceramic Basically, these considerations make it clear that sequence in Flintbek LA 48 and (a little younger) with the emergence of first Funnel Beaker ceramics in Wangels for the ENIa in the south, while in the a continuous ceramic development already com- north of the Cimbrian Peninsula, we observe the menced at Mesolithic contexts, which later reaches sequence Oxie-Volling and on the Danish islands far into the younger Early Neolithic. The local and the Oxie-Svaleklint development (Mischka et al. small regional demarcations of the ceramic sequenc- 2015, 473 – 475 figs. 6 – 8). In fact, early elements in es, but also their chronological phase differentia- Flintbek strongly correspond to Michelsberg II so tion, are thus only an arbitrary technical attempt to that a close relationship between the TRB elements order the sequences. Nevertheless, these regional and Michelsberg II can be assumed here (see below). sequences offer the possibility to describe the de- While we identify a rather early transition from velopment overall and to interpret it with respect to Ertebølle ceramics to Funnel Beaker ceramics both the connectivities of the mosaic-like distribution of in Neustadt and in Flintbek in the southern distri- different elements (Fig. 1). bution area of the TRB North Group, which finally flows into the Wangels Group, from the Danish region only later data are available (cf. Soerensen A mosaic of change: Dual ways of life 2014). In Norsminde and Björnholm on Jutland for the time phase from c. 3,950 – 3,850 BCE, Eva Koch In fact, we can thus see the coexistence of differ- identified beaker type 0 with agricultural production ent ceramic styles with other social practices on the elements and in Åkonge in Store Amose (Zealand) southern Cimbrian Peninsula. On the coast and at with forager-like subsistence, but both can certainly lagoons of eastern Holstein, aquatic communities already be assessed in connection with Oxie ceram- existed for several centuries simultaneously, for ex- ics (Koch 1998, 172). In the shell middens of Erte- ample, with first pastoral and horticulture practices bølle, Bjornsholm, Krabbesholm and Ringkloster, in the hinterland near the Kiel Fjord, or parallel to narrow, round ceramic bottoms can also be identi- the first communities that built non-megalithic long fied, which are not typical of Ertebølle ceramics, and burial mounds, e. g. in Borgstedt. Such a dual way of indicate a process of change in the ceramic design. life only disappeared entirely during the Early Neo- However, this happens with some certainty after lithic II phase (c. 3,650 BCE). The shift that occurred 372 A l on g l asti n g tran sfor mati on: northern Late Mesolithic / Early N eolithic multi-dimensional developm e nt s becomes visible not only in changes of ceramic de- The new developments that changed the social sign, but also in the adoption of pastoral practices situation in the loess regions in the last three centu- and the integration of intensive cultivation of arable ries of the 5th millennium BCE are similarly incisive plots in the environment (cf. Kirleis 2019a; 2019b). as, for example, the end of the Linear Bandkeramik The attempt made here to arrange the ceramic inven- (LBK) around 4,900 BCE. While the latter took place tories typochronologically is only one means to be more or less contemporaneously to the earliest pot- able to describe the corresponding social processes tery use in Ertebølle, the former was also synchro- ‒ which is much more important. nous to the introduction of flat-bottomed vessels in the north, i. e. the first evidence of funnel beakers. Corresponding changes or additions to ceramic Environmental, economic and ritual design are obviously already linked to changes in changes economic preferences. For example, the food spec- trum is already supplemented by domestic cattle in The described typo-chronological differentiation of Neustadt 1b (4,500 – 4,200 BCE) and sheep/goat in the ceramic inventories of the Late Mesolithic and Neustadt 2 (4,200 – 4,100 BCE). If increasingly more Early Neolithic concerns the changes in the use of ce- local evidence is taken into consideration, the vari- ramics. However, it should also serve to make a com- ability of practices stands out. While, for example, parison with other socio-economic or ritual spheres clearances and open land are already documented of the societies of that time. In this respect, we would for the Horstenmoor in west Holstein (Dörfler like to reiterate the following: While pointed-bot- 2005; Feeser/Dörfler 2016) around 4,500 – 4,200 tomed ceramic vessels and lamps hardly changed in BCE, high plantago lanceolata values in the pollen terms of typology, but rather in their relative quanti- profile of Saiser, Fundplatz 1 (Lietzow-Budelin) on ties, a development began around 4,200 BCE at the the island of Rügen, around 4,300/4,200 BCE are latest, in which new, flat-bottomed ceramic forms associated with the grazing of domesticated animals appeared. These later become the main component (Terberger/Seiler 2004, 178; Endtmann 2004). of the funnel beaker inventories. Interestingly, the described developments take Chronologically, this is contemporaneous to place before 4,050 BCE, i. e., a noticeable climate various events in the rest of north central Europe. event was prevalent at least in the western Baltic Thus, in the loess settlement zones, which were oc- region. Based on high-resolution sedimentological cupied by farming communities since around 5,300 evidence from laminated lake profiles (Dreibrodt BCE, enclosures were constructed from about 4,200 et al. 2012; Zahrer et al. 2013), very cool and wet BCE onwards, e. g. by the central German Schiepzig conditions can be postulated for about 40 years, group, which represents a typological link between which led to a considerable deterioration of living Michelsberg II/III and Late Lengyel. The use of conditions (both for foraging and farming). At the funnel-shaped storage pits in connection with ditch latest during this period, interaction networks with systems indicates a new practice, probably also a the south (i. e. with Michelsberg) are ‘opened’. Hor- new economic order, which differs strongly from the ticultural elements, such as the application of local previous one (Müller et al. 2019). slash-and-burn practices (‘Brandfeldbau’) commence Typologically, we recognise not only the devel- (Schier 2009). Both the increased micro-charcoal opmental series of tulip beakers in this Michelsberg records in pollen profiles (4,050 – 3,750 BCE) with area, but finally, from about 4,100 BCE onwards, the only few signs of clearances (Feeser / Dörfler 2015; use of flat-bottomed funnel beakers (Höhn 2002, Feeser et al. 2012), and the boom in pointed-butted 180 fig. 69; 212 fig. 164). Thus, the changes towards flint adzes point to changes in subsistence economy. flat-bottomed ceramics in parts of the inventories, They are associated with an increased population which can be traced back in their entirety to cor- growth from about 4,000 BCE onwards, which may responding contacts between western Michelsberg be connected to the introduction of the new horti- and eastern flat-bottomed ceramic traditions, are cultural techniques (Feeser et al. 2019, 1602 fig. 6). based on processes that cover not only the Cimbrian Within this period of intensive changes (c. peninsula, but also large parts of central Europe. 4,300 – 3,800 BCE), individual ritual marking in the In a model way, this can be attributed to increased groups obviously decreases. The number of individu- interactions between the Early Michelberg and Late al burials is reduced accordingly. After final changes Lengyel groups. – both in economic and ideological respect – begin to Johannes Müller 373 stabilise, the marking of single individuals increases berg expansion in the centre, and Late Lengyel influ- again. From about 3,800 BCE on, this is observable ences in the east demarcate the new developments. in long mounds and flat graves (Müller 2013). From this synopsis, the possible significance of our observations becomes apparent: (1) The be- Conclusion ginning of ceramic use in Ertebølle contexts is si- multaneous with intensified processes of change in In summary, there is much to be said for a gradual central Europe (Final LBK). (2) The beginning of process of transitions that affected different parts of flat-bottomed funnel-beaker pottery can be observed the north central European societies. Thus, the south at south Cimbrian Mesolithic sites even before con- Cimbrian region is an exemplary part of an overall siderable changes i. e., the dominance of the ‘Funnel structural change. Even if certain triggers for develop- Beaker Phenomenon’ from c. 4,050 BCE onwards. ment can be observed (e. g. the acceleration of change (3) Simultaneous with the newly emerging pottery, processes through climatic and external influences), domestic animals can be found in addition to the still the causes of change remain open: increased popula- dominant, appropriated production method. (4) The tion growth or increased mobility are certainly only introduction of horticultural subsistence practices two parts of a causal structure. We can still only de- took its course primarily during or after the climate scribe the changes, but not explain them entirely. crisis around 4,050 – 4,010 BCE, similar to the intro- duction of pointed-butted flint adzes. (5) Pointed- bottomed pottery and lamps are used at some coastal Acknowledgements sites parallel to the development of funnel beakers, partly still in the time when first non-megalithic long The DFG supported the investigations within the mounds were erected. (6) Corresponding ‘parallel framework of SFB 1266, subproject C1 (project num- worlds’ finally disappear with the introduction of ber 2901391021 – SFB 1266). Thanks are extended the animal-drawn plough and the intensification of to Eileen Küçükaraca for English corrections and to agriculture from 3,650/3,500 BCE onwards. Carsten Reckweg for the finalisation of the figures. Interestingly, we recognise many aspects of the same scenario, quite simultaneously, in other regions of north central Europe. For example, in the east, on References the Polish Baltic coast in Dąbki, the introduction of funnel beaker ceramics took place from 4,200 BCE Ten Anscher 2015: T. J. ten Anscher, Under the radar: Swift- onwards with Ertebølle ceramics still in use at the erband and the origins of the Funnel Beaker Culture. latest until about 4,000 BCE (Kotula et al. 2015, In: J. Kabacinski / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / 122 – 123). However, at this seasonally used station for T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and the production of beaver fur (Schmölcke/Nikulina the Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands 2015), no domesticated animals were found, probably (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC) (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 335 – 358. due to its special function. The continuity of the Dąbki Czekaj-Zastawny / Kabacinski 2015: A. Czekaj-Zastawny / settlement with, e. g., decorated lamps as an Ertebølle- J. Kabacinski, The early Funnel Beaker culture at Dab- TRB transitional form (Czekaj-Zastawny/Kabacinski ki. In: J. Kabacinski / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / 2015) suggests a similar development like that which T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and took place at the coastal sites of east Holstein. the Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands Furthermore, in the west, in Swifterband (SW) (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC) (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 203 – 218. contexts, we recognise the emergence of flat-bottomed Dörfler 2005: W. Dörfler, Eine Pollenanalyse aus dem vessels for SW2b from 4,150 BCE at the latest (Ten Horstenmoor bei Albersdorf. In: R. Kelm (Hrsg.), Frühe Anscher 2015, 346), which is synchronous to the Kulturlandschaften in Europa. Forschung, Erhaltung changes observed in Schleswig-Holstein and north- und Nutzung. Albersdorfer Forschungen zur Archäo- west Poland. At least in Schokland P14, these form logie und Umweltgeschichte 3 (Heide 2005) 86 – 103. the basis for the older group of the TRB-West Group Dreibrodt et. al. 2012: S. Dreibrodt / J. Zahrer / H.-R. (Pre-Drouwen), which starts at c. 3,900 BCE. Conse- Bork / A. Brauer, Witterungs- und Umweltgeschichte quently, the interaction sphere of early funnel beaker während der norddeutschen Trichterbecherkultur – re- transforming styles (Müller 2011, 295) should be konstruiert auf Basis mikrofazieller Untersuchungen seen as a multi-dimensional interaction sphere, in an jahresgeschichteten Seesedimenten. In: M. Hinz / which Swifterband continuities in the west, Michels- J. Müller (eds.), Siedlung, Grabenwerk, Grosssteingrab. 374 A l on g l asti n g tran sfor mati on: northern Late Mesolithic / Early N eolithic multi-dimensional developm e nt s Studien zu Gesellschaft, Wirtschaft und Umwelt der grabungen in Grube-Rosenhof aus den Jahren 2001 und Trichterbechergruppen im nördlichen Mitteleuropa. 2002. Universitätsforschungen zur prähistorischen Ar- Frühe Monumentalität und soziale Differenzierung 2 chäologie 163 (Bonn 2008). (Bonn 2012) 145 – 158. Grohmann 2010: I.  M. Grohmann, Die Ertebölle- und Endtmann 2004: B. Endtmann, Erste Ergebnisse der neuen frühtrichterbecherzeitliche Keramik aus Wangels, Kr. paläobotanischen Untersuchungen am mesolithischen Ostholstein. In: D. Gronenborn / J. Petrasch (eds.), Die Fundplatz von Lietzow-Buddelin auf Rügen. Jahrbuch Neolithisierung Mitteleuropas (Mainz 2010) 407 – 422. Bodendenkmalpflege Mecklenburg-Vorpommern 52, Hage 2016: F. Hage, Büdelsdorf/Borgstedt: eine trichterbe- 2004, 197 – 210. cherzeitliche Kleinregion – Siedlung, Grabenwerk, nicht- Faasch 2017: F. Faasch, Untersuchungen zu Technologie, St- megalithische und megalithische Grabanlagen. Frühe ratigraphie und Chronologie des Flintmaterials zur Zeit Monumentalität und soziale Differenzierung (Bonn 2016). der Neolithisierung. In: D. Hofmann / B. Ramminger Hartz 1999a: S. Hartz, Die Steinartefakte des endmesolithi- (eds.), Studien zur Jungsteinzeit in Norddeutschland II schen Fundplatzes Gube-Rosenhof: Studien am Flin- (Bonn 2017) 119 – 195. tinventaren aus der Zeit der Neolithisierung in Schles- Feeser / Dörfler 2015: I. Feeser / W. Dörfler, The Early wig-Holstein und Südskandinavien. Untersuchungen Neolithic in pollen diagrams from eastern Schleswig- und Materialien zur Steinzeit in Schleswig-Holstein aus Holstein and Western mecklenburg – evidence for a dem Archäologischen Landesmuseum Schloss Gottorf 1000 years cultural adaptive cycle? In: J. Kabacinski / 2 (Neumünster 1999a). S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / T. Terberger (eds.), Hartz 1999b: S. Hartz, Frühbauerliche Küstenbesiedlung The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and the Neolithisation of im westlichen Teil der Oldenburger Grabenniederung the North European Lowlands (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC) (Wangels LA 505). Ein Vorbericht. Offa 1997/1998, (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 291 – 306. 54/55, 1999, 19 – 41. Feeser / Dörfler 2016: I. Feeser / W. Dörfler, Landschaft- Hartz 2002/2003: S. Hartz, Wangels, Kr. Ostholstein. Sied- sentwicklung und Landnutzung. In: H. Dibbern (ed.), lung der späten Mittel- und Jungsteinzeit, LA 505. Offa Das trichterbecherzeitliche Westholstein 8 (Bonn 2016) 59/60, 2002/2003, 286 – 291. 17 – 24. Hartz 2004: S. Hartz, Aktuelle Forschungen zur Chrono- Feeser et al. 2012: I. Feeser / W. Dörfler / F.-R. Averdi- logie und Siedlungsweise der Ertebølle- und frühesten eck / J. Wiethold, New insight into regional and local Trichterbecherkultur in Schleswig-Holstein. Jahrbuch land-use and vegetation patterns in eastern Schleswig- Bodendenkmalpflege in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern 52, Holstein during the Neolithic. In: M. Hinz/J. Müller 2004, 61 – 81. (eds.), Siedlung, Grabenwerk, Grosssteingrab. Studien Hartz 2011: S. Hartz, From pointed bottom to round and flat zu Gesellschaft, Wirtschaft und Umwelt der Trichter- bottom – tracking early pottery from Schlewig-Holstein. bechergruppen im nördlichen Mitteleuropa. Frühe Berichte RGK 89, 2008 (2011), 241 – 276. Monumentalität und soziale Differenzierung 2 (Bonn Hartz 2015: S. Hartz, Early Funnel Beaker pottery from 2012) 159 – 191. Lübeck-Genin in northern Germany. In: J. Kabacinski / Feeser et al. 2019: I. Feeser / W. Dörfler / J. Kneisel / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / T. Terberger (eds.), M. Hinz / S. Dreibrodt, Population Dynamics in the The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and the Neolithisation of Neolithic and Bronze Age: multiproxy evidence from the North European Lowlands (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC) north-western Central Europe. The Holocene. DOI: (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 453 – 4 64. 10.1177/0959683619857223. Hartz/Lübke 2004: S. Hartz/H. Lübke, Zur chronostra- Fernandes et al. 2014: R. Fernandes / A. R. Millard / M. tigraphischen Gliederung der Ertebølle-Kultur und Brabec / M.-J. Nadeau / P. M. Grootes, Food Recon- frühesten Trichterbecherkultur in der südlichen Meck- struction Using Isotopic Transferred Signals (FRUITS): lenburger Bucht. Jahrbuch Bodendenkmalpflege in a Bayesian model for diet reconstruction. PLOS ONE Mecklenburg-Vorpommern 52, 2004, 119 – 143. 9(2) e87436, 2014. Höhn 2002: B. Höhn, Die Michelsberger Kultur in der Wet- Glykou 2016: A. Glykou, Neustadt LA156. Ein submariner terau. Universitätsforschungen zur prähistorischen Ar- Fundplatz des späten Mesolithikums und des frühesten chäologie 87 (Bonn 2002). Neolithikums in Schleswig-Holstein. Untersuchungen Kaute et al. 2004: P. Kaute / G. Schindler / H. Lübke, und Materialien zur Steinzeit in Schlewig-Holstein und Der endmesolithisch/früheolithische Fundplatz im Ostseeraum 7 (Kiel 2016). Stralsund-Mischwasserspeicher – Zeugnisse früher Goldhammer 2008: J. Goldhammer, Untersuchungen zur Bootsbautechnologie an der Ostseeküste Mecklen- Stratigraphie, Fundverteilung und zum Fundspektrum burg-Vorpommerns. Jahrbuch Bodendenkmalpflege in der mittleren Erteböllekultur in Ostholstein. Die Nach- Mecklenburg-Vorpommern 52, 2004, 221 – 241. Johannes Müller 375 Kirleis 2019a: W. Kirleis, Atlas of Neolithic plant remains Müller 2013: J. Müller, Vom Muschelhaufen zum Langhü- from northern central Europe. Advances in Archaeo- gel: Ertebølle und Trichterbecher – Landschaften als botany 4 (Groningen 2019). divergierende Raumkonzepte. In: S. Hansen / T. Meier Kirleis 2019b: W. Kirleis, Labour organisation between hor- (ed.), Landschaften als divergierende Raumkonzepte ticulture and agriculture. Two separate worlds? In: J. K. (Berlin 2013) 133 – 153. Koch / W. Kirleis (eds.), Gender Transformations in Pre- Müller et al. 2019: J. Müller / K. Schmütz / C. Rinne, historic and Archaic Societies (Leiden 2019) 459 – 476. Schiepzig enclosures: gaps in the archaeological record Klassen 2004: L. Klassen, Jade und Kupfer: Untersuchungen at the end of the fifth millennium BC in northern central zum Neolithisierungsprozess im westlichen Ostseeraum Germany? In: M. Gleser / D. Hofmann (eds.), Contacts, unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Kulturentwick- Boundaries & Innovation. Exploring developed Neo- lung Europas 5500 – 3500 BC. Jutland Archaeological lithic societies in central Europe and beyond (Leiden Society publications 47 (Højbjerg 2004). 2019) 267 – 288. Koch 1998: E. Koch, Neolithic bog pots from Zealand, Møn, Nielsen 2009: P. O. Nielsen, Den tidligneolitiske bosaettelse Falster. Nordisk Fortidsminder Ser. B 16 (Kopenhagen pa Bornholm. In: A. Schülke (ed.), Plads og rum i tragt- 1998). baegerkulturen (Kopenhagen 2009) 9 – 24. Kotula et al. 2015: A. Kotula / A. Czekaj-Zastawny / J. Ka- Philippsen 2010: B. Philippsen, Terminal Mesolithic: Diet bacinski / T. Terberger, Find distribution, taphonomy and Radiocarbon Dating at Inland Sites in Schleswig- and chronology of the Dabki site. In: J. Kabacinski / Holstein. In: K. G. S. H. D. i. Landscapes (ed.), Land- S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / T. Terberger (eds.), scapes and Human Development: The Contribution of The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and the Neolithisation of European Archaeology (Bonn 2010) 21 – 36. the North European Lowlands (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC) Schier 2009: W. Schier, Extensiver Brandfeldbau und die (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 113 – 136. Ausbreitung der neolithischen Wirtschaftsweise in Mit- Krause-Kyora et al. 2013: B. Krause-Kyora / C. Makarewicz / teleuropa und Südskandinavien am Ende des 5. Jahrtau- A. Evin / L. G. Flink / K. Dobney / G. Larson / S. sends v. Chr. Prähistorische Zeitschrift 84, 2009, 15 – 43. Hartz / S. Schreiber / C. von Carnap-Bornheim / N. Schmölcke / Nikulina 2015: U. Schmölcke / E. Nikulina, von Wurmb-Schwark / A. Nebel, Use of domesticated Mesolithic beaver hunting station or base camp of supra- pigs by Mesolithic hunter-gatherers in northwestern regional Stone Age fur trade? New archaeozoological Europe. Nature Communication 4 : 2348, 2013, 1 – 7. and archaeogenetic results from Dabki 9. In: J. Kabacin- Lübke 2004: H. Lübke, Ergänzende Anmerkungen zur Datie- ski / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / T. Terberger (eds.), rung der Einbäume des endmesolithisch/ frühneolithi- The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and the Neolithisation of schen Fundplatzes Stralsund-Mischwasserspeicher. the North European Lowlands (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC) Jahrbuch Bodendenkmalpflege in Mecklenburg-Vor- (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 65 – 86. pommern 52, 2004, 257 – 261. Schwabedissen 1972: H. Schwabedissen, Rosenhof Meurers-Balke / Kalis 2011: J. Meurers-Balke / A. J. (Ostholstein). Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 2, Kalis, Zur pollenanalytischen Datierung archäologi- 1972, 1 – 8. scher Funde in ufernahen Sedimenten – zwei Beispiele Schwabedissen 1979: H. Schwabedissen, Die „Rosenhof- zur Keramik der frühen Trichterbecher-Kultur aus Gruppe“. Ein neuer Fundkomplex des Frühneolithikums Ostholstein. Berichte RGK 89, 2008 (2011), 27 – 45. in Schleswig-Holstein. Archäologisches Korrespondenz- Meyer 2017: A.-K. Meyer, Die binnenländische Station blatt 9, 1979, 167 – 172. Schlamersdorf LA 05, Kr. Stormann. Untersuchungen Sørensen 2014: L. Soerensen, From Hunter to Farmer in zum Keramik- und Siedlungsinventar des Endmesolithi- Northern Europe. Acta Archaeologica (Oxford 2014). kums und Frühen Neolithikums. In: D. Hofmann / B. Terberger / Seiler 2004: T. Terberger / M. Seiler, Flintschlä- Ramminger (eds.), Studien zur Jungsteinzeit in Nord- ger und Fischer – Neue interdisziplinäre Forschungen deutschland II (Bonn 2017) 2 – 111. zu steinzeitlichen Siedlungsplätzen auf Rügen und dem Mischka et al. 2015: D. Mischka / G. Roth / K. Struck­meyer, angrenzenden Festland. Jahrbuch Bodendenk­malpflege Michelsberg und Oxie in contact next to the B ­ altic Sea. in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern 52, 2004, 155 – 184. In: J. Kabacinski / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / Zahrer et al. 2013: J. Zahrer / S. Dreibrodt / A. Brauer, T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and Evidence of the North Atlantic Oscillation in varve the Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands (c. composition and diatom assemblages from recent, an- 5000 – 3000 calBC) (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 465 – 477. naully laminated sediemnts of Lake Belau. Journal of Müller 2011: J. Müller, Early pottery in the North – a south- Palaeolimnology 50, 2013, 231 – 244. ern perspective. Berichte RGK 89, 2008 (2011), 287 – 300. Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 , 377 – 401) 377 A longue durée perspective on technical innovations in the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic of the North European Plain Florian Klimscha and Daniel Neumann Abstract This paper examines the technical innovation trajectories of polished stone axes, copper melting, arsenic copper alloys, cattle-drawn ploughs, and wheeled vehicles in the North European Plain and discusses their emergence, spread, and relation to the neolithisation. Even though Late Mesolithic societies in the northern lowlands did not adopt the Neolithic economy for more than a millennium, they maintained networks on different scales and got into contact with new technolo- gies from the 6th millennium calBC onwards. But innovations were rather consumed, not adopted, even though knowledge about new technologies reached the North European Plain. It is argued that the reason for this mode of interaction may be seen in a lack of mandatory sociotechnical substructures in hunter-gatherer-fisher groups. Only with the shift to the Neo- lithic way of life these groups began to lay the foundations on which new technologies could be created locally. This transfor- mation at the end of the Early Neolithic (EN II) is accompanied by a rapid adoption of other innovations, e. g. wheeled vehicles and experiments in local re-melting of copper items. Keywords Technical innovation, metallurgy, wheel & wagon, ploughing, FN II / Fuchsberg stage, Funnelbeaker culture, ­Mesolithic, North European Plain Zusammenfassung Der Beitrag befasst sich mit den Innovationsgeschichten des geschliffenen Steinbeils, der Kupfermetallur- gie, Arsenkupferlegierungen, des von Rindern gezogenen Pflugs und der Räderfahrzeuge in der nordeuropäischen Tiefebene und erörtert deren Emergenz, Verbreitung und Verhältnis zur Neolithisierung. Auch wenn die spätmesolithischen Gesellschaf- ten der Tiefebene die neolithische Wirtschaftsweise für mehr als ein Jahrtausend ablehnten, unterhielten sie doch Kontaktnetz­ werke unterschiedlicher Reichweite und gerieten dadurch seit dem 6. Jahrtausend v. Chr. mit wichtigen Innovationen in Kontakt. Der Beitrag führt dies auf die fehlenden soziotechnischen Substrukturen von Jäger-Sammler-Fischer-Gruppen zurück, was lediglich die Konsumption, nicht aber die Adaption dieser Innovationen erlaubte. Erst mit dem Wechsel zur neolithischen ­Lebensweise bauten ebenjene Gruppen, vermutlich unbewusst, die notwendigen Fundamente auf, auf denen neue Technolo- gien auch lokal produziert werden konnten. Am Ende des Frühneolithikums (FN II) führte dieser Weg zur schnellen Annahme von Rad und Wagen sowie ersten Experimenten im Umschmelzen von Kupferobjekten. Introduction theory), but considerably influenced by ideological and social aspects as well as individual agendas. In- Innovations are what makes prehistory tick. Without dividuals chose ‘the new’ for often erratic and eso- technical change and ‘progress’, there would not be a teric reasons. Thereby seemingly obvious possibili- sequence from a Stone Age to a Bronze Age and an ties to exploit new technology were often ignored. Iron Age. Pyrotechnology, agricultural tools, weap- Gift-giving, barter, raiding, and personal mobility ons, dwellings, and many other aspects of prehistoric were, among others, responsible for the distribution life changed over time and were thereby further de- of goods. There were no institutions that developed veloped (improved in a technical, rather modern new technology, but technology was tinkered with sense); this in turn is interwoven with social changes by craftsmen who were often not aware of essen- of different scale. The challenge in retrospective is tial scientific principles. Knowledge was tacit and that this improvement was not solely made to gain kept within kin groups who did not necessarily have market advantages (as often implied by underlying an interest in making their know-how available to 378 A longue durée perspective on technical innovations in the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic of the North European Plain others.­Furthermore, power sources were limited to communities rose significantly. 5 The regular appear- the muscles of humans and domesticated animals. ance of such stone tools in sites of the Swifterbant The combination of these factors resulted in and Ertebølle cultures demonstrates their use by the development of technology in a way that does Mesolithic communities, even though it is unclear not conform to modern expectations. It is actually how they were brought there. Apart from mutual barely known how innovations emerged under these exchange, expeditions of Rössen descendants into circumstances. This means that models developed the north, Mesolithic groups raiding Neolithic farm- from fully-industrialised, capitalist societies cannot steads, or ‘Grenzgängers’ living between both worlds simply be applied to fill the empty spots in the ar- seem possible. In any way, it seems plausible that the chaeological records, but innovation-processes rather axes were accompanied by information about the have to be reconstructed in large parts from the finds new way of life. However, even though Mesolithic themselves. communities did know about agriculture, animal The neolithisation may have been the most husbandry, polished stone tools, and long houses, important socioeconomic shift in human history. they were apparently not motivated to adopt them. Without the Neolithic technology package our For c. 1,200 – 1,500 years societies of farmers and modern subsistence and urban lifestyle would not complex hunter-gatherer-fishers existed next to each have become possible, but also key technologies other in the North European Plain.6 like metallurgy or animal traction would not exist. The successive introduction of Neolithic cul- After its lengthy development into a working ‘pack- tural elements started only during the last centuries age’ in the Fertile Crescent,1 Neolithic ways of life of the 5th millennium calBC and culminated in the spread to Western Anatolia, and from there were Funnelbeaker culture (Trichterbecherkultur, TRB) brought to the European subcontinent. Within the around 4,200/4,000 calBC. The shift from Late Meso- Carpathian Basin the Linear Pottery culture (Lin- lithic subsistence to the TRB was not as drastic as it earbandkeramik, LBK) was formed as the oldest seems at first glance. Especially during the early part Neolithic group of Central Europe (Bánffy 2019 of the TRB food was still acquired in large parts by [with recent reevaluation]; cf. also Bánffy 2013). hunting (Steffens 2005; cf. also Skaarup 1973). It In a rather short period of time the LBK spread to was considerably later that the TRB system, consist- the northwestern fringes of the Loess sediments. 2 ing of a very elaborate ideology, visible in massive The indigenous population did apparently not megalithic graves, ritual causewayed enclosures, and welcome the initial arrival of LBK settlers in the a huge number of hoards, and also a bundle of tech- European northwest, 3 and, apart from stone adzes nological innovations, came into full effect. (‘Schuhleistenkeile’) and very few clear imports found in Mesolithic layers or in the surroundings Ploughing and wagons of Mesolithic sites, there is not much evidence of regular interaction.4 With the following Rössen and The plough and the wheel are strongly connected Stroke-ornamented Pottery (Stichbandkeramik) with each other.7 The northwest European finds are cultures in the 5th millennium calBC the number among the earliest in Eurasia (Burmeister 2004a of Neolithic objects, primarily adzes and heavy [with further references and a detailed record]; perforated shaft-hole axes, acquired by Mesolithic 2017). The earliest finds belong to the TRB culture 1  Recently discussed again by Çilingiroğlu 2015; cf. also the 5  Although we can see some evidence, possibly in the adapta- papers in Klimscha et al. forthcoming. tion of pottery in the La Hoguette group, (cf. Cziesla this volu- me), and during the later phase of the LBK in the adaptation of 2  With the exception of small outposts like the recently pottery in the Swifterbant culture. discovered settlement at Niedernstöcken: cf. Gerken et al., this volume. 6  Details of the shift to agriculture are presented in several other papers in this volume and will therefore not be further 3  According to palaeogenetic sampling this diffusion was the discussed here (cf. Müller this volume; Amkreutz this volume; result of the movement of larger groups of settlers, and Meso- recently also Terberger et al. 2018). lithic foragers apparently did not regularly intermarry with the LBK newcomers (Haak et al. 2015). 7  Andrew Sherratt’s model of a Secondary Products Revoluti- on (Sherratt 1981; 2004) was tremendously influential even 4  Hülsebusch / Jockenhövel this volume, refer to one such though it has been criticised by a variety of authors, for instance instance: the assumed destruction of the LBK well at Erkelenz- Vosteen 1996; Bakker 2004. Cf. most recently: Burmeister Kückhoven by Mesolithic raiders. 2017; Klimscha 2017a. F l o ri a n K l i m s c h a an d Dan i el Ne u man n 379 Fig. 1 Wooden wagon parts and wagon tracks in Eurasia (c. 4,000-2,750 BC) (© F. Klimscha, Digital Atlas of Innovations). (Bakker 2004), and the early datings of some of and northern and central Jutland (Fig. 1). The evi- the northern finds have stimulated a lively discus- dence for ploughing is very similarly distributed sion about whether the technology was invented and, in many cases, closely related to that of wagons autochthonously (Vosteen 1999), or should be con- (cf. Sherratt 1981). The earliest evidence is cur- sidered as the result of a quick diffusion of knowl- rently known from the 6th /5th millennia calBC in edge (Bakker et al. 1999). The northern Pontic area the southern Levant in the form of pathologies on holds the earliest sequence of sledges and wheeled cattle bones and in slaughtering patterns of cattle vehicles and thus might be the zone of origin for (Hill 2001; cf. also Hill / Klimscha forthcoming), this technology (Klimscha 2012 – 2021; Hansen and an ad hoc usage of cattle traction has also been et al. 2017; Klimscha 2017a; 2018). In the North claimed for southeastern Europe during this time European Plain, eclectic evidence can be brought (Gaastra et al. 2018). Central European evidence forward consisting of wheel tracks, two-dimensional is significantly later and consists of few remains of depictions on pottery, megalithic slabs as well as ploughs and yokes, plough marks, and depictions of wooden remains of wagons (Bakker 2004 [with cattle teams (mostly in the Alps) as well as a handful further references]; cf. esp. Van der Waals 1964; of copper figurines that belong to the 4th millennium Vosteen 1996). The finds are concentrated in the calBC and are contemporary to or slightly earlier bogs of northwestern Germany, the Netherlands, than the evidence for wagons. 380 A longue durée perspective on technical innovations in the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic of the North European Plain Wooden wagon remains assess. From a taphonomic perspective the preserva- tion of wheels is certainly possible.13 The Neolithic wheels fround in the Netherlands have been frequently studied,8 and none of them is older Wheel tracks than 3,000 calBC.9 The situation for the finds from northern Germany is very similar, which is not sur- Wheel tracks of wagons are a source-group docu- prising, as the northwest German bogs are a direct mented relatively recently. The possibility to discover continuation of the Dutch landscape. Frequently the them is dependent on quick sedimentation over the finds were discovered during peat digging and dur- tracks to protect these very delicate features from ing the systematic excavations of bog roads (cf. the later interferences and erosion. This is normally only catalogue by Both / Fansa 2011). The oldest finds the case, if a burial construction was built immedi- date to around or after 3,100/3,000 calBC.10 although ately after a wagon had crossed the surface. Thus, significantly later dates for the respective contexts the number of discovered wheel tracks is extremely have also been proposed.11 The Neolithic wheels from sparse. Additionally, their identification rests on the Jutland are slightly younger and belong to the early premise that a track from a wagon wheel can be dif- 3rd millennium calBC.12 The apparent absence of ferentiated from a track caused by a sledge or tra- early wagon parts in Mecklenburg and Pomerania is vois.14 A spectacular discovery from Flintbek, distr. striking. Whether this reflects the prehistoric reality Rendsburg-Eckernförde, Holstein, has pushed the or simply a different level of research is difficult to beginning of wagon use to a significantly earlier date (Zich 1992; 1993; Mischka 2010; 2011). Here, two elongated-oval, parallel features were found beneath a megalithic grave of the Funnelbeaker culture (Fig. 2). The excavator B. Zich interpreted the traces as those 8  Finds are known from Bourtanger Moor / Bourtangerveen of a wheeled vehicle and considered its use in the (Nieuw-Dordrecht), Ubbena, prov. Drenthe, De Eese, com. building of the monument (Zich 1993). He assumed Steenwijkerwold, Dertienhuizen-Musselkanaal, com. Onstwed- that soil from a freshly dug pit was transported to the deof, Midlaren, com. Zuidlaren, as well as Exloërboerkijl, com. Odoorn, Weerdinge, com. Emmen, and ‘veenplads no. 3’ in the dolmen several times and that the wheel tracks thus Gasselterboerven, com. Gasselte; cf. Van der Waals 1964, were the result of multiple transports on the same 90 – 9 5, 136 – 137,141; Rostholm 1977, 211; Vosteen 1996, route. The barrow was constructed in seven phases 25 – 26 fig. 10; 1999 Nr. 33 – 34. and included twelve graves altogether. The tracks 9  Inter alia: Van der Waals 1964; Vosteen 1996; Bakker were found beneath the filling of the extended dolmen 1999; 2004; Burmeister 2004b. IV (phase 7). Dolmen IV can be dated to the Fuchs- 10  For instance at the bog road VII (Pr) near Diepholz-Vechta, berg / EN II-phase due to the find of a looped bottle where two axles from a prehistoric wagon were found, one of (‘Ösenflasche’). D. Mischka was able to pinpoint the them 14C-dated to 3,100 – 2 ,875 calBC, the second axle to c. 3,021 – 2 ,891 calBC (Burmeister 2004b, 329), from the vicinity construction history with a series of absolute dates of Tannenhausen-Aurich, where several well-dated wagon parts and proposed a date of 3,450 – 3,385 calBC for the are known, among them two wooden axles (C820 [D] and C821 [D]), radiocarbondated to c. 3,100 – 2 ,900 calBC (Burmeister 2004b, 329; Fansa 2004, 35 fig. 44), and from the Teufelsmoor near Gnarrenburg, where an axle connected to a disc wheel yielded a 14C-date of 3,100 – 2 ,400 calBC (Vosteen 1999 Nr. 35; Burmeister 2004b, 322, 329 fig. 8). 11  The Teufelsmoor find (Vosteen 1999 Nr. 35; Burmeister 2004b, 322, 329 fig. 8), was recently re-evaluated and is now 13  Two multi-part disc wheels from Skorshevo (Skorschewo), considered to be significantly younger at 2,580 – 2 ,479 calBC Kartuzy distr., have been assigned to the Neolithic / Bronze (Hesse 2011, 240). – Mid-3rd millennium dates have also been Age transition by most commentators (Vosteen 1999 Nr. 135 published for bog road and Le 15 (Vosteen 1999, 74 – 75). Taf. 83), while the chronological position of the disc wheels from Kowale remains unclear (Van der Waals 1964 A,67; Vos- 12  A single find of a disc wheel from Bjerregaard Mose, former teen 1999 Nr. 130  – 131). Furthermore, the wheels from Studsgård-Havnstrup sogn, reg. Midtjylland, dated to c. Kühlungsborn, even though of Late Bronze Age date, demons- 2,900  –  2 ,400 calBC (Rostholm 1977, 210 – 211; Vosteen 1996, trate the possibility of prehistoric wooden finds being preserved 23 fig. 3; 1999 Nr. 26); two disc wheels from Kideris, south of (Heussner 1986). Herning, reg. Midtjylland, that were found relatively near to each other but do not derive from the same context; one of them 14  While it is normally argued that a certain type of compres- was 14C-dated to c. 2,900 – 2 ,600 calBC (Rostholm 1977, 210; sion beneath wheel tracks resulting from the pressure of wheels Vosteen 1996, 25; 1999 Nr. 39), and a disc wheel from Pilkmo- can be discerned from a track mark of a sledge, Burmeister se bog, Vejle amt, radiocarbon dated to c. 2,900 – 2 ,500 calBC (2011, 216) has pointed out that the same type of compression (Vosteen 1999 Nr. 46). can be expected of a travois track. F l o ri a n K l i m s c h a an d Dan i el Ne u man n 381 wheel tracks (Mischka 2011).15 Tracks of a wagon with disc wheels were also found next to a megalithic grave at Helvesiek, distr. Rotenburg (Wümme), Lower Saxony (Vosteen 1999 Nr. 66). At the end of the 4th millennium calBC, wheel tracks are also known in relation with stone heap graves in northern Jutland (Bakker 2004, 288; Johannsen / Laursen 2010). Two-dimensional depictions Two-dimensional depictions of wagons are known from pottery and megalithic slabs (Fig. 3). The pre- historic cultures of Central Europe and the North European Plain seem to have been averse to figura- tive depictions, and the very small number of such pictures thus does not reflect a sparse use of the wag- ons, but rather a cultural taboo. This is well reflected by the placing of depictions into positions where they could not be seen, as at the Warburg I grave, distr. Höxter in the Warburg Börde, where yoked cattle- pairs were portrayed as fork-shaped signs (Günther 1990; 1997). These pictures were not meant for ev- eryday use or view, but instead seem to have had a magical quality. The Warburg grave is important because it is securely dated into the Wartberg culture, c. 3,400 – 3,050 calBC. The placing of the depictions into a position where they were invisible after the grave was build excludes the possibility that they were created significantly later. Even though they do not show wagons, but only cattle under a yoke, they are of great importance, because they allow connect- ing the date with other petroglyphs, like those from a grave from Züschen, city of Fritzlar (North Hesse), with a wagon shown in the same style (Günther 1990, 50 fig. 7,1 – 4), and the famous rock carvings of two-wheeled wagons from the Kamenaja Mogila near Myrne, rai. Melitopol, Ukraine (Günther 1990, 53 fig. 9). The modern administration districts mask the close vicinity of Züschen and Warburg. From one site to the other it is merely 36 km as the crow flies, while the linear distance between the Wartberg culture burials in Lower Saxony and Züschen is c. 120 km. Further wagon depictions are found on pot- tery sherds from the southeastern TRB groups. A rather ambiguous picture derives from a ceramic 15 It is necessary to point out, however, that the laboratory Fig.  2 Wagon tracks discovered under a megalithic grave at responsible for the radiocarbon dating in Kiel at that time had Flintbek dated to the Fuchsberg phase (after Vosteen 1996, 34 severe problems concerning the precision of their datings; cf. Abb. 24). Menennga 2017, 50 – 53 with a critical discussion. 382 A longue durée perspective on technical innovations in the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic of the North European Plain Fig. 3 Fork-shaped signs pecked into a pseudo-megalithic gallery grave at Warburg I, stone B3 (after Günther 1997, 202 Abb. 144). vessel from Ostrowiec, woj. Kielce (a.k.a. Ostrowca (Fig. 4) is better understandable as a wagon with a Świętokrzyskiego), Poland, found in a storage pit of a surrounding landscape of rivers and fields (Milis- TRB settlement together with Lengyel and Globular auskas / Kruk 1982, Taf. 8; cf. also Milisauskas / Amphora culture remains (Bakker 2004, 289). It is Kruk 1977). Each wagon is shown as a box with dated relatively late, because of the association with four appendices to which circles are attached. A fifth a globular amphora, suggesting a terminus post quem circle is placed within the box. Two lines converge of c. 3,100 calBC. The depiction is very abstract, and to form a triangle on top of which a Y-shaped sign its interpretation as a wagon is not definite. The other is placed. The depiction is rather abstract and can decoration on a TRB vessel from Bronocice, Poland only be understood as a wagon with appropriate prior knowledge. The fork-shaped signs from Züschen and Warburg representing cattle must thereby be seen as analogous to the Y-shaped sign on the Bronocice pot. Furthermore, the depiction of the wagon from a bird’s eye view with the wheels shown from the side is well known from later petroglyphs. Typologically the vessel belongs into the phase Bronocice III (Mil- isauskas / Kruk 1982, 143) that is nowadays seen as starting c. 3,500 – 3,300 calBC (cf. Kruk / Mili­ sauskas 2018). The Bronocice depiction has good analogies within rock art from central Germany. Günther (1997, 206 plate 49,1) already referred to several menhirs as well as the pottery drums from Fig.  4 Wagon depiction on a pottery vessel from Bronocice the Bernburg and Walternienburg cultures as analo- ­(after Milisauskas / Kruk 1982, Taf. 8). gies for the Züschen and Warburg graves: The ‘style’ F l o ri a n K l i m s c h a an d Dan i el Ne u man n 383 used on these monuments uses a limited number a sequence with C2 and C3 horned figurines. The of elements that describe a geographically distinct styles have been dated by the association with weap- area.16 It might be assumed that the distribution area ons – in these cases daggers – as well as archaeologi- of the style can be read as a proxy for the knowledge cal finds in the vicinity. This results in correlating of early wagons (cf. Günther 1997, 157 fig. 125). The C3 with the phase ‘Chasseen recent’, c. 4,050 – 3,500 latest date for its spread can be seen with the Bern- calBC, while C2 signs are assumed to begin at 4,000 burg culture, i. e. before 3,200/3,100 calBC, while the calBC, and C1a signs are contemporary with halberd earliest possible date can easily be connected with depictions (Huet 2016, esp. 13 fig. 12). The superim- the upper limit of the phase Bronocice III and within position of daggers by C3 horned figurines is crucial the early Wartberg culture: Raetzel-Fabian (1997, in this respect. Huet (2016, 9 – 11) describes the dag- 175) discusses a more or less simultaneous erection gers shown as resembling shapes of the Italian Eneo- of the Warburg necropolis around 3,400 calBC, based lithic, which Huet / Bianchi (2016, 114) suggested on the available 14C-dates and typological arguments, as contemporary with the Rinaldone phase. For the and this would also apply to the depictions. dating of the rock art it is relevant that the triangular An early dating of the Wartberg signs is also Remedello daggers and the axes with low flanges strengthened by new research on the huge corpus both date to 3,300 – 2 ,700 calBC (Dolfini 2013, 39 of rock art in the Alps. There are two major concen- tab. 2), while scenes including halberds with midrib trations of depictions, one in the Val Camonica and should be even older, as recently proposed by Horn / the neighbouring Valteline and Val Venoste valleys, Schenck (2016, 18) while discussing the chrono- and the other in the region of Mont Bégo (cf. Arcà logical position of Rinaldone, prov. Viterbo, grave 2011 for an overview). The chronology of the im- 3. This would suggest a date of 3,600 – 3,300/3,200 ages is established by defining stylistic units, which calBC, which is supported independently by Dol- are dated by the association with datable artefacts fini’s (2010, 711 – 715) 14C-datings of grave 21 from depicted in them (Fedele 2006, 48 fig. 1). Altogether Pietro, prov. Viterbo. 20 Accordingly, Horn’s type 2 21 depictions of ploughs and one of a wagon with a halberds, characterised by a prominent central rib Remedello or Bell Beaker date are reported from Val and relatively long blades, can be found associated Camonica. 17 The situation is similar at Mont Bégo: with cattle teams pulling ploughs in the Mont Bégo While ploughs are very numerous, wagons occur region (De Lumley 2003, 381 fig. 129), thereby dat- rarely (De Saulieu / Serres 2006, 76 fig. 7). Most ing them to 3,600 – 3,300/3,200 calBC. This would scenes were not created in a single event, but clear result in a terminus ante quem of 3,300 – 2,900 calBC associations are existent though rare. A key-position for type C1a. 21 At this point, it seems appropriate to within this sequence is given to those depictions as- return to the dating of the Wartberg culture, which, sociated with specific axe, dagger, or halberd types.18 if the analogy with the sign group of type C2 is ac- The most recent study on dating the Alpine rock cepted, should be older than or contemporary to sign art relies heavily on horn-shape and classifies such group C1a (3,600 – 3,300/3,200 calBC; cf. Huet 2016, depictions as type C1a or C3 horned figurines (Huet esp. 13 fig. 12). This, in turn, would support Raetzel 2016, 12 – 13).19 Type C1a figurines can be placed into Fabian’s hypothesis of a rather simultaneous erec- tion around 3,400 calBC. While the data from the Alpine rock art are still not conclusive, it is possible to date the appearance of the earliest two-wheeled 16  Described further above already as comprising North Hesse, Warburg Boerde and southern Lower Saxony, complemented by vehicles contemporary to early halberds, i. e. around finds from the low mountain range border in Saxony-Anhalt. or before the middle of the 4th millennium calBC (cf. Matuschik 2006). 17  These were found on the statue menhirs of Borno 1, Ceres- olo / Bagnolo 2, Ossimo 7, and Ossimo 8, the larger rocks of Cemno Masso 1 and 2, as well as on the surfaces of Naquane R.99, Campanine R.8, and R.X, and Dos Cuì; cf. Fedele 2006, 49 fig. 2. 18  The finds in question are flat axes with low flanges, daggers 20  From the same typological horizon, Horn / Schenck 2016, with a central rib of the Remedello-type as well as halberds. Cf. 18 – 20 further add the halberds from Rinaldone, grave 5; Poggio esp. Dolfini 2010; Klimscha 2010; Horn 2014. For an example Aquilone, prov. Terni; Poggio delle Sorche, prov. Grosseto; see De Saulieu / Serres 2006, 78 fig. 9,80. ­C asanuovo, prov. Perugia; Villafranca-Veronese, prov. Verona. 19  This same sequence has been published in another paper, 21  According to Huet 2016 this happened after 2,500 calBC. where the fork-shaped signs have been named A(=C2), B(=C3), From the information published it seems as if the work by Horn and C(=C1a): Huet / Bianchi 2016, 106 fig. 2. (2014; 2012 – 2021) was not taken into account. 384 A longue durée perspective on technical innovations in the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic of the North European Plain Plough marks Wooden ploughs Plough marks are known from the whole North The oldest ploughs known in Central Europe, clas- European Plain. The assumed plough marks from sified as type Asterlagen, are yet poorly understood; under barrow no. 8 at Sarnowo, com. Kozłowo, are this type requires more and better preserved finds problematic due to the discrepancy between the 14C- for a clear interpretation. The two known finds are date (4,459 – 4,343 calBC; GrN-5035: 5,570±60 BP) dated to around 3,000 calBC and to the second half and the archaeological expectation for the dating of the 3rd millennium calBC (cf. Hecht 2007). The of the Wiórek-phase (around 3,800 calBC) to which construction of ploughs of type Walle, on the other they are assigned (Wiklak 1980, 72 – 73; Tegtmeier hand, can be inferred from the completely preserved 1993, 25). Their interpretation has also been chal- find of such a plough from the Tannhäuser Moor at lenged with plausible arguments, for instance the Aurich-Walle (Eastern Frisia, Lower Saxony; Precht lack of the typical criss-cross pattern, and it was 1998; cf. also Tegtmeier 1993). Type Walle ploughs proposed that they rather represent a burnt tim- are made from a single piece of trunk wood with a ber structure (Niesiolowska-Sreniowska 1999). branch. The sole is made from the trunk, while the Further evidence is known from Zarębowo, distr. branch in its natural shape and angle is the foun- Gmina Zakrzewo, Kuyavia, dated to the later part dation for the beam. The mentioned find is radio- of the Wiórek phase around 3,400 calBC by a 14C- metrically dated to 1,940 – 1,510 calBC, but the type date (GrN-5044: 4,624±40 BP, 3,521 – 3,338 calBC, it represents is considerably older, as a recent late 94.3 %; cf. Sherratt 1981, 270; Tegtmeier 1993, 25). 3rd millennium dating of a fragment of a type Walle Plough marks from Groningen-Ooosterpoortwijk, plough from Mehlbergen-Balge, distr. Nienburg/We- the Netherlands, have been dated by a small series ser (middle Weser) demonstrates (Drenth / Lanting of radiocarbon analyses to around 3,000 calBC. 1997, 54; Hecht 2007, 197). This is also confirmed by A possibly earlier date was published recently for a fragment of a type Walle plough from layer XIII– plough marks under a barrow at Højensvej, Egense XII of Ezerovo II-Tell Dipsis, Varna prov., Bulgaria, sn., Syddanmark, Fyn (POZ-28068: 4,900±40 BP, dated to around 3,000 calBC (Pétrequin et al. 2006; 3,770 – 3,637 calBC; cf. Thrane 1982; Mischka 2013, Horvath 2015), and the petrogylphs on Cimbergo, 298 fig. 4). These are contemporary to the plough rock 8 (‘de la baita’), in the Val Camonica, where marks discovered at Flintbek, distr. Rendsburg-Eck- cattle are shown under a yoke, pulling a plough in the ernförde, Holstein (Befund 50 and 59), which have style already encountered at Warburg and Züschen been dated to 3,700 – 3,450 calBC (Mischka 2013, 298 (Tegtmeier 1993, 117; Fedele 2006, 51). 23 figs. 3; 4,2), and Aldersro, Zealand, which were dated to 3,650 – 3,535 BC (Mischka 2013, 298 fig. 4). Fi- Copper figurines of yoked cattle nally, one early date for Avebury, Wiltshire, England, needs to be mentioned, where plough marks have Two metal figurines of cattle under a yoke derive been discovered that might be older than 3,700 – 3,370 from a hoard found at Bytýn, near Poznán, Greater calBC (Tegtmeier 1993, 25; Vosteen 1999, 36). Poland, a third one from the Lisková cave, Slova- Apart from the examples associated with radiocar- kia; yet another find (bought from an arts dealer) bon datings, there is considerable evidence linked to is thought to come from Dieburg, southern Hesse. graves of the Fuchsberg/EN II phase substantiating The hoard from Bytýn (Fig. 5; cf. Wislanski 1979, an assumed beginning around 3,600 calBC. 22 While 237 fig. 136) was originally explained as an import this is even before the earliest evidence for wagons, from Anatolia (Kopacz / Tunia 1978, 196 – 199), but it should be kept in mind that the sparse evidence of this interpretation has changed during the last four wheel tracks is also associated with the Fuchsberg decades. Matuschik (2002; 2006) has convincingly phase; therefore new research might push their be- dismissed the idea of the Bytýn finds belonging to the ginning back to the same date as that for ploughing. Early Bronze Age, by dating their metal composition as well as the accompanying axes from the hoard. 23  The identification of the sign with a plough of type Walle 22  Classified as FN C or ‘dolmenzeitlich’ in the older litera- is based on the prominently displayed technical details of the ture; cf. Thrane 1982, 21; 1989, 122 – 124; Tegtmeier 1993, depiction, i. e. in the construction of the beam, the sole, and a 24 – 2 5; Vosteen 1999, 35 – 36; cf. also: Louwe Koojmans 2006, handle. If this analogy is accepted, type Walle ploughs likely 199 fig. 10; Mischka 2013, 298 fig. 4 no. 8.13 – 15. already emerged before the middle of the 4th millennium calBC. F l o ri a n K l i m s c h a an d Dan i el Ne u man n 385 c. 3,650 – 3,400 calBC. The handle is connected to the Bytýn figurines only via its motive, not by its production technique or style, but it does not date the hoard. However, as both the dating of the metal- composition as well as that of the associated flat axes are acceptable, the only argument that could force a later date would be the technical complexity of the Bytýn finds. Not only the comparability with the axes from Riesebusch, but also the arsenical copper composition as well as the motive of two pairs of cattle under a yoke all indicate an age of 3,650 – 3,400 calBC. Usually, the figurines from Liscová, Bytýn, and Dieburg are interpreted as having been part of wagon models.26 The best analogies for contemporary Fig.  5 Two cattle figurines made from copper from a hoard copper figurines cast in the lost wax-technique are found at Bytyn (after Matuschik 2002, 111 fig. 1). known from the Caucasus, where cattle figurines – however, without a yoke – were discovered in the The figurines are made from an arsenic-copper alloy princely burial of the Majkop kurgan (cf. Hansen (Mondsee copper) which is known from the early 4th 2009 for good illustrations). These can probably be millennium to around 3,400 calBC. 24 The axes from dated to around 3,800 calBC. Miniature wheels from Bytýn have good analogies in objects from the hoard Majkop contexts have shown that the possibility of from Riesebusch, Schleswig-Holstein, currently dated wagon models exists (Klimscha 2018), and the use to around 3,500/3,400 calBC (cf. Matuschik 2002, of cattle-traction has recently been supported by the 117). The copper figurine from Dieburg (Fansa 2004, discovery of cattle burials with nose-rings (Reinhold 91 fig. 125; cf. Matuschik 2002, 111 fig. 1; 2006, fig. et al. 2017). From 3,800 – 3,600 calBC onwards yoked 8,1) can be loosely typologically associated with the cattle-pairs were used to pull vehicles in the northern Bytýn hoard (Matuschik 2002, esp. 112). In con- Pontic area, and the dating is also confirmed by the trast to the latter, however, the horns of the cattle very early existance of sledge models and assumed are aligned lower and the legs are less massive. If wheeled ceramic vessels from the transition phase the dating is accepted, though, the curved shape of of Tripolye B2 and C1 (around 3,600 calBC; cf. Гусев the horns is interesting and might signify the same 1998, 23 fig. 5; Matuschik 2006, 281 fig. 3,1). horn shape as depicted in the signs at Warburg and Züschen (‘C-shaped’) in another medium. The Lisková figurine was found at the entrance Early copper in the north area of a cave, together with human bones, ceramics, and copper finds. It is attributed to the Pre-Boleráz Imports of copper axes, shaft-hole axes, and axe-adzes horizon (Struhár 2010). Klassen (2000, 125 – 128) are already known for the Ertebølle culture. Both argued for a similar age when he discussed the Bytýn typology and chemical analyses suggest that the earli- find, thereby suggesting the production of small cop- est finds were imported from either the Carpathian per figurines in Central Europe already in the 36th Basin or the Balkan region (Klassen 2000). The met- century calBC. A similar motive is indeed known allurgy of both regions has received great attention from the handle of a TRB beaker found at Krežnica- in the scientific community due to spectacular finds Jara, south of Lublin, Lesser Poland, 25 which be- of gold and copper, which are considered as indica- longs to the phase Bronocice II, currently dated to tors of the earliest stratified societies. Such finds are unknown in the North European Plain, and often the introduction of metal there is disregarded, because the number of finds is low and objects are notoriously 24  However, it is still accounted for in southeastern Europe until the early 3rd millennium calBC, which might challenge Klassen’s (2000) argument for a date of Bytýn between 3,800 and 3,400 calBC. 26  Such figurines must have been cast in the lost-wax-technique, and it was supposed to be unthinkable that metallurgy was prac- 25  Vosteen 1999 Taf. 107,62; Milisauskas / Kruk 1982, fig. ticed to such an extend in Europe before the Early Bronze Age. 2,2; Fansa 2004, 85 fig. 114; Bakker 2004, 283 fig. 1,284; Because of the rather short chronology used during the 1970s, a ­Vosteen 1999 Nr. 62 Taf 107; Dinu 1981, fig. 9,1. deduction from Anatolia seemed very possible. 386 A longue durée perspective on technical innovations in the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic of the North European Plain difficult to date. The impact of metal artefacts in Late Potential Late Mesolithic copper finds Mesolithic and Early Neolithic societies in the north is usually downplayed. 27 Many misconceptions of The earliest copper artefacts in the north are imports the role of metal artefacts are the result of a flawed from the southeast European Copper Age. Hammer chronology. New 14C-datings as well as excavations axes of Pločnik type and axe-adzes of Jászladány type in the core areas of early metallurgy are difficult to have been found in small numbers. Govedarica (2016) correlate with the local Mesolithic and Neolithic se- recently re-analysed the stratigraphy of the epony- quences of northern Europe. Still, the rather precise mous site Vinca-Pločnik and concluded very plausibly chronology of the North European Plain (Müller that type Pločnik axes were in use between 4,650 and et al. 2012) can be linked loosely with the record of 4,250/4,200 calBC (cf. also Govedarica 2001; 2010). copper finds: As there are no indications for a local This is supported by a radiocarbon date from a settle- metal production during the Neolithic so far, all finds ment pit from the periphery of the distribution of these are assumed to be imports (but see Klassen 2000; axes in Weitendorf, Styria (Wilding 2011, 39 – 41). Ba- Gebauer / Sørensen this volume), and can thus sed on this chronological framework, all finds which be dated by analogies in their areas of origin. Since are known in the north should be considered as ha- most copper artefacts do not come from contexts ving been imported by Late Mesolithic groups. The that can be dated otherwise, typological dating and, dating of the axe-adzes is more challenging as some to a lesser degree, the chronological assessment of of them might have been in use as late as during the the copper type used are the only ways to establish transition into the Baden culture around the middle of their ages. This is especially the case for the earliest the 4th millennium calBC (Zápotoký 1996, 189 – 190; finds, i. e., generally speaking, anything before 3,500 Klimscha 2016, 114 fig. 144, 115, with further refe- calBC. Nevertheless, the time lag between the use of rences). However, their production started around such objects in their areas of origin and their final 4,500 calBC, and with the recent re-dating of the later deposition remains unclear. 28 stage of the Bodrogkeresztúr culture to the end of the Finds with a typological age earlier than 5th millennium, the evidence to date axe-adzes before 4,300/4,000 calBC can be regarded as poten- 4,000 calBC becomes very strong. tially used by Mesolithic (but possibly also How did these objects reach the North Euro- Early Neolithic) communities. Within the Neo- pean Plain? Klassen (2000; 2004) is responsible for lithic sequence two horizons can be differenti- major advancements on the topic of early metal in ated, namely 4,300/4,000 – 3,600/3,500 calBC and this area, and his studies on the western Baltic area 3,600/3,500 – 3,300 calBC. 29 The earlier horizon have become a handy source to access the material represents the EN I, including the phases Oxie and (cf. also Klassen / Pernicka 1998). But Klassen did Siggeneben-Süd, the later horizon represents the not process the finds from the North Sea region, and Fuchsberg phase or EN II, and therefore also the the apparent emptiness of his maps in this regard has typologically related phases Brindley 1/2. to be seen as a lack of research rather than prehis- toric reality. Klassen had originally proposed down- the-line trade, and his distribution maps do indeed 27  Recent studies have, for example, advocated autochtho- suggest thin lines spreading out of the Carpathian nous models to explain the introduction of stone battle axes Basin and into the north (e. g. Klassen 2004, 269 without connections to archetypes from southeast Europe, or fig. 145). The finds are very scarce, but have received went so far as to deny any practical use for all pre-Bronze Age metal finds: Vandkilde 2007. Cf. also Vandkilde 1996; Klas- some attention following the realisation that it must sen 2000; 2004; Turck 2010. have been Mesolithic and Early Neolithic communi- ties, i. e. groups without metallurgical proficiency, 28  Two arguments, however, speak strongly against this ca- veat. Firstly, we do have good evidence of many finds after who acquired these goods. 30 3,500 calBC, and there are no associations with significantly Such finds are known not only from the North earlier material. Therefore, we simply have no indications from European Plain, but prominent examples were found the archaeological record that metal indeed circulated long enough to significantly blur our conclusions. Secondly, we can as far to the west as in the princely tomb of Pauil- identify influences on stone artefacts, and these in turn can be hac, dép. Gars, France (in the historical Gascogne dated much better. Thus, even if we cannot rule out that metal finds were handed down within a social group, we assume that the inherent fuzziness – which is typical for prehistoric chrono- logies – allows us to disregard errors of one or two generations. 29  These two horizons were not defined beforehand, but sim- 30  Inter alia Klassen 2004; Turck 2010; Frieman 2012; ply reflect the dating precision of metal objects. ­Govedarica 2016. F l o ri a n K l i m s c h a an d Dan i el Ne u man n 387 province). 31 Within this assemblage two boar tusks, the Pločnik and Jászladány types (cf. Laux 2000). several now lost metal beads, and two jadeite axes of These axes show morphological relations to the axes extraordinary quality were found together with four found in the famous Stollhof hoard from Lower Aus- very long flint blades, but the most impressive piece tria (Angeli 1967). 32 Klassen assigned the axes to is a gold foil object interpreted as a diadem that has his type Kaka and saw their origin in the Jordanów its best analogies in the Carpathian Basin (Klassen group. On a typological basis and because of their 2004, 266 fig. 142). A nearly identical gold diadem is material composition, they were dated to the time known from the famous Romanian hoard of Moigrad around 4,000 calBC. Regarding their typological in Transylvania (Makkay 1976; cf. also Parzinger relation to southeastern types, this is indeed pos- 1992, 246 fig. 3). Diadems of that type are assigned sible, but it lacks any contextual or radiometric to the Bodrogkeresztúr culture, and this brings us support so far, since they were exclusively found as back to the north. single depositions. 33 From Lower Saxony only one The identification of Bodrogkeresztúr pottery find of an axe with a chunky body is known, and at Dąbki in western Pomerania strengthens the its findspot Salzgitter (southern Lower Saxony) can possibility that the appearance of hammer axes and indeed be casually connected with the Jordanów axe-adzes was a result of an interregional exchange group (cf. Turck 2010, 53 – 54 figs. 58 – 6 4 for typical of Mesolithic communities. Several sherds of Bo- finds). Contemporaneous or even slightly older are drogkeresztúr pots unearthed at Dąbki 9 (Czekaj- the famous finds from Brześć Kujawski in Kujawia- Zastawny et al. 2011; 2012) allow drawing parallels Pomerania (Czerniak 1980). Similar objects are between the Late Mesolithic in the north and the known from the lake dwellings of the Alpine region Early Copper Age in the southeast of Europe. We (cf. Heumüller 2009). 34 A connection can be seen do not have any find of a securely contextualised along the Vistula river – a route that has been ar- copper artefact at a Late Mesolithic site yet, but at gued for because of the distribution of specific flint least the knowledge of Mesolithic communities in axes and pottery connecting the early TRB with the the north about copper axes is plausible: The link Cucuţeni-Tripolye culture (Dumitrescu 1955; Klim- via the pottery at Dąbki is one strong argument, scha 2007). A newly discovered copper axe from and the dating of the finds in their areas of origin, Steinbergen, distr. Schaumburg, may be assigned to predating the neolithisation of the north, the other. the same chronological horizon (Lehmann / Wulf This might suggest that finds like an axe-adze from 2013). It can be placed next to trapezoid axes with ‘southern Scandinavia’, another such find from Stein- slightly bulged rectangular sections that are well hagen near Stralsund, distr. Vorpommern-Rügen, documented in southern Scandinavia and are com- Germany and the hammer axe from Frankfurt/Oder, monly dated to the EN I. Brandenburg, Germany were indeed used by Meso- lithic people (cf. Klassen 2004; Govedarica 2010). Early Neolithic II and Middle Neolithic copper These artefacts did not have a lasting impact, though. finds Copper shaft-hole axes and axe-adzes might reflect a similar fascination as the Danubian stone tools While evidence for early copper objects is very which hunter-gatherer-fisher groups imported from sparse, there are impressive finds from the following neighbouring Rössen and Stroke-ornamented Pottery centuries (Fig. 6). A hammer axe from Müsleringen, culture groups (cf. Müller / Schirren, this volume): distr. Nienburg, from the middle Weser region rep- heavy tools made from exotic materials. Neither the resents a different type than the pure copper shaft- raw material nor the know-how to make such tools was available in the North European Plain. 32  Hansen (2012, 147 – 149) recently re-examinded the evi- Late Mesolithic or Early Neolithic copper finds dence and proposed a dating around 4,000 calBC or into the early 4th millennium with reference to the new dating of Bodrog­ keresztúr. Cf. also Neumann 2015, 90 – 103. It has been thought that a group of flat axes with chunky bodies (‘Beile mit stämmigem Körper’) might 33  For a further discussion of type Kaka, see Klassen et al. be contemporaneous to the heavy copper tools of 2008/2009. To our knowledge, type Kaka axes are not known from Swifterbant contexts. 34  Cf. also Turck 2010, 56 figs. 66 – 69 for further analogies from Baalberge contexts in central Germany. Copper jewellery 31  Eluère 1987; Guilaine 1996, 130 – 131; Klassen 2004, 266 has an even longer tradition, finally also reaching Lower Saxo- fig. 142; Hansen 2009, 290 fig. 11. ny: cf. Schlicht 1973; Czerniak 1980. 388 A longue durée perspective on technical innovations in the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic of the North European Plain Fig. 6 Copper axes from 1 Müsleringen, distr. Nienburg (© Lower Saxony State Museum Hannover), 2 Reiffenhausen, distr. Göttingen (after Grote 2004, 322 Fig. 1) and 3 Cuconeştii Vechi II, distr. Edineț, Moldova (after Dergačev 2002 Pl. 18,R). hole axes and has very good parallels in Moldova Assigning these axes to a horizon before the Corded and the Caucasus. A similar axe with a cast copper Ware culture as well as an origin in the Carpathians shaft still attached was found in Reiffenhausen, com. or Caucasus is backed by the metallurgical analyses Friedland, in the Leine uplands in the region around which show for the Reiffenhausen and Müsleringen Göttingen (southern Lower Saxony; cf. Grote 2004; axes regular, but low amounts of arsenic (Kronz cf. also Jacob-Friesen 1971). According to the most et al. 2004). convincing analogies from the princely burials of A typologically different copper axe from Scania Majkop and Klady in the Black Sea area and the Cau- represents a very good archetype for the TRB stone casus, a dating of these finds to around 3,500 calBC battle-axes (Klassen 2004, fig. 50A). This object or even earlier was proposed (Hansen 2009; 2013). might have a similar age as the finds from Reiffen- F l o ri a n K l i m s c h a an d Dan i el Ne u man n 389 hausen and Müsleringen. Compared to the preced- also dates this find to the Fuchsberg phase. It is thus ing time slot, there is a great difference between the contemporary with the hoards from Riesebusch and sporadic exchanges of exotic goods with little impact the aforementioned hoard from Bytýn. The typologi- on the societies in the North European Plain and the cal relations of both finds with type Altheim axes massive imitation of foreign copper goods in local also suggest eastern influences (cf. Klimscha 2016, stone35 from the early 4th millennium BC. 166 – 167 with further references). Two axes of trap- The recently discovered hoard from Lüstringen, ezoidal type from the area of Bremen can be brought city of Osnabrück, drew new attention to the topic forward; these also belong to the Fuchsberg phase. 37 of early metal in northwestern Europe (Hassmann The metal objects of the 4th millennium calBC 2018). The hoard is an exceptional case in the archae- are characterised by the first use of arsenic copper. ological record, as here for the first time an axe of the The shift from the use of pure copper to the use of type of Müsleringen / Reiffenhausen was part of a copper with distinct impurities may be considered larger material assemblage. The axe from the Lüstrin- as an important improvement and innovation. The gen hoard is hardly distinguishable morphologically alloy increases the artefacts’ hardness and creates from the axes of Reiffenhausen and Müsleringen. a shiny gloss on the surface. 38 It is still a matter of Furthermore, it has been likewise cast from copper debate if some of these types of copper may be the with low amounts of arsenic (Lehmann et al. 2018). result of an increasing use of fahlores or an inten- The pectorals from the hoard are strikingly similar tional alloying of copper with arsenic. Nevertheless, to a find made of arsenic copper found in the richly the metallurgical data reveals a strong correlation furnished cist grave from Velvary, Bohemia (Mou- between the emergence of blades and arsenical cop- cha 1960; Pleslová-Štiková 1993), as well as to a per39 during the 4th millennium calBC. In contrast pectoral from Villafranca Veronese 36 in northern to that of the 5th and the 3rd millennium, the metal- Italy made from silver. Although the assemblage of lurgical landscape of the 4th millennium calBC is Lüstringen is still in the process of examination, it still only vaguely understood, and rivalling classi- may be chronologically assigned to approximately the fications of copper types were introduced during same horizon as the axes – antedating the Corded the past years, e. g. Bygmet (Liversage / Liversage Ware. Their distribution patterns indicate that they 1989), Mondsee (Matuschik 1998), or Riesebusch have bypassed southern Central Europe and the tra- copper (Klassen / Stürup 2001). Recent analyses ditional Danubian communication routes: Besides emphasise that the conceptions of the metal cycles the aforementioned interregional connections, it is of the 4th millennium hardly correspond with the striking that the axes have no analogies in the south- archaeological record so far, as the evidence of lead ern regions of Central Europe. There is only one axe isotope analyses shows that Mondsee copper does of type Şiria, found in Überlingen at Lake Constance not match any known copper source from the Alpine (Matuschik 1997). Type Şiria axes, however, are area as previously supposed, and at the moment, an dated to the late Bodrogkeresztúr culture. origin from southeastern copper sources seems more Especially, during the Fuchsberg phase (EN II, plausible (Frank / Pernicka 2012).40 Copper finds or Brindley 1/2, respectively) between 3,600/3,500 from the Nordic Middle Neolithic are rare. The axe and 3,300 calBC, spectacular find concentrations of from Mellendorf, com. Wedemark (Hanover region), copper objects are known across the North European has been associated with the axes from the Bygholm Plain. According to Klassen, the weight of the finds hoard (Laux 2000, no. 8), but in contrast to the pub- from Denmark taken together is higher than that lished drawing it has low flanges. Therefore, it can of all finds from the Alps from 3,800 – 3,300 calBC. The pottery sherd found with the Bygholm hoard 37  Find locations ‘Aus der Weser’ (out of the river Weser) bet- ween the cities of Bremen and Nienburg (Laux 2000, no. 11), and Okel, city of Syke, Lower Saxony (Laux 2000, no. 9). 35  We are referring to the battle-axes of the TRB culture. With the exception of the axes from Müsleringen, Reiffenhausen, and 38  Northover 1989; Budd / Ottaway 1991; 1995; Lechtman / Lüstringen, none of the assumed copper archetypes for the TRB Klein 2002. stone axes have been found. For a different view cf. Frieman 2012. 39  Matuschik 1998; Horn 2014, 149 fig. 80; cf. also the dy- namic map created by Horn 2012 – 2021 for the different time 36  This pectoral is part of a burial assemblage of the Rinaldo- periods. ne culture and is among other things associated with a halberd made of arsenic copper (Ghislanzon 1932; Salzani 2011, 40  The traditional idea of an alpine raw material source is for 50 – 51 Tab.  1). instance referred to in Lefranc et al. 2012. 390 A longue durée perspective on technical innovations in the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic of the North European Plain be compared very well to the axe of the Ice mummy of wagon construction or by people who had seen from the Alps also known as ‘Ötzi’ (Egg 1992, 262 wagons in lands far away and were able to copy a fig. 2, 263 fig. 3; cf. also Klimscha 2010). Similar axes wagon from local know-how. have also been published from the Remedello culture In this regard, the close relationship of evidence and recently from Zug-Riedmatt and correspond in for ploughing and wagons needs to be stressed. At their radiocarbon dating between 3,250 and 3,100 the moment, there is no clear sequence in which the calBC (Gross et al. 2017). wagon is developed from more simple technology, but the available data rather suggest a wide distribution of both ploughing and wagon driving within the horizon The innovation cluster of cattle traction EN II – Fuchsberg – Brindley 1/2 – Bronocice III. There is no experimental phase visible in which both The early evidence for wheels and wagons depends technologies are being developed or in which precur- very much on the wagon tracks from Flintbek. Short- sor technologies can be identified. They appear fully ly after the middle of the 4th millennium, wagons functional in the north and quickly spred through the were regularly used in the area of southern Scandi- complete area settled by the Funnelbeaker groups. navia, Schleswig-Holstein, and Lüneburg,41 central This suggests the origin of both technologies outside Germany, Poland, and possibly also within the for- the TRB phenomenon and their diffusion as a package mer Swifterbant area, northwest Germany and the (assumedly as variations of the innovation-process of Netherlands. We still lack positive evidence from yoke and cattle teams) into the north. the latter, but the erection of megalithic graves (as- sumedly making use of cattle traction) as well as the inclusion into the TRB koine during the phases Copper objects during the Fuchsberg/ Brindley 1/2 (the relation of the early Tiefstich- Brindley 1/2 phases keramik and Fuchsberg phase has been frequently commented on) strongly suggest that wagons were Early stages of the diffusion of copper metallurgy in regular use there, too. were made possible by the high esteem in which Me- The question remains: does this date represent solithic communities held large and heavy axes. This the arrival of the innovation, or can it be read as a created the dilemma that while the finished products terminus ante quem for the arrival? The latter idea were well known to Mesolithic communities, it was is based on several lines of evidence. First of all, the completely impossible to reverse-engineer an im- technical complexity has to be considered. Wagons ported copper axe – the chaîne opératoire was com- require the domestication of cattle, the ability to pro- plex and could not be ‘re-invented’ by trial and er- duce a wagon box as well as wheels, and the means ror. With the introduction of the Neolithic economy to attach the cattle to the box and make use of their this changed slowly. New types of pottery required power (i. e. a yoke and reins). This necessitates a higher firing temperatures, and this was the first step Neolithic economy that regularly breeds cattle and towards pyrotechnological proficiency. The slowness is able to feed animals beyond the age at which they with which the regular but not very numerous im- can be butchered for meat production. We can hardly ported copper artefacts were adapted into local forms expect a technology as complex as the wagon to be in the North European Plain likely results from the invented ex nihilo, and therefore should expect ex- lack of established substructures. Metallurgy relied perimental steps on the way towards its invention. on long traditions of pyrotechnical expertise, for The use of cattle traction in the form of sledges, sleds, instance with annealing and heating metals as well and plows might therefore be understood as a prepar- as with pottery making and kiln building since the ing stage that was essential for wagon construction. Neolithic (Hansen 2017). Around the middle of the These preconditions were not necessary developed 4th millennium calBC the earliest conclusive evidence in the North European Plain, but could either have of local re-melting of copper has been documented been brought there by people who had the know-how (Klassen 2017, 211 – 216, 235 – 238).42 It is during this 41  Which seems loosley connected to the Baden culture ac- 42  This did not include the mining and smelting of ores (and cording to the burial from Oldendorf (cf. Burmeister 2004a). thus the full metallurgical cycle). F l o ri a n K l i m s c h a an d Dan i el Ne u man n 391 time that new types of alloys also arrive in the form same time as the copper shaft-hole axes. The Majkop of shaft-hole axes. culture and the late Tripolye culture currently provide the earliest evidence of wagons (Hansen et al. 2017; Klimscha 2017a; 2018). The early use of wagons in Technical innovations and the the North European Plain is therefore more than mere neolithisation of the north coincidence. Long distance communication lines be- tween the north and the Carpathian Basin and Black While the Mesolithic societies in the North Euro- Sea area have been known since the 5th millennium pean Plain remained economically conservative for calBC (Czekaj-Zastawny et al. 2011; Klassen 2000).43 most of the 5th millennium calBC (with exception During the TRB this was perpetuated into networks of the Swifterbant culture; cf. Raemaekers 1999; transmitting regular information, artefacts, and know- Ten Anscher 2012), products from their southern how. The time span 3,600 – 3,300 calBC seems to be a neighbours nevertheless fascinated them. Danubian plausible window for the diffusion of the wagon tech- stone tools were imported in high numbers, and nology. The wagon tracks from Flintbek are placed some of them might even have been brought to the into the late Fuchsberg phase of the TRB, and it is north by expeditions of farmers searching for new definitely possible that future research might push land (cf. Müller / Schirren, this volume). Small back the emergence of the wagon to the beginning axes and adzes were known in the North European of Fuchsberg, arguing that the beginning of the TRB Plain during the Mesolithic, but these were of sig- proper is the result of the application of a bundle nificantly smaller size and weight. Their functions of innovations coming from the Black Sea area. The must have differed from the Danubian stone tools, grave inventory from Oldendorf IV with its cups with which not only show a different morphology, but also looped handles also points into exactly the same direc- far greater size-ranges. In addition, the possession tion (Körner / Laux 1980).44 From the available data of such exotica would have been very prestigious it is currently impossible to argue for a chronological in itself and thus might have been a way to distin- priority of the plough over the wagon, or vice versa. guish oneself from others. The same conclusions fit The similarity between the chaîne opératoires of both to the earliest copper items. These, however, were technologies and their reliance on trained cattle teams, not made by neighbouring Neolithic communities, for which there is no earlier evidence in the north, but originated in the Carpathian Basin and the Bal- make it very plausible that both were adopted together kans. The distribution of copper items during the 5th as a package. millennium calBC suggests that Mesolithic groups The wheel might have reached the north in the had access to exchange networks that connected same way as the copper axe-adzes did five hundred them with southeastern Europe, but bypassed the years earlier. We suggest that the record of metal Danube. Yet, the frequency of contacts with groups finds in Lower Saxony and the Netherlands reflects sustained on Neolithic economies dramatically con- the communication network spanning the Baltic trasts with the hesitation to adopt this way of life region. The copper finds originated in the Black Sea in the North European Plain. The great appeal of area. The very early appearance of both arsenic cop- axes is still existent during the neolithisation of the per artefacts and evidence for the use of wheeled ve- north, but now it was sated by local production. The hicles is important in this regard. While the imported axe hoards of the TRB culture continued a tradition goods might also have been transported via several which began in the Mesolithic. Copper axes were still overlapping, smaller exchange networks, the adop- prized among the early TRB communities, but they tion of wagons suggests that people actually at least seem to have declined in numbers. It is not possible saw these vehicles and were able to describe them to draw a direct line from import to imitation to lo- precisely enough to have them replicated. cal production. The re-melting of imported copper items was only possible in the very long run, after having been ‘translated’ into Neolithic technical and 43  At this stage of the argument, we need to stress that this organisational capabilities. narrow dating of the copper finds is supported by the finds from Dąbki as well as typology. Some finds, if taken by themselves, In a certain way, the axe paved the way for metal- might even be older. lurgy. The symbolical dimensions of stone axes were essential for the TRB ideology. Hoards of polished 44  Any further discussion on the interrelation of Brindly 1/2 and Fuchsberg on the one hand and the southeastern TRB, flint axes as well as the later types of flint axes them- Bernburg, Cucuteni-Tripol’e and Baden on the other hand selves connect the TRB with the Black Sea area at the would at this point severely overburden this paper. 392 A longue durée perspective on technical innovations in the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic of the North European Plain The diffusion of the cattle traction technology be demonstrated for northern Central Europe and cluster was, however, not the result of people mi- the North European Plain. The development of the grating en masse. The wheels recorded for the TRB wagon must have happened somewhere else.46 The culture are of a different technological tradition plough appears more or less abruptly in the archaeo- than those of the Alpine (cf. summaries of finds by logical record of Central Europe around the middle Woytowitsch 1978; Schlichterle 2004; cf. also of the 4th millennium calBC, and it is associated with Burmeister 2012, 84) or the Black Sea region (cf. wagons in Alpine rock art, in the Wartberg culture, Fansa / Burmeister 2004; Matuschik 2006): the and at the Flintbek site. Ploughing and wagon driving wide distribution of wheel technology could also be likely arrived as an innovation cluster. a case of stimulus diffusion (Kroeber 1940). Ploughing is essential for any long-term agricul- ture. From at least 4,000 calBC agricultural fields Conclusion in the Swifterbant culture were worked with hand- held tools (cf. Raemaekers, this volume). The shift During the 5th millennium calBC, various Late Meso- to cattle-drawn ploughs must have had economic lithic groups maintained different levels of contact net- consequences. Apart from the technical know-how works: there was obviously relatively frequent exchange to build a plough, a cattle-team trained to pull it was with neighbouring farming groups and also sparser necessary. Owning a cattle-drawn plough allowed interaction with Copper Age societies in the Carpath- greater efficiency in agriculture and certainly made ian Basin and the western Black Sea area. During this the work easier. This had important long-term con- time these contacts had no measurable effect but set the sequences. Even small amounts of surplus (resulting stage for an axe-ideology. When the original Mesolithic from either the ability to work larger fields, or to societies were transformed into Neolithic economies, work faster) would have led to significant differences this had a delaying effect.47 The high esteem of large in wealth in the long run (Bogucki 1993). The most axes was raised even more by the irreplaceable role axes prominent positions according to the introduction now had in the routines of chopping trees and build- of the plough into northern Central Europe can be ing houses.48 Hunter-gatherer-fishers did affect their summed up with Sherratt’s innovation-cluster of trac- environment considerably by clearing habitation areas tion, plough, wagon, and woolly sheep (Sherratt and nourishing specific plants (inter alia Out 2009; 1981; 2004) – and its vehement rejection (inter alia Colledge / Conolly 2014), and the primeval forest Vosteen 1996; Bakker et al. 1999; Bakker 2004) did not disappear with the Early Neolithic.49 Neverthe- – on the one hand, and models of successive tech- less, the thinning out of the forest becomes visible in nological improvement starting with the LBK on the pollen diagrams from around 4,100 calBC onwards.50 other (Lüning 1979/1980; 2000; Lüning et al. 2001). In other words, there was a significant change that The necessary skills for creating both wagon correlates with the shift from Mesolithic to Neolithic and plough were available in the LBK with regard economies, and, depending on the region, the changes to the craftsmanship displayed in longhouses and within the Swifterbant culture and from the Ertebølle to wells.45 This shifts the focus to the availability and training of cattle teams. Indeed, it is convincing from a technical point of view that once a society used 46  Early evidence for cattle traction is currently limited to the cattle traction to plough its fields, the necessary step southern Levant and southeastern Europe: Hill 2001. in the development to use cattle to move vehicles 47  From 4,100 calBC, on the Cimbrian peninsula and in the is minimal. The components ‘cattle team + yoke + western Baltic (Hartz et al. 2000; Müller 2009), from 4,300 plough’ can be exchanged into ‘cattle team + yoke calBC onwards within the Swifterbant culture (Cappers / Rae- maekers 2008; Raemaekers 1999). + sled / travois’. A wagon would need the additional construction of an axle and wheels, and a way to fix 48  The archaeological record also has good evidence that lar- both to the chassis. While it is reasonable to assume ge axes were used for the slaughtering and/or sacrifice of cattle: Klimscha 2010. that ploughing is older than wagons, this cannot 49  Deforestation seems to have had its peak during the Single Grave culture, or even later: Kirleis et al. 2012; Behre / Kučan 1994. For the Alps a similar picture can be drawn with dense forestation until the Younger Neolithic: Rösch 1993; 2013; 45 Unless it is argued that the construction of wheels might Lechterbeck et al. 2014. have been too complex for LBK craftsmen. Assessing this pro- blem would greatly benefit from experimental data using diffe- 50  Inter alia Hartz et al. 2000; Dörfler 2001; Behre 2008; rent stone tools to produce disc wheels. Kirleis et al. 2012. F l o ri a n K l i m s c h a an d Dan i el Ne u man n 393 the Funnelbeaker culture between 4,300 – 4,100 calBC.51 the former area of the Swifterbant culture, were par- Modern research has identified two major episodes ticipating in networks reaching to the Black Sea. The within the opening of the forest, during the erection of chronological horizon of these finds correlates well megalithic graves, c. 3,400 – 3,100 calBC, and during the with the earliest evidence for wheeled vehicles, and it Single Grave culture, c. 2,800 – 2,500 calBC (Müller is suggested to translate the early dates available from 2009; Brozio et al. 2019). Flintbek and the rock art also to the TRB West group. Successively opening up spaces for agriculture Furthermore, this allows rethinking the neo- had two side effects in that it allowed small-scale lithisation process in the North European Plain. As travel on cattle-pulled vehicles, but also allowed far others have made clear, western influences and the greater lines of sight within the landscape. Therefore, role of the Swifterbant culture are still underestimated it is not by accident that the erection of megalithic (cf. Ten Anscher / Knippenberg this volume; Rae- tombs and the earliest evidence of wheel and wag- maekers this volume). Currently, we have the oldest on fall into the same chronological horizon around evidence for agriculture and animal husbandry in the 3,400 calBC. 52 Both the latter might have depended late Swifterbant culture, and can also draw a plausible on each other, and both also depended on the flint typological connection from Swifterbant pots to the axe and the opened forest. Economy, environmental typical A/B pottery of the EN I phase of the TRB change, ritual, and technology were closely inter- culture (cf. Demirci et al. this volume). An important linked (cf. Brozio et al. 2019). 53 The copper axes break is visible with the shift to EN II that is not only from Müsleringen, Reiffenhausen, and Lüstringen contemporary with the appearance of the TRB West support the idea of a diffusion of wagon technology group, but also with the aforementioned innovation from the Black Sea. The opening of the landscape did cluster, the start of megalithic burials, and the shift result in prehistoric communities choosing new ritual from a mixed farming / hunting subsistance to a full sites (Knitter et al. 2019a; b; cf. Brozio 2016), but agrarian society. It seems therefore plausible that this was also crucial for more extensive agriculture and new world of the classical TRB is primarily the result thus essential for adopting the ‘traction innovation of a new economic strategy made possible by the wide cluster’ (cf. Klimscha 2017a; b). adoption and regular use of cattle traction. Our paper has summed up several arguments concerning the relationship between diffusion of technology and socio-economic change. Networks of Technical take-offs and new questions hunter-gatherer-fishers established two communica- tion channels that were crucial for the neolithisation Crucial changes in the neolithisation of the North process in the north: contacts with the LBK suc- European Plain are strongly founded in different cessors on the one hand, and with the world of the technologies. When taking such a perspective, how- Copper Age of the Carpathian Basin and the western ever, it is important to acknowledge that we can Black Sea area on the other. understand it best from a modern retrospective that The latter one was intensified during the late 5th was unavailable to the prehistoric communities living and early 4th millennium calBC, resulting in the dif- through these changes. fusion of a technological package of cattle traction, The technologies pushing the neolithisation plough, and wheeled vehicles. The network did not could not simply be invented autochthonously. They end in the Baltic region, though. A preliminary ty- required specific resources, organisation, and techni- pological study of the available copper axes strongly cal know-how. None of it was available to the Late suggests that Lower Saxony and the Netherlands, i. e. Mesolithic communities in the north. They did es- tablish contacts with other societies possessing such know-how relatively early, but these contacts did not 51 If ten Anscher’s brilliant work on the typological analogies result in drastic changes. Nevertheless, this is not due between the later phases of Swifterbant and the earliest TRB is to incompetence or ignorance, but due to the lack accepted, this might be the same phenomenon (cf. Ten ­A nscher 2012). of sociotechnical substructures. Metallurgy required kilns that were able to produce temperatures of over 52 It is important to note that archaeologically this might have 1,000 °C, technical ceramics that survived such heat, been as early as 3,600 calBC (see above). access to copper ores, and an explicit idea about the 53  The evidence for the wagon is linked closely to megalithic very error-prone smelting and melting processes. tombs, but this is not a taphonomic relation (as suggested by Burmeister 2011; 2012; 2017). Finds from bogs demonstrate Ploughing and wagon necessitated domesticated that earlier evidence would have been preserved. cattle in large enough quantities to be able to remove 394 A longue durée perspective on technical innovations in the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic of the North European Plain animals from the meat production and use them as Bakker et al. 1999: J. A. Bakker /J. Kruk /A. E. Lanting / a ‘motor’, as well as tools and knowledge about how S. Milisaukas, The earliest evidence of wheeled ve- to build yokes, reins, wheels, and a chassis. hicles in Europe and the Near East. Antiquity 73, 1999, Mesolithic hunter-gatherer-fishers lacked many 778 – 790.Bánffy 2013: E. Bánffy, The Early Neolithic of these preconditions and the necessary experimen- of the Danube-Tisza Interfluve. BAR International Se- tation with new technologies to adopt them to their ries 2584 = Archaeolingua Central European Series 7 own necessities. For a long time they also lacked (Oxford 2013). any context in which both experimentation and pro- Bánffy 2019: E. Bánffy, First Farmers of the Carpathian duction, which did require considerable labour and Basin. Changing Patterns in Subsistence, Ritual and reorganisation (i. e. investment), could be backed54. Monumental Figurines. Prehistoric Research Papers The import of exotic axes (and possibly many other 8 (Oxford 2019). objects and ideas) from the south might have been Behre 2008: K. E. Behre, Collected seeds and fruits from motivated by struggles for status, but the more cost- herbs as prehistoric food. Vegetation History and Ar- intensive developments of ploughing, wagon con- chaeobotany 17, 2008, 65 – 73. struction, and metal casting all took place within Behre / Kučan 1994: K. E. Behre / D. Kučan, Die Ge- the later stage of the Early Neolithic, as well as the schichte der Kulturlandschaft und des Ackerbaus in distribution of battle-axe types from the North Sea der Siedlungskammer Flögeln, Niedersachsen, seit der to the Black Sea (Klimscha 2016, 115). Here new Jungsteinzeit. Probleme der Küstenforschung im südli- research needs to focus on. chen Nordseegebiet 21 (Oldenburg 1994). Bogucki 1993: P. Bogucki, Animal Traction and Household Economies in Neolithic Europe. Antiquity 67, 1993, References 492 – 503. Both / Fansa 2011: S. Both / M. Fansa (eds.), Oh schaurig Amkreutz this volume: L. Amkreutz, A view from Dogger- ists übers Moor zu gehn. 220 Jahre Moorarchäologie land – interpreting the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition (Mainz 2011). in the Lower Rhine Area wetlands (5,500 – 2 ,500 calBC). Brozio 2016: J. P. Brozio, Megalithanlagen und Siedlungs- Angeli 1967: W. Angeli, Der Depotfund von Stollhof. An- muster im trichterbecherzeitlichen Ostholstein (Bonn nalen des Naturhistorischen Museums Wien 70, 1967, 2016). 491 – 496. Brozio et al. 2019: J. P. Brozio / J. Müller / M. Furholt / Ten Anscher 2012: T. Ten Anscher, Leven met de Vecht: Schok- W. Kirleis / S. Dreibrodt / I. Feeser / W. Dörfler / land-P14 en de Noordoostpolder in het neolithicum M. Weinelt / H. Raese / A. Bock, Monuments and en de bronstijd. PhD-Thesis, University of Amsterdam economies. What drove variability in the middle- (Amsterdam 2012). Holocene Neolithic? The Holocene 2019: doi. Ten Anscher / Knippenberg this volume: T. Ten Anscher / org/10.1177/0959683619857227. A. Knippenberg, Unexpected dimensions of a Swift- Budd / Ottaway 1991: P. Budd / B. Ottaway, The properties erbant settlement at Medel-De Roeskamp (the Neth- of arsenical copper alloys: implications for the develop- erlands). ment of Eneolithic metallurgy. In: P. Budd / B. Chapman / Arcà 2011: A. Arcà, Entre Bégo et Val Camonica Une clé C. Jackson / R. Janaway / B. Ottaway (eds.), Archaeo- pour mieux comprendre l’origine de l’art rupestre dans logical Sciences 1989. Oxbow Monograph 9 (Oxford les Alpes. Bulletin d’Études Préhistoriques et Archeo- 1991) 132 – 142. logiques Alpines 2011, 71 – 91. Budd / Ottaway 1995: P. Budd / B. Ottaway, Eneolithic Bakker 2004: J. A. Bakker, Die neolithischen Wagen im arsenical copper: chance or choice? In: B. Jovanovic nördlichen Mitteleuropa. In: M. Fansa /S. Burmeister (ed.), Ancient Mining and Metallurgy in Southeast Eu- (eds.), Rad und Wagen. Der Ursprung einer Innovation. rope. International Symposium, Donji Milanovac, May Wagen im Vorderen Orient und Europa. Beiheft der Ar- 20 – 2 5, 1990 (Belgrad 1995) 95 – 102. chäologischen Mitteilungen aus Nordwestdeutschland Burmeister 2004a: S. Burmeister, Der Wagen im Neolithi- 40 (Mainz 2004) 283 – 294. kum und in der Bronzezeit: Erfindung, Ausbreitung und Funktion der ersten Fahrzeuge. In: M. Fansa / S. Burmeister (eds.), Rad und Wagen. Der Ursprung einer Innovation. Wagen im Vorderen Orient und Europa. 54  We do not suggest a capitalist mechanism here, but want Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Nordwestdeutschland, to stress that hunter-gatherers have limited resources and need a motivation to spend parts thereof on a rather vaguely defined Beiheft 40 (Mainz 2004) 13 – 4 0. idea without any direct gains. F l o ri a n K l i m s c h a an d Dan i el Ne u man n 395 Burmeister 2004b: S. Burmeister, Neolithische und Bronze­ Dergachev 2002: V. A. Dergachev, Die äneolithischen und zeitliche Moorfunde aus den Niederlanden, Nordwest- bronzezeitlichen Metallfunde aus Moldavien. Prähisto- deutschland und Dänemark. In: M. Fansa / S. Bur- rische Bronzefunde XX,9 (Stuttgart 2002). meister (eds.), Rad und Wagen. Der Ursprung einer Dinu 1981: M. Dinu, Clay Models of Wheels discovered in Innovation.Wagen im Vorderen Orient und Europa. Copper Age Cultures of Old Europe. Mid-5th Millenni- Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Nordwestdeutschland, um B.C. Journal of Indo-European Studies 9, 1981, 1 – 14. Beiheft 40 (Mainz 2004) 321 – 340. Dolfini 2010: A. Dolfini, The Origins of Metallurgy in Burmeister 2011: S. Burmeister, Innovationswege – Wege Central Italy. New Radiometric Evidence. Antiquity der Kommunikation. Erkenntnisprobleme am Beispiel 84, 2010, 707 – 723. des Wagens im 4. Jahrtausend v. Chr. In: S. Hansen / Dolfini 2013: A. Dolfini, The emergence of metallurgy in the J. Müller (eds.), Sozialarchäologische Perspektiven: Ge- central Mediterranean region: A new model. European sellschaftlicher Wandel 5000 – 1500 v. Chr. zwischen Journal of Archaeology 16, 2013, 21 – 62. Atlantik und Kaukasus. Archäologie in Eurasien 24 Dörfler 2001: W. Dörfler, Von der Parklandschaft zum (Mainz 2011) 211 – 240. Landschaftspark. Rekonstruktion der neolithischen Burmeister 2012: S. Burmeister, Der Mensch lernt fahren. Landschaft anhand von Pollenanalysen aus Schleswig Zur Frühgeschichte des Wagens. Mitteilungen der An­ Holstein. In: R. Kelm (ed.), Zurück zur Steinzeitland- thropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien 142, 2012, 81 – 100. schaft. Archäologische und ökologische Forschung zur Burmeister 2017: S. Burmeister, Early Wagons in Eurasia. jungsteinzeitlichen Kulturlandschaft und ihrer Nutzung Disentangling an Enigmatic Innovation. In: P. W. Stock- in Nordwestdeutschland. Albersdorfer Forschungen hammer / J. Maran (eds.), Appropriating Innovations: zur Archäologie und Umweltgeschichte 2 (Heide 2001) Entangled Knowledge in Eurasia 5000 – 1500 BCE (Ox- 39 – 56. ford 2017) 69 – 77. Drenth / Lanting 1997: E. Drenth / A. E. Lanting, On Cappers / Raemaekers 2008: R. T. J. Cappers / D. C. M. the importance of the ard and the wheeled vehicle for Raemaekers, Cereal Cultivation at Swifterbant? Neo- the transition from the TRB West Group to the Single lithic Wetland Farming on the North European Plain. Grave culture in the Netherlands. In: P. Siemen (ed.), Current Anthropology 49, 2008, 385 – 4 02. Early Corded Ware Culture, The A-Horizon – fiction or Colledge / Conolly 2014: S. Colledge / J. Conolly, Wild fact? International Symposium in Jutland 2nd-7th May plant use in European Neolithic subsistence economies: 1994, 2 (Esbjerg 1997) 53 – 73. a formal assessment of preservation bias in archaeobo- Dumitrescu 1955: H. Dumitrescu, Afinităţi între cultura tanical assemblages and the implications for understand- „Trichterbecher“ şi culura «Cucuteni-Tripolye». Studii ing changes in plant diet breadth. Quaternary Science şi Cercetări de Istorie Veche 6, 1955, 913 – 923. Reviews 101, 2014, 193 – 204. Egg 1992: M. Egg, Zur Ausrüstung des Toten vom Hauslab- Czerniak 1980: J. Czerniak, Rozwój społeczeństw Kultury joch, Gem. Schnal (Südtirol). In: F. Höpfel / W. Platzer / Późnej Ceramiki Wstęgowej na Kujawach. Adam Mick- K. Spindler (eds.), Der Mann im Eis 1. Bericht über das iewicz University of Poznań Archaeological Series 16 Internationale Symposium 1992 in Innsbruck. Veröffent- (Poznań 1980). lichungen der Universität Innsbruck 1872 (Innsbruck Czekaj-Zastawny et al. 2011: A. Czekaj-Zastawny / J. 1992) 254 – 272. Kabaciński / T. Terberger, Long distance exchange in Eluère 1987: C. Eluère, Les ors préhistoriques (Paris 1987). the Central European Neolithic: Hungary to the Baltic. Fansa 2004: M. Fansa, Rad und Wagen. Der Ursprung einer Antiquity 85, 2011, 43 – 58. Innovation. Wagen im Vorderen Orient und Europa. Czekaj-Zastawny et al. 2012: A. Czekaj-Zastawny / J. Ka- Führer durch die Ausstellung (Mainz 2004). baciński / A. Kotula / T. Terberger, Der steinzeitliche Fansa / Burmeister 2004: M. Fansa / S. Burmeister (Hrsg.), Fundplatz Dąbki, Pommern, und seine überregionalen Rad und Wagen. Der Ursprung einer Innovation. Wa- Beziehungen. In: R. Gleser / V. Becker (eds.), Mitteleuro- gen im Vorderen Orient und Europa. Archäologische pa im 5. Jahrtausend v. Chr. Beiträge zur internationalen Mitteilungen aus Nordwestdeutschland, Beiheft 40 Konferenz in Münster 2010 (Münster 2012) 529 – 546. (Mainz 2004). Cziesla this volume: E. Cziesla, Some remarks on the origin Fedele 2006: F. Fedele, La traction animale du Val Ca- of Mesolithic pottery in northwestern Europe. monica et en Valteline pendant le Néolithique et le Demirci et al. this volume: Ö. Demirci / A. Lucquin / F. Chalcolithique (Italie). In: P. Pétrequin / R.-M. Arbogast / Klimscha / O. E. Craig / D. C. M. Raemaekers, Lipid A.-M. Pétrequin / S. van Willingen / M. Bailly (dir.), residue analysis of ceramics from Hüde I (Lower Saxony, Premiers chariots, premiers araires. La diffusion de la Germany). traction animale en Europe pendant les IVe et IIIe mil- lénaires avant notre ère (Paris 2006) 47 – 61. 396 A longue durée perspective on technical innovations in the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic of the North European Plain Frank / Pernicka 2012: C. Frank / E. Pernicka, Copper ar- Günther 1990: K. Günther, Neolithische Bildzeichen an tifacts of the Mondsee group and their possible sources. einem ehemaligen Megalithgrab bei Warburg, Kreis In: M. S. Midgley / J. Sanders (eds.), Lake Dwellings Höxter (Westfalen). Germania 68, 1990, 39 – 6 5. after Robert Munro. Proc. Munro Int. Seminar: The Günther 1997: K. Günther, Die Kollektivgräber-Nekropole Lake Dwellings of Europe, 22 and 23 October 2010 Warburg I–V. Bodenaltertümer Westfalens 34 (Mainz (Edinburgh 2012) 113 – 138. 1997). Frieman 2012: C. Frieman, Innovation and Imitation. Stone Guilaine 1996: J. Guilaine, Proto-Megalitisme, rites funérai- Skeuomorphs of Metal from the 4th–2nd Millennia BC in res et mobiliers de prestige Néolithique en Méditerranée Northwest Europe (Oxford 2012). Occidentale. Complutum Extra 6(l), 1996, 123 – 140. Gaastra et al. 2018: J. S. Gaastra / H. J. Greenfield / M. Haak et al. 2015: W- Haak / I. Lazaridis / N. Patterson / Vander Linden, Gaining traction on cattle exploitation: N. Rohland / S. Mallick / B. Llamas / G. Brandt / S. zooarchaeological evidence from the Neolithic Western Nordenfelt / E. Harney / K. Stewardson / Q. Fu/ A. Balkans. Antiquity 92, 2018, 1462 – 1477. Mittnik / E. Bánffy / C. Economou / M. Francken / Gebauer / Sørensen this volume: A. B. Gebauer / L. Sø- S. Friederich / R. Garrido Pena / F. Hallgren / V. rensen, Supra-regional contacts and the earliest met- Khartanovich / A. Khokhlov / M. Kunst / P. Kuz- allurgy in southern Scandinavia during the Mesolithic netsov / H. Meller / O. Mochalov / V. Moiseyev / and Neolithic transition. N. Nicklisch / S.L. Pichler / R. Risch / M.A. Rojo Gerken et al. this volume: K. Gerken / A. Kotula / C. Lud- Guerra/C. Roth / A. Szécsényi-Nagy / J. Wahl/ M. wig / H. Nelson / A. Philippi, Niedernstöcken FStNr. Meyer / J. Krause / D. Brown / D. Anthony / A. 21 und 24 – eine linienbandkeramische Ansiedlung jen- Cooper / K.W. Alt / D. Reich, Massive migration from seits der Lössgrenze im Land der Jäger und Sammler. the steppe was a source for Indo-European languages in Ghislanzoni 1932: E. Ghislanzoni, La tomba eneolitica di Europe. Nature 2015: doi:10.1038/nature14317. Villafranca veronese. Bollettino di Paletnologia Italiana, Hansen 2009: S. Hansen, Kupferzeitliche Äxte zwischen 52, 1932, 9 – 21. dem 5. und 3. Jahrtausend in Südosteuropa. In: L. Govedarica 2001: B. Govedarica, Zur Typologie und Chro- Dietrich / O. Dietrich / B. Heeb / A. Szentmiklosi (eds.), nologie der Hammeräxte vom Typ Pločnik. In: R. M. Aes aeterna. Festschrift für Tudor Soroceanu zum 65. Boehmer / J. Maran (eds.), Lux Orientis. Archäologie Geburtstag. Analele Banatului S.N. Arheologie-Istorie zwischen Asien und Europa. Festschrift für Harald 17, 2009, 141 – 160. Hauptmann zum 65. Geburtstag. Internat. Arch., Stud. Hansen 2013: S. Hansen, Innovative Metals: Copper, Gold honoraria 12 (Rahden 2001) 153 – 164. and Silver in the Black Sea Region and the Carpathian Govedarica 2010: B. Govedarica, Spuren von Fernbezie- Basin during the 5th and 4th Millennium BC. In: S. Bur- hungen in Norddeutschland während des 5. Jahrtau- meister / S. Hansen / M. Kunst / N. Müller-Scheeßel sends v. Chr. Das Altertum 55, 2010, 1 – 12. (eds.), Metal Matters. Innovative Technologies and Govedarica 2016: B. Govedarica, Das Phänomen der bal- ­Social Change in Prehistory and Antiquity. Menschen kanischen Kupferzeit. In: V. Nikolov / W. Schier (eds.), – Kulturen – Traditionen 12 (Rahden/Westf. 2013) Der Schwarzmeerraum vom Neolithikum bis in die Frü- 137 – 167. heisenzeit (6000 – 600 v. Chr.). Kulturelle Interferenzen Hansen 2017: S. Hansen, Key Techniques in the Production in der zirkumpontischen Zone und Kontakte mit den of Metals in the 6th and 5th Millennia. Prerequisites, Pre­ Nachbargebieten. Prähistorische Archäologie in Südo- conditions and Consequences. In: P. W. Stockhammer / steuropa 30 (Rahden 2016) 11 – 21. J. Maran (eds.), Appropriating Innovations: Entangled Gross et al. 2017: E. Gross / G. Schaeren / I. M. Villa, Die Knowledge in Eurasia 5000 – 1500 BCE (Oxford 2017) jungsteinzeitliche Kupferbeilklinge von Zug-Riedmatt 136 – 148. Ein Schlüsselfund zur Chronologie und Metallurgie in Hansen et al. 2017: S. Hansen / J. Renn / F. Klimscha / J. der zweiten Hälfte des 4. Jahrtausends v. Chr. Tugium Büttner, Wie das Rad erfunden wurde. Spektrum der 33, 2017, 79 – 89. Wissenschaft 4/2017, 2017, 50 – 53. Grote 2004: K. Grote, Die spätneolithische Kupferaxt von Hartz et al. 2000: S. Hartz / D. Heinrich / H. Lübke, Frü- Reiffenhausen, Ldkr. Göttingen (Südniedersachsen). he Bauern an der Küste. Neue 14C-Daten und aktuelle Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 34, 2004, 321 – 356. Aspekte zum Neolithisierungsprozeß im norddeutschen Гусев 1998: C. A. Гусев, K Bопросу о Транспортных Ostseeküstengebiet. Praehistorische Zeitschrift 75, Средствах Трипольской. Россиыская Аркхеология 2000, 129 – 152. 1, 1998, 15 – 28. Hecht 2007: D. Hecht, Das schnurkeramische Siedlungs- wesen im südlichen Mitteleuropa. Eine Studie zu ei- ner vernachlässigten Fundgattung im Übergang vom F l o ri a n K l i m s c h a an d Dan i el Ne u man n 397 Neolithikum zur Bronzezeit. Diss. Univ. Heidelberg metallverarbeitender Kulturen auf das Neolithikum Mit- (Heidelberg 2007): doi.org/10.11588/heidok.00007313. tel- und Nordeuropas. Die Kunde N.F. 21, 1971, 20 – 6 5. Hesse 2011: S. Hesse, Ein neues Datum für ein altes Rad. Johannsen / Laursen 2010: N. Johannsen / S. Laursen, Archäologische Funde von Rad- und Wagenteilen aus Routes and Wheeled Transport in the Late 4th-Early 3rd dem Teufelsmoor zwischen Gnarrenburg und Karlshö- Millennium Funerary Customs of the Jutland Peninsula: fen. Rotenburger Schriften 91, 2011, 235 – 244 Regional Evidence and European Context. Praehistori- Heumüller 2009: M. Heumüller, Der Schmuck der jung- sche Zeitschrift 85, 2010, 15 – 58. neolithischen Seeufersiedlung Hornstaad-Hörnle IA Kirleis 2012: W. Kirleis, Husbandry and Beyond: New im Rahmen des mitteleuropäischen Mittel- und Jung- Data on Plant Use of the First Agricultural Societies neolithikums. Siedlungsarchäologie im Alpenvorland in Northern Central Europe. Quarternary Interna- 10 = Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Frühge- tional 279/280, 2012, 247: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. schichte in Baden-Württemberg 112 (Mainz 2009). quaint.2012.08.581. Heussner 1986: K.-U. Heussner, Zwei bronzezeitliche Kirleis et al. 2012: W. Kirleis / S. Klooss / H. Kroll / J. Scheibenräder von Kühlungsborn, Kreis Bad Doberan. Müller, Crop growing and gathering in the northern Jahrbuch Bodendenkmalpflege in Mecklenburg 1985 German Neolithic: a review supplemented by new re- (1986), 125 – 131. sults. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 21, 2012, Hill 2001: A. Hill, Specialized Pastoralism and Social St- 221 – 242. ratification. Analysis of the Fauna from Chalcolithic Klassen 2000: L. Klassen, Frühes Kupfer im Norden. Chro- Tel Tsaf, Israel. PhD-Thesis, University of Connecticut nologie, Herkunft und Bedeutung der Kupferfunde der (Storrs 2001): digitalcommons.uconn.edu/dissertations/ Nordgruppe der Trichterbecherkultur (Aarhus 2000). AAI3504774 [03/16/2017]. Klassen 2004: L. Klassen, Jade und Kupfer. Untersuchungen Hill / Klimscha forthcoming: A. Hill / F. Klims- zum Neolithisierungsprozess im westlichen Ostseeraum cha, Ploughs and the Use of Animal Traction. In: unter besonderer Berüksichtigung der Kulturentwick- S. Hansen / J. Renn / F. Klimscha / J. Büttner (eds.), The lung Europas 5500 – 3500 BC (Aarhus 2004). Digital Atlas of Innovations (Berlin 2012 – 21): https:// Klassen / Pernicka 1998: L. Klassen / E. Pernicka, Eine atlas-innovations.de/en/. kreuzschneidige Axthacke aus Südskandinavien? Ein Horn 2014: Ch. Horn, Studien zu den europäischen Stab- Beispiel für die Anwendungsmöglichkeiten der Stutt- dolchen (Bonn 2014). garter Analysedatenbank. Archäologisches Korrespon- Horn 2017: Ch. Horn, Stabdolche / Halberds. In: S. Hansen / denzblatt 28, 1998, 35 – 45. J. Renn / F. Klimscha / J. Büttner, Der Digitale Atlas Klassen / Stürup 2001: L. Klassen / S. Stürup, Decoding der Innovationen (Berlin 2012 – 2 021): https://atlas- the Riesebusch-copper: Lead-Isotope Analysis applied to innovations.de/en/. Early Neolithic Copper Finds from South Scandinavia. Horn / Schenck 2016: Ch. Horn / T. Schenck, Zum Ur- Praehistorische Zeitschrift 76, 2001, 55 – 73. sprung der Stabdolche und stabdolchartiger Waffen in Klassen et al. 2008/2009: L. Klassen / M. Dobeš / P. Pétre- Europa. Praehistorische Zeitschrift 91, 2016, 16 – 41. quin, Dreieckige Kupferflachbeile aus Mitteldeutschland Horvath 2015: T. Horvath, Die Anfänge des kontinentalen und Böhmen. Alt-Thüringen 41, 2008/2009, 7 – 35. Transportwesens und seine Auswirkungen auf die Bo- Klimscha 2007: F. Klimscha, Die Verbreitung und Datie- lerázer und Badener Kulturen (Oxford 2015). rung kupferzeitlicher Silexbeile in Südosteuropa. Fern- Huet 2016: T. Huet, New Perspectives on the Chronology beziehungen neolithischer Gesellschaften im 5. und and Meaning of Mont Bégo Rock Art (Alpes Maritimes, 4. Jahrtausend v. Chr. Germania 85, 2007, 275 – 305. France). Cambridge Archaeological Journal 27, 2016, Klimscha 2010: F. Klimscha, Kupferne Flachbeile und Mei- 199 – 221. ßel mit angedeuteten Randleisten: Ihre Bedeutung für Huet / Bianchi 2016: T. Huet / N. Bianchi, A Study of the die Entstehung und Verbreitung technischer Innovatio- Roche de l’Autel’s pecked engravings, Les Merveilles sec- nen in Europa und Vorderasien im 4.–3. Jahrtausend v. tor, Mont Bego area (Alpes-Maritimes, France). Journal Chr. Germania 88, 2010, 101 – 144. of Archaeological Science, Reports 5, 2016, 105 – 118. Klimscha 2012 – 2021: F. Klimscha, “Wheeled Vehicles.” Hülsebusch / Jockenhövel this volume: Ch. Hülsebusch / In: S. Hansen / J. Renn / F. Klimscha / J. Büttner, The A. Jockenhövel, Going North ….The Middle Neolithic Digital Atlas of Innovations (Berlin 2012 – 2021): https:// (Rössen culture) settlement of Nottuln-Uphoven (Kr. atlas-innovations.de/en/. Coesfeld, Westphalia): the first and oldest outpost of Klimscha 2016: F. Klimscha, Pietrele I: Beile und Äxte aus Neolithisation in the Northwest German Lowlands. Stein. Distinktion und Kommunikation inder Kupferzeit Jacob-Friesen 1971: G. Jacob-Friesen, Die Kupferäxte vom im östlichen Balkangebiet. Archäologie in Eurasien Typ Eschollbrücken. Ein Beitrag zur Frage des Ein­flusses (Bonn 2016). 398 A longue durée perspective on technical innovations in the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic of the North European Plain Klimscha 2017a: F. Klimscha, Transforming Technical 13, Gde. Stadt Rinteln, Ldkr. Schaumburg. Nachrichten Know-how in Time and Space. Using the Digital Atlas aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte, Beiheft 18, 2013, 222. of Innovations to Understand the Innovation Process Lehmann et al. 2018: R. Lehmann / A. Friedrichs / U. of Animal Traction and the Wheel. eTopoi. Journal for Haug, Der neolithische Kupferschatz von Osnabrück Ancient Studies 6, 2017, 16 – 6 3. (Lüstringen). Beiträge zur Metallurgie und zeitlichen Klimscha 2017b: F. Klimscha, The Diffusion of Know-how Einordnung. F.A.N.-Post. Mitteilungsblatt des Freun- within Spheres of Interaction: Modelling Prehistoric deskreises für Archäologie in Niedersachsen e. V. 2018, Innovation Processes between South-West Asia and 33 – 35. Central Europe in the 5th and 4th Millennia BC. In: Lechterbeck et al. 2014: J. Lechterbeck / K. Edinborough / P. W. Stockhammer / J. Maran (eds.), Appropriating In- T. Kerig / R. Fyfe / N. Roberts / S. Shennan, Neolithic novations: Entangled Knowledge in Eurasia 5000 – 1500 land use correlated with demography? An evaluation BCE (Oxford 2017) 149 – 160. of pollen-derived land cover and radiocarbon-inferred Klimscha 2018: F. Klimscha, Die ältesten Wagen im Kau- demographic change from Central Europe. The Holo- kasus. In: L. Giemsch / S. Hansen (eds.), Gold & Wein. cene 24, 2014, 1297 – 1307. Georgiens älteste Schätze. Begleitband der Sonderaus- Lechtman / Klein 2002: H. Lechtman / S. Klein, The Pro- stellung, 6. Oktober 2018 – 10. Feburar 2019, Archäo- duction of Copper–Arsenic Alloys (Arsenic Bronze) logisches Museum Frankfurt (Mainz 2018) 176 – 181. by Cosmelting: Modern Experiment, Ancient Practice. Klimscha et al. forthcoming: F. Klimscha/S. Hansen/J. Journal of Archaeological Science 26, 2002, 497 – 526. renn (eds.), Contextualising Ancient Technology. From Lefranc et al. 2012: P. Lefranc / R.-M. Arbogast / F. Chen- Archaeological Case Studies towards a Social Theory al / E. Hildebrand / M. Merkl / Ch. Strahm / S. of Ancient Innovations. Berlin Studies of the Ancient van Willingen / M. Wörle, Inhumations, dépots d’a- World 73 (Berlin forthcoming 2021). nimaux et perles en cuivre du IVe millénaire sur le site Knitter et al. 2019a: D. Knitter / J.-P. Brozio / W. B. Hamer Néolithique récent de Colmar „Aerodrome“ (Haut-R- / R. Duttmann / J. Müller / O. Nakoinz, Transfor- hin). Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française 2012, mations and Site Locations from an Archaeological 689 – 730. Perspective: The Case of Neolithic Wagrien, Schleswig- Liversage / Liversage 1989: D. Liversage / M. Liversage, Holstein, Germany. Land 8(4), 2019: doi.10.3390/ A method for the study of the composition of early cop- land8040068. per and Bronze Artifacts. An example from Denmark. Knitter et al. 2019b: D. Knitter /J.-P. Brozio / W. Dörf­ Helinium 28, 1989, 42 – 76. ler / R. Duttmann / I. Feeser / W. Hamer / W. Louwe Koojmans 2006: L. P. Louwe Koojmans, Les Débuts Kirleis / J. Müller / O. Nakoinz, Transforming Land- de la Traction Animale aux Pays-Bas et ses Conséquenc- scapes: Modelling land-use patterns of environmen- es. In: P. Pétrequin / R. Arbogast / A.-M. Pétrequin / tal borderlands. The Holocene 29, 2019, 1572 – 1586: S. van Willingen / M. Bailly (eds.), Premiers chariots, doi.10.1177/0959683619857233. premier araires. La diffusion de la traction animale en Kopacz / Tunia 1978: J. Kopacz / K. Tunia, Skarb z By- Europe pendant les IVe et IIIe millénaires avant notre tynia – próba interpretacji kulturowo-chronologicznej. ère (Paris 2006) 191 – 206. Archaeologia Polski 23, 1978, 191 – 201. De Lumley 2003: H. De Lumely (ed.), Région du mont Bego. Körner / Laux 1980: G. Körner / F. Laux, Ein Königreich Gravures protohistoriques et historiques. Tende, Alpes- an der Luhe (Lüneburg 1980). Maritimes 14. Secteur des Merveilles. Zone du Grand Kroeber 1940: A. L. Kroeber, Stimulus Diffusion. American Capelet. Zone XII. Groupes I á VI (Aix-en-Provence Anthropologist 42(1), 1940, 1 – 20. 2003). Kronz et al. 2004: A. Kronz / E. Pernicka / K. Simon, Na- Lüning 1979/1980: J. Lüning, Bandkeramische Pflüge. Fund- turwissenschaftliche Untersuchungen der spätneolithi- berichte aus Hessen 19/20 (= Festschrift U. Fischer), schen Kupferaxt von Reiffenhausen. Archäologisches 1979/1980, 55 – 6 8. Korrespondenzblatt 34, 2004, 327 – 356. Lüning 2000: J. Lüning, Steinzeitliche Bauern in Deutsch- Kruk / Milisauskas 2018: J. Kruk / S. Milisauskas, Brono- land. Die Landwirtschaft im Neolithikum. Universi- cice. The chronology and development of a Neolithic tätsforschungen zur Prähistorischen Archäologie 59 settlement of the fourth millennium BC (Cracow 2018). (Bonn 2000). Laux 2000: F. Laux, Die Äxte und Beile in Niedersachsen Lüning et al. 2001: J. Lüning / A. Jockenhövel / H. Bender I (Flach-, Randleisten- und Absatzbeile). Prähistosche / Th. Capelle (eds.), Deutsche Agrargeschichte. Vor- Bronzefunde IX,23 (Stuttgart 2000). und Frühgeschichte (Stuttgart 2001). Lehmann / Wulf 2013: R. Lehmann / F. Wulf, Das neolithi- Makkay 1976: J. Makkay, Problems concerning Copper Age sche Kupferbeil von Steinbergen. Steinbergen FSTNr. Chronology in the Carpathian Basin. Copper Age Gold F l o ri a n K l i m s c h a an d Dan i el Ne u man n 399 Pendants and Gold Discs in Central and South-East Müller 2009: J. Müller, Neolithische Monumente und Europe. Acta Arch. Acad. Scien. Hungaricae 28, 1976, neolithische Gesellschaften. In: H.-J. Beier / E. Clas- 251 – 300. sen / T. Doppler / B. Ramminger (eds.), Neolithische Matuschik 1997: I. Matuschik, Eine donauländische Axt Monumente und neolithische Gesellschaften. Varia vom Typ Siria aus Überlingen am Bodensee. Praehis- Neolithica 6 (Langenweissbach 2009) 7 – 16. torische Zeitschrift 72, 1997, 81 – 105. Müller this volume: J. Müller, A long lasting transforma- Matuschik 1998: I. Matuschik, Kupferfunde und Metal- tion: northern Late Mesolithic/Early Neolithic multi- lurgie-Belege, zugleich ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der dimensional developments (c. 4,750 – 3,800 BCE). kupferzeitlichen Dolche Mittel-, Ost- und Südosteu- Müller et al. 2012: J. Müller / J.-P. Brozio / D. Demnick / H. ropas. In: M. Mainberger (ed.), Das Moordorf von Reute Dibbern / B. Fritsch / M. Furholt / F. Hage / M. Hinz (Hemmenhofen 1998) 207 – 245. / L. Lorenz / D. Mischka / C. Rinne, Periodisierung Matuschik 2002: I. Matuschik, Kupferne Rinderge- der Trichterbechergesellschaften. Ein Arbeitsentwurf. spann-Darstellungen der mitteleuropäischen Kupfer- In: M. Hinz / J. Müller (eds.), Siedlung, Grabenwerk, zeit. In: J. Köninger / M. Mainberger / H. Schlichterle Großsteingrab. Studien zu Gesellschaft, Wirtschaft und / M. Vosteen (eds.), Schleife, Schlitten, Rad und Wagen. Umwelt der Trichterbechergruppen im nördlichen Mit- Zur Frage früher Transportmittel nördlich der Alpen teleuropa. Frühe Monumentalität und Differenzierung (Gaienhofen-Hemmenhofen 2002) 111 – 122. 2 (Bonn 2012) 29 – 33. Matuschik 2006: I. Matuschik, Invention et diffusion de la Müller / Schirren this volume: M. Müller / M. Schirren, roue dans l’Ancien Monde: l’apport de l’iconographie. Early and Middle Neolithic Hoards in the Area of the In: P. Pétrequin / R. Arbogast / A.-M. Pétrequin / S. van Northern Mesolithic. Willingen / M. Bailly (eds.), Premiers chariots, premier Neumann 2015: D. Neumann, Landschaften der Rituali- araires. La diffusion de la traction animale en Europe sierung. Die Fundplätze kupfer- und bronzezeitlicher pendant les IVe et IIIe millénaires avant notre ère (Paris Metalldeponierungen zwischen Donau und Po. Topoi. 2006) 279 – 297. Berlin Studies of the Ancient World 26 (Berlin, Boston Meurers-Balke 1992: J. Meurers-Balke, Palynologische 2015). Untersuchungen zum neolithischen Bohlenweg VII(Pr) Niesiolowska-Sreniowska 1999: E. Niesiolowska-Srenio- im Großen Moor am Dümmer. Archäologische Mittei- wska, The early TRB ‘Ploughmarks’ from Sarnowo in lungen aus Nordwestdeutschland 15, 1992, 119 – 146. Central Poland: a new interpretation. Oxford Journal Milisauskas / Kruk 1977: S. Milisauskas / J. Kruk, Archaeo- of Archaeology 18, 1999, 17 – 22. logical Excavations at the Funnel Beaker (TRB) site of Northover 1989: J. P. Northover, Properties and use of Bronocice. Archeologia Polonia 18, 1977, 205 – 228. arsenic-copper alloys. In: A. Hauptmann / E. Pernicka Milisauskas / Kruk 1982: S. Milisauskas / J. Kruk, Die / G. A. Wagner (eds.), Old World Archaeometallurgy. Wagendarstellung auf einem Trichterbecher aus Brono- Der Anschnitt Beiheft 7 (Bochum 1989) 111 – 118. cice in Polen. Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 12, Out 2009: W. Out, Sowing the seed?: human impact and 1982, 141 – 144. plant subsistence in Dutch wetlands during the Late Mischka 2010: D. Mischka, Das Neolithikum in Flintbek, Kr. Mesolithic and Early and Middle Neolithic (5500 – 3400 Rendsburg-Eckernförde, Schleswig-Holstein – Eine fein- cal BC). PhD-Thesis, Leiden University (Leiden 2009): chronologische Studie zur Besiedlungsgeschichte einer http://hdl.handle.net/1887/14033. Siedlungskammer anhand von Gräbern. Ungedruckte Parzinger 1992: H. Parzinger, Hornstaad – Hlinsko – Stoll- Habilitationsschrift, Universität Kiel (Kiel 2011). hof. Zur absoluten Datierung eines vor-Baden-zeitlichen Mischka 2011: D. Mischka, The Neolithic burial sequence Horizontes. Germania 70, 1992, 241 – 2 50. at Flintbek LA 3, north Germany, and its cart tracks: a Pétrequin et al. 2006: P. Pétrequin / R. Arbogast / A.- precise chronology. Antiquity 85, 2011, 742 – 758. M. Pétrequin / S. van Willingen / M. Bailly (eds.), Mischka 2013: D. Mischka, Die sozioökonomische Be- Premiers chariots, premier araires. La diffusion de la deutung von Pflugspuren im Frühneolithikum des traction animale en Europe pendant les IVe et IIIe mil- nördlichen Mitteleuropas. In: I. Heske / H.-J. Nüsse / lénaires avant notre ère (Paris 2006). J. Schneeweiß (eds.), Landschaft, Besiedlung und Sied- Pleslová-Štiková 1993: E. Pleslová-Štiková, A crescent- lung. Archäologische Studien im nordeuropäischen shaped necklace from Velvary, Bohemia. In: Amber Kontext. Festschr. Karl-Heinz Willroth zu seinem 65. in archaeology. Proceedings of the 2nd International Geburtstag. Göttinger Schriften zur Vor- und Frühge- Conference on Amber in Archaeology, Liblice 1990 schichte 33 (Neumünster 2013) 295 – 306. (Prague 147 – 152). Moucha 1960: V. Moucha, Příspěvek k datování velvarského Precht 1998: J. Precht, Der Pflug von Walle, Ldkr. Aurich. hrobu, Archeologické rozhledy 12, 1960, 465– 476. Die Kunde NF 49, 1998, 93 – 108. 400 A longue durée perspective on technical innovations in the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic of the North European Plain Raemaekers 1999: D. Raemaekers, The articulation of a Sherratt 1981: A. Sherratt, Plough and pastoralism: As- “New Neolithic”: The meaning of the Swifterbant cul- pects of the Secondary Products Revolution. In: I. Hod- ture for the process of Neolithisation in the western part der / G. Isaac / N. Hammond (eds.), Patterns of the of the North European Plain (Leiden 1999). Past, Studies in Honour of David Clarke (Cambridge Raemakers this volume: D. Raemaekers, A singularity in 1981) 261 – 305. continuity? The transition to farming in northwest Sherratt 2004: A. Sherratt, Wagen, Pflug, Rind: ihre Aus- Europe (c. 5,000 – 3,500 cal. BC) reexamined from the breitung und Nutzung – Probleme der Quelleninterpreta- perspective of multiculturalism. tion. In: M. Fansa / S. Burmeister (eds.), Rad und Wagen. Raetzel-Fabian 1997: D. Raetzel-Fabian, Absolute Chro- Der Ursprung einer Innovation. Wagen im Vorderen nologie. In: K. Günther (ed.), Die Kollektivgräber-Ne- Orient und Europa.  Beihefte der Archäologischen kropole Warburg I-V. Bodenaltertümer Westfalens 34 Mitteilungen aus Nordwestdeutschland 40 (Mainz (Mainz 1997) 165 – 178. 2004) 409 – 428. Rech 1979: M. Rech, Studien zu den Depotfunden der Trich- Skaarup 1973: J. Skaarup, Hesselø-Sølager. Jagdstation der terbecher- und Einzelgrabkultur des Nordens (Neu- südskandinavischen Trichterbecherkultur. Arkæologis- münster 1979). ke Studier 1 (København 1973). Reinhold et al. 2017: S. Reinhold / J. Gresky / N. Berezina / Steffens 2005: J. Steffens, Die Bedeutung der Jagd in der A. R. Kantarovich / C. Knipper / V. E. Maslov / V. G. Trichterbecherkultur: http://www.jungsteinsite.uni-kiel. Petrenko / K. W. Alt / A. B. Belinsky, Contextualising de/pdf/2005_steffens.pdf (accessed 25.04.2020). Innovation: Cattle Owners and Wagon Drivers in the Struhár 2010: V. Struhár, Kupferzeitliches Kollektivgrab North Caucasus and Beyond. In: P. W. Stockhammer / aus der Höhle bei Lisková, Kreis Ružomberok. In: I. J. Maran (eds.), Appropriating Innovations: Entangled Kuzma (ed.), Otazky neolitu i eneolitu našich Krajín Knowledge in Eurasia 5000 – 500 BCE (Oxford 2017) 1998 (Nitra 1999) 203 – 216. 78 – 97. Tegtmeier 1993: U. Tegtmeier, Neolithische und bron- Rösch 1993: M. Rösch, Prehistoric land use as recorded in zezeitliche Pflugspuren in Norddeutschland und den a lake-shore at Lake Constance. Vegetational History Niederlanden. Archäologische Berichte 3 (Bonn 1993). and Archaeobotany 2, 1993, 213 – 2 32. Terberger et al. 2018: T. Terberger / J. Burger / F. Lüth / Rösch 2013: M. Rösch, Land Use and Food Production in J. Müller / H. Piezonka, Step by Step. The Neolithiza- Central Europe from the Neolithic to the Medieval pe- tion of Northern Central Europe in the light of stable riod. Change of Landscape, soils and agricultural sys- isotope analyses. Journal of Archaeological Science tems according to archaeobotanical data. In: T. Kerig / 99, 2018, 66 – 86. A. Zimmermann (eds.), Economic Archaeology from Thrane 1982: H. Thrane, Drykningsspor fra yngre stenalder Structure to Performance. Universitätsforschungen zur i Denmark. In: H. Thrane (ed.), Om Yngre Stenalders Prähistorischen Archäologie 237 (Bonn 2013) 109 – 127. Bebyggelses hinstorie. Symposium 30. April – 1. Mai Rostholm 1977: H. Rostholm, Neolitiske Skivehjul fra Ki- 1981 (Odense 1982) 20 – 28. deris og Bjerregårde i Midtjylland. Kuml 1977, 185 – 222. Thrane 1989: H. Thrane, Danish Plough-Marks from the De Saulieu / Serres 2006: G. De Saulieau / T. Serres, Neolithic and Bronze Age. Journal of Danish Archaeo- Les Représentations de la Traction Animale dans la logy 8, 1989, 111 – 125. Région du Mont Bego (Alpes-Maritimes, France). In: Turck 2010: R. Turck, Die Metalle zur Zeit des Jungneolithi- P. Pétrequin / R. Arbogast / A.-M. Pétrequin / S. van kums in Mitteleuropa. Eine sozialarchäologische Unter- Willingen / M. Bailly (eds.), Premiers chariots, premier suchung. Universitätsforschungen zur prähistorischen araires. La diffusion de la traction animale en Europe Archäologie 185 (Bonn 2010). pendant les IVe et IIIe millénaires avant notre ère (Paris Vandkilde 1996: H. Vandkilde, From Stone to Bronze. The 2006) 73 – 86. Metalwork of the Late Neolithic and Earliest Bronze Schlicht 1973: E. Schlicht, Kupferschmuck aus Megalith- Age in Denmark. Jutland Archaeological Society Pub- gräbern Nordwestdeutschlands. Nachrichten aus Nie- lications 32 (Aarhus 1996). dersachsens Urgeschichte 42, 1973, 13 – 52. Vandkilde 2007: H. Vandkilde, Culture and Change in Schlichterle 2004: H. Schlichterle, Wagenfunde aus Central European Prehistory. 6th to 1st millenium BC den Seeufersiedlungen im zirkumalpinen Raum. In: (Aarhus 2007). M. Fansa / S. Burmeister (eds.), Rad und Wagen. Der Vosteen 1996: M. Vosteen, Unter die Räder gekommen. Ursprung einer Innovation. Wagen im Vorderen Orient Untersuchungen zu Sherratts ”Secondary Products Re- und Europa. Beiheft der Archäologischen Mitteilungen volution”. Arch. Berichte 7 (Bonn 1996). aus Nordwestdeutschland 40 (Mainz 2004) 295 – 314. F l o ri a n K l i m s c h a an d Dan i el Ne u man n 401 Vosteen 1999: M. Vosteen, Urgeschichtliche Wagen in Wislanski 1979: T. Wiślański, Kszałtowanie się miejscowych Mitteleuropa. Eine archäologische und religionswis- kultur rolniczo-hodowlanych. Plemiona kultury puch- senschaftliche Untersuchung neolithischer bis hallstatt- arów lejkowatych. In: W. Hensel / T. Wiślański (eds.), Pra- zeitlicher Befunde. Freiburger Archäologische Studien historia Ziem Polski 2. Neolit (Wrocław 1979) 165 – 260. 3 (Rahden/Westf. 1999). Woytowitsch 1985: E. Woytowitsch, Die ersten Wagen der Van der Waals 1964: J. Van der Waals, Neolithic Disc Schweiz. Die ältesten Europas. Helvetia Archaeologica Wheels in the Netherlands. Palaeohistoria X, 1964, 61, 1985, 2 – 41. 103 – 146. Zápotoký 1996: M. Zápotoký, Streitäxte des mitteleuropäi- Wiklak 1980: H. Wiklak, Wiki Badan Wykopaliskowych W schen Äneolithikums. Quellen und Forschungen zur Obre­
bie Grobowca 8 W Sarnowie W Woj. Wloclawskim prähistorischen und provinzialrömischen Archäologie (Results of excavations of barrow 8 at Sarnowo, Provin- 6 (Weinheim 1996). ce of Wloclawek). Prace i Materialy MAE ser. archeol. Zich 1992: B. Zich, Frühneolithische Karrenspuren in Flint- 27, 1980, 33 – 8 3. bek. Archäologie in Deutschland 8/1, 1992, 58. Wilding 2011: J. Wilding, Befunde und Fundmaterial der Zich 1993: B. Zich, Die Ausgrabung chronisch gefährdeter Kupferzeit aus Objekt 9. In: G. Fuchs (ed.), Archäo- Hügelgräber der Stein- und Bronzezeit in Flintbek, Kreis logie Koralmbahn 1: Weitendorf. Siedlungsfunde aus Rendsburg-Eckernförde. Ein Vorbericht. Offa 49/50, Kupferzeit, Bronzezeit und Frühmittelalter. Universi- 1992/1993, 15 – 31. tätsforschungen zur prähistorischen Archäologie 198 (Bonn 2011). Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 , 4 03 – 416) 403 The Schöningen group and the cultural development around 4,000 calBC Alexandra Philippi Abstract This article presents the results of the author’s bachelor thesis on the finds of the Schöningen group from the eponymous site Schöningen 9, distr. Helmstedt, in Lower Saxony, Germany. The main focus of the paper is the evaluation and classification of the ceramic finds within the Neolithic, as the latter has caused considerable problems in the past. The vessels show different characteristics in their form as well as in their decoration, which can be traced back to different strong influ- ences from the Michelsberg and the late Lengyel cultures during the Late Neolithic. Zusammenfassung Dieser Beitrag legt die Ergebnisse der Bachelorarbeit der Verfasserin zum Fundmaterial der Schöninger Gruppe vom namensgebenden niedersächsischen Fundplatz Schöningen 9, Ldkr. Helmstedt, Deutschland, vor. Der Fokus des Beitrages liegt auf der Auswertung und der Einordnung des keramischen Fundmaterials innerhalb des Neolithikums, da letz- tere in der Vergangenheit erhebliche Probleme bereitete. Die Keramikgefäße weisen sowohl in ihrer Form als auch in ihrer Verzierungsweise verschiedene Merkmale auf, die auf unterschiedlich starke Einflüsse aus der Michelsberger und der späten Lengyel- Kultur zurückgeführt werden können. Introduction the one hand to an influence of the Lengyel culture and emphasised the more structured vessel shapes. The site of Schöningen 9 is situated in a lignite mine On the other hand, he saw influences of the Rössen area on the eastern border of Schöningen, distr. Helm- culture in the Schöningen vessels. However, the Late stedt, in Lower Saxony (Fig. 1). In spring 1985 rescue Neolithic elements like arcade rims or the fragment excavations began at the site in the northern mining of a clay disc led him to consider the Schöningen area (Maier 1995, 134). The finds from an almost finds to be later than the Rössen culture (Maier 1987, round pit (feature 31; Fig. 2) attracted special atten- 115). A classification to the Michelsberg culture was tion. It contained unmodified stones and animal bones rejected because of the more rounded vessel shapes as well as a few stone artefacts and numerous pottery of the carinated bowls and their shoulder decoration; fragments (Maier 1995, 137). The pottery recovered a connection with the early Funnel Beaker culture or from this pit did not have good analogies in the ar- the Baalberge culture of Central Germany was also chaeological record of Lower Saxony. About 65 m east denied (Maier 1987, 115 – 116). of feature 31 similar pottery could be recovered from In 1991 J. Beran completed his investigation of another pit (feature 74). Therefore Maier (1995, 139) the site Salzmünde-Schiepzig, distr. Saalekreis, and assigned these finds to the same context. In feature discussed the position of the Salzmünde culture in 74 there was also a layer of charred fibres, which the Neolithic of the Saale region (Beran 1993). He were identified by Körber-Grohne (1987, 463) as discovered that the finds from Salzmünde-Schiepzig fruit stalks and awns of a feather grass (Stipa pen- had little in common with the Salzmünde culture nata L. s. Str.). and had been erroneously placed in such a cultural Because of missing parallels the classification of context by former authors (Beran 1993, 43). Beran the pottery caused considerable problems, and subse- found convincing parallels for his pottery in the ce- quently a scientific dispute developed. Already in May ramics form the site Schöningen 9 (features 31 and 1985 Maier presented the features and their finds for 74) and proposed the name ‘Schöningen group’ for the first time on a congress. Because of the presence of this type of ceramics (Beran 1993, 43 – 46). He placed arcade rims and a clay disc there was no doubt about the Schöningen group at the beginning of the Late a Neolithic classification. Maier (1987) referred on Neolithic and confirmed its similarities to the ­cultural 404 The Schöningen group and the c ultural development around 4,000 c alB C Fig. 1 Location of the site Schöningen in eastern Lower Saxony (graphic: A. Philippi; map based on Bundesamt für Kartographie und Geodäsie). Fig. 2 Schöningen 9, distr. Helmstedt. Plan and profiles of the features 31 and 74 (graphic: A. Philippi). A l exa n d ra Ph i l i p p i 405 complexes already mentioned by R. Maier (Beran Finds 1993, 44; see also Beran 1998, 74 – 78; 2009, 84; 2012). D. Kaufmann (1994, 88) criticised the term The material discussed in this article encompasses Schöningen group and, on the basis of a personal the finds from Schöningen 9, features 31 and 74. review of the finds of Schöningen 9 (features 31 and 74), he referred to differences to the ceramic of Salz- Pottery münde-Schiepzig without explaining these differences in detail. Kaufmann also pointed out that the middle Nearly 2,200 fragments of pottery have been uncov- Elbe-Saale region was located on the periphery of ered. Some vessels were already reconstructed in the archaeological and cultural centres in the south-east 1990s. All vessels were flat-bottomed. The surface of and south-west and that therefore pottery sometimes the pottery is usually well-preserved and has been cannot be clearly assigned to a specific archaeologi- carefully spread or smoothed; in rare cases it is lightly cal unit. He favoured a connection with a horizon polished. The Schöningen vessels are mostly tempered of ‘Epi-Rössen/Lengyel of middle German impact’ with crushed granite and white and red feldspar. (Kaufmann 1994, 89 – 90) and introduced the new The most characteristic vessel shape is the dec- term ‘Schiepzig group’ (Kaufmann 2007). In recent orated funnel-shaped bowl of the Schöningen type years, T. Schunke and P. Viol published further ma- (Fig. 3.1,3), which is represented by 16 specimens. An terial of this pottery-type and suggested an absolute assignment to this vessel type is probable for a further dating around 4,000 calBC on the basis of radiocarbon twelve decorated wall sherds. The vessels have an S- dates (Schunke / Viol 2014, 121; see also Damrau shaped profile. Immediately on the shoulder they are et al. 2014; Moser 2014). A chronological reference decorated with an all-round ornament, which usually to Rössen is therefore no longer given. Pottery from consists of one to three rows of an indented decora- the Schöningen group was thereafter also excavated at tion. In rare cases, this is supplemented by a further, Hundisburg-Olbetal, distr. Bördekreis. On the basis of parallel band on the neck of the vessel. In a few cases, the evaluation of these finds, K. Schmütz formulated an indented decoration is added at the base (Fig. 3.6). the hypothesis that the deviations in the pottery spec- From feature 31 ten vessels can be assigned to this trum of Schöningen 9 and Salzmünde-Schiepzig could type with certainty. Three specimens, which resemble be explained by a Michelsberg influence of varying the Schöningen bowls in their decoration, were re- strength (Schmütz 2017, 136), which led to different covered in feature 74. One piece is decorated with at local variants (see also Kaufmann 1994, 88 – 91). least two circular rows of rounded punctures on the neck of the vessel. In addition, the pottery contains undecorated funnel-shaped bowls that resemble the Features Schöningen type. The complete profile of a small, un- decorated vessel could be reconstructed. Some further During the excavations in Schöningen an area of vessels have an arcade rim (Fig. 3.2). Altogether 21 22,000 m² was archaeologically examined. Two fea- arcade rims could be detected among the finds of both tures (no. 31 and no. 74) provided finds of a new type features. These could be assigned to storage vessels. of pottery. The material includes also 18 perforated lugs. Seven Feature 31 is situated in the western part of the such specimens are from feature 31 and eleven from excavation area. The pit was almost circular in shape feature 74. The perforated lugs from both features and had a diameter of about 2.5 m and a depth of are rounded and have a horizontal perforation with about 0.6 m (Fig. 2). The pit appeared trough-shaped a max. diameter of 1.0 cm. Furthermore there are 19 in profile. From the black-brown humous filling 1,305 knobs (Fig. 3.5), all from feature 31. They are mostly fragments of pottery have been uncovered, together round in profile. Within feature 74 one handle frag- with cattle bones as well as an adze. ment was obtained. To complete the interesting pot- In the planum, feature 74 was irregularly black- tery sequence of Schöningen a fragment of a clay disc brown humous, and greasy discoloration became has to be mentioned as well (Fig. 3.7). The fragment apparent. It had an extension of approximately has a fingertip impressed decoration at its rim and on 4.5 × 3.6 m and a max. depth of approximately 0.65 m one side a mat impression. (Fig. 2). Particularly noteworthy is a layer of charred Most interesting are five wall sherds with re- feather grass about 0.3 m below the excavation level. mains of (black) painting from feature 31 (Fig. 4). 406 The Schöningen group and the c ultural development around 4,000 c alB C Fig. 3 Schöningen 9, distr. Helmstedt. Examples of important pottery from the features 31 and 74 (drawing and photos: A. Philippi). A l exa n d ra Ph i l i p p i 407 Fig. 4 Schöningen 9, distr. Helmstedt. Painted pottery from feature 31 (photos: A. Philippi). An analysis of the painted pottery fragments with a µ-RFA (X-ray fluorescence analysis) was not able to show clearly elevated element values. Since carbon cannot be proven by this method, painting with a car- bon substance might be possible. The black substance marking the decoration could also be a remnant of an adhesive for applications (e. g. made of bark). In very rare cases remains of vessel painting have been preserved on pottery from Michelsberg context. For example, two vessels form the Baumannshöhle near Rübeland in Saxony-Anhalt show remains of painting (Behrens 1969, 298; 1973, 82, 84; Schunke 1994, 130 – 131). South-eastern cultural connections might be expressed in the painted pottery,1 suggesting con- tact with the Lengyel culture. From the site Dąbki in Poland similarly painted fragments with wider lines Fig.  5 Schöningen 9, distr. Helmstedt. 1 adze (feature 31), are known from an early Funnel Beaker context (Cze- 2 axe with oval section (feature 74) (after Philippi 2018). kaj-Zastawny / Kabaciński 2015, 210 fig. 7.7, 212). Rock stone artefacts 4.4 cm; Fig. 5.2) probably made of vulcanite stone (determination by H.-P. Koch, Göttingen). Feature 74 Feature 31 yielded an adze (length 6.0 cm, width also yielded a possible rubbing stone (length 10.5 cm, 4.4 cm, thickness 1.2 cm; Fig. 5.1) made of amphibo- width 7.5 cm, weight 450 g). lite. The adze shows various damages on the neck and Finally, 15 unmodified stones (including granite) on the cutting edge. Such trapezoidal adzes were com- with a total weight of 895.4 g can be mentioned. mon during the 5th and 4th millennium calBC, includ- ing the Michelsberg culture (e. g. Seidel 2008, 164). Flint artefacts Furthermore there is a fragment of an axe with an oval cross section (preserved length 5.8 cm, width All in all 80 flint artefacts with a total weight of 590.4 g are related to the features 31 and 74. There are only two flint scrapers from feature 31. The 37 flints from 1  Umbreit 1937, 48; Jazdzewski 1965, 75, 83; Bräunig et al. feature 74 partly show heat influence. 2016, 49 fig. 38; Seger 1919, 8 – 9. 408 The Schöningen group and the c ultural development around 4,000 c alB C Feather grass In feature 74 a layer of charred (bundled) feather grass was found (Körber-Grohne 1987). The layer was c. 30 cm long, 30 cm wide and about 5 cm thick. Today feather grass is a rare plant. Together with its fruit stand, it reaches a height of 40 to 70 cm. Feather grass belongs to the vegetation of the Eurasian steppe and primarily grows in sunny, dry places. In central and western Europe it is present in limited areas such as the Thuringian Basin, the valleys of Elbe and Saale, in the foreland of the Harz and on sun-exposed slopes in southern Germany (Körber- Grohne 1987, 483). Feather grass is therefore an in- dicator of naturally woodless or only sparsely wooded areas (Körber-Grohne 1990, 90). Fig. 6 14C-date from Schöningen 9, distr. Helmstedt. Since only the fruit stands with the awns were in the pit (as ordered bundles), Körber-Grohne (1987, 465) concludes that they were collected as raw mate- comparable dynamic in its distribution at that time.2 rial. She refers to their possible use as needles for Above all, Lengyel and Michelsberg influences meet piercing holes or a use as arrowheads for hunting in south-eastern Bavaria, Bohemia and the middle smaller birds because the spelt fruits are very sharp Elbe-Saale area; they are decisive for the local for- and hard. Scheibner (2016, 124) states that wild mation of various Neolithic groups in these regions. plants and wild fruits were also collected in the Neo- Thus, at this time it is hardly possible to speak of a lithic to supplement food resources (see also Kreuz uniform Michelsberg culture, since numerous region- 2010, 55). Feather grass has edible seeds and might ally different groups of a Michelsberg complex were have served as a wild cereal. Sites in Kuyavia (Poland) formed during this period, especially in the peripheral provide evidence of larger amounts of edible wild regions, for whose differentiation individual elements plant seeds (see Bieniek 2002), including feather grass. are used (Lichardus / Lichardus-Itten 1993, 65; It is remarkable that feather grass remains in central on the problem of the concept of Neolithic cultures Europe are known only from Neolithic sites (Körber- see also Lüning 1972). The central German area in Grohne 1990, 90; Bieniek 2002, 36). According to particular appears as a border region of archaeologi- Bieniek (2002, 36), feather grass should also be con- cal cultures. At the end of the 5th millennium calBC sidered as a material for covering roofs, mattress fill- the Gatersleben group appeared in this region, whose ings, wickerwork or as an isolating material. Probably distribution area stretches from the middle Elbe-Saale feather grass was used as a multifunctional material in area to the northern Harz foreland. Its vessel shape the Neolithic. Feather grass is also known from a pit spectrum shows that it is part of a late Lengyel tradi- of the Schöningen group from Salzmünde-Schiepzig tion (Steinmann 1994, 98). To the west of this eastern (Hellmund 2014, 262 – 264; 2017, 86 – 87). cultural stream lies the eastern fringe of the Michels- berg culture with ceramics in western tradition. The pottery of the Schöningen group from the The Schöningen group and its position eponymous site shows that Epirössen and late Lengyel in the Neolithic vessel shapes are supplemented by Michelsberg ele- ments. Michelsberg influences are evident in the shap- In the second half of the 5th millennium calBC, the ing of the arcade rims, the clay disc and the carinated Michelsberg culture developed in the Paris Basin bowls as well as in the relative lack of decoration. and then spread eastwards. Around 4,000 calBC its Lengyel influences, on the other hand, can be seen in range extended from the Seine to the Weser Basin the flat-bottomed vessels, in the handles, knobs and and to Bavaria (Jeunesse 2010, 46). What is remark- able is the regionally different development of the Michelsberg culture, which is to be explained by the 2  Klassen 2004, 273; see especially Ruttkay 1984, 221 – 246; influence of the late Lengyel culture, as it shows a Neugebauer 1992, 110 – 160; Stadler et al. 2006, 53 – 81. A l exa n d ra Ph i l i p p i 409 perforated lugs. A new 14C-date from Schöningen con- Furthermore, a central European origin was firms the chronological position of this pottery type postulated, which assumes an acculturation of lo- (Fig. 6): A cattle tooth from feature 31 yielded a result cal Mesolithic hunter-gatherers. Two research ap- of 4,228 – 3,963 calBC (2σ; COL-4555.1.1: 5,230 ±39 proaches can be distinguished: On the one hand BP; calibration by Oxcal v4.3.2, Bronk Ramsey 2017; there is the idea of the origin of the Funnel Beaker r:5 IntCal13 atmospheric curve: Reimer et al. 2013). culture pottery based on the copy of older organic The date corresponds to the expected time frame and vessels. This acculturation is suggested to go back fits well to the data from Salzmünde-Schiepzig (e. g. to contacts with Danubian groups (Childe 1949, Schmütz 2017, 135). 129 – 135; Klassen 2004, 151). V. Gordon Childe was In the northern Harz foreland and in the middle the most important representative of this idea. On Elbe-Saale area around 4,000 calBC we see regional the other hand, the Rössen and Baalberge cultures differences which can be traced back to different in- were considered to be decisive for the development novation dynamics and varying degrees of influence of Funnel Beaker pottery. However, today numerous of western and eastern cultural influences (see also 14 C-dates prove the end of the Rössen culture some Müller 2001, 424). Due to the dominant Michelsberg time before the beginning of the Funnel Beaker cul- elements, the Schöningen group can be understood as ture, and further 14C-dates verify the beginning of the a variation of the Michelsberg culture. It is a precedent Baalberg culture in Central Germany not before c. for cultural structures that are rather unstable and 3,750 BC (Müller 2001, 51 – 52). According to this dynamic phenomena that can appear in various forms. information, they both had no significance for the development of the Funnel Beaker culture. Other theories are still relevant today. Accord- The time around 4,000 calBC and the ing to them, the Michelsberg culture and the late origin of the early Funnel Beaker culture Lengyel culture have been involved in the formation of the Funnel Beaker culture around 4,000 calBC In the context of the Schöningen group, the question (Klassen 2004, 152 – 154). Recent research suggests of the formation of the Funnel Beaker culture arises. that the area of southern Lower Saxony played an In the second half of the 5th millennium calBC, the important role in the development of the early Fun- north and parts of the North German Plain were still nel Beaker pottery (see Grohmann 2010, 418; Mül- inhabited by late Mesolithic hunter-gatherer com- ler 2011, 294 – 296). In southern Lower Saxony and munities with pointed-bottom pottery: the Ertebølle also in the neighbouring regions of Westphalia and culture (s. Hartz 2010, 132 – 140; this volume). In Thuringia, a strong presence of late Lengyel elements the Netherlands, Lower Saxony and possibly also in the Michelsberg pottery spectrum can be observed Westphalia (cf. Stapel, this volume), it is the Swift- (Klassen 2004, 288). In these areas, vessel forms erbant culture which documents a Mesolithic tradi- appear which differ from those of the Michelsberg tion (e. g. Raemaekers 1999; Ten Anscher 2012). culture and give the various cultural complexes a At the transition from the Ertebølle culture to the different character. The Lengyel influence can be early Funnel Beaker culture from c. 4,100 calBC seen here not only in the form of decorated rims and onwards, a change in the agricultural subsistence, isolated flat-bottomed vessels, but also in the regular but also in the pottery inventory, can be observed in appearance of a number of other flat-bottomed ves- the Baltic Sea region (Sørensen 2015, 385). Apart sels with typical Michelsberg profiles, of which the from new vessel shapes and techniques, other types funnel beakers are the most characteristic. In addi- of decoration also appear. Therefore the question tion, many of these vessels have rim ornamentation of possible external origins of these early Neolithic in the form of fingertip impressed decoration, the ceramics arises. origin of which may also be attributed to the fusion of Michelsberg and late Lengyel elements, and which Hypotheses on the origin of the Funnel is also one of the characteristics of the early Funnel Beaker culture Beaker culture (Klassen 2004, 288). First of all, the south-eastern Europe theory of Expansion of the Michelsberg culture Becker (1947) should be mentioned, according to which the south Scandinavian Funnel Beaker culture With the further expansion of the Michelsberg culture people migrated from an unspecified area in south- in the early 4th millennium calBC, a large amount of eastern Europe (Becker 1947). Michelsberg pottery finds can be found in the middle 410 The Schöningen group and the c ultural development around 4,000 c alB C Elbe-Saale area as well as in Bohemia. They prove the flaschen’ or amphorae. Early Funnel Beaker pot- increasing Michelsberg influence further east. It is tery, e. g. from Wangels LA 505, distr. Ostholstein worth noting that especially in the middle Elbe-Saale (see Klooss 2015, 36; Glykou 2016, 199 – 201), or area a decrease of the Lengyel influence can be ob- Flintbek, distr. Rendsburg-Eckernförde, illustrate the served at the same time. There only a small representa- connection between the earliest Funnel Beaker culture tion of the Jordansmühl group and a higher number in the western Baltic Sea area and the Michelsberg of Michelsberg finds can be observed (Klassen 2004, regional groups in southern Lower Saxony. At the site 290). This fusion of western and eastern cultural influ- of Wangels the data for pointed-bottom vessels or oval ences may therefore have influenced the formation of lamps are earlier than 4,100 calBC, and thus the end the Funnel Beaker culture. of the Ertebølle culture in Holstein can be identified. For the formation of the northern group of the The Early Neolithic vessel forms, on the other hand, Funnel Beaker culture the regional group of the Mi- date between 4,100 and 3,900 calBC and mark the chelsberg culture in southern Lower Saxony (see beginning of the Funnel Beaker culture in this area Leiber 1983, 189 – 213) is of high importance, as (Hartz et al. 2000, 134; cf. Hartz, this volume). A ceramic finds of the Oxie and Wangels groups (c. 14 C-dated pit (4,233 – 3,969 calBC; KIA 3072: 5,280 4,100 – 3,900 calBC), especially from Schleswig-Hol- ± 115 BP) is known from Flintbek, which included stein, show (Mischka et  al. 2015, 468 – 469; Glykou numerous Early Neolithic sherds that show parallels 2016, 199 – 201). There not only clay spoons and ladles to Michelsberg culture pottery (Zich 1992/1993, 20; can be traced back to influences of the Michelsberg Hartz et al. 2000, 132; Mischka et al. 2015). Also culture, but large storage vessels with decorated to be mentioned in this context is the site of Lübeck- rims also show parallels. Arcade rims and rims with Genin in Schleswig-Holstein. There, early pottery of finger-nail impressions, fingertip impressed decora- the Funnel Beaker culture could be dated between tion or simple punctures are typical of the funnel 4,050 and 3,700 calBC (Hartz 2015, 459; see also beakers of the Oxie group, which the large storage Hartz 2011, 258 – 270). vessels of the Michelsberg culture resemble quite closely in their profile. The complex of Flintbek, distr. Early Funnel Beaker pottery in Mecklenburg- Rendsburg-Eckernförde, also provided numerous Western Pomerania fragments of large storage vessels (dated to c. 3,985 calBC; Klassen 2004, 169; Mischka 2011; Müller Other inventories, which can be assigned to the find et al. 2012, 30 – 31). spectrum of the Oxie group and the Wangels phase, also originate from two sites in Mecklenburg-Western Early Funnel Beaker pottery in Pomerania (for the earliest Funnel Beaker culture in Schleswig-Holstein the southern Mecklenburg bay see Hartz / Lübke 2004, 119 – 143). From the site Baabe on the island of The Michelsberg influence also becomes clear when Rügen undecorated pottery is known, which can be looking at the funnel beakers of the Oxie group. Simi- assigned to the earliest Funnel Beaker culture (Hirsch lar vessels occur further south in Michelsberg contexts et  al. 2007, 11 – 51; Kotula et al. 2015, 492 – 494). The in Westphalia, southern Lower Saxony and the middle vessels have flat bottoms and strongly protruding rims. Elbe-Saale area. The Schöningen pottery also shows Pointed bottoms characteristic for the Ertebølle cul- decorated rims in the form of impressions typical for ture are missing. Only two sherds of oval lamps are the early Funnel Beaker culture. Also relatively short represented, which, nevertheless, still occur in the ear- vessel necks find their equivalents. The origin of this ly Funnel Beaker culture (Meurers-Balke 1983, 55). form in the Lower Saxony regional group of the Mi- Among the decorated pieces of early funnel bea- chelsberg culture, including the Schöningen group, kers is a rim sherd with impressions on the folded rim, can be taken for certain (see Klassen 2004, 174). and several times decorations in the form of punc- The ‘Ösenkranzflaschen’ of the Oxie group have tures below the rim appear (Hirsch et al. 2007, 30 – 31; also to be included in this discussion. Their necks Glykou 2016, 175 fig. 18.6). Based on 14C dates, a are short and cylindrical, and the lugs are perforated settlement phase between 4,100 and 3,800 calBC horizontally. The latter element is characteristic for could be verified (Hirsch et al. 2007, 13 – 14; Kotu- lugs of the Michelsberg culture, and the lugs from la et al. 2015, 492 – 494). Another coastal settlement Schöningen are also horizontally perforated with- of the Funnel Beaker culture is situated near Parow out exception. However, it is uncertain in this case on the southern Baltic Sea coast on the Strelasund whether these originally belonged to ‘Ösenkranz­ north of Stralsund. The spectrum of finds indicates a A l exa n d ra Ph i l i p p i 411 Fig. 7 Enclosure landscapes in the Leine-Weser area (graphic: A. Philippi; map based on Bundesamt für Kartographie und Geodäsie). use of the coastal zone from the Late Mesolithic to at the same time a dynamic development of regional the Neolithic and into the Bronze Age. Apart from groups is taking place. Regional differences in the Ertebølle pottery, the site also yielded funnel-shaped ceramic inventory might thus be explained (Glykou rims with impressions below the rim. Food crusts 2016, 205). If we assume that the local group of the of this pottery date between 4,100 and 3,800 calBC Michelsberg culture in southern Lower Saxony had (Lübke et al. 2000, 440; Glykou 2016, 201; see also been involved in the formation of the Funnel Beaker Terberger / Seiler 2004 fig. 18.1 – 2). A further site culture, it is quite likely that the Schöningen group which yielded ceramics of an early phase of the Funnel was part of this development. Beaker culture is Brunn 17, distr. Mecklenburgische In addition, in Lower Saxony above all the en- Seenplatte (Vogt 2009). Here similarities to the Mi- closures of Müsleringen, distr. Nienburg (Weser), and chelsberg culture can be observed in the tulip-shaped Walmstorf, distr. Uelzen, are of particular importance beakers. If one supposes that southern Lower Saxony, as contact points to the groups of the North German Westphalia and the middle Elbe-Saale region are the Plain (Richter 2002; Freese 2010; Ramminger et al. probable areas of origin of the early Funnel Beaker 2013a; 2013b). They are part of a large number of culture, it could be concluded that certain elements find complexes of this time period in Lower Saxony, were spread northwards or northeast via present-day which include both forms of the Michelsberg and an Schleswig-Holstein. This assumption is underlined by early phase of the Funnel Beaker culture. Over the last the distribution of individual elements such as arcade two decades a series of studies on the Late Neolithic rims (Glykou 2016, 205). and the enclosure between the Rhine and Elbe rivers have been published. In particular, the area of south- Contact zones of Neolithic groups ern Lower Saxony has always played a recognisable role in the question of the south-north transfer of the Numerous contacts of Mesolithic hunter-gatherers in enclosure idea and other Late Neolithic elements. In northern central Europe with Neolithic groups can be contrast to the north Harz foreland, where a regional documented especially by imports, e. g. of character- analysis of the enclosures has already taken place, the istic stone tools (Schirren 1997, 245 – 246; Klassen state of research in the neighboring area of Lower 2004, 50 – 53). An adoption of ceramic technologies Saxony to the west is still disparate. The main focus from western Europe would therefore be quite con- of the research is the presentation and analysis of the ceivable. Moreover, this area was connected to the features and finds of new research conducted on the Neolithic cultures of central Europe via the Elbe and enclosures of Rössing, distr. Hildesheim, and Müslerin- Weser (Schirren 1997, 248), so it is possible that it is gen, distr. Nienburg (Weser). Further enclosures have a matter of an expansion of individual elements, e. g. been identified by surface finds and aerial photographs decoration or vessel forms, such as the clay discs, while in the area. The project aims at the processing of the 412 The Schöningen group and the c ultural development around 4,000 c alB C enclosure landscapes in the Leine-Weser area and the vessels may also be decorated all over with impres- question of the neolithisation of the north. sions or fingertip impressed decorations (Raemaekers Find complexes from sites such as Rössing or 1999, 108, 111). The late phase (3,900/3,800 – 3,400 Müsleringen are particularly qualified for these ques- calBC) ends with the beginning of the western group tions. Above all, the site Müsleringen is in the focus of the Funnel Beaker culture (Raemaekers 1999, 112). of research, since its find material – quantitatively While the subsistence economy of the earliest phase and qualitatively most extensive of this region – so far consisted of hunting and fishing, in the middle phase allows an evaluation that goes beyond a mere sam- agricultural activities were partly carried out, probably pling character. In a whole series of find complexes due to contacts with Neolithic cultures (Raemaekers of Lower Saxony, elements of the Michelsberg and 1999, 113, 115). early Funnel Beaker cultures can be proven. They Throughout the entire period, a frequent interac- have a completely different character than those of tion with the neighbouring farming culture is notice- the Michelsberg main group. A clear attribution does able in the pottery spectrum of the Swifterbant culture, not seem possible, but a correlation with the Funnel probably due to contacts with the Linear Pottery cul- Beaker culture is often mentioned. ture and the subsequent societies. Furthermore, there The work carried out so far has given the image are ceramics, including elements from the Bischheim of the enclosure landscapes in the Leine-Weser area a and Michelsberg culture as well as round and flat significantly new character (Fig. 7). An accumulation bottoms. of potential enclosures in the Hanover region is be- Although a direct influence of the Swifterbant coming apparent, which needs to be verified by further culture on the development of the early Funnel Bea- studies. The region on the middle Weser, where three ker culture is thus not unlikely, it cannot be excluded enclosures have been detected, can be considered a that individual elements of the middle phase of the promising starting point for future research into the Swifterbant culture or the Pre-Drouwen phase (Ten Late Neolithic enclosures in this area. The northern Anscher 2015, 335 – 336) were transferred, for exam- relations of this region in the Late Neolithic – located ple, from the neighbouring Michelsberg. Pre-Drouwen directly on the Weser corridor – are also moving into phase pottery is also found at the site Hüde I at the the focus of research, as is the associated neolithisa- Dümmer lake in Lower Saxony and shows clear ref- tion of the north. The construction of the Müsleringen erences to the Michelsberg culture (Ten Anscher enclosure happened during a period of social upheaval 2015, 349 – 353). The site Hunte 3, distr. Vechta, during with new forms of interrelationships, which become recent excavations also yielded flint artefacts which apparent in the typological changes in the pottery indicate a still Mesolithic tradition, while the few deco- spectrum from 4,100 BC at the latest. rated pottery fragments can be assigned to the horizon of the Swifterbant culture (Heumüller et al. 2017). Swifterbant culture An interaction of the Michelsberg culture and the Swifterbant culture probably played a role in the While in northern Europe there is a shift from the formation of the early Funnel Beaker culture in the Ertebølle to the early Funnel Beaker culture and area of the North German Plain. the introduction of an agrarian way of life, from the Scheldt to the Elbe river a late Mesolithic society that is also in a state of change can be ascertained (Rae- Conclusion – Michelsberg as a source maekers 2015, 322). The early Swifterbant culture of inspiration is a phenomenon that has not yet been sufficiently researched (Raemaekers 2005, 29; Ten Anscher In summary, based on the current state of research, 2015, 336). Its earliest pottery dates back to around especially with regard to the findings of the early 5,000 calBC (Raemaekers 2015, 322; on the earliest Funnel Beaker culture in northern Germany, it can pottery see Raemaekers 2008). In its middle phase be concluded that the formation of the early Funnel (4,600 – 3,900/3,800 calBC), rim decorations of the Beaker culture is obviously an autochthonous devel- vessels occur more frequently and in more variation. opment under the influence of agricultural societies The vessels show an S-shaped profile, and their bot- from the south, especially the Michelsberg culture. toms are pointed or rounded. They are decorated on Numerous Michelsberg elements such as clay discs, the neck or shoulder, more rarely on the rim or below arcade rims, round-bottomed funnel-beakers, bottles the rim. The decorations consist of one or more rows or bowls underline this hypothesis. On the other of vertical impressions or finger spots. Sometimes the hand, there are elements that are rather untypical A l exa n d ra Ph i l i p p i 413 of the Michelsberg culture. Flat bottoms, fingertip A. Krenn-Leeb / H.-J. Baier / E. Claßen / F. Falkenstein / impressed decoration below the rim and knobs show S. Schwenzer (eds.), Mobilität, Migration und Kom- represent elements the origins of which are to be munikation in Europa während des Neolithikums und found in external influences (Lüning 1968, 17). In- der Bronzezeit. Varia Neolithica V (Langenweiss­bach fluences of the late Lengyel complex should be men- 2009) 73 – 87. tioned here, which is represented by the Gatersleben Beran 2012: J. Beran, Spitzhauen, Schöningen und Swifter- culture, especially in the middle Elbe-Saale area. The bant – Überlegungen zu Endmesolithikum und begin- pottery of the Schöningen group takes up these influ- nendem Jungneolithikum im norddeutschen Binnen- ences and thus shows clear parallels to the pottery land. In: R. Gleser / V. Becker (eds.), Mitteleuropa im of the early Funnel Beaker pottery. Together with 5. Jahrtausend vor Christus. Neolithikum und ältere the Michelsberg culture of southern Lower Saxony, Metallzeiten 1 (Berlin 2012) 509 – 527. it can be regarded as the stimulating agent for the Bieniek 2002: A. Bieniek, Archaeobotanical analysis of some development of the Funnel Beaker culture. To what early Neolithic settlements in the Kujawy region, cen- extent the Swifterbant culture is involved in this tral Poland, with potential plant gathering activities process will have to be clarified in future research. emphasised. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 11(1 – 2), 2002, 33 – 4 0. Bräunig et al. 2016: R. Bräunig / U. Jaekel / M. Schwa- References nitz, 5000 Jahre alte Kulturschicht. Ein Siedlungsplatz der Britzer Gruppe in Berlin-Neukölln. Archäologie in Ten Anscher 2012: T.  J. ten Anscher, Leven met de Berlin und Brandenburg 2014, 2016, 49 – 50. Vecht: Schokland-P14 en de Noordoostpolder in het Bronk Ramsey 2017: C. Bronk Ramsey, Methods for Sum- neolithicum en de bronstijd. PhD Thesis. University of marizing Radiocarbon Datasets. Radiocarbon 59(2), Amsterdam (Amsterdam 2012). 1809 – 1833. Ten Anscher 2015: T. J. ten Anscher, Under the radar: Swif- Childe 1949: V. G. Childe, The Origin of Neolithic Culture terbant and the origins of the Funnel Beaker culture. in Northern Europe. Antiquity 23, 1949, 129 – 135. In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / Czekaj-Zastawny / Kabaciński 2015: A. Czekaj-Zastawny / T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and J. Kabaciński, The early Funnel Beaker culture at Dąb- the Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands ki. In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 335 – 357. the Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands Becker 1947: C. J. Becker, Mosefundne Lerkar Frau Yngre (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im Stenalder. Studier Over Tragtbægerkulturen I Danmark Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 203 – 217. (Aarbøger 1947). Damrau et al. 2014: D. Damrau / A. Egold / P. Viol, Be- Behrens 1969: H. Behrens, Gibt es eine mitteldeutsche stattungen der Schiepziger Gruppe. In: H. Meller / S. Gruppe der Michelsberger Kultur? Jahresschrift für Friederich (eds.), Salzmünde-Schiepzig – ein Ort, zwei mitteldeutsche Vorgeschichte 53, 1969, 285 – 307. Kulturen. Ausgrabungen an der Westumfahrung Halle Behrens 1973: H. Behrens, Die Jungsteinzeit im Mittelelbe- (A 143) Teil I. Archäologie in Sachsen-Anhalt. Sonder- Saale-Gebiet (Berlin 1973). band 21/I (Halle/Saale 2014) 122 – 162. Beran 1993: J. Beran, Untersuchungen zur Stellung der Salz- Freese 2010: H.-D. Freese, Ein neolithisches Erdwerk an münder Kultur im Jungneolithikum des Saalegebietes der Weser nahe Stolzenau im Landkreis Nienburg (We- (Berlin 1993). ser). Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte 79, Beran 1998: J. Beran, Die Michelsberger Fundgruppen in 2010, 3 – 10. Mitteldeutschland. In: J. Biel / H. Schlichtherle / M. Glykou 2016: A. Glykou, Neustadt LA 156. Ein submariner Strobel / A. Zeeb (eds.), Die Michelsberger Kultur und Fundplatz des späten Mesolithikums und des frühen ihre Randgebiete – Probleme der Entstehung, Chrono- Neolithikums in Schleswig-Holstein. Untersuchungen logie und des Siedlungswesens. Kolloquium Hemmen- zur Subsistenzstrategie der letzten Jäger, Sammler und hofen, 21.–23.2.1997. Jens Lüning zu 60. Geburtstag. Fischer an der norddeutschen Ostseeküste. Untersuchun- Materialhefte zur Archäologie in Baden-Württemberg gen und Materialien zur Steinzeit in Schleswig-Holstein 43 (Stuttgart 1998) 73 – 8 3. und im Ostseeraum 7 (Kiel/Hamburg 2016). Beran 2009: J. Beran, Trichterbecherkultur und donaulän- Grohmann 2010: I.  M. Grohmann, Die Ertebølle- und dische Restgruppen. Populationsdynamik zwischen frühtrichterbecherzeitliche Keramik aus Wangels, Kr. norddeutscher Tiefebene und Mittelgebirgszone im Ostholstein. Ein Beitrag zur Neolithisierung Schles- Lichte neuer paläogenetischer Untersuchungen. In: wig-Holsteins. In: D. Gronenborn / J. Petrasch (eds.), 414 The Schöningen group and the c ultural development around 4,000 c alB C Die Neolithisierung Mitteleuropas. Internationale Bodendenkmalpflege in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern 55, ­Tagung, Mainz 24. bis 26. Juni 2005. Teil 2 (Mainz 2010) 2007 (2008), 11 – 51. 407 – 422. Jazdzewski 1965: K. Jazdzewski, Pradzieje Polski (Wroclaw Hartz et al. 2000: S. Hartz / D. Heinrich / H. Lübke, Frü- 1965). he Bauern an der Küste. Neue 14C-Daten und aktuelle Jeunesse 2010: C. Jeunesse, Die Michelsberger Kultur. In: Aspekte zum Neolithisierungsprozeß im norddeutschen Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe (ed.), Jungsteinzeit Ostseeküstengebiet. Prähistorische Zeitschrift 75, 2000, im Umbruch. Die „Michelsberger Kultur“ und Mittel­ 129 – 152. europa vor 6000 Jahren (Darmstadt 2010) 46 – 55. Hartz / Lübke 2004: S. Hartz / H. Lübke, Zur chrono­ Kaufmann 1994: D. Kaufmann, Bemerkungen zum älte- stratigrafischen Gliederung der Ertebølle-Kultur und ren Mittelneolithikum in Mitteldeutschland. In: H. J. frühesten Trichterbecherkultur in der südlichen Meck- Behrens (ed.), Der Rössener Horizont in Mitteleuropa. lenburger Bucht. Jahrbuch Bodendenkmalpflege in Beiträge zur Ur- und Frühgeschichte Mitteleuropas 6 Mecklenburg-Vorpommern 52, 2004 (2005), 119 – 143. (Wilkau-Haßlau 1994) 85 – 92. Hartz 2010: S. Hartz, Nachbarn im Norden. Die Besiedlung Kaufmann 2007: D. Kaufmann, „Schöninger“, „Schiepzi- der Ostseeküste im 5. und frühen 4. Jt. v. Chr. In: Badi- ger“ oder „Salzmünder Gruppe“? Neue 14C-Daten zum sches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe (ed.), Jungsteinzeit im Übergang vom älteren zum jüngeren Mittelneolithikum Umbruch. Die „Michelsberger Kultur“ und Mitteleuropa in Mitteldeutschland. Archäologisches Korrespondenz- vor 6000 Jahren (Darmstadt 2010) 132 – 140. blatt 37, 2007, 365 – 377. Hartz 2011: S. Hartz, From pointed bottom to round flat bot- Klassen 2004: L. Klassen, Jade und Kupfer. Untersuchungen tom – tracking early pottery from Schleswig-Holstein. zum Neolithisierungsprozess im westlichen Ostseeraum Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 89, unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Kulturentwick- 2008 (2011), 241 – 271. lung Europas 5500 – 3500 BC (Højbjerg 2004). Hartz 2015: S. Hartz, Early Funnel Beaker pottery from Klooss 2015: S. Klooss, Mit Einbaum und Paddel zum Lübeck-Genin in northern Germany. In: J. Kabaciński / Fischfang. Holzartefakte von endmesolithischen und S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / T. Terberger (eds.), frühneolithischen Küstensiedlungen an der südwestli- The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and the Neolithisation of chen Ostseeküste. Untersuchungen und Materialien zur the North European Lowlands (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Steinzeit in Schleswig-Holstein und im Ostseeraum 6 Archäologie und Geschichte im Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/ (Kiel/Hamburg 2015). Westf. 2015) 453 – 4 63. Körber-Grohne 1987: U. Körber-Grohne, Federgras- Hartz this volume: S. Hartz, Hunter- gatherer pottery from Grannen (Stipa pennata L. s. str.) als Vorrat in einer the Baltic Sea Coast – some regional examples from mittelneolithischen Grube in Schöningen, Landkreis Schleswig-Holstein. Helmstedt. Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 17, Hellmund 2014: M. Hellmund, Grannenfragmente von 1987, 463 – 4 66. Federgras (Stipa) in mittelneolithischen Befunden von Körber-Grohne 1990: U. Körber-Grohne, Gramineen und Salzmünde. In: H. Meller / S. Friederich (eds.), Salzmün- Gründlandvegetationen vom Neolithikum zum Mittel­ de-Schiepzig – ein Ort, zwei Kulturen. Ausgrabungen alter in Mitteleuropa. In: J. Grau / P. Hiepko / P. Leins an der Westumfahrung Halle (A 143) Teil I. Archäolo- (eds.), Bibliotheca botanica. Original-Abhandlungen aus gie in Sachsen-Anhalt. Sonderband 21/I (Halle/Saale dem Gesamtgebiete der Botanik (Stuttgart 1990) 90. 2014) 262 – 264. Kotula et al. 2015: A. Kotula / H. Piezonka / T. Terber- Hellmund 2017: M. Hellmund, Pflanzenfunde der Schiep- ger, New pottery dates on the Mesolithic-Neolithic ziger Gruppe und der Salzmünder Kultur von der Fund- transition in the north-central European lowlands. In: stelle Salzmünde. In: Salzmünde – Regel oder Ausnah- J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / T. me? Internationale Tagung vom 18. bis 20. Oktober Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and the 2012 in Halle (Saale). Tagungen des Landesmuseums Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands (c. für Vorgeschichte 16 (Halle/Saale 2016) 83 – 100. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im Heumüller et al. 2017: M. Heumüller / M. Briel / R. Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 489 – 509. Schoon / T. Zerl, Die Fundstelle Hunte 3 am Dümmer, Kreuz 2010: A. Kreuz, Die Vertreibung aus dem Paradies? Ldkr. Vechta – ein neuer Fundplatz der Swifterbant-­ Archäobiologische Ergebnisse zum Frühneolithikum im Kultur? Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte westlichen Mitteleuropa. Bericht der Römisch-Germa- 86, 2017, 11 – 33. nischen Kommission 91, 2010 (2012), 23 – 196. Hirsch et al. 2007: K. Hirsch / S. Klooss / R. Klooss, Leiber 1983: C. Leiber, Siedlungsgruben mit neolithischer Der endmesolithisch-frühneolithische Küstensiedlungs- Keramik in Einbeck, Kreis Northeim. Neue Ausgrabungen platz bei Baabe im Südosten der Insel Rügen. Jahrbuch und Forschungen in Niedersachsen 16, 1983, 189 – 213. A l exa n d ra Ph i l i p p i 415 Lichardus / Lichardus-Itten 1993: J. Lichardus / M. Lichardus- Moser 2014: A. Moser, Pfostengruben – Hausgrundrisse: Itten, Michelsberg und Baalberge. Ein Beitrag zu den Rössener oder Schiepziger Häuser? In: H. Meller / S. kulturellen Beziehungen während der frühen Kupferzeit Friederich (eds.), Salzmünde-Schiepzig – ein Ort, zwei in Deutschland. In: A. Lang / H. Parzinger / H. Küster Kulturen. Ausgrabungen an der Westumfahrung Halle (eds.), Kulturen zwischen Ost und West. Das Ost-West- (A 143) Teil I. Archäologie in Sachsen-Anhalt. Sonder- Verhältnis in vor- und frühgeschichtlicher Zeit und sein band 21/I (Halle/Saale 2014) 175 – 181. Einfluß auf Werden und Wandel des Kulturraums Mittel- Müller 2001: J. Müller, Soziochronologische Studien zum europa. Georg Kossack zum 70. Geburtstag am 25. Juni Jung- und Spätneolithikum im Mittelelbe-Saale-Gebiet 1993 (Berlin 1993) 61 – 87. (4100 – 2700 v. Chr.). Eine sozialhistorische Interpreta- Lübke et al. 2000: H. Lübke / S. Schacht / T. Terberger, Fi- tion prähistorischer Quellen (Rahden/Westf. 2001). nal Mesolithic and Early Neolithic Coastal Settlements Müller 2011: J. Müller, Megaliths and funnel beakers: so- on the Island of Rügen and in Northern Vorpommern. cieties in change, 4100 – 2700 BC. Kroon-Vordaacht 13 In: H. von Schmettow (ed.), Schutz des Kulturerbes un- (Amsterdam 2011). ter Wasser. Veränderungen europäischer Lebenskultur Neugebauer 1992: J.-W. Neugebauer (ed.), Die Jungsteinzeit durch Fluß- und Seehandel. Beiträge zum Internationa- im Osten Österreichs. Wissenschaftliche Schriftenreihe len Kongreß für Unterwasserarchäologie (IKUWA `99), Niederösterreich (St. Pölten-Wien 1992) 110 – 160. 18.–21. Februar 1999 in Sassnitz auf Rügen. Beiträge zur Philippi 2018: A. Philippi, Ein jungsteinzeitlicher Lückenfül- Ur- und Frühgeschichte Mecklenburg-Vorpommerns 35 ler. Neue Ergebnisse zur Schöninger Gruppe. Archäo- (Lübstorf 2000) 439 – 4 49. logie in Niedersachsen 21, 2018, 67 – 70. Lüning 1968: J. Lüning, Die Michelsberger Kultur. Ihre Fun- Raemaekers 1999: D. C. M. Raemaekers, The Articulation de in zeitlicher und räumlicher Gliederung. Berichte der of a ‘New Neolithic’. The meaning of the Swifterbant Römisch-Germanischen-Kommission 48, 1967 (1968), Culture for the process of neolithisation in the western 1 – 350. part of the North European Plain (4900 – 3400 BC). Ar- Lüning 1972: J. Lüning, Zum Kulturbegriff im Neolithikum. chaeological Studies Leiden University 3 (Leiden 1999). Prähistorische Zeitschrift 47, 1972, 145 – 173. Raemaekers 2005: D. C. M. Raemaekers, An outline of Late Maier 1987: R. Maier, Neue Siedlungsfunde des Neolithi- Swifterbant pottery in the Noordoostpolder (Province kums und der Frühbronzezeit im Braunkohlerevier bei of Flevoland, the Netherlands) and the chronological Schöningen, Ldkr. Helmstedt. In: E. Černá (ed.), Archäo- development of the pottery of the Swifterbant culture. Pa- logische Rettungstätigkeit in den Braunkohlengebieten laeohistoria. Acta et comunications institute archaeologici und die Problematik der siedlungsgeschichtlichen For- universitatis groninganae 45/46, 2003/2004 (2005), 29. schung. Internationales Symposium Most, 7.–11. April Raemaekers 2008: D. C. M. Raemaekers, Early Swifterbant 1986 in Prag (Prag 1987), 113 – 118. pottery (5000 – 4 600 calBC): Research history, age, cha- Maier 1995: R. Maier, Schöninger Gruppe, frühe Trichter- racteristics and the introduction of pottery. Berichte der becherkultur, Baalberger Kultur und Gruppe der Tief­ Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 89, 2008 (2011), stichkeramik. In: H. Thieme / R. Maier, Archäologische 485 – 500. Ausgrabungen im Braunkohlentagebau Schöningen, Raemaekers 2015: D. C. M. Raemaekers, Rethinking Swif- Landkreis Helmstedt (Hannover 1995) 134 – 141. terbant S3 ceramic variability. Searching for the tran- Meurers-Balke 1983: J. Meurers-Balke, Siggeneben-Süd. sition to the Funnel Beaker culture before 4000 calBC. Ein Fundplatz der frühen Trichterbecherkultur an der In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / holsteinischen Ostseeküste. Offa-Bücher 50 (Neumüns- T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and ter 1983). the Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands Mischka 2011: D. Mischka, Das Neolithikum in Flintbek, (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im Kr. Rendsburg-Eckernförde, Schleswig-Holstein – Eine Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 321 – 334. feinchronologische Studie zur Besiedlungsgeschichte Ramminger et al. 2013a: B. Ramminger / H. Sedlaczek / einer Siedlungskammer anhand von Gräbern. Unge- M. Helfert / N. Kegler-Graiewski, Scherbenstreuung druckte Habilitationsschrift (Kiel 2011). und Brandgräber: Neue Untersuchungen am neolithi- Mischka et al. 2015: D. Mischka / G. Roth / K. Struck- schen Erdwerk von Müsleringen. Archäologie in Nie- meyer, Michelsberg and Oxie in contact next to the Bal- dersachsen 16, 2013, 45 – 4 8. tic Sea. In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemae- Ramminger et al. 2013b: B. Ramminger / H. Sedlaczek/ N. kers / T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania Kegler-Graiewski, Vorläufige Ergebnisse zum neolithi- and the Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands schen Erdwerk aus Müsleringen, Ldkr. Nienburg/We- (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im ser. Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte 82, Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 465 – 478. 2013, 3 – 26. 416 The Schöningen group and the c ultural development around 4,000 c alB C Reimer et al. 2013: P. J. Reimer / E. Bard / A. Bayliss / J. W. Beck Sørensen 2015: L. Sørensen, Hunters and farmers in the / P. G. Blackwell / C. Bronk Ramsey / P. M. Grootes / North – the transformation of pottery traditions and T.  P. Guilderson / H. Haflidason / I. Hajdas / C. distribution patterns of key artefacts during the Meso- Hattž / T. J. Heaton / D. L. Hoffmann / A. G. Hogg / lithic and Neolithic transition in southern Scandinavia. K. A. Hughen / K. F. Kaiser / B. Kromer / S. W. Man- In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / ning / M. Niu / R. W. Reimer / D. A. Richards / E. M. T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and Scott / J. R. Southon / R. A. Staff / C. S. M. Turney / the Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands J. van der Plicht, IntCal13 and Marine13 Radiocarbon (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im Age Calibration Curves 0 – 50,000 Years cal BP. Radio­ Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 385 – 432. carbon 55 (4), 2013, 1869 – 1887. Stadler et al. 2006: P. Stadler / E. Ruttkay / M. Doneus / Richter 2002: P. B. Richter, Das neolithische Erdwerk H. Friesinger / E. Lauermann / W. Kutschera / I. von Walmstorf, Ldkr. Uelzen. Studien zur Besied- Mateiciucová / W. Neubauer / C. Neugebauer-Ma- lungsgeschichte der Trichterbecherkultur im südlichen resch / G. Trnka / F. Weninger / E. M. Wild, Ab- ­Ilmenautal. Veröffentlichungen der urgeschichtlichen solutchronologie der Mährisch-Ostösterreichischen Sammlungen des Landesmuseums zu Hannover 49 Gruppe (MOG) der bemalten Keramik aufgrund von (Oldenburg 2002). neuen 14 C-Datierungen. In: A. Krenn-Leeb / K. Grö- Ruttkay 1984: E. Ruttkay, Zusammenfassender Forschungs- mer / P. Stadler (eds.), Ein Lächeln für die Jungsteinzeit. stand der Lengyel-Kultur in Niederösterreich. Mittei- Ausgewählte Beiträge zum Neolithikum Ostösterreichs. lungen der österreichischen Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Festschrift für Elisabeth Ruttkay. Archäologie Öster- Ur- und Frühgeschichte 33/34, 1983/1984, 221 – 246. reichs 17/2, 2006, 53 – 81. Scheibner 2016: A. Scheibner, Prähistorische Ernährung Stapel this volume: B. Stapel, Swifterbant and the Late in Vorderasien und Europa. Eine kulturgeschichtliche ­Mesolithic in Westphalia. Synthese auf der Basis ausgewählter Quellen (Rahden/ Steinmann 1994: C. Steinmann, Gatersleben (GL). In: H.-J. Westf. 2016). Baier / R. Einicke (eds.), Das Neolithikum im Mittelelbe- Schirren 1997: C. M. Schirren, Studien zur Trichterbecher- Saale-Gebiet und in der Altmark (Berlin 1994) 85 – 98. kultur in Südostholstein. Universitätsforschungen zur Terberger / Seiler 2004: T. Terberger / M. Seiler, Flint- prähistorischen Archäologie (Bonn 1997). schläger und Fischer – Neue interdisziplinäre Forschun- Schmütz 2017: K. Schmütz, Die Entwicklung zweier Kon- gen zu steinzeitlichen Siedlungsplätzen auf Rügen und zepte? Großsteingräber und Grabenwerke bei Haldens- dem angrenzenden Festland. Jahrbuch Bodendenkmal- leben-Hundisburg (Bonn 2017). pflege in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern 52, 2004, 155 – 184. Schunke 1994: T. Schunke, Michelsberger Kultur (MK). Umbreit 1937: C. Umbreit, Neue Forschungen zur ostdeut- In: H.-J. Baier / R. Einicke (eds.), Das Neolithikum im schen Steinzeit und frühen Bronzezeit. Die Ausgrabun- Mittelelbe-Saale-Gebiet und in der Altmark (Berlin gen des steinzeitlichen Dorfes zu Berlin-Britz (Leipzig 1994) 129 – 143. 1937). Schunke / Viol 2014: T. Schunke / P. Viol, Die „Schiepziger Vogt 2009: J. Vogt, Der Fundplatz Brunn 17 im Landkreis Gruppe“ – eine Fundlücke wird gefüllt. In: H. Meller / Mecklenburg-Strelitz. Ergebnisse einer Grabung unter S. Friederich (eds.), Salzmünde-Schiepzig – ein Ort, besonderer Berücksichtigung der trichterbecherzeitli- zwei Kulturen. Ausgrabungen an der Westumfahrung chen Funde und Befunde. In: T. Terberger (ed.), Neue Halle (A 143) Teil I. Archäologie in Sachsen-Anhalt Forschungen zum Neolithikum im Ostseeraum. Ar- Sonderband 21/I (Halle/Saale 2014) 113 – 121. chäologie und Geschichte im Ostseeraum 5 (Rahden/ Seger 1919: H. Seger, Die keramischen Stilarten der jün- Westf. 2009) 135 – 2 36. geren Steinzeit Schlesiens. Schlesiens Vorzeit. N. F. 7, Zich 1992/1993: B. Zich, Die Ausgrabung chronisch gefähr- 1919, 8 – 9. deter Hügelgräber der Stein- und Bronzezeit in Flint- Seidel 2008: U. Seidel, Michelsberger Erdwerke im Raum bek, Kreis Rendsburg-Eckernförde. Ein Vorbericht. Offa Heilbronn. Materialhefte zur Archäologie in Ba- 49/50, 1992/1993, 15 – 31. den-Württemberg 81,1 – 2 (Stuttgart 2008). Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 , 417 – 434) 417 Some remarks on the expansion of the Younger Neolithic causewayed enclosure phenomenon towards northern Germany Benedikt Knoche Abstract The onset of the causewayed enclosure phenomenon in Schleswig-Holstein and Jutland is becoming increasingly apparent as early as the 38th and 37th centuries calBC. New information demand a re-evaluation of the relations between the traditional Neolithic landscapes at the northern edge of the low mountain range zone and the Early Neolithic phenomena north of the river Elbe. This paper deals with the significance of the enclosure phenomenon as an indicator of socio-cultural processes in the geest landscapes of Lower Saxony during the Younger Neolithic (c. 4,200 – 3,600 BC). Indirectly, the habit to build or not to build causewayed enclosures reflects the existence of specific socioeconomic and demographic structures in this area which are associated with Late Mesolithic to Early Neolithic cultural groups such as Swifterbant / Hüde I, or part of an early Funnel Beaker complex. In this context, the significance of the Weser river as a communication corridor between southern central and northern Europe is emphasised. Keywords Neolithisation, Lower Saxony, causewayed enclosures Zusammenfassung Der Beginn des Phänomens der Erdwerke kann in Schleswig-Holstein und Jütland mit wachsender Ver- lässlichkeit in das 38.–37. Jh. calBC datiert werden. Die neue Datenlage lässt eine Neubewertung des Verhältnisses zwischen den neolithischen Gebieten am Nordrand der Mittelgebirgszone und dem Frühneolithikum nördlich der Elbe lohnenswert erscheinen. Der Beitrag beschäftigt sich mit der Bedeutung des Erdwerk-Phänomens als Indikator für sozio-kulturelle Prozesse in der Geestlandschaft Niedersachsens im Jüngeren Neolithikum (ca. 4200 – 3600 calBC). Indirekt reflektiert die Entscheidung, solche Erdwerke zu errichten oder nicht, die Existenz bestimmter sozio-ökonomischer und vor allem demographischer Struk- turen in dem Gebiet der spätmesolithischen / frühneolithischen Gesellschaften wie Swifterbant / Hüde I oder Teilen der frühen Trichterbecherkultur. In diesem Zusammenhang wird die Bedeutung der Weser als Kommunikationskorridor zwischen dem südlichen Mitteleuropa und Nordeuropa deutlich. Introduction Coming from the western European region during an older phase of about 4,200 – 3,900/3,750 calBC, this Until recently, no Younger Neolithic enclosures (pre- mainly ritually driven phenomenon spread relatively 3,500 calBC) were known in the area north of the Elbe quickly within a few decades from the river Seine river, in contrast to regions further south. Only during in the west to the Harz foreland (Urbach) and even the last few years it has become clear that the begin- Bohemia (Kly) in the east. Although in general a supra- ning of the construction of causewayed enclosures here cultural phenomenon, this happened in connection dates back to the 38th/37th centuries calBC (Klassen with the spread of a certain ceramic style (Michels- 2014; Müller 2017). In particular with L. Klassen’s berg), specific lithic technologies, and probably also comprehensive work on ‘Causewayed Enclosures in expansive livestock systems. Initially, causewayed South Scandinavia and Beyond’, a reassessment of the enclosures were restricted to areas that had already southern Scandinavian enclosures and their European been inhabited by Neolithic communities since the context is available, especially with regard to their end of the 6th millennium calBC. To the north, Final early dating (Klassen 2014). Therefore the causewayed Mesolithic hunter-gatherers continued to live. The enclosures in continental Europe can be roughly as- first sporadic scattering of causewayed enclosures signed to two essential construction horizons (Fig. 1): further to the north took place in the Münsterland 418 Some remarks on the expansion of the Younger Neolithic causewayed enclosure phenomenon towards northern Germany Fig. 1 Distribution of causewayed enclosures in Europe (after Klassen 2014, fig. 123). (Nottuln, probably also Rosendahl-Osterwick) and have dealt with this question in recent years,2 this only parts of Lower Saxony (Müsleringen, possibly Walm- needs to be done in an overview manner. It summaris- storf) from about the 39th century calBC. With a later es the author’s various preliminary papers, which are construction wave from approx. 3,750 calBC onwards, only available in German language. On this basis, an it also expanded to northern Europe (Denmark) and assessment of the cultural dynamics is then carried out. northwestern Europe, with a real ‘construction boom’ of causewayed enclosures in the British Isles from approximately 3,750 calBC onwards.1 With this later Causewayed enclosures in Westphalia construction wave, it also expanded to the eastern part and Lower Saxony of central Germany (Baalberge). Most of the cause- wayed enclosures excavated so far in southern Lower In recent years, a number of studies on the Younger Saxony (Hildesheim and Hanover regions) date to Neolithic and the question of causewayed enclosures this horizon. The same applies to the West French between the Rhine and Elbe rivers have been pub- Vendée and Charent Maritime (Klassen 2014, 206 fig. lished.3 While evidence of enclosures is available in 123). The expansion phase from 3,750 calBC onwards the Lower Rhine region, there is a gap in the western indicates a widespread phenomenon documented in Hellweg area (probably due to the state of research), central, west, and northwest Europe and – as Klassen which only ends in the Soester Börde. Causewayed showed – is to be understood as a coherent process. enclosures are present in considerable numbers in In the following, the state of causewayed enclo- east Westphalia as far as the Weserbergland. Of par- sures research from Westphalia to southern Lower ticular interest in the Münsterland are the Michels- Saxony is outlined and evaluated with a view to the ad- berg culture (MK) III-complexes in the area of the jacent zone of the north German plain. Subsequently, ‘Baumberge’, a hilly landscape in the middle of the models of the relationships between the enclosure otherwise flat Westphalian Bay: Nottuln-Uphoven and landscapes on the northern edge of the low mountain probably also Rosendahl-Osterwick. Both appear with range and the early causewayed enclosure evidence unusual, linear ditch courses. According to the current further north are discussed. Since a number of studies 2  Knoche 2008a; 2013; 2018; 2019; cf. also Andersen 1997; 2017; Geschwinde / Raetzel-Fabian 2009; Klassen 2014. 1  This time horizon saw the construction of 145 new enclo- 3  Raetzel-Fabian 2000; Knoche 2008a; 2013; Geschwinde / sures. As Klassen 2014 evaluates, this was more than four Raetzel-Fabian 2009; Knoche / Schyle 2015; Rinne 2017; times as many as in the preceding horizon of equal length with Geschwinde 2018; for the Netherlands and Belgium see 58 enclosures per century. Vanmontfort 2007, 111 fig. 3. Benedikt Knoche 419 Fig.  2 Pattensen-Vardegötzen. Very likely a causewayed enclosure with two ditches (image: GoogleEarth; after Knoche 2018). state of research these seem to be regional features and in the Weserbergland region, is still disparate. New in their time period (see below; cf. Knoche 2008a; discoveries in recent years show, however, that a similar 2013). Nottuln-Uphoven also yielded Middle Neolithic density of enclosures as in the Braunschweiger Land pottery in form of vessels in the Rössen, Bischheim, can be expected there, especially in the southern part of and Funnel Beaker styles, all remains of a pre- and a the region. There are, for instance, aerial photographs of post-enclosure occupation of the place (Groer 2010). a presumed enclosure of Pattensen-Vardegötzen (Ldkr. Structural constructions, for example in the form of Region Hannover; Fig. 2), consisting of two ditch cours- typical Middle Neolithic longhouses, have, however, es (Knoche 2019). A further, probably Younger Neo- not yet been documented. lithic causewayed enclosure with three ditch courses at In southern Lower Saxony, the enclosures of Nord- Emmerthal-Börry (Ldkr. Hameln-Pyrmont) was recently stemmen-Rössing and Betheln ‘Beusterburg’ (both in the identified by H.-D. Freese on aerial photographs (Fig. 3; district of Hildesheim) as well as most of the enclosures pers. comm. H.-D. Freese). around Braunschweig fall into the later construction Along the Weser river, north of the Porta West- horizon, further north probably also Walmstorf (in the falica, several new enclosures were identified by vol- district of Uelzen). In contrast to the Hildesheim and untary research activities of the Freundeskreis für Braunschweig regions, where regional investigations of Archäologie in Niedersachsen (F.A.N.). Here, the the enclosures have already taken place (Geschwinde causewayed enclosures of Stolzenau-Müsleringen / Raetzel-Fabian 2009; Geschwinde / Grefen-Peters (Fig. 4) and Steyerberg-Wellie (both Ldkr. Nienburg/ 2017), the state of research in the adjoining western Weser; Fig. 5) led to a significant expansion of Younger parts of the country, in particular in the Hanover area Neolithic sites of this type in the region (Freese 2010; F i g .   3   E m m e r t h a l - B ö r r y. Causewayed enclosure in an aerial photograph, ditches marked (FSt. 10, aerial photo, 09.07.1999, by Otto Braasch, FM: Otto Braasch, 41089387; coloured markings ad- ded by H.-D. Freese). 420 Some remarks on the expansion of the Younger Neolithic causewayed enclosure phenomenon towards northern Germany Fig. 4 Stolzenau-Müsleringen. Causewayed enclosure (after Ramminger et al. 2013, fig. 2). 2019; Ramminger et al. 2013; Knoche 2018; 2019). side of the Weser. It is worth mentioning that one of Between these two enclosures there is probably an- the most important medieval long-distance routes, other one near Anemolter (Ldkr. Nienburg / Weser). the so-called ‘Frankfurter Weg’ (‘Frankfurt way’), According to 14C-results, the Stolzenau-Müsleringen ran parallel to the river banks (Fig. 6). In historical enclosure dates from between 4,110 – 3,800 calBC times, this way connected Frankfurt in middle Hesse (Raminger et al. 2013, 20 table 1). Steyerberg-Wellie via east Westphalia and parts of Lower Saxony with and Anemolter have not yet been dated, and nothing the Hamburg area. There further routes towards Jut- is known about their exact chronological relationship land and northern Europe were available (Knoche to Stolzenau-Müsleringen. Müsleringen proves an ear- 2013). The importance of the Weser vector and the lier apperance of causewayed enlosures in the Weser ‘Frankfurter Weg’ has been confirmed recently by region compared to the Hannover/Braunschweig re- the discovery of causewayed enclosures at Meißen gion – at least according to the data available so far. near Minden, and Petershagen (both Kr. Minden- The causewayed enclosures of Stolzenau-Müs­ Lübbecke) on the east side of the Weser (Song / leringen, Steyerberg-Wellie, and Anemolter lie lin- Pollmann 2020, 183 fig. 1.2, and information by early at intervals of about one hour’s march along H.-O. Pollmann, Münster [Westphalia], March 2020). the river Weser. The three enclosures are located It can be assumed that along the Westphalian part of within a distance of about ten kilometers on the west the Weser river south of Stolzenau-Müsleringen and Fig. 5 Steyerberg-Wellie. Causewayed enclosure in an aerial photograph, June 2018 (photo: H.-D. Freese). Benedikt Knoche 421 the Porta Westfalica / Minden there are further, yet undiscovered causewayed enclosures.4 Fords crossing the river Weser at Minden, Hameln, Höxter, and Bev- erungen are already marked by Younger Neolithic causewayed enclosures, reflecting – in addition to the south-north-routes – the predominant impor- tance of the west-east Hellweg / Deiweg-route-system between the rivers Rhine and Elbe. Historic long- distance routes and causewayed enclosures have a strong link, as has been demonstrated for a number of regions in Europe. Causewayed enclosures are therefore route-affine elements (Geschwinde / Raet- zel-Fabian 2009; Knoche 2013; Klassen 2014). The significance of the Weser river as a vector to the north and north-west is relatively well vis- ible from Müsleringen towards the northwest, as relevant vessels have been found in the river Weser at Bremen (Brandt 1969, 82 fig. 3; Knoche 1998, 62; 2008a, 131 fig. 5.11). Against this background, further causewayed enclosures in or along the Weser valley extending north can be strongly assumed from the evidence so far available. According to the situation in northeastern France (Aisne valley) and in Den- mark (Kolindsund Fjord), theoretically a distance of 4 – 5 km between enclosures is to be expected (Klas- sen 2014, 155 fig. 9). Therefore, it is very likely that further causewayed enclosures will be found to the north of Steyerberg-Wellie, especially at the conflu- ence of the Aller and Weser rivers. From this junction and river crossing (Verden), the traffic coming from Fig.  6 Causewayed enclosures north of the Porta Westfalica, the south continued in historical times along the streched along the western bank of the river Weser within a few kilometres, i.e. in distances of about an hour’s walk. South river to Bremen, or it branched off northeast towards of the Porta Westfalica, the newly discovered causewayed enclo- Hamburg, where it was possible to crossing the river sures of Minden-Meissen and Petershagen follow at a distance; Elbe towards Jutland and the Baltic Sea region. In these are also oriented towards the river Weser. It remains to be seen whether there are still undiscovered causewayed enclo- the Hamburg area, impulses from south-central Eu- sures ­immediately west and east of the Weser. So far, there are rope will have come together with impulses from the no ­reliable indications of this. 1 Steyerberg-Wellie; 2 Anemolter, a highly probable causewayed enclosure; 3 Stolzenau-Müsleringen; middle Elbe-Saale area coming along the Elbe river 4 Petershagen; 5 Minden-Meißen; 6 Minden ‘Nammer Burg’; a (cf. Knoche 2008a). At the Elbe crossing, evidence highly probable causewayed enclosure (map basis: TIM-online). of a Neolithic enclosure would not be surprising. to the north. The situation north of Steyerberg-Wellie The northern perspective is in fact still largely unclear. Those enclosures in Den- mark (Lystrup Kildevang I) and Schleswig-Holstein The causewayed enclosures situated relatively far (Büdelsdorf, Albersdorf-Dieksknöll) built as early as north along the Weser river raise questions about the the 38th (perhaps even the 39th) century calBC reveal relations of the southern Lower Saxony Late Neolithic connections to southern central Europe, which can only be described to a limited extent at present (Klatt 2009; Klassen 2014; Müller 2017). Isolated enclo- 4 It is noticeable that many hill-enclosures are superimposed by sures in northern Lower Saxony (Walmstorf) and in later, mostly Iron Age to Early Medieval structures (e. g. Betheln Brandenburg (Potsdam, Gädebehn) probably began at ‘Beusterburg’, etc.). For the Westphalian region, this was already the same time as the early constructions in Denmark shown for a large number of ‘Wallburgen’, or it was at least made very probable (e. g. Minden ‘Nammer Burg’, Porta Westfalica ‘Wit- and most causewayd enclosures in the Braunschweig tekindsburg’, etc.): cf. Knoche 2008a, 139, 151; 2013, 171, 177. region. They show that the eastern part of the north 422 Some remarks on the expansion of the Younger Neolithic causewayed enclosure phenomenon towards northern Germany German plain was basically included in the world of further south without its habit of building causewayed the enclosures. However, since the end of the 5th mil- enclosures. lennium BC (MK II), there has been influence from The period in question here between 4,100 and the Michelsberg and Jordansmühler ceramic tradi- 3,500 calBC (EN I) was a transitional phase between tions further south upon Brandenburg as well as the a foraging and an agrarian economy, between a Meso- western Baltic area (cf. Beran / Wetzel 2014). But lithic and a Neolithic lifestyle (cf. among others and this is dated to the end of the 5th and the beginning with further literature: Knoche 2008a, 129; Klassen of the 4th millenium calBC and thus not connected 2004). According to current knowledge, northwest with causewayed enclosures. The same is true for the Germany north of the Wiehengebirge was a kind of Holstein area in the far north of Germany (cf. Hartz ‘mixed cultural area’ between a Mesolithic foraging et al. 2000). The western part of Lower Saxony also way of life and economy, enriched with Neolithic ele- remains free of enclosures, even in the subsequent ments (lithic heavy tools, pottery, but in its own tra- Later Neolithic. As a communication route, the Weser dition). In addition, there are apparently specialised river must have played a major role in the transmission complexes such as Hüde I (Ldkr. Diepholz), which of the enclosure idea during the younger Neolithic, may well have been hunting stations of indigenous and probably also in a further neolithisation process.5 populations as well as of Neolithic groups further But how can we characterise the relationships be- south (Möller 2004, 40). M. Furholt characterises tween the enclosure builders of Müsleringen to any re- this phase as a ‘Virtual Neolithic’, where all elements maining Final Mesolithic populations? As Terberger of the ‘Neolithic Package’ are present and used, but et al. (2018) pointed out on the basis of stable isotope their limited use does not yet effectively change social results (13C / 15N) of human remains from northern reality and human identities. This happens only after central Europe, a farming economy was introduced 3,500 calBC, with the ‘Realised Neolithic’ (Furholt in all parts of the lowlands during the early 4th mil- 2010, 12 fig. 9). In the light of recent studies, the lennium BC. But it was not before the 3rd millennium neolithisation process in northern Europe was among cal BC that it became fully established on a general other factors the result of migrations from central Eu- scale (Terberger et al. 2018, 66). Even if the data are rope, and less of an acculturation of Late Mesolithic more scarce here, this was probably also the case in populations (Brace et al. 2018). These populations northwestern Germany. The situation in the northern present at the transition from the Mesolithic to the forefield of the traditional Neolithic settlement areas Neolithic apparently formed the demographic basis in Westphalia and the southern part of Lower Saxony for the subsequent Funnel Beaker culture / EN II, c. remains unclear. An occupation by Final Mesolithic / 3,500 – 3,300 calBC onwards (Ten Anscher 2015). The Subneolithic communities similar to Swifterbant in situation in the north German lowlands east of the the Netherlands can be assumed for western Lower Elbe river seems to be quite comparable (cf. Beran / Saxony at any rate (Hüde-Swifterbant), where cor- Wetzel 2014, 81), perhaps complemented by stronger responding pottery is found selectively (Hüde I near northerly oriented early Neolithic traditions (EN I), Diepholz).6 However, Swifterbant is only vaguely visi- similar to the western Baltic region. ble in western Lower Saxony. The reason is to be found It has been shown elsewhere by the author that in a mainly foraging way of life, which leaves relatively no far-reaching impulses seem to have come from the few archaeological traces. Compared to Westphalia, Younger Neolithic in the Münsterland (Michelsberg) for example, the lack of causewayed enclosures has a to the adjacent north German lowlands. This is not particularly negative effect to our knowledge. Compa- only demonstrated by the absence of causewayed rably, relatively little would be known of Michelsberg enclosures in western Lower Saxony during the Younger Neolithic, but also by the absence of Maas flint (especially of pointed axes made of Maas flint) as well as of leaf-shaped arrowheads (Knoche 2008a; 5  Knoche 2008a, 131; Klassen 2014, 167, 226, 228 fig. 140; cf. b). Jade axes are also present only sporadically in this the ‘north-south communication route’ („Nord-Süd-Kommuni- kationsroute“) of Müller 2017, 93 fig. 47, fig. 86. For Gädebehn area, compared to southern central Europe.7 Late see http://krg.htw-berlin.de/studium/studienschwerpunkte/ grabungstechnik-feldarchaeologie-gfa/studienprojekte/ lehrgrabung-gaedebehn/, last accessed 08.12.2019. 6  Kampffmeyer 1983; 1991; Stapel 1991; Kotula 2019, 7. For 7  Klassen 2004, 83; Pétrequin 2012, fig. 3; Pétrequin et al. Swifterbant see Raemaekers 1999; Raemaekers / De ­Roever 2017, fig. 1. Only in the western Baltic region they can be found 2010. See also Nachr. Niedersachsen Urgeschichte Beiheft 2, in certain numbers; there they also provoked formal flint imita- 1999, 89 fig. 58,2. tions, as Klassen points out. Benedikt Knoche 423 Neolithic remains, however, are known in relatively The coexistence does not only refer to the di- large numbers, and the described Younger Neolithic chotomy between the Neolithic areas in the loess gap of sites is not just a source problem. boroughs and the adjoining geest areas to the north This border situation between Westphalia / the and north-west of Germany which has been known Hellweg zone and the adjacent parts of western Lower for a long time (Kabaciński et al. 2015). The same di- Saxony stands in contrast to the situation further east, chothomy of Neolithic people and hunter-gathers can where south-north interactions along the Weser river be observed for the Belgian Younger Neolithic (cf. can actually be detected (Knoche 2008a; Klassen Vanmontfort 2007, 112). In the southern Westpha- 2004; 2014). This corridor-like role of the Weser river lian region, i. e. the low mountain range landscapes to can also be traced by the distribution of clay discs with the south of the loess boroughs, a longer coexistence fingertip prints mapped by J. Müller, and perhaps by of groups with and without a farming lifestyle up to the transmission of tetraploid free threshing wheat the Late Neolithic is now also cautiously outlined. to the north (Kirleis / Fischer 2014, 81; Müller Thus, a persistence of hunter-gatherer populations 2017). Prestige goods such as jade axes may also have in the mountain range of southern Westphalia (‘Blät- been transmitted via the Weser vector. The communi- terhöhle’ near Hagen) can be seen until about the ties located in these parts of the north German plain middle of the 4th millennium calBC (Orschiedt et al. (Hüde-Swifterbant) thus obviously behaved structur- 2015; 2017). Apparently, the use of different land- ally conservative towards the Younger Neolithic as- scape types made it possible to reconcile the two sociations of Westphalia or the Rhineland with their concepts of life and economy in the longer term, for Michelsberg tradition. In contrast, they themselves example in the sense of a ‘Paramesolithic’. These seem to have radiated impulses to the western Mün- concepts may even have formed partially socio-eco- sterland. Isolated evidence for such dynamics is repre- nomic complementary phenomena. In this context, sented by an aurochs scapula from Greven-Bockholt the occurrence of some flint artefacts in the MK (Kr. Steinfurt) with circular cutouts. Such produc- III-complex of the Soest causewayed enclosure (Kr. tion waste (from making bone rings) is known from Soest), which have formal Final Mesolithic parallels the Ertebølle area and, partly, also from Swifterbant and might easily represent a reflection of this coex- (Spoolde, Hüde I; cf. Stapel 2014; this volume; for istence, should only be pointed out in general terms the distribution of bone rings: Andersen 1998, 37). (Knoche 2008a, 80; 128). The Late Mesolithic site For Klassen, bone rings and shoulder blades with cut- ‘Retlager Quellen’ (Kr. Lippe), on the other hand, outs are part of the same distribution mechanisms as yielded unspecific ceramic fragments that might T-axes made of deer antlers. He considers them to theoretically be Younger Neolithic, assuming that be a genuine ‘innovation of the northwestern central there is no admixture of finds (Knoche 2008a, note European Mesolithic’ (Klassen 2004, 127 [author’s 709). Possibly, a comparable ‘multicultural’ situa- translation]). According to radiocarbon measurements, tion of Mesolithic and Neolithic populations can the specimen of Greven-Bockholt is dated to c. 4,350 also be expected in southern Lower Saxony with its calBC, i. e. the transition phase from the Middle to the juxtaposition of lowlands and low mountain ranges Younger Neolithic. Thus, via the Ems river, elements (Weserbergland, Deister, Süntel, Solling, Harz, etc.). from the north German plain reached southwards into the Münsterland. In the Münsterland Bay north Models of the northern dissemination of the Lippe, a spatial coexistence of Neolithic (e. g. Nottuln-Uphoven: Rössen, Bischheim) and Final Me- of the causewayed enclosure pheno­ solithic groups becomes tangible for this period – a menon real borderland in its time. The ‘multi-cultural’ local situation of Hüde I is replicated here on a regional On the basis of the current state of research at least scale; this proves both areas to be part of a broader four partially merging models of the dissemination socio-economic structure in northern central Europe. of the causewayed enclosure phenomenon to north- Little is currently known about the exact relationships ern Germany and Jutland can be discussed (Knoche between the two traditions. The artefact of Greven- 2019): Bockholt with its orientation to the Ems river thus refers to the same north-south vector also connected (1) Comprehensive and gradual extension of the to the stone hammer axes in the 38th/37th centuries causewayed enclosure phenomenon to the north calBC, again with links to the north (cf. Knoche along the northern edge of the low mountain 2008a, 185 fig. 5.44). range zone east of the Weser river (Fig. 7,1), 424 Some remarks on the expansion of the Younger Neolithic causewayed enclosure phenomenon towards northern Germany (2) Selective exclaves in the north German plain: area). At the same time, a gradual expansion from Targeted migrations from the Neolithic bor- the traditional Neolithic settlement areas across der landscapes into single regions of the north a broad front towards the north can be expected, ­German plain form hotspots of a Neolithic con- possibly also in the sense of the exclave model cept of life, which function as crystallisation (no. 2). This would result in two different veloci- cores for habitually and economically delimited ties of spread with a fast impetus along the We- (isophenomenological) Younger Neolithic settle- ser corridor and a slower land-take further east ment pockets (Fig. 7,2), (Fig. 7,3), (3) Linear, dynamic spread to the north along the val- (4) Complementary dynamics: First a linear expan- ley of the Weser or a parallel land-bound vector, sion along the Weser valley to the northern Elbe at least into the areas of Bremen and Hamburg, region and Jutland almost like a kind of ‘pincer crossing the Elbe river to Schleswig-Holstein movement’. Here the causewayed enclosure towards the western Baltic Sea area. A compa- phenomenon was intensively established with rable vector can be assumed for the Elbe from the a subsequent southern extension towards the southeast (cf. Müller 2001 on the chronological north German plain and the Hannover / Braun- and spatial dynamics of the middle Elbe-Saale schweiger Land region (Fig. 7,4). Fig. 7 Models of the enclosure phenomenon’s spread across northern Lower Saxony to the area north of the river Elbe, c. 3,900 – 3,700 calBC. Benedikt Knoche 425 For all these models, arguments and counterarguments Skærvad, Kainsbakke IV) also falls within the range can be cited, just as gradual modifications and ad- of ‘ritual linearity’ (Klassen et al. 2020, 468 fig.7). ditions are conceivable. It may even be possible to In terms of linearity of ditch and parallel rows of combine different models over time. At first glance, wooden post settings Nottuln-Uphoven in fact resem- model 1 appears to be most likely, i. e. a ‘broad front’ bles linear stone rows, as they appear slightly earlier extension beyond the existing causewayed enclosure or simultaneously next to the megalthic grave ‘Table landscapes into the north German plain, which had des Marchand’ (Dép. Morbihan) in Brittany, with the apparently been occupied by Mesolithic to Early Neo- ‘Grand Menhir Brisé’ as its relocated main compo- lithic groups so far. This also implies the possibility nent (cf. Klassen / Knoche 2019, 87; for the stone that this process might have taken the form of small- row at the side of the ‘Table des Marchand’ see e. g. scale intrusions. However, there is still a lack of con- Cunliffe 2001, 146; Bonniol / Cassen 2009). In this necting finds north of the Hannover-Braunschweig case an ideological interaction between the materials area. Model 2 initially contains only an exclave-like wood and stone can be assumed. However, rows of establishment of ‘avant-garde’ populations with sub- wooden posts accompanying trenches are a common sequent spatial and habitual effects. A comparable feature of Younger Neolithic causewayed enclosures process might have manifested itself in causewayed in central Europe (cf. Raetzel-Fabian 1999; 2000), enclosures such as Walmstorf (Ldkr. Uelzen; Rich- although not in the specifically linear arrangement ter 1998) in Lower Saxony, or Nottuln-Uphoven (Kr. present in Nottuln-Uphoven. Furthermore, not every Coesfeld) in Westphalia (cf. Knoche 2008a; but rather section of an causewayed enclosure must have been in sceptical: Geschwinde / Raetzel-Fabian 2009, 192). use at the same time. In addition, there are so-called In both cases, Neolithic populations might have occu- recuttings, i. e. re-openings of filled ditches. Taking this pied distinct fertile loess areas outside the traditional into account, the post settings can even have been the Neolithic settlement areas. Observations by L. Klassen primary constituent and most constant element of a on the construction elements of various causewayed causewayed enclosure in terms of time as a (magical) enclosures distributed over large parts of Europe also membrane (‘Bannkreis’) of a certain place. argue for the possibility of long-range migrations of at A variant of this dynamic would be model 3 with least smaller groups of people. Thus Klassen assumes its linear extensions along infrastructural vectors as a derivation of early Neolithic causewayed enclosures ‘main routes of intrusion’. The newly discovered cause- such as Büdelsdorf (Kr. Rendsburg-Eckernförde; cf. wayed enclosures of Stolzenau-Müsleringen and Stey- Hassmann 2000; Hage 2016; Müller 2017, 88) from erberg-Wellie (both Ldkr. Nienburg/Weser; cf. Freese the Neckar region. He considers migrating groups of 2010; Knoche 2019) show the essential importance people as ‘founder populations’ in the north to be of the Weser corridor as a Younger Neolithic vector. the most plausible scenario (Klassen 2014, 150; cf. About eight kilometres further north from Müsleringen, Klassen / Knoche 2019, 95). This is accompanied Steyerberg-Wellie also gives reason to suspect that fur- by a spread of north Alpine pottery and probably ther earthworks might be found along the Weser to the also copper axes far to the north and west of conti- north, possibly at intervals of five to ten kilometres. The nental Europe, soon to be followed by tetraploid free specific significance of the river Weser as a transmission threshing wheat and copper daggers.8 Further specific axis of Younger Neolithic impulses to the north has al- elements (or variants) of the causewayed enclosure ready been discussed (Klassen 2004; Knoche 2008a). phenomenon, such as the linear earthworks or linear In addition to a targeted spatial dynamic along the ditch systems (which are strictly speaking no cause- Weser and Elbe rivers, this model also assumes a kind wayed enclosures!) only found in the Münsterland of avant-garde-population, which brought the north into (Nottuln-Uphoven, probably also Rosendahl-Oster- contact with the causewayed enclosure phenomenon wick) and in one case in Denmark (Vilsund; Klassen and the underlying ideology. In contrast to the exclave 2014, 185 – 186, 189 fig. 107), suggest such a punctual model, this linear expansion then led to the establish- and disjointed character. A recently identified linear ment of a coherent corridor of causewayed enclosures. arrangement of pits and ditch segments connecting In this linear model, direct spatial contact with the two Funnel Beaker culture causewayed enclosures on traditional Neolithic settlement areas on the northern Djursland in Denmark (‘ritual superstructure’ between fringe of the low mountain range further south was always maintained. The background of such mobility might perhaps be the existence of extensive livestock 8  Klassen 2004; 2014; Knoche 2008a; Müller 2013; 2017; farming systems and the associated driving of stock Kirleis / Fischer 2014. (Knoche 2013). 426 Some remarks on the expansion of the Younger Neolithic causewayed enclosure phenomenon towards northern Germany As an extension of this model, model 4 then takes a significantly lower level of intensity (Oswald 2011, into account that in the aftermath of the establishment 2). The reasons for these regionally different behav- of the causewayed enclosure phenomenon in Jutland iours are still unknown. It can only be assumed that and Schleswig-Holstein, the neolithisation of the north ideological differences in ritual experience and action German plain then might have proceeded essentially were responsible for the difference, or that there were from north to south – and not so much from south to also forms of enclosures which cannot be proven by north on a broad front. However, the radiocarbon dates archaeological methods, for example by hedges, clear- do not support a compelling approach in this sense. ings, superficial ground carvings, etc. But even in such Arguments for this model can be seen in the flat ham- a scenario regional differences in ritual expression mer axes with their connection from north Germany to would remain. In any case, the propagation of the Jutland, which penetrated as far as Westphalia, south- causewayed enclosure phenomenon is a non-linear ern Lower Saxony, and even further south (Knoche process, which cannot be sufficiently conceptualised 2008a, 185 ff., fig. 5.44). The chrono-typologically some- with a simple broad-front area extension. what ambivalent complex of Walmstorf (Geschwinde / Not only spatially, but also temporally the cause- Raetzel-Fabian 2009, 191) might also be traced back to wayed enclosure phenomenon is represented in a these reciprocally detached relationships. Overall, the nuanced way among users of Michelsberg ceramics: significantly higher density of causewayed enclosures Several sites with an earlier version of Michelsberg in Denmark compared to Schleswig-Holstein indicates pottery (MK II/III) in Schleswig-Holstein and Bran- that Jutland may well have had a structural significance denburg appear as isolated spots in their surroundings, in the expansion of these structures, i. e. as a secondary almost like isolated offshoots far beyond the closed expansion core. However, the current state of research distribution area of this pottery (cf. e. g. Hartz et al. may have a distorting effect here (Müller 2017, 81). 2000; Beran / Wetzel 2012). The extent to which The integration of the entire north German plain into these specific neolithisation hotspots achieved a wide- the area of the so called Trichterbecher complex (cf. spread effect cannot yet be estimated, but it may have Furholt 2014, 17; Hinz 2014, 207 for a discussion remained quite limited. In any case, during this earlier from different angles) with its megalithic construc- phase of the Younger Neolithic around 4,000 calBC tions in the subsequent Late Neolithic (‘Spätneolithi- they do not seem to have been associated with cause- kum’) from approx. 3,500 calBC onwards indirectly wayed enclosures. suggests such a north-south connection already for At present, no conclusive statements can be made the late Younger Neolithic. These temporal dynamics about the exact mode of transmission of Neolithic ele- of diverse material elements from the Younger to the ments from central to northern Europe. These early Late Neolithic might then be understood as a coher- ceramic ensembles probably reflect acculturative im- ent cultural-historical process. This model would also pulses towards the western Baltic region, whereby the best explain why vessel remains from the causewayed Michelsberg ceramics apparently provided a higher enclosure of Walmstorf show stronger connections to adaptability for the Ertebølle ceramics, which were also EN I ware than to the ceramic traditions further south. largely undecorated and non-flat-bottomed. In addition In my opinion, model 4 fits best to the current state to the assumption of extensive livestock farming sys- of research. tems with transhumance, etc., a ritually / ancestor-driv- The models presented here can only display theo- en concept exists, which assumes migrations from the retical approaches to the issue. Only a specifically southwest of Germany to at least Schleswig-Holstein focused research strategy can contribute to further (Büdelsdorf) with good reasons (Klassen 2014, 167). elucidating the historical south-north dynamics during Ancestor worship and associated long-distance routes the Younger Neolithic in Lower Saxony and beyond. may have kept the link between the region of origin By the way, it should not be an a priori assumption that and the target region at least ideally, especially since the entire Lower Saxony area east of the Weser river migrations are now assumed to be a noticeable factor had been covered by causewayed enclosures, especially in the neolithisation of the north (Klassen / Knoche in the area north of the traditional Neolithic settle- 2019, 95; on migrations to the north see Sørensen ment areas. Looking at other parts of Europe, a mo- 2014). As with the economic approach (cattle driving, saic pattern of regions with and without causewayed transhumance), however, the route affinity of the cause- enclosures is to be expected. In the British area there wayed enclosures would also remain an essential factor were regions intensively filled with causewayed enclo- in this model (Fig. 8). Systematical regional research sures, while at the same time neighbouring regions on historical routes in the Braunschweig region and did not practise this phenomenon or at least only at Westphalia might provide further clarity here. Benedikt Knoche 427 Fig.  8 Long-distance routes connected the Neckar Valley and the Kraichgau region in southern central Eu- rope with south Scandinavia and the British Isles in the late 5th and early 4th millennia BC, as pointed out by L. Klassen. An extension towards Bavaria (and further on to the Black Sea) as well as the French Atlantic coast is also likely. These connections may have played a deci- sive role in the local development of causewayed en- closure construction in the western Baltic region bet- ween 3,750 and 3,500 BC (cf. Klassen 2014, fig. 140). As mentioned before, this period is a phase of seri- Deductions ous change also in the British Isles. It was not until the 38th/37th or the 35th–33th centuries calBC, respectively, If the above-mentioned ‘model 4’ actually reflects that Neolithic communities established themselves on historical reality to some degree, this leads to vari- a broad basis there, after only sporadic and ephemeral ous inferences on the general socio-cultural condi- approaches had taken place in the previous centuries tions and dynamics north of the traditional Neolithic (Sheridan 2010; Oswald 2011; Whittle et al. 2011). settlement areas during the Neolithic, especially for In addition to the causewayed enclosures, the the 38th/37th centuries calBC: construction of long barrows also began during this (1) North of the Münsterland and southern Lower phase (from c. the 38th century calBC) as another Saxony, causewayed enclosures are only detect- aspect of monumental architecture in northern Ger- able from the 38th century calBC, possibly from many and Westphalia, followed a little later or even the 39th century calBC, onwards. Up to this time simultaneously by the first gallery graves in east West- the causewayed enclosure phenomenon came to phalia and possibly in the Hellweg zone (Knoche a halt in these (so to say) borderlands. Accord- 2008a, 187 fig. 5.47).9 This close connection is vi- ing to the current state of research, causewayed sualised by the arrangement of a gallery grave in a enclosures – as a western to central European causewayed camp of Warburg-Rimbeck ‘Weißes Holz’ phenomenon – expand only in a limited way (dist. Höxter), constructed around 3,700 calBC (cf. from the northern foothills of the low moun- Knoche 2003). tain ranges into the north German lowlands. The phenomenon did not cover the entire north German plain, but was apparently only selec- tively taken up by the local populations. Some causewayed enclosures in the north might even 9  On the probable start of the gallery graves in the late Young- be traced back to migrating colonists from the er Neolithic see Knoche 2008a, 179. Meanwhile, in addition to south. Differences between the regions west and this typological derivation, there are 14C-data from Westphalian east of the Weser river are recognisable, since gallery graves available which support this view (c.f. Schier- holt et al. 2012). in the northwestern part of Lower Saxony no 428 Some remarks on the expansion of the Younger Neolithic causewayed enclosure phenomenon towards northern Germany causewayed enclosure is detectable at all for the beginning of each regionally based neolithisa- first half of the 4th millenium calBC. Exceptions tion, archaeologically detectable reactions to are only the causewayed enclosures along the it in the form of an intensified construction of Weser river itself, which can be detected further enclosures (or maybe other monumental build- north, apparently as evidence of an expansion ings) did not become noticeable until 600 – 900 along traditional communication and traffic cor- years later (Bocquet-Appel / Dubouloz 2004). ridors. It remains to be clarified whether there The observations for northwest and northern are still undiscovered causewayed enclosures Germany fit well into this pattern and emphasise immediately west and east of the Weser. above all the demographic dimension within this (2) The regionally different preparedness for the process (cf. in general also Knoche 2013, 149). integration of causewayed enclosures indicates (4) The neolithisation (early Funnel Beaker com- different attitudes to this ritual phenomenon, plex) north of the river Elbe starting on an Erte- probably in the sense of different social or cul- bølle basis (up to approximately 4,100 / 4 ,000 tural groups. In western Lower Saxony, this calBC) led to the establishment of a monumental would be Swifterbant-Hüde I, in the eastern architecture in the western Baltic Sea area from part some sort of Swifterbant as well or another the 38/37th century calBC, to which – besides early ceramic tradition roughly north of the area causewayed enclosures – also non-megalithic Hannover-Braunschweig. In the latter case, it long mounds belong (Müller 2017). These early can only be assumed that they represent deriva- (Younger Neolithic) causewayed enclosure phe- tions of an early Funnel Beaker tradition. nomena are not yet documented in the western (3) Michelsberg ceramics in the north German part of Lower Saxony north of the Westpha- lowlands are sporadically known since the lian Bay or the Wiehengebirge. Swifterbant end of the 5th millenium calBC, but there were thus proves to be a largely enclosure-resistant still no causewayed enclosures until the 39 th to socio-economic and cultural phenomenon. Here 37th century calBC. So in this region Michels- an already long-existing cultural disposition, in berg ceramics do not necessarily have to go to- form of a habitual distinction between Michels- gether with causewayed enclosures. The Early berg to the south and Swifterbant to the north, Neolithic­populations in northern central and seems obvious. This also applies to the distinc- northern Europe tended not to be causewayed tion between Swifterbant south of the river Elbe enclosure builders. According to Müller (2014, and Ertebølle north of it, where causewayed en- 187) the ‘emergence of causewayed enclosures closures definitely appeared later on during the represents social transformations’, and if this is EN I (prior to those in northwest Germany). The true, it can be assumed in the reverse conclu- construction of the first causewayed enclosures sion that an appropriate social infiltration of in the western Baltic Sea region can already be these parts of northern Germany was not strong expected in the 39 th century calBC (Klassen enough at the beginning of the 4th millenium 2014; Müller 2017). If this is true, it will put calBC. Apparently there was initially no broad the causewayed enclosures at the Weser river, demographic basis for such a social transfor- such as the early dated Stolzenau-Müsleringen mation in form of the lifestyle of the enclosure example, even more into focus as links for the builders. In this regard, causewayed enclosures causewayed enclosures north of the river Elbe. indeed are veritable markers of the existence The early construction phases of causewayed (and acceptance) of a full Neolithic lifestyle in enclosures are generally problematic to deter- northern Germany and the western Baltic re- mine. However, the starting ‘perceptibility’ of gion. This delayed start of enclosure building causewayed enclosures in southern Lower Sax- is not an isolated case: According to J.-P. Boc- ony (in the Braunschweig and Hanover region) quet-Appels and J. Dubouloz, the demographic and the area north of the river Elbe until the changes (higher birth rate, increase in popula- 38th century calBC may be no coincidence. Most tion density) in the course of the neolithisation likely there is a convergence of the underlying in large parts of Europe also led to an increased socio-economic dynamics of this time period, construction of causewayed enclosures. While which also affected the traditional Neolithic the so-called Neolithic Demographic Transi- regions of southern central Europe and west- tion (NDT) reached its peak demographically ern (France) as well as northwestern Europe and anthropologically about 500 years after the (Britain). Strong impulses for these dynamics Benedikt Knoche 429 seem to have come from southern Germany, a ‘connecting line’ to the Neolithic settlement where from the 38th century calBC a complex areas further south, as it flows into the river with copper metallurgy, flat-bottomed ceram- Lippe at Haltern am See. ics and innovations in arable farming became (6) Furthermore, the distribution of younger Neo- recognisable (‘Nordalpines Jungneolithikum’).10 lithic hammer axes demonstrates that from the (5) Thus it seems that the northern boundary of the 38th/37th centuries calBC onwards there were causewayed enclosure phenomenon up to the noticeable impulses from the north German time around 3,750 calBC and even beyond was plain into the Münsterland, east Westphalia, a relatively constant line of equilibrium between the Weser region, and southern Lower Saxony. the traditional Neolithic settlement areas in the With one exception (Gofeld), all typologically south and the directly adjoining Mesolithic to determinable specimens from Westphalia be- Early Neolithic areas in northern Germany. long to the typological groups FIC, FIIA, and In this term, the Middle to Younger Neolithic FIVB according to Zápotocký (1992), which complex of Nottuln-Uphoven is probably not have their major distribution areas in eastern something like an offset piece of a ‘pioneer-like’ Germany, especially in Mecklenburg-Western movement into new areas in the Münsterland or Pomerania and Brandenburg, partly up to the even the bordering north German plain. Rather, middle Elbe-Saale region. These axes were ob- it was probably a targeted expansion or ‘round- viously strongly bound to the rivers Ems and ing off’ of regionally already existing settlement Weser, and at least in the case of the Ems / areas (in this case from the Hellweg zone south Münsterland a continuation of final Mesolithic of the river Lippe, probably around Haltern am structures is recognisable. This means that while See). First of all, the regional situation favours the Weser vector was charged strongly south- such an interpretation: the ‘Baumberge’ on the north, the Ems vector remained consistently slopes of which the Nottuln causewayed enclo- directed from north to south. This situation sure is situated, represent a prominent elevation also explains the inability of the Westphalian that can be seen from a great distance in the enclosure builders to expand further north- otherwise flat Münsterland, and so seem predes- wards – among other reasons. In general, it must tined as a ritual focal point. Furthermore, there be understood against the background of the are smallpockets of loess soil, which corresponds Swifterbant/Hüde I-complex and/or some sort to the Hellweg loess zone and favours the model of early Neolithic populations in the subsequent of a targeted frequentation of the site. Finally, west Lower Saxon lowlands. In the longer term the Younger Neolithic causewayed enclosure these early Neolithic/Submesolithic populations with its rows of posts parallel to the ditch is very in western Lower Saxony prepared the field for likely to be understood as a ritual installation, the forthcoming later Neolithic development maybe in the form of a ‘sacred mountain’. The of the passage graves in the second half of the location on a hilly slope, with the spring of the 4th millenium calBC, very probably also via the Stever river at its feet, may well have been an river Ems. The rivers Ems and Weser form a essential motivation for a local reach of Neo- kind of opposite system, with the Weser trans- lithic groups into the Münsterland as early as mitting south-north impulses, while the Ems si- the end of the Middle Neolithic and the Younger multaneously vectored impulses in the opposite Neolithic. From the top of the hill in Nottuln- direction towards the south. This ‘spin’ is the Uphoven one can actually look up to the edge result of a specific cultural-geographical charge of the Hellweg zone further south as the tradi- in Westphalia and northwest Germany between tional Neolithic landscape in the region. The diverging Michelsberg, Swifterbant, and Early river Stever may even have been something like Neolithic traditions, or, so-to-say, ‘energy fields’. (7) The importance of the river Weser as a central transmission axis northwards becomes increas- ingly clear for the Younger Neolithic (e. g. cause- 10  ‘Nordalpines Neolithikum’ (see Knoche 2008a, 166), with impacts from as far away as the west of France (see Klassen wayed enclosures, jadeite axes, copper, pottery, 2014, 236): The copper flat axe from Pont-de-Roide (Doubs, crops). The same relationship can be seen for France) and a flat hammer axe of serpentinite from Héricourt the river Elbe further to the east, connecting (Haut-Sâone, France) ‘testify to relations between southern cen- tral Germany and areas west at the time of major enclosure con- the Saale region (Baalberge) with northern Ger- struction between 3,750 and 3,500 BC’ (Klassen 2014, fig. 139). many. Both vectors (or accompanying routes) 430 Some remarks on the expansion of the Younger Neolithic causewayed enclosure phenomenon towards northern Germany conveyed Neolithic impulses towards northern enon’, which tends to be a model of temporally Germany and southern Scandinavian regions. restricted and decentralised ritual activities. One In the wider Hamburg area, the impulses con- or even both aspects can also be found in many verged via the Elbe and Weser vectors (cf. the other regions, as Westphalia, southern Lower site of Hamburg-Boberg as a reflection of several Saxony, and north Hesse, up to the British Isles. Neolithic impulses; Laux 1986; Thielen 2020). This strengthens Klassen’s hypothesis of rela- At this crossroad a further causewayed enclo- tively uniform ideas behind the construction of sure might theoretically be expected. A sepa- the enclosures throughout Europe. As primarily rate consideration of this bi-directional setting ritual complexes, causewayed enclosures indi- would certainly be of importance for the further cate ancient routes,11 possibly well comparable understanding of the neolithisation process in to crossroads, pilgrimage stations, or devotional the north. L. Klassen explained the concept of chapels along medieval to submodern routes. Re- causewayed enclosures with more than two ditch cently, L. Klassen and B. Knoche demonstrated circuits in southern Scandinavia in particular a possible function of the trenches as ‘magical by contact with enclosure building populations circles’ (‘Bannkreise’), to protect or enclose magi- in east Westphalia and southern Lower Saxony. cal / ritual / ancestral activities within the cause- There is even some evidence suggesting ‘that wayed enclosures. Ritual travels may have been migration from the southern parts of Lower Sax- associated with this (Klassen / Knoche 2019).12 ony and (possibly) eastern parts of Westphalia Incidentally, this does not exclude mundane pur- was a potential cause for south Scandinavian poses such as stops along routes for cattle drive, neolithisation’ (Klassen 2014, 167). trade and exchange; the magical and the mun- (8) As far as the role of the rivers Weser and Elbe dane spheres were certainly inseparable dimen- as propagation paths for Neolithic populations, sions in a premodern execution and perception stock, ideas, and techniques towards the western of life (Knoche 2013, 226). Here comparisons Baltic region and northern Europe is concerned, to the wak’a (or huacas) of the Andes region are the study of K. Davison et al. (2006) for popula- possible, which already existed in pre-Columbian tion dynamics along major waterways during times and are still revered today. These wak’as the Neolithic might be helpful for further inves- are local deities or special places themselves as tigations. The authors developed a mathematical divine entities. Integrated in pilgrimages and pil- model for population spread of early Neolithic grimage routes along these sacred places of wor- farmers (LBK) along rivers such as the Danube or ship are ceremonial and ritual spots (ceque-lines, the Rhine that stresses the importance of aniso- ceque-system). Catholicism (which itself knows tropic forms of diffusion, which might lead to an ritual routes with chapels, churches, and pilgrim- effective advection of the connected attributes. ages) in Columbia has incorporated these wak’a As seen in the case of the Younger Neolithic in system into its ritual texture (Zuidema 1964). northwest Germany (as pointed out above), cul- tural reasons may have prevented a linear and isotropic neolithisation process towards the Conclusion north German plain until the middle of the 4th millennium calBC. It may be, however, that it was Causewayed enclosures can be understood as indica- precisely this inhibition that favoured a relatively tors of the neolithisation process as early as the 38th rapid anisotropic advance of younger Neolithic century calBC, regarding the early dating of some elements, such as causewayed enclosures, along Danish and north German examples. The north Ger- the river Weser (perhaps as a ‘left-open corridor’), man plain with its traditional geestland and partly influencing the north German plain up to the peatland landscapes, which borders Westphalia, the western Baltic region. (9) The high number of causewayed enclosures in rel- atively limited regions (as around Braunschweig / 11  Cf. the route-affinity of Younger Neolithic enclosures in cent- Hildesheim) or along the river Weser makes a ral and northern Europe: Raetzel-Fabian 2002; Knoche 2003; ‘central place’ function for each enclosure un- 2008a; 2013; Geschwinde / Raetzel-Fabian 2009; Klassen 2014. likely. Rather, they display with their aggrega- 12  Some years ago Cummings 2007 presented similar ideas tion and their linear arrangement (as along the of moving around in monumental spaces of Neolithic western Weser) the character of a regional ‘mass phenom- Britain. Benedikt Knoche 431 central Weser region, and southern Lower Saxony Havelland. Veröffentlichungen zur brandenburgischen to the north, is archaeologically so far largely still Landesarchäologie 46, 2012 (2014), 37 – 141. terra incognita. However, it is not probable that Neo- Bocquet-Appel / J. Dubouloz 2004: J.-P. Bocquet-Appel / lithic elements, including the causewayed enclosures, J. Dubouloz, Expected Palaeoanthropological and spread linearily throughout the whole area, but rath- Archaeological Signal from a Neolithic Demographic er that the dynamics will have varied from region to Transition on a Worldwide Scale. Documenta Praehis- region. While the Westphalian Middle and Younger torica 31 / Neolithic Studies 11, 2004, 25 – 33. Neolithic (Rössen, Bischheim, Michelsberg) had Bonniol / Cassen 2009: D. Bonniol / S. Cassen, Corpus hardly any deep entanglements with Lower Saxony descriptif des stèles ou fragments de stèle en orthogneiss. to the north (where a partly expanding Swifterbant In: S. Cassen (ed.), Autour de la Table. Explorations obviously inhibited any dissemination), the situation archéologiques et discours savants sur des architectures to the east of the Weser river was probably differ- néolithiques à Locmariaquer, Morbihan. Laboratoire ent. The reasons for this can be attributed to vary- de recherches archéologiques (LARA) (Nantes 2009) ing social and demographic causes. Above all, the 702 – 734. Weser itself must be regarded as a first-class vector Brace et al. 2018: S. Brace / Y. Diekmann / T. J. Booth / Z. for the northern relations of the Younger Neolithic Faltyskova / N. Rohland / S. Mallick / M. Ferry / causewayed enclosure builders. Via the Weser and M. Michel / J. Oppenheimer / N. Broomandkhosh- the Elbe, the causewayed enclosure idea most likely bacht / K. Stewardson / S. Walsh / M. Kayser / R. was transferred to Jutland (and maybe Schleswig- Schulting / O. E. Craig / A. Sheridan / M. Parker Holstein), where an independent (secondary) distri- Pearson / C. Stringer / D. Reich / M. G. Thomas / bution centre developed, which then in turn radiated I. Barnes, Population Replacement in Early Neolithic impulses to the south. Britain. bioRxiv Preprint, first posted online Feb. 18, 2018; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/267443. Brandt 1969: K. H. Brandt, Fundchronik Bremen 1. Zwei References steinzeitliche Tongefäßreste. Bremer Archäologische Blätter 5, 1969, 82 – 8 4. Andersen 1997: N. H. Andersen, Sarup vol. 1. The Sarup Cummings 2007: V. Cummings, Megalithic Journeys: Moving Enclosures. The Funnel Beaker Culture of the Sarup Around the Monumental Scapes of Neolithic Western Site Including Two Causewayed Camps Compared to Britain. In: V. Cummings / R. Johnston (eds.), Prehis- the Contemporary Settlements in the Area and other toric Journeys (Oxford 2007) 54 – 6 3. European Enclosures. Jutland Archaeological Society Cunliffe 2001: B. Cunliffe, Facing the Ocean. The Atlantic Publications 33.1 (Aarhus 1997). and its Peoples. 8000 BC–AD 1500 (Oxford 2001). Andersen 2011: N. H. Andersen, Causewayed Enclosures Davison et al. 2006: K. Davison / P. Dolukhanov / G. R. and Megalithic Monuments as Media for Shaping Neo- Sarson / A. Shukurov, The Role of Waterways in the lithic Identities. In: M. Furholt / F. Lüth / J. Müller (eds.), Spread of Neolithic. Journal of Archaeological Science Megaliths and Identities. Early Monuments and Neo- 33, 2006, 641 – 6 52. lithic Societies from the Atlantics to the Baltic. Frühe Deichmüller 1965: J. Deichmüller, Eine Rössener Stilvari- Monumentalität und soziale Differenzierung 1 (Bonn ante am Dümmer. Germania 43, 1965, 334 – 343. 2011) 134 – 154. Freese 2010: H.-D. Freese, Grabung in Müsleringen, Ldkr. Andersen 1998: S. H. Andersen, Ringkloster. Ertebølle Nienburg. F.A.N.-Post 2010, 3 – 5. Trappers and Wild Boar Hunters in Eastern Jutland. Freese 2019: H.-D. Freese, 2018, ein sehr gutes Luftbildjahr A Survey. Journal of Danish Archaeology 12, 1994/95 in Niedersachsen. FAN-Post 2019, 26 – 27. (1998), 13 – 59. Furholt 2010: M. Furholt, A Virtual and a Practiced Neo- Ten Anscher 2015: T. J. Ten Anscher, Under the Radar: lithic? Material Culture Symbolism, Monumentality and Swifterbant and the Origins of the Funnel Beaker Cul- Identities in the Western Baltic Region. www.jungstein- ture. In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / SITE.de, published 17th September 2010. T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and Furholt 2014: M. Furholt, What is the Funnel Beaker Com- the Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands plex? Persistent Troubles with an Inconsistent Concept. (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im In: M. Furholt / M. Hinz / D. Mischka / G. Noble / D. Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 335 – 357. Olausson (eds.), Landscapes, Histories and Societies in Beran / Wetzel 2014: J. Beran / G. Wetzel, Die neolithische the Northern European Neolithic. Frühe Monumental- Siedlung der Michelsberger Kultur Wustermark 21, Lkr. ität und soziale Differenzierung 4 (Bonn 2014) 17 – 26. 432 Some remarks on the expansion of the Younger Neolithic causewayed enclosure phenomenon towards northern Germany Geschwinde 2018: M. Geschwinde, Die jungneolithischen Kampffmeyer 1991: U. Kampffmeyer, Die Keramik der Erdwerke zwischen Rhein und Elbe. In: H. Meller / Siedlung Hüde I am Dümmer. Untersuchungen zur D. Gronenborn / R. Risch (eds.), Überschuss ohne Neolithisierung des Nordwestdeutschen Flachlands Staat. Politische Formen in der Vorgeschichte. 10. Mit- (Göttingen 1991). teldeutscher Archäologentag vom 19. bis 21. Oktober Kirleis / Fischer 2014: W. Kirleis / E. Fischer, Neolithic 2017 in Halle (Saale). Tagungen des Landesmuseums Cultivation of Tetraploid Free Threshing Wheat in Den- für Vorgeschichte 18 (Halle/S. 2018) 263 – 286. mark and Northern Germany. Implications for Crop Geschwinde / Grefen-Peters 2017: M. Geschwinde / Diversity and Societal Dynamics of the Funnel Beaker F. Grefen-Peters, Zwischen Michelsberg und Salz- Culture. Special Issue: Farming in the Forest. Ecology münde. Beobachtungen an der westlichen Peripherie and Economy of Fire in Prehistoric Agriculture. Veg- des mitteldeutschen Kulturraumes in der Mitte des etation History and Archaeobitany 23, Supplement 1, 4. Jahrtausends v.Chr. In: H. Meller / S. Friederich 2014, 81 – 96. (eds.), Salzmünde – Regel oder Ausnahme? Internatio- Klassen 2004: L. Klassen, Jade und Kupfer. Untersuchungen nale Tagung von 18. bis 20. Oktober in Halle (Saale). zum Neolithisierungsprozess im westlichen Ostseeraum Tagungen des Landesmuseums für Vorgeschichte Halle unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Kulturentwick- 16 (Halle/S. 2017) 259 – 274. lung Europas 5500 – 3500 BC. Jutland Archaeology So- Geschwinde / Raetzel-Fabian 2009: M. Geschwinde / ciety Publications 47 (Aarhus 2004). D. Raetzel-Fabian, EWBSL. Eine Fallstudie zu den Klassen 2014: L. Klassen, Along the Road. Aspects of Cause- jungneolithischen Erdwerken am Nordrand der Mit- wayed Enclosures in South Scandinavia and Beyond. telgebirge. Beiträge zur Archäologie in Niedersachsen East Jutland Museum Publications 2 (Aarhus 2014). 14 (Rahden/Westf. 2009). Klassen / Knoche 2019: L. Klassen / B. Knoche, Kerb Groer 2010: Ch. Groer, Neolithisierung im Münsterland: Stones, Causewayed Enclosures and Protective Circles in Neues zum Siedlungsplatz von Nottuln-Uphoven. South Scandinavia and Beyond. In: J. Müller / M. Hinz / Archäologie in Westfalen 2009 (2010), 169 – 172. M. Wunderlich (eds.), Proceedings of the International Hage 2016: F. Hage, Büdelsdorf/Borgstedt: eine trichter- Conference „Megaliths, Societies, Landscapes – Early becherzeitliche Kleinregion – Siedlung, Grabenwerk, Monumentality and Social Differentiation in Neolithic nichtmegalithische und megalithische Grabenanlagen. Europe“ (16th–20th June 2015) in Kiel, Vol. 1 (Bonn 2019) Frühe Monumentalität und soziale Differenzierung 81 – 101. (Bonn 2016). Klassen et al. 2020: L. Klassen / R. Iversen / N. N. Jo- Hartz et al. 2000: S. Hartz / D. Heinrich / H. Lübke, Frühe hannsen / U. Rasmussen / O. B. Poulsen, The Pitted Bauern an der Küste. Neue C-Daten und aktuelle As- 14 Ware Culture on Djursland in the Neolithic World. In: pekte zum Neolithisierungsprozeß im norddeutschen L. Klassen (ed.), The Pitted Ware Culture on Djurs- Ostseeküstengebiet. Prähist. Zeitschr. 75, 2000, 129 – 152. land. Supra-Regional Significance and Contacts in the Hassmann 2000: H. Hassmann, Die Steinartefakte der Middle Neolithic of Southern Scandinavia. East Jutland befestigten neolithischen Siedlung von Büdelsdorf, Kreis ­Museum Publications 5 (Aarhus 2020) 451 – 4 89. Rendsburg-Eckernförde. Universitätsforschungen zur Klatt 2009: S. Klatt, Die neolithischen Einhegungen im Prähistorischen Archäologie 62 (Bonn 2000). westlichen Ostseeraum. Forschungsstand und For­ Hinz 2014: M. Hinz, Same but Different? Neolithic Eco- schungsperspektiven. In: T. Therberger (eds.), Neue nomic and Cultural Change in Northern Germany. In: Forschungen zum Neolithikum im Ostseeraum. M. Furholt / M. Hinz / D. Mischka / G. Noble / D. Archäologie und Geschichte im Ostseeraum 5 (Rah- Olausson (eds.), Landscapes, Histories and Societies in den/Westf. 2009) 7 – 134. the Northern European Neolithic. Frühe Monumental- Knoche 1998: B. Knoche, Das Michelsberger Grabenwerk ität und soziale Differenzierung 4 (Bonn 2014) 207 – 218. Soest-Burgtheaterparkplatz, Stadt Soest, Kr. Soest. In: J. Kabaciński et al. 2015: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. Biel / H. Schlichtherle / M. Strobel / A. Zeeb (eds.), Die Raemakers / T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Michelsberger Kultur und ihre Randgebiete – Probleme Pomerania and the Neolithisation of the North Euro- der Entstehung, Chronologie und des Siedlungswesens. pean Lowlands (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Kolloquium Hemmenhofen, 21.–23.2.1997. Materialhefte Geschichte im Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015). zur Archäologie in Baden-Württemberg 43 (Stuttgart Kampffmeyer 1983: U. Kampffmeyer, Der neolithische Sied- 1998) 55 – 63. lungsplatz Hüde I am Dümmer. In: G. Wegner (ed.), Knoche 2003: B. Knoche, Das jungsteinzeitliche Erdwerk Frühe Bauernkulturen in Niedersachsen. Archäolo- von Rimbeck bei Warburg, Kreis Höxter. Frühe Burgen gische Mitteilungen Nordwestdeutschland, Beiheft 1 in Westfalen 20 (Münster 2003). (Oldenburg 1983) 119 – 134. Benedikt Knoche 433 Knoche 2008a: B. Knoche, Die Erdwerke von Soest (Kr. Müller 2014: J. Müller, 4100 – 2700 B.C.: Monuments and Soest) und Nottuln-Uphoven (Kr. Coesfeld). Studien zum Ideologies in the Neolithic Landscape. In: J. F. Osborne Jungneolithikum in Westfalen. Münstersche Beiträge zur (ed.), Approaching Monumentality in Archaeology (New Prähistorischen Archäologie 3 (Rahden/Westf. 2008). York 2014) 181 – 217. Knoche 2008b: B. Knoche, Chorologie Michelsberger Pfeil- Müller 2017: J. Müller, Großsteingräber, Grabenwerke, bewehrungen. In: F. Verse / B. Knoche / J. Graefe / Langhügel. Frühe Monumentalbauten Mitteleuropas. M. Hohlbein / K. Schierholt / C. Siemann / M. Uck- Archäologie in Deutschland, Sonderheft 17 (Darmstadt elmann / G. Woltermann (eds.), Durch die Zeiten . . . 2017). Festschrift für Albrecht Jockenhövel zum 65. Geburt- Orschiedt et al. 2015: J. Orschiedt / B. Stapel / M. Hein- stag. Internationale Archäologie / Studia honoraria 28 en, Parallelgesellschaften. Bauern, Hirten und letzte (Rahden/Westf. 2008) 45 – 6 6. Wildbeuter im Neolithikum Nordrhein-Westfalens. In: Knoche 2013: B. Knoche, Riten, Routen, Rinder – Das jung- Th. Otten / J. Kunow / M. M. Rind / M. Trier (eds.), neolithische Erdwerk von Soest (Kr. Soest) im Wegenetz Revolution Jungsteinzeit. Archäologische Landesaus­ eines extensiven Viehwirtschaftssystems. In: W. Melzer stellung Nordrhein-Westfalen. Schriften zur Boden- (eds.), Neue Forschungen zum Neolithikum in Soest denkmalpflege Nordrhein-Westfalen 11.1 (Darmstadt und am Hellweg. Soester Beiträge zur Archäologie 13 2015) 242 – 249. (Soest 2013) 119 – 274. Orschiedt et al. 2017: J. Orschiedt / R. Bollongino / O. Knoche 2018: B. Knoche, Jungneolithische Erdwerke. Nehlich / F. Gröning / J. Burger, Buried in a Cave Forschungsperspektiven in Niedersachsen aus Sicht – Neolithic Human Remains from the Blätterhöhle at des F.A.N. FAN-Post 2018, 23 – 26. Hagen, Germany. In: H. Meller / S. Friederich (eds.), Knoche 2019: B. Knoche, Modelle zur Expansion des jung- Salzmünde – Regel oder Ausnahme? Internationale neolithischen Erdwerksphänomens zwischen dem Nor- Tagung von 18. bis 20. Oktober in Halle (Saale). Ta- drand der Mittelgebirge und dem Raum nördlich der gungen des Landesmuseums für Vorgeschichte Halle Elbe. FAN-Post 2019, 28 – 31. 16 (Halle/S. 2017) 499 – 506. Knoche / Schyle 2015: B. Knoche / D. Schyle, Jungneo- Oswald 2011: A. Oswald, Causewayed Enclosures. Introduc- lithische Erdwerke in Westfalen: Soest und Salzkotten- tions to Heritage Assets May 2011 (2011). Oberntudorf. In: Th. Otten / J. Kunow / M. M. Rind / Oswald et al. 2011: A. Oswald / C. Dyer / M. Barber, The M. Trier (eds.), Revolution Jungsteinzeit. Archäologische Creation of Monuments. Neolithic Causewayed Enclo- Landesausstellung Nordrhein-Westfalen. Schriften zur sures in the British Isles (Swindon 2001). Bodendenkmalpflege Nordrhein-Westfalen 11.1 (Darm- Pétrequin 2012: P. Pétrequin, Jade: Inégalités sociales stadt 2015) 366 – 371. et espace européen au Néolithique: la circulation des Kotula 2019: A. Kotula, Vom späten Jäger-Sammler zum grandes haches en jades alpins. In: P. Pétrequin / S. Bauern in Niedersachsen. Hinterland oder Innovations­ Cassen / M. Errera / L. Klassen / A. Sheridan / A. M. region? F.A.N.-Post 2019, 5 – 9. Pétrequin (eds.), Grandes haches alpines du Néolithique Laux 1986: F. Laux, Die mesolithischen und frühneolith- européen. Ve et IVe millénaires av. J.-C. Tome 1 (Besan- ischen Fundplätze auf den Boberger Dünen bei Ham- çon 2012) 16 – 2 5. burg. Überlegungen zum Beginn des Neolithikums im Pétrequin et al. 2017: P. Pétrequin / S. Cassen / M. Errera / Niederelbegebiet. Hammaburg N.F. 7, 1986, 9 – 38. A. Sheridan / T. Tsonev / S. Turcanu / V. Voinea, Möller 2004: S. Möller, Kalkriese. Die Vorbesiedlung im The Europe of Jade. From the Alps to the Black Sea. Umfeld des kaiserzeitlichen Fundplatzes. Osnabrücker In: L. Manolakakis / N. Schlager / A. Coudart (eds.), Forschungen zu Altertum und Antike-Rezeption 7 (Möh- European Archaeology. Identities & Migrations. Hom- nesee 2004). mages à Jean-Paul Demoule (Leiden 2017) 285 – 298. Müller 2001: J. Müller, Soziochronologische Studien zum Raemaekers 1999: D. C. M. Raemaekers, The Articulation Jung- und Spätneolithikum im Mittelelbe-Saale-Gebiet. of a ‘New Neolithic’. The Meaning of the Swifterbant Eine sozialhistorische Interpretation prähistorischer Culture for the Process of Neolithisation in the Western Quellen. Vorgeschichtliche Forschungen 21 (Rahden/ Part of the North European Plain (4900 – 3400 BC). Ar- Westf. 2001). chaeological Studies Leiden University 3 (Leiden 1999). Müller 2013: J. Müller, Missed Innovation: the Earliest Raemaekers / De Roever 2010: D. C. M. Raemaekers / P. De Copper Daggers in Northern Central Europe and South- Roever, The Swifterbant Pottery Tradition (5000 – 3400 ern Scandinavia. In: S. Bergerbrant / S. Sabatini (eds.), BC). Matters of Fact and Matters of Interest. In: B. Van- Counterpoint: Essays in Archaeology and Heritage Stud- montfort / L. Louwe Kooijmans / L. Amkreutz / L. ies in Honour of Professor Kristian Kristiansen. BAR Verhart (eds.), Pots, Farmers and Foragers. Pottery Tra- Int. Ser. 2508 (Oxford 2013) 443 – 4 48. ditions and Social Interaction in the Earliest Neolithic 434 Some remarks on the expansion of the Younger Neolithic causewayed enclosure phenomenon towards northern Germany of the Lower Rhine Area. Archaeological Studies Leiden lithic of the Lower Rhine Area. Archaeological Studies University 20 (Leiden 2010) 135 – 149. Leiden University 20 (Leiden 2010) 189 – 207. Raetzel-Fabian 1999: D. Raetzel-Fabian, Der umhegte Song / Pollmann 2020: B. Song / H.-O. Pollmann, Neues Raum – Funktionale Aspekte jungneolithischer Mon- aus der archäologische Luftbildforschung. Kreis Min- umental-Erdwerke. Jahresschrift Mitteldeutsche Vorge- den-Lübbecke, Regierungsbezirk Detmold. Archäologie schichte 81, 1999, 81 – 117. in Westfalen 2019 (2020), 283 – 286. Raetzel-Fabian 2000: D. Raetzel-Fabian, Erdwerk und Sørensen 2014: L. Sørensen, From Hunter to Farmer in Bestattungsplätze des Jungneolithikums. Architektur Northern Europe. Migration and Adaptation During the – Ritual – Chronologie. Universitätsforschungen zur Neolithic and Bronze Age. Acta Archaeologica Supple- Prähistorischen Archäologie 70 (Bonn 2000). menta 85,I–II (Whiley 2014). Raetzel-Fabian 2002: D. Raetzel-Fabian, Monumentality Stapel 1991: B. Stapel, Die geschlagenen Steingeräte der and Communication. Neolithic Enclusures and Long Siedlung Hüde I am Dümmer. Veröffentlichungen der Distance Tracks in West Central Europe. www.jung- urgeschichtlichen Sammlungen des Landesmuseums steinSITE.de, published 05th Januar 2002. zu Hannover 38 (Hildesheim 1991). Ramminger et al. 2013: B. Ramminger / H. Sedlarczek / Stapel 2014: B. Stapel, Geräte aus dem Norden. Archäologie N. Kegler-Graiewski, Vorläufige Ergebnisse zum neo- in Deutschland 2014(3), 50. lithischen Erdwerk aus Müsleringen, Ldkr. Nienburg/ Stapel this volume: B. Stapel, Swifterband and the Late Weser. Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte Mesolithic in Westphalia. 82, 2013, 3 – 26. Terberger et al. 2018: T. Terberger / J. Burger / F. Lüth / Richter 1998: P. B. Richter, Das jungsteinzeitliche Erdwerk J. Müller / H. Piezonka, Step by Step – The Neolithisa- bei Walmstorf. Arch. Niedersachsen 1, 1998, 38 – 4 0. tion of Northern Central Europe in the Light of Stable Rinne 2017: C. Rinne, Ein jungneolithisches Erdwerk aus Isotope Analyses. Journal of Archaeological Science Südniedersachsen – Der „Kleine Heldenberg“ bei Salz­ 99, 2018, 66 – 86. derhelden, Stadt Einbeck. In: C. Rinne / J. Reinhard / Thielen 2020: L. Thielen, Die Neolithisierung auf den Fund- E. Roth-Heege / S. Teuber (eds.), Vom Bodenfund zum plätzen Hamburg-Boberg – Kontakte und Interaktion. Buch. Archäologie durch die Zeiten. Festschrift für Veröffentlichung des Archäologischen Museums Ham- Andreas Heege. Sonderband Historische Archäologie burg und Stadtmuseums Harburg 114 (Hamburg 2020). 2017 (Onlineversion), 63 – 82; doi.10.18440/ha.2017.105. Vanmontfort 2007: B. Vanmontfort, Bridging the Gap. The Schierhold et al. 2012: K. Schierhold / R. Gleser / M. Mesolithic-Neolithic Transition in a Frontier Zone. Doc. Baales, Zur Genese und Struktur der hessisch-west- Praehist. 34, 2007, 105 – 118. fälischen Megalithik. In: M. Hinz / J. Müller (eds.), Whittle et al. 2011: A. Whittle / F. Healy / A. Bayliss, Siedlung, Grabenwerk, Grosssteingrab. Studien zu Ge- Gathering Time. Dating the Early Neolithic Enclosures sellschaft, Wirtschaft und Umwelt der Trichterbecher- of Southern Britain and Ireland. Vol. 1 (Oxford 2011). gruppen im nördlichen Mitteleuropa. Schwerpunkt- Zápotocký 1992: M. Zápotocký, Streitäxte des mitteleu- programm 1400. Frühe Monumentalität und soziale ropäischen Äneolithikums. Quellen und Forschungen Differenzierung 2 (Bonn 2012) 411 – 429. zur Prähistorischen und Provinzialrömischen Archäolo- Sheridan 2010: A. Sheridan, The Earliest Pottery in Brit- gie 6 (Weinheim 1992). ain and Ireland and its Continental Background. In: B. Zuidema 1964: R. T. Zuidema, The Ceque System of Cuzco: Vanmontfort / L. Louwe Kooijmans / L. Amkreutz / the Social Organization of the Capital of the Inca. Inter- L. Verhart (eds.), Pots, Farmers and Foragers. Pottery nationales Archiv für Ethnographie 50 (Leiden 1964). Traditions and Social Interaction in the Earliest Neo- Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 , 435 – 453) 435 Subsistence change? Diversification of plant economy during the Neolithic in northern Germany Wiebke Kirleis Abstract From an economic perspective, the neolithisation can be described as a growing together of multiple arrays of food supply strategies. In the north of Germany, there is no strict division into either a Mesolithic or Neolithic way of life observable in the diet after 4,000 calBCE. Instead, the Neolithic subsistence economy there merges multiple methods of food acquisition, with the contribution of wild resources depending on availability in specific ecological niches and on culinary preferences. Changes in plant use from the uptake of agrarian practices towards the establishment of fully-fledged crop cultivation be- tween c. 4,000 to 1,700 calBCE are presented here, based on archaeobotanical data from 21 Neolithic settlement sites in northern Germany. For the northern German Neolithic, a diversification in the crop spectrum from the Early towards the Late Neolithic can be observed, contrary to southern Scandinavia. Hence, it can be inferred that the Funnel Beaker plant economy shows clear regional differentiation. As a new interpretative approach, it is proposed that the Neolithic plant economy was organised alongside different modules with adaptation to specific environmental constraints and specific needs of individual plant species. These modules included plant gathering as well as (labour) intensive and (labour) extensive crop cultivation, mutually interlinked with specific technological and cultural innovations, each with variable relevance through time and space. Keywords Plant economy, Neolithic, northern Germany, archaeobotany Zusammenfassung Die Neolithisierung kann aus wirtschaftlicher Sicht als ein Zusammenwachsen verschiedener Strategien der Nahrungsmittelversorgung beschrieben werden. Nach 4000 v. u. Z. ist im Norden keine strikte Trennung zwischen meso- lithischen und neolithischen Ernährungstraditionen zu beobachten. Stattdessen führt die neolithische Wirtschaftsweise ver- schiedene Strategien des Nahrungserwerbs zusammen, wobei der Beitrag der Wildressourcen von deren Verfügbarkeit in bestimmten ökologischen Nischen und von kulinarischen Vorlieben abhängt. Veränderungen in der Pflanzennutzung von der Übernahme agrarischer Praktiken hin zur Etablierung eines vollwertigen Pflanzenanbaus zwischen ca. 4000 und 1700 v. u. Z. werden hier basierend auf archäobotanischen Daten von 21 neolithischen Siedlungsplätzen in Norddeutschland vorgestellt. Für das norddeutsche Neolithikum ist eine Diversifizierung des Kulturpflanzen­ spektrums vom Früh- zum Spätneolithikum zu beobachten, ein gegenläufiger Trend im Vergleich zum südlichen Skandinavien. Daraus lässt sich ableiten, dass die Pflanzenwirtschaft der Trichterbecherzeit eine deutliche regionale Differenzierung aufweist. Als neuer interpretativer Ansatz wird vorgeschlagen, die neolithische Pflanzenwirtschaft als modulares System zu betrachten, dessen verschiedene Module an spezifische Umweltbedingungen angepasst waren und die spezifischen Bedürfnisse einzelner Pflanzenarten berücksichtigten. Die Module umfassten das Sammeln von Nutzpflanzen sowie den (arbeits-) intensiven und den (arbeits-) extensiven Kulturpflanzenanbau, die jeweils wechselseitig mit spezifischen technologischen und kulturellen Innovationen verknüpft waren und unterschiedliche zeitliche und räumliche Relevanz hatten. Introduction ception is that northern hunter-gatherer-fishers were confronted with early central European farmers and The discussion on the transition from hunter-gatherer- adapted their economies.1 The northern European fisher communities towards the establishment of a plain is generally considered as a region where hunt- fully Neolithic way of life within Europe is very much ing, fishing, and the gathering of wild plants were the driven by the idea of a dualistic concept of lifestyles of either (semi-)mobile Mesolithic or of sedentary agrar- ian Neolithic groups, accompanied by a perspective 1  Klassen 2004; Müller 2013; Price / Gebauer 2017; Gron / of directional one-way development. The general per- Sørensen 2018. 436 Su bs i ste n ce ch an ge? D iversif ication of plant economy during the N eolithic in northern G er m any Fig. 1 Geographical distribution of the 21 Neolithic sites with archaeobotanical investigations in northern Germany (site no. according to Table 1). preferred economic activities of the Mesolithic groups In contrast to the interrelations between LBK or living there, and where agriculture and livestock breed- post-LBK farmers and the Nordic Mesolithic, we can ing became the basis of livelihood with a time lag of observe a direct adoption of pastoral and agricultural about 1,400 years.2 practices by southern Scandinavian and northern Ger- However, recent studies showed that in the late man groups from 4,100 calBCE onwards. Even though 6th and 5th millennium calBCE both groups co-existed it is often argued that sub-Mesolithic groups were in the northern European plain for quite some time found at certain sites until about 3,000 calBCE (e. g. (e. g. Kirleis et al. in prep.; cf. Gerken / Nelson 2016; the cemetery of Ostorf), dietary calculations showed Ismail-Weber 2017). Since settlements belonging to that a primarily Neolithic society had been developed the Linear Pottery (LBK) and subsequent Neolithic that practiced varied combinations of different nutri- groups (e. g. Rössen) have recently been discovered tional strategies (Lübke et al. 2007; Olsen / Heine- outside the main loess regions, the separation of the meier 2007; Fernandes et al. 2015). A comparison of living environments of Mesolithic and farming groups archaeobotanical inventories in particular indicates along natural boundaries is partly obsolete (Ismail- that on the one hand, there are basic trends, but on the Weber 2017). In contrast, natural transition zones are other hand there are differences in the ways in which of particular importance as border regions between plants are included, e. g. with respect to the integration different habitats. They represent direct contact zones of gathered wild plants and the like. between Mesolithic and Neolithic lifestyles and act as The aim of this study is to present archaeobotani- catalysts for cultural exchange. cal data from 21 Neolithic settlement sites in north- ern Germany, with the highest site density in Holstein (Fig. 1; Table 1), using this as a basis to identify how 2 E.g. Hartz et al. 2007; Müller 2011; Kirleis et al. 2012; plant use developed over time, from the uptake of Terberger et al. 2018. agrarian practices towards the establishment of fully- Wi e b ke K i rl e i s 437 No. Site name Site type Feature types Archaeolo- „No. of „No. of „No. of cereal Reference (if applicable) gical features“ samples“ grains“ period 1 Vechta Fst. 10 settlement pit LN 1 3 101 Kirleis 2019 2 Altgaul Fpl. 2 settlement pit, palaeosoil, layer LN 29 40 0 Lehmphul 2000 layer LN I 15 20 14 diverse LN II 1 1 0 3 Lavenstedt settlement well MN Ib 3 5 35 Kirleis 2019 Fpl. 178 pit, cultural and MN I/II 545 683 245 natural layer, profile, fireplace, bank 4 Rullstorf Fst. 8 settlement pit, cultural and natu- EN II / MN I 46 136 37 Kirleis 2019 ral layer, posthole 5 Flögeln- settlement diverse MN I-IV 7 111 1085 Behre /Kučan Eekhöltjen 1994 6 Gädebehn fortified diverse, pit EN Ib 3 4 9 Fpl. 10 settlement 7 Bad Oldesloe- settlement cultural layer EN I 2 5 1 Kirleis et al., Wolkenwehe 2012 LA 154 cultural layer EN Ib 2 4 5 cultural layer EN II 2 3 12 cultural layer EN II-MN II 11 28 34 cultural layer MN V / YN 1 7 16 39 cultural layer YN 1 2 4 1 cultural layer YN 2 2 3 5 8 Todesfelde settlement floor YN 3 1 1 4 Effenberger LA 31 2017, 2018 burnt horizon, pit, LN 4 4 697 posthole posthole, silo LN I 3 3 7110 floor, burnt horizon LN II 2 2 818 9 Bad Segeberg fortified pit, ditch system EN Ib / EN II 6 22 5 Kirleis 2019 LA 94 settlement diverse MN I 17 112 98 10 Bosau settlement pit LN 2 2 6145 Kirleis 2019; Kirleis 1981 11 Hemmingstedt settlement pit, posthole, diverse EN II / MN I 28 32 226 Kirleis 2019 LA 2 12 Büdelsdorf fortified pit, ditch system, EN Ib 6 6 0 Hage 2016 LA 1 settlement, cultural layer, diverse settlement pit, ditch system EN Ib / EN II 5 5 0 pit, ditch system, EN II 4 4 0 cultural layer, fire- place pit, ditch system, MN I 6 10 53 fireplace, posthole pit, ditch system, MN II 5 5 2 posthole diverse LN 1 1 0 13 Rastorf LA settlement pit EN Ib / EN II 1 1 8 Kirleis 2019 6 a/c pit, fireplace, EN II 3 18 56 occupation layer Table 1 21 Neolithic sites with archaeobotanical investigations in northern Germany (No. 1 – 12). 438 Su bs i ste n ce ch an ge? D iversif ication of plant economy during the N eolithic in northern G er m any No. Site name Site type Feature types Archaeolo- „No. of „No. of „No. of cereal Reference (if applicable) gical features“ samples“ grains“ period 14 Oldenburg settlement pit, inhumation, MN I 12 12 1254 Kirleis 2019; LA 77 posthole Brozio 2016 well, pit, pit complex, MN II 59 143 7716 posthole pit, posthole, cultural MN III/IV 37 37 817 layer diverse MN I-II 1 1 0 well, pit, inhumation, MN I-IV 290 337 3771 cultural and natural layer, posthole, diverse pit, posthole, diverse MN II-IV 16 16 63 15 Oldenburg settlement cultural layer EN II-MN Ia 1 1 3 Kirleis 2019; LA 191 Filipović et al., diverse 2019 diverse diverse diverse settlement cultural layer MN I-IV 17 17 3350 16 Wangels settlement cultural layer EN Ib 1 1 1 Kirleis 2019; LA 505 Kroll 2001 diverse MN V 2 13 70 17 Oldenburg settlement cultural layer MN 1 1 106 Brozio et al. LA 232 2019b; pit MN I 1 1 2338 Filipović et al., 2019 pit, ditch, posthole, MN I-II 32 32 658 cultural layer 18 Göhl LA 142 settlement pit, fireplace, pos- MN I-II 43 48 11 this publication thole, diverse diverse YN 1 1 1 0 diverse LN 1 1 2 19 Heringsdorf- settlement pit EN Ib 1 1 0 Kirleis 2019 Süssau LA 38 MN I/II 5 5 2 20 Grube LA 65 settlement pit EN Ib / EN II 1 1 26 Kirleis 2019 21 Tastrup LA 29 settlement well EN Ib / EN II 4 17 2 Bock 2016 diverse EN II-MN Ib 1 1 1 diverse MN II-V 1 1 0 Table 1 21 Neolithic sites with archaeobotanical investigations in northern Germany (No. 13 – 21). Wi e b ke K i rl e i s 439 fledged crop cultivation between c. 4,000 to 1,700 cal- Archaeological sub-periods absolute dates BCE BCE. Focusing on domestic rather than burial sites Early Neolithic, EN I 4000 – 3500 allows us to get insight into the routine practices of a EN Ib 3800 – 3500 plant economy that may have varied between different EN II 3500 – 3300 regions and social groups, and also into a diachronic Middle Neolithic, MN 3300 – 2800 perspective of the uptake of sedentary agrarian life- MN I 3300 – 3100 styles from the Early Neolithic all way through to the MNIb 3200 – 3100 Late Neolithic (Kirleis / Klooss 2014). MN II 3100 – 3000 MN III/IV 3000 – 2900 Material and Methods MN V 2900 – 2800 (2600) Younger Neolithic, YN 1 2850 – 2600 Data on charred plant assemblages from 21 northern YN 2 2600 – 2450 German Neolithic sites comprise the baseline for this YN 3 2450 – 2250 evaluation, including published as well as unpublis- Late Neolithic, LN 2250 – 1700 hed data, all stored in the ArboDat database at Kiel LN II (2350) 2250 – 1950 University. LN II 1950 – 1700 The sites date to 4,000 – 1,700 calBCE, and only such sites that cover at least two archaeological sub- Combined archaeological absolute dates BCE sub-periods periods / combined sub-periods are considered (Ta- EN II-MN Ib 3500 – 3100 ble 2). Plant assemblages that can only be dated to EN Ib/EN II 3800 – 3300 more general units, e. g. the Funnel Beaker period as EN II-MN Ia 3500 – 3200 such (4,000 – 2,800 calBCE), are excluded to avoid background noise. Only data on charred plant remains EN II/MN I 3500 – 3100 are considered. Data on water-logged plant material EN II-MN II 3500 – 3000 are not included, as only two sites provided such mate- MN Ib-MN IV 3200 – 2900 rial: Bad Oldesloe-Wolkenwehe LA154 with selective MN I-II 3300 – 3000 preservation conditions due to recurrent desiccation MN II-IV 3100 – 2900 of the peat matrix (Kirleis et al. 2012), and the Middle MN II-V 3100 – 2800 (2600) Neolithic V (3,000 – 2,900 calBCE) site Wangels LA505 MN I-IV 3300 – 2900 with sound and reliable water-logged plant assem- MN V/YN 1 2900 – 2600 blages (Kroll 2001; Kirleis 2019a, 125); the latter EN/MN 4000 – 2800 (2600) one is referred to for comparison in the discussion. The archaeobotanical records are mostly related to Table 2 Archaeological periodisation for the north European plain domestic sites, but for the sites Büdelsdorf LA1, Bad (after Müller et al. 2012). Segeberg LA94, and Gädebehn 10, ditch systems are recorded for certain periods that might also account for ritual plant depositions. lithic site Rastorf LA6a/c provides evidence of only The data included had to fulfill certain require- rarely preserved charred linseeds, while the remain- ments to ensure a reasonable degree of comparability ing four other sites were included to ensure coverage and representativeness. Finds had to originate from of archaeological periods that otherwise would have sites with a Neolithic domestic context, comprising been fully excluded (e. g. the Late Neolithic site Bosau at least twenty-five charred cereal grains, ideally from LA242). Not all periods are covered with a compa- a minimum of three features. 25 cereal grains from rable number of sites. Particularly from the Younger at least three features per site may seem to be a weak Neolithic Single Grave culture there are only very few criterion. However, this reflects the generally low find sites known at all, from which very few were archaeo- concentrations of botanical remains for Neolithic sites botanically investigated. on the north European plain (Kirleis et al. 2012; cf. For the database presented here, an application Regnell / Sjögren 2006; Bogaard / Jones 2007). of frequency measurings is not appropriate. Instead, The site Heringsdorf-Süssau LA38 was included de- absolute numbers of cereal grains were considered spite comprising only 13 cereal grains. For five other and included for calculations at each site. This site sites, mass finds originating from only one or two data provide the baseline for the application of an features were considered, since e. g. the Early Neo- aoristic approach to allow for a diachronic perspec- 440 Su bs i ste n ce ch an ge? D iversif ication of plant economy during the N eolithic in northern G er m any Archaeological period EN Ia EN Ia EN Ia EN Ia EN Ib EN Ib EN Ib EN Ib EN Ib EN Ib EN II EN II cal BCE 4000 – 3950 3950 – 3900 3900 – 3850 3850 – 3800 3800 – 3750 3750 – 3700 3700 – 3650 3650 – 3600 3600 – 3550 3550 – 3500 3500 – 3450 3450 – 3400 Crop seeds and fruits Papaver somniferum x 10 Linum usitatissimum x 10 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Triticum cf. spelta Triticum aestivum s.l. 3 3 Triticum monococcum Hordeum vulgare, hulled Hordeum vulgare var. nudum 3 3 3 3 3 3 157 157 Triticum dicoccum 1 3 3 3 3 3 22 22 Threshing remains Cerealia indet., culm fragment Cerealia indet., glume fragment Cerealia indet., rachis segment Hordeum vulgare 0,5 0,5 Triticum aestivum s.l. Triticum durum s.str. Triticum dicoccum 3,9 4,2 4,2 4,2 4,2 4,2 54,4 54,4 Triticum monococcum 0,4 0,4 0,4 0,4 0,4 0,4 0,7 0,7 Triticum cf. spelta Archaeological period EN II EN II MN Ia MN Ia MN Ib MN Ib MN II MN II MN III/IV MN III/IV MN V MN V-YN 1 cal BCE 3400 – 3350 3350 – 3300 3300 – 3250 3250 – 3200 3200 – 3150 3150 – 3100 3100 – 3050 3050 – 3000 3000 – 2950 2950 – 2900 2900 – 2850 2850 – 2800 Crop seeds and fruits Papaver somniferum x 10 5 5 10 10 Linum usitatissimum x 10 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Triticum cf. spelta Triticum aestivum s.l. 3 3 2 2 3 3 8 8 2 2 1 1 Triticum monococcum 7 7 7 7 12 12 5 5 1 1 Hordeum vulgare, hulled 66 66 71 71 66 66 66 66 Hordeum vulgare var. nudum 157 157 901 901 909 909 2394 2394 620 620 51 51 Triticum dicoccum 22 22 1431 1431 1435 1435 2829 2829 889 889 133 133 Threshing remains Cerealia indet., culm fragment 3,0 3,0 3,0 3,0 3,0 3,0 3,0 3,0 Cerealia indet., glume fragment 0,4 0,4 0,4 0,4 75,9 75,9 0,4 0,4 Cerealia indet., rachis segment 6,3 6,3 6,3 6,3 110,8 110,8 10,8 10,8 Hordeum vulgare 0,5 0,5 89,5 89,5 89,5 89,5 251,8 251,8 91,8 91,8 49,9 49,9 Triticum aestivum s.l. 0,1 0,1 0,1 0,1 5,6 5,6 0,1 0,1 2,0 2,0 Triticum durum s.str. 1,0 1,0 Triticum dicoccum 54,4 54,4 750,6 750,6 752,1 752,1 7702,9 7702,9 794,1 794,1 220,4 220,4 Triticum monococcum 0,7 0,7 19,6 19,6 19,6 19,6 24,1 24,1 7,6 7,6 1,1 1,1 Triticum cf. spelta 0,7 0,7 0,7 0,7 0,7 0,7 Archaeological period YN 1c YN 1c YN 1c YN 1c YN 2a YN 2a/b YN 2b YN 3a YN 3a YN 3b YN 3b LN I cal BCE 2800 – 2750 2750 – 2700 2700 – 2650 2650 – 2600 2600 – 2550 2550 – 2500 2500 – 2450 2450 – 2400 2400 – 2350 2350 – 2300 2300 – 2250 2250 – 2200 Crop seeds and fruits Papaver somniferum x 10 Linum usitatissimum x 10 Triticum cf. spelta 261 Triticum aestivum s.l. 486 Triticum monococcum 23 Hordeum vulgare, hulled 17 Hordeum vulgare var. nudum 5 5 5 5 1 1 1 171 Triticum dicoccum 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 860 Threshing remains Cerealia indet., culm fragment Cerealia indet., glume fragment Cerealia indet., rachis segment Hordeum vulgare 1,8 Triticum aestivum s.l. Triticum durum s.str. Triticum dicoccum 976,8 Triticum monococcum Triticum cf. spelta 31,9 Archaeological period LN I LN I LN I LN I LN I LN II LN II LN II LN II LN II cal BCE 2200 – 2150 2150 – 2100 2100 – 2050 2050 – 2000 2000 – 1950 1950 – 1900 1900 – 1850 1850 – 1800 1800 – 1750 1750 – 1700 Crop seeds and fruits Papaver somniferum x 10 Linum usitatissimum x 10 Triticum cf. spelta 261 261 261 261 261 27 27 27 27 27 Triticum aestivum s.l. 486 486 486 486 486 486 486 486 486 486 Triticum monococcum 23 23 23 23 23 2 2 2 2 2 Hordeum vulgare, hulled 17 17 17 17 17 13 13 13 13 13 Hordeum vulgare var. nudum 171 171 171 171 171 112 112 112 112 112 Triticum dicoccum 860 860 860 860 860 154 154 154 154 154 Threshing remains Cerealia indet., culm fragment Cerealia indet., glume fragment Cerealia indet., rachis segment Hordeum vulgare 1,8 1,8 1,8 1,8 1,8 1,5 1,5 1,5 1,5 1,5 Triticum aestivum s.l. Triticum durum s.str. 0,2 0,2 0,2 0,2 0,2 Triticum dicoccum 976,8 976,8 976,8 976,8 976,8 88,4 88,4 88,4 88,4 88,4 Triticum monococcum Triticum cf. spelta 31,9 31,9 31,9 31,9 31,9 1,9 1,9 1,9 1,9 1,9 Table 3 Absolute data for Figs. 2 and 3, aoristic approach. Diachronic perspective on the Neolithic crops in northern Germany, 4,000 – 1,700 calBCE. Wi e b ke K i rl e i s 441 Fig. 2 Diachronic perspective on the Neolithic crops in northern Germany, 4,000 – 1,700 calBCE: cereals and oil plants (data as listed in Table 1. Note that the hulled variety of barley is only identified at one FBC site (Flögeln) – all other FBC sites show the free-threshing ­variety of barley.). tive on the data, calculating the species relevance in Results 50-year time slices for the period 4,000 – 1,700 calBCE (Fig. 2). The aoristic method is used successfully in Diachronic perspective on cereals and oil plants criminological studies to calculate the probability that in northern Germany, 4,000 – 1,700 calBCE an event took place in a certain period (Ratcliffe / McCullagh 1998; Ratcliffe 2000; 2002). Eventually, The overall picture of the northern German plant longer periods of, for example, occupancy of sites assemblages shows clear differences between two are subdivided into 100-year steps or 50-year steps periods (Figs. 2 – 3). The crop assemblages from the and result in a uniform statistical distribution of the Early to Younger Neolithic (4,000 – 2 ,250 calBCE) probabilities of the individual objects and monuments are dominated by two main cereals, emmer (Triticum (Mischka 2004; Müller 2015). dicoccum) and barley (Hordeum vulgare). For these Only cereal grains definitely identified to spe- periods, socio-cultural changes have only a minor im- cies level are recorded, except for the identification of pact on preferences in nutrition and plant economy. Triticum cf. spelta. For barley, we differentiate between In contrast, the Late Neolithic (2,250 – 1,700 calBCE) Hordeum vulgare, the hulled variety, and Hordeum crop assemblage is clearly different from the previous vulgare var. nudum, which is the free-threshing one. time, since two new cereal species, spelt (Triticum cf. Within the area of the Funnel Beaker culture the spelta) and free-threshing wheat (T. aestivum s.l.), hulled variety of barley is only identified at the site gain relevance and widen the cereal spectrum. of Flögeln with numerous findings (Behre / Kučan In the narrow crop assemblage of the Early Neo- 1994). All other Funnel Beaker sites show evidence for lithic I (4,000 – 3,500 calBCE), with only marginal the free-threshing variety of barley, Hordeum vulgare evidence for the Early Neolithic Ia and the main data var. nudum. It would be worth re-visiting the Flögeln belonging to the Early Neolithic Ib, emmer and bar- barley to verify if this is simply a matter of different ley show equal shares. In addition, the oil and fibre use of nomenclature, or if the Flögeln barley grains plant linseed/flax is present. When oil rich seeds get indeed show the distinct impressions from glumes and in contact with fire, they usually immediately burn to glume remains sticking to the grain surface. ash. The probability for the preservation of oil-rich 442 Su bs i ste n ce ch an ge? D iversif ication of plant economy during the N eolithic in northern G er m any Fig. 3 The Neolithic crop assemblages in northern Germany in six archaeological periods between 4,000–1,700 calBCE (data as listed in Table 1. Note that the hulled variety of barley is only identified at one FBC site (Flögeln) – all other FBC sites show the free-threshing ­variety of barley.). seeds in charred conditions is extremely low. The and free-threshing barley comprise the main cereal linseed/flax finds from Rastorf 6a/c included here – components, with emmer dominating, as supported although low in absolute find numbers – are to be by numerous finds of glume bases. Single finds of considered as evidence for a fully-fledged cultivation einkorn, free-threshing wheat – the latter at site of the species. The charred seeds originate from a pit Wangels LA505 identifiable as T. turgidum/durum fill with an extraordinary texture that is described (Kirleis 2019a, 128) – and opium poppy supplement in the excavation report as ‘greasy’ (Steffens 2009), the crop spectrum. Data for the plant assemblages a texture that most probably reflects the burning of the Younger Neolithic (2,800 – 2,250 calBCE) are of a linseed assemblage or storage (Kirleis 2019a, extremely sparse and hardly reliable. The assemblage 79). In the Early Neolithic II (3,500 – 3,300 calBCE) consists of barley and emmer, the main components free-threshing barley predominates over emmer, but thus similar to those of the preceding periods. A together both remain the dominant cereal species. sound database for the Late Neolithic (2,250 – 1,700 For emmer, there are numerous additional findings of calBCE) reveals clear changes in crop cultivation. chaff indicating emmer processing activities. Barley A diversification of domesticates is observable. Now and emmer are supplemented by minor contributions four species, emmer, free-threshing wheat (including of free-threshing wheat (T. aestivum s.l.) and lin- T. turgidum/durum), spelt, and free-threshing barley, seed. The Middle Neolithic (MN) I–IV (3,300 – 2,900 are the main cereals, supplemented by einkorn and ­c alBCE) again shows emmer and free-threshing hulled barley. ­barley as the main cultivars, with emmer dominat- ing this time. The cereal spectrum is supplemented Diachronic perspective on the tradition of by minor contributions of einkorn and free-threshing plant gathering in northern Germany, wheat. Among the numerous threshing remains there 4,000 – 1,700 calBCE: gathered plants versus are single glumes, possibly from spelt (Triticum cf. cultivars spelta), originating from the site Göhl LA142. Single finds of linseed/flax and opium poppy seeds (Papaver The relevance of gathered plants in the northern somniferum), both from the site of Oldenburg LA77, German Neolithic in a diachronic perspective is indicate the oil plants. The charred plant assemblage depicted as z-scores of the ratio of gathered plants/ of the short period of MN V (2,900 – 2,800 calBCE) crops (Fig. 4). A wide definition is used for gathered resembles the composition of the MN I–IV. Emmer plants, including next to the common important Wi e b ke K i rl e i s 443 Fig. 4 Diachronic perspective on the tradition of plant gathering. Ratio of gathered plants/crops (z-score standardization, after Kirleis 2019b, 465, fig. 3). staples such as hazelnuts, berries or crab apples with Diachronic perspective on subsistence high caloric impact, as well such wild plants and strategies in northern Germany, 4,000 – 1,700 weedy herbs – like white goosefoot – that provi- calBCE: intensive versus extensive cultivation de edible fruits and seeds. The graph shows that a mixed plant economy was applied throughout the Subsistence regimes can follow different types of Neolithic, and this to variable extent. Interestingly, cultivation strategies. Two main strategies, intensive the Early Neolithic II (3,500 – 3,300 calBCE) was and extensive cultivation (Fig. 5), can be inferred for the phase with the highest relevance of plant gathe- prehistoric crop cultivation (Van der Veen 2005). In ring, a phase when crop cultivation was consolidated order to identify past human activities and to gain as a second mainstay alongside animal husbandry an understanding of social organisation, it is crucial and hunting game. There were multiple reasons to define the cultivation strategies with utmost cla- for integrating wild plants into the subsistence in rity and to bring into focus the farmers’ investment. Neolithic societies. First of all, it is a strategy of Thus, labour input, among the several, often inter- diversification that increases food security and pro- related aspects, is decisive in defining intensive and vides an extra supply of additional nutrients and special flavours. Next to such economic and dietary Intensive Extensive cultivation cultivation reasons, gathered plants played an important role Labour input per area high low in the ritual sphere of Neolithic societies and are Yield per area high low often overrepresented in burial contexts (Kirleis / Yield per person low high Klooss 2014). That Neolithic ways of life included Example Small scale culti­ Large arable fields, vation, gardening shifting cultivation foraging traditions to a variable extent is not only Archaeobotanical Dominant annual Dominant perennial shown in the use of plants, but also in the hunting indication weeds weeds of game. 3 Archaeological Digging stick / hoe Animal draught ard indi­cation (material culture) 3  Steffens 2005; Hinz 2018; Brozio et al. 2019a; Knitter Fig.  5 Characteristics for intensive and extensive cultivation et al. 2019. ­strategies (after van der Veen 2005). 444 Su bs i ste n ce ch an ge? D iversif ication of plant economy during the N eolithic in northern G er m any Fig. 6 Diachronic perspective on cultivation strategies in northern Germany, 4,000 – 1,700 calBCE (after Brozio et al. 2019a, fig. 4). extensive cultivation strategies. This is in contrast Extensive cultivation strategies are practised on large to a definition relating to palaeo-ecological reconst- arable fields as well as in shifting cultivation. ructions that often refers to consolidated agriculture Specific tools and technologies are used for – as proven by large-scale woodland opening – as either strategy. Intensive crop growing is carried ‘intensified’ agriculture. This nomenclature is mis- out with the digging stick and the hoe, often as a leading and should be avoided, since the large-scale collective activity (Kirleis 2019b). In the archaeo- woodland opening – seen from the work force per- logical record, both tools are rarely encountered. spective – goes along with the application of exten- Traces indicating the possible use of a digging stick sive cultivation strategies on expanded arable fields. were unearthed only in a Swifterbant context in the Intensive cultivation is characterised by high Netherlands, dating to the second half of the 5th mil- labour input per area, the yield per area is high, but lennium calBCE (Huisman / Raemaekers 2014). the yield per person is low. This cultivation strategy Extensive crop cultivation is mainly carried out applies for small-scale cultivation on garden-like with the ard, a simple plough that scratches the plots. In contrast, extensive cultivation builds upon soil before seeding, invented in the 4th millennium low labour input per unit of arable land, low yields calBCE. Earliest ard marks on Fyn, Denmark, date ­ per area, but accounts for high yields per person. to about 3,700 ­calBCE; they are commonly preserved below megalithic tombs that were erected between Wi e b ke K i rl e i s 445 3,600 and 3200 calBCE (Beck 2014; Müller 2014; even more importance when spelt entered the crop Sørensen / Karg 2014). The ‘boom’ of ard marks spectrum in the Late Neolithic. The Middle Neolithic directly predates the erection of megalithic tombs (3,300 – 2,800 calBCE) is a period with more or less (Mischka 2013). It is often overlooked but impor- balanced extensive and intensive agricultural practices. tant that the ard is a tool that can be pulled either by humans or by draught animals. To differentiate Informed crop cultivation: adaptation to plant both, systematic measurements of the depth of ard traits and ecological niches marks are a desideratum that might reveal the depth of ground penetration which supposedly is deeper The Neolithic dwellers lived in a widely forested envi- when animal traction was applied. To date, animal ronment (Feeser et al. 2019; Knitter et al. 2019) with traction is proven to have taken place on a regular small-scale clearings for farmsteads. Further opening basis only since the Middle Neolithic, i. e. from 3,300 of the dense woodland cover was triggered by livestock calBCE onwards (Johannsen 2006). The full adop- browsing in the vicinity of the farmsteads, thus facili- tion of animal traction for plowing coincides with the tating the establishment of plots for crop cultivation. introduction of wheel and wagon or cart in the mid While cultivation on freshly cleared plots is highly 4th millennium calBCE, another technological innova- beneficial with respect to plant nutrients, depletion of tion that accounts for animal traction (Mischka 2011; soils becomes relevant if plots are periodically under Klimscha 2017; Klimscha / Neumann this volume). cultivation (Schier et al. 2013). It is assumed that in- From an archaeobotanical point of view, the tensive garden plots were in use over long time periods documented weed spectrum allows for the identifi- over the course of the Neolithic, possibly for several cation of differences in the subsistence regime. The generations. The recurrent crop cultivation on the weeds can be grouped into annual and perennial same plots changed the soil properties. Intensive use species, each linked with a variable degree of distur- and biomass removal by harvesting of crops may have bance and thus a specific mode of arable practice. led to a severe leaching of soils, accounting for the ap- The occurrence of annual weeds is linked with a plication of manure to sustain high yields. The stable high disturbance regime, intensive earthwork and isotopic composition of cereal grains can indicate the weeding. In contrast, the perennial weed species use of livestock manure and hint at water management dominate in cultivation regimes that are managed ex- strategies that enhance crop yields. Whether or not tensively, e. g. with the ard, just scratching furrows in manuring was implemented as a cultivation strategy the ground for seeding, leaving undisturbed patches in the northern German Neolithic, is currently being between the ard marks and later rows of plants. investigated. To infer tendencies in crop management strat- First results from stable isotope studies applied egies regarding intensive versus extensive cultiva- on charred material from the northern German site tion in the northern German Neolithic and how it Oldenburg LA77, distr. Holstein, have shown a high relates to specific crop plants, the ratios of emmer degree of variation (Filipović et al. 2019a). Crab plus spelt/free-threshing barley and annual/peren- apple provides a signal of natural soils with δ15N val- nial weeds are calculated (Brozio et al. 2019a). For ues below any manuring regime (Fig. 7). The emmer the periods 4,000 – 2,800 and 2,250 – 1,900 calBCE, grains group with consistent values in the range of sound background data on cereal and weed seeds natural soils and a low level of manuring (resulting and fruits are available. They show that the ratio of in δ15N values between 3 – 6 ‰). The individual grains free-threshing barley/emmer-spelt for the Early Neo- of barley however show a high variety in the range of lithic period (4,000 – 3,300 calBCE) is linked with the δ15N values. This may be explained by differences in ratio of perennial to annual weeds, indicating that in the incorporation of nitrogen in the living plant, or this period in particular free-threshing barley may taphonomic reasons, like the effects of charring and have been grown extensively (Fig. 6). However, emmer the state of grain preservation. The narrow range of and annual weeds are present as well and show that emmer δ15N values, when compared with barley, might intensive crop growing was a complimentary part of also be interpreted as a consequence of stable grow- the agricultural system. In contrast, for the Late Neo- ing conditions for emmer, with cultivation on similar lithic period (here: 2,250 – 1,900 calBCE) the ratio of plots and consistent treatment, perhaps in the dry emmer-spelt/free-threshing barley matches the ratio upland zone near to the settlement. The high degree of annual to perennial weeds. Since annual weeds of variation in barley may, in contrast, reflect the wide dominate, it can be assumed that intensive agricul- ecological amplitude of this species, regardless of the ture was the practice applied to emmer and gained presence/absence of manuring, that allows for success- 446 Su bs i ste n ce ch an ge? D iversif ication of plant economy during the N eolithic in northern G er m any Fig. 7 Stable carbon and nitrogen isotope measurements on plant remains from the site Oldenburg LA77 (after Filipović et al. 2019a, fig. 7). ful cultivation on different plots including those with than values that have been reported for barley and poor soil properties (e. g. Klassen 2005). Furthermore, emmer from several Bronze Age sites in the Nether- archaeological contexts affect the signals; a high input lands, where increased δ15N values reached above 6 ‰ of manure was deduced in cereal grains deposited (Bakels 2018). This indicates that the maintenance at domestic sites, while cereal deposits at ritual sites of soil fertility was not a focal point of Neolithic cul- revealed non-manuring signals (Bogaard et al. 2013; tivation strategies, but became relevant when animal Kanstrup et al. 2014; Styring et al. 2016). husbandry gained further importance in the Bronze The δ13C values for most of the emmer and barley Age and animal dung was a widely available resource. samples at Oldenburg LA77 fall into a range that in- dicates a well-balanced hydrological regime. This can Summarising diachronic developments in be expected in a temperate zone, which fits with the northern German Neolithic crop cultivation situation of site Oldenburg LA77 in the Oldenburger Graben, a wetland area with tiny islands that was cut The cereal spectrum in northern Germany in the off from direct access to the Baltic Sea during the Funnel Beaker period (4,000 – 2,800 calBCE) is nar- Middle Neolithic (Filipović et al. 2019a; b). row. It comprises free-threshing barley and emmer To sum up, emmer and barley may have been as the main crops; einkorn and free-threshing wheat grown on soils of different quality and moisture status occur as minor components only, and whether they in the vicinity of the site Oldenburg LA77. The em- were intentionally cultivated or a random admixture mer cultivation plots received perhaps greater care, remains unclear. From the Early Neolithic onwards, whereas barley cultivation may have been less inten- the cereals are accompanied by the oil plant linseed/ sive, or less demanding than that of emmer, and it was flax, and from the Middle Neolithic by opium poppy therefore grown on any ground, spreading out into as well. Towards the Late Neolithic a drastic change areas less suitable for emmer cultivation. An in-depth occurs. The number of main cereal staples is doubled. knowledge of Neolithic farmers about environmen- Now four cereal species become main staples: emmer, tal conditions as well as crop traits and needs might barley, spelt, and free-threshing wheat. In particular, entail such an adaptation to local conditions. The the newcomer spelt indicates new exchange networks application of manure varied over time and space. (Effenberger 2017; 2018). Gathered plants accom- The data from the Oldenburg LA77 site fit nicely with pany the cultivars throughout the Neolithic, but to the reported nitrogen values for emmer and barley a varied extent. The overall picture for the northern grains from Neolithic sites in southern Scandinavia German Neolithic shows a diversification of plant that range from between unmanured and low to me- use over time, a widening of the plant components dium manuring regimes (Bogaard et al. 2013; Gron relevant for economy and diet that reaches its highest et al. 2017). The values for the Neolithic are far lower diversity in the Late Neolithic. Wi e b ke K i rl e i s 447 A similar picture arises when looking into agrar- as well as in northern Germany domestic animals, ian strategies. Stable isotope analyses show an elabo- next to game, played an important role. The adop- rate treatment of the different cultivars: no massive tion of animal husbandry indicates the commence- manuring, but directed care for such species that ment of farmers’ activities, with pastoral activities were esteemed valuable. The spectrum of cultivation contributing to the opening of the woodland canopy technologies widened during the Neolithic when the (Hartz et al. 2007; Feeser / Dörfler 2019a). The ard was introduced (cf. also Klimscha / Neumann woodland opening was further triggered by direct hu- this volume). An animal-drawn ard allows for tilling man activities, i. e. the foundation of farmsteads, but large fields. Our investigations show that this new also ritual sites with different expressions of monu- technology of extensive cultivation on large arable mentality. Such open areas in the densely forested fields did not take over, but complemented already environment served as main precondition for crop consolidated horticulture strategies, whereever suit- cultivation based on free-threshing barley and emmer able and beneficial. Intensive crop cultivation by use in northern Germany. From joint palaeo-ecological of the hoe continued on small garden-like plots. The and archaeological studies it is already known that opening of woodlands can be traced in the region- the phase of the highest intensity of monument build- al pollen records and indicates the enlargement of ing activities and the highest rate of land opening arable fields, most probably by means of extensive overlap (Feeser / Furholt 2014; Müller 2019). Par- cultivation, but near-site and on-site archaeobotani- ticularly during the Funnel Beaker period, economic cal studies are necessary to give a complete picture, and ritual activities were closely interrelated (Brozio highlighting plant gathering and the continued small- et al. 2019a). Palynological investigations show that scale cultivation practices (Feeser et al. 2012; Feeser / the megalithic tombs in the northern and western Dörfler 2015; Kirleis 2019a). Funnel Beaker region were often erected on former To sum up, the diachronic development of crop arable land and former settled areas. In particular, cultivation in the northern German Neolithic shows clumped pollen grains of cereals, ribwort plantain, one main pattern: It is the pattern of diversification and wild grasses, often together with ard marks, that applies for the cultivars as well as for the socio- prove local cereal cultivation in the Early Neolithic technological management of crop cultivation. The (Feeser / Dörfler 2019b). The first consolidation of early Neolithic starts off with a narrow spectrum an economic and cultural landscape is expressed by of crops that is widened towards the Late Neolithic a massive, relatively stable openness in the landscape and all the way through accompanied by gathered and by intensive monument building, especially from plants to a variable extent. The cultivation strategies 3,600 to 3,200 calBCE (Müller 2019). It reflects a applied can be described as a modular system. The newly established economic system that was now, first farmers grew their crops on small plots. With the next to animal husbandry, building on cereal cul- invention of the animal-drawn ard, large arable fields tivation as a second important pillar of subsistence as a new module supplement the widely consolidated economy, with the growing of free-threshing barley crop cultivation on garden-like plots. Plant gather- and emmer. The agrarian technological innovations ing may even have benefitted from the large-scale (ploughing with the ard, the use of draught animals) woodland opening, since the number of woodland widened the arable practices applied. Extensive culti- edges increased. Woodland edges are the favourable vation strategies complemented intensive crop grow- habitat of many of the gathered plants, such as crab ing and show that diversified cultivation techniques apple, hazel or blackberry. Resource availability was were established from 3,300 calBCE onwards. The most probably amplified (Kirleis 2018). crop spectrum, however, remained basically the same all throughout the Early and Middle Neolithic, with emmer and barley as the main cultivars. This also Discussion accounts for the MN V that is archaeologically char- acterised by the ‘Store Valby phenomenon’, which is Subsistence change in the archaeological now interpreted as expressing socio-cultural changes context of the northern German Neolithic in the area of the Cimbrian Peninsula / southern Scandinavia, with Funnel Beaker societies declin- For the northern Neolithic, a stepwise adoption of ing, while at the same time the rise of the Globular subsistence strategies is indicated (Hartz et al. 2007; Amphora phenomenon with its own coarse ware, axe Sørensen 2014; Kirleis 2019b). In the subsistence and adze types, as well as cattle burials is observed of Early Neolithic groups in southern Scandinavia (Brozio et al. 2019c). From an archaeobotanical 448 Su bs i ste n ce ch an ge? D iversif ication of plant economy during the N eolithic in northern G er m any point of view, it is noteworthy that there are contin- technological management of crop cultivation. The ued indications for the cultivation of opium poppy, onset of crop cultivation started with a narrow set and that – for the first time in northern Germany – of main cultivars, namely free-threshing barley and there is evidence of grains from the tetraploid variety emmer. This cereal assemblage is then widened with of free-threshing wheat Triticum durum/turgidum in an off-set of about 1,500 years into the Late Neo- a domestic context at the MN V site Wangels LA505. lithic when spelt and free-threshing wheat become The phenomenon of the Younger Neolithic two additional main staples. If we compare this re- Single Grave culture groups developed with a low gional picture with data from southern Scandinavia, spatial representation of domestic sites, with their in particular from southern Sweden, but also from own forms of social organisation and their own Denmark (as compiled by Kirleis / Fischer 2014, fig. symbols that are expressed in a new monumental 6), a different pattern is observed. The crop spectra boom (Brozio 2019a). The Younger Neolithic sub- of the sites Almhov, Kvärlöv, Hjulberga, Limensgård, sistence economy is perceived as primarily relying and Frydenlund show a notable contribution of free- on animal husbandry, the plant component being threshing wheat as early as in the Early Neolithic I. difficult to trace. But the sparse evidence for cereal Based on this compilation, it is concluded that the cultivation shows a continuation of previous tradi- finds of free-threshing wheat support the scenario tions, with cultivation strategies being adapted to of a chronological separation of different agricultur- specific environmental constraints when necessary al systems that were implemented within different (Klassen 2005). This is in contrast to the Late Neo- Funnel Beaker phases. The evidence for tetraploid lithic period, beginning around 2,250 calBCE, when free-threshing wheat shows that the ­tradition of the an emphasis is placed on intensive crop cultivation early Funnel Beaker groups is linked to southwest- strategies and new specific storage systems. The ern agricultural developments, for example, of the pattern of diversification in subsistence economy Michelsberg culture. In southern Scandinavia, the becomes evident. It finds its expression in a wider Early Neolithic I shows a substantial cereal spectrum crop spectrum and in new subsistence management with emmer, barley, and free-threshing wheat as main strategies, indicating possibly new networks, wherein staples. It is separated from the agricultural system of spelt and hulled barley are encountered as new cul- the Middle to Late Neolithic that built upon a stan- tivars, and the cultivation of free-threshing wheat dardised narrow cereal spectrum with only barley and is consolidated (Effenberger 2017; 2018). At the emmer as main staples. The change was supported same time, massive changes in the archaeological by the introduction of the new ard technology dur- record concern the declining relevance of monu- ing the late Early/Middle Neolithic transition. The ments, which are replaced by high deposition rates ard was most probably in use on a regular basis with of status symbols in the form of flint daggers and a draught animal system since the Middle Neolithic metal objects, reflecting supra-regional metallurgy (Johannsen 2006). The standardised narrow cultivar exchange systems (Klassen 2004; Vandkilde 2017). package, combined with extensive cultivation strate- The new Late Neolithic economic growth features gies, may have allowed for surplus production and a strong plant component. It is reflected in a highly at the same time furthered population growth. Such variable, but strongly increasing human impact on agricultural change most likely mirrors transforma- the environment with maximal indications for soil tions in the organisation of Funnel Beaker societies, erosion around 1,900 calBCE, with the transforma- with a new burial attitude emerging, in connection tions further influenced by a regional abrupt cool- with intensive monument building about 3,600 – 3,200 ing event that is evidenced in the Skagerrak pal- calBCE that required increased labour input. aeo-climatological records (Butruille et al. 2017; The different phasing of agricultural systems in Brozio 2019a). the Funnel Beaker period as described in Kirleis and Fischer (2014) remains valid, but when compared Comparison of the diachronic developments in with the improved evidence for northern Germany, it crop cultivation in the southern Scandinavian has to be seen as a specific regional expression for the and northern German Neolithic onset of crop cultivation in southern Scandinavia. In contrast, cereal cultivation in northern German The diachronic development of crop cultivation in Funnel Beaker groups focused on barley and em- the northern German Neolithic, as presented in this mer from the beginning. Free-threshing wheat was paper, is characterised by the pattern of diversification known as well, but did not become a main staple in the crop spectrum as well as seen in the socio- food until the Late Neolithic. Wi e b ke K i rl e i s 449 A modular system of subsistence management plant gathering, (labour) intensive and extensive after 4,000 calBCE – an archaeobotanical crop cultivation, with adaptation to specific environ- perspective mental constraints and specific needs of individual plant species. Each module had a variable relevance The neolithisation (in an economic sense) in north- throughout time and space and was influenced by ern Germany is seen as a process of adaptation that technological and cultural innovations. Furthermore, lasted for several generations; it is considered a slow when looking into the crop spectrum, Funnel Beaker and gradual sequence of changes towards agrarian groups, and possibly also Single Grave groups, had subsistence. The introduction of domestic animals a narrow set of cultivars, building upon two main and crop cultivation took place between 4,000 – 3,700 staples, barley and emmer. Only in the Late Neolithic calBCE. However, culinary practices that originated the crop spectrum widened, and emmer, barley, spelt, in pre-agricultural societies continued (Hinz 2018; and free-threshing wheat comprised the cereals that Kirleis 2019b). This accounts for wild plants and served as main plant staples then. wild terrestrial animals and is further indicated in the While a diversification in the crop spectrum stable isotope records from samples of human remains from the Early towards the Late Neolithic can be (13C/15N) from northern central Europe, showing the observed for the northern German Neolithic, an importance of aquatic food ressources far into the 4th opposed trend is visible for southern Scandinavia. millennium calBCE (Terberger et al. 2018). With Thus, the Funnel Beaker plant economy shows clear respect to wild plant consumption, both individual regional differentiation. and cultural preferences will have played a role. More- The neolithisation from an economic perspec- over, edible wild plants provide nutrients, vitamins tive can be described as a ‘growing together’ of multi- and minerals in high concentrations. Wild plant use ple arrays of food supply strategies. There is no strict implies subsistence diversification as a strategy for division into either a Mesolithic or a Neolithic way risk-management (Jacomet / Schibler 2010, 116). of life observable in the diet after 4,000 calBCE. In- For the Neolithic in northern Germany, a modular stead, Neolithic subsistence economy was organised system of subsistence management is suggested, where as a modular system, combining multiple methods of multiple plant use practices co-exist to variable extent. food acquisition, the relevance of each component Farming and plant gathering are identified as the main underlying a non-linear fluctuation. The contribution activities. The gathering of plants can even be incor- of wild resources depended on availability in specific porated into farming activities, e. g. as a family task, ecological niches, and on cultural preferences. when fruits are gathered as ‘by-products’ on the way to remote arable fields. Acknowledgements Conclusion The German Research Foundation (DFG) suppor- ted the archaeobotanical investigations in the Plant economy is discussed for the northern Ger- frame of SPP1400 and SFB1266 (project number man Neolithic, with emphasis on the period from 2901391021 – SFB 1266). I am particularly grateful 4,000 – 1,700 calBCE. Based on data from the plant to Johannes Müller and his vivid group of archaeo- assemblages from 21 sites, three main topics occur logists, and the many colleagues of SFB 1266, for that characterise the plant-based subsistence economy: providing an inspiring and stimulating research In a diachronic perspective, a diversification can environment. Helmut Kroll, Stefanie Klooß, Drag- be observed in multiple aspects of plant economy. ana Filipović, and Tanja Reiser deserve the utmost The transition towards sedentary ways of life goes thanks for multiple discussions on the identifica- along with a widening of subsistence strategies. With tion of charred plant remains and Neolithic plant respect to plant economy, plant gathering was supple- economy, for support in filling our database with a mented by crop cultivation carried using a multitude growing amount of data from numerous sites, and for of different strategies. Plant economy as such was systematic data archiving. Roisin O’Droma kindly organised alongside different modules, including took over the English proof reading. 450 Su bs i ste n ce ch an ge? D iversif ication of plant economy during the N eolithic in northern G er m any References Store Valby phenomenon. Journal of Neolithic Archaeol- ogy 21, 2019, 103 – 146. Bakels 2018: C. C. Bakels, Maintaining fertility of Bronze Butruille et al. 2017: C. Butruille / V. R. Krossa / C. Age arable land in the northwest Netherlands. In: C. C. Schwab / M. Weinelt, Reconstruction of mid- to late- Bakels / Q. P. J. Bourgeois / D. R. Fontijn et al. (eds.), Holocene winter temperatures in the Skagerrak region Local Communities in the big world of prehistoric north- using benthic foraminiferal Mg/Ca and δ18O. The Ho- west Europe (Leiden 2018) 65 – 76. locene 27(1), 2017, 63 – 72. Beck 2014: M. R. Beck, Højensvej høj 7 e en tidligneolitisk Effenberger 2017: H. Effenberger, Pflanzennutzung und langhøj med flere faser ved Egense, Svendborg. Aarbøger Ausbreitungswege von Innovationen im Pflanzenbau for Nordisk Oldkyndighed og Historie 2011/2012, 2014, der nordischen Bronzezeit und angrenzender Regionen 33 – 118. (Neumünster 2017). Behre / Kučan 1994: K. E. Behre / D. Kučan, Geschichte der Effenberger 2018: H. Effenberger, The plant economy of Kulturlandschaft und des Ackerbaues in der Siedlungs- the Northern European Bronze Age – more diversity kammer Flögeln, Niedersachsen, seit der Jungsteinzeit. through increased trade with southern regions. Vegeta- (Niedersachsen 1994). tion History and Archaeobotany 27(1), 2017, 65 – 74. Bock 2016: A. Bock, Tastrup LA 29, ein trichterbecher- Feeser / Dörfler 2015: I. Feeser / W. Dörfler, The Early zeitlicher Brunnenbefund. In: J. Müller (ed.), Wasser, Neolithic in pollen diagrams from eastern Schleswig- Landschaft und Gesellschaft: Studien zum Ressourcen- Holstein and western Mecklenburg – evidence for a management der Trichterbechergesellschaften. Frühe 1000 years cultural adaptive cycle? In: J. Kabaciński / Monumentalität und soziale Differenzierung 10 (Bonn S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / T. Terberger (eds.), 2016) 9 – 116. The Dąbki site in Pomerania and the Neolithisation of Bogaard / Jones 2007: A. Bogaard / G. Jones, Neolithic the North European Lowlands (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). farming in Britain and central Europe: contrast or con- Archäologie und Geschichte des Ostseeraums 8 (Rah- tinuity? In: A. Whittle / V. Cummings (eds.), Going den/Westf. 2015) 291 – 306. over: the Mesolithic–Neolithic transition in north-west Feeser / Dörfler 2019a: I. Feeser / W. Dörfler, Land-use and Europe (Oxford 2007) 357 – 375. environmental history at the Middle Neolithic settle- Bogaard et al. 2013: A. Bogaard / R. Fraser / T. H. Heaton / ment site Oldenburg-Dannau LA 77. Journal of Neolithic M. Wallace / P. Vaiglova / M. Charles / G. Jones / Archaeology 21, 2019, 157 – 208. R. P. Evershed / A. K. Styring / N. H. Andersen / Feeser / Dörfler 2019b: I. Feeser / W. Dörfler, Palynol- R. M. Arbogast / L. Bartosiewicz / A. Gardeisen / ogische Untersuchungen zum Bestattungsplatz Wan- M. Kanstrup / U. Maier / E. Marinova / L. Ninov / gels LA 69. Journal of Neolithic Archaeology 21, 2019, M. Schafer / E. Stephan, Crop manuring and inten- 89 – 102. sive land management by Europe’s first farmers. PNAS Feeser / Furholt 2014: I. Feeser / M. Furholt, Ritual and 110(31), 2013, 12,589 – 12,594. economic activity during the Neolithic in Schleswig- Brozio 2016: J. P. Brozio, Megalithanlagen und Siedlungs- Holstein, northern Germany: An approach to combine muster im trichterbecherzeitlichen Ostholstein (Bonn archaeological and palynological evidence. Journal of 2016). Archaeological Science 51, 2014, 126 – 34. Brozio et al. 2019a: J. P. Brozio / J. Müller / M. Furholt / Feeser et al. 2012: I. Feeser / W. Dörfler / F. Averdieck / W. Kirleis / S. Dreibrodt / I. Feeser / W. Dörfler / J. R. Wiethold, New insight into regional and local M. Weinelt / H. Raese / A. Bock, Monuments and land-use and vegetation patterns in eastern Schleswig- economies: What drove their variability in the mid- Holstein during the Neolithic. In: M. Hinz / J. Müller dle-Holocene Neolithic? The Holocene 29(10), 2019, (eds.), Siedlung, Grabenwerk, Großsteingrab. Studien 1558 – 1571. zu Gesellschaft, Wirtschaft und Umwelt der Trichter- Brozio et al. 2019b: J.  P. Brozio / D. Filipović / U. bechergruppen im nördlichen Mitteleuropa. Frühe Schmölcke / W. Kirleis / J. Müller, Mittel- bis jung- Monumentalität und Soziale Differenzierung 2 (Bonn neolithische Siedlungshinterlassenschaften zwischen 2012) 159 – 190. 3300 – 2600 v. Chr. – Der Fundplatz Oldenburg LA 232 Fernandes et al. 2015: R. Fernandes / P. M. Grootes / M. J. im Oldenburger Graben, Ostholstein. Prähistorische Nadeau / O. Nehlich, Quantitative diet reconstruction Zeitschrift 93(2), 2019, 185 – 224. of a Neolithic population using a Bayesian mixing model Brozio et al. 2019c: J. P. Brozio / J. Müller / D. Filipović / (FRUITS): the case study of Ostorf (Germany). American W. Kirleis / U. Schmölcke / J. Meyer, The Dark Ages Journal of Physical Anthropology 158, 2015, 325 – 340. in the North? A transformative phase at 3000 – 2750 BCE Filipović et al. 2019a: D. Filipović / J. P. Brozio / P. Ditch­ in the western Baltic: Brodersby-Schönhagen and the field / S. Klooss/ J. Müller / W. Kirleis, Middle- Wi e b ke K i rl e i s 451 Neolithic agricultural practices in the Oldenburger Forschung. Festschrift für Helmut Schlichtherle zum Graben wetlands, northern Germany: First results of 60. Geburtstag (Freiburg 2010) 113 – 126. the analysis of arable weeds and stable isotopes. The Johannsen 2006: N. N. Johannsen, Draught Cattle and the Holocene 29(10), 2019, 1587 – 1595. South Scandinavian economies of the 4th millennium Filipović et al. 2019b: D. Filipović / J. P. Brozio / J. Kac- BC. Environmental Archaeology 11, 2006, 35 – 4 8. zmarek / J. Müller / W. Kirleis, Food transformed? Kanstrup et al. 2014: M. Kanstrup / M. K. Holst / P. M. Jen- Taphonomical investigation into a potentially symbolic sen / I. K. Thomsen / B. T. Christensen, Searching for role of crops at two Neolithic settlements in northern long-term trends in prehistoric manuring practice. δ15N Germany. Prähistorische Zeitschrift 94(1), 2019, 31 – 59. analyses of charred cereal grains from the 4th to the 1st Gerken / Nelson 2016: K. Gerken / H. Nelson, Niedern- millennium BC. Journal of Archaeological Science 51, stöcken 21. Lineinebandkeramisches Expansionsgebiet 2014, 115 – 125. jenseits der Lößgrenze im Land der Jäger und Sammler? Kirleis 2018: W. Kirleis, The cultural significance of plants. Nachrichten aus Niedersachsen Urgeschichte 85, 2016, In: A. Haug / L. Käppel / J. Müller (eds.), Past land- 31 – 8 4. scapes: the dynamics of interaction between society, Gron et al. 2017: K. J. Gron / D. R. Gröcke / M. Larsson / landscape and culture (Leiden 2018) 169 – 82. L. Sørensen / L. Larsson / P. Rowley-Conwy / M. J. Kirleis 2019a: W. Kirleis, Atlas of Neolithic plant remains Church, Nitrogen isotope evidence for manuring of from northern central Europe. Advances in Archaeo- early Neolithic Funnel Beaker Culture cereals from botany 4 (Groningen 2019). Stensborg, Sweden. Journal of Archaeological Science Kirleis 2019b: W. Kirleis, Labour organisation between hor- 14, 2017, 575 – 9. ticulture and agriculture: two separate worlds? In: J. K. Gron / Sørensen 2018: K. J. Gron / l. Sørensen, Cultural Koch / W. Kirleis (eds.), Gender Transformations in Pre- and economic negotiation: a new perspective on the historic and Archaic Societies (Leiden 2019) 449 – 4 65. Neolithic transition of southern Scandinavia. Antiquity Kirleis / Fischer 2014: W. Kirleis / E. Fischer, Neolithic 92, 364, 2018, 958 – 974. cultivation of tetraploid free threshing wheat in Den- Hage 2016: F. Hage, Büdelsdorf/Borgstedt: Eine trichter­ mark and Northern Germany: implications for crop becherzeitliche Kleinregion (Bonn 2016). diversity and societal dynamics of the Funnel Beaker Hartz et al. 2007: S. Hartz / H. Lübke / T. Terberger, Culture. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 23, From fish and seal to sheep and cattle: new research S1, 2014, 81 – 96. into the process of Neolithisation in northern Germany. Kirleis / Klooss 2014: W. Kirleis / S. Klooss, More In: A. Whittle/ V. Cummings (eds.), Going over: the than simply fallback food? Social context of plant use Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in NW Europe. Proceed- in the northern German Neolithic. In: A. Chevalier /E. ings of the British Academy 144 (Oxford 2007) 567 – 594. Marinova /L. Peña-Chocarro (eds.), Plants and peo- Hinz 2018: M. Hinz, From hunting to herding? Aspcts of the ple. Choices and diversity through time. Earth Serie 1 social and anial landscape during the southern Scandina- ­(Oxford 2014) 326 – 335. vian Neolithic. In: A. Haug / L. Käppel / J. Müller (eds.), Kirleis et al. 2012: W. Kirleis / S. Klooss / H. Kroll / Past landscapes: the dynamics of interaction between J. Müller, Crop growing and gathering in the north- society, landscape and culture (Leiden 2018) 207 – 233. ern German Neolithic: a review supplemented by new Huisman / Raemaekers 2014: D. J. Huisman / D. C. M. results. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 21(3), Raemaekers, Systematic cultivation of the Swifterbant 2012, 221 – 242. wetlands (The Netherlands). Evidence from Neolithic Kirleis et al. in prep.: W. Kirleis / S. Jahns / Y. Dannath / tillage marks (c. 4300 – 4 000 cal. BC). Journal of Ar- R. Neef, Früher Ackerbau an der Peripherie – Die chaeological Science 49, 2014, 572 – 584. Pflanzenfunde neolithischer Fundplätze im Havelland, Ismail-Weber 2017: M. Ismail-Weber, . . . 100  km from the Brandenburg. Archäologie in Berlin und Brandenburg. next settlement . . . Mobility of Linear Pottery groups in Klassen 2004: L. Klassen, Jade und Kupfer, Untersuchungen Brandenburg, north-eastern Germany. In: S. Scharl / B. zum Neolithisierungsprozess im westlichen Ostseeraum Gehlen (eds.), Mobility in Prehistoric Sedentary Societ- unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Kulturentwick- ies. Kölner Studien zur Prähistorischen Archäologie 8 lung Europas 5500 – 3500 BC (Aarhus 2004). (Rahden/Westf. 2017) 75 – 117. Klassen 2005: L. Klassen, Zur Bedeutung von Getreide Jacomet / Schibler 2010: S. Jacomet / J. Schibler, Subsis- in der Einzelgrabkultur Jütlands. Journal of Neolithic tenzwirtschaft aus archäologischer Sicht. In: I. Matu- Archaeology 7, 2005, 49 – 6 5. schik / Ch. Strahm / B. Eberschweiler / G. Fingerlin / Klimscha 2017: F. Klimscha, Transforming Technical A. Hafner / M. Kinsky / G. Mainberger / G. Schöbel Know-how in Time and Space. Using the Digital Atlas (eds.), Vernetzungen. Aspekte siedlungsarchäologischer of Innovations to understand the Innovation Process 452 Su bs i ste n ce ch an ge? D iversif ication of plant economy during the N eolithic in northern G er m any of Animal Traction and the Wheel. eTOPOI, Journal ties. Early Monuments and Neolithic Societies from the for Ancient Studies 6, 2017, 16 – 6 3: http://www.edi- Atlantic to the Baltic. Frühe Monumentalität und soziale tion-topoi.org/articles/details/1214. Differenzierung 1 (Bonn 2011) 273 – 284. Klimscha / Neumann this volume: F. Klimscha / D. Neu- Müller 2013: J. Müller, Vom Muschelhaufen zum Langhü- mann, A longue durée perspective on technical innova- gel: Ertebølle und Trichterbecher – Landschaften als tions in the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic of the divergierende Raumkonzepte. In: S. Hansen / Th. Meier North European Plain. (eds.), Landschaften als divergierende Raumkonzepte Knitter et al. 2019: D. Knitter / J. P. Brozio / W. Dörfler / (Berlin 2013) 133 – 153. R. Duttmann / I. Feeser / W. Hamer / W. Kirleis / Müller 2014: J. Müller, 4100 – 2700 B.C.: Monuments and J. Müller / O. Nakoinz, Transforming landscapes: ideologies in the Neolithic landscape. In: J. F. Osborne Modeling land-use patterns of environmental border- (ed.), Approaching Monumentality in Archaeology (New lands. The Holocene 29(10), 2019, 1572 – 1586. York 2014) 181 – 217. Kroll 2001: H. Kroll, Der Mohn, die Trichterbecherkultur Müller 2015: J. Müller, Crisis – What crisis? Innovation: und das südwestliche Ostseegebiet Zu den Pflanzen- Different approaches to climatic change around 2200 funden aus der mittelneolithischen Fundschicht von BC. In: H. Meller / H. W. Arz / R. Jung / R. Risch (eds.), Wangels LA 505, Kr. Ostholstein. In: R. Kelm (ed.), 2200 BC – Ein Klimasturz als Ursache für den Zerfall Zurück zur Steinzeitlandschaft, Archäologische und der alten Welt. Tagungen des Landesmuseums für Vor- ökologische Forschung zur jungsteinzeitlichen Kultur- geschichte Halle 12 (Halle 2015) 1 – 16. landschaft und ihrer Nutzung in Nordwestdeutschland. Müller 2019: J. Müller, Boom and bust, hierarchy and Albersdorfer Forschungen zur Archäologie und Umwelt- ­balance: From landscape to social meaning – Megaliths geschichte 2 (Heide 2001) 70 – 76. and societies in Northern Central Europe. In: J. Mül- Lehmphul 2020: R. Lehmphul, Die Stratigraphie von ler / M. Hinz / M. Wunderlich (eds.), Megaliths – So- Altgaul., Lkr. Märkisch-Oderland: Siedlungsarchäolo- cieties – Landscapes. Early Monumentality and Social gische Studien am Übergang vom Endneolithikum zur Differentiation in Neolithic Europe, Proceedings of the Frühbronzezeit. Forschungen zur Archäologie im Land International Conference „Megaliths – Societies – Land- Brandenburg (Wünsdorf 2020). scapes“, Kiel, 16 – 20 June 2015. Early Monumentality and Lübke et al. 2007: H. Lübke / F. Lüth / T. Terberger, Fishers Social Differentiation in Neolithic Europe 2 (Bonn 2019) or farmers? The archaeology of the Ostorf cemetery 31 – 76. and related Neolithic finds in the light of new data. In: Müller et al. 2012: J. Müller / J. P. Brozio / D. Demnick / L. Larsson / F. Lüth / T. Terberger (eds.), Innovation and H. Dibbern / B. Fritsch / M. Furholt / F. Hage / Continuity. Non-megalithic mortuary practices in the M. Hinz / L. Lorenz / D. Mischk a / C. Rinne, Baltic. New methods and research into the development ­Periodisierung der Trichterbechergesellschaften. Ein of Stone age society. Bericht der Römisch-Germanische Arbeitsentwurf. In: M. Hinz / J. Müller (eds.), Siedlung, Kommission 88, 2007, 307 – 338. Grabenwerk, Großsteingrab. Studien zu Gesellschaft, Mischka 2004: D. Mischka, Aoristische Analyse in der Wirtschaft und Umwelt der Trichterbechergruppen im ­A rchäologie. Archäologische Informationen 27(2), nördlichen Mitteleuropa. Frühe Monumentalität und 2004, 233 – 243. soziale Differenzierung 2 (Bonn 2012) 29 – 33. Mischka 2011: D. Mischka, The Neolithic Burial Sequence Olsen / Heinemeier 2007: J. Olsen / J. Heinemeier, AMS at Flintbek LA 3, North Germany, and its cart tracks: a dating of human ones from the Ostorf cemetery in the precise chronology. Antiquity 85, 2011, 742 – 758. light of new information on dietary habits and fresh- Mischka 2013: D. Mischka, Die sozioökonomische Be- water reservoir effects. In: L. Larsson / F. Lüth / T. deutung von Pflugspuren im Frühneolithikum des Terberger (eds.), Innovation and Continuity. Non-me- nördlichen Mitteleuropas. In: I. Heske / H.-J. Nüsse / galithic mortuary practices in the Baltic. New methods J. Schneeweiß (eds.), „Landschaft, Besiedlung und and research into the development of Stone age society. Siedlung“ Archäologische Studien im nordeuro­ Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 88, päischen Kontext. Festschrift für Karl-Heinz Will- 2007, 339 – 352. roth zu seinem 65. Geburtstag. Göttinger Schriften Price / Gebauer 2017: T. D. Price / A. B. Gebauer, The Vor- und Frühgeschichte 33 (Neumünster 2013) Emergence of Inequality in the Context of early 295 – 306. Neolithic northern Europe. In: S. Hansen / J. Müller Müller 2011: J. Müller, Ritual Cooperation and Ritual Col- (eds.), Rebellion and Inequality in Archaeology (Bonn lectivity: The social structure of the middle and younger 2017) 135 – 152. Funnel Beaker North Group (3500 – 2 800 BC). In: M. Ratcliffe 2000: J. H. Ratcliffe, Aoristic analysis: The spa- Furholt / F. Lüth / J. Müller (eds.), Megaliths and Identi- tial Interpretation of unspecific temporal events. Inter- Wi e b ke K i rl e i s 453 national. Journal of Geographical Information Science the Neolithic and Bronze Age. Acta Archaeologica 85,2 14, 2000, 669 – 679. (Oxford 2014). Ratcliffe 2002: J. H. Ratcliffe, Aoristic signatures and the Sørensen / Karg 2014: L. Sørensen / S. Karg, The ex- Spatio-temporal analysis of high volume crime patterns. pansion of agrarian societies towards the north – new Journal of Quantitative Criminology 18(1), 2002, 23 – 43. evidence for agriculture during the Mesolithic/Neolithic Ratcliffe / Mccullagh 1998: J. H. Ratcliffe / M. Mccul- transition in Southern Scandinavia. Journal of Archaeo- lagh, The perception of crime hot spots: A spatial study logical Science 51, 2014, 98 – 114. in Nottingham. In: N. G. La Vigne / J. Wartell (eds.), Steffens 2005: J. Steffens, Die Bedeutung der Jagd in der Crime Mapping Case Studies: Successes in the Field. Trichterbecherkultur. Journal of Neolithic Archaeology Washington DC: Police Executive Research Forum 7, 2005. www.jungsteinSITE.de. accessed 18.02.2021. (Washington 1998) 45 – 50. Steffens 2009: J. Steffens, Die neolithischen Fundplätze Regnell / Sjögren 2006: M. Regnell / K.-G. Sjögren, von Rastorf, Kreis Plön. Eine Fallstudie zur Trichter- Introduction and development of agriculture. In: becherkultur im nördlichen Mitteleuropa am Beispiel K.-G. Sjögren (ed.), Ecology and economy in Stone eines Siedlungsraumes (Bonn 2009). Age and Bronze Age Scania. National Heritage Board, Styring et al. 2016: A. K. Styring / U. Maier / E. Stephan / Archaeological Excavations Department (Lund 2006) H. Schlichtherle / A. Bogaard, Cultivation of choice: 106 – 169. New insights into farming practices at Neolithic Schier et al. 2013: W. Schier / O. Ehrmann / M. Rösch / A. lakeshore sites. Antiquity 90, 2016, 95 – 110. Bogenrieder / M. Hall / L. Herrmann / E. Schulz, Terberger et al. 2018: T. Terberger / J. Burger / F. Lüth / The Economics of Neolithic Swidden Cultivation: Re- J. Müller / H. Piezonka, Step by step – The Neolithi- sults of an Experimental Long-Term Project in Forch- sation of Northern Central Europe in the light of stable tenberg (Baden-Württemberg, Germany). In: T. Kerig / isotope analyses. Journal of Archaeological Science 99, A. Zimmermann (eds.), Economic Archaeology. From 2018, 66 – 86. Structure to Performance in European Archaeology. Vandkilde 2017: H. Vandkilde, The metal hoard from Pile Universitätsforschungen zur Prähistorischen Archäo- in Scania, Sweden (Aarhus 2017). logie 237 (Bonn 2013) 97 – 106. Van der Veen 2005: M. Van der Veen, Gardens and fields: Sørensen 2014: L. Sørensen, From hunter to farmer in the intensity and scale of food production. World Ar- Northern Europe. Migration and adaptation during chaeology 37, 2005, 157 – 163. Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 , 455 – 468) 455 Neolithic landscape under the bog – new investigations in the Ahlen-Falkenberger Moor, dist. Cuxhaven, Germany Anja Behrens, Moritz Mennenga, Steffen Wolters and Martina Karle Abstract The neolithisation process in northern Lower-Saxony (4,000 – 3,500 calBC) is still not very well understood, as there are hardly any known sites from this time period. This is due to, on the one hand, an intense bog growth, commencing c. 7,000 calBC and covering vast areas of the coastal region, concealing especially the late Mesolithic and Neolithic cultural landscape. On the other hand, preservation conditions in the dry and sandy Pleistocene ground are rather poor. Only few Neolithic settle- ments and almost no Mesolithic features have been found so far, and undisturbed structures are rare. As the cultural develop- ments in northern Lower-Saxony in the 4th millennium calBC are diverse (and still need to be untangled in the Elbe-Weser triangle), this is very unfortunate. However, as an exception to these conditions, continuous bog drainage over the last 100 years and the resulting severe desiccation of peat have partly revealed a hidden Funnel Beaker culture landscape in the Ahlen- Falkenberger Moor north of Bad Bederkesa, dist. Cuxhaven. This particularly rich ‘time capsule’ is currently examined within the new project ‘Preserved in the Bog’, which seeks to uncover Funnel Beaker culture relics in the peat through a large-scale examination of the bog area. Based on the combination of archaeological, botanical and geological methods, the project aims to reconstruct the landscape development during the Funnel Beaker period – a period with a sharp rise of sea as well as bog level – and to evaluate environmental impacts affecting the Neolithic societies as well as the other way around. This approach also allows to draw further important conclusions about cultural processes in Lower Saxony during that period. Keywords Neolithisation, Elbe-Weser triangle, bog landscape, Funnel Beaker culture, state of preservation, geomagnetic survey, landscape development, megalithic graves, settlements Zusammenfassung Die Neolithisierung in Niedersachsen (4000 – 3500 v. Chr.) lässt sich nach heutigem Forschungsstand kaum nachvollziehen, da Fundstellen aus dieser Zeit weitgehend fehlen. Einerseits ist dies auf ein flächenhaftes Moorwachstum zurückzuführen, welches ab dem 7. Jahrtausend v. Chr. bis in die Eisenzeit weite Küstenbereiche und somit vor allem meso- lithische und neolithische Landschaften verdeckte. Zum anderen sind die Erhaltungsbedingungen in den zugänglichen sandi- gen Geestgebieten schlecht, so dass nur wenige Fundstellen und zudem kaum ungestörte Befunde bekannt sind. Dies ist besonders bedauernswert, da die kulturellen Entwicklungen in Niedersachsen im 4. Jahrtausend v. Chr. sehr vielfältig gewesen sein müssen und es Strukturen sowie Vernetzungen noch zu entschlüsseln gilt. Hier kommt dem Ahlen-Falkenberger Moor, nördlich von Bad Bederkesa, Ldkr. Cuxhaven, gelegen, nun eine besondere Rolle zu, da aufgrund intensiver Drainagemaßnah- men der letzten 100 Jahre und der damit verbundenen Torfsackung eine erhaltene trichterbecherzeitliche Landschaft zu Tage tritt. Im Rahmen des Projektes “Relikte im Moor” werden diese besondere “Zeitkapsel” und damit das Gebiet selbst sowie die darin befindlichen Hinterlassenschaften der Trichterbecherkultur interdisziplinär untersucht. Basierend auf archäologischen, botanischen sowie geologischen Methoden ist es Ziel des Projektes, die Landschaftsentwicklung zur Zeit der Trichterbecher- kultur zu rekonstruieren sowie Aussagen über die damals herrschenden Umwelteinflüsse und ihre Auswirkungen auf die Ge- sellschaften und umgekehrt zu treffen. Mit diesen Analysen sollen zudem wichtige Erkenntnisse zu den kulturellen Prozessen in Niedersachsen im 4. Jahrtausend v. Chr. ermöglicht werden. 456 A Neol i th i c l an ds cape u n de r th e bog – new investigations in the Ahlen-Falkenberger Moor, dist. Cuxhaven, G er m any The Neolithic in northwestern The Elbe-Weser triangle – preservation Germany – state of research of cultural material During the early 4th millennium calBC, the Neolithic The Elbe-Weser triangle represents an area of its way of life began to emerge in northern central Eu- own importance throughout nearly all (pre-)histori- rope. In the area of the Mesolithic hunters and gath- cal times, forming a zone of intense interactions erers of the Ertebølle culture, this transition came to between northern, western, and southern archaeo- its climax with the appearance and development of logical cultures. Evidence on cultural affiliations the Funnel Beaker culture (TRB). In the region of in the Mesolithic and early Neolithic is missing, as the present Netherlands and neighbouring areas, the the archaeological record for this time in the region neolithisation began with the adoption of agriculture in particular is very poor (see below; cf. synopsis: and livestock farming already in the later phases of Mahlstedt 2015b, 72 – 73). the Swifterbant culture (Ten Anscher 2015). There is evidence for close connections between the traditions Preservation conditions in northwest Germany and the Netherlands during the Mesolithic (Mahlstedt 2015a, 150) as well as The fragmentary record can be explained with the for the later TRB.1 First traces of a defined Neolithic diverse landscape – a mosaic of Pleistocene plains culture are present around 3,470 calBC (Mennenga (‘Geest’), Holocene clay districts (‘Marsch’), as well 2017, 91 – 96). As there is hardly any evidence for as bogs and fens – and its highly variable preser- the period between 3,900 – 3,400 calBC (Mahlstedt vation conditions, for which the southern North 2015b, 72; Mennenga 2017, 15 – 21), little is known Sea shore region is particularly well-known. This about the changes of the human way of life between contrast becomes most clear when comparing the the rivers Elbe and Ems. Current interdisciplinary landscapes of clay districts and Pleistocene ground research on the changing lifestyle in northern central (detailed description: Behrens et al. 2019): Clay dis- Europe is limited to the areas east (Terberger et al. tricts are commonly known for excellent organic 2018) and west (most recently: Raemaekers 2019) of preservation, allowing extensive conclusions to be northern Lower Saxony. However, palynological stud- drawn on former living conditions (Strahl 2004). ies show that in northwestern Germany first anthro- However, access to archaeological deposits in this pogenic impacts on the closed mixed oak forests are type of landscape depends on local accumulation detectable around 4,000 calBC (Behre / Kučan 1994; rate and resulting coverage with marine sediments Kramer / Bittmann 2015a, 103). For the successive (Behre 2008). The neighbouring moraine ranges, centuries, the settlement indicators and the changes on the other hand, are characterised by very poor in tree pollen spectra imply small-scale arable farm- preservation conditions due to their dry, aerated, ing in combination with forest pasture and pollarding lime-poor soils (Jacomet / Kreuz 1999). Still, many (Behre 2001). During the period between 3,500 and sites from all periods are known, but erosion and soil 2,600 calBC, which coincided with the main phase formation processes steadily diminish the archaeo- of the erection of megalithic tombs (Müller 2011, logical record (cf. Schwank 2017). This is reflected 18), intensive human intervention in the environment by the state of Stone Age settlements. The Lower caused an opening of the landscape (Behre / Kučan Saxony Institute for Historical Coastal Research 1994; Kramer / Bittmann 2015a). On the other hand, (NIhK) carried out the latest investigations within the landscape was changing very much during the the project ‘Settlement and land use in Neolithic middle Neolithic – caused by a rise of sea as well as northwestern Germany’, as part of the priority pro- bog level which made large areas no longer usable as gram (SPP) 1400 ‘Early monumentality and social before (Behre 2005). Although this implied a shifting differentiation’, which was funded by the German of habitation and cultivation to higher grounds, the Research Foundation (DFG). Regarding the conser- continuous agricultural use from the Neolithic to the vation conditions, it was concluded that undisturbed Common Era is well established in the Elbe-Weser tri- cultural layers and features represent exceptions on angle (Behre / Kučan 1994; Nösler / Wolters 2009). Pleistocene ground (Mennenga 2017, 293 – 294). Chances for the preservation of cultural remains are increased in areas where there is protection by covering layers of Medieval ‘Eschboden’ (plaggen soil 1  Bakker 1979; 1992; Brindley 1986; for new research cf. overlays), colluvium or non-erosive clastic sediment Mennenga 2017; Lorenz 2018; Menne 2018. deposits, and, last but not least, peat. A n j a Be h re n s , M o ri tz M e n n e n ga, Steffe n Wol te rs an d Martina Karle 457 Mesolithic Neolithic (TRB) The archaeobotanical and archaeological Total number of sites 31 393 (133) evidence Burials – 144 (101) Settlements / camp sites 3 33 (7) First Neolithic activities in the Elbe-Weser triangle are evident by palynological profiles from various Table  1 Archaeological sites in the area between the rivers micro-regions, including the Ahlen-Falkenberger ­Geeste and Schwinge, as listed in the database of the State ­Agency for Cultural Heritage of Lower Saxony (ADABweb; report: Moor (Kramer / Bittmann 2015b, 442) and its sur- November 2020). Surface finds in brackets. roundings, the Dorumer Moor in the north (Kramer Fig. 1 The area of the Elbe-Weser triangle, with a map of megalithic tombs and Neolithic settlement sites. The black box on the left marks the study area, see Fig. 2 (graphics: M. Mennenga, NIhK; map basis: State Office for Mining, Energy and Geology Lower Saxony [LBEG], Hannover; soil landscapes scale 1: 50.000; mapping of megalithic tombs after data from the Lower Saxony Monument Database ADABweb and Fritsch et al. 2010; of settlements according to Mennenga 2017, 57). 458 A Neol i th i c l an ds cape u n de r th e bog – new investigations in the Ahlen-Falkenberger Moor, dist. Cuxhaven, G er m any et al. 2012), and the southern Swienskuhle (Behre / (Mennenga 2017, 93 – 96). One of the best-known sites Kučan 1994; Kramer / Bittmann 2015a), all dist. of the TRB is located on the sandy island of Flögeln Cuxhaven. A few archaeological traces from the Me- (site Flögeln 48). In the 1970 s and 1980s, remains of solithic are known in this region, excluding finds of three houses were documented there during excava- early pottery (Metzger-Krahé 1977, 150 – 160), but in tions by the NIhK within the DFG project ‘Develop- contrast many traces of Neolithic activities have been ment of a settlement micro-region [Siedlungskammer] found in the areas of Wanna and Flögeln, both dist. in the Elbe-Weser triangle since the Neolithic’ (sum- Cuxhaven – but mostly as surface finds (Nösler et al. marised in Mennenga 2017; 2019). During this time 2011; see Table 1). Only on the sites of Flögeln and of research the Ahlen-Falkenberger Moor in the north Hainmühlen, dist. Cuxhaven, Lavenstedt, dist. ­Roten­- was still mostly regarded as no man’s land for the burg (Wümme), and Pennigbüttel, dist. Osterholz, Neolithic period. Over the past decades, however, it early resp. middle Neolithic building structures were has become clear that a Neolithic landscape has been found (Zimmermann 2001; Mennenga 2017; 2021). preserved in that area. Due to ongoing desiccation In general, cultural remains of the TRB are much more of peat, more and more megalithic graves of the TRB numerous compared to the Mesolithic record (Fig. 1). become visible. In order to access and document these The finds and features of the TRB within the magnificent archives, the NIhK started new investiga- Elbe-Weser triangle are generally assigned to the West tions in 2019 (Behrens et al. 2019). Group (Midgley 1992) with its core area of distri- bution between the river Weser and the Ijsselmeer. Evidence for the development of agricultural practices The Ahlen-Falkenberger Moor – is still scarce for this region, in particular for the Elbe- a research history Weser triangle (cf. Mennenga 2017, 15 – 20). The most striking features in the landscape are the megalithic The bog is located north of Bad Bederkesa, between tombs, which were probably built between 3,400 and the Pleistocene ranges of Flögeln (south) and Wanna 3,200 calBC (Müller 2011, 39; Furholt / Mischka (north). Within the 40 km² wide and flat bog area the 2019, 934), though no 14C dates are available so far small sandy Pleistocene outcrops ‘Großer Ahlen’ and for this region. In the area between the rivers Geeste ‘Kleiner Ahlen’ are prominently visible (Fig. 2). and Oste different architectural styles appear. Beside The survey and excavations in 2019 were not the a few extended dolmens and the supposed polygonal first archaeological investigations in the Ahlen-Falken- dolmen of Stintstedt, dist. Cuxhaven, passage graves berger Moor. U. Körber-Grohne, H. Schnee­kloth, and with three to five capstones represent the dominant K.-E. Behre conducted the first research of vegeta- type (Sprockhoff 1975; Laux 1979, 65; 1991). Ex- tion history and bog stratigraphy in the area (Körber- ternal constructions around the chambers, such as Grohne 1967; Schneekloth 1970; Behre 1976). In clay or stone coverings, were observed several times particular, Schneekloth’s work with radiocarbon-dated (Sprockhoff / Siebs 1957, 8). So far, there are no fur- pollen profiles provided extensive information on bog ther studies on the biographies of these monuments. growth and also revealed a marine transgression south According to F. Laux (1979, 80), there was – based of the Großer Ahlen, which dates back to the Neo- on the deposits and their composition – only one lithic. Furthermore, the NIhK investigated the history brief phase of primary use, concluding that new graves of the bog between 1995 and 2000 as part of the were erected for subsequent funerals. However, this project ‘Beginning and spread of large-scale moorland seems more doubtful in view of recent evidence for the formation in northwestern Germany as an indicator periods of use of megalithic tombs spanning several of changed environmental conditions’, funded by the centuries, e. g. in neighbouring western Lower Saxony DFG (Petzelberger et al. 1999; Gerdes et al. 2003). (Menne 2018, 128), Schleswig-Holstein (Brozio 2016, According to the results of this project, bog-growth in 174 – 176), and the Altmark (Diers / Fritsch 2019). the Ahlen-Falkenberger Moor began in the Mesolithic In addition to the megalithic tombs, flat graves shortly after 6,500 calBC and continued into the Iron need to be listed, which also occur in settlement con- Age, covering the lower-lying megalithic tombs (Behre texts (Kossian 2005, 309 – 319, Mennenga et al. 2013, 2005, 215). Significant influence on the vegetation, van der Velde et al. 2019). Regarding the settle­ments presumably caused by human activities, is visible at itself, next to ground plans of houses only few other the earliest around 3,500 calBC (Behre / Kučan 1994; features are known. Within the above-mentioned SPP Kramer  / Bittmann 2015a, 103). As part of the 1400, settlement structures could be re-evaluated and above-mentioned project ‘Settlement and land use in most cases chronologically allocated using 14C data in Neolithic northwestern Germany’, palynological A n j a Be h re n s , M o ri tz M e n n e n ga, Steffe n Wol te rs an d Martina Karle 459 Fig. 2 Ahlen-Falkenberger Moor, dist. Cuxhaven. The study area with known Mesolithic sites as well as Neolithic settlements and burials (graphics: M. Mennenga, NIhK; map basis: State Office for Mining, Energy and Geology Lower Saxony [LBEG], Hannover; soil landscapes scale 1 : 50.000; mapping of megalithic tombs based on data from the Lower Saxony Monument Database ADABweb and Fritsch et al. 2010; of Mesolithic sites based on ADABweb). investigations were also carried out on the ‘emerged’ from the Stone Age to the Iron Age were preserved megalithic graves in the Ahlen-Falkenberger Moor (O’Connell et al. 2020). (near sites Wanna 1000 and 1225), as well as near Today five megalithic graves are located on the northern sandy area of Wanna. The 14C-dates from ‘Großer Ahlen’ and ‘Kleiner Ahlen’ (Sprockhoff 1975, the peat base at the graves suggest a very late onset of nos. 636 – 642; see Fig. 2). Due to intensive drainage peat growth in the 1st millennium calBC (Nösler et al. measures for cultivation purposes, starting in the early 2011; Kramer et al. 2012). As the two monuments 20th century, the peat thickness decreased, revealing have been erected on higher ground, the results show more graves situated within the bog during the 1930s that bog growth and expansion continued over millen- (site Wanna 1225; Sprockhoff 1975, no. 643) and nia with high dynamics and that the graves were finally 1970 s (e. g. site Wanna 1000). In 2016 the capstones covered in the Iron Age. By that time, the graves lying of two more tombs were found (sites Wanna 1588 and lowest were probably totally covered for long. From 1591; Hüser 2019, 25), while yet another one was de- an archaeological and landscape-historical point of tected in 2019 (see below), a total of twelve monuments view, they should, therefore, show better conservation are known so far, all of them passage graves. The mega- conditions. As examples of excellent preservation of lithic tombs of Ahlen-Falkenberg are almost completely features and finds in the northwestern German bog unexplored. The few opened graves, ‘Kronskark’ (Wan- lands, the remains of Stone Age buildings and track- na 1215) as well as ‘Karls­kirche’ (Wanna 1222), are ways, documented in the surroundings of Dümmer, located on higher ground ‘islands’. No records of those distr. Diepholz, have to be mentioned (Fansa / Schnei- investigations have survived, and thus, the graves were der 1996). Considering the Ahlen-Falkenberger Moor excavated under circumstances unknown to research. it seems that the research potential is quite similar The first and, so far, only systematic investigation was to that of the famous Irish bogs, where numerous carried out in 1963 due to sand extraction at the megalithic tombs, field boundary systems, and hearths grave of the ‘Hoher Kopf’ (Wanna 1002) by the Lower 460 A Neol i th i c l an ds cape u n de r th e bog – new investigations in the Ahlen-Falkenberger Moor, dist. Cuxhaven, G er m any Fig. 3 The completely overgrown megalithic tomb Wanna 1000 after intervention through cultivation measures. From left to right: Dr.  Peter Schmid, Prof. Dr. Haio Zimmermann (both NIhK), and H.  Nast (Archaeological Heritage Agency, district of Cuxhaven; ­photo Dr. H. Aust, Archaeological Heritage Agency, district of Cux­ haven). ­ axony Institute for Clay District and Terp Research S funded by the Ministry of Science and Culture of Low- (today: NIhK; cf. Schmid 1963; Sprockhoff 1975, er Saxony within the program ‘Pro*Niedersachsen’, no. 641). Since the monument was already severely started in 2019. The project is running for four years disturbed at that time, the structures could not be ex- and is affiliated with the NIhK. Its archaeological focus actly clarified and documented. It was reconstructed is on the remains of the TRB and younger Neolithic as a passage grave with four capstones. Around the cultures. Within the project a number of methods are tomb, remains of a ring-shaped stone packing, which applied, and several fieldwork campaigns will be car- probably covered the grave, were detected. During the ried out. Results from the first year of research are investigation of ‘Hoher Kopf’ about 400 ‘Tiefstich’- presented below. decorated sherds were excavated, some of them with ‘Tvaerstik’ ornamentation (Lorenz 2018, 74; for the Geophysical prospection definition of ‘Tvaerstik’ see Mennenga 2017, 41), which is characteristic of the TRB West Group ce- The majority of the megalithic graves known from the ramics. Moreover, a rudimentary assessment of the study area were discovered only after they had become architecture of Wanna 1000 was undertaken by the visible above ground again due to peat decay. In the Heritage Agency of the district of Cuxhaven and the course of the preliminary work, however, it has been NIhK in the 1970s. The monument was already dis- possible to identify and map further sites in the bog turbed by agricultural activities, which had uncovered with the use of geomagnetic measurements. For this the upper constructions (Fig. 3). Fortunately, the four reason, a large-scale geophysical survey of the study capstones remained in situ, and no intrusions into the area is part of the project schedule. A total of about chamber were reported. The excavation photograph 1,300 ha needs to be prospected in the Ahlen-Falken- shows a massive stone packing, slightly perturbed due berger Moor with an 11-probe geomagnetic device to the disturbance, but still, it seems, covering the top available at the NIhK. Until summer 2020 approx. 800 of the capstones, with the exception of the highest of ha have been measured already. Extensive structures, them. None of the other megaliths located within the which were investigated through core drilling and bog have been studied in detail so far; in most cases smaller exploratory excavations, are recognisable in the only the capstones of the graves are visible. measurement images. In this way, characteristic anoma- lies were examined, supporting the interpretation of the magnetograms. It became apparent that the megalithic New research on a buried landscape graves – and in part also modern structures – can be de- rived well from the measured values. Megalithic tombs Due to the high research potential in this area the and other aggregations of stones appear prominently in project ‘Preserved in the Bog – Relics of Prehistoric the images – due to the use of very large igneous rocks Settlement Landscapes in the Elbe-Weser Triangle’, for building them (Fig. 4). In contrast, the search for A n j a Be h re n s , M o ri tz M e n n e n ga, Steffe n Wol te rs an d Martina Karle 461 Fig.  4 Overview of results of different geomagnetic measurement conducted in the Ahlen-Falkenberger Moor (top). 1 Natural boulders under the bog (bog depth less than 2.5 m. 2 Megalithic graves Wanna, sites 1000 and 1588. 3 Marine-influenced area in the north of the study area (graphics: M. Mennenga, D. Dallaserra, J. Lühmann, all NIhK; map basis as for Fig. 2). 462 A Neol i th i c l an ds cape u n de r th e bog – new investigations in the Ahlen-Falkenberger Moor, dist. Cuxhaven, G er m any further findings from settlement contexts in the bog is rough reconstruction of the surface was possible (Beh- difficult. In some areas, a large number of anomalies rens et al. 2019). However, connecting these data with can be observed, suggesting an anthropogenic origin. the mentioned markers of bog growth and the known However, test excavations revealed them to be naturally archaeological sites enabled an estimation of the area scattered larger boulders covered by a peat-layer with of assumed Neolithic land use – settlements, cultiva- a thickness of up to 2.5 m. In deeper layers, the bog tion, graves. The potential use-zone is narrowed down acts as a filter, so that these large individual stones are further through the inclusion of new data, allowing a no longer visible in measurement images. Where the more accurate delimitation of possible areas where peat layers are thinner, a differentiation between rocks Neolithic remains are still covered by peat. of the natural Pleistocene landscape and archaeologi- Since the analysed core data were obtained from cal features – excluding megalithic graves – based on surveys spanning the past 120 years, in some cases, the magnetic values is currently not possible. Further elevation measurements did not comply with current analysis of the measured data compared to the results standards and have been corrected with modern data.2 of test trenches should allow a more differentiated In order to compensate for possible discrepancies in consideration of these anomalies. elevation values by correlating current measurements Despite the above-mentioned problems, further of the peat base with pre-existing elevation data, con- structures are becoming visible in the north of the trol drillings need to be conducted. First field work for study area, which are of great value to the project. Here this already took place in 2019. Based on the results of formerly marine or limnic areas could be detected on the geophysical prospection as well as the coring data the basis of the magnetic data; although dating results in the database of the LBEG, systematic drilling is car- of the flooding and the coverage by bog are still pend- ried out in order to increase the density of information ing, it can be assumed that these sediments date to the for the small-scale recording of the palaeo-topography Middle Neolithic, based on comparisons with datings before the onset of peat formation. A drilling grid of from other marine transgressions in the study area. approx. 100 x 100 m is created, and the transition be- tween Holocene and Pleistocene strata is documented. Geological and botanical investigations So far over 600 drillings have been made. In addition to the determination of the palaeo-relief, sedimentologi- Today the landscape in the area is flat and relatively cal evidence of marine sediments is analysed in order homogenous, but older data and geophysical surveys to enable the reconstruction of Neolithic shoreline show that this was not the case in the past. The covered positions. It is also important to identify possible in- megalithic tombs were erected on different elevation dications of human activities such as cultural layers. levels – on former small ridges and hills. In order to Another key aspect in landscape reconstruction understand the cultural space, however, it is essential to is the dating of the start of bog growth and the deter- reconstruct the palaeo-landscape. Therefore, geological mination of peat thickness in the Neolithic and later and vegetation-historical investigations form another periods. Previous research on the development of the focus of the project. The basis for investigation is the Ahlen-Falkenberger Moor has shown that the peat Neolithic land surface, which can be approximated growth in the study area depends strongly on the to- by determining the top of the Pleistocene deposits. pography. This concerns both the type of peat-forming Using the data of the Lower Saxony State Office of vegetation at the bog base and the timing of the onset Mining and Geology (LBEG), a first reconstruction of peat growth. However, the horizontal and vertical of the palaeo-topography could be obtained. For this dynamics and, consequently, the spatial development purpose, the transition between Holocene deposits of peat formation have been only vaguely known so and Pleistocene strata was extracted from the digital far. Obtaining temporally and spatially high-resolution coring data. The documented depths and the respective information by evaluating all existing data and archives data at the coring sites have been used to calculate the as well as carrying out further coring is therefore one elevation of the pre-Holocene surface. A preliminary of the priority objectives of the project. evaluation yielded basic information about the palaeo- The peat cores are sampled for pollen analysis at relief of the study area. On the basis of this data, a the base of the peat as well as at relevant stratigraphical first assessment of the contact zone between the bog transitions, such as the shift from fen to raised bog, or and the Pleistocene ground could be determined, and the boundary between highly and slightly decomposed the relief of the last surface before the onset of peat growth was interpolated. Since the cores were drilled irregularly at lateral intervals of 200 – 500 m, only a 2  Written communication Dr. J. Sbresny, LBEG, Hannover. A n j a Be h re n s , M o ri tz M e n n e n ga, Steffe n Wol te rs an d Martina Karle 463 raised bog peat. Through biostratigraphic correlation the immediate vicinity of megalithic tombs, charcoal the samples can be dated and thus provide a relative fragments and remains of charred heather species are chronological framework of peatland growth, which frequently recorded in this layer, indicating fires during is refined by 14C data and fixed in absolute chronologi- the initial stages of bog growth. Although the close cal order. The selection of the 14C samples is based vicinity to the megalithic tombs suggest intentional on the preliminary pollen-analytical investigations, fires, a natural cause cannot yet be excluded at that and the dating results can thus be validated by the stage of research. pollen-analytical dating. The material for radiocarbon On the basis of the results of geophysical and datings is obtained after careful sieving of the peat stratigraphical investigations, archaeological excava- samples, which allows the selection of defined ter- tions are carried out. In addition to surface prospection restrial macrofossils and avoids the contamination by in the area of the Pleistocene ground, large stone graves rootlets or other non-contemporaneous material. In and settlements are to be examined. Concerning the addition, the results of the pollen analysis allow for megalithic installations, the focus is on the documenta- the reconstruction of the terrestrial vegetation at the tion of the architecture, especially exterior construc- time of the onset of peat growth. tions, as well as on reconstructing the history of their South of the Großer Ahlen, the occurrence and use. In this way, in addition to answering questions distribution of old clay deposits over fen bog has been regarding social structure and practices, fundamental documented in several cores. Schneekloth (1970) statements on grave construction in the Elbe-Weser dates the deposition of marine clay to the 3rd millen- area – which have so far been quite impossible – can nium calBC. However, his age model is rather impre- be made. Furthermore, for the detection of settlement cise, and, therefore, needs to be refined in order to sites, promising areas will be identified on the basis of improve the understanding of landscape development. geophysical measurements, pedological mapping and The first new results on plant macro-remains now date drilling, followed by small test trenches in these zones. the marine ingression between 3,368 and 3,104 calBC (AWI-4382: 4547 ± 30 BP).3 It is not yet clear how Archaeological investigations long a direct connection to the North Sea existed, but it is safe to assume that the subsequent gradual turn In the summer of 2019 a first larger excavation cam- to brackish and fresh water conditions and the final paign was carried out on two monuments. The first silting-up of the sea arm were already completed by was a TRB passage grave located approx. 200 m 2,898 – 2,678 calBC (AWI-4380: 4206 ± 31 BP). north of the Dahlemer See (Wanna 1592; see Fig. 2). The analyses of the first cores from the bog con- Its orientation is east-west, with the entrance in the firm the widespread distribution of raised bog peat south. During ploughing in the 1950s two capstones directly on Pleistocene sand, the so-called ‘wurzelech- were removed by farmers. They moved them to a hole tes Hochmoor’. So far, the vast majority of the basal directly next to the grave (Fig. 5,1); after this event peat samples date to the 3rd and 4th millennia calBC, the location of the grave was forgotten for decades. indicating that the raised bog growth in the Elbe-We- Due to the geomagnetic survey it could be redetected. ser triangle accelerated during this period. Older bog After removing 25 cm of topsoil, three further areas (see for example Gerdes et al. 2003) could be capstones became visible in the course of the exca- confirmed for the southern part of the study area. In vation, which indicated that the construction had addition, the dates of the peat base in the vicinity of the originally been a passage grave with five capstones, ‘Kleiner Ahlen’ show that the expansion of the bog on making it the largest monument of the grave group the Pleistocene sandy areas lasted at least until the 1st of Ahlen-Falkenberg (6.3 m x 2 m). The further exca- millennium calBC. Accompanying analyses of macro- vations revealed a complex architecture. A massive remains and the determination of loss-on-ignition of stone packing around the chamber was document- the sediment show that proper peat growth is often ed – up to 2.5 m wide at the base and up to 1.4 m preceded by a waterlogged period, with thin deposits high. The capstones were still visible, the entrance characterised by leaves, flowers, and stems of heather accessible. On top and within the packing numerous dwarf shrubs (Calluna vulgaris, Erica tetralix), few burnt pieces of flint were found, which suggests in- peat moss residues, and a high proportion of sand. In tentional scattering. No other outside constructions, such as a mound, were built here. Of further interest is the shape of the chamber itself, which has slightly 3  All calibrated radiocarbon dates are provided in 2-sigma angled walls on the west side. This represents a rare range, calibrated with OxCal (IntCal13). 464 A Neol i th i c l an ds cape u n de r th e bog – new investigations in the Ahlen-Falkenberger Moor, dist. Cuxhaven, G er m any Fig. 5 Wanna 1592, dist. Cuxhaven. Com- pound structure from motion model after removing 20 – 30 cm of the top soil around and within the chamber. In the northern part the complete stone packing is visible after removing 1.8 m of peat. Numbers 1 – 4 refer to text information (graphics: M. Men- nenga, NIhK / P. Frederiks, HTW Berlin). feature4 among the generally straight-walled, rectan- ken pieces of pottery were recovered, belonging to gular or trapezoid tombs in the Elbe-Weser triangle several, partially richly decorated TRB vessels. The (Sprockhoff 1975, atlas pages 1 – 16). vessel fragments imply at least one clearing event of Grave Wanna 1592 had an eventful history. In- the chamber, maybe even more. Interestingly, the side the excavated chamber area in the west (Fig. 5,2) entrance had been sealed completely by stones (ø the remains of a burial were found. On top of a paved 15 – 25 cm, c. 1 m³) in a later phase, probably as the chamber floor, covered with a layer of gravel, two passage was destructed. Maybe we can find here the slightly broken vessels (a funnel beaker cup orna- reason for the disturbance on the western chamber mented with vertical stripes on the belly [Brindley side, as people tried to gain access to the interior 1 – 5] and a one-piece bowl) as well as pieces of two once again after the entrance had been closed. decorated pots and three amber beads were uncov- Beside this megalithic tomb, a second site, de- ered. The fragmented, mingled and scattered material tected through geomagnetic survey and located south suggests that the deposition was not in situ. As parts of the village Ahlen-Falkenberg, was examined (site of the stone packing on the outside of the western Wanna 1594; see Fig. 2). After removing up to 1 m of chamber area were removed (Fig. 5,3), indicating peat around the structure an almost circular mound a disturbance, this might explain the rearranged of compact stones with a diameter of approx. 6 m contents of the chamber. The burial horizon was and up to 0.9 m height became visible (Fig. 6). In the covered with a layer of sand, 20 – 25 cm thick, which centre, underneath a 20 – 30 cm thick layer of smaller must have accumulated after or in the context of stones, one huge boulder (2.1 m x 1.1 m) was located. the disturbance. The entrance showed also traces of Around this erratic a standing stone slab in the east intrusion, as one of the former capstones was found as well as two slightly displaced flat stones in the displaced in front of the construction (Fig. 5,4). The north form a sort of chamber on top. Within this boulders on the west side were still in position, form- area, broken and very badly preserved pottery was ing a 1.6 m long and approx. 0.8 m wide entrance. recovered, unfortunately allowing no conclusions The construction of the eastern side is unclear, as on the vessel type. boulders or traces of removed boulders are missing. Due to time constraints, it was not possible to At the bottom of the entrance dozens of small bro- remove the boulder and uncover what lies beneath during the 2019 campaign. Further investigations in 2021 revealed a Late Neolithic / Early Bronze Age 4  A very similar construction is known from Axstedt, dist. cult site. Osterholz: cf. Sprockhoff 1975, no. 620. A n j a Be h re n s , M o ri tz M e n n e n ga, Steffe n Wol te rs an d Martina Karle 465 Fig. 6 Wanna 1594, dist. Cuxhaven. Final planum of the excavation campaign 2019 (photo: A. Behrens, NIhK). So far only archaeological material allows a due to its proximity to Ertebølle and Swifterbant as chronological statement about the excavated sites. well as the succeeding TRB North Group.5 However, However, 14C dating of the bog growth is currently the question still remains as to why it is not until in progress, also including samples from the peat the middle of the 4th millennium BC that a cultural directly overlaying the monuments and adjacent transition becomes apparent in the archaeological palaeo-surfaces. Thus, termini ante quem for the record, while in the Baltic Sea region, as well as in erection of the monuments can be expected. Further- some southern areas of Lower Saxony, this transition more, excavations on two more passage graves were can be traced some 500 years earlier. This issue will carried out in 2020, giving more detailed information not be discussed here (cf. Klassen 2004, 297 – 299); on the grave constructions and their history. rather, the research potential in the exploration of the hidden landscape at Ahlen-Falkenberg shall be high- lighted. It is only possible to gain important answers Conclusions and outline by obtaining new data. For example, the detailed recording of building structures and the dating of The project ‘Preserved in the Bog’ makes use of the megalithic tombs will allow important conclusions excellent preservation conditions prevailing in the about spatial and cultural factors to be drawn. High- prehistoric landscape of the Ahlen-Falkenberger resolution pollen analyses as evidence for landscape Moor and aims to arrive at far-reaching insights development, as well as archaeological investigations about the effects of environmental processes on the of the settlement and burial landscape provide in- societies settling there at that time. The focus is on sights into the economic and cultural use of space the remains of the TRB culture, which is evidenced by humans. This approach not only allows to draw in the region from about 3,470 calBC (Mennenga extensive conclusions about human-environmental 2017). Due to variable preservation conditions for relations in the Ahlen-Falkenberg area, but also pro- material remains in this region, the neolithisation vides a basis for comparative supra-regional studies. process is not well documented here. The diversity of material heritage, e. g. tools and implements, vessel forms and ornamentation, and later in the design of houses and megalithic graves, testifies to the integra- tion into a far-reaching communication and exchange network of the TRB (cf. Müller 2019). Here, the 5  Currently investigated by Svea Mahlstedt (Mahlstedt et al. Elbe-Weser triangle probably plays a decisive role this volume). 466 A Neol i th i c l an ds cape u n de r th e bog – new investigations in the Ahlen-Falkenberger Moor, dist. Cuxhaven, G er m any References Diers / Fritsch 2019: S. Diers / B. Fritsch, Changing en- vironments in a megalithic landscape: The Altmark Ten Anscher 2015: T. J. Ten Anscher, Under the radar: Swif- case. In: J. Müller / M. Hinz / M. Wunderlich (eds.), terbant and the origins of the Funnel Beaker culture. Megaliths – Societies – Landscapes. Early Monumen- In: J. Kabaciński / S. Hartz / D. C. M. Raemaekers / tality and Social Differentiation in Neolithic Europe II. T. Terberger (eds.), The Dąbki Site in Pomerania and Frühe Monumentalität und soziale Differenzierung 18 the Neolithisation of the North European Lowlands (Bonn 2019) 719 – 752. (c. 5000 – 3000 calBC). Archäologie und Geschichte im Fansa / Schneider 1996: M. Fansa / R. Schneider, Die Ostseeraum 8 (Rahden/Westf. 2015) 335 – 357. Moorwege im Großen Moor und im Aschener-Brägeler Bakker 1979: J. A. Bakker, The TRB West Group Studies in Moor. Arch. Mitt. Nieders. 1996, 5 – 13. the Chronology and Geography of the makers of hune- Fritsch et al. 2010: B. Fritsch / M. Furholt / M. Hinz / L. beds and Tiefstich Pottery (Amsterdam 1979). Lorenz / H. Nelson / G. Schafferer / S. Schiesberg / Bakker 1992: J. A. Bakker, The Dutch Hunebedden. Mega- K.-G. Sjögren, Dichtezentren und lokale Gruppierun- lithic Tombs of the Funnel Beaker Culture (Amsterdam gen – Eine Karte zu den Großsteingräbern Mittel- und 1992). Nordeuropas. Journal of Neolithic Archaeology 12. Behre 1976: K.-E. Behre, Pollenanalytische Untersuchungen https://doi.org/10.12766/jna.2010.56. zur Vegetations- und Siedlungsgeschichte bei Flögeln Furholt / Mischka 2019: M. Furholt / D. Mischka, The und im Ahlenmoor (Elb-Weser-Winkel). Probleme der phasing of megalithic construction activities and its Küstenforschung im südlichen Nordseegebiet 11, 1976, implications for the development of social formations 101 – 118. in Northern-Central Germany. In: J. Müller / M. Hinz / Behre 2001: K. E. Behre, Umwelt und Wirtschaftsweisen in M. Wunderlich (eds.), Megaliths – Societies – Landsca- Norddeutschland während der Trichterbecherzeit. In: R. pes. Early Monumentality and Social Differentiation in Kelm (ed.), Zurück zur Steinzeitlandschaft. Albersdorfer Neolithic Europe III. Frühe Monumentalität und soziale Forschungen zur Archäologie und Umweltgeschichte 2, Differenzierung 18 (Bonn 2019) 921 – 938. (Heide 2001) 27 – 38. Gerdes et al. 2003: G. Gerdes / B. E. M. Petzelberger / Behre 2005: K.-E. Behre, Die Einengung des neolithischen B. M. Scholz-Böttcher / H. Streif, The record of Lebensraumes in Nordwestdeutschland durch klimabe- climatic change in the geological archives of shal- dingte Faktoren. Meeresspiegelanstieg und großflächi- low marine, coastal, and adjacent lowland areas of ge Ausbreitung von Mooren. In: D. Gronenborn (ed.), Northern Germany. Quaternary Science Reviews 22, Klimaveränderung und Kulturwandel in neolithischen 2003, 101 – 124. Gesellschaften Mitteleuropas, 6700 – 2200 v. Chr. RG- Hüser 2019: A. Hüser, Wanna FStNr. 1000, 1588 und 1591, ZM-Tagungen 1 (Mainz 2005) 209 – 220. Gde. Wanna, Ldkr. Cuxhaven. Fundchronik Nieder- Behre 2008: K.-E. Behre, Landschaftsgeschichte Nord- sachsen 2017. Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Ur­ deutschlands. Umwelt und Siedlung von der Steinzeit geschichte, Beih. 22, 2019, 25 – 26. bis zur Gegenwart (Neumünster 2008). Jacomet / Kreuz 1999: S. Jacomet / A. Kreuz, Archäobota- Behre / Kučan 1994: K.-E. Behre / D. Kučan, Die Ge- nik: Aufgaben, Methoden und Ergebnisse vegetations- schichte der Kulturlandschaft und des Ackerbaus in und agrargeschichtlicher Forschung (Stuttgart 1999). der Siedlungskammer Flögeln, Niedersachsen, seit der Klassen 2004: L. Klassen, Jade und Kupfer (Århus 2004). Jungsteinzeit. Probleme der Küstenforschung im südli- Körber-Grohne 1967: U. Körber-Grohne, Geobotanische chen Nordseegebiet 21, 1994, 5 – 227. Untersuchungen auf der Feddersen Wierde. Feddersen Behrens et al. 2019: A. Behrens / M. Mennenga / S. Wolters / Wierde 1 (Wiesbaden 1967). M. Karle, „Relikte im Moor“ – ein neues Projekt zur Kossian 2005: R. Kossian, Nichtmegaltihische Grabanla- Erforschung der mittelneolithischen Landschaftsent- gen der Trichterbecherkultur in Deutschland und den wicklung im Ahlen-Falkenberger Moor, Ldkr. Cux­ Niederlanden. Veröffentlichungen des Landesamtes für haven. Siedlungs- und Küstenforschung im südlichen Archäologie, Landesmuseum für Vorgeschichte Sach- Nordseegebiet 42, 2019, 9 – 22. sen-Anhalt 58 (Halle/S. 2005). Brindley 1986: A. L. Brindley, The typochronology of TRB Kramer / Bittmann 2015a: A. Kramer / F. Bittmann, Flö- west group pottery. Palaeohistoria 28, 1986, 93 – 132. geln reloaded – Zur Chronologie der Vegetations- und Brozio 2016: J.-P. Brozio, Megalithanlagen und Siedlungs- Siedlungsgeschichte in Nordwestdeutschland während muster im trichterbecherzeitlichen Ostholstein. Frühe des Neolithikums. Siedlungs- und Küstenforschung im Monumentalität und soziale Differenzierung 9 (Bonn südlichen Nordseegebiet 38, 2015, 89 – 106. 2016). Kramer / Bittmann 2015b: A. Kramer / F. Bittmann, Re- vised human impact in north-western Germany during A n j a Be h re n s , M o ri tz M e n n e n ga, Steffe n Wol te rs an d Martina Karle 467 the Neolithic. Methodological limits and challenges. Mennenga et al. 2013: M. Mennenga / D. Behrens / A. Journal of Quaternary Science 30(5), 2015, 434 – 451. Hummel / H. Jöns, Ein neuer Hausgrundriss der Trich- Kramer et al. 2012: A. Kramer / M. Mennenga / D. Nös- terbecher-Westgruppe aus Visbek (Lkr. Vechta). Ar- ler / H. Jöns / F. Bittmann, Neolithic Land Use His- chäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 43, 2013, 499 – 507. tory in Northwestern Germany – First Results from Metzger-Krahé 1977: F. Metzger-Krahé, Mesolithikum an Interdisciplinary Research Project. In: M. Hinz / J. an der Unterelbe. Das Verhalten des mesolithischen Müller (eds.), Siedlung, Grabenwerk, Großsteingrab. Menschen zu seiner Umwelt. Offa-Ergänzungs-Reihe Studien zu Gesellschaft, Wirtschaft und Umwelt der 2 (Schleswig 1977). Trichterbechergruppen im nördlichen Mitteleuropa. Midgley 1992: M. Midgley, TRB Culture. The First Farmers Frühe Monumentalität und soziale Differenzierung 2 of the North European Plain (Edinburgh 1992). (Bonn 2012) 317 – 336. Müller 2011: J. Müller, Megaliths and funnel beakers. So- Laux 1979: F. Laux, Die Großsteingräber im nordöstlichen cieties in change 4100 – 2700 BC. Kroon-voordracht 33 Niedersachsen. In: H. Schirnig (ed.), Großsteingräber (Amsterdam 2011). in Niedersachsen. Veröffentlichungen der Urgeschicht- Müller 2019: J. Müller, Boom and bust, hierarchy and ba- lichen Sammlungen des Landesmuseums Hannover 24 lance: From landscape to social meaning – Megaliths (Hildesheim 1979) 59 – 82. and societies in Northern Central Europe. In: J. Müller / Laux 1991: F. Laux, Überlegungen zu den Großsteingräbern M. Hinz / M. Wunderlich (eds.), Megaliths – Societies – in Niedersachsen und Westfalen. Neue Ausgrabungen Landscapes. Early Monumentality and Social Differen- und Forschungen in Niedersachsen 19, 1991, 21 – 9 9. tiation in Neolithic Europe I. Frühe Monumentalität Lorenz 2018: L. Lorenz, Kommunikationsstrukturen mittel- und soziale Differenzierung 18 (Bonn 2019) 31 – 76. neolithischer Gesellschaften im nordmitteleuropäischen Nösler / Wolters 2009: D. Nösler / S. Wolters, Kontinui- Tiefland. Frühe Monumentalität und soziale Differen- tät und Wandel – zur Frage der spätvölkerwanderungs- zierung 14 (Bonn 2018). zeitlichen Siedlungslücke im Elbe-Weser-Dreieck. In: O. Mahlstedt 2015a: S. Mahlstedt, Das Mesolithikum im Heinrich-Tamaska / N. Krohn / S. Ristow (eds.), Dunkle westlichen Niedersachsen. Frühe Monumentalität und Jahrhunderte in Mitteleuropa (Hamburg 2009) 367 – 388. soziale Differenzierung 7 (Bonn 2015). Nösler et al. 2011: D. Nösler / A. Kramer / H. Jöns / K. Mahlstedt 2015b: S. Mahlstedt, Steinzeitliche Siedlungen Gerken / F. Bittmann, Aktuelle Forschungen zur auf dem Seegrund des Zwischenahner Meeres. Sied- Besiedlung und Landnutzung zur Zeit der Trichterbe- lungs- und Küstenforschung im südlichen Nordseegebiet cher- und Einzelgrabkultur in Nordwestdeutschland 38, 2015, 71 – 79. – ein Vorbericht zum DFG-SPP „Monumentalität“. Mahlstedt et al. this volume: S. Mahlstedt / M. Karle / Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte 80, 2011, J.F. Kegler, Foraging in a changing landscape – the late 23 – 45. Mesolithic in the coastal area of Lower Saxon. O’Connell et al. 2020: M. O’Connell / K. Molloy / E. Menne 2018: J. Menne, Keramik aus Megalithgräbern in Jennings, Long-term human impact and environmental Nordwestdeutschland. Interaktionen und Netzwerke change in mid-western Ireland, with particular refe- der Trichterbecherwestgruppe. Frühe Monumentalität rence to Céide Fields – an overview. E&G Quarternary und soziale Differenzierung 16 (Bonn 2018). Science Journal 69, 2020, 1 – 32. Mennenga 2017: M. Mennenga, Zwischen Elbe und Ems: Petzelberger et al. 1999: B. E. M. Petzelberger / K.-E. Die Siedlungen der Trichterbecherkultur in Nordwest- Behre / M. A. Geyh, Beginn der Hochmoorentwicklung deutschland. Frühe Monumentalität und soziale Diffe- und Ausbreitung der Hochmoore in Nordwestdeutsch- renzierung 13 (Bonn 2017). land. Erste Ergebnisse eines neuen Projektes. TELMA. Mennenga 2019: M. Mennenga, Settlements and houses Berichte der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Moor- und Tor- between Elbe and Ems – The Funnel Beaker Culture fkunde 29, 1999, 21 – 38. in North-Western Germany. In: J. Müller / M. Hinz / Raemaekers 2019: D.  C.  M. Raemaekers, Taboo? The M. Wunderlich (eds.), Megaliths – Societies – Landsca- process of Neolitisation in the Dutch wetlands re- pes. Early Monumentality and Social Differentiation in examined (5000 – 3400 cal BC). In: R. Gleser / D. Hof- Neolithic Europe I. Frühe Monumentalität und soziale mann (eds.), Contacts, boundaries and Innovation in Differenzierung 18 (Bonn 2019) 507 – 524. the fifth millenium (Leiden 2019) 91 – 102. Mennenga 2021: M. Mennenga, Danish cult houses in Schmid 1963: P. Schmid, B38 Ahlenfalkenberg. Mitteilungen north-western Germany? Rethinking the Funnel ­Beaker des Marschenrates zur Förderung der Forschung im buildings of Flögeln and Hainmühlen, District of Cux­ Küstengebiet der Nordsee 3, 1963, 27 – 28. haven. Prähistorische Zeitschrift. aop. DOI: https://doi. Schneekloth 1970: H. Schneekloth, Das Ahlen-Falken- org/10.1515/pz-2021-2011. berger Moor. Geologisches Jahrbuch 89, 1970, 63 – 96. 468 A Neol i th i c l an ds cape u n de r th e bog – new investigations in the Ahlen-Falkenberger Moor, dist. Cuxhaven, G er m any Schwank 2017: S. Schwank, Böden und Paläolandschaft Terberger et al. 2018: T. Terberger/ J. Burger/ F. Lüth/ in Lavenstedt 178, Ldkr. Rotenburg (Wümme). In: M. J. Müller/ H. Piezonka, Step by step – The Neolithi- Mennenga (ed.), Zwischen Elbe und Ems: Die Siedlun- sation of Northern Central Europe in the light of stable gen der Trichterbecherkultur in Nordwestdeutschland. isotope analyses. Journal of Archaeological Science 99, Frühe Monumentalität und soziale Differenzierung 13 2018, 66 – 86.  (Bonn 2017) 413 – 419. van der Velde et al. 2019: H. van der Velde / N. Bouma / Sprockhoff 1975: E. Sprockhoff, Atlas der Megalithgräber D. C. M. Raemaekers, A monumental burial ground Deutschlands 3: Niedersachsen – Westfalen (Bonn 1975). from the Funnel Beaker Period at Oosterdalfsen (the Sprockhoff / Siebs 1957: E. Sprockhoff / B. E. Siebs, Die Netherlands). In: J. Müller / M. Hinz / M. Wunderlich Großsteingräber des Elb-Weser-Winkels (Bremerhaven (eds.), Megaliths – societies – landscapes (Bonn 2019) 1957). 319 – 328. Strahl 2004: E. Strahl, Archäologie der Küste. Marsch, Zimmermann 2001: W. H. Zimmermann, Die trichterbecher- Watt, Ostfriesische Inseln. In: M. Fansa / F. Both / zeitlichen Häuser von Flögeln-Eekhöltjen im nördli- H. Haßmann (eds.), Archäologie – Land – Niedersach- chen Elbe-Weser-Gebiet. In: R. Kelm (ed.), Zurück zur sen. 25 Jahre Denkmalschutzgesetz – 400 000 Jahre Steinzeitlandschaft. Archäobiologische und ökologische Geschichte. Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Nord- Forschung zur jungsteinzeitlichen Kulturlandschaft und westdeutschland, Beiheft 42 (Stuttgart 2004) 495 – 510. ihrer Nutzung in Nordwestdeutschland. Albersdorfer Forschungen zur Archäologie und Umweltgeschichte 2 (Heide 2001) 116 – 125. Sto n e Ag e Bo rd e rlan d Ex pe r i e n ce (M A N 60, 2 02 2 ) 469 List of authors Dr. Theo J. ten Anscher Prof. Dr. Agnieszka Czekaj-Zastawny RAAP Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology Pollaan 48 E/F Polish Academy of Sciences NL-7202 BX Zutphen Sławkowska 17

PL-31-016 Kraków

Dr. Luc W.S.W. Amkreutz National Museum of Antiquities Erwin Cziesla Papengracht 30 Martin Wurzel Archäologie und Postbus 11114 Umwelttechnik GmbH NL-2301 EC Leiden Fasanenstraße 25b

D-14532 Stahnsdorf

Drs. Steffen Baetsen ADC ArcheoProjecten Dr. Özge Demirci Nijverheidsweg-Noord 114 Groningen Institute of Archaeology NL-3812 PN Amersfoort University of Groningen

Poststraat 6 NL-9712 ER Groningen Dr. Andreas Bauerochse

Lower Saxony State Service for Cultural Heritage Scharnhorststraße 1 Walter Dörfler D-30175 Hannover Institute of Prehistoric and

Protohistoric Archaeology Christian-Albrechts-University Dipl. Prähist. Anja Behrens Johanna-Mestorf-Straße 2 – 6 Lower Saxony Institute for Historical Coastal D-24118 Kiel Research

Viktoriastraße 26/28 D-26382 Wilhelmshaven Dr. Anne Birgitte Gebauer

Danish Nationalmuseum Ny Vestergade 10 Mirjam Briel M.A. DK-1471 Copenhagen Lower Saxony State Service for Cultural Heritage

Ofener Straße 15 D-26121 Oldenburg Klaus Gerken

Hohes Ufer 10 D-31535 Neustadt Prof. Dr. Oliver E. Craig

Department of Archaeology University of York Dr. Sönke Hartz Wentworth Way Stexwigfeld 5a UK-YO10 5DD York D-24857 Borgwedel

470 L ist of au t h o rs Dr. Marion Heumüller PD Dr. Florian Klimscha Lower Saxony State Service for Cultural Heritage Lower Saxony State Museum Scharnhorststraße 1 Willy-Brandt-Allee 5 D-30175 Hannover D-30169 Hannover

Dr. Daniela Hofmann Dr. Sebastiaan Knippenberg Department of Archaeology, History, Cultural ARCHOL Studies and Religion Einsteinweg 2 University of Bergen NL-2333 CC Leiden Øysteinsgate 3, Postboks 7805

N-5020 Bergen

Dr. Benedikt Knoche Kanalstrasse 46 Dr. Christian Hülsebusch D-48147 Münster/Westf.

Prof. Dr. Albrecht Jockenhövel Dr. Andreas Kotula Am Biederlackturm 7 Brandenburg Authorities for Heritage Management D-48282 Emsdetten and Archaeological State Museum

Wünsdorfer Platz 4 – 5 D-15806 Zossen (Ortsteil Wünsdorf) Prof. Dr. Jacek Kabaciński

Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology Polish Academy of Sciences Dr. Hanns Hubert Leuschner Rubież 46 Department of Palynology and Climate Dynamics PL-61-612 Poznań Albrecht-von-Haller Institute for Plant Sciences

University of Göttingen Wilhelm-Weber-Straße 2a Dr. Martina Karle D-37073 Göttingen Lower Saxony Institute for Historical Coastal

Research Viktoriastraße 26/28 Dr. Alexandre Lucquin D-26382 Wilhelmshaven Department of Archaeology

University of York Wentworth Way Dr. Jan F. Kegler UK-YO10 5DD York Ostfriesische Landschaft

Archäologischer Dienst & Forschungsinstitut Hafenstraße 11 Clemens Ludwig M.A. D-26603 Aurich Lower Saxony State Service for Cultural Heritage

Scharnhorststraße 1 D-30175 Hannover Prof. Dr. Wiebke Kirleis

Institute of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Archaeology Dr. Svea Mahlstedt Environmental Archaeology/Archaeobotany Lower Saxony Institute for Historical Coastal Christian-Albrechts-University Research Johanna-Mestorf-Straße 2 – 6 Viktoriastr. 26/28 D-24118 Kiel D-26382 Wilhelmshaven

Li st o f a u th o rs 471 Dr. Moritz Mennenga Alexandra Philippi M.A. Lower Saxony Institute for Historical Coastal Lower Saxony State Service for Cultural Heritage Research Scharnhorststraße 1 Viktoriastr. 26/28 D-30175 Hannover D-26382 Wilhelmshaven

Prof. Dr. Daan C. M. Raemaekers Dr. des. Ann-Katrin Meyer Groningen Institute of Archaeology Wakenitzstraße 39 University of Groningen D-23564 Lübeck Poststraat 6

NL-9712 ER Groningen

Helle M. Molthof M.A. RAAP Dr. Michael Schirren Le Pooleweg 5 State Office for culture and preservation of monu- NL-2314 XT Leiden ments of Mecklenburg-Western-Pomerania

Dienststelle Stralsund Badenstraße 16 Prof. Dr. Johannes Müller D-18439 Stralsund Institute of Prehistoric and

Protohistoric Archaeology Christian-Albrechts-University Reinhold Schoon Johanna-Mestorf-Straße 2 – 6 Johannisstraße 27 D-24118 Kiel D-37073 Göttingen

Michael Müller Dr. Bernhard Stapel Hausotterstr. 91 LWL-Archäologie für Westfalen D-13409 Berlin Außenstelle Münster

An den Speichern 7 D-48157 Münster Dr. Hildegard Nelson

Hohes Ufer 10 D-31535 Neustadt Dr. Lasse Sørensen

Danish Nationalmuseum Ny Vestergade 10 Dr. Daniel Neumann DK-1471 Copenhagen Lower Saxony State Museum

Willy-Brandt-Allee 5 D-30169 Hannover Prof. Dr. Thomas Terberger

Lower Saxony State Service for Cultural Heritage Scharnhorststraße 1 Dr. Hans Peeters D-30175 Hannover Groningen Institute of Archaeology

University of Groningen Poststraat 6 Dr. Laura Thielen NL-9712 ER Groningen

472 L ist of au t h o rs Dr. Steffen Wolters Dr. Tanja Zerl Lower Saxony Institute for Historical Coastal Archaeobotanical Laboratory of the Department Research of Prehistoric Archaeology Viktoriastraße 26/28 University of Cologne D-26382 Wilhelmshaven Weyertal 125

D-50923 Köln

ISBN 978-3-89646-953-3 ISSN 0465-2770