Between the Vinča and Linearbandkeramik worlds: the diversity of practices and identities in the 54th–53rd centuries cal BC in south-west Hungary and beyond

Szederkény-Kukorica-dűlő is a large settlement in south-east Transdanubia, Hungary, excavated in advance of road construction, which is notable for its combination of pottery styles, variously including Vinča A, Ražište and LBK, and longhouses of a kind otherwise familiar from the LBK world. Formal modelling of its date establishes that the site probably began in the later 54th century cal BC, lasting until the first decades of the 52nd century cal BC. Occupation, featuring longhouses, pits and graves, probably began at the same time on the east and west parts of the settlement, the central part starting a decade or two later; the western part was probably abandoned last. Vinča pottery is predominantly associated with the east and central parts of the site, and Ražište pottery with the west. Formal modelling of the early history and diaspora of longhouses in the LBK world suggests their emergence in the Formative LBK of Transdanubia c. 5500 cal BC and then rapid diaspora in the middle of the 54th century cal BC, associated with the ‘earliest’ (älteste) LBK. The adoption of longhouses at Szederkény thus appears to come a few generations after the start of the diaspora. Rather than explaining the mixture of things, practices and perhaps people at Szederkény by reference to problematic notions such as hybridity, we propose instead a more fluid and varied vocabulary including combination and amalgamation, relationships and performance in the flow of social life, and networks; this makes greater allowance for diversity and interleaving in a context of rapid change

The Beaker phenomenon and the genomic transformation of northwest Europe

From around 2750 to 2500 bc, Bell Beaker pottery became widespread across western and central Europe, before it disappeared between 2200 and 1800 bc. The forces that propelled its expansion are a matter of long-standing debate, and there is support for both cultural diffusion and migration having a role in this process. Here we present genome-wide data from 400 Neolithic, Copper Age and Bronze Age Europeans, including 226 individuals associated with Beaker-complex artefacts. We detected limited genetic affinity between Beaker-complex-associated individuals from Iberia and central Europe, and thus exclude migration as an important mechanism of spread between these two regions. However, migration had a key role in the further dissemination of the Beaker complex. We document this phenomenon most clearly in Britain, where the spread of the Beaker complex introduced high levels of steppe-related ancestry and was associated with the replacement of approximately 90% of Britain’s gene pool within a few hundred years, continuing the east-to-west expansion that had brought steppe-related ancestry into central and northern Europe over the previous centuries

Archaeology and the global economic crisis. Multiple impacts, possible solutions (ed. Nathan Schlanger and Kenneth Aitchison)

The texts presented here are extended and updated versions of the papers given at a session entitled “Archaeology and the global crisis - multiple impacts, possible solutions”, held on the 17th September 2009 at the 15th annual meeting of the European Association of Archaeologists (EAA) in Riva del Garda, Italy. As coorganisers of this session, we were particularly happy to see that over a hundred colleagues attended and took part in some lively discussions, where sober realism was mixed with hope and determination. The session furthermore benefitted from the friendly atmosphere and excellent organisation of the EAA meeting itself, as skilfully orchestrated by Franco Nicolis together with Martina Dalla Riva, their teams and sponsors. Indeed the European Association of Archaeologists as a whole, so we feel, has amply fulfilled its vocation as meeting-ground and think-tank for professional archaeologists from Europe and beyond (http://www.e-a-a.org). We are grateful in any case that our session at Riva del Garda was sponsored – in an intellectual sense – by three EAA committees or working parties. One is the “Committee on archaeological legislation and organisation in Europe”, chaired by Christopher Young and Jean-Paul Demoule: the crisis and the structural changes that follow make the critical and comparative work of this committee more important than ever before. Further support was received from the “Committee on professional associations in archaeology”, chaired by Kenneth Aitchison, a committee that is acutely concerned with working practices in European archaeology and how they are being affected by the economic situation. The third and most recently created of these EAA groups is the working party on “ACE - Archaeology in contemporary Europe: professional practices and public outreach” (www.ace-archaeology. eu) – a European Commission ‘Culture’ programme funded network gathering a dozen of partners from across the continent to examine together the fields of practice and social dimensions of contemporary archaeology. In addition to the invaluable material support provided by the ACE network, many of its partners contributed their comments and insights to the preparation of the ‘Crisis’ session, and also through subsequent meetings in Thessaloniki (with our Aristotle University partner) and in Budapest (with our KÖH partner). In this volume, ACE partners have contributed the chapters on the situations in the Netherlands, Spain, France and Poland. Another relevant European initiative is the “Discovering the Archaeologists of Europe” project (www.discovering-archaeologists.eu), a review of the archaeological labour market in twelve European Union states with the support of the European Commission ‘Leonardo da Vinci’ programme in 2006-2008. As data for the project were collected in 2007, at the height of the economic cycle, they give us very valuable information and insights for critical comparisons with the ongoing crisis situation.European Commission (through the Culture 2007-2013 programme) in the framework of the ACE project – “Archaeology in Contemporary Europe. Professional Practices and Public Outreach”Peer reviewe

Seasonal calving in European Prehistoric cattle and its impacts on milk availability and cheese-making

Abstract Present-day domestic cattle are reproductively active throughout the year, which is a major asset for dairy production. Large wild ungulates, in contrast, are seasonal breeders, as were the last historic representatives of the aurochs, the wild ancestors of cattle. Aseasonal reproduction in cattle is a consequence of domestication and herding, but exactly when this capacity developed in domestic cattle is still unknown and the extent to which early farming communities controlled the seasonality of reproduction is debated. Seasonal or aseasonal calving would have shaped the socio-economic practices of ancient farming societies differently, structuring the agropastoral calendar and determining milk availability where dairying is attested. In this study, we reconstruct the calving pattern through the analysis of stable oxygen isotope ratios of cattle tooth enamel from 18 sites across Europe, dating from the 6th mill. cal BC (Early Neolithic) in the Balkans to the 4th mill. cal BC (Middle Neolithic) in Western Europe. Seasonal calving prevailed in Europe between the 6th and 4th millennia cal BC. These results suggest that cattle agropastoral systems in Neolithic Europe were strongly constrained by environmental factors, in particular forage resources. The ensuing fluctuations in milk availability would account for cheese-making, transforming a seasonal milk supply into a storable product

Ethics of DNA research on human remains: five globally applicable guidelines.

We are a group of archaeologists, anthropologists, curators and geneticists representing diverse global communities and 31 countries. All of us met in a virtual workshop dedicated to ethics in ancient DNA research held in November 2020. There was widespread agreement that globally applicable ethical guidelines are needed, but that recent recommendations grounded in discussion about research on human remains from North America are not always generalizable worldwide. Here we propose the following globally applicable guidelines, taking into consideration diverse contexts. These hold that: (1) researchers must ensure that all regulations were followed in the places where they work and from which the human remains derived; (2) researchers must prepare a detailed plan prior to beginning any study; (3) researchers must minimize damage to human remains; (4) researchers must ensure that data are made available following publication to allow critical re-examination of scientific findings; and (5) researchers must engage with other stakeholders from the beginning of a study and ensure respect and sensitivity to stakeholder perspectives. We commit to adhering to these guidelines and expect they will promote a high ethical standard in DNA research on human remains going forward

Parallel paleogenomic transects reveal complex genetic history of early European farmers

Ancient DNA studies have established that Neolithic European populations were descended from Anatolian migrants1–8 who received a limited amount of admixture from resident hunter-gatherers3–5,9. Many open questions remain, however, about the spatial and temporal dynamics of population interactions and admixture during the Neolithic period. Using the highest-resolution genome-wide ancient DNA data set assembled to date—a total of 180 samples, 130 newly reported here, from the Neolithic and Chalcolithic of Hungary (6000–2900 BCE, n = 100), Germany (5500–3000 BCE, n = 42), and Spain (5500–2200 BCE, n = 38)—we investigate the population dynamics of Neolithization across Europe. We find that genetic diversity was shaped predominantly by local processes, with varied sources and proportions of hunter-gatherer ancestry among the three regions and through time. Admixture between groups with different ancestry profiles was pervasive and resulted in observable population transformation across almost all cultural transitions. Our results shed new light on the ways that gene flow reshaped European populations throughout the Neolithic period and demonstrate the potential of time-series-based sampling and modeling approaches to elucidate multiple dimensions of historical population interactions

Ethics of DNA research on human remains: Five globally applicable guidelines

We are a group of archaeologists, anthropologists, curators and geneticists representing diverse global communities and 31 countries. All of us met in a virtual workshop dedicated to ethics in ancient DNA research held in November 2020. There was widespread agreement that globally applicable ethical guidelines are needed, but that recent recommendations grounded in discussion about research on human remains from North America are not always generalizable worldwide. Here we propose the following globally applicable guidelines, taking into consideration diverse contexts. These hold that: (1) researchers must ensure that all regulations were followed in the places where they work and from which the human remains derived; (2) researchers must prepare a detailed plan prior to beginning any study; (3) researchers must minimize damage to human remains; (4) researchers must ensure that data are made available following publication to allow critical re-examination of scientific findings; and (5) researchers must engage with other stakeholders from the beginning of a study and ensure respect and sensitivity to stakeholder perspectives. We commit to adhering to these guidelines and expect they will promote a high ethical standard in DNA research on human remains going forward.Fil: Alpaslan Roodenberg, Songül. Harvard Medical School; Estados Unidos. Universidad de Viena; AustriaFil: Anthony, David. Harvard University; Estados UnidosFil: Babiker, Hiba. Max Planck Institute For The Science Of Human History; Estados UnidosFil: Bánffy, Eszter. No especifíca;Fil: Booth, Thomas. No especifíca;Fil: Capone, Patricia. Harvard University; Estados UnidosFil: Deshpande Mukherjee, Arati. No especifíca;Fil: Eisenmann, Stefanie. Institut Max Planck for Evolutionary Anthropology; AlemaniaFil: Fehren Schmitz, Lars. University of California; Estados UnidosFil: Frachetti, Michael. Washington University in St. Louis; Estados UnidosFil: Fujita, Ricardo. Universidad de San Martín de Porres; PerúFil: Frieman, Catherine J.. The Australian National University; AustraliaFil: Fu, Qiaomei. No especifíca;Fil: Gibbon, Victoria. University of Cape Town; SudáfricaFil: Haak, Wolfgang. Max Planck Institute For The Science Of Human History; AlemaniaFil: Hajdinjak, Mateja. The Francis Crick Institute; Reino UnidoFil: Hofmann, Kerstin P.. Deutsches Archäologisches Institut; AlemaniaFil: Holguin, Brian. University of California; Estados UnidosFil: Inomata, Takeshi. University of Arizona; Estados UnidosFil: Kanzawa Kiriyama, Hideaki. National Museum Of Nature And Science; JapónFil: Keegan, William. University Of Florida. Florida Museum Of History; Estados UnidosFil: Kelso, Janet. Institut Max Planck for Evolutionary Anthropology; AlemaniaFil: Krause, Johannes. Institut Max Planck for Evolutionary Anthropology; AlemaniaFil: Kumaresan, Ganesan. Madurai Kamaraj University; IndiaFil: Kusimba, Chapurukha. University of Florida; Estados UnidosFil: Kusimba, Sibel. University of Florida; Estados UnidosFil: Lalueza Fox, Carles. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas; EspañaFil: Llamas, Bastien. University of Adelaide; AustraliaFil: MacEachern, Scott. University of Duke; Estados UnidosFil: Mallick, Swapan. Harvard Medical School; Estados UnidosFil: Matsumura, Hirofumi. Sapporo Medical University; JapónFil: Morales Arce, Ana Y.. University of Bern; SuizaFil: Motuzaite Matuzeviciute, Giedre. Vilniaus Universitetas; LituaniaFil: Mushrif Tripathy, Veena. Deccan College Post Graduate and Research Institute; IndiaFil: Nakatsuka, Nathan. Harvard Medical School; Estados UnidosFil: Nores, Rodrigo. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto de Antropología de Córdoba. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Filosofía y Humanidades. Instituto de Antropología de Córdoba; ArgentinaFil: Ogola, Christine. National Museums Of Kenya; KeniaFil: Okumura, Mercedes. Universidade de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Patterson, Nick. Harvard University; Estados UnidosFil: Pinhasi, Ron. Universidad de Viena; AustriaFil: Prasad, Samayamantri P. R.. No especifíca;Fil: Prendergast, Mary E.. Rice University; Estados UnidosFil: Punzo, Jose Luis. No especifíca;Fil: Reich, David. Harvard University; Estados Unidos. Harvard Medical School; Estados UnidosFil: Sawafuji, Rikai. The Graduate University For Advanced Studies; JapónFil: Sawchuk, Elizabeth. University of Alberta; CanadáFil: Schiffels, Stephan. Institut Max Planck for Evolutionary Anthropology; AlemaniaFil: Sedig, Jakob. Harvard University; Estados Unidos. Harvard Medical School; Estados UnidosFil: Shnaider, Svetlana. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique; FranciaFil: Sirak, Kendra. Harvard University; Estados Unidos. Harvard Medical School; Estados UnidosFil: Skoglund, Pontus. The Francis Crick Institute; Reino UnidoFil: Slon, Viviane. Universitat Tel Aviv; IsraelFil: Snow, Meradeth. University Of Montana Missoula; Estados UnidosFil: Soressi, Marie. Leiden University; Países BajosFil: Spriggs, Matthew. The Australian National University; AustraliaFil: Stockhammer, Philipp W.. Ludwig Maximilians Universitat; Alemania. Institut Max Planck for Evolutionary Anthropology; AlemaniaFil: Szécsényi Nagy, Anna. No especifíca;Fil: Thangaraj, Kumarasamy. Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology; IndiaFil: Tiesler, Vera. Universidad Autónoma de Yucatán; MéxicoFil: Tobler, Ray. University of Adelaide; AustraliaFil: Wang, Chuan Chao. Xiamen University; ChinaFil: Warinner, Christina. Institut Max Planck for Evolutionary Anthropology; Alemania. Harvard University; Estados UnidosFil: Yasawardene, Surangi. No especifíca;Fil: Zahir, Muhammad. Hazara University; Pakistá