Social Worlds and Communities of Practice: a polythetic culture model for 3rd millennium BC Europe in the light of current migration debates

As an alternative to the traditional practice of cultural history using a monothetic classification of material, creating “archaeological cultures”, a polythetic culture model based on Strauss´s social worlds and Wenger´s communities of practice is proposed, which better represents the archaeological record dated to the 3rd millennium BC in Central Europe. Based on this approach current migration models elaborated for the 3rd millennium in connection with aDNA evidence are re-evaluated. It is argued that the use of “archaeological cultures” misleads our understanding of population movements. Steppe ancestry, as representing migrants or their descendants, is not primarily connected to specific “cultures” such as the Corded Ware or the Bell Beaker, but rather to a specific social world, a new set of burial practices, i.e. the Late Neolithic complex of individual, gender-specific burials with strict rules of orientation. A strong expression of a new cosmological understanding, a specific set of values is the migration process, rather than specific pottery styles, specific weapons or specific tool types. Including the differential patterns of material culture in the archaeological record results in suggestions of different scenarios of population mixing and social change.Nous proposons ici un modèle polythétique basé sur les mondes sociaux de Strauss et les communautés de pratique de Wenger en tant qu’alternative à la pratique traditionnelle de l’histoire culturelle qui met en œuvre une classification monothétique des vestiges matériels en créant des « cultures archéologiques ». Celui-ci permet de mieux représenter les données archéologiques du IIIe millénaire en Europe centrale. Les modèles de migration actuels élaborés pour le IIIe millénaire en relation avec des données aDNA sont réévalués sur la base de cette approche. Nous soutenons que l’emploi de « cultures archéologiques » en tant que modèle explicatif induit en erreur notre compréhension des mouvements de population. L’ascendance steppique, représentée par des migrants ou leurs descendants, n’est pas essentiellement connectée à des « cultures » spécifiques comme le Cordé ou le Campaniforme mais plutôt à un monde social spécifique, un nouvel ensemble de pratiques funéraires qui correspond au complexe des sépultures individuelles à différenciation sexuelle du Néolithique final avec des règles d’orientation strictes. Le processus de migration correspond précisément à cette forte expression d’une vision cosmologique nouvelle, d’un nouvel ensemble spécifique de pratiques funéraires, plutôt que la diffusion de styles céramiques particuliers, d’armes ou de types d’outils spécifiques. En incluant différents modèles de culture matérielle aux interprétations archéologiques, divers scénarios de mélanges de populations et de changements sociaux sont proposés

Mondes sociaux et communautés de pratique : un modèle culturel polythétique pour l’Europe du IIIe millénaire avant notre ère à la lumière des débats actuels sur la migration

Nous proposons ici un modèle polythétique basé sur les mondes sociaux de Strauss et les communautés de pratique de Wenger en tant qu’alternative à la pratique traditionnelle de l’histoire culturelle qui met en œuvre une classification monothétique des vestiges matériels en créant des « cultures archéologiques ». Celui-ci permet de mieux représenter les données archéologiques du IIIe millénaire en Europe centrale. Les modèles de migration actuels élaborés pour le IIIe millénaire en relation avec des données aDNA sont réévalués sur la base de cette approche. Nous soutenons que l’emploi de « cultures archéologiques » en tant que modèle explicatif induit en erreur notre compréhension des mouvements de population. L’ascendance steppique, représentée par des migrants ou leurs descendants, n’est pas essentiellement connectée à des « cultures » spécifiques comme le Cordé ou le Campaniforme mais plutôt à un monde social spécifique, un nouvel ensemble de pratiques funéraires qui correspond au complexe des sépultures individuelles à différenciation sexuelle du Néolithique final avec des règles d’orientation strictes. Le processus de migration correspond précisément à cette forte expression d’une vision cosmologique nouvelle, d’un nouvel ensemble spécifique de pratiques funéraires, plutôt que la diffusion de styles céramiques particuliers, d’armes ou de types d’outils spécifiques. En incluant différents modèles de culture matérielle aux interprétations archéologiques, divers scénarios de mélanges de populations et de changements sociaux sont proposés.As an alternative to the traditional practice of cultural history using a monothetic classification of material, creating ‘archaeological cultures’, a polythetic culture model based on Strauss´s social worlds and Wenger´s communities of practice is proposed, which better represents the archaeological record dated to the 3rd millennium BC in Central Europe. Based on this approach current migration models elaborated for the 3rd millennium in connection with aDNA evidence are re-evaluated. It is argued that the use of “archaeological cultures” misleads our understanding of population movements. Steppe ancestry, as representing migrants or their descendants, is not primarily connected to specific ‘cultures’ such as the Corded Ware or the Bell Beaker, but rather to a specific social world, a new set of burial practices, i.e. the Late Neolithic complex of individual, gender-specific burials with strict rules of orientation. A strong expression of a new cosmological understanding, a specific set of values is the migration process, rather than specific pottery styles, specific weapons or specific tool types. Including the differential patterns of material culture in the archaeological record results in suggestions of different scenarios of population mixing and social change

Absolutchronologie und die Entstehung der Schnurkeramik

The analysis of the available radiocarbon and dendrochronological dates of the Central European Corded Ware/Single Grave Culture gives new evidence for the evaluation of the formation processes of the Central European Corded Ware and the problem of the so-called „A-Horizon“. Ceramic forms in single graves develop earlier in Poland than in western and southern Central Europe. It is possible to show the development of a non-ceramic Corded Ware – or the development of a „corded ware-fashioned“ burial rite – in the western parts that takes place contemporaneous with the early CWC in Poland. This points towards a spread of Corded Ware cultural traits through a wide-spanning communication network rather than through migration.The dates also point towards the existence of an „A-Horizon“ in the 28th century BC, though it is shown that this horizon is to be understood as a number of connencting forms within different regional contexts

MegaForm – Ein Formalisierungssystem für die Analyse monumentaler Baustrukturen des Neolithikums im nördlichen Mitteleuropa

MegaForm is a recording system for Neolithic megaliths in northern Central Europe and southern Scandinavia. It was created in the context of the Priority Program 1400 “Early Monumentality and Social Differentiation”. It aims at formalising the recording of architectural traits of megaliths, non-megalithic monuments and simple graves, focussing on single characteristics, not on complex types. Specific national traditions have resulted in different terminologies. MegaForm unites these into one overall recording system, a new standard for the recording and description of megaliths. In this article, the recording system is proposed and commented, and it is possible to download a suitable database system

Forum : Populism, Identity Politics, and the Archaeology of Europe

SSR gratefully acknowledges M.J. Walsh, J.-L. Renaud, and another anonymous col- league for comments on this manuscript. MB would like to thank P. Pavúk, N. Vlhová, and M. Havlíková for reading and commenting on his paper. KK grate- fully acknowledges the editorial help of his friend Sappho Haralambous-Howe. Naturally, the views and opinions expressed here are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of other agencies.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Using the Capability Approach to Conceptualise Inequality in Archaeology: the Case of the Late Neolithic Bosnian Site Okolište c. 5200–4600 BCE

The past few decades have witnessed a growing realisation that market-based measures of human well-being—measures that centre on income and consumption distributions—miss some other perhaps even more essential elements of human well-being. This insight has found a prominent expression in the work of the Nobel Prize-winning economist Amartya Sen’s so-called capability approach. At the same time, the market-based measure of inequality as a function of the distribution of material remains in graves and other locations remain dominant in archaeology. In this paper, we explore the significance of the capability approach, and the associated concept of human well-being based on the idea of capabilities, to the archaeology of social inequality and social malintegration. We discuss these notions using the case study of the Late Neolithic Bosnian tell site Okolište and argue that there, in c. 5200–4600 BCE , the monopolisation of certain critical goods led to a critical capability inequality, malintegration and to a prolonged period of social unrest and decline

Periodisierung der Trichterbecher-Gesellschaften. Ein Arbeitsentwurf

Old and new data from the Funnel Beaker societies have been collated to create a new chronological chart of regional developments. The comparison between Scandinavian and North Central European periodisations offers the possibility to identify different developments in a synchronized time frame

Re-integrating Archaeology: A Contribution to aDNA Studies and the Migration Discourse on the 3rd Millennium BC in Europe

Since aDNA research suggested a marked gene influx from Eastern into Central Europe in the 3rd millennium bc, outdated, simplistic narratives of massive migrations of closed populations have re-appeared in archaeological discussions. A more sophisticated model of migration from the steppes was proposed recently by Kristiansen et al. As a reaction to that proposal, this paper aims to contribute to this ongoing debate by refining the latter model, better integrating archaeological data and anthropological knowledge. It is argued that a polythetic classification of the archaeological material in Central Europe in the 3rd millennium reveals the presence of a new complex of single grave burial rituals which transcends the traditional culture labels. Genetic steppe ancestry is mainly connected to this new kind of burials, rather than to Corded Ware or Bell Beaker materials. Here it is argued that a polythetic view on the archaeological record suggests more complicated histories of migration, population mixtures and interaction than assumed by earlier models, and ways to better integrate detailed studies of archaeological materials with a deeper exploration of anthropological models of mobility and social group composition and the molecular biological data are explored

Mobility and Social Change: Understanding the European Neolithic Period after the Archaeogenetic Revolution

Abstract This paper discusses and synthesizes the consequences of the archaeogenetic revolution to our understanding of mobility and social change during the Neolithic period in Europe (6500–2000 BC). In spite of major obstacles to a productive integration of archaeological and anthropological knowledge with ancient DNA data, larger changes in the European gene pool are detected and taken as indications for large-scale migrations during two major periods: the Early Neolithic expansion into Europe (6500–4000 BC) and the third millennium BC “steppe migration.” Rather than massive migration events, I argue that both major genetic turnovers are better understood in terms of small-scale mobility and human movement in systems of population circulation, social fission and fusion of communities, and translocal interaction, which together add up to a large-scale signal. At the same time, I argue that both upticks in mobility are initiated by the two most consequential social transformations that took place in Eurasia, namely the emergence of farming, animal husbandry, and sedentary village life during the Neolithic revolution and the emergence of systems of centralized political organization during the process of urbanization and early state formation in southwest Asia