Monuments and Monumentality:The cosmological model of the world of megaliths

Neolithic monuments are physical and conceptual expressions of ideas about the nature of the world inhabited by early north European farmers. This contribution explores the complex symbolism encoded in megalithic architecture, and the socio-ritual interactions within which megaliths offered venues for public gatherings in which individuals participated singly or as members of larger groups. By bringing communities together – be it in thanksgiving, worship or pilgrimage – megaliths bridged the gap between the immediate, quotidian and local realities of life and the anomalous entities of the multi-dimensional universe in which past, present and future were given tangible permanence

The origin and function of the earthen long barrows of northern Europe

The earthen long barrow of Northern Europe is one of many elements within a widespread tradition of large-scale monuments of funerary association witnessed in many regions of Europe throughout the Neolithic period. A considerable body of theoretical concepts has arisen from the various attempts to interpret the origins and use of these monumentsThe area of the North European Plain, diverse both geographically and environmentally, was inhabited by a variety of Late Mesolithic hunting and fishing communities, some of which achieved a considerable degree of economic stability. Contemporaneous events to the south of the Plain involved settlement by LBK groups and the introduction of a farming economy to the loess lands and similar environments in Central Europe. Prolonged contacts between these two economically and culturally diverse systems led ultimately to the adoption of a farming economy in Northern Europe, and with it to the emergence of a new cultural complex - the TvichterbeoherkuZtur. One of the characteristic manifestations of this culture was the development of a tradition of large funerary monuments - the earthen long barrows. These barrows have long been a source of interest to antiquarians and from the mid-19th century were regularly, albeit not thoroughly, investigated.The barrows are found in several concentrations across the North European Plain. The monuments are characterised by a number of commonly recognised features. Earthen mounds - occasionally exceeding one hundred metres in length - are set within stoneand/or timber-built enclosures. Complex interior arrangements involve a variety of structures whose purpose may not always be obvious but which nevertheless cannot be regarded as purely utilitarian in character. Recent discoveries in some areas confirm a long-held notion that the barrows contain within them remains of grave chambers, greatly varying in design and construction.Evidence today suggests that a probable prototype of the external form of the earthen long barrow may be found in the local domestic architecture of the Late LBK, while the burial ritual was firmly rooted within the North European Mesolithic tradition. But the interpretation of their function centres equally on their social and symbolic significance within the communities of the TRB cultur

From Ancestral Village to Monumental Cemetery: The Creation of Monumental Neolithic Cemeteries

The north-west communities of the mid-5th millennium BC embarked upon a remarkable transformation of their surroundings by creating permanent abodes for their dead which manifest themselves in veritable monumental long barrow cemeteries. These make a highly significant appearance on the periphery of the disintegrating Danubian world, precisely in the areas of intensive cultural contacts between the indigenous hunter-gatherers and the Danubian farmers.The sites are important not only in terms of their visual and cultural impact in the landscape, and in terms of the actual burial ritual which imaginatively combined elements of hunter-gatherer and Danubian burial practices, but also in terms of their relationship with both past and contemporary settlement patterns.The idea of a house of the living serving as a prototype for ahouse of the dead has an ancestry that goes back to at least the mid-19th century, but the results of the past two decades of research have enabled us to consider this issue anew. In areas as far apart as Kujavia and the central Paris basin, long mounds can be shown to imitate the Danubian long houses.However, a house was merely a component of a village – one ofmany elements which symbolised families coming together to form a community. The significance of the long mound cemeteries lay not just in imitating the long houses but in monumentalising entire ancestral villages. Thus, the intentional combining of architecture with the funerary sphere linked elements of the past – the abandoned villages– with those of the future – enduring abodes for their dead

Who was who in the Neolithic

Death was no great leveller in the TRB. Prominent ancestors reposed in solitude under huge earthen mounds or shared stone chambers with select members of their community. Others were buried in flat graves, settlement pits or otherwise obscured from view – clearly relegated to future oblivion and known to us only through accidents of archaeological discovery. The paper explores these apparent differences – can we account for such varying treatment of individuals who apparently belonged to the same community, shared the same daily life, followed the same cultural traditions and espoused the same world views

Mutations in sphingosine-1-phosphate lyase cause nephrosis with ichthyosis and adrenal insufficiency

Steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome (SRNS) causes 15% of chronic kidney disease cases. A mutation in 1 of over 40 monogenic genes can be detected in approximately 30% of individuals with SRNS whose symptoms manifest before 25 years of age. However, in many patients, the genetic etiology remains unknown. Here, we have performed whole exome sequencing to identify recessive causes of SRNS. In 7 families with SRNS and facultative ichthyosis, adrenal insufficiency, immunodeficiency, and neurological defects, we identified 9 different recessive mutations in SGPL1, which encodes sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P) lyase. All mutations resulted in reduced or absent SGPL1 protein and/or enzyme activity. Overexpression of cDNA representing SGPL1 mutations resulted in subcellular mislocalization of SGPL1. Furthermore, expression of WT human SGPL1 rescued growth of SGPL1-deficient dpl1. yeast strains, whereas expression of disease-associated variants did not. Immunofluorescence revealed SGPL1 expression in mouse podocytes and mesangial cells. Knockdown of Sgpl1 in rat mesangial cells inhibited cell migration, which was partially rescued by VPC23109, an S1P receptor antagonist. In Drosophila, Sply mutants, which lack SGPL1, displayed a phenotype reminiscent of nephrotic syndrome in nephrocytes. WT Sply, but not the disease-associated variants, rescued this phenotype. Together, these results indicate that SGPL1 mutations cause a syndromic form of SRNS

Le Néolithique en Europe du Nord : origine et originalités

The Neolithisation of Northern Europe was neither synchronous nor uniform and it cannot be defined in simple terms. The early Neolithic populations of Northern Europe – known in the archaeological literature since the beginning of the last century under the name of the TRB culture – are a consequence of a long period of contact and of mutual influences between two communities with contrasting life-styles : the Linearbandkeramik and its derivatives settled in the central European loess, and the immensely varied hunter-gatherers roaming in the sandy and forested habitats of the North European Plain. The unique nature of this process is reviewed here through the prism of ceramics, flint industries and ceremonial landscape. It demonstrates the active participation of hunter-gatherers and the novel way in which the traditional Neolithic elements were transformed into different cultural, economic and social phenomena through a web of dynamic relationships across the vast area of Northern Europe.Les premières populations néolithiques du Nord de l’Europe doivent être perçues en relation avec les contacts et les influences mutuelles entre deux communautés à modes de vie très différents : les Danubiens, premiers fermiers établis en Europe centrale, et les derniers chasseurs-cueilleurs qui occupaient les zones sablonneuses et boisées de la plaine nord-européenne. Le caractère unique de ce processus de fusion – dont les aspects céramiques, lithiques et du paysage cérémoniel sont décrits ici – réside dans le rôle actif que les chasseurs-cueilleurs y ont tenu et dans la manière dont les traits néolithiques traditionnels ont été transformés en de nouvelles caractéristiques culturelles, économiques et sociales.Midgley Magdalena S. Le Néolithique en Europe du Nord : origine et originalités. In: Préhistoire de l’Europe : des origines à l’Âge du Bronze. Actes du 125e Congrès national des sociétés historiques et scientifiques, « L’Europe », Lille, 2000. Paris : Editions du CTHS, 2003. pp. 413-428. (Actes du Congrès national des sociétés savantes, 125

Du Mésolithique au Néolithique en Europe du Nord

L’émergence du Néolithique en Europe du Nord ne fut ni synchrone ni uniforme et on ne peut pas la définir en termes simples. Les problèmes qui se rapportent à la discussion de ce processus complexe concernent les relations entre les communautés de tradition danubienne et les divers groupes de chasseurs-cueilleurs. L’influence culturelle, économique et sociale des Danubiens profite d’une longue histoire de recherche et constitue depuis longtemps le sujet de débats archéologiques. Par contraste, le rôle du chasseur-cueilleur dans ce processus a été moins discuté. L’objectif de cet article est d’explorer la contribution de l’héritage des chasseurs-cueilleurs à la naissance du Néolithique en Europe du Nord, comme on le voit au moyen de découvertes récentes et sur fond de nouvelles considérations théoriques et méthodologiques.The Neolithisation of Northern Europe was neither synchronous nor uniform and it cannot be defined in simple terms. The issues pertinent to the debate on this complex process revolve around the relationship between the communities of the Danubian tradition and the various late hunter-gatherer groups. The cultural, economic and social impact of the Danubians has a long history of research and has featured in archaeological debates for quite some time. In contrast, the role of the hunter-gatherers in this process has been less frequently discussed. Thus, the objective of the present article is to explore the contribution of the hunter-gatherer heritage to the emergence of the Neolithic in Northern Europe, as seen through recent discoveries and against the background of new theoretical and methodological considerations

Espaces, monumentalisme et pratiques funéraires des sociétés néolithiques en voie de hiérarchisation - Les nécropoles monumentales Cerny du bassin Seine-Yonne

International audienceDurant presque un millénaire, les phénomènes qui marquent la néolithisation conduisent progressivement à l'émergence, au Néolithique moyen, des premières sociétés structurées hiérarchisées. Parmi les divers témoins du comportement des groupes néolithiques, les pratiques funéraires offrent un observatoire particulièrement révélateur des attitudes collectives. À ce titre, l'apparition et le développement précoce de véritables nécropoles, regroupant d'imposants monuments funéraires consacrés à des personnages d'un rang particulier, représentent des manifestations qui reflètent pour partie cette évolution de l'organisation sociale. Le monumentalisme funéraire étudié depuis une quinzaine d'années en sud-est du Bassin pari-sien (secteur Seine-Yonne) révèle une mutation dans les comportements idéologiques. Développé au sein des groupes de population Cerny dès le second tiers du V e millénaire, il témoigne de pratiques se démarquant notablement des traditions des communautés agro-pastorales antérieures : apparition de véritables nécropoles, inhumation allongée en espace coffré, statut privilégié des défunts. Le phénomène se corrèle non seulement avec des transformations économiques,mais aussi avec les premières constructions d'enceintes et un nouveau mode d'appropriation du territoire. Le contexte de développement des interactions culturelles entre groupes de population durant ces périodes ne peut seul suffire à expliquer cette mutation. Il semble désormais nécessaire d'envisager que la genèse du phénomène se fonde sur une acculturation entre groupes tardi-mésolithiques et populations néolithiques d'ascendance danubienne. Les pistes d'interprétation proposées mériteront toutefois d'être étayées et soumises à validation, leur contenu résultant de l'étude du contexte sépulcral et se fondant encore sur des constats trop ténus ou difficilement généralisables au regard de la complexité des phénomènes à analyser. Pascal DUHAMEL, Magdalena MIDGLE

Chambered Tombs and Passage Graves of Western and Northern Europe

This contribution explores variations in the construction, form, use, and re-use of Neolithic chambered tombs in three key areas of northern and western Europe: (1) France and Iberia; (2) northern Germany, Holland, and southern Scandinavia; and (3) Britain and Ireland. The chapter outlines chronological patterns, and considers key themes such as the choice of materials for construction, locations chosen for construction, conditions of access to and decorations at the monuments, the deposition of human remains and other material at the tombs, and activities at the exterior of these monuments. The implications of similarities and differences between regions are examined, and potential areas for future research are discussed

Bell beaker copper use in central Europe : a distinctive tradition? : a re-evaluation of the composition of copper artefacts and its effects on the properties of the metal

This thesis is concerned with the manufacture of copper artefacts by the users of Bell Beaker pottery in the Eastern Bell Beaker group in central Europe, and addresses the question: did these metalworkers have distinct metallurgical abilities, techniques and preferences that set them apart from contemporary and earlier metal-using groups in the same region? Can we talk of a 'Bell Beaker' metallurgical tradition? Despite the long history of research into the so-called Bell Beaker phenomenon, there has been no definite answer to this question. The composition of copper artefacts is influenced by the production process and the composition of the ore, and so two artefacts that share a similar composition reflect a metallurgical similarity. Artefact composition is defined by variations in trace element impurities that are contained in the copper. Trace elements, however, do not only point to metallurgical processes: they also affect the physical and chemical properties of the metal. Consequently, this thesis aims to clarify whether the distribution of the Bell Beaker phenomenon throughout central Europe and its dissociation from other archaeologically visible groups there is associated with the use of a specific metallurgical tradition. It will be argued that if metal workers of other archaeological groups of the 3rd millennium BC, such as the Corded Ware complex, dealt with different types of copper, having different properties, this would give an insight into the relationship between those people and the Bell Beaker phenomenon in central Europe. In order to explore these issues, a database of some 1943 trace element analyses of Chalcolithic copper objects from central Europe has been created, then statistically grouped and evaluated according to two questions: firstly, were metalworkers selecting specific types of copper for their physical and chemical properties? Secondly, are Eastern Bell Beaker copper artefacts made from specific types of copper? The result of the statistical evaluation has demonstrated that, generally, copper artefacts with higher impurity levels are more common throughout the 3rd millennium BC than in earlier periods. In particular, higher concentrations of arsenic, antimony, lead and nickel (> c. 2%) indicate that these types of copper have improved properties (e.g. hardness, tensile strength, malleability). Furthermore, with the appearance of archaeological remains classified as belonging to the Earliest Bronze Age (e.g. the Blechkreis and the Nitra group), there is an almost exclusive use of types of copper that contain even greater quantities of antimony, nickel and arsenic. These types of copper may have been preferred by metalworkers because their superior tensile strength and hardness improves the quality an artefact. It therefore appears that the metallurgical properties of copper were gradually improved throughout the Chalcolithic in central Europe. It seems that there was a network distributing copper over the area of this research, because the types of copper used by the Eastern Bell Beaker group do not show great regional variation. The uniformity of the archaeological records of the Eastern Bell Beaker group is also reflected in their metalworking tradition. However, it was for the first possible to clarify that the people of the Eastern Bell Beaker group did not deal with a specific type of copper compared with other archaeological groups. Bell Beaker copper types do not differ from those generally used throughout the 3rd millennium BC, albeit that only a small set of Bell Beaker artefacts (chiefly daggers and awls) has provided trace element analyses. As neither regional nor cultural specific metallurgy can be detected for this period, it is argued that the Eastern Bell Beaker group is – at least in metallurgical terms – connected with other local communities in central Europe. Consequently, metallurgy cannot be cited as a defining factor of archaeological groups in central Europe during the 3rd millennium BC. In terms of the Corded Ware and Bell Beaker groups, metallurgical expertise was probably at the same level of knowledge. Hence, even if the types of copper artefact that were manufactured were ‘culture-specific’, the manufacturing techniques and the access to resources were not restricted to a single archaeological group. It can therefore cautiously be suggested that, between c. 2700 and 2000 BC, metallurgists – perhaps as itinerant craftsmen – produced copper artefacts according to the demands of their ‘customers’.EThOS - Electronic Theses Online ServiceGBUnited Kingdo