Razor sharp

Posted on 01/27/2012 by Katzman

The appearance of Levallois technology (named after a suburb of Paris where it was first described) in Africa and Europe c. 300–250 ka years ago (OIS8) is commonly used to define the Lower-to-Middle Palaleolithic and ESA/MSA boundary (as first proposed by Bosinski in Ronen 1982) and arguably represents a major innovation in lithic practices during the Middle Pleistocene.

I was always fascinated by the razor sharp Levallois Flakes from Kebara, made by Neanderthals c 50 ka BP. They are thin, but not so thin that they are ineffective. They are not so thick that they could not be re-sharpened effectively and exibit a balanced centre of gravity.

Intuitively they look like desired endproducts of a subtle and planned core reduction strategy. They are sharper than many blades from the European Aurignacien in my collection. But-I always was aware that this impression could be incorrect and could be biased by my suggestions of a certain unity of early humans (Neanderthals, Archaic H. Sapiens and H. Sapiens sensu strictu). In the archaeological literature, there are many suspicions regarding the “preferred” and “planned” nature of Levallois technology, coming especially from the “hypersceptical camp”.

Several examinations of archaeological material on the issue of Levallois predetermination and planning and they have produced mixed results. Dibble focused on the issue of predetermination in Levallois flakes by evaluation of flakes from 27 different assemblages in southern France. Regarding his esults from incomplete reconstructions of the chaine opératoire he argued that their manufacture could not be linked to “the presence of linguistic rules, structures, or categories”. A study by Schlanger, however, used flakes from a refitted Levallois core from the early Middle Palaleolithic site of Maastricht-Belvédère (Netherlands) and reached a different conclusion. Here, he found that length; widths and thicknesses of the nine Levallois flakes were, as a group, more standardized than the 32 non-Levallois (debitage) flakes.

Lycett and Eren recently adopted an experimental approach to this issue. They focused on the production of “preferential” Levallois cores and their products and found that their results strongly support the view that Levallois reduction strategies were  indeed a organized process and a deliberate, engineered strategy orientated toward specific goals. Levallois knapping from these experiments may seen as an indication of an advanced cognitive competence of their makers and therefore for long-term working memory.

Suggesting Reading:

http://www.mendeley.com/research/understanding-levallois-lithic-technology-cognitive-archaeology/

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0029273

 

 

Posted in Plaeolithics and Neolithics | Leave a comment

Bechar / Algeria: Aterian Artifacts and their functional meaning

Posted on 01/22/2012 by Katzman

These are some “Aterian” artifacts from the Algerian Sahara showing the variability of a random sample. The morphological continuum of Aterian tools ranges from pointed and elongated triangular forms to rounded and squat blunt forms, as demonstrated in this post. Typologically this sample of consists of “points”, “side-scrapers” and “end-scrapers”. Actually we have no idea about the functional impact of “Aterian” implements.

The Aterian is certainly much older than previously assumed and dates back at least to OIS6. The technocomplex is defined by the presence of ‘tanged’ or tools, which have been widely assumed to be among the earliest projectile weapon tips. This hypothesis has never been explored in detail before, despite the fact, that many Aterian Artifacts rather resemble “scrapers” and that the “points” are better described as stemmed convergent tools with two retouched edges.

Radu Iovita (RGZM, Schloss Monrepos, Neuwied, Germany) recently demonstrated in a large sample of Aterian tools that the variation in shape within that the sample exhibits size-dependent patterns consistent with a reduction of the tools from the tip down, with the tang remaining intact. This pattern supports a functional hypothesis of Aterian artifacts as hafted knives or scrapers with alternating active edges, rather than as weapon tips. Anyhow the use of (spear) tips of some of these tools cannot be ruled out.

Suggested Reading:

http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0029029

About upper Pleistocene discpersals of the genus homo:

http://www.hindawi.com/journals/ijeb/2011/615094/cta/

Posted in Plaeolithics and Neolithics | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Stone Age after the Stone Age: Arctic Bone Harpoon

Posted on 01/19/2012 by Katzman

This is a small Bone Harpoon from the Canadian Arctic, (12 cm long) probably from the early Thule complex.

Barbed bone and antler points have been found in all major regions of the Old World with the exception of Australia. Likewise they occur widely in the New World, absent only in Middle America and the north-western portion of South America. They can be as small as 4 cm and as large as 50 cm and are and were used for different tasks: hunting game (for example at the Maiendorf site) but also for fishing (even in the Sahara during  the early Holocene!). Barbed points may be classified either as “fixed,” when permanently attached to a spear or arrow shaft, or as “harpoons” (sensu strictu) when they separate from a shaft on impact and remain attached to it by line. Barbs ensured that the point stayed embedded in the flesh of the animal once it was harpooned.

 The earliest harpoons so far  were found at three archaeological sites at Katanda on the Upper Semliki River (Democratic Republic of Congo). Dating by both direct and indirect means indicate an age of ~90 ka or older.. Such weapons could were obviously used to hunt catfish; those remains were abundant at the site. One exemplar may weight as much as 68 kg (enough to feed 80 people for two days). Because no other barbed points from the MSA have been found, some researchers suggest, that these findings are coming from a disturbed context. Anyhow, published data from the site so far indicate that there are only minor taphonomic disturbances and that the barbed points are not from a later LSA occupation. It remains an enigma, why this invention was not transferred to /or accepted by other foragers.

The earliest well-dated non-African specimens are associated with the 13,5 ka BP Magdalenian levels at Tito Bustillo cave in northern Spain. Unilaterally and bilaterally barbed harpoons are both hallmarks of the upper Magdalenian and often found together. The succession of a “ Magdalenien V” with unilaterally barbed harpoons, followed by a “Magdalenien VI” with bilaterally barbed harpoons is a theoretical construct of the early 20th century and a good example how unreflected evolutionary thinking may bias the data. Unilateral barbed points and harpoons are common in the European Mesolithic.  Such items are very rare in the Natufian; the largest sample, seven specimens, from Kebara Cave, Israel, is dated to ca. 11 ka BP.

During the early Holocene barbed points are common in Africa; It seems that these tools were selctively used for fishing.  African sites wherewith barbed bone points always show an abundance of fish bone, if the fauna is preserved. This is especially evident in sites of the “Khartoum Neolithic”.

It appears that the expansion of aquatic resources in the Holocene made the “green” Sahara attractive to populations with existing fishing and riverine hunting skills. Their ability to hunt hippopotamus and crocodiles and to catch a wide variety of deepwater fish species would have propelled a rapid dispersal from east to west and into the central Sahara, to judge by the numerous branches of Nilo-Saharan in the east. The archeological remains of this “aqualatic complex” are barbed bone points and a fish hook technology.

Our ancestors did not simply drift northward from their African origins as their abilities to cope with cooler climates evolved. After the initial settlement of the lower Eurasian latitudes, they actively moved into the Arctic and the Americas, in relatively rapid bursts of expansion about 15-10 ka BP.

The Inuit have the most complex pre-industrial forms of harpoons ever developed. The primary use of the Inuit harpoon was for hunting sea mammals, both at breathing holes in the sea ice and in open water; although in some arctic areas the harpoon was used for fish as well. The inhabitants of the circumpolar region  used harpoons with fixed foreshafts after 3500 BC . During the Thule complex (after 900-until now), the inhabitants added  loose foreshafts to their repertoire. This may indicate that the earliest inhabitants of the area hunted only at breathing holes and that open water hunting was a later innovation, or it may simply reflect a development from an all-purpose form to specialized harpoons for particular hunting conditions.

 
Posted in Plaeolithics and Neolithics | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Leaf Point from Moravany nad Váhom-Dlhá

Posted on 01/15/2012 by Katzman

This is a Leaf Point from Moravany nad Váhom-Dlhá (4,5×2,5×07 cm).

Paleolithic findings at Moravany were first considered in 1931, when two interested collectors, V. Vlk and H. Sonntag, recovered patinated flint artifacts from the ploughed fiels along the Vah valley. Lothar Zotz, who worked in Breslau at this time, visited some of the sites together with Vlk since 1935 . Zotz came back in 1940, at this time allready professor of prehistory at the German Karls-University in Prague, and excavated several sites until 1943. The main results of his research can be summarized as following: In Moravany there are sites from various Upper Paleolithic technocomplexes. Zotz was the first, who described an earlier phase at Moravany nad Váhom-Dlhá with typical leafpoints and the  richer findings from a late Gravettian with shouldered points. Zotz also reconstructed the chaine operatoire, which started either from a broad triangular flake, but also from small triangular „bifaces“

 In 1946 Karel Absolon made excavations at Dlhá, and prepared drawing of artifacts for a later publication. Bárta’s revisory excavations in the 1960ies were more metricoulos than those of his forrunners, as he did not only collect leaf points, but also cores, flakes and blades. The most important class of retouched tools were leaf points with either flat retouch or partial flat retouch, including semi-finished points and fragments of points. As allready mentioned by Zotz, they were mostly made of local raw materials, such as (black to reddish) radiolarites, quartz and silicificated sandstone. Imported raw materials, obsidian and limnosilicite, were less frequent. „Atypical“ End-scrapers, side-scrapers, burins and combined tools were rare and non-diagnostic. The workshop character of the site was documented by the presence of semi finished products and debitage.

The leafpoints from Dlhá are unique and can not be easily integrated into the „Szeletian“ concept sensu strictu as a ”transitional” technocomplex . So far, in Europe,diagnostic triangular Moravany-Dlhá points are only known from the Moravany vincinity, from Vlčkovice in Western Slowakia and from isolated stray finds at Miscolc (Hungary) and at Brudersdorf (Austria). Their incorporation into an interstadial soil at Dlhá, first demonstrated by Lais in the 1937, indicates an Interstadial before or after the Pavlovian , which at Moravany nad Váhom is always incorporated in the pure loess. Zotz`s documentation and much of the archaeological findings (about 200 leaf points!) were lost when the German troops  were kicked out from Prague in 1945.

At Vlčkovice a triangular leaf point was found together with arched backed blades in an interstadial soil, dated to the Arcy-Denekamp episode (32-28 ka BP) and topped by a Gravettian industry in the upper parts of this soil. On the other hand at Trencianské Bohuslavice elaborated elongated leaf points have been clearly documented in a „Willendorf-Kostenki“ context at 19 ka BP.

Absolons drawings:

Posted in Plaeolithics and Neolithics | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Weaving

Posted on 01/13/2012 by Katzman

Two spindle whorls from the LBK of Lower Austria (diameter: 2,5 and 1,5 cm; about 5000 BC). At this time hand-spinning and loom-based weaving was fully established in Neolithic societies.

Perishable materials, including cordage, nets and textiles, have long been recognized as an important piece of forager technology in the Upper Paleolithic. Especially the role of textiles within prehistoric communities is thought to be socially, ideologically and culturally important. However such technologies are nearly invisible in the archaeological record because the organic materials are so rarely preserved.  This is unfortunate, because the simple presence or absence of such an enormous class of raw materials has vast implications for our understanding Paleolithic lifestyles.

Perishable materials comprise up to 95% of material culture in ethnographically documented forager groups (Owen 1995). Archaeological work at wet sites (lakes in the Alpine foreland, the La Draga site in Spain, bodies from the Iron Age in bogs), and other sites of extraordinary preservation (e.g. organic material from the salt mines in Austria, the Alpine Ice Man) indicates that the remains found in most archaeological contexts may be far from representative of the complete array of items used by prehistoric populations.

At Dzudzuana  Cave (Republic of Georgia) flax (Linum usitatissimum) fibers were recovered from four Upper Paleolithic occupations dating between 26 and 32 ka BP. These fibers had clearly been modified, cut, twisted and even dyed gray, black, turquoise and pink, most likely with locally available natural plant pigments.

Soffer and co-workers have studied female figurines from Middle-East Europe and argue that they are dressed in apparel that has been twined or knit. Soffer has also suggested that many Paleolithic antler and bone artifacts interpreted as hunting implements were actually used in the production of textiles. There are some data from microwear analysis to substantiate these arguments. Owen’s research on the division of labor during the German Magdalenian and her studies of bone needles and awls also suggest that plant materials played a significant role in Magdalenian.

Finally clay fragments imprinted with cordage, knots and woven fabrics come from several Pavlovian sites, including Dolni Vestonice and Pavlov (Czech Republic; 27ka BP). At Pavlov impressions of knotted nets survived in clay which maybe have been used to capture birds. The textiles, basketry, and cordage specimens represented in the impressions were made of plant rather than animal fibers, though an identification of the species used is impossible. These findings suggest that weaving technology of course dates back into the late Pleistocene.

Ohalo II, a submerged and well-preserved early “Epipaleolithic” site in the Sea of Galilee, Israel also contained cordage dated to about ~21 Ka BP.  The only surviving Palaeolithic fragments of ropes are preserved as apparent natural casts come from Lascaux (19 ka BP), but it has not been possible to determine the material used in its construction.

Who handled the work with perishable materials? Soffer suggests, that cross-cultural ethnographic data could indicate that these tasks were associated with women, but until now this remains speculative.

 

Posted in Plaeolithics and Neolithics | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Patterns in Prehistory

Posted on 01/09/2012 by Katzman

The analytical tools we use to evaluate the visible world determine the structure of our “reality”. If we image the human body with a CT-scanner (an anatomic 3-D view of the body) the results will differ from the results if a FDG-PET scanner (metabolic imaging of the body that uses radioactive glucose) is used. Nevertheless both results are valid in their own context, and the combination of both (FDG-PET/CT) may be more valid regarding the extend of a disease compared to only one imaging modality.

Knowledge and Interpretations of Archaeological patterns also depend on choice of analytical tools. This fact was nicely demonstrated by the 2009 thesis of Héloïse Koehler regarding Middle Paleolithic groups in Northern France during the Early Weichselian.

Koehler showed that the use of different analytic frames revealed different interpretative results. While the lithic assemblages are quite similar at a general scale of analysis, they look very different at a fine scale, at which five groups could be distinguished. Koehler proposes that these groups may reflect distinct technological traditions, included within similar cultural areas.

We are waiting for other publications that use new approaches to overcome outdated interpretations in prehistory. Such approaches could be inspired by an Epistological Constructivism that proposes that knowledge should be understood as socially construct, defined by practice and by the activities of and interactions between individuals. Knowledge in this definition becomes “fluid” and expandable and more scientific.

Unfortunately the thesis of Héloïse Koehler is not available via the www. A good overview, written by herself can be found at:

http://www.geo.uni-tuebingen.de/fileadmin/website/arbeitsbereich/ufg/urgeschichte_quartaeroekologie/publikationen/GFU/2011/013-032_GFU_Mitteilung20_WEB.pdf
Posted in Plaeolithics and Neolithics | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

The Meaning of Colors

Posted on 01/08/2012 by Katzman

Colorful Neolithic arrowheads (largest example: 6×1,8×0,3 cm).

 All material productions are culturally, socially and physically embedded. From the ethnological record, we know that in traditional societies, raw material for stone tool production is not solely selected for its functional properties. A distinctive color, shape, or texture of the lithic raw material is often associated with a mythical and spiritual meaning. Colored stones or stones that are covered with colored pigments are suggested being charged with spiritual power.

Coloration by pigments seems to be an early trait of the human lineage. It seems now to be widely accepted, that these pigments were mainly used for non-utilitarian activities such as body painting, personal ornamentation, coloring of important artifacts (beads, tools) and rock surfaces.

Paleolithic men had five main colors at their disposal: yellow, red, brown, black and white. Manganese oxides were the most common inorganic pigments used for black painting. The only organic pigment preserved for black coloration is charcoal, which allows dating cave “art” with C-14. If there were other organic substances that were processed for coloration is unknown. Red (reddish brown and yellow-orange) pigments were produced from iron oxides, like hematite or limonite, and from ochre. White was very rare but could be obtained from kaolinite or illite (at Lascaux).

 In Africa the evidence for human ochre use extends back to the beginnings of the MSA, for example in the Kapthurin Formation, Kenya, dated to >240 k.a, at Twin Rivers, Zambia dated roughly to the same time interval. Excavations at Sai 8-B-11 in northern Sudan show yellow and red pigment lumps associated with grinding tools with traces of pigments and vegetal materials. The associated Sangoan core axe lithic ensemble is dated to 200 k.a BP.

In Europe the use of pigments by Neanderthals is well documented during the later phases of the Middle Paleolithic (from 120 to 40 k.a BP). Most often, these pigments consist of manganese dioxide, and more rarely ochre. Most of these sites date to the end of the Middle Paleolithic (OIS 4/3) and are attributed to the MTA and the Charentian Mousterian. In the 1980’s 14 small red dots were identified during excavations of the Middle Paleolithic site Maastricht- Belvédère, dating to 250 k.a BP. These samples were identified as hematite and may be the earliest examples of pigment use by Neanderthals.

 Graves with ochre bedding are known from Qafzeh Cave in Israel (900 ka BP), where the skeletal remains and burials of the first early modern humans in the Levant were found. From the 60 Upper Paleolithic graves in Europe, about 30 are connected with the use of ochre (Paviland, Krems Wachtberg, Brno II, Dolni Vestonice, Balzi Rossi, Kostenki 14 and 15, Sungir, Cro Magnon). In Lagar Velho (Portugal) a burial of a child, dated to the Gravettian at 25 ka BP was found. The four years old child was covered with red ochre and laid on a bed of burnt vegetation together with pierced teeth and marine shells. The burial of two newborns was found at the Krems Wachtberg Pavlovian site in Austria. The children were sprinkled with ochre and wrapped in skin, together with a necklace of mammoth ivory. The 27 000 years old grave was covered with a mammoth shoulder blade.

The exact meaning of these practices is unknown. Many traditional societies today regard the color red as symbolic of fertility or vitality. It is generally suggested that during the Paleolithic the color red may have been a symbol for blood and life and on a higher intellectual level a symbol of transformation. During the Upper Paleolithic, there was also a powerful symbolic relation between ochre and femininity regarding that many Paleolithic “Venus figurines” were painted with red ochre or hematite. The Venus from Mauern (Gravettian about 28 ka BP) is completely covered with a thick layer of ochre. Ochre was also found on the Venuses from the Grimaldi Caves (Gravettian / Epigravettian), and on the Venuses from Willendorf (Austria; Wachau; Kostenkian about 25 ka BP) and Laussel (Gravettian).

 Suggested Reading:

http://arheologija.ff.uni-lj.si/documenta/pdf33/petru33.pdf

http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/2822

Posted in Plaeolithics and Neolithics | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Epipaleolithic blade from Maroc

Posted on 01/06/2012 by Katzman

A large (14x4x1,5cm) Epipaleolithic blade from Maroc

The Epipaleolithic of theMaghreb is spanning the time from the LGM about 20000 ka BP until the Holocene. During this time span both temperate and wet climates, but also hyperarid conditions were present and men successfully coped with them. If settlement systems were stable over the whole period is somewhat unclear.

The exact time of the earliest occurrence of an Upper Paleolithic of the region is a matter of debate. At the Grotto d´Ifri n`Ammar, in the Moroccan Rif mountains, there are indications for an early upper Paleolithic before the Iberomaurusian (20 ka-10 ka BP), which has not been dated yet. Genetic evidence suggests that there may have been population exchange between the Maghreb, Cyrenaica, and theLevantduring or before the LGM. This has led to the idea that the Iberomaurusian culture spread from theNear East. However, the Iberomaurusian at Tamar Hat (Algeria) and Taforalt (easternMorocco) predates its appearance at Haua Fteah (Libya). More research is needed into the period immediately before the appearance of the Iberomaurusian acrossNorth Africa. Unfortunately, with the exception ofMorocco, this is unlikely to happen soon after the “Arabian spring”.

A number of lithic tools ( backed bladelets, segments) are in many ways very similar between the Iberomaurusian and the Capsian (10-7 ka BP). This has led some (Lubell 1995) to speculate that there is a strong continuity between the two industries.  In general geometrics increase from the Iberomaurusian to the Capsian. Tixier’s (1963) typology of the Epipaleolithic wisely does not seek for “Fossil directeurs” of either the Iberomaurusian or the Capsian but gives an exact description about the wealth and variety of artifact types, which clearly exceed the complexicity of the late European Paleolithic . Large backed or  semi-apruptly retouched blades, like the  example displayed here, are more common during the typical Capsian. Anyhow the inverse retouche of this artifact is a rare feature.

During the Iberomaurusian  blanks were detached from small single platform cores. Although there are some larger artifacts (> 10 cm), most tools are made from bladelets. Most of these microliths are backed bladelets. Some segemnts are also present. There are some thumbnail scrapers and burins . Geometric microliths are present but rather uncommon. Most implements would have been used in composite tools.

The Capsian beginns during the arid younger Dryas and  is traditionally divided into two horizons, the typical Capsian and the upper Capsian which are sometimes found in chronostratigraphic sequence. Some authors suggest that a time overlap of these entities may also be possible.

The typical Capsian is characterized by a significant blade based component (burins (ca. 25%), endscrapers (ca. 20%),, and large  backed tools). Backed bladelets are present in quantities of about 10-20%. Geometric microliths comprise about 10% of the outillage.

The Upper Capsian is characterized by abundant and varied geometric microliths and numerous forms of backed bladelets. Burins are fewer than during the typical Caspian, but there is much regional variability.

How Epipaleolithic ensembles refer to specific activities, ecological factors, site structure, style and culture, duration of stay and raw materials is still a matter of debates. There is a clear need for much more stratigraphic sequences, excavated with modern methods over the whole area.

Posted in Plaeolithics and Neolithics | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

The developement of social complexicity in central Europe

Posted on 01/04/2012 by Katzman

Flanged Axe (17 x 4x 1,5cm); Southern Germany 1600 BC.

For only 2% of the human evolution, Europa could be considered as the “center of the world”(*) . During the Bronze Age, the continent was clearly at the periphery.

In nature, metals are hardly ever pure. Almost all copper ores contain some small proportion of arsenic, tin, zinc, antimony, or nickel, which mixes with the copper during smelting. These alloys are still dominated by copper, but all alloys have a lower melting point than pure copper.

“Bronze” is any alloy that is 85-95% copper, with the other 5-15% made up of mainly of tin or arsenic. It remains somewhat unclear when and how the mechanical properties of different bronzes were fully recognized and deliberately produced.  Bronze is easier to work, especially to cast, than pure copper. It has a lower melting point and is less prone to subsequent fragmentation due to blistering during casting.

In the earliest phase of bronze metallurgy, bronze was rarely used to produce weapons and tools; rather, it was used for prestige goods. This suggests the value placed on other qualities of the metal: possibly its texture and color, since the addition of tin gave copper a golden-brownish shine similar to that of gold.

In the Middle East, Arsenic ores were more common than tin ores which are virtually unknown in this region before 3000 BC. After this date, Cretan and Western Mediterranean bronzes were largely made with arsenic, Egyptian bronzes almost exclusively with arsenic, but Anatolian bronzes were made with tin and arsenic.

The earliest bronze artifacts known so far have been found on the Iranian plateau and are dated to the 5th millennium BC.  The “Bronze Age” begins in the last centuries of the fourth millennium BC in the Near East and the Aegean, when far-ranging trade networks were created. Such networks imported tin and charcoal to Cyprus, where copper was mined and alloyed with the tin to produce bronze. Bronze objects were then exported. Isotopic analysis of the tin in selected Mediterranean bronze objects indicates it came from as far away as Great Britain.

The Early Bronze Age of central Europe was up into an early phase from about 2300 to 2000 BC and a later phase from about 2000 to 1600 B.C. The Middle Bronze Age spanned the time between about 1600 and 1350 BC. Although central Europe was  at the periphery of the “Bronze Age World”, it was clearly involved into the technological, economic and ideological networks, which connected Europe with the Civilizations of Egypt, Mesopotamia and the Aegean. The societies of central Europe were also deeply involved into a process of accelerated specialization and social stratification.  In addition central Europe offered important commodities and prestigious goods for the rest of the world:

Central Europe is rich in different copper sources: the eastern Alpine area, the Harz Mountains in central Germany, the northern Carpathians in eastern Slovakia, and the eastern Carpathians in Transylvania. This latter area probably provided most of the gold used in the Bronze Age of central Europe as well.

On the other hand, Europe has very few sources of tin. Sources already of importance during the Bronze Age were mined in the Erzgebirge along the border between Germany and Czech Republic, the Iberian Peninsula, the Bretagne in France, and Devon and Cornwall in southwestern England, roughly beginning at 2500 BC.

Salt became a highly valued commodity from the Bronze Age, if not earlier, as its uses expanded to food preservation, leather tanning, cloth dyeing and medicine. The number and size of confirmed salt production sites in Western Europe increased in the Bronze Age from 1800 BC onwards. Production for domestic needs was replaced by commercial production at this time. In Central Europe the famous salt mines at Hallein and Hallstadt in the Austrian Alps and the salt mines at Halle / Saale in central Germany began operating sometime between the 13th and 14th Centuries BC.

Baltic amber was traded following several roots over Europe and into the Middle East. Glob  pointed to a find of over 2 kg of amber in a Bronze Age pot on the shore between Saeby and Frederikshavn (Jutland) as a possible collection for export. At Qatna (Syria) baltic amber was  used for making  prestige artifacts found in a Royal tomb of c. 1340 BC.

Although central Europe played only a marginal role in the economic world system of the “Bronze Age”, several  links with “core areas” in the Middle East were clearly a significant factor in the development of its social and economic complexity.

(*) In reality there is nothing like a „center“ and a “periphery” of the world. For this post I use the term “center” to describe a region with high economic power, a place of maximal flow of commodities coordinated by of a group of individuals exerting the ideological and intellectual “hegemony” (in Antonio Gramscis sense).
Posted in Plaeolithics and Neolithics | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Conformism in prehistoric societies

Posted on 12/31/2011 by Katzman

Some microlithis from the North/West Sahara-traces of a long standing conformism in the production of such artifacts.

Prehistoric archaeology is often modeled through the paradigm of the collective. Conformistic collectives adapt to their environment and their decisions are made in the interest of reproductive success, risk minimization and competitive advantage. In this paradigm the actions and reactions of individuals are often reduced to passive and mechanistic actions.

Conformism stands for security: Security about the individual’s position within a group, security about the role that the individual has to play in its society, security in knowing how to do things-for example how to prepare hunting weaponry.

Conformism stands for stasis. Conformists refuse anything new and believe in the normative power of the facts. Non-Conformists imagine another kind of making their world. They may fail, and indeed often do, but if they have the creative power for convincing innovations, such innovations will be quickly adapted by others. Therefore Non-Conformists have indeed the virtue to change the world. What looks like a linear process in the archaeological record in retrospect is in reality an iterative adventure of Non-Conformists.

When the first microliths for composite weapons appeared in the MSA, these small artifacts were certainly considered as an innovation. The Howiesons Poort industry in S-Africa flourished at 65-60 k.a. (that are: 170 human generations) and vanished again. Earlier suggestions about climatic conditions, which should have triggered these processes, now seem to be an oversimplification. Such theories deny that individuals not only adapt to their environment but also manipulate and create their world according to their needs.

The Epipaleolithic in North Africa may have been invented at place or spread from the Levant or the Nile valley and the lithic inventories remained considerable stable over 15000 years. The archeological data, until now, can neither trace the origin of the Epipaleolithic, nor the individual action that created such tools for the first time. Unfortunately currently high resolution archaeological data are only rarely used to trace individual actions….

It would be worth while to study paleolithic societies in terms of conformism / non-conformism. To my knowledge no explicit archeological / anthropological theory about this topic exists . Or is there anyone on the www who knows more ?

Posted in Plaeolithics and Neolithics | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment