P1030600

LBK Dialogues

Studies in the fonnation of the Linear Pottery Culture

Edited by

Alena Lukes Marek Zvelebil

BAR International Series 1304 2004

The Many Okigins of the LBK

A bit rac!

In (his contribulion I disom and Integrale Iłu lindings of the contributors to this votwmc, and bjgbhjsh* i* pntupd mdnmuem towards our understanding of the origint of the LBK, I begin by consideńng the broad histoocal coadiiinai of ^spehMs fNfoai. frontier mobility and contact between (bragers and hrmert - conditions wtfhtn which the cooouemńmm of tke LBK aeeanad. Ifioo to discuss the significant patterns in the evidcnce for this. This discussion concludes by suggesting futurę dwrenans to saaaaaeh dedicated to understanding culture cliange as a learning procoss involving tntcr-geaeraóomi tnaaaumoa ofcukwc, Nur-eaoaMSjr contact, acęuisilion of knowledge and innoyation.

Introductlon: Agro-PoMtorai Dlepertalt in Europę

The origins of the Neolithic in Europę are inevitably connectcd with the introduction of lanning to the continenŁ Traditionally, the Neolithic, as a period and as a way of lite, has been delined by the practice of forming. Although this defining criterion has been questioned by some archaeologists (i.e. Thomas 1.988, 1991; Hodder 1990), agro-pastoral tanning reinains the main feature which separatce Neolithic farmers firom the preceding hunler-gathercrs of the Mesolithic.

There can be little doubt that agro-pastoral (Neolithic) tanning originated in the Levant and Anatolia some 10,000 years ago. Over the next 4000 years it spread throughout Europę, mostly between 8000 and 4000 years ago. In some regions, such as the east Baltic, northwest Russia and most of peninsular 5candinavia, farming did not develop until the Iron Age or early Medieva! period (Zvelebil 1981, 1985, 1998; Taavitsainen et al. 1998; Antanaitis 1999). This means that the introduction of farming into Europę as a whole was a very long process indccd.

How were farming practices and the associated loclinujuc* and traditions introduced? This is a key (juestion if we want to understand the subsequent dcvclopmcnts in European prehistory, because it involves humans as individuals and social groups, human action and motivation, and the passage of cultural traditions ciUicr inter-gcncrationally, or trom one community to another. The idenlity and cultural knowledge of people is therefore crucial to our understanding of the whole process of emergence of the Neolithic.

Conventionally there are three main points of view, ncither of which address directiy the human communities who constitutcd Neolithic society and culture, or the sociology of the processes that played a role in their crcation. Kather, the prevailing archaeological view sccks to explain the replacemcnt of cultural unita -asscmblages of materia! culture - in terms of collective and generał human migration, indigenous adoption through contextually unspecified contact, or as a mixture o f boih processes (Fig. 3).

Our volume reflects this current position, but at the same iimc sccks to transcend it by focussing on anthropological and sociological approaches to the pwMaa, baaad oe due development of the concept of cahmt aa aa aliriBacs system passed on through the icqn—bon of knowiadpr by cro«e»generationsl or mter-eooaaaaal tananuasśen of culture as well as łanoyatśon. Processes of leasing tnvolved in such cultural traasaaasioas of kaowledge aae conditioned by age, geoder, and status of the iawbd individuals, and unfbld within a social consect anaaaoi by the coamology and ideology of the social arsors (individuals, groups, comaamtfies) tnvołv«d m this process.

As a morę conventional approoch, (be idsgraiicnisi explanation represents the tradMtonal, ooUaM ncw formulated by Gordon Childe (1957(19251) aa woS aa Piggott (1965) and Clark (1966). Accorótng a Aa interpretation, farmers migrańng trom Ac Ncar Ew. colonised hitherto unformed aresa of lupę, sapticod indigenous hunter'gatberers and Acwby anroduced farming into Europę. This process ta thougfc! to kanw hoeo óri>fcn by rapid popu Lali on gowA cspcńanoad by the Neolithic farming popuiationa.

The Jndigenut expiaaalioo adagia tbe eggoaaas perspective (Oenoell 1983; Barter 1985; WfcćKfc 1996). The adoption of farming ta Europę and the ongiś oi dm Neolithic came about exclu$ivety through fronsuer caabn and cultural diffuaioa Migraboo firom the Ncar East had little or no role to pisy. GcncbcaJły. Aa, popadaftann of Near Eastern origin had bttk ar ao coctfributtan lo maku. Tbe Jntegrationist atpłanalioa ngaA bocb bP* of processes - those invoiving populatioa iswfcr and Ant that do not - aa beśng rsapoasihk for Al sgndasil traasition (Zuekbtl 1986, 1989, 1995< 19958. 1998; Price 1987, 1991, 1996; ZdhAo 1993, 1997; Chapman 1994; Thorpe 1996). The anpneiawrn of the nfon i coniributtons of aach process dtflbni Anna auaAnr to author.

The varying talergmcatsom of Am Ant groups aro of a degree ratber than rocgnriraL buc Ac afimMai popułatton hstory, gonatte panammg and laganc c hangę at the agńcadtucal anensa m pM nppnt

Ali of the mndeli sucmaanaad aboua inuha featnaswal eveota mactod by pnlonwcsiw and eoaiMC Iguan fongtng and Arsuing oomnuaMw*. Tlan guuouwna mdl to unfold to panuruud wy* Auwcrf at nnp pustawa*