DOI Kapitel:
Changing Worlds – The Spread of the Neolithic Way of Life in the North
DOI Kapitel:Amkreutz, Luc: A view from Doggerland – interpreting the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in the wetlands of the Rhine-Meuse delta (5,500 – 2,500 calBC)
DOI Seite / Zitierlink:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.66745#0317
Farming as a proportion of economy (%)
316
A view from Doggerland - interpreting the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in the wetlands of the Rhine-Meuse delta
100 -
80 "
60 -
Consolidation Phase:
Farming principle mode
of existence. Foraging
loses economical,
organizational and
ideological significance.
Domesticates/cultigens
more than 50% of total.
Availability Phase:
Foraging principle '
means of subsistence, |
domesticates/cultigens.
less than 5%
of total.
Substitution Phase:
Farming strategies '
developed, while |
foraging stategies |
retained. Domesticate/-
cultigens 5-50% of total. I
Fig. 3 The availability model (adapted from Zvelebil
1986; 1998; after Amkreutz 2013a, fig. 3.7).
be studied (eventually we all became farmers).
There is therefore a need to zoom in on regional
developments that are culturally meaningful and
coherent yet geographically broad enough to
understand the multitude of factors in play and
the effects of interaction, contact and exchange.
This also means acknowledging ‘historicity’,
the notion that things developed differently at
different places.
In relation to this and opposing Zvelebil (1998,
11) this makes it questionable to what extent
the contribution of domesticates may be distin-
guished for a cultural unit, based on single sites.
Raemaekers (1999, 13) argued that presence /
absence rather than proportional data may be
used, as sites fit in a settlement system and the
subsistence base could basically be gathered from
the most agricultural sites. For instance it is ar-
gued that real agrarian settlements are distinctly
present within the Vlaardingen culture in the
coastal area (including house plans, many bones
from domestic animals and evidence for cereal
cultivation in pollen diagrams). It is argued that
the main sites (‘base camps’) were therefore lo-
cated in the (intra-)coastal area, while it is sug-
gested that the sites with a more ‘wild’ signature,
situated in the freshwater marshes, would have
functioned in a subordinate position in this settle-
ment system (Raemaekers 2003, 743-744). It is
also suggested that this system may already have
been in place during the period of the Hazen-
donk group (Raemaekers 2003, 743-744; Louwe
Kooijmans 2007). It is questionable to what ex-
tent this underlies the differences in faunal com-
position between sites observed and wether it is
not a relict from a final point of critique:
— That the model is read from left to right and
therefore has a distinct teleological character. Our
western studies of this period have been distinctly
coloured by our aim to define a moment at which
hunter-gatherers became farmers, and ultimately
this and the vocabulary we use for this (e. g. fron-
tier, transition, process, availability, substitution;
cf. also Whittle / Cummings 2007, 2) are rooted
in the antiquarian perspective of the superiority
of agriculture (Grabber /Wengrow 2021).
It is thus questionable whether the diverse landscape
of sites and faunal compositions in the LRA wetland
lends itself easily for an economic perspective based
on progress but studied primarily through a quantita-
tive analysis of faunal remains at single sites that stand
for cultural phases. The social perspective offered by
Raemaekers (2019) through a diachronic model of
taboo in this respect offers a welcome alternative. In
any case, it tries to understand the developments tak-
ing place not by focusing on a taphonomically flawed
category of faunal remains, but from the perspective of
the inhabitants themselves and their actions in relation
to changes taking place. These patterns, although for
now based on a limited number of cases, document
distinct and meaningful actions. At the same time the
316
A view from Doggerland - interpreting the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in the wetlands of the Rhine-Meuse delta
100 -
80 "
60 -
Consolidation Phase:
Farming principle mode
of existence. Foraging
loses economical,
organizational and
ideological significance.
Domesticates/cultigens
more than 50% of total.
Availability Phase:
Foraging principle '
means of subsistence, |
domesticates/cultigens.
less than 5%
of total.
Substitution Phase:
Farming strategies '
developed, while |
foraging stategies |
retained. Domesticate/-
cultigens 5-50% of total. I
Fig. 3 The availability model (adapted from Zvelebil
1986; 1998; after Amkreutz 2013a, fig. 3.7).
be studied (eventually we all became farmers).
There is therefore a need to zoom in on regional
developments that are culturally meaningful and
coherent yet geographically broad enough to
understand the multitude of factors in play and
the effects of interaction, contact and exchange.
This also means acknowledging ‘historicity’,
the notion that things developed differently at
different places.
In relation to this and opposing Zvelebil (1998,
11) this makes it questionable to what extent
the contribution of domesticates may be distin-
guished for a cultural unit, based on single sites.
Raemaekers (1999, 13) argued that presence /
absence rather than proportional data may be
used, as sites fit in a settlement system and the
subsistence base could basically be gathered from
the most agricultural sites. For instance it is ar-
gued that real agrarian settlements are distinctly
present within the Vlaardingen culture in the
coastal area (including house plans, many bones
from domestic animals and evidence for cereal
cultivation in pollen diagrams). It is argued that
the main sites (‘base camps’) were therefore lo-
cated in the (intra-)coastal area, while it is sug-
gested that the sites with a more ‘wild’ signature,
situated in the freshwater marshes, would have
functioned in a subordinate position in this settle-
ment system (Raemaekers 2003, 743-744). It is
also suggested that this system may already have
been in place during the period of the Hazen-
donk group (Raemaekers 2003, 743-744; Louwe
Kooijmans 2007). It is questionable to what ex-
tent this underlies the differences in faunal com-
position between sites observed and wether it is
not a relict from a final point of critique:
— That the model is read from left to right and
therefore has a distinct teleological character. Our
western studies of this period have been distinctly
coloured by our aim to define a moment at which
hunter-gatherers became farmers, and ultimately
this and the vocabulary we use for this (e. g. fron-
tier, transition, process, availability, substitution;
cf. also Whittle / Cummings 2007, 2) are rooted
in the antiquarian perspective of the superiority
of agriculture (Grabber /Wengrow 2021).
It is thus questionable whether the diverse landscape
of sites and faunal compositions in the LRA wetland
lends itself easily for an economic perspective based
on progress but studied primarily through a quantita-
tive analysis of faunal remains at single sites that stand
for cultural phases. The social perspective offered by
Raemaekers (2019) through a diachronic model of
taboo in this respect offers a welcome alternative. In
any case, it tries to understand the developments tak-
ing place not by focusing on a taphonomically flawed
category of faunal remains, but from the perspective of
the inhabitants themselves and their actions in relation
to changes taking place. These patterns, although for
now based on a limited number of cases, document
distinct and meaningful actions. At the same time the