DOI chapter:
Changing Worlds – The Spread of the Neolithic Way of Life in the North
DOI chapter: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 Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.66745#0321
320
A view from Doggerland - interpreting the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in the wetlands of the Rhine-Meuse delta
sibilities of the environment, both regarding hunting
and farming (e. g. Amkreutz 2013, 427; of. also Rae-
maekers 1999; 2003). As such the predominance of
domesticated fauna is mainly a feature of coastal and
potentially wetland margin sites from the Hazendonk
group onwards, however, as late as the Vlaardingen
culture there are distinctly different domestic sites,
such as Hekelingen 3. These sites have a more varied
faunal composition, and their records show that wild
resources (at Hekelingen 3 over 50 %) remained an
important aspect of subsistence (Amkreutz 2013a,
427). The contribution of crop cultivation is more dif-
ficult to establish (Out 2009, 445), but also appears
to have been of greater importance in the coastal
areas, while there is positive information for small-
scale cultivation, for instance around the Swifterbant
sites (Huisman / Raemaekers 2014). This indicates
that well into the late Neolithic there is a range of
different wetland ‘livelihoods’ existing side by side.
Moreover, the supposed agricultural character of
sites such as Schipluiden is also to be seen more
nuanced. Hallowed as the the first site that yield-
ed convincing evidence for a complete ‘Neolithic’,
including crop agriculture, animal husbandry and
year-round occupation (Louwe Kooijmans 2006),
the stable isotope analysis of the skeletons of its in-
habitants indicated that marine foods actually ac-
counted for a large proportion of the diet (Smits /
Van der Plight 2009). Recently it has been suggested
that this signal may also derive from the consump-
tion of (for instance) meat from cattle grazing on
the salt marsh as indicated by their isotopic values.
It is likely that both strategies were going on as the
authors conclude (Kamjan et al. 2020, 15), and the
puzzle remains difficult to entangle. Also evidence
postdating Schipluiden indicates that one site should
not be interpreted as the norm.
In conclusion it appears that adopting produc-
ing modes of food procurement did not always have
the repercussions we assume they do, based on our
often used Neolithic perspective (Whittle / Cum-
mings 2007). The flexibility and independent choices
of the communities involved are also emphasised by
the Delfland case-study (Louwe Kooijmans 2009),
where largely contemporaneous Hazendonk-group
sites such as Schipluiden, Ypenburg and Rijswijk,
which are situated in close proximity and within
comparable geographical and ecological contexts,
display distinctly different choices in subsistence
procurement, settlement layout and occupation dy-
namics over time. All of this speaks of a range of
pursued strategies, the use of which is sometimes
permanent H seasonal 9 short-term • extractive
hypothetical
residential move - — — - expedition-taskforce .interaction/exchange
Fig. 7 Cartogram of the hypothetical range of site relationships for the Late Neolithic Vlaardingen culture based on the economic, struc-
tural and seasonal information of excavated Vlaardingen sites (cf. Amkreutz 2013a, ch. 8). Site relations are hypothetical, but the evidence
allows for multiple systems instead of one focused on permanent settlement and subordinate site relations (after Amkreutz 2013a, fig. 8.9).
A view from Doggerland - interpreting the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in the wetlands of the Rhine-Meuse delta
sibilities of the environment, both regarding hunting
and farming (e. g. Amkreutz 2013, 427; of. also Rae-
maekers 1999; 2003). As such the predominance of
domesticated fauna is mainly a feature of coastal and
potentially wetland margin sites from the Hazendonk
group onwards, however, as late as the Vlaardingen
culture there are distinctly different domestic sites,
such as Hekelingen 3. These sites have a more varied
faunal composition, and their records show that wild
resources (at Hekelingen 3 over 50 %) remained an
important aspect of subsistence (Amkreutz 2013a,
427). The contribution of crop cultivation is more dif-
ficult to establish (Out 2009, 445), but also appears
to have been of greater importance in the coastal
areas, while there is positive information for small-
scale cultivation, for instance around the Swifterbant
sites (Huisman / Raemaekers 2014). This indicates
that well into the late Neolithic there is a range of
different wetland ‘livelihoods’ existing side by side.
Moreover, the supposed agricultural character of
sites such as Schipluiden is also to be seen more
nuanced. Hallowed as the the first site that yield-
ed convincing evidence for a complete ‘Neolithic’,
including crop agriculture, animal husbandry and
year-round occupation (Louwe Kooijmans 2006),
the stable isotope analysis of the skeletons of its in-
habitants indicated that marine foods actually ac-
counted for a large proportion of the diet (Smits /
Van der Plight 2009). Recently it has been suggested
that this signal may also derive from the consump-
tion of (for instance) meat from cattle grazing on
the salt marsh as indicated by their isotopic values.
It is likely that both strategies were going on as the
authors conclude (Kamjan et al. 2020, 15), and the
puzzle remains difficult to entangle. Also evidence
postdating Schipluiden indicates that one site should
not be interpreted as the norm.
In conclusion it appears that adopting produc-
ing modes of food procurement did not always have
the repercussions we assume they do, based on our
often used Neolithic perspective (Whittle / Cum-
mings 2007). The flexibility and independent choices
of the communities involved are also emphasised by
the Delfland case-study (Louwe Kooijmans 2009),
where largely contemporaneous Hazendonk-group
sites such as Schipluiden, Ypenburg and Rijswijk,
which are situated in close proximity and within
comparable geographical and ecological contexts,
display distinctly different choices in subsistence
procurement, settlement layout and occupation dy-
namics over time. All of this speaks of a range of
pursued strategies, the use of which is sometimes
permanent H seasonal 9 short-term • extractive
hypothetical
residential move - — — - expedition-taskforce .interaction/exchange
Fig. 7 Cartogram of the hypothetical range of site relationships for the Late Neolithic Vlaardingen culture based on the economic, struc-
tural and seasonal information of excavated Vlaardingen sites (cf. Amkreutz 2013a, ch. 8). Site relations are hypothetical, but the evidence
allows for multiple systems instead of one focused on permanent settlement and subordinate site relations (after Amkreutz 2013a, fig. 8.9).