Search

The production, distribution and use of copper objects and the development of metallurgical skills in Neolithic Northern Central Europe and Southern Scandinavia are linked to early centres of copper metallurgy of South East Central Europe and Southeast Europe. A total of 45 Neolithic copper objects, until now the largest sample of Early Neolithic objects from the Northern Central European Plain and Southern Scandinavia, were selected for new lead isotope analyses. They aided in the identification of the origin of the copper: These new analyses indicate that the copper ore deposits in Southeastern Europe, especially from the Serbian mining areas, were used for the Early Neolithic northern artefacts (ca. 4100–3300 BC). The most likely sources of copper for the few Middle Neolithic artefacts (ca. 3300–2800 BC) seem to be from the Slovak Ore Mountains, the Serbian mining areas and the Eastern Alps, whereas deposits of the Slovak Ore Mountains and the Alpine region were used for the Late Neolithic and the Early Bronze Age (ca. 2300–1700 BC) artefacts. For the artefacts dated after 2000 BC, the Great Orme mine in Wales also appears to have been the source of copper for the analysed metals. The use of copper from different regions of Europe probably reflects changing social and cultural connectivities on a European scale and the changing chronology of copper exploitation.

Old and new data from the Funnel Beaker societies have been collated to create a new chronological chart of regional developments. The comparison between Scandinavian and North Central European periodisations offers the possibility to identify different developments in a synchronized time frame., Journal of Neolithic Archaeology, 12 (2010)

Until today a detailed mapping of the megalithic structures from the 4th millenium BC in northern Europe seems a desideratum. The DFG-Priority Program 1400 “Early Monumentality and Social Differentiation” is currently working on the Neolithic of the northern European plain. One important aim is to record and analyse the archaeological evidence within the working region in a systematical way. As a first step, an account of all megaliths available is of crucial importance. The map presented here reveals remarkable spatial patterns that may serve as a starting point for further research., Journal of Neolithic Archaeology, 12 (2010)

Studies of patterns of activity in human skeletal remains have grown in number over the last few years. Different methods have been used to reconstruct activity patterns in past populations. In this review of the available literature the common themes of these studies have been isolated in order to show that many studies do not truly conform to the standards of the field. Inadequate sample size, too far-reaching conclusions and neglect of other possible explanations are among the problems easily recognised in the literature. Many assumptions are lacking a sound experimental basis, and it becomes increasingly evident that there are many more problems and limits of interpretations than have been usually acknowledged in the recent past. It also appears that many results, which have been interpreted in terms of sexual division of labour may, in fact, be expressions of the intrinsic sexual dimorphism of Homo sapiens and not culture- or population-specific peculiarities. Acknowledging the results of many studies from the field of sports medicine it appears doubtful that adult patterns of activity can truly be isolated from those which stem from the formative years of the human skeleton during the subadult growth period. A more cautious approach to the interpretation of data and a return to more basic research are needed to adequately address all the possibly confounding issues when trying to reconstruct patterns of activity from archaeological skeletal remains.

The megalithic tomb Lüdelsen 3 was excavated in 2007 within the frame of the project „Megalithic landscapes of the Altmark“. A complex architectural and depositional history of one of the earliest Funnel Beaker chambered cairns (ca. 3600 cal BC) was decoded. Both early to late Funnel Beaker activities as well as a Single Grave burial could be reconstructed. The architecture and functional change was synchronised to changing local environs. The building ground was subject to deforestation und reforestation activities, related to differential ritual activities. Forest covered the surroundings of the megalithic tomb and the monument itself during most parts of the Neolithic. Accordingly, the tomb could not function as a territorial marker. In spite of a wide range of ritual activities as documented inside the chamber and at the surrounding mound, the number of deposited items is limited. This is in clear contrast to ritual activities at passage graves, within which larger assemblages of artefacts were deposited., Journal of Neolithic Archaeology, 10 (2008)