Added
Figures are still being added, but
if no figures are visible, it is a browser problem
The
dissertation has a copyright. Please give proper credit when quoting its
content.
A SPATIAL ANALYSIS OF MEGALITHIC TOMBS
4. THE TRB SOCIETY
By
Maximilian O.
All rights reserved
4.1 Introduction
Bartel (1982) outlined various
approaches used to determine the social organization from burial practices.[1]
Some methods cannot be applied to the TRB. Others may be useful, as long it is
not assumed a priori that complex and
“expensive” mortuary
customs are directly linked to the “size,”
“complexity” and “richness” of the society which
practiced such customs (Braun 1981:411). However, Braun notes that Binford
(1971) and Saxe (1970) showed that such mortuary rituals form a system of
symbolic communication, which affirms, reinforces social order.
In order to gauge the social
complexity of a prehistoric culture one must, therefore, consider not just the
mortuary practices, which reflects only a part of the ideology, but also the
environment, technology, economy, trade, settlement pattern, etc. (cf.
Steponitis 1981).
4.2 Environment, technology, and economy
In the early Atlantic Period
(6500 B.C.) the present coastline became discernible in the geologic
record (C. Christiensen 1993:20-22). The resulting Late Mesolithic
environment, which gave rise to the TRB, was no doubt rich and diverse. There
was a drastic difference between the storm ridden
Such conditions lend them self to
a sedentary way of life along vast inland wetlands while exploitation of
coastal resources (C. Christiensen 1993:22-23) during the Late
(Mesolithic) Ertebølle continued. The discovery of some 20 canoes in the
coastal zone of Denmark (ibid.) provided ability for human interaction and
long-distance communication along the coast. Such conditions foster the
development of a complex social organization and a wide-ranging trade network,
among hunter-gathers, as demonstrated ethnographically for the North American
northwest coast (e.g. Bancroft-Hunt 1992). The resulting farm-based
society’s impact of the environment from ca. 3200 to 2200 b.c.
is strikingly reflected in the Post-Ice Age pollen record. In
Thus the attack on the primeval
forests was largely associated with agricultural activity, which is attested by
the oldest evidence of plowing in ca. 3620±60 b.c /
4470-4350 B.C. (terminus antequem?)
on the old surface below one of the (Wiórek phase?) long-mounds at Sarnowo
(Bakker et al. 1969:224, Gabalowna
1970, Midgley 1983:359, 390; 1992:390,
Milisauskas 1978a:142, Piggott 1983: 35-36). In
Figure 4.1a. C14 date from Oldenburg Dannau layer containing mostly MN III pottery.
Pollen analysis verifies that
agriculture was practiced as far north as
But while many communities
engaged in agriculture and animal husbandry, hunting, fishing, seal hunting, or
shellfish collecting continued to be important, remaining the mainstay of
subsistence for some time in various regions (Clark 1977; Hoika 1971; Kælas
1981, 1991; Skaarup 1983). The use of wild animals, such as elk, red and roe
deer, auerochs, wild pig, and various other species are archaeologically
attested. In the same sites domesticated cattle, sheep/goat, pig, dog, and
perhaps horse have been demonstrated. But there seems to be considerable
variation of the number of animals and species represented at sites (Midgley
1992:369-375, Fig. 106-107; Milisauskas 1978:146 Table 6.7). In Jylland
animal husbandry is evident in the late EN C/II, when the focus is
primarily on pigs. During the MN animal husbandry increased gradually. The
frequency of pig decreased in favor of bovines and sheep/goat (T. Madsen
1982, 1990). The remains of fauna and flora from the settlement of Sarup also
imply a strong increase in animal husbandry during the MN, and an increase of
barley over wheat during the beginning of that period (e.g. Skaarup 1983:41).
At Bronocice, cattle dominated right from the start (3110±110 b.c./ 3990-
3780BC B.C.) and the percentage of pigs was lower than in other
southeastern Polish TRB sites (Milisauskas et al 1991:458).
The unequal distribution of
resources is a key factor in the dynamics of social complexity and
interregional trade (Bogucki 1993). Amber, an important prestige item used for
jewelry, existed primarily near the coast of the western Baltic and northern
Jylland. Salt was only available in the coastal regions and perhaps in places,
such as the Lüneburg Heath and other limited areas with salt springs. Suitable
material for the all important ground stone axes often had to be imported from
the highlands, such as the Harz. Next to the ground stone tools, made from
various materials ranging from green-stone to porphyry, flint was the most
important resource for celts, chisels, projectile points, knifes, scraper etc.
While surface flint is found in most parts of Denmark and Schleswig-Holstein,
high quality flint for the larger tools was far more restricted and sometimes
had to be mined (e.g Bakker 1979a:80 Fig. 42; B·lbel 1986, 1990; Balcer 1980; Blomqvist 1989:303
Fig. 8.59; B. Madsen 1993:126 unnumbered Fig.; Midgley 1992:234
Fig. 75, Tilley 1996:250-255, Fig. 6.3-6.4). Obsidian was used in
Thus the North/Central European
environment contributed to differences in economic activities and the relative
isolation of large areas. These ecological and economic differences must have
caused a need for organized trade and communication, which culminated in the
use of roads and possibly even canals.
4.3 TRB and gallery-grave group settlement patterns
Regional and temporal differences
must also have existed in the settlement pattern. Comparing various types of
settlements and megalithic tombs, Skaarup (1983:46-50) suggests that large
groups of people were organized on the local or village level during the
EN. More intense economic activity,
including trade, resulted in a settlement pattern that added Meeting Places (causewayed
enclosures?) in the early part of the MN. He concluded that the tendency
towards increasing social differentiation was probably intensified during the
MN.
Figure 4.2a Baalberg/Salzmünde C14 dates from the Halle-Dölauer Heide (Midgley 1992:500 No. 212-214).
Although Skaarup’s theses
is theoretically plausible, Bakker would place the partially excavated
fortified hilltop village of Halle-Dölauer-Heide at the turn of EN/MN (personal
communication November 23, 1993). Absolute dates (Fig. 4.2a) yield a C14 SUM of 3900-3350 B.C. and the lowest date
is most likely 3530-3320 B.C., placing the beginning of the site at least
into the Fuchsberg phase and ending with MN Ia as defined by P. O. Nielsen
(1993a:85, unnumbered Fig.; 1993b:93),[6]
perhaps implying that social complexity developed earlier in some places. This
is reinforced by Nielsen (ibid.), concludes that Sarup-like sites existed from
the EN C/II to the middle of the MN A, and the fact that the “majority of the finds date to the EN and
MN I” at Büdelsdorf (Haßmann 1994:9).
The TRB settlement pattern along
with various interpretations has been outlined by Midgley (1992:303 ff.),
Nielsen (1993b), Starling (1984), and Tilley 1996:167-179). Some large sites
have been interpreted as fortified (hilltop) villages, while others are seen as
causewayed camps used as ritual centers or meeting places.
At Kr. Uelzen, Germany, a
hypothetical hierarchical settlement pattern had been proposed and extrapolated
for the entire TRB (Baldia 1981a-c). The projected pattern consisted of a
correlation between tombs and non-funerary sites, such as causewayed camps,
villages and activity sites. It was concluded that the
causewayed camp/fortified village, may have formed the center of each
major settlement system, at least at the end of the EN.[7]
Causewayed camps functioned not only as ritual centers, but, given their location
and size, also could have been used as communal fortifications, trade and
communication centers, and river as well as overland traffic/trade control
points. This suggests that a relatively complex settlement pattern had been
achieved by the early MN, when most of the tombs were built.
The interpretation of
causewayed camps and large villages as central sites in the TRB settlement
pattern was originally questioned, because their large number at close
proximity in East Jylland.[8]
An analogous situation occurred at
Marlborough Downs in Great Britain, where the pattern of centrality was
seemingly interrupted by the close proximity of Windmill Hill, Rydbury,
and Knap Hill, which together were associated with 16 megalithic and 21
non-megalithic tombs (Renfrew 1973). Renfrew did not explain why there were
three causewayed camps in close proximity, nor was he very specific about the
dating and function of these camps. However, like Danish sites, the 8 ha
Windmill Hill had human skeletal debris in its ditches and, according to
Wainwright (1989:109), it dated to about 2500 b.c. Together with Rydbury,
and Knap Hill, it turned out to be part of over 50 such enclosures in
southern Britain alone, all dating from ca. 3000 - 2500 b.c., suggesting
that the close proximity of several central sites is not unusual. In fact,
T. Madsen (1982, 1988, 1990) has since interpreted East Jylland
causewayed camps as central sites.
Danish archaeologists generally
view their causewayed camps as ritual
meeting places (Anderson 1975, Midgley 1992:303 ff., T. Madsen
1977, 1988, 1990). At partially excavated Toftum, the ritual function was
deduced from the lack of demonstrated settlement debris within the area
surrounded by the palisade and ditches. The ditches, located on the steep
slope of the knoll, were supposedly deliberately filled shortly after they were
dug. The fill contained artifacts, including complete or nearly complete pots.
There were intact skeletons of whole animals as well as parts, suggesting
sacrifices instead of consumption. Numerous incomplete human skeletons were
also interpreted as sacrifices. The ditches further showed traces of large
fires, suggesting ritual activity to T. Madsen (1977:182).
Assigning a ritual function to
most of the causewayed camps and similar sites throughout Europe is a long
lasting tradition, that deserves close scrutiny. For example the British
causewayed camps
... have been variously
interpreted as settlements, cattle enclosures, ritual centers and periodic
meeting places. A recently excavated enclosure at Etton in the Cambridgeshire
Fens shows a differentiation between one part used for domestic settlement and
the other used for burial. It is clear therefore that the enclosures served a
variety functions, some of which had relevance to the community at large.
(Wainwright 1989:28)
Furthermore, on the continent,
numerous fortified MBK and related settlements are known, but only three
provided evidence of meager house remains within causewayed camps (Boelicke
1975, Müller-Karpe 1974:195, Lüning 1968). This may be due to soil erosion,
rather than a lack of houses. Correspondingly, evidence of TRB houses is
exceedingly rare, as are complete skeletons.
Central German TRB’s
causewayed camps have been identified as fortified villages. The layout of most sites, particularly the
huge site of Halle-Dölauer Heide, was very complex and irregular. Its size was
akin to the main settlement at Bronocice.[9]
Such causewayed enclosures often acquired
a domestic character, even during the TRB (Midgley 1992:325). In the
North Group Büdelsdorf supplied evidence of pottery production, containing
domestic and flint manufacturing debris deposited throughout the use of the
ditches and later (Haßmann 1994, Midgley 1992:345-346). At Stryczowice, Poland
a ditch was interpreted as a moat built at ca. 2600 and in use at
2400 b.c. The artifacts from the site include spindle whorls and loom
weights, flint artifacts and grindstones (Uzarowicz-Chmielewska 1991). Even at
Toftum stray surface finds of pottery, flint drills and a quartzite grindstone
were recovered from the unexcavated area.[10]
Are such artifacts evidence of residential debris or rituals?
The question may be impossible to
answer. Still, P. O. Nielsen (1993b:93) considers Sarup-like sites as
“fortified structures.”
But at Toftum the ditches run down slope in a manner that does not necessarily
imply a defensive function. Yet they curve into the direction of a very narrow
land bridge in the marsh as if to block it and channel traffic through an
entrance (T. Madsen 1977:162 Fig. 1). Such a gateway has been proposed for
Halle-Dölauer Heide and must have existed at Büdelsdorf, where the large
north northeastern causeway is roughly aligned with a string of distant megalithic
tombs (Behrens 1973:204 Fig. 84, Haßmann 1994 Fig. 1-2, Midgley
1992:325).
Causewayed camps and comparable
sites are frequently located on top of a hill or promontory. They are
frequently near the a stream, e.g. Årupgård, Büdelsdorf, Sachsenwaldau
(Fig. 17.18-17.19), Walmstorf (Fig. 17.32), Sarnowo,
Gródek Nadbuüny, and Starú Zámek.[11] Sarup is located on a promontory between two
creeks. The hilltop site of Bronocice and its relationship to the smaller sites
and streams also shows that such primary villages were located in defensible
areas (Fig. 4.1), even if the defensive structures at some Polish sites
may precede the TRB settlement (cf. Midgley 1992:349-350).
Figure 4.3. Figure 4.1. The 50 ha hilltop TRB village of Bronocice, Poland and surrounding settlements (Milisauskas 1978). Bronocice is located on top of a steep promontory between two streams. The area represents the typical settlement pattern of the TRB. A late presumably defensive ditch, associated with Baden was built at 2300±115 b.c. (2820BC (0.49) 2660BC).
In Kr. Uelzen the
distribution of all the sites, secular and sepulchral, seems to be centered
around the fortified site of Walmstrof (Fig. 17.32). A circle with a radius of 17 km encompasses
all but two tombs. A walk of three to
four hours from Walmstorf to the periphery of the community seems a fair
estimate (Baldia 1981c) and falls within the identifiable local pottery
similarity range of 10-25 km, reinforcing the notion of a centralized
community. The tombs suggest lines of communication that at least partly focus
on Walmstorf.
Similar relationships between
tombs and secular sites have been illustrated by Schwabedissen for the TRB
village near the town of Sachsenwaldau and the tombs in the Sachsenwald
(Fig. 17.18-17.19; Schwabedissen 1970). The village was located on a knoll
in a marsh, across the river from at least ten tombs. The ceramics in the
village and the nearby tombs belonged to the Fuchsberg style. All the tombs there form alignments that may
suggest a prehistoric road system, related to and perhaps controlled and
maintained by the TRB village. A similar situation existed at Büdelsdorf, where
the tombs seem to approximate the modern road system. The newly discovered Diksknöll
causewayed camp near Albersdorf may suggest a similar layout (Arnold 1994,
Haßmann 1994 Fig. 1).
Again, the village (Site 1A) of
Sarnowo, was located on a small rise, next to nine “chamberless”
long-mounds (Fig. 17.41).[12]
It is tempting to see the megalithic tomb group outside of the village as
having a fundamentally different function than the earth graves within
Site 1A.[13]
The relationships between various
secular and sepulchral sites have been analyzed in many parts of the TRB
(e.g. Madsen 1982; Skaarup 1983; Schirnig 1979b-e; Schlüter 1979;
Strömberg 1971a, 1980, 1987, 1990b; Tilley 1996:167-165, 190-192). In Kr.
Uelzen the relationship between tombs, sites, soil types, and streams show that
there was a differential association of tombs and secular sites to soil types
in the river and creek zone versus
the rest of this county (Baldia 1981a-c, Schirnig 1979b, Fig. 1). Secular
sites, including the central site Walmstorf (Fig. 17.32), were tied to
the streams and creeks. These secular
sites were largely within less then 2.5 km from the most fertile
soils. The majority of the tombs were
located within a 5 km radius of the various secular sites. The tombs were strongly tied to the less
fertile ground moraine according to Schirnig (1979b). A significant number of tombs were located in
the river and creek zone.
Chronological changes must also
be considered. T. Madsen (1982) noticed an evolution of the TRB settlement
pattern in Northeast Jylland, where the EN phase had seven catching sites and an equal number of residential sites. The early MN had two catching sites, nine residential
sites, and seven central sites.
The later MN had only residential sites,
of which fourteen were recorded, but their size had increased. An even more
complex system is stipulated by Skaarup for the islands south of Fyn (1983,
1985) and Nielsen (1993b:93) notes that sites like Troldebjerg, whose horseshoe
shaped structures could, according to some, resemble a bastions, occupied an
area of over 30 000 m2, Klintebakken, 37 000 m2,
and three sites from the MN V range from 70 000-300 000 m2.
Among these MN V sites is the hilltop settlement Spodsbjerg (Skarup
1985:41-43). Its earthworks include elaborate, bark-covered fascines with
transverse sleepers.
Figure 4.4. The elaborate construction of the fascines the hilltop village, Spodsbjerg, Longelse sb. 13, (Skaarup 1985:41 Fig. 11).
Figure 4.5. The elaborate construction protecting the southwest side of the hilltop village, Spodsbjerg, Longelse sb. 13, (Skaarup 1985:41 Fig. 10).
A closer look at the East Jylland
tombs shows that they form alignments, which may indicate the location of
prehistoric roads, leading past the central sites. For example, at Årupgård the
tombs probably aligned with a prehistoric road, that crosses the river about
1000 m east of the site (T. Madsen 1982:109 Fig. 8, 1990:37
Fig. 5). As noted, a similarly relationship exists at Büdelsdorf and many
other sites.
Therefore, the emerging TRB
settlement pattern seems to consist of central sites with nearby megalithic
tombs. The pattern existed as far south as the Hildesheim Basin (cf. Heege
1989) and is surprisingly similar to the pattern of the adjacent Wartberg
culture, where Schwellnus (1979) demonstrated that villages were built on
hilltops and the associated gallery-graves were up to 1 km away.
Given this evidence, the TRB
settlement pattern seems to be sufficiently standardized at the beginning of
the MN to permit the following generalization for the time, when most of the
tombs were constructed: By the MN, or even before that time, causewayed camps
and other, sometimes fortified, hilltop sites may have functioned as central
places that provided goods and services to smaller settlements and the
hinterland. Surrounding the causewayed camp or similar large hilltop site are
smaller villages and activity sites, as well as megalithic tombs, stone
packing graves, and earth burials or flat-graves. The graves may be located
either in the village or among and within the tumuli and long-mounds that are
usually some distance from the villages. A series of centrally located
communities might have been bound together through a road network. These roads,
apparently lined by megalithic tombs near the major population centers,
fostered trade and transportation between communities.
4.4 Trade and transportation
Trade in pottery, flint, battle
axes, amber, imported copper, gold etc. suggests a long distance communication
pattern that shifts through time, even though there seems to be no clear cut
evidence of long distance trade in ceramics. Direct evidence of pottery made by
the same hand was found only six
kilometers apart (Bakker 1976 Footnote 80). Similar evidence from Scandinavia
indicates distances of 10 to 25 km, while general evidence of similarity
in pottery ornamentation does not exceed 60 km.[14]
However, EN pottery of Bornholm also shows a close relationship to the
Oxie Group of southern Skåne, requiring sea travel of
ca. 40-50 km, and it also exhibits decorations and forms similar to
ceramics at Kosin, Pyrzyce (Nielsen and Nielsen 1990:59), requiring an ocean
voyage of some 100 km plus a similar distance by river and land. This pottery, dredged up from the ocean
floor, provides indisputable evidence of these EN sea voyages. TRB interaction
between Skåne’s east coast and the southern Baltic KAK in the late MN is
also confirmed by KAK pottery found at Nymölla, 20 km south of Kirkestad
(Wyszomirska 1991). On a more general level, certain ceramic forms, and a
number of decorative motives exhibit a broad interregional distribution that
suggests active interregional and even intercultural communication through time
and space, as exemplified by Gródek Nadbuüny (Guminski 1989).
|
Table 4.1 Number of copper finds in Neolithic TRB related cultures of eastern and Central Germany (Jacobs 1989). Baalberge 3 Salzmünde
8 Walternienburg 2 Bernburg 8 Globular
Amphora 2 Havelland 9 |
Figure 4.6 (Figure 4.2.) The EN copper hoard of Bygholm, near Horsens, East Jylland (Müller-Karpe 1974 after Sylvest). The three copper arm spirals, four flat-axes and a dagger were found in the EN II Funnel Beaker.
Copper, amber, certain ceremonial(?)
axe forms, and pottery have been viewed as indicators of contact with western
Hungary, the eastern Alpine region and northwestern Yugoslavia as early as the
EN C. Quantities of supposedly Hungarian copper reached Jylland during the
EN (but perhaps not during most of the MN). But the copper sources remain
elusive, inspite of intense use of spectral analysis.[15] Dating the copper imports is equally
problematic.
Midgley (1992:300) states that
the earliest copper imported to North Group is that found at Barkær, but its
dates are uncertain (cf. Liversage 1992:102). The copper disk at
Konens Høj may date between 3780BC-3510BC B.C. However, as discussed
elsewhere, P. O. Nielsen has reservations about these early dates. Midgley
(ibid.) also notes the early dates of the copper disks from the Rude cist, but
mentions its dating problems.[16]
To complicate matters further, T. Madsen (1980:101 Fig. 15, b-e) already
saw parallels in the smaller amber disks with cross designs from the KAK and
Randsborg (1987) has reversed his earlier position of attributing the disk to
the Early Neolithic (ibid. 1970, 1979), now dating it to the final TRB phase.
But Randsborg’s 1987 interpretation is challenged by Menke (1989:66).
Menke suggests that the beaker containing the Bygholm copper hoard (Fig. 4.2) has analogous
forms in disperate places, such as Heilshoop (Kr. Stormarn) or Asmasså and
Tygapil (Skåne), and suggests that it predates the Fuchsberg stile
(1989:60-65). He places the earliest copper imports into the (early?) Virum-Volling
phase. P. O. Nielen (1993:85 unnumbered Fig.) dates the beginning of Volling to
perhaps 3900 B.C. Bakker (1979a:127) observed that the copper artifacts from
Bygholm are typologically almost identical to Jordansmühl (Lengyel) copper
artifacts, which chronologically overlaps to some extent with early Volling as
seen in Fig. 3.6. The same Figure shows that the Brzeíº Kujawski (Lenyel) dates may be too early to derive the
copper Rude copper plate from Poland, a view that is perhaps confirmed by the
different design of the respective copper plates (Midgley 1992:23 Fig. 7, 2;
Madsen 1980:79 Fig. 1). Fig. 3.6 would also imply that the Guhrauer Group
mentioned by Menke (1989) could not have been the source. Conversly, the
Hornstaader Group of the Bodensee lake dwellings, chronologically wedged
between Rüssen and Pfyn and stradelling parts of Aichbühl and Schussenried in
southern Germany, may come close to Nielsen’s dating of the earliest
Volling (Menke 1989:41 Fig. 2), but the Hornstaad (Kr. Konstanz) copper plate
(ibid. Fig. 1) seems to be more akin to the Brzeíº Kujawski plate than the Rude plate.
Interaction with the area near
the Black Sea has also been proposed (Kosko 1981). The early
radiocarbon dates from Sarnowo could bolster the notion that very early links
between the TRB’s western Baltic communication and trade network and the
copper using cultures of southeastern Europe existed (but see Footnote 11).
Copper ore was smelted at Gródek Nadbuzny, Cmielów,
and Sarnowo (e.g. Kowalczyk 1970:153, 155). At the last site copper traces were
found beneath Long-mound 8 (Gabalówa 1970:89). Smelting
is also documented in one Bohemian Baalberge site (Behrens 1973:193), further
implying that the raw material came from the Czech and Slovak Republics, but
not newcessarily Hungary. The same sources and/or sources in the Harz or the
Ore Mountains are likely for artifacts of east and Central Germany
(Table 4.2; Jacobs 1989). Copper was found in many passage-graves of the
TRB West Group, including gallery-graves. A total of 47 megalithic tombs of
eastern and Central Germany contain copper (ibid.).
A case can be made for the long
distance trade of flint. Bakker, citing
Brandt (1967), suggests that trade of thin-butted, thick-bladed nordic flint
axes of the TRB West Group were imported exclusively from North Jylland.
Long distance trade in a nearly opposite direction is reported by Eckert (1987)
from a TRB site near Nottuln, Kr. Coesfeld. Several flint artifacts from
the Maas region (Baldia 1978a) have been documented and even occur in
gallery-graves (e.g. De Grooth 1991:164, Heege 1989:213). The flint trade
indicates a far flung system of interaction. Milisauskas (1978:150) notes that:
Jurrassic flint from the
Kraków area in Poland, flint from the Rügen area of Germany, flint from Volynia
in the Soviet Union, banded flint from the Krzemionki area in Poland, Swieciechow
flint from the Annopol area in Poland, and “Chocolate” flint from
the Radom area in Poland were exchanged between the Funnel Beaker
settlements. These varieties of flint are found hundreds of kilometers away
from their sources ... Settlements located near the flint sources, such as Cmielów,
Poland, have much higher frequencies of flint debitage ... (‘production
settlements’). ... Those sites located farther away from the flint
sources tend to have more finished tools ... The availability of good local
flint did not eliminate interest in nonlocal or “exotic” flint.
Nevertheless, long distance trade
does not necessarily imply that individual traders transported their goods in
person from, let us say, the Czech-Slovak area all the way to Sweden. It is just as likely that there was a
transportation system, probably utilizing animal traction, which was organized
to prevent much long distance travel by individual traders. Water transport may have resulted in trade
networks similar to the Kula Ring
or the Vitaz Strait trade system of
the Pacific Ocean, especially in the western Baltic.
Travel between Jylland and the
Danish islands on one side, and the islands and Sweden on the other, must have
been of prime importance in acquiring resources not available locally. This is
shown by the distribution of copper axes (Fig. 4.3). Such a trade network
should have fostered the initial development of megalithic tombs in and around
the western Baltic.
Figure 4.3. Distribution
of copper flat axes by weight class (Randsborg 1979). The coastal concentration
of the finds implies a trade network making use of waterways where ever
possible.
Randsborg (1979:308-309) points
out that a dug-out canoe, archaeologically demonstrated in Denmark since the
Mesolithic (e.g. Grøn and Skaarup 1991) could make all crossings, even to
Sweden and Bornholm in only one day. The crossing from Rügen to the nearest
Danish island would have taken just a little longer. Travel in the Baltic should in general have
been fairly safe, but the dangers of maritime travel in the North Sea probably
outweighed the benefits according to Bakker (1976). Travel in the Skagerrak is
uncertain, even though flint from North Jylland appears to have been traded to
the Swedish west coast.[17]
The ocean currents, which circulate in a counter clockwise motion in the
Skagerrak (Bägerfeldt 1993:115), inviting a round trip Polynesian type voyage
from North Jylland via the islands of Tjörn and Orust, Oslo Bay, and the
southern Norwegian coast, may have been too difficult to navigate during the
Neolithic.[18]
Water transport by canoes also
existed along the inland waters judging from the canoe found at Hüde I,
Dümmer Lake (Schirnig 1979d: 239 Fig. 8). Yet it seems that only
secondary and tertiary streams were effectively used for water transport. The
major rivers, i.e. the Ems, Weser, Elbe, Oder, and the Vistula, appear to have
hindered interaction (Baldia 1987). The most likely crossing points of the Elbe
were the regions around Stade and Wedel, Harburg and Hamburg-Altona, as well as
Lauenburg and Artlenburg (Bakker 1976, 1979a, 1991). Similar crossing points must
have existed for the other rivers, because the distribution of trapezoidal
mounds show a significant correlation with some of these fords and several
other likely river crossings throughout the TRB culture area (ibid.).
Land transportation by means of
ox-drawn wagons are illustrated in the gallery-grave of Züschen/Lohne.[19]
The wagons appear to be single axle two wheel vehicles, while four wheeled
wagons are depicted on TRB pottery from Bronocice in Southern Poland at
2700/2600-2500 b.c. (3340/3180-3110 B.C.). Further evidence for
wheels and wagons confirms the development of a complex transportation system,
which may have started during the EN, may go back to Mesolithic paths,
culminating in the MN/LN when wooden wheels are known in Denmark, Netherland and
Switzerland.[20]
4.5 Social organization
There is a lack of consensus
about the social complexity of the TRB. This is in part due to the variability
in settlement patterning, economic activity, and mortuary practices. Many thought that the tomb building societies
were organized into individual, competing chiefdoms,[21]
whereas Körner and Laux (1980) postulated a kingship organization, which, by
extension, would seem to imply the existence of archaic states in Northern
Europe at the dawn of the Nordic MN. Their argument pivots on the complex
burial architecture with no more than two or three interments in the Oldendorf
(Luhe) passage-graves.[22]
Behrens and Schröter (1980)
postulated a chiefdom-like social organization based on the elaborate mounds
near Halle-Dölauer Heide. Randsborg (1975) reached similar conclusions
while analyzing burial goods of Danish megalithic and non-megalithic burials.
Zápotocký (1992:209) concluded that the increasing variation in settlement
types, monumental architecture, walls, ditches, palisades, plow agriculture,
copper metallurgy, and wagon construction, along with the use of
battle axes indicated a hierarchical social organization.
Yet Milisauskas (1987:169)
proposed a simple two level hierarchy based on the settlement surveys of southeastern
Poland. This view is derived from the assumptions that there is a close
connection between the settlement pattern and the social organization as
expressed by Johnson (1973) for sites in prehistoric Iran. J. Voss (1980a,
b) viewed the Western TRB as an egalitarian tribal society, basing his argument
primarily on pottery analysis. T. Madsen (e.g. 1992:36) viewed the
organization as horizontal, with megalithic tombs as a symbolic manifestation
of group rights, in a segmented, lineage based society.
In light of these differences, it
is virtually impossible to decide what the complexity of TRB social
organization could have been - a conclusion that U. Fischer reached as
long ago as 1956. It is, therefore, necessary to use direct ethnographic analogies.
Based on this evidence, the TRB social organization differs from an egalitarian
society, i.e. bands and tribes,
if one follows Wason’s distinctions between egalitarian and ranked
societies.[23]
He analyzed the ethnographic record and its implications for determining social
organization from the archaeological record. According to Wason (1985:121-122)
:
egalitarian societies depend
mainly on wild food resources, obtained with very few tools or weapons. There
is no restriction on any of the members in access to raw materials... This is
related to the rather loose nature of territorial boundaries, and consistent
also with the limited degree to which there is any private or group property.
... Reciprocity is the major form of exchange ... Leadership is transient (and
is based) on authority and for the most part is not associated with power.
Clearly, the archaeological
record shows that domesticates were in common use in many parts of the TRB (e.g.
Midgley 1992:356-368, Skaarup 1975:211-219). Tools were numerous and
technologically complex. Territorial boundaries may have been demonstrated.[24]
The question of leadership and
power are more difficult to infer from the archaeological record, as Wason
indicated. Nevertheless, if rank is defined as valued status not attainable by
all individuals with sufficient talent (ibid. p. 141), TRB society may have
been ranked by the end of the EN C.
Ranking is a fundamental feature of chiefdoms (ibid. p. 124 ff), where statuses will be arranged from highest to lowest. But in the TRB it is not easy to ascertain status distinctions, especially from its burial practices. Megalithic tombs alone do not qualify as an indicator of a ranked society, since supposed status symbols, such as battle axes and elaborately decorated pottery, are also found in modest earth-graves (e.g. Bakker 1992:57, Schlicht 1968:59-61). However, the elaborate efforts to create complicated, sometimes even hidden chamber entrances could mean restricted access to the chamber by a selected social segment. This is supported by the osteological evidence of endogamy in passage-graves (H. Grim 1984), which may imply that only a select, closely related group was buried in some of these tombs,