scholarly journals Early pottery use across the Baltic – A comparative lipid residue study on Ertebølle and Narva ceramics from coastal hunter-gatherer sites in southern Scandinavia, northern Germany and Estonia

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 142-151 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vasiliki Papakosta ◽  
Ester Oras ◽  
Sven Isaksson
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 705-717
Author(s):  
Konstantin Mikhailovich Andreev ◽  
Alexander Alekseevich Vybornov

Abstract Early pottery on the territory from the Eastern Caspian Sea and Aral Sea to Denmark reveals a certain typological similarity. It is represented by egg-shaped vessels with an S-shaped profile of the upper part and a pointed bottom. The vessels are not ornamented or decorated with incised lines, organized often in a net. This type of pottery was spread within hunter-gatherer ancient groups. The forest-steppe Volga region is one of the earliest centers of pottery production in Eastern Europe. The first pottery is recorded here in the last quarter of the seventh millennium BC. Its appearance is associated with the bearers of the Elshanskaya cultural tradition. The most likely source of its formation is the territory of Central Asia. Later, due to aridization, these ceramic traditions distributed further westward to the forest-steppe Don region. During the first half of the sixth millennium BC, groups associated with the bearers of the Elshanskaya cultural tradition moved westward. Significant similarities with the ceramic complexes of the Elshanskaya culture are found in materials from a number of early pottery cultures of Central Europe and the Baltic (Narva, Neman, and Ertebølle).


2001 ◽  
Vol 138 (5) ◽  
pp. 589-607 ◽  
Author(s):  
MARK WILLIAMS ◽  
PHILIP STONE ◽  
DAVID J. SIVETER ◽  
PAULINE TAYLOR

The Cautley Mudstone Formation and Cystoid Limestone Member of the Ashgill Formation (Windermere Supergroup; Ashgill Series), from the Cautley district of northern England, has yielded an ostracod fauna of more than 30 species. Many of these have short ranges, permitting recognition of stratigraphically successive Pusgillian–lower Cautleyan, middle–upper Cautleyan, and Rawtheyan ostracod faunas. Several species are also known from the upper Ordovician of North America (Anticosti Island), Scotland (Girvan district) and the Baltic region (Estonia, glacial erratic boulders of northern Germany), providing evidence to correlate upper Ordovician successions in these areas. The ostracods include abundant podocopes, at some horizons accounting for more than 80% of the fauna. Binodicopes are also common, but palaeocopes are rare. Assemblages are typical of a clastic dominated open marine shelf setting. Diversity at most horizons is low (c. 3–5 species), but reaches a peak of between 13–14 species in middle Cautleyan horizons. Lower diversity at Pusgillian and Rawtheyan horizons coincides with the encroachment of deeper marine-shelf facies which were probably hostile to Ordovician benthonic ostracods. Some of the ostracods (particularly Aechmina) have distributions suggesting tolerance of a range of mid- to deep shelf benthonic palaeoenvironments, but none were pelagic. During Ashgill times the Cautley district (part of palaeocontinental Avalonia) was replete with ostracod genera and species which also occur in the Baltic region (palaeocontinental Baltica; more than 90% generic similarity) and to a lesser, but nonetheless significant extent in North America and Scotland (parts of palaeocontinental Laurentia). Such trans-Tornquist Sea and Iapetus Ocean distributional patterns add to previous ostracod data that support models which show palaeogeographical proximity of Avalonia and Baltica, and Avalonia and Laurentia, by Ashgill times. The widely cited observation, that trans-Iapetus ostracod faunas remained strictly provincial until the mid-or late Silurian, cannot be sustained.


Author(s):  
Peter Rowley-Conwy ◽  
Keith Dobney

In Mesolithic and Neolithic southern Scandinavia, Sus is often the animal found most commonly on archaeological sites, and it undoubtedly formed a major part of the meat diet throughout the prehistoric period. Unfortunately, it is difficult to ascertain whether this meat comes from wild boar (Sus scrofa) or domestic pigs (Sus scrofa f. domestica), as archaeologists have only the bones to go on when seeking to determine the status of the animals they study. This contribution will examine bones from a series of sites, most in Denmark but some also in Sweden. Three main areas will be considered. First, Mesolithic animals will be discussed. These are universally regarded as wild boar, and the effects of the rising sea level and consequent fragmentation of their populations will be examined. Second, Danish Neolithic and later domestic animals will be discussed; these could either have been domesticated in Denmark from local wild boar, or could have been introduced from outside along with exotic agricultural items such as wheat or sheep. Third, we will consider Middle Neolithic animals from the Swedish island of Gotland in the Baltic Sea. Wild boar were almost certainly not present on Gotland during the Mesolithic, and the animals must therefore have been introduced by human agency. However, opinion is divided as to whether they were domestic pigs, wild boar introduced to found a hunted population, or a crossbred or feral population. The sites to be examined are listed in Table 7.1. The various sites have been excavated at various times over the last century or so. Some were published shortly after being excavated, but others had to wait many years for publication. Excavation quality has certainly varied, but we believe this will probably not have exerted a major influence on the results we present. Our work is based on the mandibles, and these are large and robust. They are unlikely to be overlooked during even poor-quality excavations, and they survive better than many other parts of the skeleton. Samples are therefore unlikely to be biased either by recovery of preservation. In grouping sites by period, for example ‘Early Mesolithic’, we are certainly conflating sites of somewhat different ages.


2004 ◽  
Vol 223 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Else-Ragnhild Neumann ◽  
Marjorie Wilson ◽  
Michel Heeremans ◽  
Elizabeth Ann Spencer ◽  
Karsten Obst ◽  
...  

The Holocene ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (10) ◽  
pp. 1589-1599 ◽  
Author(s):  
Veronica Rohde Krossa ◽  
Matthias Moros ◽  
Guillaume Leduc ◽  
Martin Hinz ◽  
Thomas Blanz ◽  
...  

1999 ◽  
Vol 46 ◽  
pp. 13-24
Author(s):  
Trine Pedersen ◽  
Søren Gregersen

The Tor project makes use of teleseismic tomography across the Sorgenfrei-Tornquist Zone and has now revealed significant variations in the deep lithosphere under northern Germany, Denmark and southern Sweden. Here we present the first interpretations of P-wave traveltime anomalies from the Tor project. The project utilised 120 seismographs placed in a rectangular array, the largest seismic antenna so far used in Europe, for half a year in the period 1996–1997. The present investigation establishes a 3D crustal/upper mantle model of the P-wave velocity based on existing data. A picture of the crustal influence on the seismic P-wave rays is established by ray tracing through the model. When this is subtracted from that observed by the Tor array, a picture of the influence of the lower lithosphere/asthenosphere system emerges. For several earthquakes it is shown that the observed P-wave traveltime anomalies of nearly 2 seconds can be divided almost equally between known crustal effects and lower lithosphere/asthenosphere differences. The transition appears gradual from most directions but for rays coming from the north-east direction the transition appears sharper. This means that the broad scale deep lithosphere transition is gradual with the sharpest discontinuity plane dipping down steeply in a north-easterly direction from the Sorgenfrei-Tornquist Zone. Based on existing knowledge of the area we conclude that the transition from thin to thick lithosphere occurs within a short distance, and that the lithosphere/asthenosphere boundary dips steeply down from the surface expression of the Sorgenfrei-Tornquist Zone.


Author(s):  
Rosemarie Lühr

Abstract Subject of the investigation are settlement names that refer to waters. These oikonyms are often the oldest. The research area is that of the Ancient European Hydronymy. The Old European hydronyms occur in Central Europe, in the Baltic region, in Southern Scandinavia, in the British Isles, in France, on the Iberian Peninsula and in Italy. The research question is, if the expression of spatial relationships in oikonyms with water words is a universal? It turns out to be also other naming strategies. The theoretical framework is Levinson’s (2008) description of spatial cognition. The connection of spatial cognition with landscape terms is new in toponomastics.


Author(s):  
П. Е. Сорокин ◽  
В. И. Кильдюшевский ◽  
В. Н. Матвеев

Сосуды из каменной массы, изготавливавшиеся в городах Северной Германии и получившие в литературе название рейнской керамики, были широко распространены в позднее Средневековье и Новое время в Северной Европе. В русских городах они встречаются значительно реже, причем в основном на Северо-Западе, вовлеченном в балтийскую торговлю. Значительно более широко они представлены в Восточной Прибалтике, Финляндии, а также в городах Выборг, Ниеншанц и Но-тебург, входивших в состав шведских владений. Поступление сосудов из каменной массы в прибалтийские страны отражает торговые и политические процессы в Балтийском регионе. The stone vessels, manufactured in the cities of Northern Germany and got the name of Rhenish ceramics in literature were widespread in the Late Middle Ages and Modern Time in Northern Europe. In Russian cities, they are met much rarer, mostly in the North-West involved in the Baltic trade. Much more commonly they are represented in the Eastern Baltic countries, Finland, and also in the cities of Vyborg, Nyenschantz and Noteburg, which once were part of the Swedish realm. The flow of stone vessels into the Baltic countries reflects trade and political processes in the Baltic region.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document