Social changes in Late Bronze and Early Iron Age Wales: The beginning of Celtic Wales? In R. Karl, K. Möller (eds.), Proceedings of the second European symposium in Celtic Studies, held at Prifysgol Bangor University from July 31st to August 3rd 2017, 159-179 Hagen/Westf.: curach bhán 2018. (original) (raw)
Related papers
In his paper, J. D. Hill asked us how we imagine Iron Age societies, whether as simple triangles or pyramids (figure 15.1), or whether we had different geometrical shapes-and thus different Iron Ages-in our mind. The implicit criticism (following his more explicit criticism in of the simple 'triangular' model for Iron Age societies is well justified: after all, the 'triangular' model of Iron Age societies is usually based on the assumption that Iron Age societies were large societies, early states as described by Caesar (b.g. 6,[11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20]. Hill (2006) has produced alternative geometrical models based on anthropological analogies (figure 15.2). His alternatives are 'non-triangular', and are based on a much more bottom-up approach, pointing out the significance of individual households and kinship in small-scale communities, which may have had many and very different 'shapes' to the societies envisaged in the 'classical triangular' model.
This is the second part of a study on Bronze Age tells, and on our approaches towards an understanding of this fascinating way of life drawing on the material remains of long-term architectural stability and references back to ancestral place. Focusing on a rather specific way of organising social space and a particular materiality as a medium of past social action, this is also a study with wider implications for the study of European prehistory and theoretical issues of archaeological interpretation. Unlike the reductionist macro perspective of mainstream social modelling, inspired by aspects of practice theory outlined in this book, the account given seeks to allow for what is truly remarkable about these sites, and what we can infer from them about the way of life they once framed and enabled. The social is never a static given, but is situated in space and time where it constantly unfolds anew. The stability seen on tells, and their apparent lack of change on a macro scale, are specific features of the social field, in a given region and for a specific period of time. They come about as the result of social life unfolding in a specific way, and not another, that leaves the total nexus of practices and the material arrangements that together make up human sociality seemingly unchanged in outward appearance. In a community thus favouring tradition over change, norms and shared ends not only link and orient actions into practices, as they always do, but may effectuate the broadly speaking unchanged persistence of traditional practices and discourage deviation by social actors, without ever reducing them, of course, to mere dummies. Similarly, the material world that is always both the outcome of action and structures that action in the context of organised practices, by virtue of its longevity and apparent givenness may come to prefigure the social future in likenesses of the past more consistently than is otherwise the case. The social process, however, will always be fundamentally open and indeterminate, as social actors do have agency and intentionality in pursuit of their notion of a life well accomplished. Both stability and change are contingent upon specific historical contexts, including traditional practices, their material setting and human intentionality. They are not an inherent, given property of this or that ‘type’ of society or social structure. For on our tells, it is argued here, underneath the specific manifestation of sociality maintained, we clearly do see social practices and corresponding material arrangements being negotiated and adjusted. Echoing the argument laid out in the first part of this study, it is suggested that archaeology should take an interest in such processes on the micro scale, rather than succumb to the temptation of neat macro history and great narratives existing aloof from the material remains of past lives.
Prehistoric Society, 2021
My first impression was that this book was going to fall firmly in the tradition of thematic-centred overviews of the Late Neolithic and Bronze Age used to such great effect by Richard Bradley in his black-book or 'circle' trilogy, starting with The Significance of Monuments (also published by Routledge). These often read like a quick sprint, a clever idea deftly communicated through a lively though selective use of examples. In comparison, Bronze Age Worlds is more of a long walk, a slower pace, its points more densely explored. The structure of the book is more circular than linear, returning again and again to the same subjectssepulchral traditions, metalwork deposits, settlements, landscape architecturebut at different scales of inclusivity. This provides a rich and rewarding reading experience on the Bronze Age of Britain and Ireland for the period c. 2500-700 BC. The book begins with a discussion of the discovery and previous interpretations of the Late Bronze Age associated deposit from Dowris, County Offaly (IE), supplemented by Johnston's own: "a gathering of things and a gathering of persons" (p.5). Here, each artefact in the deposit is suggested to have been individually contributed (as part of a wider 'gift economy'), each embodying a different 'person'. Broader scales of both time and space are also represented. This includes the condition of the artefacts, as reflected in use-traces and repairs, and in their morphology, which variously embody local, regional and supra-regional 'styles', as well as differing periods of manufacture. The function of certain artefacts, such as the bronze cauldron and buckets, may also reference collective events where participants gathered to feast. Finally, the location of the deposit, whilst possibly meaningful in its own right (isolated, marginal), may have embodied further meaning in respect of the other kinds of places that surrounded it. This extended discussion of Dowris serves to introduce the central theme of the book: kinship. It also places what follows, albeit briefly, in its wider archaeological milieu (post-processual; unequivocally anthropological). Following recent trends in post-processual archaeology, Johnston adopts a 'relational' approach. As an archaeological schema, it is concerned with describing associated things. Emphasis is therefore placed on the various kinds of assemblages
Indo-European from the east and Celtic from the west: reconciling models for languages in later prehistory John T. Koch Canolfan Uwchefrydiau Cymreig a Cheltaidd Prifysgol Cymru University of Wales Centre for Advanced Welsh and Celtic Studies Linguistic and archaeological evidence suggests that Celtic branched off from Proto-Indo-European in south-west Europe, in contact with p-less Iberian and Aquitanian/Palaeo-Basque. An overview of some current theories of the Indo-European homeland reveals the limitations of the family-tree model and favours alternatives. Evidence for the Celticity of the South-western (a.k.a. Tartessian) inscriptions of the Early Iron Age (750–500 BC) will be briefly summarized. The archaeological context of the SW stelae shows a survival or revival of funerary rites of the same region (south Portugal) of the Early and Middle Bronze Age (1800–1300 BC). These rites articulate an indigenous cultural identity predating the arrival of the Phoenicians, iron working, and literacy in Atlantic Iberia, all of which occurred by 900 BC. Looking into the deeper prehistory of the Copper Age of the 3rd millennium BC, the distinctive features of the SW necropolises (e.g. anthropomorphic stelae depicting high-status weapons and reused as lids over single-burial cists at the centres of paved circular barrows) have antecedents in the ‘Yamnaya package’ of the Pontic steppes, rather than the local Beaker complex. This steppe culture, which expanded west to Hungary 2900–2700 BC, has been associated with the expansion of Indo-European languages in the traditional ‘kurgan’ theory of Gimbutas and Mallory.
Exploring Celtic Origins: New ways forward in archaeology, linguistics, and genetics
Exploring Celtic Origins: New ways forward in archaeology, linguistics, and genetics, 2019
E x p l o r i n g C e l t i c O r i g i n s is the fruit of collaborative work by researchers in archaeology, historical linguistics, and archaeogenetics over the past ten years. T his team works towards the goal of a better understanding of the background in the Bronze Age and Beaker P eriod of the people who emerge as Celts and speakers of Celtic languages documented in the I ron Age and later times. L ed by S ir Barry Cunliffe and John Koch, the contributors present multidisciplinary chapters in a lively user-friendly style, aimed at accessibility for workers in the other fields, as well as general readers. T he collection stands as a pause to reflect on ways forward at the moment of intellectual history when the genome-wide sequencing of ancient DNA (a.k.a. ‘the archaeogenetic revolution’) has suddenly changed everything in the study of later European prehistory. How do we deal with what appears to be an irreversible breach in the barrier between science and the humanities? Exploring Celtic O rigins includes colour maps and illustrations and annotated Further R eading for all chapters.
Celtic origins: Archaeologically speaking
Language on the move across domains and communities. Selected papers from the 12th triennial Forum for Research on the Languages of Scotland and Ulster, Glasgow 2018., 2020
This paper uses a systematic evidence-based approach to evaluate three major competing hypotheses for the origins of Celtic languages. Influenced by recent developments in archaeological theory, a multidisciplinary approach draws upon historical linguistics, archaeology, and genetics.