Individuals, communities, narratives. The state of biosocial archaeology in the Middle Danube Region - Programme and abstracts (original) (raw)
Related papers
Acta Archaeologica, 2006
In Hungary, prehistoric archaeology, and Neolithic research in particular, has reached the level at which the problems of demography as well as those of social organisation and structure can be more intensively studied, beyond the primary analysis of material culture. 1 This development fits a general research trend pursued across Europe. This qualitative change was, in part, facilitated by guest researchers from abroad, who became involved with prehistoric research in the Carpathian Basin through their personal archaeological projects. Their new approaches have inspired the emergence of a broader view among local archaeologists. 2 On the other hand, it is an indubitable fact that, for a long time, the comprehensive work by János Makkay 3 has remained the benchmark study in the forefront of neolithic research in Hungary that also guided the clarification of demographic and social relations. Makkay's book may be considered a milestone especially, since it directed attention to the importance of settlement history in dealing with these problems. Prior to that time, on the basis of the analysis carried out in the Tiszapolgár-Basatanya cemetery, 4 it had been generally assumed that social questions in Early Prehistory may be dealt with chiefly on the basis of archaeological observations made in burials. To some extent, that attitude has remained influential in connection with the Lengyel culture, its research is concentrated on the analysis of cemeteries within the framework of "sozialarchäologische Forschungen". 5 In addition to the gradual adoption of the interpretive frameworks of the most influential trends in European archaeology (processual, post-processual, cognitive-processual and interpretative archaeology) 6 in Hungary, another development of similar importance must be mentioned: large surface excavations could be carried out * The shorter version of this paper was presented at the conference entitled "(un)settling the using modern techniques. 7 Parallel with these excavations, several field surveys on a regional level facilitated the study of higher levels of settlement history, including the Neolithic Period as well. 8 Meanwhile, an evidently important basis for assessing prehistoric social relations is the availability of comparative archaeological information from the settlements and cemeteries of cultural units investigated. 9 A great variety of the possibilities of analysing the various levels of pathways to power (e. g.: data on mortuary practices, artefacts and settlements) are presented in the theoretical syntheses written by M. Parker-Pearson, 10 B. Hayden, 11 P. K. Wason, 12 and F. McHugh. 13 Another important requirement in studying social archaeology is the availability of a certain chronological framework, as has recently been convincingly demonstrated by J. Müller in relation to the Neolithic of the Middle Elbe-Saale region. 14 Owing to the aforementioned circumstances, the site of Polgár-&VV]KDORPKDVRIIHUHGXQLTXHH[FDYation results 15 . In relation to these, questions of social relations in the Late Neolithic of the Upper Tisza Region can not only be posed, but also discussed in sufficient detail.
Social dimensions of the Late Neolithic settlement of Polgár-Csőszhalom (Eastern Hungary)
Acta Archaeologica, 2006
In Hungary, prehistoric archaeology, and Neolithic research in particular, has reached the level at which the problems of demography as well as those of social organisation and structure can be more intensively studied, beyond the primary analysis of material culture. 1 This development fits a general research trend pursued across Europe. This qualitative change was, in part, facilitated by guest researchers from abroad, who became involved with prehistoric research in the Carpathian Basin through their personal archaeological projects. Their new approaches have inspired the emergence of a broader view among local archaeologists. 2 On the other hand, it is an indubitable fact that, for a long time, the comprehensive work by János Makkay 3 has remained the benchmark study in the forefront of neolithic research in Hungary that also guided the clarification of demographic and social relations. Makkay's book may be considered a milestone especially, since it directed attention to the importance of settlement history in dealing with these problems. Prior to that time, on the basis of the analysis carried out in the Tiszapolgár-Basatanya cemetery, 4 it had been generally assumed that social questions in Early Prehistory may be dealt with chiefly on the basis of archaeological observations made in burials. To some extent, that attitude has remained influential in connection with the Lengyel culture, its research is concentrated on the analysis of cemeteries within the framework of "sozialarchäologische Forschungen". 5 In addition to the gradual adoption of the interpretive frameworks of the most influential trends in European archaeology (processual, post-processual, cognitive-processual and interpretative archaeology) 6 in Hungary, another development of similar importance must be mentioned: large surface excavations could be carried out * The shorter version of this paper was presented at the conference entitled "(un)settling the using modern techniques. 7 Parallel with these excavations, several field surveys on a regional level facilitated the study of higher levels of settlement history, including the Neolithic Period as well. 8 Meanwhile, an evidently important basis for assessing prehistoric social relations is the availability of comparative archaeological information from the settlements and cemeteries of cultural units investigated. 9 A great variety of the possibilities of analysing the various levels of pathways to power (e. g.: data on mortuary practices, artefacts and settlements) are presented in the theoretical syntheses written by M. Parker-Pearson, 10 B. Hayden, 11 P. K. Wason, 12 and F. McHugh. 13 Another important requirement in studying social archaeology is the availability of a certain chronological framework, as has recently been convincingly demonstrated by J. Müller in relation to the Neolithic of the Middle Elbe-Saale region. 14 Owing to the aforementioned circumstances, the site of Polgár-&VV]KDORPKDVRIIHUHGXQLTXHH[FDYation results 15 . In relation to these, questions of social relations in the Late Neolithic of the Upper Tisza Region can not only be posed, but also discussed in sufficient detail.
Folia Quaternaria, Kraków, 2016
A b s t r a c t. In this study, we summarise the preliminary results of thirty years of investigations at the Polgár-Bosnyákdomb site. The significance of the site located on the one-time bank of the Tisza River is that it lies no more than 5 km away from the well-known Polgár-Csőszhalom settlement complex. One of our goals was to investigate the relation between the settlements in the Polgár Island micro-region and to identify the similarities and differences between them. It is quite obvious that with its estimated 70 hectares large extent, Polgár-Csőszhalom was a dominant settlement complex in this landscape during the earlier fifth millennium, while the Bosnyákdomb settlement, represented an entirely different scale with its 8 hectares and had a different role during this period. The AMS dates provide convincing evidence that the two settlements had been occupied simultaneously during one period of their lives. Despite their spatial proximity and chronological contemporaneity, the two settlements had a differing structural layout. Although both had a prominent stratified settlement mound that was separated from the single-layer settlement part by a ditch, the system of the ditches, their structure and, presumably, their social use differed substantially. This would suggest that each community constructed its settlement and architectural structures according to different spatial rules in the different locations of Polgár Island. Despite the spatial differences, we could identify traces of similar community events on the settlement mounds at Bosnyákdomb and Csőszhalom such as the recurring practice of house burning. Despite the smaller excavated areas, we identified wholly different mortuary practices at Bosnyákdomb, diverging fundamentally from the funerary rites practiced at Csőszhalom. The bones of the deceased were secondarily deposited into the ditch of the central mound. The various cultural features discussed in the above indicate that the community responses of the groups settling and living in the Polgár area during the Late Neolithic to the environmental challenges of the land around them were embodied by a set of distinctive cultural behaviours. Nevertheless, certain elements in the colourful diversity of material features and their different levels outline the structure of a micro-regional network with Csőszhalom in its centre in the Upper Tisza region. K e y w o r d s: Neolithic, tell-like and horizontal settlement complex, enclosure system, 14 C dating, Polgár Island, Great Hungarian Plain Publikacja jest udostępniona na licencji Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 PL)
2016_FROM BONES TO HUMAN BEINGS New Advances in the Study of Neolithic Burials in the Polgár Area I
In the strict sense, bioarchaeology refers to the biological and chemical examination of human remains, but in a wider sense, it involves the analysis of all organic archaeological remains. The results of these analyses contribute to the reconstruction of former populations as well as to a better understanding of individual dietary habits and behaviours, possible migrations, diseases and pathologies, and various activities and workloads, while a wider application sheds light on the period's animals and plants, land use and lifeways. This study is based on the interim results of the Hungarian and international bioarchaeological research projects focusing on the Middle and Late Neolithic burials uncovered at Polgár and other neighbouring sites and seeking answers to the questions of whence and when did these people arrive, how tall they were, how healthy they were, what they ate, and how they worked. A total of 314 burials were uncovered at four major sites dating from the Middle and Late Neolithic (5500– 4500 BC) on the outskirts of Polgár and Hajdúnánás in Hajdú-Bihar County during the salvage excavations preceding the motorway construction projects begun in the 1990s. 2 (Fig. 1) Although this does not seem a
2012
In addition to several thousand archaeological features, forty-three settlement burials were also uncovered on the LBK site at Balatonszárszó-Kis-erdei-dűlő. The majority of the crouched inhumation burials came to light from the uppermost level of the settlement’s refuse pits. The study offers a detailed assessment of the settlement’s Neolithic burials together with the examination of possible patterns in the mortuary rites, as well as an overview of the culture’s graves and mortuary practices in the western half of the Carpathian Basin, i.e. in Hungary and Slovakia. The findings are compared to the treatment of the dead in other regions of the LBK distribution in Europe in order to identify possible local traditions in the light of similarities with and divergences from the general patterns in the mortuary rites practiced by LBK communities.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.
Related papers
Introduction: Early studies on the Hungarian Neolithic
From farmers to heroes? Archaeological studies in honor of Sławomir Kadrow. Editors: Maciej dębiec, Jacek górski, Johannes Müller, Marek Nowak, Andrzej Pelisiak, Thomas saile, Piotr włodarczak universitätsforschungen zur prähistorischen Archäologie 376, Bonn 2022, 255-277, 2022
“Archäologie in Eurasien" 31, Berlin, pp. 105-128.