English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

International audienceThis article examines cultural dynamics in the Neolithic of temperate Europe through a study of bone, antler and tooth artefacts from settlements and burials dating from Linear Pottery through to Michelsberg and Chasséen (VIth to IVth millennia BC). The artefacts, which include previously unpublished material, are examined together with evidence for animal breeding and hunting, with a view to considering the whole range of resources provided by animals, be they real or symbolic. As a result of this analysis, it is suggested here that while domestication is an integral part of society, hunting is transferred from the material to the ideological sphere. Use of resources from domestic animals becomes so important in economic terms that its impact can be seen in settlement architecture. At the same time, hunting becomes a socially valued and emblematic factor which eventually influences and transforms burial practices and probably also the underlying social structure. This phenomenum occurs over a wide area of western and central Europe and is undoubtedly an important factor in the development of the Neolithic. A fresh insight into the neolithisation process is thus offered, integrating different and previously unexploited data. The transfer of hunting from the real to the symbolic sphere is interpreted as resulting from the interaction of two entirely different cultural entities. To put it simply, one is a hunting culture with Mesolithic origins and the other an animal husbandry culture belonging to Neolithic settlers. Yet the situation is far more complex because Mesolithic people could have herded and Neolithic people actually did hunt. The interpretation proposed here is based to a large extent on evidence for changes in hunting practices, involving «‑specialized‑» hunting of red deer, an animal which was accorded a special status. It is suggested, as a working hypothesis, that the two cultural entities could have lived side by side with little métissage in Linear Pottery villages throughout the duration of this culture. They would have lived in houses of different sizes and each would have had specific meat diets. In fact the slight differences that are not easily detectable in the archaeological record reflect profound differences in food customs and way of life, which maintained a strong and long-lasting separation between these two contrasting entities. This cohabitation with almost no intermixing was replaced by a first episode of fusion towards the end of the Linear Pottery which reduced the vivacity of the Mesolithic component, while at the same time contributing to the downfall of the Linear Pottery Culture. True cultural or even «‑ethnic‑» métissage occurred and this altered Neolithic social and economic organization through the appropriation of certain hunter-gatherer values. From then on there followed cyclic episodes of fusion between the two kinds of culture, linked to the spatial expansion of the Neolithic, right up to its final stages. The origins of the «‑chalcolithisation‑» process may lie in one of the last, or perhaps the very last of these episodes.Mots-clés. Néolithique européen, industrie en matières osseuses, parure en matières osseuses, os, bois de cerf, dent, fonction des outils, symbolique. Keywords. European Neolithic, bone industry, bone ornaments, bone antler, teeth, use of tools, symbolic traits. Résumé. Nous proposons ici une étude des objets élaborés avec les matières osseuses. Cette étude est placée dans la perspective de la dynamique évolutive et culturelle générale du Néolithique du VI e au IV e millénaire avant J.-C. en Europe tempérée. L'examen de mobiliers osseux inédits, provenant d'habitats et de sépultures, combiné aux données de l'élevage et de la chasse, tente de cerner l'ensemble des ressources, matérielles comme idéelles, que l'exploitation animale fournit entre le Rubané, le Michelsberg et le Chasséen. Une fois structuré, cet ensemble de données conduit à observer un transfert de la sphère matérielle à l'idéel concernant la chasse, et ce à mesure que la société s'enracine dans la domestication. Autrement dit, l'économie se renforce dans l'exploitation des ressources animales domestiques de manière assez forte pour influencer l'architecture de l'habitat-; c'est du moins l'idée que défend cet article. En parallèle, la chasse devient un facteur emblématique et socialement valorisant qui, à son tour, influence les pratiques funéraires et, vraisemblablement aussi, ébranle les fondements de la structure sociale qui avait cours jusqu'alors. Ce transfert, qui se produit sur un vaste territoire, de l'ouest européen jusqu'aux confins de l'Europe centrale, possède indéniablement une certaine prégnance dans l'évolution du Néolithique de cette aire. Son origine sociologique paraît s'imposer, offrant matière à réviser le processus de la néolithisation grâce à des arguments tout à fait différents de ceux qui sont habituellement considérés pour ce sujet. Le recyclage de la pratique concrète de la chasse vers l'idéel est interprété comme le résultat de l'interaction de deux entités culturelles bien dissociées. En schématisant, l'une, ayant la culture de la chasse, serait d'origine mésolithique-; l'autre, ayant la culture des animaux domestiques, serait originaire des colons néolithiques. La situation est en fait bien plus compliquée car les «-Mésolithiques-» pratiqueraient l'élevage tandis que les «-Néolithiques-» chassent. L'interprétation proposée est fondée sur l'évolution de la pratique cynégétique et une certaine «-spécialisation-» de celle-ci sur une espèce donnée, le cerf, auquel est conféré un statut très particulier. Considérant ce nouvel argument, on aboutit à penser qu'une période de cohabitation sans mélange (ou très peu) entre les deux entités sociales serait possible tout au long du Rubané et au sein des villages de cette culture. Les deux entités en présence se manifesteraient en habitant des maisons de tailles différentes et en mangeant des viandes spécifiques. Ces différences, très subtiles sur le plan matériel et difficiles à détecter, masquent en fait des pratiques alimentaires et des habitus profondément différents, qui maintiennent une distinction sociale forte entre elles. La cohabitation presque sans mélange de ces deux entités sociales au cours du Rubané pourrait laisser la place à un premier épisode de fusion à la fin de cette culture-; cette hypothèse explicite la fin du Rubané qui est en même temps la fin de la vivacité de la composante mésolithique déjà intégrée dans les villages de cette culture. Un vrai mélange culturel sinon «-ethnique-» pourrait se produire ensuite au sein d'une organisation et d'une structure économique dans la logique du Néolithique tandis qu'il s'approprie certaines des valeurs sociales des chasseurs-cueilleurs. À partir de là, des épisodes de fusion cycliques entre ces deux cultures se succéderaient, liés à l'expansion territoriale du Néolithique. Ce phénomène possède encore vraisemblablement une suite jusque dans les dernières étapes du Néolithique. Le dernier de ces épisodes, ou parmi les derniers, pourrait être une des origines du processus de «-chalcolithisation-». Abstract. This article examines cultural dynamics in the Neolithic of temperate Europe through a study of bone, antler and tooth artefacts from settlements and burials dating from Linear Pottery through to Michelsberg and Chasséen (VI th to IV th millennia BC). The artefacts, which include previously unpublished material, are examined together with evidence for animal breeding and hunting, with a view to considering the whole range of resources provided by animals, be they real or symbolic. As a result of this analysis, it is suggested here that while domestication is an integral part of society, hunting is transferred from the material to the ideological sphere. Use of resources from domestic animals becomes so important in economic terms that its impact can be seen in settlement architecture. At the same time, hunting becomes a socially valued and emblematic factor which eventually influences and transforms burial practices and probably also the underlying social structure. This phenomenum occurs over a wide area of western and central Europe and is undoubtedly an important factor in the development of the Neolithic. A fresh insight into the neolithisation process is thus offered, integrating different and previously unexploited data. The transfer of hunting from the real to the symbolic sphere is interpreted as resulting from the interaction of two entirely different cultural entities. To put it simply, one is a hunting culture with Mesolithic origins and the other an animal husbandry culture belonging to Neolithic settlers. Yet the situation is far more complex because Mesolithic people could have herded and Neolithic people actually did hunt. The interpretation proposed here is based to a large extent on evidence for changes in hunting practices, involving «-specialized-» hunting of red deer, an animal which was accorded a special status. It is suggested, as a working hypothesis, that the two cultural entities could have lived side by side with little métissage in Linear Pottery villages throughout the duration of this culture. They would have lived in houses of different sizes and each would have had specific meat diets. In fact the slight differences that are not easily detectable in the archaeological record reflect profound differences in food customs and way of life, which maintained a strong and long-lasting separation between these two contrasting entities. This cohabitation with almost no intermixing was replaced by a first episode of fusion towards the end of the Linear Pottery which reduced the vivacity of the Mesolithic component, while at the same time contributing to the downfall of the Linear Pottery Culture. True cultural or even «-ethnic-» métissage occurred and this altered Neolithic social and economic organization through the appropriation of certain hunter-gatherer values. From then on there followed cyclic episodes of fusion between the two kinds of culture, linked to the spatial expansion of the Neolithic, right up to its final stages. The origins of the «-chalcolithisation-» process may lie in one of the last, or perhaps the very last of these episodes

Animaux domestiques, bêtes sauvages et objets en matières animales du Rubané au Michelsberg : de l'économie aux symboles, des techniques à la culture