Open AccessTaking out the Trash: On Excavating Settlements in General, and Houses of the Battle Axe Culture in Particular
Author(s) -
Åsa M. Larsson
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
current swedish archaeology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.256
H-Index - 8
eISSN - 2002-3901
pISSN - 1102-7355
DOI - 10.37718/csa.2008.07
Subject(s) - battle , human settlement , taphonomy , argument (complex analysis) , settlement (finance) , excavator , prehistory , archaeology , interpretation (philosophy) , history , period (music) , mainland china , art , engineering , aesthetics , china , philosophy , civil engineering , biochemistry , chemistry , linguistics , world wide web , computer science , payment
Archaeological interpretation rests partly on theory and partly on material remains, and changes in field methods can cause major changes in both areas. Longhouses were virtually unknown on mainland Sweden until the introduction of the excavator machine in the late 1970s. However, this method is biased in that the cultural practice of some periods is favoured at the expense of others. From the Battle Axe culture very few houses and artcfacts have been found, and it has bcen suggested the sitcs were not true settlements. This vicw is challenged by showing that taphonomic processes and cultural practice combine to make this period difficult to identify using the standard field method. Paradoxically, some other periods have no more remains and/or house structures than the Battle Axe period has, but they are not subjected to the same debate. Comparison with Corded Ware sites in Europe provides support for the argument that the scarcity of Battle Axe settlements is mainly due to taphonomic processes. Thc article calls for more reflective field methods on all prehistoric settlements.