Fruits, fish and the introduction of pottery in the Eastern European plain: Lipid residue analysis of ceramic vessels from Zamostje 2

Abstract

The Neolithization of Northern Eurasia is marked by the emergence of pottery among hunter-gatherer societies. The driving forces behind the adoption of ceramic cooking vessels among non-agricultural societies remain unclear, although previous research, mainly in North East Asia (e.g. Japan, Korea and the Russian Far East), suggests that it was adopted as a specialist technology for processing aquatic resources, linked to the intensification of fishing activities and a move to sedentism. The stratified site of Zamostje 2 in the forest zone of the Volga-Oka region includes both aceramic Mesolithic and two early ceramic horizons dating to Early Neolithic (EN) and Middle Neolithic (MN). This provides a unique opportunity to look at the impacts of the adoption of pottery on the wider economy and determine whether pottery function changes over time. This was achieved through the analysis of lipids from 166 potsherds dating from the earliest phases (mid-6th millennium cal BC) to the MN (5th millennium cal BC). Contrary to our expectations, the pottery from the EN phase was used to process a broad range of foodstuffs including terrestrial resources, such as forest fruits, in addition to freshwater fish. In contrast, pottery from the MN phase was used exclusively for processing aquatic resources. The results show that in this case, pottery was adopted as a more general-purpose cooking container, at least in the earliest phases of use, and that a specialist function only emerged later. Introduction: Hunter-gatherers pottery and Neolithization of Northern EurasiaArchaeologists now acknowledge two contrasting processes of Neolithization. The classic definition of the Neolithic arose in Western Europe and involved the emergence of farming in the Near East, and the dispersal of a package of innovations including domestic crops and animals, village life and pottery into Northwest Europe. In contrast, archaeologists working in other parts of Eurasia define the onset of the Neolithic by the emergence of pottery cooking containers among hunter-gatherer societies, along with an increase in sedentism, emergence of new subsistence strategies with food storage and fishing intensification, and settlement at strategic locations giving access to a

Organic residue analysis shows sub-regional patterns in the use of pottery by Northern European hunter–gatherers

“…The presence of plants in pottery is difficult to assess, due to the fact that they generally have a lower lipid content compared to animal products, often lack specific biomarkers and are characterized by a broad range of isotopic values [7,95,96]. For this reason, the contribution of plant resources to circum-Baltic pottery cannot be excluded.…”

“…In Eastern Europe and Western Siberia, the use of pottery among hunter-gatherer societies, established along major river basins (e.g. the Ob', Volga and Don rivers) [5][6][7], is well attested, and here, in contrast to the Western conception, is regarded as the innovation that defined the start of the Neolithic itself. Indeed, these Eastern 'Neolithic' hunter-gatherer ceramic traditions might have influenced prehistoric hunter-gatherers in present-day Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Belarus (including the Narva and Neman cultures) who began producing pottery by the mid-6th millennium cal BC [8][9][10].…”

Neolithic farmers or Neolithic foragers? Organic residue analysis of early pottery from Rakushechny Yar on the Lower Don (Russia)

“…The other samples falling in the non-ruminant isotopic value area, without aquatic biomarkers, might either result from the degradation of these specific molecules or could also reflect the processing of non-ruminant terrestrial products rather than aquatic resources. These samples tend to have fatty acids more depleted in 13 C (δ 13 C 16:0 = -28.3 ± 0.9‰; δ 13 C 18:0 = -28.6 ± 0.7‰) than samples with aquatic biomarkers (δ 13 C 16:0 = -26.7 ± 1.4‰; δ 13 C 18:0 = -26.9 ± 1.4‰; (Bondetti et al 2020b) and early agricultural sites in (c) Syria (Nieuwenhuyse et al 2015) and (d) Anatolia (Evershed et al 2008b;Debono Spiteri et al 2016). For (a) and (b) plots, the filled circles indicate samples with aquatic signals.…”

“…Based on evidence from Northern Europe and East Asia, it appears that aquatic foods were preferentially cooked in hunter-gatherer vessels, perhaps marking intensification of fishing at this time, leading to surplus production and creating the conditions for increased sedentism and population growth (e.g. Craig et al 2007Craig et al , 2011Craig et al , 2013Bērziņš 2010;Lucquin et al 2016bLucquin et al , 2018Oras et al 2017;Shoda et al 2017;Gibbs et al 2017;Bondetti et al 2020b). However, other studies have shown more variable patterns of use which, arguably, reflect economic continuity from the preceding 'Mesolithic' period (Oras et al 2017;Bondetti et al 2020b), where it is argued that intensified fishing was already established (e.g.…”

“…Craig et al 2007Craig et al , 2011Craig et al , 2013Bērziņš 2010;Lucquin et al 2016bLucquin et al , 2018Oras et al 2017;Shoda et al 2017;Gibbs et al 2017;Bondetti et al 2020b). However, other studies have shown more variable patterns of use which, arguably, reflect economic continuity from the preceding 'Mesolithic' period (Oras et al 2017;Bondetti et al 2020b), where it is argued that intensified fishing was already established (e.g. Bērziņš 2010) or came later.…”