The Mechanisms of Neolithisation of Western Europe: Beyond a South/North Approach

Abstract

Up until now, the neolithisation of Western Europe during the sixth millennium BCE has mainly been approached through the characterisation of its diffusion vectors (cultural vs demic diffusion) and the emergence of technoeconomic innovations (rhythms, scenarios, and transmission). Traditionally, two primary routes of agricultural diffusion are distinguished: one extending along the Danube river corridor to the Atlantic coast (Linearbandkeramik) and the other along the Mediterranean coastal zone (Impressed Ware). To move beyond this dichotomy, this article proposes a first attempt at an integrated approach to the mechanisms of neolithisation in Western Europe, one of the few territories where it is possible, and therefore necessary, to investigate the processes that are common to both of these principal neolithisation complexes. The most widely held vision, inherited from the 1980s, of a European Neolithic that developed from east to west following a regular rhythm has progressively been replaced by a more complex model of diffusion characterised by arrhythmia and cultural reconfigurations. Despite having different origins and trajectories, the expansion of the first farmers was made possible by a number of common mechanisms. Impresso-Cardial and Linearbandkeramik societies faced similar constraints, especially with regard to ensuring the stability of their social and economic models, while minimising the risks inherent to the colonisation of new territories. Three main mechanisms would have structured the first neolithisation phases of both spheres: a strong mobility of populations regulated to varying degrees by social rules, a strong solidarity expressed at multiple levels of interactions within each sphere, and, finally, the existence of syncretism and cultural recompositions including close and long-distance relations.

Les premiers villages agricoles de l’est du plateau Iranien à la vallée de l’Indus : état de la question

“…Les questions qui concernent les processus impliqués dans la néolithisation des confins indoiraniens et plus généralement des régions à l'est du Zagros rejoignent celles qui sont posées à propos de la néolithisation de l'ouest de l'Europe, laquelle, partant également du Proche-Orient, est datée en France du VI e millénaire avant notre ère [117] (Hamon et Manen, 2021). Ces questions dont nous avons noté une partie en début de cet article incluent : les trajectoires spatiales de la néolithisation ; les mécanismes de la néolithisation (diffusion démique ou culturelle, ou encore invention indépendante, une question qui semble davantage ouverte en Asie qu'en Europe) ; les rythmes des migrations, incluant, entre autres, des phases de colonisation rapide et d'autres de densification des habitats ; les relations avec les populations locales (assimilation, coexistence, conflit, départ, absence ou disparition) ; les modalités d'adaptation à de nouveaux territoires pour y garantir une implantation réussie (modalités et degré de recomposition des pratiques culturelles et des stratégies de subsistance).…”

“…Sur la question des trajectoires, au même titre que la dichotomie entre les deux routes principales de la diffusion de l'agriculture en Europe, l'une longeant le Danube et allant jusqu'à la côte atlantique (cultures à céramique rubanée ou linéaire) et l'autre suivant la côte méditerranéenne (cultures à céramique cardiale) [117] (Hamon et Manen, 2021), il semble important d'unir les recherches et les données au nord et au sud des déserts iraniens et de l'Hindu Kush et d'évaluer les contributions respectives des cultures de ces régions notamment dans la constitution des premiers villages agricoles des confins indo-iraniens. Les résultats des recherches rendent en effet bien compte de l'existence d'échanges, incluant des mouvements de population, sur des distances parfois très grandes, ce qui, ajouté à la faiblesse des données relatives au Néolithique, suggère qu'il convient de n'écarter aucune hypothèse et d'ouvrir le champ des possibilités bien au-delà des régions étudiées.…”

The shaping of social and symbolic capital during the transition to farming in the Western Mediterranean: Archaeological network analyses of pottery decorations and personal ornaments

“…Previous studies have shown that during the Early Neolithic human communities were highly connected and mobile, with well-developed large-scale circulation networks [51][52][53][54] that favoured both cultural and demic diffusions. Additional studies have evidenced that each mechanism acted to a different extent across Europe [55,56], although these interactions did not uniformly affect the various elements of the first farmers' material culture.…”

Neolithization and Population Replacement in Britain: An Alternative View

“…While Brace and colleagues suggest that groups from Iberia may have made their way to Britain by way of France, this is somewhat at odds with the existing evidence. The dispersal of Cardial-Epicardial Neolithic people from the ‘Mediterranean arch’ of the Côte d'Azur, Languedoc, Valencia and Catalonia took the form of a radial expansion along the river corridors of the Rhone, Garonne and Ebro (Guilaine 2015, 94; Hamon & Manen 2021, 720). Neolithic populations were established in the Aquitaine basin appreciably earlier than on the coast of Cantabria (Arias 2007, 60; Perrin et al 2018, 322), and there is less indication of any movement eastwards from Spain into France.…”