Archaeology

This paper presents the research history at the site Swifterbant S25. This site was discovered in 2009 and proves to be the key to conclude that the Swifterbant area was not abandoned around 4000 cal BC. In the period 4000-3700 cal BC the area was exploited at several sites.

This contribution presents the characteristics of the early phase of pottery from the Swifterbant culture (5000-4600 cal. BC). The pottery derives from the Dutch sites Bronneger, Hoge Vaart, Hardinxveld-Giessendam Polderweg and Hardinxveld-Giessendam De Bruin. It concerns relatively coarse ware mostly tempered with stone grit and built-up with small coils using U-technique. Morphological evidence is rare due to the site characteristics (all but Bronneger are settlements). In general the pots are S-shaped, but open and closed forms are found as well. The pots have round, point or pointed bases. The occurrence of knobs is another characteristic. Decoration is rare.
There has been debate on the relations between Swifterbant and Ertebølle ceramics. It is concluded here that these should be considered two separate traditions. This conclusion is based on technological differences (U-technique for Swifterbant versus H-technique for Ertebølle), the absence of lamps in Swifterbant assemblages, the relatively numerous Swifterbant assemblages (versus the limited numbers of vessels in Ertebølle sites) indicating a different role ceramics played in society. Furthermore the earliest Swifterbant ceramics predate the ceramic Ertebølle phase indicating that the inspiration for the Swifterbant ceramic tradition may not be found in the Ertebølle culture. It is proposed here that the Bandceramic tradition was the source of inspiration. Functional analysis is needed to understand the role of this new type of material culture in the Late Mesolithic hunter-gather societies of the early Swifterbant culture.

In my PhD thesis I aim to bridge the gap between the site-oriented reports and the general supra-regional discussions of the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition through a systematic description of the material remains from the sites of the Swifterbant Culture by means of a regional study. A further focus is on the social relations between neighbouring cultures in the German Rhineland and Denmark, as it appears from the material legacy, resulting in a discussion of the nature of the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in northwestern Europe from a long-term perspective.

The centuries after the levee occupation at Swifterbant (4300–4000 BC) and before the start of the TRB West group in the Netherlands around 3400/3300 BC are relatively sparse in terms of archaeological remains.
This article presents the available ceramic evidence from the major assemblages. On the basis of this Late Swifterbant material schemes are presented on the chronological development and regional variation of the pottery of the Swifterbant culture.

In this article the introduction of pottery during the Late Mesolithic Swifterbant
culture (c. 6000 BP) is discussed. Special reference is made to Holocene landscape developments, the evidence for fishing, and problems associated with the interpretation of spatio-temporal patterning in radiocarbon dates.

In the Swifterbant area in The Netherlands, a complete Neolithic landscape is preserved, buried in a wetland environment. A dozen sites (dating from ca. 4300–4000 cal. BC) on levees of a former creek system are characterized by a black layer containing large amounts of carbonized plant remains, burnt bone, flint and pottery. These sites are usually interpreted as occupation sites with accumulated refuse of a society in transition from a Mesolithic to a Neolithic lifestyle (hunting and herding), in an area that was too wet for crops.
In the context of a new research campaign in the area, we investigated the site- and land-use on two locations (S2 and S4) using micromorphological techniques.
On S2, the soil matrix in the archaeological horizon has a heterogeneous, non-sedimentary appearance due to the ubiquitous presence of rounded and subrounded aggregates. These aggregates indicate that the sediment was disturbed after deposition, but it is unclear by what human activity. This disturbance is not restricted to the archaeological site horizon, but extends also into the under- and overlying layers.
On S4, three layers can be distinguished. Only the lower and central parts are usually regarded as archaeological layers. The lower layer shows thorough mixing of the (partly decalcified) groundmass and the incorporation of anthropogenic materials (carbonized plant remains, burnt bone, etc.). Most probably, the thorough mixing is a result of tillage. The central layer consists of thinly laminated phytoliths and carbonized plant remains with ample fragments of (burnt) bone, angular sediment clods and some dog coprolites.
Mineral sediments are absent. Apparently, the layer was formed by human activities that resulted in a massive accumulation of burnt organic materials and anthropogenic debris. The preservation of the microlayering formed by phytoliths and carbonized is remarkable, since trampling would have deformed or disturbed the layering. The surprising conclusion therefore has to be that this location was not the main settlement area—as was implicitly thought until now. Rather, the area should be interpreted as a location where specific activities resulted in the accumulation of burnt plant material, e.g. a waste dump. The upper layer again has indications of anthropogenic soil disturbance. Samples from the basin adjacent to the levee site show sediments that are deformed by trampling. The transition of the site to the channel shows no signs of trampling, but rather interfingering of site layers with channel sediments. Lack of trampling in the central zone of S4 and the adjacent channel shore is at odds with the classical interpretation that the site represents a settlement area. The black layers that up till now were thought to encompass a complete settlement, could very well be a very prominent part of larger sites with remains of human activities during the Neolithic.

The transition to early agriculture on the North European Plain is a much debated issue in which emphasis is placed on the available pollen evidence. It has been suggested that cereal cultivation was probably practiced in the upland areas and surplus yields were brought to the wetland sites. An
alternative model that gives special attention to crop assemblages, flooding, and yields and is illustrated with evidence from the type-location sites of Swifterbant, dated between 4300 and 4000 BC, envisions cereal cultivation in the wetlands themselves. Evidence for early agriculture is found in particular in pollen diagrams, diatom analysis, and large numbers of cereal remains. It appears that small-scale cereal cultivation may have been possible and attractive in addition to hunting and gathering in wetland sites because of their variety of biotopes, including areas suitable for agriculture.

In this contribution, the Archaeological Heritage Management (AHM) of stone age occupation in the cov-ered landscape of the Dutch province Flevoland is presented. It focuses on the research strategy, project organisation and stone age site location models. In the final part of the contribution, a case study from the municipality of Zeewolde is presented. It is argued that assessment based on borings is a necessary first phase of AHM leading to a relatively detailed geological map. On the basis of this map, zones with expected high site density might be selected. These zones are defined for two periods: for the first, the research area can be assigned a Pleistocene upland and site location models from other areas might be used. Later, occupation took place in a drowning landscape. The rise in the ground water level lead to changes in flora and fauna and thus also to shifts in site location. It is suggested that for this period, a series of maps with expected site density should be developed on the basis of the shift in the location of the gradient zones. These maps with relatively high temporal resolution might form the basis of a more specific stone age-AHM.

This monograph explores the biography of an enigmatic type of material culture: the perforated wedges from the Early Neolithic (c. 5000-4000 cal. BC) in northwestern Europe. These themes are explored in a multi-facetted approach which compare the finds from three regions: the so-called source societies in Germany where the wedges were produced and two areas in which these items are found as a result of exchange. It concerns southern Scandinavia (the Ertebølle culture) and the Netherlands (the Swifterbant culture).

This paper presents an overview of the pottery of the Swifterbant culture (5000-3400 cal BC). The Swifterbant culture is found in north-western Europe, between the river Scheldt in Belgium and the river Elbe in northern Germany. Most sites are located in the wetland areas of the Netherlands; its distribution across the sandy areas is as yet more difficult to determine due to the restricted preservation conditions. The production of pottery started in the Late Mesolithic; the source of inspiration for this innovation is still under debate. The debate focuses on the question to what extent contacts with LBK farmers and neighbouring hunter-gatherer groups is of relevance. A second point of discussion is the importance of the base morphology. The ceramics of the middle phase (4600-3900/3800 cal BC) reveal regional styles within a technological and morphological tradition. The late phase (3900/3800-3400 cal BC) seems restricted to the northern part of the Netherlands and northern Germany; in the southern part of the Netherlands the Hazendonk group developed.

"In this paper I focus on the production of pottery within the Hazendonk group. The intriguing presence of two pottery groups at the Middle Neolithic coastal site of Schipluiden is the starting point for this paper. On the basis of intra-site and inter-site comparison the meaning of these pottery groups is approached.
A first issue concerning the observed patterns is that of mobility. The coastal area of Schipluiden appears to have been a newly-settled area during the time of the Hazendonk group as no older coastal sites are known. The new settlers of the coastal area may have brought their Hazendonk ceramic tradition with them, developing the coastal styles in the following generations.
The second issue of relevance are the existence of exchange networks. The presence of flint artefacts made on exotic materials such as Rijckholt flints and quern stones indicate that in a network in which exchange and mobility are combined raw materials were transported to the coastal area.
The third issue to be discussed in relation to the observed pottery patterns is that of mode of production. Ethnographic literature provides us with various models in which degrees of production specialisation lead to notions of production at the level of a household, a family, ad hoc specialists or true specialists. It is difficult to relate these categories to the Hazendonk group as we are dealing with patterns in consumption rather than production. The lack of spatial patterning at Schipluiden indicates that there is no household consumption, but this does not indicate that household production should be dismissed. The most extensively excavated sites suggest the existence of settlements in which a small group of households lived together. Diatom analysis suggests both local production and consumption. Another aspect of relevance here is the lack of stylistic development through time across the entire Hazendonk area. This conservative technological tradition indicates that the emblemic value of this category of material culture is very restricted and the pottery is foremost a functional artefact group.
One potential explanation of the observed pottery groups of Schipluiden might be proposed on the basis of these three issues. The coastal area was colonised by people of the Hazendonk group living further inland. After settling contacts between the potters in the coastal area and those beyond were restricted, resulting in regionally preferred decorative schemes. It appears that in the supra-regional exchange of marriage partners potters were not exchanged. Instead, a ceramolocal marriage system developed in which partners married into the potter’s family. The occurrence of two pottery groups at Schipluiden and
Ypenburg is evidence of two contemporary traditions – microstyles – providing pottery for all households. A final topic to be discussed is that of the gender of the potters. On a general level it is evident that whereas flint procurement is related to mobility and exchange due to the absence of raw materials in the coastal area, pottery production is a local activity. This suggests that gender roles may be related to degree of mobility. In my opinion, it is a matter of personal preference to identify the ceramolocal pottery tradition with a matrilocal exchange system in which ‘mobile males’ marry into their wives’ family or the other way around."

The pottery assemblage from Schipluiden is the largest Hazendonk assemblage available. This, and the phasing of the site’s occupation, allowed a detailed analysis of the chronological development of the pottery. The analysis showed that there are two Hazendonk 3 wares, distinguishable on the basis of tempering agents, wall thickness and wall decoration. The first, dominant ware is mainly quartz-tempered, relatively thick-walled and often decorated. The second ware is shell-tempered, relatively thin-walled and rarely decorated. Both wares were probably produced locally.

If the effect of large-scale erosion in the Dutch coastal area is taken into account, it has to be concluded that the duration of the process of neolithization is not easily determined for the Dutch delta. At the moment, the wealth of zoological information does not allow an interpretation in terms of the three phases of Zvelibil’s availability model because we have to realise that one coastal site dated older than ca. 4000 BC might alter our interpretation drastically. It remains unknown whether coastal sites from the Swifterbant culture would have been similar to their Vlaardingen counterparts in terms of their subsistence base. This means that the long transition model and the short transition model are equally valid.
This situation will remain so until older beach ridges are discovered. In this context, the densely populated Southwestern part of the Randstad (the area between The Hague, Rotterdam and Hook) is a blessing in disguise. On the one hand, a major part of the archaeological sites is probably already destroyed as a result of both natural and human activities. On the other hand, major infra-structural projects in this area will lead to new discoveries of well-preserved archaeological sites deep in the subsoil, which would otherwise remain undiscovered.

This artcile adresse the influence of the Ertebølle culture in the research history of the Dutch Neolithic. It was used as analogy for two phases of newly discovered archaeological phenomena: the Vlaardingen culture (in the 1950's) and the Swifterbant culture (1960's-1970's).

"The imagery of prehistory. Playing with cavemen.
Representations of prehistory should by definition be based on archaeological research. It is interesting to note that the translation of scientific insights into other domains reduces the variability of the archaeological record to a limited number of stereotypes. In this paper, toy representations of prehistoric people are analysed. It is clear that prehistoric man is reduced to the ‘caveman’ stereotype which includes dark hair, animal-skin garb and club. It is proposed that the Flintstones comics and TV series served as the main source of inspiration for this rather uniform group of toys."