More Sophisticated Models Of The Bronze Age

Eurogenes calls attention to a notable new ancient DNA paper in a post entitled "Not Bell Beaker, not Corded Ware, but . . . the SGBR Complex."

Since aDNA research suggested a marked gene influx from Eastern into Central Europe in the 3rd millennium bc, outdated, simplistic narratives of massive migrations of closed populations have re-appeared in archaeological discussions. A more sophisticated model of migration from the steppes was proposed recently by Kristiansen et al. As a reaction to that proposal, this paper aims to contribute to this ongoing debate by refining the latter model, better integrating archaeological data and anthropological knowledge. It is argued that a polythetic classification of the archaeological material in Central Europe in the 3rd millennium reveals the presence of a new complex of single grave burial rituals which transcends the traditional culture labels. Genetic steppe ancestry is mainly connected to this new kind of burials, rather than to Corded Ware or Bell Beaker materials. Here it is argued that a polythetic view on the archaeological record suggests more complicated histories of migration, population mixtures and interaction than assumed by earlier models, and ways to better integrate detailed studies of archaeological materials with a deeper exploration of anthropological models of mobility and social group composition and the molecular biological data are explored.

Furholt, Martin, Re-integrating Archaeology: A Contribution to aDNA Studies and the Migration Discourse on the 3rd Millennium BC in Europe, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, Published online: 10 June 2019, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/ppr.2019.4

The concept of a population genetic and burial practice movement that corresponds only partially with distributions of Bell Beaker and Corded Ware relics is attractive in the wake of new ancient DNDA data showing that Iberian Bell Beakers have less steppe ancestry and more indigenous ancestry than other Continental and British Isle Bell Beaker individuals.

The abstract is referring to Kristian Kristiansen, who studies the Bronze Age at the University of Gothenburg in Sweden, who is referred to in the journal Nature as on of the field's biggest cheerleaders for Ancient DNA technology, who observes that: “Suddenly there was a lot of free intellectual time to start thinking about prehistoric societies and how they are organized.” (The linked March 2018 review article wonderfully contextualizes the latest movements in the field.) Kristiansen is the lead archaeology in the Copenhagen group, and is associated with a Bronze Age migration model summarized in the following map from a 2018 presentation entitled "The Indo-Europeanization of Europé."

At least one important conclusion in this presentation, which was plausible for a long time, now seems implausible in light of genetic evidence that Davidski at Eurogenes, in particular, has given a great deal of attention.

The Maikop culture prospered from this Mesopotamian venture for metal, and soon expanded into the steppe, where is became the Kurgan or Yamna culture. . . . More and more prehistoric mines, copper and gold, are being recorded and excavated in the Caucasus to support its bridging role between Mesopotamia/Anatolia and the steppe during this period. . . . A recently published Maikop tumulus used stelae and decorated stone slabs for the construction of the chamber, a tradition (stelae) to be found later also in the steppe. These stelae had apparently been reused from older burials, as a demonstra7on of power

The archaeological and ancient DNA evidence increasingly points to the Balkans (with a nexus localized roughly to contemporary Moldova) as the source of that technology in the Yamna culture, although the Mesopotamian-Anatolian-Steppe archaeological links aren't, as observed, entirely absent.

One possible alternative explanation for the archaeological links between the steppe cultures and the Maikop culture, which would be more consistent with the genetic evidence, is that the direction of archaeological influence ran in the other direction, from steppe to Maikop, rather than the other way around as suggested by Kristiansen.

On the other hand, I do credit Kristiansen for two very important thing: (1) an exceptional level of interdisciplinary analysis that is sadly lacking in a lot of ancient DNA work, and (2) a willingness to connect the dots to create plausible narratives even if there is some possibility that they could be incorrect in some respects. And, some parts of the analysis are, in my humble opinion, in light over the evidence correct even though many scholars aren't willing to stick their necks out to say so in such a clear way:

Bell Beaker groups migrated along the Atlantic seaboard, but also into Central northwestern Europe, where they met Corded Ware groups that stopped their expansion and took over the Bell Beaker package before migrating to England.

I also appreciate the skepticism about linguistic assumptions evidenced in statements like this one:

The western expansion of supposed PIE speaking Yamna groups into the Carpathians and their influence areas, versus supposed Bell Beaker groups of supposed proto-Celtic speaking/Latin speaking populations. Corresponds with gene flow of 1rb male lines from the steppe to England 

The following map of Celtic toponyms is particularly interesting:

The summer 2018 presentation sums up with these rather cryptic statements:

The three models: one for each millennium BCE that contributed to formation and distribution Celtic languages 

• 3rd millennium Beaker migrations to UK and north Iberia spread proto italo-celtic 

• 2nd millennium Bronze Age Atlantic trade systems spread languages of proto-Celtic south but interacted with proto-Germanic speaking population to the north 

• 1st millennium: La Tene migrations from Gaul/Belgium to UK spread a Gaulish version of Celtic to Ireland/UK 

• Thus, this later spread came to dominate. It explains why insular Celtic has virtually no connections to the maritime world. 

The new paper from June 2019 does not appear to be open access, but the bibliography, reproduced below the fold without reformatting, is a nice overview of the major recent work in the field.

Allentoft, M.E. et al. 2015. Population genomics of Bronze Age Eurasia. Nature 522(7555), 167–72CrossRef | Google Scholar | PubMed

Anthony, D.W. 2007. The Horse, the Wheel, and Language: how Bronze-Age riders from the Eurasian steppes shaped the modern world.Princeton: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar

Artemenko, I.I. 1987. Kul’tury shnurovoy keramiki: srednedneprovskaya, prikarpatskaya, gorodoksko-zdobickaya, stzhizhovskaya. InArkheologiya SSSR. Epokha bronzy lesnoy polosy SSSR, 35–51. Moskva: Russian Academy of SciencesGoogle Scholar

Beckerman, S.M. 2015. Corded Ware Coastal Communities: using ceramic analysis to reconstruct third millennium BC societies in the Netherlands. Leiden: Sidestone PressGoogle Scholar

Behrens, H. 1973. Die Jungsteinzeit im Mittelelbe-Saale-Gebiet. Berlin: Deutsche Verlag der WiesenschaftenGoogle Scholar

Bentley, R.A. 2007. Mobility, specialisation and community diversity in the Linearbandkeramik: isotopic evidence from the skeletons. In Whittle, A., and Cummings, V. (eds), Going over. The Mesolithic–Neolithic Transition in North-Western Europe, 117–40. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar

Brandt, G. et al. 2013. Ancient DNA reveals key stages in the formation of Central European mitochondrial genetic diversity. Science342(6155), 257–61CrossRef | Google Scholar | PubMed

Brandt, G., Knipper, C., Nicklisch, N., Ganslmeier, R., Klamm, M. & Alt, K.W. 2014. Settlement Burials at the Karsdorf LBK Site, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany: Biological Ties and Residential Mobility. In Whittle, A., and Bickle, P. (eds) Early Farmers. The View from Archaeology and Science, 95–114. Oxford: British Academy. Available at:http://www.britishacademypublications.com/view/10.5871/bacad/9780197265758.001.0001/upso-9780197265758-chapter-6[Accessed?]Google Scholar

Brozio, J.P. 2016. Megalithanlagen und Siedlungsmuster im trichterbecherzeitlichen Ostholstein. Bonn: HabeltGoogle Scholar

Brozio, J.P., Kirleis, W. & Müller, J. 2013. Jungsteinzeit zwischen Haus und Freifläche – Oldenburg-Dannau LA 77. Archäologische Nachrichten aus Schleswig-Holstein 19, 25–7Google Scholar

Buchvaldek, M., Moucha, V., Popelka, M. & Vojtěchovská, I. 1997. Katalogy šňůrové keramiky v Čechách XI-XIV. Kladensko, Slánsko, Kralupsko a Praha-západ– Kataloge der Schnurkeramik in Böhmen XI-XIV. Die Räume von Kladno, Slaný, Kralupy n. Vlt. und Praha-West. Praehistorica 22, Varia Archaeologica 7, 113–255Google Scholar

Burmeister, S. & Müller-Scheeßel, N. 2006. Soziale Gruppen – kulturelle Grenzen: die Interpretation sozialer Identitäten in der prähistorischen Archäologie. Münster: WaxmannGoogle Scholar

Cameron, C.M. 2013. How people moved among ancient societies: broadening the view. American Anthropologist 115(2), 218–31CrossRef | Google Scholar

Charniauski, M. 2011. Belarusian wetland settlements in prehistory. Wetland settlements in northern Belarus. In Prackėnaitė, E.(ed.), Wetland Settlements of the Baltic. A Prehistoric Perspective, 113–32. Vilnius: Center of Underwater Archaeology. Available at:https://www.academia.edu/37345867/Belarusian_Wetland_Settlements_in_Prehistory_Wetland_settlements_in_Northern_Belarus[Accessed November 20, 2018]Google Scholar

Childe, V.G. 1929. The Danube in Prehistory. Oxford: ClarendonGoogle Scholar

Clarke, D.L. 1968. Analytical Archaeology. London: MethuenGoogle Scholar

Dörfler, W. & Müller, J. 2008. Umwelt – Wirtschaft – Siedlungen im dritten vorchristlichen Jahrtausend Mitteleuropas und Südskandinaviens [Tagung Kiel 2005]. Neumünster: WachholtzGoogle Scholar

Dornheim, S., Liessner, B., Metzler, S., Müller, A., Ortolf, S., Sprenger, S., Stadelbacher, A., Strahm, C., Wolters, K. & Wiermann, R.R.2005. Sex und gender, Alter und Kompetenz, Status und Prestige: Soziale Differenzierung im 3. vorchristlichen Jahrtausend. InMüller, J. (ed.), Alter und Geschlecht in ur- und Frühgeschichtlichen Gesellschaften, 27–71. Bonn: Habelt, Universitätsforschungen zur Prähistorischen ArchäologieGoogle Scholar

Dresely, V. 2004. Schnurkeramik und Schnurkeramiker im Taubertal. Stuttgart: TheissGoogle Scholar

Eggert, M.K.H., Müller-Scheessel, N. & Samida, S. 2012. Prähistorische Archäologie: Konzepte und Methoden 4., überarb. Aufl. Tübingen:AttemptoGoogle Scholar

Eisenmann, S. et al. 2018. Reconciling material cultures in archaeology with genetic data: The nomenclature of clusters emerging from archaeogenomic analysis. Scientific Reports 8(1), 13003CrossRef | Google Scholar | PubMed

Fischer, U. 1956. Die Gräber der Steinzeit im Saalegebiet. Studien über neolithische und frühbronzezeitliche Bestattungsformen in Sachsen-Thüringen. Berlin: de GruyterCrossRef | Google Scholar

Frînculeasa, A., Preda, B. & Heyd, V. 2015. Pit-Graves, Yamnaya and Kurgans along the lower Danube: disentangling IVth and IIIrd millennium bc burial customs, equipment and chronology. Praehistorische Zeitschrift 90(1–2), 45–113CrossRef | Google Scholar

Furholt, M. 2008a. Erscheinungen asynchroner kultureller Entwicklung am Übergang vom Spät- zum Endneolithikum in Mitteleuropa. Eine Untersuchung der Siedlungsfunde mit Schnurkeramik. In Dörfler, W., and Müller, J. (eds), Umwelt – Wirtschaft – Siedlungen im dritten Jahrtausend Mitteleuropas und Südskandinaviens. Internationale Tagung Kiel 4.–6. November 2005, 9–34.Neumünster: Offa-Bücher 84.Google Scholar

Furholt, M. 2008b. Pottery, cultures, people? The European Baden material re-examined. Antiquity 82, 617–28CrossRef | Google Scholar

Furholt, M. 2009. Die nördlichen Badener Keramikstile im Kontext des mitteleuropäischen Spätneolithikums (3650–2900 v. Chr.). Bonn:HabeltGoogle Scholar

Furholt, M. 2012. Die räumliche Struktur der entwickelten Trichterbecherkeramik: Eine quantitative Analyse stilistischer Ähnlichkeitsmuster. In Hinz, M. & Müller, J., (eds), Siedlung, Grabenwerk, Großsteingrab. Studien zu Gesellschaft, Wirtschaft und Umwelt der Trichterbechergruppen im nördlichen Miteleuropa. Frühe Monumentalität und soziale Differenzierung, 473–84. Bonn: HabeltGoogle Scholar

Furholt, M. 2014. Upending a ‘totality’: re-evaluating Corded Ware variability in Late Neolithic Europe. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 80, 67–86CrossRef | Google Scholar

Furholt, M. 2018a. Massive migrations? The impact of Recent aDNA studies on our view of third millennium Europe. European Journal of Archaeology 21(2), 159–91.CrossRef | Google Scholar

Furholt, M. 2018b. Translocal communities– exploring mobility and migration in sedentary societies of the European Neolithic and Early Bronze Age. Praehistorische Zeitschrift 92(2), 304–21CrossRef | Google Scholar

Gerling, C., Bánffy, E., Dani, J., Köhler, K., Kulcsár, G., Pike, A.W.G., Szeverénvi, V. & Heyd, V. 2012. Immigration and transhumance in the Early Bronze Age Carpathian Basin: the occupants of a kurgan. Antiquity 334, 1097–111CrossRef | Google Scholar

Goldberg, A., Günther, T., Rosenberg, N.A. & Jakobsson, M. 2017. Ancient X chromosomes reveal contrasting sex bias in Neolithic and Bronze Age Eurasian migrations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114(10), 2657–62CrossRef | Google Scholar | PubMed

Großmann, R. 2016. Das dialektische Verhältnis von Schnurkeramik und Glockenbecher zwischen Rhein und Saale. Bonn: HabeltGoogle Scholar

Haak, W., Brandt, G., de Jong, H.N., Meyer, C., Ganslmeier, R., Heyd, V., Hawkesworth, C., Pike, A.W.G., Meller, H. & Alt, K.W. 2008.Ancient DNA, Strontium isotopes, and osteological analyses shed light on social and kinship organization of the Later Stone Age.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105(47), 18226–31CrossRef | Google Scholar | PubMed

Haak, W. et al. 2015. Massive migration from the steppe was a source for Indo-European languages in Europe. Nature 522(7555),207–11CrossRef | Google Scholar

Hachem, L. & Hamon, C. 2014. Linear Pottery Culture household organisation. An economic model. In Whittle, A. and Bickle, P. (eds),Early Farmers. The View from Archaeology and Science, 159–80. Oxford: British Academy & Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar

Hafner, A. & Suter, P.J. 2003. Das Neolithikum in der Schweiz. www.jungsteinsite.de. 27 November 2003Google Scholar

Hansen, M. 1986. Enkeltgravskulturens bopladsfund fra Vesthimmerland of Tibe-Området. In Adamsen, C., and Ebbesen, K. (eds),Stridsøksetid i Sydskandinavien, 286–91. Copenhagen: Forhistorisk Arkaologisk Institut, Kobenhavns UniversitetGoogle Scholar

Hansen, K.P. 2003. Kultur und Kulturwissenschaft (3rd edn). Tübingen/Basel: Utb GmbhGoogle Scholar

Hecht, D. 2007. Das schnurkeramische Siedlungswesen im südlichen Mitteileuropa: eine Studie zu einer vernachlässigten Fundgattung im Übergang vom Neolithikum zur Bronzezeit. Heidelberg: UniversitätsbibliothekGoogle Scholar

Heyd, V. 2017. Kossinna’s smile. Antiquity 356, 348–59CrossRef | Google Scholar

Hillier, B. & Hanson, J. 1984. The Social Logic of Space. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRef | Google Scholar

Hofmann, D. 2015. What have genetics ever done for us? The implications of aDNA data for interpreting identity in Early Neolithic Central Europe. European Journal of Archaeology 18(3), 454–76CrossRef | Google Scholar

Hübner, E. 2005. Jungneolithische Gräber auf der jütischen Halbinsel. Typologische und chronologische Studien zur Einzelgrabkultur.Copenhagen: Det kongelige oldskriftselskabGoogle Scholar

Ion, A. 2017. How interdisciplinary is interdisciplinarity? Revisiting the impact of a DNA research for the archaeology of human remains. Current Swedish Archaeology 25, 177–98Google Scholar

Iversen, R. 2015. The Transformation of Neolithic Societies: An Eastern Danish Perspective on the 3rd Millennium bc. Højbjerg: Jutland Archaeological SocietyGoogle Scholar

Jacobs, J. 1991. Die Einzelgrabkultur in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. Schwerin: Archäologisches Landesmuseum Mecklenburg-VorpommernGoogle Scholar

Jones, S. 1996. Discourses of identity in the interpretation of the past. In Graves-Brown, P., Jones, S., & Gamble, C. (eds), Cultural Identity and Archaeology, 62–80. London/New York: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar

Kleijne, J.P. 2013. A Matter of Life and Death at Mienakker (the Netherlands): late Neolithic behavioural variability in a dynamic landscape.Amersfoort: Cultural Heritage Agency of the NetherlandsGoogle Scholar

Knipper, C., Mittnik, A., Massy, K., Kociumaka, C., Kucukkalipci, I., Masu, M., Wttenborn, S., Metz, S.E., Staskiewicz, A., Krause, J. &Stockhammer, P.W. 2017. Female exogamy and gene pool diversification at the transition from the Final Neolithic to the Early Bronze Age in central Europe. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114(38), 10083–8.CrossRef | Google Scholar | PubMed

Kolář, J. 2018. Archaeology of Local Interactions. Social and Spatial Aspects of the Corded Ware Communities in Moravia. Bonn: HabeltGoogle Scholar

Kossian, R. 2004. Die Untersuchungen in dem neolithischen ‘Huntedorf 1’ am Dümmer (Ldkr. Diepholz, Niedersachsen) in den Jahren 1938 bis 1940. Ein Zwischenbericht zum Stand der wissenschaftlichen Auswertung. In Beier, H.-J., and Einicke, R. (eds), Varia neolithica III, 75–99. Weissbach: Beiträge zur Ur- und Frühgeschichte MitteleuropasGoogle Scholar

Kossinna, G. 1919. Das Siegreiche Vordringen meiner wissenschaftlichen Anschauungen als Ergebnis meiner wissenschaftlichen Methode. Mannus 11/12, 396–404Google Scholar

Kristiansen, K., Allentoft, M.C., Frei, K.M., Iversen, R., Johannsen, N.N., Kroonen, G., Pospieszny, L., Price, T. D., Rasmussen, S., Sjögren,K.-G., Sikora, M. & Willersley, E. 2017. Re-theorising mobility and the formation of culture and language among the Corded Ware Culture in Europe. Antiquity 356, 334–47CrossRef | Google Scholar

Lazaridis, I. & Reich, D. 2017. Failure to replicate a genetic signal for sex bias in the steppe migration into Central Europe. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114, E3873–4. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1704308114CrossRef | Google Scholar | PubMed

Lüning, J. 1972. Zum Kulturbegriff im Neolithikum. Praehistorische Zeitschrift 47, 145–73CrossRef | Google Scholar

Maggetti, M. & Suter, P. 2017. Mineralogisch-petrographische und chemische Untersuchungen der Keramik. In Suter, P. (ed.), Um 2700 v. Chr. Wandel und Kontinuität in den Ufersiedlungen am Bielersee, 236–9. Bern: Archäologischer Dienst des Kantons BernGoogle Scholar

Makarewicz, C. 2013. A pastoralist manifesto: Breaking stereotypes and re-conceptualizing pastoralism in the Near Eastern Neolithic.Levant 45(2), 159–74CrossRef | Google Scholar

Malmström, H., Linderholm, A., Skoglund, P., Storå, J., Sjödin, P., Gilbert, M.T., Holmlund, G., Willerslev, E., Jakobsson, M., Lidén, K. &Götherström, A. 2015. Ancient mitochondrial DNA from the northern fringe of the Neolithic farming expansion in Europe sheds light on the dispersion process. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences 370(1660), p. 20130373; doi: 10.1098/rstb.2013.0373CrossRef | Google Scholar | PubMed

Matthias, W. 1982. Kataloge zur Mitteldeutschen Schnurkeramik T. 5. Mittleres Saalegebiet. Berlin: Deutscher Verlag der WissenschaftenGoogle Scholar

Müller, J. 2001. Soziochronologische Studien zum Jung- und Spätneolithikum im Mittelelbe-Saale-Gebiet (4100–2700 v. Chr.).Rahden/Westfalen: LeidorfGoogle Scholar

Müller, J. 2013. Kossinna, Childe and aDNA. Comments on the construction of identities. Current Swedish Archaeology 21, 35–7Google Scholar

Müller, J. & Peterson, R. 2015. Ceramics and society in Northern Europe. In Fowler, C., Harding, J., and Hofmann, D. (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Neolithic Europe, 573–604. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar

Nordqvist, K. & Häkälä, P. 2014. Distribution of Corded Ware in the areas north of the Gulf of Finland – an update. Estonian Journal of Archaeology 18(1), 3CrossRef | Google Scholar

Olalde, I. et al. 2018. The Beaker phenomenon and the genomic transformation of northwest Europe. Nature 555(7695), 190–6CrossRef | Google Scholar | PubMed

Pechtl, J. 2015. Linearbandkeramik pottery and society. In Fowler, C., Harding, J., and Hofmann, D. (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Neolithic Europe, 555–72. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar

Prescott, C. & Glørstad, H. 2015. Expanding 3rd millennium transformations: Norway. In Prieto Martínez, M.P. and Salanova, L. (eds),The Bell Beaker Transition in Europe: Mobility and local evolution during the 3rd millennium bc, 77–87. Oxford: Oxbow BooksGoogle Scholar

Rascovan, N., Sjögren, K.G., Kristiansen, K., Nielsen, R., Willerslev, E., Desnues, C. & Rasmussen, S. 2018. Emergence and spread of basal lineages of Yersinia pestis during the Neolithic decline. Cell 176(1–2), 295–305; doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2018.11.005CrossRef | Google Scholar | PubMed

Reich, D. 2018. Who We Are and How We Got Here: Ancient DNA and the New Science of the Human Past. New York: PantheonGoogle Scholar

Rimantienė, R. 1992. The Neolithic of the Eastern Baltic. Journal of World Prehistory 6(1), 97–143CrossRef | Google Scholar

Robb, J. & Harris, O.J.T. 2018. Becoming gendered in European prehistory: Was Neolithic gender fundamentally different? American Antiquity 83(1), 128–47CrossRef | Google Scholar

Roberts, B.W. & Vander Linden, M. (eds). 2011. Investigating Archaeological Cultures. New York: SpringerCrossRef | Google Scholar

Salzman, E. 2004. Poselenija kultury schnurowoi keramiku na territorii Kalinigradskoi oblasti. KalinigradGoogle Scholar

Sarauw, T. 2007. Danish Bell Beaker pottery and flint daggers – the display of social identities? European Journal of Archaeology 11(1),23–47CrossRef | Google Scholar

Schachner, G. 2012. Population Circulation and the Transformation of Ancient Zuni Communities. Tucson: University of Arizona PressGoogle Scholar

Schultrich, S. 2018. Das Jungneolithikum in Schleswig-Holstein. Leiden: Sidestone PressGoogle Scholar

Šebela, L. 1999. The Corded Ware Culture in Moravia and in the Adjacent Part of Silesia (Catalogue). Brno: Archeologický Ústav Akademie Věd České Republiky v BrněGoogle Scholar

Shennan, S. 2000. Population, culture history, and the dynamics of culture change. Current Anthropology 41(5), 811–35CrossRef | Google Scholar

Shishlina, N.I. 2008. Reconstruction of the Bronze Age of the Caspian Steppes: Life styles and life ways of pastoral nomads. Oxford: British Archaeological Report S1876Google Scholar

Shishlina, N., Sevastyanov, V. & Hedges, R.E.M. 2012. Isotope ratio study of Bronze Age samples from the Eurasian Caspian Steppes. In Kaiser, E., Burger, J., & Schier, W. (eds), Population Dynamics in Prehistory and Early History. New Approaches Using Stable Isotopes and Genetics, 177–97. Berlin/Boston: De GruyterGoogle Scholar

Sjögren, K.-G., Price, T.D. & Kristiansen, K. 2016. Diet and mobility in the Corded Ware of Central Europe. PLOS ONE 11(5), e0155083CrossRef | Google Scholar | PubMed

Skoglund, P., Malmström, H., Raghavan, M., Storå, J., Hall, P., Willerslev, E., Gilbert, M.T., Götherström, A. & Jakobsson, M. 2012.Origins and genetic legacy of Neolithic farmers and hunter-gatherers in Europe. Science 336(6080), 466–9CrossRef | Google Scholar

Skoglund, P., Malmström, H., Omrak, A., Raghavan, M., Valdiosera, C., Günther, T., Hall, P., Tambets, K., Parik, J., Sjögren, K.G., Apel, J.,Willerslev, E., Storå, J., Götherström, A. & Jakobsson, M. 2014. Genomic diversity and admixture differs for stone-age Scandinavian foragers and farmers. Science 344(6185), 747–50CrossRef | Google Scholar | PubMed

Strahl, E. 1990. Das Endneolithikum im Elb Weser Dreieck. Hildesheim: Veröffentlichungen der urgeschichtlichen Sammlungen des Landesmuseums zu Hannover 36Google Scholar

Strahm, C. 1971. Die Gliederung der Schnurkeramischen Kultur in der Schweiz. Bern: Stämpfli & CieGoogle Scholar

Strahm, C. 2010. Endneolithische Siedlungsmuster. In Matuschik, I., and Strahm, C. (eds), Vernetzungen. Aspekte siedlungsarchäologischer Forschung. Festschrift für Helmut Schlichterle zum 60. Geburtstag, 317–30. Freiburg: LavoriGoogle Scholar

Strahm, C. & Buchvaldek, M. 1991. Die kontinentaleuropäischen Gruppen der Kultur mit Schnurkeramik. Prague: Praehistorica 19Google Scholar

Strien, H.-C. 2005. Familientraditionen in der bandkeramischen Siedlung bei Vaihingen/Enz. In Lüning, J., and Frirdich, C. (eds), Die Bandkeramik im 21. Jahrhundert, 189–97. Rahden/Westfahlen: LeidorfGoogle Scholar

Suter, P. 2017. Um 2700 v. Chr. Wandel und Kontinuität in den Ufersiedlungen am Bielersee. Bern: Archäologischer Dienst des Kantons BernGoogle Scholar

Vander Linden, M. 2006. Le phénomène campaniforme dans l’Europe du 3ème millénaire avant notre ère: synthèse et nouvelles perspectives. Oxford: British Archaeological Report S1470Google Scholar

Vander Linden, M. 2015. Bell Beaker pottery and society. In Fowler, C., Harding, J., and Hofmann, D. (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Neolithic Europe, 605–20. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar

Vander Linden, M. 2016. Population history in third-millennium-bc Europe: assessing the contribution of genetics. World Archaeology 48(5), 714–28CrossRef | Google Scholar

Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRef| Google Scholar

Włodarczak, P. 2006. Kultura Ceramiki Sznurowej na Wyżynie Małopolskiej. Kraków: Instytut archeologii i etnologii Polskiej Akademii NaukGoogle Scholar

Zvelebil, M. & Pettitt, P. 2013. Biosocial archaeology of the Early Neolithic: Synthetic analyses of a human skeletal population from the LBK cemetery of Vedrovice, Czech Republic. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 32(3), 313–29CrossRef | Google Scholar