Institute of Archaeological Sciences, Prehistoric Archaeology, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Oeschger Centre for Climate Change Research (OCCR), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
PLoS One. 2020 Dec 28;15(12):e0243719. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0243719. eCollection 2020.
In archaeological research, changes in material culture and the evolution of styles are taken as major indicators for socio-cultural transformation. They form the basis for typo-chronological classification and the establishment of phases and periods. Central European Bronze Age material culture from burials reveals changes during the Bronze Age and represents a perfect case study for analyzing phenomena of cultural change and the adoption of innovation in the societies of prehistoric Europe. Our study focuses on the large-scale change in material culture which took place in the second millennium BC and the emergence at the same period of new burial rites: the shift from inhumation burials in flat graves to complex mounds and simple cremation burials. Paul Reinecke was the first to divide the European Bronze Age (EBA) into two phases, Bz A1 and A2. The shift from the first to the second phase has so far been ascribed to technical advances. Our study adopted an innovative approach to quantifying this phenomenon. Through regressive reciprocal averaging and Bayesian analysis of radiocarbon-dated grave contexts located in Switzerland and southern Germany, we modelled chronological changes in the material culture and changes in burial rites in these regions in a probabilistic way. We used kernel density models to summarize radiocarbon dates, with the aim of visualizing cultural changes in the third and second millennium BC. In 2015, Stockhammer et al. cast doubt on the chronological sequence of the Reinecke phases of the EBA on the basis of newly collected radiocarbon dates from southern Germany. Our intervention is a direct response to the results of that study. We fully agree with Stockhammer's et al. dating of the start of EBA, but propose a markedly different dating of the EBA/MBA transition. Our modelling of radiocarbon data demonstrates a statistically significant typological sequence of phases Bz A1, Bz A2 and Bz B and disproves their postulated chronological overlap. The linking of the archaeological relative-chronological system with absolute dates is of major importance to understanding the temporal dimension of the EBA phases.
在考古学研究中,物质文化的变化和风格的演变被视为社会文化转型的主要指标。它们构成了类型年代分类和阶段与时期建立的基础。从中欧墓葬出土的青铜时代物质文化揭示了青铜时代的变化,为分析史前欧洲社会的文化变迁和创新采用现象提供了一个完美的案例研究。我们的研究重点是公元前 2 千年发生的大规模物质文化变化,以及同期新的丧葬仪式的出现:从平葬到复杂土墩和简单火葬的转变。Paul Reinecke 是第一个将欧洲青铜时代 (EBA) 分为两个阶段,Bz A1 和 A2 的人。从第一阶段到第二阶段的转变迄今为止归因于技术进步。我们的研究采用了一种创新的方法来量化这一现象。通过对位于瑞士和德国南部的放射性碳定年墓葬背景进行回归递归平均和贝叶斯分析,我们以概率的方式模拟了这些地区物质文化和丧葬仪式的年代变化。我们使用核密度模型来总结放射性碳年代,目的是可视化公元前三千年和二千年的文化变化。2015 年,Stockhammer 等人基于从德国南部新收集的放射性碳年代,对 EBA 的 Reinecke 阶段的年代序列提出了质疑。我们的干预是对该研究结果的直接回应。我们完全同意 Stockhammer 等人对 EBA 开始的年代,但对 EBA/MBA 过渡的年代提出了明显不同的看法。我们对放射性碳数据的建模证明了 Bz A1、Bz A2 和 Bz B 阶段具有统计学上显著的类型序列,并反驳了它们假设的年代重叠。将考古相对年代系统与绝对日期联系起来,对于理解 EBA 阶段的时间维度至关重要。