Inventing the Neolithic? Putting evidence-based interpretation back into the study of faunal remains from causewayed enclosures.
Parmenter, Pip C.R.
Johnson, Emily V.
Outram, Alan K
Taylor & Francis (Routledge)
Reason for embargo
Publisher embargo 18 months
The paper argues that our current understanding of the animal bones from causewayed enclosure sites in Britain is flawed. During the 1980-90s, a number of key interpretations, still frequently espoused, were based more upon anecdote and theory-driven assertion than on empirical evidence. An example is that evidence of bone processing (butchery and bone fracture) does not feature heavily in the faunal record from causewayed enclosures. Using data from the sites of Etton and Staines, this view must now be questioned. Both butchery and peri-mortem bone fracture are present in these assemblages in substantial quantities. These sites are compared with Ludwinowo 7, a Linearbandkeramik settlement site in Poland and there are considerable similarities between the three different sites. This suggests possibility that the broader economic utility of animal bone assemblages at causewayed enclosures has been underestimated, having been, up to now, regarded as ‘not indicative of domestic settlement’.
This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in World Archaeology on 2015, available online: http://wwww.tandfonline.com/10.1080/00438243.2015.1072476
Published online: 11 August 2015