Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T16:59:14.306Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Crafting axes, producing meaning. Neolithic axe depositions in the northern Netherlands

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 2008

Abstract

This paper deals with Dutch flint axe depositions associated with the Middle Neolithic Funnelbeaker Culture (Trichterbecher Kultur – TRB). Large flint axes were acquired as finished products from southern Scandinavia and were deposited in specific, waterlogged places in the landscape. The application of new empirical research techniques has revealed unexpected patterns of use and treatment of these axes. Moreover, contextual analysis shows significant differences in terms of size and wear patterns compared with axes retrieved from megalithic tombs. The evidence strongly suggests that the observed differences may have been linked to completely different use-lives between the two classes of axes. Drawing on ethnographic analogy, it will be argued that the large flint axes deposited in natural places in the landscape became animated with special powers through the act of production. Given the highly ritualized treatment that accompanied their exchange, they must have played an important role in TRB cosmology.

Type
Notes
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Achterop, S.H., 1960: Een depot van vuurstenen bijlen bij Reest, Nieuwe Drentse Volksalmanak, 179–89.Google Scholar
Akerman, K., Fullagar, R. and van Gijn, A., 2002: Weapons and wunan. Production, function and exchange of Kimberley points, Australian Aboriginal studies 1, 1342.Google Scholar
Bakker, J.A., 1979: The TRB west group. Studies in the chronology and geography of the makers of Hunebeds and Tiefstich pottery, Ph.D. thesis, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Bakker, J.A., 1982: TRB settlement patterns on the Dutch sandy soils, Analecta praehistorica Leidensia 15, 87124.Google Scholar
Bakker, R., 2003: The emergence of agriculture on the Drenthe Plateau. A palaeobotanical study supported by high-resolution 14C dating, Groningen (Archäologische Berichte 16).Google Scholar
Barrett, J.C., and Fewster, K.J., 2000: Intimacy and structural transformation. Giddens and archaeology, in Holtorf, C. and Karlsson, H. (eds), Philosophy and archaeological practice. Perspectives for the 21st century, Göteborg, 2538.Google Scholar
Beuker, J., 2005: Imports from all quarters. Stone axes in the northern Netherlands, in Louwe Kooijmans, L.P., van den Broeke, P.W., Fokkens, H. and van Gijn, A. (eds), The prehistory of the Netherlands, Amsterdam, 277–80.Google Scholar
Bradley, R., 1990: The passage of arms. An archaeological analysis of prehistoric hoard and votive deposits, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Bradley, R., 2000: An archaeology of natural places, London.Google Scholar
Bradley, R., 2005: Ritual and domestic life in prehistoric Europe, London.Google Scholar
Bradley, R., and Edmonds, M. (eds), 1993: Interpreting the axe trade. Production and exchange in Neolithic Britain, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Brück, J., 1999: Ritual and rationality. Some problems of interpretation in European archaeology, European journal of archaeology 2, 313–44.Google Scholar
Burton, J., 1984: Quarrying in a tribal society, World archaeology 16, 234–47.Google Scholar
Childe, V.G., 1952 (1949): Social worlds of knowledge, in Cumberlege, G. (ed.), Hobhouse Memorial Lectures 1941–1950, London.Google Scholar
Ebbesen, K., 1982: Yngre stenalders depotfund som bebyggelseshistorisk kildemateriale, in Thrane, H. (ed.), Om Yngre stenalders bebyggelseshistorie, Odense, 6079.Google Scholar
Fontijn, D.R., 2002: Sacrificial landscapes. Cultural biographies of persons, objects and ‘natural’ places in the Bronze Age of the southern Netherlands, c.2300–600 BC, Leiden (Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia 3334).Google Scholar
Gell, A., 1992: The technology of enchantment and the enchantment of technology, in Coote, J. and Shelton, A. (eds), Anthropology, art and aesthetics, Oxford, 4063.Google Scholar
Gell, A., 1998: Art and agency. An anthropological theory, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giddens, A., 1984: The constitution of society, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Godelier, M., 1990 (1986): The making of great men. Male domination and power among the New Guinea Baruya, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Godelier, M., 1999: The enigma of the gift, Chicago.Google Scholar
Graf, F., 1993: Greek mythology. An introduction, London.Google Scholar
Hampton, O.W., 1999: Culture of stone. Sacred and profane uses of stone among the Dani, Texas (Texas A & M University Anthropology Series, 2).Google Scholar
Harvey, G., 2006: Animism. Respecting the living world, New York.Google Scholar
Helms, M.W., 1988: Ulysses’ sail. An ethnographic odyssey of power, knowledge, and geographical distance, Princeton.Google Scholar
Ingold, T., 2007: Materials against materiality, Archaeological dialogues 14, 116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lanting, J.N., and Van Der Plicht, J., 2000: De 14C chronologie van de nederlandse pre- en protohistorie III. Neolithicum, Palaeohistoria 41–42, 1110.Google Scholar
Malinowski, B., 1961 (1922): Argonauts of the western Pacific. An account of native enterprise and adventure in the archipelagoes of Melanesian New Guinea, London.Google Scholar
Mauss, M., 2002 (1924): The gift. The form and reason for exchange in archaic societies, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Midgley, M.S., 1992: TRB culture. The first farmers of the north European plain, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Paton, R., 1994: Speaking through stones. A study from northern Australia, World archaeology 26 (2), 172–83.Google Scholar
Ray, J.D., 1986: The emergence of writing in Egypt, World archaeology 17 (3), 307–16.Google Scholar
Rudebeck, E., 1998: Flint extraction, axe offering, and the value of cortex, in Edmonds, M. and Richards, C. (eds), Understanding the Neolithic of north-western Europe, Glasgow, 312–27.Google Scholar
Spek, T., 2004: Het Drentse esdorpen-landschap. Een historisch-geografische studie, Utrecht.Google Scholar
Stout, D., 2002: Skill and cognition in stone tool production. An ethnographic case study from Irian Jaya, Current anthropology 43 (5), 693722.Google Scholar
Ter Wal, A., 1996: Een onderzoek naar de depositie van vuurstenen bijlen, Palaeohistoria 37–38, 127–58.Google Scholar
Tilley, C., 1996: An ethnography of the Neolithic. Early prehistoric societies in southern Scandinavia, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Tilley, C., 2004: The materiality of stone, Oxford.Google Scholar
Tomsen, C.J., 1845: Om den nordiske oldtids broncearbeider, Antiquariske tidsskrift 1, 171–75.Google Scholar
Van Gijn, A.L., 1990: The wear and tear of flint. Principles of functional analysis to Dutch Neolithic assemblages, Leiden (Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia 22).Google Scholar
Van Gijn, A.L., in preparation: The flourish and demise of an old technology. The meaning of flint for Neolithic and Bronze Age societies in the Netherlands.Google Scholar
Weiner, A.B., 1985: Inalienable wealth, American ethnologist 12 (2), 210–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiner, A.B., 1992: Inalienable possessions. The paradox of keeping-while-giving, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Wentink, K., 2006: Ceci n'est pas une hache. Neolithic depositions in the northern Netherlands, Leiden M.Phil. thesis (http://edna.itor.org/nl/projecten/a00308/).Google Scholar
Wentink, K., and van Gijn, A., 2008: Neolithic depositions in the northern Netherlands, in Hamon, C. and Benedicte, B. (eds), Hoards from the Neolithic to the Metal Ages. Technical and codified practices. Session of XIth Annual Meeting of the European Association of Archaeologists, Oxford (BAR International series 1758), 2943.Google Scholar
Worsaae, J.J.A., 1866: Om nogle mosefund fra bronzealder, Aarbøger for Nordisk Oldkyndighed og Historie, 313–26.Google Scholar