Organic residue analysis shows sub-regional patterns in the use of pottery by Northern European hunter-gatherers.
Early Neolithic
Late Mesolithic
circum-Baltic area
cooking pottery
hunter–gatherers
organic residue analysis
Journal
Royal Society open science
ISSN: 2054-5703
Titre abrégé: R Soc Open Sci
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101647528
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2020
Apr 2020
Historique:
received:
18
11
2019
accepted:
27
03
2020
entrez:
21
5
2020
pubmed:
21
5
2020
medline:
21
5
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The introduction of pottery vessels to Europe has long been seen as closely linked with the spread of agriculture and pastoralism from the Near East. The adoption of pottery technology by hunter-gatherers in Northern and Eastern Europe does not fit this paradigm, and its role within these communities is so far unresolved. To investigate the motivations for hunter-gatherer pottery use, here, we present the systematic analysis of the contents of 528 early vessels from the Baltic Sea region, mostly dating to the late 6th-5th millennium cal BC, using molecular and isotopic characterization techniques. The results demonstrate clear sub-regional trends in the use of ceramics by hunter-gatherers; aquatic resources in the Eastern Baltic, non-ruminant animal fats in the Southeastern Baltic, and a more variable use, including ruminant animal products, in the Western Baltic, potentially including dairy. We found surprisingly little evidence for the use of ceramics for non-culinary activities, such as the production of resins. We attribute the emergence of these sub-regional cuisines to the diffusion of new culinary ideas afforded by the adoption of pottery, e.g. cooking and combining foods, but culturally contextualized and influenced by traditional practices.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32431883
doi: 10.1098/rsos.192016
pii: rsos192016
pmc: PMC7211838
doi:
Banques de données
figshare
['10.6084/m9.figshare.c.4938162']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
192016Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn
Informations de copyright
© 2020 The Authors.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
We declare we have no competing interests.
Références
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2016 Apr 12;113(15):3991-6
pubmed: 27001829
Proc Biol Sci. 2014 Feb 12;281(1780):20132372
pubmed: 24523264
Nat Plants. 2016 Dec 19;3:16194
pubmed: 27991880
Sci Rep. 2017 Jul 26;7(1):6633
pubmed: 28747692
Nature. 2013 Jan 24;493(7433):522-5
pubmed: 23235824
Nature. 2008 Sep 25;455(7212):528-31
pubmed: 18690215
Archaeol Anthropol Sci. 2019;11(8):4011-4024
pubmed: 31565086
Proc Biol Sci. 2019 Jan 16;286(1894):20182347
pubmed: 30963881
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2016 Nov 29;113(48):13594-13599
pubmed: 27849595
Nat Commun. 2018 Oct 3;9(1):4064
pubmed: 30283003
Sci Rep. 2015 Nov 27;5:17352
pubmed: 26611741
PLoS One. 2013 Aug 21;8(8):e70583
pubmed: 23990910
Proc Biol Sci. 2014 Sep 22;281(1791):20140819
pubmed: 25080345
Nat Commun. 2013;4:2348
pubmed: 23982268
Nature. 2013 Apr 18;496(7445):351-4
pubmed: 23575637
PLoS One. 2014 Feb 13;9(2):e87436
pubmed: 24551057
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018 Jul 31;115(31):7931-7936
pubmed: 30012598
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Nov 1;108(44):17910-5
pubmed: 22025697
Science. 1998 Nov 20;282(5393):1478-81
pubmed: 9822376
Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom. 2012 Oct 15;26(19):2359-64
pubmed: 22956328
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Feb 18;100(4):1524-9
pubmed: 12574520
Nature. 2015 Nov 12;527(7577):226-30
pubmed: 26560301