Buy new:
$83.99$83.99
Arrives:
Friday, July 7
Ships from: Amazon.com Sold by: Amazon.com
Buy used: $44.19
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required. Learn more
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Europe in the Neolithic: The Creation of New Worlds (Cambridge World Archaeology) 2nd Edition
| Price | New from | Used from |
Purchase options and add-ons
- ISBN-100521449200
- ISBN-13978-0521449205
- Edition2nd
- PublisherCambridge University Press
- Publication dateJune 13, 1996
- LanguageEnglish
- Dimensions6.85 x 1.04 x 9.72 inches
- Print length460 pages
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on Amazon-
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
I could barely get through a chapter of this. Also, since it's out of print (I wonder why...), it was very expensive and now I can't resell it.
The strength of the book however is not the archaeological analysis, theories, or thoughts expressed concerning prehistoric Europe but rather the breadth of information presented from the initial contact that indigenous hunter-gatherer groups had with wayward farmers from the southeast (Balkans), and the material remains associated with such archaeological horizons onward c. 6000-2500 BC. So its a fairly decent overview in regards to the archaeological remains of prehistoric Europe particularly concerning animal depositions, pottery types, the nature of settlements, some mention here and there of burial characteristics, all framed within the light of Europe's gradual transition from a hunter-gather to agricultural landscape.
And of course as mentioned in a prior review, the main thesis was that the LBK horizon (Europe's first "widespread" archaeological horizon with "Neolithic traits" or, more bluntly, evidence of agricultural production and increased sedentary lifestyles) really was not the result of different population groups from the near east, but rather started by the same hunter gatherer's of paleolithic Europe who adopted the ways of migrant farmers coming from Anatolia to the Balkans (suggested in small numbers here) after a brief contact period, and the rest as they say is history.
The evidence for this according to Whittle is that the "values" expressed in the material remains of Neolithic Europe are essentially the same as those of the preceding communities of hunter-gatherer Europe. This is of course a vague notion as the "values" expressed in material culture, particularly from archaeological horizons that are thousands of years removed from modern day people, are really not that discernible and your average archaeologist today would still tell you the same. And so the focus of the book is very much the age old autochtonus development vs. migration theories for prehistoric Europe, in which autochtonus development is quite often overemphasized and migration viewed as a mostly dubious concept with some ever so slight nods given to it though mostly garnered with hyper-critical scrutiny.
And hence my title, "a product of its times", as the 90's saw the emergence of archaeologists who began publishing their own books on anti-migration concepts more than ever in an attempt to frame the prehistoric record in terms which they saw as less aggressive or dare I say PC. This was largely the result what happened both prior and during WWII within the field of archaeology, since these times witnessed the use and abuse of migration theories for nationalistic gain and hence the association of migrationalist banter as a reflectance of neo-nationalist-militaristic thought. Concepts like "long uninterpreted community values", in addition to emphasizing the egalitarian nature of hunter-gather Europe (see Tilley's book for this one) became a way of correcting some of the wrongs of the past.
However, autochtonus development can be used and abused as well, and moreover, the archaeological analysis luculently proving uninterrupted mostly non-mobile interactions within the confines of prehistoric Europe is nowhere to be found in this text. Such evidence for the authoritative pronouncement of autochtonus development rested during this time (the 90's) on emphasizing dating methods that suggested "gradual" development for the acceptance of agriculture. This is rather vague, sketchy ground to stand on since a date cannot show the qualitative nature of agriculture's appearance in an area and one must remember that this is simply a quantitative value for measuring time. Likewise, this book was published before the use of strontium isotope analysis, a method utilized on prehistoric human remains to effectively determine if people changed their location or not during their lifetime. Furthermore, aDNA, (used to determine biological kinship but also demographic change among today's researchers concerned with prehistory) was not in use either, and current genetic research does indeed suggest that the people of the LBK horizon descended from wayward agriculturalists with more approximate origins in the near east.
There's also evidence stemming from aDNA and diet analysis, that people of the PWC horizon represented groups with a very persistent identity rooted around hunter gatherer ways who were likely pushed out of their territories more and more by groups partaking in agricultural activities since most of their haplogoups found are now primarily in Finland and Estonia.
And ergo the gross folly of this book as its aim of overemphasizing autochtonus development paints a picture of a very non-dynamic Europe during the Neolithic and essentially homogenizes the archaeological record. You begin to feel as though you are reading about the same thing from one archaeological horizon to the next and that change was never really there, rather its the same thing over and over and over from 6000 to 2500 BC, vested in the fabled "hunter gatherer communal values". And you begin to wonder if the title "Europe in the Neolithic: The Creation of New Worlds" is being used facetiously.
Another problem is the lack of effectively communicating how the archaeological record relates to people in more tangible terms. Instead, greater concern is placed on the environment and a rather opaque attempt is made on past landscape cultural-geography by describing site/settlement distribution which itself is inherently vague and meandering territory particularly for archaeologists yet this was another direction that archaeologists insisted on delving into during the 90's with mixed results. I had much hope for the chapter and section on "Unfair Settlements", but its not at all what you'd think it would be about. It is indeed just one of many rather vague and uncertain statements made concerning the then state of research about Neolithic Europe and does nothing to add any valuable insight at all to social dynamics during this point in prehistory.
And yes as mentioned in a prior review, Whittle insists on writing in a very unclear manner, perhaps underscoring his own uncertainty, but most likely on purpose, coming off as elitist or to use this book as an exercise in pretentious academic writing in order to impress colleagues (you wonder just who target audience is at times).
Update: I once said despite the many things lacking or wrong with this book, I still was unable to completely hate it. That may be true still today and I still own the book yet I rarely read it now. Why? There have been soooo many genetic aDNA studies looking at autosomal, Y-chromosome, and mtDNA that it is now more or less a waste of time to pick this book and try and understand anything meaningful about pre-historic Europe's agricultural transition and how it relates to demographics. Yes, I said too that this is someone's interpretation which I accepted, but this books premise has turned out to be so glaringly wrong that I can't stand by that statement anymore. Therefore I acknowledge it is what it is but no longer accept it in anyway other then perhaps to get a sense of the various material cultural horizons that archaeologists uncovered concerning Europe's shift to agriculture. It still certainly is a very perspective laden foray into Europe's deep past, a work that serves as a marker or point in prehistoric archaeological thought, albeit highly skewed in the other direction, in an attempt to over-correct some of theories which the author admits he wholeheartedly subscribed to and defended in the past. And ergo very flawed based on more processual studies.
So I can't say get the book now for any other reason except to get a sense of the material cultural horizons that archaeologists uncovered concerning Europe's shift to agriculture. But really, it's not up-to-date in thought and I must say skip it altogether. There are probably better texts out there now that address this matter more appropriately.


