Megasites in Prehistoric Europe: Where Strangers and Kinsfolk Met

Bisserka Gaydarska; John Chapman

doi:10.1017/9781009099837

Series: Elements in the Archaeology of Europe

Megasites in Prehistoric Europe

Where Strangers and Kinsfolk Met

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 October 2022

Bisserka Gaydarska and

John Chapman

Show author details

Bisserka Gaydarska: Affiliation:
Durham University
John Chapman: Affiliation:
Durham University

Summary

This is an Element about some of the largest sites known in prehistoric Europe – sites so vast that they often remain undiscussed for lack of the theoretical or methodological tools required for their understanding. Here, the authors use a relational, comparative approach to identify not only what made megasites but also what made megasites so special and so large. They have selected a sample of megasites in each major period of prehistory – Neolithic, Copper, Bronze and Iron Ages – with a detailed examination of a single representative megasite for each period. The relational approach makes explicit comparisons between smaller, more 'normal' sites and the megasites using six criteria – scale, temporality, deposition / monumentality, formal open spaces, performance and congregational catchment. The authors argue that many of the largest European prehistoric megasites were congregational places.

Element contents

Summary
References

Get access

Keywords

megasites congregation relational approach Nebelivka Alsónyék Valencina de la Concepción Corneşti Bil’sk

Type: Element
Information: Series: Elements in the Archaeology of Europe

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009099837 [Opens in a new window]

Online ISBN: 9781009099837

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication: 27 October 2022

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

Ade, D., Fernández-Götz, M., Rademacher, L., Stegmaier, G. & Willmy, A. (2013) Der Heidengraben – ein keltisches Oppidum auf der Schwäbischen Alb. Führer zu archäologischen Denkmälern in Baden-Württemberg 27, Stuttgart: Theiss Verlag.Google Scholar

Bánffy, E., Oross, K., Osztás, A. et al. (2016). The Alsónyék story: towards the history of a persistent place. Bericht der Römisch Germanischen Kommission, 94, 283–318.Google Scholar

Bayliss, A., Beavan, N., Hamilton, D. et al. (2016). Peopling the past: creating a site biography in the Hungarian Neolithic. Bericht der Römisch-Germanische Kommission, 94, 23–91. https:10.11588/berrgk.1938.0.37150.Google Scholar

Bertók, G. & Gáti, Cs. (2014). Old times – new methods. Budapest: Archaeolingua.Google Scholar

Bickle, P. & Whittle, A. (eds.) (2013). The first farmers of central Europe: diversity in LBK lifeways. Oxford: Oxbow Books.Google Scholar

Chapman, J. (2020). Forging identities in Balkan prehistory: dividuals, individuals and communities, 7000 – 3000 BC. Leiden: Sidestone Press.Google Scholar

Chapman, J., Videiko, M., Hale, D. et al. (2014). The second phase of the Trypillia Megasite methodological revolution: a new research agenda. European Journal of Archaeology, 17(3), 369–406.Google Scholar

Costa Caramé, M., Díaz-Zorita Bonilla, M., García Sanjuán, L. & Wheatley, D. (2010). The Copper Age settlement of Valencina de la Concepción (Seville, Spain): demography, metallurgy and spatial organization. Trabajos de Prehistoria, 67(1), 87–118.CrossRef Google Scholar

Danielisová, A. & Fernández-Götz, M. (eds.) (2015). Persistent economic ways of living: production, distribution, and consumption in late prehistory and early history. Budapest: Archeolingua.Google Scholar

Daragan, M. (2020). About appearance of mega-hillforts in the Ukrainian forest-steppe in the Early Scythian time: the search for an explanatory model. Tyragetia, s.n., XIV [XXIX](1), 117–39.Google Scholar

Depaermentier, M. L. C., Kempf, M., Bánffy, E. & Alt, K. W. (2020a). Tracing mobility patterns throughout the 6–5th millennia BC in Transdanubia and the Great Hungarian Plain with strontium and oxygen stable isotope analyses. PLoS ONE 15(12): e0242745. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0242745.Google Scholar

Depaermentier, M., Osztás, A., Bánffy, E. et al. (2020b). Neolithic land-use, subsistence, and mobility patterns in Transdanubia: a multiproxy isotope and environmental analysis from Alsónyék – Bátaszék and Mórágy – Tűzkődomb. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, 33, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2020.102529.Google Scholar

Fernández-Götz, M. (2018). Urbanization in Iron Age Europe: trajectories, patterns, and social dynamics. Journal of Archaeological Research, 26, 117–62.Google Scholar

Fletcher, R. (1995). The limits to settlement growth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Fletcher, R. (2019). Trajectories to low-density settlements past and present: paradox and outcomes, Frontiers in Digital Humanities. https://doi.org/10.3389/fdigh.2019.00014.CrossRef Google Scholar

García Sanjuán, L. (2017). Farming economy and wealth economy in the Copper Age of the Lower Guadalquivir river: debating strategic resources at Valencina de la Concepción (Seville, Spain). In M. Bartelheim, P. Bueno Ramírez and M. Kunst (eds.), Key resources and socio-cultural developments in the Iberian Chalcolithic. Tübingen: University of Tübingen, 237–56.Google Scholar

García Sanjuán, L., Cintas-Peña, M., Díaz-Zorita Bonilla, M. et al. (2019). Burial practices and social hierarchisation in Copper Age Southern Spain: analysing tomb 10.042-10.049 of Valencina de la Concepción (Seville, Spain). In Müller, J. and Hinz, M. (eds.), Megaliths, societies, landscapes: early monumentality and social differentiation in Neolithic Europe. Kiel: University of Kiel, 1005–38.Google Scholar

García Sanjuán, L., Vargas Jiménez, J. M., Cáceres Puro, L. M. et al. (2018). Assembling the dead, gathering the living: radiocarbon dating and Bayesian modelling for Copper Age Valencina de la Concepción (Seville, Spain). Journal of World Prehistory, 31, 179–313. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10963-018-9114-2.CrossRef Google Scholar

Gaydarska, B. (ed.) (2020). Early urbanism in Europe. The Trypillia megasites of the Ukrainian Forest-Steppe. Warsaw: De Gruyter.Google Scholar

Gaydarska, B. & Chapman, J. (2021). Relations make the world go round: a relational approach to Trypillia megasites. In Diachenko, A., Harper, T. K., Rassamakin, Y. and Sobkowiak-Tabaka, I. (eds.), Data systematization in the Neo-Eneolithic of Southeastern and Central Europe. Essays in honor of Sergej Ryzhov. Kyiv: NASU Institute of Archaeology, 204–45.Google Scholar

Gogâltan, F. (2017). The Bronze Age multilayered settlements in the Carpathian Basin (ca. 2500–1600/1500 BC). An old catalogue and some chronological problems. Journal of Ancient History and Archaeology, 4, 28–63.Google Scholar

Gogâltan, F. & Sava, V. (2010) Sântana-Cetatea Veche. A Bronze Age earthwork on the Lower Mureş. Arad: Complexul Muzeul Arad.Google Scholar

Hansen, S. and Krause, R. (eds.) (2018). Bronzezeitliche Burgen zwischen Taunus und Karpaten. Bonn: Habelt-Verlag.Google Scholar

Haselgrove, C., Rebay-Salisbury, K. & Wells, P. S. (eds.) (2018). Oxford handbook of the European Iron Age. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199696826.001.0001.Google Scholar

Heeb, B., Lehmpful, R., Szentmiklosi, A. et al. (2018). Corneşti-Iarcuri im rumänischen Banat und sein bronzezeitlicher Kontext. In Hansen, S. and Krause, R. (eds.), Bronzezeitliche Burgen zwischen Taunus und Karpaten. Bonn: Habelt-Verlag, 395–406.Google Scholar

Heeb, B. S., Szentmiklosi, A., Bălărie, A. et al. (2017). Corneşti-Iarcuri – 10 years of research. In Heeb, B., Szentmiklosi, A., Krause, R. and Wemhoff, M. (eds.), Fortifications: rise and fall of defended sites in the Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age of South-East Europe. Berlin: Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, 217–28.Google Scholar

Hurtado, V. (2006). The ditched enclosures of the Middle Guadiana basin. In Valera, A. and Shaw Evangelista, L. (eds.), The idea of enclosure in recent Iberian prehistory. WAC Volume 36, Session WS29, International Series 2124. Oxford: BAR, 109–22.Google Scholar

Johnson, G. (1982). Organizational structure and scalar stress. In Renfrew, C., Rowlands, M. J. and Segraves-Whallon, B. (eds.), Theory and explanation in archaeology: the Southampton Conference. London: Academic Press, 389–421.Google Scholar

Johnson, J. A. (2020). Trade, community and labour in the Pontic Iron Age forest-steppe region, c. 700–200 BC. In Pankova, S. V. and StJ Simpson, (eds.), Masters of the Steppe: the impact of the Scythians and Later Nomad societies of Eurasia. Oxford: Archaeopress Archaeology, 198–209.Google Scholar

Kassabaum, M. C. (2019). A method for conceptualizing and classifying feasting: interpreting communal consumption in the archaeological record. American Antiquity, 84(4), 610–31.Google Scholar

Keeley, L. H., Fontana, M. & Quick, R. (2007). Baffles and bastions: the universal features of fortifications. Journal of Archaeological Research, 15, 55–95.Google Scholar

Krause, R., Szentmiklosi, A., Heeb, B. et al. (2019). Cornești-Iarcuri. Die Ausgrabungen 2013 und 2014 in der befestigten Großsiedlung der späten Bronzezeit. Eurasia Antiqua, 22, 133–84.Google Scholar

Martínez-Sevilla, F. García Sanjuán, Lozano Rodríguez, L., J. et al. (2020). A new perspective on Copper Age technology, economy and settlement: grinding tools at the Valencina mega-site. Journal of World Prehistory, 33(4), 513–59.Google Scholar

Mazzucato, M. (2021). Mission economy. A moonshot guide to changing capitalism. Dublin: Allen Lane.Google Scholar

Molloy, B., Jovanović, D., Bruyère, C. et al. (2020). A new Bronze Age mega-fort in Southeastern Europe: recent archaeological investigations at Gradište – Idjoš and their regional significance, Journal of Field Archaeology, 45(4), 293–314.Google Scholar

Moore, T. & Armada, X.-L. (2011). Crossing the divide: opening a dialogue on approaches to western European first millennium BC studies. In Moore, T. and Armada, X.-L. (eds.), Atlantic Europe in the first millennium BC: crossing the divide. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 3–77.Google Scholar

Müller, J., Rassmann, K. and Videiko, M. (eds.) (2016). Trypillia-Megasites and European prehistory, 4100–3400 BCE. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Munro, R. (1997). Ideas of difference: stability, social spaces and the labour of division. In Hetherington, K. and Munro, R. (eds.), Ideas of difference. Oxford: Blackwell, 3–24.Google Scholar

Nebbia, M. (2020). Landscape studies. In Gaydarska, B. (ed.), Early urbanism in Europe. The Trypillia Megasites of the Ukrainian Forest-Steppe. Berlin: De Gruyter, 60–110.CrossRef Google Scholar

Nyerges, É. Á. & Biller, A. Zs. (2015). Neolithic animal husbandry in the Tolnai-Sárköz region on the basis of the archaeozoological finds from the Alsónyék-Bátaszék archaeological site, Hungarian Archaeology E-Journal (Winter). www.hungarianarchaeology.hu.Google Scholar

Osztás, A., Bánffy, E., Zalai-Gaál, I. et al. (2016a). Alsónyék-Bátaszék: introduction to a major Neolithic settlement complex in south-east Transdanubia, Hungary. Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission, 94, 7–21.Google Scholar

Osztás, A., Zalai-Gaál, I., Bánffy, E. et al. (2016b). Coalescent community at Alsónyék: the timings and duration of Lengyel burials and settlement, Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission, 94, 179–282.Google Scholar

Poux, M. (ed.) (2012). Corent: voyage au coeur d’une ville gauloise, 2^nd edn. Paris: Errance.Google Scholar

Seager, , Thomas, M. (2020). Neolithic Spaces, volume 2: The Bradford Archive of Aerial Photographs. Accordia Specialist Studies on Italy 19.ii. London: Accordia Research Institute, University of London.Google Scholar

Sherlock, S. C., Windingstad, J. D., Barker, A. W., O’Shea, J. M. & Sherwood, W. C. (2013) Evidence for Holocene aeolian activity at the close of the Middle Bronze Age in the Eastern Carpathian Basin: geoarchaeological results from the Mureş River Valley, Romania. Geoarchaeology 28, 131–46.Google Scholar

Smith, M. L. (2008). Urban empty spaces. Contentious places for consensus-building. Archaeological Dialogues, 15 (2), 216–31.CrossRef Google Scholar

Szentmiklosi, A., Heeb, B. S., Heeb, J. et al. (2011). Corneşti-Iarcuri – a Bronze Age town in the Romanian Banat. Antiquity, 85, 819–38.Google Scholar

Szeverényi, V., Priskin, A., Czukor, P. et al. (2015). Subsistence, settlement and society in the Late Bronze Age of South East Hungary: a case study of the fortified settlement at Csanadpalota-Földvár. In Kniesel, J., Dal Corso, M., Kirleis, W. et al. (eds.), The third food revolution?: setting the Bronze Age table. Common trends in economic and subsistence strategies in Bronze Age Europe. Bonn: Habelt, 97–117.Google Scholar

Taylor, T., Havlicek, C. M. & Beckwith, C. I. (2020). The Scythian empire: reassessing steppe power from western and eastern perspectives. In Pankova, S. and Simpson, StJ. (eds.), Masters of the steppe. The impacts of the Scythians and later nomad societies of Eurasia. Oxford: Archaeopress, 616–26.Google Scholar

Valera, A. (2012). Ditches, pits and hypogea: new data and new problems in South Portugal Late Neolithic and Chalcolithic practices. In, J. F. Gibaja, A. F. Carvalho and Chambon, P. (eds.), Funerary practices in the Iberian Peninsula from the Mesolithic to the Chalcolithic, International Series 2417. Oxford: BAR, 103–12.Google Scholar

Valera, A. C., Silva, A. M., Cunha, C. & Evangelista, L. (2014). Funerary practices and body manipulations at Neolithic and Chalcolithic Perdigões ditched enclosures (South Portugal). In Valera, A. C. (ed.), Recent prehistoric enclosures and funerary practices in Europe, International Series 2676. Oxford: BAR, 37–57.Google Scholar

Vaquer, J. (1990). Le néolithique en Languedoc occidentale. Paris: CNRS.Google Scholar

Ventresca Miller, A., Johnson, J., Makhortykh, S. et al. (2019). Mobility and diet in the Iron Age Pontic forest-steppe: a multi-isotopic study of urban populations at Bel’sk. Archaeometry, 61 (6), 1399–416, https://doi.org/10.1111/arcm.12493.Google Scholar

Videiko, M. (2013). Kompleksnoe Izuchenie Krupnykh Poselenij Tripolskoj Kultury V – IV Tys Do N.e. Saarbrücken: Lambert Academic Publishing.Google Scholar

Whittle, A. (2018). The times of their lives. Hunting history in the archaeology of Neolithic Europe. Oxford: Oxbow Books.Google Scholar

Zalai-Gaál, I., Osztás, A. & Köhler, K. (2012). Totenbrett oder Totenhütte? Zur Struktur der Gräber der Lengyel-Kultur mit Pfostenstellung in Südtransdanubien. Acta Archaeologica Hungarica 63, 69–116.CrossRef Google Scholar

Бойко, Ю. (2017). Социальний склад населення басейну р. Ворскли за Скіфської доби. Київ: Котельва.Google Scholar PubMed

Дараган, M. (2017). Городища-гиганты скифской эпохи в Украинской Лесостепи (особенности расположения и фортификации. В: Археология и геоинформатика, вып. 8, SD-resurs.Google Scholar

Корост, І. (ред.) (2016). Більське городище в наукових працях Б. А. Шрамка. Харків: Котельва.Google Scholar PubMed

Скорий, С., Білозор, В., Супруненко, О. & Кулатова, І. (2019). Селища скіфського часу в системі Великого укріплення Більського городища. Київ: ТОВ ‘Майдан’.Google Scholar

Шапорда, О. (2017). Дослідження території Більського археологічного комплексу в 2016 році. Археологічні дослідження Більсьского городища – 2016. Київ: Котельва, 179–237.Google Scholar

Element contents

Megasites in Prehistoric Europe

Summary

Keywords

Access options

References

Save element to Kindle

Save element to Dropbox

Save element to Google Drive