We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The archaeological discourse on the spread of the Neolithic way of life has experienced several paradigm shifts during the last three decades. This chapter attempts to classify different past and recent approaches to describe or even explain that major transformation. A review of Neolithization models suggested for central Europe during the last five decades illustrates changing assumptions and schools of archaeological research. While the more recent regional models tend to integrate elements of demic diffusion as well as indigenous adaptation, some recent general and global models focus on external and internal causes for the Neolithic transformation in a rather deterministic way. While the classical “wave of advance” model (Ammermann and Cavalli-Sforza) can be regarded as characteristic for the broad generalizations of processual archaeology, enhanced spatial and temporal resolution revealed a rather discontinuous and nonlinear process of spread (“modèle arythmique” of Jean Guilaine). It is argued that these “stagnation phases” in the spread of the Neolithic from the Near East throughout Europe, despite having a similar structure, might reflect different regional variants in the Neolithic transformation. In conclusion it will be suggested that “Neolithization” actually comprises quite different processes with specific regional scope and time scale, involving both change and its avoidance.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.