EURASIA AT THE DAWN

OF HISTORY
URBANIZATION AND SOCIAL CHANGE

Edited by

MANUEL FERNÁNDEZ-GÖTZ
University of Edinburgh

DIRK KRAUSSE
State Office for Cultural Heritage Baden-Wuerttemberg

With the assistance of Denise Beilharz

University Printing House, Cambridge cb2 8bs, United Kingdom
One Liberty Plaza, 20th Floor, New York, ny 10006, USA
477 Williamstown Road, Port Melbourne, vic 3207, Australia
4843/24, 2nd Floor, Ansari Road, Daryaganj, Delhi - 110002, India
79 Anson Road, #06-04/06, Singapore 079906

Cambridge University Press is part of the University of Cambridge.

It furthers the University’s mission by disseminating knowledge in the pursuit of
education, learning, and research at the highest international levels of excellence.

www.cambridge.org
Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9781107147409

C Cambridge University Press 2016

This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception

and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements,
no reproduction of any part may take place without the written
permission of Cambridge University Press.
First published 2016
Printed in The United States of America
A catalog record for this publication is available from the British Library.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
isbn 978-1-107-14740-9 Hardback
Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of
URLs for external or third-party Internet Web sites referred to in this publication
and does not guarantee that any content on such Web sites is, or will remain,
accurate or appropriate.
CONTENTS

List of Figures page ix

List of Tables xv
List of Contributors xvii

INTRODUCTION

1 MATERIALITIES OF COMPLEXITY IN ANCIENT EURASIA 3

Manuel Fernández-Götz and Dirk Krausse

PART I BETWEEN MYTH AND LOGOS

2 COGNITIVE ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE MAKING OF THE

HUMAN MIND 23
Colin Renfrew

3 HISTORY OF WRITING, HISTORY OF RATIONALITY 40

David R. Olson

4 THE IMPACT OF SOCIAL DIFFERENTIATION ON IDENTITY:

LIGHTS AND SHADOWS OF THE INDIVIDUALIZATION
PROCESS 52
Almudena Hernando

PART II THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL

DIFFERENTIATION

5 THE NEOLITHIC CONQUEST OF THE MEDITERRANEAN 67

Jean Guilaine

6 LOW-DENSITY URBANISM: THE CASE OF THE TRYPILLIA

GROUP OF UKRAINE 81
John Chapman and Bisserka Gaydarska

v
vi CONTENTS

7 FROM THE NEOLITHIC TO THE IRON AGE –

DEMOGRAPHY AND SOCIAL AGGLOMERATION: THE
DEVELOPMENT OF CENTRALIZED CONTROL? 106
Johannes Müller

PART III APPROACHING SOCIAL COMPLEXITY

8 EARLY STATE FORMATION FROM A BIG HISTORY POINT

OF VIEW 127
Fred Spier

9 REFRAMING ANCIENT ECONOMIES: NEW MODELS, NEW

QUESTIONS 139
Gary M. Feinman

PART IV URBANISM THROUGH THE AGES:

CONCEPTS, MODELS, AND DEFINITIONS

10 HOW CAN ARCHAEOLOGISTS IDENTIFY EARLY CITIES?

DEFINITIONS, TYPES, AND ATTRIBUTES 153
Michael E. Smith

11 CITIES BETWEEN DE-TERRITORIALIZATION AND

NETWORKING: ON THE DYNAMICS OF URBANIZATION
IN THE GLOBAL CONTEXT 169
Hans Peter Hahn (Frankfurt)

PART V ANCIENT CIVILIZATIONS AT THE TURN OF

THE AXIS

12 EGYPT IN THE ‘AXIAL AGE’ 183

Jan Assmann

13 CONSERVATIVE VERSUS INNOVATIVE CULTURAL AREAS

IN THE NEAR EAST CA. 800–400 BC 198
Mario Liverani

14 ELITE BURIALS IN FIRST-MILLENNIUM BC CHINA:

TOWARDS INDIVIDUALIZATION 211
Alain Thote
CONTENTS vii

15 GIANT TUMULI OF THE IRON AGE: TRADITION –

MONUMENTALITY – KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER 225
Svend Hansen

PART VI TIMES OF CONNECTIVITY: THE

MEDITERRANEAN ON THE MOVE

16 AGENCY, STRUCTURE, AND THE UNCONSCIOUS IN THE

LONGUE DURÉE 243
John Bintliff

17 PHOENICIANS ABROAD: FROM MERCHANT VENTURERS

TO COLONISTS 254
María Eugenia Aubet

18 SPHERES OF INTERACTION: TEMPERATE EUROPE AND

THE MEDITERRANEAN WORLD IN THE IRON AGE 265
John R. Collis

PART VII EARLY URBAN CULTURES FROM SOUTH

TO NORTH

19 THE DETERMINACY OF SPACE AND STATE FORMATION IN

ARCHAIC GREECE 279
Jonathan M. Hall

20 INTERCULTURAL NETWORKS AND URBANIZATION IN

SOUTHERN ITALY IN THE EARLY IRON AGE 291
Massimo Osanna

21 POWER AND PLACE IN ETRURIA 304

Simon Stoddart

22 URBANIZATION PROCESSES AND CULTURAL CHANGE IN

THE EARLY IRON AGE OF CENTRAL EUROPE 319
Manuel Fernández-Götz and Dirk Krausse

23 FOUNDING RITUALS AND MYTHS IN THE KELTIKÉ 336

Martín Almagro-Gorbea
viii CONTENTS

PART VIII CHANGING SYMBOLS, CHANGING MINDS?

24 PHASE TRANSITION, AXIAL AGE, AND AXIS

DISPLACEMENT: FROM THE HALLSTATT TO THE LA TÈNE
CULTURE IN THE REGIONS NORTHWEST OF THE ALPS 353
Rudolf Echt

25 EARLY CELTIC ART IN CONTEXT 370

Otto-Herman Frey

26 IMAGES, ORNAMENT, AND COGNITION IN EARLY LA

TÈNE EUROPE: A NEW STYLE FOR A CHANGING WORLD 380
Peter S. Wells

27 THE NETWORK GENESIS OF THE LA TÈNE CULTURES: A

WESTERN POINT OF VIEW 392
Pierre-Yves Milcent

Index 407
LIST OF FIGURES

1.1 (a) A modern urban landscape: Aerial view of Chicago; (b) Early
urbanism in ancient Europe: idealized reconstruction of the
Heuneburg agglomeration in the sixth century BC. page 4
1.2 The Hohmichele mound near the Heuneburg, one of the largest
Early Iron Age tumuli in Central Europe. 5
1.3 Locations of the six areas where the ‘urban revolution’ took place
independently. 12
1.4 Plan of temple A at Manching, which existed before the Late Iron
Age agglomeration was founded and was, from the beginning, at
its centre. 13
1.5 Materialized power: warrior statues from Northwestern Iberia.
These stone sculptures express the power acquired by particular
aristocratic leaders towards the end of the Iron Age and the role of
the body as a privileged space for social negotiation. 16
2.1 Stone cubes from the Indus Valley civilization. Metric analysis
indicates that they embody a measurement system based on mass. 25
2.2 Schematic diagram indicating aspects of human cognition. 26
2.3 Histogram suggesting the existence in Neolithic times of a unit of
measure, the ‘megalithic yard’. 29
2.4 The reconstruction of Maya polities using epigraphic as well as
survey data. 30
2.5 Settlement pattern in Baden-Württemberg during the Late
Hallstatt period (620–450 BC), a first step towards the
reconstruction of polities. 31
2.6 Grave 4 from the Copper Age cemetery at Varna, ca. 4500 BC,
indicating that high value was assigned to gold. 32
2.7 Statue of warrior from the Fürstensitz on the Glauberg wearing
jewellery like that found in the sumptuous grave. 34
2.8 Rich textiles from the princely burial at Hochdorf. 35
2.9 The rise and fall of the Fürstensitze, indicating principal trade
routes. 36
4.1 Two sets of cognitive features. 56
4.2 Bell-Beaker ‘package’. 59
4.3 Cross-group uniformity of appearance among the European
Bell-Beaker elites, from Scotland to Sicily, and from Portugal to
Moravia. 61

ix
x LIST OF FIGURES

5.1 Emergence and expansion of the Neolithic economy towards the

Mediterranean. Three large complexes are discernable: To the east,
the PPNB, founder of the system; in the center, diverse cultures of
the first Greco-Anatolian Neolithic; to the west, cultures of the
impressa/cardial complex. (The dates indicate the first events of the
Neolithic in the various areas considered here.) 70
5.2 First expansion of Neolithic pioneer groups in the Western
Mediterranean from areas with archaic impressa ceramic of the
Central Mediterranean (Southeast Italy, Sicily). The red dots
represent the principal known pre-cardial sites. 73
5.3 The Mediterranean around 3000 BC Egypt: First historical
dynasties. Levant, Anatolia, Aegean: proto-urban or sub-urban
Early Bronze Age; Central and Western Mediterranean: Final
Neolithic/Chalcolithic. 75
5.4 Tholos of Los Millares (Almeria, Spain), Chalcolithic, 4th
millennium BC. 76
5.5 Tarxien temples (Malta), 4th–3rd millennia BC. 78
6.1 The trajectory of settlement sizes towards low-density urbanism. 83
6.2 Timeline of the Trypillia–Cucuteni group. 84
6.3 Trypillia figurines. 86
6.4 (a) Settlement sizes by Trypillia phase; (b) Number of
neighbourhoods by quarter, Nebelivka mega-site; (c) Spacing
between assembly houses, Nebelivka mega-site; and (d) Number
of structures by neighbourhood, Nebelivka mega-site. 89
6.5 Interpretive plan of the geophysical investigations at Nebelivka. 91
6.6 Preliminary partition of the Nebelivka mega-site into quarters. 94
6.7 Quarter K, Nebelivka mega-site. 96
6.8 Quarter N, Nebelivka mega-site. 97
7.1 Extremely high population agglomerations in European prehistory
in comparison: Late Neolithic Okolište (5200–4600 BC),
Chalcolithic Taljanky (3800–3600 BC) and Iron Age Heuneburg
(600 BC). 108
7.2 Different categories for the reconstruction of population densities.
1–7 yield absolute population ranges (p/km²), the latter mostly
relative values. In addition to archaeology, the fields of
palaeodemography, ethnology, genetics, and ecosystem research are
also involved. 110
7.3 Absolute population values and values for the agrarian population
in Europe (a) and relative population values in Europe and the
Near East (b) from 6500 to 1500 BC. Numbers indicate
technological innovations and social changes described in the text. 111
7.4 At Late Neolithic Okolište a planned enclosure encompassed the
domestic space, small longhouses existed, and a population of not
less than 2,000 people was agglomerated at the site. The size of the
site contrasts to what is known in general from the Late Neolithic
or Early Chalcolithic of Southeast Europe. The planned layout of
LIST OF FIGURES xi

the settlement is visible in the geomagnetic survey; the

contemporaneity of the houses was proved by targeted excavations. 114
7.5 In Late Neolithic Okolište part-time specializations within direct
neighbourhoods indicate a community organized on “equal
terms.” In spite of this, some economically and demographically
productive households stood out. 116
7.6 Taljanky. (A) Interpretation of an early geophysical plot/aerial
photograph of Taljanky; (B) New geophysical plan of the
Frankfurt-Kiel-Kiev research project. Both the structural planning
of the settlement and the huge size of contemporary structures
become obvious. 117
7.7 A comparison between the largest settlement agglomerations in
the Near East and Europe displays huge differences: Whereas in
Mesopotamia cities are known already from the Early Bronze Age
onwards, in most other regions comparable settlement sizes do not
start until after 1500 BC. Exceptions are the Pontic Trypillian sites. 120
8.1 Schematic table depicting the ‘social typologies’ proposed by
neo-evolutionary anthropology and some of the main alternative
classifications. 134
9.1 Mesoamerica, showing the location of the Valley of Oaxaca. 142
10.1 The relationship between the functional and sociological
definitions of urbanism. All “sociological” cities also fit the
functional definition, whereas the converse is not true. 155
10.2 Royal palace at the Classic Maya city of Palenque. The two
primary urban functions of Maya cities were royal administration
(as signaled by palaces) and state religion (as signaled by large
temples). 156
10.3 Two-dimensional city typologies. (A) comprehensive typology;
(B) targeted typology for European cities after AD 1000. 157
10.4 Simplified urban typology based on social impact (urban
functions). 164
11.1 Photos showing market activities in Timbuktu taken by
L. Frobenius during his stay at Timbuktu in 1908. 177
12.1 Images of Montemhet, Fourth Prophet of Amun, 7th century BC.
They illustrate the classicism of the period, whose formal
programme draws on elements used 1,000 years earlier that were
regarded as ‘classical’. 191
13.1 The palace-centred trade of the Late Bronze Period. 202
13.2 The tribe- and city-state–centred trade of the Early Iron Age
Period. 202
13.3 The alphabet and the trade routes, ca. 750–550 BC. 203
14.1 Ground plan and section of grave 251 in Jinshengcun (Taiyuan,
Shanxi), ca. 475–425 BC. 213
14.2 Ritual assemblage of grave 251 in Jinshengcun. From top to
bottom and from left to right: a tripod ding used to cook meat, a
footed cup dou to present food, a vessel fanghu for the wine, a jar lei
xii LIST OF FIGURES

and a bird-shaped jug designed to contain water for ablution

practices. 215
14.3 Ground plan of grave 11 in Shuihudi, 217 BC. 220
15.1 Poggio Civitate (Murlo). Representation of a feast. 228
15.2 Sumptuous grave of Hochdorf. Cauldron with protomes of lions. 229
15.3 Bronze foot bowl from Hallstatt. 230
15.4 Hydria of Damon, 560–545 BC. 232
15.5 Cauldron from grave MM in Gordion. 236
16.1 The structural history model of the French Annales School. 244
16.2 Morgenroth’s (2004) models of Iron Age sociopolitical
transformation in Southern Iberia. 246
16.3 Terrenato’s (2011) model for the rise of the Roman city-state. 247
17.1 First Phoenician contacts, 9th century BC. 256
17.2 First Phoenician colonies, ca. 800 BC. 258
17.3 Bronze statuette found in the sea near Cádiz. 259
17.4 Colonial areas (8th–7th centuries BC): (1) Lixus, (2) Gadir, (3)
Cerro del Prado, (4) Cerro del Villar, (5) Toscanos, (6) Morro de
Mezquitilla/Chorreras, (7) Almuñécar, (8) Villaricos, (9) Ebusus,
(10) Tharros, (11) Sulcis, (12) Nora, (13) Cagliari, (14) Utica, (15)
Carthage, (16) Motya, (17) Panormo, (18) Solunto, (19) Malta, and
(20) Kition. 261
17.5 Eighth-century BC house from Chorreras (Málaga). 262
18.1 Distribution of major sites in Hallstatt D and La Tène A. 269
18.2 Distribution of major open settlements of La Tène B2 to D1. 271
18.3 Distribution of Late Iron Age oppida. 272
19.1 Distribution of 8th-century BC burials at Argos. 283
19.2 Photograph of Argos from the Argive Heraion. 287
20.1 The Ionian coast between Taras and Sybaris and its immediate
hinterland. 292
20.2 Torre di Satriano: The settlement in the Second Iron Age. 293
20.3 Torre di Satriano: Apsidial building, plan (a) and reconstruction
(b) of the elevation. 296
20.4 Torre di Satriano: The so-called Anaktoron. 297
20.5 Torre di Satriano: Greek vase forms documented in the so-called
Anaktoron. 299
21.1 Etruria and the rank-size transformation. 305
21.2 Territory of Tarquinia. 310
21.3 Settlement and material culture in Etruria. 311
21.4 The unstable frontier between North and South Etruria. 312
21.5 The northern frontier of Perugia. 314
22.1 Centralization processes between Central Italy and Northern
Germany, 8th–3rd centuries BC. 321
22.2 Symbols of political power: Mudbrick wall with towers at the
Heuneburg. 324
22.3 Glauberg: Plan of the sumptuous burial 1 (right). The grave goods
(centre) that correspond to features of the stone statue (left) are
highlighted. 327
LIST OF FIGURES xiii

22.4 Two examples of regular settlement layouts as evidence for urban

planning in the Late Hallstatt period. Top: Heuneburg, plans of the
settlement during the mudbrick wall phase. Bottom: Mont Lassois,
geomagnetic plan of the plateau. 330
22.5 Temperature curve between ca. 950–250 BC. 332
23.1 Monumental water basin at Bibracte with a topo-astronomically
oriented Pythagorean layout. 339
23.2 Ionian-Iberian bronze of a king sacrificing a ram. Puerta del
Segura, Jaén. 341
23.3 Phyale from Tivissa with two daimones sacrificing a ram to the
ancestor. 343
23.4 Plan of the poliadic temple of the Founding Hero of Termes,
Soria. 344
23.5 Head of the ‘founding hero’ on Celtiberian coins transformed into
the head of Augustus. 345
24.1 The statue from Hirschlanden. 354
24.2 The statue from the Glauberg. 355
24.3 The statues of a man and a woman from Vix ‘Les Herbues.’ 360
24.4 Distribution map of Late Hallstatt and Early La Tène graves with
gold torques: 1. Châtonnaye, 2. Payerne, 3. Lentigny, 4. Guin, 5.
Hermrigen, 6. Gunzwil-Adiswil, 7. Apremont, 8. Mercey-sur
Saône, 9. Savoyeux, 10. Ensisheim, 11. Hundersingen,
Giessübel-Talhau Tumulus, 12. Helpfau-Uttendorf, 13. Vix, 14.
Ihringen, 15. Kappel, 16. Dusslingen, 17. Rottenburg-Baisingen, 18.
Bad Cannstatt I and II, 19. Hatten, 20. Eberdingen-Hochdorf, 21.
Ludwigsburg, 22. Wallerfangen, 23. Reinheim, 24. Bad Dürkheim,
25. Besseringen, 26. Waldalgesheim, and 27. Glauberg. 361
24.5 General distribution map of Hallstatt D1–D3 and La Tène A–B
sumptuous graves (Fürstengräber). 365
25.1 The ‘golden bowl’ from Schwarzenbach in Saarland and drawings
from friezes with palmette flowers. 371
25.2 ‘Decorative disk’ from Schwabsburg: Gold on iron and bronze,
with amber and coral inlays (top); the similarly worked decorative
disk from Weiskirchen (bottom). 373
25.3 Circular compositions drawn with a compass: Reconstructed
drawing of an arrangement of stars in circles (top left); frieze from
the spouted flagon from the Glauberg (centre left); stars in circles
around the base of the flagon’s spout (bottom left); pattern on the
front and back of the cap from the statue from the Glauberg (top
right half); and decoration on the temples of the faces on the four
sides of the stone stele from Pfalzfeld (bottom right half). 374
25.4 Plan of the ditches from tumulus 1 at the Glauberg. 377
25.5 Engravings on the sword sheath from grave 2 at the Glauberg. 378
26.1 Drawing of a bronze fibula from Panenský Týnec, Czech
Republic. Length 10.2 cm. 383
26.2 Schematic sketch of the man buried in grave 1 at the Glauberg,
showing the positions of visually complex ornaments on his
xiv LIST OF FIGURES

body – earrings, neck ring, belt hook and attachments, finger ring,
and scabbard. Other objects bearing complex ornaments were in
the grave, but not placed on the body. 384
26.3 Schematic sketch of the woman buried in the Reinheim grave,
showing the positions of visually complex ornaments on her
body – neck ring, two fibulae, bracelets, and finger ring. 385
27.1 Cultural panorama of France before and at the beginning of the
La Tène period. 395
27.2 Medio-Atlantic carinated potteries of 5th century BC from
Brittany, Champagne, Belgium and Southern England. 397
27.3 N°1–6: Evolution of Early La Tène fibulae from their prototypes
from Spain and Mediterranean France. N°7–11; Evolution of Early
La Tène daggers and swords from their prototypes from the
Thames Basin and the Jogassian area. Different scales. N°1–2:
Tortosa (Catalonia); 3: Offaing (Belgium, prov. Luxembourg); 4:
Sogny (Champagne-Ardenne); 5: Crozant (Limousin); 6:
Icklingham (Suffolk); 7: Chaillon (Lorraine); 8: London; 9:
Saint-Gibrien (Champagne-Ardenne); 10: Hammersmith (West
London); and 11: Flaujac-Poujols (Midi-Pyrénées). 399
27.4 Examples of square enclosures from the Atlantic Bronze Age and
Atlantic First Iron Age. Cemeteries: n°1: Tagnon (Ardennes)
11th–10th century BC; n°2: Thourotte (Picardy) 11th–10th
century BC; n°3: Canchy (Picardy) early 6th century BC; n°4:
Eterville (Lower Normandy) 6th century BC; n°5–6: Basly (Lower
Normandy) late 7th century BC. Settlements: n°7: Nonant (Lower
Normandy) 15th–14th century BC; n°8: Courseulles-sur-Mer
(Lower Normandy) early 5th century BC. 401
27.5 Hypothetical evocation of the network genesis of the La Tène
Cultures. 403
LIST OF TABLES

10.1 Archaeological urban attributes page 159

10.2 Archaeological urban attributes at Aztec sites 162
10.3 Archaeological urban attributes at Heuneburg and Manching 163

xv
CONTRIBUTORS

Dr. Manuel Fernández-Götz, School of History, Classics and Archaeology,

University of Edinburgh

Prof. Dr. Dirk Krausse, Landesamt für Denkmalpflege im

Regierungspräsidium Stuttgart

Prof. Dr. Colin Renfrew, Department of Archaeology and Anthropology,

Division of Archaeology, University of Cambridge

Prof. Dr. David Olson, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University
of Toronto

Prof. Dr. Almudena Hernando, Departamento de Prehistoria, Facultad de

Geografía e Historia, Universidad Complutense de Madrid

Prof. Dr. Jean Guilaine, Collège de France

Prof. Dr. John Chapman and Dr. Bisserka Gaydarska, Department of

Archaeology, Durham University

Prof. Dr. Johannes Müller, Institut für Ur- und Frühgeschichte,

Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel

Dr. Fred Spier, Faculteit der Natuurwetenschappen, University of Amsterdam

Prof. Dr. Gary M. Feinman, Department of Anthropology, The Field Museum

Prof. Dr. Michael E. Smith, School of Human Evolution & Social Change,
Arizona State University

Prof. Dr. Hans Peter Hahn, Institut für Ethnologie, Goethe Universität
Frankfurt am Main

xvii
xviii LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS

Prof. Dr. Jan Assmann, Ägyptologisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität

Heidelberg

Prof. Dr. Mario Liverani, Dipartimento di scienze storiche archeologiche e

anthropologiche, Università degli Studi di Roma La Sapienza

Prof. Dr. Alain Thote, École pratique des hautes études, Collège de France

Prof. Dr. Svend Hansen, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut,

Eurasien-Abteilung

Prof. Dr. John Bintliff, School of History, Classics and Archaeology, University
of Edinburgh

Prof. Dr. María Eugenia Aubet, Departamento de Humanidades, Universidad

Pompeu Fabra

Prof. Dr. John R. Collis, Department of Archaeology, University of Sheffield

Prof. Dr. Jonathan M. Hall, Department of Classics, University of Chicago

Prof. Dr. Massimo Osanna, Dipartimento di Studi Umanistici, Università

degli Studi di Napoli Federico II

Dr. Simon Stoddart, Department of Archaeology and Anthropology, Division

of Archaeology, University of Cambridge

Prof. Dr. Martín Almagro-Gorbea, Real Academia de la Historia, Gabinete

de Antigüedades

Prof. Dr. Rudolf Echt, Universität des Saarlandes, Vor- und Frühgeschichte
und Vorderasiatische Archäologie

Prof. Dr. Otto-Herman Frey, Vorgeschichtliches Seminar der Philipps

Universität Marburg

Prof. Dr. Peter S. Wells, Department of Anthropology, University of

Minnesota

Dr. Pierre-Yves Milcent, Université de Toulouse

INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER ONE

MATERIALITIES OF COMPLEXITY IN
ANCIENT EURASIA
Manuel Fernández-Götz and Dirk Krausse

LINKING PAST AND PRESENT: EXPLORING THE ROOTS OF THE

MODERN WORLD

Our current world is characterized by life in cities, the existence of marked

social inequalities, and a growing process of individualization (Clark 2013; Her-
nando 2012). But when and how did these phenomena arise? What was the
social and economic background for the development of hierarchies and the
first cities? How did mental structures, identities, and the perception of space
change as a result of so many people living together in comparatively small
areas? In which ways did the evolution of more impersonal relationships asso-
ciated with urban ways of life affect social organization (Figure 1.1)? Accord-
ing to the concept of materiality (Hodder 2012; Maran/Stockhammer 2012;
Olsen 2010), people create material culture while at the same time mate-
rial culture creates them, making them who they are and conditioning the
way they experience the world. Consequently, material culture actively con-
structs identity, whether through pottery production, the wearing of jewellery,
the building of sanctuaries and the like (Malafouris 2013). Just as the inven-
tion of the modern car in the nineteenth century dramatically changed the
perception of time, space, and the landscape, we can imagine, for instance,
the major impact that the domestication of horses, the development of the
wheel, and the use of chariots would have had in ancient Eurasia (Anthony
2007). Accepting this premise, one of the starting points of this work is that

3
4 MANUEL FERNÁNDEZ-GÖTZ AND DIRK KRAUSSE

(a)

(b)
1.1. (a) A modern urban landscape: Aerial view of Chicago (Photo: M. Fernández-Götz);
(b) Early urbanism in ancient Europe: idealized reconstruction of the Heuneburg agglomer-
ation in the 6th century BC (after Krausse et al. 2016).

the basic structure of perception of the world is transformed as the material

world changes, at the same time as the latter – the realm of things – changes
as the subjective/cognitive world alters (Hernando 2002; see Chapter 4 in this
volume).
MATERIALITIES OF COMPLEXITY IN ANCIENT EURASIA 5

1.2. The Hohmichele mound near the Heuneburg, one of the largest Early Iron Age tumuli in
Central Europe (after Krausse et al. 2016).

In many parts of Eurasia, the last few millennia BC marked a fundamental

turning point that was accompanied by the appearance of a whole range of
phenomena that were to play an important part in shaping our world. Some
of the key elements are early state formations, urbanization, writing, and inter-
continental trade networks (Kristiansen/Larsson 2005; Wilkinson et al. 2011).
This age of increasing mobility of people, ideas, and goods saw the develop-
ment of city-states as a framework for community life, the first empires, the
appearance of sumptuous aristocratic and royal burials, large-scale colonization
throughout the Mediterranean and the Black Sea, the development of bronze
and iron technology, the widespread adoption of the alphabet, and the earliest
coinages, to name just a few examples (Figure 1.2). In other words, it was a
period of growing connectivity and increasing socioeconomic and technolog-
ical complexity. At the same time, it was also a key period from the perspec-
tive of philosophy and the history of religion. This is particularly true for the
centuries around the middle of the 1st millennium BC, which saw the teach-
ings of Confucius and Lao-Tze in China, the development of Buddhism in
India, and the rise of Greek philosophy. Although these phenomena are very
different in content, they are testimony to a change in human thought and
perception that was both an expression of and a catalyst for deep-seated social
and historical developments. Although the creation of concepts such as the
‘Axial Age’ may lack the necessary nuances (see Assmann, Chapter 12), nev-
ertheless they are a clear indication of the overwhelming importance of this
6 MANUEL FERNÁNDEZ-GÖTZ AND DIRK KRAUSSE

period for the development of humankind (Arnason et al. 2005; Bellah/Joas

2012).
Eurasia at the Dawn of History: Urbanization and Social Change is centred on
the processes of centralization, cultural interaction, and social differentiation
that led to the development of the first urban centres and early state forma-
tions of ancient Europe – although from a marked comparative perspective that
includes both broader theoretical-methodological reflections on urbanization
dynamics and individualization, as well as comparisons with areas such as the
Near East, Egypt, and China (for recent overviews on the comparative archae-
ology of complex societies, see Smith 2012; Trigger 2007). Its analysis not only
applies the conventional perspective of settlement research but also puts the
emphasis on the preconditions and consequences of urbanization from a cog-
nitive perspective (see Renfrew, Chapter 2). In this sense, not only do writing
and its implications play a major role (see the later discussion) but so does the
visual world in general, from everyday tools to elaborate prestige objects and
monumental fortifications (Wells 2012;see Chapter 26).Central concepts of the
volume are the long-term and grand narrative; its geographical limits are China
and the Atlantic coasts, although with a greater emphasis on Europe. Follow-
ing Cunliffe (2008), Europe is understood here as a ‘peninsula’ or subcontinent
of the larger Eurasian continent. The chronological framework goes from the
Neolithic to the Late Iron Age, with a focus on the early 1st millennium BC.
The present volume looks at the larger picture of the transition between late
prehistory and early history, although with a very different focus and content
than that attempted in works from V. G. Childe’s seminal book The Dawn of
European Civilization (1925) to more recent volumes such as C. Broodbank’s
The Making of the Middle Sea: A History of the Mediterranean from the Beginning
to the Emergence of the Classical World (2013). Although we agree that there is
a need for more detailed analyses of specific contexts, we are also convinced
that it is essential to use medium- and large-scale studies to understand specific
social phenomena and recognise converging and diverging patterns. The main
aim of this book is to contribute to a deeper understanding of the processes
that led to the evolution of the first cities and to the integration of local and
subregional groups into larger communities. The initial thrust came from a
conference organized in February 2013 in Stuttgart with the support of the
German Research Foundation and the Ministry of Finance and Economics1 .
The contributions presented there have been enriched by additional parts and
chapters.
What preconditions were necessary for the development of large agglom-
erations? What was the role of religion in bringing together groups that pre-
viously had for the most part been scattered? What effects did the distribu-
tion and spread of goods and ideas have during the course of Phoenician and
Greek colonization? Can we identify structural similarities between the early
MATERIALITIES OF COMPLEXITY IN ANCIENT EURASIA 7

urbanization processes that took place in Greece, Etruria, or southern

Germany? What were the conceptual background and the inspirations behind
new directions in art;for example,the La Tène style? These and other questions
are discussed and compared during the course of the book.
For practical reasons, the volume is divided into eight parts:

1. Between Myth and Logos: After this introductory chapter by the editors,
the first part continues with Colin Renfrew’s (Cambridge) overview on
the main approaches and fields of study offered by cognitive archaeology.
David R.Olson (Toronto) examines the role of the invention of writing in
the development of those cognitive functions that we take as characteris-
tic of modern forms of rationality. On a similar line, Almudena Hernando
(Madrid) discusses ‘individuality’ as the result of an individualization pro-
cess that transforms personal identity.
2. The Development of Social Differentiation: At the beginning of the second
thematic block, Jean Guilaine (Paris) considers the impact of social differ-
entiation throughout the Mediterranean Neolithic. John Chapman and
Bisserka Gaydarska (Durham), meanwhile, present the spectacular results
from recent research at the 4th-millennium BC Trypillia mega-sites of
Eastern Europe. On a broader basis and presenting examples from Bosnia,
Ukraine, and Germany, Johannes Müller (Kiel) interprets late prehistoric
centralization processes as triggers of social control in nonliterate societies.
3. Approaching Social Complexity: The development of early state formations
represents a much-debated but fundamental aspect of growing complexity.
Fred Spier (Amsterdam) analyzes this question from the point of view
of ‘big history.’ Gary M. Feinman (Chicago), for his part, explores how
ancient economies worked and varied and how the diversity of economic
arrangements can underpin societal change and variation.
4. Urbanism through the Ages: Concepts, Models, and Definitions: This part is
devoted to comparative urban studies,both through theoretical discussions
and concrete examples from different parts of the world. Michael E. Smith
(Tempe) reviews three main approaches used by archaeologists to define
and identify early cities, advocating the use of a polythetic set of archae-
ological attributes to study the nature and intensity of ancient urbanism.
Equally refreshing is the chapter by Hans Peter Hahn (Frankfurt), who
examines the dynamics of urbanization in the global context on the basis
of African examples.
5. Ancient Civilizations at the Turn of the Axis: This part starts with Jan Ass-
mann’s (Heidelberg) discussion of the concept of the ‘Axial Age’ pro-
posed by Karl Jaspers. Whereas his chapter is mostly centred on Egypt,
the next contribution by Mario Liverani (Rome) distinguishes between
‘conservative’ and ‘innovative’ cultural areas in the Near East in the period
8 MANUEL FERNÁNDEZ-GÖTZ AND DIRK KRAUSSE

between ca. 800–400 BC. Moving on to the Far East, Alain Thote (Paris)
traces the growing trend towards individualization visible in elite burials
of 1st-millennium BC China. Also thematically closely linked is the next
chapter by Svend Hansen (Berlin), who studies the giant tumuli of the
Iron Age using the key words ‘tradition,’ ‘monumentality,’ and ‘knowledge
transfer.’
6. Times of Connectivity: The Mediterranean on the Move: The 1st millennium
BC was a period of increasing connectivity in the Mediterranean and its
surrounding areas. John Bintliff (Leiden/Edinburgh) analyzes the topic of
social change in the European Iron Age through the use of the Annales
historians’ concept of structural history as well as recent developments
in neuroscience. Of central importance for this period was the impact
of Phoenician colonization, which is addressed by María Eugenia Aubet
(Barcelona). A comparative view of the Mediterranean and temperate
Europe is offered by John Collis (Sheffield), who contrasts two different
traditions of urbanization.
7. Early Urban Cultures from South to North:Following on the previous chapter
by Collis, this part presents four case studies of centralization and urban-
ization processes in the Mediterranean and Central Europe. Jonathan
Hall (Chicago) explores the origins of the Greek polis, Massimo Osanna
(Matera) analyzes the settlement structures in the hinterland of the Ionian
coast of Southern Italy, and Simon Stoddart (Cambridge) outlines the
development of political landscapes in Etruria. That similar processes also
took place north of the Alps is shown by Manuel Fernández-Götz’s (Edin-
burgh) and Dirk Krausse’s (Esslingen) chapter on the development of
urban centres in the Early Iron Age of temperate Europe. Finally, Martín
Almagro-Gorbea (Madrid) summarizes the evidence for founding rituals
and myths in the so-called Celtic world.
8. Changing Symbols, Changing Minds?: The last thematic block uses the
example of La Tène art to discuss the cognitive dimensions of chang-
ing visual representations. At least in the beginning, it was a ‘grand style’ –
to use Earle’s (2002) expression – which strengthened the bonds between
dominant persons who shared the same language, endowing them with
a symbolic capital that distinguished them from the common people of
their communities. Rudolf Echt (Saarbrücken) describes the transition
from the Hallstatt to the La Tène period, understood as an ‘axis displace-
ment’. Otto-Hermann Frey (Marburg) analyzes the cultural influences
and symbolic motives of the new art style, whereas Peter Wells (Min-
nesota) concentrates on the cognitive implications of the changing visual
world.To conclude,Pierre-Yves Milcent (Toulouse) proposes a new ‘mul-
tipolar’ model for the origin of the La Tène cultures, in a setting where
the Atlantic regions also play an important part.
MATERIALITIES OF COMPLEXITY IN ANCIENT EURASIA 9

On the basis of the ‘History of Culture’ perspective adopted in this book (Mor-
ris 2000), the objective is that these different sections will attract different types
of readers: Some may be interested only in the theoretical and methodolog-
ical contributions on comparative urbanization, individualization, or writing;
others may prefer concrete case studies such as those on China, Ukraine, or
southern Italy; and still others may want to read about specific aspects related
to the development and cognitive implications of La Tène art. Although this
book does not pretend at any time to provide a complete picture – neither
thematically nor geographically – of ‘Eurasia at the dawn of history,’ it aims to
contribute to the development of ‘grand narratives’ that help to make archaeo-
logical and ancient historical research more accessible for the broader discussion
in the humanities and social sciences (Broodbank 2013; Renfrew 2007; Scarre
2005). In what follows we comment on individualization, urbanization, and the
fractality of power.

RELATIONAL AND INDIVIDUALIZED IDENTITIES

B. Olsen (2007) has recently stated that if there is one social trend that runs
through the whole of humanity,it is increasing materiality.Although this is true,
a no less significant development should be added:the growing importance that
individualism has acquired in comparison with relational identity (Hernando
2002, 2012). Societies always combine features of both modes of identity, but in
varied ways – there is no white or black, but shades of grey (Fowler 2016). Thus
throughout history we find multidimensional degrees of relational personhood,
ranging from more ‘relational’ identities to others that put greater emphasis on
individuality; in the latter, the sense of an interior ‘I’ that is separate and distinct
from the rest of the world is more developed (Dülmen 2001; Hernando 2002;
see Chapter 4). As different studies have shown, the process of individualization
occurred as the identity counterpart of greater socioeconomic complexity and
hence the increasing division of functions (Elias 1994; Hernando 2012). In fact,
it was not until the seventeenth century that the term ‘individual’ was applied
to persons, which indicates that only then were the degree of individualization
and the number of people affected sufficient to be recognized as a reality by
language (Elias 1991; Hernando 2002).
In present-day state societies, the individual human being depends more on
him- or herself (i.e. the individual has a growing number of alternatives and a
greater range of choice). In contrast, in societies with a lower level of socio-
economic complexity the basic structure of personality tends to show a greater
consonance with the basic structure of the social group in question (Elias 1991).
Identity in these communities is much more relational; that is, it is more deter-
mined by relations with the group: People know who they are more as a result
of their identification with the group than through the differences that mark
10 MANUEL FERNÁNDEZ-GÖTZ AND DIRK KRAUSSE

them out within it. An interesting example can be found in Leenhardt’s (1979)
study of the Kanaks of New Caledonia, where nobody knew who he was as
a separate individual, but each was defined through his relationship with oth-
ers: A person was the father of his son, the son of his father, the nephew of
his uncle, the brother of his sister, and so on. Therefore, the major criticism
that can be made of current applications of so-called action theory is that it
establishes the ‘individual’ of modernity as the main protagonist throughout
history, without paying attention to other ways of perceiving reality and there-
fore constructing identity (Fowler 2004; Harris 2009; Thomas 2004). The way
in which the peoples of Antiquity perceived the world and acted in it was very
far removed from our modern Western rationalism, and it has to be stressed
that not only their technology – as often thought – but also their mentality and
being-in-the-world were different (Chic García 2014; Hernando 2002) because,
as the concept of materiality shows, the material and the cognitive spheres are
not separate but inextricably linked (see the earlier discussion). As Wells (2008:
58–59) has rightly stated, ‘the brains of infants in Iron Age Europe developed
their cognitive maps differently from the way our brains do today’. Instead
of projecting our modern reasoning and emotions onto the past, we should
start by recognizing that the past was ‘a foreign country’ (Lowenthal 1985), a
world of ‘otherness’. Although we still lack many keys to understanding the
past, acknowledging its complexity is a good starting point.
Closely linked to the process of individualization is the way in which reality
is represented, in which two basic mechanisms can be recognized: metonymy
and metaphor (Hernando 2002; Olson 1994). Whereas in the first the symbols
or signs used to represent reality are part of that reality (e.g. a tree, a rock, the
sun), in the case of metaphor reality and the signs that represent it are different
things (e.g. a map, a clock). In practice, all societies use both forms of repre-
sentation, but they do so to varying degrees: Oral societies favour metonymy
and contemporary societies metaphor. In this context, writing and its deriva-
tions (mathematical and chemical formulae,etc.) imply a qualitative change that
transforms people’s relationship with the world, because they are forms of rep-
resentation that use abstract signs invented by the human mind (Goody 1986;
Harris 2009; Olson 1994, 2016; see Chapter 3). By increasing the degree of the
metaphorical representation of reality and therefore rationalization and abstrac-
tion, the feeling that an ‘I’ exists that is distinct from the rest of human and
nonhuman nature also increases: Thinking becomes less ‘globalizing’ and more
‘fractured.’ In simple terms we could say that whereas written knowledge –
transmitted through solitude, reading, and writing – favours individualization,
orally transmitted knowledge – repeated and passed on through communica-
tion with others – reinforces relational identity. Given that the chronological
framework discussed in this book includes the invention and spread of the first
writing systems starting from areas such as Mesopotamia, Egypt, and China
MATERIALITIES OF COMPLEXITY IN ANCIENT EURASIA 11

(Powell 2012), these reflections appear to be fundamental to understanding

cultural change and identity transformation (see Chapters 3 and 4).
Oral tradition is the realm of the emotional mind, expressed with symbols
and myths, so in preliterate societies the qualitative prevails. In contrast, break-
ing down reality into the smallest units, into phonetic letters visible to the
eye, involves developing a linear perception of the world, with some things
appearing after others: This inevitably means that quantitative elements play
an increasingly important part in the way in which reality is perceived. There-
fore we could say that writing is both a consequence of the increasing division
and specialization of labour and one of the main means by which that process is
accelerated (Hernando 2002). In this sense, the societies analyzed in this book
remained more myth based and displayed a less advanced process of individ-
ualization than our modern Western societies. However – and although their
perception of the world was very heterogeneous and displayed different degrees
of individualization – they were also a very long way from the ‘eternal present’
that characterizes groups like the Pirahã of the Amazon, whose language has
no numbers, colours, or tenses and who, when asked about creation, respond
‘everything is the same’ (Everett 2005). Indeed, the development of hierarchies
and of relationships of marked subordination and dependence, both inside and
amongst groups, is a characteristic phenomenon of large parts of Eurasia in
the last few millennia BC, although inequality and centralized control did not
always increase in a linear manner, but were sometimes followed by periods of
decentralization and greater social isonomy (see the later discussion).

URBANIZATION AND CENTRALIZED CONTROL

The phenomenon of early urbanization has been a matter of consider-

able discussion amongst scholars of archaeology, ancient history, and anthro-
pology (Creekmore/Fisher 2014; Fernández-Götz et al. 2014; Gates 2011;
Marcus/Sabloff 2008; Smith 2003; Yoffee 2015; see Smith, Chapter 10). The
notion of urbanization as a continuous, impartible process was recently stressed
by Osborne (2005) in an introductory discussion of ancient Greek urban-
ization. As a phenomenon that admits of degrees, urbanization exhibits a
gradual, transformative character. Cities are not static entities that suddenly
appear, but interactive organisms that emerge and develop in relation to their
social, economic, and political environment. This leaves room for either tem-
poral decline or an increase of urban standards. Ultimately, even occasional
ruptures and breaks in settlement evolution are part of urban settlement
history.
From a conventional perspective, Europe has not been considered to be one
of the world’s regions where the ‘urban revolution’ took place independently
(Figure 1.3); however, this view may need to be revised in light of the new
12 MANUEL FERNÁNDEZ-GÖTZ AND DIRK KRAUSSE

1.3. Locations of the six areas where the ‘urban revolution’took place independently (after Smith
2009).

discoveries made in the Trypillia mega-sites of Ukraine, which provide evi-

dence for low-density urbanism in the 4th millennium BC (Müller et al. 2016;
see Chapman/Gaydarska, Chapter 6 in this volume). The size and complex-
ity of settlements like Nebelivka or Taljanky are comparable with the Early
Bronze Age city of Uruk, implying the possibility of state-level societies in
Eastern Europe around or soon after 4000 BC. (Chapman et al. 2014). However,
this first wave of centralization was followed by a period of decentralization:
After some centuries of use, the Trypillia mega-sites were abandoned, and the
settlement pattern reverted to smaller sites, in what constitutes a specific case
study of the nonlinear nature of history (Müller, Chapter 7 in this volume).
All over ancient Eurasia – for example, in the Mycenaean world or the area
of the Late Hallstatt and Early La Tène Fürstensitze (see Hall, Chapter 19, and
Fernández-Götz/Krausse, Chapter 22) – there are cases where it is not possible
to speak of a linear and continuous evolution from more decentralized and
egalitarian forms to others that were more centralized and hierarchical (i.e.
‘from villages to cities’ or ‘from chiefdoms to states’). It is true that, from a long-
term perspective, a trend towards the development of more hierarchized and
centralized social structures can be seen, but this was neither a teleological nor
a linear process. Instead it included cycles of regression, crisis, times of reduced
hierarchization, and demographic decrease. Moreover, it must be assumed that
the changes did not always take place peacefully and that conflict – either from
inside or from outside – was often involved (Müller forthcoming). In this sense,
we can subscribe to the following reflections offered by Kristiansen (1998: 417):
MATERIALITIES OF COMPLEXITY IN ANCIENT EURASIA 13

‘We also have to give up the modernist liberal myth that change and progress
was always accomplished peacefully and freely, and that conflict, disruption and
migration did not occur in Prehistory.’
If we adopt a Foucauldian approach (Foucault 1980), the development of
major agglomerations represented a new technology of power that enabled a
more hierarchical and centralizing ideology to be articulated (see also Müller,
Chapter 7 in this volume). From this point of view, and in line with the con-
cept of materiality, their appearance can also be seen as a way of reinforcing
social cohesion and political control:Urban centres are usually the expression of
more unequal societies and at the same time contributed to the construction
of those inequalities. Their internal structure often indicates initial planning
and a manifestation of the principles of social order that govern communities.
In many cases, their foundation was a deliberate response to a political deci-
sion and was accompanied by a series of ritual performances and myths (see
Almagro-Gorbea, Chapter 23). In this context, it is important to emphasize
that one of the principal motivations for erecting the monumental fortifica-
tions that characterize many urban settlements would have been precisely to
reinforce the feeling of belonging to the group, social cohesion, and political
control by undertaking collective works of great magnitude, which in addition
needed periodic repairs. From this perspective, fortifications can also be seen
as symbols of communal labour and identity.

1.4. Plan of temple A at Manching, which existed before the Late Iron Age agglomeration was
founded and was, from the beginning, at its centre (after Sievers 2010, modified).
14 MANUEL FERNÁNDEZ-GÖTZ AND DIRK KRAUSSE

A final aspect that we would like to point out is the crucial role of sanctuar-
ies as focal points for social aggregation and collective identity construction. In
periods of centralization, communal rituals develop to sustain the new higher
order of social organization (Kristiansen 1998). From the Mesopotamian ziggu-
rats to the urban sanctuaries of the Greek poleis and the public spaces within the
Late Iron Age oppida of temperate Europe, religion appears to be an essential
element in most urbanization processes, being at the root of the fusion of pre-
viously scattered communities. In some cases it has even been determined that
the existence of a place for cult activities and/or supralocal assemblies preceded
the concentration of a significant number of people or even the fortification
of the area (cf. Fernández-Götz 2014) (Figure 1.4).

THE CAPILLARITY OF POWER: MATERIAL ENTANGLEMENTS

Closely associated with the processes of centralization and urbanization, pro-

duction and trade in wide parts of Eurasia reached levels previously unknown
during the last few millennia BC. This development had major repercussions
not only on the manufacture and circulation of objects but also on the con-
struction and expression of identity through them (see for example Wells 2008,
2012). In general terms, standardization and specialization are characteristic of
more centralized and unequal forms of power such as complex chiefdoms or
early states (Rice 1991), with a relationship between larger and more complex
populations and increasing simplification of operating chains being observed.
The fact that certain items and technologies were used over large areas implies
that people were in contact, information flowed, innovations spread, and ideas
and tastes were shared2 .
However, considerable diversity and heterogeneity also existed, sometimes
even within the same region or community. Thus, we must always consider
the diachronic and synchronic variations as well as the continuous interplays
between connectivity and regionality: Most people were probably very local in
their daily-life focus but, at the same time, were also part of much wider social
networks. Furthermore, innovations and cross-cultural interactions were not
always welcomed but, on the contrary, were often seen as a threat to traditional
ways of life and values (on the archaeology of resistance, see González-Ruibal
2014). The agency of local societies largely determined which cultural ele-
ments were accepted and which rejected, in a decision that would have been
consistent with their respective economies of power.
The transformations mentioned earlier (including the development of more
unequal power relations, the emergence of cities, and the greater productive
specialization and increasing standardization of material culture) were closely
interrelated and were also reflected in terms of the structuring of the land-
scape. In fact, from a long-term and ‘grand narrative’ perspective, this period
was characterized by a process of division and compartmentalization of space,to
MATERIALITIES OF COMPLEXITY IN ANCIENT EURASIA 15

the extent that it can be called ‘the age of enclosure’ (Harding et al. 2006). Sub-
division was not restricted to reinforcing the differentiation between ‘interior’
and ‘exterior’ in agglomerations through the construction of artificial defences,
but also affected many other and varied spheres, such as the division of agri-
cultural land into plots, delimitation of farm boundaries, segregation of liv-
ing units within settlements, or the establishment of sacred areas and funerary
enclosures.
Over and above their diversity, an aspect common to all these manifesta-
tions is the intention of including and excluding, of establishing a practical but,
also and above all, symbolic distinction between the ‘internal’ and the ‘external.’
This process is,therefore,a phenomenon that can only be fully understood from
a broader perspective, because fragmentation or division is closely linked to
increasing rationality and growing socioeconomic/technological complexity.
At the risk of oversimplifying, and without trying to establish a universal equa-
tion of absolute value, we could coin the following formula – the more divisive
the society, the more space is divided – which can be explained by the fractal
relationship between persons and culture (Descola 2013; Hernando/González-
Ruibal 2011). In a sense, as a society itself displays more divisions it also estab-
lishes more divisions in the material world, and this in turn shapes new ways
of perceiving space and moving in it. Thus, the enclosures would express, in
spatial terms, the progressive establishment of limits and distinctions within and
between communities.
The process described went hand in hand with increasing social and eco-
nomic complexity and would have affected not only relations between the
persons themselves but also the form in which humans perceived their rela-
tionships with other beings and natural phenomena. Although the degree of
individualization, rationalization, and abstraction would still have been embry-
onic in comparison with the levels reached in subsequent periods of history, in
terms of mentality the last few millennia BC saw growing division and frag-
mentation: between persons, between them and nature, in the landscape, and
in the internal organization of settlements. In a Foucauldian sense, the rhetoric
of the political sphere can be uncovered even in aspects as apparently trivial as
the decoration of ceramics. By applying this approach to the protohistory of
the Northwestern Iberian Peninsula, González-Ruibal (2006–07) points out
that power in the Late Bronze Age lay not only in treasure or in large metal
hoards: The bronze axe used by a farmer and the path he takes from the open
hamlet to the hillfort were also imbued with power relations. Similarly, in the
Late Iron Age the capillary action of domination and control can be seen both
in the warrior statues and in cooking pots, rectilinear house plans, and hair pins
(Figure 1.5).
As noted at the beginning, the material reality around us shapes our habitus
and imbues us with unwritten social rules and ways of speaking and moving
(Hodder 2012). When material culture changes, so do persons, because the
16 MANUEL FERNÁNDEZ-GÖTZ AND DIRK KRAUSSE

1.5. Materialized power: warrior statues from Northwestern Iberia. These stone sculptures
express the power acquired by particular aristocratic leaders towards the end of the Iron Age and
the role of the body as a privileged space for social negotiation (after González-Ruibal 2007).

material transforms them, and they come to perceive reality, nature, and the
body in a different way. Riding a horse instead of walking, using a glass ves-
sel instead of a wooden one, consuming wine, and separating different rooms
within a house are not merely incidental aspects that reflect aesthetic or tech-
nical changes alone; they actively and profoundly influence the construction
of identity, whether consciously or unconsciously. In fact, studying material
culture can be valuable for gaining access to issues outside conscious awareness
(Hernando 2012). Finally, behind all these transformations we should note not
MATERIALITIES OF COMPLEXITY IN ANCIENT EURASIA
only a new experience of being-in-the-world but also the capillary nature of
power that, according to Foucault (1980), percolates through the interstices of
daily life.
NOTES
1. ‘Individualization, Urbanization and Social
Differentiation: Intellectual and Cultural
Streams in Eurasia (800–400 BC).’ Organiz-
ers: Prof. Dirk Krausse, Dr. Manuel Fernández-
Götz, Dr. Denise Beilharz, and Prof. Martin
Bartelheim. The conference was funded by
the German Research Foundation (DFG) and
the Ministry of Finance Baden-Württemberg.
REFERENCES
Anthony, D. W. (2007): The Horse, the Wheel,
and Language: How Bronze-Age Riders from
the Eurasian Steppes Shaped the Modern World.
Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Arnason, J. P./S. N. Eisenstadt/B. Wittrock (eds.)
(2005): Axial Civilizations and World History.
Brill, Leiden.
Bellah, R. N./H. Joas (eds.) (2012): The Axial Age
and Its Consequences. Harvard University Press,
Cambridge, MA.
Broodbank, C. (2013): The Making of the Mid-
dle Sea: A History of the Mediterranean from the
Beginning to the Emergence of the Classical World.
Thames & Hudson, London.
Chapman, J./M. Videiko/B. Gaydarska/N.
Burdo/D. Hale/R. Villis/N. Swann/N.
Thomas/P. Edwards/A. Blair/A. Hayes/M.
Nebbia/V. Rud (2014): The planning of
the earliest European proto-towns: A new
geophysical plan of the Trypillia megasite
of Nebelivka, Kirovograd Domain, Ukraine.
Antiquity Gallery, available at http://antiquity
.ac.uk/projgall/chapman339/.
Chic García, G. (ed.) (2014): Historia de Europa
(ss. X a.C. – V d.C.). Universidad de Sevilla,
Sevilla.
Childe, V. G. (1925): The Dawn of European Civi-
lization. Kegan Paul, London.
Clark, P. (ed.) (2013): The Oxford Handbook of
Cities in World History. Oxford University
Press, Oxford.
17
We thank D. Beilharz for her assistance in the
production of this volume.
2. Directly related to this topic was the interna-
tional conference ‘Appropriating Innovations:
Entangled Knowledge in Eurasia, 5000–1500
BCE,’ which was held in Heidelberg in January
2015.
Creekmore, A. T./K. Fisher (eds.) (2014): Making
Ancient Cities: Space and Place in Early Urban
Societies. Cambridge University Press, Cam-
bridge.
Cunliffe, B. (2008): Europe between the Oceans:
Themes and Variations: 9000 BC–AD 1000. Yale
University Press, New Haven.
Descola, P. (2013): Beyond Nature and Culture.
University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Dülmen, R. van (ed.) (2001): Entdeckung des Ich:
Die Geschichte der Individualisierung vom Mitte-
lalter bis zur Gegenwart. Böhlau, Cologne.
Earle, T. (2002): Bronze Age Economics: The Begin-
nings of Political Economies. Westview Press,
Boulder.
Elias, N. (1991): The Society of Individuals. Black-
well, Oxford.
Elias, N. (1994): The Civilizing Process. Blackwell,
Oxford.
Everett, D. L. (2005): Cultural constraints on
grammar and cognition in Pirahã: Another
look at the design features of human language.
Current Anthropology 46 (4), 621–646.
Fernández-Götz, M. (2014): Identity and Power:
The Transformation of Iron Age Societies in North-
east Gaul. Amsterdam Archaeological Studies
21. Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam.
Fernández-Götz, M./H. Wendling/K. Winger
(eds.) (2014): Paths to Complexity: Centralisa-
tion and Urbanisation in Iron Age Europe.Oxbow
Books, Oxford.
18 MANUEL FERNÁNDEZ-GÖTZ AND DIRK KRAUSSE
Foucault, M. (1980): Power/Knowledge: Selected
Interviews and Other Writings. Pantheon, New
York.
Fowler, C. (2004): The Archaeology of Person-
hood: An Anthropological Approach. Routledge,
London.
Fowler, C. (2016): Relational Personhood Revis-
ited. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 26 (3),
397–412.
Gates, C. (2011): Ancient Cities: The Archaeology of
Urban Life in the Ancient Near East and Egypt,
Greece and Rome. Routledge, New York.
González-Ruibal, A. (2006–07): Galaicos. Poder y
comunidad en el Noroeste de la Península Ibérica.
Brigantium 18/19, A Coruña.
González-Ruibal, A. (2007): La vida social de
los objetos castreños. In F. J. González García
(ed.), Los pueblos de la Galicia céltica. Akal,
Madrid, 259–322.
González-Ruibal, A. (2014): An Archaeology of
Resistance:Materiality and Time in an African Bo-
rderland. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, MD.
Goody,J.(1986):The Logic of Writing and the Orga-
nization of Society. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
Harding, A./S. Sievers/N. Venclová (eds.) (2006):
Enclosing the Past: Inside and outside in Prehistory.
J. R. Collis Publications, Sheffield.
Harris,R.(2009):Rationality and the Literate Mind.
Routledge, New York.
Hernando, A. (2002): Arqueología de la Identidad.
Akal, Madrid.
Hernando, A. (2012): La fantasía de la individuali-
dad. Katz, Buenos Aires.
Hernando, A./A. González-Ruibal (2011): Frac-
talidad, materialidad y cultura: Un estu-
dio etnoarqueológico de los Awá-Guajá
de Maranhão (Brasil). Revista Chilena de
Antropología 24, 9–61.
Hodder, I. (2012): Entangled: An Archaeology of
the Relationships between Humans and Things.
Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford.
Krausse, D./M. Fernández-Götz/L. Hansen/I.
Kretschmer (2016):The Heuneburg and the Early
Iron Age Princely Seats: First Towns North of the
Alps. Archaeolingua, Budapest.
Kristiansen, K. (1998): Europe before History.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Kristiansen, K./T. B. Larsson (2005): The Rise of
Bronze Age Society: Travels, Transmissions and
Transformations. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
Leenhardt, M. (1979): Do Kamo: Person and Myth
in the Melanesian World. University of Chicago
Press, Chicago.
Lowenthal, D. (1985): The Past Is a Foreign Coun-
try. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Malafouris, L. (2013): How Things Shape the Mind:
A Theory of Material Engagement. MIT Press,
Cambridge, MA.
Maran, J./P. W. Stockhammer (eds.) (2012): Mate-
riality and Social Practice: Transformative Capac-
ities of Intercultural Encounters. Oxbow Books,
Oxford.
Marcus, J./M. Sabloff (eds.) (2008): The Ancient
City: New Perspectives on Urbanism in the Old
and New World. SAR Press, Santa Fe, NM.
Morris, I. (2000): Archaeology as Cultural History:
Words and Things in Iron Age Greece. Blackwell,
Oxford.
Müller, J. (ed.) (forthcoming): Archaeology of
Rebellion. Habelt, Bonn.
Müller,J./K.Rassmann/M.Videiko (eds.) (2016):
Trypillia: Mega-Sites and European Prehistory
4100–3400 BCE. Themes in Contemporary
Archaeology 2. Routledge, London.
Olsen, B. (2007): Genealogías de la asimetría: por
qué nos hemos olvidado de las cosas. In A.
González-Ruibal (ed.), Arqueología Simétrica:
Un giro teórico sin revolución paradigmática. Com-
plutum 18, 287–291.
Olsen, B. (2010): In Defense of Things: Archaeol-
ogy and the Ontology of Objects. AltaMira Press,
Lanham, MD.
Olson, D. R. (1994): The World on Paper: The Con-
ceptual and Cognitive Implication of Writing and
Reading. Cambridge University Press, Cam-
bridge.
Olson, D. R. (2016): The Mind on Paper: Reading,
Consciousness and Rationality. Cambridge Uni-
versity Press, Cambridge.
Osborne, R. (2005): Urban sprawl: What is
urbanization and why does it matter? In
R. Osborne/B. Cunliffe (eds.), Mediterranean
Urbanization 800–600 BC. Oxford University
Press, Oxford, 1–16.
MATERIALITIES OF COMPLEXITY IN ANCIENT EURASIA
Powell, B. (2012): Writing: Theory and History of
the Technology of Civilization. Wiley-Blackwell,
Oxford.
Renfrew, C. (2007): Prehistory: The Making of
the Human Mind. Weidenfeld & Nicolson,
London.
Rice, P. M. (1991): Specialization, standardiza-
tion, and diversity: A retrospective. In R. L.
Bishop/F. W. Lange (eds.), The Ceramic Legacy
of Anna O. Shepard. University Press of Col-
orado, Niwot, 257–279.
Scarre, C. (ed.) (2005): The Human Past: World
Prehistory & the Development of Human Societies.
Thames & Hudson, London.
Sievers, S. (2010): L’oppidum de Manching.
L’Archéologue, archéologie nouvelle 108, 32–35.
Smith, M. E. (2009): V. Gordon Childe and the
urban revolution: A historical perspective on
a revolution in urban studies. Town Planning
Review 80 (1), 3–29.
Smith, M. E. (ed.) (2012): The Comparative Archae-
ology of Complex Societies. Cambridge Univer-
sity Press, Cambridge.
19
Smith, M. L. (ed.) (2003): The Social Construction
of Ancient Cities. Smithsonian Institution Press,
Washington, DC.
Thomas, J. (2004): Archaeology and Modernity.
Routledge, London.
Trigger, B. G. (2007): Understanding Early Civ-
ilizations: A Comparative Study. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
Wells, P. S. (2008): Image and Response in Early
Europe. Duckworth, London.
Wells, P. S. (2012): How Ancient Europeans Saw the
World: Vision, Patterns, and the Shaping of the
Mind in Prehistoric Times. Princeton University
Press, Princeton.
Wilkinson, T. C./S. Sherratt/J. Bennet (eds.)
(2011): Interweaving Worlds: Systemic Interaction
in Eurasia, 7th to the 1st Millennia BC. Oxbow
Books, Oxford.
Yoffee, N. (ed.) (2015): The Cambridge World His-
tory. Volume 3: Early Cities in Comparative Per-
spective, 4000 BCE–1200 CE. Cambridge Uni-
versity Press, Cambridge.