FrBeakr

From Seshat Data Browser
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Phase I Variables (polity-based)

General variables

♠ RA ♣ Agathe Dupeyron ♥

♠ Original name ♣ Beaker Culture ♥

♠ Alternative names ♣ Bell-beaker culture ♥ [1]

♠ Peak Date ♣ ♥

Temporal bounds

♠ Duration ♣ 3200-2000 BCE ♥ [2] 2800-1800 BCE [3] [2900-2000 BCE] "The Late Neolithic/Early Bronze Age Bell Beaker culture is found in western, central and Mediterranean Europe, 2900-2000 BC (Figure 8.4) ) (Harrison 1980)." [4]

After 2500 BCE: expansion of the Bell-Beaker complex into Western Europe. [5]

♠ Degree of centralization ♣ quasi-polity ♥

♠ Supra-polity relations ♣ none ♥

Supra-cultural relations

♠ preceding (quasi)polity ♣ Late Neolithic Europe ♥ "Throughout this Atlantic zone, a common set of artefacts made their appearance in the later third millennium: the Bell-Beakers themselves, individual burials in round mounds, and an associated set of weapons and small stone and metal artefacts. These Bell-Beaker tumuli often formed the nuclei for continuing clusters of such barrow-burials in succeeding centuries. [...] Rather than representing a coherent migration of a distinctive people, the Bell-Beaker phenomenon is better seen as the outcome of the kind of processes discussed at the end of Chapter 5: as part of the breakdown of traditional social structures and the emergence of more mobile ways of life that began in northern Europe after 3000 BC. [...] The name given to this phenomenon comes from the characteristic drinking vessel with its inverted bell-shaped profile, which carries incised decoration in horizontal zones around the body." [6]
♠ relationship to preceding (quasi)polity ♣ {continuity; population migration} ♥ "Some scholars believe that the Beaker package was spread by actual immigrants or by traders in search of desired materials, while others argue that they represent an ideology and set of status symbols that were readily taken up by the emerging leaders of increasingly hierarchical communities. [...] In some regions Beaker practices were adopted wholesale and marked a sharp break with earlier traditions. In others there was some continuity: For example, final burials in some megalithic tombs contained Beaker material. Settlements belonging to the makers of Beaker pottery are elusive, and it has been suggested that they led a relatively mobile way of life, probably associated with pastoralism, though probably, like Corded Ware, Beaker material was used by communities practicing many economic strategies."[7]
♠ succeeding (quasi)polity ♣ Atlantic Complex ♥
♠ Supracultural entity ♣ Chalcolithic; Late Neolithic ♥ [8] "The following are the more important of the archaeological cultures, which fall within the timespan of the Late Neolithic: the south-eastern European Late Gumelnitsa, Salcutsa, and the Late Tripolye culture of the Ukraine, the central European Corded Ware, Globular Amphora, BodrogkeresztUr, Baden, late Funnel Beaker, and Bell Beaker cultures." [9]
♠ scale of supra-cultural interaction ♣ ♥ km squared. An estimate of the area encompassed by the supracultural entity

♠ Capital ♣ none ♥

♠ Language ♣ ♥

General Description

In the late 3rd millennium BCE, new forms of material culture spread across the former megalithic zone of Neolithic Europe.[10][11][12] The Beaker, or Bell-Beaker,[13] phenomenon is named after a characteristic drinking vessel, which had an inverted bell shape and was decorated with incisions.[14] Other features of this cultural 'package' include individual burials in round mounds, sets of weapons and metals, and other precious items.[15]
The phenomenon started in what is now the Netherlands and expanded into Britain, Brittany, southern Spain and then into most of continental France, Belgium, Switzerland and Western Europe in the form of small pockets of activity.[16][17]

Population and political organization

Beaker society was organized into myriad stratified polities of varying sizes. Some were composed of small, dispersed communities with 10 to 20 domestic units,[18] but larger groups could gather into fortified settlements: Los Millares in Spain was home to 1000-1500 people.[19] The Beaker culture is also associated with demographic growth in Europe, as the small-scale polities moved into previously marginal lands.[20]
The spread of this material culture has been interpreted as evidence for a wide set of circulation networks, fuelled by elite demand for prestige goods.[21] The items may have been exchanged on the occasion of social rituals consolidating the power of emerging leaders.[22] In this interpretation, the archaeologically visible spread of Beaker culture would not be tied to immigration but to the emergence of mobile ways of life,[23] with independent leaders affirming their belonging to a wider cultural sphere through the consumption and display of valuable items.[24]
Beaker people built on the legacy of their early Neolithic predecessors, reusing and modifying ceremonial structures such as Stonehenge.[25] However they distinguished themselves through their burial customs, preferring single burials in grave pits to passage and gallery graves. In certain areas, such as the Iberian Peninsula or southern France, they occasionally reused ancient megalithic structures.[26]

Social Complexity variables

♠ RA ♣ Agathe Dupeyron ♥

Social Scale

♠ Polity territory ♣ ♥ in squared kilometers

♠ Polity Population ♣ [800-1200] ♥ for a fortified settlement.

around 100 inhabitants for isolated settlement

"Settlement System. It seems that the population of the areas of influence of the Bell Beaker was mainly dispersed. The settlements are single or isolated, or, at most, there are concentrations of 10 to 20 domestic units. This type of settlement may allow its inhabitants to move with a certain frequency." [27] From that we can infer that polity population was probably around 100 inhabitants. "The Bell Beaker communities developed in a period of demographic growth, as we can deduce from the numerous sites of this period, the fact that the Bell Beaker communities moved to and exploited previously marginal lands, and the fact that in some areas there was a more permanent and nuclear type of settlement. But there are some differences depending on the different areas of study.

fortified settlements. 1000-1500

In the areas where there was a dispersed type of settlement, the number of inhabitants per settlement was not very high (one or two families). On the other hand, in the areas where there are remains of fortified settlements, the number of inhabitants may be higher. For example, Los Millares (Spain) may have had between 1,000 and 1,500 inhabitants, considering the surface of the settlement and the minimum number of individuals necessary to benefit from the fortifications." [28]

long village of 50 individuals

"In this settlement, only the sandy ridge itself can be regarded as arable lend. This ridge 700-800 m long and between 70-100 m wide, would give roughly 5 to 8 ha of fertile land. This area could be expected to support a family of four to seven people (Harrison 1986). If all the eight sites along the ridge were occupied at the same time, the total number of people in this long "village" would number only up to 50 individuals (Harrison 1986)." [29] in Molenaarsgraaf (Netherlands)


♠ Population of the largest settlement ♣ [800-1200] ♥

"But nevertheless, in some sites, the archaeological entries are so numerous that we have to talk of major (even fortified) settlements. Some exam- ples are Los Millares (Southeast Spain), Vilanova de Sao Pedro (Portugal), Camp de Laure (France), and Mount Pleasant (Great Britain). These settlements cover up to a few hectares and are usually found in easily defensible areas, such as hills or river spurs." [30] "The Bell Beaker communities developed in a period of demographic growth, as we can deduce from the numerous sites of this period, the fact that the Bell Beaker communities moved to and exploited previously marginal lands, and the fact that in some areas there was a more permanent and nuclear type of settlement. But there are some differences depending on the different areas of study. In the areas where there was a dispersed type of settlement, the number of inhabitants per settlement was not very high (one or two families). On the other hand, in the areas where there are remains of fortified settlements, the number of inhabitants may be higher. For example, Los Millares (Spain) may have had between 1,000 and 1,500 inhabitants, considering the surface of the settlement and the minimum number of individuals necessary to benefit from the fortifications." [31]

Hierarchical Complexity

♠ Settlement hierarchy ♣ [1-2] ♥ levels. "Towns began to appear in the late first millennium over much of Europe, with considerable populations and large-scale industrial activity." [32] From this we can infer that most settlements before the 1st millennium BCE were villages or hamlets. "The fortified settlements had a hierarchical system of population with an area of influence more or less extensive." [33]

♠ Administrative levels ♣ 1 ♥ levels. Probably unknown. At least one can be inferred for a fortified settlement.

"Political Organization. It seems that, at least in some areas, there was a significant increase of social disparity and, as a consequence, an increase in the number of communities with a stratified social structure and the beginning of leadership. However, in other areas, it seems that tribal structures remained, but it is possible that they were hierarchical in some way. There were different types of hierarchies, with different levels of division of work, but nowadays we cannot be sure of the exact level of division of labor." [34]

♠ Religious levels ♣ suspected unknown ♥ No information found in sources.

♠ Military levels ♣ suspected unknown ♥ No information found in sources.

Professions

♠ Professional military officers ♣ suspected unknown ♥

♠ Professional soldiers ♣ suspected unknown ♥

♠ Professional priesthood ♣ suspected unknown ♥

Bureaucracy characteristics

♠ Full-time bureaucrats ♣ suspected unknown ♥

♠ Examination system ♣ suspected unknown ♥

♠ Merit promotion ♣ suspected unknown ♥

♠ Specialized government buildings ♣ suspected unknown ♥

Law

♠ Formal legal code ♣ suspected unknown ♥

♠ Judges ♣ suspected unknown ♥

♠ Courts ♣ suspected unknown ♥

♠ Professional Lawyers ♣ suspected unknown ♥

Specialized Buildings: polity owned

♠ irrigation systems ♣ inferred present ♥ "In the Mediterranean area, transhumance was very important, but in other areas, such as Central Europe, Great Britain, and the Southeast of the Iberian peninsula, production was based on intensive agriculture, thanks to the generalization of some innovations such as the plow, the carts drawn by animals, and a primitive system of irrigation." [35]
♠ drinking water supply systems ♣ suspected unknown ♥ No information found in sources.
♠ markets ♣ suspected unknown ♥ No information found in sources.
♠ food storage sites ♣ ♥

Transport infrastructure

♠ Roads ♣ inferred present ♥ Roads are present in earlier times, so we could infer that they were still in use in the Late Neolithic. "Use of carts suggests the presence of roads. As previously mentioned, a cart track was found under a Funnel Beaker megalithic tomb at Flintbek, near Kiel in Germany in 1989 (Zich 1993) which can be dated typologically to around 3630/3500 BC. A number of scholars have attempted to reconstruct Neolithic roadways. Bakker(1976:66-67)notes that "the difference between the prehistoric major routes in the North European Plain and those of the early Middle Ages was very slight" Also, the existence of trackways in bog areas may be connected with the appearance of carts around 3500 BC. Wooden trackways, 4 m wide and made of oak, pine, alder and ash, dated to the Third millennium BC have been found in bogs in northern Germany (Hayen 1985). Trees from an estimated 40 ha of forest were needed to construct 1 km of trackway. The trackway at DUmmer, dated to the mid-third millennium BC, is 2.5 km long and used 15,000 planks from 2,500 trees, mostly alder, for its construction. Not all trackways were suitable for wheeled transport as has been shown by Coles (1975). The track built of split alder trunks at Abbot's Way in England is over 1200 m long, but only 1-1.5 m wide, with an irregular surface. Such constructions indicate that members of Neolithic communities could be mobilized from time to time for communal activities." [36]
♠ Bridges ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Canals ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Ports ♣ suspected unknown ♥

Special purpose sites

♠ Mines or quarries ♣ present ♥ "The attractive honey-colored flint from the Grand Pressigny mines was used to make long blades and daggers and was also traded in the form of cores, being distributed deep into northern and central Europe and being buried in single graves with AOO beakers or battle-axes." [37]

Information

Writing System

♠ Mnemonic devices ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Nonwritten records ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Written records ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Script ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Non-phonetic writing ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Phonetic alphabetic writing ♣ suspected unknown ♥

Kinds of Written Documents

♠ Lists, tables, and classifications ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Calendar ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Sacred Texts ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Religious literature ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Practical literature ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ History ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Philosophy ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Scientific literature ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Fiction ♣ suspected unknown ♥


Money

♠ Articles ♣ inferred present ♥ "From a functionalist point of view, it is suggested that the circulation networks changed and became wider because the elite demanded some goods of prestige, with a special preference for the exotic goods, to reinforce their status. So the Bell Beakers and their associated products can be understood as symbols of prestige. The goods of prestige may have been exchanged through social rituals such as weddings, initiation ceremonies, and funerals or may have been part of a more complex exchange system, which would have been essential to communicate with other elite. It is suggested that, together with these goods of prestige, through the same ways, circulated other goods (metals, salt, foods, and other essential raw materials) and that these goods were also reserved for the most powerful men, their families, and some proteges. Metallic objects were very important in these commercial networks." [38]
♠ Tokens ♣ inferred present ♥ "From a functionalist point of view, it is suggested that the circulation networks changed and became wider because the elite demanded some goods of prestige, with a special preference for the exotic goods, to reinforce their status. So the Bell Beakers and their associated products can be understood as symbols of prestige. The goods of prestige may have been exchanged through social rituals such as weddings, initiation ceremonies, and funerals or may have been part of a more complex exchange system, which would have been essential to communicate with other elite. It is suggested that, together with these goods of prestige, through the same ways, circulated other goods (metals, salt, foods, and other essential raw materials) and that these goods were also reserved for the most powerful men, their families, and some proteges. Metallic objects were very important in these commercial networks." [39]
♠ Precious metals ♣ inferred present ♥ "There is evidence of these new circulation networks in the fact that we find, in some areas, objects and materials that must have come from far away, because they are not characteristic of these particular areas. They are naturally scarce materials (gold), materials that are found only in very limited areas (obsidian), and exotic materials (ivory from Africa and amber from the Baltic)." [40]
♠ Foreign coins ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Indigenous coins ♣ suspected unknown ♥.
♠ Paper currency ♣ suspected unknown ♥

Postal System

♠ Couriers ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Postal stations ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ General postal service ♣ suspected unknown ♥

Warfare variables

♠ RA ♣ Agathe Dupeyron; Edward A L Turner ♥

Military Technologies

Military use of Metals

♠ Copper ♣ present ♥ "The need for prestige goods probably underlies the widespread adoption of new styles of pottery, particularly Corded Ware and Beakers, which were associated with other distinctive artifacts, such as bat- tle-axes, archery equipment, and ornaments of metal and other exotic materials. Metal artifacts spread to most parts of the continent during the third millennium and copper and gold metallurgy were widely adopted; some Corded Ware groups may have practiced a limited amount of copper metallurgy, but in western Europe the spread of metalworking was often associated with Beaker pottery." [41]
♠ Bronze ♣ absent ♥ "The first users of Bell-Beakers did not practice metallurgy, and the earliest daggers were made of flint; though they soon came to be cast in copper" [42]
♠ Iron ♣ absent ♥ Chronologically before the Iron Age
♠ Steel ♣ suspected unknown ♥ No information found in sources.

Projectiles

♠ Javelins ♣ inferred present ♥ "Spears were used from the Palaeolithic period for hunting, both handheld and as projectiles, and also served as weapons in early times, though it was not until the Middle Bronze Age when socketed metal spearheads began to be developed that spear superseded arrows as the preferred projectile. Their frequency in Bronze and Iron Age burials shows that they were used by all warriors and particularly by fighters who did not own a sword." [43]
♠ Atlatl ♣ inferred absent ♥ Not mentioned in the literature.
♠ Slings ♣ inferred absent ♥ Not mentioned in the literature.
♠ Self bow ♣ present ♥ "The need for prestige goods probably underlies the widespread adoption of new styles of pottery, particularly Corded Ware and Beakers, which were associated with other distinctive artifacts, such as battle-axes, archery equipment, and ornaments of metal and other exotic materials." [44]
♠ Composite bow ♣ inferred absent ♥ Not mentioned in the literature.
♠ Crossbow ♣ inferred absent ♥ Not mentioned in the literature.
♠ Tension siege engines ♣ inferred absent ♥ Not mentioned in the literature.
♠ Sling siege engines ♣ inferred absent ♥ Not mentioned in the literature.
♠ Gunpowder siege artillery ♣ inferred absent ♥ Not mentioned in the literature.
♠ Handheld firearms ♣ inferred absent ♥ Not mentioned in the literature.

Handheld weapons

♠ War clubs ♣ inferred present ♥ "Disc-shaped stone objects with a shafthole were made in the Neolithic period and are generally thought to have been mace heads, used as weapons, although there is no clear evidence of this before the Chalcolithic period." [45]
♠ Battle axes ♣ present ♥ "The need for prestige goods probably underlies the widespread adoption of new styles of pottery, particularly Corded Ware and Beakers, which were associated with other distinctive artifacts, such as battle-axes, archery equipment, and ornaments of metal and other exotic materials." [46] possibly ritual use though?
♠ Daggers ♣ present ♥ "Bell-Beakers are usually found with other weapons: daggers, and archery equipment such as triangular barbed-flint arrowheads and wristguards of fine stone." [47]
♠ Swords ♣ inferred absent ♥ "During the second millennium daggers became longer, evolving into rapiers; long, slender blades with sharp points for thrusting at the opponent. These were difficult to wield efficiently; examples where the rivets between blade and hilt had given way show the strain imposed when warriors attacked with a sweeping action. By the later second millennium narrow rapiers had developed into wider swords with cutting edges, suitable for deal- ing slashing blows, and Carp’s-Tongue swords (a long blade with a long narrow point and slotted hilt) designed both to thrust and to cut. At the same time hilts also evolved, giving a better grip and replacing the weak riveted join between blade and hilt with a flange extending from the blade to which a hilt of other materials was fastened." [48]
♠ Spears ♣ inferred present ♥ "Spears were used from the Palaeolithic period for hunting, both handheld and as projectiles, and also served as weapons in early times, though it was not until the Middle Bronze Age when socketed metal spearheads began to be developed that spear superseded arrows as the preferred projectile. Their frequency in Bronze and Iron Age burials shows that they were used by all warriors and par- ticularly by fighters who did not own a sword." [49] Reference is not specific to Paris Basin cultures so more research is needed.
♠ Polearms ♣ inferred present ♥ "Blades were also mounted at right angles to a wooden staff as halberds in the Early Bronze Age: they were unreliable weapons as they tended to shear at the rivets joining blade to shaft." [50]Reference is not specific to Paris Basin cultures so more research is needed.

Animals used in warfare

♠ Dogs ♣ suspected unknown♥ Not mentioned in the literature.
♠ Donkeys ♣ inferred absent ♥ Not mentioned in the literature.
♠ Horses ♣ inferred present ♥ "Horses, originally domesticated in the east and introduced into Southeast Europe by steppe people, were now being domesticated from local wild herds by the people in southern central Europe. From there they spread widely within the rest of Europe, being found, for instance, in Scandinavia in the late TRB or early Corded Ware period and in western Europe and the Mediterranean in Beaker contexts." [51]
♠ Camels ♣ inferred absent ♥ Not mentioned in the literature.
♠ Elephants ♣ inferred absent ♥ Not mentioned in the literature.

Armor

♠ Wood, bark, etc ♣ suspected unknown ♥ Not mentioned in the literature.
♠ Leather, cloth ♣ inferred present ♥ "Bell-Beakers are usually found with other weapons: daggers, and archery equipment such as triangular barbed-flint arrowheads and wristguards of fine stone. The first users of Bell-Beakers did not practice metallurgy, and the earliest daggers were made of flint; though they soon came to be cast in copper, and then bronze. This martial image was perhaps completed by leather jerkins and later by woven fabrics, held by a belt with an ornamental bone ring to secure it; such figures are schematically represented on the later statue menhirs of the west Alpine region." [52]
♠ Shields ♣ suspected unknown ♥ Not mentioned in the literature.
♠ Helmets ♣ inferred absent ♥ "Leather and bronze helmets were developed in the Bronze Age, the latter often for ceremonial use. An impressive pair of Late Bronze Age helmets were recovered from Viksø in Denmark; they bore long curved horns and a face made up of eyes, eyebrows, and a curling beak." [53] no geographical resolution, no indication that they were present before the Early Bronze Age.
♠ Breastplates ♣ inferred absent ♥ Inferred from absence of breastplates in previous and subsequent (quasi)polities in Paris Basin.
♠ Limb protection ♣ inferred absent ♥ Inferred from absence of breastplates in previous and subsequent (quasi)polities in Paris Basin.
♠ Chainmail ♣ absent ♥ "Protective equipment is virtually unknown before the third millennium and was only seriously developed in the Bronze Age, when weapons became common and conflict more formalized and predictable." [54]
♠ Scaled armor ♣ absent ♥ "Protective equipment is virtually unknown before the third millennium and was only seriously developed in the Bronze Age, when weapons became common and conflict more formalized and predictable." [55]
♠ Laminar armor ♣ absent ♥ "Protective equipment is virtually unknown before the third millennium and was only seriously developed in the Bronze Age, when weapons became common and conflict more formalized and predictable." [56]
♠ Plate armor ♣ absent ♥ "Protective equipment is virtually unknown before the third millennium and was only seriously developed in the Bronze Age, when weapons became common and conflict more formalized and predictable." [57]

Naval technology

♠ Small vessels (canoes, etc) ♣ inferred present ♥ "the Bronze Age is the period that saw the development of a new type of seafaring craft, the sewn-plank boat, which would have been suited to undertake the long-distance journeys required for maintaining exchange networks; and that evidence in the form of logboats indicates that rivers became increasingly important during this period as arteries for travel and transport" [58]
♠ Merchant ships pressed into service ♣ inferred absent ♥ Not mentioned in the literature.
♠ Specialized military vessels ♣ inferred absent ♥ Not mentioned in the literature.

Fortifications

♠ Settlements in a defensive position ♣ present ♥ "But nevertheless, in some sites, the archaeological entries are so numerous that we have to talk of major (even fortified) settlements. Some exam- ples are Los Millares (Southeast Spain), Vilanova de Sao Pedro (Portugal), Camp de Laure (France), and Mount Pleasant (Great Britain). These settlements cover up to a few hectares and are usually found in easily defensible areas, such as hills or river spurs." [59]
♠ Wooden palisades ♣ present ♥ "The defensive structures of these settlements were large stone walls, sometimes reinforced with bastions and towers. In a few reported cases, there is evidence of the existence of a wooden palisade." [60]
♠ Earth ramparts ♣ suspected unknown ♥ Not mentioned in the literature.
♠ Ditch ♣ present ♥ "Evidence for warfare varies in the different areas of Europe during the Late Neolithic. In France, numerous fortified sites are found (Cassen and Boujot 1990); for example, in the Charentes and adjoining regions approximately 60 fortified sites are known (Giot 1994). Some of them such as Champ-Durand in Vendee, have a triple row of interrupted ditches with dry-stone walls and towers to protect entrances." [61]
♠ Moat ♣ inferred absent ♥ Not mentioned in the literature.
♠ Stone walls (non-mortared) ♣ present ♥ "Evidence for warfare varies in the different areas of Europe during the Late Neolithic. In France, numerous fortified sites are found (Cassen and Boujot 1990); for example, in the Charentes and adjoining regions approximately 60 fortified sites are known (Giot 1994). Some of them such as Champ-Durand in Vendee, have a triple row of interrupted ditches with dry-stone walls and towers to protect entrances." [62]
♠ Stone walls (mortared) ♣ inferred absent ♥ Not mentioned in the literature.
♠ Fortified camps ♣ present ♥ "Evidence for warfare varies in the different areas of Europe during the Late Neolithic. In France, numerous fortified sites are found (Cassen and Boujot 1990); for example, in the Charentes and adjoining regions approximately 60 fortified sites are known (Giot 1994). Some of them such as Champ-Durand in Vendee, have a triple row of interrupted ditches with dry-stone walls and towers to protect entrances." [63]
♠ Complex fortifications ♣ present ♥ three lines of walls in Los Millares (Chalcolithic site in Spain with Beaker influences) "Los Millares in Almeria was "surrounded by an extensive defensive system, comprising three lines of walls, associated bastions, towers, a ditch...and, in a later phase, outlying forts," (Monks 1997:15). The site probably enclosed an area of 2 ha (5 acres). It was built of limestone held together with mortar. "The outerwall, which belongs to a later phase, is over 300 m in length, with an elaborate barbican entrance flanked by towers and bastions, and an outer ditch. Openings or arrowslits provide good visibility...as well as providing protection for archers firing from within the towers" (Monks 1997:15-16)." [64]
♠ Long walls ♣ 0 ♥ km.
♠ Modern fortifications ♣ inferred absent ♥ Not mentioned in the literature.


Phase II Variables (polity-based)

Institutional Variables

♠ RA ♣ ♥

Limits on Power of the Chief Executive

Power distributed

♠ Constraint on executive by government ♣ ♥
♠ Constraint on executive by non-government ♣ ♥
♠ Impeachment ♣ ♥

Social Mobility

Status

Elite status

♠ elite status is hereditary ♣ suspected unknown ♥ "It seems that, at least in some areas, there was a significant increase of social disparity and, as a consequence, an increase in the number of communities with a stratified social structure and the beginning of leadership. However, in other areas, it seems that tribal structures remained, but it is possible that they were hierarchical in some way. There were different types of hierarchies, with different levels of division of work, but nowadays we cannot be sure of the exact level of division of labor."[65]

Religion and Normative Ideology

♠ RA ♣ Enrico Cioni ♥

Deification of Rulers

♠ Rulers are legitimated by gods ♣ suspected unknown ♥

♠ Rulers are gods ♣ suspected unknown ♥

Normative Ideological Aspects of Equity and Prosociality

♠ Ideological reinforcement of equality ♣ suspected unknown ♥

♠ Ideological thought equates rulers and commoners ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Ideological thought equates elites and commoners ♣ suspected unknown ♥

♠ Ideology reinforces prosociality ♣ suspected unknown ♥

♠ production of public goods ♣ suspected unknown ♥

Moralizing Supernatural Powers

♠ Moral concern is primary ♣ inferred absent ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement is certain ♣ unknown ♥
♠ Moralizing norms are broad ♣ inferred absent ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement is targeted ♣ inferred present ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement of rulers ♣ inferred present ♥
♠ Moralizing religion adopted by elites ♣ inferred present ♥
♠ Moralizing religion adopted by commoners ♣ inferred present ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement in afterlife ♣ unknown ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement in this life ♣ inferred present ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement is agentic ♣ inferred present ♥

These data were reviewed by expert advisors and consultants. For a detailed description of these data, refer to the relevant Analytic Narratives, reference tables, and acknowledgements page. [66] [67] [68]

References

  1. (Milisauskas and Kruk 2002, 248)
  2. (McIntosh 2006, 55)
  3. (Sherratt in Cunliffe 1994, 250)
  4. (Milisauskas and Kruk 2002, 252)
  5. (Sherratt in Cunliffe 1994, 250)
  6. (Sherratt in Cunliffe 1994, 250-251)
  7. (McIntosh 2006, 61)
  8. (McIntosh 2006, 55)
  9. (Milisauskas and Kruk 2002, 248)
  10. (McIntosh 2006, 55) McIntosh, J. 2006. Handbook to Life in Prehistoric Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/B5R92FJH.
  11. (Sherratt 1994, 250) Sherratt, Andrew. 1994. "The emergence of elites: earlier Bronze Age Europe, 2500-1300 BC." in B. Cunliffe (ed.) The Oxford illustrated prehistory of Europe: 244-276. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/STUGR4MM.
  12. (Milisauskas and Kruk 2002, 252) Milisauskas, Sarunas, and Janusz Kruk. 2002. “Late Neolithic Crises, Collapse, New Ideologies, and Economies, 3500/3000-2200/2000 BC.” In European Prehistory: A Survey, edited by Sarunas Milisauskas, 247-69. New York: Springer US. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/ERGSEABJ.
  13. (Milisauskas and Kruk 2002, 248) Milisauskas, Sarunas, and Janusz Kruk. 2002. “Late Neolithic Crises, Collapse, New Ideologies, and Economies, 3500/3000-2200/2000 BC.” In European Prehistory: A Survey, edited by Sarunas Milisauskas, 247-69. New York: Springer US. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/ERGSEABJ.
  14. (Sherratt 1994, 250-251) Sherratt, Andrew. 1994. "The emergence of elites: earlier Bronze Age Europe, 2500-1300 BC." in B. Cunliffe (ed.) The Oxford illustrated prehistory of Europe: 244-276. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/STUGR4MM.
  15. (Clop Garcia 2001, 26) Garcia, Xavier Clop. 2001. “Bell Beaker.” In Encyclopedia of Prehistory, edited by Peter Neal Peregrine and Melvin Ember, 4:24-31. New York: Springer US. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/XHZC4QMJ.
  16. (Sherratt 1994, 246) Sherratt, Andrew. 1994. "The emergence of elites: earlier Bronze Age Europe, 2500-1300 BC." in B. Cunliffe (ed.) The Oxford illustrated prehistory of Europe: 244-276. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/STUGR4MM.
  17. (Milisauskas and Kruk 2002, 214) Milisauskas, Sarunas, and Janusz Kruk. 2002. “Late Neolithic Crises, Collapse, New Ideologies, and Economies, 3500/3000-2200/2000 BC.” In European Prehistory: A Survey, edited by Sarunas Milisauskas, 247-69. New York: Springer US. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/ERGSEABJ.
  18. (Clop Garcia 2001, 25) Garcia, Xavier Clop. 2001. “Bell Beaker.” In Encyclopedia of Prehistory, edited by Peter Neal Peregrine and Melvin Ember, 4:24-31. New York: Springer US. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/XHZC4QMJ.
  19. (Clop Garcia 2001, 26) Garcia, Xavier Clop. 2001. “Bell Beaker.” In Encyclopedia of Prehistory, edited by Peter Neal Peregrine and Melvin Ember, 4:24-31. New York: Springer US. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/XHZC4QMJ.
  20. (Clop Garcia 2001, 26) Garcia, Xavier Clop. 2001. “Bell Beaker.” In Encyclopedia of Prehistory, edited by Peter Neal Peregrine and Melvin Ember, 4:24-31. New York: Springer US. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/XHZC4QMJ.
  21. (Clop Garcia 2001, 26) Garcia, Xavier Clop. 2001. “Bell Beaker.” In Encyclopedia of Prehistory, edited by Peter Neal Peregrine and Melvin Ember, 4:24-31. New York: Springer US. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/XHZC4QMJ.
  22. (Clop Garcia 2001, 26) Garcia, Xavier Clop. 2001. “Bell Beaker.” In Encyclopedia of Prehistory, edited by Peter Neal Peregrine and Melvin Ember, 4:24-31. New York: Springer US. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/XHZC4QMJ.
  23. (Sherratt 1994, 250-251) Sherratt, Andrew. 1994. "The emergence of elites: earlier Bronze Age Europe, 2500-1300 BC." in B. Cunliffe (ed.) The Oxford illustrated prehistory of Europe: 244-276. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/STUGR4MM.
  24. (Clop Garcia 2001, 26) Garcia, Xavier Clop. 2001. “Bell Beaker.” In Encyclopedia of Prehistory, edited by Peter Neal Peregrine and Melvin Ember, 4:24-31. New York: Springer US. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/XHZC4QMJ.
  25. (Clop Garcia 2001, 28) Garcia, Xavier Clop. 2001. “Bell Beaker.” In Encyclopedia of Prehistory, edited by Peter Neal Peregrine and Melvin Ember, 4:24-31. New York: Springer US. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/XHZC4QMJ.
  26. (Clop Garcia 2001, 28-29) Garcia, Xavier Clop. 2001. “Bell Beaker.” In Encyclopedia of Prehistory, edited by Peter Neal Peregrine and Melvin Ember, 4:24-31. New York: Springer US. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/XHZC4QMJ.
  27. (Clop Garcia 2001, 25)
  28. (Clop Garcia 2001, 26)
  29. (Clop Garcia 2001, 30)
  30. (Clop Garcia 2001, 25)
  31. (Clop Garcia 2001, 26)
  32. (McIntosh 2006, 155)
  33. (Clop Garcia 2001, 25)
  34. (Clop Garcia 2001, 28)
  35. (Clop Garcia in Peregrine and Ember 2001, 26)
  36. (Milisauskas and Kruk 2002, 214)
  37. (McIntosh 2006, 62)
  38. (Clop Garcia 2001, 26)
  39. (Clop Garcia 2001, 26)
  40. (Clop Garcia 2001, 26)
  41. (McIntosh 2006, 55-58)
  42. (Sherratt in Cunliffe 1994, 251)
  43. (McIntosh 2006, 298)
  44. (McIntosh 2006, 55-58)
  45. (McIntosh 2006, 298)
  46. (McIntosh 2006, 55-58)
  47. (Sherratt in Cunliffe 1994, 251)
  48. (McIntosh 2006, 298)
  49. (McIntosh 2006, 298)
  50. (McIntosh 2006, 298)
  51. (McIntosh 2006, 55-58)
  52. (Sherratt in Cunliffe 1994, 251)
  53. (McIntosh 2006, 300)
  54. (McIntosh 2006, 299)
  55. (McIntosh 2006, 299)
  56. (McIntosh 2006, 299)
  57. (McIntosh 2006, 299)
  58. (Fookens and Nicolis, 2012, 75)
  59. (Clop Garcia 2001, 25)
  60. (Clop Garcia 2001, 25)
  61. (Milisauskas and Kruk 2002, 259)
  62. (Milisauskas and Kruk 2002, 259)
  63. (Milisauskas and Kruk 2002, 259)
  64. (Milisauskas and Kruk 2002, 259)
  65. (Clop Garcia 2001, 28)
  66. http://seshatdatabank.info/databrowser/moralizing-supernatural-punishment-acknowledgements.html
  67. http://seshatdatabank.info/databrowser/moralizing-supernatural-punishment-narratives.html
  68. http://seshatdatabank.info/databrowser/moralizing-supernatural-punishment-nga_tables.html

Clop Garcia, X. 2001. Bell Beaker. In Peregrine, P.N. and M. Ember (eds) Encyclopedia of Prehistory. Volume 4: Europe, pp.24-31. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.

Cunliffe, B. 1994. ed. The Oxford Illustrated Prehistory of Europe. Oxford University Press: Oxford, New York.

Fokkens, H., Achterkamp, Y. and Kuijper, M. 2008. Bracers or Bracelets? About the Functionality and Meaning of Bell Beaker Wrist-guards. Proceddings of the Prehistoric Society 74:109-140

Fokkens, H. and Nicolis 2012. Background to Beakers : inquiries in regional cultural backgrounds of the Bell Beaker complex. Leiden : Sidestone Press

Heyd, V. 2013. Europe 2500 to 2200 BC: Between Expiring Ideologies and Emerging Complexity. In Fokkens, H. and Harding, A. The Oxford Handbook of The European Bronze Age. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p.47-67

McIntosh, J. 2006. Handbook to Life in Prehistoric Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Milisauskas, S. and J. Kruk. 2002. Late Neolithic crises, collapse, new ideologies, and economies: 3500/3000-2200/2000 BC. In S. Milisauskas (ed.) European Prehistory: a Survey, pp.247-270. First edition. Springer, New York.

Small, A. Margaret F. Bruce and Ian A. G. Shepherd. 1988. A beaker child burial from Catterline, Kincardine and Deeside. Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 11 8 (1988), 71-77, Fiche 2: El-7

Soriano, I., J. F. Gibaja and L. Vila. 2015. Open Warfare or the Odd Skirmish? Bell Beaker Violence in the North-Eastern Iberian Peninsula. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 34 (2), 157-183.