Neolithic Culture: the issues of interpretation

In Soviet science, the prevailing viewpoint was that the Neolithic culture corresponded to a group of related tribes. A.A. Formozov and M.V. Voyevodsky also distinguished larger communities: cultural areas, zones, provinces. The study of Australian aborigines has shown that they had no division into...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Vladimir V. Stavitsky
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: State institution «Tatarstan Аcademy of Sciences» 2024-08-01
Series:Археология евразийских степей
Subjects:
Online Access:https://evrazstep.ru/index.php/aes/issue/view/49
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1832586477101383680
author Vladimir V. Stavitsky
author_facet Vladimir V. Stavitsky
author_sort Vladimir V. Stavitsky
collection DOAJ
description In Soviet science, the prevailing viewpoint was that the Neolithic culture corresponded to a group of related tribes. A.A. Formozov and M.V. Voyevodsky also distinguished larger communities: cultural areas, zones, provinces. The study of Australian aborigines has shown that they had no division into tribes. The basis of their social structure was local groups (communities), and all larger associations were amorphous and unstable. Each community was at the Centre of its social ties, that led to primeval cultural continuity, which, in the absence of natural and geographical obstacles, had no clearly defined boundaries. Ethnic kinship was not a decisive factor in the process of formation of similar features of material culture. The decisive significance was the belonging to a single economic and cultural type, which facilitated contacts between Neolithic communities. Three main cultural and economic types can be distinguished for the population of the East European Plain: 1) hunters of steppes and forest steppes on large gregarious herbivores, 2) forest hunters and fishermen of the temperate zone, 3) semi-sedentary fishermen of forest rivers of the temperate zone. The ethnographic analogue of archaeological culture is a historical and cultural area, which often has an ethnically heterogeneous structure, and its components are not necessarily connected by common origin. In the Neolithic, the boundaries of such areas coincide with large river basins and natural landscape zones. The archaeological culture of the Neolithic represents a peculiar clot of cultural and primeval continuity.
format Article
id doaj-art-1233743d0a2d41dc869a9e476d8dd6d6
institution Kabale University
issn 2587-6112
2618-9488
language English
publishDate 2024-08-01
publisher State institution «Tatarstan Аcademy of Sciences»
record_format Article
series Археология евразийских степей
spelling doaj-art-1233743d0a2d41dc869a9e476d8dd6d62025-01-25T12:02:15ZengState institution «Tatarstan Аcademy of Sciences»Археология евразийских степей2587-61122618-94882024-08-01481410.24852/2587-6112.2024.4.8.14Neolithic Culture: the issues of interpretationVladimir V. Stavitsky0Penza State University. Lermontov St., 37, Penza, 440026, Russian FederationIn Soviet science, the prevailing viewpoint was that the Neolithic culture corresponded to a group of related tribes. A.A. Formozov and M.V. Voyevodsky also distinguished larger communities: cultural areas, zones, provinces. The study of Australian aborigines has shown that they had no division into tribes. The basis of their social structure was local groups (communities), and all larger associations were amorphous and unstable. Each community was at the Centre of its social ties, that led to primeval cultural continuity, which, in the absence of natural and geographical obstacles, had no clearly defined boundaries. Ethnic kinship was not a decisive factor in the process of formation of similar features of material culture. The decisive significance was the belonging to a single economic and cultural type, which facilitated contacts between Neolithic communities. Three main cultural and economic types can be distinguished for the population of the East European Plain: 1) hunters of steppes and forest steppes on large gregarious herbivores, 2) forest hunters and fishermen of the temperate zone, 3) semi-sedentary fishermen of forest rivers of the temperate zone. The ethnographic analogue of archaeological culture is a historical and cultural area, which often has an ethnically heterogeneous structure, and its components are not necessarily connected by common origin. In the Neolithic, the boundaries of such areas coincide with large river basins and natural landscape zones. The archaeological culture of the Neolithic represents a peculiar clot of cultural and primeval continuity.https://evrazstep.ru/index.php/aes/issue/view/49archaeologyneolithicarchaeological cultureprimeval continuitycommunitylocal groupcultural and economic type
spellingShingle Vladimir V. Stavitsky
Neolithic Culture: the issues of interpretation
Археология евразийских степей
archaeology
neolithic
archaeological culture
primeval continuity
community
local group
cultural and economic type
title Neolithic Culture: the issues of interpretation
title_full Neolithic Culture: the issues of interpretation
title_fullStr Neolithic Culture: the issues of interpretation
title_full_unstemmed Neolithic Culture: the issues of interpretation
title_short Neolithic Culture: the issues of interpretation
title_sort neolithic culture the issues of interpretation
topic archaeology
neolithic
archaeological culture
primeval continuity
community
local group
cultural and economic type
url https://evrazstep.ru/index.php/aes/issue/view/49
work_keys_str_mv AT vladimirvstavitsky neolithicculturetheissuesofinterpretation