Final Report Summary - IBERENCLOGIS (Assessing early social complexity in the Late Prehistory of Southern Iberia: Spatial technologies applied to the study of chalcolithic walled and ditched enclosures.)
In recent decades, studies on British and Irish causewayed enclosures, French enceintes fossés, Central European kreisgrabenanlagen and erdanlagen, or Scandinavian Sarupanloeg have demonstrated that the construction of enclosed earthwork monuments emerges from the VI to the III millennia BC in many different regions of prehistoric Europe at different times. Together with associated burial monuments, such as megalithic collective tombs, and other megaliths, these enclosures represent the earliest monumental architecture in Europe following – although generally not immediately– the transition to farming in Europe. As such, these sites are central to understanding how early farming communities eventually developed into the highly complex, hierarchical societies we see in later Prehistory.
In the southern regions of the Iberian Peninsula, ditched enclosure sites are known from the IV millennium BC, and walled enclosures from the III millennium BC. From the outset, most Spanish and Portuguese archaeologists considered ditched sites as basically analogous to walled sites and interpreted them both as 'fortified settlements': permanently inhabited centres with robust defensive systems composed of either walls or ditches. Some of them (including Los Millares in Almería and Valencina de la Concepción near Seville) are of such exceptional size that they are among the largest prehistoric sites in Europe. As a result, some Iberian archaeologists have argued that the southern Iberian Chalcolithic (or Copper age, roughly from the end of the IV to the end of the III millennia BC) saw the emergence of unprecedented levels of social inequality and the decline of kinship as the basis for most human social relationships. If true, this represents the development of some of the earliest 'complex communities' in Western European Prehistory. Although southern Iberian ditched enclosures possess certain regional peculiarities, however, they do not superficially appear to differ fundamentally from enclosures in other European areas in terms of their position in the landscape, site layout, depositional practices and chronology. Yet, in most other areas of Europe, enclosure sites are interpreted very differently, often as seasonal gathering places for the agglomeration of smaller-scale, more mobile communities that remain based largely on principles of kinship.
This 24-month-long project has investigated the extent to which different types of enclosures in southern Iberia may have had similar or different purposes, and how these Iberian enclosures relate to other traditions of monumental enclosure construction in other parts of Europe. The project made use of spatial approaches and Geographic Information Systems to analyse archaeological sites, namely Iberian walled and ditched enclosures, and compared them with contemporary sites in other European regions. With the aid of spatial technologies, the researchers have sought statistical regularities and patterns that could indicate commonalities or differences between enclosures, and between enclosures and other components of their geographic setting, thus gaining a far more detailed understanding of the spatial choices and decisions that prehistoric communities made when constructing these sites. The aim was to get a clearer idea of the nature of Iberian enclosures and shed some light on the social processes responsible for the construction of such monumental structures. The approach taken is largely geographic, in order to encompass a large number of sites and regions, and multi-scalar. The research questions can be summarised as: 'How do southern Iberian ditched enclosures of the III millennium BC differ from contemporary walled enclosures?' and 'How do Iberian enclosures relate to prehistoric enclosure sites in other regions of Europe?'
The project included a number of training and outreach activities. As regard the former, among other things, during the period of execution of the project the host institution (University of Southampton) provided the specific training that ensured the fellow could complete the research project, namely Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and spatial analysis, through attendance and assessment of post-graduate modules. In terms of outreach activities, an online portal about European prehistoric enclosures aimed at the general public, not experts, has been designed (http://generic.wordpress.soton.ac.uk/ditchedenclosures/). Most of the content has been created by the fellow and the scientist in charge.
The researchers have focused on two geographical areas, that were studied independently and later compared: a) the Guadiana basin in South-Western Iberia (including areas of Spain and Portugal), where both Neolithic-Chalcolithic ditched and walled enclosures are known; b) what could be broadly called 'South-East England', comprising the Thames Valley and Estuary and East Anglia, where Neolithic causewayed enclosures abound. Analyses carried out have included topographical location, prominence in the landscape, proximity to water sources, geology of the hinterland and other variables. Comparisons have been conducted on two levels. First, Southern Iberian ditched enclosures have been compared with British causewayed enclosures, in order to assess the degree of regional variability. And second, ditched enclosures in the Guadiana area have been contrasted, on the basis of the parameters mentioned above, with Copper Age ditched enclosures from the same region, in order to gain knowledge about the potential differences in use and/or meaning of different types of enclosures.
Results indicate that differences between ditched enclosures in the Iberian and the British study areas are notable, particularly in terms of prominence in the landscape. However, the differences between ditched and walled enclosures in the Guadiana basin are much more significant. A preliminary result of the project is the realisation that ditched and walled enclosures in Southern Iberia seem to be discrete phenomena, indicating perhaps different purposes for their construction. The principal project outputs have been several academic papers in refereed journals (such as Proceeedings of the Prehistoric Society) and multiple presentations at established international conferences (namely the UISPP World Congress and the EAA Annual Meeting). The fellow has also organised at the host institution an European Workshop on Neolithic ditched enclosures that benefited from the participation of Danish, British, Spanish, German and French researchers.
Name of the project: IBERENCLOGIS
Host Institution: University of Southampton (United Kingdom)
Supervisor: David W Wheatley (dww@soton.ac.uk)
Researcher: Víctor Jiménez Jáimez (V.J.Jimenez-Jaimez@soton.ac.uk)
In the southern regions of the Iberian Peninsula, ditched enclosure sites are known from the IV millennium BC, and walled enclosures from the III millennium BC. From the outset, most Spanish and Portuguese archaeologists considered ditched sites as basically analogous to walled sites and interpreted them both as 'fortified settlements': permanently inhabited centres with robust defensive systems composed of either walls or ditches. Some of them (including Los Millares in Almería and Valencina de la Concepción near Seville) are of such exceptional size that they are among the largest prehistoric sites in Europe. As a result, some Iberian archaeologists have argued that the southern Iberian Chalcolithic (or Copper age, roughly from the end of the IV to the end of the III millennia BC) saw the emergence of unprecedented levels of social inequality and the decline of kinship as the basis for most human social relationships. If true, this represents the development of some of the earliest 'complex communities' in Western European Prehistory. Although southern Iberian ditched enclosures possess certain regional peculiarities, however, they do not superficially appear to differ fundamentally from enclosures in other European areas in terms of their position in the landscape, site layout, depositional practices and chronology. Yet, in most other areas of Europe, enclosure sites are interpreted very differently, often as seasonal gathering places for the agglomeration of smaller-scale, more mobile communities that remain based largely on principles of kinship.
This 24-month-long project has investigated the extent to which different types of enclosures in southern Iberia may have had similar or different purposes, and how these Iberian enclosures relate to other traditions of monumental enclosure construction in other parts of Europe. The project made use of spatial approaches and Geographic Information Systems to analyse archaeological sites, namely Iberian walled and ditched enclosures, and compared them with contemporary sites in other European regions. With the aid of spatial technologies, the researchers have sought statistical regularities and patterns that could indicate commonalities or differences between enclosures, and between enclosures and other components of their geographic setting, thus gaining a far more detailed understanding of the spatial choices and decisions that prehistoric communities made when constructing these sites. The aim was to get a clearer idea of the nature of Iberian enclosures and shed some light on the social processes responsible for the construction of such monumental structures. The approach taken is largely geographic, in order to encompass a large number of sites and regions, and multi-scalar. The research questions can be summarised as: 'How do southern Iberian ditched enclosures of the III millennium BC differ from contemporary walled enclosures?' and 'How do Iberian enclosures relate to prehistoric enclosure sites in other regions of Europe?'
The project included a number of training and outreach activities. As regard the former, among other things, during the period of execution of the project the host institution (University of Southampton) provided the specific training that ensured the fellow could complete the research project, namely Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and spatial analysis, through attendance and assessment of post-graduate modules. In terms of outreach activities, an online portal about European prehistoric enclosures aimed at the general public, not experts, has been designed (http://generic.wordpress.soton.ac.uk/ditchedenclosures/). Most of the content has been created by the fellow and the scientist in charge.
The researchers have focused on two geographical areas, that were studied independently and later compared: a) the Guadiana basin in South-Western Iberia (including areas of Spain and Portugal), where both Neolithic-Chalcolithic ditched and walled enclosures are known; b) what could be broadly called 'South-East England', comprising the Thames Valley and Estuary and East Anglia, where Neolithic causewayed enclosures abound. Analyses carried out have included topographical location, prominence in the landscape, proximity to water sources, geology of the hinterland and other variables. Comparisons have been conducted on two levels. First, Southern Iberian ditched enclosures have been compared with British causewayed enclosures, in order to assess the degree of regional variability. And second, ditched enclosures in the Guadiana area have been contrasted, on the basis of the parameters mentioned above, with Copper Age ditched enclosures from the same region, in order to gain knowledge about the potential differences in use and/or meaning of different types of enclosures.
Results indicate that differences between ditched enclosures in the Iberian and the British study areas are notable, particularly in terms of prominence in the landscape. However, the differences between ditched and walled enclosures in the Guadiana basin are much more significant. A preliminary result of the project is the realisation that ditched and walled enclosures in Southern Iberia seem to be discrete phenomena, indicating perhaps different purposes for their construction. The principal project outputs have been several academic papers in refereed journals (such as Proceeedings of the Prehistoric Society) and multiple presentations at established international conferences (namely the UISPP World Congress and the EAA Annual Meeting). The fellow has also organised at the host institution an European Workshop on Neolithic ditched enclosures that benefited from the participation of Danish, British, Spanish, German and French researchers.
Name of the project: IBERENCLOGIS
Host Institution: University of Southampton (United Kingdom)
Supervisor: David W Wheatley (dww@soton.ac.uk)
Researcher: Víctor Jiménez Jáimez (V.J.Jimenez-Jaimez@soton.ac.uk)