t5 articulo a social change in nw iberia

8/13/2019 T5 Articulo a Social Change in NW Iberia

1/20

Neighbours but diverse: social change innorth-west Iberia during the transition

from the Mesolithic to the Neolithic(55004000 cal BC)

PABLO ARIAS

INTRODUCTION1

THE IBERIAN PENINSULA is often described as a miniature continent. Thecomplexity of its orography and its geographic situation in a temperate lati-tude, between the Mediterranean and the Atlantic environmental regions,result in a highly compartmented landscape, with strong contrasts within rel-

atively short distances. This is, indeed, the case in the north-west quadrant ofthe Peninsula, including Galicia, northern Portugal, the Cantabrian coastalarea, the northern Meseta and the Upper Ebro valley. There we can find awide range of geographical regions, from the flat semi-steppe areas ofCentral Castile, with its hard continental climate and Mediterranean vegeta-tion, to the green mountainous Cantabrian region, one of the most humidareas of Europe, covered with green meadows and deciduous forests.

Without implying in the slightest an environmental determinism, it isobvious that the population involved in the transition to the Neolithic hadto face very different conditions. Besides, the Mesolithic backgrounds anddegrees of exposure to external influences are very diverse. All this permitsus to predict great variability in the transitions to the Neolithic in a rela-tively restricted area (around 200,000 square km), thus allowing the popu-lations involved to know each other, and to develop complex systems ofrelationships.

Proceedings of the British Academy 144, 5371, The British Academy 2007.

1 This paper is a contribution to the research project El origen de las sociedades campesinas en

la fachada atlntica europea (HUM2004-06418-C02-00), granted by the Programa Nacional deHumanidades del Plan Nacional de ID I (20042007) of the Spanish Government. I wouldalso like to thank my colleagues Jess Garca Gazlaz and Jess Sesma for allowing me to useunpublished data from their research at Los Cascajos.

Copyright British Academy 2007 all rights reserved


2/20

54 Pablo Arias

From another point of view, it is likely that the existence of natural bar-riers, such as the Cantabrian, Central and Iberian Cordilleras, frequentlyreaching 2000 m above sea level or more, favoured the territorial behaviour

characteristic of Holocene groups.In this paper I will present the available information on the lateMesolithic and the early Neolithic in north-west Iberia (Fig. 1), and discussits significance when attempting to understand the processes of transitionfrom foraging to peasant societies.

THE UPPER EBRO VALLEY

With the present information, the most probable scenario relates the origin ofthe Neolithic in this part of Europe to the expansion of the MediterraneanNeolithic towards the interior. That gives a paramount importance to theEbro valley, one of the main routes of communication in the IberianPeninsula. Actually, within the area analysed in this paper, it is this region

Figure 1. Sites that have provided relevant information on the transition to the Neolithic innorth-west Iberia.



3/20

alone that has provided assemblages that might be related to the earliestphase of the Iberian Neolithic, identified archaeologically by the predomi-nance of pottery decorated with impressions of the cockle Cerastoderma

edule (cardial ware). Despite the low representativeness of the collection, thismight be the case of the cave site of Pea Larga (Fernndez Eraso 1997),where the earliest layer has provided 17 sherds of cardial pottery (out of 24decorated sherds among 460 fragments: Fig. 2). Unfortunately, the only radio-carbon date for this context is too imprecise (I-15150: 6150 230 BP, corres-ponding to the intervals 55204540 cal BC (at 2 sigma) and 53204800 cal BC(at 1 sigma).2 Besides, the part of the interval with a highest probability lies

SOCIAL CHANGE IN NORTH-WEST IBERIA 55

2 All the radiocarbon dates cited in this paper have been calibrated according to the IntCal04curve (Reimer et al. 2004), using the 5.0.1 revision of the CALIB program (Stuiver & Reimer1993).

Figure 2. Sherd of cardial pottery from Pea Larga Cave (from Fernndez Eraso 1997).



4/20

56 Pablo Arias

clearly below the chronological boundary between the earliest (real cardial)Neolithic horizon and a later, more complex, phase when this kind of potterytends to be substituted by assemblages where other types of impressed and

incised decorations predominate: the so-called Epicardial and the LateCardial or Neolithic IB (around 5300 cal BC: Bernabeu 1999; 2002; Juan-Cabanilles & Mart 2002; Mestres & Martn 1996).

However, around 5200 cal BC, there is a network of Neolithic sites in theUpper Ebro valley, including both the left and the right banks of the riverand even some valleys that run up towards the north. This seems to be shownby the amazingly homogeneous radiocarbon dates from Atxoste, CuevaLbrega, Los Husos and Los Cascajos, corresponding to contexts withEpicardial type assemblages that may be classified as really Neolithic, given

the high proportion of domestic animals in the faunal assemblages that havebeen studied so far.

But the situation in this area at the end of the sixth millennium cal BC isrelatively complex. On the left bank of the river, which is the best researched,a dense network of Mesolithic sites, located in rock-shelters, has been stud-ied in recent years (Alday 2002). These have provided assemblages compara-ble with the Geometric Mesolithic of Mediterranean Spain. The role playedby the populations which are behind those assemblages in the Neolithisationprocess has still not been determined exactly. Nevertheless, there are signs

suggesting phenomena of acculturation, such as the relative continuity of thepopulation (most of the early Neolithic sites in this area are located in placeswhere there are final Mesolithic occupations: Fuente Hoz, Mendandia,Atxoste, La Pea de Maran, Kanpanoste Goikoa) and in some cases, itappears that there is a certain continuity between the Mesolithic andNeolithic stone tool assemblages (Alday 1999; Cava 1994).

However, the data provided by some early Neolithic sites suggest a certainbreak or novelty, such as occurs at Pea Larga itself, Los Husos, CuevaLbrega or Los Cascajos. The latter is a particularly relevant site. The pre-liminary reports that have been published so far on this recently excavatedopen air settlement (Garca Gazlaz & Sesma 1999; 2001; Pea et al. 2005a)show a clear break with the Mesolithic tradition in funerary behaviour(Fig. 3), lithic technology and settlement pattern. Looking for references inthe Mediterranean (mainly Catalonian) Neolithic seems to be the mostpromising path to understand this site.

A particularly interesting case is that of Mendandia, a site located nearthe main nucleus of Neolithic population at the end of the sixth millennium,

where a sequence with three levels containing pottery has been documented(Alday 2005). These are dated respectively to about 6050 (III sup), 5500 (II)and 5400 (I) cal BC. Although they have been described as Neolithic, thosecontexts have yielded assemblages of a Mesolithic type and only wild species.



5/20

This suggests the possibility of the existence of long range contacts with theMediterranean coast that would have allowed new goods to reach these dis-tant, but well communicated interior areas. This hypothesis seems to be con-firmed by the presence at this and other Mesolithic sites of adornments madefrom shells of Columbella rustica, coming from the Mediterranean (lvarez2003) or the predominance of evaporitic flint from the middle Ebro Valley atLos Husos (Fernndez Eraso et al. 2005).

The case of Mendandia is not so exceptional in the region as it mightseem to be at first sight. To the north-east, in Navarra, in the foothills of thePyrenees, there are several sixth millennium cal BC contexts that have beenattributed to the Neolithic simply because of the presence of some potterysherds (Abauntz layer c, Aizpea layer b, and Zatoya layer I). In fact, in noneof these is there any sign of agriculture or stock herding, while the industries,except for the very scarce pottery, may be classified as Mesolithic. This sug-

gests that, as in other areas of Atlantic Europe, we may be facing thearchaeological evidence of foragers who owned pottery, either because theyhad learnt how to make it, or because they had acquired some vesselsthrough exchange. Indeed, all these sites have provided Columbella rustica


Figure 3. Early Neolithic burial at Los Cascajos. Photo: courtesy of Jess Garca Gazlaz and

Jess Sesma.



6/20

58 Pablo Arias

shells, both in layers with pottery and in the preceding strata accepted asMesolithic (lvarez 2003).

In this respect, we may wonder if the inter-relationship could not have

worked in both directions. An aspect that has not been sufficiently exam-ined is the expansion of the Helwan technique in the manufacture of geo-metric microliths. This type of retouch is very characteristic of the earlyNeolithic in the Ebro valley, and it also appears after the middle of thesixth millennium cal BC at sites in Lower Aragon and Valencia. Generally,this has been interpreted as the addition of another element in the localNeolithic package, spread by the supposed colonisers coming from theMediterranean coast, together with domestic species and pottery. However,there is evidence against this rather simplistic idea, as some examples of

this type of retouch have been found in Mesolithic contexts in the northof the peninsula since the start of the sixth millennium cal BC, as well asthere being no logical relation between this particular technique in themanufacture of projectiles and the Neolithic way of life. The hypothesismay be proposed, although not yet tested, that this technique arose amongthe Mesolithic groups in the western Pyrenees, perhaps derived from a typethat is not unusual in the area in the seventh millennium: the triangles withinverse retouch on the short side, sometimes related to the Sonchamppoints (Cava 2001). If this were confirmed, it may be proposed that they

spread inversely, from the hunter-gatherers in the north to the firstNeolithic groups in the east of the Peninsula, following the same routesthat pottery, domestic species and Mediterranean shells took, but in theopposite direction.

THE NORTHERN MESETA

One of the most significant advances in the knowledge of the IberianNeolithic in the last few years has been the documentation of what has beencalled the Interior Neolithic (Fernndez-Posse 1980). Several research proj-ects have been able to document a network of Neolithic settlements withEpicardial type assemblages dated to the last third of the sixth millenniumcal BC. Some of these are located in caves, such as the classic example ofLa Vaquera (Fig. 4) in Segovia (Estremera 2003), but most of them are openair settlements, like the important sites of La Lmpara and La Revilladel Campo in Soria (Kunst and Rojo 1999) or some contexts documented

in palaeosoils sealed by megalithic monuments, like La Velilla andQuintanadueas. It is even probable that the start of the impressive flintmining activity at Casa Montero, near Madrid, can be attributed to thismoment (Consuegra et al. 2004).



7/20

Unfortunately, the study of the Neolithisation of the Meseta is seriouslycomplicated by the almost complete absence of Mesolithic remains in theinterior of the Peninsula. This has made many researchers propose a modelof colonisation in a completely empty territory (Delibes de Castro &

Fernndez Manzano 2000; Estremera 2003; Kunst & Rojo 1999).As myself and others have developed in more detail elsewhere (Arias et al.2005), the use of negative arguments, like the ones used for this problem, isvery risky, especially when many areas have not been explored yet, and the


Figure 4. Early Neolithic impressed pottery from La Vaquera (from Estremera 2003).



8/20

60 Pablo Arias

interior Mesolithic has a serious problem of archaeological visibility (thereare no clear criteria to assign decontextualised material to this period). Inaddition, there are signs that indicate the presence of hunter-gatherers in the

area. As well as some sites with material that is probably Mesolithic (seeArias et al. 2005 for a detailed analysis), there is certain indirect evidence,such as some absolute dates that are difficult to attribute to Neolithic groupsor the presence of mixed traits in the early Neolithic of the Meseta.

CANTABRIAN SPAIN

Cantabrian Spain is one of the classic areas for Mesolithic studies in the

Iberian Peninsula. A dense network of sites is known, particularly on theeastern coast of Asturias, where about a hundred shell middens belonging tothis period have been catalogued along some 35 km of coastline (Fano 1998).However, the distribution of the main settlements, generally located 1 or 2km inland from the present shore, and the palaeoeconomic information, sug-gest that they were not groups specialised in exploiting only the marine envi-ronment, but that they are an example of a broad spectrum economy, centredon hunting and gathering on the coastal platform, complemented with fish-ing and collecting seafood, and hunting on nearby rocky hills (Arias 1999).

Some stable isotope data for coastal sites confirm this hypothesis, showing adiet in which the intake of protein was distributed approximately equallybetween land and marine food, as the d13C suggests, and the high values ofd15N indicating that the latter probably derive more from fish than frominvertebrates (Arias & Fano 2005).

From this point of view, there is a notable contrast between the isotopicvalues at coastal sites and those of a well documented inland site: Los Canes,a burial cave with three graves holding five individuals. Despite being only11 km from the coast, the diet of its inhabitants appears to have come exclu-sively from terrestrial resources (Fig. 5). This is particularly interesting, inthat it confirms the existence of inland populations, which has been a fre-quent topic for discussion in local prehistory. Equally, the fact that they didnot exploit the nearby marine resources suggests a territorial behaviour forthese groups, which is consistent with the concentration of graves in the site.

The first evidence of the exploitation of domestic species in the area isdated to the first half of the fifth millennium cal BC. Cattle bones associatedwith impressed ware, similar to that from the Upper Ebro, found at the

cave site of Arenaza, have been dated to about 4900 calBC

(Arias & Altuna1999). At another cave site, El Mirn, a grain of emmer (Triticum dicoccum)has been dated to around 4400 cal BC (Gx-30910: 5550 40 BP; 44604340cal BC) (Pea et al. 2005b; Pea et al. 2005a). It is interesting to point out that



9/20

both sites have yielded assemblages with high percentages of domesticanimals (7080%), which makes one question gradualist hypotheses, suchas myself and others have occasionally supported. However, the regionalarchaeological record for the first half of the fifth millennium cal BC is verycomplex. Together with those fully Neolithic sites, we find numerous con-

texts showing a total continuity with the Mesolithic, many of which show nosigns of domestic species, and even have possible evidence of intensificationin gathering, such as the presence of barnacles (Pollicipes cornucopia) in somelate middens. At the moment, it is not clear if this is merely a question of


Figure 5. Stable isotopes values for Mesolithic and Neolithic sites in Cantabrian Spain.



10/20

62 Pablo Arias

logistic mobility (specialised settlements corresponding to groups of farmerswho continued hunting and gathering in certain places, as has been proposedto explain some Neolithic contexts in the south-east of France: e.g. Binder

1991), or whether we are dealing with a Neolithisation in a mosaic pattern,with groups of farmers and hunter-gatherers living at the same time in nearbyareas.

In any case, there is an appreciable time difference between the start of theNeolithic in the region and in the neighbouring Upper Ebro (at least fourcenturies: probably more). These two regions are close to one another, com-munication (especially in the Basque Country) is easy, and there are signs thateven in the Mesolithic there were contacts between the two areas. We canpoint out, for example, the use of flint from the Ebro valley at some sites in

the Basque Country (Fernndez Eraso et al. 2005), the presence of marineshells at several Mesolithic sites in the Upper Ebro (lvarez Fernndez 2006)or the existence of technical and stylistic similarities between the assemblageson both sides of the Cordillera (Arias 1991). Helwan technique is particularlyinteresting in this respect. Some Mesolithic contexts dated to the sixth mil-lennium cal BC, such as Los Canes, have provided microliths made with thistechnique, characteristic of the Ebro valley Neolithic. This suggests thatthere could be contacts between the hunter-gatherers of Cantabrian Spainand the earliest farmers in the Upper Ebro, perhaps prolonging in time social

networks that already existed before the Neolithisation of the latter region.This allows us to define the last centuries of the Mesolithic in Cantabrian

Spain as an example of societies in the availability phase proposed byZvelebil and Rowley-Conwy (1986; see Zvelebil & Lillie 2000 for a more elab-orated version of the model). And probably change reached these societiesthrough these networks, as the available evidence indicates a process of accul-turation with a fundamentally indigenous base. The industrial features of thefirst Neolithic in the Cantabrian Region display considerable continuity withthe local Mesolithic. There are also signs of continuity in the symbolic world,as shown by the presence of Asturian picks, a typically Mesolithic tool, usedas a grave good in the Asturian burial of Molino de Gasparn, and also inmegalithic monuments probably dated to the second half of the fifth millen-nium cal BC (Arias & Fano 2003). Some singular items point in the samedirection, such as some painted cobble stones in early megalithic assem-blages, apparently continuing a tradition in the regional Mesolithic (Arias1991).

Two main lines of explanation have been followed to tackle the problem

of the causes of the Neolithisation of this area. One relates change with thedevelopment of social complexity among the hunter-gatherers, and the otherlinks it to subsistence problems. It is not easy at the moment to respond tothis dilemma, although the evidence for the second line is somewhat more



11/20

solid. Despite some signs of social inequality, such as the differences in thegrave goods found in the burials of Los Canes, it does not seem that thecomplex hunter-gatherers model can be applied to the Cantabrian Mesolithic.

Besides, for the moment we have no evidence for the diffusion of prestigeitems or imported goods among these groups. In contrast, the clear signs ofdietary stress in the most recent skeleton from Los Canes (Mara DoloresGarralda,pers. comm.), and the indirect evidence provided by the intensifica-tion in the gathering of sea food, or the territoriality itself, in a narrowregion, relatively poor in natural resources, where there seems to have beenconsiderable population density in the Mesolithic, all suggest that the systemcould have been near its limits and that farming might have become a sociallyacceptable solution.

GALICIA AND NORTHERN PORTUGAL

The archaeological information about the Neolithisation of the far north-west of the Peninsula, the Spanish region of Galicia and the formerPortuguese provinces of Beira Alta, Douro Litoral, Minho and Trs-os-Montes e Alto Douro,3 is scarce and incomplete. In great part, this comesfrom preservation problems, related to the acidity of the soils which makes

the fossilisation of archaeological materials difficult, and it is also probablydue, in the case of coastal areas, to structural phenomena that have increasedthe effect of the Flandrian transgression.

The information about the Mesolithic is particularly precarious. In Galiciasome very poor sites are known in inland areas like Serra do Xistral or OBocelo, and perhaps some of the problematic surface finds of lithic materialsin coastal areas can be attributed to this period. The situation in the north ofPortugal is a little better, as some sites have been studied in recent years, suchas the open air settlement at Prazo (Trs-os-Montes: Monteiro-Rodrigues2000; Monteiro-Rodrigues & Angelucci 2004), with quartz tools associatedwith problematic sixth millennium cal BC dates (see Zilhos comments inCarvalho 2003), or the rock shelter of Buraco de Pala (Sanches 1997). We mayadd some possible indirect evidence of the activity of the hunter-gatherergroups, like some changes recorded in pollen diagrams for Serra do Xistral inthe second half of the seventh millennium cal BC (Ramil 1993).

The oldest evidence for the presence of Neolithic groups is probably pro-vided by a series of sites in the area of Beira Alta, like Buraco da Moura de

So Romo or Penedo da Penha (Valera 2005). Although so far no absolute


3 In the current administrative division of Portugal, that corresponds, approximately, to thedistricts of Viana do Castelo, Braga, Porto, Vila Real, Bragana, Guarda, Viseu and Aveiro.



12/20

64 Pablo Arias

dates have been published, the characteristic industries (pottery with conicalbasis and impressed and incised designs comparable with the so-called cul-tura de las cuevas in the Meseta and Andalucia, almagra ware) suggest that

these sites correspond to the last third of the sixth millennium cal BC or thestart of the fifth, which is not surprising if we note their proximity to thewell known nucleus of Neolithic population in the limestone massif ofEstremadura. The radiocarbon date for the site of Quinta de Assentada (Sac-1774: 5870 110 BP; 50004490 cal BC), with undecorated spherical-shapedpottery that Valera (2005) attributes to a later phase of the local Neolithic,might confirm this hypothesis.

To the north of the river Douro, there is no clear sign of the Neolithicuntil c. 4750 cal BC, which is the date for contexts with pottery and domesti-

cated vegetable or animal species at Buraco de Pala and Prazo. TheNeolithisation process, however, is not clear. The researchers who excavatedthese sites, where Neolithic levels cover Mesolithic strata, interpret some con-tinuity in settlement patterns and lithic technology as possible evidence forprocesses of change within the local hunter-gatherer communities (Monteiro-Rodrigues 2000; Sanches 2003). However, recent studies question this inter-pretation, arguing that the lithic assemblages of those sites are highlydependent on the limitations of the local raw material (Carvalho 2003). Inany case, the change seems to have been relatively rapid, if we consider the

high percentages of domesticated species (in particular, the remains of bar-ley, wheat and pulses at Buraco da Pala: Fig. 6), which casts doubts onextremely gradualist models like the one recently proposed by Jorge (1999).

Some data obtained further to the north are more difficult to interpretat the moment. Among these we can point out the presence of impressedpottery at coastal sites in the south of Galicia, like A Cunchosa, ORegueirio or Lavaps, which has been linked with a possible maritime dif-fusion of the early Neolithic from central Portugal, and even with impressedtypes on the French Atlantic coast (Surez Otero 1997). Unfortunately, thecontext of this pottery is not well defined and in fact in some cases it is notclear whether it can be related to later, Chalcolithic, decorated pottery fromthe same sites. In fact, the oldest well documented contexts with pottery inGalicia, the sites of Porto dos Valos and A Gndara, dated to the secondhalf of the fifth millennium cal BC, have only provided undecorated sherds(Prieto 2005).

Equally problematic is the identification of cereal pollen associated withsixth millennium cal BC dates, such as those from palaeosoils documented

below several Galician dolmens (Barbanza, As Rozas, Parxubeira, and AsPereiras) or the questionable site of O Reiro, where a date of c. 5500 cal BChas been obtained for a context with pottery, wild mammals, remains of fishand cereal pollen (Ramil 1973). The stratigraphical association of all these



13/20

elements is not sufficiently clear, so the presence of agriculture or potterycannot be proven for such an early date in the far north-west of thePeninsula.

THE REGIONAL SEQUENCE: A PROPOSAL FOR THE

TRANSITION TO THE NEOLITHIC IN NORTH-WEST IBERIA

In conclusion, the north-west of the Iberian Peninsula provides, in arestricted area, a huge variety of Neolithisation processes, probably inter-related, on an unequal background of Mesolithic populations, with greatcontrast between densely populated areas, such as the Cantabrian coast orthe Upper Ebro, and others with lower densities.

It is precisely in one of these densely populated areas where the first con-tacts appear to have happened. The evidence from Mendandia suggests that,about 5500 cal BC, not much later than the time when the first Neolithicgroups were established on the Mediterranean coast, the first pottery could

have reached the Upper Ebro. The earliest pots were probably no more thanattractive prestige goods, which reached this area through exchange net-works, whose existence is proved by the presence of Mediterranean shells inthe local Mesolithic.


Figure 6. Charred seeds of fava bean (Vicia faba) from Buraco da Pala (from Sanches 1997).



14/20

66 Pablo Arias

However, for a long time, it is not likely that frequent contacts took place.During the second third of the sixth millennium cal BC, the evidence is soscarce that we can only talk of a very limited relationship. The situation

changes after 5300/5200 cal BC. At this time there is a rapid advance of theagricultural frontier in the Ebro valley and the Meseta, and perhaps also incentral Portugal. It is likely that in some cases there was a true colonisationby groups coming from the east or the south, as suggested by settlements likeLa Lmpara, Los Cascajos and perhaps the sites in Beira. However, theMesolithic groups did not remain passive. They are probably responsible forsome Neolithic contexts with signs of continuity, and of some of the peculi-arities of the local Neolithic. It is more than likely that the establishment ofNeolithic groups in the axis of the Ebro Valley intensified the contacts with

hunter-gatherer groups in the surrounding area. These relationships wouldexplain the proliferation of pottery in Mesolithic sites in the foothills of thePyrenees. It is also possible that there were some types of contacts withgroups in Cantabrian Spain, although pottery was not adopted, eitherbecause the contacts were more sporadic or because there was greater socialresistance among these societies.

In the first half of the fifth millennium cal BC, the Neolithisation of thenorth-west of the Peninsula was completed with the adoption of farming inthe Cantabrian region, the north of Portugal and perhaps Galicia. It appears

that this was carried out basically by the hunter-gatherer groups. Thus, itseems that colonisation was restricted to ecologically more favourable areas,such as the Ebro Valley, whereas in regions where it was more difficult toadapt to the new ways of life, we should look at the local populations as themost likely responsible for the change. In any case, the most recent evidencesuggests that it was a relatively rapid process, although the complexity of thesituation in the Cantabrian region still has not been explained.

Finally, in the second half of the fifth millennium cal BC, a most impor-tant change from the symbolic and social point of view happens: the build-ing of the earliest megalithic monuments. Megaliths present some veryinteresting features in this part of the Iberian Peninsula. The earliest struc-tures appear practically simultaneously in all the regions we have studied inthis paper, about 4300 cal BC, and a true explosion in the number of monu-ments occurs around 40003900 cal BC (Arias et al. 2006; Scarre et al. 2003).However, this apparent uniformity hides a great variety. In reality, what uni-fies this phenomenon is simply the notion of monumentality and probably offuneral collectiveness. But, if we examine the concrete solutions, from both

the architectonic and the grave goods points of view, there are huge differ-ences between, on the one hand, Galicia and the north of Portugal, on theother, Cantabrian Spain, and finally the Meseta and Upper Ebro (Fig. 7).This suggests that the arrival of megaliths cannot be explained as a simple



15/20


Figure 7. Examples of megaliths from Galicia (1. Casa dos Mouros, La Corua), theCantabrian Region (2. Cantos Huecos, Cantabria) and the Upper Ebro valley (3. La Cabaa,Burgos).



16/20

68 Pablo Arias

case of diffusion, and much less, as has traditionally been suggested, as a con-sequence of colonisation. In reality, what spread, in a simultaneous, almostexplosive, way was an idea, a concept, and each society interpreted it in its

own way, incorporating elements of its own cultural background and its ownhistory. From this point of view, the megaliths can be seen as the end pointof the process of deep social change that we call Neolithisation: a process ofvariable geometry in which the last Mesolithic societies in the north-west ofthe Peninsula were transformed to give birth to a new world.

REFERENCES

ALDAY, A. 1999. Dudas, manipulaciones y certezas para el Mesoneoltico vasco. Zephyrus 52,12972.ALDAY, A. 2002. Las unidades industriales mesolticas en la Alta-Media Cuenca del Ebro.

Complutum 13, 1950.ALDAY, A. 2005. El campamento prehistrico de Mendandia: Ocupaciones mesolticas y neo-

lticas entre el 8500 y el 6400 b.p. Vitoria: Diputacin Foral de lava.LVAREZ FERNNDEZ, E. 2003. Die Reise der Schnecke Columbella rustica whrend

des Mesolithikums und zu Beginn des Neolithikums in Europa. ArcheologischesKorrespondenzblatt 33, 15766.

LVAREZ FERNNDEZ, E. 2006. Los objetos de adorno-colgantes del Paleoltico Superior ydel Mesoltico en la Cornisa Cantbrica y en el valle del Ebro. Salamanca: Universidad de

Salamanca (col. Vtor, 195).ARIAS, P. 1991. De cazadores a campesinos. La transicin al Neoltico en la regin cantbrica.Santander: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Cantabria.

ARIAS, P. 1999. The origins of the Neolithic along the Atlantic coast of continental Europe: asurvey. Journal of World Prehistory 13, 40364.

ARIAS, P. & ALTUNA, J. 1999. Nuevas dataciones absolutas para el Neoltico de la cueva deArenaza (Bizkaia). Munibe (Antropologia-Arkeologia) 51, 16171.

ARIAS, P., ARMENDARIZ, A. & TEIRA, L. C. 2006. The megalithic complex in CantabrianSpain. In A. A. Rodrguez Casal (ed.), Le Mgalithisme Atlantique/The Atlantic Megaliths:Acts of the XIVth UISPP Congress. University of Lige, Belgium, 28 September 2001.

Symposium 9.4, 1129. Oxford: Archaeopress (British Archaeological Reports S1521).

ARIAS, P., CERRILLO, E. & GMEZ PELLN, E. 2005. A view from the edges: theMesolithic settlement of the interior areas of the Iberian Peninsula reconsidered. Paperpresented at the 7th International Conference on The Mesolithic in Europe, Belfast, 29 August2 September 2005.

ARIAS, P. & FANO, M. A. 2003. Shell middens and megaliths: Mesolithic funerary contexts inCantabrian Spain and their relation to the Neolithic. In G. Burenhult (ed.), Stones and bones.Formal disposal of the dead in Atlantic Europe during the Mesolithic-Neolithic interface

60003000 BC. Archaeological Conference in Honour of the Late Professor Michael J. OKelly.

Proceedings of the Stones and Bones Conference in Sligo, Ireland, May 15, 2002, 14566.Oxford: British Archaeological Reports International Series 1201.

ARIAS, P. & FANO, M. A. 2005. Le rle des ressources marines dans le Msolithique de la

rgionb Cantabrique (Espagne): Lapport des isotopes stables. In G. Marchand & A. Tresset(eds), Unit et diversit des processus de nolithisation sur la faade atlantique de lEurope(6e4e millnaires avant J.-C. Table Ronde de Nantes 2627 avril 2002, 17388. Paris: SocitPrhistorique Franaise (Mmoire 36).



17/20

BERNABEU, J. 1999. Pots, symbols and territories: the archaeological context of the neo-lihisation in Mediterranean Spain. Documenta Praehistorica 26, 10119.

BERNABEU, J. 2002. The social and symbolic context of Neolithization. In E. Badal,J. Bernabeu & B. Mart (eds), El paisaje en el Neoltico mediterrneo, 20933. Valencia:

Universitat de Valncia (Saguntum extra 5).BINDER, D. 1991. Une conomie de chasse au Nolithique ancien: La grotte Lombard Saint-

Vallier-de-Thiey (Alpes-Maritimes). Paris: CNRS.CARVALHO, A. F. 2003. A emergncia do Neoltico no actual territrio portugus: pressupostos

tericos, modelos interpretativos e a evidncia emprica. O Arquelogo Portugus, srie IV, 21,65150.

CAVA, A. 1994. El Mesoltico en la cuenca del Ebro. Estado de la cuestin. Zephyrus 47, 6591.CAVA, A. 2001. La industria ltica. In I. Barandiarn & A. Cava (eds), Cazadores-recolectores

en el Pirineo navarro: El sitio de Aizpea entre 8.000 y 6.000 aos antes de ahora, 63147.Vitoria: Universidad del Pas Vasco.

CONSUEGRA, S., GALLEGO, M. M. & CASTAEDA, N. 2004. Minera neoltica de slex

de Casa Montero (Viclvaro, Madrid). Trabajos de Prehistoria 61/2, 12740.DELIBES, G. & FERNNDEZ MANZANO, J. 2000. La trayectoria cultural de la Prehistoria

reciente (64002500 BP) en la Submeseta Norte espaola. In P. Bueno, J. L. Cardoso,M. Daz-Andreu, V. Hurtado, J. Oliveira, S. O. Jorge & V. O. Jorge (eds), Pr-histria recenteda Pennsula Ibrica. 3 Congresso de Arqueologia Peninsular. Actas, vol. IV, 95122. Porto:ADECAP.

ESTREMERA, M. S. 2003. Primeros agricultores y ganaderos en la Meseta Norte: el Neolticode la Cueva de La Vaquera (Torreiglesias, Segovia). Valladolid: Junta de Castilla y Len.

FANO, M. A. 1998. El Hbitat Mesoltico en el Cantbrico Occidental. TransformacionesAmbientales y Medio Fsico durante el Holoceno Antiguo. Oxford: British ArchaeologicalReports International Series 732.

FERNNDEZ ERASO, J. 1997. Excavaciones en el abrigo de Pea Larga (Cripn-Alava).Vitoria: Diputacin Foral de lava.

FERNNDEZ ERASO, J., MUJIKA, J. A. & TARRIO, A. 2005. Relaciones entre la CornisaCantbrica y el valle del Ebro durante los inicios del Neoltico en el Pas Vasco. In P. Arias,R. Ontan & C. Garca-Monc (eds), III Congreso del Neoltico en la Pennsula Ibrica,2019. Santander: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Cantabria (Monografasdel Instituto Internacional de Investigaciones Prehistricas de Cantabria 1).

FERNNDEZ-POSSE, M. D. 1980. Los materiales de la cueva del Aire de Patones (Madrid).Noticiario Arqueolgico Hispnico 10, 3964.

GARCA GAZLAZ, J. & SESMA, J. 1999. Talleres de slex versus lugares de habitacin. LosCascajos (Los Arcos, Navarra), un ejemplo de neolitizacin en el Alto Valle del Ebro. In

J. Bernabeu & T. Orozco (eds), Actes del II Congrs del Neoltic a la Pennsula Ibrica, 34350.Valencia: Universitat de Valncia (Saguntum extra 2).

GARCA GAZLAZ, J. & SESMA, J. 2001. Los Cascajos (Los Arcos, Navarra). Intervenciones19961999. Trabajos de Arqueologa Navarra 15, 299306.

JORGE, S. O. 1999. Domesticar a terra. As primeiras comunidades agrrias em territrioportugus. Lisboa: Gradiva.

JUAN-CABANILLES, J. & MART, B. 2002. Poblamiento y procesos culturales en la PennsulaIbrica del VII al V milenio A. C. (80005500 BP): Una cartografa de la neolitizacin. InE. Badal, J. Bernabeu & B. Mart (eds), El paisaje en el Neoltico mediterrneo, 4587.Valencia: Universitat de Valncia (Saguntum extra 5).

KUNST, M. & ROJO, M. 1999. El Valle de Ambrona: un ejemplo de la primera colonizacin

neoltica de las tierras del interior peninsular. In J. Bernabeu & T. Orozco (eds), Actes del IICongrs del Neoltic a la Pennsula Ibrica, 25970. Valencia: Universitat de Valncia(Saguntum extra 2).




18/20

70 Pablo Arias

MESTRES, J. S. & MARTN, A. 1996. Calibracin de las fechas radiocarbnicas y su con-tribucin al estudio del Neoltico cataln. In I Congrs del Neoltic a la Pennsula Ibrica,791803. Gav: Museu de Gav.

MONTEIRO-RODRIGUES, S. 2000. A estao neoltica do Prazo (Freixo de NumoNorte

de Portugal) no contexto do Neoltico Antigo do Noroeste peninsular. Algumas con-sideraes preliminares. In P. Arias, P. Bueno, D. Cruz, J. X. Enrquez, J. de Oliveira &M. J. Sanches (eds), 3 Congresso de Arqueologa Peninsular. Actas. Vol. 3: Neolitizao emegalitismo da Pennsula Ibrica, 14980. Porto: ADECAP.

MONTEIRO-RODRIGUES, S. & ANGELUCCI, D. E. 2004. New data on the stratigraphyand chronology of the prehistoric site of Prazo (Freixo de Numo). Revista Portuguesa deArqueologia 7, 3960.

PEA, L., ZAPATA, L., GARCA GAZLAZ, J., GONZLEZ MORALES, M. R., SESMA,J. & STRAUS, L. G. 2005a. The spread of agriculture in northern Iberia: new archaeo-botanical data from El Mirn cave (Cantabria) and the open-air site of Los Cascajos(Navarra). Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 14, 26878.

PEA, L., ZAPATA, L., IRIARTE, M. J., GONZLEZ MORALES, M. R. & STRAUS, L. G.2005b. The oldest agriculture in northern Atlantic Spain: new evidence from El Mirn Cave(Ramales de la Victoria, Cantabria). Journal of Archaeological Science 32, 57987.

PRIETO, M. P. 2005. La cermica neoltica en Galicia. Estudio de sntesis desde la perspectivade la Arqueologa del Paisaje. In P. Arias, R. Ontan & C. Garca-Monc (eds), IIICongreso del Neoltico en la Pennsula Ibrica, 33748. Santander: Servicio de Publicacionesde la Universidad de Cantabria (Monografas del Instituto Internacional de InvestigacionesPrehistricas de Cantabria 1).

RAMIL, J. M. 1973. Paradero de Reiro. Cuadernos de Estudios Gallegos 28, 84, 2331.RAMIL, P. 1993. Evolucin climtica e historia de la vegetacin durante el Pleistoceno Superior

y el Holoceno en las regiones montaosas del Noroeste Ibrico. In A. Prez, L. Guitin &

P. Ramil (eds), La evolucin del paisaje en las montaas del entorno de los caminos jacobeos,2560. Santiago de Compostela: Xunta de Galicia.

REIMER, P. J., BAILLIE, M. G. L., BARD, E., BAYLISS, A., BECK, J. W., BERTRAND,C. J. H., BLACKWELL, P. G., BUCK, C. E., BURR, G. S., CUTLER, K. B., DAMON,P. E., EDWARDS, R. L., FAIRBANKS, R. G., FRIEDRICH, M., GUILDERSON, T. P.,HOGG, A. G., HUGHEN, K. A., KROMER, B., MCCORMAC, F. G., MANNING, S. W.,RAMSEY, C. B., REIMER, R. W., REMMELE, S., SOUTHON, J. R., STUIVER, M.,TALAMO, S., TAYLOR, F. W., VAN DER PLICHT, J. & WEYHENMEYER, C. E. 2004.IntCal04 terrestrial radiocarbon age calibration, 026 kyr BP. Radiocarbon 46/3, 102958.

SANCHES, M. J. 1997. Pr-histria recente de Trs-os-Montes e Alto Douro: O abrigo do Buracoda Pala (Mirandela) no contexto regional. Porto: Sociedade Portuguesa de Antropologia e

Etnologia.SANCHES, M. J. 2003. Sobre a ocupao do Neoltico inicial no Norte de Portugal. In V. S.

Gonalves (ed.), Muita gente poucas antas? Origens, espaos e contextos do Megalitismo.Actas do II Colquio Internacional sobre Megalitismo, 15579. Lisboa: Instituto Portugus deArqueologia.

SCARRE, C., ARIAS, P., BURENHULT, G., FANO, M. A., OOSTERBEEK, L., SCHULTING, R.,SHERIDAN, A. & WHITTLE, A. 2003. Megalithic chronologies. In G. Burenhult (ed.),Stones and bones. Formal disposal of the dead in Atlantic Europe during the Mesolithic-

Neolithic interface 60003000 BC. Archaeological conference in honour of the late Professor

Michael J. OKelly. Proceedings of the stones and bones conference in Sligo, Ireland, May 15,

2002, 65111. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports International Series 1201.

STUIVER, M. & REIMER, P. J. 1993. Extended 14C data base and revised CALIB 3.0 14C agecalibration program. Radiocarbon 35/1, 21530.

SUREZ OTERO, J. 1997. Del yacimiento de A Cunchosa al Neoltico en Galicia. Primeraaproximacin al contexto cultural de la aparicin del megalitismo en Galicia. In



19/20

A. Rodrguez Casal (ed.), O Neoltico Atlntico e as orixes do megalitismo, 485506. Santiagode Compostela: Universidade de Santiago de Compostela.

VALERA, A. C. 2005. Problemas da Neolitizao na bacia interior do Mondego. In P. Arias,R. Ontan & C. Garca-Monc (eds), III Congreso del Neoltico en la Pennsula Ibrica,

94555. Santander: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Cantabria (Monografasdel Instituto Internacional de Investigaciones Prehistricas de Cantabria 1).

ZVELEBIL, M. & LILLIE, M. 2000. Transition to agriculture in eastern Europe. In T. D. Price(ed.), Europes first farmers, 5792. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

ZVELEBIL, M. & ROWLEY-CONWY, P. 1986. Foragers and farmers in Atlantic Europe. InM. Zvelebil (ed.), Hunters in transition: Mesolithic societies of temperate Eurasia and theirtransition to farming, 6793. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.




20/20

t5 articulo a social change in nw iberia

Documents