Marine exploitation and the arrival of farming : resolving the paradox of the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in Denmark
(2025) In Quaternary Science Reviews 363.- Abstract
- The transition to farming in the coastal environments of southern Scandinavia remains a key conundrum in European prehistory. This region was heavily exploited by Late Mesolithic communities of the Ertebølle culture, complex hunter-fisher-gatherers who flourished for some 1500 years prior to the arrival of farming at around 4000 BCE marking the start of the Neolithic period. Extensive genetic and isotopic analyses of skeletal remains suggests that the arrival of farming is marked by a rapid demographic change and that incoming populations of farmers’ had little reliance on marine resources. In contrast, frequent archaeological finds of shell middens and fishing gear in the Early Neolithic supports evidence for continuity in the use of... (More)
- The transition to farming in the coastal environments of southern Scandinavia remains a key conundrum in European prehistory. This region was heavily exploited by Late Mesolithic communities of the Ertebølle culture, complex hunter-fisher-gatherers who flourished for some 1500 years prior to the arrival of farming at around 4000 BCE marking the start of the Neolithic period. Extensive genetic and isotopic analyses of skeletal remains suggests that the arrival of farming is marked by a rapid demographic change and that incoming populations of farmers’ had little reliance on marine resources. In contrast, frequent archaeological finds of shell middens and fishing gear in the Early Neolithic supports evidence for continuity in the use of marine resources across the transition.
To assess this apparent paradox, focusing on the Danish evidence, we explore the spatiotemporal trends in the density of some 1500 radiocarbon dates using new informatics tools and modelling strategies. We indeed find strong archaeological indicators of sustained and even intensified patterns of coastal exploitation across and beyond the transition; shell middens, fishing implements, and aquatic residues in ceramics continue well into the Neolithic. Using an agent-based demographic model, we demonstrate how small differences in fertility could rapidly dilute signals of coastal resource use in the context of a growing Neolithic population. More broadly, we suggest that complex palimpsests of archaeological remains and biological information from human remains can only usefully be interpreted through the lens of demography (Less) - Abstract (Swedish)
- The transition to farming in the coastal environments of southern Scandinavia remains a key conundrum in European prehistory. This region was heavily exploited by Late Mesolithic communities of the Ertebølle culture, complex hunter-fisher-gatherers who flourished for some 1500 years prior to the arrival of farming at around 4000 BCE marking the start of the Neolithic period. Extensive genetic and isotopic analyses of skeletal remains suggests that the arrival of farming is marked by a rapid demographic change and that incoming populations of ‘farmers’ had little reliance on marine resources. In contrast, frequent archaeological finds of shell middens and fishing gear in the Early Neolithic supports evidence for continuity in the use of... (More)
- The transition to farming in the coastal environments of southern Scandinavia remains a key conundrum in European prehistory. This region was heavily exploited by Late Mesolithic communities of the Ertebølle culture, complex hunter-fisher-gatherers who flourished for some 1500 years prior to the arrival of farming at around 4000 BCE marking the start of the Neolithic period. Extensive genetic and isotopic analyses of skeletal remains suggests that the arrival of farming is marked by a rapid demographic change and that incoming populations of ‘farmers’ had little reliance on marine resources. In contrast, frequent archaeological finds of shell middens and fishing gear in the Early Neolithic supports evidence for continuity in the use of marine resources across the transition.
To assess this apparent paradox, focusing on the Danish evidence, we explore the spatiotemporal trends in the density of some 1500 radiocarbon dates using new informatics tools and modelling strategies. We indeed find strong archaeological indicators of sustained and even intensified patterns of coastal exploitation across and beyond the transition; shell middens, fishing implements, and aquatic residues in ceramics continue well into the Neolithic. Using an agent-based demographic model, we demonstrate how small differences in fertility could rapidly dilute signals of coastal resource use in the context of a growing Neolithic population. More broadly, we suggest that complex palimpsests of archaeological remains and biological information from human remains can only usefully be interpreted through the lens of demography (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/dfd62a5b-3b25-47d1-ad35-723d5cbe2be9
- author
- organization
- publishing date
- 2025-05-31
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- Hunter-gatherers, Farmers, Mid-Holocene, Shell middens, Shell banks, Fishing gear, Fish, Marine mammals, Stable isotopes, Organic residues, Radiocarbon dating, Agent-based modelling
- in
- Quaternary Science Reviews
- volume
- 363
- article number
- 109447
- pages
- 17 pages
- publisher
- Elsevier
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:105006738368
- ISSN
- 0277-3791
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.quascirev.2025.109447
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- dfd62a5b-3b25-47d1-ad35-723d5cbe2be9
- date added to LUP
- 2025-06-10 14:01:11
- date last changed
- 2025-06-26 02:58:34
@article{dfd62a5b-3b25-47d1-ad35-723d5cbe2be9, abstract = {{The transition to farming in the coastal environments of southern Scandinavia remains a key conundrum in European prehistory. This region was heavily exploited by Late Mesolithic communities of the Ertebølle culture, complex hunter-fisher-gatherers who flourished for some 1500 years prior to the arrival of farming at around 4000 BCE marking the start of the Neolithic period. Extensive genetic and isotopic analyses of skeletal remains suggests that the arrival of farming is marked by a rapid demographic change and that incoming populations of farmers’ had little reliance on marine resources. In contrast, frequent archaeological finds of shell middens and fishing gear in the Early Neolithic supports evidence for continuity in the use of marine resources across the transition.<br/><br/>To assess this apparent paradox, focusing on the Danish evidence, we explore the spatiotemporal trends in the density of some 1500 radiocarbon dates using new informatics tools and modelling strategies. We indeed find strong archaeological indicators of sustained and even intensified patterns of coastal exploitation across and beyond the transition; shell middens, fishing implements, and aquatic residues in ceramics continue well into the Neolithic. Using an agent-based demographic model, we demonstrate how small differences in fertility could rapidly dilute signals of coastal resource use in the context of a growing Neolithic population. More broadly, we suggest that complex palimpsests of archaeological remains and biological information from human remains can only usefully be interpreted through the lens of demography}}, author = {{McLaughlin, T. Rowan and Robson, Harry K. and Maring, Rikke and Boethius, Adam and Guiry, Eric and Groß, Daniel and Koivisto, Satu and Philippsen, Bente and Milner, Nicky and Bailey, Geoff and Craig, Oliver E.}}, issn = {{0277-3791}}, keywords = {{Hunter-gatherers; Farmers; Mid-Holocene; Shell middens; Shell banks; Fishing gear; Fish; Marine mammals; Stable isotopes; Organic residues; Radiocarbon dating; Agent-based modelling}}, language = {{eng}}, month = {{05}}, publisher = {{Elsevier}}, series = {{Quaternary Science Reviews}}, title = {{Marine exploitation and the arrival of farming : resolving the paradox of the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in Denmark}}, url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2025.109447}}, doi = {{10.1016/j.quascirev.2025.109447}}, volume = {{363}}, year = {{2025}}, }