Keywords Mesolithic Á Neolithic Á High mountain human occupations Á
Farming Á Pastoralism Á Pyrenees
4.1 Introduction
The science of archaeology is undergoing constant change. In recent decades, our
understanding of human populations in the late Pleistocene and the first half of the
Holocene has increased considerably, owing both to new theoretical approaches
and to an increase in the number of researchers. A greater volume of information
now exists, for example about the changes of hunter-gatherer communities at the
end of the last Ice Age and the development of the Neolithic in SW Europe (Bahn
1983; Galop 2006; Tzortzis and Delestre 2010). In connection with the latter period,
in the last thirty years a considerable amount of data has accumulated about such
diverse aspects as crop types, seasonality of the settlements, the mobility of flocks,
people and objects, the impact of economic practices on the environment and the
appearance of signs of social inequality.
Technical and methodological innovations have actively contributed to such a
development; for example, the improvements in the methods of palaeocarpological
remains recollection (and of palaeobotanical remains, in general) have altered the
appearance and interpretations of many archaeological sites. Another is the introduction of new technologies and techniques for studying artefacts, such as the
analysis of residues on pottery and lithic implements, the petrographic analysis of
raw materials, traceological studies, etc. (Mazzucco et al. 2013). Also, the application of isotopic and DNA analysis to the study of animal and human osseous
remains as well as of plants has improved our understanding of the processes of
domestication of some species, livestock, and human mobility patterns, etc.
(Edwards et al. 2007).
A further factor is related to the expansion of research, which has noticeably
increased the number of empirical prehistoric records in southern Europe. New sites
have been identified, some of which are now of great importance. One example is
the early Neolithic site of La Draga, on the shore of Lake Banyoles (Antolín et al.
2014). Similarly, some geographic areas have received greater attention than in
previous decades. This is the case of mountain areas in southern Europe, where
numerous research projects are currently in progress. These programmes have
largely embraced the growing sensibility of archaeological science towards
understanding economic practices in the past, their relationship with the physical
environment (geomorphology, climate, fauna and flora, etc.) and how this changed
over time. In this context, it is important to identify the start of human presence in
the different altitudinal zones in the mountain ranges after the last Ice Age and also
the appearance of significant changes in the ways of life. One of these was
undoubtedly the domestication of animals and plants in the first half of the
Holocene. Recent publications reveal the current relevance of this archaeology of
76
E. Gassiot Ballbè et al.
Farming Á Pastoralism Á Pyrenees
4.1 Introduction
The science of archaeology is undergoing constant change. In recent decades, our
understanding of human populations in the late Pleistocene and the first half of the
Holocene has increased considerably, owing both to new theoretical approaches
and to an increase in the number of researchers. A greater volume of information
now exists, for example about the changes of hunter-gatherer communities at the
end of the last Ice Age and the development of the Neolithic in SW Europe (Bahn
1983; Galop 2006; Tzortzis and Delestre 2010). In connection with the latter period,
in the last thirty years a considerable amount of data has accumulated about such
diverse aspects as crop types, seasonality of the settlements, the mobility of flocks,
people and objects, the impact of economic practices on the environment and the
appearance of signs of social inequality.
Technical and methodological innovations have actively contributed to such a
development; for example, the improvements in the methods of palaeocarpological
remains recollection (and of palaeobotanical remains, in general) have altered the
appearance and interpretations of many archaeological sites. Another is the introduction of new technologies and techniques for studying artefacts, such as the
analysis of residues on pottery and lithic implements, the petrographic analysis of
raw materials, traceological studies, etc. (Mazzucco et al. 2013). Also, the application of isotopic and DNA analysis to the study of animal and human osseous
remains as well as of plants has improved our understanding of the processes of
domestication of some species, livestock, and human mobility patterns, etc.
(Edwards et al. 2007).
A further factor is related to the expansion of research, which has noticeably
increased the number of empirical prehistoric records in southern Europe. New sites
have been identified, some of which are now of great importance. One example is
the early Neolithic site of La Draga, on the shore of Lake Banyoles (Antolín et al.
2014). Similarly, some geographic areas have received greater attention than in
previous decades. This is the case of mountain areas in southern Europe, where
numerous research projects are currently in progress. These programmes have
largely embraced the growing sensibility of archaeological science towards
understanding economic practices in the past, their relationship with the physical
environment (geomorphology, climate, fauna and flora, etc.) and how this changed
over time. In this context, it is important to identify the start of human presence in
the different altitudinal zones in the mountain ranges after the last Ice Age and also
the appearance of significant changes in the ways of life. One of these was
undoubtedly the domestication of animals and plants in the first half of the
Holocene. Recent publications reveal the current relevance of this archaeology of
76
E. Gassiot Ballbè et al.