Advertisement

Resources, Use Potential and Basic Needs

A Methodological Framework for Landscape Archaeology
  • Tilman Lenssen-Erz
  • Jörg Linstädter
Chapter
Part of the Studies in Human Ecology and Adaptation book series (STHE, volume 4)

Abstract

Landscape archaeology as an analytical concept is not really new. Compilations of publications on this issue list several hundred references. Although they are far from being unanimous in their understanding of landscape archaeology, there is a common theme among almost all approaches, that is, the use of the term “landscape” as an analytical concept for a comprehensive understanding of the relation of prehistoric people to their environs, how they acted upon it, and, for a lesser number of papers, how they were cognizant of it. To clarify its full potential the term “landscape” is defined here and an epistemological frame developed for its implementation. The aim is to grasp the complex network of relations between resources, use of resources, and basic human needs in one comprehensive representation. This approach helps to work through all relevant issues in a checklist and facilitates comparisons between different case studies. Case studies from northern and southern Africa demonstrate the value of such an approach.

Keywords

Geographic Information System Cultural Landscape Stone Tool Natural Asset Landscape Archaeology 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Anschuetz, K.F., Wilshusen, R.H. & Scheick, C.L. (2001). An archaeology of landscapes: Perspectives and directions. Journal of Archaeological Research, 9, (2)157–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bailloud, G. (1997). Art rupestre en Ennedi. Éditions Sépia.Saint-Maur:Google Scholar
  3. Beck, D.E. & Cowan, C.C. (1996). Spiral Dynamics: Mastering Values, Leadership and Chance. Blackwell.Cambridge, MA:Google Scholar
  4. Bender, B. (2002). Time and landscape. Current Anthropology, 43, 103–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bernbeck, R. (1997). Theorien in der Archäologie. A. Francke Verlag.Tübingen, Basel:Google Scholar
  6. Boelicke, U. (1982). Gruben und Häuser: Untersuchungen zur Struktur bandkeramischer Hofplätze. In E. Bakels (Ed.), Siedlungen der Kultur mit Linearkeramik in Europa (pp. 17–28). Internationales Kolloquium Nové Vozokany.Google Scholar
  7. Bradley, R. (1994). Symbols and signposts – Understanding the prehistoric petroglyphs of the British Isles. In C. Renfrew & Ezra B.W. Zubrow (Eds.), The Ancient Mind – Elements of Cognitive Archaeology (pp. Cambridge University Press.Cambridge: 95–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bradley, R., Criado Boado, F. & Fábregas Valcarce, R. (1994). Rock art research as landscape archaeology: A pilot study in Galicia, north-west Spain. World Archaeology, 25, (3)374–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Breunig,. P(1988). Botanisch-archäologische Beobachtungen in einem afrikanischen Hochgebirge. Aspekte zur prähistorischen Besiedlung eines ariden Gunstraumes. Archäologische Informationen (11), 153–73.Google Scholar
  10. Breunig,. P(1989). Archäologische Untersuchungen zur Besiedlungsgeschichte des Brandbergs – Archaeological invetsigations into the settlement history of the Brandberg. In Pager. H. The Rock Paintings of the Upper Brandberg, Part I – Amis Gorge Heinrich-Barth-Institut.Köln: pp. 17–45.Google Scholar
  11. Breunig, P. (1990). Temperaturen und Niederschläge im Hohen Brandberg. Journal Namibia Wissenschaftliche Gesellschaft, 42, 7–24.Google Scholar
  12. Breunig, P. (2003). Der Brandberg. Untersuchungen zur Besiedlungsgeschichte eines Hochgebirges in Namibia. Heinrich-Barth-Institut.Köln:Google Scholar
  13. Dowson,. T.A(2007). Debating shamanism in southern African rock art: Time to move on… South African Archaeological Bulletin, 62, 185, 46–61.Google Scholar
  14. Dünne,. & JGünzel,. (Eds.) S(2006). Raumtheorie – Grundlagen aus Philosophie und Kulturwissenschaft. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  15. Frank, T. & Wendt, K.P. (2003). Up & down. Scaling archaeological data provided by GIS based procedures. Paper presented at the congress Enter the Past, Vienna, 8–12 April 2003.Google Scholar
  16. Gautier, A. (1982). Neolithic faunal remains in the Gilf Kebir and the Abu Hussein Dunefield, Western Desert, Egypt. In El-Baz & F. Maxwell (Eds.), M.A. Desert Landforms in Southwest-Egypt: A Basis for Comparison with Mars DC: NASA.Washington, pp. 335–339.Google Scholar
  17. Gehlen, B., Kindermann, K., Linstädter, J. & Riemer, H. (2002). The Holocene occupation of the Eastern Sahara: Regional chronologies and supra-regional developments in four areas in the absolute desert. In Jennerstrasse 8 (Ed.) Tides of the Desert – Gezeiten der Wüste Heinrich-Barth-Institut.Köln: pp. 85–116.Google Scholar
  18. Guenther, M. (1986). The Nharo Bushmen of Botswana – Tradition and Change. Helmut Buske.Hamburg:Google Scholar
  19. Hallier, M. (1996). Zwei keramische Fundplätze am Übergang vom 5. zum 4. Jahrtausend vor Christi Geburt in Südwest-Ägypten: Wadi Bakht 82/15 und 82/24. Unpubl. Masters Thesis KöGoogle Scholar
  20. Heyd,. T (2002). Natural heritage: Culture in nature. In German Commission for UNESCO/Brandenburg University of Technology at Cottbus (Eds.), Natur und Kultur – Ambivalente Dimensionen unseres Erbes – Perspektivenwechsel/Nature and culture – Ambivalent dimensions of our heritage – Change of perspective. Deutsche UNESCO-KommissionUNESCO.Cottbus: pp. 85–95.Google Scholar
  21. Hirsch,. E(1995). Landscape: Between place and space. In E. Hirsch & M. O’Hanlon (Eds.), The Anthropology of Landscape. Perspectives on Place and Space Clarendon Press.Oxford: pp. 1–30.Google Scholar
  22. Hodder, IShanks, M.,Alexandri,A.,Buchli,V.Carman, , J.,Last,& J.Lucas,G(1995). Interpreting Archaeology. Routledge.London/New York:Google Scholar
  23. Hodder, I.R. & Orton, C. (1976). Spatial Analysis in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press.London/New York:Google Scholar
  24. Hollmann, J. (2003). Indigenous knowledge and paintings of human-animal combinations: Ostriches, swifts and religion in Bushman rock-art, Western Cape Province Unpubl. Masters Thesis, Johannesburg.Google Scholar
  25. Ingold, T. (1993). The temporality of the landscape. World Archaeology, 25, (2)152–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jahnkuhn, H. (1977). Einführung in die Siedlungsarchäologie. Walter de Gruyter.Berlin/New York:Google Scholar
  27. Kalis,. A.J(1988). Zur Umwelt des frühneolithischen Menschen: Ein Beitrag der Pollenanalyse. Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte Baden-Württembergs 31: 125–137.Google Scholar
  28. Kalis,. & A.JZimmermann,. A(1988). An integrative model for the use of different landscapes in Linearbandkeramik times. In Bintliff, J.L. Davidson & D.A. Grant, E.G. Conceptual Issues in Environmental Archaeology Edinburgh University Press.Edinburgh: pp. 145–152.Google Scholar
  29. Keding, B., Lenssen-Erz, T. & Pastoors, A. (2007). Pictures and pots from pastoralists – Investigations into the prehistory of the Ennedi Highlands, NE Tchad. Sahara, 18, 23–45.Google Scholar
  30. Kröpelin,. S(1989). Untersuchungen zum Sedimentationsmilieu von Playas im Gilf Kebir (Südwest-Ägypten). In Kuper, R. Forschungen zur Umweltgeschichte der Ostsahara Heinrich-Barth-Institut.Köln: pp. 183–305.Google Scholar
  31. Kuper,. R(1995). Prehistoric research in the Southern Libyan desert. A brief account and some conclusions of the B.O.S. project. Cahier de Recherches de l’institut de Papyrologie et d’Egyptologie de Lille 17, 123–140.Google Scholar
  32. Layton,. & RUcko,. P(1999). Introduction: Gazing on the landscape and encountering the environment. In Ucko & P. Layton (Eds.), R. The Archaeology and Anthropology of Landscape Routledge.London/New York: pp. 1–20.Google Scholar
  33. Lenssen-Erz,. T(1997)Metaphors of intactness of environment in Namibian rock paintings. In Faulstich (Ed.), P. Rock Art as Visual Ecology American Rock Art Research Association.Tucson, AZ: pp. 43–54.Google Scholar
  34. Lenssen-Erz, T. (2001). Gemeinschaft – Gleichheit – Mobilität. Felsbilder im Brandberg, Namibia, und ihre Bedeutung. Grundlagen einer textuellen Felsbildarchäologie. Heinrich-Barth-Institut.Köln:Google Scholar
  35. Lenssen-Erz,. T(2003). Mental mapping of arid landscapes in Southern Africa: A cognitive ethnographic-archaeological approach. Paper presented to the session ‘Glimpses of a Landscape’s Past,’ Fifth World Archaeological Congress,DC.Washington, 21–26Google Scholar
  36. Lenssen-Erz,. T(2004). The landscape setting of rock-painting sites in the Brandberg, Namibia: Infrastructure, Gestaltung, use and meaning. In Chippindale & C. Nash: G. The Figured Landscapes of Rock Art Cambridge University Press.Cambridge: pp. 131–150.Google Scholar
  37. Lenssen-Erz,. T(2007). Rock art in African Highlands: Ennedi Highlands, Chad – Artists and herders in a lifeworld on the Margins. In Bubenzer, O. Bolten & A. Darius (Eds.), F. Atlas of Environmental Change and Human Adaptation in Arid Africa Heinrich-Barth-Institut.Köln: pp. 48–51. Africa Praehistorica 21.Google Scholar
  38. Lenssen-Erz, T. (forthcoming), Rock art in context-theoretical aspects of pragmatic data collections. To appear in: K. Helskog (ed). Working with rock art: International Respctives. Papers from the SACRA conference, Kimberley 2006.Google Scholar
  39. Lenssen-Erz,. & TCzerniewicz, Mvon(2005). Résultats préliminaires des recherches archéologiques dans l’Ennedi. Revue Scientifique du Tchad, 7, (2)5–18.Google Scholar
  40. Lenssen-Erz,. & TNeubig,. J(2003). Augenblick und Ewigkeit, Raum und Diskurs. Artefakte der prähistorischen Kunst Namibias und die Arteplage in Murten, Expo.02 in der Schweiz. In Pastoors & A. Weniger (Eds.), G.-C. Höhlenkunst und Raum: Archäologische und architektonische Perspektiven - Cave art and space: Archaeological and architectural perspectives. (pp. 74–90) Mettman: Neanderthal MuseumGoogle Scholar
  41. Leser, H. (1997). Landschaftsökologie,UTB für Wissenschaft.4th edn. Stuttgart:Google Scholar
  42. Linstädter, J. (1999). Leben auf der Düne. Der mittelneolithische Fundplatz Wadi Bakht 82/21 im Gilf Kebir (Südwest-Ägypten). Archäologische Informationen, 22, (1)115–124.Google Scholar
  43. Linstädter, J. (2003). Neolithic land-use systems in the Gilf Kebir, South-West Egypt. In Z. Hawass & L. Pinch Brock (Eds.), Egyptology at the Dawn of the 21st Century. Proceedings of the Eighth International Congress of Egyptologists in Cairo 2000 (pp. 381–389). Cairo: American University in Cairo Press.Google Scholar
  44. Linstädter, J. (Ed.) 2005. Wadi Bakht – Landschaftsarchäologie einer Siedlungskammer im Gilf Kebir (SW-Ägypten). Africa Praehistorica, 18, Köln: Heinrich-Barth-Institut. 372–387.Google Scholar
  45. Linstädter, J. (2007). Rocky islands within oceans of sand – Archaeology of the Jebel Ouenat/Gilf Kebir region, Eastern Sahara. In O. Bubenzer, A. Bolten & F. Darius (Eds.), Atlas of environmental and cultural change in arid Africa. Africa Praehistorica, 21, Köln: Heinrich-Barth-Institut. 34–37.Google Scholar
  46. Linstädter,. & JKröpelin,. S(2004.Wadi Bakht revisited: New data on Holocene climate and prehistoric occupation in the Gilf Kebir plateau (Central Eastern Sahara, SW Egypt). Geoarchaeology 19: 753–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Linstädter, J., Richter,. & JLinstädter,. A(2002). Optimale Datenerhebung mit minimalem Aufwand. Archäologisches Informationen, 25, (1&2)99–106.Google Scholar
  48. Littlejohn,. J(1963). Temne space. Anthropological Quarterly, 36, (1)1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Luig, U. & von Oppen, A. (1997). Landscape in Africa: Process and vision. Paideuma, 42, 7–45.Google Scholar
  50. Lüning, J. (1982). Siedlung und Siedlungslandschaft in bandkeramischer und Rössener Zeit. Offa, 39, 9–33.Google Scholar
  51. Lüning, J. (1997). Landschaftsarchäologie in Deutschland – Ein Programm. Archäologisches Nachrichtenblatt, 3, 277–285.Google Scholar
  52. Marshall, L. (1976). The !Kung of Nyae Nyae. Harvard University Press.Cambridge, MA:Google Scholar
  53. Maslow, A. (1970). Motivation and Personality, 2nd edn. Harper.New York:Google Scholar
  54. Maslow, A. (1981). Motivation und Persönlichkeit. rororo.Reinbek:Google Scholar
  55. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005). Ecosystem and Human Well-Being: Current State and Trends. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  56. Neumann,. K(1989). Zur Vegetationsgeschichte der Ostsahara im Holozän. Holzkohlen aus prähistorischen Fundstellen. In Kuper (Ed.), R. Forschungen zur Umweltgeschichte der Ostsahara Heinrich-Barth-Institut.Köln: pp. 13–181.Google Scholar
  57. Ouzman,. S(1998a). Mindscape. In Bouissac, P. Encyclopedia of Semiotics Oxford University Press.New York: pp. 419–421.Google Scholar
  58. Ouzman,. S(1998b). Towards a mindscape of landscape: Rock-art as expression of world-understanding. In Chippindale & C. Taçon (Eds.), P.S.C. The Archaeology of Rock-Art. Cambridge University Press.Cambridge:Google Scholar
  59. Ouzman,. S(2002). Encountering an encultured nature – Some edifying examples from indigenous Southern Africa. In German Commission for UNESCO/Brandenburg University of Technology at Cottbus (Eds.), Natur und Kultur – Ambivalente Dimensionen unseres Erbes – Perspektivenwechsel/Nature and Culture – Ambivalent Dimensions of our Heritage – Change of Perspective. Deutsche UNESCO-KommissionUNESCO.Cottbus: pp. 99–117.Google Scholar
  60. Pager,. H(1989–2006). The Rock Paintings of the Upper Brandberg, Part I – VI. Heinrich-Barth-Institut.Köln:Google Scholar
  61. Peters, J. (1987). The faunal remains collected by the Bagnold-Mond Expedition in the Gilf Kebir and Gebel Uweinat in 1938. Archéologie du Nil moyen, 2, 251–264.Google Scholar
  62. Sauer, C. (1963). The morphology of landscape. InLeighly(Ed.) J. Land and Life: A Selection of Writings of Carl Sauer. University of California Press:Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
  63. Schade, C.C.J. (2000). Landschaftsarchäologie – eine inhaltliche Begriffsbestimmung. Studien zur Siedlungsarchäologie II. Rudolf Habelt.Bonn:Google Scholar
  64. Schama, S. (1995). Landscape and Memory. Fontana.London:Google Scholar
  65. Schön, W. (1994). The late Neolithic of Wadi el Akhdar (Gilf Kebir) and the eastern Sahara. Archéologie du Nil moyen, 6, 131–175.Google Scholar
  66. Schön, W. (1996). Ausgrabungen im Wadi el Akhdar, Gilf Kebir. (SW-Ägypten)Heinrich-Barth-Institut.Köln:Google Scholar
  67. Schütz,. & ALuckmann,. T(1975). Strukturen der Lebenswelt. Neuwied, Luchterhand. (Engl: The Structures of the Life-World. London: Heinemann).Google Scholar
  68. Segal,. E.M(1994). Archaeology and cognitive science. In Renfrew & C. Zubrow, E.B.W. The Ancient Mind – Elements of Cognitive Archaeology Cambridge University Press.Cambridge: pp. 22–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Shaw,. W.B.K(1936). An expedition to the Southern Libyan Desert. The Geographical Journal, 87, 193–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Silberbauer, G.B. (1981). Hunter and Habitat in the Central Kalahari Desert. Cambridge University Press.Cambridge:Google Scholar
  71. Stehli, P. (1973). Keramik. In J.-P. Farruggia, R. Kuper , J. Lüning & P. Stehli Der (Eds.), Bandkeramische Siedlungsplatz Langweiler (pp. 57 – 105) ( Rheinische Ausgrabungen, Band 13 ). Bonn : Rheinland Verlag KölnGoogle Scholar
  72. Swartz,. &B.K. JrHurlbutt,. T.S(1994). Space, place and territory in rock art interpretation. An integration of concepts of space and their application to an unusual petroglyph locality in the Great Basin, USA. Rock Art Research, 11, 1, 13–22.Google Scholar
  73. Tanaka, J. (1980). The San Hunter-Gatherers of the Kalahari. University of Tokyo Press.Tokyo:Google Scholar
  74. Tilley, C. (1994). A Phenomenology of Landscape: Places, Paths and Monuments. Berg.Oxford:Google Scholar
  75. Van Neer, W. & Breunig, P. (1999). Contribution to the archaeozoology of the Brandberg, Namibia. Cimbebasia, 15, 127–140.Google Scholar
  76. Van Neer,. & WUerpmann,. H.-P(1989). Palaeoecological significance of the Holocene faunal remains of the B.O.S. missions. In Kuper (Ed.), R. Forschungen zur Umweltgeschichte der Ostsahara Heinrich-Barth-Institut.Köln: pp. 307–341.Google Scholar
  77. Vita-Finzi, C. (1978). Archaeological Sites in Their Setting. Thames and Hudson.London:Google Scholar
  78. Webster’s Third New International Dictionary. (1993). Cologne: Könemann.Google Scholar
  79. www.bristol.ac.uk, 2007. MA Landscape Archaeology. URL: www.bristol.ac.uk/archanth/postgrad/landscape.htmlLast update: 2007-05-10. Access date: 2007-09-02.
  80. www.exeter.ac.uk, 2007. MA in Landscape Archaeology. URL: www.exeter.ac.uk/postgraduate/degrees/archaeology/landscapema.shtmlLast update: 2007-04-25. Access date: 2007-09-02.
  81. www.oxford.ac.uk, 2007. MSc in Applied Landscape Archaeology. URL: www.awardbearing.conted.ox.ac.uk/archaeology/mscala.phpLast update: 2007. Access date: 2007-09-02.
  82. www.sheffield.ac.uk, 2007. MA Landscape archaeology. URL: www.shef.ac.uk/archaeology/prospectivepg/masters/landscape.htmlLast update: 2007. Access date: 2007-09-02.
  83. Yar, M. (2001). Hannah Arendt 1906–1975. In J. Fieser & B. Dowden (Eds.), The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. URL: www.utm.edu/research/iep/a/arendt.htm.Access date: 2003-05-30.
  84. Zimmermann,. A(1995). Austauschsysteme von Silexartefakten in der Bandkeramik Mitteleuropas.. Universitätsforschungen zur prähistorischen Archäologie 26Habelt.Bonn:Google Scholar
  85. Zimmermann, A. (2001). Ist die politische Forderung nach der ‘beispielhaften Ausgrabung’ aus fachlicher Sicht immer unerfüllbar? Zum Aspekt der Repräsentativität von Ausgrabungsergebnissen. Archäologisches Nachrichtenblatt, 6, 131–137.Google Scholar
  86. Zimmermann, A., Richter,., JFrank,. & TWendt,. K.P(2004) Landschaftsarchäologie II, Überlegungen zu Prinzipien einer Landschaftsarchäologie. Bericht der RGK, 85, 37–95.Google Scholar
  87. Zubrow,.E.B.W(1994a). Cognitive archaeology reconsidered. In Renfrew & C. Zubrow (Eds.), E.B.W. The Ancient Mind – Elements of Cognitive Archaeology (pp. 187–190). Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Zubrow,. E.B.W(1994b). Knowledge representation and archaeology: A cognitive example using GIS. In Renfrew & C. Zubrow (Eds.), E.B.W. The Ancient Mind – Elements of Cognitive Archaeology Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. pp. 107–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tilman Lenssen-Erz
    • 1
  • Jörg Linstädter
  1. 1.African Research CenterUniversity of CologneCologneGermany

Personalised recommendations