Regional variation in the use of the earliest pottery in North-western Europe: organic residue analysis of Swifterbant pottery (5000 - 4000 cal. BC)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis aims to investigate the function and functional variation of ceramic vessels of the Swifterbant culture (c. 5000-4000/3400 cal BC) in the Dutch wetlands through the application of lipid residue analysis.It is the first systematic application of this method to Swifterbant pottery.The Swifterbant culture is a hunter-gatherer-fisher society which demonstrates a continuation of huntergatherer subsistence strategies alongside a gradual shift towards food production on the basis of cereal cultivation and animal husbandry.Whilst the earliest Swifterbant pottery is dated to c. 5000 cal BC, the arrival of domesticated animals is dated to c. 4500 cal BC and cereals at c. 4300 cal BC.Here, lipid residue analysis was applied to 148 samples, representing 146 individual vessels recovered from eight archaeological sites: Swifterbant type sites S2, S3 and S4 (c.4300-4000 cal BC) in Flevoland, the Netherlands; Polderweg, De Bruin, Brandwijk, and Hazendonk (c.5000-3800 cal BC) in the Lower Rhine-Meuse area, the Netherlands; and finally, Hüde I (4700-3500 cal BC) in Lower Saxony, Germany.Overall, the new data generated for this thesis shows that Swifterbant pottery has been continuously and primarily used for processing of aquatic resources, almost exclusively freshwater fish, despite its highly diversified subsistence strategies, which game animals and other terrestrial and aquatic food resources.The results also present temporal changes in the exploitation of food resources in the Lower Rhine-Meuse area where we see pottery also being used to process different ranges of foodstuffs such as terrestrial resources and dairy products.The identification of dairy residue is the first direct evidence so far from Swifterbant pottery.Overall, this study shows that the motivation for the uptake of pottery into the Swifterbant culture was not necessarily related to changing subsistence strategies as we see a clear continuity in culinary traditions after the introduction of domesticates into the Swifterbant culture.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".