A zooarchaeological re-examination of occupational fluidity between fourth millennium BC domestic and ritual sites in Yorkshire

这项提议旨在挑战长期确立的新石器时代的“居住”概念，即在公元前四千年期间，约克郡的仪式纪念碑遗址与之截然不同，通过引导物质文化集合而不是建筑形式。基于越来越多的关于仪式(Richards and Thomas 1984，Thomas 1999)和‘日常’沉积实践(McFadyen 2007，Harris 2009，Garrow 2012)的研究，有人提议对遗址档案进行比较重新审查，从而能够更精确地描述人们如何生活在传统上被分配给家庭(在约克郡的公元前四千年期间，包括早期的新石器时代房屋和坑遗址)和仪式(以长而圆的手推车的形式)的遗址，以及这些遗址是如何通过这些惯例出现的。这种审查的关键是来自所有地点类型的动物群组合。与最近呼吁重新评估我们对新石器时代建筑的理解(新石器时代研究小组2018年秋季会议)和传统分配的建筑标签日益失败相一致，这项建议完美地将物质文化方法应用于约克郡公元前第四个千年的仪式建筑，在撰写本文时，这些建筑呈现出令人眼花缭乱的国内和仪式建筑元素的集合。受将新石器时代早期社会理解为短暂的半流动牧民(Edmonds 1999)的趋势的启发，该项目希望通过对建筑类别的细分，以一种“开放的”方式调查这些遗址。这将允许考虑不同地点之间的职业“流动性”。通过对具有不同时间活动模式的地点进行比较的方法，我们对重复短期行动(通常在国内矿坑地点发现)所涉及的过程的理解可以应用于经常在较长时间内“开放”沉积的手推车沟渠。手推车沟也可以分解为重复的动作吗？这将如何改变我们对职业的看法和人们的生活方式？

This proposal seeks to challenge long established concepts of Neolithic 'dwelling' as distinct to and separate from ritual monument sites during the fourth millennium BC in Yorkshire by leading with material culture assemblages rather than architectural forms. Building on a growing body of research considering ritual (Richards and Thomas 1984, Thomas 1999) and 'everyday' depositional practices (McFadyen 2007, Harris 2009, Garrow 2012), it is proposed a comparative re-examination of the site archives will allow for more refined narratives for how people lived at traditionally assigned domestic (during the fourth millennium BC in Yorkshire this includes earlier Neolithic houses and pit sites) and ritual (in the form of long and round barrows) sites, and on how it was through those practices that these sites emerged. Key to this scrutiny are the faunal assemblages from all site types. In line with the recent call for a reappraisal of our understanding of Neolithic architecture (Neolithic Study Group Autumn Meeting 2018) and the growing failure of traditionally assigned architectural labels, this proposal is perfectly positioned to apply a material culture approach to Yorkshire's fourth millennium BC ritual structures which at the time of writing present a bewildering collection of both domestic and ritual architectural elements. Inspired by trends to understand earlier Neolithic society as transient semi-mobile pastoralists (Edmonds 1999), this project wishes to investigate these sites in an 'open-minded' way, through the breaking down of architectural categories. This will permit the consideration of occupational 'fluidity' between differing sites. Through a comparative approach to sites with differing temporal activity patterns, our understanding of the processes involved in repetitive short-term actions (typically found at domestic pit sites) can be applied to barrow ditches which often remain 'open' to deposition for longer periods of time. Can barrow ditches be broken down into repetitive action too? And how would this change how we perceive occupation and the ways people went about their lives?