Bell Beaker from ditch 2 of Porto Torrão.
This is an interesting relation to analyze. At the
moment the situation is the following one.
In Portugal the smaller ditched enclosures usually
don’t have bell beakers (a difference regarding the walled ones). Only the
larger enclosures raveled the presence of this type of pottery. This is the case of
Perdigões, Porto Torrão and even Alcalar (with an AOC fragment). In all the
rest, beakers are still to be recorded. But even this statement has its
exception: at Bela Vista 5 we have a “Ferradeira” grave inside the ditches, and
even if this kind of assemblage is not exactly a classic beaker one, it shared
enough characteristics to be considered a specific expression of the beaker
phenomena.
But apart from this, the present rule is that, in
ditched enclosures, decorated Bell Beaker pottery is absent except from the
larger ones, where can be very well represented, as it happens in Porto Torrão.
But another interesting situation occurs in Alentejo.
As I stressed before (Valera e Rebuge, 2011), we can find beakers in several
small open sites or walled enclosures in Alentejo, such as Monte do Tosco,
Porto das Carretas, Miguens 3, Outeiro de São Bernardo, Barrada do Grilo, etc.
But in all cases the beaker style tends to be exclusively monothematic: we have
International style (for instance Porto das Carretas) or geometric combed
style (for instance Barrada do Grilo) or incised style (for instance Monte do
Tosco).
In the large enclosures, however, we have them all. In
Porto Torrão, in Perdigões, but also in the near Spanish ones, like Pijotilla.
What does this exactly means?
Some written opinions about Iberian ditched
enclosures support the idea that they were no longer built during the late
third millennium. But the data is say otherwise. Not just Bela Vista 5 was built in the last
quarter of that millennia (although it is a “Ferradeira” context), but ditch
two of Porto Torrão has beaker pottery in the lower layers and the outside
ditch of Perdigões is dated from the third quarter of the millennia, clearly in
a beaker phase, and have some beaker pottery in its upper half stratigraphy.
So, in beaker times some ditches in large complex enclosures might have been opened
and were surly active during the second half of the millennia. It is not like the
reoccupations of abandoned chalcolithic sites in ruins, like it happens in the
walled enclosures of Monte do Tosco or Porto das Carretas, where the walls were
not rebuilt, only stone huts were raised and the area reoccupied is much
smaller. On the contrary, something was happening in these large enclosures that
show they continued active with the same general social meaning during the Late
Chalcolithic. That is exactly what we can see at Perdigões, with the outside
ditch being dated from this period but respecting the order of the previous enclosures
and the organization of space and landscape, reusing older tombs with similar procedures
and occupying (and respecting) the amphitheatre were the site was meant to be.
It seems that what was happening in large ditched
enclosures in the second half of the third millennium was different from what
was happening in smaller sites, ditched, walled or open.
But this is based on the data we have at the moment.
And, as recent times have been showing, everything can change in a “blink of an
eye” in Alentejo.
References:
Valera, A.C. e
Rebuge, J. (2011), "O Campaniforme no Alentejo: contextos e circulação. Um
breve balanço.", Arqueologia do norte alentejano. Comunicações das 3as
Jornadas, CMF, p.111-121
How many LBK sites did the Beaker people take over?
ReplyDeleteWell, there is no LBK in Portugal. But if you are talking about enclosures, all the big ones (Perdigões, Porto Torrão, Alcalar) have beaker potery.
ReplyDelete