Pottery, cultures, people?

The European
Baden material re-examined

Research
Martin Furholt∗

The Baden culture, like others in central Europe, has long been assumed to be the material
indication of a people. In a searing analytical deconstruction, the author shows that ‘Baden’
pottery has no equivalence with other cultural practices, and is itself an amalgam of a number of
different pottery fabrics and styles, many of them regionally diverse. Singled out among them is
the early Boreláz fine ware which is actively spread in central Europe, perhaps accompanied by a
knowledge of the first wheeled vehicles.
Keywords: Central Europe, Neolithic, culture concept, Baden culture, pottery, Boreláz ware,
wheeled vehicles

Introduction
Baden culture is a term well established in the archaeological literature, being of exceptional
importance since it is associated with influential models of supra-regional perspective:
Nandor Kalicz sees Baden culture as connected to the Anatolian-Aegean Bronze Age (Kalicz
1963); Baden culture plays a major role in Sherratt’s ‘Secondary Products Revolution’
(Sherratt 1981: 264f.; 1997) and more recently, Maran (2001; 2004) has stressed the
connections between Baden culture and the earliest wheeled vehicles. The influences of
Baden culture on central European pottery styles have been postulated in several cases, for
example the Cham culture (Matuschik 2001) or the Salzmünde culture (Behrens 1973).
Considering the important role Baden culture plays in our understanding of Late
Neolithic Europe it is alarming how poorly defined the concept still is. One problem
lies in the assumption of block-like cultural coherence, but this critique could be directed
towards many Neolithic cultures. The aim of this paper is to show an alternative to the
culture-historical framework by applying a polythetic classification and relating the material
culture to different spheres of cultural communication. To this end, I have re-examined the
components of the Baden culture and assigned different roles to them, isolating the special
supra-regional role of one of them – Boreláz ware.

The traditional concept of Baden culture

Although there has been much discussion on the problems of the traditional concept of
culture since it was formulated by Childe (e.g. Müller 2001: 38ff.; Shennan 1989; Wotzka
1993), the concept of Baden culture has remained more or less unquestioned in central
∗
Institut für Ur- und Frühgeschichte, Christian Albrechts-Universität, D-24098 Kiel, Germany (Email:
martin.furholt@ufg.uni-kiel.de)
Received: 24 May 2007; Accepted: 14 September 2007; Revised: 18 October 2007
antiquity 82 (2008): 617–628
617
 Martin Furholt

European archaeology. It is generally assumed that this pottery style equates to a distinct
social group with a more or less homogenous culture, having a certain set of stone tools,
burial rites, clay figurines, a common economic basis, settlement structure etc. Where
congruence between different spheres of the material culture – a premise for the application
of Childe’s concept – is lacking, this is either explained by the scarcity of the archaeological
remains or even constructed through a research practice that actively seeks out the culture’s
burial ritual, economy or settlement structure.
Recent research on Baden culture has seldom questioned whether the archaeological
phenomenon is to be classified as an archaeological culture. Instead, the discussion has
centred around problems of dating and its relation to other archaeological cultures (see
Němejcová-Pavúková 1998 for a summary). A challenge to that approach was the discovery
of the close links between an early Baden pottery, the so-called Boleráz, and the neighbouring
Cernavodă III culture (Roman & Diamandi 2001). In the early period, pottery of one style
was in use along the whole course of the Danube, while the later Baden subgroups have a
much more limited distribution. The result of these observations was to question whether
the early Boleráz-Cernavodă III pottery and the later Baden pottery represented two separate
cultures or one.

Critique of the concept of a culture

Such a question is misleading, since it is built on a number of assumptions that have never
been validated. The first of these is that Baden culture pottery has a discrete distribution
and a sharp boundary with other pottery styles, a proposition maintained despite its obvious
disagreement with the archaeological evidence: namely that a great amount of settlement
assemblages contain a mixture of types. One response is to create new composite cultures,
such as the Cernavodă III-Boleráz, or the mixture of Funnel Beaker and Baden pottery in
parts of Lesser Poland (Zastawny 1999). But the regular appearance of Boleráz pottery in
settlements dominated by Funnel Beaker pottery in Moravia (Procházková & Vitula 2001),
Bohemia (Zápotocký 2000), Upper Silesia (Bukowska-Gedigowa 1980) and Lesser Poland
(Kruk & Milisauskas 1990) cannot be explained by labelling such finds as ‘imports’ or as the
result of ‘cultural contacts’. Neither does the creation of yet another culture, called Funnel
Beaker-Baden solve the problem.
A second assumption is that the distribution of Baden culture pottery corresponds to the
distribution of other types of material culture. This too is unsupported by the archaeological
record. Flint industries, for example as defined by Balcer (1988) show no congruence to
the boundaries given by the Baden style pottery. Investigations directed towards the flint
industries of the Baden culture reveal their lack of uniformity (Kaczanowska 1982/1983;
Pelisiak 1991). The so-called ‘human figurines with mobile head’ are usually described as a
common type of idol associated with Baden pottery (Kalicz 2002; Novotný 1981). The fact,
that these figurines are found in the Carpathian Basin and south-western Slovakia, whereas
animal figurines dominate in Austria and Moravia (Pavelčı́k 1982; 1992; Ruttkay 1995:
154), strongly indicates that the clay figurines denote a cultural sphere with boundaries
cutting right through the area of the Baden culture.

618
 The European Baden material re-examined

Neither do cultural practices equate to the cultural region of the pottery. Burial customs
associated with Baden style pottery show a high degree of regionality (Sachße 2005). The
ratios of animal bones from the settlements reveal the dominance of sheep and goat in a
number of settlements with Baden style pottery in the Carpathian Basin, while in the regions

Research
to the north, cattle is dominant (Benecke 1994: 89ff.). Again, a boundary is cutting right
through the area of the Baden culture, forming two areas that tie in with their respective
surroundings. It is impossible to find any sphere of material culture that shows a distribution
corresponding to that of the pottery style.
Lastly, it is necessary for the argument for a cultural zone to assume that Baden culture
pottery has itself a uniform style. This third assumption seems to be the most forced of
all. In the literature there are so many names for subgroups or related groups of the Baden
culture that it seems strange that it has been possible to preserve the concept of one uniform
culture for so long. In fact, during the last decades some of the subgroups were separated
from the Baden culture, such as the Kostolac- or the Bošáca group (Němejcová-Pavúková
1998), while close links between Baden, Jevišovice and Řivnác cultures are obvious. The
remaining Baden culture is further divided into very different groups, such as Viss, Ossarn,
Ózd, Úny, Fonyód, Mogiła, Zesławice-Pleszów etc. (Němejcová-Pavúková 1998). In
1973 Neustupný wrote that in no single region were all the phases of the Baden culture
documented by unambiguously phased assemblages (1973: 328). The Baden culture, as
a homogenous entity was obviously already in doubt 35 years ago, but nevertheless the
concept has remained largely unquestioned. The three premises stated above, which might
qualify Baden culture as an archaeological culture in the traditional sense, have clearly to
be rejected. The concept of the Baden culture as a homogenous cultural unit cannot be
sustained.

Towards a new concept: the Baden pottery styles

Since Baden culture was defined by the stylistic traits of pottery, it should be made clear
that this is the basic meaning of the term. The problems listed above indicate the necessity
of a definition of the Baden pottery style that ignores traditional terminological boundaries.
Secondly, a polythetic classification of the material, following Clarke (Clarke 1968: 246ff.),
should replace the premise of congruent distributions of the different spheres of material
culture. Thirdly, a uniformity of the Baden pottery style should not be presupposed, but
the search for subgroups should be part of the investigation.
Such an investigation has been carried out on material from the regions of Moravia,
Upper Silesia and Lesser Poland. Here, 120 assemblages from settlements were sampled
in order to cover the spatial and temporal reach of the so-called Baden culture as
it appears in the literature. In a second step, the investigation was extended into the
surrounding areas, thus covering the northern area of the distribution of Baden style pottery
(Figure 1).
The pottery in the assemblages was then classified scientifically. Figure 2 shows a
correspondence analysis of the decorative motifs of 389 settlement finds from the study
area. The graph seems quite blurry at first, because it contains a broad regional scale, but is
in fact quite well structured, as the grey shading indicates. It draws on a set of regional analyses

619
 Martin Furholt

Figure 1. The settlement finds forming the basis for the analysis.

(see key) and reveals a number of more general style groupings (for details of the method,
see Furholt 2008). Style 1, to the left, is the so-called Boleráz style (Němejcová-Pavúková
& Bárta 1977), Style 2 could be called Funnel Beaker with Boleráz influences (cf. Šmı́d
2003). Style 3 is a variant of post-Boleráz, while Style 4 is referring to the Late Baden and
Bošáca (Pavelčı́k 1973), Style 5 to Jevišovice B (Medunová-Benešová 1977), encompassing
also variants of Kostolac and Řivnác (Ehrich & Pleslová-Štiková 1968), whereas Style 3/4
is referring to the different variants of Classical Baden and Ossarn (Mayer 1995). Style 7
is denoting Funnel Beaker complexes with Baden style influences in Lesser Poland, Greater
Poland and Kuyavia (Burchard 1973).
One principle variant (along the x-axis) is clearly dominated by time, demonstrated by the
15 new radiocarbon dates (Table 1) included in the analysis. The diagram covers the period
from 3650-2900 BC. Styles 1 and 2 are distinguished by the strength of Funnel Beaker
influence, as the units in the upper part of the graph show a dominant influence of the Funnel
Beaker pottery style. A second variant (along the y-axis) seems therefore to be determined
to a great deal by the difference in composition between a southern cultural influence, that
I will call ‘Baden’ and a northern cultural influence, denoted as ‘Funnel Beaker’.
So, the phenomenon that is usually called Baden culture in the literature, is actually to
be described as a number of distinct pottery styles, sharing a number of common features,
but still differentiable. They are largely differentiated by period of manufacture and by the
Funnel Beaker-Baden dichotomy.

620
 The European Baden material re-examined
621

Figure 2. Correspondence analysis of the decoration motifs for 389 settlement assemblages.

Research
 Martin Furholt

Table 1. List of 15 radiocarbon dates obtained for settlement finds with Baden style pottery (after
Furholt 2008). Note that the date from Jevišovice B seems too old.
Feature Context Lab No. Date Dev. 13 C BCcal (1σ ) Sample

Jevisovice C2 cultural layer Erl-6430 4821 50 −21,5 3660-3520

animal bone
Jevisovice C1 cultural layer Erl-6431 4670 50 −21,5 3520-3360
animal bone
Jevisovice B cultural layer Erl-6432 4745 49 −19,7 3640-3380
animal bone
Brno Lisen III cultural layer Erl-6433 4710 49 −20,3 3630-3370
animal bone
Brno Lisen II cultural layer Erl-6434 4748 51 −21,0 3640-3380
animal bone
Wojnowice 3 settlement pit UtC-13259 4356 46 −23,8 3020-2900
animal bone, cattle
Zeslawice 97 settlement pit UtC-13260 4387 45 −24,4 3090-2910
animal bone, cattle
Zeslawice 140a settlement pit UtC-13261 4420 43 −21,4 3260-2920
animal bone,
domestic pig
Wyciaze 50 settlement pit UtC-13263 4542 43 −20,3 3370-3100 animal bone,
domestic pig
Iwanowice Babia settlement pit UtC-13264 4365 43 −20,8 3020-2910 animal bone, cattle
Gora I, 1
Iwanowice Babia settlement pit UtC-13265 4336 44 −22,0 3020-2890 animal bone, cattle
Gora I, 18
Iwanowice Babia settlement pit UtC-13266 4380 50 −21,3 3090-2910 animal bone, cattle
Gora I, 21
Iwanowice Babia settlement pit UtC-13267 4300 44 −24,8 3010-2870 animal bone, cattle
Gora I, 38b
Iwanowice Babia settlement pit UtC-13268 4362 43 −22,8 3020-2910 animal bone,
Gora I, 62 dom. sheep
Hlinsko 1/69 settlement pit UtC-13773 4620 60 −20,0 3500-3140 animal bone, wild
boar

The (early Baden) Boleráz style

For a long time, the Boleráz style (Figure 3) has been known as the earliest subgroup of the
Baden culture (Neustupný 1959), and the increasing number of radiocarbon dates allows a
more precise dating (mapped in Figure 2). Schwechat 14 (Austria), positioned at the very
beginning of Style 1, has yielded the oldest date (see Wild et al. 2001), being earlier than
3650 BC, while Jevišovice C1, positioned in the later part of the cluster, dates into the
period 3520-3350 BC. Arbon Bleiche 3 (Lake Constance), at the end of that cluster, was
dated by dendrochronology to 3384-3370 BC (de Capitani 2002) and confirms an overall
duration from 3650 BC to 3350 BC. The stratigraphy of Jevišovice (Medunová-Benešová
1981) indicates that in the region of southern Moravia, the Boleráz style is not present long
before 3520 BC. The lowest layer, C2, dated to 3650-3520 BC, shows very little Boleráz
influence, whereas the next layer, C1, dated to 3520-3350 BC is a key site for the definition
of that style. Boleráz influences in Lesser Poland cannot be dated earlier than the phase
Bronocice III, starting somewhat around or after 3500 BC. Although most dates for Boleráz
lie between 3650 and 3350 BC (Wild et al. 2001), there are two series indicating a survival
of the Boleráz style after 3350 BC, one from Balatonöszöd (Horváth et al. in press) and one
from Györ-Szabadrétdomb (Figler et al. 1997).

622
 The European Baden material re-examined

Research
Figure 3. A typical inventory of the Boleráz style, selected from Jevišovice C1 (after Medunová-Benešová 1981).

The overall picture provided by the radiocarbon dates seems to indicate the presence
of a core area of the Boleráz style in Lower Austria and a subsequent spread to the north
and west after 3500 BC, maybe also to the south and east, where we presently lack dates.
In Figure 2, we defined the Styles 1 (Boleráz) and 2 (Funnel Beaker with Boleráz). The
difference between them is obviously a gradual one that can be described by the values of
the y-axis of the correspondence analysis. Mapping these values for each find in the early
period (3650-3500 BC) and interpolating them (see contours), illustrates the character of
the spread of the Boleráz style (Figure 4). The boundary between settlements dominated by
Funnel Beaker style (positive values) and settlements dominated by Boleráz style (negative
values) is stretching somewhere north of the Danube. Additionally, the spread of Boleráz
seems to be concentrated to the big river valleys of Moravia, up to the Moravian Gate in
the east, and to Bohemia, in the west. In the following period (3500-3350 BC), the Boleráz
style spreads further to the north and dominates most of Moravia and Bohemia, reaching
Lake Constance in the west.

Regional and supra-regional fabrics

In order to understand the systems of pottery distribution better, fabric analysis was applied
to 8000 vessels from Moravia, Upper Silesia and Lesser Poland. A number of attributes
including the material of the temper, the surface treatment, wall thickness, colour and

623
 Martin Furholt

Figure 4. Interpolation of the values of the second axis of the analysis (Figure 2), using triangulation with smoothing (Vertical
Mapper, ver. 3.1) for the earliest period of the Boleráz style (3650-3500 BC).

structure were assembled and the resulting data set subjected to correspondence analysis in
its turn (Furholt 2008). The analysis (Figure 5) grouped the vessels into three clusters, the
differentiation between them being an expression of the fabric coarseness, from thick walled,
richly tempered vessels on the right side, to smoothed or polished, thin walled vessels on
the left side of the graph. Thus, the three clusters are interpreted as the reflection of three
technical standards for the production of three types of fabric (technical groups, TG) of
different quality – fine wares (TG1 and 2) and coarse wares (TG3).
Examining the occurrence of fine and coarse fabrics within the style groups offers some
important results. Fine ware fabrics do not vary as between Style 1 and 2. Style 2 tends to
contain Boleráz fine ware vessels with Funnel Beaker coarse wares, a trend illustrated in the
hilltop settlement site of Rmı́z (Figure 6; Šmı́d 1994) and at the settlement site of Přáslavice
(Procházková & Vitula 2001). Šmı́d’s (2003) study of Moravian grave mounds also reveals
the repeated combination of a set of Funnel Beaker vessels with one or two Boleráz vessels,
the latter clearly restricted to jugs and cups of fine ware. At Arbon Bleiche 3 (de Capitani
2002) the dominant fabric (at 80-90 per cent) is a coarse ware with local regional forms,
while the minority fabric, a fine ware includes most of the Boleráz vessels (de Capitani
2002).
Within the pottery assemblages we can therefore identify at least two spheres of cultural
interaction. Among coarse ware styles, local traditions are utilised, like the Moravian Funnel
Beaker or the Pfyn-Horgen style at Lake Constance, while in the sphere of fine wares,

624
 The European Baden material re-examined

Research
Figure 5. Correspondence analysis of the technical parameters of 8000 pots from the regions of Moravia, Upper Silesia and
Lesser Poland. The units (triangles) are grouped in three distinctive clusters. The variables’ position are indicated by the dots.

Figure 6. Ratio of pots sampled from the site of Rmı́z, illustrating the relationship between style and technical group.

625
 Martin Furholt

Figure 7. Model of the pottery assemblage containing elements representing different cultural spheres related to diverse social
realms.

supra-regional styles seem to play a much greater role, like the pottery of the Boleráz
style.

Discussion
With these results in mind we can replace a ‘culture’ with a composite model, in which
different kinds of material belong to different sub-systems and play different roles in society
(Figure 7). In this case the coarse-ware-vessels seem to refer to local networks and social
interactions, while the fine ware vessels would represent a supra-regional system in which
the material is used more actively, in contrast to the supposedly more habitual role of the
coarse ware. The fine ware in the Boleráz style shows no restriction to, or preference for, any
kind of settlement type, environment or type of economy. There is an association with the
custom of cremation (Sachße 2005), indicating that the style bears ideological connotations,
whose content remains unclear. The connection of the Boleráz style with the appearance of
the earliest evidence for wheeled vehicles has long been noted (Maran 2001; 2004; Sherratt
1981; 1997; 2004). And this association has been strengthened by the recent dates. Though
there are dates for the earliest evidence of wheeled vehicles lying between 3600 and 3300
BC, wherever more precise dates are available, we find a quite clear restriction to the time
span of 3500-3350 BC (see Bakker et al. 1999). The earliest dates for Boleráz in its supposed
core area (Lower Austria, south-west Slovakia) indicate a start of that style before or around
3650 BC. But it also seems clear that the spread of this style cannot be fixed before the year
3520 BC – moreover, it seems to have taken place exactly in the time-window (3520-3350
BC), as the dendrochronology dates from Arbon Bleiche 3 seem to prove.

626
 The European Baden material re-examined

Conclusion
The so-called Baden culture does not embrace a consistent cultural package, and even
if expressed by pottery alone has been shown here to be a coarse approximation of a

Research
number of ceramic subsystems. What is more, fine and coarse ware pottery show different
developments. In the early phase (3650-3350 BC) coarse fabrics are regionally diverse and
local in their context and meaning. The earliest fine wares, the Boleráz wares, have their first
use in Austria (and the adjacent region), but then spread over a short time span to north and
west mixing with other cultural attributes. This expansion, dated by new radiocarbon dates
to 3520-3350 BC coincides closely to the spread of wheeled vehicles as currently known.

Acknowledgements
Research in the Czech Republic and in Poland was funded by the DAAD and Studienstiftung des Deutschen Volkes.
I wish to thank a lot of people, especially Cornelia Becker, Maria Guagnin, Volker Heyd, Sławomir Kadrow,
Johannes Müller, Jaroslav Peška, Constanze Rassmann, Knut Rassmann, Lubomir Šebela and Piotr Włodarczak
for discussions and aid.

References Figler, A., L. Bartosiewicz, G. Füleky & E.

Bakker, J.A., J. Kruk, A.E. Lanting & S.
Milisauskas. 1999. The earliest evidence of
wheeled vehicles in Europe and the Near East.
Antiquity 73: 778-90.
Balcer, B. 1988. The Neolithic flint industries in the
Vistula and Odra Basins. Przegla̧d Archeologiczny
35: 49-100.
Behrens, H. 1973. Die Salzmünder Gruppe der
mitteldeutschen Trichterbecherkultur und die
nordwestlichen Ausstrahlungen der Badener Kultur,
in B. Chropovský (ed.) Symposium über die
Entstehung und Chronologie der Badener Kultur:
23-30. Bratislava: Slovakian Academy of Sciences.
Benecke, N. 1994. Archäozoologische Studien zur
Entwicklung der Haustierhaltung in Mitteleuropa
und Südskandinavien von den Anfängen bis zum
ausgehenden Mittelalter. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
Bukowska-Gedigowa, J. 1980. Osady neolityczne w
Pietrowicach Wielkich pod Raciborzem. Wrocław:
Polska Academia Nauk.
Burchard, B. 1973. Zur Genesis der Kultur mit
kannelierter Keramik, in B. Chropovský (ed.)
Symposium über die Entstehung und Chronologie der
Badener Kultur: 55-66. Bratislava: Slovakian
Academy of Sciences.
Clarke, D.L. 1968. Analytical Archaeology. London:
Methuen.
de Capitani, A. 2002. Gefässkeramik, in A. de
Capitani, S. Deschler-Erb, U. Leuzinger, E.
Marti-Grädel & J. Schibler (ed.) Die
Jungsteinzeitliche Seeufersiedlung Arbon Bleiche 3.
Funde: 135-276. Frauenfeld: Departement für
Erziehung und Kultur des Kantons Thurgau.
Ehrich, R.W. & E. Pleslová-Štiková. 1968.
Homolka. An Eneolithic settlement site in Bohemia.
Cambridge (MA): Peabody Museum.
Hertelendi. 1997. Copper Age settlement and the
new water system: a case study from north-western
Hungary, in J. Chapman & P. Dolukhanov (ed.)
Landscapes in flux (Colloquia Pontica 3): 209-230.
Oxford: Oxbow.
Furholt, M. 2008. Die nördlichen Badener Keramikstile
im Kontext des mitteleuropäischen Spätneolithikums
(3650-2900 v. Chr.). Bonn: Rudolf Habelt.
Horváth, T., E. Svingor & M. Molnár. In press.
Újabb adatok a baden-péceli kultúra datálásához
[New dates to the chronology of Baden/Pécel
culture]. Archeometriai Mühely 2007/1.
Kaczanowska, M. 1982/1983. Z badań nad
przemysłem krzemiennym kultury ceramiki
promienistej. Acta Archaeologica Carpatica 22:
65-96.
Kalicz, N. 1963. Die Péceler (Badener) Kultur und
Anatolien. Budapest: Hungarian Academy of
Sciences.
– 2002. Eigenartige anthropomorphe Plastik der
kupferzeitlichen Badener Kultur im
Karpatenbecken. Budapest Régiségei 36: 11-53.
Kruk, J. & S. Milisauskas. 1990. Radiocarbon dating
of Neolithic assemblages from Bronocice. Przegla̧d
Archeologiczny 37: 195-228.
Maran, J. 2001. Zur Westausbreitung von
Boleráz-Elementen in Mitteleuropa, in P. Roman.
& S. Diamandi (ed.) Cernavodă III-Boleráz. Ein
vorgeschichtliches Phänomen zwischen dem Oberrhein
und der unteren Donau (Symposium Magnalia/
Neptun 18-24 October 1999; Studia Danubiana,
series Symposia 2): 673-720. Bucharest: Vavila.
– 2004. Die Badener Kultur und ihre Räderfahrzeuge,
in S. Burmeister & M. Fansa (ed.) Rad und Wagen.
Der Ursprung einer Innovation. Wagen im vorderen
Orient und Europa: 265-82. Mainz: Philipp von
Zabern.

627
 Martin Furholt
Matuschik, I. 2001. Boleráz und Baden aus der Sicht
des Südbayerischen Spätneolithikums, zugleich ein
Beitrag zur Genese der Chamer Kultur, in P. Roman
& S. Diamandi (ed.) Cernavodă III-Boleráz. Ein
vorgeschichtliches Phänomen zwischen dem Oberrhein
und der unteren Donau (Symposium
Magnalia/Neptun 18-24 October 1999; Studia
Danubiana, series Symposia 2): 673-720.
Bucharest: Vavila.
Mayer, C. 1995. Klassische Badener Kultur, in E.
Lenneis, E. Ruttkay & C. Neugebauer-Maresch
(ed.) Jungsteinzeit im Osten Österreichs: 161-77.
St. Pölten, Wien: Niederösterreichisches Pressehaus.
Medunová-Benešová, A. 1977. Jevišovka kultura na
jihozápadnı́ Moravě. Praha: Academia.
– 1981. Jevišovice-Starý Zámek. Schicht C2, C1, C.
Katalog der Funde. Brno: Československé Akademie
Véd.
Müller, J. 2001. Soziochronologische Studien zum Jung-
und Spätneolithikum im Mittelelbe-Saale-Gebiet
(4100-2700 v. Chr.). Rahden/Westfalen: Marie
Leidorf.
Némejcová-Pavúková, V. 1998. Die Badener Kultur,
in J. Preuß (ed.) Das Neolithikum in Mitteleuropa:
383-400. Weissbach: Beier & Beran.
Némejcová-Pavúková, V. & J. Bárta. 1977.
Äneolithische Siedlung der Boleráz-Gruppe in
Radošina. Slovenská Archeológia 25: 433-48.
Neustupný, E. 1959. Zur Entstehung der Kultur mit
kannelierter Keramik. Slovenská Archeológia 7:
260-84.
– 1973. Die Badener Kultur, in B. Chropovský (ed.)
Symposium über die Entstehung und Chronologie der
Badener Kultur: 317-52. Bratislava: Slovakian
Academy of Sciences.
Novotný, B. 1981. Zur Idolatrie der Badener Kultur
in der Slowakei. Slovenská Archeológia 29: 131-8.
Pavelć´ik, J. 1973. Zur Problematik der mährischen
kannelierten Keramik, in B. Chropovský (ed.)
Symposium über die Entstehung und Chronologie der
Badener Kultur: 367-92. Bratislava: Slovakian
Academy of Sciences.
– 1982. Drobné terrakoty z Hlinska u Lipnı́ku (okr.
Přerov). Památky Archeologické 73: 261-92.
– 1992. Nové nálezy antropomorfnı́ch a zoomorfnı́ch
◦ Central Europe (4th millennium BC). Radiocarbon
idoluna Moravé. Pravěk Nova Řada 2: 205-14.
Pelisiak, A. 1991. Ze studiów nad wytwórczościa˛
kamieniarska˛ w kre˛gu kultury badeńskiej. Acta
Archaeologica Carpatica 30: 17-54.
Procházková, P. & P. Vitula 2001. Přáslavice. Dı́ly
pod dědinou (I). Sı́dliště kultury nálevkovitých
◦ Höhensiedlungen des älteren Äneolithikums in
poháru. Olomouc: Vlastivědné muzeum v
Olomouci.
628
Roman, P. & S. Diamandi (ed.). 2001. Cernavodă
III-Boleráz. Ein vorgeschichtliches Phänomen
zwischen dem Oberrhein und der unteren Donau
(Symposium Magnalia/Neptun 18-24 October
1999; Studia Danubiana, series Symposia 2).
Bucharest: Vavila.
Ruttkay, E. 1995. Spätneolithikum, in E. Lenneis, C.
Neugebauer-Maresch & E. Ruttkay (ed.)
Jungsteinzeit im Osten Österreichs: 108-209.
St. Pölten, Wien: Niederösterreichisches Pressehaus.
Sachße, C. 2005. Untersuchungen zu den
Bestattungssitten der Badener Kultur in ihrem
räumlichen und zeitlichen Umfeld. Unpublished
dissertation, University of Heidelberg.
Shennan, S. 1989. Introduction: archaeological
approaches to cultural identity, in S. Shennan (ed.)
Archaeological approaches to cultural identity: 1-32.
London: Unwin Hyman.
Sherratt, A. 1981. Plough and pastoralism: aspects of
the secondary products revolution, in I. Hodder, G.
Isaac & N. Hammond (ed.) Pattern of the past.
Studies in honour of David Clarke: 261-305.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
– 1997. Changing perspectives on European prehistory,
in A. Sherratt (ed.) Economy and society in prehistoric
Europe: 15-19. Princeton (NJ): Princeton
University Press.
– 2004. Wagen, Pflug, Rind: ihre Ausbreitung und
Nutzung – Probleme der Quelleninterpretation, in
M. Fansa & S. Burmeister (ed.) Rad und Wagen.
Der Ursprung einer Innovation. Wagen im vorderen
Orient und Europa: 409-28. Mainz: Philipp von
Zabern.
Šm´id, M. 1994. Ein Wall mit steinerner Stirnmauer aus
der älteren Stufe der Trichterbecherkultur auf dem
Burgwall Rmı́z bei Laškov im Kataster der
gemeinde Námešt na Hané, Kreis Olomouc, Land
Mähren. Jahresschrift für mitteldeutsche Vorgeschichte
76: 201-30.
– 2003. Mohylová pohrebištĕ kultury nálevkovitých
poháru na Morave. Brno: Ústav Archeologické
Památkové Péče Brno.
Wild, E.M., P. Stadler, M. Bondár, S. Draxler, H.
Friesinger, W. Kutschera, A. Priller, W. Rom,
E. Ruttkay & P. Steier 2001. New chronological
frame for the young Neolithic Baden culture in
43: 1057-64.
Wotzka, H.-P. 1993. Zum traditionellen Kulturbegriff
in der prähistorischen Archäologie. Paideuma 39:
25-44.
Zápotocký, M. 2000. Cimburk und die
Böhmen. Praha: Institute of Archaeology.
Zastawny, A. 1999. Uwagi na temat chronologii
osadnictwa kultury badeńskiej w zachodniej cze˛ści
Małopolski. Sprawozdania Archeologiczne 51: 9-55.