Ideas around prehistoric societies (Idéer omkring f⊘rhistoriske samfunn)

Abstract

This book does not aim at documentation of the ideas around prehistoric societies launched. It is just intended as a guiding pointer for future studies. In this respect it has been necessary to give a critical evaluation of the ‘New Archeology’ which has based itself on logical empiricism which is obsolete in modern philosophical thinking. Instead the book claims the complementarity of science and art. Otherwise the problem of social groups is considered all the way from human palaeontology of. Interdisciplinary studies on a wide scale is strongly recommended, the writer himself having one foot in prehistory and the other one in socio‐cultural anthropology. But if archaeology shall be able to reach a truly holistic view, which is considered absolutely necessary, inter‐disciplinarity must be still more comprehensive, including ecology, history of religions, early historical sources, etc.

The socio‐cultural distinction between the older hunting‐fishing economy and the slow process of Indo‐Europeanization is stressed, and the following emphasis in patrilinearity in the upper social strata, whereas bilaterality may have continued to exist in the lower and dependent strata.

Being a study claiming the necessity of a holistic theory ecological studies cannot be confined to the exploitation of material resources but must be extended to social organization, and, in fact, even to Cosmos. Modern students of religion claim that in non‐Western societies religion is not considered an autonomous category but is a completely integrated part of the whole socio‐culture. The immigration of various Indo‐European groups from Middle‐ or late Neolithic times of are pointed out, the latest from the 3rd to the 5th centuries A.D., and the political consequences these may have involved.

An Epilogue considers archaeology's relation to the modern ‘action anthropology’ pointing to the fact that we all have responsibility for people, not only for our small scholarly community, but for humanity as a whole. Archaeology scarcely can come to be ‘action anthropology’ proper, but indirectly it may contribute to “action anthropology’ by demonstrating certain basic trends in Western civilization, such as warlikeness, the basic background for our organizations, etc.