A Copper Age settlement and cemetery was fully excavated at Rákóczifalva-Bivaly-tó Site 1/C in 2005-2007, making it possible to compare the use of its material culture in closely related, coeval, but different archaeological contexts. Such a rare set of circumstances allows the authors to highlight methodological issues associated with the distorting effect of archaeological finds made on sites where only settlement or burial data are available, and on the importance of choosing appropriate analytical units.

In the present article we explore the possibilities of reconstructing social behaviour through a detailed analysis of the so-called ‘ashmounds’ of the Late Bronze Age in Eastern Europe, starting from new research at a settlement of the Noua culture, Rotbav in south-eastern Transylvania. For the first time, the excavations comprised not only the ‘ashmound’ but also its vicinity, revealing the existence of structures like houses and pits. Furthermore, the analysis and comparison of the finds revealed significant differences between the ‘ashmound’ and the rest of the domestic spaces. This leads us to a new interpretation of the ‘ashmounds’ as special places, linked with feasting activities and collective leatherworking. This new interpretation is supported not only by the examination of the finds but also by new archaeozoological and chemical analyses, which are usually missing in Eastern Europe.

This article examines the evidence for fragmentation practices on Middle–Late Bronze Age (c. 1600–700 bc) settlement sites in Ireland by looking at two kinds of material: human remains, both burnt and non-burnt, and quern stones. It highlights evidence for the manipulation of non-burnt skulls through ‘de-facing’ and the potential retention of cranial and other fragments for ‘burial’ in settlements. It also explores the more difficult task of determining whether incomplete skeletal representation in cremated remains can be interpreted as deliberate fragmentation, and how the context of deposition must be considered. Human agency in relation to the fragmentation patterns of querns is also examined to understand whether the act of breaking these objects was intentional or unintended and if depositing them was symbolic or simply fortuitous. By discussing this evidence, I hope to contribute to the argument that the funerary and settlement spheres in later prehistoric Ireland were becoming increasingly intertwined.

It has long been claimed that the coaxial stone boundaries of Céide Fields, County Mayo, are a phenomenon of the Irish Early Neolithic — analogous to later prehistoric ‘Celtic’ fields in all but age. This study argues that the age disparity is an artefact of the research methods, and that the age of the main Céide Fields complex has been overestimated by as much as two-and-a-half millennia.

The first phase of the Trypillia mega-sites' methodological revolution began in 1971 with aerial photography, magnetic prospection, and archaeological excavations of huge settlements of hundreds of hectares belonging to the Trypillia culture in Ukraine. Since 2009, we have created a second phase of the methodological revolution in studies of Trypillia mega-sites, which has provided more significant advances in our understanding of these large sites than any other single research development in the last three decades, thanks partly to the participation of joint Ukrainian-foreign teams. In this paper, we outline the main aspects of the second phase, using examples from the Anglo-Ukrainian project ‘Early urbanism in prehistoric Europe: the case of the Trypillia mega-sites', working at Nebelivka (also spelled ‘Nebilivka’), and the Ukrainian-German project ‘Economy, demography and social space of Trypillia mega-sites', working at Taljanky (‘Talianki’), Maydanetske (‘Maydanetskoe’), and Dobrovody, as well as the smaller site at Apolianka.

The contrast between monumentalized burials and almost invisible settlements has dominated Neolithic studies in western Europe, reinforcing an artificial divide between ceremonial and economically productive landscapes. By combining a material culture approach with a landscape scale, comparative artefact studies can trace connections between people, places, and social contexts. This paper investigates social networks in Late Neolithic Portugal by examining artefact provenance, biographies, and deposition on the Mondego Plateau. It focuses on three sites and four object categories characteristic of this period. The study reveals great diversity of raw materials, circulation of everyday objects, and regional availability of resources previously thought to be imports. It suggests that people used dispersed resource areas in an integrated way, and that exchange was an integral part of routine life. Evidence for links across the region is not restricted to tombs. Burial assemblages resulted from a complex web of social relations that preceded, accompanied, and followed the actions surrounding death. Understanding these places and fundamental questions about Neolithic social production and reproduction requires reconnecting tombs and settlements into wider lived landscapes.

The case study presents completely different interpretations of the same archaeological evidence. Reasons for that are not only the state of knowledge and the possibilities of research, but also the impact of changes in the socio-political climate and varying theoretical traditions. The examples are taken from the Late La Tène settlement Basel-Gasfabrik, which has been excavated for almost 100 years. The study focuses on a number of more or less complete human skeletons from sunken features inside the settlement. This phenomenon prompted the archaeologists to find explanations for this apparent exception to the ancient rule of burying the dead outside the settlements. The interpretations of this ‘abnormal' burial practice range from victims of war to burials of the members of the élite. The discussion continues on the basis of the synopsis of all verifiable options of dealing with the dead and includes evidence from similar sites elsewhere.

This article examines the character and role of exchange in Bronze Age Britain. It critiques anachronistic models of competitive individualism, arguing instead that the circulation of both artefacts and the remains of the dead constructed the self in terms of enduring interpersonal ties. It is suggested that the conceptual divide between people and things that typifies post-Enlightenment rationalism has resulted in an understanding of Bronze Age exchange that implicitly characterizes objects as commodities. This article re-evaluates the relationship between people and things in Bronze Age Britain. It explores the role of objects as active social agents; the exchange of artefacts and of human remains facilitated the production of the self and the reproduction of society through cyclical processes of fragmentation, dispersal and reincorporation. As such, Bronze Age concepts of personhood were relational, not individual.