522
Documenta Praehistorica XLVII (2020)
Introduction
The process of cultural unification in prehistory
made the world look similar, but not homogenous.
This phenomenon may be compared with modern
globalisation, although significant difference be-
tween the two processes should be also highlighted.
In archaic societies, as opposed to modern ones, cul-
tural unification was much slower and took hun-
dreds and thousands of years (Bauman 2001). In
Approaching the unification and diversity
of pottery assemblages> the case of Western Tripolye
culture ceramics in the Southern Bug and Dnieper interfluve,
4100–3600 cal BC
Aleksandr Diachenko1, Iwona Sobkowiak-Tabaka2, and Sergej Ryzhov3
1 National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Institute of Archaeology, Kyiv, UA
oleksandr.diachenko@gmail.com
2 Adam Mickiewicz University, Faculty of Archaeology, Poznan, PL
iwosob@amu.edu.pl
3 National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Institute of Archaeology, Kyiv, UA
vshumova@ukr.net
ABSTRACT – This paper questions the cycling nature of the unification and diversity of pottery forms
through a case study of ceramics of the Western Tripolye culture in the Southern Bug and Dnieper
interfluve in modern Ukraine. We identified the cultural cycle representing the transition from more
unified ceramic assemblages to more diverse ones, and then back to more unified assemblages. This
cultural cycle is disturbed by the increase in the diversity of pottery sets at three of ten subsequent
time periods we have analysed. The obtained results are discussed in frames of deterministic expla-
nations and the dynamic behaviour of complex systems.
IZVLE∞EK – V ≠lanku se spra∏ujemo o cikli≠ni naravi poenotenja in raznolikosti kerami≠nih oblik s
pomo≠jo ∏tudijskega primera lon≠enine iz zahodne tripoljske kulture na obmo≠ju ju∫nega medre≠ja
Buga in Dnepra v sodobni Ukrajini. Prepoznali smo kulturni cikel, ki predstavlja prehod iz bolj po-
enotenih kerami≠nih zbirov k ve≠ji raznolikosti ter prehod nazaj k bolj enotnemu zbiru. Ta kulturni
cikel zmoti nara∏≠anje raznolikosti lon≠eninskih zbirov v treh od desetih zaporednih ≠asovnih obdo-
bjih, ki smo jih analizirali. Dobljene rezultate obravnavamo v okviru deterministi≠nih razlag in di-
nami≠nem vedenju kompleksnih sistemov.
KEY WORDS – cultural cycles; unification; diversity; complex systems; pottery assemblages; Cucuteni-
Tripolye cultural complex; Western Tripolye culture
KLJU∞NE BESEDE – kulturni cikli; poenotenje; raznolikost; kompleksni sistemi; zbiri lon≠enine; kul-
turni kompleks Cucuteni-Tripolye; zahodna kultura Tripolye
Pristop k poenotenju in raznolikosti zbirov lon;enine> primer keramike zahodne
kulture Tripolye v ju/nem medre;ju Buga in Dnepra v ;asu 4100–3600 pr. n. [t.
DOI> 10.4312\dp.47.30
Approaching the unification and diversity of pottery assemblages> the case of Western Tripolye culture ceramics in the Southern Bug ...
523
sented by Oswald Spengler, who claimed that his-
tory does not have any universal laws, but that each
cultural item has its own laws and goes through
certain phases – from the rise and peak, to its fall
and destruction (Spengler 2014).
In sociology, the first theory of historical cycles was
introduced by Vilfredo Pareto in the 19th century.
In his view, a social system in constant motion rep-
resents a smooth transition from a state of equilib-
rium to destabilization, and to a collapse of the equi-
librium and the re-establishment of a state of equi-
librium (Pareto 1975). These four stages of develop-
ment were also used by Karl Marx and later by Gor-
don Childe in one of his most important works,
titled ‘Man Makes Himself’, published in 1936
(Lech 1999). In modern sociology, the most inter-
esting cyclic theory was formulated by Piterim So-
rokin in ‘Social and Cultural Dynamics’, published
in the late 1930s (Sorokin 1937). According to this,
the social world consists of holistic socio-cultural
systems. The main element of each system is the cul-
tural mentality, on which other elements of the sy-
stem depend. In other words, the history of human-
kind is the cycle of changes of cultural mentality.
Therefore, the shape of history is not linear, but is
defined by the recurring rhythm of cultural chan-
ges. The mechanism of changes is regulated by the
internal capabilities of each socio-cultural system.
Worth highlighting here is that there is a limit to the
possibility of cultural development, beyond which
a given cultural mentality is exhausted, loses the
possibility of expansion and is not able to develop.
Then a syncretic mentality appears containing both
elements of the previous and new cultural mentality
in order to give way to the newly emerging cultural
mentality, which at that moment has an expansive
and creative potential. And so the cycle goes on and
on (Sorokin 1937). External factors, such as environ-
ment, diffusion or conquest are of secondary impor-
tance – those can influence the length of the phases
of each cycle, but are not able to replace its endoge-
nous logic (Sztompka 2012).
The humanities and social sciences, including ar-
chaeology, consider different concepts of time. The
first concept, so-called event history is mainly relat-
ed to political events. Another, cyclical time, refers
to business cycles (see below). The last concept, lon-
gue durée, characterizes changes in social structures
and the history of civilisations. In this case studies
cover a period of several centuries (Braudel 1999).
The idea of longue durée was used, among the oth-
ers, by Charles Cobb (1991) to identify the pheno-
many cases cultural unification was accompanied by
the formation of numerous cultural groups and re-
gional variations characterized by Modderman as
“diversity in uniformity” (1988).
This paper examines the cycling nature of the unifi-
cation and diversity of pottery forms through a case
study of ceramics of the Western Tripolye culture in
the Southern Bug and Dnieper interfluve in modern
Ukraine. First, we will briefly review the concept of
cycles in philosophy, natural and social sciences,
complementing the earlier review of Detlef Gronen-
born and co-authors (Gronenborn et al. 2017). Se-
cond, we will present our sample and methodology
of approaching unification and diversity. Third, we
will discuss the results and their implications for fur-
ther research in archaeology.
Cycles in natural and social phenomena
Cambridge Dictionary (online) defines a cycle as
“a complete set of events that repeat themselves re-
gularly in the same order, or a regularly repeated
period of time”. The first attempts at the depiction
socio-political and economic events as cycling are
known from the philosophers of Ancient Greece
(Liddel 2010). Among the most important historians
who described the development of the Roman Em-
pire using the concept of cycle was Polybius (Kimla
2009). His ideas, and particularly the elements of
degenerationism, were adapted centuries later by
the Renaissance thinker Niccolò Machiavelli (Kenny
2005). A systematic approach to history as a series
of recurring cycles then started in the 19th century.
It was assumed that history has a repetitive rhythm,
that no historical events are completely unique, as
after some time the course of history returns to its
starting point, or at least to states similar to those
that took place earlier. What happens now is thus
not a culmination, but only a transitional stage of
the process (Sztompka 2012).
The Russian philosopher Nikolai Danilevskiy, in his
work titled ‘Russia and Europe’, stated that the
issue of development refers not to humankind as a
whole but to civilisations. Each civilisation goes
through a normal life cycle. The first stage is the oc-
currence of civilisation as a synthesis of previously
scattered cultural elements. The second is the achie-
vement of real cultural and political distinctiveness,
the third stage is the blossoming of civilisation, and
the fourth is stagnation and apathy. Finally, the fifth
is the break-down and the fall of the civilisation (Da-
nilevskiy 1895). A very similar approach was pre-
Aleksandr Diachenko, Iwona Sobkowiak-Tabaka, and Sergej Ryzhov
524
mena responsible for cultural chan-
ges among prehistoric societies in
American Middle West.
Another concept from Fernand Brau-
del, directly related to the longue
durée, is based on the idea of cen-
tre and periphery (Braudel 1992).
This concept was further developed
by Immanuel Wallerstein (1974) in
his world system theory. He distin-
guished three stages of human deve-
lopment. The first is the epoch of
‘mini-systems’, small self-sufficient communities
which are typical of hunter-gatherers societies. The
next stage is the ‘epoch of empires’, and the last one
is the ‘global system’. It is worth highlighting that
these systems consist of central, peripheral and mar-
ginal zones which are related to each other. The
changes in the centre are mirrored by those in the
periphery and vice-versa. This concept is often used
by archaeologists, especially in research concerning
the Bronze and Iron Ages in Europe (e.g., Kristian-
sen 1994; Sherratt 1994; Kadrow 2001; Kristian-
sen, Larsson 2005).
The idea of cycles has also been widely adapted by
natural scientists to report various phenomena. One
of the first was Milutin Milankovi≤, who described
long-term climate changes caused by changes in the
position of Earth in relation to the Sun, the so-called
Milankovitch cycles. This theory explains the ice
ages that repeatedly occurred in the geological past,
as well as the climate changes which may occur in
the future (Hays et al. 1976; Campisano 2002). The
idea of cyclical phenomena was used
to recognize the glacial-interglacial
cycle of vegetation changes (Fig. 1;
Iversen 1958), solar cycles (increas-
ing sun irradiance every 11 years –
Hathaway et al. 1999) and their in-
fluences on human disease and adap-
tability (Davis, Lowell 2006); to iden-
tify earthquakes cycles (O’Malley et
al. 2017; Galvez et al. 2019) or to
explain epidemic cycles (Althouse,
Hébert-Dufresne 2014). However,
we should also admit that there are
critics of cycles in the natural scien-
ces, including the cycling nature of
earthquakes (Bak 1996). To a cer-
tain extent, human beings ‘look for’
cycling behaviour in non-cycling phe-
nomena, trying to predict negative
events and thus become protected from their im-
pacts (Bak 1996).
The other widely known cycles are business and
product life cycles. Both are used by economists to
describe fluctuations in economic system and the
sales of individual products. Business cycles occur-
ring in the economy represent wide changes in to-
tal output, incomes and employment, usually last-
ing from two to ten years. We can distinguish two
main phases of business cycles – expansion and re-
cession – with peaks and troughs marking the turn-
ing points (Fig. 2). A key important observation is
that there no identical cycles, and the precise pre-
diction of their duration and timing is not possible
(Samuelson, Nordhaus 1995).
Very similar to the aforementioned cycle is the pro-
duct life cycle, characterizing the period in which
the product is presented to the market. This case
also includes four stages: introduction, growth, ma-
turity and decline (Fig. 3; Altkorn 2004).
Fig. 1. Glacial and post-glacial cycles (redrawn from Iversen 1958).
Fig. 2. A scheme of business cycle (redrawn from Samuelson, Nord-
haus 1995).
Approaching the unification and diversity of pottery assemblages> the case of Western Tripolye culture ceramics in the Southern Bug ...
525
It is worth noticing that, regardless of the field the
concept of cycle is applied to, four distinct phases of
changes are distinguished. This phenomenon resem-
bles the Aristotle’s quartet, which he adopted from
Plato, although it appears even earlier with Empedo-
cles. This earlier quartet distinguished four elements,
namely earth, air, fire and water, which can be set
alongside the previous concepts of change presented
by Thales, Anaximander, Heraclitus and Xenophanes
(Fig. 4; Ball 2004).
Adaptive cycles are also widely applicable to describe
patterns of changes in complex systems, both in eco-
systems and social systems. Ecologists have noticed
that each cycle consists of four phases: rapid growth,
conservation, release and renewal (Fig. 5). The key-
point in this case is an assumption about the dyna-
mics of structural and functional properties and also
processes. It means we are able to distinguish peri-
ods of growth, destruction and de-
composition varying over scales of
space and time (Angeler et al. 2015).
Further development of the idea of
adaptive cycles indicates that they
mirror the unavoidable dynamics of
complex adaptive systems, resulting
in the internal process of self-orga-
nization and evolution along time
(Sundstorm, Allen 2019).
Over the last two decades the con-
cept of adaptive cycles was borrow-
ed from socioeconomics and ecology
and applied in many others fields,
including social sciences and the hu-
manities. For instance, this concept
was used by Jared M. Diamond
(2005) to approach the rise and fall
of pre-historic, ancient and modern societies. It can
be also applied to recognize changes in current west-
ern societies, driven by factors such as technology,
industry or digitization (Gilpin 2000).
Adaptive cycles are also being investigated in archa-
eology. The leitmotif of these studies is the state-
ment made by Gunderson and Holling that “Resi-
lience is the ability of the system to return to the
original state after disturbance” (Gunderson, Hol-
ling 2002). Andreas Zimmermann (2012) proposed
using the term cultural cycles to refer to Central Eu-
ropean prehistory, especially in relation to agrarian
societies. The crucial results of his research are that:
(a) cultural cycles caused by internal factors such as
the dynamics of social and economic relations are
an alternative to external ones, i.e. climate fluctua-
Fig. 3. Product life cycle curve (redrawn from Alt-
korn 2004 with modifications).
Fig 4. Aristoteles’ quartet. The four elements of Em-
pedocles, imbued with two qualities, by means of
which they could be transformed (redrawn from
Ball 2004).
Fig. 5. Graphical representation of the four phases of the adaptive
cycles. r rapid growth; K conservation; W release; a renewal. The
cycles mirroring changes in two properties: Y axis: the potential
that is inherent in the accumulated resources of biomass and nu-
trients; X axis: the degree of connectedness among controlling vari-
ables (see Gunderson, Holling 2002.6–8, Fig. 1).
Aleksandr Diachenko, Iwona Sobkowiak-Tabaka, and Sergej Ryzhov
526
tions; (b) cultural memory and traditions are piv-
otal factors that influence the cultural system; (c)
cultural evolution is marked by stages and tradi-
tions; (d) the complexity of cultural systems is no-
ticeable by the non-linear changes over the middle
and long-term time scales. The concept of ‘adaptive
cycle’ was also used by Gronenborn and co-authors
(2014) in a study of LBK development in Western
Europe. More recently, they applied the theory of
adaptive cycles to recognize the population dynam-
ics and social resilience strategies in early farming
societies of SW Central Europe (Gronenborn et al.
2017; 2018). Following the studies conducted by
Gronenborn and his co-authors, our paper focuses at
the following questions: (1) are ceramic styles de-
veloped in cycles from more unified to more diverse,
and then back to more unified? and (2) what fac-
tors impact the transitions from more unified to
more diverse and from more diverse to more uni-
fied pottery assemblages?
Data input and estimations
Method
The philosophical connotations suggested for ‘hey-
day’ and ‘decline’, as broadly presented above, in
most cases correspond to widely used archaeologi-
cal categories of ‘unification’ (approximating ‘birth’
and ‘death’) and ‘diversity’ (approximating ‘growth’).
Both of these categories can be quantified with the
application of Claude Shannon’s diversity index
(Shannon 1948). Providing numerical values for
‘unified’ and ‘diverse’, this approach suggests a gra-
dual transition from one to the other as a reasonable
alternative to the widely accepted understanding of
the two categories as binary oppositions. The utility
of the diversity index is confirmed by its successful
applications in archaeology (e.g., Justeson 1973; Di-
ckens Jr., Fraser 1984; Bevan et al. 2012; Furholt
2012; Crema 2015; Gronenborn et al. 2017; 2018;
Drost, Vander Linden 2018).
Shannon’s index is estimated as:
(eq. 1)
where H is the entropy taken for a measure of di-
versity, pi is the proportion of elements belonging
to the i-th type (Spi = 1), and K is the normalizing
coefficient (Shannon 1948).
Data input
We have tested the possible cyclic nature of the de-
velopment of pottery styles using an example of ce-
ramic assemblages of Western Tripolye culture (he-
reinafter – WTC) sites in the Southern Bug and Dnie-
per interfluve, modern Ukraine dated to c. 4100–
3600 cal BC (Fig. 6). This region is widely known for
Tripolye mega-sites, the largest population agglom-
erations in Neolithic Europe, i.e. Nebelevka, Dobro-
vody, Chicherkozovka, Talianki and Maidanetske
(e.g., Menotti, Korvin-Piotrovkiy 2012; Müller et
al. 2016b). Materials from the mega-sites of Chicher-
kozovka and Talianki are included into our sample.
Taxonomically WTC belongs to the Cucuteni-Tripol-
ye cultural complex (hereinafter – CTCC) spread
from the Carpathians in the west to the eastern bank
of Dnieper in the east, c. 5000–3000/2950 cal BC.
The internal structure of WTC includes ‘genetic lines’
subdivided into local groups, some of which also
include site-types (e.g., Dergachev 1980; Ryzhov
2007). It should be noted that the term ‘genetic
lines’ proposed by Dergachev reflects the similarity
and change in ceramic assemblages of local groups
replacing each other over time (Dergachev 1980).
The difference in pottery styles and duration of exi-
stence decreases from the top down in this taxono-
mic hierarchy.
Based on pottery seriation, Sergii Ryzhov (1993;
2000a; 2007; 2015) included the sites which are
analysed in this paper into Vladimirovskaya, Nebe-
levskaya and Tomashovskaya local groups. These
three local groups form the Vladimirovsko-Toma-
shovskaya line of development of WTC. Phases (if
not subdivided into stages) and stages of develop-
ment of local groups include synchronous settle-
ments. Synchronous ceramic assemblages have iden-
tical sets of pottery forms, while the percentage of
vessels of each type across different sites is similar,
varying only up to a few percent. Therefore, signi-
ficant changes in relative frequencies estimated for
pottery of different shapes and ornamentation sche-
mes indicate the chronological difference between
the sites. Secondary characteristics, such as modifi-
cations in ornamentation schemes or ‘signs’ on pot-
tery, may be considered as markers of either chro-
nological or spatial differences (Ryzhov 1999).
Initially the Vladimirovskaya group settlements were
not subdivided into phases of development, while
two phases were distinguished in the Nebelevskaya
group. The ceramic assemblage of the settlement of
Gordashevka 1 indicated its intermediate chronolo-
gical position between the Vladimirovskaya and Ne-
belevskaya local groups (Ryzhov 1993). The Toma-
shovskaya group sites were subdivided into four
stages of development (Ryzhov 2000a). Further ap-
H K p pi i
i
N
= −
=
∑ log
1
Fig. 6. Western Tripolye sites
in the Southern Bug and
Dnieper interfluve. Site num-
bering: 1 Popudnia; 2 Khri-
stinovka 1; 3 Tomashovka,
4 Cherpovody 2; 5 Gorodni-
tsa; 6 Kocherzhintsy-Pan-
kovka; 7 Dobrovody; 8 Sush-
kovka; 9 Korzhova Slobod-
ka; 10 Yatranovka 1; 11 Pe-
regonovka; 12 Romanovka;
13 Moshurov 1; 14 Talianki;
15 Maidanetske; 16 Ostro-
vets; 17 Nebelevka; 18 Vladi-
mirovka; 19 Polonistoe; 20
Tsyurupy; 21 Leshchevka; 22
Fedorovka; 23 Staraya Bu-
da; 24 Nemorozh; 25 Gorda-
shevka 1; 26 Talnoe 1; 27
Talnoe 3; 28 Talnoe 2; 29
Rassohovatka; 30 Bondarka
2; 31 Glubochek; 32 Kolodistoe 1; 33 Kolodistoe 2; 34 Goncharykha; 35 Krivye Kolena; 36 Peschane; 37
Yampol; 38 Komarovka; 39 Peremozhintsy; 40 Kvitki 2; 41 Valiava; 42 Nezamozhnik; 43 Olshana 1; 44
Khlystunovka; 45 Buda Orlovetskaya; 46 Ksaverovo; 47 Zelenaya Dibrova; 48 Novo-Ukrainka; 49 Chichir-
kozovka; 50 Vasilkov; 51 Lebedin; 52 Andreevka; 53 Likareve (Base of the map by Ben Jennings, created
using STRM data and ArcWorld River and Lake Overlay).
Approaching the unification and diversity of pottery assemblages> the case of Western Tripolye culture ceramics in the Southern Bug ...
527
plication of spatial statistics to the same dataset al-
lowed synchronization of the latest settlements of
the Vladmirovskaya group with the earliest sites of
the Nebelevskaya group, and the latest settlements
of the Nebelevskaya group with the earliest sites of
the Tomashovskaya group. Moreover, spatial statis-
tics allowed the identification of three subsequent
stages of development of the Vladimirovskaya group,
with the third one including two sub-stages, three
subsequent stages of the second phase of Nebelev-
skaya group and two subsequent phases of the third
phase of the Tomashovskaya group (Diachenko,
Menotti 2012). These results of the spatial analysis
find agreement with second-order differences in pot-
tery styles (Ryzhov 2000a; 2015). The overall fine-
grained chronology is confirmed by the correspon-
dence analysis of the ceramics (Müller et al. 2016a).
In order to avoid misunderstandings, the chronolo-
gical division of sites referring to
different phases and stages may
be considered in frames of subse-
quent ‘analytical periods’ labelled
from 1 to 10 (e.g., Diachenko, Zu-
brow 2015). Figure 7 summarizes
the taxonomy and chronology of
the analysed WTC sites.
Here we analyse quantitative chan-
ges in the shapes of the ‘table cera-
mics’ produced using clay mass
with an admixture of small-grained sand (Fig. 8).
We consider the distribution of the main types of
pottery morphology represented by goblets, goblet-
shaped vessels, sphere-conical and biconical vessels,
amphorae, pear-shaped vessels, lids, craters and cra-
ter-shaped vessels, pots, binocular-shaped vessels, lad-
les and vessels on trays (e.g., Ryzhov 2012). Bowls
were deliberately excluded from the analysis because
small fragments of bowls are easier to distinguish
typologically than ceramic fragments of any other
type. Therefore, if bowls are included into the esti-
mations, the overall distribution may be biased de-
pending on the extent of pottery fragmentation in
some collections. The same will be introduced more
precisely below.
Analytical period 1 is represented by ceramics com-
ing from surveys at the single earliest WTC site in
Fig. 7. Taxonomy and chronology of Western Tripolye sites in the
Southern Bug and Dnieper interfluve.
settlement
of
Gordashevka 1
Aleksandr Diachenko, Iwona Sobkowiak-Tabaka, and Sergej Ryzhov
528
the Southern Bug and Dnieper interfluve, the mega-
site of Fedorovka (Ryzhov 2015). Analytical periods
2 and 3, or the second and third stages of the Vla-
dimirovskaya group, were distinguished base on spa-
tial statics and second-order criteria in pottery seri-
ation (Diachenko, Menotti 2012; Ryzhov 2015). Un-
fortunately, the data for the precise estimation of
pottery types for these analytical periods was not
available to us. Therefore, the related values were
contingently reduced to zero in our analysis.
Analytical periods 4 and 5 correspond to the first
phase and first stage of the second phase of the Ne-
belevskaya group, respectively. The numbers esti-
mated for analytical period 4 are represented by the
mean values which were obtained for pottery types
coming from Houses 1, 2 and 3 excavated at the set-
tlement of Peschanoe (Ryzhov 1991; Chernovol, Ry-
zhov 2006). The numbers estimated for analytical
period 5 are the mean values which were obtained
for ceramic assemblages coming from Houses 1 and
2 excavated at the large settlement of Glubochek
(Ryzhov 2000b).
The subsequent five analytical periods correspond
to the first and second phases, the first and second
stages of the third phase, and the fourth phase of
the Tomashovskaya local group. The numbers esti-
mated for analytical period 6 are the averages ob-
tained for pottery collections which resulted from
the surveys and excavations conducted in 1920s at
the sites Popudnia, Staraya Buda and Sushkovka in
the Southern Bug and Dnieper interfluve (Ryzhov
2000a). The values for analytical period 7 were esti-
mated from the ceramic assemblage coming from
House 1 excavated at the mega-site of Chicherkozov-
ka (Ryzhov 2000a). The numbers estimated for ana-
lytical period 8 are the mean values obtained from
the pottery collections which come from excavations
of Houses 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 at
Talianki (from excavations in the 1980s directed by
Vladimir Kruts; Ryzhov 2000a). Analytical period 9
is represented by the mean values obtained for a set
of vessels from the excavations of House 1 at the
small site of Moshurov 1, the off-spring of the mega-
site of Maidanetske (Ryzhov 2000a). Finally, the
numbers for analytical period 10 are the mean val-
ues estimated for ceramic collections which come
from surveys at the settlements Bondarka 2 and Gon-
charykha (Ryzhov 1999; 2000a).
The number of pottery fragments at each analytical
period in our sample varies from
c. 1000–2000 (analytical periods
1, 6, 7, 9 and 10) to c. 4000–6000
(analytical periods 4 and 5). In
the case of analytical period 8,
the sample includes c. 25 000
pottery fragments. Ordinarily one
would normalize the estimated
values in order to obtain statisti-
cally significant results. However,
this is not necessary in our case
for the following reasons. Pottery
of different shapes is distributed
in approximately the same per-
centages in dwellings at synchro-
nous settlements. Therefore, the
relative number of ceramics be-
longing to different morphologi-
cal types does not change, when
the absolute number of fragments
increases with adding an assem-
blage from a house or two from
the same site or some other con-
temporaneous settlement. For
example, the percentages of dif-
ferent pottery types in Talianki
estimated as a mean for the as-
semblages from 11 houses do not
Fig. 8. Western Tripolye pottery shapes: 1, 3 goblets; 2 goblet-shaped
vessel; 4, 7 amphorae; 5 sphere-conical vessel; 6 biconical vessel; 8
pear-shaped vessel; 9 lead; 10, 11 craters; 12 binocular-shaped vessel
(re-drawn from Ryzhov 2015).
Approaching the unification and diversity of pottery assemblages> the case of Western Tripolye culture ceramics in the Southern Bug ...
529
change with excluding ceramic sets from several
houses from the sample. In other words, the mean
percentage of pottery types from seven, nine or 11
houses remains the same. The relative frequencies
of pottery in unbiased surface collections are also
similar to the distributions in house inventories. For
instance, the percentage of forms estimated from c.
2000 ceramic fragments from House 1 in Chichirko-
zovka corresponds to the percentage of forms esti-
mated from several thousand ceramic fragments
from surface collection (the surveys of Ivan Girnyk,
with data analysed by Sergey Ryzhov). Moreover,
the WTC ‘assembly places’, which differ from other
houses by their size and location in settlement struc-
ture are characterized by the same house invento-
ries as other dwellings at particular sites (e.g., Neb-
bia et al. 2018; Hofmann et al. 2019).
The number of vessels counted for each type was re-
calculated into relative frequencies. Then we esti-
mated the values of Shannon’s diversity index for
each analytical period. The results obtained are re-
presented in Fig. 9. The results of the estimations
are discussed in more detail below.
Results
The development of pottery shapes of WTC in the
Southern Bug and Dnieper interfluve corresponds
to the cultural cycle representing the transition from
more unified ceramic assemblages to more diverse,
and then back to more unified (Fig. 9). A possible
sample effect on the analysed trend may be assumed
considering the highest diversity of ceramics at ana-
lytical periods 4 and 5, which correspond to the high
number of pottery fragments counted for this time
range, while the decrease in diversity from period
4 to period 5 may be explained by the reduction in
the number of analysed house inventories from
three to two. However, the highest
absolute number of pottery frag-
ments counted for Talianki (analyti-
cal period 8) corresponds to the low-
er diversity index than found with
the values obtained for Peschanoe
and Glubochek (analytical periods
4 and 5, respectively). Moreover,
this highest absolute number was es-
timated from eleven house invento-
ries, significantly exceeding the num-
ber of houses analysed from Pescha-
noe and Glubochek (Fig. 9: analytical
periods 4, 5, 8). The diversity index
estimated for Talianki is also some-
what lower than the value estimated for a single
house inventory from Moshurov 1 (analytical period
9). It should be noted that the values of H estimat-
ed for the first and last analytical period may be
somewhat lower than they have to be due to the ce-
ramic collections obtained from surveys, while the
highest diversity index estimated for analytical pe-
riod 6 may be caused by the number of sampled
sites. However, the three sites referring to analytical
period 6 are located in the same micro-region, while
the diversity index estimated for pottery assemblages
obtained from these settlements is significantly high-
er than the diversity index estimated for the set of
pottery coming from two settlements located in diffe-
rent micro-regions and referring to analytical period
10 (Fig. 9: analytical periods 6 and 10; see also Dia-
chenko, Menotti 2012). Thus, we conclude that the
particular values of H estimated for different analy-
tical periods might be somewhat impacted by the
sample effects, but these effects do not change the
overall trend in the transition from more unified ce-
ramic assemblages to more diverse, and then back
to more unified.
The disturbances in the cultural cycle are represent-
ed by significant increases in the diversity of pottery
assemblages at analytical periods 4 and 6 and in-
crease in diversity at analytical period 9 (Fig. 9). We
should admit that the increase in diversity repre-
sents relatively short-term changes in the system,
while the subsequent transition to uniformity fits
the earlier trends in the development of pottery
styles (Fig. 9: analytical periods 4 to 10). Since both
cases of the increase in pottery diversity correspond
to the initial phases of the Nebelevskaya and Toma-
shovskaya groups, respectively, the identical distri-
bution of pottery types over time is expected to be
identified for Vladimirovskaya group in further stu-
dies.
Fig. 9. Unification and diversity of Western Tripolye pottery shapes.
Aleksandr Diachenko, Iwona Sobkowiak-Tabaka, and Sergej Ryzhov
530
Let us now consider the factors which might have
impacted the development of pottery shapes repre-
sented in the obtained distribution of the values of
the diversity index. The usual suspects for the cultu-
ral transformations are climate change, migrations,
changes in social organization, economic producti-
vity or spatial demography, and the ‘isolation by di-
stance’ principle. Table 1 summarizes the compar-
isons between shifts in environmental circumstan-
ces, socio-economic and demographic development
which might have impacted the changes in ceramic
styles and the increase or decrease in diversity of
pottery styles of WTC in the Southern Bug and Dnie-
per interfluve. In each case changes are compared to
the preceding analytical period.
The increase in pottery diversity during analytical
periods 4 and 6 correlates with migrations of the
WTC population from the Dniester region to the
Southern Bug and Dnieper, which are indicated by
the demographic estimations and observations of
pottery ornamentation (Ryzhov 2007; Diachenko
2016). One more migration of WTC groups from the
Dniester and Bug interfluve to the analysed region
occurring in analytical period 9 correlates with the
slight increase in ceramic diversity compared to the
value obtained for analytical period 8 (Tkachuk
2008; Diachenko 2016). We should note that the
number of people involved in the migration in ana-
lytical period 9 is also approximated to the smaller
values than the number of migrants who came to
the Southern Bug and Dnieper interfluve during
analytical periods 4 and 6. Since the new arrivals
did not settle separately but mixed with the popu-
lation of local settlements, it is reasonable to con-
clude that they contributed to the local pottery as-
semblages with their traditions. Further on, synthe-
sis of different traditions resulted in more unified
pottery styles.
The possible influence of the other listed factors
does not correlate with the observed dynamics of
the cultural cycle (Tab. 1). Applying the ‘isolation by
distance’ principle suggested by Stephen Shennan
and co-authors (2015) to our dataset, one would ex-
pect the increase in pottery diversity with the in-
crease of the occupied territory. However, WTC
reached its largest territorial extent in the Southern
Bug and Dnieper interfluve during analytical period
5, which is characterized by the lower value of the
diversity index than the preceding analytical period
4 and the subsequent analytical period 6. Mean-
while, we cannot exclude that the effect of the ‘isola-
tion by distance principle’ somewhat increased the
value of the diversity index estimated for analytical
period 6.
The settlement dynamics of WTC populations in the
analysed region represent two different trends chang-
ing one another over time (Diachenko, Menotti
2017). The largest settlements of the Vladimirovska-
ya and Nebelevskaya groups, Fedorovka and Nebe-
levka, respectively, are dated to the initial phases of
these local groups. Both of these large settlements
were formed as the result of migrations to the re-
gion. After abandoning Fedorovka, its former inha-
bitants built the Vladimirovka and Peregonovka set-
tlements, both of nearly equal size and significantly
smaller than Fedorovka. Leaving Nebelevka, its for-
mer inhabitants built the somewhat smaller settle-
ment of Glubochek and several medium and small
size settlements in the region. The settlement dyna-
mics of the Tomashovskaya group sites in analytical
periods 6, 7, 8 and 9 are characterized by the in-
crease of the subsequent largest settlements in size,
while the number of inhabitants was increasing at
the annual rate of 0.3% (Diachenko 2016; Diachen-
ko, Menotti 2017). Both trends do not correlate with
the changes in the values of the diversity index esti-
mated for pottery shapes.
According to the available proxies, around the end
of the 3800s cal BC (analytical period 6) the climate
changed from more arid in the preceding period to
warmer and more humid (e.g., Anthony 2007; Dia-
chenko 2010; Harper 2019; Harper et al. 2019).
This climate shift probably impacted the increase in
agricultural productivity in analytical periods 6–10
compared to analytical periods 1–5. Meanwhile, nei-
ther climate change per se, nor its economic impacts.
influenced the increase in diversity of ceramic styles.
Except for the analytical period 6, the values of the
diversity index indicate the trend of unification of
pottery shapes (Fig. 9; Tab. 1). The available evi-
dence on integrative architecture in Tripolye settle-
ments shows complex decision-making rather than
top-down centralized control (Hofmann et al. 2019).
Conceptually this fits Anthony Giddens’ (2003) struc-
turation theory and Piotr Sztompka’s (1991) concept
of society as a process, in which social actions are
based on human actions making and constantly
changing social structures. According to these con-
cepts, we should pay more attention to the daily
practices, routines, habits, intentions, sex and age of
pottery makers. Considering this variability in intra-
social structures and actions, one would also expect
an increase in ceramic diversity at least for the ana-
lytical periods 6–9 characterized by a number of
Approaching the unification and diversity of pottery assemblages> the case of Western Tripolye culture ceramics in the Southern Bug ...
531
chronologically subsequent mega-sites increasing in
population size. However, the values estimated with
equation 1 demonstrate the opposite trend (Fig. 9).
Conclusion and discussion
The results obtained in this study indicate that the
development of pottery shapes of the WTC in the
Southern Bug and Dnieper interfluve passed through
a cultural cycle from unification to diversity and then
back to unification. This cultural cycle is disturbed
by the increase in diversity of pottery forms at three
analytical periods, which may be explained by mi-
grations into the analysed region. However, none
of the possible factors which might impact the de-
velopment of ceramics have shown a correlation
with the cultural cycle in WTC pottery styles. At first
glance, the discovered cultural cycle conceptually
fits the ideas of Danilevskiy, Spengler and Sorokin
(Danilevskiy 1895; Sorokin 1937; Spengler 2014).
Considering the results obtained for the develop-
ment of Neolithic ceramic assemblages (Gronenborn
et al. 2017; 2018; Gjesfjeld et al. 2020), which are
similar to the results of our case study, we question
the cyclic nature of cultural development following
the stages of ‘unification’ – ‘diversity’ – ‘unification’
in the results of the dynamic behaviour of culture as
a complex system. In this respect, it is reasonable
to assume that the ‘hidden cycling trend’ resulting
from non-linear complex dynamics may to a certain
extent be impacted by different external factors, but
remain the same in its main properties. By definition,
the behaviour of complex
systems is caused by their
internal dynamics (e.g.,
Bentley 2003). Therefore,
the modelling of complex
cultural dynamics is a cru-
cial issue in further work
on prehistoric culture.
Our case study also raises
the question of the utility
of approaches which in-
clude both qualitative and
quantitative characteristics
of datasets to pottery se-
riation. This also includes
the detailed chronologies
produced by data analysis
accounting for the relative
frequencies (or percentages) of artefacts belonging
to different types which find their confirmation in
absolute dating, because the underlying methodolo-
gy is in fact a truncated version of Shannon’s diver-
sity index. With updating such approaches to con-
sider the diversity index, we would expect an in-
crease in the number of cultural cycles identified in
archaeological data.
Further work on complex cultural dynamics requires
consideration of the cultural hierarchy and corre-
sponding improvements in methodology. We should
note that the related studies are being conducted by
Ray J. Rivers and his collaborators (as seen in the pa-
per presented by Rivers at the 25th Neolithic Semi-
nar in Ljubljana). One of the most important theore-
tical and methodological challenges behind further
studies on complex cultural behaviour is the need to
distinguish between complex non-linear behaviour
and the changes due to the impact of external factors.
Analytical Shannon’s Climate Migrations Changes Changes in ‘Isolation by
period diversity change in economic settlement distance’
index productivity systems principle
1 N\A N\A + N\A N\A N\A
2 | s s s s +
3 | s s s s S
4 ≠ s + s + +
5 Ø s s s + +
6 ≠ + + ≠ + +
7 Ø + s ≠ s S
8 Ø s s s s S
9 ≠ s + s s S
10 Ø s s s s S
‘≠’ – increased from the preceding analytical period, ‘Ø’ – decreased from the preceding
analytical period, ‘+’ – changes occurred, ‘s’ situation remained stable, ‘|’ no data avail-
able, ‘N\A’ not applicable
Tab. 1. Changes in the diversity of WTC pottery styles in the Southern Bug
and Dnieper interfluve and their possible causing factors.
This research was funded by the National Science
Center of Poland, grant 2018/29/B/HS3/01201 awar-
ded to Iwona Sobkowiak-Tabaka. We are grateful to
Mihael Budja for his kind invitation to present and
discuss the results of this study at the 25th Neolithic
Seminar in Ljubljana, and to the anonymous revie-
wers for their valuable comments and suggestions.
Many thanks are also due to Benjamin Jennings who
created the base of map 6 for us.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Aleksandr Diachenko, Iwona Sobkowiak-Tabaka, and Sergej Ryzhov
532
References
Althouse B. M., Hébert-Dufresne L. 2014. Epidemic cycles
driven by host behaviour. Journal of the Royal Society.
Interface 11: 20140575. doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2014.0575
Altkorn J. 2004. Podstawy marketingu. Instytut Marke-
tingu. Kraków.
Angeler D. G., Allen C. R., Garmestani A. S., Gunderson L.
H., Hjerne O., and Winder M. 2015. Quantifying the adap-
tive cycle. PLOS One 10(12): 0146053.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0146053
Anthony D. W. 2007. The horse, the wheel, and lan-
guage: How Bronze age riders from the Eurasian Step-
pes shaped the modern world. Princeton University Press.
Princeton and Oxford.
Bak P. 1996. How nature works: The science of self-or-
ganized criticality. Copernicus. New York.
Ball P. 2004. The elements. A very short introduction.
Oxford University Press. Oxford.
Bauman Z. 2000. Globalizacja. I co z tego dla ludzi wy-
nika. Państwowy Instytut Wydawniczy. Warszawa.
Bentley R. A. 2003. An introduction to complex systems.
In R. A. Bentley, H. D. G. Maschner (eds.), Complex sys-
tems and archaeology. Empirical and theoretical appli-
cations. University of Utah Press. Salt Lake City: 9–23.
Bevan A., Crema E., Li X., and Palmisano A. 2013. Inten-
sities, interactions and uncertainties: Some new approa-
ches to archaeological distributions. In A. Bevan, M. Lake
(eds.), Computational approaches to archaeological
space. Left Coast Press. Walnut Creek, CA: 27–52.
Braudel F. 1992. Kultura materialna, gospodarka i ka-
pitalizm XV–XVIII wiek. Vol. 3: Czas świata. Państwowy
Instytut Wydawniczy. Warszawa.
Braudel F. 1999. Historia i trwanie. Czytelnik. Warszawa.
Cambridge Dictionary. online https://dictionary.cambrid
ge.org/
Campisano C. J. 2012. Milankovitch cycles, palaeoclima-
tic change, and hominid evolution. Nature Education
Knowledge 4(3): 5.
Chernovol D., Ryzhov S. 2006. Doslidzennia trypilskogo
poselennia bilia s. Pischana. Arkheologichni doslidzen-
nia na Ukraini 8: 373–376.
Cobb Ch. R. 1991. Social reproduction and the long durée
in the prehistory of the Middlecontinental United States.
In R. W. Preucel (ed.), Processual and postprocessual
archaeologies. Multiple ways of knowing the past. South-
ern Illinois University. Carbondale: 168–182.
Crema E. 2015. Time and probabilistic reasoning in set-
tlement analysis. In J. A. Barcelo, I. Bogdanovic (eds.), Ma-
thematics in archaeology. CRC Press. London and New
York: 314–334.
Danilewski N. 1895. Rossiya i Evropa. Vzgliad na kultur-
nye i politicheskie otnosheniya slavianskogo mira k
germano-romaskomu. Tipografiya Bratjev Panteleevykh.
Sankt-Petersburg.
Davis G. E. Jr., Lowell W. E. 2006. Solar cycles and their
relationship to human disease and adaptability. Medical
Hypotheses 67: 447–461.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2006.03.011
Dergachev V. A. 1980. Pamiatniki pozdnego Tripolya.
Shtiintsa. Kishinev.
Diachenko A. 2010. Evstaticheskie kolebaniya urovnia
Chernogo moria i dinamika razvitiya naseleniya Kukuten-
Tripolskoj obshchnosti. Stratum Plus 2: 37–48.
2016. Demography reloaded. In J. Müller, K. Rassmann
and M. Videiko (eds.), Trypillia mega-sites and Euro-
pean prehistory, 4100–3400 BC. Routledge. New York:
181–193.
Diachenko A., Menotti, F. 2012. The gravity model: moni-
toring the formation and development of the Tripolye cul-
ture giant-settlements in Ukraine. Journal of Archaeolo-
gical Science 39(4): 2810–2817.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2012.04.025
Diachenko A., Menotti, F. 2017. Proto-cities or not proto-
cities? On the nature of Cucuteni-Trypillia mega-sites. Jour-
nal of World Prehistory 30(3): 207–219.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10963-017-9105-8
Diachenko A., Zubrow E. B.W. 2015. Stabilization points
in carrying capacity: Population growth and migrations.
Journal of Neolithic Archaeology 17: 1–15.
https://doi.org/10.12766/jna.2015.1
Diamond J. M. 2005. Collapse: How societies choose to
fail or succeed. Viking. New York.
Dickens, Jr. R. S., Fraser M. D. 1984. An information-theo-
retic approach to the analysis of cultural interactions in
the Middle Woodland period. Southeastern Archaeology
3(2): 144–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2012.04.025
Approaching the unification and diversity of pottery assemblages> the case of Western Tripolye culture ceramics in the Southern Bug ...
533
Drost C., Vander Linden M. 2018. Toy story: Homophily,
transmission and the use of simple simulation models for
assessing variability in the archaeological record. Journal
of Archaeological Method and Theory 25(4): 1087–1108.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-018-9394-y
Furholt M. 2012. Kundruci: Development of social space
in a Late Neolithic tell-settlement in Central Bosnia. In R.
Hofmann, F.-K. Moetz, and J. Müller (eds.), Tells: Social
and environmental space. Rudolf Habelt. Bonn: 203–220.
Galvez P., Somerville P., Petukhin A., Ampuero J.-P., and
Peter D. 2019. Earthquake cycle modelling of multi-seg-
mented faults: Dynamic rupture and ground motion simu-
lation of the 1992 Mw 7.3 Landers earthquake. Pure and
Applied Geophysics 177: 2163–2179(2020).
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-019-02228-x
Giddens A. 2003. Stanowienie społeczeństwa. Zarys teo-
rii strukturacji. Wydawnictwo Zysk i S-ka. Poznań.
Gilpin R. 2000. Challenge of global capitalism: The world
economy in the 21st century. Princeton University Press.
Princeton.
Gjesfjeld E., Silvestro D., Chang J., Koch B., Foster J. G.,
and Alfaro M. E. 2020. A quantitative workflow for mod-
eling diversification in material culture. PLoS ONE 15(2):
e0227579. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0227579
Gronenborn D., Strien H.-C., Dietrich S., and Sirocko F.
2014. ‘Adaptive cycles’ and climate fluctuations: a case
study from Linear Pottery Culture in western Central Eu-
rope. Journal of Archaeological Science 51: 73–83.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2013.03.015
Gronenborn D., Strien H.-C., and Lemmen C. 2017. Popu-
lation dynamics, social resilience strategies, and adaptive
cycles in early farming societies of SW Central Europe.
Quaternary International 446: 54–65.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2017.01.018
Gronenborn D., Strien H.-C., van Dick R., and Turchin P.
2018. Social diversity, social identity, and the emergence
of surplus in western central European Neolithic. In H.
Meller, D. Gronenborn, and R. Risch (eds.), Surplus with-
out the State – Political forms in prehistory. 10th Archaeo-
logical conference of Central Germany, October 19 – 21,
2017 in Haale (Saale). Grafisches Centrum Cuno. Haale
(Saale): 201–220.
Gunderson L. E., Holling C. S. 2002. Panarchy: Under-
standing transformations in human and natural sys-
tems. Island Press. Washington, D.C.
Harper T. K. 2019. Demography and climate in Late Eneo-
lithic Ukraine, Moldova, and Romania: Multiproxy evi-
dence and pollen-based regional corroboration. Journal
of Archaeological Science: Reports 23: 973–982.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2017.06.010
Harper T. K., Diachenko A., Rassamakin Yu. Ya., and Ken-
nett D. J. 2019. Ecological dimensions of population dy-
namics and subsistence in Neo-Eneolithic Eastern Europe.
Journal of Anthropological and Anthropological Scien-
ces 53: 92–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaa.2018.11.006
Hathaway D., Wilson R., and Reichmann E. 1999. A synthe-
sis of solar cycle prediction techniques. Journal of Geo-
physical Research 104(22): 375–388.
Hays J. D., Imbrie J., and Shackelton N. J. 1976. Variations
in the Earth’s Orbit: Pacemaker of the Ice Ages. Science
194: 1121–1132.
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.194.4270.1121
Hofmann R., Müller J., Shatilo L., Videiko M., Ohlrau R.,
Rud V., Burdo N., Dal Corso M., Dreibrodt S., and Kirleis
W. 2019. Governing Tripolye: Integrative architecture in
Tripolye settlements. PLoS ONE 14(9): e0222243.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222243
Iversen J. 1958. The bearing of glacial and interglacial
epochs on the formation and extinction of plant taxa. Up-
psala Universiteit Årsskrift 6: 210–215.
Justeson J. S. 1973. Limitations of archaeological infer-
ence: An information theoretic approach with applica-
tions in methodology. American Antiquity 38(2): 131–
149. https://doi.org/10.2307/279360
Kadrow S. 2001. U progu nowej epoki. Gospodarka i
społeczeństwo wczesnego okresu epoki brązu w Euro-
pie Środkowej. Instytut Archeologii i Etnologii Polskiej
Akademii Nauk. Oddział w Krakowie. Kraków.
Kristiansen K. 1994. The emergence of the European
world system in the Bronze Age. In K. Kristiansen and J.
Jensen (eds.), Europe in the first millennium B.C. J. R.
Collis Publications. Sheffield: 7–30.
Kristiansen K., Larsson T. B. 2005. The rise of Bronze Age
society. Travels, transmissions and transformations.
Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
Kenny A. 2005. Krótka historia filozofii zachodniej.
Prószyński i S-ka. Warszawa.
Kimla P. 2009. Polibiusz (Polybios z Megalopolis). In K.
Chojnacka, M. Jaskólski (eds.), Słownik historii doktryn
politycznych 4. Wydawnictwo Sejmowe. Warszawa: 631–
632.
Lech J. 1999. V. Gordon Childe (1982–1957) w poszukiwa-
niu źródeł cywilizacji europejskiej. Zarys biograficzny. In
J. Lech, F. M. Stępniowski (eds.), V. Gordon Childe i ar-
Aleksandr Diachenko, Iwona Sobkowiak-Tabaka, and Sergej Ryzhov
534
cheologia w XX wieku. Państwowy Instytut Wydawniczy.
Warszawa: 19–66.
Liddel P. P. 2010. Metabole politeion as universal histo-
riography. In P. P. Liddel, A. T. Fear (eds.), Historiae
Mundi. Studies in Universal History. Bristol Classical
Press. Bristol: 15–29.
McAnany P., Yoffee N. (eds.), 2010. Questioning collapse:
Human resilience, ecological vulnerability, and the af-
termath of empire. Cambridge University Press. Cam-
bridge.
Menotti F., Krovin-Piotrovskiy A. G. (eds.). 2012. The Tri-
polye culture giant-settlements in Ukraine: Formation,
development and decline. Oxbow Books. Oxford.
Modderman P. J. R. 1988. The Linear Pottery culture: Di-
versity in uniformity. Berichten van de Rijksdienst voor
het Oudheidkundig Bodemonderzoek 38: 63–139.
Müller J., Hofmann R., Brandtstätter L., Ohlrau R., and Vi-
deiko M. 2016a. Chronology and demography: How many
people lived in a mega-site? In J. Müller, K. Rassmann, and
M. Videiko (eds.), Trypillia mega-sites and European pre-
history, 4100–3400 BC. Routledge. New York: 133–170.
Müller J., Rassmann K., and Videiko M. (eds.) 2016b. Try-
pillia mega-sites and European prehistory, 4100–3400
BC. Routledge. New York.
Nebbia M., Gaydarska B., Millard A., and Chapman J. 2018.
The making of Chalcolithic assembly places: Trypillia me-
gasites as materialized consensus among equal strangers?
World Archaeology 50(1): 41–61.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.2018.1474133
O’Malley R. T., Mondal D., Goldfinger Ch., and Behrenfeld
M. J. 2017. Evidence of systematic triggering at teleseismic
distances following large earthquakes. Scientific Reports
8: 11611. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-30019-2
Pareto V. 1975. O równowadze systemu społecznego. In
W. Derczyński, A. Jasińska-Kania, and J. Szacki (eds.), Ele-
menty teorii socjologicznych. Państwowy Instytut Wydaw-
niczy. Warszawa: 183–189.
Ryzhov S. 1991. Doslidzhennia bilia s. Pischana v Bugo-
Dniprovskomu mezhyrichchi. In O. I. Andrushko (ed.),
Tezy dopovidej X Vinnytskoi oblasnoi istoryko-kraezna-
vchoi konferentsii. VOOUTOPIK. Vinnytsia: 15–17.
Ryzhov S. 1993. Nebelivska grupa pamjatok trypilskoi
kultury. Arkheologiya 3: 101–114.
1999. Keramika poselen trypilskoi kultiry jak istory-
chne dzerelo. Unpublished PhD thesis. Institute of Ar-
chaeology National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine.
Kyiv.
2000a. Raspisnaya keramika tomashovskoj localno-
chronologicheskoj gruppy tripolskoj kultury. Stratum
Plus 2: 459–473.
2000b. Trypilske poselennia bilia s. Glybochok. In D.
Kozak (ed.), Arkheologichni vidkryttia v Ukraini 1994–
1996 rokiv. Shliakh. Kyiv: 133–135.
2007. Suchasnyj stan vyvchennia kulturno-istorychnoi
spilnosti Kukuten-Trypillia. In Yu. Rassamakin, S. Ry-
zhov (eds.), Oleh Olzhych. Archeologiya. Vydavnytsvo
im. Oleny Teligy. Kyiv: 437–477.
2012. Tripolian pottery of the giant-settlements: Cha-
racteristics and typology. In F. Menotti, A. G. Krovin-Pio-
trovskiy (eds.), The Tripolye culture giant-settlements
in Ukraine: Formation, development and decline. Ox-
bow Books. Oxford: 139–168.
2015. Vladimirovskaya lokalno-chronologicheskaja
gruppa zapadnotripolskoj kultury v Bugo-Dneprovskom
mezhdurechje. In A. Diachenko, F. Menotti, S. Ryzhov,
K. Bunyatyan, and S. Kadrow (eds.), The Cucuteni-Try-
pillia cultural complex and its neighbours. Essays in
memory of Volodymyr Kruts. Astrolabe. Lviv: 153–166.
Samuelson P. A., Nordhaus W. D. 1995. Ekonomia 1. Pań-
stwowy Instytut Wydawniczy. Warszawa.
Shannon C. 1948. A mathematical theory of communi-
cation. Bell System Technical Journal 27(3): 379–423.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538-7305.1948.tb01338.x
Shennan S. J., Crema E. R., and Kerig T. 2015. Isolation-
by-distance, homophily, and ‘core’ vs. ‘package’ cultural
evolution models in Neolithic Europe. Evolution and Hu-
man Behavior 36(2): 103–109.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2014.09.006
Sherratt A. 1993. What would a Bronze Age world sys-
tem look like? Relations between Temperate Europe and
the Mediterranean in later prehistory. Journal of Euro-
pean Archaeology 1(2): 1–59.
Sorokin P. A. 1937. Social and cultural dynamics 1–4.
American Book Company. New York.
Spengler O. 2014. Zmierzch Zachodu. Aletheia. Warszawa.
Sundstrom S. M., Allen C. R. 2019. The adaptive cycle:
More than a metaphor. Ecological Complexity 39: 100767.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecocom.2019.100767
Approaching the unification and diversity of pottery assemblages> the case of Western Tripolye culture ceramics in the Southern Bug ...
535
Sztompka P. 1991. Society in action. The theory of social
becoming. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
2012. Socjologia. Analiza społeczeństwa. Wydawni-
ctwo Znak. Kraków.
Tkachuk T. 2008. Ceramic imports and imitations in Try-
pillia culture at the end of period CI – period CII. In P. F.
Biehl, Yu. Ya. Rassamakin (eds.), Import and imitation in
archaeology. Langenweißbach. Beier & Beran: 35–50.
Wallerstein I. 1974. The modern world-system. Academic
Press. New York.
Zimmermann A. 2012. Cultural cycles in Central Europe
during the Holocene. Quaternary International 274:
251–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2012.05.014