Linas Daugnora, Algirdas Girininkas Rytų Pabaltijo bendruomenių gyvensena XI-II tūkst. pr. kr. - Kaunas, 2004, 304 p.

THE SUBSISTENCE ECONOMY OF EAST BALTIC COMMUNITIES IN THE 11TH - 2ND MIL. BC

Summary

Systematic research into the evolution of economy and social structure in the East Baltic Stone and Early Bronze Age is only beginning. The information we have about foraging and agriculture is based on the analyses of only a few habitation sites. Archaeologists even more rarely consider the evolution of social structure in their publications. Based on the most recent archaeological, osteological, palynological, macrobotanical, and trace analysis material from various East Baltic sites, we attempt to reconstruct the economy and social structure in the East Baltic during the Stone and Early Bronze Ages and propose a corresponding model.

The evolution of economy is discussed in terms of research in the aforementioned disciplines. This work incorporates material from archaeological sites in Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, the Kaliningrad oblast, northwestern Byelorussia, Russia (the southern Pskov and western Smolensk regions), and northeastern Poland.

Hunting

No Late Paleolithic camp sites with preserved osteological material have yet been discovered in the East Baltic. It is believed that the main hunted animal was the reindeer. Reindeer antlers were used to produce isolated finds encountered in Maurušaičiai (Kaliningrad oblast), Kalniškiai (Klaipėda), and Dviete, near Lake Lubana (Latvia).

Among the most hunted animals since the beginning of the Mesolithic were elk, red deer, aurochs, boar, marten, beavers, and, near the shores of the Baltic - seals and porpoises (Tables 44-50). Data provided in the tables show that during the entire Mesolithic the animal most hunted in the entire East Baltic was elk. The hunting situation changed in the Early Neolithic. Red deer started being hunted more in the southern East Baltic, while in the northern region, boar and elk were hunted more. The situation remained the same in the Middle Neolithic. Research data show that in the Late Neolithic, elk started being hunted more intensively again in the southern region of the East Baltic, while boar, beaver, and elk - in the northern. An increase in the population of red deer is noticeable in the southeastern East Baltic at the beginning of the Early Bronze Age. By the end of the period, the elk, beaver, red deer, and roe deer became the dominant hunted animals. Also hunted were fur-bearing animals (Tables 44-47). These changes were undoubtedly influenced by changing environmental conditions, especially in the Middle Neolithic.

Seals started being hunted along the Baltic coast from the very beginning of the Mesolithic (Lougas 1997:38). The hunting of seals became especially widespread and reached its maximum in the Neolithic. Seals were still hunted in the Early Bronze Age, but considerably less than during the Neolithic and closer to the quantities hunted in the Mesolithic (Table 48-50). This change could be related to changing environmental conditions as well as to the spread of an agricultural economy.

Osteological research supports the notion that during the Neolithic and Bronze Age people usually used the most widespread and most often hunted animals for raw material for their tools (Schibler 1981; Daugnora and Girininkas 1996; Girininkas 1996). They also used the bones of various species of birds (Table 51).

The osteological material of the Zvidze settlement allows for an interpretation of Mesolithic bird hunting. The material shows that the most frequently hunted birds were ducks, although cranes, gallinaceous birds, buzzards, and sea eagles are also present in the inventories, suggesting that they, too, could have been hunted for ornaments or used in rituals (Table 52).

We present a summary of bird hunting features in the East Baltic Neolithic in Tables 51-54. The data show that the most hunted bird in the Early Neolithic, probably also the one most suitable for food, was the mallard. Other birds, such as the raven, could be isolated finds or birds hunted for ornaments (i.e., for feathers). The small variety of bird species found to date does not allow for a broader interpretation as regards the Early Neolithic.

Šventoji 2B stands out from the general spectrum of Middle Neolithic sites in that fifteen species of birds have been identified from this site. The dominant family consists of ducks (7 species). Within the family, most often found were bones of the mallard and velvet scoter. Herons, coots, and storks also deserve attention. The bones of these birds additionaly have been found in settlements of other regions along the Baltic coast. Why there have been no geese bones found in these and other sites (except for Šventoji 23 and Šarnelė) is unknown. A small amount of Middle Neolithic gallinaceous bird bones have also been recovered.

We can generalize about Late Neolithic ornithological data from the Žemaitiškė 2 settlement data at Lake Kretuonas. Twelve species of birds have been found at this site (Table 51). They are from a variety of duck and crane families, as well as from birds of prey. Sea eagles also used to fly to this location.

In characterizing the entire Neolithic, it is possible that a large portion of the birds were hunted for food (from the duck, goose, stork, and diver families), while birds of prey and owls might have been used for ritual purposes. Some birds within the inventory only were migrating through the area (e.g., glaucous gull, sea eagle).

Investigation of Bronze Age bird species shows that there is less variety. Excavations at Kretuonas 1C and later settlements exemplify the drop (Bilskienė and Daugnora 2000:573-574), as does osteological material encountered at early hillforts. Bones of the mallard, grey goose, and wood grouse continue to occur at early hillforts (Лухтан 1986:3-17).

Fishing

Only few data concerning fishing are known from Final Paleolithic times. Large pike bones were found in Obšrūtai (Kaliningrad oblast) together with hunting tools - a dagger and a spear (Gros 1937:154).

Fish caught in the Mesolithic included fish belonging to the salmon, carp, perch, and catfish families (Tables 3 and 4). It is an important fact that the people of this time period fished mostly freshwater fish (Lougas 1997:25), making use of all the methods and equipment that are used even to this day.

Many fish bones of sea-dwelling species start being encountered among the osteological material of Early Neolithic sites (Lougas 1997:25). Fishers settled near rivers or lakes; often settlements are found near the chanels of lakes or seaside lagoons. For example, while analyzing the Late Mesolithic-Early Neolithic osteological material from Danish settlements, Eng-hoff(1987, 1991, 1993) identified 21 species of fish (seafish or those favoring saltwater comprised 12%, freshwater fish -71%, and migrating fish -17% (mostly roach and eel). An analogous environmental situation -a seaside lagoon -existed along the East Baltic shores as well. Here, both freshwater and marine fishbones are encountered starting the end of the Early Neolithic. Marine fish species increase in variety and proportion during the Middle and Late Neolithic (Tables 17, 18, and 32).

Pike bones comprise as much as 94% offish bones (31-130 cm) at the Early Neolithic site of Osa in northeastern Latvia (Sloka 1975). At the site of Zvejsala, pike bones make up 76% of all fish bones, while pikeperch make up 10%. The variety of typical river and lake fish is smaller at this settlement, but research suggests that it was precisely the large and nutritionally valuable species offish that were caught at Zvejsala.

Marine fishbones were often encountered at seaside settlements during the Middle Neolithic (Tables 17-19). We can divide the fish species presented in Tables 55 and 56 into freshwater and marine species. Certain marine species of fish, especially young individuals that live along the shores during the summer, were caught by people at rivermouths or near seaside lagoons.

Table 55 shows previously collected fish data (Rimantienė 1979; analyzed by Cepkin and Sloka), divided into freshwater and marine species. Comparing these data with the data from excavations at Šventoji 4 in which bones were carefully recovered through wet-screening (Daugnora and Hufthammer 1999), it is noteworthy that river and sea flounder, as well as arctic cod were also present. On the other hand, no bones of twaithe shad (Alosa fallax) nor tuna (Thunnus thynnus L.) were observed. Our data show that marine fish species made up 1.4% of the inventory, while freshwater fish comprised 79.8%, and unidentified species - 18.1%.

The importance of fishing during the Late Neolithic is illustrated by research conducted at the Loona site (Estonia). The people who lived at this site were already good fishers of the sea; more than 3000 cod bones (Gadus morhua) were discovered here. The amount comprises 95% of all fish bones excavated at this site.

Having only a limited amount of Late Neolithic osteologi-cal material from fish, in an effort to find differences between the osteological material encountered near the coast and those found inland, we present the excavated fish bone data from Kre-tuonas 1A (see Table 29).

Continentally, East Baltic Late Neolithic people fished mostly for pike, perch, catfish, carp, pikeperch, and others, while at the coast they fished for cod, flounder, and other fish species that lived in brackish water (Tables 28, 29, 32, and 33). During the Early Bronze Age, pike, catfish, pikeperch, and carp were caught (Table 42) (Лозе 1979:126).

The Procurement and Utilization of Natural Resources

The procurement, processing, and transportation of flint, slate, and amber were separate branches of the economy in the East Baltic Stone and Bronze Ages. Flint was a strategic raw material during this entire time period because of its structural properties. The flint most popularly used during the Stone Age in the East Baltic was that of the upper and middle reaches of the Nemunas River. This flint was exported further north into East Baltic territory. Flint was already mined and worked in the quarries near lake Titnas and in the Margionys village (Varėna region) since the Final Paleolithic. From the Final Paleolithic through the Early Iron Age, much flint was extracted from the Rosj River basin (Nemunas River's left tributary) near Volkovysk (Byelorussia) and the mines east of Balstogė at Rybniki (Poland). There was often a shortage of flint in the northern part of the East Baltic. But whereas there was an obvious shortage of flint in the Early Mesolithic, the flint supply grew in the Middle and Late Mesolithic. A fair amount of flint products and material that originated in the upper Nemunas basin are found on Mesolithic sites in the western and eastern parts of Lithuania as well as in Latvia and Estonia.

Less flint artifacts are encountered in the northern part of the East Baltic during the Early Neolithic. People in this area compensated for the lack of flint by utilizing bone and antler for tool material. They also used slate, quartz, and quartzite.

In the Middle Neolithic, in addition to the flint quarried from the upper Nemunas, East Baltic inhabitants used flint from the upper Valdaj. Flint from this locale spread with the influence of the Comb-and-Pit Pottery culture.

In the Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age, the people in the northern East Baltic widely used flint from the upper Nemunas for tool and weapon production. It must have been under the influence of the Globular Amphora and Corded Ware cultures that banded flint from the central Vistula River appeared. The shortage of flint in the northern East Baltic territories during distinct parts of the Stone Age was influenced by hostilities among separate tribes. The stronger, more bellicose tribes would try to take control of the flint quarries as strategic places of production. During the Neolithic, flint quarries were controlled for a time by the Globular Amphora (Чарняуск!, Кудрашоу, Лшнщкая 1996:85-87) and Corded Ware culture (Гурина 1976:127-131) people. This is understandable because the control of a vitally important material's production ensured not only well-being for the community, but also economic domination over other tribes.

Amber artifacts began to make their appearance in the East Baltic only in the Middle Neolithic after the Littorina transgression of the Baltic Sea began. At that time, sea currents began to erode the amber-rich sediments of the Semba banks. Soon thereafter, amber became a product for sale, trade, and the most important material of burial rites. Amber spread in Central and Northeastern Europe in the Middle Neolithic. Its spread was associated with the Comb-and-Pit Pottery and early Globular Amphora cultures. The appearance of these cultures' products in the East Baltic was apparently associated, at least in part, with the trade of amber products.

The demand for amber products grew in the Late Neolithic. The appearance and settlement of Globular Amphora and Corded Ware culture people in these amber-rich territories were not incidental; an effort was made to control valuable territory (Rimantienė 1996:164-168; 1989). The early appearance of cultured plants and animals was also not incidental in this amber-rich territory. It was not that the territory's environmental conditions were ideal for farm products, but rather that they were useful products that were exchanged for amber.

Slate is found in abundance along the coast between Tallinn and Narva. During the Stone and Bronze Ages, slate, too, was used for tool production. Tools and ornaments made from slate became especially widespread in the Middle Neolithic, together with the influence of the Comb-and-Pit Pottery culture in the East Baltic (Eiea 1988:35-37). Later, during the Late Neolithic, people of the Corded Ware culture settled into these slate-rich territories.

Flint, amber, and slate quarries were important places in the East Baltic from strategic and economic points of view. Thus, we find traces within them of all who succeeded in controlling them or using them in trade.

Stock Breeding

The development of stock breeding in the East Baltic is best illustrated by osteological data. The first data related to stock breeding in the East Baltic is at the Cedmar A site which according to radiocarbon dating can be ascribed to the end of the Early Neolithic (5400-5100 BP). However, we cannot dismiss the possibly (albeit controversially) domestic animal bones and teeth encountered at the Early Neolithic settlements of Riigikula III, Konnu, and Zvidze and the apparently Late Mesolithic burials of Donkalnis. The Funnel Beaker culture may have had the largest influence on the formation of a farming economy in the East Baltic. Traces of this culture are even found around Lake Lu-bana. The existence of these isolated domesticated animal bones in sites dated to the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic could be the consequence of various ties with people in Central and Southern Europe.

Stock breeding in the East Baltic was that branch of economy that was most easily integrated into a foraging lifestyle. Mobile shepherds and tribes who practiced animal husbandry (the Globular Amphora, Corded Ware cultures) had a large influence on its expansion. The tribes of these latter cultures picked only places appropriate for their animals - river valleys and floodplains where it was easy to find fodder. But even here it was difficult to adapt. Perhaps that is why their habitation sites were not widespread and only temporay. For lack of new methodology and research, their living areas are very difficult to track. The economic model and social structure of these people were different from that of the local people. Their material culture remains are often found in the habitation sites of the indigenous people, suggesting that in one way or another the new arrivals had relations with the locals - whether peaceful or not. These contacts provided the impulse for the local inhabitants to integrate farming elements into their economy.

Osteological data provide incontrovertible evidence concerning the existence of stock breeding in the Middle Neolithic. The percentage of domestic animal bones in the entire osteolo-gical inventory in the Middle Neolithic ranged from 1% (at the Sarnate S site) to 6.14% (at Kretuonas IB). In the Late Neolithic, the amount of domesticated animal bone increased from 9% (at Loona) to 17% (Cedmar D). In the Early Bronze Age, the percentages of domestic animal bone range from 9.6% (at Kretuonas 1C) to 74.7% (at the Grande Narkūnas hillfort at the end of the Bronze Age). The latter time period fits Zvelebil's proposed substitution phase, whose samples in Central Europe already in the Early Neolithic's Linearbandkeramik culture were comprised of 30 to 60% domestic animal bone (Kruk and Milisaus-kas 1999:297). It is noteworthy that people in the East Baltic reached the same economic level that Central Europeans already enjoyed in the Early-Middle Neolithic only during the Early Bronze Age.

Both along the coast and inland, away from the coast, people in the East Baltic became familiar with stock beeding about the same time: during the transition between the Early and Middle Neolithic. Different animals were domesticated in different regions, however. Near the coast, alongside fishing and seal hunting, pig breeding developed. Few bones from other species have been found in this territory, except for elk bones. Further inland, meanwhile, aside from goat/sheep bones, cattle bones are found more often. These characteristics are noticeable throughout the entire Neolithic. Only a larger amount of cattle bones appears in the western and southwestern parts in the Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age. This process could be associated with amber trade. An analogous spread of animal domesticates both coastally and inland in the Neolithic and Early Bronze Age is observed in Sweden (Ahlfont et al 1995:161-176).

Farming

The most data about farming and its origins comes from palyno-logy and from the tools archaeologists find associated with farming. Pollen of the first grain crops (anthropochores) (Avena and Cerelia) come from the Early-Middle Neolithic from southeastern Lithuania. In certain settlement layers, cereal pollen comprised even 1% of pollen in the beginning of the Late Neolithic (Stančikaitė 2000:25). Weeds made their appearance at the same time. In Estonian territory, isolated pollen grains of Cere-alia, Avena, and Triticum appear only at the end of the Middle Neolithic (Kriiska 2000:73). This illustrates how growing cereal crops in the northern East Baltic began later than it did in the southern East Baltic.

Hemp, Italian millet, and cereal pollen have been observed in the cultural layers of Late Neolithic settlements in the western part of the East Baltic. The data there suggest that the people were familiar with cultivated plants and themselves began to cultivate them.
Assertions that farming was developing on Baltic Haff culture sites along the Baltic's southeastern coast are very controversial. The data suggest that cereals and cattle, sheep, and goat were received in exchange for various sea products, including amber. The mattocks uncovered at settlements were suitable for digging amber, the large pots -for food, maybe cereal storage, the hand grinding stones and milling stones -for grinding grain, and the oblong lamps were suitable for light, fueled by seal fat.

The ard and ox yoke models discovered at Šventoji 4 and Šventoji 6 (Rimantienė 1996:41-44; 1994:120-121), which supposedly show that the people were farming grain crops and herding animals are dubious. Controversial radiocarbon data from the wooden ard from Šventoji 4A (Mažeika ir Petrošius 1998:481) presently prevent us from attempting any further concrete conjectures concerning the use of plowing implements in the Late Neolithic.

Social Structure

As mentioned in previous chapters, the main means of food acquisition from the Mesolithic through the Early Bronze Age were hunting, fishing, and gathering. Exogamous communities comprised of separate families existed in the Mesolithic. The influence of these separate families grew stronger throughout the Mesolithic. With changing environmental conditions, the economy changed as well. Individualized hunting and fishing strategies spread in forested territory.
An agricultural economy's influence is noticeable only starting from the Middle Neolithic. East Baltic people's social structure was that of ethnographically known hunter-fishers and gatherers. Their changes are reflected in the spiritual aspects of the Narva and Nemunas culture material as well. The people of the latter cultures kept ties with the people of the Funnel Beaker, Globular Amphora, and Corded Ware cultures who lived alongside the former. Under their influence, the indigenous people's social structure slowly changed. Up to the beginning of the Bronze Age, not all East Baltic inhabitants lived a sedentary life. The people of the Globular Amphora and Corded Ware cultures were more mobile.

The local Narva and Nemunas culture groups could have been comprised of a few nuclear families, totalling 25-30 people, who needed about a ten square kilometer territory rich and varied in vegetation and animal life for food acquisition. A strict exogamy within the kin group would have meant that marriages needed to occur with members of other kin groups. The transference of a few individuals to another kin group did not create large conflicts with other groups. Certain cultural similarities are found in the archaeological material that only could have occurred among groups who were somehow related, possibly through marriage. The area within which separate communities migrated in search of food was strictly regimented and "coordinated" with neighboring groups. In their economic and social structure, the tribes were egalitarian; the most important decisions of the tribe were made collectively. Division of labour must have been along gender and age lines. Only personal traits played a part in social status and prestige. It is important to note that communities that lived near larger lakes or seaside lagoons or other water sources (Šventoji, Biržulis, Kretuonas, Lu-bana, Sarnate, Virtsjarve, Burtnieki, etc.) were more sedentary and often reached a high cultural level because fishing ensured a consistent food supply. The environment of places rich in food and tool material was highly valued and could have been the object of larger or smaller conflicts. It is not unlikely that in those places where the communities had a good supply of food and tool material, the people could experiment and start to adopt elements of farming. Research data show that a production economy began to grow slowly within the foraging economy beginning in the Middle Neolithic. That is why archaeologists have noted neither clear nor sudden changes in social structure during the Neolithic. For tribes such as the Comb-and-Pit Pottery culture people who lived a more intensive, mobile lifestyle, where only survival was ensured, it was difficult to adopt a new farming model. It would be complicated and risky if the strategy failed. However, those who could afford to experiment very likely did.

Social structure slowly changed in the Late Neolithic. The territorial boundaries of local communities grew even stricter. Settlements started being more heavily guarded with fortification structures that protected from attacks of other communities (Žemaitiškė l, Šventoji l A).

The territory of local communities during the Early Bronze Age was even more circumscribed in terms of space. By the end of this time period, homesteads started being built not only on hills in difficult to reach places, but also with fortifications. The first hillforts appeared as a consequence and became the community's center of defense, economy, and possibly spirituality. Community land appeared next to the hillforts. Every family's rights to their parcel of land became important. Patriarchal social relations took final hold during this time period.

Changing social structure is reflected in the shape and furnishings of the domicile (Table 58). Short-term living areas -camp sites in separate East Baltic locales -existed until the Late Mesolithic. Data from Final Paleolithic and Early Mesolithic camp sites usually consist of only a certain amount of artifacts, typically flint and stone tools. The other part of the site, the organic part associated with production, is typically destroyed altogether and is only rarely encountered in peatbogs. But even the reindeer hunters needed to live in a sedentary fashion for a while, especially in the winter when the food supply had to last and the domicile had to be anchored more suitably. Domiciles took different shape in the summer and winter seasons. The layouts of the various dwellings depended on the type of economy. A unique shape associated with seasonal hunting and fishing existed and remained during the entire prehistoric period discussed here. Seasonally, the dwellings took the form of yurts-light, round, tent type structures that do not leave any traces. Only a few hearths are found near them and their flint and ceramic artifacts are encountered up to the Early Bronze Age. Starting the Late Mesolithic when the inhabitants began to intensively fish, they lived in comfortable environmental conditions where there was a varied landscape with a wide variety of animals and birds. They then began to live in one place for a longer period of time. Semi-subterraean dwellings of irregular construction, firmly hammered into the ground and with light surface structures are encountered in settlements during this time period. The structures encountered are usually irregular oval shapes, reminiscent of yurts. More-or-less symmetrical, rectangular surface structures appeared in the East Baltic in the Middle Neolithic in tandem with the formation of a farming economy. The shape of this structure came about through need: the animals needed a place in which they were protected from the cold and from attacking neighboring groups. The people also needed a place to store fodder and manure as well as a place for themselves to take shelter (Probst 1999:280). These buildings were constructed from posts and their appearance also must have been associated with changes in the surroundings. Pasture land in which the animals could graze, a farmstead, and burial ground also must have been present.

Seasonal structures could have existed at the same time alongside the rectangular structures mentioned. Structures on platforms supportd by poles were built in places favorable to fishing (Žemaitiškė 2, Kretuonas l, Šventoji 6 (all in Lithuania), Abora, Lagaža (in Latvia), Usviaty (Russia, southern Pskov region), but not far from the main homestead. In addition to the platform structures near good fishing spots, dwellings were set up in damp places. These were square structures whose dirt floor was made of poles and bark layers (Sarnate S, T, and others). Other tools associated with production often have been found near this type of structure: seal slaughterhuts (the Naaka-mae site; Lougas, Liden and Nelson 1996:406), weirs for catching fish (Žemaitiškė 2, Šventoji 9, Zvidze).

The people of the Globular Amphora and Corded Ware cultures lived alongside the Narva and Nemunas culture people. The social structure of the former likely was different than has been written about thus far. The people of these tribes, who reached the banks of the wide East Baltic rivers, were nomads who bred domestic animals. They were not sedentary farmers. If they had been farmers, their settlements would have been large with prominent cultural layers; such settlements have not yet been found in the East Baltic. Nomad animal breeders would establish themselves along river floodplains and in river valleys, sometimes in the homesteads of local people. They used hafted polished flint axes to thin out the vegetation along the river, in search of comfortable places to set up temporary dwellings. It was through these pastoralists that the Narva and Nemunas culture people became aquainted with stock raising. They traded with them and eventually took over this branch of economy. They became intermediaries between the Funnel Beaker, Globular Amphora, and Corded Ware culture peoples, spreading the concept of a farming economy to other local inhabitants. Patriarchal relations dominated among the stock breeders and pastoralists. Together with the new form of economy, patriarchal social relations were also adopted by the indigenous inhabitants.

Unlike the people of the Globular Amphora and Corded Ware cultures, in adopting the traditions of the pastoralists, the indigenous Late Neolithic peoples continued to lead a sedentary lifestyle. For this reason the cultural layers of their settlements are better preserved and considerably richer in artifacts. Buildings apparently kept their square form through the very end of the Early Bronze Age. Their function could not have changed much. They served to house the animals, to protect them from the elements, predatory animals, and warring kin. They stored the fodder, manure, and housed the people themselves (Behre 1998:94, Harsema 1993:103; Fokkens 1998:35-43; Tesch 1992:300-302). Burial grounds were often either within the territory of the settlement (Abora I) or right alongside it (Zvejnieki I).
The surroundings of the homestead must have changed during the Early Bronze Age. Aside from the main dwelling structure and the sheds next to it, there must have been a pasture in which the animals could graze as well as young vegetation growing back where woodland had been cleared and burned. The western part of the East Baltic also had enclosures with plots of arable land similar to the Kašučiai enclosure in the Kretinga region (Kanarskas 2002:20-22). In the southwestern and western parts of the East Baltic, people buried their dead beyond the settlement site's territory - in barrows, sometimes - in flat cemeteries.

Conclusions

1. In the wake of climatic changes (after 8690 BC), vegetation and fauna also changed. These environmental changes in the East Baltic formed two separate regions - the West-Northwest-North region and the East-South-Southwest region - or, more simply, the Coastal and Continental regions. The foraging economy developed in different ways in each region. The boundary line or edge of the last glaciation, which is marked by many lakes and forests, is still easily detectable. The composition of the soil, the vegetation and the fauna - all differ to the northwest and to the southeast of this line. Different economic activities resulted in each region as a consequence.

In the Final Paleolithic, economy was based on the hunt of herd animals - reindeer. Hunting changed at the Paleolithic-Mesolithic boundary; the hunting of individual forest fauna developed. A microlithic technology appeared in hunting tools. The species composition of hunted animals and fish changed. The type of foraging undertaken by coastal inhabitants and by mainland inhabitants differed. The former were engaged as well in seal and fowl hunting, the latter - in the hunting of forest animals and birds, the catching of freshwater fish. In the entire East Baltic territory, however, elk, beaver, boar, red deer, and among the birds - duck and geese were hunted.

In the Early Neolithic boar, elk, red deer, roe deer, beaver, bear and marten, seals in the coastal zone, and birds, like ducks were most often hunted.
With changing climatic conditions, the species composition of hunted fauna changed in the Middle Neolithic. Seals, elk, and red deer became the most hunted. The first two faunai species were most widespread in the coastal and northern East Baltic area, while red deer were most widespread in the boundary zone of the last glaciation. Ducks were the most hunted of the fowl.

In the Late Neolithic, the dominant hunted animals were elk, even pushing out the red deer from the edge of the last glaciation to second place. In the coastal area, seals were especially hunted, as were boar and elk. In the northern part of the East Baltic during this time period, boar, beaver, and elk were most prominently hunted, and duck - among the fowl.

In the Early Bronze Age, among the most hunted fauna were elk, beaver, boar, red deer, and marten. Seals were still much hunted along the coast.

2. During the entire Mesolithic, Neolithic, and Early Bronze Age, the fish that were most often caught by East Baltic inhabitants were pike, pikeperch, catfish, common bream, and perch. Starting in the Early Neolithic, more fish species were being caught along the coast, like flounder and cod. Osteological data show that in the Middle and Late Neolithic, the amount offish caught from the sea grew proportionately even more.

All the fishing methods and implements that were known in the 19th century already appeared and formed in the Mesolithic: nets, fishhooks, creels, beating through the ice, weirs. Fishing techniques and tools only grew more perfected and varied with time.

3. At the end of the Early Neolithic in the southern East Baltic, alongside the traditional branches of economy - hunting, fishing, gathering -the beginnings of a farming economy appea red: stock breeding and agriculture. Changes in economy were largely influenced by the ties of the southern East Baltic people with the tribes of the Funnel Beaker culture. The economic base of the latter was agriculture and stock breeding. Isolated domes ticated animal bones are found in East Baltic settlements of this time period, as are isolated Avena and Cerealia pollen grains.

The main branches of economy in the Middle Neolithic were still hunting, fishing, and gathering. It was during the Middle Neolithic that coastal and continental economies began to diverge in the East Baltic. Along the boundary line of the last glaciation and the territory northwest of it, the farming economy formed in different directions, with an emphasis on stock breeding development in the former and stock breeding as well as agriculture in the latter.

Ties among the peoples of the Globular Amphora, Nemunas, and Narva cultures in the Middle Neolithic influenced the quicker development of stock breeding in the East Baltic. In the Middle Neolithic, East Baltic economy was still in the availability phase in regards to farming. In the northern part of the East Baltic at the same time period, no clear traces of any kind of farming evidence have been observed. During the entire Neolithic, the development toward a farming economy was slow and consistent, especially in the southwestern East Baltic where amber appeared and was processed for export.

A foraging economy remained dominant in the Late Neolithic. A farming economy in the southwestern region of the East Baltic reached its substitution phase, while in the northern region -only its availability phase. Stock breeding developed more in the last glaciation-lin region at this time, while both stock breeding and agriculture developed in the southern part of the East Baltic. This dual development in production economy was influenced by trade in amber in the south. At this time, in some cases, cereal pollen reaches 1% in the pollen diagrams. The local Narva culture inhabitants' ties with the Globular Amphora and Corded Ware culture people influenced these processes. The Globular Amphora culture people who live alongside the local inhabitants and the Corded Ware culture people of the entire

East Baltic practiced stock breeding. Since the economic base of the Corded Ware culture people was not very profitable, they were usually forced to adopt to local forms of economy, and, being war-like, they took over quarry and resource areas, thereby having a profound impact on their neighbors.

In the Early Bronze Age, the farming economy of the people living on the land that was along the edge of the last glaciation reached its substitution phase, while in the southern part of the East Baltic, the people's farming economy was in the consolidation phase. Metal products that were adapted as farming tools as well appeared in the southwestern East Baltic.

Two time periods stand out in the development of a farming economy in the East Baltic: the Middle Neolithic and the end of the Early Bronze Age, when farming spread quickly. The hypothesis put forth here is that the spread of a farming economy is strongly related with the influence of the Funnel Beaker culture in the Middle Neolithic, as well as with climatic changes and a lessening of food resources, whereas the intensification of the farming economy at the end of the Early Bronze Age is associated with the working of metal and its use on the farm.

4. The social structure in the East Baltic during the Late Paleolithic and Mesolithic was that of exogamous kin groups that comprised endogamous tribes. During the Late Paleolithic, communities would get together during seasonal elk hunts, live together during the winters, and then disperse once again until the next hunting season.
The family's influence grew in the kin group during the Mesolithic. Changes in animals hunted, as well as the progressively more specialised hunting and fishing tools, support this notion. Analyses from cemeteries of the time show a unified matrilineal social structure, focused on production and defense.

Communities of the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic already had their own defined economic territories. Life in consistent places and territories, something illustrated by archaeological artifact typology, shows that the status of the family changed from the community's point of view. Exogamous ties existed not only between kin groups and tribes.

Clearer changes are noticeable in social structure during the Middle Neolithic. When the economic structure began to change during this time period, the first signs of a collapsing matrilineal family occur. These changes are apparent from burial ground research. We can surmise from the time's burials that the kin group was a big family consisting of 3-4 couples and their offspring, where female dominance could be put up against the male collective. A certain equality could have existed between genders. The kin group's economic status still did not fully allow a separate couple and their offspring to live apart from the community.

In the Late Neolithic, local communities had a defined economic resource territory. The farmstead's meaning and ownership of items of production such as pastures, forest land, water resources, etc., became clear with that territory. Separate families grew stronger in their roles as economic units. A group of related families had to live within one community; these comprised a single economic and social collective - a patronymy. Flexible relations were maintained with other communities due to the rule of exogamy. All the people residing in a settlement were unified by matters of economy, natural resources, animal protection, and defense. For this reason, economic and social structure were egalitarian. The community was also unified ideologically: everyone believed to have been a descendant of the same ancestor, an ancestor from the male lineage.

New changes in social structure occurred during the Early Bronze Age with the transition to a farming economy. New farming plots and pasture land were attained. Conflicts occurred more often. This motivated the people to protect their homesteads from attack. Hillforts appeared. These were the economic, defensive, and ideological centers of separate local kin groups. The center was governed by a patriarch who was experienced in the art of war. Arable plots and pasture lands of other patronymics were in a circumscribed territory around the hillfort. The economic role of related families-patronymies grew stronger, although membership in one or another larger kin group was more meaningful than membership in a nuclear family. This is suggested by burial traditions in excavated burial grounds. The final establishment of patriarchal relations took place during the Early Bronze Age together with the consolidation of a farming economy.

5. The exploitation, trade, and ownership of flint, amber, and slate played an important role in prehistoric economy. Tribal communities that exported flint benefited greatly from an economic point of view. At certain times during the East Baltic Neolithic, for example during the Early and then the Late Neolithic, flint shortages could have been the result of competition for resources. Slate and slate products had a similar economic value as flint, although perhaps somewhat less.
Starting in the Middle Neolithic, amber collectors, processors, and merchants played a special role in East Baltic economics. In exchange for amber, which, apparently, had great ideological value in ornament manufacture, amber collectors would receive domesticated animals and agricultural products. The southeastern part of the East Baltic became a springboard from which the inhabitants started to adopt new forms of economy. Various cultural groups crossed paths in this part of East Baltic territory.

Translated into English by Indre Antanaitis-Jacobs