BArBArA BurchArd And studies on the chronology of the funnel BeAker culture in lesser PolAnd

Włodarczak P. 2020. Barbara Burchard and studies on the chronology of the Funnel Beaker culture in Lesser Poland. Sprawozdania Archeologiczne 72/1, 11-29. Barbara Burchard (1930-2016) was one of the most important researchers in the field of the Funnel Beaker culture (FBC) in southeastern Poland. In her studies she managed to highlight certain crucial problems related to the Middle Eneolithic period: (1) the origins of the FBC in Lesser Poland, (2) the process known as Badenisation, and (3) the reception of the megalithic burial rite. Therefore, it is worth looking at her research achievements from the perspective of present-day studies on the Neolithic in southeastern Poland. The results obtained by Burchard remain largely valid today, as does the list of unsolved problems specified by her.


IntroductIon
Of crucial importance to Polish taxonomic and chronological research concerning the Funnel Beaker culture (FBC) was Konrad Jażdżewski's work, published in the 1930s (Jażdżewski 1936). It was particularly important for Lesser Poland, an area included in the southeastern (or Lesser Poland) group of this culture, which was distinguished at that time. However, in that period and in subsequent decades there was a lack of valuable publications of sufficiently large collections of Middle Eneolithic materials originating from regular excavations, despite the awareness of an abundance of finds in the loess uplands of Lesser Poland. Beginning her career in the Institute of the History of Material Culture of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Barbara Burchard [1930-2016 (Figs 1 and 2) chose as the basis of her studies the best known collection of FBC materials from western Lesser Poland at the time, namely that from Książnice Wielkie, Proszowice district (together with Anna Eker: Burchard and Eker 1964). From that moment, taxonomic-chronological studies and analyses of burial rites continued to be the focus of her research for the next half-century. Although sometimes in the shadow of her other, wide-ranging works, these studies merit attention and epitomise 20 th -century research on the Neolithic of Lesser Poland. Their results remain largely valid today, as does the list of unsolved problems specified by Burchard. Scholars investigating the Neolithic of Lesser Poland put emphasis on the issues of taxonomy and chronology, which stemmed from their conviction about the importance of reconstructing detailed timeframes of cultural relations, an approach that was inscribed indelibly into the paradigm of cultural-historical archaeology. It also continued to influence the nature of research carried out from the 1960s onward, in acceptance of many assumptions of the "new archaeology". This is particularly true with respect to settlement studies in the Lesser Poland loess uplands, which included the development of models of the Neolithic economy (primarily : Kruk 1973;1980). Cultural-chronological findings were always taken into account in this research, adjusting the resolution of taxonomic and chronological divisions accordingly. The chronometry of the Middle Eneolithic in Lesser Poland continues to be discussed today (e.g. Włodarczak 2006;Nowak 2009;2017;, although with the focus shifted towards the application of absolute dating methods. Nevertheless, the establishment of temporal frameworks for particular stages representing diagnostic states of cultural development still remains the essence of these studies. In practice, it is still about building chronological and typological models that would best illustrate prehistoric processes. There is little doubt that, in her studies, Barbara Burchard managed to highlight certain crucial problems related to these issues. They concerned the following: (1) the origins of the FBC in Lesser Poland, (2) the process known as Badenisation, and (3) the reception of the megalithic burial rite. Therefore, it is worth looking at her research achievements from the perspective of present-day studies on the Neolithic in southeastern Poland. 2. dIvISIon Into the oLder PhaSe and the "cLaSSIc PerIod" In Barbara Burchard's studies on the chronology of the FBC, determination of general developmental stages was an issue of crucial importance. She emphasised two caesuras: /1/ the beginning of the older phase, understood as the time immediately preceding the period of clear predominance of "classic" materials in loess areas of western Lesser Poland (beginning in the 1980s, these materials have often been described as BR II and BR III after two chronological phases of the Bronocice settlement), and /2/ the beginning of the period of "southern influences", i.e. the influences of the Baden complex (together with the Pre-Baden phase known as Boleráz). These two horizons mark the boundaries of the "classic phase" in western Lesser Poland, and this is where the majority of FBC sites known from the area belong (Burchard 1973a;1981, 225-229;Burchard et al. 1991, 97-98). As it was at the time when this model was being created, it is difficult today to find conclusive arguments for placing these two caesuras in time. Moreover, the very existence of the older ("pre-classic") phase has not been fully and confidently demonstrated as yet. In many approaches, material relics of this period are assumed to be ceramic assemblages stylistically older than sub-phase IIIB in the lowland zone (the late Wiórek phase; Nowak 2009, 326 f.;Kruk and Milisauskas 2018, 66). So far, assemblages that could be described as clearly Sarnowo or Pikutkowo in style are lacking in the area of our interest (Nowak 2009, 334, 335), and materials believed to be the oldest (e.g. Kraków-Nowa Huta, site 49 -"Stacja Zdawcza") do not differ much from those representing the beginnings of the "classic phase".
Thus, the question of the integrity of ceramic materials of phase I of the FBC in Lesser Poland remains unsolved. Their relationship to the older stage of the classic horizon, e.g. the relationship between pottery from Kraków-Nowa Huta sites 49 and 62 on one hand, and the materials from Zawarża on the other, is difficult to determine. From the perspective of stratigraphy, of particular importance are the materials from phase BR I discovered in the Bronocice site. However, their early chronological position was fixed by only a single radiocarbon date (Kruk and Milisauskas 1990, 198, 199), and the scope of sources included into this phase is modest (recently: . The genetic relationship between phases BR I and BR II is even harder to demonstrate. Sławomir Kadrow pointed to a noticeable boundary between these periods, referring to both the genetic differences and the differences observed by Janusz Kruk and Sarunas Milisauskas with respect to economic and settlement patterns (Kadrow 2009). In his opinion, older assemblages (corresponding to phase BR I) show connections with the eastern group in the lowlands, and only younger materials from western Lesser Poland (BR II and BR III) should be included into the southeastern group. In such an approach, the term "southeastern group" becomes a genetic indicator rather than a territorial one. A weak point of this concept, however, is the lack of archaeological evidence for genetic differences between assemblages representing the earliest (BR I) and later (BR II) phases of the FBC. The existing analyses of source materials (still few) highlight above all the continuity of development between these two phases (see e.g. Kulczycka-Leciejewiczowa 2002;Kluzik 2010). In addition, no distinctly "older" ceramic assemblage has as yet been found in Lesser Poland that would pre-date the "Wiórek phase" in the lowlands. Summing up, we are still unable to precisely determine the nature of cultural relationships in the last quarter of the 4 th millennium BC, i.e. the relationships among the oldest developmental phases of the FBC, the Lublin-Volhynia culture, and the Wyciąże-Złotniki group.
Often used by Burchard, the term "classic phase" has come under criticism in the 21 st century (e.g. Nowak 2009, 336;Kadrow 2009Kadrow , 1438. It has been argued that the label reflects a certain style of ceramic assemblages that may actually represent different chronological horizons, e.g. later ones in the cases of cultural stagnation. This is allegedly proven by radiocarbon dates, some of which suggest a very late chronology of classic assemblages, like those from Kichary Nowe and Zimne (Zimno in Polish; Bronicki et al. 2003;Włodarczak 2006, 56-57;Nowak 2009, 336). In my opinion, this criticism has not always been justified. True, the concept of the "classic phase" involves a generalisation and incorporates a majority of the materials analysed to date into one group -perhaps even the entirety of materials from Lesser Poland pre-dating the appearance of the Baden style. Attempts at determining more precisely the absolute age of FBC finds from the discussed area typically point at a time span much narrower than previously assumed (of fewer than 500 years, instead of up to 1,000 years as previously believed). From this perspective, the term "classic" should be applied to the materials younger than the Lublin-Volhynia culture and older than the Boleráz horizon, which means falling within ca. 3800-3500/3300 BC, thus correlating with the late Wiórek style in the lowlands. In such an approach, the term "classic phase" can be seen as an indicator of a clearly distinguishable prehistoric process.

the nIedźWIedź tyPe
Among the results of Burchard's excavations at Niedźwiedź, Kraków district (1965)(1966)(1967)(1968)(1969)(1970)(1971)(1972)(1973) was the discovery of materials distinguished by a previously unknown combination of cultural traits. Ceramic objects retrieved from pits 29 and 39 were given the name of "assemblages of the Niedźwiedź type" (Burchard 1977). For a long time, their only analogies were sparse materials known from sites in the Kraków-Nowa Huta area (Godłowska 1976, 31, 32;Kaczanowska 1976, 249, 253;Burchard 1981, 231). In the opinion of Burchard, these finds were younger than the "classic" FBC, and were linked with the early horizon of Baden influences (Burchard 1981, 231, 232). They were to mark the earliest stage of these influences, pre-dating the assemblages that J.K. Kozłowski defined as the Wyciąże-Książnice group. The synchronisation of Niedźwiedź-type materials with surrounding cultural units proposed by Burchard seems controversial today, since it groups together cultural phenomena of clearly diversified chronology: Bodrogkeresztúr -Lažňany -Furchenstich -Ohrozim -Boleráz. Moreover, Burchard argued that in the late FBC period (i.e. Proto-Baden) one can find in western Lesser Poland materials of a diversified nature, allegedly reflecting their diversified origins. She mentioned in this context the Wyciąże-Książnice group (Post-Polgár), FBC-Baden materials (the Bronocice type), and the Niedźwiedź type (Burchard 1973b, 110, 111). This approach to the Pre-Baden horizon, recognising the importance of division into Post-FBC and Post-Polgár materials, is continued by Albert Zastawny (2018).
In attempting to reinterpret the pits from Niedźwiedź, one should note the different natures of pit 29 and 39, which may imply their different chronology. The more modest assemblage from pit 39 is easier to assess, as the whole of it finds good analogies in FBC-Baden materials from the loess uplands of western Lesser Poland -both those attributed to the Wyciąże-Książnice group (including the finds from Książnice Wielkie and Smroków - Burchard and Eker 1964;Włodarczak 2013) and those from Bronocice from phases BRIII-IV (Kruk and Milisauskas 1983;2018). Pit 39 can thus be placed in the earliest horizon of the FBC-Baden assemblages in western Lesser Poland, which postdates the "classic" stage of the FBC (ca. 3400-3100 BC -according to the most recent chronometric findings). The rich assemblage from pit 29 (Fig. 3) does not find such clear analogies among FBC-Baden fig. 3. niedźwiedź, Kraków district, site 1. ceramic from pit no. 29. acc. to Burchard 1977 materials in Lesser Poland. Instead, it shows certain traits that link it with the style characteristic of the late stage of the broadly understood circle of southern cultures. Burchard mentioned in this context of Lažňany and Furchenstich, among others. If these connotations are to be accepted, the assemblage from pit 29 should not be linked with the Post-FBC -early Baden period, but rather with an older period, contemporary with the beginnings of FBC settlement in the loess uplands of Lesser Poland. This adds particular importance to comparisons with materials having a similar cultural-chronological position, discovered in recent years. Materials revealing "southern" traits and pre-dating classic FBC assemblages are known from site 5 at Modlnica (Zastawny and Grabowska 2011). Their distinct trait is the Furchenstich ornamentation, featuring above all on vessels having the proportions of cups. Other vessels from these assemblages refer to the Late-and Post-Lengyel horizons, and to Baalberg assemblages. Therefore, they are probably earlier than the classic horizon of the FBC, and later than the Bodrogkeresztúr horizon. Materials revealing similar characteristics have also been found at archaeological sites in Kraków-Bieżanów, where they co-occurred with finds representing the early FBC (Zastawny and Grabowska 2017).
Summing up, the "Niedźwiedź type" today seems to be a phenomenon largely limited to just one feature (pit 29), with some analogies in a few other sites of the early FBC horizon, above all among assemblages with pottery decorated using the Furchenstich technique. As for the absolute chronology of these materials, presently one can only intuitively point at a time span of 3900-3700 BC, more likely its later section.

Phenomenon of fBc-Baden grouPS
Discussing the FBC chronology, an important caesura is connected to the appearance of finds revealing characteristics of the Baden complex (including the Pre-Baden stage of Boleráz). Within the range of the southeastern group, this process is clearly noticeable only in western Lesser Poland, where materials combining traits typical of the FBC and the Baden culture, i.e. FBC-Baden materials, have been identified. Burchard investigated this phenomenon in the 1960s and 70s (1970; 1973a; 1973b; 1977). Simultaneously, a different view was presented by Janusz Krzysztof Kozłowski (e.g. 1968;1971; on the basis of research at the Kraków-Wyciąże site. Later, in the context of the taxonomical division of the materials from Bronocice, Janusz Kruk and Sarunas Milisauskas presented their model, considerably enriched by abundant FBC-Baden materials of differing chronology (phases BR III and BR IV). In an attempt to connect all the above findings, Albert Zastawny presented Pre-Baden materials in Lesser Poland as a distinctly diversified group (Zastawny 2011;2018). At the same time, he followed J.K. Kozłowski's proposition to attribute some of these materials (assemblages of the Wyciąże or Wyciąże-Książnice type) to the "Late Polgár" Wyciąże-Złotniki group (Zastawny 2018, 497). Summing up, the following genetically diversified manifestations of the Pre-Baden stage were distinguished: the Wyciąże group, the Niedźwiedź type, TRB-Baden materials, and Boleráz-type materials from cave sites. Kruk and Milisauskas came to the conclusion that these propositions are overly complicated, and that the Niedźwiedź type, the Wyciąże group, and the Bronocice materials from phases BRIII-BRIV can all be considered similar manifestations of the early stage of the process of Badenization (Kruk and Milisauskas 2018, 71-75). Moreover, more recent chronometric data do not corroborate the temporal proximity of Wyciąże-type (Pre-Baden) and Wyciąże-Złotniki (Late-and Post-Polgár -Hunyadihalom) assemblages (see Nowak 2017;. Despite formal similarities in pottery identified by J.K. Kozłowski, a direct genetic relationship between Late Polgár and Pre-Baden settlement cannot be proved. One can only point to a similar -southern (Transcarpathian) -direction of genetic relationships, resulting in certain general stylistic resemblances in archaeological material.
Test excavations carried out by Burchard at Bronocice uncovered materials revealing traits of the early Baden-Boleráz type (Burchard 1975). Later, large-scale excavations conducted in this site by a Polish-American expedition produced a vast collection of sources linked with the "FBC-Baden" groups (e.g. Kruk and Milisauskas 1981;1983;1990;2018). Bronocice remains to this day the only extensively excavated site connected with this phenomenon. The location of the site, and above all a series of radiocarbon dates it produced (recently: , have caused the FBC-Baden materials (phase BR V) to be seen as a phenomenon parallel with the late-classic Zesławice-Pleszów and Mogiła groups of the Baden culture (e.g. Kruk and Milisauskas 1983;1990;Zastawny 1999, 28-31), a view maintained in recent publications as well (Kruk et al. 2016, 34, 35, Table 3). Such a synchronisation was proposed in spite of distinct differences in ceramic materials, with FBC-Baden materials representing Boleráz (BR III), post-Boleráz (BR IV), and early-classic (BR V) styles, and materials of the Mogiła and Zesławice-Pleszów groups representing primarily the late-classic style of the Baden culture (cf. Kruk and Milisauskas 1983;2018). The first series of radiocarbon dates obtained for charcoal from Bronocice apparently corroborated this reconstruction, although a significant portion of the samples had very large standard deviations, considerably hampering interpretation of the results (Kruk and Milisauskas 1990). The dates suggested the puzzling possibility of a relatively late chronology of some Baden culture materials from BR V -as late as ca. 2600 BC. On the one hand, this hinted at a very long duration of the FBC-Baden phase, and on the other it allowed for the synchronisation of its younger section with the Corded Ware culture (with the older barrow phase, or even with the beginnings of the Kraków-Sandomierz group).

In LIght of radIocarBon datIng
The first radiocarbon dates were obtained for the Lesser Poland FBC as early as the 1960s (Jażdżewski 1961;Kowalczyk 1968;Bakker et al. 1969). Until the late 1970s there were only single age determinations, insufficient for creating a chronological model of cultural processes. C 14 dates obtained for sites like Ćmielów, Niedźwiedź, or Stryczowice applied to crucial sites, but they were few and often insufficiently precise. A larger number of dates were obtained for the settlement at Gródek, Hrubieszów district. In this case, however, the insufficient understanding of their context and the lack of a coherent approach to the settlement's chronology diminished the importance of these results. The situation improved with a series of 14 C dates from Bronocice (Kruk and Milisauskas 1983;1990), which became a benchmark for dating Middle-and Late Eneolithic materials throughout Lesser Poland (Fig. 4). Its huge advantage was that the absolute chronology was tied with clearly defined occupational phases. With time, however, certain deficiencies of even this series became evident, including insufficient precision of results and insufficient distinctiveness of the published materials associated with the earliest phase. In addition, the results obtained at that time, especially those linked with the earliest (BR I) and latest (BR V) phases of the settlement's development did not allow for credible estimations of the duration of particular phases. These early results can only partly be verified by means of a new series of dates, obtained for human and animal bones using the AMS technique . This new series is characterised by high precision (small standard deviations) and better sample contexts than in the older series. However, it is worth noting that even with this new series, the possibilities of dating FBC settlement phases in western Lesser Poland are still far from satisfactory, which stems from the scarcity of high-precision results, necessary for deter- fig. 4. the chronological scheme of fBc in Lesser Poland based on radiocarbon dates from site 1 at Bronocice. acc. to  mining the timeframes for particular phases. Series from newly investigated sites, like a settlement at Mozgawa, Pińczów district (Nowak 2017, 254, fig. 12), will perhaps improve the situation. Other problems include the absence of good data for determining chronologies of certain cemetery types (including tombs of the Niedźwiedź type), and poor data for settlements from sandy areas and for places where raw flint materials were exploited. Today, the greatest shortcoming of the chronometric data is the impossibility to precisely determine the chronology of the earliest stage of FBC development in western Lesser Poland. A single 14 C date from feature 5-B6 at Bronocice is of poor quality (Kruk et al. 2018, 33, 36), and its cultural context is contested (Nowak 2009, 326;Kadrow 2009, 139; see comments in: Kruk and Milisauskas 2018, 117). Furthermore, it is difficult to compare age determinations of different quality obtained in different laboratories. Thus, one cannot but agree with the sceptical view expressed by Marek Nowak with respect to the reliability of single results pointing at an early date (ca. 4000-3800 BC) of the FBC in western Lesser Poland, a short series of 14 C dates from Gnojno (Nowak 2017, 263-264) being an example. These problems can -in many cases -be overcome by renewed dating of controversial results and by obtaining coherent series of results for the sites in question.
The aforementioned rejection of certain radiocarbon results calls for -in my opiniona consequently selective approach to all series of 14 C dates available for the Eneolithic in Lesser Poland. Samples of poor quality, including those originating from uncertain contexts and those having large standard deviations, should not be taken into account when calculating the ages of particular cultural phenomena. The problem is evident, since some of these phenomena have been reconstructed on the basis of results of inconsistent quality, including the Lublin-Volhynia culture and the Wyciąże-Złotniki group (cf. Nowak 2017, 252-253, figs 10-11).
The inclusion of all dates results in long timespans and apparent chronological overlapping (sometimes even complete) of many cultural phenomena. In other words, with such an approach, absolutely any hypothesis can be proved.
Given the above, poor quality dates obtained for the materials recovered by Barbara Burchard at Niedźwiedź (Burchard 1973b) no longer play any significant role in determining the chronology of the FBC in Lesser Poland today. What would be important, however, is to verify these results by new attempts at dating, as the materials from Niedźwiedź are linked with the late stage of the "classic phase" in western Lesser Poland (Burchard 1981), a period with thus far insufficient chronometric coverage. It would also be important to determine the age of the Niedźwiedź-type materials. There is no doubt that the chronological questions expressed by Burchard on the basis of the materials she discovered deserve to be addressed by future chronometric research.

tomBS of the nIedźWIedź tyPe and the tranSformatIonS of BurIaL rIteS In WeStern LeSSer PoLand
A trapezium-shaped structure discovered at Niedźwiedź in 1968 (Fig. 5) was initially incorrectly associated with cultures of the Lengyel-Polgár complex and interpreted as a dwelling (Burchard 1973c). This changed slightly later, after correspondence between Burchard and Professor Magdalena Midgley. Advice received from Prof. Midgley, an expert in megalithic funerary rituals, induced Burchard to reinterpret the feature as a Middle Eneolithic tomb (Burchard 1998;. Such a function was indicated by its shape, and by the discovery of a Corded Ware culture burial within the structure (CWC often dug their burials into FBC tombs, which is also confirmed by new discoveries made during rescue excavations carried out in connection with road-building projects in Lesser Poland). However, no Middle Eneolithic graves have been found at Niedźwiedź. They were probably damaged by erosion, as was the case with many tombs in the Polish Lowlands published by Seweryn Rzepecki (2011a). A good analogy for the structure from Niedźwiedź is a tomb from Lublin-Sławinek (Jastrzębski and Ślusarska 1985). In her pursuit of a comprehensive understanding of megalithic rites in Lesser Poland, Burchard resumed excavations of the "Mogiła Stradowska" (Stradów Tomb) in the 1990s, more than 30 years after it was investigated by Jan Gromnicki (Gromnicki 1959). The research, conducted methodically and using interdisciplinary methods, resulted in the documentation of many interesting details of the megalithic burial rite (Fig. 6;Burchard 1998;. However, the results have never been fully published. The number of timber-andearth tombs known from Lesser Poland has been constantly growing since the last years of the 20th century, with Słonowice, where 10 tombs have been found, being the most important site documenting this phenomenon (also lacking full publication; Tunia 2006). The results of research at Słonowice demonstrated the evolution of the form of tombs towards the gradual reduction of timber elements lining the sides of the earthen embankment (Przybyła and Tunia 2013, 158-160;. In recent years, tombs of the Niedźwiedź type have also been explored in a few new sites (among other places, in Czaple Wielkie, Giebułtów, and Pielgrzymowice -the research by M.M. Przybyła). A better understanding of such structures also results in their increasingly frequent identification in non-invasive research (primarily analyses of LiDAR images and geomagnetic surveys). As a result, tombs of the Niedźwiedź type should be seen not as a particularly unique and sublime manifestation of funeral rites, but rather as a widespread element of FBC funerary behaviours, represented in all micro-regions throughout western Lesser Poland. Recently, it has been recorded for the first time in the sub-Carpathian area as well -at the Szczytna and Skołoszów sites (Król et al. 2014).
Radiocarbon dates from Słonowice and Malżyce indicate that tombs of the Niedźwiedź type, and probably other similar structures (involving the use of stone) as well, were erected in a period corresponding to the "classic" phase of the FBC: between ca. 3700/3600 and 3400/3300 BC. No tombs have been found as yet that could be dated later, i.e. to the times of the predominance of the FBC-Baden style in the western Lesser Poland FBC (tombs from the western part of the Nałęczów Plateau have sometimes been mentioned as having a late chronology, but no dates have as yet been published. Today, it would be necessary to verify these determinations with modern techniques regardless. Without such verification, their different chronological position in relation to the dating of tombs in other parts of Lesser Poland cannot be accepted). Thus, the megalithic trend in Lesser Poland is a phenomenon that links closely with ideological tendencies observable over the whole of Europe, corresponding to megalithic Kuyavian tombs in the lowlands and Early Neolithic long tombs in Scandinavia, to mention only a few examples. Apparently, with the process of Badenization, the custom of erecting long, monumental tombs was abandoned in western Lesser Poland.
The "Stradów Tomb" in Zagaje Stradowskie illustrates the accumulation of many stages through which a funerary-ceremonial centre was used by several Eneolithic and Early Bronze Age communities (Fig. 5). In the period between the construction of the long tombs and the digging of the CWC niche graves, the area of the site was reshaped by the erection of a circular mound. It is difficult to determine whether this took place in the Final Eneolithic or during the existence of the FBC -as was probably the case at Malice Kościelne, Sandomierz district (Bargieł and Florek 2006), and perhaps at Kolosy, Kazimierza Wielka as well (Włodarczak 2008). The genesis of the ritual that involved erecting circular mounds, represented by one fully certain feature from Malżyce site 30 -barrow no. 1 ( Fig. 6; see Tunia and Włodarczak 2013) -is still unknown. It may be linked with southern influences (Baalberg), or with the early stage of steppe influences. The former possibility also points at the direction of cultural contacts that became particularly important in the second half of the 4 th millennium BC and resulted in the rise of the FBC-Baden groups. In this line of interpretation, barrows (i.e. circular or oval tombs) would mark the closing stage in the trend of long "megalithic" tombs, where timber-and-earth structures of the Niedźwiedź type also belong.

Summary: SPecIfIcIty of the LeSSer PoLand cuLturaL-chronometrIc modeL
The nature of Barbara Burchard's studies on the FBC settlement in western Lesser Poland still remains in the mainstream of research on the issue carried out in Poland. Research tools are being constantly improved, new materials keep emerging, and new approaches sometimes disprove previous perspectives on prehistoric processes. Despite all these advances, some of the problems singled out by Burchard concerning the genesis of the Lesser Poland FBC, the dynamics of its development, the genesis of its funeral rites, fig. 7. Barbara Burchard consulting the fBc ceramic during visit at site 30 in malżyce near Zagaje Stradowskie. 14th September 2004. Photo by P. Włodarczak and the role of communities from the 4 th millennium BC in the rise of the new world of the Late and Final Eneolithic still cannot be convincingly solved. Her cautious scepticism (Fig. 7) regarding the possibility of finding satisfactory answers to these questions has found good justification over the decades in obstacles encountered by subsequent generations of archaeologists. Nevertheless, step by step, new field discoveries supported by proper analyses allow for expanding the limits of our knowledge in this respect. Tombs of the Niedźwiedź type offer a good illustration of this process: they were discovered in the 1970s but initially misinterpreted (Burchard 1977); in the 1980s and 90s they came to be regarded as unique manifestations of funerary behaviours of FBC communities in Lesser Poland (Burchard 1998); and in the 21 st century, they are known from many examples and are considered common ceremonial structures typical of every settlement micro-region in Lesser Poland (Rzepecki 2011b;Król 2011). As was also true in the past, new discoveries result in new perspectives.