General habitation models based on well-researched regions tend to be applied to other, less intensively studied regions, usually implicitly. However, whether they lend themselves to do that is hardly ever tested. It may even be that such general models prevent us from obtaining a clear view of patterns of supra-regional, regional, and local diversity. As a test case, this paper focuses on the development of landscape and habitation in the eastern part of the Netherlands from the Late Neolithic period until the start of the Middle Roman period (c. 2850 BC–AD 100). Special attention is given to site location, settlement development, and landscape organisation. The research area until now has hardly entered the archaeological debate on the habitation history of the Low Countries. It is demonstrated that even though some habitation characteristics are well-known from other parts of the Low Countries, and sometimes beyond, the organisation of later prehistoric societies in the research area also deviates in interesting ways. The case-study makes clear that leaning too heavily on research results from other regions brings the risk that specific characteristics of a region will be overlooked or that regional diversity will be ignored in order to make the data fit the expected pattern. One size does not fit all. The only way to prevent this is to build new, solid interpretative frameworks for regions that have so far received little attention, and to create an awareness that existing models should not be applied uncritically.
Through the Gloomy Vale: Underworld Alignments at Stonehenge
