930 Geschichte des Altertums bis ca. 499, Archäologie
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (54)
- Contribution to a Periodical (11)
- Doctoral Thesis (8)
- Article (7)
- Book (4)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
- magisterthesis (1)
Language
- English (46)
- German (37)
- Multiple languages (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (86)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (86)
Keywords
- Archaeology (2)
- 3. Jahrhundert n. Chr. (1)
- African Archaeology (1)
- Analytical chemistry (1)
- Anthropology (1)
- Archaeobotany (1)
- Archaeometry (1)
- Archäologie (1)
- Archäometrie (1)
- Athletik (1)
- Bantu expansion (1)
- Bildung (1)
- Bronze Age (1)
- Bronzezeit (1)
- Burgenkunde (1)
- Cenchrus americanus (1)
- Central African rainforest (1)
- Central Oman (1)
- Central and Northern Europe (1)
- Coefficient correction (1)
- Early Iron Age (1)
- Eastern Mediterranean (1)
- Eisenzeit (1)
- Funde (1)
- Grabreliefs (1)
- Hellenismus (1)
- Human nutrition (1)
- Iron Production (1)
- Keramikanalyse (1)
- Klassische Archäologie (1)
- Late Bronze Age (1)
- Linear regression (1)
- Mitteleuropa (1)
- Musa (1)
- Nigeria (1)
- Nok (1)
- Nok Culture (1)
- Nok-Kultur (1)
- Numismatik (1)
- Pb isotopes (1)
- R-code (1)
- Reproducibility (1)
- Rome (1)
- Rätien (1)
- Second Punic War (1)
- Standardisation (1)
- Straßenstation (1)
- Subsaharan (1)
- Terrakotten (1)
- Urnfield Culture (1)
- Vigna unguiculata (1)
- Wadi Suq period (1)
- Westafrika (1)
- Western Mediterranean (1)
- XRF analysis (1)
- central place (1)
- centralni prostor (1)
- družbena teorija (1)
- geoprostorski statistični podatki (1)
- geospatial statistics (1)
- keramische Taphonomie (1)
- kultura žarnih grobišč (1)
- long distance exchange (1)
- methodology (1)
- metodologija (1)
- settlement sites (1)
- silver coinage (1)
- social theory (1)
- tombs (1)
- trace elements (1)
Institute
- Sprach- und Kulturwissenschaften (86) (remove)
Foreword
(2018)
Vorwort
(2018)
Foreword
(2019)
The construction of fortified settlements upon mountain summits and mountain spurs signifies a new form of defensive architecture for the Bronze Age in the 2nd millennium BC, which we designate ‘Bronze Age’ hillforts or fortresses. With mighty walls and gates built using various techniques with wood, clay and stone, the fortifi ed hill settlements manifest an eminent need for protection from assault, while at the same time they were obviously centres of power, from which territories and natural resources as well as travel routes could be controlled. Within the focus of the Hesse excellence initiative LOEWE “Prehistoric Conflict Research – Bronze Age Fortifi cations between Taunus and Carpathian Mountains” new approaches are made on the subject “War and Fortresses as Architecture of Power” in 2016–2019. Th ese studies are being carried out by the Goethe University in Frankfurt/Main and the Römisch-Germanische Kommission in Frankfurt/Main. The objective was to observe the development and character of fortifi ed structures in cultural spheres south of the Alps and landscapes north of the Alps in diachronic comparison in order to better understand the genesis and function of fortifications in their cultural milieu.
Attributing the large-scale, but tactically suspect, south Levantine Bronze Age fortification systems a ‘social’ role has become an archaeological commonplace, yet it begs the crucial question of form – if a polity, a social class, or a collective wish to advertise their cohesion, power, or wealth, why choose fortifications, rather than burial monuments, temples or palaces? In other words, what social end was served by conspicuous, inefficient, military consumption? This paper aims to offer a preliminary answer to this question through three interlocking arguments: The first, that societies like that of the Levantine Bronze Age are characterized by the existence of cooperative labor obligations; the second, that this collective labor investment was, in the ancient Levant, primarily dedicated to defense; the third, that tactically imperfect fortifications were nonetheless strategically successful as defensive installations, even while promoting social cohesion and projecting elite power.
In Bronze Age Cyprus, fortifications are only known from the beginning of Late Cypriote I (17th century BC) onwards, after previously only open settlements existed. In the first phase of the construction of these fortifications they had no uniform character, while later in the 13th century BC (Late Cypriote IIC), like in the Levant, they served primarily to secure settlements with a character of economic and administrative centres. Castles as enwalled noble residences are generally unknown in the Bronze Age of Cyprus.
The current paper summarizes the development of Bronze Age Aegean fortifications with a special focus on the Aegean Early and Middle Bronze Age. In order to get a better understanding of Aegean fortifications for each period, their numbers are set into relation with the number of known sites and other features. The impressive multi-phased fortifications of sites such as Troy or Kolonna on the island of Aegina will be used as case studies to explain the development of Early to Middle Bronze Age sites in the central Aegean. The final part of the paper gives a preview on the development of Late Bronze Age (Mycenaean palatial and postpalatial) fortifications.
The paper presents a reconsideration of settlement pattern and defensive systems in south-eastern Italy during the Bronze Age, on the ground of the archaeological data coming from the excavations at Coppa Nevigata. In particular, the transformations of the defensive lines of the settlement are discussed, which were strictly linked to both defensive and offensive strategies and their changes. Moreover, the paper seeks to examine some related problems, such as the possible origin for the model of complex fortification lines in southern Italy, the pattern(s) of fortified settlement in the Eastern Adriatic and matters related to the social organisation of the Bronze Age southern Italian communities that built the fortification lines.
The hillfort settlement of Monkodonja, located in the vicinity of the town Rovinj, is representative of the Bronze Age Castellieri culture in Istria. Twelve years of excavations that lasted one month each year revealed a proto-urban settlement with extensive fortification system, and a tripartite division of its interior that could well reflect the hierarchical social structure of its inhabitants. Remarkably, a change in the fortification concept during the time of the settlement’s existence could also be observed. With regard to bronze objects and ceramic finds the settlement is dated generally between the developed Early Bronze Age and the beginning of the Middle Bronze Age, or in Br A2 and Br B1 periods according to the chronology of Paul Reinecke. Moreover, about 40 radiocarbon dates from the Monkodonja settlement have also been analysed. The foundation of the settlement is dated to around 1800 cal BC. The second extensive building phase, including the rebuilding of the fortification system according to new defensive concepts, is dated approximately to 1600 cal BC, while the destruction of the settlement occurred around 1500 cal BC or in the middle of the 15th century BC at the latest.
Until now 33 hilltop settlements that might represent Bronze Age hillforts have been registered in South Bohemia. However, only four sites have been distinguished and designated with certainty as Bronze Age fortifications through modern archaeological excavations. As for the other sites, the probability is smaller. The main chronological horizons of the preference for hillforts are the turn of the Early to the Middle Bronze Age (Br A2/B1–B1; c. 1800–1500 BC) and the turn of the Late and Final Bronze Age (Ha A2–B1 and Ha B; c. 1050–800 BC). Enclosed areas of rather small dimensions existed throughout the Bronze Age. There are several Bronze Age hillforts, about which we have gained a fairly clear idea about the construction of their fortifications.