Refine
Year of publication
- 2019 (37) (remove)
Document Type
- Part of a Book (37) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (37)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (37)
Keywords
- Digitalisierung (2)
- Herstellung (2)
- Kritik (2)
- Technologie (2)
Institute
- Sprach- und Kulturwissenschaften (37) (remove)
Shattered maceheads at early bronze age Tel Bet Yerah: symbolic power and destruction, but whose?
(2019)
An unusually large number of stone macehead fragments were found in a large open court in the Early Bronze Age site of Tel Bet Yerah, Israel. Maces, which first appear in the Levant in the seventh millennium BCE, are considered the earliest dedicated combat weapons in western Asia; in later periods they take on a symbolic role. We discuss the sequence of events leading to the accumulation of maceheads at Bet Yerah, the people who may have been implicated in it and its possible political significance.
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 history of the Lombards could well be designated a history of warfare, for in the course of the 206-year existence of their realm in Italy the Lombards constantly carried out warfare of varying intensity, whether in their own defence or to expand their territory. Even the time prior to their invasion of Italy, especially their advances from Pannonia, were already marked by numerous military conflicts. Of particular interest here are the questions with reference to the background and the course of these conflicts, and also to the weaponry that was utilised. In the following contribution the weapons of Lombard warriors – or more specifically – the weapons used by warriors in Lombardian Italy will be examined. This specification is necessary because Lombard warriors experienced many interactions with other powers, for example, with Byzantine forces stationed in Italy (until 751 AD), and with foreign enemies like the Franks and Avars, who however could always turn into cooperative partners for the Lombards. Thus, it can be assumed that ultimately through contacts with enemies as well as with allies, the different types of Lombard weaponry depended upon the respective situation. Aside from use in real battles, weapons of the Lombards also had other functions: They were of symbolic significance in that they could demonstrate power and social differences. Certain types of weapons can be interpreted as signs of rank – which of course applies to the early Middle Ages on the whole. In principal, three groups of source material are at disposal for study: 1) references in written sources, 2) contemporary depictions of Lombard warriors, and 3) archaeological evidence, that is, weapons and pieces of armament found in graves, settlements and also occasional finds – including those without a find context. An overall picture of Lombard weaponry can only be gained when all possible source groups are evaluated.
The eastern part of the state of Hesse in Germany between the Vogelsberg and Rhön mountains was one area included in the field investigations of the LOEWE project on “Prehistoric conflict Research – Bronze Age Hillforts between Taunus and Carpathian Mountains”. There are several mountains in the county of Fulda with remains of protohistoric fortifications, which still need to be dated and further investigated. Our surveys and excavations took place successively at Stallberg, Kleinberg, Haimberg and Sängersberg. The results are briefly presented in this paper and will form part of more detailed forthcoming publications. At Stallberg and Kleinberg, no archaeological features had been destroyed by erosion, so sufficient material was found to date these sites. At Stallberg, two main periods of use have been documented by radiocarbon dates and corresponding artefacts: the Late Neolithic Michelsberg Culture and the Late Middle-Ages. At Kleinberg, radiocarbon datings indicate an occupation at the end of the Bronze Age and during the first Iron Age, whereas most of the ceramic sherds are typical for the second Iron Age and medieval times. Unfortunately, the fortification at the Haimberg is destroyed, and further excavation is not possible. Finally, at Sängersberg, the various field investigations brought forth evidence of conflicts during the Bronze Age.
Th e article discusses the plant species found during the 2016 archaeological campaign inside the fortification of Teleac. Analysis of the macro remains recovered from archaeological deposits in Teleac helped to reconstruct the plant species cultivated by the Late Bronze Age inhabitants. The predominant cereal species in the samples was Panicum miliaceum (broomcorn/domestic millet) with 51 seeds, followed by Triticum monococcum (einkorn) with 27 seeds and Triticum spelta (spelt wheat) with 14 seeds. Also revealed were Triticum dicoccum (emmer) with 9 seeds and Secale sp. (rye) with 7 seeds. An overview of the entire Bronze Age, our focus shows that during this period the communities were engaged predominantly in agriculture, preserving their habits from the area of their origin. The results of specific analyses show that peasant farming was the mainstay of Bronze Age life.
In this work we present an overview of the proliferation of walled hilltop sites in southwestern Europe, named castellari in Liguria, castellar in Provence, castelo in Portugal, with the question whether they are real settlements or just fortified enclosures in the Final Bronze Age. In many cases scholars considered only those with a similar context in Iron Ages as real fortifications. But, after a study with the support of psychology and physiology of violence and a careful examination of the structures and their contexts, it is possible to hypothesize their defensive nature also during the Final Bronze Age with less doubt. In this way it is possible to delineate, in a chronologically non-uniform way, in southwest Europe a social phenomenon definable as ‘castling’, and we can link this phenomenon to specific causes. Within this phenomenon, we can consider the use of walls on hilltops as practical-symbolic function concurrently. The case study of the Portuguese Middle Tagus region in Central Portugal and of the Liguria region in northwest Italy, the two extremities of the considered macro-region, are considered.
Micromorphology is a suitable method to study the contents and stratigraphic relationships of pit fills. Within the ramparts of Corneşti-Iarcuri, fill layers of a pit were sampled. Th e pit fill was macroscopically divided into primary and secondary fill due to striking differences. These differences could be verified and concretized micromorphologically.
The LOEWE-project “Prehistoric Conflict Research” is determined in several new ways to interpret the archaeological evidence of Bronze Age fortifications. One way is the comparison with other non-modern cultures of conflict and their use of fortifications. In this paper, the conquest of Aquitaine by the Carolingian rulers of the Franks (760–769 CE) is taken as such an example. By analysing the (near-)contemporary historiographical record, the military role of fortifications in post-Roman warfare is discussed. It turns out that in the historiographers’ view, fortified settlements were focal points of military activity, and that combat occurred around them far more often than in the open field. Nonetheless, warfare in the surroundings of fortifications signified more than only sieges: the historiographical sources show a great variety of events connected to them as part of the war. Furthermore, a semantic inquiry of the material shows a special notion in texts concerning the “capture” of fortified settlements. This could be achieved not only by force, but also with diplomatic means, and the historiographers valued success higher than bravery. Moreover, the amount of violence seems to have been limited, as is indicated by the small number of destroyed fortifications and by the debates ensuing about one particular massacre (Clermont-Ferrand in 761 CE), which obviously was at odds with contemporary ideas about appropriate warfare. These results imply that archaeological research on conflict would benefit greatly from broadening its scope beyond actual battle events, in order to disclose the conflicts of Bronze Age Europe in all their complexity.
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.
Sântana-Cetatea Veche. A late bronze age mega-fort in the Lower Mureș Basin in Southwestern Romania
(2019)
Our contribution provides an overview of the archaeological investigations carried out, including those in 2018, at the large fortification of Sântana–Cetatea Veche, north of Arad in Romania. The new research was undertaken within the framework of the LOEWE project “Prehistoric Conflict Research – Bronze Age Hillforts between Taunus and Carpathian Mountains”. In accordance with the main scientific guidelines of the project, the research efforts encompassed archaeological fieldwork, magnetometric surveys of the entire area of the fortification, as well as a LiDAR scan covering an area of nearly 850 ha. As a result of the excavation undertaken in the eastern part of the defences pertaining to enclosure III, new absolute chronological data were obtained, which in corroboration with the older information offer a clear dating of the fortification system to the 15th to 13th centuries BC.