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)
Die seit der jüngeren Bronzezeit verstärkt auftretenden Bogenschützen und Schleuderer bedurften eines spezifischen Trainings und einer Ausbildung, die weg vom Individualkämpfer zum Kämpfer im Verbund ausgerichtet war. Dieser Prozess wird als Professionalisierung in der Kriegsführung und als einschneidende Veränderung im Konfliktgeschehen in der Bronzezeit verstanden. Der Begriff der Professio nalisierung wird daher zunächst in seiner technischen Bedeutung verwendet. Mit der Entwicklung von einer individuellen zu einer organisierten und in der Gruppe ausgeübten Aktion sind eine Steigerung der Effizienz und eine Standardisierung verbunden, die zur Verbesserung der Qualität – eben dem bewaffneten Konflikt führt. Seit der jüngeren Mittelbronzezeit und in der Spätbronzezeit sind durch spektakuläre neue Befunde Befestigungen bekannt geworden, die Spuren von Angriffen und Zerstörungen durch Brand/ Feuer aufweisen. Dabei kamen Fernwaffen zum Einsatz, Pfeil und Bogen sowie Schleuderkugeln und Speere. Jedoch scheinen solche Konflikte keine alltäglichen Ereignisse gewesen zu sein, da von den meisten Befestigungen keine Hinweise auf Konflikte oder Gewaltereignisse vorliegen.
In der Schachthöhle mit dem Namen Mušja jama/Fliegenhöhle bei Škocjan im Hinterland der Triester Bucht an der nordöstlichen Adria sind mehrere Hunderte von Metallfunden zu Tage gekommen, überwiegend aus Bronze, einige wenige auch aus Eisen. Ihr Erhaltungsstand ist sehr unterschiedlich. Überwiegend handelt es sich um Reste von prachtvollen Waffen und Bronzegefäßen, während Elemente des Trachtzubehörs und andere Geräte unterrepräsentiert sind. Unter den Funden finden sich nur wenige Objekte lokaler Provenienz, es überwiegen erstaunlicherweise solche, deren Verbreitungsradius weit über die Region um das Caput Adriae hinausgeht, manche kommen sogar von sehr fern. Anhand der Verbreitungskarten von einigen kennzeichnenden Waffentypen erweist sich Škocjan als ein bemerkenswerter Schnittpunkt im „globalen“ Sinne der europäischen Urnenfelderkultur, aber auch noch in der frühen Eisenzeit. Vergleicht man z. B. insgesamt die Verbreitung von Glocken- und Kegelhelmen gegenüber der von Kammhelmen, zeigt sich eine Zweiteilung zwischen der östlichen und westlichen Ausrüstung der Elitekrieger in Europa, wobei die Trennlinie vom Caput Adriae, d. h. von Škocjan, entlang der Ostalpen und Elbe bis zur Ostsee verläuft. Man kann annehmen, dass es sich in der Mušja jama/Fliegenhöhle um die Weihungen mehrer Kriegsbeuten an Gottheiten martialischen Charakters handelte, wobei sich offenbar im Laufe der Zeit das Glücksrad zwischen den östlichen und westlichen Akteuren – Feldherren – gedreht hat.
Vorwort
(2019)
Geophysical prospection and excavations show that the heavily fortified Teleac hillfort was densely occupied with a population reaching the low thousands. In this article it is argued that Teleac was a local political centre that acted as a hub for transportation and trade in a region that is rich in mineral resources. Recent investigations also reveal that Teleac was attacked in the late 10th century in an event that breached and destroyed the formidable northern defensive system. This attack suggests that the level of military threat was quite severe in the eastern Carpathian Basin. The attacking forces must have had significant offensive capabilities in order to tackle Teleac’s defences. It is also a strong indication that not only Teleac, but contemporary fortified settlements in the surrounding region were at least in part erected to resist serious military threats.
The large hillfort of Teleac, commanding the Mureş River valley, the principal East-West connecting axis in the Carpathian Basin, was likely built in the second half of the 11th century BC and occupied until the end of the 10th or the early 9th century BC. The fortification wall was destroyed around 920 BC, according to recent investigations. More than 40 iron objects were discovered in the fortified complex. These iron finds viewed together with numerous other iron finds from other sites signify that Transylvania was an early centre of the implementation of iron and presumably iron production. Thereby, the use of iron for producing weapons probably stood in the foreground. This is indicated by corresponding grave finds in Greece that contain a sword as offering, but also iron swords found in Slovenia and Romania.
The large fortifi cation of Corneşti-larcuri is located on the Mureş River in Romania and comprises four rings of defensive ramparts. With the outermost rampart encircling a total area of 17.65 km2, Corneşti-larcuri is thus considered the largest Bronze Age fortification in Europe. New intensive research began in 2007 with the six-year project “Investigations on settlement structures and the chronology of the Late Bronze Age fortification of Corneşti-larcuri in Romanian Banat”, funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG). The project terminated in the autumn of 2017. Now the goal is to evaluate the data collected during the last eleven years and to develop the first syntheses. As part of the new excavations, a total of 109 radiocarbon datings from diff erent contexts (ramparts, ditches, pits, house structures, etc.) were obtained. The subsequent phase model based upon these data essentially refers to the dating of ramparts I and II and to pits associated with house contexts. Thus, it enables a site biography for Corneşti-larcuri to be outlined for the first time and four settlement phases to be distinguished.
Among many prehistoric hillforts of the Western Carpathians the one located at Maszkowice village displays unique traits. The site was excavated in 1960s and 1970s, but it was not until 2015 that the new field project revealed remains of massive stone fortifications. The wall of the Zyndram’s Hill is dated to the Early Bronze Age (18th century BC), being one of the earliest examples of defensive stone architecture in Europe outside Mediterranean. In our paper we shall discuss the development of the defensive system with its geographical and settlement context. Considering the results of fieldwork and other applied methods we can assume, that the enclosed settlement in Maszkowice functioned as an isolated point located in scarcely populated area. Therefore, we need to stress the landscape and geological circumstances which played a significant role in inner layout organization, social perception and the development of settlement and its fortifications. The stone wall was erected already at the beginning of the site’s occupation. The defensive system existed then in its most elaborated form (with at least two gates leading into the village), while later during several dozen years the fortifications slowly but constantly deteriorated. Finally, in conclusion we shall consider the stone wall of Zyndram’s Hill not as a product of local adaptation, but as a result of a prepared execution of a project.
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 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.
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.
In the archaeology of Scandinavian Bronze Age rock art, there is a long-standing debate over the function and role of the engraved weapons and warriors. The question can be boiled down to: Are the depicted warriors actual fighters, or are they showmen merely portraying an identity to gain status and power? One of the proposals was that spears are active because they occur in killing scenes and swords are passive because they are mostly depicted sheathed. Discussing recent rock art research on the transformation of petroglyphs, their narrative structure as well as new discoveries of weapon depictions, and confronting this with results from use wear analyses on similar weaponry, this paper sets out to argue that the answers to this problem may not be as straight forward as previously proposed. Instead it is proposed that while there is a concern with showmanship relating to a warrior identity in Scandinavian rock art, it is based on real combat, fighting, and killing. Rock art was used to enhance the stature of warriors and to make narratives more exciting that involve warriors.
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 this paper I assess two archaeological phenomena for Bronze to Iron Age Britain: the expanding scale of conflict over this period and the practice of what is often called deviant burial, and I consider their possible connection. Such burials may relate to a wider pattern of social violence, given that community setbacks need to be explained away, perhaps requiring scapegoats to take the blame, who met their death as a result of being identified as ‘the enemy within’. Although burials with weaponry occurred in the Early Bronze Age, there is little evidence of conflict and few deviant burials. The Later Bronze Age and the Iron Age, by contrast, provide significant evidence at varying scales of both warfare and deviant burial practices.
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.
Panel discussion
(2019)
This paper provides a glimpse into the palaeoecological conditions at the prehistoric settlement Corneşti-Iarcuri in the southwest Romanian Banat, which is known as the largest Bronze Age fortification in Europe. Preservation of pollen is generally poor in the region, where extensive marshlands have been drained and converted into arable lands since the 18th century. Remarkably, some fossil topsoils buried under thick colluvial layers within the fortification proved to contain pollen. Together with the sediments themselves, which serve as direct evidence for anthropogenically infl uenced geomorphodynamics and could partially be put into chronological context by radiocarbon dating, the on-site palynological data offer a unique opportunity to reconstruct the palaeoenvironmental setting at Corneşti. Results reveal that during the Chalcolithic period, a partially cleared open woodland with Tilia, Quercus and Corylus prevailed. Soil erosion began in some central parts of the settlement site, resulting in the accumulation of up to 90 cm of colluvium in the main valley. Until the Early Iron Age, regional tree percentages dropped from around 38 to 22 %, while anthropogenic indicators (Cerealia, Plantago lanceolata, Polygonum aviculare) increased from 11 to 16 %. Meanwhile, between 50 to 170 cm of colluvium were deposited at the investigated floodplain sites.
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.
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.
Research on Bronze Age weapons from wet contexts in northern Europe often interprets those finds as structured deposits of a symbolic nature, placed in liminal environments that had special significance in social and religious terms. Much less consideration is given to direct or indirect connections with war and conflict in the competitive chiefdom polities of the Bronze Age. As territorial boundaries, rivers were obvious settings for conflict, with confrontations at fording points leading to weapon loss in battle. There may also have been intentional deposition connected to the death of a warrior at or near that location. River deposition may also signify the celebration of a military victory, involving a ritualized destruction of the weapons of the vanquished. They may also represent an assertion of territory or an expression of ritualized violence. Such scenarios illustrate how the use of weapons as funerary or votive offerings does not preclude a close association with warfare. The parallel phenomenon of hoarding in the same period may reflect a political climate in which it was necessary to hide valuables. This paper explores possible connections between the deposition of weapons and valuables in wet contexts and the landscape context of war in Ireland during the later Bronze Age, with implications for research in other parts of Europe.
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.