BALTICA6
Transcription
BALTICA6
ARCHAEOLOGIA BALTICA 2006 6 Institute of Baltic Sea Region History and Archaeology Lithuanian Institute of History Klaipėda, 2006 BALTICA 6 UNIVERSITY ARCHAEOLOGIA KLAIPĖDA UDK 902/904 Ar 46 Editorial Board Editor in Chief Prof. habil. dr. Vladas Žulkus (Klaipėda University, Lithuania) Habil. dr. Vytautas Kazakevičius (Klaipėda University Institute of Baltic Sea Region History and Archaeology, Lithuania) Deputy Editor in Chief Habil. dr. Algirdas Girininkas (Klaipėda University Institute of Baltic Sea Region History and Archaeology, Lithuania) Members Prof. dr. Claus von Carnap-Bornheim (Archäologisches Landesmuseum Schloß Gottorf, Schleswig, Germany) Dr. Rasa Banytė-Rowell (Lithuanian Institute of History, Lithuania) Dr. Anna Bitner-Wróblewska (State Archaeological Museum in Warsaw, Poland) Dr. Audronė Bliujienė (Klaipėda University Institute of Baltic Sea Region History and Archaeology, Lithuania) Dr. Džiugas Brazaitis (Klaipėda University Institute of Baltic Sea Region History and Archaeology, Lithuania) Dr. Agnė Čivilytė (Lithuanian Institute of History, Lithuania) Prof. dr. Wladyslaw Duczko (Uppsala University, Sweden) Dr. John Hines (Cardiff University, United Kingdom) Associated prof. dr. Rimantas Jankauskas (Vilnius University, Lithuania) Dr. Romas Jarockis (Klaipėda University Institute of Baltic Sea Region History and Archaeology, Lithuania) Dr. Vygandas Juodagalvis (Lithuanian Institute of History, Lithuania) Prof. Dr. Andrzej Kola (Torun Nicolaus Copernicus University, Poland) Dr. Marika Mägi (Tallinn University, Estonia) Habil. dr. Alvydas Nikžentaitis (Lithuanian Institute of History, Lithuania) Dr. Jörn Staecker (Gotland University, Sweden) Prof. habil. Dr. Andrejs Vasks (University of Latvia, Latvia) Editorial Assistant Jurgita Žukauskaitė (Klaipėda University Institute of Baltic Sea Region History and Archaeology, Lithuania) English Language Editor Joseph Everatt German articles prepared by authors Lithuanian Language Editor Roma Nikžentaitienė Design Algis Kliševičius Layout by Lolita Zemlienė Archaeologia Baltica volume 6 was prepared by Klaipėda University Institute of Baltic Sea Region History and Archaeology Cover illustration: A Brooch from Laiviai (Kretinga district) Cemetery © Institute of Baltic Sea Region History and Archaeology, 2006 © Lithuanian Institute of History, 2006 © Article authors, 2006 © Klaipėda University Press, 2006 ISSN 1392-5520 Klaipėdos universiteto leidykla ARCHAEOLOGIA BALTICA 6 Klaipėda, 2006 SL 1335. 2006 09 28. Apimtis 27,5 sąl. sp. l. Tiražas 350 egz Klaipėdos universiteto leidykla, Herkaus Manto g. 84, LT-92294 Klaipėda Tel. (8~46) 398 891, el. paštas: [email protected] Spausdino spaustuvė „Petro Ofsetas“, Žalgirio g. 90, Vilnius A RT I C L E S Povilas Tebelškis, Rimantas Jankauskas. The Late Neolithic Grave at Gyvakarai in Lithuania in the Context of Current Archaeological and Anthropological Knowledge............................................... 8 Bernd� Zich. ����� Neolithic Vehicle Tracks Superposed by Long-Barrow LA 3, Flintbek, North Germany................22 Algimantas Merkevičius. The Vaškai Hoard.. .......................................................................................... 32 Sebastian Brather. Zwischen „Fluchtburg“ und „Herrensitz“. Sozialgeschichtliche Interpretationen früh- und hochmittelalterlicher Burgwälle in Ostmitteleuropa........................................................................................40 BALTICA 6 Introduction..............................................................................................................................................................6 ARCHAELOGIA CONTENTS Marina Smirnova. Pole Constructions in Open Air Ritual Areas of the Northern Sambia in the First Millenium AD................................................................................................................................58 Andris Šne. The Economy and Social Power in the Late Prehistoric Chiefdoms of Eastern Latvia............................68 Oleg Proshkin. The Question of the Heterogeneous Population of the Upper Oka and the Upper Desna Region in the Middle Ages..............................................................................................80 Vladas Žulkus. Kurland. Die Grenzen und die nordlichen Landschaften in 8.-13. Jahrhundert..........................88 ����������� Gurly Vedru. Prehistoric Human Settlement in the Lower Reaches of the River Jägala...........................................104 Heidi Luik & Ülle Tamla. Small Bone Spades: Used Material, Processing Technology, and Possible Function.................................................................................................................................. 112 Audronė Bliujienė. Some Notes on Curonian Women’s Bead Sets with Bronze Spacer Plates in their Headbands, Headdresses Made of Cloth and Unaccountable Ware during the Viking Age and Early Medieval Times........................................................................................................................... 126 Ilona Vaškevičiūtė. A New Type of Bronze Pins in Eastern Baltic........................................................................144 Vladimir I. Kulakow. Die Runen des Samlands: Funde Saison 2001..................................................................152 Krista Sarv. Medieval Leather Footwear from Tallinn.....................................................................................158 Vytautas Kazakevičius. Riders of Žąsinas (Classification of Spurs from Viking Period and Early Middle Ages on the Basis of Material from Žąsinas Cemetery)....................................................................166 Birutė Salatkienė. The Reconstruction of Wells and Lime Bark Buckets from Lieporiai 1 Settlement............174 Mindaugas Brazauskas. The Dendrochronological Dating of Barrel Heads Finds from the Second Part of 16th in Klaipeda / Memel..................................................................................................190 D I S C U SS I ONS Tomas Ostrauskas. On the Genesis of Kunda Culture. A.Sorokin’s Hypothesis. Comments............................198 REVIEWS Tomas Ostrauskas. A. Sorokin. Mesolithic culture of Butovo..........................................................................204 Kęstutis Katalynas. Vladas žulkus. Medieval klaipėda. Town and castle. Archaeology and history.............210 Ilona Vaškevičiūtė. Mindaugas Bertašius. Central Lithuania in the Eighth to the Twelfth Centuries................214 Vytautas Kazakevičius. Archaeologia Lituana...................................................................................................216 Vytautas Kazakevičius. M. Michelbertas. Corpus der Römischen Funde im Europäischen Barbaricum. Litauen................................................................................................................218 Guidelines for authors ......................................................................................................................................220 Introduction Introduction Ten years have passed since the appearance of the first volume of Archaeologia Baltica, an edition that was conceived and edited by habil. dr. Vytautas Kazakevičius (11.10.1953–7.9.2005). Five volumes of Archaeologia Baltica were published during the next decade. Starting with the sixth volume, Klaipėda University Institute of Baltic Sea Region History and Archaeology, in cooperation with the Lithuanian Institute of History, will become the editors and publishers of this archaeological magazine, which is important to both Lithuania and the entire Baltic region. Until 2005, Vytautas Kazakevičius was the managing editor of the magazine. The last volume of Archaeologia Baltica, which was ready in 2002, is being published just now. From the viewpoint of the editorial board and the authors, the research articles are still topical and are being published, with some exceptions, as they were presented three years ago. The new editorial board has accepted several recently written articles. Three articles were omitted, as they have been published in other scholarly journals. In this volume of Archaeologia Baltica articles in German remain. The new editorial board will strive to establish a close dialogue between researchers, theoretical schools and other different disciplines that represent the Baltic region, and will aspire to discuss problems that are important to archaeologists of the entire Baltic region. The structure of the journal has been changed. Archaeologia Baltica will present original research articles, reports, discussions, reviews, and comments on the latest research publications. Some volumes of Archaeologia Baltica will be designed for conference papers on Baltic region archaeology. This periodical, published in English twice a year, will contain articles by Lithuanian, Latvian, Estonian, German, Polish and Russian archaeologists, and by archaeologists from other countries, with material from different chronological periods, discussions on social and economic phenomena of prehistoric societies, on technological changes, and on the latest anthropological research of burial grounds. The editors of Archaeologia Baltica are interested in cooperation and invite archaeologists from all academic institutions and museums within the Baltic region to contribute to this journal. This will stimulate the development of archaeology. Finally, by discussing and expressing our views, we will contribute to the further progress of archaeology, to the overall benefit of the subject. Archaeologia Baltica Editorial board The Late Neolithic Grave at Gyvakarai in Lithuania in the Context of Current Archaeological and Anthropological Knowledge Povilas Tebelškis, R i m a n ta s Jankauskas, A RT I C L E S T he L ate N e o lithic G rav e at G y vakarai in L ith u ania in the C o nte x t o f C u rrent A rchae o l o gical and A nthr o p o l o gical K n o w ledge POVILAS TEBELŠKIS, Rimantas Jankauskas Abstract The paper discusses a rare archaeological and anthropological find – a Late Neolithic grave, found in the year 2000 in Gyvakarai village (Kupiškis region). The site was discovered by chance, when local inhabitants were digging gravel from the slope on the left bank of the Žvikė creek. Radiocarbon dating (two separate samples of bone analysed): 3745±70 bp (right tibia, Ki-9470) and 3710±80 bp (left ulna, Ki-9471) confirmed the initial supposition of Late Neolithic, and actually falls to the very end of this period. The following grave goods associated with the inhumation were found: boat-shaped polished stone axe with shaft-hole; hafted axe, produced from flint of a greyish colour; a blade-knife, produced from flint of a greyish colour; a hammer-headed bone (antler?) pin, found among disturbed bones of the burial (to our knowledge this is the first hammer headed pin in Lithuania). The osteological analysis of the burial revealed that the bones belonged to one fragmentary skeleton. Bone fragments are well preserved, and were from parts of the skull vault, both maxillas, the right side of the mandible, five cervical, twelve thoracic, five lumbar vertebrae, fragments of ribs, the handle of the sternum, both clavicles and scapulae, humeri, ulnae, right radius, right and left hand bones, fragments of both coxal bones, femora, tibias, fibulas and bones of the feet. The skeleton belonged to an adult male that died at the age of 35-45 years. The skull vault was too fragmentary for measurement, visually it can be evaluated as hypermorphic, dolichocranic, with an average or even a broad face. The postcranial skeleton is hypermorphic, with marked muscle insertions. The reconstructed stature is 173-176 cm. Such a massive skeleton is typical of other Lithuanian Corded Ware/Boat Axe culture people, and similar to those found in Estonia, Prussia and later the Fatyanovo people from the Central Russian plain. This new case forces us to revive the long-lasting discussions about the origins of Indo-Europeans and the Balts. Summarising the current empirical facts and hypotheses based on archaeological, linguistic, anthropological and genetic data, we can find support for both migration and acculturation models. All known Corded Ware/Boat Axe burials in Lithuania are singular, contain individuals of adult/mature age, are associated with a particular set of grave goods and characterised by a very specific phenotype – these facts would support the hypothesis of immigration. However, some facts would also speak for the acculturation hypothesis: probably the adoption of the Indo-European language was earlier, via cultural transfer, and migrants of Kurgan people already found communities with whom they could communicate. However, they left no significant impact on the local anthropological substrate. Key words: Late Neolithic, Corded Ware/Boat Axe culture, migration model, acculturation model, grave. Introduction The area of the eastern Baltic shore is a place of longterm interactions between various cultures and people. These interactions can be analysed from different points of view, as the history of “ethnos” and “population” takes place in at least three autonomous and only partially overlapping arenas: 1) biogenetic (history of the gene pool), the object of bioarchaeology, physical anthropology and population genetics; 2) ethnocultural (the history of a material culture, here seen as the infrastructure, technologies, productive activities and adaptive strategies [Harris 1997]), as much as it can be derived by archaeological methods; 3) linguistic, with its corresponding methods. Thus the solution of ethnocultural and linguistic problems will not be complete if the biogenetic arena is not taken into account, and vice versa. In contemporary archaeology, various schools and traditions of interpretation and explanation of archaeological artefacts and their assemblages have been developed. The need for the theory is based on the need to sort out a plethora of archaeological facts. Despite the many arguments and examples to the contrary, archaeologists, linguists and geneticists alike continue to identify genetically separate populations, with their own separate languages, material cultures and ethnic identities as single units and norms, rather than exceptions. The recognition of one separate phe- BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 1. The situation plan of the Late Neolithic grave in the village of Gyvakarai nomenon (usually linguistic) sets off a search for the presence of others (Zvelebil 1995). Such a simplistic approach has its roots in the Romantic nationalism of the 19th century. Modern anthropology (in the broadest sense) rejects the normative view of archaeological culture. Different pots do not necessarily symbolise different people. The researcher must avoid overemphasising his own methods and finds. While working in his field, he must also take into account patterns of development in the gene pool, the material culture and language. We cannot assume a straightforward correlation between gene flow and the material culture pattern, nor one between material and non-material aspects of culture (Zvelebil 1998). Genetic analyses of living European populations, for example, show gross discrepancies between the genetic and linguistic affinities of a region’s population (Guglielmino et al 1990) and provide evidence that genetic diversity is influenced more by geography than language (Rosser et al 2000). Thus, each particular find should be analysed in a broad context. This paper is devoted to a rare archaeological and anthropological find, a Late Neolithic grave, found in 2000 in the village of Gyvakarai in the Kupiškis region. Archaeological finds The site was discovered by accident, when local inhabitants were digging gravel from a slope on the left bank of Žvikė creek (Fig. 1). During this, some bones and a stone axe were found, but the grave was disturbed. Later, when professional archaeologists arrived at the site, it was impossible to determine the direction and position of the body and the position of the axe. An area of 50 square metres was investigated, and the rest of the human bones, as well as some extra artefacts, were collected. Radiocarbon dating (two separate samples of bone were analysed) 3745±70 bp (right tibia, Ki-9470) and 3710±80 bp (left ulna, Ki-9471) confirmed the initial supposition of Late Neolithic, and actually falls at the very end of this period. The following burial items associated with the inhumation were found: The Late Neolithic Grave at Gyvakarai in Lithuania in the Context of Current Archaeological and Anthropological Knowledge Povilas Tebelškis, R i m a n ta s Jankauskas, 1. A stone axe, boat-shaped, with a shaft-hole, symmetrical, polished, and produced from dark, finegrained stone. The length of the axe is 15 centimetres, the biggest width 5.5 centimetres, the blade width 3.5 centimetres, the shaft-hole diameter 2.3 centimetres, the measurements of the butt 2.8×3.2 centimetres. The precise position in the grave is unknown, according to the words of the initial discoverer, it was located near the head (Fig. 2). 2. A hafted axe, produced from flint of a greyish colour. The height is 6.3 centimetres, the width at the butt 2.3 centimetres, at the blade 3.3 centimetres, maximum breadth 1.2 to 1.3 centimetres. The butt is of a quadrangular shape, 2.2×1.0 centimetres, the blade slightly convex. The precise position in the grave is unknown (Fig. 2). 3. A blade-knife, produced from flint of a greyish colour. The length is 8.6 centimetres, maximum breadth 3.3 centimetres, triangular in cross-section, slightly convex. The sides of the blade are chipped (Fig. 2). 4. A bone (antler?) pin, found among the disturbed bones of the burial. Broken into two pieces. The total length is 12.3 centimetres, the head length 2.8 centimetres, the width 0.46 centimetres, with an oval-shaped knob at one end. The upper part contains a hole (0.52 10 Fig. 3. Hammerheaded pins: 1 Gromovo (Hohenbruch); 2 Bischofsburg (both former East Prussia); 3 Biskupiec (Poland); 4 Chuderice (Czech Republic); 5 Vinelz (Switzerland); 6 Denmark; 7 Novosiolki (Ukraine); 8 Ivachny (Ukraine); 9 Novochernomorye (Ukraine); 10-11 Chanev; 12 Voronkovo (both Russia) Fig. 2. Inventory of the grave BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 4. Grave 3 in the Voronkovo burial ground (Yaroslavl area) and its inventory Fig. 5. Burials of Corded Ware/Boat Axe culture in Lithuania: 1 Meškos galva; 2 Alksnynė; 3 Juodkrantė; 4 Kurmaičiai; 5 Lankupiai; 6 Šakyna; 7 Grinkiškis; 8 Plinkaigalis; 9 Veršvai; 10 Paštuva; 11 Spiginas; 12 Gyvakarai centimetres in diameter). The diameter of the needle near the head is 0.6 to 0.9 centimetres, in the middle 0.7 centimetres, and near the blunt tip 0.7 centimetres. The surface of the pin is polished (Fig. 2). The posi- tion in the grave remains obscure. To our knowledge, this is the first hammer-headed pin found in Lithuania. The closest analogies of such pins (Fig. 3) are in today’s Kaliningrad region and Poland: single pins of Ta b l e 1 . R a d i o c a r b o n d a t e d L i t h u a n i a n L a t e N e o l i t h i c C o r d e d Wa r e / B o a t A x e b u r i a l s Site Sex, age Plinkaigalis 241 F, mature Dating (uncalibrated), years bp 4030±55 (OxA-5928) Calibrated dating (BC ± 1 σ) (Girininkas 2002) 2620-2470 Plinkaigalis 242 F, mature 4280±75 (OxA-5936) 2920-2880 Spiginas 2 Gyvakarai M, 50-55 M, 35-45 4080±50 (GIN-5571) 3745±70 (Ki-9470), 3710±80 (Ki-9471) 2880-2470 2281-2035 2269-1977 Author Butrimas, Kazakevičius 1985; ������ C14 – Ramsey et al 2000 Butrimas, Kazakevičius 1985; ������ C14 – Ramsey et al 2000 Butrimas 1992 11 The Late Neolithic Grave at Gyvakarai in Lithuania in the Context of Current Archaeological and Anthropological Knowledge Povilas Tebelškis, R i m a n ta s Jankauskas, Fig. 6. Skeleton inventory of the Late Neolithic grave in the village of Gyvakarai 12 such a type were found in Gromovo (Hohenbruch), Bischofsburg (Gimbutas 1956) and Biskupiec (Okulicz 1973). Similar pins are known from Denmark (Gimbutas 1956), the Czech Republic, Switzerland (Behrens 1952), Ukraine (Artemenko 1967, Latynin 1967), burials of Fatyanovo culture (Khanevo, Voronkovo) in the Moscow and Yaroslavl areas, where some graves (eg Voronkovo 3) contain a very similar inventory as in our case (a stone axe with a shaft hole, a hafted axe, a blade-knife and a hammer-headed pin, plus two ceramic vessels and a heavily eroded bone instrument) (Fig. 4) (Krainov, Gadziatskaya 1987). All these burials are dated approximately to the middle of the second quarter of the second millennium BC. But the highest number of such hammer-headed pins (over 100) comes from the territory north of the Black Sea and the northern Caucasus. Latynin (1987) considers that these pins (manufactured not from bone, but from elk or deer antlers) should be associated with Yamna (Kurgan, according to Gimbutas) culture and dated to the second half of the third millennium BC. Thus, the hammer-headed pin from Gyvakarai fits well into Anthropological data The osteological analysis of the burial revealed that the bones belonged to one fragmented skeleton (Fig. 6). The bone fragments are well preserved, and were from parts of the skull vault, both maxillas, the right side of the mandible, five cervical, twelve thoracic, five lumbar vertebrae, fragments of ribs, the handle of the sternum, both clavicles and scapulae, humeri, ulnae, the right radius, the right and left hand bones, fragments of both coxal bones, femora, tibias, fibulas and bones of the feet. The skeleton belonged to an adult male (according to the morphology of the pelvic bones and skull), that died at the age of 35 to 45 years (according to the pubic symphysis, cranial suture closure and dental wear). The skull vault was too fragmented for measurement; visually it can be evaluated as hypermorphic, dolichocranic, with an average or even a broad face. The postcranial skeleton is hypermorphic, with marked muscle insertions. The reconstructed stature is 173 to 176 centimetres (Table 2). Such a massive skeleton is typical of other Lithuanian Corded Ware/Boat Axe culture people (see also Table 2). This very specific phenotype of the Corded Ware/ Boat Axe bearers (extreme hypermorphy, pronounced dolichocrany, a high, broad and strongly profiled face, and robust body build), is characteristic of Spiginas 2, Plinkaigalis 241 and 242 individuals, (Česnys 1985a), and similar to those found in Estonia (Mark 1956), Prussia (for summary, see Česnys 1991a, 1991b, 1991c), and later Fatyanovo people from the Central Russian plain. This type has no precedent in this area (Early Neolithic Kretuonas 1B male average stature is only 157.9 cm, and Early and Late Bronze Age from Kirsna-Turlojiškės is 165.8 ���������� cm). Measurement 1 6 1 2 4 5 6 7 7a 10 1 2 3 4 5 5(6) Gyvakarai (M, 35-45) Right Left Clavicula 174 40 Humerus 347 342 64 26 26 20 19 69 69 76 77 51 Radius Spiginas 2 (M, 50-55) Right Left 22 19 66 72 269 253 41 45 19 12 BALTICA 6 The uniqueness of the Gyvakarai find is illustrated by the fact that till now in Lithuania only 12 such supposedly Late Neolithic Corded Ware/Boat Axe burial places with 21 graves are known (Fig. 5) (Butrimas, Kazakevičius 1985; ��������������������������������������� Girininkas 2002)����������������� . Unfortunately, some of them, found in the 19th and first half of the 20th centuries, are known only from descriptions, and a new analysis of these archaeological and anthropological finds, especially radiocarbon dating, is impossible. The most recent and radiocarbon dated ones are from Plinkaigalis and Spiginas, thus Gyvakarai is the fourth and the latest dated Late Neolithic grave in Lithuania (Table 1). Fourteen Neolithic Corded Ware/Boat Axe culture burial places with 44 graves are known in Latvia (Grasis 1996; Girininkas 2002) and 20, with 40 graves, in Estonia (Girininkas 2002). Ta b l e 2 . M e a s u r e m e n t s ( a c c o r d i n g t o M a rtin, Saller 1957) of postcranial skeletons o f t w o N e o l i t h i c C o r d e d Wa r e / B o a t A x e culture male graves ARCHAELOGIA the area of Kurgan culture expansion, and such finds should be considered as (proto) Indo-European. 44 18 13 13 34 Ulna 1 2 3 11 12 13 14 39 15 19 21 29 40 16 20 285 241 38 14 19 21 29 37 Femur 1 2 6 7 8 9 10 18 19 20 478 474 32 8 8a 9 9a 10 10b Stature (TrotterGleser), cm Stature (Nainys), cm 33 36 29 48 28 27 88 34 25 49 49 156 28 28 88 34 26 33 39 22 23 90 32 40 22 23 89 86 Tibia 22 88 79 77 176,3 180,2 172,7 179,0 13 The Late Neolithic Grave at Gyvakarai in Lithuania in the Context of Current Archaeological and Anthropological Knowledge Povilas Tebelškis, R i m a n ta s Jankauskas, Discussion This new Gyvakarai grave forces us to revive the longlasting discussions about the origins of the Indo-Europeans and the Balts that have continued for the last 150 years. At least three hypotheses of Indo-European dispersal in the eastern Baltic, combining mostly archaeological, anthropological and genetic data, should be taken into consideration. Hypothesis 1 (Adams, Otte 1999). Hunter-gatherer colonisation. The primary cause of the Indo-European spread was oscillations in the climate, each of which would have been capable of causing changes in population density. Intense cold and dry phases caused population contraction in some areas and low population densities or almost complete depopulation. A transition to a warmer and moister climate could be followed by exponential expansion. Any population group that acquired both general adaptive cultural traits and technologies enabling its expansion could spread rapidly to areas relatively free of other hunter-gatherer groups and to make a substantial contribution to the gene pool and linguistic legacy of Europe. At least three possible periods of such climate change can be traced. 1a. Late Glacial (c. 15,000–10,000 BP). A gradual colonisation of the ice-free areas of northern Europe during this period occurred, with most migrations taking place during the Late Glacial Bolling (12,800–12,000 BP) and especially Allerod (11,800–11,000 BP) interstadials, when environmental conditions in most of northern Eurasia were particularly mild. Anthropological finds from this period are scarce. However, Late Palaeolithic individuals from both the Last Glacial Maximum and Recession (c. 23,000–15,000 BP) and the Late Glacial in Central and Eastern Europe (Sungir, Dolní Věstonice, Předmosti, Maszycka, Kostenki) almost everywhere are quite uniformly hypermorphic, dolichocranic, with average or wide flattened faces and robust body build (Alekseev 1978; Gochman 1986; Vlček, Klima 1986). We can speculate about the low intensity gene flow between small mobile hunter-gatherer groups because of their small population size and similar modes of subsistence, causing a uniformity of anthropological traits. Adaptations to a cold environment also cannot be excluded. Population genetic data on mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) (Richards et al 1996; Lell, Wallace 2000) points out that the great majority (70%–80%) of modern European lineages are derived even before this period, during the initial colonisation of Europe that started c. 45,000 BP. 1b. The transition to the warm and moist Holocene period after the Younger Dryas cold event (10,800– 10,000 BP) was especially impactful on both the en- 14 vironment and humans. “… changes from a mild climate to full glacial and from glacial back to something similar to the present took place within a few decades. The warming may not even have required more than 20 years” (Lundqvist 1996). This could have caused a complete or almost complete depopulation in northern and Central Europe during the Younger Dryas, and an inflow of population at the subsequent beginning of the Holocene, which also corresponds to the beginning of the Mesolithic. Archaeologically, noticeable changes in more effective technologies (microlithic stone tools, more individual hunting in forests with the bow and arrow, intensive fishing) (Antropologicheskiye tipy, 1988) are noteworthy, as they might have led directly to a population wave. The Mesolithic saw a gradual increase in population size, more settled communities and the development of a more complex social structure and ideology (O’Shea, Zvelebil 1984; Dolukhanov 1997; Zvelebil 1998). Although the Mesolithic should not be treated as a homogeneous entity, classic anthropological data related to the Mesolithic in general noted a certain trend towards gracilisation: hypermassive dolichocranic people with broad flat faces were replaced by more gracile dolichocranic, with narrower and more profiled faces (Vasilyevka 1 and 3) or mesocranic flat-faced people (eg Zveinieki, Oleniy Ostrov, Janislawice). Two Lithuanian (Late) Mesolithic individuals, (Spiginas 4, Donkalnis 4) fit into the range of the second complex (Butrimas 1992; Antanaitis, Jacobs in Ramsey et al 2000). Some investigators have suggested eastern immigrations already in the tenth to eighth millennia BP (Denisova 1975), resulting in metisation with the Mongoloid stem. However, other morphological peculiarities, including odontometry, contradict this opinion (Balčiūnienė et al 1992) and support regionalisation due to the development of more localised mating networks (Petersen 1997). Jacobs (1992) presents strong arguments for the presence of at least two quasi-isolated human mating networks in Mesolithic northern Europe. Population genetic analyses mtDNA of recent populations, to our knowledge, have not been able to trace any significant Mesolithic migrations (Simoni et al 2000), although this statement is being discussed (Torroni et al 2001). 1c. Finally, a less severe cold and dry event corresponding to the “elm decline” in north-west and north central Europe c. 5,200 or 5,000 BP (Behre 1988; Regnell et al 1995) with a subsequent warmer and moister climate period than today. In this case, the hunter-gatherer population wave could be supplemented with a slower one of early farmers. This potential event overlaps partially with Hypothesis 2. 2b. The acculturation model (Zvelebil 1995; Zvelebil 1998). According to this hypothesis, the indigenous forager population acquires farming techniques, along with plant and animal domesticates, mostly by contact through trade and exchange. In this case, spatial distribution of allele frequencies does not predict clines. The demic diffusion model in Europe and the Near East is supported by the data of many gene frequencies – nearly half of the alleles studied show clinal patterns (Barbujani et al 1994), which may reflect regularities related to the origin of agriculture in Europe (Sokal 1991). On the other hand, classic craniometry does not provide data supporting the demic diffusion hypothesis (Harding et al 1990). Recent investigations of mitochondrial and Y chromosome polymorphisms have fuelled further discussion. The data of Richards et al (1996), based on mtDNA, points out that the major extant lineages throughout Europe predate the Neolithic expansion and that the spread of agriculture was accompanied by only a relatively minor component of contemporary Middle East agriculturists (only ~12% in north and north-central Europe), thus supporting the acculturation, or the technology transfer, hypothesis. Data obtained by new methods, taken separately, often brings more confusion, instead of elucidating the problem of Indo-European origins. So, where is the truth, and who is right? In our opinion, both demic diffusion and acculturation may have been in operation, when generalisations are avoided. Zvelebil’s “Neolithic creolisation” hypothesis (1995) is a good synthesis of both. It envisages three stages of Indo-European dispersal in Neolithic Europe: A. The introduction of agro-pastoral farming to Europe from Anatolia, which took place in 8,000–6,000 BP, B. Adoption of farming by indigenous hunter-gatherers via contact-induced language shift c. 6,500–4,000 BP. The farming economy was adopted and modified by the needs of indigenous hunter-gatherer communities. This stage’s duration is uneven chronologically and regionally, lasting some 2,500 years or longer on the panEuropean scale. Zvelebil (1995) argues that the adoption of an Indo-European language as a lingua franca was probably the most common course of events. The language of farmers, as the language of innovation and desired resources, would have enjoyed prestige status. This mode of change probably took place in the circum-Baltic area, as the mapping of the agro-pastoral spread, according to archaeological data, points to very gradual changes in subsistence patterns and suggests similar changes in the gene pool of the first farmers (Zvelebil 1998). Traces of Globular Amphora culture settlements in Lithuania (Brazaitis 2002; Rimantienė 2002) from the middle of the third millennium BC prove the presence of a long-lasting frontier of interaction between agricultural and foraging modes of subsistence. Indeed, ��������������������������������������������� it took about 1,500 years for the agricultural frontier to shift from southwest Lithuania to southern Finland, and an extra 1,000 years to Karelia. The transition itself was also very gradual. The availability phase, when farming is known to foraging groups and there is an exchange of materials and information between foragers and farmers, by presently published data, took about 1,500–2,000 years in western Lithuania, (c. 6,600–4,400 BP), embracing all Early and Middle Neolithic (Daugnora, Girininkas 1996). In eastern Lithuania and central Latvia, the availability phase continued up to 3,800–3,600 BP, including also all the Late Neolithic. The process was indeed diachronic, uneven and long-lasting, and it is no wonder that it causes discussions on chronology among archaeologists. The burial pattern in the Spiginas site supports the concept of a gradual change of cultures: in the Spiginas site, four graves were unearthed in a 420-square-metre area. Two of them are attributed to Late Mesolithic: grave 3 – 7780+/-65 years bp (OxA-5925); grave 4 – 7470+/-60 years bp (GIN-5571), the distance between the graves is one metre. But grave 1’s date is Middle Neolithic, 5020+/-200 years bp (GIN-5569); and grave BALTICA 6 2a. Renfrew’s (1987) language-farming hypothesis. According to this, farming was introduced to Europe from Anatolia by immigrant farmers or demic diffusion some 8,000 years ago, and those farmers, who were the original proto-Indo-European speakers, colonised most of Europe. Major technological advances and the transition to farming caused an increase in production and population growth, which in turn fuelled the need for the colonisation of new habitats. The “wave of advance” model requires only local migratory movement (Cavalli-Sforza et al 1994). This model does not exclude a limited admixture of the indigenous hunter-gatherer population; however, the spread of farming and languages from the Near East should have determined clines in gene pools, defined by languages (Barbujani et al 1994). occurred essentially in the same way as postulated by Renfrew for the whole of Europe. Language dispersal during this stage would occur through replacement by demic diffusion into the cultural provinces of the Balkan Neolithic, the Linear Pottery and the Tripolye cultures. Recent data on mtDNA also proves Neolithic demic diffusion only in southern, but not northern Europe (Simoni et al 2000), as the frequencies of Neolithic haplogroups were lowest in Scandinavia (Lell, Wallace 2000). ARCHAELOGIA Hypothesis 2. Neolithisation. Two hypotheses that relate the Indo-European spread due to this process are known. 15 The Late Neolithic Grave at Gyvakarai in Lithuania in the Context of Current Archaeological and Anthropological Knowledge Povilas Tebelškis, R i m a n ta s Jankauskas, 16 Hypothesis 3. Kurgan culture migrations (Childe 1950; Gimbutas 1980). According to this model, in the midfourth millennium BC, the indigenous Late Neolithic communities in the forest-steppe between the Dnieper and the Volga and the surrounding areas developed horse riding skills and concentrated on the pastoral element of the Neolithic economy. These developments provided an economic rationale for dispersal. The addition of wheeled transport from about 3000 BC increased the mobility of these groups, and created conditions radically different from before. In contact with more sedentary agriculturists, nomadic pastoralists are known to assume the role of the social elite, thus enabling another Indo-European language dispersal stage, the elite dominance stage (Zvelebil 1995). Cultural and linguistic data points to this way of Indo-European dispersal into Central Asia and back to southeast Europe. day’s gene pool (Cavalli-Sforza et al 1994) and largely reflect the Neolithic expansion (Barbujani et al 1995), archaeological and anthropological data often suggests the opposite. A very specific phenotype of Corded Ware/Boat Axe bearers (extreme hypermorphy, pronounced dolichocrany, high, broad and strongly profiled face and robust body build) is characteristic of Spiginas 2, Plinkaigalis 241 and 242 and Gyvakarai individuals. Till now, the immigrant character of Corded Ware/Boat Axe bearers was insufficiently disputed. It is possible to suppose that the newcomers were not so numerous to change the gene pool of the autochthonous population (Butrimas, Česnys 1990). Probably, these nomads often acted as trade intermediators and could be more or less integrated into local communities (Girininkas 2002). In western Lithuania, the hybridisation of local Narva early farmers and foragers and Corded Ware/Boat Axe bearers resulted in the synthetic Baltic Coastal (Pamarių, Rzucewo, Baltic Haff) culture. If the assumption that other Donkalnis graves are indeed Late Neolithic is proven, we will also have an example of the metisation of those people. In eastern Lithuania, pre-Corded Ware traditions were stronger and existed through all the Late Neolithic to the Bronze Age (Rimantienė 1996). No wonder that Girininkas (1996) comes to the conclusion that Baltic culture reaches back to Mesolithic times. Other researchers have also recently disputed the purely immigrant character of Corded Ware/Boat Axe culture and its bearers and propose new models, taking into account the relatively broad dispersal of available radiocarbon dates and stressing the autochthonous developments of subsistence and settlement patterns, society and ideology, and not uniform craniometric features (Lang 1998). In contrast with “classic” genetic markers and mtDNA data, the diversity of the Y chromosome points to a much stronger pre-Indo-European substrate among contemporary Lithuanians and Latvians, thus diminishing the contribution of Kurgan migrations: haplogroup 16 (Tat C allele) frequencies among Lithuanians (47%) and Latvians (32%) are closer to Estonians (37%) and Finns (61%), than to Ukrainians (11%), Poles (4%), Byelorussians (2%) and Czechs (0%) (Rootsi et al 2000; Rosser et al 2000). In the eastern Baltic, these migrants are associated with Corded Ware/Boat Axe Culture and its bearers, and their arrival is dated about 2400 to 2000 BC. This roughly coincides with the beginning of the Late Neolithic, or substitution phase. This would mean that the wave of agricultural spread (by acculturation or demic diffusion) was reached by the second wave, Boat Axe people migrations. Although population genetic data of extant European populations reveals only a slight impact of supposed Kurgan culture migrations in to- This way notwithstanding, long-lasting discussions about the homeland of Indo-Europeans and their emergence in the eastern Baltic still go on. Thus, when a problem has remained unresolved for so long, and all the time new hypotheses are created, it seems that we are dealing with a methodological crisis of serious difficulty (Mallory 1996). It becomes evident that each discipline involved (first linguistics, later archaeology and classic physical anthropology, and recently population genetics, including DNA studies) after the initial 2 – 4080+/-120 bp (GIN-5570), and attributed to Late Neolithic (Butrimas 1992). A comparison of Lithuanian Mesolithic (Spiginas 3 and 4, Donkalnis 4) and Early Neolithic (Kretuonas 1B) skeletal material does not show any dramatic changes in people’s physique (in both cases, mesomorphic mesocranic middle to broad face Europids with short stature and brachymorphic body build) (Česnys 1985b; Balčiūnienė et al 1992). However, odontometric data indicates a slight reduction of the teeth size (in the frame of the same massive Central European type) (Balčiūnienė 1985; Balčiūnienė et al 1992). It suggests that we should not suspect any substantial changes in the gene pool, and the above-mentioned slight dental reduction could be explained by the well-established general processes of gracilisation during the transition to Neolithic (Calcagno, Gibson 1988). This way the majority of current data supposes a cultural rather than demic diffusion of agriculture during at least the Early/ Middle Neolithic, or availability phase, till about 2000 BC. Lithuanian data also supports Zvelebil’s opinion that hunter-gatherers of the coastal and lakeshore zone were better equipped demographically and technologically to interact with the farming communities on an equal basis than the more mobile groups of the continental interior. Concluding remarks Summarising the current empirical facts and hypotheses based on archaeological, linguistic, anthropological and genetic data, we can find support for both migration and acculturation models. All known Corded Ware/Boat Axe burials in Lithuania are singular, contain individuals of adult/mature age, are associated with a particular set of grave goods, and are characterised by a very specific phenotype. These facts would support the immigration hypothesis. A stable isotope analysis of Linearbandkeramik people in Central Europe (5200 to 5000 BC) proves that a number of individuals even 2,000 years earlier could migrate to different locations during their life (Price et al 2001). BALTICA 6 However, some facts would also speak for the acculturation hypothesis: the Spiginas 2 individual was buried in the same site as two Mesolithic and one Middle Neolithic individual, pointing to the use of the same site for inhumations for around 3000 years (!); genetic data of extant populations in Lithuania and Latvia does not contain any evident traces of a substantial inflow of immigrants, and their gene pool has more affinities with the pre-Indo-European substrate. An analysis of zooarchaeological finds (Daugnora, Girininkas 1996) and nutrition based on stable isotope analysis (Antanaitis, Ogrinc 2000) proves a very gradual transition to an agricultural mode of subsistence. Probably, the adoption of the Indo-European language was earlier, via cultural transfer, and Kurgan migrants already found communities with whom they could communicate. However, they left no significant impact on the local anthropological substrate. ARCHAELOGIA stage of enthusiasm later faces these difficulties. First of all, the possibilities and limits of each approach should be clearly realised, and also that they are dealing with relatively independent processes. Concerning archaeology and linguistics, a conflict for primacy between these two fields exists. There is no way in which an archaeological record can be read as a clear expression of a linguistic entity. On the other hand, when linguists wish to place their reconstructions in real time and space, they are at the mercy of other disciplines (Mallory 1996). The same can also be applied to physical anthropology, with its own methodological difficulties (the opposition between typological and evolutionary approaches), as well as for genetic studies of recent populations: we have no reliable means to track the genealogies of individuals back to such a deep past. Many recent gene pools can be affected by later migrations. We have to wait for the analysis of ancient DNA from sufficient samples of Mesolithic/Neolithic populations for more conclusive results. Another major problem would be the as clear as possible elucidation of all cultural patterns and variables: the availability of resources, subsistence strategies, technological skills, exchange patterns, artefact function (both direct and symbolic), the social context of production, status and prestige, mobility patterns, descent, residence and marriage rules, etc (Zvelebil 1998). These cultural variables influence to a great extent the biological characteristics of a population (density, life expectancy, reproduction rates, morbidity and possible vectors of selection, mating networks) that are reflected in the gene pool of the population. This implies an inter-disciplinary approach, and close collaboration between different disciplines. As we have tried to summarise in our report, what is true for one arena, does not necessarily work in another. Thus we have no grounds to reject any of the hypotheses discussed; it just depends which approach, biogenetic, cultural or linguistic, is given priority. Translated by Rimantas Jankauskas References Adams, J., Otte, M. 1999. Did Indo-European Languages Spread Before Farming? In: Current Anthropology 40, 73–77. Alekseev, V.P. 1978. Paleoantropologija zemnogo šara i formirovanije čelovečeskich ras. Paleolit. Moskva, Nauka. Antanaitis, I., Ogrinc, N. 2000. Chemical analysis of bone: stable isotope evidence of the diet of Neolithic and Bronze Age people in Lithuania. Lietuvos aukštųjų mokyklų mokslo darbai. Istorija� XLV, ������������������� Vilnius, 3���� –��� 15. Antropologičeskije tipy drevnego naselenija na territorii SSSR 1988. Zubov A.A. (Ed.). Moskva: Nauka. Artemenko, I.I. 1967. Plemena verchnego i srednego Podneprovja v epochu bronzy. Moskva. Balčiūnienė, I. 1985. Kretuono 1-os gyvenvietės vidurinio neolito kapai. Odontologiniai duomenys. In: Lietuvos archeologija 4, Vilnius, 12–14. Balčiūnienė, I. Česnys, G., Jankauskas, R. 1992. �������� Spigino mezolito kapų kraniometrija, odontologija, osteometrija ir paleopatologija. In: ���� LA 8, Vilnius, 10–16. Barbujani, G., Pilastro, A., Domenico, S. de, Renfrew C. 1994. Genetic Variation in North Africa and Eurasia: Neolithic Demic Diffusion vs. Paleolithic Colonisation. In: Amer. J. Phys. Anthropol. 95, 137–154. Barbujani, G., Sokal, R.R., Oden, N.L. 1995. Indo-European Origins: A Computer-Simulation Test of Five Hypotheses. In: Amer. J. Phys. Anthropol. 96, 109–132. Behre, K.-E. 1988. The Role of Man in European Vegetation History. In: Huntley, B. Webb, T. (Eds.). Vegetation History. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 635–672. Behrens, H., 1952. Ein neolithisches Bechergrab aus Mitteldeutschland mit beinerner Hammer-kopfnadel und Kupfergeräten. In: Jahresschrift für Mitteldeutsche Vorgeschichte. Bd. 36. Halle, S 62. Brazaitis, Dž. 2002. Rutulinių amforų kultūra Lietuvoje – reiškinys ar epizodas? Lietuvos archeologija 23, 29���� –��� 40. Butrimas, A. 1992. Spigino mezolito kapai. LA 8, 4���� –��� 10. 17 The Late Neolithic Grave at Gyvakarai in Lithuania in the Context of Current Archaeological and Anthropological Knowledge Povilas Tebelškis, R i m a n ta s Jankauskas, 18 Butrimas, A. Česnys, G. 1990. ����������������������������� The Emergence of the Pamarių (Baltic Coastal) Group of Indo-Europeans According to Archaeological and Anthropological Data. In: The Journal of Indo-European Studies 18, 359–377. Butrimas, A., Kazakevičius, V. 1985. ����������������������������� Ankstyvieji virvelinės keramikos kultūros kapai Lietuvoje. Archeologiniai tyri–��� 19. mai. In: LA 4, Vilnius, 14���� Calcagno, J.M., Gibson, K.R. 1988. ������������������������ Human dental reduction: Natural selection or or the probable mutation effect. In: Amer. J. Phys. Anthropol. 77, 505–517. Cavalli-Sforza, L., Menozzi, P., Piazza, A. 1994. The History and Geography of Human Genes. Princeton University Press. Childe, V.G. 1950. Prehistoric migrations in Europe. Oslo: Aschelong. Česnys, G. 1985a. Ankstyvieji virvelinės keramikos kultūros kapai Lietuvoje. Antropologiniai tyrimai. In: LA 4, Vilnius, 19–22. Česnys, G. 1985b. Kretuono 1-os gyvenvietės vidurinio neolito kapai. Antropologiniai tyrimai. In: LA 4, Vilnius, 9–13. Česnys, G. 1991a. The Neolithic and Bronze Age man in South-East Baltic Area. 1. An Inventory of recent and old craniological materials from univariate viewpoint. In: Homo 42, 1–20. Česnys, G. 1991b. The Neolithic and Bronze Age man in South-East Baltic Area. 2. Multivariate approach. In: Homo 42, 130–149. Česnys, G. 1991c. The Neolithic and Bronze Age man in South-East Baltic Area. 3. An essay on the genesis of craniological types. In: Homo 42, 232–243. Daugnora, L., Girininkas, A. 1996. Osteoarcheologija Lietuvoje. Vidurinysis ir vėlyvasis holocenas. Vilnius: Savastis. Denisova, R.Ja. 1975. Antropologija drevnich baltov. Riga: Zinatne. Dolukhanov, P.M. 1997. The Pleistocene-Holocene Transition in Northern Eurasia: Environmental Changes and Human Adaptations. In: Quaternary International 41/42, 181–191. Gimbutas, M. 1956. The Prehistory of Eastern Europe. Mesolithik, Neolithik and Copper Age Cultures in Russia and the Baltic Area. Cambridge. Gimbutas, M. 1980. The Kurgan wave migrations (3400– 3200 B.C.) into Europe and the following transformation of culture. In: Journal of Near Eastern Studies 8, 273–315. Girininkas, A. 1996. The Narva culture and the Origin of the Baltic culture. In: Jones-Bley K., Huld M.E. (Eds.). The Indo-Europeanization of Northern Europe. Journal of Indo-European Studies Monograph 17, 42–47. Girininkas, A. 2002. Migraciniai procesai Rytų Pabaltijyje vėlyvajame neolite. Virvelinės keramikos kultūra. In: LA 23, Vilnius, 73–92. Gochman, I.I. 1986. Antropologičeskije osobennosti drevnego naselenija severa jevropeiskoi časti SSSR i puti ich formirovanija. In: Gochman I.I., Kozintsev A.G. (Eds.). Antropologija sovremennogo i drevnego naselenija jevropeiskoi časti SSSR. Leningrad: Nauka. Grasis, N. 1996. Auklas keramikas kultūras apibedījumi Sarkanos un Selgās. In: Zinātniskās atskaites sesijas materiāli par arheologu 1994 un 1995 gada pētījumu rezultātiem. Rīga, 60–61. Guglielmino, C.R., Piazza, A., Menozzi, P., Cavalli-Sforza, L.L. 1990. Uralic Genes in Europe. In: Amer. J. Phys. Anthropol. 83, 57–68. Harding, R.M., Rösing, F.W., Sokal, R.R. 1990. Cranial measurements do not support Neolithization of Europe by demic expansion. In: Homo 40, 45–58. Harris, M. 1997, Culture, People, Nature: an Introduction to General Anthropology, 7th ed. New York e.a.: Longman. Jacobs, K. 1992. Human population differentiation in the peri-Baltic Mesolithic: the odontometrics of Oleneostrovskii mogilnik (Karelia). In: Human Evolution 7, 33–48. Krainov, D.A., Gadziatskaya, O.S. 1987. Fatjanovskaja kul’tura. Jaroslavskoje ���������������������������� povolžje. In: Archeologija SSSR, Moskva. Lang, V. 1998. Some aspects of the Corded Ware Culture east of the Baltic Sea. In: Julku, K., Wiik, K. (Eds.). The Roots of Peoples and Languages of Northern Eurasia I. Turku, 84–104. Latynin, B.A. 1967. Molotočkoobraznyje bulavki, ich atribucija i datirovka. In: Archeologičeskij sbornik Gosudarstvennogo Ermitaža, vyp. 9, Leningrad. Lell, J.T., Wallace, D.C. 2000. The Peopling of Europe from Maternal and Paternal Perspectives. In: Amer. J. Hum. Genet. 67, 1376–1381. Lundqvist, J. 1996. The Younger Dryas Cold Event and its Consequences for Man. In: PACT 90, 71–81. Mallory, J.P. 1996. The Indo-European Homeland Problem: a matter of Time. In: Jones-Bley K., Huld M.E. (Eds.). The Indo-Europeanization of Northern Europe. Journal of Indo-European Studies Monograph 17, 1–22. Mark, K. 1956. Paleoantropologija Estonskoi SSR. ���� In: Trudy –���� 228. in-ta etnografii im. N.N. Miklucho-Maklaja 32, 170����� Martin, R., and Saller, K. 1957. Lehrbuch der Anthropologie. Bd 1. Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer Verlag. O’Shea J., Zvelebil, M. 1984. Oleneostrovski mogilnik: Reconstructing the Social and Economic Organization of Prehistoric Foragers in Northern Russia. ���� In: Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 3, 1���� –��� 40. Okulicz, J. 1973. Pradzieje ziem Pruskich od póżnego paleolitu do VII w.n.e. Wroclaw etc. Petersen, H.C. 1997. A discrimination analysis approach to morphological regionalization in the European Late Mesolithic. In: Anthrop. Anz. 55, 33–42. Price, T.D., Bentley, R.A., Lüning, J., Gronenborn, D., Wahl, J. 2001. Prehistoric human migration in the Linearbandkeramik of Central Europe. In: Antiquity 75, 593–603. Ramsey, C.B., Pettitt, P.B., Hedges, R.E.M., Hodgins, G.W.L., Owen, D.C. 2000. Radiocarbon dates from the Oxford AMS System: Archaeometry datelist 29. Commentary on Lithuanian Stone Age grave dates by I.Antanaitis and K.Jacobs. In: Archaeometry 42(1), 243–254. Regnell, M., Gaillard, M.-J., Bartholin, T.S., Karsten, P. 1995. Reconstruction of Environment and History of Plant Use During the Late Mesolithic (Ertebølle Culture)at the Inland Settlement of Bökeberg III, Southern Sweden. In: Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 4, 67–91. Renfrew, C. 1987. Archaeology and language: the puzzle of Indo-European Origins. London: Jonathan Cape Ltd. Richards, M., Côrte-Real, H., Forster, P., Macaulay, V., Wilkinson-Herbots, H., Demaine, A., Papiha, S., Hedges, R., Baudet, H.-J., Sykes, B. 1996. Paleolithic and Neolithic Lineages in the European Mitochondrial Gene Pool. ���� In: Amer. J. Hum. Genet. 59, 185����� –���� 203. Rimantienė, R. 1996. Akmens amžius Lietuvoje (2nd ed.). ���� Vilnius. Rimantienė, R. 2002. Rutulinių amforų kultūra Vakarų Lietuvoje. In: Lietuvos archeologija ������������������� 23, Vilnius, 41���� –��� 50. Rimantas Jankauskas Department of Anatomy, Histology and Anthropology Faculty of Medicine Vilnius University Čiurlionio 21, LT2009 Vilnius, e-mail: [email protected] Received: 2002 Povilas Tebelškis, Rimantas Jankauskas Santrauka Etnoso ir populiacijos istoriją reikia nagrinėti atsižvelgiant į biogenetinių, materialinės kultūros ir lingvistinių procesų sąveiką. Šiuolaikinė antropologija pabrėžia teorinių modelių svarbą siekiant susiorientuoti įvairių faktų gausybėje. Archeologai, lingvistai ir genetikai neretai linkę pervertinti savo metodų reikšmę ir turimus faktus nagrinėti izoliuotai, nors vis daugiau duomenų liudija, kad ne visada galima nustatyti tiesioginius ryšius tarp biogenetinių procesų ir materialinės kultūros vystymosi, taip pat tarp materialinių ir nematerialinių kultūros pusių. Todėl kiekvienas naujas radinys turi būti nagrinėjamas tokiame plačiame kontekste. Straipsnyje aptariamas unikalus archeologinis ir antropologinis radinys – apardytas vėlyvojo neolito kapas iš Gyvakarų (Kupiškio raj.), aptiktas 2000 m. Radiokarbono datavimas – 3745±70 (dešinysis blauzdikaulis, Ki-9470), 3710±80 (kairysis alkūnkaulis, Ki-9471) – patvirtino vėlyvojo neolito (jo pačios pabaigos) datą. Kape rasti iš tamsios spalvos šlifuoto smulkiagrūdžio akmens pagamintas akmeninis laivinis kovos kirvis, titnaginis įtveriamasis kirvukas, titnaginė skeltė-peilis ir kol kas vienintelis Lietuvoje kaulinis (raginis?) kūjagalvis smeigtukas, analogijų kuriam randama Vidurio Europoje, Fatjanovo kultūros kapinynuose, tačiau didžiausias skaičius – teritorijoje į šiaurę nuo Juodosios jūros ir Šiaurės Prieškaukazėje. Iki pastarojo meto Lietuvoje žinoma 11 vėlyvojo neolito virvelinės keramikos / laivinių kovos kirvių kultūros palaidojimų, iš jų radiokarbonu datuoti 4. Skeletas fragmentiškas, priklausęs 35–45 m. vyrui, kurio kaukolė vizualiai įvertinta (išmatuoti dėl fragmentiškumo nepavyko) kaip hipermorfiška, dolichokraninė, vidutinio pločio ar net plačiu veidu. Postkranijinis skeletas labai masyvus, rekonstruotas ūgis – 173–176 cm. Tokios fenotipo ypatybės būdingos ir kitiems Lietuvos virvelinės keramikos / laivinių kovos kirvių kultūros atstovams (Spiginas 2, Plinkaigalis 241 ir 242), analogijų jam randama Estijoje, Prūsijoje ir Fatjanovo kultūroje. Šis radinys paskatino sugrįžti prie diskusijų apie indoeuropiečių atsiradimą ir plitimą Rytų Baltijos regione. Straipsnyje aptariamos kelios archeologiniais, antropologiniais ir genetiniais duomenimis paremtos hipotezės. Genetikos BALTICA 6 V Ė lyvojo neolito kapas i Š G yvakar Ų dabartinių archeologijos ir antropologijos žinių k o ntekste ARCHAELOGIA Rootsi, S., Kivisild, T., Tambets, K., Adojaan, M., Parik, J., Reidla, M., Metspalu, E., Laos, S., Tolk, H.-V., Villems, R. 2000. On the phylogeographic context of sex-specific genetic markers of Finno-Ugric populations. In: Künnap, A. (Ed.). The Roots of Peoples and Languages of Northern Eurasia II and III. Tartu, 148–164. Rosser, Z.H., Zerjal, T., Hurles, M.E., Adojaan, M., Alavantic, D., Amorim, A., Amos, W., Armenteros, M., Arroyo, E., Barbujani, G., Beckman, G., Beckman, L., Bertranpetit, J., Bosch, E., Bradley, D.G., Brede, G., Cooper, G., CorteReal., H.B.S.M., de Knijf, P., Decorte, R., Dubrova, Y.E., Evgrafov, O., Gilissen, A., Glisic, S., Golge, M., Hill, E.W., Jeziorowska, A., Kalaydjieva, L., Kayser, M., Kivisild, T., Kravchenko, S.A., Krumina, A., Kučinskas, V., Lavinha, J., Livshits, L.A., Malaspina, P., Maria, S., McEalreavey, K., Meitinger, T.A., Mikelsaar, A.-V., Mitchell, R.J., Nafa, K., Nicholson, J., Norby, S., Pandya, A., Parik, J., Patsalis, P.C., Pereira, L., Peterlin, B., Pielberg, G., Prata, M.J., Previdere, C., Roewer, L., Rootsi, S., Rubinsztein, D.C., Saillard, J., Santos, F.R., Stefanescu, G., Sykes, B.C., Tolun, A., Villems, R., Tyler-Smith, C., Jobling, M.A. 2000. Y-Chromosomal Diversity in Europe Is Clinal and Influenced Primarily by Geography, Rather than by Language. In: Amer. J. Hum. Genet. 67 (6), 1526–1543. Simoni, L., Calafell, F., Pettener, D., Bertranpetit, J., Barbujani, G. 2000. Geographic Patterns of mtDNA Diversity in Europe. In: Amer. J. Hum. Genet. 66, 262–278. Sokal, R.R. 1991. The Continental Population Structure of Europe. In: Annual Review of Anthropology 20, 119-140. Torroni, A., Bandelt, H.-J., Macaulay, V., Richards, M., Cruciani, F., Rengo, C., Martinez-Cabrera, V., Villems, R., Kivisild, T., Metspalu, E., Parik, J., Tolk, H.-V., Tambets, K., Forster, P., Karger, B., Francalacci, P., Rudan, P., Janicijevic, B., Rickards, O., Savontaus, M.-L., Huoponen, K., Laitinen, V., Koivumäki, S., Sykes, B., Hickey, E., Novelletto, A., Moral, P., Sellitto, D., Coppa, A., Al-Zaheri, N., Santachiara-Benerecetti, A.S., Semino, O., Scozzari, R. 2001. A Signal, from Human mtDNA, of Postglacial Recolonization in Europe. In: Amer. J. Hum. Genet. 69, 844–852. Vlček, E., Klima, B. 1986. Lovci mamutu z Dolnich Vestonic. Katalog k vystave. Praha. Zvelebil, M. 1995. Indo-European origins and the agricultural transition in Europe. In: Kuna, M., Venclova, N. (Eds.). Whither archaeology? Papers in honour of Evžen Neustupny. Praha: Institute of Archaeology, 173–203. Zvelebil, M. 1998. Agricultural Frontiers, Neolithic Origins, and the Transition to the Farming in the Baltic Basin. In: Zvelebil M., Domanska L., Dennell R. (Eds.). Harvesting the Sea, Farming the Forest. The emergence of Neolithic Societies in the Baltic Region. Sheffield Academic Press, 9–27. 19 The Late Neolithic Grave at Gyvakarai in Lithuania in the Context of Current Archaeological and Anthropological Knowledge Povilas Tebelškis, R i m a n ta s Jankauskas, 20 duomenys (mitochondrinės DNR, perduodamos motinos linija, tyrimai) liudija, kad didžioji dalis Europos gyventojų yra pirmosios kolonizacijos bangos vėlyvojo paleolito pabaigoje palikuonys, o mezolito kolonizacijos po paskutinio ledynmečio reikšmė ginčijama. Neolitizacijai Europoje aiškinti naudojami deminės difuzijos iš Artimųjų Rytų („kylančios bangos“) arba kultūros difuzijos (žemdirbystės kultūros perdavimo) modeliai. Kartu su žemės ūkiu plito ir indoeuropiečių kalbos. Archeologijos ir genetikos duomenų sugretinimas liudija, kad deminė difuzija iš tikrųjų galėjo vykti Pietų Europoje, tačiau Šiaurės Europai tinkamesnis laipsniško kultūros (kartu ir kalbos) perėmimo modelis. Kurganų kultūros antrosios bangos žmonių imigracija, kaip liudija genetikos duomenys, nepaliko žymesnio pėdsako dabartinių visos Europos, taip pat ir Rytų Baltijos regiono žmonių genofonde. Apibendrinant archeologijos, lingvistikos, antropologijos ir genetikos duomenis, galutinės išvados neretai priklauso nuo to, kuriai sričiai – biogenetinei, materialinės kultūros ar kalbos – tyrinėtojas teikia pirmenybę. Jei faktai ištraukiami iš bendro konteksto, galima pasirinkti ir migracijas, ir kultūros perdavimą paremiančių duomenų. Visi iki pastarojo meto Lietuvoje žinomi virvelinės keramikos / laivinių kovos kirvių kultūros kapai yra pavieniai, juose palaidoti suaugę ar brandaus amžiaus žmonės, visuose yra savitos įkapės ir visi pasižymi ypatingu fenotipu – tai paremtų jų imigracijos hipotezę. Savo ruožtu kiti faktai paremia akultūracijos modelį: Spigino kapas Nr. 2 yra greta dviejų mezolito ir vieno vidurinio neolito individų – toje pat vietoje buvo laidojama apie 3000 metų. Dabartinių Lietuvos ir Latvijos gyventojų genofonde iki šiol nerasta to laikotarpio imigracijos pėdsakų – jis artimesnis ikiindoeuropietiškajam substratui. Zooarcheologijos ir stabiliųjų izotopų tyrimų duomenys įrodo labai lėtą perėjimą prie žemdirbystės. Gali būti, kad indoeuropiečių kalba buvo perimta jau anksčiau, ir pavieniai Kurganų kultūros imigrantai jau rado bendruomenes, su kuriomis galėjo bendrauti. Kad ir kaip ten būtų, vietos bioantropologiniame substrate ryškesnio pėdsako jie nepaliko. N e o l i t h i c Ve h i c l e Tr a c k s S u p e rposed by Long-Barrow LA 3, Bernd� ���� Zich F l i n t b e k , N o r t h G e r m a n y Neolithic Vehicle Tracks Superposed by L o ng - B a r r o w L A 3 , F l i ntb e k , N o rt h G e r m an y Bernd� ���� Zich Abstract Out of 71 investigated tumuli in the prehistoric cemetery near Flintbek, long-barrow LA 3 deserves special attention because of its gradual extension in early Neolithic times and its superposition of a vehicle track. Key words: vehicle tracks, long-barrows, megalithic graves, Funnel Beaker Culture, wheeled transportation. In Flintbek, southwest of Kiel, the capital of SchleswigHolstein (north Germany), a Neolithic and Bronze Age cemetery was excavated1 from 1977 to 1996 (Zich 1992b; 1992/93; 1995; 1999a; 1999b; 2005). At least 19 out of about 80 located prehistoric sites could be identified as megalithic graves of Funnel Beaker Culture. They belong to a micro-region of less than 12 square kilometres (Fig. 1). Unfortunately, all megalithic graves in Flintbek were in very bad condition, since they were destroyed during the 19th century. Therefore, their documentation derived mainly from subterraneous traces. On this premise, it was necessary to excavate them completely, which is quite uncommon in the archaeology of megaliths. This method resulted in new ideas on the grave building and burial rites of a megalithic community. Six of the Flintbek sites turned out to be remains of long-barrows2. Special attention is drawn to long-barrow LA 3 (Fig. 2). Its excavation provided excellent information on the gradual growth of a megalithic monument, because more than half a metre of the raised mound had been preserved. In this case, there were better chances to place profiles in line with the monument. The discovery that megalithic and contemporaneous non-megalithic graves coexisted in one and the same long-barrow3 is of great importance. At least four extended dolmen, three Konens Høj-type graves (Madsen 1979), two graves which seemed to contain tree-coffins (Baumsärge), and another grave with an ordinary case-shaped wooden coffin were found. Two more burials in the upper layers had been destroyed by agriculture. Besides the graves, some traces of settlement contexts were discovered. Among several ard-marks, a posthole and three fireplaces, traces were found which were eventually interpreted as vehicle tracks. 22 Northeast of chamber IV, standing out against the glacial soil and covered by the long-barrow mound, we discovered two dark traces, 19.4 metres and 18.2 metres long, which were at points 0.6 metres wide. They ran completely parallel, forming a slight curve (Fig. 3). The average distance between them measured 1.1 to 1.2 metres. West of the traces a single six-metrelong track, only 0.06 metres wide, ran parallel to the others. Its profile was roundish-rectangular. The same width was found in the middle section of the large eastern track. Here the soil changed to sandy ground and for that reason the tracks ran into single grooves, which were also roundish-rectangular in profile. Furthermore, the profiles of the two main traces showed that the transitional soil to the glacial surface was hard and compressed and in some places covered with grey, washed-out sand (Fig. 4). Based on these indications, we concluded that the tracks in Flintbek had been caused by a wheeled vehicle. In our opinion, only a rolling movement can produce such traces. The grey washed-out sand in the grooves indicates that rain had rinsed some earthen material into the tracks. This interpretation is closely linked to the results of the long-barrow’s gradual extension (Fig. 5). Certain stratigrafical evidence suggests the following sequence. The first burial was the Konens Høj-type grave A (Fig. 6), which lay on the Neolithic surface. Its most significant feature is the use of wooden components (Madsen 1979, 301 ff.), shown by remarkable, up to 0.5-metre-deep postholes and some traces of mouldered wood on the longer sides. Its inner floor was covered by a stone pavement. Outside, the wooden construction had been propped up by small supporting stones. The grave contained a thin-butted flint-axe and five transverse arrowheads. The edge of an oval-shaped mound was to be seen, which had been partly raised from the dug-out soil of two adjacent ditches to its left and right (Fig. 2). BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 1. Flintbek, Rendsburg-Eckernförde county (north Germany). Map of the tumulus cemetery Fig. 2. Flintbek, long-barrow LA 3, detailed plan of the excavated area 23 N e o l i t h i c Ve h i c l e Tr a c k s S u p e rposed by Long-Barrow LA 3, Bernd� Zich ���� F l i n t b e k , N o r t h G e r m a n y After grave A, Konens Høj-type grave B was built, almost in the same way as grave A (Fig. 2), but in this case the Neolithic surface was thinner, because the soil had already partly been taken to erect the mound for the older burial. To point out the chronological sequence of grave A and B it is important that the dug-out yellow glacial soil from the neighbouring posthole of grave B was lying at the foot of the mound of grave A. This observation was also made in the schematic view, where the soil material belonging to grave B enclosed the already existing mound (Fig. 5). Another important hint concerning the dating was that on the edge of the tumulus fragments of a late early Neolithic lugged flask were found. The grave itself contained another thinbutted flint-axe. Fig. 3. Flintbek, long-barrow LA 3, vehicle tracks, viewed from WSW Fig. 4. Flintbek, long-barrow LA 3, vehicle tracks in profile, viewed from NE In a third phase the barrow was extended to cover grave C and D (Figs. 2 and 5), which were probably burials in tree-coffins (Baumsärge), as indicated by parallel rows and one oval-shaped end of a series of stones, usually found in Bronze Age tumulus graves4. No remains of the coffin were preserved, but in grave D the silhouette of the buried individual was visible. The grave goods, including a thin-butted flint-axe and eight transverse arrowheads (Fig. 7), suggest that we are dealing with a Funnel Beaker Culture burial. Some useful information concerning the relative-chronological age of the third phase was that the Neolithic surface had been widely removed. This could only have happened in conjunction with the already existing two phases of the barrow. Stratigraphical evidence arose from a profile, which clearly showed that the soil material covering grave C superposed the foot of the neighbouring mound belonging to grave A. Another profile across the third phase of the barrow proved that tree-coffin grave D was younger than grave C. The condition of the soil material showed a trunk dug into this part of the mound. Grave E was also of Konens Høj-type (Figs. 2 and 5). The only difference compared to graves A and B was a layer 24 BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 5. Flintbek, long-barrow LA 3, schematic view of the gradual extension 25 N e o l i t h i c Ve h i c l e Tr a c k s S u p e rposed by Long-Barrow LA 3, Bernd� Zich ���� F l i n t b e k , N o r t h G e r m a n y Extended dolmen chambers I and II were covered by the same kind of soil (Figs. 2 and 5). The barrow’s fifth phase was lined by packedup stones of non-megalithic size. Chronological evidence arose from the fact that the stone line partly overlapped the mound of grave B (Fig. 8) and that the mound of phase V obviously superposed the older phases. Fig. 6. Flintbek, long-barrow LA 3, grave A of Konens Høj-type, with a central pavement and a frame of stones, viewed from WSW Gauta 2006 Fig. 7. Flintbek, long-barrow LA 3, grave goods from grave D (the length of the thin-butted axe is 17 cm) of burnt flint instead of a stone pavement inside the burial chamber. Its relative-chronological age was obvious by the fact that in connection with one of its postholes the dugout glacial soil could be localised at the foot of the existing mound. Within the grave a thin-butted flint-axe and five transverse arrowheads were found. 26 Up to the fifth phase, all burials of long-barrow LA 3 were situated parallel with the barrow. In phase V the first megalithic chambers were built, and the orientation changed to a transverse position. Chamber I revealed some details concerning construction. At first a foundation trench was dug 0.32 metres deep into the subsoil, producing more than four cubic metres of dug-out material, which could be found on the Neolithic surface close around the trench. On its perimeter six orthostates (kerbstones) were placed and supported as required with small stones at their base. Gaps between the pillar-stones were filled in with drywalling, and from the outside the chamber was covered by a layer of clay, as concluded from a remaining 0.2-metre-high collar on the outer base of the chamber. The inner floor was almost trough-shaped, with a burnt layer on the topsoil and covered by a stone pavement with a coating of fired flint. As the stones of the pavement did not show any effects of heat, the firing must have been done from outside the chamber. Grave F had been dug into the mound of phase V (Figs. 2 and 5). For this reason it is obvious that it is younger than dolmens I and II. It contained an ordinary case-shaped wooden coffin and was found between grave B and chamber I. Traces of mouldered wood could be identified especially at the bottom. The Funnel Beaker Culture context is given by another thin-butted flint-axe. However, its age in relation to the following graves is rather uncertain. Extended dolmen is to be seen in connection with phase VI (Figs. 2 and 5). A profile of the destroyed structure showed that its foundation trench hardly reached the glacial soil, which was only possible because it was dug into an already existing mound. This assumption became clearer with another profile of the chamber. A sixth phase of the mound was recognised, which was larger than phase V. It was surrounded by kerbstones, as proven by several traces in the ground. Phase VII of the barrow is represented by an enlargement, which now for the first time grew into its width (Figs. 2 and 5). It was constructed in connection with chamber IV (Fig. 9). The edges were enclosed by large stones, and with this last phase the barrow acquired a total size of 54 by 18 metres. A lugged flask (Fig. 10) was standing in Fig. 8. Flintbek, long-barrow LA 3. Line of stones (phase V; see left) overlapping the mound of grave B (see foreground), viewed from SW Fig. 9. Flintbek, long-barrow LA 3, destroyed chamber IV (phase VII), viewed from NNW situ on the pavement of chamber IV, dating phase VII to the end of the early Neolithic period (Becker 1947, 141–145, 151–156, Fig. 34; Hoika 1990, 211–216, Plate 2). Chamber IV gave further important information. It was built in an unusually large foundation trench which moreover penetrated a natu- The observations concerning the Flintbek long-barrow’s final seventh phase are closely related to the interpretation of the vehicle tracks. As no traces of clay and dug-out material from chamber IV’s unusually large foundation trench were found on the site, the material must have been removed, probably by a cartlike vehicle (Zich 1992) whose wheels caused the traces mentioned above. This idea was supported by the evidence that single tracks were 0.06 metres wide, thus corresponding to the breadth of Neolithic disc-wheels. Because of the large amount of removed soil, we can easily imagine that the vehicle was in use several times, causing Fahrgeleise. Their preservation on the surface of the glacial soil was promoted by the fact of the long-barrow’s growth, because in connection with phases I to VI, most of the Neolithic ground had already been dug off to built up the mound. So the tracks were well preserved, standing out against the yellow to light brown sterile glacial soil. BALTICA 6 Finally, we would like to point out that Flintbek long-barrow LA 3 was built up in seven different phases. Meanwhile, similar results are known from three other long-barrows in Flintbek: also for LA 4, LA 17/171 and LA 37 a gradually extension was proven. ARCHAELOGIA ral clay bed in the subsoil. With a size of 16 square metres and a depth of 0.41 metres, the amount of clay dug out can be estimated at about 6.5 cubic metres. Their immediate relation with the building of dolmen-chamber IV is proven by the fact that the traces only ran to the northeast edge of the foundation trench. On the dolmen chamber’s opposite side no traces were found, although here the conditions for preservation were almost the same. For this reason, we suggest that the vehicle tracks are directly linked to the building of chamber IV. Chamber IV, by stratigraphical evidence belonging to the final building phase, is dated by the already mentioned lugged flask to the end of the early Neolithic period, corresponding with the Fuchs- 27 N e o l i t h i c Ve h i c l e Tr a c k s S u p e rposed by Long-Barrow LA 3, Bernd� Zich ���� F l i n t b e k , N o r t h G e r m a n y rail-shaped traces from Helvesiek, Lower Saxony, lying close to a passage grave (Dehnecke 1979: 469–473, Fig. 7). Very similar traces from Schneverdingen (Lower Saxony), Krautheim and Großbrembach (Thuringia), superposed by burials from Single Grave, Unetician and strata of Urnfield cultures, are known (Möbes 1986: 213, Fig. 1; Voss 1970: 234, Fig. 19, a-b). From Denmark, information on rail-shaped vehicle tracks from Arnitlund near Vojens, found under a Bronze Age tumulus (Aner, Kersten 1984: 90, Abb. 66; Neumann 1958: Figs. 5–6), should be mentioned, although their interpretation does not seem Fig. 10. Flintbek, long-barrow LA 3. Lugged flask (height 19 cm) from chamber IV, to be free of doubt. dating the vehicle tracks berg phase of the northern Funnel Beaker Culture, dating with its climax stage to circa 3550 to 3400 BC (Hoika 1990: 203–207, Table 1). Wheeled transportation5 has been found in connection with Funnel Beaker Culture in northern and middle Europe. Carvings of carriages are known from several orthostates (kerbstones) and a smaller stone of the large megalithic grave of Züschen (Gandert 1964: 43–46, Plate 1, 3–4; Günther 1990: 48–52, Figs. 7–8) and from a roof-stone of the Warberg grave in Hessia (Günther 1990: 39–43, Figs. 3–6); and moreover from a funnel beaker from Bronocice in Poland (Kruk, Milisauskas 1982: Fig. 1, Plate 8). Furthermore, important evidence is given by the hoard from Bytyn in Poland, with its two harnessed oxen of copper (Gandert 1964: 47–51, Plate 2; Pieczynski 1985). Also some wooden disc-wheels and Bohlenwege (plank ways), mainly in Lower Saxony and Holland, dating from Funnel Beaker Culture, are known (Hayen 1989: 33). 28 Last but not least, there are clay models of disc-wheels (Spennemann 1984), the oldest ones from the Balkans (Häussler 1994: 223, Fig. 5), dating to the fourth and fifth millennia BC. These examples give us an idea about vehicles in early Funnel Beaker Culture. In this connection, some other findings, up to now only mentioned in passing, should be considered: the so-called Fahrgeleise. This German term has been used in research papers concerning old ways and roads (Dehnecke 1979). They are known in great numbers, dating from post-medieval and maybe medieval times. Meanwhile, there is some information about Fahrgeleise of even older times: The first was excavated in 1955, the The traces under Flintbek longbarrow LA 3 were doubtless caused by a vehicle, and may be called Fahrgeleise. This can also be proved by comparing them to profiles of recent way or cart marks in the same area, which means in the same quality of soil; whereas it has clearly been shown by experiments that movements of sledges or simple timber trails do not cause comparable traces. Notes (1) The excavations in Flintbek will be published as a monograph. The illustrations in this report can only give some examples of the documentation. In fact, many more profile-lines were cut into the soil to find out numerous details concerning stratigraphical relations. These detailed plans will be discussed in the main publication. Since the monograph will be printed in German, captions and legends differ from the language of the report. The main aspect of the future publication will be the development of a micro-region from Neolithic to Bronze Age times. The excavations were carried out by the Landesamt für Vor- und Frühgeschichte von Schleswig-Holstein (LVF), since 1996 Archäologisches Landesamt Schleswig-Holstein (ALSH); the scientific edition of the results was sponsored by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG). This report is dedicated to D. Stoltenberg (ALSH), who was responsible for the technical leadership of the Flintbek excavations, in recognition of his excellent work. (4) Many similar examples are to be found in catalogues of Bronze Age finds of the northern hemisphere: Aner and Kersten 1973 passim; moreover Zich 2005, 31 ff. (5) For a general view on this subject, see Piggott 1983, Fansa and Burmeister (eds.) 2004, ������������������� Vosteen 1999. References Aner, E., Kersten, K. 1973 passim: Die Funde der älteren Bronzezeit des nordischen Kreises in Dänemark, Schleswig-Holstein und Niedersachsen, Bd. 1����������������� –���������������� 9, 17����������� –���������� 19 (København and Neumünster 1973 passim). Bakker, J.A. 2004: Die neolithischen Wagen im nördlichen Mitteleuropa. In: Fansa, M. Burmeister, St. (edit.), Rad und Wagen. Der Ursprung einer Innovation. Wagen im Vorderen Orient und Europa. Beiheft der Archäologischen Mitteilungen aus Nordwestdeutschland Nr. 40 (2004) 283–294. Becker, C.J. 1947: Mosefundne Lerkar fra Yngre Stenalder. Studier over Tragtbaegerkulturen i Danmark. In: Aarbøger 1947, 1����� –���� 318. Burmeister, S. 2004: Der Wagen im Neolithikum und in der Bronzezeit: Erfindung, Ausbreitung und Funktion der ersten Fahrzeuge. In: Fansa, M. u. Burmeister, St., Rad und Wagen. Der Ursprung einer Innovation. Wagen im Vorderen Orient und Europa. Beiheft der Archäologischen Mitteilungen aus Nordwestdeutschland Nr. 40 (2004) 13���� –��� 40. Dehnecke, D. 1979: Methoden und Ergebnisse der historisch-geographischen und archäologischen Untersuchung und Rekonstruktion mittelalterlicher Verkehrswege. In: Jankuhn, H. u. Wenskus, R. (Hrsg.), Geschichtswissenschaft und Archäologie. Untersuchungen zur Siedlungs-, Wirtschafts- und Kirchengeschichte (Sigmaringen 1979) 433����� –���� 483. Gandert, O.-F. 1964: Zur Frage der Rinderanschirrung im Neolithikum. In: Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz 11, 1964, 34���� –��� 56. Günther, K. 1990: Neolithische Bildzeichen an einem ehemaligen Megalithgrab bei Warberg, Kreis Höxter (Westfalen). In: Germania 68/1, 1990, 39���� –��� 65. Häussler, A. 1994: Archäologische Zeugnisse für Pferd und Wagen in Ost- und Mitteleuropa. In: Hänsel, B. u. Zimmer, St. (Hrsg.), Die Indogermanen und das Pferd. Akten des Internationalen interdisziplinären Kolloquiums Freie Universität Berlin, 1.-3. Juli 1992 (Budapest 1994) 217����� –���� 257. Hayen, H. 1989: Früheste Nachweise des Wagens und die Entwicklung der Transport-Hilfsmittel. Beiträge zur Transportgeschichte. In: Mitteilungen der Berliner Gesellschaft für Anthropologie, Ethnologie und Urgeschichte 10, 1989, 31���� –��� 49. BALTICA 6 (3) Long-barrow LA 3 has already been presented in two preliminary reports of the Flintbek excavations (Zich 1992b: 12, Abb. 4; 1992/93, 23–28, Abb. 8). This, however, has been done in a very early state, discussing the excavation results. The published plans were only meant as a very schematic view to describe the main features of the monument, and may now be replaced by the more detailed ones (see Fig. 3 and Zich 1999a: 387–392, Abb. 12). Hoika, J. 1990: Zum Übergang vom Früh- zum Mittelneolithikum in der Trichterbecherkultur. In: Jankowska, D. (Hrsg.), Die Trichterbecherkultur. Neue Forschungen und Hypothesen 1. Symposium Dymaczewo 1988 (Poznań 1990) 197����� –���� 217. Kruk, J., Milisauskas, S. 1982: Die Wagendarstellung auf einem Trichterbecher aus Bronocice in Polen. In: ���� Archäolo–���� 144. gisches Korrespondenzblatt 12, 1982, 141����� Madsen, T. 1979: Earthern Long Barrows and Timber Structures: Aspects of the Early Neolithic Mortuary Practice in Denmark. ���� In: Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 45, 1979, 301����� –���� 320. Möbes, G. 1986: Urgeschichtliche und mittelalterliche Wagenspuren in den Kreisen Sömmerda und Weimar. In: Ausgrabungen und Funde 31, 1986, 213����� –���� 216. Müller, J. 2004: Zur Innovationsbereitschaft mitteleuropäischer Gesellschaften im 4. vorchristlichen Jahrtausend. In: Fansa, M. u. Burmeister, St. (edit.) Rad und Wagen. Der Ursprung einer Innovation. Wagen im Vorderen Orient und Europa. Beih. Arch. Mitt. NWDeutschland Nr. 40 (2004) 255����� –���� 264. Neumann, H. 1958: Vejspor under bronzealderhøj. In: Haderslev Amts Museum 7, 1958, 24���� –��� 29. Pieczyński, Z. 1985: Uwagi o skarbie miedzianym z Bytynia, woj. poznańskie (Bemerkungen über den kupfernen Hortfund aus Bytyn, Woj. ������������� Poznań). In: Fontes Archaeologici Posnaniensis 34, 1985, 1��� –�� 7. Piggott, S. 1983: The Earliest Wheeled Transport. From the Atlantic Coast to the Caspian Sea (1983). Spennemann, D.R. 1984: Ein tönernes Radmodell aus dem späten Jungneolithikum Süddeutschlands? In: Germania 62/1, 1984, 55���� –��� 61. Voss, K.C. 1970: Überschnittene Wagengeleise im Bereich zweier Grabhügel der Einzelgrabkultur bei Schneverdingen, Kr. Soltau. In: Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte 39, 1970, 230����� –���� 235. Vosteen, M. 1999: Urgeschichtliche Wagen in Mitteleuropa. Eine archäologische und religionswissenschaftliche Untersuchung neolithischer bis hallstattzeitlicher Befunde. In: Freiburger Archäologische Studien 3 (Rahden/Westf. 1999). Zich, B. 1992a: Frühneolithische Karrenspuren aus Flintbek. In: AiD 1992/1, 58. Zich, B. 1992b: Ausgrabungen auf dem stein- und bronzezeitlichen Grabhügelfeld von Flintbek, Kreis RendsburgEckernförde. Ein Vorbericht. In: Archäologische Nachrichten aus Schleswig-Holstein 3, 1992, 6���� –��� 21. Zich, B. 1993: Die Ausgrabungen chronisch gefährdeter Hügelgräber der Stein- und Bronzezeit in Flintbek, Kreis Rendsburg-Eckernförde. Ein Vorbericht. In: Offa 49/50, 1992/93 (1993), 15���� –��� 31. Zich, B. 1995: Drei Jahrtausende Siedelverlauf und Landausbau. In: AiD 1995/2, 6���� –��� 11. Zich, B. 1999a: Flintbek, Kreis Rendsburg-Eckernförde. H.H. Andersen, W. Bauch, K. Bokelmann, I. Clausen, A. Feiler-Kramer, S. Hartz, J. Hoika, H.J. Kühn, H.E. Saggau, C.M. Schirren, B. Zich, Zehnter Arbeitsbericht des Archäologischen Landesamtes Schleswig-Holstein. Grabungsberichte der Jahre 1988-1993. In: Offa 53, 1996 (Neumünster 1999) 386������������������������ –����������������������� 396. 431��������������� –�������������� 436. 438. 445. Zich, B. 1999b: Das Hügelgräberfeld von Flintbek nach zwanzig Ausgrabungsjahren. In: Jahrbuch für das ehemalige Amt Bordesholm, H. 1, 1999, 7���� –��� 58. Zich, B. 2005: Flintbek. In: Aner, E., Kersten, K. u. Willroth, K.-H., Die Funde der älteren Bronzezeit des nordischen ARCHAELOGIA (2) LA 3, 4, 17/171, 37, 137 and 167 29 N e o l i t h i c Ve h i c l e Tr a c k s S u p e rposed by Long-Barrow LA 3, Bernd� Zich ���� F l i n t b e k , N o r t h G e r m a n y Kreises in Dänemark, Schleswig-Holstein und Niedersachsen Bd. XIX, Kreis Rendsburg-Eckernförde (südlich des Nord-Ostsee-Kanals) und die kreisfreien Städte Kiel und Neumünster (Neumünster 2005) 31���� –��� 84. All photographs and plans published with permission of the ALSH Photographs by D. Stoltenberg and L. Herrmannsen. Graphic design by H. Hammon and G. Hagel Bernd Zich Archäologisches Landesmuseum (ALM) Stiftung Schleswig-Holsteinische Landesmuseen Schloss Gottorf D-24837 Schleswig Germany Received: 2006 N e o l i t o la i k o ta r p i o ve ž im o v ė ž ė s p o i lg u o j u F l i ntb e k L A 3 pilkapiu, Š iau r ė s V o kieti j o j e Bernd Zich Santrauka Neolito ir bronzos amžiaus Flintbeko kapinynas, kuris yra į pietryčius nuo Kylio, buvo tyrinėtas nuo 1977 iki 1996 metų. Šešiose Flintbeko gyvenvietėse pavyko aptikti ilgųjų pilkapių liekanų. Megalitinei kultūrai priklausantis LA 3 pilkapis, kuriame aptikta nuosekli laidosenos seka (1–3 pav.), vertas atskiros publikacijos. Be to, po šiuo pilkapiu buvo aptiktos dviejų vežimų paliktos vėžės (4–5 pav.), kurių ilgis buvo 19,4 ir 18,2 m. Atstumas tarp vėžių takų buvo 0,6 m, o vėžių plotis siekė 1,1–1,2 m. Suspaustas dirvožemis po vėžėmis rodo, kad jas galėjo palikti 6 cm pločio diskinis ratas. 30 Įspaustas vėžes padeda datuoti pilkapio konstrukcijos formavimo raida (8 pav.). Ilgajame pilkapyje ankstyviausiu palaidojimu galima laikyti kapą A (9 pav.). Jo įrangoje naudotos medžio konstrukcijos. Antrajam pilkapio įrangos etapui priklausė kapas B, kurio įranga panaši kaip ir kapo A. Trečiajam pilkapio etapui priklauso C ir D kapai, kuriuose mirusieji palaidoti skobtiniuose karstuose. E kapas priklauso ketvirtajam pilkapio įrangos etapui. Jis yra identiškas A ir B kapams. Visi aukščiau tirti kapai buvo orientuoti išilgai ilgojo pilkapio sampilo. Megalitinės kameros I, II įrengtos jau penktajame pilkapio raidos etape. Kameros, kuriose buvo laidojami mirusieji, orientuotos jau skersai ilgojo pilkapio sampilo. F kape aptiktas karstas pagamintas iš storų medinių lentų. Pastarasis kapas buvo įkastas į pilkapio sampilą megalitinių kapų egzistavimo metu. III megalitinė kamera sietina su šeštuoju pilkapio plėtros etapu. IV megalitinė kamera (13 pav.) mirusiajam buvo įrengta šalia ilgojo pilkapio sampilo, todėl pilkapis septintajame raidos etape, kuris priskiriamas Piltuvėlinių taurių kultūros Fuchsbergo etapui (3550 – 3400 BC), buvo praplėstas į plotį. Šiame pilkapio raidos etape, kuris buvo paskutinis, pilkapis tapo 54 m ilgio ir 18 m pločio. Išlikusios vežimo vėžės siejamos su paskutiniu pilkapio įrangos ir plėtros etapu. Su vežimo vėžėmis, kurios išliko po LA 3 pilkapio sampilu, galima sieti ant puodų sienelių, megalitinių statinių akmenyse pavaizduotus vežimus su ratais ar aptiktus medinių ratų fragmentus, kurie datuojami IV– III tūkst. pr. Kr. Algimantas Merkevičius T h e Va š k a i H o a r d T h e Va š k a i H o a r d 32 Algimantas Merkevičius Abstract The article describes the Vaškai hoard, found in the 19th century. The hoard consists of a Mälar-type axe, a shaft-hole axe and a miniature dagger. At present, the Vaškai hoard is kept in the State Historical Museum in Stockholm and can be dated to the beginning of the first milennium BC or the Bronze Age V (Montelius – period IV). Key words: Vaškai hoard, axe, dagger, Lithuania, Stockholm, Bronze Age. Introduction Review of investigations Not many hoards dating from the Bronze Age have been found in Lithuania; therefore, each of them is of particular importance. Archaeological publications refer most commonly to three hoards from the period, found at Pabaliai, Baudėj�������������������������� os������������������������ and Vaškai (Gimbutienė 1985: 62; Grigalavičienė 1980: 4; Grigalavičienė 1995: 155-156, Fig. 90, 177, Fig. 102, 103, etc). Some more hoards may have been found, though. Besides the three hoards mentioned above������������������������� ,������������������������ Puzinas also describes a fourth hoard found in the village of Miežaičiai (Puzinas 1938: 202-204), while Kulikauskas mentions six hoards in Lietuvos archeologijos bruožai (Features of Lithuanian Archaeology). He adds the hoards from Gedminai and the Telšiai and Raseiniai areas, though he dates the Pabaliai and Baudėjai hoards to the Early Iron Age (LAB 1961: 107). As most of the hoards were found before the Second World War, and the circumstances are rather ambiguous, the number of hoards is not clear either. Some of the finds might have come from deteriorated burials, or artificially arranged collections of finds, rather than true hoards, due to which the number of hoards indicated by archaeological publications differs. The earliest known reference to this hoard can be found in Carl von Schmith’s Necrolituanica, written in 1863. Drawings of finds from the hoard are presented on page 22, Fig. 129, 131 and 132 (Fig. 1). This means that the hoard was found before 1863, but we know almost nothing about the circumstances. Later, in 1880, the manuscript of Necrolituanica and some finds from von Schmith’s collection, as well as finds from the Konstantinovo-Vaškai hoard, were bought in Kaunas by Montelius (Janse 1929: 176; Nerman 1933: 238; Lamm 1997: 12). At present, finds from the Vaškai hoard are kept at the State Historical Museum in Stockholm (Nos. 6565:14–16). The museum has filled out find cards for the Vaškai hoard, which, in line with Necrolituanica, indicate that the hoard was found in the locality of Konstantinovo, Panevėžys “Kr.” The hoard was referred to as Konstantinovo or Constantinovo by scholars in the first half of the 20th century, while Lithuanian archaeologists, starting with Puzinas, call it the Vaškai hoard. It is most likely that the locality of Konstantinovo had already disappeared before the Second World War. The present article describes the Vaškai hoard, found in the 19th century. The circumstances of the discovery of this hoard are even more obscure than in the case of the other hoards. Some scholars even doubt if it is a true hoard, as they suggest rather different dates for some of the finds (LAB 1961: 107). Puzinas is even more categorical. He says that “probably we are dealing with individual finds, and not a hoard” (Puzinas 1938: 202). The fact that the shaft-hole axe should be attributed to an earlier period was also pointed out by Gimbutienė (Gimbutienė 1985: 62). If this is a hoard, the important thing is to know how it turned up in northern Lithuania. The present article reviews a number of problems related to this hoard. The K(C)onstantinovo-Vaškai hoard has been mentioned by a number of archaeologists, but these are mainly short presentations of information. Usually, they include a description of the composition of the hoard, its chronology and the place of storage. In his short article Janse describes simply the Mälar-type axe and the circumstances under which the hoard appeared in Stockholm (Janse 1929: 176-177�������������������� , Fig. 73����������� ). A short description of the hoard, accompanied by a photograph of the finds, was published by Ebert. He also discusses the dating of finds in the hoard. He attributes the Mälar-type axe to period IV, and shifts the dating of the shaft-hole axe to 1800–1200 BC with reference to Tallgren��������������������������������������������������� (Ebert 1929: 7, Fig. 4: d, e, f)������������������ . A short description of the Konstantinovo hoard and the circumstances BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 2. The Vaškai hoard, kept at the Stockholm State Historical Museum Fig. 1. Drawings of the artefacts in the KonstantinovoVaškai hoard, from Carl von Schmith’s Necrolituanica: 129 the shaft-hole axe; 131 the Mälar-type axe; 132 the miniature dagger of its discovery was also published by Nerman (Nerman 1933: 238, Fig. 1–2). He attributes the hoard to period IV, and claims that it comes from one single pot (���������������������������������������������������� Nerman 1933: ��������������������������������������������� 238). Ebert also claims that the hoard was found at Konstantinovo, Kr., Panevėžys (Ebert 1929: 7). Puzinas, however, indicates that the hoard was found at Vaškai (Biržai county), in a clay pot. He attributes the Mälar-type axe to period IV, and derives it from central Sweden, while the shaft-hole axe is attributed to a much earlier period (Puzinas 1938: 202). Subsequent archaeological publications already mention Vaškai instead of the locality of Konstantinovo. The hoard is also mentioned in articles and books by Grigalavičienë. In Lietuvos TSR archeologijos atlasas she attributes the hoard to the Bronze Age period IVV, and claims that all the artefacts were found in one clay pot. (Grigalavičienė 1974: 208, 221). She also describes the hoard in a book on the earliest metal artefacts found in Lithuania, which was published in Russian (Grigalavičienė, Merkevičius 1980: 4, 39, 43, 46, 6869), as well as a further book on the Bronze and Early Iron ages in Lithuania (Grigalavičienė 1995: 155, 159, 162, Fig. 89:1, 90), which briefly mentions the finds from the Vaškai hoard. She dates the Mälar-type axe from the Vaškai hoard to period IV. Grigalavičienė has discussed the distribution and chronological placement of Mälar-type axes, as well as the typology, chronology and distribution of the shaft-hole axe (��������������� Grigalavičienė 1995: 155–156, 159, Fig. 89:1, 90). The Vaškai hoard is also mentioned by Gimbutienė (Gimbutienė 1985: 62). She underlines that the shaft-hole axe should be dated to a period earlier than that of the socketed axe, and therefore questions the contemporaneity of the axe (��������������������������������������������������� Gimbutienė 1985: ���������������������������������������� 62). The Vaškai hoard is also mentioned by Okulicz (Okulicz 1976: 103, 143, Fig. 36:1) and Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė (Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė 1986: 36). Composition of the hoard The hoard consists of three finds, namely a Mälar-type axe, a shaft-hole axe (Galich type) and a miniature dagger (Fig. ����������������������������������������������������� 2) (Puzinas �������������������������������������������� 1938: 202, etc). All the artefacts are kept at the State Historical Museum in Stockholm (Nos. 6565:14-16). The Mälar-type axe (SHM 6565:15) has been cleaned and conserved, it is in excellent condition, and light yellow in colour. The lower part of the socket displays five horizontal rollers. One roller stretches from the top of the socket to the beginning of the blade. Two further rollers run from the bottom of the horizontal rollers to the beginning of the blade. The overall length of the axe is 12.2 centimetres. The length of the socket until the horizontal notches is 3.5 centimetres, the diameter of the socket 2.9 centimetres, and the thickness of the socket 0.3 centimetres. The blade is 5.5 centimetres long and 4.6 centimetres wide. The loop is 1.3������� centi������ metres long and 0.4������������������� centimetres thick. ������������������ 33 T h e Va š k a i H o a r d Algimantas Merkevičius The shaft-hole axe (SHM 6565:14) has been cleaned and conserved, it is in excellent condition, and of a reddish yellow “copper” colour. The composition of the metal of this axe is very different to that of the Mälar axe, as indicated by the dissimilarity of their colours. The overall length of the axe is 13 centimetres. The blade is slightly bent, ten centimetres long, 5.3 centimetres wide and 0.6 centimetres thick. The width of the blade at the socket is 3.8 centimetres. The thickness of the blade at the socket is 2.3 centimetres. The external diameter of the socket is 4.3 centimetres, the height of the socket is three centimetres. The �������������������������������������������������� miniature dagger ���������������������������������������� (SHM 6565:16) is partly cleaned, and dark green in colour. It�������������������������� has a flat pommel on the handle, a piece of which������������������������������� is broken. The overall length of the dagger is eight centimetres. The length of the blade is 5.7 centimetres. The width of the blade at the handle is 1.3 centimetres, and the thickness of the blade at the handle 0.3 centimetres. The handle with the pommel is 2.3 centimetres long, 0.5 centimetres wide, and 0.3 centimetres thick. Is it really a hoard? As mentioned above, archaeologists in the first half of the 20th century, as well as later authors who referred to them, claim that the hoard was found in one pot. Ebert writes that a shaft-hole axe, attributable to the Galich type according to Tallgren, a Mälar-type axe and a miniature dagger were found in a pot at Konstantinovo, Kr., Panevėžys (Ebert 1929: 7). Nerman holds a similar opinion that all the artefacts mentioned above were found in one pot (Nerman 1933: 238) or “in a clay pot” (Puzinas 1938: 202). Lithuanian postwar archaeological literature also indicates that the hoard was found “in a pot from the Neolithic period” (LAB 1961: 107), or that “all the items were found in a clay pot” (LAA 1974: 221). If we rely on the information from all the authors who are mentioned above, claiming that all the artefacts were found in one clay pot, the indisputable conclusion is that all three artefacts mentioned above come from one and the same hoard. The question, however, arises as to the arguments for such statements. The authors mentioned probably refer to Montelius himself, who had received the information from von Schmith, who must have known the circumstances of the discovery of these artefacts. Some uncertainty exists only due to the fact that most archaeologists believe the shaft-hole axe to be much earlier than the other two finds. If that is true, we can also question whether the information that all the artefacts were found in a single pot is correct. 34 The chronology and origin of the artefacts from the hoard The majority of scholars attribute the KonstantinovoVaškai Mälar-type axe to Montelius’ Bronze Age period IV (Nerman 1933: 238; Ebert 1929: 7; Puzinas 1938: 202; Grigalavičienė 1995: 155), and Janse to period IV-V (Janse 1929: 176). Most scholars attribute the Vaškai hoard Mälar-type axe to the area of central Sweden (Janse 1929: 176; Puzinas 1938: 202; Okulicz 1976: 103; Gimbutienė 1985: 62; Grigalavičienė 1995: 155), though Mälar axes of a similar type were cast in Lithuania as well. Excavations at the Narkűnai hillfort have yielded as many as 25 fragments of casting moulds used to manufacture Mälar-type bronze axes (Fig. 3) �������������������������������������������� (Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė 1986: 33, Fig. 49). Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė has defined on the basis of the casting moulds that these axes used to be 8.5 to 9.5 centimetres long, their socket was 2.5 to three centimetres in diameter, and the blade 3.5 centimetres wide. She believes that these axes are very close to the Swedish Mälar axes. According to her, Mälar axes were basically used in the seventh to eighth centuries BC (ibid. 34, 36). Miniature daggers seem not to have been manufactured in Lithuania. Four specimens have been found, including three chance finds and one from the Vaškai hoard. These artefacts are characteristic of Scandinavia, and present imitations of swords. Grigalavičienė attributes the Vaškai dagger to Bronze Age period IV, and believes that the dagger originates from Scandinavia (Grigalavičienė, Merkevičius 1980: 46; Grigalavičienė 1995: 162). A dagger comparable to the Vaškai one has been found on Gotland������������������������������� (Fig�������������������������� . 4). It is attributed to Montelius’ period IV (Montelius 1986: Fig. 75). Thus, the Mälar axe and the miniature dagger are contemporaneous artefacts originating in central Sweden and Gotland. The contemporaneity of the Mälar-type axe and the dagger is�������������� indisputable. Scholars have had especially many reservations regarding the dating of the shaft-hole axe and the circumstances of its appearance in Lithuania. With reference to Tallgren, Ebert dates the shaft-hole axe to the period from 1800 to 1200 BC (Ebert 1929: 7). Puzinas also claims that the shaft-hole axe might be much earlier than the Mälar-type axe (Puzinas 1938: 202). Gimbutienė identifies this axe as an east Russian-type shaft-hole axe, and dates it to a period earlier than that of the Mälar-type axe, as a result of which she doubts the contemporaneity of the hoard (Gimbutienė 1985: 62). Grigalavičienė attributes the shaft-hole axe to the Catacomb culture and dates it to the 15th or 14th century BC (Grigalavičienė, Merkevičius 1980: 43; Grigalavičienë 1995: 159). This type of axe is�������� charac������� BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 3. A casting mould from the Narkūnai hill-fort, according to A. Luchtanas, 1981, Fig. 6 teristic of the Abashevo culture dating from the second and third quarters of the second millennium BC. Axes similar to the Vaškai specimen are typical of the late stage of this culture (Priachin, Chalikov 1987: 124125, Fig. 60b, Fig. 63:12). They are also known in the Srubnaya culture (Klochko 1993: 58), as well as other cultures of southeast������������������������������� , northeast�������������������� Europe and the Caucasus, in the basins of the Dniester, Bug, Volga, Don and adjacent areas, and dated to the second millennium BC. These axes disappeared at the end of the Bronze Age, and were already completely out of use during the Hallstatt period (Klochko 1993: 17). Many scholars call the shaft-hole axe from Vaškai a Galich-type axe, with reference to the Galich hoard found in 1835, not far from Kostroma, northeast of Moscow (Tallgren 1926: Abb. 77:1-18; Gimbutas 1965: 110-111, Fig. 73, 74). It is believed to have been discovered in a pot containing five copper idols of a human form, one small animal figurine, one plate terminating in animal heads, two daggers with handles of a snake-like form and with a small snake depicted on the handle, two small, flat, double-edged “knife-daggers” with backward-curved points, 11 round copper plates, one double spiral made of copper wire, three concave bracelets, small beads of copper, silver buttons, and silver beads, etc (Gimbutas 1965: 110). In terms of typology, the shaft-hole axe from the Galich hoard and the shaft-hole axe from the Vaškai hoard are not identical; therefore, the interpretation of the Vaškai shaft-hole axe as a Galich-type axe is not ����������������������������������������������� very ������������������������������������������ accurate.��������������������������������� A very similar axe was found in the Nikopol hoard (Fig. 5) (Müller-Karpe 1980: Fig. 534:B1).� Shaft-hole axes disappear at the beginning of the first millennium BC. The end of the late distribution period of these axes coincides with the beginning of the distribution period of Mälar-type axes and miniature daggers, which means that the chronological discrepancy of these finds is not as big as it might seem at first glance and as some archaeologists maintain. In terms of typology, the Vaškai hoard shaft-hole axe can be dated to the end of the second millennium BC or to the beginning of the first millennium BC. This dating of the shaft-hole axe does not conflict with the hypothesis that artefacts of the Vaškai hoard are more or less contemporaneous. The shaft-hole axe could possibly have been placed in the clay pot at the same time as the Mälar-type axe and the miniature dagger. The opinion that the pot found at Vaškai really contained a hoard is indirectly supported by the fact that at that time it was customary to deposit and hide artefacts in clay pots. The Galich hoard, as well as some other hoards, were also found in one Fig. 4. pot, as was the case at Vaškai. A miniature This is an indirect verification dagger of the authenticity of the hoard. from Appearance of the hoard in Lithuania The appearance of the Vaškai hoard in Lithuania is an intricate problem. As the artefacts of the hoard are not very remote from Gotland, according to O. Montelius, 1986, Fig. 75 (no scale) 35 T h e Va š k a i H o a r d Algimantas Merkevičius Fig. 5. A shafthole axe from the Nikopol hoard, according to H. Müller-Karpe, 1980, Fig. 534:B1. (no scale) locations along this trade route, including the VolgaKama area, Lithuania, etc. The latter artefact became a symbol of this trade route. Residents of central Scandinavia, who had a lot of good ships, were probably the most active players on this trade route. Hundreds of images of their ships carved on rocks are found in central Sweden (Coles 2000). These travellers spread Scandinavian-type artefacts, such as axes, daggers and others, which were taken over and consequently even manufactured by other residents on the trade route. The skills, customs and ideas spread as well. The shaft-hole axes, which were widespread in the northeast of Russia, were included into the exchange system of the route, though at the time when the trade route functioned the use of shaft-hole axes was coming to an end, due to which their distribution failed, and only a few examples of these artefacts are known. All three artefacts of the Vaškai hoard came to Lithuania via the trade route which ran between central Sweden, Gotland and northeast Russia at the beginning of the first millennium BC.��������������������������� The miniature dagger, and possibly even the Mälar-type axe, came from central Sweden, and the shaft-hole axe from northeast Russia. These artefacts belonged to an exceptional person, and were either hidden in the ground or sacrificed.� Final conclusions 36 a chronological point of view, they could have been used at the same time and could have turned up in one pot. All the artefacts represent luxury articles of the period. The Mälar-type axe could be attributed to local manufacture. A production point of these axes has been found on the Narkūnai hill-fort (Kulikauskienė 1986: 33-36, Fig. 49), though shaft-hole axes and miniature daggers were apparently not manufactured in Lithuania. According to Gimbutienė, the finds in the Vaškai hoard testify to relations with the north and the east (Gimbutienė 1985: 62). In the Bronze Age an amber trade route existed between the eastern Baltic area and the middle Volga ������������������������������������� (Fig. 6) ���������������������������� (Gimbutienė 1985: Fig. 25). Besides amber, the route was used for the exchange of non-ferrous metals and manufactured articles. This is testified to by finds of Mälar-type axes and other artefacts all the way along the zone between central Sweden and the middle Volga. Contacts between the residents of various regions located close to this route were long-lasting and extensive. Artefacts from different regions were traded on this route. The manufacture of some artefacts, such as the Mälar-type axe, which originates in central Scandinavia, started at various The Vaškai hoard, containing a Mälar-type axe, a shafthole axe and a miniature dagger, was found under obscure circumstances before 1863, turned up somehow in the collection of Carl von Schmith, was purchased by Montelius in 1880, and donated to the Royal Academy of History and Letters in Stockholm. At present, the hoard is kept at the State Historical Museum in Stockholm. The circumstances of the discovery of the hoard are not known, which raises the question, is it really a hoard? Nevertheless, our investigation leads us to the opinion that it is a hoard, whose artefacts were found in the same clay pot. Mälar-type axes originate in central Sweden. They were manufactured and widespread in Scandinavia, the east Baltic region and northeast Russia. These axes are dated to the Bronze Age, Montelius’ period IV-V. Miniature daggers comparable to the example found at Vaškai are also attributed to artefacts from central Sweden and Gotland, and are dated to the Bronze Age, Montelius’ period IV. Shaft-hole axes were widespread between south������������� ������������������ east Russia, Ukraine, �������������������������� the Caucasus and northeast Russia. These are dated to the second millennium BC. They disappeared at the beginning of the first millennium BC. BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 6. Amber trade routes in the Bronze Age, according to M. Gimbutienė, 1985, Fig. 25 The Vaškai hoard is a hoard of prestigious artefacts which can be dated to the beginning of the first millennium BC or the Bronze Age, Montelius’ period IV. The Vaškai hoard is a product of the trade route which operated between central Sweden, Gotland, the east Baltic region and northeast Russia (the middle Volga) in the first half of the first millennium BC. Translated by Dalė Merkevičienė Abbreviations LAA – Lietuvos TSR archeologijos atlasas. 1. 1974. Vilnius LAB – Kulikauskas P., Kulikauskienė R., Tautavičius A. Lietuvos archeologijos bruožai. 1961. Vilnius References Coles, J. 2000. Patterns in a rocky land: Rock carvings in south-western Uppland, Sweden. In: Aun 27. Volume 1. Ebert, M. 1929. Reallexikon der vorgeschichte. ��� 13. Gimbutienė, M. 1985. Baltai priešistoriniais laikais. Vilnius. Gimbutas, M. 1965. Bronze Age Cultures in Central and Eastern Europe. Paris. The Hague. London. Grigalavičienė, E. 1974. Žalvario amžiaus paminklai ir radiniai. In: Lietuvos TSR archeologijos atlasas. Akmens ir žalvario amžiaus paminklai. 1. Vilnius. Grigalavičienė, E., Merkevičius A. 1980. Drevneišie metaličeskije izdelija v Litve. Vilnius. Grigalavičienė, E. 1995. Žalvario ir ankstyvasis geležies amžius Lietuvoje. Vilnius. Janse, O. 1929. ������������������������������������������ En Lithauen funnen brons-celt av s. k. Malardalstyp. In: Forvännen. 24. Klochko, V. 1993. Weapons ������������������������������������������ of the tribes of the northern Pontic zone in the 16th-10th centuries B.C. In: Baltic-Pontic studies 1. Kulikauskas P., Kulikauskienė R., Tautavičius A. 1961. Lietuvos archeologijos bruožai. Vilnius. Lamm, J. P. 1997. Carl von Schmith and his Necrolituanica. In: Archeologia Baltica. 2. Luchtanas, A. 1981. Žalvario apdirbimas ankstyvuosiuose rytų Lietuvos piliakalniuose. In: Lietuvos archeologija. 2, Vilnius. Montelius, O. 1986. Dating in the Bronze Age with special reference to Scandinavia. ���������� Stockholm. Müller-Karpe, H. 1980. Handbuch der vorgeschichte. Bronzezeit. 4/3. München. Nerman, B. 1933. Miscellanea. ����������������� In: Acta Archaeologica. �� 4. Okulicz, L. 1976. Osadnictwo strefy wschodniobaltyckiej w I tysiącleciu przed naszą erą. Wroclaw. Warszawa. Krakow. Gdansk. Priachin, A., Chalikov, A. 1987. Abashevskaja kultūra. ���� Epocha bronzy lesnoj polosy SSSR. In: Archeologija SSSR. Moskva. Puzinas, J. 1938. Naujausių proistorinių tyrinėjimų duomenys (1918–1938 metų Lietuvos proistorinių tyrinėjimų apžvalga). In: Senovė. T. 4, Kaunas. Tallgren, A.M. 1926. Eurasia septentrionalis antiqua. 2. Tallgren, A.M. 1937. The Arctic Bronze Age in Europe. In: Eurasia Septentrionalis Antiqua, 11. Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė, R. 1986. Narkūnų didžiojo piliakalnio tyrinėjimų rezultatai (apatinis kultūrinis sluoksnis). In: Lietuvos archeologija, 5, Vilnius. Algimantas Merkevičius Received: 2002 Department of Archaeology Faculty of History Vilnius University Universiteto g. 7, LT-01513, Vilnius, Lithuania e-mail: [email protected] ������������������������������� 37 Algimantas Merkevičius T h e Va š k a i H o a r d Va š k ų lobis ALGIMANTAS MERKEVIČIUS Santrauka L������������������������������������������������� ietuvoje rasta nedaug žalvario amžiumi datuojamų lobių, todėl kiekvienas jų yra ypač svarbus. Straipsnyje aptariamas Vaškų lobis, rastas XIX a. Jo radimo aplinkybės labai neaiškios. Dalis autorių abejoja, ar tai lobis, nes pavieniai radiniai gana skirtingai datuojami. Ankstyviausias žinomas šio lobio paminėjimas yra Carlo von Schmitho „Necrolithuanicoje“, parašytoje 1863 m. Taigi lobis buvo rastas dar prieš 1863 metus ir apie jo radimo aplinkybes beveik nieko nežinome. Šiuo metu Vaškų lobio radiniai saugomi Valstybės istorijos muziejuje Stockholme (inventoriaus Nr. 6565:14-16). Vaškų-Konstantinovo lobį yra minėję nemaža archeologų, tačiau tai daugiausia trumpos informacijos apie jį. Dažniausiai aprašoma lobio sudėtis, jo chronologija ir lobio saugojimo vieta. Lobį sudaro 3 dirbiniai: Meliaro tipo kirvis, (Haličo tipo) pentinis kirvis ir miniatiūrinis durklas. Meliaro kirvis (6565:15) yra apvalytas, konservuotas, labai geros būklės, šviesiai geltonos spalvos. Su ąsele. Įmovos apatinėje dalyje yra penki horizontalūs voleliai. Vienas volelis eina nuo įmovos viršaus iki ašmenų pradžios. Dar du voleliai išlieti nuo horizontalių volelių apačios iki ašmenų pradžios. Kirvio bendras ilgis – 12,2 cm. Įmovos ilgis iki horizontalių rumbelių – 3,5 cm, įmovos skersmuo – 2,9 cm, įmovos storis – 0,3 cm. Ašmenų ilgis – 5,5 cm, ašmenų plotis – 4,6 cm Ąselės ilgis – 1,3 cm, ąselės storis – 0,4 cm. Pentinis kirvis (6565:14) yra apvalytas, konservuotas, labai geros būklės, rausvai gelsvos, „varinės“ spalvos. Šio kirvio metalo sudėtis gerokai skiriasi nuo Meliaro kirvio. Pentiniame kirvyje daugiau vario ir mažiau kitų spalvotųjų metalų. Bendras kirvio ilgis – 13 cm. Ašmenys truputį lenkti, 10 cm ilgio ir 5,3 cm pločio. Ašmenų plotis ties įmova – 3,8 cm. Ašmenų storis – 0,6 cm. Ašmenų storis ties įmova – 2,3 cm. Įmovos išorinis skersmuo – 4,3 cm, įmovos aukštis – 3 cm. Miniatiūrinis durklas (6565:16) yra truputį apvalytas, tamsiai žalios spalvos. Durklo rankena yra su nedidele plokščia buožele, kuri yra su dviem nedidelėmis skylutėmis. Dalis buoželės nulūžusi. Bendras durklo ilgis – 8 cm. Ašmenų ilgis – 5,7 cm. Ašmenų plotis ties rankena – 1,3 cm, ašmenų storis ties rankena – 0,3 cm. Rankenos ilgis su buožele – 2,3 cm, plotis – 0,5 cm, storis – 0,3 cm. 38 Vaškų lobio atsiradimas Lietuvoje yra sunkiai išsprendžiama problema. Kadangi chronologiškai lobio dirbiniai nėra tolimi, jie vienu laiku galėjo būti naudojami ir vienu metu atsirasti Lietuvoje bei sudėti į vieną puodą. Visi dirbiniai – to meto prabangos daiktai. Meliaro kirvis galėjo būti ir vietoje gamintas, nes Narkūnų piliakalnyje rasta šių kirvių gamybos vieta, tačiau pentiniai kirviai ir miniatiūriniai durklai Lietuvoje greičiausiai nebuvo gaminami. Visi trys Vaškų lobio dirbiniai atkeliavo į Lietuvą I tūkst. pr. Kr. pradžioje funkcionavusiu prekybos keliu tarp Centrinės Švedijos, Gotlando, Rytų Baltijos regiono ir Šiaurės rytų Rusijos. Meliaro tipo kirvis ir miniatiūrinis durklas buvo atgabenti iš Centrinės Švedijos, o pentinis kirvis – iš Šiaurės rytų Rusijos. Šie prestižiniai, mažai Lietuvoje naudoti dirbiniai buvo skirti išskirtiniam asmeniui ir buvo arba saugomi užkasti žemėje, arba galbūt net paaukoti. Sebastian Brather Zwischen „Fluchtburg“ und „Herrensitz“ Sozialgeschichtliche Interpretationen frühund hochmittelalterlicher Burgwälle in Ostmitteleuropa Z w is c h e n „ F l u c h t b u r g “ u n d „ H e r r e n si t z “ S ozi a l g e s c hi c h t l i c h e I n t e r p r e tat io n e n f r ü h - u n d ho c h m i t t e l a lt e r l i c h e r B u r g w ä l l e i n O s t m i t t e l e u r o pa Sebastian Brather Abstract Die Diskussionen um die Ursachen des frühmittelalaterlichen Burgenbaus im östlichen Mitteleuropa und um die Funktionen der Befestigungen dauern an. Die steigende Zahl der Jahrringdaten gestattet neue und immer detailliertere Einblicke. Key words: Burgwälle, Ostmitteleuropa, Mittelalter, Dendrodaten, Sozialstrukturen. 1 . Vo n d e r „ F l u c h t b u r g “ z u m „Herrensitz“? Burgwälle gelten als Charakteristikum des früh- und hochmittelalterlichen Osteuropa. Ihre große Zahl ließ diese Gebiete den Normannen als gardarike („Burgenland“) erscheinen. Im heutigen Ostmitteleuropa wird ihre Zahl auf etwa 3000 geschätzt (Abb. 1): 700 in Deutschland, 2000 im heutigen Polen, 200 in Mähren und der Slowakei, 120 in Böhmen (Herrmann 1976:111). Aufgrund der großen Zahl, der mitunter „monumentalen“ Reste und der eindrucksvollen Lage zogen die Burgwälle seit dem 19. Jahrhundert breites Interesse auf sich. Daß es sich um militärische Befestigungen („Schanzen“) handelt, schien den meisten Beobachtern offensichtlich; andere Interpretationen wie die als kultische Versammlungsplätze und (Sonnen‑)Heiligtümer blieben eher marginal. Die frühmittelalterlichen Burgwälle unterscheidet von den spätmittelalterlichen Burgen formal, daß sie nicht in Stein errichtet wurden und deshalb allein wallartige Ruinen hinterlassen haben. Kennzeichen sind daher Wall (in Holz-Erde-Konstruktion) und Graben; diese pragmatische Charakterisierung beschränkt sich auf die Bauform (Gebuhr/Gebuhr 2001). Die archäologische Burgenforschung meinte, zwei zentrale Ursachen für den Burgenbau zu erkennen. Resümierend schrieb Carl Schuchhardt: „Der große Dualismus, der durch Alteuropa geht mit Indogermanen im Norden und Vorindogermanen im Westen und Süden, macht sich auch im Burgenwesen geltend. Bei den Völkern um das Mittelmeer, von der Behla 1888: 51–76, bes. 75: „Versammlungsstätten für religiöse 40 Angelegenheiten“. – Im frühen 19. Jahrhundert dominierte die Vorstellung, es mit Heiligtümer zu tun zu haben; vgl. Wagner 1828. Wohl erst mit Klemm 1836 setzte sich die Interpretation als Befestigungen allgemein durch. frühägyptischen bis zur römischen Zeit, geht der Festungsbau von den Gebietern aus, die ein Schloß für ihre Herrschaftszwecke errichten. Im Norden ist das erste die Volksburg, die einer sich bergenden Menge zur Verfügung steht“ (Schuchhardt 1931:1) Zu diesen „Volksburgen“ schienen bereits die großen umwallten Siedlungen der jüngeren Bronze- und älteren Eisenzeit zu gehören, die nicht selten im frühen Mittelalter erneut genutzt wurden. Kaiser Wilhelm II., der Schuchhardts archäologische Vorträge und Belehrungen schätzte, interessierte sich bei einem Grabungsbesuch am 2. November 1908 auf der „Römerschanze“ bei PotsdamSacrow besonders dafür, „ob schon Fürstensitz oder nur Fluchtburg“. Allgemein habe, so Schuchhardt, die „genetische“ Entwicklung des Burgenbaus von der „altgermanischen Volksburg“ über den befestigten „fränkisch-römischen Herrenhof“ zur mittelalterlichen „Herrenburg“ geführt (Schuchhardt 1913:207). Noch die zusammenfassende Darstellung Hansjürgen Brachmanns zum frühmittelalterlichen Befestigungsbau von 1993 verfährt im Grunde ebenso (Brachmann 1993:210). Für die slawischen Siedlungsgebiete östlich von Elbe und Saale erschloß man eine entsprechende Entwicklung – von den frühen „Volksburgen“ zu den jüngeren „Herrensitzen“. 2. Burgentypen und Funktion Grundlage dieser Funktionsbestimmungen waren und sind primär Grundriß-Typologien (Tab. 1). Umfang So das Gedächtnisprotokoll Schuchhardts (Staatliche Museen zu Berlin [Preußischer Kulturbesitz], Museum für Vor- und Frühgeschichte, I A 20, 2301/08); vgl. Meyer im Druck, Abb. 5. – Eggers 1986:224, schreibt diese mündliche Äußerung einem Telegramm des Kaisers an Schuchhardt zu. Ein solches Telegramm läßt sich aber nach Auskunft der zuständigen Archivare weder im Museum für Vor- und Frühgeschichte Berlin noch im Geheimen Staatsarchiv Berlin-Dahlem nachweisen. BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Abb. 1 Verbreitung früh- und hochmittelalterlicher Burgwälle im östlichen Deutschland (nach Starigard/Oldenburg 1991:55 Abb. 2). Ta b . 1 Ve r s c h i e d e n e f u n k t i o n a l e B u r g e n t y p e n u n d d i e j e w e i l s v e r m u t e t e n b a u l i c h e n Charakteristika. Eindeutige Zuordnungen erscheinen demzufolge unmöglich ( v g l . Te x t ) Fluchtburg Volksburg Fürstenburg, Burgstadt Herrensitz, Adelsburg Tempelburg Lage zur Besiedlung peripher zentral? zentral zentral zentral Form: groß, unregelmäßig Form: klein, rund Vorburg, Suburbium ? ? ? ? militärische Anlage strategisch Innen besiedlung kaum dicht dicht dicht ? mehrteilige Anlage () ? dicht 41 Sebastian Brather Zwischen „Fluchtburg“ und „Herrensitz“ Sozialgeschichtliche Interpretationen frühund hochmittelalterlicher Burgwälle in Ostmitteleuropa und Bauaufwand der jeweiligen Anlage stellen dabei den zentralen Anhaltspunkt dar (1). Außerdem werden Innenbesiedlung (2) sowie Lage zu Besiedlung und Verkehr (3) berücksichtigt. Diese beiden Aspekte lassen sich allerdings nur beurteilen, wenn ausreichende Beobachtungen durch Prospektion und Grabung vorliegen; dies ist aber oft nicht der Fall (Herrmann 1968:146 Anm. 5). Andere, häufig unterschiedene Burgentypen wie Höhen- und Niederungsburgen oder Burgen in Spornlage, ein- und mehrteilige Anlagen, Abschnittsund Ringwälle (Olczak/ Siuchniński 1975) sowie der divergierende Aufbau der Wallkonstruktionen (Herrmann 1967) spielen für die Ermittlung der jeweiligen Nutzung Abb. 2Grundrisse „altslawischer Volks- und Fluchtburgen“. a) Feldberg; b) Groß Görnow; c) praktisch keine Rolle Sternberger Burg; d) Menkendorf; e) Schlieben; f) Tornow, Burg A; g) Cösitz; h) Zehren (nach (Jankuhn 1981:217; Herrmann/Coblenz 1985:191 Abb. 86). Ebner 1976:15 f.). umgebenden Besiedlung – hängen jedoch in starkem a) Ausgedehnte Burgwälle mit großer Innenfläche Maße von der Intensität der Forschung ab und sind werden als „Volksburgen“ (Schuchhardt 1931:232) deshalb keine verläßlichen Indikatoren. Große Wälle bzw. „Fluchtburgen“ (Herrmann 1960:53 f.) interpre- mit nachweislich „dicht besiedelter Innenfläche“ (Martiert; hier suchte die Bevölkerung angeblich vorüber- schalleck 1954:39), die also dauerhaft bewohnt waren, gehenden Schutz bei kriegerischen Übergriffen. Für sollen „befestigte Siedlungszentren großer vorklasRefugien sollten spärliche Funde und eine abseitige sengesellschaftlicher Gruppen von Produzenten, von Lage sprechen. „Die Lage der Burgen in den Gauen denen sich die Oberschicht noch nicht abgesondert erklärt sie oft von selbst als Volksburgen“, formulierte hatte“ (Herrmann/Coblenz 1985:187), gewesen sein Werner Radig (1940:123) apodiktisch. Beide Merkma- (Abb. 2). Hier scheinen romantische Vorstellungen le – Fundhäufigkeit innerhalb des Walls und Lage zur Herrmann/Coblenz 1985:197, zufolge war es so, „dass kleinere Hierfür spielen vor allem lokale topographische Gegebenheiten, 42 vorhandene Baumaterialien sowie militärische Erfordernisse eine wichtige Rolle. Menschengruppen ständig in der Befestigung wohnten, diese gewissermaßen zur Verfügung hielten, und die Masse der Bevölkerung nur in Kriegszeiten Zuflucht fand.“ BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Abb. 3 Tornow, Burg B – eine „kleine Feudalburg“ (nach Herrmann/Coblenz 1985:208 Abb. 100). einer egalitären „Frühzeit“ auf, denen entsprechend Schuchhardt formulieren konnte: „Daß in den [sächsischen, S. B.] Volksburgen ein Fürst jemals dauernd wohnte, dürfen wir nicht annehmen, weder nach den literarischen noch nach den archäologischen Zeugnissen“ (Schuchhardt 1924:46). „Dienstsiedlungen“, wie sie im přemyslidischen Böhmen, im piastischen Polen und im arpadischen Ungarn im Umkreis zentraler „Fürstenburgen“ existierten (Lübke 1991), waren eine Folge politischer Machtkonzentration und verweisen auf eine sozial differenzierte Gesellschaft. „Fürstensitze“ nimmt man aber für andere große Burgen in Anspruch. Große „stadtähnliche“ Anlagen (Herrmann 1960:54–58), „Fürstenburgen“ bzw. „Stammesvororte“ (Herrmann 1968:155) werden durch mächtige Befestigungen und dichte Besiedlungsspuren gekennzeichnet. Vorburgen bzw. Suburbien sowie Hinweise auf Handwerk und Austausch gelten als Indizien „frühstädtischer“ Strukturen. Meistens ergibt sich diese Interpretation außerdem aus der späteren Bedeutung der Anlagen als regionale Mittelpunkte. Abhängige b) „Herrensitze“ (Hülle 1940:61 f.; Marschalleck 1954:36–38) sind dagegen definitionsgemäß klein. Es handelt sich mit Schuchhardt um „kleine runde Herrenburgen“ (Schuchhardt 1931:232) bzw. mit Herrmann um „kleine Feudalburgen“ (Herrmann 1960:65 f.). Das weithin rezipierte Beispiel Tornow in der Niederlausitz böte „das Bild einer kleinen, offenbar einfach organisierten Grundherrschaft [...,] von einem burggesessenen Grundherren und seiner kleinen Gefolgschaft [...] aufrechterhalten und beherrscht“ (Abb. 3) (Herrmann 1966:139). Neben diesen kleinen Herrensitzen habe es mittelgroße Anlagen – Herrmanns Typologie zufolge Vor allem in Polen und Böhmen; vgl. insgesamt Šolle 1984; Herr- mann/Coblenz 1985:210–226. 43 Sebastian Brather Zwischen „Fluchtburg“ und „Herrensitz“ Sozialgeschichtliche Interpretationen frühund hochmittelalterlicher Burgwälle in Ostmitteleuropa mit einem Durchmesser zwischen 40 und 80 m (Herrmann 1960:58–65) – gegeben, die als Mittelpunkte von Burgbezirken fungierten. Parallelen in Niedersachsen hatte Schuchhardt (1931:188) als „Gauverwaltungsburgen“ bezeichnet. Eine gewissermaßen „extremistische“ Position verfocht Helmut Preidel, der (im Anschluß an Otto Brunner [1939]) schlichtweg alle Befestigungen als „Herrenburgen“ (Preidel 1961:61), „Adelsburgen“ oder „Herrenhöfe“ deklarierte (Preidel 1966:57). Deshalb sah Preidel wie andere Anhänger von „Adelsburgen“ bei mehrgliedrigen Anlagen die „Kernburg“ als den zweifellos ältesten Teil der Befestigung an (Preidel 1961:68), während Vertreter der „Volksburg“-These diese als spätere Hinzufügung zu einer großen „Fluchtburg“ zu betrachten neigten (Herrmann 1960:65). c) Neben diesen beiden „klassischen“ Typen sind des weiteren „rein militärische Anlagen“ beschrieben worden (Marschalleck 1954:38 f.). Seine Ausgrabungen auf dem „Breiten Berg“ bei Striegau (Strzygom) in Schlesien hatten Gerhard Bersu zu dem Schluß geführt, „in der Grundrißanordnung [eine] starke Beziehung zur byzantinischen Befestigungstechnik“ (Bersu 1930:41) zu vermuten (Abb. 4). Im Anschluß daran bezog auch Wilhelm Unverzagt die Anlage von Kliestow an der Oder auf „byzantinische“ Vorbilder und rekonstruierte 1942 „Unterstände“, „Baracken“ bzw. „Kasernen“ entlang der Innenseite des Walles (Unverzagt 1940; Kritik bei Preidel 1966:58–64). „Eine Sonderlage verleiht einzelnen Burgen den Charakter einer Sperrburg an einer Furt oder an einer alten Völkerstraße bzw. vor einem Paß“, meinte Radig (1940:123), und gelegentlich wurden gar territoriale „Verteidigungslinien“ fantasievoll postuliert, ohne dass entsprechend durchgreifende und großräumige Herrschaftsbildungen zu erwarten wären. Hatte man bereits im 19. Jahrhundert Fürstenburgen, Zufluchtstätten und militärische Anlagen zumindest konzeptionell getrennt (Friedel 1878:41), so warf Hülle diese Unterscheidung 1940 wieder über Bord: „Der Zweck besonders der großen Ringwälle kann nicht zweifelhaft sein: ihre strategisch wichtige Lage spricht in den meisten Fällen dafür, daß sie als Wehranlagen für eine kriegerische Truppe, seltener als Fliehburgen für einen Gau angelegt sind. Aber auch die kleineren Burgwälle und Burghügel haben in erster Linie militärischen Zwecken gedient: Sie waren die Sitze der „Zupane“, der kleineren slawischen Fürsten, die ein Gebiet in der Größe der späteren Burgwardeien unter sich hatten“ (Hülle 1940:47; Hervorhebung im Original). d) Zu erwähnen sind schließlich „kultische Anlagen“, wie sie anhand von Chroniken des 11. Jahrhunderts für Rethra (Thietmar von Merseburg VI,17–25) und des 12. 44 Abb. 4 Striegau (Strzygom), Breiter Berg. Nach „byzantinischen“ Vorbildern rekonstruierte Innenbebauung des als militärische Anlage interpretierten Burgwalls (nach Bersu aus Schuchhardt 1931: 236 Abb. 222). Jahrhunderts für Arkona (����������������� Saxo Grammaticus XIV,39�� ��������) überliefert sind. Entgegen Behlas (1888:51–76) Diktum und Schuchhardts (1926) Erwartungen lassen sich dafür kaum archäologische Argumente anführen, denn die Befunde sind natürlich nicht eindeutig. In Einzelfällen mögen sich dennoch Hinweise ergeben, doch lag beispielsweise im entsprechend apostrophierten „slawischen Tempelort“ von Groß Raden das vermutete Heiligtum nicht innerhalb des Ringwalls, sondern in der offenen Siedlung davor (Schuldt 1985). Auffälligerweise setzen sämtliche Interpretationen für jede Anlage eine weithin dominierende Funktion voraus. Die mögliche und angesichts der Nutzungsdauer oft wahrscheinliche Parallelität verschiedener sozialer, politischer, militärischer, administrativer, wirtschaftlicher, religiöser und rechtlicher Aufgaben (Ebner 1976:77–82) gerät damit aus dem Blick. 3. Einordnung und Datierung Interpretation und Datierung der Burgwälle bedingten sich stets gegenseitig, und beides blieb bis zum Vorliegen von Jahrringdaten gleichermaßen unsicher. Daß Neuerdings vermutet auch Kobyliński 1990:154, daß bestimmte Aufgrund viel zu früher Datierungen bleiben auch Herleitung und Burgwälle kultischen Zwecken dienten. Funktion der Burgen bei Kobyliński 1990 rein hypothetisch. BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Abb. 5 „Schloßberg“ bei Feldberg, Rekonstruktion der Innenbebauung (nach Herrmann 1969:49 Abb. 21). die ostmitteleuropäischen Burgwälle weit überwiegend in das frühe und hohe Mittelalter gehören, hatte bereits um 1870 Rudolf Virchow anhand der spezifischen „Burgwallkeramik“ herausgefunden (Virchow 1869:411 f.; 1872; 1880:228). Erst zu Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts konnten prähistorische Siedlungsgrabungen unternommen werden, nachdem Schuchhardt die „Idee“ des Pfostenlochs auf ostdeutsche Verhältnisse übertragen hatte (Schuchhardt 1909:215 f.). Die Ausgrabungen im römischen Lager von Haltern hatten gezeigt, daß auch Holzbauten Spuren im Boden hinterlassen – und zwar in Form von Bodenverfärbungen. Schuchhardt wurde Vorsitzender der 1927 gegründeten Arbeitsgemeinschaft zur Erforschung der nord- und ostdeutschen vor- und frühgeschichtlichen Wall- und Wehranlagen (Unverzagt 1985:16–23), und vom ihm stammte die erste umfassende archäologische Übersicht zu prähistorischen Befestigungen, in der sich auch die oben zitierten Eingangspassage findet. Damit setzten Versuche ein, die Burgwälle in einen genaueren historischen Rahmen einzuordnen bzw. „Verfassung“ und Sozialgeschichte genauer zu analysieren. Hier boten sich größere Spielräume, denn die Möglichkeiten archäologischer Chronologie waren begrenzt. Grabfunde, die prinzipiell durch Kombinationsstatistiken der Grabbeigaben differenzierte Datierungen erlauben, fallen für das östliche Mitteleuropa weitgehend aus. Ursache ist die Seltenheit von Grabbeigaben. Nahezu alle archäologischen Datierungen stützten sich daher auf die Keramik, deren stilistische und technologische Entwicklung eher den longues durées zugehört. Die von Alfred Götze 1901 begründete Dreiteilung der slawischen Keramik erlaubte für eine ungefähr sechs Jahrhunderte währende Spanne daher allenfalls eine Zeitangabe von jeweils etwa 100 bis 200 Jahren. So konnte Schuchhardt den Schloßberg bei Feldberg noch für das 1066/8 zerstörte Rethra halten (Schuchhardt 1926:25–63), obwohl der dortige Burgwall tatsächlich 200 Jahre älter ist (Abb. 5) (Herrmann 1969). In den 1930er Jahren neigte man zu sehr frühen Datierungen der slawischen Burgwälle insgesamt, obwohl die slawische Kultur eher als primitiv galt. Die kleinen Rundwälle von Kleinitz, Poppschütz und Gustau in Schlesien z. B. wurden bereits in das 6./7. Jahrhundert gesetzt (Petersen 1937; Jahn 1937; Langenheim 1939). Dadurch ließ sich vermeiden, eine eigenständige Burgenentwicklung – und d. h. auch Herrschaftsbildung – im östlichen Mitteleuropa vorauszusetzen. Denn mit der zeitlichen Nähe zur Völkerwanderungszeit konnte germanischer Einfluß postuliert werden. Der Burgenbau wurde überaus weit zurückverfolgt und zum Indiz spezifischer, jahrhundertelang bestehender Adels- und Herrschaftsformen erklärt. Für Hülle war es „denkbar, Götze 1901 („Stil I–III“); Schuchhardt 1919 („früh-, mittel- und spätslawisch“); Knorr 1937 („revidierter Stil I–III“). Allerdings geriet diese Auffassung tendenziell in die Nähe der Hypothese slawischer Besiedlungskontinuität (mitunter gar seit der Bronzezeit), was sie auch unter deutschen Archäologen umstritten bleiben ließ. 45 Sebastian Brather Zwischen „Fluchtburg“ und „Herrensitz“ Sozialgeschichtliche Interpretationen frühund hochmittelalterlicher Burgwälle in Ostmitteleuropa Abb. 6 Burgwälle mit Feldberger Keramik, Lage im Gelände. Die Keramikfunde weisen auf eine Nutzung der Burgwälle im 8./9. Jahrhundert hin. Erfaßt ist lediglich das Verbreitungsgebiet der Feldberger Keramik, so daß besonders der südliche und östliche Teil des Kartenausschnittes keine repräsentative Verbreitung der karolingerzeitlichen Burgwälle bietet. Das Vorkommen von Burgwällen auf Geländekuppen („Höhenburgen“) wird von der Topographie (eiszeitliche Grund- und Endmoränen) bestimmt, nicht von kulturellen oder politischen Faktoren. Niederungsburg; Höhenburg (verändert nach Brather 1998:116 Abb. 1). daß die Slawen diese Einteilung in Burgwarde, die den Hundertschaften und Gauen bei den Germanen sehr ähnlich sind, von den Goten übernommen“ und bei ihrer Einwanderung nach Mitteleuropa mitgebracht hatten (Hülle 1940:47 f.). Andererseits verwies Hülle darauf, daß häufig große jungbronze- bzw. eisenzeitliche Anlagen10 erneut aufgesucht worden waren und insofern gar keine slawischen (frühmittelalterlichen) Befestigungen darstellten (Hülle 1940:61). Unabhängig von der Zeitstellung und der Nutzung der „Wehranlagen“ als „Volks-, Gau- und Kastellaneiburgen, [als] rein militärische Anlagen und [als] kleine Herrensitze“ interpretierte Wilhelm Unverzagt die häufig beobachteten Zerstörungen und Wiederherstellungen als Widerspiegelung der „politischen Schicksale ihrer Bewohner“ (Unverzagt 1942:281). Worauf die behauptete Funktion der Burgwälle jeweils zurückzuführen sein sollte, bleibt dabei etwas unklar. In erster Linie waren es „Flußübergänge [als] die strategisch schwachen Stellen, die eines künstlichen Schutzes bedurften“ (Unverzagt 1942:281); deshalb konnte Unverzagt (1940:86) diese Burgwälle auch als „slawische Befe „Es sind Volksburgen, nicht Herrenburgen, denen wir in der gan- 10 46 zen ‘vorrömischen Eisenzeit’ in Mittel- und Westeuropa begegnen“; Schuchhardt 1931:116. stigungen im deutschen Osten“ bezeichnen. An die genannten Frühdatierungen ließ sich anknüpfen, als nach 1945 die zuvor in ein schiefes Licht geratene slawische Frühgeschichte verstärkte Aufmerksamkeit erfuhr. Das politische und wissenschaftliche Bestreben zielte letztlich darauf, eine zu Westeuropa parallele kulturelle und politische Entwicklung zu belegen. Dazu bedurfte es eines möglichst frühen Ansatzes, um einer solchen Entwicklung ausreichend Zeit einräumen zu können. Folglich wurden auch die Burgwälle früh angesetzt, und zwar sowohl die „Flucht-“ als auch die „Adelsburgen“. Erstere ließen sich nun, indirekt wiederum an romantische Konzepte ursprünglich „demokratischer“ Gesellschaften anknüpfend, als Beleg egalitärer Verhältnisse verstehen. Und war nicht in den Jahren zuvor die Fähigkeit der Slawen zur eigenen Staatsbildung bestritten worden? Letztere Burgen repräsentierten, wenn sie sich als früh erwiesen, eine dem Frankenreich vergleichbare Entwicklung zur feudalen Gesellschaft und belegten damit eine differenzierte soziale Entwicklung. Es erschien daher und aufgrund von Parallelen in Osteuropa naheliegend, den Burgenbau (wie schon bei Hülle) mit der Einwanderung zu verbinden. Joach- Interessanter ist hier aber die Frage nach möglicherweise unterschiedlichen Funktionen der Burgentypen; dafür sind die Wallkonstruktionen irrelevant. Die relativ großen Burgen Mecklenburgs, als „Feldberger Höhenburgen“ charakterisiert (Abb. 6) und mit dem seit 789 erwähnten Stammesverband der Wilzen identifiziert (vgl. Brather 1998), sollten eine besondere wilzische Sozialstruktur widerspiegeln. Die anhand weniger Suchschnitte erschlossene „regelhafte“ Innenbesiedlung in Form langer Hausreihen wertete Herrmann als Widerspiegelung egalitärer Verhältnisse – ein möglicher Reflex „einer besonderen Abwehrsituation [...], die auf der Konzentration vieler Krieger in Siedlungen oder Burgen beruhte“ (Herrmann 1968:173). An der Spitze der Gesellschaft habe ein von der breiten Masse (populus) abgesonderter Stammesfürst (rex) gestanden. Diese „gentile“ Struktur sei durch das Feh- BALTICA 6 len einer adligen Schicht unterhalb des Fürsten gekennzeichnet gewesen und habe damit „starke Züge der militärischen Demokratie“ getragen (Herrmann 1968:172). Herrmann dehnte diese Interpretation auch auf die großen Burgen (Reitwein, Kliestow, Lebus) an der mittleren Oder aus, die Unverzagt noch für byzantinischen Vorbildern folgende militärische Anlagen zur „Grenzsicherung“ gehalten hatte (Unverzagt 1942:281). Die „verspätete“ bzw. retardierende Sozialstruktur sei außerdem eine wesentliche Voraussetzung für den prononciert heidnischen Lutizenbund des 11. Jahrhunderts gewesen, der angesichts verbreiteter Feudalisierungstendenzen eine Sackgasse gesellschaftlicher Entwicklung darstellte. ARCHAELOGIA im Herrmann postulierte seit den 1960er Jahren fünf Einwanderergruppen für das Gebiet östlich von Elbe und Saale, indem Spezifika von Burgen- und Hausbau, Grab- und Keramikformen kombiniert und damit homogene „Stammesgruppen“ vorausgesetzt wurden (Herrmann 1983). Zwei dieser Gruppen (Prag, Sukow) vertraten eine erste Einwandererwelle, auf die eine zweite mit den drei übrigen Gruppen (Rüssen, Feldberg, Tornow) gefolgt sei. Mit dem Zusammenstoß der Gruppen waren gewaltsame Konflikte vorprogrammiert, die zum Burgenbau geführt hätten, wobei jede Gruppe auf ihr aus den Ursprungsregionen vertraute Wallkonstruktionen zurückgegriffen hätte (Herrmann 1967). Die Unterschiede – Steinplatten-Trockenbauweise an Elbe/ Saale, Plaggenschichtungen bzw. Feldsteinschüttungen im Norden – dürften entgegen Herrmanns Annahme primär auf den lokal zur Verfügung stehenden Baumaterialien beruhen (Henning 1997:25 Abb. 3). Die kleinen Ringwälle vom „Tornower Typ“ mit 20 bis 50 m Durchmesser unterschieden sich Herrmann zufolge von dem „als früheste Burgenform erkannten Typ der Fluchtburg und des Burgbezirksmittelpunktes“, doch sind die Differenzen offensichtlich marginal (Herrmann 1968:175). Die Niederlausitzer Ringwälle repräsentierten angeblich „eine einfache, ursprünglich organisierte Grundherrschaft ohne größere Eigenwirtschaft, die durch den Schutz einer starken Burg und eine kleine Gefolgschaft des Grundherren aufrechterhalten wurde“ (Herrmann 1968:177). Damit schien die Feudalentwicklung wie im Frankenreich verlaufen zu sein, denn ungeachtet mancher Bedenken setzte sich eine sehr frühe Datierung in das 7./8. Jahrhundert durch, die weithin akzeptiert wurde (vgl. Wachter 1981 mit der Beschreibung von „Burgwällen der Landnahmezeit“). Deshalb setzte man auch die Anfänge der großen „Fürstenburgen“ wie Brandenburg/Havel (Grebe 1991), Berlin-Spandau (v. Müller/v. Müller-Muči/ Nekuda 1993), Dorf Mecklenburg (Donat 1984)und Starigard/Oldenburg (Gabriel 1984) bereits in das 7. Ta b . 2 D i f f e r i e r e n d e D a t i e r u n g e n v o n B e r l i n - S p a n d a u . E r s t d i e l e t z t e n d r e i P h a s e n stimmen ungefähr überein. Die archäologische Datierung der frühen Phasen beruhte auf Interpolationen, die den Beginn des Burgenbaus mit einer slawischen Einwanderung verbanden, und orientierte sich an den Ansätzen für die Burg von Brandenburg/Havel Phase 1 2a 2b 3 4 5a 5b 6a 6b 7 8 „traditionelle“ archäologische Chronologie (v. Müller/v. Müller-Muči/Nekuda 1993:17) um 700 erste Hälfte des 8. Jh. zweite Hälfte des 8. Jh. – erstes Drittel des 9. Jh. um 900 – erstes Drittel des 10. Jh. Mitte des 10. Jh. Mitte des 10. Jh. – zweites Drittel des 10. Jh. letztes Drittel des 10. Jh. – 983 erstes Drittel des 11. Jh. zweites Drittel des 11. Jh. – letztes Drittel des 11. Jh. erste Hälfte des 12. Jh. zweite Hälfte des 12. Jh. Dendrochronologie (Heußner/Westphal 1998:230 Abb. 7) 920 963–965 1035–1050 1062–1063 1075–1078 1080–1086 1106–1107 um 1150 47 Sebastian Brather Zwischen „Fluchtburg“ und „Herrensitz“ Sozialgeschichtliche Interpretationen frühund hochmittelalterlicher Burgwälle in Ostmitteleuropa Abb. 7 Jahrringdaten für Burgwälle der Niederlausitz. Die Daten spiegeln wechselnd intensive Phasen des Holzeinschlags und damit des Burgenbaus wider (nach Henning 1998:24 Abb. 13). Jahrhundert, ohne daß für diese allgemeinen Überlegungen zur Datierung klare Indizien beizubringen waren (Tab. 2). Welche Funktionen den verschiedenen Burgwalltypen zugeschrieben werden sollten, blieb angesichts dieser Überlegungen unverändert vage. Dies hatte einen einfachen Grund. Formale topographische Kriterien geben über Nutzung und Funktion(en) der Anlagen nicht unmittelbar Auskunft (v. Uslar 1964:249–267; Ebner 1976:37 f.). Denn die Form der Befestigungen hängt stets auch von den topographischen Gegebenheiten (Höhen- oder Niederungslage, zur Verfügung stehende Fläche) und von zeittypischen Bautechniken ab. Erst detaillierte Ausgrabungen, genaue Datierungen und die Einbeziehung des näheren und weiteren Umfelds können an dieser Stelle weiterführen, und sie sind für jeden Einzelfall zu unternehmen. Solange diese Anforderungen nicht erfüllt werden, müssen sich die Diskussionen um Nutzung und Sozialstrukturen im Kreise drehen. 4. Dendrochronologie und Ereignisgeschichte Die seit etwa zehn Jahren in immer größerer Zahl vorliegenden Dendrodaten (Herrmann/Heußner 1991; Henning/Heußner 1992) verändern das Bild des Burgenbaus erheblich. Nicht nur die Chronologie der Befestigungstypen muß grundlegend revidiert werden, auch die zugrundeliegenden historischen Entwicklungen bedürfen einer Neubewertung. Es erscheint schließlich fraglich, ob sich aus den Wallgrundrissen überhaupt Rückschlüsse auf die Art der Nutzung oder 48 den Anlaß der Errichtung ziehen lassen, hängen doch Umfang und Grundriß einer Anlage nicht unwesentlich von der Topographie ab. Funktionen werden nun nicht mehr aufgrund der Grundrisse, sondern anhand der Zeitstellung ermittelt. Das von Joachim Henning initiierte „Niederlausitzer Burgenprogramm“ hatte Anfang der 1990er Jahre zum Ziel, sämtliche Burgwälle einer abgeschlossenen Kleinregion dendrochronologisch zu datieren, um endlich verläßliche Daten zu erhalten. Schmale Schnitte durch den äußeren Wall- und Grabenbereich dienten der Gewinnung datierbarer Holzproben (Henning 1998). Da die Wälle meist (mehrfach) erneuert und dabei – so die plausible Annahme – jeweils nach außen erweitert wurden, zeichnen sich einander überschneidende Gräben ab, die von jüngeren Wällen z. T. verschüttet wurden. Methodisch ließe sich einwenden, daß nur bis in die äußere Wallfront geführte Schnitte die älteste Wallphase unter ungünstigen Umständen nicht erreichen – und damit die Datierung zu jung ausfallen kann. Das Ergebnis war jedoch überraschend eindeutig. Statt der postulierten frühen Errichtung kleiner Rundwälle des „Typs Tornow“ im 7./8. Jahrhundert ließ sich keine einzige der etwa 25 untersuchten Anlagen vor das letzte Drittel des 9. Jahrhunderts datieren. Daß Wasserstand und Klima die Erhaltung älterer Hölzer verhindert hätten und die Jahrringdaten damit ein verfälschtes Bild lieferten, mag die Ergebnisse zwar beeinflussen, doch zeigen Daten von Brunnen aus offenen Siedlungen an, daß eine ländliche Besiedlung seit dem frühen 8. Jahrhundert durchaus zu fassen ist (Biermann/Dalitz/Heußner 1999). Als Beleg für eine langfristig zunehmende soziale Differenzierung, die bereits zur Merowingerzeit eingesetzt und rasch Wenn dem so ist, dann dürften Binnendifferenzierungen der slawischen Gesellschaften keine große Rolle für den Burgenbau gespielt haben. Vielmehr scheint die unmittelbare äußere Bedrohung der entscheidende Faktor gewesen zu sein. Sie zwang wahrscheinlich zu diesen Verteidigungsanstrengungen – ebenso wie man in Westeuropa Ringwälle zum Schutz gegen wikingische Plünderungen baute (van Heringen/Hendrikx/ Mars 1995).13 Über die Nutzung der Wälle ist damit König Arnulf zog 889 gegen die Abodriten; Annales Fuldenses a. 11 889. Die wichtigsten Berichte stammen von Thietmar von Merseburg 12 und Widukind von Corvey. – Die durch Thietmar VI,57 (urbs quaedam Iarina [...], a Gerone dicta marchione) mit dem Markgrafen Gero in Verbindung gebrachte Burg von Gehren läßt sich dendrochronologisch auf „um/nach 960“ eingrenzen; Henning 2002:134 Anm. 17; Gebuhr 1996. 13 Hinzuweisen ist außerdem auf die Verteidigungsbemühungen gegen die Ungarn im 10. Jahrhundert. BALTICA 6 Die Jahrringdaten zeigen, auch wenn sie nicht immer jahrgenau ausfallen, weil z. B. die „Waldkante“ nicht mehr vorhanden ist oder die Zuordnung der Hölzer zu einzelnen Wallbauphasen unsicher bleibt, daß die Niederlausitzer Ringwälle nicht alle gleichzeitig erbaut wurden. Dennoch zeichnen sich Phasen intensiver Bau- bzw. Ausbau-Tätigkeiten ab: die Jahre um 890, zwischen 910 und 930, die 940er Jahre und um 960 (Abb. 7). Die Gleichzeitigkeit zu politischen Ereignissen dürfte kaum zufällig sein, auch wenn neue Daten die Gewichte noch verschieben mögen. Läßt sich der Beginn des Burgenbaus im späten 9. Jahrhundert mangels Überlieferung nicht unmittelbar mit „historischen Daten“ verbinden11, so fällt dies für das 10. Jahrhundert nicht schwer. Bereits 905/6 zog Heinrich im Auftrag seines Vaters Otto, des sächsischen Herzogs, gegen die Daleminzer; 928/9 kämpfte er nun als König gegen Daleminzer, 932 gegen die benachbarten Lusizi, und 963 unternahm Markgraf Gero einen Angriff gegen letztere und die Selpoli.12 Die meisten Burgen wurden offenbar ungefähr gleichzeitig mit der Erhebung Heinrichs zum König erbaut. Daraus zieht Henning den Schluß: „Diese Burgenbaugipfel können nur als fortifikatorische Aufrüstungsphasen vor den drohenden sächsischen Angriffen interpretiert werden“ (Henning 2002:135). Als zusätzliches Indiz für militärische – und herrschaftliche – Hintergründe lassen sich möglicherweise Funde von Reitersporen ansehen, die überwiegend innerhalb von Befestigungen gefunden werden (Kind 2002:284 Abb. 1). Der Niederlausitzer Burgenbau insgesamt läßt sich dennoch nicht mit einzelnen Ereignissen verknüpfen; er war eine strukturelle Reaktion auf die politischen Entwicklungen der Jahrzehnte um 900. noch keine endgültige Klarheit gewonnen. Handelte es sich um nur im Notfall aufgesuchte Anlagen, die „normalerweise“ allenfalls von wenigen Kriegern besetzt waren, oder um dauerhaft von einer größeren Gruppe bewohnte Burgen? Läßt sich eine Antwort geben, die sich Schuchhardt (1939:354) mit folgender Feststellung noch versagte: „Man kann also noch nicht sagen, ob solch ein Ringwall der Sitz eines einzelnen Edelings war oder die Genossenschaftsburg von gleichgestellten Bauern“? Die wenigen Ausgrabungsbefunde – Tornow (Herrmann 1966: 131 Abb. 53; 135 Abb. 54; Beilage 7), Schönfeld (Wetzel 1985:44 Abb. 28, 54 Abb. 37), Presenchen (Henning 1991:128 f. Abb. 8–9) – ergeben alle eine recht dichte Innenbesiedlung, doch sind deren Nutzungsdauer und ‑intensität kaum näher zu bestimmen, weil sich dort keine Hölzer erhalten haben (Abb. 8). Angesichts der zahlreichen offenen Siedlungen im unmittelbaren Umfeld („Vorburgsiedlungen“) und des recht geringen Umfangs der Befestigungen stellt die ständige Besiedlung durch die gesamte Bevölkerung nicht die wahrscheinlichste Erklärung dar. ARCHAELOGIA zu einer Feudalgesellschaft geführt habe, fallen diese Ringwälle daher vollkommen aus. Ändert sich damit auch ihre funktionale Interpretation? Für die großen Burgwälle in Mecklenburg und Ostholstein liegen bislang erst wenige Jahrringdaten vor, so daß zurzeit nur ein Teil exakt zu datieren ist: Alt Lübeck (818), Scharstorf (835), Bosau (837) und Ilow (840) lieferten Daten aus der ersten Hälfte des 9. Jahrhunderts (Henning 2002:139; vgl. Herrmann/Heußner 1991). Andere Befestigungen können anhand der vorliegenden Klein- und Keramikfunde ungefähr zeitlich eingeordnet werden; für einige ergibt sich daraus eine Datierung bereits nach der Mitte des 8. Jahrhunderts. Auch diese „frühen“ Burgen lassen sich mit militärischen Auseinandersetzungen parallelisieren. Gegen Ende des 8. Jahrhunderts gerieten Wilzen und Abodriten in die fränkisch-sächsischen Auseinandersetzungen hinein (Dralle 1978). In wechselnden Bündnissen wurden diese Slawen zum Ziel von Angriffen, von denen einer 789 Karl d. Gr. bis zur civitas Dragaviti führte.14 Verschiedene Indizien deuten also darauf hin, daß auch die „frühen“, in den Jahrzehnten um 800 erbauten „nördlichen“ Großburgen in Situationen akuter äußerer Bedrohung entstanden. Daß es sich um häufig umfänglichere Anlagen handelte, ist kein Beleg für besondere (gentile?) Sozialstrukturen. Zunächst handelte es sich um eine zeittypische Burgenbauweise, denn auch die in den „Sachsenkriegen“ errichteten Burgen besaßen große Innenflächen (Brachmann 1993:126–152, Beilage 4; Jankuhn 1976). Ebenso wie bei den späteren kleinen Ringwällen orientierte man sich im östlichen Mitteleuropa bereits zur Karolingerzeit an den fortifikatorischen und waffentechnischen Möglichkeiten der zeitgenössischen Geg Die Reichsannalen bieten für die Jahrzehnte um 800 eine ganze 14 Reihe von Nennungen eroberter slawischer civitates, oppida und castella. 49 Sebastian Brather Zwischen „Fluchtburg“ und „Herrensitz“ Sozialgeschichtliche Interpretationen frühund hochmittelalterlicher Burgwälle in Ostmitteleuropa Abb. 8Grundriß der älteren Burg von Presenchen, Kr. Dahme-Spreewald. Die ebenerdigen Blockbauten haben nur unregelmäßige flache „Gruben“ hinterlassen, doch zeichnet sich eine dichte Bebauung ab (nach Henning 1991:128 Abb. 8). ner. Zwar konnten in diesen relativ großen umwallten Flächen erheblich mehr Menschen als in den kleinen Ringwällen unterkommen, doch gab es auch viel weniger „Großburgen“; die Größe der Anlagen mag daher primär den „Einzugsbereich“ widerspiegeln. 50 Waren die Burgwälle also – entgegen bisherigen Annahmen – gänzlich unabhängig von sozialen Strukturen? Zumindest für die jeweils erstmalige Errichtung eines Burgwalls scheint dies angesichts der Datierungen und der daraus zu erschließenden historischen Zusammenhänge häufig zuzutreffen. Unmittelbare militärische Bedrohungen, und d. h. politische Entwicklungen, bewirkten den Bau defensiver Schutzbauten oder Verteidigungsanlagen. Dies hatte schon Schuchhardt so gesehen, dabei allerdings wiederum Sozialstrukturen und Ereignisgeschichte miteinander vermengend: „das einzige politische Element, das was uns zeigt, wer Herr im Lande war, gegen welchen Feind man sich sichern mußte und wie diese Verhältnisse wechselten und sich verschoben, – sind die Burgen“ (Schuchhardt 1924:7; Hervorhebung im Original). Ist archäologisch erkennbar, daß ein Burgwall nur kurzzeitig genutzt wurde, dürfte das diese ereignisgeschichtliche Interpretation unterstützen. Eine größere Zahl ist aber mehrmals erneuert, ausgebaut oder längere Zeit genutzt worden. Für diese Fälle dürfte zutreffen, was Kurt-Ulrich Jäschke für die Abwehr von Normannen und Ungarn im 9./10. Jahrhundert feststellte: „Herrschaftssicherung nach Innen war ursprünglich nicht das Ziel der [...] Burgenbauten. Sie hatten ihren Zweck erfüllt, wenn die äußere Bedrohung des Landes überstanden war, und lebten nur dann weiter, wenn andere als militärische Faktoren ihren Bestand sichern halfen“ (Jäschke 1975:120). Zunehmendes Bevölkerungs- (GringmuthDallmer 1998) und Wirtschaftswachstum, daraus entstehende rivalisierende Herrschaftsansprüche und das Bemühen um deren Legitimation bzw. Präsentation werden dazu beigetragen haben (Biermann/Frey 2001:74 f.). Dies gilt ebenso für wichtige „Fürstenburgen“ der Elbslawen. Burgen wie Brandenburg/Havel, Dorf Mecklenburg oder Berlin-Spandau lieferten bislang keine Jahrringdaten vor dem 10. Jahrhundert (Tab. 2) (Heußner/Westphal 1998), auch wenn ein Baubeginn bereits vor 900 wahrscheinlich sein dürfte, wie er z. B. für Oldenburg (Starigard) in Holstein (8./9. Jahrhundert) belegt ist (Starigard/Oldenburg 1991);15 15 Es sei noch einmal an das prinzipielle Problem erinnert, die frü- BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Abb. 9Der Raum zwischen Oder und Weichsel im 10./11. Jh. Kursiv „Stammesname“ (in der Schreibweise der Quellen); dendrochronologischen Daten zufolge um 940 errichteter Burgwall in Großpolen (B Bnin; G Gnesen; Gb Grzybowo; Gz Giecz; L Ląd; OL Ostrów Lednicki; P Posen); weiterer wichtiger Burgwall um 1000; unterstrichen Bistum bzw. Erzbistum; + wichtiges Gräberfeld mit Bestattungen, die Sporen (1 Biernatki; 2 Bnin; 3 Brześć Kujawski; 4 Buczek; 5 Iwno; 6 Luboń; 7 Lutomiersk; 8 Łubowo; 9 Mielno; 10 Niepruszewo; 11 Ostrowąż; 12 Skarbienice; 13 Sowinki; 14 Szarów) und/oder Waffen (15 Biskupin; 16 Chwalborzyce; 17 Marzenin; 18 Skokówko; 19 Śląskowo) enthalten (nach Kurnatowska 1991:84 Abb. 1; 2000a:459 Abb. 306). hier ist mit unzutreffenden Zuordnungen von Hölzern zu einzelnen Bauphasen des Walls zu rechnen. Diese „Mittelpunktsburgen“ stellten dauerhaft bewohnte und repräsentative Anlagen dar, worauf chronikalische Angaben sowie archäologische Befunde („palastartige“ Großbauten) und Funde (Luxus- und Fremdgüter, reiche Grabausstattungen) verweisen (Gabriel 1989). Sie waren Ort und Symbol16 fürstlicher Macht und spiegeln insofern eine wirtschaftlich und sozial differenzierte Gesellschaft wider (Brachmann 1996). Nicht nur bei den Elbslawen, sondern auch in Böhmen (Frolik/Smetánka 1997; Dvorská/Boháčová 1999) und Großpolen (Kurnatowska 1991; 2000a; 2000b; Dulinicz 2002; Dvorská/Heußner/Poláček/Westphal 1999) entwickelten sich diese wichtigen regionalen Mittelpunkte – die sogenannten „Burgstädte“ (Burg 1995) – kaum vor dem 10. Jahrhundert; allein Mähren machte im 9. Jahrhundert eine besondere, südöstlich (byzantinisch) orientierte Entwicklung durch (Poláček 1996). Auch in diesen Fällen dürften unruhige Verheste Phase tatsächlich zu erfassen und sekundär verbaute ältere Hölzer plausibel „unterzubringen“. 16 Den symbolischen Aspekt spätmittelalterlicher Burgen betont Zeune 1996. hältnisse zum Bau der jeweils ersten Befestigung wesentlich beigetragen haben. Mährische und böhmische „Fürsten“ trugen im späteren 9. und im 10. Jahrhundert untereinander und mit dem Karolingerreich gewaltsam Konflikte aus; die großpolnischen Piasten konkurrierten zwischen 940 und 963 mit den Ottonen um das Slawenland zwischen Elbe und Oder – und gerade in dieser Zeit entstanden die Burgen von Gnesen, Giecz, Bnin, Ląd, Ostrów Lednicki und Posen (Kurnatowska 2000a; Krąpiec 1998). Innerhalb kurzer Zeit – d. h. im Zuge einer dynamischen Entwicklung – wurden aus diesen Befestigungen die politischen, wirtschaftlichen und kirchlichen Zentren der piastischen Herrschaft (Abb. 9). Der Bau sowohl der kleinen Ringwälle des 9./10. Jahrhunderts als auch der karolingerzeitlichen Großburgen wurde in unsicheren Zeiten mit einiger Wahrscheinlichkeit von den slawischen Oberschichten organisiert und forciert. Als deren dauerhafte Wohnplätze scheinen sie jedoch zunächst nicht gedient zu haben,17 denn Auch Kempke 1999:53, resümiert: „die Wehrfunktion stand im 17 Mittelpunkt“. 51 Sebastian Brather Zwischen „Fluchtburg“ und „Herrensitz“ Sozialgeschichtliche Interpretationen frühund hochmittelalterlicher Burgwälle in Ostmitteleuropa die Jahrringdaten belegen einen zeitlich und räumlich eng begrenzten Burgenbau, der mit historischen „Ereignis-Horizonten“ korrespondiert. Dennoch sind wohl Rückschlüsse auf soziale Strukturen möglich, weil die Errichtung ein geplantes, koordiniertes Vorgehen und damit eine „zentrale“ Leitung voraussetzte; soziale „Abhängigkeiten“ bestimmter Bevölkerung(sgrupp)en lassen sich allerdings nur begründet vermuten. Die Vielzahl an Ringwällen in der Niederlausitz dürfte kleinräumig zersplitterte Machtverhältnisse widerspiegeln, während wenige Burgen in anderen Gebieten für großräumigere Herrschaften sprechen. Nicht das bloße Vorhandensein von Burgen, sondern ihre relative Häufigkeit oder regionale „Dichte“ dürfte ein Kriterium zur Abgrenzung von Herrschaftsbereichen sein. Der Burgenbau stellt ein sekundäres, an bestimmte Situationen gebundenes Kennzeichen sozialer Differenzierung dar. Eine sozial differenzierte Gesellschaft bedarf jedoch nicht zwingend der Befestigungen, wie der Blick auf andere historische Situationen (vorrömische Eisenzeit, römische Kaiserzeit) unterstreicht.18 Wenn es aber unter bestimmten Verhältnissen Befestigungen gibt, dann machen sie indirekt Herrschaftsstrukturen oder Machtverhältnisse sichtbar. Wenn Burgwälle eine zunächst durch äußere Bedrohungen bedingte und damit örtlich und zeitlich spezifische Erscheinung darstellten, wie ist dann die Descriptio civitatum ad septentrionalem pagam Danubii des sogenannten Bayerischen Geographen (Clm. 560, fol. 149v/150r) zu bewerten? Diese kurze Liste, die für viele gentes Osteuropas jeweils eine bestimmte Anzahl von civitates nennt, galt bislang als Beleg für eine flächendeckende Burgen- und Herrschaftsorganisation (Billig 1996). Wichtig ist die Datierung dieser Quelle, die paläographisch um 900 angesetzt werden kann.19 Relevanz für die Frühzeit slawischer Besiedlung besäße der Text nur dann, wenn er ältere „Schichten“ aufwiese. Die Jahrringdaten zeigen jedenfalls, daß Burgwälle nicht von Beginn an die frühmittelalterliche Besiedlung Ostmitteleuropas prägten und deshalb nichts mit Einwanderungen und ethnischen „Überschichtungen“ zu tun haben; Burgen wurden vielmehr in bereits bestehende „Siedlungskammern“ sekundär hineingebaut, wie außerdem an vielen Orten ältere Siedlungsbefunde unter dem Wall zeigen (Brather 2001:123). Eine Frühdatierung der Angaben des Textes in die erste Hälfte des 9. Jahrhunderts (oder gar noch früher), wie sie – unter der Prämisse eines frühen und flächendeckenden Burgenbaus – nicht selten geäußert Deshalb können Befestigungen nicht aus allgemeinen historischen 52 wurde (Herrmann 1986), müßte nun angesichts der neuen Daten voraussetzen, daß mit dem Begriff civitas nicht Burgen, sondern etwa „Siedlungskammern“ gemeint waren. Die knappen Angaben erlauben kaum ein klares Urteil (zum Begriff: Hellmann 1984); lediglich im Passus zu den Bulgaren, die ein sehr umfangreiches Gebiet bewohnen, wird die geringe Zahl von fünf civitates damit begründet, daß dieses Volk (oder seine Großen?) wegen seiner (ihrer?) großen Zahl und Macht civitates nicht benötigte.20 Wahrscheinlich ist demnach, daß der Bayerische Geograph tatsächlich Burgen auflistet – und demzufolge kaum vor den Jahrzehnten um 900 angesetzt werden kann. 5. Gegenwärtiger Zwischenstand Die Diskussionen um die Ursachen des frühmittelalterlichen Burgenbaus im östlichen Mitteleuropa und um die Funktionen der Befestigungen dauern an (Abb. 10). Die steigende Zahl der Jahrringdaten gestattet neue und immer detailliertere Einblicke. Dessen ungeachtet lassen sich einige Feststellungen treffen: 1. Sofern Dendrodaten vorliegen, erfolgte die Errichtung von Burgwällen in durch gewaltsam ausgetragene Konflikte geprägten Zeiten. In wieweit auch „innerslawische“ Auseinandersetzungen den Burgenbau forcierten, ist schwer zu beurteilen; eindeutige Hinweise darauf geben für die elbslawischen Gebiete weder schriftliche noch archäologische Quellen, doch für Masowien zeichnet sich z. B. ein Burgenbau als Reaktion auf piastische Expansionen ab (Dulinicz 1998; 1999). Trotz ihrer jahrgenauen Angaben können Dendrodaten nur schwer mit einzelnen Ereignissen verknüpft werden; sie spiegeln eher strukturelle Reaktionen auf politische Gegebenheiten wider. 2. Burgwälle stellten ein sekundäres Element frühmittelalterlicher Siedlungsstrukturen dar, denn zumindest im 7. und 8. Jahrhundert kam man in weiten Teilen Ostmitteleuropas ohne sie aus. Sie reflektieren damit nicht unmittelbar wachsende soziale Differenzierungen, denn diese gab es auch ohne Befestigungen. Es handelte sich bei den Burgwällen dennoch um eigenständige, charakteristische Bauten, die mittelbar Gesellschaftsstrukturen sichtbar werden lassen.21 3. Da es sich bei den Bauformen und Grundrissen zunächst um zeittypische Modelle handelt, erlauben diese Merkmale keinen Hinweis auf ihre jeweilige Nutzung. Die Bauorganisation dürfte in den Händen Herrmann 1965:220: Vulgarii regio est inmensa et populus multus 18 20 Erwägungen heraus postuliert werden, wie dies Hardt 2002:254 unternimmt. 19 Fritze 1989 („um 900“) und Bischoff 1960:262 Anm. 3 („noch vor 900“) – gegen Dralle 1981:43 f. (Ende des 8. Jahrhunderts) und Fritze 1952 (zwischen 844 und 862). habens civitates V. eo quod multitudo magna ex eis sit et non sit eis opus civitates habere. 21 Dies gilt auch dann, falls sich unter den Befestigungen auch „ringförmige[n] Gehege für Sklaven“ befanden, wie McCormick 2002:176 vermutet. Vgl. auch Donat 2001:235–242. BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Abb. 10Archäologische Anhaltspunkte für die Rekonstruktion von Funktionen eines Burgwalls. einer Oberschicht gelegen haben, doch waren die Anlagen keine „Herrenburgen“ im Sinne eines Adelssitzes. Zunächst bildeten sie vielleicht ad hoc errichtete Refugien kleinerer bzw. größerer (Siedlungs-)Gemeinschaften, ohne damit romantischen Vorstellungen von „Flucht-“ oder „Volksburgen“ zu entsprechen. Ihre Anzahl je Region dürfte dennoch mittelbar die Reichweite politischer Herrschaft bzw. deren Zersplitterung widerspiegeln. 4. Viele Burgwälle wurden, wenn die Bedrohung weggefallen war, wieder aufgegeben. Andere Befestigungen existierten fort, indem sie weitere Funktionen an sich zogen. In bzw. an den großen „Fürstenburgen“ waren neben der Herrschaft auch Kult22, Handwerk und Austausch, Kommunikation und Schutz lokalisiert, was diese als zentrale Orte par excellence erscheinen läßt. Gerade diese strukturellen Aspekte sind der archäologischen Interpretation direkt zugänglich, während sich Herrschaftsverhältnisse und politische Ereignisse allenfalls mittelbar in den Befunden reflektiert werden. Wirtschaftliche und soziale Differenzierungen kennzeichnen großräumigere Herrschaftsbildungen, wie sie sich erst an den „Großburgen“ des 10. Jahrhunderts (bzw. den großmährischen Anlagen des 9. Jahrhunderts) ablesen lassen. 5. Die archäologische Burgenforschung muß sich in jedem Einzelfall auf Luftbilder und geophysikalische Kirchen fanden sich – in Mähren, Böhmen, Polen und bei den 22 Elbslawen – stets innerhalb der umwallten Fläche; vgl. zum Zusammenhang zwischen Burg und Kirche Streich 1984. Prospektion, gezielte Flächengrabungen und präzise Jahrringdaten sowie die Einbeziehung des Umfelds konzentrieren. Nur dann läßt sich vermeiden, daß eine einseitige Fixierung auf Grundrißtypen und Gesellschaftsmodelle (mangels verläßlicher topographischer, zeitlicher und funktionaler Einordnung) zu falschen historischen Schlüssen führt. Nur dann kann die mißliche Gegenüberstellung von „Fluchtburg“ und „Herrensitz“ überwunden werden – und die wirtschaftliche Bedeutung der Burgen verstärkt in den Blick genommen werden. Literatur Behla, R. 1888. Die vorgeschichtlichen Rundwälle im östlichen Deutschland. Eine vergleichend-archäologische Studie. Berlin. Bersu, G. 1930. Der Breite Berg bei Striegau. Eine Burgwalluntersuchung I. Die Grabungen. Breslau. Biermann, F./Dalitz, St./Heußner, K.-U. 1999. Der Brunnen von Schmerzke, Stadt Brandenburg a. d. Havel, und die absolute Chronologie der frühslawischen Besiedlung im nordostdeutschen Raum. In: Prähistorische Zeitschrift 74, 219–243. Biermann, F./Frey, K. 2001. Ringwall und Macht. Über die Burgen des 9./10. Jh. am Teltow und im Berliner Raum. In: Przegląd archeologiczny 49, 59–83. Billig, G. 1996. Zur Rekonstruktion der ältesten slawischen Burgbezirke im obersächsisch-meißnischen Raum auf der Grundlage des Bayerischen Geographen. In: Neues Archiv für sächsische Geschichte 66, 1995, 27–67. Bischoff, B. 1960. Die südostdeutschen Schreibschulen und Bibliotheken in der Karolingerzeit 1. Die bayrischen Diözesen. ²Wiesbaden. 53 Sebastian Brather Zwischen „Fluchtburg“ und „Herrensitz“ Sozialgeschichtliche Interpretationen frühund hochmittelalterlicher Burgwälle in Ostmitteleuropa 54 Brachmann, H. 1993. Der frühmittelalterliche Befestigungsbau in Mitteleuropa. Untersuchungen zu seiner Entwicklung und Funktion im germanisch-deutschen Bereich. Berlin. Brachmann, H. 1996. Westslawische Burgherrschaft im Übergang von der Stammes- zur Staatsgesellschaft. In: Osteuropäische Geschichte in vergleichender Sicht. Festschrift K. Zernack, hrsg. M. G. Müller/F. Adanir/Chr. Lübke/M. Schulze Wessel. Berliner Jahrbuch für osteuropäische Geschichte 1996/1. Berlin, 55–73. Brather, S. 1998. Karolingerzeitlicher Befestigungsbau im wilzisch-abodritischen Raum. Die sogenannten Feldberger Höhenburgen. In: Frühmittelalterlicher Burgenbau in Mittel- und Osteuropa. Tagung Nitra 1996, hrsg. J. Henning/ A. T. Ruttkay. Bonn, 115–126. Brather, S. 2001. Archäologie der westlichen Slawen. Siedlung, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft im früh- und hochmittelalterlichen Ostmitteleuropa. Berlin, New York. Brunner, O. 1939. Land und Herrschaft. Grundfragen der territorialen Verfassungsgeschichte Südostdeutschlands im Mittelalter. Baden. Burg 1995. Burg – Burgstadt – Stadt. Zur Genese mittelalterlicher nichtagrarischer Zentren in Ostmitteleuropa, hrsg. H. Brachmann. Berlin. Donat, P. 1984. Die Mecklenburg. Eine Hauptburg der Obodriten. Berlin. Donat, P. 2001. Aktuelle Fragen der archäologischen Forschungen zur Geschichte der Slawen im nördlichen Deutschland. In: Bodendenkmalpflege in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. Jahrbuch 48, 2000, 215–257. Dralle, L. 1978. Wilzen, Sachsen und Franken um das Jahr 800. In: Aspekte der Nationenbildung im Mittelalter, hrsg. H. Beumann. Sigmaringen, 205–227. Dralle, L. 1981. Slawen an Havel und Spree. Studien zur Geschichte des hevellisch-wilzischen Fürstentums (6. bis 10. Jh.). Berlin. Dulinicz, M. 1998. Frühmittelalterliche Burgen in Masowien. Erste Ergebnisse der deutsch-polnischen Untersuchungen. In: Frühmittelalterlicher Burgenbau in Mittel- und Osteuropa. Tagung Nitra 1996, hrsg. J. Henning/A. T. Ruttkay. Bonn, 167–174. Dulinicz, M. 1999. Archeologia o Mazowszu w czasie powstawania państwa polskiego. Zarys problematyki. Archeologia Polski 44, 93–116. Dulinicz, M. 2002. Forschungen zu den Herrschaftszentren des 10. bis 11. Jahrhunderts in Polen. In: Europa im 10. Jahrhundert. Archäologie einer Aufbruchszeit, hrsg. J. Henning. Mainz, 147–160. Dvorská, J./Boháčová, I. 1999. Das historische Holz im Kontext der archäologischen Untersuchungen der Prager Burg. In: Probleme der mitteleuropäischen Dendrochronologie und naturwissenschaftliche Beiträge zur Talaue der March, hrsg. L. Poláček/J. Dvorská. Brno, 55–67. Dvorská, J./Heußner, U./Poláček, L./Westphal, Th. 1999. Zum Stand der Dendrochronologie in Mikulčice (Mähren, Tschechien). In: Probleme der mitteleuropäischen Dendrochronologie und naturwissenschaftliche Beiträge zur Talaue der March, hrsg. L. Poláček/J. Dvorská. Brno, 69–78. Ebner, H. 1976: Die Burg als Forschungsproblem mittelalterlicher Verfassungsgeschichte. In: Die Burgen im deutschen Sprachraum. Ihre rechts- und verfassungsgeschichtliche Bedeutung 1, hrsg. H. Patze. Sigmaringen, 11–82. Eggers, H. J. 1986. Einführung in die Vorgeschichte. ³München. Friedel, E. 1878. Die Stein-, Bronce- und Eisen-Zeit in der Mark Brandenburg. Berlin. Fritze, W. H. 1952. Die Datierung des Geographus Bavarus und die Stammesverfassung der Abodriten. In: Zeitschrift für slavische Philologie 21, 326–342. Fritze, W. H. 1989. s. v. Geographus Bavarus. In: Lexikon des Mittelalters 4. München, Zürich, 1269 f. Frolík, J./Smetánka, Z. 1997. Archeologie na pražskem hradě. Praha, Litomyšl. Gabriel, I. 1984. Starigard/Oldenburg. Hauptburg der Slawen in Wagrien 1. Stratigraphie und Chronologie. Neumünster. Gabriel, I. 1989. Hof- und Sakralkultur sowie Gebrauchsund Handelsgut im Spiegel der Kleinfunde von Starigard/ Oldenburg. In: Berichte der RGK 69, 1988, 103–291. Gebuhr, R. 1996. Burg und Landschaft. Kulturhistorische Untersuchung zur Archäologie frühgeschichtlicher Wehrbauten an Elbe und Elster am Beispiel der Burg auf dem „Grünen Berg“ bei Gehren. Magisterarbeit HumboldtUniversität. Berlin. Gebuhr, K./Gebuhr, R. 2001. Bemerkungen zum Begriff „Burg“. In: Sinn und Sein, Burg und Mensch, hrsg. F. Daim/Th. Kühtreiber. Ausstellungskatalog. St. Pölten, 418–426. Götze, A. 1901. Die Schwedenschanze auf der Klinke bei Riewend, Kreis Westhavelland. In: Nachrichten über deutsche Alterthumsfunde 12, 17–26. Grebe, K. 1991. Die Brandenburg vor 1000 Jahren. Potsdam. Gringmuth-Dallmer, E. 1998. Bevölkerungsexplosion um die Jahrtausendwende? Zur Umgestaltung der slawischen Siedlungslandschaft in Nordostdeutschland. In: Archäologische Forschungen in urgeschichtlichen Siedlungslandschaften. Festschrift G. Kossack, hrsg. H. Küster/A. Lang/P. Schauer. Regensburg, 577–601. Hardt, M. 2002. Aspekte der Herrschaftsbildung bei den frühen Slawen. In: Integration und Herrschaft. Ethnische Identitäten und soziale Organisation im Frühmittelalter, hrsg. W. Pohl/M. Diesenberger. Wien, 249–255. Hellmann, M. 1984. s. v. civitas § 2. civitas bei den Slawen. In: Reallexikon der germanischen Altertumskunde² 5. Berlin, New York, 13–14. Henning, J. 1991. Germanen, Slawen, Deutsche. Neue Untersuchungen zum frühgeschichtlichen Siedlungswesen östlich der Elbe. In: Prähistorische Zeitschrift 66, 119–133. Henning, J. 1997. Ringwallburgen und Reiterkrieger. Zum Wandel der Militärstrategie im ostsächsisch-slawischen Raum an der Wende vom 9. zum 10. Jahrhundert. ���������������������� In: Military studies in medieval Europe. Papers of the ‘Medieval Europe Brugge 1997’ conference 11, ed. G. �������������� de Boe/Fr. Verhaeghe. Zellik, 21–31. Henning, J. 1998. Archäologische Forschungen an Ringwällen in Niederungslage. Die Niederlausitz als Burgenlandschaft des östlichen Mitteleuropas im frühen Mittelalter. In: Frühmittelalterlicher Burgenbau in Mittel- und Osteuropa. Tagung Nitra 1996, hrsg. J. Henning/A. T. Ruttkay. Bonn, 9–29. Henning, J. 2002. Der slawische Siedlungsraum und die ottonische Expansion östlich der Elbe. Ereignisgeschichte, Archäologie, Dendrochronologie. In: Europa im 10. Jahrhundert. Archäologie einer Aufbruchszeit, hrsg. J. Henning. Mainz, 131–146. Henning, J./Heußner, K.-U. 1991. Zur ������������������������� Burgengeschichte im 10. Jahrhundert. Neue archäologische und dendrochrono- BALTICA 6 tausrüstung aus Europa und ihr Beitrag zur Kultur- und Sozialgeschichte der Ottonenzeit. In: Europa im 10. Jahrhundert. Archäologie einer Aufbruchszeit, hrsg. J. Henning. Mainz, 283–299. Klemm, G. Fr. 1836. Handbuch der Germanischen Alterthümer. Dresden. Knorr, H. A. 1937. Die slawische Keramik zwischen Elbe und Oder. Einteilung und Zeitansetzung auf Grund der Münzgefäße. Mit einem kurzen Abriß der frühmittelalterlichen Keramik. Leipzig. �������� Kobyliński, Z. 1990. Early medieval hillforts in Polish lands in the 6th to the 8th centuries. Problems of origins, function, and spatial organization. In: From the Baltic to the Black Sea. Studies in medieval archaeology, ed. D. Austin/ L. Alcock. London, 147–156. Krąpiec, M. 1998. Dendrochronological dating of early medieval fortified settlements in Poland. In: �������������������� Frühmittelalterlicher Burgenbau in Mittel- und Osteuropa. Tagung Nitra 1996, hrsg. J. Henning/A. T. Ruttkay. Bonn, 257–266. Kurnatowska, Z. 1991. Tworzenie się państwa pierwszych piastów w aspekcie archeologicznym, in: Od plemienia do państwa. Śląsk na tle wczesnośredniowiecznej słowiańszczyzny zachodniej, hrsg. L. Leciejewicz. Wrocław, Warszawa, 77–98. Kurnatowska, Z. 2000a. Herrschaftszentren und Herrschaftsorganisation. In: Europas Mitte um 1000. Beiträge zur Geschichte, Kunst und Archäologie 1, hrsg. A. Wieczorek/H.M. Hinz. Ausstellungskatalog Budapest, Krakau, Berlin, Mannheim, Prag, Bratislava. Stuttgart, 458–463. Kurnatowska, Z. 2000b. Wczesnopiastowskie grody centralne. Podobieństwa i różnice. In: Gniezno i Poznań w państwe pierwszych Piastów, hrsg. A. Wójtowicz. Poznań, 9–32. Langenheim, K. 1939. Der frühslawische Burgwall von Gustau, Kr. Glogau. In: Altschlesien 8, 104–127. Lübke, Chr. 1991. Arbeit und Wirtschaft im östlichen Mitteleuropa. Die Spezialisierung menschlicher Tätigkeit im Spiegel der hochmittelalterlichen Toponymie in den Herrschaftsgebieten von Piasten, Přemysliden und Arpaden. Stuttgart. Marschalleck, K.-H. 1954. Burgenprobleme zwischen Elbe und Oder. In: Frühe Burgen und Städte. Beiträge zur Burgen- und Stadtkernforschung. Festschrift W. Unverzagt. Berlin, 29–43. McCormick, M. 2002. Verkehrswege, Handel und Sklaven zwischen Europa und dem Nahen Osten um 900. Von der Geschichtsschreibung zur Archäologie? In: Europa im 10. Jahrhundert. Archäologie einer Aufbruchszeit, hrsg. J. Henning. Mainz, 171–180. Meyer, M. im Druck. Zur Entwicklung der archäologischen Grabungstechnik in der ersten Hälfte des 20. Jahrhunderts aus Berliner und Brandenburger Sicht. In: Berlin und Brandenburg. Geschichte der archäologischen Forschung. Tagung Berlin 2003, hrsg. E. Gringmuth-Dallmer/J. Kunow/W. Menghin. v. Müller, A./v. Müller-Muči, K./Nekuda, V. 1993. Die Keramik vom Burgwall in Berlin-Spandau. Berlin. Olczak, J./Siuchniński, K. 1975. Typologische Klassifikation der frühmittelalterlichen Burganlagen in Mittelpommern. In: Ethnographisch-archäologische Zeitschrift 16, 443–474. Petersen, E. 1937. Der Burgwall von Kleinitz, Kr. Grünberg. In: Altschlesien 7, 59–93. Poláček, L. 1996. Zum Stand der siedlungsarchäologischen Forschung in Mikulčice. In: Frühmittelalterliche Machtzentren in Mitteleuropa. Mehrjährige Grabungen ARCHAELOGIA logische Daten zu Anlagen vom Typ Tornow. In: Ausgrabungen und Funde 37, 314–324. van Heringen, R. M./Hendrikx, P. A./Mars, A. 1995. Vroegmiddeleeuwse ringwalburgen in Zealand. Goes, Amersfoort. Herrmann, E. 1965. Slawisch-germanische Beziehungen im südostdeutschen Raum von der Spätantike bis zum Ungarnsturm. Ein Quellenbuch mit Erläuterungen. München. Herrmann, J. 1960. Die vor- und frühgeschichtlichen Burgwälle Groß-Berlins und des Bezirkes Potsdam. Berlin. Herrmann, J. 1966. Tornow und Vorberg. Ein Beitrag zur Frühgeschichte der Lausitz. Berlin. Herrmann, J. 1967. Gemeinsamkeiten und Unterschiede im Burgenbau der slawischen Stämme westlich der Oder. In: Zeitschrift für Archäologie 1, 206–258. Herrmann, J. 1968. Siedlung, Wirtschaft und gesellschaftliche Verhältnisse der slawischen Stämme zwischen Oder/ Neiße und Elbe. Studien auf der Grundlage archäologischen Materials. Berlin. Herrmann, J. 1969. Feldberg, Rethra und das Problem der wilzischen Höhenburgen. In: Slavia antiqua 16, 33–69. Herrmann, J. 1976. Zwischen Hradschin und Vineta. Frühe Kulturen der Westslawen. ²Leipzig, Jena, Berlin. Herrmann, J. 1983. Wanderungen und Landnahme im westslawischen Gebiet. ���������������������������������������� In: Gli Slavi occidentali e meridionali nell’alto medioevo 1. Spoleto, 75–101. Herrmann, J. 1986. Ruzzi, Forsderen ludi, Fresiti. Zu historischen und siedlungsgeschichtlichen Grundlagen des „Bayrischen Geographen“ aus der ersten Hälfte des 9. Jahrhunderts. In: ders., Wege zur Geschichte. Ausgewählte Beiträge, hrsg. B. Tesche. Berlin, 455–461. Herrmann, J./Coblenz, W. 1985. Burgen und Befestigungen. In: Die Slawen in Deutschland. Geschichte und Kultur der slawischen Stämme westlich von Oder und Neiße vom 6. bis 12. Jahrhundert. Ein Handbuch. Neubearbeitung, hrsg. J. Herrmann. Berlin, 186–232. Herrmann, J./Heußner, K.-U. 1992. Dendrochronologie, Archäologie und Frühgeschichte vom 6. bis 12. Jh. in den Gebieten zwischen Saale, Elbe und Oder. In: Ausgrabungen und Funde 36, 255–290. Heußner, K.-U./Westphal, T. 1998. Dendrochronologische Untersuchungen an Holzfunden aus frühmittelalterlichen Burgwällen zwischen Elbe und Oder. In: Frühmittelalterlicher Burgenbau in Mittel- und Osteuropa. Tagung Nitra 1996, hrsg. J. Henning/A. T. Ruttkay. Bonn, 223–234. Hülle, W. 1940. Westausbreitung und Wehranlagen der Slawen in Mitteldeutschland. Leipzig. Jahn, M. 1937. Der Burgwall von Poppschütz, Kr. Freystadt. In: Altschlesien 7, 93–112. Jankuhn, H. 1976. Die sächsischen Burgen der karolingischen Zeit. In: Die Burgen im deutschen Sprachraum. Ihre rechts- und verfassungsgeschichtliche Bedeutung 1, hrsg. H. Patze. Sigmaringen, 359–382. Jankuhn, H. 1981. s. v. Burgenkunde. In: Reallexikon der germanischen Altertumskunde² 4. Berlin, New York, 216– 223. Jäschke, K.-U. 1975. Burgenbau und Landesverteidigung um 900. Überlegungen zu Beispielen aus Deutschland, Frankreich und England. Sigmaringen. Kempke, T. 1999. Slawische Burgen des 7.–10. Jahrhunderts. In: Burgen in Mitteleuropa. Ein Handbuch 1. Bauformen und Entwicklung, hrsg. H. W. Böhme/B. von der Dollen/D. Kerber/C. Meckseper/B. Schock-Werner/J. Zeune. Stuttgart, 45–53. Kind, Th. 2002. Archäologische Funde von Teilen der Rei- 55 Sebastian Brather Zwischen „Fluchtburg“ und „Herrensitz“ Sozialgeschichtliche Interpretationen frühund hochmittelalterlicher Burgwälle in Ostmitteleuropa 56 und ihre Auswertung, hrsg. Č. Staňa/L. Poláček. Brno, 213–260. Preidel, H. 1961. Slawische Altertumskunde des östlichen Mitteleuropas im 9. und 10. Jahrhundert 1. Gräfelfing. Preidel, H. 1966. Slawische Altertumskunde des östlichen Mitteleuropas im 9. und 10. Jahrhundert 3. Gräfelfing. Radig, W. 1940. Die sorbischen Burgen Westsachsens und Ostthüringens. In: Hülle 1940, 119–167. Schuchhardt, C. 1909. Die Römerschanze bei Potsdam nach den Ausgrabungen 1908 und 1909. In: Prähistorische Zeitschrift 1, 209–238. Schuchhardt, C. 1913. s. v. Befestigungswesen. In: Reallexikon der germanischen Altertumskunde, hrsg. J. Hoops, Bd. 1. Stuttgart, 204–211. Schuchhardt, C. 1919. 1. Festrede des Vorsitzenden Herrn Schuchhardt. In: Zeitschrift für Ethnologie 51, 276–290. Schuchhardt, C. 1924. Die frühgeschichtlichen Befestigungen in Niedersachsen. Bad Salzuflen. Schuchhardt, C. 1926. Arkona, Rethra, Vineta. Ortsuntersuchungen und Ausgrabungen. ²Berlin. Schuchhardt, C. 1931. Die Burg im Wandel der Weltgeschichte. Potsdam. Schuchhardt, C. 1939. Vorgeschichte von Deutschland. 4Berlin. Schuldt, E. 1985. Groß Raden. Ein slawischer Tempelort des 9./10. Jahrhunderts in Mecklenburg. Berlin. Šolle, M. 1984. Staroslovanské hradisko. Charakteristika, funkce, výrós a význam. Praha. Starigard/Oldenburg 1991. Starigard/Oldenburg. Ein slawischer Herrschersitz des frühen Mittelalters in Ostholstein, hrsg. M. Müller-Wille. Neumünster. Streich, G. 1984. Burg und Kirche während des deutschen Mittelalters. Untersuchungen zur Sakraltopographie von Pfalzen, Burgen und Herrensitzen 1–2. Sigmaringen. Unverzagt, M. 1985. Wilhelm Unverzagt und die Pläne zur Gründung eines Instituts für die Vorgeschichte Ostdeutschlands. Mainz. Unverzagt, W. 1940. Der Burgwall von Kliestow, Kr. Lebus. In: Studien zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte [Festschrift Carl Schuchhardt]. Berlin, 73–87. Unverzagt, W. 1942. Landschaft, Burgen und Bodenfunde als Quellen nordostdeutscher Frühgeschichte. In: Deutsche Ostforschung. Ergebnisse und Aufgaben seit dem ersten Weltkrieg. Festschrift Albert Brackmann, hrsg. H. Aubin/O. Brunner/W. Kohte/J. Papritz, Bd. 1. Leipzig, 267–290. v. Uslar, R. 1964. Studien zu frühgeschichtlichen Befestigungen zwischen Nordsee und Alpen. Köln, Graz. Virchow, R. 1869. Die Pfahlbauten im nördlichen Deutschland. In: Zeitschrift für Ethnologie 1, 401–416. Virchow, R. 1872. Über Gräberfelder und Burgwälle der Nieder-Lausitz und die überoderischen Gebiete. In: Zeitschrift für Ethnologie 4, , Verhandlungen, (226)–(238). Virchow, R. 1880. Der Spreewald und die Lausitz. Zeitschrift für Ethnologie 12, 222–236. Wachter, B. 1981. s. v. Burg § 27. Westslaw[ische] B[urg]. In: Reallexikon der germanischen Altertumskunde² 4. Berlin, New York, 202–208. Wagner, Fr. A. 1828. Die Tempel und Pyramiden der Urbewohner auf dem rechten Elbufer unweit dem Ausfluß der schwarzen Elster. Leipzig. Wetzel, G. 1985. Die archäologischen Untersuchungen in den Gemarkungen Schönfeld und Seese, Kr. Calau. In: Veröffentlichungen des Museums für Ur- und Frühgeschichte Potsdam 19, 13–117. Zeune, J. 1996. Burgen. Symbole der Macht. Ein neues Bild der mittelalterlichen Burg. Regensburg. Sebastian Brather Institut für Ur- und Frühgeschichte Universität Wien, Austria [email protected] Erhalten: 2002 NUO „PILIES-SLĖPTUVĖS“ I K I „ D I D I K O RE Z I DENC I J O S “ . RY T Ų I R V I D U R I O E U R O P O S ANKSTYVŲJŲ VIDURAMŽIŲ IR VIDURAMŽIŲ PILIAKALNIAI S O C I A L I N Ė S I S T O R I J O S ASPEKTU Sebastian Brather Santrauka Diskusija apie priežastis, kurios ankstyvaisiais viduramžiais vertė pradėti statyti pilis, tebesitęsia. Naujai ir detaliau pažvelgti į šį reiškinį leidžia pastaruoju metu gausėjančios dendrochronologinės datos. Daromos tokios išvados: 1. Žmonės piliakalnius pradėjo įrenginėti ir pilis statyti paaštrėjus tarpusavio kovoms tarp genčių ir genčių viduje. Elbės slavų regione tai paliudyta rašytiniais ir archeologijos šaltiniais. Mazovijoje pilių statyba siejama su reakcija į Piastų ekspansiją. Dendrochronologines datas sunku susieti su konkrečiais istoriniais įvykiais, tačiau jos pakankamai gerai atspindi struktūrinę reakciją į politinius įvykius. 2. Piliakalniai yra antrinis ankstyvųjų viduramžių gyvenviečių struktūrinis elementas. Piliakalniai neatspindi augančios socialinės diferenciacijos – ji egzistavo ir prieš jiems atsirandant. Piliakalnių statybos reiškinys yra tarpininkas, padedantis išryškinti visuomenės struktūrą. 3. Piliakalnių formą ir planą galima susieti su atitinkamais laikotarpiais, tačiau šie požymiai negali parodyti jų naudojimo būdo. Pilių statybos organizavimas buvo aukštesniojo visuomenės sluoksnio rankose, tačiau jos nuo to netampa „didikų pilimis“. Pilys turbūt pradžioje buvo skirtos pasislėpti bendruomenės nariams, tačiau jos neatitinka romantiško „pilių-slėptuvių“ ar „liaudies pilių“ įvaizdžio. Pilių skaičius buvo susijęs su politinės valdžios susiskaldymu regionuose. 5. Pilių archeologija turi apimti aerofotografiją, geofizinius tyrimus, kasinėjimus dideliais plotais, tikslias dendrochronologines datas, aplinkos tyrimus. Vienpusė piliakalnių planų ir modelių fiksacija, neatsižvelgiant į topografinius, temporalinius ir funkcinius veiksnius, gali sąlygoti klaidingas istorines išvadas. Abejotiną priešpriešą tarp sąvokų „pilis slėptuvė“ ir „didiko rezidencija“ leistų atmesti tik tyrimų visuma. BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA 4. Dauguma pilių būdavo atstatinėjamos periodiškai, kitos keitė savo funkcijas. Pvz., didelėse „kunigaikščių pilyse“, be valdymo funkcijos, įžiūrimos ir kitos: kulto, amatų ir prekinių mainų, komunikacijų ir gynybinė. Tokios pilys laikomos centrinėmis vietomis. Šias funkcijas ir politinius įvykius atspindi archeologiniai radiniai. Aukštuomenės formacijas išryškino ūkinė ir socialinė diferenciacija bei X a. „didžiosios pilys“. 57 Marina Smirnova Pole Constructions in Open Air Ritual Areas of the Northern Sambian Coast in the First Millennium Ad P o l e C ons t r u c t i ons i n O p e n A i r R i t u a l A r e as of t h e N ort h e rn S am b i an C oas t i n t h e f i rs t M i l l e nn i u m A D Marina Smirnova Abstract The open ritual area is one type of pagan cult site. In this article are presented the results of an analysis of wooden pole frames and constructions from six open ritual areas in the northern Sambian peninsula. Their chronogical time covers the third to the 13th centuries AD. Open ritual areas coexisted with fireplaces and pits. In the early phase pole constructions are characterised by a rectangular shape, and subsequently a roundish shape. Analogies with open ritual areas are known in Poland, Denmark and Germany. Key words: open ritual area, Sambia, wooden pole, ritual, fireplace, pit, construction. The open ritual area (ORA) represents one type of pagan cult site. The term was introduced by I.P. Rusanova (Русанова, Тимощук 1993: 6) for the notation of places for the realisation of repeated rites, which were never contoured or distinguished by artificial banks or ditches. The complexity of their functional attribution and their relative sparsity for a long time made these archaeological sites an “ungrateful theme” for the typology, analysis of components, and describing of chronological and local variants. However, recently researchers from different countries have carried out the cataloguing of ritual areas in the southeast Baltic and nearby territories (Даугудис 1988, Daugudis 1992; Русанова, Тимощук 1993; Slupecki 1994; Vaitkevičius 1998, etc). This has revealed a considerable amount of archaeological sites in this category. Thus, the opportunity has appeared to compare ОRA planigraphic characteristics, and to analyse the components and means of structural organisation. I present the results of an analysis of wooden pole frames and constructions which form one of the organisational components of ritual areas in this quite short publication. (Besides the timber frames and constructions for such sites, stones and pavements, pits, fireplaces and other devices should be mentioned as features of the organisation of the sacral space for ritual activity.) A compact group of six ORAs in the northern Sambian peninsula (Kaliningrad region, Russia) was chosen for analysis (Fig. 1). They probably had a similar ritual function, since all of them are situated in cemeteries or are adjoining them. Their chronological time span is quite wide: the third to the 13th centuries AD. The considerable role of “purgatorial fire” in the rituals of the people who left these sites does not allow 58 us to date precisely the initial appearance of these ritual complexes; therefore, the relative chronology here can be based only on the abandoning of a complex or an enclosed space. The termination of activity at these sites is as follows: 1. third to fifth centuries AD for the “area with three fireplaces” at Dobroye (Hünenberg); 2. fourth to fifth centuries for the “Moulder workshop” at Dobroye (Hünenberg); 3. not later than the early sixth century for Kovrovo (Dollkeim); 4. late tenth century for Klintsovka 1; 5. tenth century for Mokhovoye (Kaup); 6. not later than the 13th century for Klintsovka 3. All these ritual places were excavated in 1978–2002 by the Baltic archaeological expedition under Vladimir Kulakov. We can reconstruct actual timber pole constructions and frames basing ourselves only on preserved postholes, since unburned timber cannot survive in the local soil. Post-holes traced during excavations allow us to discern two variants: 1. small shallow pits left by thin poles with a diameter of about ten centimetres; 2. post-holes from poles with a large diameter, which have been dug up to a metre into the subsoil. The physical characteristics of such post-holes vary in particular sites depending on the soil and the probable means of their erection, but in general such differences are seen in the majority of the sites analysed. BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 1. Open-air ritual areas on the northern coast of Sambia. The difference between these two variants can be especially clearly seen at Dollkeim (Fig. 2). In contrast to larger post-holes, pits of the first type never form any complex constructions, planigraphically they may be seen as single or forming small groups. Such pits here were frequently dug over already existing holes of other types. Alternatively, poles may also be traced only at the bottom of pits covered by later deposits. This allows us to assume a short period of existence of thin poles. Massive poles are included here into the original frame, and are discussed below. Two types of holes are identified at the Hünenberg ORA, but not so evidently as at Dollkeim. At the eastern ritual complex (the “field with three fireplaces” (Fig. 3), pits of a smaller diameter are seen as an irregular group in the eastern part of the eastern construction. Meanwhile, poles of a different diameter were used in the same sites for more complex constructions. A combination in one construction of poles with a different diameter demonstrates the rather younger western complex (the so-called “moulder workshop”) from the ritual area of this cemetery (Fig. 4). In the Hünenberg ORA thin poles were probably used as a supplementary material in complex wooden construction. At the same time, they also served as temporary markers: a function recorded not only for the ritual area, but also for the cemetery’s surroundings. The tendency to use poles of a different diameter in one construction is even more clearly seen in the Klintsovka 3 open ritual area, where holes with variations in diameter of two or three times coexist in the same series during both phases of its functioning (Fig. 5). Only in two cases is it possible to assume a short-term use and a slight replacement of poles, which are located near other ritual objects in the eastern ritual group of the early phase and the late phase of the southern group. These post-holes were dug into pits of a larger diameter, and their characteristics give us reason to suppose that they were not intended as poles. A few post-holes are recorded at the Klintsovka 1 ORA (Fig. 6), and there is not sufficient data to divide them according to diameter. Only two post-holes of quite a large diameter were revealed at the Kaup-Mokhovoye ritual area (Fig. 7). At the ORA under consideration, massive poles were used in two ways: as detached post poles, and for complex pole frames and constructions. Post poles. These are recorded at Klintsovka 1 ORA, where they were included in ritual groups and combined with other elements of ritual structures. They are related to stone with traces of anthropogenic activity and with a groove-shaped pit. This group is situated at the southern border of the area. Revealed at the northwest border of the same area, stone rings may presum- 59 Fig. 2. Dollkeim cemetery. Pole constructions of the early and late phase 60 Marina Smirnova Pole Constructions in Open Air Ritual Areas of the Northern Sambian Coast in the First Millennium Ad BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 3. Early and late pole constructions in the “open-air ritual area with three fireplaces”, Hünenberg cemetery ably be interpreted as the remains of the strengthening for a pole of considerable diameter. As in the south, it was accompanied by a stone with artificial marks and some pits, which have a function other than the erection of poles. A ritual group with similar elements (which comprised a pole, a stone, and a pit of another type) marks the western border of the ORA at Klintsovka 3 (Fig. 5). One more post-pole was traced to the southeast of the stone-paved fireplace. Two massive poles were elements of a sacral structure of the Mokhovoye-Kaup open-air ritual area (Fig. 7). They are aligned from north to south, and have some stone paving; however, the character of the post-holes’ infill differs, so they cannot be considered as elements of one pole construction. It should be noted that we do not have enough information to discuss whether these poles were decorated with anthropomorphic carvings in their upper part, ie if they were used as idols. Complex pole constructions and frames. Some variants of pole constructions and frames were recorded in the ritual areas considered. The earliest construction comes from Dollkeim-Kovrovo (Fig. 2). Here in the south of the ritual area the remains of a rectangular-shaped pole frame are revealed, running from north to south. Pits of an average diameter form its long sides, and there is one more series of pits in the central part, where the pits are aligned in the same direction. Along the western side, at the ancient surface, some residuals of a sod band were found. These pieces of surface soil with roots of plants probably adjoined the bottom of the “wall” line. Unfortunately destroyed by pits on the northern side of the construction, they belonged to the later phase of the ritual area’s existence. The construction is dated to the Late Roman Period; it has analogies in Poland, and on the southwest and western shores of the Baltic (Fig. 8) (Mączyńska 1998: 304, abb. 7). To the north and northeast of this construction another one appeared later, and partly overlapped it. With modifications and rearrangements, it existed right up 61 Marina Smirnova Pole Constructions in Open Air Ritual Areas of the Northern Sambian Coast in the First Millennium Ad Fig. 4. Pole construction at the “moulder workshop”, Hünenberg cemetery Fig. 5. The open-air ritual area at Klintsovka 3: pole constructions of the early and the late phases 62 to the turn of the fifth and sixth centuries (Fig. 8). This construction consists of two lines of massive poles, and runs from northeast to southwest. ular series of thin poles. The basic elements (stones, pits, etc) of construction were found in the frames of the rectangular area. The southeast line length is 16.5 metres, it included four poles, separated by 4.5 metres from each other. The remnants of the second line are nine metres northwest of it. Only one pole has survived, while others were destroyed by modern pits. The southwest and northwest borders of the area are marked by an irreg- It is interesting that sections of 4.5 metres in length and divisible by 4.5 metres probably represent a Prussian measure of length in those times, as this length was revealed in other ritual areas, which will be discussed below. BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 6. The open-air ritual area at Klintsovka 1 Attention should be paid to the fact that there were permanent walls between the poles of one series. It may be traced by the location of synchronic pits of another character on each side of the presumable wall, as well as by the lack of either wall remnants or even traces of it. Stratigraphic observations on pits located inside and outside the frame revealed “aeolian constructions”. The geographer L.A. Zhindarev kindly confirmed that they appear during rainy and stormy seasons in areas with a similar soil (mild loamy sand), which clearly demonstrates the lack of a roof above the considered area. Thus, we are dealing with pole constructions without permanent walls, bounding the central part of the ritual area. The frame, along with other ritual objects of the open-air ritual area under consideration, went out of use no later than the early sixth century AD, when burials cut into the remnants of pits and constructions in the ritual area. Pole constructions and frames are revealed in a ritual area at Dobroye-Hünenberg cemetery in its eastern as well as its western parts (Fig. 9). In many respects, similar and partly overlapping pole constructions were revealed at the extreme western area (the “area with three fireplaces” (Fig. 3). The more eastern one was excavated almost completely, while the western one was partly destroyed by a modern sand pit. The eastern rectangular frame was constructed from coupled poles (with somewhat massive poles erected at the corners). Its longer sides ran from northwest to southeast. The short sides were 4.5 metres long, while the longer ones extended to 8.7 or nine metres. The northwest part was fenced in by a double series of poles. Coupled poles were also found at the centre of the construction. The locating of pits/fireplaces between the poles of the shorter side confirms a lack of permanent walls at least along the shorter sections, at Dollkeim. Unfortunately, there is not enough evidence to discuss the possibility of the existence of a roof. The construction was presumably destroyed by a fire, which may be traced by ash and charcoal in the post-holes. Planigraphically similar remnants of the second frame, with the same coupled poles and fireplaces on the shorter side, were traced to the east of the above-mentioned construction. Its southeast part was destroyed by the sand pit. Stratigraphic observations give some grounds to suppose its later existence. 63 Marina Smirnova Pole Constructions in Open Air Ritual Areas of the Northern Sambian Coast in the First Millennium Ad Fig. 7. The open-air ritual area, Kaup cemetery Inside both frames there were complex ritual areas with clay fireplaces, sacrificial pits, etc. 64 and 2.9 metres long. The distance of 4.5 metres between coupled poles in this frame should be noted as well. As at the eastern ritual area, the pole construction here coexisted with fireplaces and pits, forming a single complex. The construction in the western part of the sacral area of the Dobroye-Hünenberg cemetery (the “moulder workshop”) had slightly different characteristics (Fig. 4). It was erected in a small foundation pit of irregular ovoid shape, facing the same way as the constructions in the “area with three fireplaces”. Two symmetrical series of pits left by thin poles were traced near the short sides. Near the longer sides of the foundation pit a similar pit was found in the northeast part, and a wider roundish hollow was recorded in the southwest. The remnants of walls were not revealed. The pole frame had an irregular rectangular shape with sides of two Pole constructions in the open-air ritual area at Klintsovka 3 may be described as fences. This open-air ritual area is the only one located outside a cemetery. During the early as well as the late phases of its use it consisted of a series of post-hole fencing from south-southwest to southeast, and other elements (Fig. 5). In the late phase, the series of close post-holes continues to the northeast, pits of the early phase have not been recorded there, although they were probably destroyed by the erection of the later pole construction. The planigraphics of the fence demonstrated its irregular roundish shape, with an open space on the northwest side; the BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 8. Analogies with open-air ritual areas of the first and second chronological variants. 1 Open-air ritual areas of the northern Sambian coast; 2 Enderupskov; 3 Højvang; 4 Hørløk; 5 Store Skinberg; 6 Farre; 7 Køstrup; 8 Bitoften; 9 Møllegårdsmarken; 10 Gjurup; 11 Friedland; 12 Novy Targ; 13 Maslomęcz; 14 Pskov; 15 Кereliai; 16 Bačkininkėliai; 17 Chodosevichi; 18 Shumsk; 19 Płock; 20 Breczlav-Pohansko planigraphics of the pits are quite uniform in the early phase. A roundish paved area situated in the northwest open sector was used as a fireplace. Inside the fence there were pits and small stone paved areas. Complex pole constructions and frames were not revealed in the Klintsovka 1 and Mokhovoye-Kaup open ritual areas. Unfortunately, the earliest pole construction belonging to the first phase of the Dollkeim ORA was later destroyed. It is impossible to trace the location of the entrance. Surviving remnants at the sides give reason to suggest an orientation of the long axis from north to south. The long axis of all constructions from both parts of the Dobroye-Hünenberg ORA was uniformly oriented, and coincided with the sunset point at the summer solstice (astronomic observations were kindly made by M.G. Gusakiv, in compliance with basic information on the main points of sunrise and sunset, prepared at the Physics Institute of Earth RAS). Taking into consideration the distribution of the fireplaces on the shorter sides of the construction, the location of the pits inside them, and the arrangement of the poles, we may suppose the existence of an entrance at the northeast side of two constructions in the “area with two fireplaces”. In the “moulder workshop” the location of the entrance may be supposed to be on the southwest as well as the northeast sides. The orientation of the construction’s sides at the Dollkeim ORA during the late phase coincides with the maximum of the moonrise at this latitude. From the location of the construction’s sides, its entrance was also at the northeast. The alignment of the construction’s sides during the late phase of the Dollkeim ORA (31° NE-SW) coin- 65 Marina Smirnova Pole Constructions in Open Air Ritual Areas of the Northern Sambian Coast in the First Millennium Ad Fig. 9. Hünenberg cemetery. The “open-air ritual area with three fireplaces” and the “moulder workshop” in the cemetery cides with the maximum point of the high moonrise at the given latitude. By locating the objects in the frame, we may suppose the position of an entrance in the northeast side. At both stages of the Klintsovka 3 ORA’s existence, its “fence” was open to the northwest, where the fireplace was located, so the ORA was oriented to the point of the summer sunset at the solstice. It was in the exact direction from a southeast group of poles and pits through a pole in front of the fireplace and the fireplace itself. The “entrance” was presumably near the fireplace, to the west of it, or less probably to the northwest, where the open sector is shown in the line of poles. It should be noted that the locating of poles and other objects inside the areas, where timber was traced, mainly follows the same patterns: the orientation is to the sunset at the summer solstice, to the points of sunrise and sunset of the full and new moon, and midday points (north-south). Such an exact arrangement of construction in accordance with astronomic points is evidence of special accounts and measurements before the construction. Probably, some of the pits of thin poles appeared from the preliminary planning of the area, chosen by the ancient builders for an ORA. 66 The direction of the sunset point during the summer solstice (there are five examples of such an alignment) and the directions of the midday point, the moon, and the summer sunset were probably the most important; they are recorded for an early ORA (Hünenberg) as well as for a later ORA (Kaup). So, this direction was important during all the period considered. Concerning chronological modifications in the form and dimensions of the constructions, it should be mentioned that the rectangular shape and small dimensions apply to more ancient ones (the early stage of Dollkeim, the “area with three fireplaces” from the Hünenberg ORA). Around the middle of the first millennium, ORAs began to acquire other features: the areas were enlarged, ORAs became ovoid or roundish in form. Analogies with early areas are known in northern Poland (Novy Targ, Maslomęcz), but they are much more numerous in the southwest, in Denmark and in the north of Germany (Enderupskov, Højvang, Hørløk, Store Skinberg, Farre, Køstrup, Bitoften, Møllegårdsmarken, Gjurup, Friedland), where small pole frames of a rectangular shape are known in cemeteries. They are aligned mainly north-south, with a small deviation to the northwest (Mączyńska 1998: 301–304). Late ORAs have a roundish shape and have analogies in remains from the same period in Lithuanian (Кereliai, Bačkininkėliai, etc [Daugudis 1992: 65–67] and Slavic territories [Płock, Breczlav-Pohansko, Pskov, Chodosevichi, Shumsk, etc]) (Slupecki 1994: 130–132; Русанова, Тимощук 1993: 18) (Fig. 8). Detached post poles are known everywhere. There are no analogies with the ORA at Dollkeim because of its special features, though some details are the same as at other ORAs considered. Its alignment differs, its main axis depends on the moon instead of the sun. In the second half of the period considered constructions gained a roundish shape, and detached post poles were used more often. During all the period under consideration, some technological details of constructions (alignment, measure of length, etc) were kept to. The observance of traditions in funeral rites and the existence of some cemeteries throughout all the period is shown. Under these circumstances, it is possible to explain the modifications in the forms and means of the sacral space organisation in ORAs by changes in funeral rituals, in the participants, in the set of rituals which were followed at these sanctuaries, and finally by changes in ideas about the ties of the participants with the other world, the view of the path of the deceased to the other world. References Daugudis, V. 1992. Pagoniškųjų šventyklų Lietuvoje klausimu. In: Ikikrikščioniškosios Lietuvos kultűra. Vilnius. Mączyńska, M. 1998. Ein spätkaiserzeitliches “Totenhaus” aus Ostpolen und sein Beziehungen zu Skandinavien. In: Studien zur Archäologie des Ostsseeraumes. Von der Eisenzeit zum Mittelalter. Neumünster. Slupecki, L.P. 1994. Slavonic Pagan Sanctuaries. Warsaw. Vaitkevičius, V. 1998. Senosios Lietuvos šventvietės. Vilnius. Даугудис, В. 1988. О языческих святилищах в Литве. In: Археология и история Пскова и псковской земли. Псков. Русанова, И.П., Тимощук, Б.А. 1993. Языческие святилища древних славян. Москва. Marina Smirnova Institute of Archaeology RAS, Dm. Ulyanova 19 Moscow, Russia e-mail: [email protected] Received: 2002 I m . e . t ū kstantme č io ritualini ų viet ų stulp ų konstrukci j os š iaurin ė j e S am b i j o j e Analizei pasirinktos šešios pagoniškų apeigų vietos, esančios kompaktiškoje grupėje šiaurinėje Sambijos dalyje (1 pav.). Visos jos tyrinėtos 1978–2002 metais. Tai apeigų vieta Dollkeime (dab. Kovrovo) (2 pav.), dvi tokios paskirties vietos žinomos Dobroje (buv. Hünenberge) (3–5 pav.), Klincovkoje 1 (6 pav.), Klincovkoje 3 (7 pav.), Kaupe (dab. Mochovoje) (8 pav.). Jos galėjo turėti tokias pačias funkcijas, nes yra kapinynų teritorijose arba šliejasi prie jų. Pagoniškųjų apeigų vietų chronologija plati – nuo III iki XIII a., tačiau intensyviau kiekviena iš jų buvo naudojama skirtingais laikotarpiais. Antai pirmoji su trimis židiniais Dobroje (buv. Hünenberge) datuotina III–V a., antroji – vadinamoji „liejiko dirbtuvių“ vieta Dobroje – IV–V a., VI a. pradžia datuotina apeigų vieta Dollkeime (Kovrovo), X a. pabaiga – Klincovkoje 1, X a. – Kaupe (dab. Mochovoje) ir ne vėlesniu kaip XIII a. laikotarpiu – Klincovkoje 3. BALTICA 6 The early phase is characterised by rectangular frames of rather small dimensions. tymas bei konstrukcija. Minimos ugniavietės, akmenys, grindiniai ir duobės. ARCHAELOGIA Thus an analysis of pole constructions and frames in a small area of Sambia allows us to reveal chronological differences in the arrangement of the sacral space in an ORA: Šių vietų planigrafinė struktūra atsekama iš išlikusių stulpaviečių. Jų pėdsakus galima suskirstyti į du variantus: pirmasis – nedidelių ir plonų, negiliai įkastų stulpų, kurių skersmuo – apie 10 cm, vietos; antrasis – didesnio skersmens stulpavietės, kuriose stulpai buvo įleisti į gruntą apie 1 metrą. Skirtumai tarp šių dviejų variantų stulpaviečių gerai išryškėjo Dollkeime (2 pav.). Plonieji stulpai nesudarė jokios konstrukcijos. Jie pavieniai arba buvę įkasti nedidelėmis grupėmis. Masyvieji stulpai sudarė kažkokių statinių konstrukcijas. Nėra duomenų, ar stulpai buvo papuošti antropomorfinėmis figūromis ir ar jie buvo laikomi šventais ir garbinami. Analogiškų apeigų vietų yra aptikta Lenkijoje, Danijoje, šiaurinėje Vokietijoje, kur kvadrato formos stulpaviečių vietos žinomos kapinynų teritorijose (9 pav.). Vėlesnio laikotarpio apeigų vietų planigrafija keičiasi, įgauna apskritą formą. Tokių aptikta Lietuvoje (Bačkininkėliai, Kereliai) ir slavų žemėse – Pskove, Chodosevičiuose, Šumske. Šiose apeigų vietose buvo atliekamos laidotuvių apeigos, jos buvo tarsi tiltas tarp gyvųjų ir mirusiųjų pasaulių. Vertė Vytautas Kazakevičius MARINA SMIRNOVA Santrauka Straipsnyje analizuojama pagoniškų apeigų vietų planigrafinė struktūra: stulpaviečių pėdsakai ir jų išsidės- 67 Andris Šnē The Economy and Social Power in the Late Prehistoric Chiefdoms of Eastern Latvia T h e E c o n o m y a n d S o c i a l P o w e r i n t h e L ate P r e h i st o r i c C h i e f d o m s o f E a ste r n L at v i a Andris Šnē Abstract The article is devoted to the economic structure of chiefdoms’ socio-political organisation, and the role of the economy in constructing and maintaining social and power relations in Latvia in the middle and late Iron Age. Key words: economy, chiefdom, production, farming, craft, Middle and Late Iron Age. Introduction: the economy as a source of power 68 Both economic and social relations are closely tied in different forms. Production is a social process to satisfy the material needs and wishes of people, but human efforts through production change the environment and transform the natural world into a social construction (Gosden 1989: 355), so economic activities participate in the emerging inequality of society and wealth and power structures. Different views have been expressed concerning the general framework and labelling of the character of the political structure in east Latvian societies during later prehistory. In Marxist historiography, which tended to view the Late Iron Age as the early Middle Ages in Latvia, social organisation was connected with the so-called military democracy and the transitional period to the feudal state (it was considered that, for example, in eastern parts of Latvia, state-like formations had already emerged; Moora 1952: 119; Mugurevich 1965: 122; Tõnisson 1974: 172). Contrary to this, and using anthropological schemes of social evolution, late prehistoric societies have recently been interpreted as chiefdoms (Šnē 1997; 2000; 2002). Actually, the term “chiefdom”, since its invention in Western anthropology in the 1950s, has survived many interpretations and attributes, but is nevertheless widely used (especially in evolutionary trajectories of social development) to characterise a very broad range of societies somewhere between segmentary societies and early states. In these evolutionary schemes, chiefdoms are considered to describe complex pre-state and pre-industrial societies that are regional polities with a prestige goods economy, monumental buildings, redistribution, a political hierarchy of sites and persons, and other characteristic features (Service 1962; 1975; Renfrew & Bahn 1996: 166–169). But we have to bear in mind that the development of state societies is not the intentional aim of a human population, and societies fluctuated all the time in terms of social dynamics. Of course, these very general terms do not describe political and social relations in practice, so they can only be used as a point of departure and a general framework that has to be followed by a study of the way in which different structures of societies existed. This article deals with the economic structure of chiefdoms’ socio-political organisation, the role of the economy in constructing and maintaining social and power relations in present-day Latvia during later Prehistory, that is, the period known in the chronological scheme of Latvian archaeology as the end of the Middle Iron Age (AD 600–800) and the Late Iron Age (AD 800– 1200), the end of which saw the start of the Crusades and the introduction of feudalism in the Eastern Baltic region. More extensively excavated are sites in eastern Latvia from this period that allow us to focus attention on this region. From the seventh century, eastern Latvia was populated by the Latgallians; their material culture is evidenced in widely excavated cemeteries such as Odukalns, Kristapiņi (over 300 graves in each were excavated), Nukšas (more than 200 graves), Kivti, Ģūģeri, Liepiņas (with about 150 graves), etc. Selonian culture later developed on the left bank of the River Daugava (where they left Lejasdopeles barrow cemetery, with about 40 excavated graves), and from the tenth century the Livs settled along the lower courses of the rivers Daugava and Gauja. Cemeteries like Liepenes, Pūteļi and Priedes, with large numbers of mounds, are attributed to the Gauja Livs, while in the lower reaches of the Daugava the Livs left Laukskola cemetery (with more than 600 excavated graves) and the complex of three almost simultaneous cemeteries on Dole Island, Vampenieši I and II and Rauši, where almost 500 graves have been excavated. Those mentioned above, of course, are only some, but the more widely archaeologically excavated of researched cemeteries; the number of excavated cemeteries in eastern The economy is one of the foundations of human society; it involves different activities of people. It is used to distinguish two groups of goods produced, subsistence goods and wealth. According to Brumfiel and Earle (Brumfiel, Earle 1987: 4), subsistence goods include everything that is necessary to satisfy the everyday survival needs of a household, while wealth is made up of goods and values used in rituals and exchange, as well as specific and rare means of subsistence. The value of these goods is defined through social position and regional or long-distance trade. But both subsistence goods and wealth play some, but a different, role in possessing and defining social status, as well as being concerned with the construction of power relations. Power relations have only recently been reexamined in archaeological discourse, but it actually also belongs to the other social sciences. It was the studies of Michael Foucault that put questions about power back again into the focus of social theory. Very often, power is defined by the intentions and will of humans, it has been viewed as the ability to achieve the proposed results. Max Weber understood power as the ability that allows some individual to realise his will in social relations independently of the resistance to these intentions (Clegg 1989: 72–73). Some social theorists connect power to capacity and abilities, while others link power to the realisation of power and the act of power. For Giddens (Giddens 1999), power is the ability to get results independently of the interests of particular classes and strata; power is the means to do something, and as such it is directly involved in the action of the human agent. Action and agency are mutually connected to power; without power there is no action, and vice versa. Foucault (Foucault 1980; 2000) characterises power as a particular technique, which, due to its normative features, achieves and realises strategic goals; power is neither institution nor structure. Power and the way it acts are historically specific; as power is created by everything, then power is everywhere. Power can be understood as multiply organised, hierarchical and coordinated relations which are connected and intercon- BALTICA 6 nected with other forms of relations, for example, kin, production, etc. Mann (Mann 1986) puts forward his idea about society as a network of organised power. He distinguishes four sources of social power: ideological, economic, military and political power, the last of which was absent in prehistoric pre-state societies. There is no simple and common scheme of sources of power for all societies; there were different sources of power active in different societies and ages. Also, sources of power do not mean the realisation of power; it is necessary to have the presence of both, objective situation (sources of power) and agents, active individuals who attempt to change the situation with the help of sources of power. ARCHAELOGIA Latvia is about two hundred. Alongside the cemeteries of local communities, archaeological excavations on a different scale on a number of habitation sites have been carried out. So among the well-researched hill-forts of the Latgallians are Jersika, Dignāja, Asote, Oliňkalns, Koknese and Madalâni, while in the area of the Selonians excavations took place on sites like Stupeļi and Sēlpils hill-forts and the Krīgāni settlement. Habitation sites of the Livs are mostly studied on the basis of material from the Daugava Livs’ settlement sites, like Laukskola, Rauši and Kābeles, but their material culture also dominates in Daugmale hill-fort during the Late Iron Age. The basis of economic power lies in the need to organise access and control over resources, including both those necessary for subsistence and those used for surplus production and exchange. Needs for survival are satisfied with the help of social organisation, through the collection, transformation and redistribution of production. Generally, there are two trends in analyses of the economic basis of political actions. Marxists stress control over the process of production, while followers of Weber emphasise the organisation of economic exchange and trade. The emergence of forms of exchange transforms them into the social fact that contains the potential for the possession of power. So economic organisation involves different stages, like production, redistribution, exchange and consumption (Mann 1986: 24–25). The maintenance of power is expensive; it demands material input, services and time. In Prehistoric societies, the economy was tied to ideology; according to Bourdieu (1977: 191), economic power also needs symbolic capital and symbolic violence too. Economic sources of power are directly connected with economic specialisation, and its relationships with the subsistence economy. Economic aspects of the institutionalisation of power touch the monopoly of subsistence resources, the production of prestige goods, and their exchange and trade. The subsistence economy and social relations Control over economic processes is the way towards the direct material control over people. Earle (Earle 1991) distinguishes ten political strategies of chiefs, and as the first he stresses the control of the elite over the subsistence economy. Land was the basis of the subsistence economy for hundreds of years since the introduction of farming; arable land was still of the greatest importance in medieval Europe. For most so- 69 Andris Šnē The Economy and Social Power in the Late Prehistoric Chiefdoms of Eastern Latvia cieties in Latvia, farming was the main branch of the subsistence economy, as is evidenced by finds of both seeds of cereals and farming tools in habitation sites, as well as in burials among the grave items. There is hardly any settlement site or hill-fort where during archaeological excavations farming tools such as sickles, scythes, hand millstones and stone querns have not been found; there are also some finds of iron ploughshares (mostly in the basin of the River Daugava) and hoes (a tool more characteristic of the Semigallians). Some buildings of flour-mills were uncovered in some settlements, for example, Mārtiņsala, Kābeles, Laukskola settlements, Sēlpils and Madalāni hill-forts (Daiga 1973; 33; Mugurēvičs 1975: 69; Šnore, Zariņa 1980: 32; Urtāns 1984: 100). Due to the essential role of farming in the subsistence of local societies, the question about the owners of arable land becomes very important. Soviet historiography (reflecting the political ideology, but without archaeological evidence) suggested that in the Late Iron Age land was inherited, while there were still pastures, forests and waters left under the control of the local community (Moora, Ligi 1969: 29). New aspects of property would show the study of fossil field systems that has also started recently in Latvia (see Ritums 2000 for a contemporary survey of the research). It is too early to speak about the results, but it seems that different forms of property existed during later Prehistory in Latvia. According to the “local laws” codified in the 13th century, a gradual transition from collective property to private in Latvia had started before the Crusades (Blūzma, Lazdiņš 1998), so probably there was a multiplicity also in forms of landowning. The other important branch of the subsistence economy was stockbreeding. Like farming tools, different artefacts related to stockbreeding are found in almost any excavated habitation living site. So, for example, in the Mārtiņsala settlement, 30 shears were found (Mugurēvičs 1974: 58). Among the most common tools are spindle whorls made from stone, clay, bone and other raw material. So 56 spindle whorls were found in the settlement at Stupeļi hill-fort (Stubavs 1978: 65), 40 were found in Sēlpils hill-fort (Šnore, Zariņa 1980: 34), while in the western part of Jersika hill-fort, more than 90 spindle whorls were found (Mugurēvičs, Vilcāne 2000: 100). The remains of a hearth in the Kābeles settlement preserved a complex of about eight or nine spindle whorls; actually this settlement site was extremely rich in such artefacts (Daiga 1973: 31). The bones of domesticated animals form the greatest proportion (about 70% to 90%) of osteological evidence found in all habitation sites. So, for example, in the Asote hill-fort, bones of domesticated animals 70 formed 71.9% of all the bones (Shnore 1961: 93-94). There are different proportions of domesticated animals in different sites. In materials of the late Middle Iron Age, at Ķente hill-fort, with the surrounding settlement, bones of cattle dominated (about 55%; Stubavs 1976: 84); but in Jersika hill-fort, more than half the bones of domesticated animals belonged to pigs (Vilcāne 2001: 68); while in Asote hill-fort they formed 72% of bones (Shnore 1961: 93). Bones of pigs formed about a third of bones in Rēzekne hill-fort (Mugurēvičs 1985: 69); they were also dominant in material from the hill-forts of the Selonians, Sēlpils and Dignāja (Mugurēvičs 1977: 49; Šnore, Zariņa 1980: 168). In some other sites, the proportion of bones of pigs and cattle is similar or close to that of Oliņkalns and Lokstene hill-forts (Mugurēvičs 1977: 43, 89). In the excavated settlements of the Livs, for example, at Laukskola, Rauši and Mārtiņsala, the majority of bones found belonged to cattle and pigs, and it was the bones of pigs that usually formed the greater proportion of the bones of domesticated animals there (Mugurēvičs 1974: 57; Šnore 1991: 77; Zariņa 1973: 84). Anthropological studies of pre-industrial societies put forward the idea about the political meaning of feasts where the main provision was pork. Feasts were organised by the leading kin or chief, and they served as a means of creating and/or maintaining political alliances, as well as prestige. The amount and proportion of bones of pigs found in archaeological contexts were connected with feasts and socio-political competition in Prehistoric and early medieval Britain also (Bradley 1984: 64). As has already been mentioned, the bones of pigs are very often the greater part of bones of domesticated animals in late Prehistoric sites in eastern Latvia. So probably one way to use the surplus of stockbreeding was competing feasts containing also a socially and politically symbolic meaning. Agricultural tools are not too common among grave items, but, as well as exchange and trade utensils, they are the only tools found in burials (if we do not consider warfare as a profession in Prehistory represented by weaponry). Craft tools, for example, are always absent in burials. Shears are usually placed in the female graves, but in a couple of burials in the Vampenieši I and II cemeteries their finds are attributed to the male graves (Šnore 1996: 126). Sickles are found already in seventh and eighth-century burials, as is evidenced, for example, in the Kalnieši II and Kalnabrici cemeteries (Šnore 1993: 26; Urtāns 1962: 52–53). There are several late Middle Iron Age and Late Iron Age cemeteries of the Latgallians and the Selonians in which female burials contained sickles, for example, Jersika, Beteļi, Skripsti, Aizkalne, Ģūģeri and other cemeteries. It is not often that sickles and shears are put in the same The other branches of the subsistence economy, like fishing, hunting, beekeeping and gathering, during later Prehistory had a secondary role. Hunting (usually fur-bearing animals) was closely related to exchange, as furs were among the most important goods of import. Eastern areas of Latvia and Lithuania were the richer fur regions of the Eastern Baltic (Moora, Ligi: 1969: 22–23). In more distant areas, these branches of the economy still had a great importance, for example, the population of the settlement on an island in Lake Krīgāni mostly dealt with fishing (Stubavs 1980: 95–96). Also, in the economy of the Livs, fishing was among the most important economic activities, probably due to their situation close to the Bay of Riga and the rivers Daugava and Gauja. Economic organisation in chiefdoms is usually characterised by redistribution. Food resources collected by the chiefs could be used in several ways to maintain the social and political positions of the chiefs. Following Dodgshon (1995: 108), it is possible to distinguish four aspects of the political use of the subsistence economy. First, food is given out as a gift, it enabled a feeling of dependency of members of the kin and/or community. Second, if chiefs had control over fertile land, the rent could include cattle that were later used as, for example, dowry wealth, leading to the conducting of political marriage alliances. Third, and very important, was the consumption of food in feasts. Fourth, it was a central element to maintaining the retinue, that would allow the minimalisation of the amount of farming activities among semi-professional warriors. In the context of redistribution, the presence of the socalled storage pits may reflect the limited influence of the chiefs over the subsistence economy. These pits BALTICA 6 served for the storage of food resources (such as grain), drying corn, and other activities. Storage pits are identified in several habitation sites, for example, in the Asote hill-fort (Shnore 1961: 85), but they were very common among the Livs. About 30 such constructions were found in the Rauši settlement (Šnore 1991: 75), while more than 100 storage pits were uncovered in the Laukskola settlement. The largest ones covered an area of up to two by two metres, and reached about 1.5 metres’ depth (Zariņa 1973: 82–83). So probably subsistence resources were only partly distributed among members of society with the help of the chief, but the other part of production was left to the disposal of the individual households or kin. ARCHAELOGIA grave, as, for example, in burial 71 of Koknese cemetery. Also, sickles in some cases are found in male burials. In the Nukšas cemetery, sickles were found among the grave items of a (male?) cenotaph from the tenth century (Shnore 1957: 30); the eighth-century male burial 14 of Kivti cemetery also contained sickles (Šnore 1987: 29); and these tools were also put in male burials in Ģūģeri cemetery (Apala 1992: 10). It should be noted that the tradition to put agricultural tools in burials in eastern Latvia was not so common, and developed as it was in the lands of the Curonians (in western Latvia), where, for example, up to five scythes have been found in some male cremation burials in the Late Iron Age cemetery at Sārāji. It is hard to connect the farming tools found in burials with positions of important social status or power, so probably these artefacts were put in graves in favour of the subsistence wealth of the deceased, or due to some personal skills or abilities performed during the lifetime. Crafts and craftsmen in social networks A lot of attention has been paid to different aspects of craft specialisation in Prehistoric societies. Although some craft specialisation could be found already in the Middle Iron Age, it was the later part of the Iron Age when we can distinguish quite clearly different branches of economic specialisation. Almost every excavated site contains some evidence of metallurgy and iron-working, as well as jewellery production. These are traces of workshops, half-made artefacts, tools with a special function and purpose, common features of local artefacts that show and prove the existence of specialised craftsmen. Special tools, as well as workshops, are evidence of iron-working. Iron-working took place in both settlements and hill-forts, as remains of smithies have been uncovered in Daugmale, Aizkraukle, Oliņkalns, Asote, Dignāja, Jersika, etc, hill-forts, and in Spietiņi, Rauši, Rīga and other settlements (but the number of sites where the tools of smiths have been found is much higher). In the Rauši settlement two deposits of smith’s tools that were dated to the second half of the 11th century and the 13th century were found during excavations. One of them consisted of about 40 artefacts, including tools and production (Daiga 1971). There were quite often several smithies identified per site, for example, in Asote hill-fort and the Rauši settlement (Shnore 1961: 97-100; Šnore 1991: 78-79). In Asote hill-fort, three or four workshops of jewellery production were recognised, and part of them goes back to the tenth century (Shnore 1961: 105), while in Oliņkalns hill-fort two such workshops from the second half of the 11th century were found (Mugurēvičs 1977: 44). Six workshops were uncovered in the Rauši settlement (Šnore 1991: 78-79), but there usually the tools or pieces of raw material can be used to show the existence of specialised craftsmen. 71 Andris Šnē The Economy and Social Power in the Late Prehistoric Chiefdoms of Eastern Latvia It seems that other branches of crafts were usually still organised on the domestic level. But due to the introduction of the potter’s wheel in the tenth century, pottery also moved towards a specialised branch of the economy, at least in the areas along the River Daugava. Despite this, as late as the 12th century there was still hand-made pottery in use. Some kilns have been identified in several hill-forts and settlements, for example Asote, Aizkraukle and Daugmale hill-forts and the Rauši settlement (Shnore 1961: 109; Šnore 1991: 83; Urtāns 1967: 42; 1974: 75). In Tanīskalna hill-fort, a footwear-making workshop with an amount of cuttings of shoes was found (Balodis 1928: 37). According to research by Anna Zariņa (Zariņa 1970; 1988; 1999), weaving was done on a domestic level until the 11th century in the area of the Livs, and until the 12th century in the area of the Latgallians. It seems that amber, wood, horn and bone specialists had also emerged in some cases. So nine tools for wood carving were found in the Mārtiņsala settlement within a house’s foundations (Mugurēvičs 1974: 56), but a deposit of about 25 kilograms of raw amber was found in the Kābeles settlement in the cellar of a house (Daiga 1973: 33); a raw amber deposit was also found in Daugmale hill-fort (Radiņš, Zemītis 1988: 119). Some habitations reflect a spatial organisation within the site according to the economic activities of its inhabitants, as particular areas of the sites seem to have a higher concentration of crafts than others. So, in Aizkraukle hill-fort, the workshops for iron and metalworking were located close to the central part of the plateau (Urtāns 1977: 65). The western part of the site can be considered the area of craftsmen in Jersika hill-fort (Mugurēvičs, Vilcāne 2000: 100); but in the Kābeles and Lipši settlements it was the southwest part (Daiga 1973: 33; 1976: 44). In the settlement at the foot of Daugmale hill-fort, a concentration of crafts tools and workshops was found in the eastern part (Zemītis 1998: 83). But it should be noted that craftsmen’s workshops are very similar to other buildings in their size and construction, although often workshops consisted of two rooms. So it seems that craftsmen and their social position were not distinguished in some particular way; socially, they were like other members of a community 72 Gender archaeology has paid quite a lot of attention to labour specialisation between males and females. Traditionally, some areas of production are regarded as connected with male activities, while others are attributed to females, like the preparation of food, plant gathering, weaving, etc, which can be linked with females generally all over the world (Wright 1991: 198). The tools of these branches are female symbols, and females are identified with these activities. But actu- ally the division of labour and specialisation according to sex and/or gender is not so easily distinguishable as it is assumed: both males and females participated in most branches of production simultaneously. And it also goes for craft production on both levels connected to the household and/or the market or the political elite. Of course, it is not an easy task (and it is probably impossible) to establish who produced particular tools, jewellery, pots, clothes and other utensils, but anyway the role of females in these activities cannot be reduced to only secondary activities. According to Brumfiel and Earle (Brumfiel, Earle 1987), approaches to specialisation, exchange and social organisation can be attributed to one of three models: economic development, the adaptional or the political model. The model of economic specialisation (represented by researchers such as Friedrich Engelss and Colin Renfrew) considers the specialisation and intensification of exchange as an integral part of economic development. It means that the development of specialisation goes along with an increase in political complexity. The adaptional perspective (which includes a variety of models put forward by researchers like Marshall Sahlins, Elman R. Service and Karl Wittfogel) in the study of specialisation and social complexity stresses either necessity or the profitable character of economic management, so this model proposes the inclusion of the political elite in the development of economic specialisation. It was the political approach to the study of mutual relationships between economic specialisation and socio-political organisation that paid primary attention to the role of the elite in the organisation of production and exchange. According to this model, the political elite used exchange and specialisation to create and maintain social inequality, to form new institutions of control, and to consolidate political alliances. The elite can fulfil these tasks with control over long-distance trade and/or the surplus of production. The inclusion of subsistence products in the relations of exchange meant the creation of some values useful for craftsmen in local exchange to obtain the necessary means of subsistence and production. So then a system of staple finances is replaced by a system of wealth finances, where some production serves as a means of payment. Actually, it is the surplus that characterises the social role of the economy (as Earle calls it, “political economy”; see Earle 1997). If specialisation is absent in the process of production, then power relations emerge on the basis of general production, and the use of the surplus or surplus production is concentrated in the hands of at least partly attached specialists, and the use of the surplus is strictly limited. So the political elite used economic specialists and their production in the realisation of their interests, It is still a question for debate whether economic specialists were attached to some upper layer, or if they produced their items for the whole community. Soviet historiography considered that craftsmen supplied only the elite with their production, so satisfying their demands, and that some items were also imported outside the region of their production. So in his detailed analyses of craft production from Ķente hill-fort with the surrounding settlement, Stubavs (Stubavs 1976: 97) states that craftsmen (jewellers) worked only according to individual requests, but they were not directed towards the market because there was no indication about serial/mass production and standardisation. As we have seen, it is impossible to deny the presence of craft specialists in societies of later Prehistory, but their attachment to and dependence on the ruling elite would be an overestimated conclusion. It seems that craftsmen usually produced their goods for everybody, including special artefacts of the elite, but mostly (due also to their limited number) they were orientated towards the local community in general. Probably at least some of the specialists were full-time craftsmen, but only in the larger sites of economic centres were they involved in exchange and trading activities. Exchange and the emergence of early towns Exchange and trade are transforming factors in societies; in fact, this was the way in which changes were brought to societies. In chiefdoms, the economic value of exchange is subordinate to its political and ideological value (Hedeager 1994). Long-distance trade provided chiefs with prestige goods, used either as status symbols or as gifts. Gifts, due to their dual character (any gift demands return in some form or another), were of great importance, as with them there was a possibility to establish alliances and networks of supporters. Therefore, social research has to pay attention to the meaning and political importance of exchange/ trade in the chiefdoms under question. BALTICA 6 The study of exchange and trade was among the favourite subjects of processual archaeology, where it was often linked with the study of social processes. The social role and meaning of exchange and trade characterises the finds of imported artefacts and exchange/ trade items (represented by weights and balances). As with the development of crafts, a similar tendency of increasing importance can be seen in exchange and trade during later Prehistory in Latvia. Although the interregional and local contacts can be traced since the Stone Age, it was later Prehistory when the character of economic contacts, exchange and trade took new forms. ARCHAELOGIA craftsmen and merchants often acted as the political personnel of the elite, especially if personal goods and utensils were used as symbols of status and authority. The possession of particular items as symbols gave the legitimisation of the socio-political status by physically expressing the social position. It is noted that in societies with a higher level of centralisation status symbols also become more complex, their production demands more sophisticated technologies and increasing labour input, so actually there is a necessity for economic specialisation (Peregrine 1991). From the middle of the tenth century, burials of local merchants are found all over Latvia. These are graves that, among other burial items, contain also balances and weights (Berga 1992; 1996). Artefacts connected with exchange and trade are usually found in male burials. More than 160 weights and more than 370 balances are found in present-day Latvia (Berga 1996: 50). There are two regions where the exchange artefacts are concentrated: Kurzeme (western Latvia), and the lower reaches of the Daugava, in the lands of the Livs. For example, in Laukskola cemetery, weights and balances were found in 19 burials (Zariņa 1997), but in cemeteries on Dole Island in ten burials (Šnore 1996: 116). The cemeteries of the Latgallians produced much fewer artefacts of exchange and trade. There are three burials with these items in Ģūģeri cemetery (Apala 1992: 10), two in Jaunāķēni cemetery. Single so-called merchant burials are found, for example, in Kivti cemetery (Šnore 1987: 28) and Jaunpiebalga cemetery. In Lejasdopeles cemetery, weights are found in only one burial, but balances in five (Šnore 1997). Of course, not all individuals buried with weights and/or balances were merchants; some of them may be taken as judges or persons with a high social position, but at least some of them dealt with trade. Late Iron Age graves also show an increasing number of imported artefacts, brought from both east and west, that included weapons and jewellery, as well as everyday utensils. According to the distribution of western imports (these items very often also served as prestige goods), there are some areas with a higher concentration of finds, for example, the lower reaches of the rivers Daugava and Gauja, and the western Baltic coast of Latvia. Imported items from the east that were mostly mass utensils, like glass beads and cowry shells, are concentrated in eastern Latvia, close to the borders of the Russian principalities. So not all of the sites and areas had the same character, and the proportion of non-agrarian activities within the economies of sites differed greatly. It is also clearly re- 73 Andris Šnē The Economy and Social Power in the Late Prehistoric Chiefdoms of Eastern Latvia 74 flected in the distribution of coins over Latvia. The first coins appeared in the late ninth century: these were Arabic dirhams which later in the 11th century were replaced by West European coins. The flow of coins into Latvia ended in the second half of the 11th century. In the tenth to 11th centuries, coins, like imported artefacts, are mostly found around the waterways, the rivers Daugava and Gauja, in their lower reaches, so indicating their leading role in exchange and trade (Berga 1988). About 5,000 coins from the Late Iron Age are found in present-day Latvia (Berga 1988: 9). Most of them are found in hoards and deposits (some contained a couple of hundred coins), but among the cemeteries the richest ones are those of the Livs. There have been found 236 coins in the cemeteries of the Daugava Livs, and 26 in the cemeteries of the Gauja Livs (Berga 1988: 70-89). Usually the coins were used as pendants in necklaces, but some were put in burials as part of the ritual activities. The low number of coin finds in the lands of the Latgallians may be partly explained by the absence of the tradition of wearing pendants (this is characteristic of the Balts generally), as well as because only some areas were situated close to waterways and land routes (Berga 1988: 25). But, anyway, the activities of the Latgallians and the Selonians in exchange and trading are not so explicitly reflected in archaeological evidence as in the case of the Livs. Also, among habitation sites, the largest number of coins were at Daugmale hill-fort, where about 190 coins have been collected (Berga 1994: 41). As it seems, trade, including long-distance trade, played a great role in the Liv chiefdoms’ economies; moreover, we can speak about trade as the key element of Liv societies which created their character as an “open” society. Possibly, the geographical position of the Liv lands, which was very suitable within Scandinavian trading networks (and trade routes meant also cultural, social and military contacts/activities), was the reason for the development and flourishing of the Livs’ culture. Also, the emergence of local merchants reflects this important role of trade in late prehistoric societies of present-day Latvia. But we have to note that the number of merchant burials is very low in the Livs’ cemeteries (not to mention the cemeteries of the Latgallians and the Selonians). So in Salaspils Laukskola cemetery, among 609 burials, just 19 are identified as merchants’ graves (15 adult male and four boys’ graves). All burials of merchants are male graves; which is different from Scandinavia, where female burials are also found. The explanation could probably be some kind of job difference between genders: while male merchants participated in long-distance trade, females took an active part in the local infrastructure of exchange and trading activities. Obviously, merchants were rich people, but their identification with social and political leaders is not so simple. Among the other symbols of status and power, one of the more common was the sword as a symbol of power, and almost all of the merchants’ burials among the other rich grave items contained a sword. But we have to remember that trade went side by side with warfare and plundering, so it was a question of survival to have good equipment. Another aspect of the burials of the Livs’ merchants is provided by their chronology. Most of these burials go back to the end of the 11th century and the first half of the 12th century, a time that is characteristic with the total flourishing of the Livs’ material culture. An important part of it is also the large amount of West European coins and silver, so we might assume that the previous century was a time of accumulation, while the end of the 11th century and the early 12th century saw a decrease in the value and status of silver. It was not mere a symbol of a rather small elite, but an indicator of the quite high average prosperity in society. Trade that was previously a resource under the control of a limited group of people had now become an activity involving, in some form or another, almost all members of society. The development of non-agrarian economies (exchange and crafts) and the rise of some central economic regions and sites allow us to put the question about the emergence of early towns in late Prehistoric Latvia. The presence of economically and socially different sites might indicate some complexity of local social structures. In anthropology and archaeology, not to mention the wide range of sociological literature, a lot of studies have questioned the character of the early town, and the criterion that would allow us to call some sites early towns. Around a hundred definitions of “town” and “urbanisation” have been proposed. For example, according to the archaeologist Peter Wells (Wells 1984: 15), who has elaborated the idea of Gordon V. Childe, urban territory and urban society may be connected with a large population and territory, economic specialisation, supported by taxes and tributes, monumental public buildings, writing, sophisticated art, long-distance trade, and the formation of a religious, social or military elite. The American anthropologist Linda Manzanilla (Manzanilla 1997: 5) characterises urban society by the division of labour, it is the existence of specialists dealing with non-subsistence economic activities, institutions coordinating the economy and the existence of social groups or people who participate in decision making and live in urban centres. The archaeologist Georg Woolf (Woolf 1993: 223–224) mentions as criteria of urbanism the settlement hierarchy and the functions of a central site for higher-level sites, as well as an internal structure of There are some exceptional and widely excavated sites in eastern Latvia that reflect the features mentioned above. Among the most well-known archaeological sites of Latvia is Daugmale hill-fort, situated on the left bank of the River Daugava. The site was excavated several times, in the 1930s by Valdemārs Ģinters (Ģinters 1936a; 1936b), in the 1960s by Vladislavs Urtāns (Urtāns 1967; 1968; 1969; 1970; 1971), and in the 1980s and 1990s by Guntis Zemītis and Arnis Radiņš (Radiņš, Zemītis 1988; 1990; Zemītis 1992; 1994; 1996; 1998). The site was already used in the first millennium BC, and the habitation there lasted until the end of the 12th century, although weak traces of habitation can be seen also from the following centuries. Daugmale hill-fort produced an extremely large amount of artefacts; in the settlement of Daugmale hill-fort, farming tools formed only about 1% of the artefacts found, trading and exchange utensils about 4% (Zemītis 1998: 83). The hill-fort has provided the largest number of coins found in Latvia. Probably the inhabitants of Daugmale in the second half of the 11th century tried to introduce their own currency, as in Daugmale and the surrounding graveyards replicas of West European coins have been found. There are 39 known replicas of West European coins from 13 sites, with the highest concentration in the lower reaches of the rivers Daugava and Gauja. So 12 coins were found in the Laukskola cemetery, eight in Daugmale hill-fort, and four in the Ģūģeri cemetery, while only one or two items have come from the hill-forts of the Latgallians (Koknese, Jersika, Stupeļi). These coins were made from copper covered by a thin layer of silver (Berga 1993). This attempt (probably led by a very ambitious and active chief based in Daugmale) was not successful, because later such local coins did not appear any more. The attempts to establish their own currency (although without their own symbols) may be connected to the sharp decrease in the inflow of foreign coins in Latvia. True, the issue of its own currency is one of the BALTICA 6 features of a centralised society; also in Scandinavia, the beginnings of a currency coincide with the emergence of state structures. But the failure of such an attempt indicates the quite strong positions and the influence of ideology of equality that were able to prevent such an attempt. It seems that a settlement was also situated on Daugmale hill-fort, or at least a large workshop of Scandinavians, as among the artefacts found in Daugmale there are a lot of Scandinavian imports (including also some unique items, like a stone with runic inscriptions and a bronze figure of a rider), as well as imitations of Scandinavian artefacts. On the basis of archaeological research, it is stated that the eastern part of the settlement was almost exclusively a crafts area, where a lot of remains of different workshops were found. Like some other hill-forts on the banks of the River Daugava, Daugmale also has its own harbour connected to the settlement. Daugmale is the only widely discussed site in Latvian archaeological literature and in more detail concerning its urban character. Andris Caune (Caune 1992), and later also G. Zemītis (Zemītis 1993), showed the similarities between Daugmale and Scandinavian vica settlement sites, putting the site in a wider European context and following Scandinavian examples. It was stressed that in a historical perspective, Daugmale played a role as the forerunner of medieval Riga. ARCHAELOGIA the site divided into large areas of non-agrarian activities. We might also mention the very recent study of the archaeologist Peter Bogucki (Bogucki 1999: 333) who describes urban sites as agglomerations of people, characterised by craft specialisation and long-distance trade, as well as a military defence system. To summarise these partly overlapping definitions (and those mentioned above do not form a complete list of the meanings of urbanism), as characteristic features of early towns, we may propose, first, the structure of the site with regard to its number of inhabitants, and a systematic and intensive regular building structure and non-agrarian functions; and, second, the functions of the site as a socio-economic centre which is clearly separated from its surroundings. Among the high number of hill-forts located on the banks of the River Daugava, we will also name Aizkraukle and Jersika, sites that are situated on the right bank of the river. Aizkraukle hill-fort, with its large settlement, is one of the largest archaeological sites in Latvia. The plateau of the hill-fort covers half a hectare, while the settlement reaches up to three hectares including the harbour. Archaeological excavations were carried out there in the 1970s by V. Urtāns (Urtāns 1972; 1973; 1974; 1976; 1977; Urtāns, Briede, Urtāns 1975) and the finds include evidence about a lot of crafts and trade activities on the site. Jersika forms a complex with the Dignāja hill-fort, which lies on the opposite bank of the River Daugava just in front of it. Nearby also lies a cemetery used from the tenth to the 14th centuries. This complex of archaeological monuments was excavated in 1939 by Francis Balodis (1940, the excavations in Jersika) and Elvīra Šnore (1939, the excavations in Dignāja). Jersika hill-fort was also researched during the last decade by Ēvalds Mugurēvičs and Antonija Vilcāne (Mugurēvičs, Vilcāne 1992; 1994; 2000; Vilcāne 1996; 1998; 2002). Dignāja hill-fort was abandoned before the early tenth century when the site of Jersika emerged. The plateau of Jersika is 7,500 square metres, and the hill-fort is surrounded by a ten-hectare settlement. The results of excavations reflected the craft activities of local peo- 75 Andris Šnē The Economy and Social Power in the Late Prehistoric Chiefdoms of Eastern Latvia ple, and also the contacts with neighbouring areas directed eastwards. Jersika was among the sites where the habitation continued after the Crusades, in the 14th century. There are a lot of other hill-forts, settlements and complexes of archaeological sites situated close to the course of the River Daugava and in other regions of Latvia as well. But it is hard to judge the urban character of a site only on the basis of its topography and morphology; it is necessary to know what kind of activities were performed there and what the subsistence was of the inhabitants of the particular site. So, concerning the presence of the early town in late prehistoric Latvia, first of all we can accept the concept of the town as an economic centre functioning in Latvia during the 11th to the 12th centuries. As it seems from evidence obtained in archaeological excavations from sites of the tenth to the 12th centuries, urbanisation had begun, towards urban areas in the sense of Viking Age Scandinavia. Such forerunners of towns were trading and craft centres, located mostly around the most important waterways, but we cannot identify a real urban pattern where political power was also involved in the later Prehistory of Latvia. Only in the 13th century is it possible to find the beginnings of medieval towns in Latvia. So exchange and production underwent deep transformations during the late Middle and the Late Iron Age in eastern Latvia, and the economic transformations also influenced the abilities and possibilities for local chiefs, as well as their political economy. Production and its support, the expense of raids and the organisation of feasts formed a debit to the economic balance of the chiefs, while credit consisted of income from trade and exchange, tributes and captured goods (Gosden 1989: 368-370). And through redistribution, the benefits of local chiefs also reached every member of the community. It seems that societies of eastern Latvia were generally rather prosperous, although, of course, besides the large middle social layer, there were some rich and also some poor members of communities. But it was after the late Middle Iron Age (the eighth and ninth centuries) when the earlier great differences in the amounts of rich and poor burials were reduced, and such extreme cases became quite rare. Economic relations and the economy itself provided opportunities for some agents to increase their wealth, and on the same basis also their power, while at the same time under ideological pressure it also helped to maintain political equality during later Prehistory. 76 Abbreviations AE – Arheoloģija un etnogrāfija, Rīga ASM 1990-1997 – Zinātniskās atskaites sesijas materiāli par arheologu 1990.-1997.gada pētījumu rezultātiem. Rīga, 1992-1998 LVIŽ – Latvijas Vēstures Institūta Žurnāls LZAV – Latvijas Zinātņu Akadēmijas Vēstis. A daļa. (until 1991 – Latvijas PSR Zinātņu Akadēmijas Vēstis) RT 1958-1970 – Zinātniskās atskaites sesijas referātu tēzes par arheologu, antropologu un etnogrāfu 1958.-1970.gada pētījumu rezultātiem. Rīga, 1959-1971. (under little modified titles in some issues) ZASM 1971-1989 – Zinātniskās atskaites sesijas materiāli par arheologu un etnogrāfu 1971.-1989. gada pētījumu rezultātiem. Rīga, 1972.-1990 References Apala, Z. 1992. Ģūģeru arheoloģiskā kompleksa izpēte. In: ASM 1990-1991, 8–15. Balodis, F. 1928. Izrakumi Raunas Tanīsa kalnā 1927.gadā. (Archaioloģijas raksti, IV sēj. 1.d.). Rīga. Balodis, F. 1940. Jersika un tai 1939.gadā izdarītie izrakumi. Rīga. Berga, T. 1988. Moneti v arheologicheskih pamyatnikah Latvii IX-XII vv. Riga. Berga, T. 1992. Waagen zum Wagen von Munzsilber in Lettland. In: Die Kontakte zwischen Ostbaltikum und Skandinavien im frühen Mittelalter. Stockholm, 33–46. Berga, T. 1993. 11.gadsimta Rietumeiropas monētu atdarinājumi Latvijā. In: LVIŽ 1, 22–29. Berga, T. 1994. Daugmales pilskalna monētas (8.-12.gs.). In: AE XVII, 41–46. Berga, T. 1996. Saliekamie svariņi Latvijā (10.-13.gs.). In: AE XVIII, 49–61. Blūzma, V., Lazdiņš, J. 1998. Paražu tiesības Latvijas teritorijā līdz XIII gs. In: Latvijas tiesību avoti. Teksti un komentāri. 1.sēj. Seno paražu un Livonijas tiesību avoti 10.gs. - 16.gs. Rīga, 19–25. Bogucki, P. 1999. The Origins of Human Society. Oxford and New York. Bourdieu, P. 1977. Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge. Bradley, R. 1984. The social foundations of prehistoric Britain: themes and variations in the archaeology of power. London and New York. Brumfiel, E., Earle, T.K. 1987. Specialization, exchange, and complex societies: an introduction. In: Specialization, exchange, and complex societies. Cambridge, 1–9. Caune, A. 1992. Rīgas loma Daugavas lejteces apgabalā 10.12.gs. In: LZAV 3, 7–13. Clegg, S.R. 1989. Frameworks of Power. London, Newbury and New Delhi. Daiga, J. 1971. Doles Raušu kalēja depozīts. In: RT 1971, 16–19. Daiga, J. 1973. Kābeļu apmetne. In: ZASM 1972, 30–34. Daiga, J. 1976. Izrakumi Lipšu ciemā un kapulaukā. In: ZASM 1975, 39–46. Dodgshon, R.A. 1995. Modelling chiefdoms in the Scottish Highlands and islands prior to the ‘45. In: Celtic Chiefdom, Celtic State. Cambridge, 99–109. Earle, T.K. 1991. The evolution of chiefdoms. In: Chiefdoms: Power, Economy, and Ideology. Cambridge, 1–15. BALTICA 6 över gränser. Möten mellan lettisk och svensk arkeologi. Göteborg, 183–207. Šnē, A. 2000. Vara un vadonība lībiešu sabiedrībās aizvēstures beigās. In: Cauri gadsimtiem. Rīga, 141–148. Šnē, A. 2002. Sabiedrība un vara: sociālās attiecības Austrumlatvijā aizvēstures beigās. Rīga. Šnore, E. 1939. Dignājas pilskalns: īss pārskats par 1939.g. izrakumiem. In: Senatne un Māksla 4, 42–54. Šnore, E. 1987. Kivtu kapulauks. Rīga. Šnore, E. 1991. Raušu ciems Doles salas augšgalā. In: LZAV 6, 69–87. Šnore, E. 1993. Agrā dzelzs laikmeta uzkalniņi Latvijas austrumu daļā. Rīga. Šnore, E. 1996. Daugavas lībieši Doles salā. In: AE XVIII, 111–130. Šnore, E. 1997. Lejasdopeļu kapulauks senajā Sēlijā. In: AE XIX, 64–81. Šnore, E., Zariņa, A. 1980. Senā Sēlpils. Rīga. Tõnisson, E. 1974. Die Gauja-Liven und ihre materielle Kultur (11.Jh. - Anfang 13.Jh.). Tallinn. Urtāns, V. 1962. Kalniešu otrais kapulauks. In: Latvijas PSR Vēstures muzeja raksti: Arheoloģija. Rīga, 37–82. Urtāns, V. 1967. Daugmales ekspedīcijas rezultāti 1966.gadā. In: RT 1966, 41–42. Urtāns, V. 1968. Daugmales ekspedīcijas rezultāti 1967.g. In: RT 1967, 77–80. Urtāns, V. 1969. Daugmales ekspedīcijas rezultāti 1968.g. In: RT 1968, 55–57. Urtāns, V. 1970. Daugmales ekspedīcijas darba rezultāti. In: RT 1969, 67–69. Urtāns, V. 1971. Daugmales ekspedīcijas darba rezultāti 1970.gadā. In: RT 1970, 56–58. Urtāns, V. 1972. Aizkraukles arheoloģiskās ekspedīcijas guvumi 1971.gadā. In: ZASM 1971, 99–103. Urtāns, V. 1973. Aizkraukles arheoloģiskās ekspedīcijas 1972.gada darbu rezultāti. In: ZASM 1972, 66–71. Urtāns, V. 1974. Izrakumi Aizkraukles senvietu kompleksā. In: ZASM 1973, 74–77. Urtāns, V. 1976. Pētījumi Aizkraukles pilskalnā, priekšpilī un Lejasžagaru kapulaukā 1975.gadā. In: ZASM 1975, 87–91. Urtāns, V. 1977. Izrakumi Aizkraukles pilskalnā 1976.gadā. In: ZASM 1976, 64–68. Urtāns, V. 1984. Arheoloģiskie izrakumi Madalānu pilskalnā un kapulaukos. In: ZASM 1982–1983, 99–103. Urtāns, V., Briede, I., Urtāns, J. 1975. Aizkraukles ekspedīcijas darbs 1974.gadā. In: ZASM 1974, 86–93. Vilcāne, A. 1996. Arheoloģiskie izrakumi Jersikā. In: ASM 1994–1995, 120–123. Vilcāne, A. 1998. Izrakumi Jersikas pilskalnā. In: ASM 19961997, 77–79. Vilcāne, A. 2001. Par sēļu iespējamību Dubnas baseinā. In: LZAV 5/6, 63–71. Vilcāne, A. 2002. Arheoloģiskie izrakumi Jersikas pilskalnā 2000. un 2001.gadā. In: Arheologu pētījumi Latvijā 2000. un 2001.gadā. Rīga, 117–122. Wells, P.S. 1984. Farms, Villages, and Cities: Commerce and Urban Origins in Late Prehistoric Europe. Ithaca. Woolf, G. 1993. Rethinking the Oppida. In: Oxford Journal of Archaeology 12(2), 223–234. Wright, R.P. 1991. Women’s Labor and Pottery Production in Prehistory. In: Engendering Archaeology. Women and Prehistory. Oxford, 194–223. Zariņa, A. 1970. Seno latgaļu apģērbs 7.-13.gs. Rīga. Zariņa, A. 1973. Salaspils Laukskolas lībiešu ciems (izrakumu rezultātu kopsavilkums). In: ZASM 1972, 81–84. ARCHAELOGIA Earle, T.K. 1997. How Chiefs Come to Power: the Political Economy in Prehistory. Stanford. Foucault, M. 1980. Power/Knowledge. Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972–1977. New York. Fuko, M. 2000. Seksualitātes vēsture I: Zinātgriba. Rīga. Giddens, E. 1999. Sabiedrības veidošanās. Rīga. Ģinters, V. 1936a. Daugmales pilskalna 1935.gada izrakumi. In: Senatne un Māksla 1, 33–56. Ģinters, V. 1936b. Daugmales pilskalna 1936.gada izrakumi. In: Senatne un Māksla 4, 87–105. Hedeager, L. 1994. Warrior economy and trading economy in Viking-Age Scandinavia. In: Journal of European Archaeology 2.1, 130–148. Mann, M. 1986. The sources of social power. Vol.1: A history of power from the beginning to A.D. 1760. Cambridge. Manzanilla, L. 1997. Early Urban Societies. Challenges and Perspectives. In: Emergence and Change in Early Urban Societies. New York and London, 3–39. Moora, H. 1952. Pirmatnējā kopienas iekārta un agrā feodālā sabiedrība Latvijas PSR teritorijā. Rīga. Moora, H., Ligi, H. 1969. Hozyaistvo i obshchestvenniy stroi narodov Pribaltiki v nachale XIII veka. Tallinn. Mugurevich, E.S. 1965. Vostochnaya Latviya i sosedniye zemli v X-XIII vv. Riga. Mugurēvičs, Ē. 1974. Ciems un pils Mārtiņsalā (izrakumu rezultātu kopsavilkums). In: ZASM 1973, 54–58. Mugurēvičs, Ē. 1975. Izrakumi Mārtiņsalā. In: ZASM 1974, 68-70. Mugurēvičs, Ē. 1977. Oliņkalna un Lokstenes pilsnovadi. 3.15.gs. arheoloģiskie pieminekļi. Rīga. Mugurēvičs, Ē. 1985. Rēzeknes pils un tās apkārtnes novads 9.-17.gs. In: LZAV 3, 48–71. Mugurēvičs, Ē., Vilcāne, A. 1992. Arheoloģiskie izrakumi Jersikas pilskalnā. In: ASM 1990-1991, 75–80. Mugurēvičs, Ē., Vilcāne, A. 1994. Arheoloģiskie pētījumi Jersikas pilskalnā un senpilsētā. In: ASM 1992-1993, 68– 72. Mugurēvičs, Ē., Vilcāne, A. 2000. Jersikas arheoloģiskās pētniecības desmitgade. In: Arheologu pētījumi Latvijā 1998. un 1999.gadā. Rīga, 96–107. Peregrine, P. 1991. Some political aspects of craft specialization. In: World Archaeology 23(1), 1–11. Radiņš, A., Zemītis, G. 1988. Izrakumi Daugmales arheoloģiskajā kompleksā. In: ZASM 1986-1987, 117– 121. Radiņš, A., Zemītis, G. 1990. Daugmales arheoloģiskās ekspedīcijas darbs. In: ZASM 1988-1989, 129–132. Radiņš, A., Zemītis, G. 1992. Die Verbindungen zwischen Daugmale und Skandinavien. In: Die Kontakte zwischen Ostbaltikum und Skandinavien im frühen Mittelalter. Stockholm, 135–142. Renfrew, C., Bahn, P. 1996. Archaeology: Theories, Methods and Practice. London. Service, E.R. 1962. Primitive Social Organization. New York. Service, E.R. 1975. Origins of the State and Civilisation. New York. Shnore, E.D. 1957. Nukshinskij mogiljnik. Riga. Shnore, E.D. 1961. Asotskoje gorodishche. Riga. Stubavs, A. 1976. Ķentes pilskalns un apmetne. Rīga. Stubavs, A. 1978. Izrakumi Stupeļu pilskalnā un senpilsētā 1977.gadā. In: ZASM 1977, 62–68. Stubavs, A. 1980. Arheoloģiskie pētījumi Ritē (1976.-1979. g.). In: ZASM 1979, 91–96. Šnē, A. 1997. Social Structures of Livonian Society in the Late Iron Age (10th – Early 13th Century). In: Arkeologi 77 Andris Šnē The Economy and Social Power in the Late Prehistoric Chiefdoms of Eastern Latvia Zariņa, A. 1988. Lībiešu apģērbs 10.-13.gs. Rīga. Zariņa, A. 1997. Kapi ar tirgotāja piederumiem Salaspils Laukskolas kapulaukā (10.-13.gs.). In: AE XIX, 97–106. Zariņa, A. 1999. Apģērbs Latvijā 7.-17.gs. Rīga. Zemītis, G. 1992. Arheoloģiskie izrakumi Daugmalē. In: ASM 1990-1991, 117–121. Zemītis, G. 1993. Daugmale (10.-12.gs.) - senākā pilsētveida apmetne Daugavas lejtecē un Rīgas priekštece. In: LZAV 7/8, 130–136. Zemītis, G. 1994. Izrakumi Daugmales senvietu kompleksā pilskalnā, senpilsētā un kapulaukā pie senpilsētas. In: ASM 1992-1993, 102–105. Zemītis, G. 1996. Izrakumi Daugmales pilskalna valnī un senpilsētā. In: ASM 1994-1995, 128–131. Zemītis, G. 1998. Pētījumi Daugmales senpilsētas austrumu daļā. In: ASM 1996-1997, 80–83. Andris Šnē Chair of Ancient and Medieval History Faculty of History and Philosophy University of Latvia, Brivibas 32 Rīga LV 1050, Latvia e-mail: [email protected] Received: 2002 Ū kis ir socialin ė valdžia v ė ly vuosiuose priešistoriniuose gentiniuose ry tin ė s latvijos junginiuose Andris Šnē Santrauka Mainai ir gamyba vidurinio geležies amžiaus pabaigoje ir vėlyvajame geležies amžiuje rytinėje Latvijoje patyrė didelių pokyčių, o ūkio transformacijos savo ruožtu irgi darė įtaką vietinių vadų gebėjimams ir galimybei vykdyti jų politinę ekonomiką. Gamyba ir jos skatinimas, išlaidos karo žygiams ir švenčių organizavimas formavo pasyvųjį vadų ekonominį saldą, tuo tarpu kreditą sudarė pajamos iš prekybos ir mainų, duoklės ir grobio (Gosden 1989: 368–370). Perskirstant vietinių vadų pelno dalis atitekdavo ir kiekvienam bendruomenės nariui. Panašu, kad rytinės Latvijos bendruomenės buvo gana pasiturinčios, nors, suprantama, greta plataus vidurinio socialinio sluoksnio egzistavo ir turtingi jos nariai bei varguomenė. Tačiau tik po vėlyvojo vidurinio geležies amžiaus (VIII–IX a.) ėmė nykti didieji skirtumai tarp turtingų ir skurdžių kapų ir tokie kraštutiniai atvejai tapo labai reti. Ekonominiai santykiai ir pati ekonomika sudarė galimybes kai kuriems bendruomenių nariams pagausinti savo turtus, o kartu ir 78 sustiprinti savo valdžią. Tuo pat metu, veikiant ideologiniam spaudimui, vėlyvaisiais priešistoriniais laikais ji kartu padėjo išlaikyti politinę lygybę. Vertė Romas Jarockis Oleg Proshkin The Question of the Heterogeneous Population of the Upper Oka and The Upper Desna Region in the Middle Ages T h e Q u e s t i o n o f th e H e t e ro g e n e ou s P opu l at i o n o f th e U pp e r O k a a n d th e U pp e r D e s n a R e g i o n i n th e M i dd l e A g e s Oleg Proshkin Abstract Among the barrows attributed to the local Slavic population in the area of the left bank of the Upper Oka and right bank of the Upper Desna are barrows where the burial rites differ from the local inhabitants’. Different types of burials, a man’s burial with weapon and a horse, a horse’s burial, a horse’s burial with a man’s or animal’s cremation, a man’s burial with weapons, a man’s burial with a bird’s burial, a man’s burial under a rectangular stone barrow, were typical burial customs of Baltic and Finno-Ugric inhabitants in the 11th to 13th centuries AD. Key words: barrow, burial item, Slavonic, Baltic, Finno-Ugric, Oka, Desna, medieval. A lot of barrows are known in the enormous area of the left bank of the Upper Oka and the right bank of the Upper Desna basin in the Kaluga and Smolensk regions. They were erected by the local Slavic population at the end of the first or the beginning of the second millennium AD. They may be divided into three groups by the ethnic signs. The first group. Vyatichi barrows are situated in the central and eastern parts of the region. The second group. Krivichi barrows are located in the Desna and Ugra (a left tributary of the Oka) basin. The third group. Vyatichi and Krivichi barrows are both situated in the Bolva river basin (a left tributary of the Desna). The barrows date from the 11th to the 13th centuries AD. The earliest Slavic burial rite was cremation with urns, bronze and glass ornaments in a mound dated to the ninth or tenth centuries AD. (Yermolino) (Массалитина 1992: 3–6). The rite of cremation stopped in the 11th century. At first, the rite of inhumation of a single corpse under a barrow appeared; and at the end of the 11th century it was laid in a pit grave. These burials contained rich implements, such as pottery, bronze and silver ornaments, and iron tools (Prudki) (Прошкин 1986: 67). Many archaeologists have investigated barrow cemeteries in this area, eg V. Sedov, T. Nikolskaya and others (Седов 1973: 10–16; Никольская 1981: 97–119). 80 From the 14th century, barrows are not typical of the region. The inhabitants buried their dead in cemeteries in the Christian rite. At the end of the 19th century, the archaeologists N. Bulychov and D. Chetyrkin explored several barrows in which the burials were committed in a rite not typical of the inhabitants either of the ninth to 11th centuries, or of the 14th and 15th centuries (Fig. 1). Two barrow cemeteries with such interments are situated in the Bolva basin. 1. Trashkovichi (Fig. 1). The barrow cemetery is located 300 metres northeast of the village, on the right bank of the Snopot’ river (a right tributary of the Bolva). It contained 17 round mounds (Fig. 2, 1). The author researched the cemetery in 1987 and fixed the traces of the excavations which Bulytchov did on the method of “a well”. At the end of the 19th century, the barrows were situated in two groups along both sides of the road. The first group (13 mounds) are in a forest. The barrows have been preserved up to the present. The second group (four mounds) were situated in a field and have not been well kept. The barrows’ height was 0.6 to 1.9 metres, the diameter from six to nine metres. In 15 barrows there were burials containing inhumations, which were supplied with rich funeral gifts, including rings, buckles, amulets, beads, pottery and other objects from the 11th and 12th centuries (Булычов 1899). According to the ornaments and the burial rite, local Slavic inhabitants called “Krivichi” in written sources made these barrows. Two barrows (1 and 12) differed from the others very much. In barrow 1 a burial of a dead person with a horse was discovered. It was found at a depth of about 105 centimetres from the mound’s edge. The horse lay on the right side, pointing north. The individual was placed extended on its back beside the horse. Its hand bones were stretched along its skeleton. It was pointing east. An iron spearhead and axe were laid near the right hand of the skeleton. A clay urn was at its feet BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 1. Map of barrow cemeteries (Drawing by O. Proshkin) (Булычов 1899: 58) (Fig. 2, 3). Bulychov does not describe these items and does not draw them. But some artefacts from this barrow cemetery are preserved at the State Historical Museum in Moscow. The spearhead and axe from barrow 1 form part of the museum’s collection (SHM, No 25778) (Fig. 4, 1). Kirpichnikov distinguishes similar spearheads in the third type (data from the ninth to the beginning of the 11th centuries) (Кирпичников 1966: 13–14). But such spearheads were found in burials of the seventh to eighth centuries (Kochkino), and in deposits of the 15th and 16th centuries (Novgorod) (АКР 1994: 44; Медведев 1959: 130). The axe has two pairs of side trunnions, a shaft-hole, a small flanged butt and a cutting edge (Fig. 4, 4 from the SHM’s collection; 5 drawing by Kirpichnikov). Kirpichnikov groups similar axes in the fourth type (ninth to 12th centuries) (Археология СССР 1985: 310). He dates the axe from barrow 1 at Trashkovichi 81 Oleg Proshkin The Question of the Heterogeneous Population of the Upper Oka and The Upper Desna Region in the Middle Ages Fig. 2. Vygor’ and Trashkovichi burials (Drawing by N. Bulychov) to the 11th century (Кирпичников 1966: 118–119). But such axes were found in later burials (Археология СССР 1987: 141). Paulsen considers that similar axes were made in Russia and in the eastern Baltic (Paulsen 1956: 38–39). 82 In barrow 12 a man’s skeleton was placed in a supine position on the land surface under the mound. Its hand bones were stretched along its trunk. It was pointing east. An iron knife and axe were laid near its left hand, “there was a ring in the right ear” (earring) (Булычов 1899: 60). The axe is preserved in the State History Museum. It has a narrow cutting edge, a butt, and trunnions (Fig. 4, 2 the SHM’s collection, 3 drawing by Kirpichnikov). This axe is close to the third type of battleaxes, but it has some distinguishing features (Кирпичников 1966: 35–36). Kirpichnikov dates the axe to the 11th century (Кирпичников 1966: 112–113). BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 3. Leonovo: the burial in barrow 4 (Drawing by N. Bulychov) 2. Vygor’ (Fig. 1). The barrow cemetery was situated between the villages of Vygor’ and Prochody, and consisted of two barrows which Bulychov excavated. Their condition is unknown today. One of the barrows contained the burial of a horse in the centre of the mound. The horse lay on its right side with the head to the southwest. A clay urn with burned bones was found to the northwest of the horse at the edge of the mound (Булычов 1899: 63) (Fig. 2, 2). One burial was situated in the Ugra basin. 3. Leonovo (Fig. 1). The barrow cemetery was located on the outskirts of the village, on the right bank of the Popolta (a left tributary of the Ugra). It comprised nine barrows, eight of them round, with diameters of six to 20 metres, and one rectangular, measuring 2.1 by 2.8 metres, with a height of 0.7 metres, and built of stone (Fig. 3). In four barrows, burials according to a rite of inhumation were discovered. They were accompanied by burial items from the 11th and 12th centuries. The ornaments and the burial rite indicate that these barrows were built by local Slavic inhabitants, called “vyatichi” in written sources, and also by inhabitants of southern and northern Russia (Булычов 1899). The rectangular barrow was situated at the edge of the cemetery, and was orientated from east to west. The corpse was laid under the mound in a pit grave (the depth was 1.4m). He was placed in a supine position, his head was pointing east, his hands were laid on his belly (Fig. 3) (Булычов 1899: 2). Another three barrows with unusual burials are known in the Zhyzdra river basin, a left tributary of the Oka. 4. Vasil’yevskoe-Parshino (Fig. 1). The cemetery incorporated 11 round barrows, with diameters from eight to 17 metres. Bulychov excavated five of them. Their condition is unknown today. They are not dated. A man’s interment was discovered in barrow 3, laid in a pit grave, and there were no implements in the burial. In barrow 9 a horse’s skeleton was found, at a depth of 1.4 to 1.5 metres from the edge of the mound. Its head was pointing south. The horse’s inhumation is not described. But it is known that there were coals underneath the skeleton (Булычов 1899: 38). 5. Gubino-Merenistchy (Fig. 1). The cemetery was situated between the villages, near the village of Volkonskoe, in the wasteground of Dubrovka. It consisted of 20 round barrows. I. Chetyrkin excavated five of them. Their condition is unknown today. Some pieces of pottery which have not survived were discovered in one of the barrows. The barrows are not dated. 83 Oleg Proshkin The Question of the Heterogeneous Population of the Upper Oka and The Upper Desna Region in the Middle Ages Fig. 4. Grave items from Trashkovichi: 1 spearhead (drawing by O. Proshkin); 2, 3 axe (2 from the State Historical Museum, drawing by O. Proshkin; 3 drawing by A. Kirpichnikov); 4, 5 axe (4 from the State Historical Museum, drawing by O. Proshkin; 5 (Drawing by A. Kirpichnikov) In barrow 1 (the height is 1.8m, the diameter 15m) a horse’s skeleton was discovered at a depth of about 0.5 to 0.6 metres from the edge. The burial is not described. There was a pile of ash underneath the skeleton (Четыркин 1899: 12). In barrow 2 (the height is 2.1m) “birds’ bones” were laid in the centre under the mound of the barrow. There was a man’s skeleton with the head pointing west in a pit grave, under the “birds bones” (Четыркин 1899: 12). 84 Thus six types of burial are known: 1) a man’s burial with a weapon and a horse; 2) a horse’s burial; 3) a horse’s burial with a man’s or an animal’s cremation; 4) a man’s burial with weapon; 5) a man’s burial with a bird’s burial; 6) a man’s burial under a rectangular stone barrow. The burial rite of these barrows differs very much from the local inhabitants’ rite of the Middle Ages. There are no analogies with the rite of the neighbouring areas, either. Written sources describing events in the 11th and 12th centuries in the Upper Oka basin area mention the “Golyad’” tribe. Golyad’ is mentioned for the first time in 1056, when Prince Izyaslav fought We probably have to appeal to written sources of the 14th and 15th centuries. In the second half of the 14th century, the Lithuanian Grand Duke Algirdas fought the enormous Smolensk lands and the greater part of the Upper Oka area. At the end of the 14th century, the border dividing Lithuania and Muscovy ran along the Ugra and Oka rivers. In the “List of Towns” of the end of the 14th century, the next Lithuanian towns situated in the Upper Oka area are named: Berezuesk, Lyubutsk, Mtsensk, Moshchin, Vorotynsk, Serensk, Devyagorsk, Meshchovsk, Obolensk, Serpeysk, Tarusa (Тихомиров 1952: 224) (Fig. 1). The first inhabitants to come from the Eastern Baltic region probably migrated to the Oka area before 1341, before Algirdas’ campaign to Mozhaysk. In 1449, the greater part of the Upper Oka was named as old Lithuanian possessions (ДДГ 1950: 160–161). Only in 1503 did Moscow win the Upper Oka and Desna area back. The Lithuanians and other inhabitants of the Eastern Baltic region left certain traces, such as the burial rite typical of them. Many scholars have noticed these facts (Кулаков 1987: 23–24; and others). Men’s burials with horses, weapons and sacrificial birds were typical of Baltic and Finno-Ugric peoples. Horses’ burials were typical of nomads of the European and Asian steppes for a long time. On Old Russian territory, horses’ burials or burials with horses are known in the interments of fighters, and also where Slavic peoples bordered closely Baltic and Finno-Ugric ones (Голубева 1981: 87). But it is impossible to regard the burials with horses in the barrows of the Upper Oka and Upper Desna region as fighters’ burials. They were not supplied with rich harnesses, belt-buckles or ornaments. Steppe nomads’ burials with horses are different too (Зяблин 1955; and others). The burial rite with horses here has many analogies with ones in northeast Europe, where it persisted up to the late Middle Ages. A striking example of it is the cremation of the Lithuanian Grand Duke Algirdas with his horses in 1377. This rite is very ancient, and connected with the worship of these animals. Its roots BALTICA 6 probably derived from the Stone Age. Vaitkunskienė divides men’s burials in Lithuania since the middle of the first millennium AD into three groups. The second category of burials were usually supplied with a spear and an axe, the third were supplied with a horse (Вайткунскене 1987: 57). In most cases, such burials in Lithuania are dated from the end of the first millennium AD to the 13th and 14th centuries (Куликаускене 1953). A horses’ burial rite with the remains of a cremation was marked in many Lithuanian cemeteries, where it persisted up to the 15th century (Урбанавичюс 1985: 161; 1988: 401; and others). Many researchers have noted the existence of horses’ burials from the middle of the first millennium AD and especially at the beginning of the second millennium AD on southeast Baltic territory as an ordinary phenomenon (Кушнер 1991: 39; and others). In east Lithuanian barrows, the greatest number of horses’ burials were made separately from men’s. In barrows one horse pointing south, east or west was interred. Such burials appeared in the middle of the first millennium AD, and spread widely at the turn of the second millennium AD (Таутавичус 1959: 37). Men’s burials with weapons, clay vessels and burials with sacrificial birds are known in Lithuania up to the 16th century (Урбанавичюс 1979: 439; 1985: 162; and others). ARCHAELOGIA this tribe (ПСРЛ 1962: 151). It was mentioned again in 1147, when Prince Svyatoslav waged war on Smolensk (ПСРЛ 1962: 339). This shows that the Golyad’ tribe lived in the Protva basin (Oka left tributary) (Fig. 1). Many different points of view are expressed about the ethnic origin of this tribe. Many scholars consider that the Golyad’ are Balts (Седов 1982: 44; Кушнер 1991: 56; and others). But archaeological materials of the Balts are not found on the River Protva in the 11th and 12th centuries. The rectangular stone barrow at Leonovo has analogies in the Upper Nemunas area. There, similar funeral constructions are dated, according to the Polish and Lithuanian coins discovered in them, to the 13th to 16th centuries (Седов 1982: 122). Therefore, the burials in the Upper Oka and the Upper Desna area may be connected hypothetically with the population of the Eastern Baltic (Lithuanians, Yotvingians and others), and dated to the 11th to 15th centuries. But the local inhabitants could have built some of them. References Paulsen, P. 1956. Axt und Kreuz in Nord – und Osteuropa. Bonn. Археологическая карта России. Ивановская область. 1994. Москва. Археология СССР. 1985. Древняя Русь. Москва. Археология СССР. 1987. Финно-угры и балты в эпоху средневековья. Москва. Булычев, Н. 1899. Журнал раскопок по части водораздела верхних притоков Волги и Днепра. Москва. Вайткунскене, Л. 1987. К вопросу о начале дружин в Литве. In: Задачи советской археологии в свете решений XXVII съезда КПСС. Москва. Голубева, Л. 1981. Конские погребения в курганах Северо-Восточной Руси VIII-XI вв. In: Советская археология. № 4. 85 Oleg Proshkin The Question of the Heterogeneous Population of the Upper Oka and The Upper Desna Region in the Middle Ages ДДГ. 1950. Духовные и договорные грамоты великих и удельных князей 14-16 вв. Москва-Ленинград. Зяблин, Л. 1955. О татарских курганах. In: Советская археология. XXII. Кирпичников, А. 1966. Древнерусское оружие. In: Свод археологических источников. Е1-36. Выпуск 2. МоскваЛенинград. Кулаков, В. 1987. Литовцы в Калужской земле. In: Вопросы археологии и истории Верхнего Поочья. Калуга. Куликаускене, Р. 1953. Погребения с конями у древних литовцев. In: Советская археология. XVII. Кушнер, П. 1991. Этническое прошлое Юго-Восточной Прибалтики. Вильнюс. Массалитина, Г. 1992. Раскопки длинного кургана у с. Ермолино. In: Боровский краевед. 4. Боровск. Медведев, А. 1959. Оружие Новгорода Великого. In: Материалы и исследования по археологии СССР. Выпуск 65. Москва. Прошкин, О. 1986. Калужская областная экспедиция. In: Археологические открытия 1984 года. Москва. ПСРЛ. Полное собрание русских летописей. Том 2. 1962. Ипатьевская летопись. Москва. Седов, В. 1973. Ранние курганы вятичей. In: Краткие сообщения Института археологии. Выпуск 135. Седов, В. 1982. Восточные славяне в VI-XIII вв. Москва. Таутавичус, А. 1959. Восточнолитовские курганы. In: Вопросы этнической истории народов Прибалтики. Москва. Тихомиров, М. 1952. «Список русских городов дальних и ближних». In: Исторические записки. 40. Урбанавичюс, В. 1979. Могильник Диктарай. In: Археологические открытия 1978 года. Москва. Урбанавичюс, В. 1985. Реликты язычества в памятниках 14-16 вв. в Литве. In: Новое в археологии Прибалтики и соседних территорий. Таллин. Урбанавичюс, В. 1988. Исследование могильника у д. Серяджюс. In: Археологические открытия 1986 года. Москва. Четыркин, И. 1899. Дневник раскопок, произведенных в 1898 г. в уездах Козельском, Лихвинском и Калужском. In: Известия Калужской Ученой Архивной Комиссии. № 2. Калуга. Oleg Proskhin Plechanov ul. 5-33, 248030 Kaluga, Russia e-mail: [email protected] Received: 2002 D ė l kit ų e tnini ų grupi ų g y v e nto j ų O kos ir D e snos auk š tupiuos e viduram ž iais ОLEGAS PROŠKINAS 86 pabaigoje – II tūkstantmečio pradžioje vietinių slavų palikti paminklai. Pagal radinius juos galima skirstyti į 3 grupes: 1-oji grupė – viatičių pilkapiai, aptinkami centrinėje ir rytinėje šio regiono dalyse. 2-oji grupė – krivičių pilkapiai, jie koncentruojasi Desnos ir Ugros (kairysis Okos intakas) baseinuose. 3-ioji grupė – viatičių ir krivičių pilkapiai. Jie aptinkami drauge ir išsidėstę Bolvos upės (kairysis Desnos intakas) baseine. Pilkapynai datuojami IX–XIII a. Ankstyviausi IX–X a. pilkapiai yra slavų su degintiniais kapais ir inventoriumi: urnomis, žalvariniais bei stikliniais dirbiniais. Nuo XI a. mirusiųjų kremacija nutrūksta. Paplinta inhumacija. Iš pradžių mirusiuosius laidodavo ant pirminio žemės paviršiaus, vėliau – į duobę po pilkapio sampilu. Kapuose daug dirbinių: puodų, žalvarinių ir sidabrinių papuošalų, geležinių buities rakandų (pvz., Prūdki). Nuo XIV a. pilkapiai šioje teritorijoje jau nebūdingi. Atsiranda plokštinių krikščioniškų kapinynų. Tarp minėtų pilkapių aptikta tokių, kuriuose laidosena nebūdinga vietiniams gyventojams nei IX–XIII, nei XIV–XV amžiais ar dar vėliau. Du tokie pilkapynai yra Bolvos baseine. Tai Traškovičiai. Jame 17 pilkapių, išsidėsčiusių dviem grupėmis (1:1 pav., 2:1 pav.). Iki dabar išliko 13 pilkapių grupė, buvusi miške. Kiti pilkapiai, XIX a. pabaigoje buvę ariamame lauke, sunaikinti. Sampilai 0,6–1,9 m aukščio ir 6–9 m skersmens. 15-oje pilkapių aptikta griautinių kapų, kuriuose buvo XI–XII a. radinių. Tai vietinių gyventojų – krivičių – pilkapiai. Pilkapiuose Nr. 1 ir Nr. 12 aptikti mirusieji laidoti galvomis į rytus. Įkapes sudarė ietigaliai, kirviai, peilis ir puodeliai (4:1 pav.; 2, 4 pav.). Pilkapyje Nr. 1 šalia vyro buvo palaidotas ir žirgas. Abu kapai datuojami XI a. Vigor pilkapyne buvo 2 pilkapiai, kuriuos XIX a. pabaigoje ištyrė N. Buličiovas (1:2 pav.). Vieno pilkapio centre aptikti žirgo griaučiai, atkreipti galva į pietvakarius. Sampilo pakraštyje rastas molinis indas su sudegintais kaulais (2:2 pav.). Leoniovo pilkapyne buvo 9 pilkapiai (1:3 pav.). 8 iš jų apskriti – nuo 6 iki 20 m skersmens, devintas – stačiakampio formos, – 2,1 х 2,8 m ir 0,7 m aukščio – buvo sukrautas iš akmenų. 4-iuose pilkapiuose buvo rasta griautinių kapų ir XI–XII a. dirbinių. Tai viatičių ir galbūt šiaurės bei pietų Rusios gyventojų kapai. Stačiakampio formos pilkapyje buvo griautinis kapas, orientuotas galva į vakarus (3 pav.). Santrauka Dar 3 pilkapiai su neįprasta laidosena buvo žinomi Žizdros upės baseine. Okos aukštupio kairiajame ir Desnos aukštupio dešiniajame krante, t. y. dabartinėse Kalugos ir Smolensko srityse, žinoma daug pilkapynų. Tai I tūkstantmečio Vasilevskoje–Paršino (1:4 pav.) pilkapyne yra 11 apskritos formos 8–17 m skersmens pilkapių. 5 iš jų tyrinėti N. Buličiovo. 9-ajame pilkapyje rasti žirgo griaučiai orientuoti galva į pietus. Po griaučiais buvo anglių. BALTICA 6 Visų išvardytų laidosenos pavyzdžių analogijų aplinkui nėra. Rašytiniai šaltiniai, kuriuose aprašomi XI–XII amžių įvykiai, šiose teritorijose mini galindus ir nurodo konkrečią jų gyvenamąją teritoriją – Protvos upės baseiną (1 pav.). Vėlesni, XIV–XV a., rašytiniai šaltiniai mini Lietuvos didįjį kunigaikštį Algirdą užkariavus Smolensko žemes ir didžiąją dalį Okos aukštupio. XIV a. antrojoje pusėje siena tarp Lietuvos ir Maskvos ėjo Ugros ir Protvos upėmis, XIV a. pabaigos „Miestų sąraše“ taip pat minima daug lietuvių miestų (1 pav.). Išeiviai iš Rytų Pabaltijo turėjo palikti čia savo pėdsakų. Mirusiųjų kapai su žirgais, ginklais, taip pat su paukščiais būdingi baltams ir finougrams. ARCHAELOGIA Gubino–Mereniščių (1:5 pav.) pilkapyną sudarė 20ties pilkapių grupė. 5 iš jų tyrinėjo I. Četirkinas. Viename iš jų aptikta keramikos šukė. Chronologija neaiški. Pilkapyje Nr. 1 buvo žirgo griaučiai. Paukščio kaulų rasta pilkapyje Nr. 2, o po jais, pilkapio centre, duobėje, buvo griautinis vyro kapas, orientuotas galva į vakarus. Taigi analizuoti svetimi slavams laidojimo papročiai Okos ir Desnos aukštupių regione turi analogijų su laidojimo tradicijomis Rytų Pabaltijyje ir palikti išeivių bei galbūt išlikusių vietinių galindų ir datuotini XI–XV a. Vertė Vytautas Kazakevičius 87 Kurland. Die Grenzen und die nördlichen Landschaften in 8.–13. Jahrhundert K u r l a n d . D i e G r e n z e n u n d d i e n ö r dl i c h e n L a n d s c h a f t e n i n 8 . – 1 3 . J a h r h u n d e rt VLADAS ŽULKUS VLADAS ŽULKUS Abstract Das kurische Territorium und die einzelne Territorien kurischer Landschaften genauer zu bestimmen ist es möglich anhand der archäologischen und historischen Informationen. Key words: Kuren, Stämmen, Balten, Landschaften, Orden. 1. Einführung Im Bereich der Vor- und Frühgeschichte der Kuren gibt noch keine spezielle monografische Forschung. Einer der Gründe hierfür ist, dass das alte Kurland – ebenso wie die Gebiete der Selen und Semgallen – heute auf Lettland und Litauen verteilt liegt. Westlettland, dass den halben Teil der ethnisch kurischen Gebiete einnimmt, wird seit altersher Kurland (lett.: Kurzeme) genannt. Die Erforschung der Geschichte der kurischen Stämme ergeht sich deswegen im Allgemeinen auf diese Region, bestehend aus kurischem, livischem und semgallischen Kulturerbe. Die frühmittelalterliche Küstenkultur in Litauen wurde lange Zeit nicht als eigenständiges Forschungsobjekt behandelt: Historiker betrachteten sie als szemaitisch, die Archäologen als allgemein-litauisch. ”Kuren” waren sowohl in der litauischen als auch in der westeuropäischen Geschichtswissenschaft sogar lange Zeit ein Synonym für Letten. Die historischen Komplikationen, in dessen Folge die Kurenstämme mit dem Gebiet des sogenannten Kurlands oder mit dem russischen Gouvernement Kurland gleich gesetzt wurden (analog zur Identifizierung der alten Prussen mit den Einwohnern Ostpreußens), hatte Einfluss auch auf die Archäologie. Die kurische Kultur wurde im Wesentlichen verbunden mit den nördlichen Kuren oder mit der im frühen Mittelalter kolonisierten Kultur der Liven. 88 Die wissenschaftlichen archäologischen Publikationen über die sind verschiedener Art: Es wurde über die Ausgrabungen verschiedener Objekte aus dem kurischen Altertum veröffentlicht, verschiedene Arten der archäologischen Objekte klassifiziert, kulturelle Charakteriska der Kuren wurden gesucht und das kurische Territorium bestimmt. Über die nordkurische Kultur im Eisenzeitalter denken ganzheitlich lettische Archäologen nach (Latvijas 1974; ��������� Мугуревич 1965; Mugurēvičs 1997; 1999; 2000a; Caune A. 1991; Асарис 1997; Asaris 1998; 1999; Озере������������� ������������������ 1986; 1987; Vasks 1997; 1999; Urtāns 1998; Apals, Mugurēvičs 2001). Von Archäologen wurde bisher nicht versucht, einzelne Territorien kurischer Landschaften genauer zu bestimmen, obwohl Historiker dies schon über ein Jahrhundert lang machen (Bielenstein 1892; Dopkewitsch 1933; Salys 1930). Das kurische Territorium aus historischen Quellen und archäologischen Daten zu synthetisieren versuchte Ē. Mugurēvičs (1997, 1999; 2000a). Die südkurischen Landschaften wurden erst 1989 genauer abgegrenzt (Žulkus, Klimka 1989). 2. Die Grenzen Kurlands A.Die Ostgrenze Dass die östliche kurische Grenze so unterschiedlich festgelegt wurde, liegt zuallererst an verschiedenen Methoden: Sprachwissenschaftler, die Probleme bei der Datierung von Gewässer- und Ortsbezeichnungen haben, heben sehr alte “Kulturschichten” hervor, die sich auf die Mitte des ersten Jahrhunderts nach Christus beziehen. Historiker benutzen demgegenüber spätere schriftliche Quellen aus dem 13.-15. Jahrhundert. In denen von ihnen präsentierten Grenzen sind deutlich Aufteilungen und Wanderungsbewegungen zu verspüren, deren wichtigster Grund die Ordensinvasion war. Ein weiterer Grund liegt darin, dass Forscher die recht ausgedehnte unbewohnte Wildnis zwischen den Stämmen mal dem einen, mal dem anderen Stamm zuschreiben, also den Kuren oder den Szemaiten, und dabei das Territorium des Einen ausdehnen und des Anderen beschneiden. Die litauischen Forscher der ersten Hälfte des 20. Jahrhunderts wollten die Belege der politisch engagierten deutschen Forscher widerlegen, dass Litauens Küste nicht litauisch (bzw. szemaitisch), sondern kurisch gewesen sei - was zu jener Zeit als nicht litauisch galt. In ähnlichen Wirren verstrick- In keiner bekannten schriftlichen Quelle der Zeit vor dem Deutschen Orden sind die Grenzen Kurlands genauer beschrieben. In der Beschreibung des Rimbert (um 873 n. Chr.) wird indirekt auch das Territorium Kurlands erwähnt: Am (nördlichen oder südlichen) Rande Kurlands war Seeburg; in der Mitte Kurlands, nach fünf Tagen Reise, die wichtigste kurische „Stadt“, Apulia (litauisch: Apuolė); und Kurland bestand aus fünf Landschaften. Adam von Bremen (ca. 1040-1080) schildert Kurland als eine Insel - ”vel maxima est illa, quae Churland dicitur” (Adami IIII: 190). In den Ordensquellen wurden 1252 und 1253 neun kurz beschriebene kurische Landschaften erwähnt sowie 150 Siedlungen in Kurland genannt (LEK Bd. ��������� I, Abt. 1, Nr. CCXXXVI, CCXLVI, CCLIII). Dennoch ��������������������� bleiben einige Unklarheiten wegen der Grenzen besonders in den Randgebieten. B.Das Problem der Südgrenze Besonders unklar ist dabei die südliche Grenze des von den Kuren bewohnten Gebiets. Vor der Ankunft des Ordens gehörte der Unterlauf der Memel nicht den Kuren, wie in einer Quelle von etwa 1231 zu lesen ist. Die Landschaft Lamata wird separat von Kurland erwähnt (Scriptores 1, 1861: 737). Auf eine Karte von Ebstorff aus dem Jahre 1235 (Stradiņš, Cēbere 2001: 331) liegt Kurland aber nördlich vom Fluss Memel, Lamata ist dort hingegen nicht namentlich erwähnt (Abb. 1). In einer anderen Quelle aus der Mitte des 13. Jahrhunderts (1265-1260: ”Descriptiones terrarum”) steht wie folgt geschrieben: ”Samland verbündet sich mit Kurland, das sich weiter nach Norden hinzieht und von Süden und Westen vom Meer umgeben ist. Im Osten liegt bereits ein heidnisches Land genannt Szemaiten (Samogitia). Dorthin kann ein Christ niemals ohne Schwert gehen.“ (zitiert nach Gorski 1981; Mugurēvičs 1995: 24). Mit dem von Süden umschließenden Meer ist nichts anderes als das kurische Haff gemeint. Aus dieser Beschreibung geht hervor, dass Lamata nicht zu den Samen, sondern zu den Kuren gehörte. In einer späteren Quelle, der um 1290 geschriebenen Livländischen Reimchronik, werden die nördlichen Nachbarn der Kuren, die Liven, als Oselêre erwähnt. Die südlichen Nachbarn werden nicht genannt - obwohl geschrieben wird, dass Kurland eine Länge von 50 Meilen aufweise: (Livländische 351ff.; 357f.) Nach Kwauka ist es vom Kap Domesnes bis nach Samland eine Strecke von 50 Meilen nach Süden (Kwauka 1986: 88). So müsste die terra Lamata schon zu Kurland gehört haben. Die Situation klärt sich durch ein Dokument vom 29. Juli 1252, in dem Lamata - bis dahin separat vom kurischen Territorium - dem Bischofstum Kurland zugesprochen wird (LEK Bd. ����������� I,. Abt. 1, Nr. CCXXXVI), d. h. es wird formal der Herrschaft des Livländischen Ordens und des Kurländischen Bischofs unterstellt. De facto wird diese Abhängigkeit auch später rechtlich bestätigt, obwohl zur südlichsten Landschaft Pilsats Mitte des 13. Jahrhunderts die Gebiete südlich der Burgen Žardė-Laistai nicht gehörten und der Orden sich mit dem Bischof die Wiesen an der Dreverna (in der Quelle Drivene), und die Wiesen zwischen den Flüssen Minge und Žardė sowie die Wälder zwischen Minge und Memel nicht aufteilte (LEK Bd. I, Abt. 1: Nr. CCXLIX). BALTICA 6 dâ liet bie des meres strant ein gegende, heizet Kûrlant: die ist wol vumfzik mîle lanc. …………………………………. Oselêre daz sint heiden sûr, die sint der Kûuren nâkebûr. ARCHAELOGIA en sich manche noch heute, wenn z. B. die kurische Landschaft Pilsats für ein „baltisch-kurischer westszemaitischer Bezirk“ gehalten wird (Pėteraitis 1992: 51). Eine der der unglaublichsten Einordnungen des kurischen Lebensraums stammt von Kustavi Grotenfelt. Er wies nach, dass die Kuren ein ehemalig finnischer Stamm seien und ihr Lebensort sei die Insel Ösel (estnisch: Saaremaa) gewesen (Grotenfelt 1912: 155ff). Was sagen dazu archäologische Quellen? Deutliche Unterschiede lassen sich anhand der Ausgrabungen der Gräberfelder der Kuren und ihrer Nachbarn feststellen. Im Mittelalter - bzw. dem Baltischen mittleren Eisenzeitalter (5.-7. Jahrhundert) - wurden die Toten in den Küstengebieten Litauens und Lettlands unverbrannt in Gräbern bestattet, die mit unregelmäßigen ovalen oder rechteckigen Steinkreisen markiert waren (im südlichen Teil wurde diese Sitte schon seit dem 1.-3. Jahrhundert praktiziert. Weiter nach Norden kann man solche, auf das 5.-7. Jahrhundert datierten Gräber im Gräberfeld von Ošenieki (Vērgale) finden, das eine schon von altersher bestehende Grenze Kurlands markiert. Weiter nach Norden breitet sich vom Fluss Tebra eine wenig besiedelte Gegend aus, und vom Fluss Abava, einem rechten Nebenfluss der Venta, beginnt der Lebensraum der Liven, der baltischen Finnen. Die Liven beerdigten ihre Toten in Gräbern mit Steinkonstrukten; manchmal verbrannten sie ihre Toten, manchmal aber auch nicht. (Tenisons 1994: 24; Vasks 1997; 63ff, 73f). Später breiteten sich die Liven noch nach Süden aus. Livische Hydronyme kann man entlang des Flusses Rīva und am Oberlauf der Užava, südlich des Flusses Abava und im Gebiet links des Flusses Slocene finden (Mugurēvičs 1987: 64, Abb. 11). Die nördliche Grenze des kurischen Territoriums überschritt im 10. Jahrhundert den Fluss Tebra (Mugurēvičs 1997a: 78). Zwischen den Siedlungen der Liven und der Kuren lag eine Wildnis von 6-15 km Breite. 89 Kurland. Die Grenzen und die nördlichen Landschaften in 8.–13. Jahrhundert VLADAS ŽULKUS C. Nordost- und Südostgrenze Im Nordosten reichten die Kuren auch nicht bis an den Mittellauf der Venta: Die östliche Grenze verlief an den Oberläufen von Virvytė und Minge, in Richtung der Szemaiten breitete sich Wildnis aus. Im Südosten lebten Kuren bis zum 5./6. Jahrhundert am rechten Ufer der Jūra, in späteren Zeiten kann man hier schon Szemaiten finden; die südliche Grenze befand sich zwischen Priekulė und Klaipėda. Die kurischen Grenzen begannen sich ab dem 11. Jahrhundert zu verändern, als die Kuren begannen, ihre Herrschaft auszudehnen, und dabei zuerst die bis dahin unbesiedelten Gebiete zwischen den Stämmen besetzten. So entstand im Norden Kurlands „die Landschaft zwischen Skrunda und Semigallia”. Als dies nicht mehr ausreichte bedrängten die Kuren im Norden die Wenden, die am Unterlauf der Venta lebten, sowie die an den Küsten der Bucht von Riga lebenden Liven. Die Wenden wurden gezwungen, sich zurückzuziehen und siedelten sich in Latgallen und in der Gegend von Cēsis (deutsch: Wenden) an. Die Eroberung der livischen Gebiete dauerte einige Jahrhunderte. Anhand archäologischer Informationen kann man sehen, wie sich die livischen Gräberfelder langsam mit den Kuren typischen Gräbern abwechseln. An den finno-ugrischen Hintergrund der nördlichen Gebiete Kurlands erinnern die Namen der kurischen Landschaften: Bandava (Bandowe), Ventava (Winda), Vanema (Wannenia) = Vredecuronia. Anfang des 13. Jahrhunderts war den Quellen nach das ganze im 13. Jahrhundert als Kurland bezeichnete Territorium von Kuren kolonisiert (Mugurēvičs 1997a: 78). Archäologische Daten zeigen, dass sich nördlich der Flüsse Venta und Abava livische, kolonisiert livische, aber nur wenige kurische Gräberfelder aus dem 11.13. Jahrhundert finden lassen. Frühere als auf das 11./12. Jahrhundert datierte Gräberfelder mit kurischen Brandgräbern wurden nicht gefunden. Das nördlichste derzeit bekannte Gräberfeld ist Nevejas Upesvagari (Asaris 1997). Liven lebten noch an den Unterläufen von Imula und Amula, den linken Nebenflüssen der Abava (Gräberfelder von Matkules Lanksēde und Matkules Bienes), den Oberläufen der Abava (Gräberfelder Virbu Zunnas, Lipstu Stautiņi) und entlang des Flusses Slocene (Tukuma Jaunais tirgus). Zwischen der Abava und den Seen Sasmaukas und Lubezers wurden mehr livische als kurische Gräberfelder gefunden (Asaris 1996: 38, Abb. 1; Mugurēvičs 1999). Nördlich der Abava wurden keine Gräberfelder mit kurischen Brandgräbern gefunden, die auf früher als das 11./12. Jahrhundert datiert werden könnten. Die Kuren siedelten anfangs ent- 90 Abb. 1. Auf eine Karte von Ebstorff aus dem Jahre 1235 liegt Kurland nördlich vom Fluss Memel. lang der Abava und übernahmen fruchtbarere bereits von Liven kultivierte Gebiete, bevor sie nach Norden, Nordosten und Osten drängten. Es wird allgemein angenommen, dass die Kolonisierung der Liven friedlich vonstatten ging, jedoch zumindest anfänglich müssten die Kuren auf deutlichen Widerstand der örtlichen Bewohner gestoßen sein. Nicht zufällig kann man in den Gräbern kurischer Männer eine große Anzahl Waffen finden, was die Vermutung nahe legt, dass es hier noch im 12. Jahrhundert das Gefolge eine wichtige soziale Institution war (Asaris 1997). In den schriftlichen Quellen des 13. Jahrhunderts werden Siedlungen im Norden Kurlands erwähnt und Vermutungen über zuvor dichter besiedelte Orte geäußert. Zahlreich neue Siedlungen entstanden nur in der Niederung des Flusses Rinda und in der „Landschaft zwischen Skrunda und Semigallia ” (Asaris 1999:128). Die nach dem 11. Jahrhundert in den ehemals livischen Landschaften gegründeten Zentren waren stärker kolonisatorischer Art. Es waren militärisch-administrative Zentren mit wenigen dazu gehörigen Siedlungen, die einen geringen Einfluss auf die örtliche finno-ugrische Kultur ausübten. Dies zeigt sich nicht nur im dünnen Netzwerk kurischer Gräberfelder, sondern auch in der Verbreitung von kurischen Handwerkswaren. Im 11./12. Jahrhundert waren die kurischen kammförmigen Anhänger, die Miniaturen von Werkzeugen zum Bänderweben nördlich der Abava völlig unbekannt (������������ Озере������� 1986). Das 10./11. Jahrhundert kann als Periode der kurischen Expansion auch in Richtung ihrer östlichen und südlichen Nachbarn gesehen werden. Den zugenommenen kurischen Einfluss auf die Szemaiten an den 3. Die Landschaften und ihre Bestimung Bei der Kartografierung der archäologischen Objekte wurden unterschiedliche Territorien innerhalb des kurischen Stammes festgestellt - die Grenzen der sogenannten „Landschaften“, welche sich bereits im 5./ 6. Jahrhundert gebildet hatten (Abb. 2). Fünf solcher Landschaften wurden - ohne Angabe ihrer Namen in der Mitte des 9. Jahrhunderts erwähnt (Vita Anskarii: 1884: 853, 30c). Mugurēvičs vermutet berechtigterweise, es wären die Landschaften Pilsats, Megowe, Ceklis, Duvzare und Piemare gewesen, und hat dabei das in jener Zeit von Kuren bewohnte Territorium im Sinn (Mugurēvičs 1997a: 78). Die Ordensquellen des 13. Jahrhunderts erwähnen bereits neun kurische Landschaften (von Süd nach Nord): Pilsats, Megowe, Ceklis (Ceclis), Duvzare, Piemare (Bihavelanc), “terra inter Scrunden et Semigalliam”, Ventava (Winda), Bandava (Bandowe) und Vanema (Wannenia, Vredecuronia). In einem Dokument vom 12. August 1252 werden die südlichen Landschaften als unbewohnt ausgenommen, ”von den landen, die noch ungebuwet sin, als Ceclis, und Megowe, Pilsaten und Dovzare”. In der Teilungsurkunde von 1253 - es handelt sich um die Aufteilung der Ländereien des “unbebauten” Kurlands zwischen dem Bischof von Kurland und dem Deutschen Orden -werden fünf solcher „unbebauten“ Landschaften erwähnt: Ceclis, Megowe, Dovzare, Ceclis, “terra inter Scrunden et Semigalliam” (LEK Bd. ����������������������� I, Abt. 1, Nr. CCXXXVI). �������� Man kann annehmen, dass zwischen ihnen auch schon im Jahre 853 (Vita Anskarii 1884: 853, 30.c) erwähnte Länder stehen. In diesen “unbebauten” Landschaften kann man den schriftlichen Quellen zufolge eine durchgehende Landeseinteilung beobachten: Borchsukunge (castelleturae), Land, Burg. “Unbebaut” bedeutete nicht wüstes Land, es war nur gemeint, dass das Gebiet noch nicht vom Orden beherrscht war (vgl. Salys 1930: 188ff) Schon die Untersuchungen von H. Dopkewitsch hatten folgendes gezeigt: 1. Von den Anhand der archäologischen, historischen und linguistischen Informationen ist es möglich, die verschiedenen Landschaften der Kuren auf Landkarten zur lokalisieren. Das Territorium der einzelnen kurischen Gebiete war von sehr unterschiedlich Größe - von einigen Hunderten bis zu Tausenden Quadratkilometern. Im einzelnen gab es folgende Landschaften: Pilsats mit ca. 200 qkm Größe; Megowe und Duvzare - etwa jeweils 500 qkm; Ceklis - ca. 2500 qkm, Bihavelank (Piemare) - etwa 1250 qkm; Ventava – um 600 qkm, Bandava über 1600 qkm, Vanema über 4000 qkm und das Territorium der Landschaft zwischen Skrunda und Semigallia betrug um 1200 qkm. Archäologisch am besten untersucht worden sind die südlichen kurischen Landschaften Pilsats und Megowe sowie ihre Nachbarlandschaft Lamata (Žulkus, Klimka 1989). Die Ziel der unseren Forschungen ist das Territoriium des Landschaft Ceklis und die einzelnen Territorien der nordkurischen Landschaften genauer zu bestimmen. BALTICA 6 Deutschen ist dieses Land nicht besiedelt worden; 2. Die einheimische kurische Bevölkerung wurde bei den Grenzbestimmungen als sachkundig herangezogen – die ”seniores et discretiores”, von denen 1253 die Rede ist, sind nichts anderes als einheimische Kuren gewesen (Dopkewitsch 1933: 11). ARCHAELOGIA Ufern der Jūra in jener Zeit zeigen die kurischen Funde in den Gräberfeldern von Bikavėnai und Žąsinas (Vaitkunskienė 1997). In den prussischen Landschaften auf der Halbinsel Samland kann in den Gräberfeldern des 10. bis 12. Jahrhunderts zahlreich kurischer Frauenschmuck gefunden werden. V. Kulakov ließ sich zu der Vermutung hinreißen, prussische Krieger hätten kurische Frauen geheiratet, denn massiv verbreitet sind kurische Schwertscheidenbeschläge, Waffen und Pferdeausrüstungsteile für kurische Krieger im prussischen Gefolge (Kulakov 1994: 107ff). A.Ceklis Zwischen den größten kurischen Landschaften lag Ceklis (Ceclis) das im Osten von Szemaiten und im Süden von der zur Landschaft Lamata gehörenden Wildnis begrenzt wurde. Unter Rücksichtnahme auf alle Daten (archäologische, historische und geografische) sind die Grenzen von Ceklis bis heute allerdings nicht genauer bestimmt worden. Die südliche Grenze von Ceklis verlief entlang des Flusses Minge bis zum Nebenfluss Skinija an ihrem Unterlauf. A. Salys zog diese Südgrenze vom Oberlauf der Venta direkt bis zum Memeldelta und rechnete dabei zu den Kuren Gebiete der Szemaiten am Fluss Virvytė sowie die fast unbewohnte von sumpfigen Wäldern bewachsene Wildnis in der Gegend von Rietavas (Salys 1930). Der südlichste derzeit bekannte Ort von Ceklis ist der Burgwall von Dovilai an der Minge. In Quellen aus dem 13. Jahrhundert wurde die Südgrenze Ceklis noch südlicher gezogen - sie verband Ventės ragas (Die Windenburger Ecke) mit dem Unterlauf der Memel (Salys 1930), das heißt zu ihr hätte ein Teil des Territoriums von Lamata gehört. Im Südwesten trennte ein einige Kilometer breiter Waldstreifen, der sich entlang der linken Nebenflüsse der Smiltelė bis zum Oberlauf der Šventoji hinzog, die 91 Kurland. Die Grenzen und die nördlichen Landschaften in 8.–13. Jahrhundert VLADAS ŽULKUS Abb. 2. Die Territorien innerhalb des kurischen Stammes und die Grenzen der sogenannten “Landschaften” (V. Žulkus.) I – Terra Lamata; II - Szemaiten; III – Semigallen. 1 – Pilsats; 2 – Megowe; 3 – Duvzare; 4 – Ceklis; 5 – Bihavelank (Piemare); 6 – Bandava; 7 – Ventava; 8 – Vanema (Vredecuronia); 9 – Die “Landschaft zwischen Scrunda und Semigallia”. 92 Siedlungen Ceklis von der Küste. In diesen Wäldern entsprangen alle rechten Nebenflüsse der Dangė-Akmena. Die Burgwälle, Siedlungen und Gräberfelder am westlichen Rand von Ceklis befanden sich in den Flussniederungen entlang der Minge und der Flüsse Salantas und Erla, sowie entlang der Bartuva. Nicht wenige der damaligen Burganlagen am westlichen Rand von Ceklis wurden 1253 erwähnt: Gargždai – Garisda, Lekemė – Letsime, Stalgėnai (Paminijis) – Pamenie, Kalniškiai – Kalnesemme und Kartena – Kartine (LEK Bd. I, ����������������������������������������� Abt. 1, Nr. CCLIII; �������������������������� Salys 1930: 180f). Es ist nicht ganz klar, ob das Territorium zwischen den Flüssen Venta und Vadakstis sowie den Sümpfen von Kamanai von altersher kurisch bewohnt war oder später erobert worden war. Diese Gegend trennte ein Band von Sümpfen vom zentralen Territorium der Landschaft – mit einer separaten Gruppe von Burgwällen und Gräberfeldern: Daubariai, Šapnagiai (heutiger Bezirk/Rajon Mažeikiai). Im Nordosten von Ceklis lebten die Kuren in der Gegend des heutigen Mažeikiai bis zum Mittellauf der Ašva. Zwischen den Siedlungen der Kuren und der Semgallen lag bis zu 15 km breite sumpfige und bewaldete Wildnis. Die Grenze zwischen den Stämmen markierte die Ašva- ein Hydronym mit der Bedeutung einer mytologischen Stute, was eindeutig einen sakralen Raum kennzeichnet. Nach Informationen aus historischen Quellen des 13. Jahrhunderts gehörte dieser Raum zwischen den Stämmen zur Landschaft Ceklis, während Archäologen am rechten Ufer der Venta und ihrem Nebenfluss Dabikinė zerstörte Gräber der Semgallen fanden. Die alten Gräber der Semgallen überschreiten im Allgemeinen die Venta nicht (Jarockis 1998: 49), nur an der Einmündung der Virvytė wurden nördlich der Venta welche gefunden (Pavirvytė-Gudai). I. Vaškevičiūtė schreibt den Semgallen einen recht großen Raum zwischen dem Unterlauf der Virvytė und der Venta zu (Vaškevičiūtė 1993: 126, Abb. 1), obwohl sich dort Ödnis befand und hinter den Sümpfen im Süden schon Szemaiten lebten. Vom Mündung der Virvytė in die Venta verlief die Westgrenze des Territoriums der Szemaiten ein Stück nach Süden am Mittellauf der Virvytė. Nördlich gab es eine etwa 10 km breite waldreiche Wildnis, hinter der bereits Kuren lebten. Das genauer bestimmte Territorium von Ceklis betrug etwa 2500 qkm, in ihm sind mehr als 180 Wohnorte bekannt, und nach aktuellsten Daten kamen auf eine Siedlung in der Landschaft Ceklis etwa 14 qkm. BALTICA 6 Die kurische Ostgrenze verlief bei der Umgebung von Telšiai. Die ethnische Grenze zwischen Kuren und Szemaiten hat dabei das Flüsschen Telšė anscheinend nicht überschritten. Westlich davon wurden die Verstorbenen mit den charakteristischen kurischen Grabbeigaben brandbestattet, aber südöstlich vom Fluss Patekla liegen dicht beieinander zwei Burgwälle und fünf Gräberfelder mit Gräbern unverbrannter Szemaiten (Tautavičius 1981a). Es handelt sich dabei um die ehemalige kleine szemaitische Landschaft Viešvė, die im 13. Jahrhundert schon dem Territorium Ceklis angeschlossen worden war (Salys 1930). ARCHAELOGIA Im Norden wurde Ceklis von den Landschaften Duvzare und Bandava sowie der Landschaft zwischen Skrunda und Semigallia begrenzt. Diese Nordgrenze stimmte fast vollständig mit der heutigen litauisch-lettischen Grenze überein und passierte von West nach Ost die Flüsse Apše (rechter Nebenfluss der Barta) und Lūšė (linker Nebenfluss der Venta) sowie den Unterlauf des Vadakstis. Im 13. Jahrhundert wurde Ceklis das Territorium zwischen den Flüssen Apšė und Virvytė zugeschrieben (von dort sind zwei Burgwälle und ein Gräberfeld bekannt). Es ist allerdings glaubwürdiger, dass dieses kleine Landstück zur Landschaft Duvzare gehörte. Ansonsten stimmen archäologische und historische Daten über die Norgrenze von Ceklis überein. Die Umgebung von Apuolė im nördlichen Ceklis war noch im 13. Jahrhundert dicht besiedelt. Im Jahre 1253 wurden folgende Orte erwähnt: Mosėdis – Mayseden, Šakaliai – Zekulseme, Veiteliai=Gesalai – Zesele , Užluobė – Loben (LEK Bd. I, ����������������������� Abt. 1, Nr. CCLIII; �������� Salys 1930: 180). Die Gruppierungen von Burgwällen mit Siedlungen und Gräberfeldern zeigen an, dass es in der Landschaft Ceklis 10-11 territoriale (zumeist auch administrative) Einheiten gegeben hat, die in Quellen des 13. Jahrhunderts „Borgsochungen“ (lateinisch: castellaturae) genannt wurden. Sie waren voneinander durch unbewohnte Gebiete getrennt. Diese Stellen sind bis heutzutage dünner besiedelt und die heutigen Bezirks/ Rajonsgrenzen entsprechen an vielen Stellen den ehemaligen Borgsochungen. Die Borgsochungen waren nicht einheitlich groß und sie waren auch nicht von gleicher Einwohnerdichte. In den Borgsochungen kann man zwischen 4 und 14 Burgwälle sowie zwischen 5 und 12 Gräberfelder finden. Eine Ausnahme bildeten die Grenzgebiete, an den es mächtige Burgen gab, die aber dünner besiedelt waren (Paplienijis - an der Grenze zu den Szemaiten; Griežė - an der Grenze zu den Semgallen). Manche dieser Grenzburgen können schon im 13. Jahrhundert vernachlässigt gesehen werden – in Quellen des 13. Jahrhunderts wird Gondinga nicht mehr erwähnt und Griežė (Grese) – war 1264 abgebrannt (Salys 1930: 180). Das größte Territorium mit über 11-13 Burgwällen und 18-19 Gräberfeldern befand sich im nördlichen Teil von Ceklis – die zentrale Burg dieses Burggebietes war Apuolė, und es existierte noch 1253 (Appule, Ampule im LEK Bd. I, ��������������� Abt. 1, Nr. CCCXXVII) Andere größere Burggebiete gab es auch noch im Westen und Südwesten der Landschaft Ceklis. Eines dieser Zentren war Imbarė (1253 als Embere erwähnt; und ein anderes Gondinga (dem Umfeld dieser Burg wird der Burgwall Grigaičiai zugeschrieben, der nicht weit vom See Ilgis befand und der 1253 als Ylse erwähnt wird (LEK Bd. I, ������������������������������ Abt. 1, Nr.. CCLIII; �������������� Salys 1930: 180). Im Jahr 1253 wurden zwei Burgen beim See Plateliai erwähnt, in denen sich später Bischofsburg und Bischofsgut befanden: Alsėdžiai – Alizeyde (1421 stand 93 Kurland. Die Grenzen und die nördlichen Landschaften in 8.–13. Jahrhundert VLADAS ŽULKUS auf diesem Burgwall die Burg des ersten szemaitischen Bischof Mathäus) und Žemaičių Kalvarija (Garde), wo am Anfang des 15. Jahrhunderts ein Bischofsgut gegründet wurde (LEK Bd. ����������������������������� I, Abt. 1, Nr. CCLIII; �������������� Salys 1930: 178ff; Žulkus 1999a.: 150). 4. Die nördlichen Landschaften A. Duvzare Diese Landschaft wird in den Quellen Duizare oder Donzare genannt (LEK Bd. ������������������������ I, Abt. 1, Nr. CCXLVII; ��������� PU II 357-361 (1291). Die Herkunft der Landschaftsbezeichnung ist nicht ganz klar. Nach Meinung von K. Būga stammt der Name vom See Duvzaris (jetzt See Pape), das Wort Duvzaris hätte demnach zwei Bedeutungen. Die Erklärung von K. Būga (Būga Bd. 3 (1961): 165), der auch in Betracht zieht, dass zu Zeiten der Wikinger sich an der Küste völlig andere Seen befanden (Žulkus, Springmann 2001) ist aber nicht überzeugend. Das Territorium, wie es anhand von schriftlichen Quellen und archäologischen Daten bestimmt wird, ist kleiner als von Historikern aufgezeigt (Latvijas vēstures 1998: 12). Die südliche Grenze von Duvzare verlief am Mittellauf des Flusses Šventoji. Vom Oberlauf der Šventoji bog die Grenze von Duvzare nach Norden bis zum Mittellauf der Vārtāja (lit.: Bartuva) in der Gegend des heutigen Skuodas und verlief weiter nach Süden mit der Apšė und ihrem Nebenfluss Virvytė. Von Oberlauf der Apšė wandte sich die Grenze Richtung Norden bis zum Oberlauf des Flusses Virga (die an deren Oberlauf befindliche Siedlung Elkene gehörte bereits zur Landschaft Bandava). Dieser Fluss, die Virga, bildete die nördliche Grenze von Duvzare sowie die südliche von Bihavelank. Vom Zusammenfluss von Virga und Vārtāja verlief die Grenze entlang des Flusses bis zur Mündung der Barta, und von dort Richtung der Mittelläufe von Ječupe und Tosele sowie der Küstenseen. An den Oberläufen der Barta zwischen dem Fluss Barta und dem Meer, gab es - wie am See Pape - bis dato keine archäologischen Funde. In diesen seen- und sumpfreichen Gebieten (wo sich hier die großen Sümpfe Kirbas purvs ausbreiten) lebte fast niemand. Solch unbewohnte Gegenden existierten ansonsten zwischen Duvzare und Megowe sehr selten. Ausgedehnte sumpfige Wildnis gab es im Osten des Gebiets, an der Grenze zur Landschaft Ceklis und im Nordwesten, zwischen den Siedlungen von Duvzare und Bihavelank. Das so bewohnte Territorium von Duvzare war also deutlich kleiner, nicht 500 sondern nur etwa 400 qkm groß. In der Landschaft Duvzare wurden über 30 Wohn- 94 orte gezählt; auf eine Siedlung kamen dabei – ohne den unbewohnten Küstenraum – etwa 12 qkm Territorium. In Dokumenten aus der Mitte des 13. Jahrhunderts werden 14 Wohnorte in Duvzare genannt (LEK Bd. I, Abt. 1, Nr. ����������������������������� CCCXXVII-CCCXXIX; Mugurēvičs 1999: 59f), von denen Teil noch nicht lokalisiert werden konnten. Von Archäologen wurde festgestellt, dass der östliche Teil von Duvzare, entlang der Bartuva und nördlich von ihr, der dichter besiedeltere war. Hier wurden 11 Burgwälle und 8 Gräberfelder gefunden (in zweien von ihnen befanden sich sowohl kurische als auch livische Gräber). Zwei von diesen Burgwällen Didždāmas und Trekņu – wurden stechen als wichtigere Handwerkszentren heraus (Asaris1995: 14; 1998: 95). Im Jahre 1253 wurde Didždāmas als Damis und Trekņu als Trecne erwähnt; des weiteren wurde noch eine Siedlung in Duvzare lokalisiert. Im östlichen Teil von Duvzare könnte es 3 oder 4 Burgbezirke gegeben haben und als ein wichtigeres Verwaltungszentrum gilt Damis (ein anderes nah gelegenes Zentrum, Aizvīķu, gehörte im 13. Jahrhundert zur Landschaft Ceklis). Im westlichen Teil von Duvzare sind 6 Gräberfelder und 4 Burgwälle bekannt (alle am Fluss Šventoji). Von den in 13. Jahrhundert erwähnten Orten wurden nur drei lokalisiert: Popissen (wahrscheinlich beim Fluss Tebra), Rutzowe (Rucava) und Emplitten (Impiltis). Drei der bekannten Burgwälle liegen nebeneinander im Abstand von 0,3 bis 1,3 km, und unter ihnen befand sich das wichtigste Zentrum von Duvzare: Impiltis (Emplitten, Empilten, Ampillen, Ampilten). Bei einem Hauptburgwall befanden sich 2 Siedlungen, ein Gräberfeld und ein mythologischer Stein (“Opferstein)”. Folglich kann man in Impiltis ein wichtiges Handelsund Handwerkszentrum vermuten. Impiltis existierte als politisches und wirtschaftliches Hauptzentrum der Landschaft Duvzare bis zur Mitte des 13. Jahrhunderts. Im Jahre 1263, als Duvzare den Kuren vom Orden abgenommen wurde, wurde die Burg Implitis niedergebrannt, ihre Besatzung zog sich nach Litauen zurück. Der Burgwall von Impiltis wurde von Archäologen erforscht, aber eine endgültige zusammenfassende Erforschung des Gräberfelds ist noch nicht erfolgt (LEK Bd. I, ������������������������������������������������� Abt. 1, Nr. CCCXXIX; LAA II: 69, 70, Nr. 238, 239; Vaitkevičius 1998: 101). Über die alten Einwohner von Duvzare wissen wir wenig, denn die Gräberfelder sind – mit Ausnahme von Tiltini – noch nicht erforscht. Außer den Wohnorten wurde in der Landschaft Duvzare im 13. Jahrhundert einer der wichtigsten heiligen Orte dieser Landschaft erwähnt: ”Die heilige see to Dovzare ” (LEK Bd. I, ��� Abt. 1, Nr. CCXLVIII). ������������������������������ Wo sich dieser See befand ist jedoch bis heute unklar. Die südliche Grenze von Bihavelank verlief – ebenso wie die Nordgrenze der benachbarten Landschaft Duvzare mit den Flüssen Tosele, Ječupe, Barta, Vārtāja und Virga bis zu ihren Oberläufen. Von hier wandte sich die Grenze der Landschaft nach Norden bis zur Quelle der Tebra und verlief mit diesem Fluss bis zur Mündung in die Saka. Die Saka war die Nordgrenze des bewohnten Territoriums von Bihavelank. Historiker ziehen die Grenze noch weiter nördlich (Latvijas vēstures 1998: 12), was aber völlig unbegründet ist, denn zwischen den Flüssen Saka und Užava wurde weder von Archäologen eine einzige Siedlung gefunden noch wurden sie in Quellen erwähnt. Von Saka aus befand sich nach Norden eine 10 bis 20 Kilometer breite Wildnis. Im Westen stieß Bihavelank ans Meer, obwohl auf etwa 80 km Länge die Küste dieses Gebietes fast unbewohnt war. Wie auch in anderen kurischen Küstenlandschaften befanden sich die Siedlungen in einigen Kilometern Abstand vom Meer, zahlreich waren sie an den östlichen Ufern der „Haffseen“. Eine Ausnahme bildeten nur einige nahe der Küste befindliche Dörfer im 13. Jahrhundert (Medce, Lypa, Percunencalwe – vielleicht Perkone?). Insgesamt gab es laut Quellen Mitte des 13. Jahrhunderts in dieser Landschaft mehr als 40 bewohnte Orte. Zusammen mit den von Archäologen identifizierten Orten (Burgwälle und Gräberfelder) wurden in Bihavelank über 60 Wohnorte gefunden. Die rund 1250 qkm von Bihavalank ent- Verwaltungs- und wichtige Handwerkszentren des Altertums könnte man an folgenden Orten suchen: Bei den Burgwällen am Ort Vārtāja (in der Nähe wurde im 13. Jahrhundert Byrsegalewe erwähnt), Vecpils (nicht weit vom See Durbe mit den Siedlungen Octo, Duppele, Ylmede, Drage, Warva), Matra (in der Nähe ist die Siedlung Medce bekannt) und Grobiņa (um den Ort befinden sich einige Gräberfelder und aus den Quellen ist die Siedlung Salene bekannt) sein. Einige dieser Burgwälle sind recht groß, und außerdem gut befestigt: Vecpils – 1800 qm, Grobiņa – 2800 qm, Vārtāja – 4800 qm. An allen Wohnorten wurden zahlreiche bearbeitete Fundstücke gefunden (Asaris 1995: 14; 1998: 95). Die Territorien der ”Borchsukungen“ vor der Ankunft des Deutschen Ordens sind hier nicht so einfach zu erkennen wie anderenorts. Aufgrund der besonderen uneinheitlichen geografischen Umgebung bildeten die Siedlungen keine kompakten Territorien sondern erstreckten sich entlang der damaligen Seen und zwischen den Sümpfen, die meisten gruppierten sich am Fluss Tebra bei Aizpute (dt.: Hasenpot) (teils zur Landschaft Bihavelank teils zur benachbarten Landschaft Bandava gehörig). 5-6 Gebiete hätten sich vor der Ankunft der Deutschen Borchsukungen bilden können. Zu Ordenszeiten sind auf dem Territorium von Bihavelank 5 Borchsukungen gewähnt: Sacken (1230 „Kiligunde“ genannt, 1305 ”castrum Sacke” - deutsch: Sackenhausen), Zierau (”castrum Zintere” – der Burgwall Dzintare am Fluss Tebra), Aizpute, Grobiņa und Durbe. Ihre Gebiete entsprachen wahrscheinlich den territorialen Gebilden der Vor-Ordens-Zeit (Dopkewitsch 1933: 78ff). Die wichtigste Territorien von Bihavelank beherrschte nach einer Quelle von 1230 der kurische Herrscher Lamikis - ”Lammekinus rex et pagani de Curonia, de terris Esestua, scilicet Durpis et Saggara” (BG 419). Dem ”König” Lamikis hat wahrscheinlich der größere Teil des Territoriums Bihavelank gehört (Mugurēvičs 2000a: 81, 86). Auf Wirtschaft und Besiedlung von Bihavelank übte seine spezifische geografische Beschaffenheit großen Einfluss aus. In dieser Landschaft lagen bei bis zu 40km Landschaftsbreite in Ost-West-Richtung alle bekannten Wohnorte nicht mehr als einige Kilometer vom Wasser entfernt, von Flüssen oder Seen, und der BALTICA 6 Der Landschaftsname, den man in den ältesten bekannten Quellen findet, ist Bihavelanc, Bihavelant (LEK Bd. ������������������������������������������������ I, Abt. 1, Nr. ��������������������������������� CCXLVIII; PU II 357-361 (1291)). Lettische Historiker nennen diese Landschaft Piemare, Litauer Pamarys (Die Begriffe bezeihen sie auf ein Territorium an einer größeren Wasserfläche, größer als ein See – litauisch marios). Es wurde auch versucht, diese Landschaft Ezertuve zu nennen (von lett. ”ezers” = der See). Dabei wurde sich auf eine Quelle von 1230 gestützt, in der erwähnt wird, dass Esestua vom ”König” Lammekinus regiert werde. Diese Bezeichnung wurde allerdings auch anders erklärt: ”den Namen der altkurischen Landschaft Esastoue möchte ich als eine semgallische Sprachform Iesēstuve ‘die Besteigungsstelle’ deuten” (Blesse 1938: 81). K. Būga erklärt – wie auch andere Sprachwissenschaftler – die Benennung als ”Land entlang des Haffs”. Diese Erklärung der Bezeichung verursacht keine größeren Diskussionen, außer dass die Forscher mit dem ”Haff” den Libau-See meinen (Būga Bd. 3 (1961): 165), und noch ist unbekannt, ob der jetzt seperate See Bihevalank seinerzeit eines gemeinsames Haff bildete. Ē. Mugurēvičs meinte, dass Bihavelanc bedeutet „Land an der See“ (Mugurēvičs 1999: 60f). sprachen also rund 20 qkm pro Einwohner, d. h. diese Landschaft war dünner besiedelt als die ehemaligen kurischen Territorien im Süden. Die Situation in Bihavelank wurde durch Wasserreichtum und sumpfige Beschaffenheit bestimmt. Nach heutigen Daten war besonders der Süden – zwischen den Flüssen Tosele und Otaņķe – dünn besiedelt, dort gab es keine bedeutenden Burgen. Wesentlich mehr Siedlungen befanden sich in der Mitte der Landschaft und in ihrem Norden, entlang der Flüsse Ālande, Durbe und Saka. ARCHAELOGIA B. Bihavelank (Piemare) 95 Kurland. Die Grenzen und die nördlichen Landschaften in 8.–13. Jahrhundert VLADAS ŽULKUS Großteil lag direkt an Gewässern, die mit dem Meer verbunden waren. Viele der Flüsse von Bihavelank waren sehr kurz - sie flossen in den Lagunensee und verbanden die Seen Tosmare, Libau, Meeke und Pape. Dieser große Lagunensee war an einigen Stellen mit dem Meer verbunden und bot gute Bedingungen für Fischfang und Schifffahrt sowie Nah- und Fernhandel. Grobiņa, das bekannteste kurische Handelszentrum mit einer Kolonie von schwedischen Wikingern und Händlern, lag auf einer kleinen Anhöhe an dem zu jener Zeit wasserreichem Fluss Ālande, nur einige Kilometer vom Lagunensee. Die Ufer der Grenzflüsse Tebra, Virga und Vārtāja waren sowohl von Seiten der Landschaft Bihavelank als auch in den benachbarten Landschaften Bandava und Duvzare dicht besiedelt und die Flüsse dienten als wichtige Wasserwege. Bei den wichtigsten Handelszentren wurden Depotfunde aus dem mittleren und späten Eisenzeitalter (Wikingerzeit) gefunden. In der Landschaft Bihavelank wurden sogar 7 Schätze gefunden sechs davon in der Umgebung von Grobiņa. In allen Depotfunde wurden arabische und westeuropäische Münzen gefunden (Urtāns V. 1977: 165, 170, 175, 196, 216). C. Bandava Der Name Bandava (Bandowe) wird zum ersten Mal in Ordensquellen erwähnt (LEK Bd. ������������������� I, Abt. 1, Nr. ���� CCXLVIII) Dort werden auch fast 50 Ortsnamen Bandavas genannt. Der Name Bandava kommt vom entweder von “banda” - ein kleines Ackerstück im Wald oder hängt mit dem indo-europäischen bhen (hauen, fällen) zusammen. So könnte der Landschaftsname Bandava “gerodetes Land” bedeuten (Mugurēvičs 1999: 62). Die Ostgrenze von Bandava stimmt mit der heutigen lettisch-litauischen Grenze überein: Sie verlief am Oberlauf der Apše sowie an Jonupis ir Lūšė, Nebenflüssen der Venta, bis zur Venta. Von diesem Orte in Richtung des Flusses Barta waren die Siedlungen entlang beider Seiten des Flusses Venta verteilt. Hier lagen einige in den Quellen des 13. Jahrhunderts erwähnte und lokalisierte Siedlungen: Celde, Lene, Scrunden, Bandowe. Entlang der Venta verlief die östliche Grenze von Bandava bis zur Gegeng von Kuldīga (Goldinghen). Von dort entfernten sich die Siedlungen von Bandava etwas von der Venta. Nicht weit davon lagen auch einige Orte von Ventava, die mitunter auch Bandava zugeordnet werden: die Siedlungen Wyllegalle, Cormele, Ywande, Kemele, Walteten sowie der See Nabba,. In den noch verbliebenen rund 15 km bis zur Mündung der Venta näherte sich die Nordgrenze von Bandava wieder der Ortschaft Varve (Warva). Von der 96 Mündung der Venta bis zur Wildnis zwischen Bandava und Bihavelank im Süden war die Küstenregion kaum besiedelt. Einige Kilometer vom Meer sind zwei livische Gräberfelder und die Siedlung Lippeten unweit des Flusses Užava bekannt. Dieses Gebiet südlich der Venta wird manchmal zur Landschaft Ventava gerechnet (Latvijas vestures 1998: 12). Jenseits der Wildnis, in Richtung des Zusammenflusses von Alokste und Tebra überquerte die Landschaftsgrenze von Bandava in südlicher Richtung den Fluss Tebra. Der Ort Aizpute gehörte zu Bandava. Weiter nach Süden – unweit der Tebra – wurden die Wohnorte Perbona und Calvien (Burgwall Kalvenes) gefunden. Noch weiter nach Süden wurde die Westgrenze markiert durch die in der Mitte des 13. Jahrhundert noch existenten Siedlungen an den Oberläufen der Flüsse Vārtāja, Virga und Runia: Assiten, Elkene, Amboten (Embute), Baten . Auf dem Territorium von Bandava, das knapp über 2000 qkm betrug, sind über die Quellen hinaus noch etwa 30 Burgwälle und 25 Gräberflder mit kurischen und livischen Gräbern bekannt. Bis zur Ankunft des Ordens muss es in der Landschaft Bandava nicht weniger als 100 Wohnorte gegeben haben und so kommen rein rechnerisch auf eine Siedlung in dieser Landschaft etwa 20 qkm Territorium. In Bandava könnte es bis zu 10 kleinere Gebietseinheiten gegeben haben. Von den Borgsochungen der Ordenszeit entsprach nur Bandove im Norden einem vorherigen Burggebiet. Anderenorts waren die neuen Gebietseinheiten viel größer als die alten (vgl. Dopkewitsch 1933). 1253 wurden die ”castellaturis” Dzerbiten und Mesote erwähnt (LEK Bd. I, ������������������������ Abt. 1, Nr. CCXLVII). Die Zentren der Burgbezirke werden bei größeren Burgwällen vermutet. Anhand der archäologischen Datenlage lassen sich unter den Burgwällen von Bandava einige differenzieren: anhand ihrer Größe, Befestigungsanlagen und der Funde, die auf ein entwickeltes Handwerk hinweisen. An der Landschaftsgrenze, am Fluss Užava, neben Alsunga (Alswanghen) befindet sich der Burgwall Dižgabalkalns (1100 qm groß). In dessen Nähe liegt ein teilweise untersuchtes weitläufiges kurisches Gräberfeld. Eines der größten wirtschaftlichen und administrativen Zentren hat sich in der Nähe von Kuldīga, der späteren Hauptstadt des Herzogtums Kurland, befunden. Am Ufer der schiffbaren Venta befand sich der etwa 1 ha große Burgwall Veckuldīga (Alt-Kuldīga) mit einem 9 ha großen Hackelwerk, das bis zur Mitte des 14. Jahrhundert bewohnt gewesen ist. Die reichen Funde, Gegenstände und Schmucksachen, in den Gräberfeldern der Gegend von Kuldīga (Lielivande, Padures Remeši) sind womöglich im Hackelwerk Veckuldīga hergestellt worden. D. Die „Landschaft zwischen Scrunda und Semigallia“ In einem Dokument vom 5. April 1253 wird unter ”unbekanten Curländischen Ländereien” eine ”terra, quae est inter Scrunden et Semigalliam” erwähnt (LEK Bd. I, Abt. 1, Nr. ������������������������������������ CCXLIX). 1291 wird diese Landschaft nicht mehr erwähnt (LEK Bd. ������������������������� I, Abt. 1, Nr. DXL). ���� Sie existiert auch nicht auf der Landkarte ”Lettland am Ende 12. Jahrhundert”, im 1998 vom Lettischen Historischen Institut heraus gegebenen lettischen Geschichtsatlas. Dieses Territorium wird dort zur Landschaft Bandava gerechnet (Latvijas vēstures 1998: 12). Landschaft zwischen Scrunda und Semigallia bedeutete in der Mitte des 13. Jahrhundert nicht eine Landschaft mit eigenen ethnischen Zügen, sondern nur ein großes dünn besiedeltes Territorium, halb Wildnis, zwischen den Stämmen gelegen. Die Größe der Landschaft betrug etwa 1120 qkm, obwohl sie auch über 100 qkm größer gewesen sein könnte, wenn man das überhaupt nicht bewohnte Gebiet zwischen den Flüssen Vadakstis und Ezerupe sowie dem See Cieceres hinzuzählt. Südliche Grenze der Landschaft zwischen Scrunda und Semigallia waren die damaligen Flussverläufe von Vadakstis und Ezerupe bis zu ihrem Zusammenfluss mit der Venta. Südlich von diesen Stellen lag die Landschaft Ceklis und südöstlich, hinter den dünn besiedelten Orten, befand sich das Territorium der Semgallen. Die Westgrenze der Landschaft verlief in der Nähe der Flussufer der Venta; an den Ufern befanden sich Burgen und Siedlungen, die zur Landschaft Bandava gehörten. Die nördliche Grenze war die Škede, ein Nebenfluss der Venta, an dem im 13 Jahrhundert die dort befindlichen Siedlungen Varme und Scheden (Škede) erwähnt wurden. Eine solche Grenzsetzung zeigte auch Būga auf (Būga Bd. 3 (1961): 166). Nördlich vom Fluss Škede bis zu den Siedlungen von Ventava befand sich ein Raum von einigen Kilometer unbewohnten Landes. Die östliche Landschaftsgrenze verlief am Mittellauf der Imula (wahrscheinlich befand sich hier die ehemalige Siedlung Sascile - Satiki?) sowie an deren Außer den 11 in dem Dokument von 1253 erwähnten Siedlungen (LEK Bd. ������������������������������� I, Abt. 1, Nr. ���������������� CCXLIX) sind in der Landschaft zwischen Scrunda und Semigallia noch neun Burgwälle und drei Gräberfelder (Mugurēvičs 1999: 65) bekannt (ohne die am linken Ufer der Venta gefundenen Gräberfelder und die Burgwällen von Ranku und Krievu kalns). Der Großteil der Chronologie dieser Burgwälle ist unbekannt (Asaris 1995), die Gräberfelder sind unerforscht, deshalb kann man nur sehr ungefähr annehmen, dass es in dieser Landschaft im 12./13. Jahrhundert etwa 25 bewohnte Orte gegeben habe. So kämen auf einen Wohnort ungefähr 45-50 qkm. BALTICA 6 Oberlauf (der östlichste Burgwall dieser Landschaft war wohl Gaižu am rechten Ufer der Imula) bis zum See Ciesere. Bei diesem See befanden sich die Siedlungen Celme und Salden (heute lettisch: Saldus). Vom See Ciesere verlief die Ostgrenze in südlicher Richtung entlang des Oberlaufs der Ezerupe. Östlich der Landschaft zwischen Scrunda und Semigallia befand sich an vielen Stellen eine bis zu zehn und mehr Kilometer breite Wildnis. ARCHAELOGIA Bedeutende Zentren kann man auch bei den Burgwällen Turlava (Turlowe) und Embute (Amboten) vermuten, doch ihr Erforschungsgrad erlaubt es nicht, ihre Besiedlungsdauer sowie ihre Bedeutung genauer zu bestimmen (Asaris 1995: 14; 1998: 95f). Außer diesen Burgwällen gab es andere, auf denen die Burgen der weniger wichtigen Fürsten standen – die Burgen der Burggebietsherrscher. Eine von ihnen ist das ehemalige Kazdanga. In seiner Umgebung ist ein Depotfund von Silberbarren bekannt (Urtāns V. 1977: 194ff). Die Siedlungen der Landschaft zwischen Scrunda und Semigallia verteilen sich sehr unregelmäßig. Ein Teil der Burgen und Wohnorte lag am Fluss Venta, aber eben diese könnten auch zur Landschaft Bandava gehört haben. Einige Dörfer befanden sich am Fluss Škede, aber hier ist nicht ein einziger Burgwall gefunden worden. Ein nicht besonders großes Burggebiet könnte sich am Mittellauf der Ciecere befunden haben (Burgwälle Ciecere und Bendelu). Ein anderer Wohnort befand sich am Fluss Zane. Der zentrale Teil der Landschaft war nicht besonders sumpfig, aber von großen Waldgebieten bewachsen und völlig leer. Das am dichtesten besiedelte Territorium und Kern der Landschaft war die Umgebung des damaligen Saldus (dt. Frauenburg) mit vier Burgwällen, zwei Gräberfeldern und zwei in den Quellen des 13. Jahrhundert erwähnten Siedlungen. Folglich war auf dieses Burggebiet ein Drittel aller Siedlungen und Burgwälle konzentriert und es ist die einzige Stelle in dieser Landschaft mit einer solch bedeutenden Burgen- und Siedlungskonzentration. So ist sehr wahrscheinlich, dass bei der Nennung der „terra inter Scrunden et Semigalliam“ im 13. Jahrhundert nur an dieses Burggebiet gedacht wurde, dessen Fürst auch die umliegenden Territorien kontrollierte. E . Ve n t a v a Die Landschaft Ventava - Wynda ist eine der „neuen“ kurischen Landschaften, die erst im 11.-12. Jahrhundert erobert wurden, zuvor lebten hier Liven. Sie wur- 97 Kurland. Die Grenzen und die nördlichen Landschaften in 8.–13. Jahrhundert VLADAS ŽULKUS de ebenfalls das erste Mal im 13. Jahrhundert in den Ordensquellen erwähnt. Zweifellos bekam die Landschaft ihren Namen vom Fluss Venta und ihr Territorium erstreckte sich entlang der beiden Ufer der Venta. In Quellen aus dem 13. Jahrhundert fanden mehr als 20 Ortsnamen von Ventava ihre Erwähnung, von denen der Großteil bereits identifiziert ist. Andererseits sind die Grenzen von Ventava nicht besonders klar. Historiker ziehen die südliche Grenze vom Mittellauf der Užava bis zum Fluss Abava. Die nördliche und nordöstliche Grenze wird normalerweise vom heutigen lettischen Küstenstädtchen Ovīši bis zum 1251 erwähnten See Usmas (Husman) gezogen (Latvijas vestures 1998: 12); ebenso wird sie auch von Archäologen gesetzt (Vasks 1999: 78; Mugurēvičs 2000a: 81). Damit wurden die Grenzen von Ventava auf Kosten der Landschaft Bandava nach Süden ausgeweitet und Ventava wird ein Teil der unbewohnten Gebiete zugeschrieben, so die Wildnis südwestlich der Wohnorte der Landschaft Vanema (Vredecuronia). Besonders strittig ist die Grenze von Ventava am linken Ufer des Flusses Venta. Nach Mugurēvičs (2000a: 80ff) gehörte zur Landschaft Ventava das ganze Territorium zwischen dem linken Ufer der Venta und dem Meer bis zum Mittellauf der Užava. Dem stehen Informationen aus einem Dokument des Jahres 1253 entgegen, nachdem die Siedlungen am linken Ufer des Flusses Užava, die damaligen und in der Zwischenzeit identifizierten Orte Warve, Walteten und Lippeten nicht zur Landschaft Ventava, sondern zu Bandava gehörten (LEK Bd. ������������������������������������������������ I, Abt. 1, Nr. CCXLVIII). ���������������������� Das zu Ventava gehörige Vendzava lag nach Mugurēvičs am linken Ufer der Ventava, wohingegen in der Mitte des 13. Jahrhunderts eindeutig geschrieben wurde, Wense (Vensen) sei ”ab opposito Goldinghen” (LEK Bd. �������������������� I, Abt. 1, Nr. CCXLVIII). Wense muss folglich südlich vom Fluss Abava gewesen sein, am rechten oder linken Ufer der Venta. Apussen, westlich der Venta, und Wense waren zusammen die südlichsten Siedlungen, die in den Quellen des 13. Jahrhunderts erwähnt wurden. Bei der weiteren Diskussion über die Grenzen von Ventava kann der Gleichsetzung von Sirien (Syrien) mit Ziras, Terewenden mit Terande und Edualia (Edvale, Edewalen) mit Edole am rechten Ufer der Užava nicht zugestimmt werden. Die so lokalisierten Orte, die im 13. Jahrhunderts erwähnt wurden, überschneiden sich nach Westen mit den 1253 erwähnten Orten der Landschaft Bandava - stagnum Nabba, Kemele, Ywande, Cormele, Wyllegale. Und deutlich dehnen sich damit die Grenzen Ventavas auf Kosten der Landschaft Bandava aus. Verwirrung stiftet hier ein Dokument von 1230, in dem die Herrschaft von ”Lammekinus rex de Curonia” 98 (Mugurēvičs 2000a: 81) erwähnt wird. Dieser kurische Nobele beherrschte Gebiete sowohl in Ventava als auch in Bandava und Bihavelank (Piemare). Der archäologischen und historischen Datenlage zufolge hat es am Ende des 12. Jahrhundert in der Landschaft Ventava über 30 Siedlungen gegeben (Mugurēvičs 2000a: 75). Wenn man die unbewohnten Gebiete nordöstlich des Unterlaufes der Venta und die Wildnis zwischen den südöstlichsten besiedelten Orten Ventavas und dem Fluss Škede ausnimmt, dann hätte das bewohnte Territorium nur rund 600 qkm betragen. Es zog sich fast 50 km entlang der Venta hin; die breiteste Stelle (etwa 40 km) befand sich zwischen den Seen Usmas und Nabba, die schmalste beiderseits des Flusses Venta an der Küste. Es scheint, als ob Ventava eine der am dichtesten besiedelten kurischen Landschaften war, hier kamen auf eine Siedlung rund 20 qkm Territorium. Der größte Teil der Siedlungen befand sich an der Venta, dem wichtigsten Wasserweg im nördlichen Kurland. Die Struktur dieser Siedlungen ist in der Landschaft Ventava ähnlich wie in der Landschaft Ceklis, wo sich die Lebenszentren entlang des Flusses Minge gruppierten. Ein Unterschied zu Ceklis ist, dass anhand der schriftlichen Quellen des 13. Jahrhundert festgestellt werden kann, dass sich am Fluss Venta sowohl Siedlungen von Ventava als auch von Bandava befanden. Es hat den Anschein, als ob diese Situation Zeugnis einer Konkurrenz ist, beim Versuch Schifffahrt und Handel über den Fluss Venta zu kontrollieren. Jedoch gibt es zwischen den bekannten Wohnorten überhaupt keine Befestigungen und die ersten Burgwälle tauchen erst in 35 Kilometern Entfernung von der Mündung des Flusses auf. Wenn man von deren Verteilung ausgeht, dann standen früher von Pilten bis Kuldīga beiderseits des Flusses Venta nur Burgen, die von den Menschen Ventavas errichtet waren. Von Kuldiga aus weiter nach Süden wurde der Fluss allerdings schon von den Einwohnern der Landschaft Bandava kontrolliert. Die große Konzentration von Siedlungen, Gräberfeldern und Burgwällen zeigt dass Vindava, das Zentrum der Landschaft Ventava in der Gegend von ZlēkasPriednieki lag. In Priednieki sind neben Funden der Ostseefinnen (Liven) und der Kuren (9.-13. Jahrhundert) auch Gegenstände skandinavischer Herkunft festgestellt worden. Nördlich der Siedlung befindet sich ein Burgwall –Pabērzkalns mit zwei parallelen Erdwällen und einem schmalen Plateau. Dieser Burgwall stellt einen für Kurland fremdartigen Befestigungstypus dar. Die archäologischen Ausgrabungen bestätigten an die ���������������������������������������������������������� In der Mitte des 14. Jahrhunderts in Kastellaturen Neuhausen und Alswanghen sind einigen Familien von Lammathe, Lammike erwähnt (Bauer 1933: 147ff). F. Va n e m a ( Vr e d e k u r o n i a ) Der ganze nördliche Teil von Kurland bildete die Landschaft Vanema (Miera Kursa), die in den Quellen des 13. Jahrhundert als Vredecuren, Vredekuronia (LEK Bd. I, ��������������������������������������������� Abt. 1, Nr. CCXLVIII) ������������������������������ erwähnt wurde. Noch im 13. Jahrhundert bestand der Großteil der Bewohner dieser Landschaft nicht aus Kuren, sondern aus mehr oder weniger kolonisierten Liven Vanema war die größte Landschaft Kurlands, ihre Fläche 4000 qkm. Sie wurde nach Nordwesten, Norden und Osten vom Meer begrenzt. Auch die Grenze auf dem Land bietet keinen Anlass für größere Diskussionen. Südwestlich wird die Grenze vom Küstenstädtchen Oviši in Richtung See Usmas bis zu den Mittelläufen von Imula und Amula gezogen. An der südlichen Grenze flossen die Abava und ihr Nebenfluss Slocene bis zu den Gewässern der Bucht von Riga (Latvijas vēstures 1998: 12). Die archäologischen Daten präzisieren diese Grenzziehungen: Zwischen Vanema und Ventava lag bis zum See Usmas eine bis zu 10 km breite Wildnis; unbewohnt war auch der Raum zwischen den Flüssen Amula und Abava - Erwähnung fand er im 13. Jahrhundert als ”wiltnisse tusche Candowe und Semigallen” (LEK Bd. I, �������������������������� Abt. 1, Nr. CCXLVIII). ����������� Aus Vanema wurden in den Quellen des 13. Jahrhundert etwa 45 bewohnte Orte erwähnt, meistens Dörfer. Natürlich befanden sich die Burgwälle zumeist bei den in den Quellen erwähnten Wohnorten (Asaris 1999: 128f). Der größte Teil des Territoriums von Vanema war vergleichsweise dünn besiedelt. Sehr klar sind die Kon����������������������������������������������������� Nach Mugurēvičs (1999: 63) um 6800 qkm., weil er zur Landschaft Vanema auch die umgebende Wildnis zählt Im südwestlichen Teil der Landschaft breiteten sich die Burgen und Siedlungen entlang des Flusses Rinda, bei den Seen Puzes und Usmas und am Unterlauf der Stende aus. Neben fünf derzeit bekannten Burgwällen sind auch einige der im 13 Jahrhundert erwähnten Siedlungen (LEK Bd. ������������������������������������� I, Abt. 1, Nr. CCXLVIII) ���������������������� lokalisiert worden: Anse, Popen, Puse (Pussen), Topen (Copen), Vietsede, Matre, Moden, Cersangere, Ugale. Das wichtigste Zentrum dieses Burggebietes ist allerdings bis heute nicht identifiziert worden, viele Burgwälle mit ihren ehemaligen Siedlungen sind auch noch nicht erforscht (Asaris 1998: 91ff). Mit dem See Usmas und den bei ihm befindlichen Wohnorten geht diese Mikroregion Vanema direkt in die Landschaft Ventava über. Der See Usmas war eine wichtige Stätte der Kommunikation mit den anderen Gebieten der Landschaft Vanema, die sich am Fluss Abava befanden. BALTICA 6 zentrationsstellen der ehemaligen Burgen, Siedlungen und Gräberfelder. Die alten livisch und kurisch bewohnten Gebiete stimmen sehr gut mit den Grenzen der im 14.-16. Jahrhundert erwähnten Borgsochungen überein, die als territorial-administrative Einheiten des Ordens bei dessen Expansion seiner alten Territorien in die zwischen den Gebieten liegende Wildnis eingerichtet wurden. Es ist gut möglich, dass an manchen Stellen die Grenzen der neuen Burggebiete auch mit den vorherigen Grenzen übereinstimmen, in denen die Landschaft kontrolliert und genutzt wurde. ARCHAELOGIA sem Ort die Datierung des Burgwalls in die Wikingerzeit und den skandinavischen Einfluss. Die Gegenden von Priednieki, Paberzkalns und Pasilciems gehörten in der ersten Hälfte des 13. Jahrhunderts zu den Territorien Winda genannt. Der Herrscher dieser Landschaft war der ”König” Lammekinus, dessen Hauptsitz sich wohl im Burggebiet Normis befunden hat. Der Ortsname Normis lässt sich als das heutige Schleck identifizieren (Mugurēvičs 1999: 62f; 2000a: 86-87). Die Analyse des archäologischen Fundmaterials zeugt von intensiver wirtschaftlicher Entwicklung, die zur Bildung von Wirtschafts- und Verwaltungszentren führte. Mit der Landschaft Winda gibt nach Meinung von Mugurēvičs einen Zusammenhang mit der Inschrift auf dem Runenstein der Schonhems-Kirche auf der Insel Gotland. Der Runenstein spricht von einem Mann Liknat, der im (Gebiet) Winda (a:uitau) gestorben ist. (Mugurēvičs 2000a: 83, 86f). Entlang des Flusses Abava gibt es einige Dutzende Burgwälle der Landschaft Vanema, livische, kurische und gemischte Gräberfelder (dorp Husman, Rende (Rennen), Pedewale, Zabele, Mattecul (Mateculen), Wane, Cabele (Kabilwen), Candowe, Pure). An der Slocene, einem Nebenfluss der Abava, die sich am Rande der Landschaft befand, lag das gut bekannte Zentrum Tukums (Tuckemen). Entlang der Flüsse Abava und Slocene verlief zur Wikingerzeit ein wichtiger Weg, der die semgallischen Bewohner der Bucht von Riga mit dem Oberlauf der Venta verband. Die Komplexe von zwei Burgwällen, die BurggebietsZentren waren, sind erforscht: Matkule (Burgwall, Vorburg, Siedlung, Kultort und Gräberfeld) und Sabile (Burgwall, Siedlung und Gräberfeld). Die Ausgrabungen ergaben, dass die beiden Orte Zentren von Handwerk, Handel, Verwaltung und Kultus waren (Asaris 1998: 94). Zweifellos befand sich Talsi, wo der 3300 qm große Burgwall mit Vorburg, dem etwa 4 ha großen Hackelwerk und den Grabstätten im See Vilkumuiža einen einheitlichen bildete. Als ein lokales Zentrum nicht ���������������������������������������������������������� Für Nordkurland wurden die administrativ-territoriale Einheiten Borchsukunge in die Quellen des 13. Jahrhunderts nicht erwähnt. 99 Kurland. Die Grenzen und die nördlichen Landschaften in 8.–13. Jahrhundert VLADAS ŽULKUS weit von Talsi sei Mezite genannt (Burgwall von 2400 qm, Hackelwerk von etwa 2 ha, zwei Gräberfelder, Kultstätte oder Versammlungsplatz (”Thingplatz”) – der sogenannte „Götzenberg“). Wie man aus im Hackelwerk schließen kann, haben im 13. Jahrhundert die Kuren gegen die Deutschen gekämpft. A. Bielenstein hat diesen Ort als das im Jahre 1234 erwähnte ”castellatura Lodgiae” identifiziert (Asaris 1998: 94). Ohne Zweifel lässt sich auch sagen, dass ein separates kleineres Territorium im Norden von Vanema den Komplex Dundaga (Dondagen) bildete. Abgeschnitten vom Meer durch ein einige Kilometer breites Band von Sümpfen, standen zur Wikingerzeit hier auf 6-10 km vom Meer kleine Burgen mit Nebensiedlungen und Dörfern. Das Zentrum dieses Burggebiets befand sich bis zur Ordenszeit beim großen Burgwall Dundaga(s) Kalnadarzs (Asaris 1999: 129). Das von den umgebenen Territorien getrennte Dundaga bildete zur Ordenszeit eine eigene Kirchgemeinde. Ende des 13. Jahrhundert gab es in Dundaga auf einem Raum von rund 300 qkm 15 Dörfer mit dazu gehörenden Feldern (Auns 1998). Die zerstreuten Dörfer, die in diesem Burggebiet lagen, können als typisch und charakteristisch für die heidnischen Kuren angesehen werden. Die Landschaft Vanema unterschied sich im 13. Jahrhundert von den anderen kurischen Landschaften im 12.-13. Jahrhundert durch ihre noch sehr uneinheitliche ethnische Zusammensetzung. Zwischen Stende und Škede sowie am Oberlauf der Abava bestand der größte Teil der Einwohner immer noch aus den örtlichen Liven, die in großen Dörfern (150-200 Einwohner) lebten. Die Verteilung der kurischen Gräberfelder und Fundstücke (Asaris 1999: 129) zeigt deutlich, dass die Kuren zuerst einzelne Territorien Vanemas aus denen von ihnen errichteten Burgen kontrollierten, bei denen sich auch Ansiedlungen von Handwerker und Händlern bildeten und erst später in die benachbarte livische Umgebung eindrangen. 5. Zum Schluss Die kurischen Gebiete waren nicht gleichmäßig dicht besiedelt. Die meisten Burganlagen und Wohnorte befanden sich in Kurland bis zur Mitte des 13. Jahrhunderts im zentralen und südlichen Teil. Die nördlichen Gebiete, aus denen im 10. Jahrhundert die Liven vertrieben worden waren, waren – besonders an der Küste – vergleichsweise dünn besiedelt. Die meisten Burgen und Dörfer konzentrierten sich hier auf das Landesinnere. In den neuen kurischen Ländern wurden die gleichen territorialen und wirtschaftlichen Strukturen wie in den 100 alten eingepflanzt, in denen sie schon einige Jahrhunderte lange Tradition hatten. Die Wirtschaftsstruktur der Stämme, Länder und Burggebiete sollte ausbalanciert sein, weswegen eine entsprechende Anzahl primärer und zentraler Wirtschaftseinheiten existierte. Die Expansion des Ordens in die westbaltischen Gebiete begann um die Jahrhundertwende 12./13. Jahrhundert. In der zweiten Hälfte des 13. Jahrhunderts hatte sich der Orden schon auf fast dem gesamten Territorium ausgebreitet, das später zum Ordensstaat gehören sollte. Die alten kurischen politischen, administrativen und gesellschaftlichen Strukturen wurden in der Ordenszeit zerstört oder verändert. Die verschiedenen alten politischen und administrativen Zentren erfüllten seit dem 13. Jahrhundert eine andere Bedeutung als in den entsprechenden Strukturen des Ordens. A B K Ü RZUN G EN AHUK – Acta Historica Universitatis Klaipedensis ATL – Archeologiniai tyrinėjimai Lietuvoje LEK – Liv-, Est- und Kurländisches Urkundenbuch PBVK – Pirmā Baltijas vēsturnieku konference Historische QUELLEN Livl��������������������������������������� ändische Reimchronik. Hildesheim. 1993. Liv-, Est-und Kurländisches Urkundenbuch. Abt. 1.Bd.1. (Neudruckausgabe). Aalen. 1967. Vita Anskarii auct. Rimberto. In: Scriptores rerum germanicarum in usum scolarum. Hannoverae. 1884. P. 5-79. L ITERATUR Apals, J., Mugurēvičs, �������������������������������������������������� Ē. 2001. Vēlais dzels leikmets (agrie viduslaiki) 800.-1200. g. In: Latvijas senākā vēsture 9. g. t. pr. Kr. – 1200. g. Rīga. Lpp. 290-377. Asaris, J. 1995. Kurzemes pilskalni. In: Kurzeme un kurzemnieki. Rīga. Lpp. 12-17. Asaris, J. 1996. Par kuršu izplatību Ziemeļkurzemē 11. – 13. gs. In: Arheoloģija un etnogrāfija XVIII. Rīga. Lpp. 3842. Asaris, J. 1998. ����������������������������������������� Kurländische Handwerkszentren im 12.-13. Jahrhundert. In: Culture Clash or Compromise? The Europeanisation of the Baltic Sea Area 1100-1400 AD. Acta Visbyensia XI. Visby. P. 91-97. Asaris, J. 1999. The Use of Archaeological data fot the Identification of Primary Units in Northern Kurzeme. In: Europeans or not? Local Level Strategies on the Baltic Rim 1100-1400 AD. CCC papers: 1. Visby. ����������� P. 127-130. Auns, M. 1998. ���������������������������������������������� Acquisition of the acquired. The establishing of a real administration in Livonia. In: Culture ����������������� Clash or Compromise? ������������������������������������������� The Europeanisation of the Baltic Sea area 1100-1400 AD. Acta Visbyensia XI. �������������������� Gotland. S. 259-267. Bielenstein, A. 1892. Die Grenzen des lettischen Volksstammes und der lettischen Sprache in der Gegenwart und im 13. Jahrhundert. St. Petersburg. Blesse, E. 1938. Sprache als Quelle zur Geschichte der lettischen Volksstämme. In: ���� PBVK. Rīgā. S. 70-93. Būga, K. 1958, 1959, 1961. Rinktiniai raštai. T. 1-3. Vilnius. Caune, A. 1991. ����������������������������������������� Die Gräbertypen und Bestattungssitten im Vladas Žulkus Klaipėdos Universitetas H. Manto 84, LT-92294 Klaipėda e-mail: [email protected] BALTICA 6 Vasks, A. 1997. The cultural and ethnic situation in Latvia during the early and middle Iron Age (1st-8th century AD). In: Latvian Ethnic History 3(16). University of Latvia. Rīga. P. 49-74. Vasks, A. 1999. Latvian archaeology: research and conclusions. In: Inside Latvian archaeology. Gotarc series A, Vol. 2. Göteborg. P. 3-88. Vaškevičiūtė, I. 1993. Pietinių· žiemgalių· dvasinė kultūra ir materialinė būtis V-XII a. Daktaro disertacija. �������� Vilnius. Žulkus, V., Klimka, L. 1989. Lietuvos pajūrio žemės viduramžiais. Lietuvos istorija. Vilnius. Žulkus, V., Springmann, M-J. 2001. Die Flüsse als Straßen der Europäisierung, Fluss und Hafen Šventoji – Heiligen Aa. In: L������������� übeck Style? ���������������� Novgorod Style? ����������� Baltic Rim �������� Central Places as Arenas for Cultural Encounters and Urbanisation 1100 – 1400 AD. CCC papers: 5. Riga. P. 167-183. Асарис��, �������������������� И������������������� . 1997. ����������������� О северных ������������ территориях ����������� расселения куршей в ������� X������ -����� XIII� �������� вв. (по ���������� материалам могильников). In: Vakarų baltai: etnogenezė ir etninė istorija. ������������� Vilnius������ , 199208. Мугуревич, Е.С. 1965: Восточная Латвия и соседние земли в ������ X����� -���� XII� ���� вв. ����� Рига. Озере, И. А. 1986. Привески-амулеты из могильников Курземе X-XV вв. Kраткие сообщения Института археологии Академии наук СССР. Вып. 183. Москва, 41-49. Озере, И. А.1987. Этническая истории куршей V-IX веков. Автореферат диссертации кандидата историческич наук. Москва. ������� ARCHAELOGIA Ostbaltikum in der Zeit vom 1. bis 13. Jahrhundert. In: Horst/H. Keiling (Hrsg.), Bestattungswesen und Totenkult. Berlin. S. 257-274. Gorski, K. 1981. Descriptiones terrarum. In: ���� Zapiski Historiczne, T. XLVI, R. 1981, Z. 1. S. 7-16. Grotenfelt, K. 1912. Über die in den alten nordischen Quellen erwähnten Kuren und ihre Wohnsitze. In: Suomen muinaismuistoyhdistyksen aikakauskirja XXVI. Helsinki, 1912. Dopkewitsch, H. 1933. Die Burgsuchungen in Kurland und Livland vom 13. - 16. Jahrhundert. Mitteilungen aus der livländischen Geschichte 25. Bd. ������������������� 1. Heft. Riga. Jarockis, R. 1998. Šiaurės Lietuvos piliakalnių ir jų papėdžių gyvenviečių žvalgomieji tyrinėjimai 1996 metais. In: ���� ATL 1996 ir 1997 metais. Vilnius. P. 66-70. Kulakov, V. 1994. Vakarų lietuvių V-XII a. radiniai prūsų žemėse. In: Klaipėdos miesto ir regiono archeologijos ir istorijos problemos. AHUK II. Klaipėda. P. 107-122. Kwauka, P. 1968. ��������������������������������������� Das Kurische im nördlichen Ostpreußen. In. „Memeler Dampfbooot“. 1968. 03. 20, Nr. 6, 7. S. 74f., 87f. Latvijas, 1974. Latvijas PSR arheoloģija. Rīga. ����� Latvijas vēstures atlants. 1998. Rīga. Mugurēvičs, Ē. 1995. Ģeogrāfiskais traktāts “Descriptiones terrarum” un tā informācijas avoti par Austrumbaltijas tautām 13. gadsimta vidū. ���� In: Latvijas Zinātņu Akademijas Vēstis 7/8/1995. Rīga. Lpp. 23-30. Mugurēvičs, Ē. 1987. Pūres Zviedru kapulauks. In: Arheoloģija un etnogrāfija XV. Rīga. Lpp. 56-67. Mugurēvičs, Ē.������������������������������������������ 1997. Kurlands Siedlungsplätze in frühgeschichtlicher Zeit. ���� In: Archaeologia Baltica 2. ������������ Vilnius. S. 85-93. Mugurēvičs, Ē. 1997a. Ethnic processes in baltic-inhabited territories and the emergence of the Latvian nation in the 6th to the 16th century. In: Latvian Ethnic History 3(16). University of Latvia. Rīga. P. 75-92. Mugurēvičs, Ē. 1999. Novadu veidošanānas in to robežas Latvijas teritorijā (12. gs. – 16. gs. vidus). In: ���� Latvijas zemju robežas 1000 gados. Rīga. Lpp. 54-90. Mugurēvičs, Ē. 2000. Die Balten im frühen Mittelalter nach schriftlichen Quellen. In: ���� Archaeologia Baltica 4. Vilnius. S. 71-80. Mugurēvičs, Ē. 2000a. Arheoloģiskie pētījumi Ventas lejteces apgabala dzels laikmeta un viduslaiku pieminekļos. Izrakumi Zlēkās. In: Arheoloģija un etnogrāfija XX. Rīga. Lpp. 74-87. Pėteraitis, V. 1992. Mažoji Lietuva ir Tvanksta. ��������� Vilnius. ���� Tauta ir Salys, A. 1930. Die žemaitischen Mundarten. In: žodis. T.III. �������������� Kaunas. Stradiņš, J., Cēbere, D. 2001. Zinātnes un augstskolu aizsākumi Rīgā (līdz 19. gs. pirmajai pusei). ���� In: Senā Rīga. Pētijumi pilsētas arheoloģijā un vēsturē. ��������� 3. Rīga. Lpp. 325-432. Tenisons, Ē. 1994. Arheologu domas par lībiešu izcelsmi. ���� In: Lībieši. Rīga. Lpp. 16-33. Tautavičius, A. 1981a. Žemaičių etnogenezė (archeologijos duomenimis). In: Iš lietuvių etnogenezės. Vilnius. P. 2735. Urtāns, J. 1998. Latvijas seno kulta vietu identifikācija. In: Latvijas vēsture 1998 Nr. 2. Lp. 19-24. Urtāns, V. 1977. Senākie depoziti Latvijā (līdz 1200. g). Rīga. Vaitkevičius, V. 1998. Senosios Lietuvos šventvietės. Žemaitija. Vilnius. Vaitkunskienė, L. 1997. Dėl vakarų žemaičių kultūros substrato. In: Vakarų baltai: etnogenezė ir etninė istorija. Vilnius. P. 151-163. Erhalten: 2002 K uršas . R ibos ir šiaurin ė s žem ė s V I I I – X I I I amžiais VLADAS ŽULKUS Santrauka Kuršių pietinių ir šiaurinių žemių teritorijos apibrėžiamos remiantis archeologijos ir istorijos šaltiniais. Adomas Bremenietis (apie 1040–1080 m.) Kuršą manė esant sala: „vel maxima est illa, quae Churland dicitur“ (Adami IIII: 190). Ordino 1252 ir 1253 m. šaltiniuose yra paminėtos kuršių žemės ir apie 150 gyvenviečių. Nepaisant to, atribojant atskiras žemes neaiškumų išlieka. Prieš ateinant Ordinui Nemuno deltoje yra buvusi atskira Lamatos žemė (apie 1231 m. rašytas dokumentas), tačiau jau 1235 m. Ebstorfo žemėlapyje (1 pav.) ir XIII a. vid. aprašymuose Kuršo pietinė riba vedama iki Sambijos, t. y. iki Nemuno žiočių. Lamata Kuršui buvo priskirta Ordinui pareiškus savo teises į Kuršą. Iki Ordino laikų pietinė Pilsoto žemės (kartu ir Kur- 101 Kurland. Die Grenzen und die nördlichen Landschaften in 8.–13. Jahrhundert VLADAS ŽULKUS šo) riba ėjo įpiečiau Smiltelės upelio. Šiaurinė kuršių apgyventos teritorijos riba iki X a. buvo Tebros upė, tik vėliau kuršiai apsigyveno į šiaurę nuo jos. Šiaurės rytuose kuršiai nesiekė Ventos vidurupio, rytinė kuršių teritorijos riba ėjo Virvytės ir Minijos aukštupiais. Pietryčiuose iki V–VI a. kuršių kultūra reiškėsi dešiniajame Jūros krante, vėliau atsitraukė arčiau Minijos. Nuo XI a. kuršių sienos kito prasidėjus jų ekspansijai. Pirmiausia jie apgyvendino kaimynines pusiau dykas žemes (atsirado Žemė tarp Skrundos ir Žiemgalos), vėliau išvijo vendus iš Ventos žemupių ir pradėjo kolonizuoti lyvių žemes. XIII a. pr. kuršiai kontroliavo teritoriją nuo Nemuno žiočių pietuose iki Rygos įlankos šiaurėje. XIII a. vidurio Ordino šaltiniuose yra minimos 9 kuršių žemės. Archeologijos ir XIII a. rašytinių šaltinių duomenimis, nustatyti tokie apytikriai žemių dydžiai: Pilsotas apie 200 km2, Mėguva ir Duvzarė – apie 500 km2, Ceklis (Ceclis) – apie 2500 km2, Piemare (Bihavelanc) – apie 1250 km2, Žemė tarp Skrundos ir Žiemgalos – (“terra inter Scrunden et Semigalliam”) – apie 1200 km2, Ventava (Winda) – apie 600 km2, Bandava (Bandowe) – apie 1600 km2 und Vanema (Wannenia, Vredecuronia) – daugiau kaip 4000 km2. Pietinių kuršių žemės yra labiau ištirtos ir jų teritorijos apibrėžtos tiksliau. Ceklio ir šiaurinių žemių teritorijų bei ribų tyrimas yra šio straipsnio uždavinys. Ceklio pietinė riba ėjo išilgai Minijos iki jos intako Skinijos. Rietavo apylinkėse driekėsi didelė dykra. Labiausiai į pietus nutolusi Ceklio gyvenvietė, atrodo, bus buvę Dovilai prie Minijos. Ordino laikais Ceklis nusidriekė iki pat Ventės rago. Pietvakariuose žemės ribos ėjo Smiltelės intakų aukštupiais iki Šventosios aukštupių. Vakarinės gyvenvietės ir pilys stovėjo Minijos pakrantėse, prie Salanto, Erlos ir prie Bartuvos. Šiaurėje Ceklis ribojosi su Duvzare, Bandava ir žeme tarp Skrundos ir Žiemgalos. Ši siena beveik sutapo su dabartine Latvijos–Lietuvos siena ir ėjo Apšės ir Lūšės upėmis bei Vadaksties žemupiu. XIII a. Cekliui priskirta teritorija tarp Apšės ir Virvytės anksčiau galėjo priklausyti Duvzarės žemei. Neaišku, ar nuo seno kuršių buvo kontroliuota teritorija tarp Ventos ir Vadaksties bei Kamanų pelkynai. Ribą tarp Ceklio kuršių ir žiemgalių galėjo žymėti Ašvos upė. Rytuose Ceklis siekė Telšės upę. Duvzarės pietinė riba ėjo Šventosios vidurupiu. Nuo Šventosios aukštupių siena yra ėjusi iki Vartajos (Vārtāja, liet. Bartuva) vidurupio. Toliau nuo Apšės aukštupio link Virgos aukštupio. Virgos upė buvo šiaurinė Duvzarės ir pietinė Piemarės žemės riba. Nuo Virgos ir Vārtājos santakos siena ėjo paupiu iki Bartos, o nuo čia suko link Ječupės bei Toselės vidurupių ir link pajūrio ežerų. 102 Piemarė (liet. Pamarys) pietuose ribojosi su Duvzare ir tarp šių žemių buvusiomis dykromis. Rytinė teritorijos riba ėjo Tebros ištakomis, toliau šia upe iki jos santakos su Saka. Saka buvo Piemarės šiaurinė riba, už jos tęsėsi 10–20 km pločio dykra. Vakaruose Piemarė priėjo iki pajūrio ežerų ir iki pat pajūrio, kuris vikingų laikais buvo apgyventas labai retai. Bandavos rytinė siena ėjo Apšės aukštupiu, Jonupio ir Lūšės upėmis iki Ventos. Bandavos gyvenvietės buvo abipus Ventos upės (gyvenvietės Celde, Lene, Scrunden, Bandowe). Palei Ventą Bandavos teritorija tęsėsi iki Kuldigos (Kuldīgos, Goldinghen) apylinkių. Nuo čia Bandavos gyvenvietės atsitraukė nuo Ventos. Apie 15 km nuo Ventos žiočių Bandavos šiaurinė riba priartėjo prie Varvės (Varve) vietovės. Pietinė siena peržengė Tebros upę, Bandavai priklausė ir Aizputės apylinkės. Dar labiau į pietus ribas žymėjo Vartajos (Vārtāja) aukštupiai, Virgos (Virga) ir Runios (Runia) upės su gyvenvietėmis Assiten, Elkene, Amboten (Embute), Baten. Žemė tarp Skrundos ir Žiemgalos XIII a. buvo labai retai apgyventa teritorija, pusiau dykra, buvusi tarp kuršių ir žiemgalių genčių. Pietinė žemės riba buvo Vadaksties ir Ezerupės tėkmės iki jų susiliejimo su Venta. Įpiečiau jau buvo Ceklio žemė, o į pietryčius – Žiemgala. Vakarinė siena ėjo netoli nuo Ventos, šiaurinę sieną ženklino Škedė, Ventos intakas. Rytinis žemės kraštas baigėsi ties Imulos upe ir Cieserės (Ciesere) ežeru. Nuo šio ežero rytinė siena suko į pietus, palei Ežerupės (Ezerupe) aukštupius. Į rytus nuo šios žemės driekėsi 10 ir daugiau kilometrų pločio dykra. Ventava yra viena iš „naujųjų“ žemių, kuršių kolonizuotų XI–XII a. Žemės teritorija apėmė plotus abipus Ventos upės. Pietinė žemės riba buvo Užavos vidurupiai iki pat Abavos. Šiaurinė ir šiaurrytinė siena paprastai vedama nuo dabartinio pajūrio miestelio Oviši (Ovīši) iki Usmo (Usmas) ežero. Pietinės žemės ribos ir teritorija apie Ventą žymima nevienareikšmiai, neretai Ventavai yra priskiriamos kai kurios Bandavos gyvenvietės (Warve, Walteten, Lippeten). 1230 m. paminėtas kuršių karalius Lamikis („Lammekinus rex de Curonia“) valdė žemes abipus Ventos: Ventavos, Bandavos, Piemarės teritorijose. Visą šiaurinę Kuršo dalį apėmė Vanemos (Vanema) žemė, įkurta buvusiose lyvių teritorijose. Šiaurės vakaruose, šiaurėje ir rytuose žemės ribos buvo Baltijos jūra. Gana aiški yra ir šios žemės pietinė riba, ji ėjo nuo Oviši pajūryje į rytus link Usmo (Usmas) ežero iki Imulos (Imula) ir Amulos (Amula) upių vidurupių, Abavos ir Slocenės upėmis iki Rygos įlankos. Apie Usmo ežerą, tarp Amulos ir Abavos, nuo Vanemos žemės iki Ventavos buvo dykros. Vanemos žemė buvo gana retai apgyventa, vienas svarbiausių žemės centrų BALTICA 6 Senoji kuršių politinė, administracinė ir ūkinė sankloda Ordinui atėjus buvo pertvarkyta. Ordino valstybės struktūroje pasikeitė ir žemių teritorijų ribos, ir senųjų centrų reikšmė bei funkcijos. ARCHAELOGIA buvo Talsio (Talsi) apylinkėse, šiaurinėje dalyje išsiskyrė Dundagos (Dundaga) kompleksas. 103 Gurly Vedru Prehistoric Human Settlement in the Lower Reaches of the River Jägala Prehistoric Human Settlement in the Lower Reaches of the River Jägala Gurly Vedru Abstract This paper describes traces of human activities in the lower reaches of the River Jägala (North Estonia) from the Mesolithic till the Middle Ages. Attention is paid to the conditions essential to life and how people adjusted to them in the Prehistoric period and the Middle Ages. Also, the topic of the ritual landscape is discussed and the possible religious and ritual significance of the landscape analysed. This paper also tries to find an answer to the question whether people in Prehistoric times were only guided by economic considerations, or if there were also other aspects that attracted them near the banks of the River Jägala. Key words: landscape, environment, Estonia, Prehistoric period, settlement, grave, economy. Introduction The River Jägala is one of the longest rivers in north Estonia. It starts in central Estonia and runs into the Gulf of Finland 77 kilometres away. The upper and middle reaches of the river flow on the Central Estonian Plateau where it is surrounded by marshy terrain, and the middle reaches flow across a cultural landscape and through forests. On the lower reaches there are alvar and morainal areas which were inhabited by people relatively early. The mouth of the river lies on new and relatively unproductive soil. At the transition from the glint to the coastal lowland the river forms a waterfall with a height of about eight metres, which is one of the highest in north Estonia. It flows into the Gulf of Finland at a distance of two kilometres from the waterfall (Fig. 1). The aim of this paper is to study human settlement in the neighbourhood of the estuary, ancient relics on the terrain which are directly or indirectly connected with the river. While investigating the formation and development of the settlement of the region, several questions arise. It is not possible to find answers to all of them. However, some can be answered. What were the main factors in the colonisation of this area? Was it just the alvars, which were easy to cultivate, or were there also other reasons, spiritual rather than economic ones? Why were some places colonised, then abandoned and then recolonised? What kind of changes took place in human settlement in the different phases of the Prehistoric Period? Alvar soils are located in the coastal area of northern and western Estonia. In north Estonia alvars are located near the glint, ie on the north Estonian limestone plateau. They are thin (10–30 cm) and humus-rich and could be cultivated easily with primitive tools. Thus, alvars were the first areas to be cultivated in Estonia. 104 The first archaeological excavations in the lower reaches of the River Jägala took place in the 1920s, when Arthur Spreckelsen, a Baltic-German amateur archaeologist, excavated the hill-fort of Jägala Jõesuu. Several plots were opened in different parts of the hillfort, and a Stone Age settlement layer was unearthed beneath the fortifications of a later period (Spreckelsen 1925). Another Baltic-German researcher, Adolf Friedenthal, excavated one of the stone graves located on the left bank of the River Jägala, at the end of the 1920s (Friedenthal 1929). The next archaeological investigations took place in 2001, when the author of this paper excavated a settlement site of the Prehistoric Period (Vedru 2001). Although some sites in the region have been excavated and the results published, or local antiquities have been used in more extensive studies, either independently or as comparative material (Jaanits 1959; Lang 1996, Vedru 2001), a study encompassing all the known antiquities as well as the general background has still not been made. Human settlement cannot be analysed just by marking findspots and settlement sites on a map; it requires a thorough locality analysis, starting from the peculiarities of any specific place (Tilley 1994). The present paper will discuss the relations between man and nature, the possible significance of the river for people at different times, and, through this, the settlement in different phases of the Prehistoric Period. The subject of human settlement on the lower reaches of the River Jägala is part of an extensive project analysing prehistoric settlement in the area between the Jägala and Valgejõe rivers. The financial support for the archaeological investigations in the framework of the project, and Jõesuu means the mouth of a river in Estonian. BALTICA 6 for the writing of this paper, comes from the Estonian Science Foundation (grant No 4202). ARCHAELOGIA The region of the lower reaches of the River Jägala will be discussed mainly as a living environment, ie from the point of view of the nature of the area (Preucel, Hodder 1996: 32). Attention will be paid to what conditions the environment offered to people in these areas, and how people adjusted to them in different times. In addition, the topic of the ritual landscape will be discussed, and the possible religious and ritual significance of the landscape will be analysed, ie we will try to find an answer to the question whether the people of these times were guided only by economic aspects or whether there were also other aspects that attracted them. People understand the surrounding landscape differently, and it is probably not possible to find two people who would interpret the same place identically. It all depends on the individual, their outlook, conceptions and prejudices, as well as age, social position, and a variety of other factors (Bender 1993a, b). Most likely the view of landscape and place of Prehistoric people varied in the same way. Still, why are monuments found in certain places? What was the reason for choosing a site? Thus, when analysing the ancient relics of Fig. 1. Stone Age archaeological sites in the region of the lower reaches of a certain region, we cannot find answers the River Jägala: 1 glint; 2 waterfall; 3 stray find; 4 settlement site to questions concerning ancient settlement merely by assessing the natural factors of the location. North Estonian landscapes are predominantly flat, ar It must also be taken into account that people who lived ticulated only by the glint edge and water bodies. Of in a place gave a meaning to it, and that some places had the latter, a river that made the landscape impressive a greater significance than others. Although we are not could have possessed various meanings for the people able to reconstruct the thoughts of people of the past, it living there, being at the same time both a natural boris still possible to analyse the known monuments from der between settlement areas and a centre or an axis the point of view of their relation to the landscape, and around which the settlement concentrated (Lang 1996: to try to perceive the wholeness, ie the creations of Fig. 102, 103, 104). people together with nature. In this paper, I will not describe abstract landscapes whose soil and nature are typical of a certain region, but a specific area. Though it has many features similar to other places, it is still different and unique, and the settlement of this area developed accordingly, as we can assume on the basis of the antiquities preserved. Thus, my study also includes a phenomenological interpretation, and an analysis of the archaeological monuments of the location from the point of view of the people who lived in the landscape (Thomas 1993; Tilley 1993, 1994, etc). Archaeological sites on river landscapes have been studied in various places in the world (Buikstra, Charles 2000; Lehtonen 2000; Snead, Preucel 2000, etc). Several studies have pointed out that both rivers and especially waterfalls possessed a great psychologiNorth Estonian Glint is a part of the Baltic Glint. It divides north Estonia into two landscape regions: the north Estonian coastal plain in the north and the north Estonian limestone plateau in the south. Glint or the north Estonian limestone bluff is in some places visible as a high and steep terrace; in other places it is completely buried. The height of the bank sporadically rises to 25–35 metres. 105 Gurly Vedru Prehistoric Human Settlement in the Lower Reaches of the River Jägala cal importance for people. The significance of rivers and waterfalls seems to be quite universal, and is regarded as true, for example, for the Australian Aboriginals (Taçon 2000), the Saami (Bradley 2002, 6) and the ancient Greeks (Bradley 2002, 23). It is also thought that in the Neolithic Period in Britain some rivers that were borders and/or places where ritual communication was carried out had a significance in myths (Edmonds 1999: 21, 99). Sacrifices were made to some rivers, as well as to other bodies of water (Bradley 2002: 51). Waterfalls are considered places of mental importance, where different worlds – the upper world, the lower world and the earth plain – made contact and where an intense connection existed between different levels of existence (Taçon 2000: 37–40). Taking all this into consideration, we might suppose that the waterfall on the River Jägala also had at least some significance for ancient people living in the vicinity, and that their beliefs and memories of their ancestors were connected with it. This account book was compiled in about 1240 by monks who had arrived to baptise the Estonians. The list of villages also shows their size in ploughlands (Johansen 1933). Two villages in the lower reaches of the River Jägala are mentioned in this list, both of which are also represented by archaeological finds. Monuments The Stone Age The oldest settlement in the region dates back to the Mesolithic Period and is located on the highest terrace of a small triangular cape at the confluence of the Jõelähtme and Jägala rivers (Fig. 1). The finds gathered from the surface were quartz and flint flakes with working traces (AI 6458). Traces of human activities from the Neolithic Period are more numerous and are found in a larger area. Only one settlement site is The present article about the Prehistoric human settlement in the region of the lower reaches of the River Jägala is based mainly on known archaeological monuments and on the results of fieldwork carried out on them. For a long time, the only monuments known in the region were groups of stone cist graves and cup-marked stones on the left bank of the river, the hill-fort near the mouth of the river, and some stray finds. Only in recent years have settlement sites been sought and found during archaeological survey trips (Vedru 1999, 2000, 2001b). Although it is possible that more settlements will be found as a result of future investigations, it cannot alter the overall picture to a great extent, because most of the prehistoric periods are already represented by archaeological sites. Most likely there might be some Stone Age settlement sites in the vicinity of the river that have yet not been discovered, and also the present knowledge about the settlement of some periods might be updated with sites of a different nature. For example, we may discover additional Bronze Age settlement sites or additional Late Iron Age burial sites. 106 In addition to archaeological data, information about villages at the end of the Prehistoric Period and the beginning of Fig. 2. Bronze Age and pre-Roman Iron Age archaeological sites in the rethe Middle Ages can be obtained from gion of the lower reaches of the River Jägala: 1 settlement site; 2 stone-cist a written source, Liber Census Daniae. grave; 3 cup-marked stone BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA known from this period, and is located near the estuary of that time, in a meander of the river on the high right bank. In 1920–1923 archaeological excavations were carried out here under the supervision of Arthur Spreckelsen (Spreckelsen 1925). The finds dated the settlement to the Middle Neolithic Period (Jaanits 1959; Lang 1996: 397). In addition, two Neolithic boat axes have been found from the village of Koogi (AI 3198; AM 293), and an antler axe (AI 4415) on the right bank of the River Jägala. Settlement sites and stray finds from the Neolithic Period are also known in the neighbouring areas. In the west they are located at a distance of about four kilometres from the River Jägala on alvar areas suitable for early farming (Lang 1996: 397–399, Fig 112). In the east the distance to the next settlements, situated by the River Kaberla, is almost the same. There we can find a fragment of a boatshaped axe from a Neolithic settlement (Vedru 2003: 329). From the Bronze Age to the Roman Iron Age In spring 2001 a settlement site, first used in the Bronze Age, was discovered in the immediate vicinity of the Jägala waterfall Fig. 3. Roman Iron Age archaeological sites in the region of the lower reaches of the River Jägala: 1 tarand grave; 2 stray find (Fig. 2; Vedru 2001b). The settlement is located on a high bank at about 30 or 40 metres from the water. Besides the waterfall, there is a In this region, the stone cist graves and cup-marked ford in the river with a smooth limestone bed and shallow stones are remarkably numerous in the western alwater. The Bronze Age settlement was relatively small var areas but absent in the Kaberla area (Lang 1996: and not very dense. On the basis of the finds recovered Fig. 113, 121). during a survey and archaeological excavations, we may presume that a single farm, the predominant settlement form of that period, was located here. Nearby, at about F r o m t h e M i d d l e I r o n A g e t o t h e e n d 100 metres from the site, at the former location of the o f t h e P r e h i s t o r i c P e r i o d waterfall, there is a stone with 15 cup marks. The stone is relatively large and clearly visible. In the vicinity From this period, only a few monuments are known, about ten more cup-marked stones are known, around in the lower reaches of the River Jägala. The hill-fort the village of Koila on the left bank of the river, and by of Jägala Jõesuu and the settlement nearby belong to the side of the River Jõelähtme (Fig. 2). On the left bank the Middle Iron Age. The hill-fort was most likely there are also some groups of stone cist graves, which built in the sixth century, and was used until the secon the terrain are related to the edge of the glint and the ond half of the first millennium (Lang 1996: 327). The Jõelähtme and Jägala rivers. Two finds recovered from concentrated settlement site from the Viking Age was the three stone graves date from the Late Bronze Age, situated about one kilometre upstream from the hilland one from the third or fourth centuries (Lang 1996: fort, in the immediate vicinity of the waterfall, on the 401–402). In the village of Koila some graves from the right bank of the river. The place had been inhabited already in the Bronze Age, but in the following centuRoman Iron Age were also found (Fig. 3). 107 Gurly Vedru Prehistoric Human Settlement in the Lower Reaches of the River Jägala ries the settlement shifted downstream to a presumed harbour site. Another settlement, established in the Viking Age, is located in the village of Koila, about 0.5 kilometres south of the Joa settlement, around 200 metres from the River Jõelähtme (Fig 4). It is possible to assume on the basis of finds that these sites were also inhabited at the end of the Prehistoric Period and in the Middle Ages. Both villages are also mentioned in Liber Census Daniae: the size of the village of Joa was eight ploughlands, and that of the village of Koila ten ploughlands (Johansen 1934: 437–438). Thus both these ancient villages were founded in the Viking Age and, possibly with some intervals, have been inhabited up to the present day. In the west, in the Rebala settlement centre, there may be some graves dating back to the Roman Iron Age; in the east there are none. Changes in settlement patterns took place in the Viking Age, when villages appeared in Estonia. In both neighbouring settlement clusters, villages are known that stayed there all through the end of the Prehistoric Period and the Middle Ages. Discussion: the formation of settlements, development and the reasons for development It has been shown above that the lower reaches of the River Jägala were inhabited, to a greater or lesser extent, all through the Prehistoric Period. However, it is possible to distinguish some periods of more intensive settlement. The oldest inhabited site in this region is the high terrace of a small triangular cape at the confluence of the Jägala and Jõelähtme rivers. By its natural conditions, the place was, no doubt, attractive for Stone Age man: besides the river there were forests, and the sea was not far, so that different sources of subsistence were available, which was very important. There was a waterfall nearby, which, being a remarkable natural object, evidently possessed an equal spiritual significance. In addition to surface finds, the age of the settlement can be deduced indirectly from its relative distance from the sea, because Mesolithic settlements were located mainly near inland water bodies. 108 The next settlement by age was closer to the sea, near the estuary. This was relatively well protected by a meander of the river (Fig. 1); the distance to the previous settlement site is about 1.5 kilometres. Whether the settlement at the confluence was also used at that time remains a question, since no pottery has been found there. Moreover, no archaeological excavations have been carried out; thus, we cannot say for sure that the site was uninhabited in that period. Even if it were, that would not mean that the waterfall was forgotten by the people or had lost its significance. It is possible that the tenets of that time demanded some distance, or at least did not preclude it. The journey to the falls might have possessed a significance of its own, and how it was performed, either on foot or by water. But coming back to the economic factors, the choice of habitation on the seashore may indicate that, besides being a source of food, the sea might have been a vital communication link with distant places (Vedru 2001a), ie it may have been to some extent already “domesticated” at that time. The Neolithic population was also more settled and attached to one place; thus, a strategically vital living place may have been of greater importance than the possible spiritual support expected from the immediate neighbourhood of the waterfall. The Jõesuu settlement by the estuary was abandoned at the end of the Stone Age. Since several stray finds have been recovered from the region (Fig. 1), there may be some hitherto undiscovered settlement sites. In the Bronze Age a new shift occurred in settlement patterns: people moved back upstream, to the alvar areas. It has been repeatedly accentuated that alvars, with their thin layer of soil, were the earliest tilled areas in Estonia (Lõugas 1970: 28, 29, 44), and this is the type of soil where the Bronze Age and the pre-Roman Iron Age monuments of the discussed area come from. Since the tenets were transformed together with the increasing significance of cultivation, the newly inhabited areas may be connected with a new religion. Still, it need not mean that places of significance for the previous generations forfeited their importance. The stone cist graves typical of the period are clustered on the left bank of the River Jägala, and none can be found on the right bank (Fig. 2). Excavation results suggest that these grave groups date back to the Late Bronze Age and were probably also used at the beginning of the Roman Iron Age. The graves are situated in two groups. Most of them, nearly 30 graves, are located at the edge of the glint and have a view of the sea and partly of the estuary of the River Jägala; there is also a single cup-marked stone nearby. The other group, consisting of only five graves, is located on the left bank of the River Jõelähtme, not far from the place where it runs into the River Jägala. Though graves are few in this location, there are a dozen cup-marked stones in the area, situated roughly parallel to the riverbank, mostly in view of each other and the riverbank. Thus it seems that where many graves were sited, the cupmarked stones were few, and vice versa (Vedru 2002). All the graves and stones in the locality are situated high on the glint and have a view of the river and/or the sea from above. This location limited access to them from these sides, which, considering the steep edge of It is possible that, to some extent, the site of the later hill-fort near the estuary was also used. Excavations there have revealed a few potsherds belonging to the second half of the first millennium BC (Lang 1996: 326). Possibly, it was a habitation near the harbour or some other place connected with marine activities. The monuments known to date from the Roman Iron Age are scarce, not only in the vicinity of the River Jägala but also in the wider region. The settlement on the right bank of the River Jägala had been abandoned by that time, and the monuments from the Roman Iron Age are concentrated on the left bank of the river. In the whole region, a few tarand graves are known, only one of which has been excavated; the others have been identified by their shape. Presumably, a change occurred in that period in settlement patterns as well as in ideology (Lang 1996: 358). This assumption is based on the fact Fig. 4. Viking Age archaeological sites in the region of the lower reaches of that there are everywhere more stone cist the River Jägala: 1 hill-fort; 2 settlement site; 3 harbour site graves than tarand graves. Perhaps the Joa settlement was also abandoned due the glint, made approaching them from the water bodies to the disappearance of the old ideology expressed by difficult, if not impossible. This choice of location may cup-marked stones and stone cist graves. However, we have had a certain meaning, and, furthermore, a similar also have to take into account that with primitive tilllocation pattern for monuments is also characteristic of age the fertile land was soon exhausted, and new areas were put under cultivation, and so the settlement shiftother regions of north Estonia (Vedru, 2002). ed. Thus, farms stayed in a place for only a short time Only one cup-marked stone is known from the right and left no easily perceivable marks on the ground. bank of the River Jägala, about 50 metres from it. The river can be seen from this stone, and in the past the The settlement pattern changed once again in the Midwaterfall lay roughly in line with it. Nearby, at about dle Iron Age, when the monument complex by the es100 metres from the stone and 30 to 40 metres from the tuary of the River Jägala appeared. The hill-fort was river, there is a Bronze Age settlement site. Cup-marked founded on a well-protected site in a meander of the stones near settlement sites are also known from else- river where people had already lived in the Stone Age, where. It seems that some rule existed, according to and it was still being used in the Viking Age. Potsherds which graves were located further from settlements, from the second half of the first millennium found there while cup-marked stones could be (but not necessarily) confirm the latter belief. Finds have also been recovnear the settlements (Vedru 2002). The habitation by ered from the vicinity of the hill-fort, where presumthe waterfall was by the ford near the edge of the glint. ably a settlement from that period existed (Lang 1996: This may have been a cult site rather than a settlement, Fig. 115). This complex is probably connected with since the waterfall, which may have had an important the harbour site nearby, that may have been much used BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA part in religious activities, may also have served as a sacrificial place, the more so that sacrifices are known to have taken place by the waterfall in later times. On the other hand, it could just have been a single farm among fertile soil, located in that place only because of the favourable natural conditions. 109 Gurly Vedru Prehistoric Human Settlement in the Lower Reaches of the River Jägala during this period. Possibly only a trading site, and not a habitation, was located near the harbour at that time. Two more settlement sites from the same period are known in the lower reaches of the River Jägala. The first of these is located on the right bank of the river by the waterfall where a Bronze Age settlement had been. The Iron Age settlement was located on the same site, but was considerably larger. The finds and the intensive cultural layer indicate that it must have been a village consisting of several farms. Considering the short distance to the Jõesuu hill-fort, it seems possible that this village owned the hill-fort, and by this also controlled the harbour. The other Viking Age settlement site is known on the right bank of the river, in the present village of Koila, by the side of the road to the River Jägala. Considering the nature of the cultural layer identified, and by the finds collected from the surface, we may presume that this settlement was much less intensive than the Joa settlement. Both settlement sites were still occupied at the end of the Prehistoric Period and in the Middle Ages. In the neighbourhood of the village of Koila some stray finds have come to light, some of which are believed to come from a grave (Lang 1996: 404). Though the grave mentioned was situated on the left bank of the River Jõelähtme, it may have belonged to the people living in the village of Koila on the other bank. Both settlement sites are also mentioned in the list of villages of Liber Census Daniae, compiled in the 1240s. Thus, these are the oldest villages with permanent settlements in the lower reaches of the River Jägala that have been preserved to the present day. As regards the periods of more intensive settlement, we may observe that in the lower reaches of the River Jägala the Stone Age stands out, with traces of human activity found in several places, as do the Bronze and pre-Roman Iron ages. The next intensive period was the Viking Age, and only the Roman Iron Age and the following Middle Iron Age are poorly represented. How can this absence of finds be explained? It cannot have been due to the population leaving. The few known monuments and the fact that the period is also relatively poor in finds in other regions of Estonia refute this hypothesis (Lang 1996: Fig. 109, 127; Vedru 1999). The small number of graves might be the result of a change in ideology, due to which fewer stone graves were built. Settlements may have been located in different places where they have not yet been discovered. 110 In conclusion, it might be said that the settlement of the region has been concentrated around the river since the Stone Age. Alongside the economic advantages, the waterfall could have been an additional attraction. The waterfall is remarkable in Estonia for its size, and people could have associated their tenets and (mythical) antecedents with it. It could also have been a place where communication with spirits took place. Moreover, the area in the lower reaches offered suitable conditions for people who lived there in different periods of the Prehistoric Period. In the Stone Age the river and the forests in the vicinity, and later also the fertile soil, offered what people needed. Throughout the ages, the river has probably also been an important route for traffic. Thus, the location and changes in settlement patterns can be explained by the suitability of the natural conditions for the main activities of the period. However, I have also tried to bring in another viewpoint, by stressing the psychological importance of the waterfall. It is possible that this is the place where both economic and psychological reasons intertwined. In the course of time, some sites were abandoned and others inhabited, and the relations between people and their surroundings changed. Still, the area never completely lost its significance as a suitable living environment. Acknowledgements The author wishes to express her gratitude to the Estonian Science Foundation (grant No 4202), the artist Kersti Siitan, and the translators Liis Soon and Piret Viilu. References Bender, B. 1993a. Introduction. Landscape – Meaning and Action. In: Landscape: Politics and Perspectives. Providence/Oxford, 1–17. Bender, B. 1993b. Stonehenge – Contested Landscapes (Medieval to Present Day). In: Landscape: Politics and Perspectives. Providence/Oxford, 245–279. Johansen, P. 1933. Die Estlandliste des Liber Census Daniae. Kopenhagen-Reval. Lang, V. 1987. Tallinna ümbruse tarandkalmed. In: Proceedings of the Academy of Sciences of the Estonian SSR. Social Sciences, 36, 2, 190–206. Lang, V. 1996. Muistne Rävala. Muistised, kronoloogia ja maaviljelusliku asustuse kujunemine Loode–Eestis, eriti Pirita jõe alamjooksu piirkonnas. Tallinn. Lõugas, V. 1970. Eesti varane metalliaeg (II a.-tuh. keskpaigast e.m.a.–1. sajandini m.a.j.). Dissertatsioon ajalooteaduste kandidaadi kraadi taotlemiseks. Tallinn. (Manuscript in the archives of the AI). Preucel, R.W., Hodder, I. 1996. Nature and Culture. In: Contemporary Archaeology in Theory. Oxford, 23–38. Spreckelsen, A. 1925. Der Burgberg Jaggowall, Ksp. Jegelecht, Estland. In: Beiträge zur Kunde Estlands, X, 16–32. Thomas, J. 1993. Time, Culture and Identity. London and New York. All illustrations by Kersti Siitan Gurly Vedru Institute of History Rüütli 6, Tallinn 10130, Estonia e-mail: [email protected] Received: 2002 P rie š istorin ė s ž moni ų g y venviet ė s J egalos ( J ä gala ) ž emup y je Gurly Vedru Santrauka Jegala (Jägala) yra viena ilgiausių upių šiaurinėje Estijoje. Tekėdama link pajūrio žemumos, ji suformuoja maždaug 8 m aukščio vandens krioklį, kuris yra vienas didžiausių šiaurinėje Estijoje. Dar už 2 km nuo krioklio upė įsilieja į Suomių įlanką. Šio tyrimo tikslas yra ištirti upės žiočių kaimynystėje esančias žmonių gyvenvietes bei senovės reliktus toje vietoje, kuri yra tiesiogiai ar netiesiogiai susijusi su upe. Jegalos žemupio regionas vietos gamtos požiūriu yra traktuojamas kaip gyvenamoji aplinka. Dėmesys yra skiriamas gyvybiškai svarbioms šiame regione sąlygoms ir žmonių prisitaikymui įvairiais laikotarpiais prie jų. Be to, aptariama ir ritualinių apeigų vietų tema, analizuojama ir galima religinė bei ritualinė šios vietovės svarba, mėginant atsakyti į klausimą, ar tų laikų žmonės vadovavosi tik ekonominiais sumetimais, ar egzistavo ir kitų aspektų, kurie traukė juos. BALTICA 6 me trikampiame kyšulyje prie Joeletmės (Jöelähtme) ir Jegalos upių santakos (1 pav.). Neolito laikotarpio žmonių veiklos pėdsakai yra gausesni ir aptinkami didesnėje teritorijoje. Iš šio laikotarpio yra žinoma tik viena gyvenvietė, buvusi prie to meto upės žiočių, upės vingyje, aukštame dešiniajame krante. Tarp bronzos amžiaus gyvenviečių tipų atsiranda naujų požymių – žmonės ima judėti aukštyn upe. Žmonių veiklos paminklų aptinkama greta upės, krioklio ir iš dalies pajūryje (2 pav.). 2001 m. pavasarį visiškai greta Jegalos vandens krioklio buvo aptikta bronzos amžiaus gyvenvietė (2 pav.). Greta jos, toje vietoje, kur kažkada buvo vandens krioklys, guli akmuo su 15 taurės pavidalo ženklų. Šalia, Koilos kaime, kairiajame upės krante ir greta Joeletmės upės, aptikta dar maždaug 10 tokių akmenų (2 pav.). Kairiajame upės krante yra kelios grupės akmenimis išklotų kapaviečių, kurios šioje vietovėje yra susijusios su Joeletmės ir Jegalos upėmis. Du tose kapavietėse aptikti radiniai yra datuojami vėlyvuoju bronzos amžiumi, o vienas – III–IV amžiais. Koiloje buvo aptikta ir keletas kapaviečių iš romėniškojo geležies amžiaus laikotarpio (3 pav.). ARCHAELOGIA Tilley, C. 1993. Art, Architecture, Landscape (Neolithic Sweden). In: Landscape: Politics and Perspectives. Providence/Oxford, 49–84. Tilley, C. 1994. A Phenomenology of Landscape. Places, Paths and Monuments. Oxford/Providence, USA. Vedru, G. 1999. Archaeological Evidence for Settlement in the Surroundings of Lake Kahala. In: PACT 57. Environmental and Cultural History of the Eastern Baltic Region. Rixensart, 405–414. Vedru, G. 2000. Aruanne arheoloogilistest välitöödest Jõelähtme ja Kuusalu kihelkonnas 1999. a. (Manuscript in the archives of the AI). Vedru, G. 2001a. Põhja–Eesti muinasaegsest rannikukasutusest. In: Eesti Arheoloogia Ajakiri 5, 2, 110–127. Vedru, G. 2001b. 2001. Aastal Jägala ja Valgejõe vahelisel alal teostatud arheoloogiliste välitööde aruanne. (Manuscript in the archives of the AI). Vedru, G. Forthcoming. Inimene, aeg ja maastik. Jaanits 1959=Янитс‚ Л. 1959. Поселения эпохи неолита и раннего металла в приустье р. Эмайыги (Эстонская ССР). Таллин. Jegalos Joesu (Jägala Jõesuu) piliakalnis ir greta esanti gyvenvietė yra priskiriami viduriniam geležies amžiui. Jie greičiausiai atsirado VI amžiuje ir gyvavo iki antrosios pirmojo tūkstantmečio pusės. Vikingų laikotarpio gyvenvietė buvo maždaug 1 km atstumu aukštyn upe nuo piliakalnio, greta vandens krioklio, dešiniajame upės krante. Kita gyvenvietė, įkurta Vikingų laikotarpiu, yra Koilos kaime, apie 500 m į pietus nuo Joa gyvenvietės ir apie 200 m nuo Joeletmės upės (4 pav.). Remiantis radiniais, galima daryti išvadą, kad šios vietos irgi buvo apgyvendintos priešistorinio laikotarpio pabaigoje ir viduramžiais. Abi gyvenvietės yra minimos ir Liber Census Daniae. Joa gyvenvietė buvo 8 arimų, o Koilos – 10 arimų dydžio. Taigi abi šios senovinės gyvenvietės atsirado vikingų laikotarpiu ir su tam tikrais intervalais išliko gyvenamos iki mūsų dienų. Seniausia regiono gyvenvietė yra datuojama mezolito laikotarpiu ir yra ant aukščiausios pakopos nedidelia- 111 Small Bone Spades: Material U s e d , P r o c e s s i n g Te c h n o l o g y, and Possible Function Heidi Luik Ülle Tamla S m a l l B o n e S pa d e s : M at e r i a l U s e d , P r o c e ss i n g T e c h n o l o g y, a n d P o ss i b l e Function Heidi Luik and Ülle Tamla Abstract Estonian and Latvian small bone spades are discussed. The majority of spades are found in hill-forts and settlement sites from the 11th to the 13th centuries. The tools and technique of manufacture are investigated. Key words: Estonia, Latvia, 11th to 13th centuries, bone spades, bone manufacturing. 112 Introduction Small bone spades in Estonia The writing of the present paper was inspired by finds of several small bone spades in archaeological excavations of recent years, and the study of local boneworking in connection with the financial support of the Estonian Science Foundation for the research projects “Ancient Hill-Forts of Estonia: Varbola Jaanilinn. Fortifications, Buildings, Finds. The Socio-Economic and Military-Political Background” and “Bone Artefacts in Estonian Archaeological Material from the Prehistoric and Medieval Periods (the last quarter of the first millennium and the first half of the second millennium AD)”. With the help of the grants mentioned, the technique of manufacture of bone artefacts has been investigated, the material identified, and copies of some bone objects, including a small bone spade, have been made. In Estonia a total of 39 small bone spades and some presumed blanks are known from 13 spots (Table 1 and Fig. 1–11). Of these finds, about one third have been published (Moora, Saadre 1939: Fig. 27; Тыниссон, Селиранд 1978: Fig. 2: 1; Краут 1980: Plate 18: 12– 15; Tamla, Tõnisson 1990: Plate 11: 3; Tamla 1992: Fig. 5: 4; Valk 2000: Photo 5: 1, 2; Tamla, Maldre 2001: Fig. 8–11; Luik 2001: Fig. 5 and 6; Lang et al 2002: Fig. 6). No special publication has been issued about bone spades as a separate type of artefact, and they have rarely been published along with other finds. Therefore, the present paper sets out to make a survey of all known finds of small bone spades, and to investigate the material, tools and technique of manufacture. At the same time, we try to find out whether the differences in their shape, material and decoration enable us to determine their field of use and their users, and to specify the territorial differences or chronology. The present study is based on all known finds of small bone spades in Estonia (the collections of the Institute of History in Tallinn and of Tartu University, and the archaeological collections of Pärnu and Viljandi museums) and in Latvia (the find complexes of Daugmale, Aizkraukle, Mārtiņsala, Talsi and Jersika in the Latvian History Museum in Riga). The information about small bone spades from other regions is mostly from archaeological literature. The majority of Estonian small bone spades are found at hill-forts and settlement sites, mainly the larger hillforts and settlement sites from the end of the Prehistoric Period (11th to 13th centuries), but some also come from sites with both earlier and later material. None of the bone spades were found at sites with only medieval finds, which indicates that they were not manufactured any more by the Middle Ages. In some excavations, those of the Kuusalu settlement site and the Varbola hill-fort, it was observed that several small bone spades were found on a relatively small and densely builtover area (Luik 2001: 24; Селиранд, Тыниссон 1978; Тыниссон, Селиранд 1978). The origin of the bone spades from Savastvere is different: four small bone spades were found, together with bronze ornaments, in a hoard discovered in a settlement layer dating from the middle or the second half of the 12th century (Jaanits et al 1982: 363–365). Only two bone spades have been found among the contents of graves, both from the excavations of the flat cemetery of Pada, dated to the late 12th or early 13th centuries. One of them, a fragmentarily preserved openwork specimen, was placed between the legs of a young man who died at the age of 18 to 20 years, slightly above the knees (grave 92). The other, a plain small bone spade, was discovered with a dou- BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 1. Distribution of bone spades in Estonia and Latvia: 1 Lehmja; 2 Rebala; 3 Kuusalu; 4 Pada; 5 Varbola; 6 Keava; 7 Soontagana; 8 Lõőhavere; 9 Savastvere; 10 Mustivere; 11 Viljandi; 12 Otepää; 13 Rőuge; 14 Talsi; 15 Cēsis; 16 Mārtiņsala; 17 Daugmāle; 18 Aizkraukle; 19 Jersika (Drawing by Kersti Siitan) Fig. 2. Bone spades from the Savastvere hoard (AI 3355: 130, 132, 131, 133. Drawings by Heidi Luik) ble burial of children (grave 122), where it was located beside an earthenware vessel on the tibiae of a child buried at the age of six to eight years (Tamla, Maldre 2001: 373). Although no small bone spades have hitherto been found with cremation burials, we must bear in mind that burnt bone artefacts are, as a rule, not discernible. Generally, bone artefacts are discovered in cremation burials only if they contain preserved metal rivets (eg combs), or if they bear visible ornamentation (eg Luik 1994: Fig. 12–14; 1998: Fig. 17, 33–37; Mägi 2002: Plates 1: 6; 24: 2, 3 and 25: 15). Small bone spades in Latvia In Latvia, small bone spades (a total of 54 specimens from six spots; Table 2 and Fig. 1; 12–15) occur on the 113 Small Bone Spades: Material U s e d , P r o c e s s i n g Te c h n o l o g y, and Possible Function Heidi Luik Ülle Tamla Livs’ territories, and only a few have been published (eg Ģinters 1936: Fig. 13: 6; Apals 1998: Fig. 6: 14). Latvian bone spades come from hill-forts, the overwhelming majority of them, 40 specimens, from the Daugmale hill-fort. Daugmale was the most important manufacturing and trade centre in the lower reaches of the River Daugava, and has been classified as proto-town or early urban centre, and controlled the trade on the River Daugava until the last quarter of the 12th century (Urtāns 1994; Latvijas pilskalni 1998; Radiņš 2000: 121; Ciglis et al 2001: 12). Since 1935, large-scale excavations have been carried out in Daug- Fig. 3. Bone spades from Lõhavere hill-fort (AI 4133: 1355, 1961a, AI 3578: 1311, male, and extensive material re- AI 4133: 1961. Drawings by Heidi Luik) covered (circa 18,000 artefacts and 200,000 potsherds; Radiņš 2000: 102). From the southeastern-most centre of the Daugava Livs, Aizkraukle, nine spades and blanks are known, from other find spots one or two specimens have been found. We must also consider the possibility that the material we have seen does not include all the bone spades found in Latvia. Small bone spades in other regions Relying upon information from published finds, as well as a brief study of the Novgorod collection of finds, we may suppose that small bone spades were also used in northwest Russia, eg in Novgorod (Колчин et al 1985: 80; НГМ КП 33996/A-100: 27) and Pskov (eg Белецкий 1991: 29). The reason why only one small bone spade is known from Finland (Visa Immonen, pers. comm.) probably lies in the poor preservation of bones in the soil there. An object rather similar to specimens from the eastern shore of the Baltic Sea, named “a flat spoon”, was found in Schleswig, north Germany (Ulbricht 1984: 63, Plate 46: 14). At least three small spades made of reindeer antler have been found in Arctic Norway. According to the description by Thorleif Sjövold (Sjövold 1974: 257) they are about ten-centimetre-long specimens, rather flat, with short handles and wide blades, the edge of which is more or less sharp. In Sweden, two small bone spades are known from Birka (Arbman 1940: Plate 151: 3, 8). About one of these, richly decorated with plaited deco- 114 Fig. 4. Bone spades made of rib from Rõuge (AI 4040: 3698) and Otepää (AI 4036: IIIO 216. Drawings by Heidi Luik) ration and pits, and with a partly preserved blade, it is not clear whether it was spade-shaped or spoon-shaped like the other finds depicted on the same plate. The spoons found in the British Isles have flat blades, like Estonian and Latvian small spades, but their shape is more triangular or oblong, and they have round edges (MacGregor 1985: Fig. 98: l-p). Larger spade-shaped objects (up to 20cm long), mostly made of whale bone, have been found in Norway and the British Isles (Sjövold 1974: Plates 27: I; 28: f and 59; MacGregor 1985: 176–177, Fig. 93: g, h). Obviously, the range of their use (which is not definitely known, but it has been presumed that they might have been used for chopping meat) is different from that of BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 5. Bone spades from Varbola hill-fort (AI 4783: 746, AI 5299: 372. Drawings by Kersti Siitan) Fig. 7. Bone spades from Lehmja settlement site (AI 5310 III: 700/ 744, 566. Drawings by Heidi Luik) Fig. 6. Bone spades from Kuusalu settlement site (AI 5043: 536, 444. Drawings by Heidi Luik) Fig. 8. Bone spades from Pada cemetery (AI 5366: XCII, 12, CXXI, 4. Drawings by Heidi Luik) small bone spades. It must only be mentioned that several of the large bone spades from Norway come from richly furnished (women’s) graves dating from the period from the seventh century to the second half of the ninth century (Sjövold 1974: 257 ff.). decorated (Fig. 3: 1; 6: 2; 12: 4). Some have flat handles of an even width. These specimens are not decorated either (Fig. 2: 1, 3; 4: 1, 2; 9: 2). Most frequent are small bone spades with flat handles widening in the middle. Some of these handles have profiled edges. This type also contains some undecorated spades (Fig. 2: 2, 4; 5: 2; 7: 2; 8: 2), but often they are decorated with a pattern of pits or engraved lines (Fig. 3: 2–4; 6: 1; 7: 1; 10; 12: 2, 3), where sometimes the pits form a cross (Fig. 5: 1; 12: 1). One of the Daugmale spades has an engraved plaited ornament on the handle (Fig. 13: 3). Some have openwork carved handles; sometimes these are also decorated with lines or pits (Fig. 8: 1; 9: 1; 11:1, 3, 4; 13: 1, 2). Some spades have a pierced hole(s) in the upper part of the handle (Fig. 5: 1; 11: 1; 13: 1), which indicates the possibility that they The appearance of small bone spades Most of the small bone spades discussed have smooth polished surfaces. The decorated specimens often have decoration on both sides. The shape of the handles of bone spades varies. There are small spades with thin handles, the diameter of which is nearly the same in width as in thickness. The handles often end with a slightly widening knob. Such spades are usually not 115 Small Bone Spades: Material U s e d , P r o c e s s i n g Te c h n o l o g y, and Possible Function Heidi Luik Ülle Tamla Fig. 10. Bone spade from Keava (TÜ 1026: 412. Drawing by Heidi Luik) Fig. 9. Bone spades from Viljandi (VM 10742: 390, 781. Drawings by Kersti Siitan) were probably worn as pendants. It was also possible to hang spades which had handles ending with a knob or an extension (eg Fig. 2: 2; 6; 10). There are also spades which have no hole, knob or extension on their handle (eg Fig. 2: 1, 3, 4), and which accordingly could not be hung. Most of the wholly preserved spades are seven to nine centimetres long. The shortest is the 5.3-centimetre specimen from the Savastvere hoard. Some shorter ones are around six centimetres long. The longest spades are about ten centimetres long. The blades of the spades are mostly 1.6 to 2.5 centimetres wide. The thickest place, usually in the middle part of the spade, is 0.15 to 0.7 centimetres thick; on specimens made of rib it is 0.15 to 0.25 centimetres, and on those made of long bones it is 0.25 to 0.7 centimetres. Material and manufacture. Experiment in making a bone spade 116 The material of the bone spades found in Estonia was identified by Liina Maldre, an osteologist at the Institute of History. According to her, the majority of small spades are made of bone; only one, a specimen from Kuusalu (Table 1: 21), is thought to be made of elk antler (Luik 2001: Fig. 6: 1). According to Maldre, the Fig. 11. Bone spades from Soontagana hill-fort (PäM 2766: 856, PäM 2767: 1343, 1130, PäM 1971a: 410, 480. Drawings by Heidi Luik) Depending on the material – long bone or rib – used for making the spade, the preparation was different. From long bones, first of all, the epiphysis was removed, then the bone was sawn or split into strips of the required width (Ulbricht 1984: 19, Fig. 2). These strips were cut into pieces of the required length, of which the spades were carved (Fig. 16). Ribs were first cut into pieces, after that both edges were cut off and the bone was split longitudinally into two thin plates (Fig. 17: a; Ulbricht 1984: 22). Another possibility was to cut a piece of a suitable length from the rib, and, without splitting it, to carve a spade (Fig. 17: b). After that, Fig. 12. Bone spades decorated with dots from Daugmale (A 9964: 7424, 105, there were two possibilities: first, to 7727, A 11971: 1165. Drawings by Heidi Luik) use the spade made of unsplit rib (Fig. 17: b1; eg Table 2: 25 and 39), in this case spades with spades are too thoroughly worked to make it possible one porous side that split incidentally in the course of to determine the animal species, and in most cases also processing or use were cast aside. The second possibilthe part of the skeleton from which the bone for the ity was that the spade was split deliberately after carvspade was taken. In many cases, long bones were used; ing it in order to get two spades (Fig. 17: b2; eg Fig. while a more accurate identification of the bone is im14). In this case, porous bone tissue can be observed on possible. Most likely they were the metacarpal and the rear sides (Fig. 4: 1; 9: 2). We do not know whether metatarsal bones of cattle and horses, which have quite it was left this way because the artefact would become a thick and straight compact part, but other bones also too thin and brittle if the rear side was also polished, could have been used. The smaller part of the spades, or whether the artefact remained unfinished for some six in total (Fig. 4; 9: 2; 11: 2–4), are made of ribs. The reason. The latter seems likely, for instance, in the case Latvian spades are also mostly made of long bones; of an unfinished spade from Viljandi (Fig. 9: 2). From the use of ribs is considerably rarer, it was identified in Soontagana fragments of two very thin spades are only eight cases (Table 2: 1, 15, 19, 22, 25, 39, 46 and known, with both sides polished (Fig. 11: 3, 4). This 48; Fig. 14). Three spades (Table 2: 6, 7 and 26; Fig. was possibly the reason why these spades were broken 15) are different from the others, since they are made while in use. of the shield of a sturgeon (Acipenser sturio, identified Small bone spades made of the shield of a sturgeon, by Lembi Lõugas). found in Latvia, are very rare. They are characterised In determining the method of work and its sequence, by the flaky slivering surface, and by the rear with large blanks and unfinished artefacts play an important part, round pores (Fig. 18). One of these was found at Daugmaking it possible to recreate the production chain male and two at Aizkraukle. One of the latter is an unu- BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA (Averbouh 2001). Among Estonian and Latvian finds there are some presumed blanks and unfinished spades (Fig. 9: 2; 11: 2, 5; 14 and 15; Luik 2001, Fig. 6: 5). The sawn-off ends of long bones, and fragments of long bones and ribs bearing cutting traces, which may be debris from bone-working, including the manufacture of bone spades, occur among finds from several sites (eg Soontagana: PäM 2766: 713; Varbola: Tamla, Maldre 2001: 372, Fig. 3 and 4; Otepää: Maldre 2001: 21, Fig. 7: a; Daugmale: A 11971: 1694). 117 Small Bone Spades: Material U s e d , P r o c e s s i n g Te c h n o l o g y, and Possible Function Heidi Luik Ülle Tamla Fig. 13. Bone spades from Mārtiņsala (RDM I 2443) and Daugmale (A 11971: 735, A 11970: 1752. Drawings by Heidi Luik) Fig. 15. An unfinished spade made from the shield of a sturgeon found at Aizkraukle (A 12301: 238. Drawing by Heidi Luik) sually large specimen with the width of the blade at 3.5 centimetres. Since its handle is broken, its length cannot be determined. The other of the Aizkraukle spades is unfinished (Fig. 15), which proves that spades were made from the shield of a sturgeon on the spot. The tools used for bone-working can best be studied on the basis of debris from bone-working and unfinished objects, since the finished artefacts are usually carefully polished, and thus the traces left by tools are not discernible any more. Most likely a saw was used for the primary cutting of the bone, but due to further processing traces of sawing cannot be seen on the artefacts. They can be observed on the debris from bone working found in Otepää and Varbola (Maldre 2001: Fig. 7: a; Tamla, Maldre 2001: 372, Fig. 4). For the longitudinal splitting of bones, especially the shorter fragments, an axe was used (Ulbricht 1984: 29), or a chisel and a hammer (Spitzers 1999: Fig. 12). However, the main tool for carving bone spades was obviously a knife. It was even possible to smooth the surface only with a knife. On the basis of traces on several spades, we can say that most were smoothed with a knife. Sometimes rasps and files were also used, traces of them are discernible on some bone objects (eg on one of the spades from Varbola, Fig. 5: 2, as well as on some Latvian spades, eg Table 2: 4 and 52). For the final polishing, organic matter may have been used, such as sand and leather, ash, chalk, etc (Ulbricht 1978: 118 Fig. 14. Unfinished spades made of rib found at Aizkraukle (A 12222: 139. Drawings by Heidi Luik) Some artefacts from the shield of a sturgeon have also been found in Estonia: eg a larger pendant was found in Pada settlement site (Тамла 1983: Table 15: 4), and a piece of a shield came to light in the excavation of Town Hall Square in Tallinn (Fig. 18). Among spades made of long bones there are decorated and undecorated specimens. The ornamentation usually consists of a simple pattern of pits and engraved lines, the application of which did not require special tools: a knife with a sharp point was enough. For carving Fig. 16. The stages of making a spade from a rib: a) the piece of rib is split longitudiopenwork spade handles, the banally into two thin plates and then the spade is made; b) the spade is carved without sic tool was also a knife, which splitting the rib; b1) a spade of unsplit rib is used; b2) the spade is split deliberately after carving in order to get two spades. (Drawing by Heidi Luik) was also used to make the larger holes. Small round holes were obviously made with an auger. The spades made of ribs are usually undecorated, only sometimes (eg on spades from Soontagana) have some holes been bored in the handles (Fig. 11: 3, 4). Fig. 17. A fragment of a shield of a sturgeon found at Tallinn (AI 4061: 2681). (Photograph by Erki Russow) Fig. 18. The stages of making a spade from the metacarpal bones of cattle. (Drawing by Heidi Luik) Jana Ratas, of the Institute of History, has made an experimental copy of one of the openwork spades from Varbola (Fig. 19). She used the metapodium of an elk. First, the bone was boiled until the emission of grease ceased. The bone was sawn into pieces before boiling, to make it possible to use a smaller pot. Ingrid Ulbricht thinks it is likely that bone was boiled to prepare it for further processing (Ulbricht 1984: 18-19). Arthur MacGregor, on the contrary, asserts that long boiling removes collagen from the bone (in boiling water, collagen turns into gelatine, which is soluble in water), thus making the bone brittle (MacGregor 1991: 360). Raw bone is the easiest to cut and process, but freshly boiled bone is also relatively easily cut. Later, it becomes harder to process. Ratas discovered in the course of her experiment that BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA 41; MacGregor 1985: 58). Polishing the surface was important also, because this way the pores on the surface were filled in, thus preventing the excessive drying of the bone. By preserving its moisture, the bone also preserves its tenacity and elasticity; a dry bone becomes brittle and fragile. 119 Small Bone Spades: Material U s e d , P r o c e s s i n g Te c h n o l o g y, and Possible Function methods the experiment used also demonstrated how beautiful and impressive new bone objects were, compared to preserved archaeological ones (Fig. 19). The use Heidi Luik Ülle Tamla What were small bone spades used for? They have often been called pendants, but only some of them are given a hole in the upper part of the handle. Neither are they all decorated. Without precluding the possibility that some of the spades were used as ornaments (pendants resembling in shape and in size bronze amulets, imitating, most likely, padlock keys), it seems more likely that they were commodities which could be worn hanging from a belt or a chain. It is assumed that they were cosmetic or toilet objects. For instance, it has been suggested that they were dandruff-scrapers (Moora, Saadre 1939: 176). But they could also have been used to take ointment or salve, including honey, from a receptacle and/or to spread it on the skin (as spatulas). Fig. 19. A bone spade from Varbola (ERM A 484) and a copy of the spade made by Jana Ratas. (Photograph by Heidi Luik) to make a boiled bone more easily workable, it must be soaked in hot water from time to time. It is also possible to make an artefact from a raw bone, and to clean it by boiling afterwards, but raw bone tends to putrefy very quickly. The bones may also have been cleaned of meat and grease by some other method, for instance by burying them in the ground for some time (Luik 2000: 144), or by putting them into an anthill, where ants clean them. This method is nowadays used by hunters for preparing trophies. Next, Ratas cut a piece of a suitable size from the bone using a saw; the further processing was done mainly with a knife and a rasp. For piercing the holes, she used an auger and a knife. Because of the absence of more suitable tools, she carved the cavities in the handle of the spade with modern chisels for making woodcuts and linocuts, holding the blade at the required angle against the bone, and hitting the handle with a hammer. In her opinion, this can also be done with a sharptipped chisel and a hammer. For finishing the surface, a knife and a file were used, and the final polishing was done with sand and a piece of woollen cloth. It took about 25 hours (after boiling the bone) to make this spade, but we must bear in mind that this was just the first attempt. Carefully copying the shape and size of the original also extended the time. An experienced craftsman would, no doubt, take considerably less time to make such an artefact. Besides, the study of the 120 Who used these spades? About gender and age we can only draw conclusions on the basis of finds from burials, which are very few. Therefore, we cannot say anything definite on this point. The only finds from burials suggest that these objects could also have been used by (young) men and small children. Could the small bone spades be some objects belonging to the local elite? The assumption of their cosmetic use would connect them primarily with the wealthier section of the population. This is supported by the finds’ locations: the majority of the spades are found at hill-forts, which were the political centres of their time, and most of them are also mentioned in the Chronicle of Henry the Livonian (HCL 1982). Spades found in the early urban manufacturing centre of Daugmale are especially numerous. The rich hoard of bronze and silver ornaments, also containing four small bone spades, found at Savastvere (Jaanits et al 1982: 363-365, Fig. 249; Luik 1999: 143, Fig. 10, 11) most likely also belonged to a wealthy and influential woman. Both bone spades from the Pada cemetery come from richly furnished graves. In the double grave there was a small penannular brooch by the chest of a child aged six to eight years; the hands were decorated with bracelets of bronze wire; around the neck was a necklace of three sheet pendants coated with silver, a tooth pendant, a bronze bell and glass beads; and at the feet there was an earthernware pot. Still richer was the burial site of a young man buried together with a Such pendants have been found in Latvia, in the richly furnished female burial site of the Scandinavian type in Smukumi (From Viking to Crusader 1992: No 2247), and in the burial ground in Jaunzeme (Tõnisson 1974: Plate 32: 7). Find place Savastvere Savastvere Savastvere Savastvere Lõhavere Lõhavere Lõhavere Lõhavere Lõhavere Lõhavere Mustivere Otepää Rõuge Varbola Varbola Varbola Varbola Kuusalu III Kuusalu III Kuusalu III Kuusalu III Kuusalu III Kuusalu III Lehmja III Lehmja III Lehmja III Pada Pada Rebala Viljandi Viljandi Keava Keava Keava Keava Soontagana Soontagana Soontagana Soontagana Soontagana Soontagana hoard hoard hoard hoard hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort settlement hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort settlement settlement settlement settlement settlement settlement settlement settlement settlement cemetery cemetery settlement settlement settlement hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort Find number AI 3355: 130 AI 3355: 131 AI 3355: 132 AI 3355: 133 AI 3578: 1311 AI 4133: 1355 AI 4133: 3439 AI 4133: 1961 AI 4133: 1961a AI 3578: 313 AI 3993: 503 AI 4036: IIIO 216 AI 4040: 3698 AI 4783: 576 AI 4783: 746 AI 5299: 372 ERM A 484 AI 5043: 389 AI 5043: 444 AI 5043: 463 AI 5043: 528 AI 5043: 536 AI 5043: 562 AI 5310 III: 566 AI 5310 III: 700/ 744 AI 5310 III: 875 AI 5366: CXXI, 4 AI 5366: XCII, 12 AI 5916: 8 VM 10742: 390 VM 10742: 781 TÜ 1026: 412 TÜ 1026: 432 TÜ 1026: 508 TÜ 1026: 503 PäM 2766: 856 PäM 2767: 1130 PäM 1971a: 410 PäM 1971a: 607 PäM 2767: 1343 PäM 1971a: 480 Material long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone rib rib long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone antler? long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone rib long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone rib rib long bone rib long bone Decoration undecorated undecorated undecorated undecorated dots, lines undecorated dots dots dots undecorated fragment undecorated undecorated fragment dots profiled, undecorated openwork undecorated undecorated dots dots, lines dots, lines undecorated undecorated dots openwork, lines undecorated openwork, dots undecorated openwork, dots unfinished dots fragment undecorated openwork, dots openwork openwork openwork fragment blank? blank? BALTICA 6 No 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. ? ? ARCHAELOGIA Ta b l e 1 . S m a l l b o n e s p a d e s f o u n d i n E s t o n i a 121 Small Bone Spades: Material U s e d , P r o c e s s i n g Te c h n o l o g y, and Possible Function Heidi Luik Ülle Tamla 122 Ta b l e 2 . S m a l l b o n e s p a d e s f o u n d i n L a t v i a No 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. Find Place Aizkraukle Aizkraukle Aizkraukle Aizkraukle Aizkraukle Aizkraukle Aizkraukle Aizkraukle Aizkraukle Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Daugmale Mârtiňsala Mârtiňsala Talsi Jersika Cēsis hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort settlement settlement hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort hill-fort Find number A12222: 139 A12222: 171 A 12276: 164 A 12276: 224 A 12301: 43 A 12301: 238 A 12301: 299 A 12345: 7 A 12345: 199 A 9964: 105 A 9964: 172 A 9964: 672 A 9964: 911 A 9964: 1035 A 9964: 1456 A 9964: 2033 A 9964: 2331 A 9964: 2349 A 9964: 2510 A 9964: 3630 A 9964: 4115 A 9964: 4505 A 9964: 4669 A 9964: 6242 A 9964: 6359 A 9964: 6531 A 9964: 6813 A 9964: 6920 A 9964: 7424 A 9964: 7464 A 9964: 7727 A 9964: 7959 A 9964: 8218 A 11970: 61 A 11970: 1752 A 11971: 281 A 11971: 735 A 11971: 1165 A 11971: 1522 A 11971: 1536 A 11971: 2401 A 12150: 441 A 12705: 107 A 12600: 100 A 12695: 127 A 12695: 466 A 12763: 77 A 12763: 100 A 12826: 157 RDM I 2443 RDM I 2445 A 11431: 1938 A 10330: 665 VI 242: 92 Material rib long bone long bone long bone long bone shield of a sturgeon shield of a sturgeon long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone rib long bone long bone long bone rib long bone long bone rib long bone long bone rib shield of a sturgeon long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone rib long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone rib long bone rib long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone long bone Decoration blank (2) undecorated dots undecorated undecorated unfinished dots undecorated profiled, dot dots openwork fragment openwork, dots dots undecorated, hole dots undecorated undecorated fragment undecorated fragment profiled profiled, openwork openwork, dots undecorated undecorated fragment, undecorated fragment, undecorated dots, lines fragment, dots dots, lines dots, lines fragment, undecorated unfinished plaited fragment, dots openwork, dots profiled, dots, lines undecorated undecorated undecorated openwork dots, lines undecorated undecorated undecorated dots unfinished? undecorated openwork, dots profiled, dots undecorated fragment openwork Acknowledgements This article was supported by the Estonian Science Foundation (grant No 4203) and the project “Estonian Language and National Culture”. The authors wish to thank Jānis Ciglis from the Latvian History Museum, Liina Maldre and Lembi Lõugas who identified the bone material, the artist Jana Ratas who made a copy of a small bone spade, the artist Kersti Siitan, and the translator of the article Liis Soon. Abbreviations A – Latvian History Museum, Riga AI – Institute of History, Tallinn ERM – Estonian National Museum, Tartu PäM – Pärnu Museum RDM – Collection of the Dome Church of Riga VI – Latvian Institute of History, Riga VM – Viljandi Museum TÜ – University of Tartu НГМ – State Museum-Reserve of Novgorod References Apals, J. 1998. Vendi un Cēsu Riekstu kalns. In: Senā Rīga. Pētījumi pilsētas arheoloģijā un vēsturē. Rīga, 125–143. Apals, J., Atgāzis, M., Graudonis, J., Loze, I., Mugurēvičs, Ē., Vasks, A., Zagorska, I. 2001. Latvijas senākā vēsture. 9 g. t. pr. Kr.-1200. g. Rīga. Arbman, H. 1940. Birka I. Die Gräber. Tafeln. Stockholm. Averbouh, A. 2001. Methodological Specifics of the TechnoEconomic Analysis of Worked Bone and Antler: Mental Refitting and Methods of Application. In: British Archaeo In analyses of the contents of graves the Danish archaeologist Lotte Hedeager has introduced a method where, in comparing graves, she does not consider every find separately, but counts the number of different artefact types (NAT). By this method, the NAT of the child’s burial site with a bone spade from Pada is 9, and the NAT of a male burial is 12. Such a method of comparison has not been used widely in Estonia. In her latest study, Marika Mägi (Mägi 2002: 115, Fig. 51) presents a calculation for burials in Saaremaa, where the average NAT for the 12th century is circa 10. Thereby, the burials analysed in the stone graves belong to the wealthier section of the population of Saaremaa. BALTICA 6 logical Reports, International Series 937, 2001: Crafting Bone: Skeletal Technologies through Time and Space. Proceedings of the 2nd meeting of the (ICAZ) Worked Bone Research Group, Budapest, 31 August–5 September 1999. Oxford, 111–121. Brīvkalne, E. 1964. Daži amatniecības darinājumi Tērvetes pilskalnā. In: Arheoloģija un etnogrāfija, VI. Rīga, 85– 104. Ciglis, J., Zirne, S., Žeiere, I. 2001. Lībieši senatnē / The Livs in Antiquity. Rīga. From Viking to Crusader. 1992. Scandinavia and Europe 800-1200. Nordic Council of Ministers in collaboration with the Council of Europe. The 22nd Council of Europe Exhibition. Uddevalla. Ģinters, V. 1936. Daugmales pilskalna 1935. g. izrakumi. In: Senātne un Māksla, I. Rīga, 33–56. HCL 1982. Henrici Chronicon Livoniae / Henriku Liivimaa kroonika. E. Tarvel (ed.) Tallinn. Jaanits, L., Laul, S., Lõugas, V., Tõnisson, E. 1982. Eesti esiajalugu. Tallinn. Lang, V., Tvauri, A., Rohtla, M.-L. 2002. The Hill-Fort of Keava. In: Archaeological Field Works in Estonia, 2001. Latvijas pilskalni (Eiropas kultűras mantojuma dienas “Latvijas pilskalni” 1998. gada 12.-13. septembris). 1998. Rîga. Luik, H. 1994. Ühepoolsed luukammid Eestis. In: Stilus, 5. Tallinn, 4–55. Luik, H. 1998. Muinas- ja keskaegsed luukammid Eestis. Muinasaja Teadus, 6. Tallinn. Luik, H. 1999. Kammikujulised luu- ja pronksripatsid Eestis. In: Eesti Arheoloogia Ajakiri / Journal of Estonian Archaeology, 3: 2. Tallinn, 131–159. Luik, H. 2000. Luust uisud Eesti arheoloogilises leiumaterjalis. In: Eesti Arheoloogia Ajakiri / Journal of Estonian Archaeology, 4: 2. Tallinn, 129–150. Luik, H. 2001. Luuesemed Kuusalu Pajulinnast ja asulatest. In: Eesti Arheoloogia Ajakiri / Journal of Estonian Archaeology, 5: 1. Tallinn, 3–36. MacGregor, A. 1985. Bone, Antler, Ivory & Horn. The Technology of Skeletal Materials Since the Roman Period. London. MacGregor, A. 1991. Antler, Bone and Horn. In: J. Blair, N. Ramsey (eds.). English Medieval Industries. London, 355–378. Maldre, L. 2001. Bone Artefacts from Otepää. In: British Archaeological Reports, International Series 937, 2001: Crafting Bone: Skeletal Technologies through Time and Space. Proceedings of the 2nd meeting of the (ICAZ) Worked Bone Research Group, Budapest, 31 August–5 September 1999. Oxford, 19–30. Moora, H., Saadre, O. 1939. Lõhavere linnamägi. In: Muistse Eesti Linnused. 1936.-1938. a. uurimiste tulemused. Tartu, 139–182. Mägi, M. 2002. At the Crossroads of Space and Time. Graves, Changing Society and Ideology on Saaremaa (Ösel), 9th13th centuries AD. CCC papers, 6. Tallinn. Radiņš, A. 2000. Daugavas ceļš un Daugmale. In: Cauri gadsimtiem. Rakstu krājums veltīts Valdemāram Ģinteram (1899-1979). Latvijas Vēstures Muzeja Raksti, 7. Rīga, 101–121. Sjövold, T. 1974. The Iron Age Settlement of Arctic Norway, II. Late Iron Age. Tromsö Museums Skrifter, X: 2. Tromsö-Oslo-Bergen. Spitzers, T. 1999. Sotzialwirtschaftshistorische Aspekte der Spätmittelalterlichen Knochenbearbeitung Anhand von Abfällen der Perlendrechslerei aus Konstanz am Boden- ARCHAELOGIA spear: on each arm he had bracelets twisted out of three wires; on the third finger of each hand there was a ring twisted from several wires; he also had a bronze chain with an openwork pendant round the neck, a penannular brooch and bronze spirals on the chest, a belt with a bronze buckle and plaques, with a tinderbox and a sheathed knife with a bone handle hanging from it. The knife is remarkable for its finely worked bone handle, decorated with an S-pattern and two lozenge-shaped bronze plaques. This handle is evidently not of local origin, but made by a specialised craftsman. 123 Small Bone Spades: Material U s e d , P r o c e s s i n g Te c h n o l o g y, and Possible Function Heidi Luik Ülle Tamla see. In: Beiträge zur Mittelalterarchäologie in Österreich, 15, 241–250. Tamla, Ü. 1992. The Hill-Fort of Varbola-Jaanilinn and the Settlement at Jalase. In: PACT, 37. Estonia: Nature, Man and Cultural Heritage. Proceedings of a Round Table held at Tallinn, April 1991 at the Estonian Academy of Sciences. Rixensart, 145–155. Tamla, Ü., Maldre, L. 2001. Artefacts of Bone, Antler and Canine Teeth among the Archaeological Finds from the Hill-Fort of Varbola. In: British Archaeological Reports, International Series 937, 2001: Crafting Bone: Skeletal Technologies through Time and Space. Proceedings of the 2nd meeting of the (ICAZ) Worked Bone Research Group, Budapest, 31 August–5 September 1999. Oxford, 371–381. Tamla, Ü., Tõnisson, E. 1990. Archäologische Ausgrabungen auf der Wallburg Varbola-Jaanilinn 1988–1989. In: Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. Social Sciences, 4. Tallinn, 423–427. Tõnisson, E. 1974. Die Gauja-liven und ihre Materielle Kultur 11. Jh.-Anfang 13.Jhs. Tallinn. Ulbricht, I. 1978. Die Geweihverarbeitung in Haithabu. In: Die Ausgrabungen in Haithabu, 7. Neumünster. Ulbricht, I. 1984. Die Verarbeitung von Knochen, Geweih und Horn im mittelalterlichen Schleswig. In: Ausgrabungen in Schleswig. Berichte und Studien, 3. Neumünster. Urtâns, J.T. 1994. Latvian Hillforts: The Originality of the Archaeological Reality. Amsterdam. Valk, H. 2000. Archaeological investigations in Late Prehistoric-Early Medieval Viljandi and Pilistvere churchyard. In: Archaeological Field Works in Estonia, 1999. Tallinn, 39–53. Белецкий В.Д. 1991. Древний Псков. Каталог выставки. Ленинград. Колчин Б., Янин В.������������������� ,������������������ Ямщиков С. 1985.� ������ Древний Новгород. Прикладное искусство и археология. Москва. Краут А. ���������������������������� 1980. Спасательные ���������������������� раскопки ���������� поселения ����� позднего железнего века в Куусалу.����� ���� In:� Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. Social Sciences, 4. Tallinn, 382����� –���� 386. C�������� елиранд Ю., ������������� Тыниссон Э. ������������������������� 1978. Предварительные результаты исследования городища Варбола в 19741976 гг. In: Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. Social Sciences, 1. Tallinn, 90–95. Тамла Т. 1983. Селище в Пада. In: Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. Social Sciences, 4. Tallinn, 302–306. Тыниссон Э., Селиранд Ю. 1978. О раскопках городища Варбола. In: Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. Social Sciences, 4. Tallinn, 358–360. Ülle Tamla Institute of History Rüütli 6 10 130 Tallinn, Estonia e-mail: [email protected] Heidi Luik Institute of History Rüütli 6 10 130 Tallinn, Estonia e-mail: [email protected] 124 Received: 2002 K auliniai maži kastuv ė liai : medžiaga , gam y bos technologija, naudojimas HEIDI LUIK, ÜLLE TAMLA Santrauka Maži kauliniai kastuvėliai paplitę visoje Estijos teritorijoje, išskyrus Saaremą. Latvijoje jie iš esmės aptinkami Dauguvos lyvių teritorijoje. Randama šių dirbinių ruošinių ir nebaigtų drožti kastuvėlių, dėl to, kaip manoma, jie yra vietinės gamybos. Kastuvėlius galima sieti su XI–XIII amžių gyvenvietėmis. Vienintelis Vikingų laikotarpiu datuotinas kastuvėlis, pagamintas iš šonkaulio, aptiktas Rougėje (Rõuge). Iš viso Estijoje surasta 39 tokie dirbiniai ir keletas ruošinių (1 lentelė ir 1–11 pav.). Dauguma jų aptikti XI–XIII a. piliakalniuose ir gyvenvietėse. Nė vienas toks dirbinys nebuvo rastas viduramžių gyvenvietėse. Tai rodo, kad tuo metu jie jau nebuvo gaminami. Tik du kastuvėliai aptikti XII–XIII amžiaus pradžios Pados (Pada) kapinyno kapuose. Latvijoje maži kauliniai kastuvėliai (iš viso 54 vienetai) rasti lyvių teritorijoje (2 lentelė, 1, 12–15 pav.). Latvijoje jų aptikta piliakalniuose. Dauguma, apie 40 vienetų, buvo Daugmalės (Daumāle) piliakalnyje, 9 kastuvėliai ir ruošiniai yra iš Aizkrauklės (Aizkrauklė), likusieji – iš kitų vietų. Šie dirbiniai taip pat buvo naudoti ŠV Rusijoje, t. y. Novgorode ir Pskove. Panašių dirbinių rasta ir Šlėzvige. 3 kastuvėliai, padaryti iš šiaurės elnio rago, žinomi iš arktinės Norvegijos, 2 aptikti Birkoje. Daugelis aptariamų dirbinių yra gerai nugludintu paviršiumi ir ornamentuoti iš abiejų pusių. Ornamentas sudarytas iš duobučių arba linijų, kartais kryžių iš duobučių (3:2-4, 6:1, 7:1, 10, 12:2, 3, 5:1, 12:1 pav.). Vienas kastuvėlis iš Daugmalės yra papuoštas tinkliniu ornamentu (13:3 pav.). Yra ir neornamentuotų kastuvėlių (2:2, 4, 5:2, 7:2, 8:2 pav.). Rankenėlės įvairios (2:1, 3, 3:1, 4:1, 2, 6:2, 9:2, 12:4 pav. ). Kai kurių dirbinių rankenėlių galuose išgręžtos skylutės, todėl galima prielaida, kad jie buvo nešiojami ant kaklo (5:1, 11:1, 13:1 pav.). Gerai išlikusių kastuvėlių ilgis yra 7–9 cm, jų ašmenų plotis 1,6–2,5 cm. Pagaminti iš ilgųjų gyvūnų kaulų, dažniausiai iš arklių ir galvijų čiurnų kaulų. Mažesnieji drožti iš šonkaulių. Latvijoje šie dirbiniai taip pat dažniausiai gaminti iš ilgųjų kaulų. Šonkauliai naudoti retai (2 lent.). Labai retai maži kauliniai kastuvėliai daryti iš eršketo (Acipenser sturio) žvynų (18 pav.). Vienas Istorijos instituto konservatorius J. Ratas pagamino vieno iš kastuvėlių kopiją. Darbas truko 25 valandas. Žinoma, įgudę meistrai tokį dirbinį pagamindavo greičiau. BALTICA 6 Kokie įrankiai buvo naudojami kaulams apdirbti, geriausiai galima pamatyti tyrinėjant dirbinių nuolaužas ir nebaigtus gaminti daiktus. Užbaigti dirbiniai yra kruopščiai nupoliruoti ir jų paviršiuje įrankių paliktų pėdsakų nematyti. Išilginiam kaulo perskėlimui naudoti kirvis, kaltas ir kūjelis. Pagrindinis įrankis kauliniams kastuvėliams gaminti, be abejonės, buvo peilis. Kartais naudotos ir dildės. Jų palikti pėdsakai matyti ant dirbinių paviršių (5:2 pav.). Galutiniam daikto poliravimui naudoti ir smėlis, oda, pelenai bei kreida. ARCHAELOGIA iš jų nebaigtas gaminti (15 pav.). Tai įrodo, kad jie taip pat gaminti vietoje. Kam buvo naudojami maži kauliniai kastuvėliai? Dažnai jie skiriami kabučiams, tačiau tik dalis galėjo turėti tokią paskirtį. Greičiausiai jie buvo skirti kosmetikos ar tualeto reikmenims, pavyzdžiui, pleiskanoms pašalinti, taip pat galėjo būti naudojami ir balzamui ant odos tepti. Kas juos naudojo? Apie tai, kokios lyties ir amžiaus gyventojai kastuvėlius naudojo, galima spręsti iš kapuose rastų šių dirbinių. Tačiau kapuose jų rasta nedaug. Tai jaunų vyrų ir mažų vaikų kapai. Daugiausia kaulinių kastuvėlių aptikta piliakalnių kultūriniuose sluoksniuose, kurie tuo metu buvo politiniai regionų centrai. Daugelis jų minimi Henriko Latvio Livonijos kronikoje. Turtingas žalvarinių ir sidabrinių daiktų lobis su 4 kauliniais kastuvėliais, aptiktas Savastverėje (Savastvarė), priklausė turtingai moteriai. Taip pat dviejuose turtinguose kapuose kastuvėliai rasti ir Pados kapinyne. Maži kauliniai kastuvėliai buvo paplitę žemyninėje Estijoje ir Dauguvos lyvių teritorijoje Latvijoje. Ruošiniai ir nebaigti gaminti tokie dirbiniai rodo jų vietinę kilmę. Dar negalima kalbėti apie tai, kad juos gaminti specializavosi atskiri meistrai. To daryti neleidžia dabar turima šaltinių bazė. Vertė Vytautas Kazakevičius 125 AUDRONĖ BLIUJIENĖ Some Notes on Curonian Wo m e n ’s B e a d S e t s w i t h B r o n z e Spacer Plates in their Headbands, Headdresses Made of C l o t h a n d U n a c c o u n t a b l e Wa r e d u r i n g t h e Vi k i n g A g e a n d E a r l y M e d i e v a l Ti m e s S o me N o tes o n C u r o n i an W o men ’ s B ea d S ets w i th B r o n z e S pace r P l ates i n the i r H ea d ban d s , H ea d d r esses M a d e o f C l o th an d U nacc o untab l e Wa r e d u r i n g the V i k i n g A g e an d E a r ly M e d i eva l T i mes AudronĖ BliujienĖ Abstract Curonian women’s bead sets with bronze spacer plates or pectoral ornaments, headbands, headdresses made of cloth, caps adorned with metal spirals and unaccountable ware from the Viking Age and early medieval times in a lot of cases are not correctly interpreted. Some of the Curonian ornaments investigated in this article have good parallels in Livonian, Gotlandic and Scandinavian material and material from Finland. At the same time, bead sets with spacer plates both in Gotland and in Curonia were an outcome of the rivalry between Western Europe and the Byzantine Empire in designing symbols of power and prestige. Key words: bead set, spacer plate, pectoral ornament, headband, headdress, unaccountable ware. S o m e n o t e s o n C u r o n i a n w o m e n ’s headdress It seems that Curonian culture is one of the best known of its kind researched by scholars. However, some aspects of Curonian culture based on inaccurate assumptions are interpreted wrongly. This has happened with Curonian headdresses, to which have been attributed even bead sets composed of bronze spacer plates and monochromic and multicoloured glass and bronze beads. The same has happened with unknown designed cloth headdresses and ware with clasps. The problem occurred because different research classifies identical objects as different artefacts. Another part of this problem developed out of objective conditions, such as unpublished material of Curonian cemeteries, the poor survival of artefacts even during excavations, or the fragmentation of artefacts in the storage of museums. Furthermore, littoral soil creates bad conditions for the preservation of all sorts of organic material (bone, cloth, leather). These aspects do not promote the positive analysis of material. The appearance and development of the custom of cremation also aggravates research into these ornaments. Similarly, without quoting simultaneous analogies from the Eastern Baltic region, Scandinavia, Gotland, Finland and other countries, the wrong conclusions about some culture features of Curonian culture are reached. 126 Metal clasps of the Curonians’ prede c e s s o r s i n We s t e r n L i t h u a n i a n S t o n e Circle Grave Culture For centuries, both married women and young girls of Baltic tribes covered their hair. Women wore hemispherical caps in the Western Lithuanian Stone Circle Grave Culture, the Nemunas delta region and central Lithuania from the end of the second century till the middle of the fourth century (phase B2/C1–C3) (Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė 1959: 32–33, Figs. 2–3; Jovaiša 1992: 97; Kačkutė 1995: 14). These caps were fastened with cloth with tiny bronze bobbles with legs, of a specific design. At the same time, headbands designed with tiny bronze bobbles fastened by leather or cloth were common to women’s garments of Western Lithuanian Stone Circle Grave Culture (Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė 1959: 45–46, Fig. 19; Kačkutė 1995: 15–18). Some such headbands were adorned with double flat spirals. To the headbands were attributed artefacts made from four to seven leather strips, with bronze staples and joined to two bronze clasps (Fig. 1: 1) (Bezzenberger 1892: 153, 160–161, Tafel: VIII: 15; Šturms 1942; Stankus 1995: 39–40, Fig. 33; Banytė-Rowell 2001: Fig. 25). Most of the headbands with clasps are too fragmented, and it is impossible to reconstruct the ornament or even to describe them as headbands (Stankus 1995: Fig. 33). It should be mentioned that headbands with clasps are concentrated between the left bank of the middle reaches of the River Minija and the vicinity BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 1. Unaccountable ware: 1 Baitai cemetery, grave 37; 2 Palanga, grave 20; 3 Palanga, grave 108; 4 Laiviai, stray find (LNM AR 2: 31–32); 5 Palanga, grave 90; 6 Laiviai, grave 15; 7 Palanga, grave 100 (1–5 bronze, leather, birch bark; 6 bronze, leather, birch bark, silver plate; 7 bronze, leather, birch bark, cloth; 1 - after Banytė-Rowell, 2001, Fig. 25; 2–7 LNM AR. Drawings by Audronė Ruzienė). 127 AUDRONĖ BLIUJIENĖ Some Notes on Curonian Wo m e n ’s B e a d S e t s w i t h B r o n z e Spacer Plates in their Headbands, Headdresses Made of C l o t h a n d U n a c c o u n t a b l e Wa r e d u r i n g t h e Vi k i n g A g e a n d E a r l y M e d i e v a l Ti m e s Fig. 2. Aukštkiemiai (formerly Oberhof, Klaipėda district), grave 202:1–4, 5 armlet, and grave 388:6–7 (photograph from VDKM archive, no scale) of Klaipėda. An exception to this distribution is only the headband found at Mazkatuži (Liepāja district, Latvia). However, bronze clasps produced from two rectangular bronze plates similar to clasps are attributed as headbands, belts, amrings and garment clasps at the same time (Bezzenberger 1892: 153, 160–161, Tafel: VIII: 15; Stankus 1995: 63, Fig. 55: 13–14). To the specific armlet might be ascribed ornaments made from two or four leather strips and embraced with bronze staples, and in the front part joined with a round clasp similar to the decoration of box-shaped neck-rings (Fig. 2:5). Such ornaments have been found only at Lazdininkai (Kalnalaukis, grave 81/2003) and Aukštkiemiai (formerly Oberhof, Klaipėda district, grave 202) (Butkus, Kanarskas 2005: 118–119; MVF archive; photograph of Aukštkiemiai cemetery, graves 202 and 388, from VDKM archive). The armlet from Aukštkiemiai has not survived, and the headband (?) from Lazdininkai (Kalnalaukis) was found to have disintegrated. Therefore, it is difficult to judge their real purpose. It might be that all the artefacts mentioned above were pieces of headbands which women of the Western Baitai (Klaipėda district, grave 37), Bandužiai (Klaipėda district, in graves 63 and 85 only rectangular bronze clasps were found), Mazkatuži (Liepāja district, grave 5), Šernai (Klaipėda district, graves 24 and 72). Artefacts found in the Šernai cemetery by Adalbert Bezzenberger are ascribed as parts of belt clasps (grave 24) or details of a headband (grave 72) (Bezzenberger 1892: 153, 160–161, Tafel: VIII: 15). 128 Lithuanian Stone Circle Grave Culture wore from the end of the second century till the middle of the fourth century (phases B1/C2–C3). However, for the moment there is not enough data to argue that headbands with rectangular clasps in a certain way came into the Curonian culture of the seventh to ninth centuries (Figs. 1: 2–7; 3: 2). Bead sets with bronze spacer plates or headbands of Curonian women? Several Curonian women’s bead sets with bronze spacer plates are attributed as headbands, while other ornaments strung with the same accessories (spacer plates and different sorts of beads), after more than 50 years of intensive investigations into Curonian culture, are considered to be pectoral ornaments (Figs. 4–6) (Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė 1959: 48–49; 1986: 146–147; 1997: 39–40, Fig. 31; Kuncienė 1981: 78; Bliujienė 2001: 235–242, Figs. 2–4). Therefore, the problem of confusing the same ornament originates from several different reasons. Firstly, ornaments with spacer plates and different beads appeared in Curonia during the Late Viking Age, when the Curonians developed cremation burial customs. Only a few ornaments strung with bronze spacer plates and beads have been found in late inhumation graves. In these cases, ornaments strung with bronze spacer plates and different beads were found on the breast or on the nape of the deceased women (Valatka 1956; 2004: 56–59; LAB 1961: Fig. BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 3. Lazdininkai cemetery (Kalnalaukis, Kretinga district) inhumation woman’s grave 72/2000 (1 clay; 2 bronze, leather, birch bark; 3 silver, bronze, silver plate, blue glass; 4 bronze, iron, silver plate, blue glass; 5 silver; 6 bronze, silver plate, blue glass; 7 bronze, birch bark; 8 amber; 9 iron; drawing by Virgilijus Truklickas) 129 AUDRONĖ BLIUJIENĖ Some Notes on Curonian Wo m e n ’s B e a d S e t s w i t h B r o n z e Spacer Plates in their Headbands, Headdresses Made of C l o t h a n d U n a c c o u n t a b l e Wa r e d u r i n g t h e Vi k i n g A g e a n d E a r l y M e d i e v a l Ti m e s Fig. 4. Pectoral ornament or bead set from Bandužiai cemetery, cremation burial 43a (MLIM, bronze, glass; photograph by Mindaugas Brazauskas) 270; LLM 1958: Fig. 415). However, it is difficult to establish exactly how such ornaments were located on the bodies of deceased women even in inhumation graves, because in the coastal cemeteries skeletons and other organic materials have disappeared. Most of the bead sets are found in a disintegrated state. Therefore, the position of the artefact in the grave provides few clues in discussing the original placement of the ornaments. Consequently, at Siraičiai grave 7(18) and Gintališkė grave 5 fashionable bead sets or pectoral ornaments strung with bronze spacer plates and different beads were found. A hemispherical cap adorned with bronze spirals and fixed to the deceased woman’s hair with two different headdress pins and a fashionable bead set with seven bronze spacer plates were found at the Siraičiai cemetery in the inhumation grave 7(18). This is obvious from the report of the researcher Vitas Valatka (Valatka 1956; 2004: 56–59). A similar pectoral ornament was found at the Bandužiai cemetery in a woman’s cremation burial 43A (Fig. 4). The bead set was found on the nape of the deceased woman at Siraičiai. This ornament was 23 centimetres in length and has seven bronze spacer plates 5.8 centimetres wide. Each of the bronze spacer plates has 12 small holes; a bronze wire was threaded through these holes, and about five hundred small black and white glass beads (with a diameter of 0.4 centimetres) were strung on the bronze wire (Valatka 1956; 2004: 56–59). 130 One more fashionable bead set or pectoral ornament and hemispherical cap adorned with bronze spirals were found in the richly equipped female (girl’s) grave 5 at the Gintališkė cemetery (Plungė district). The bead set was found on the breast of the deceased person in an extended position (Baleniūnas 1940: 14–17; LAB 1961: Fig. 270; LLM 1958: Fig. 415). This fashionable pectoral ornament was strung from two rectangular-shaped bronze spacer plates, 42 blue, whitish and yellow glass beads and bronze spirals. All the parts of this bead set were strung in five rows (Baleniūnas 1940: 14–17). A bronze neck ring and necklace strung with 35 glass and bronze beads were found on the deceased girl’s neck (Baleniūnas 1940: 14; LLM 1958: Figs. 362, 415). There was a reason to put fashionable pectoral jewellery on the girl’s breast. The importance of the bead set was emphasised in this act at the same time. Vladas Nagevičius has written about the “garland of bronze spirals” from the first Pryšmančiai cemetery (Nagevičius 1935: 62). However, he did not indicate the circumstances of the finding of this artefact, and just mentioned that a “garland of bronze spirals” was found during his previous excavations in 1909, and that this item is similar to the artefact from the male grave 65 (Nagevičius 1935: 51, 84, Tables I: 4, VII: 1). It might be that the cap adorned with ten rows of spirals was found in the male inhumation grave 65. On the other hand, it might be that an elaborate but typical Curonian men’s belt set with pendants was enclosed in this grave beside the deceased man’s head (Nagevičius 1935: 26–27, 61, tab. VII: 1). The artefact written about by Nagevičius in 1958 was somehow reconstructed as a female “headband” (LLM 1958: 332, Figs. 359–360). This reconstruction of a “headband” or “garland of bronze spirals” has no clasp or other possibility to be fastened to the hair, cap or cloth headdress, because all the parts of it are not joined into one piece. A few bead sets or ornaments with bronze spacer plates were found in “specific graves” and perhaps collective cremations, or are known as a stray finds (Lekemė village, Plungė district) (Butėnienė 1959: 164; VolkaitėKulikauskienė 1959: 48–49, Fig. 21; Valatka 2004: 73). This artefact is in the LNM (LNM AR 3: 59). The pectoral ornament came to the Alka Museum in Telšiai from the private collection of Lapinskas (from Lekemė village). BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 5. Bronze spacer plates of Curonian bead sets: 1–3 Pryšmančiai I: KM without inventory numbers; 4 Klaišiai (Truikiai), stray find; 5 Lazdininkai (Kalnalaukis), cremation burial 179/1976 (1–2, 4–5 bronze; 3 bronze covered by tin; 1–3, 5 drawings by Virgilijus Truklickas, 4 after Dakanis, 1983) As mentioned above, only a few intact well-preserved examples of bead sets with bronze spacer plates are known in the area inhabited by the Curonians. However, even these bead sets with bronze spacer plates with clear enough finding circumstances provoked the rise of a myth about Curonian “headbands” (VolkaitėKulikauskienė 1959: 48–49, Fig. 21; 1970: 123–128; 1987: 189, Fig. 30, 2001: 128–130). The residual part of the Curonian bead sets with bronze spacer plates or just the constituent parts of spacer plates were found in cremation graves of the tenth to the 12th centuries, or are known as stray finds (Figs. 4–6). Bead sets or pectoral ornaments are found in small piles together with other grave goods (Bandužiai, Klaipėda district, grave 43a). Sometimes broken, burned, but mostly unburned grave goods are in disorder, scattered all over the grave pit in Curonian cremation burials (Girkaliai, grave 24; Kretinga, graves 6 and 34; Palanga, grave 198; Slengiai, graves 23 and 25). Sometimes bronze spacer plates as additional grave goods are found in birch bark boxes (Kiauleikiai, grave 10/1985) (Šimėnas 1984). Therefore, it is possible to make a reconstruction of the set as a fashionable pec- 131 AUDRONĖ BLIUJIENĖ Some Notes on Curonian Wo m e n ’s B e a d S e t s w i t h B r o n z e Spacer Plates in their Headbands, Headdresses Made of C l o t h a n d U n a c c o u n t a b l e Wa r e d u r i n g t h e Vi k i n g A g e a n d E a r l y M e d i e v a l Ti m e s Fig. 6. Bead set and dress pins from the Palanga cemetery, cremation burial 198 (reconstruction) (bronze, glass, opaque past; drawing by Audronė Ruzienė; reconstruction Audronė Bliujienė) toral ornament, actually applying to the cremation and inhumation burial context, and analogous with Scandinavia, Gotland, Finland and other regions of the eastern Baltic zone (Fig. 7). There is insufficient data to support the assumption that Curonian women wore headbands. Judging from the distribution of complete artefacts and single spacer plates, fashionable pectoral jewellery with bronze spacer plates, multicoloured glass and bronze beads, as well as bronze spirals, were popular enough ornaments in southern Curonian lands. Curonian bead sets with bronze spacer plate distribution and chronology Bead sets with bronze spacer plates or fashionable pectoral ornaments have been found in burials with elaborated grave goods. These pectoral ornaments are known only from the Curonian territory around Klaipėda in the south to Talsi in the north. Women of the other Bandužiai cremation burial 43a; Ėgliškiai-Anduliai (former Anduln, Kretinga district, stray finds; MVF I a 829k, 2377, 2378, 2949, 3506), Genčai the 1st cemetery (Kretinga district; stray find LNM AR 694: 1899), Gintališkė (Plungë district; inhumation grave 5), Girkaliai (Klaipėda district; cremation burials 17, 23 and stray find LMIM inv. no. 4412), Kiauleikiai (stray find LNM AR 4: 391), Klaišiai–Truikiniai (Skuodas district; stray find), Kretinga (cremation burials 6 and 34), Laiviai (Kretinga district; graves 43 and 198), Lazdininkai (Kalnalaukis) Kretinga district; graves 61, 73, 126 and 179), Lekemė (Plungė district; stray find TAM inv. 4491); Palanga (cremation burials 67, 198, 271 and stray finds LNM AR 396: 2762, 2764, 2839), Pryšmančiai the 1st cemetery (Kretinga district; KM stray finds without inv. no.), Ramučiai (Klaipėda district; grave 213), Siraičiai (Telšiai district; inhumation grave 7 (18)) and Slengiai (Klaipėda district; cremation burials 23 and 25) cemeteries, Vilkumuiža Lake (Talsi region Latvia; LVM PV 12380, 12 386). 132 Baltic tribes did not have such fashionable pectoral ornaments designed from glass or bronze beads, bronze spirals and bronze spacer plates. Curonian women probably wore bead sets from the end of the ninth century, but most finds probably belong to between the tenth and 11th centuries (LAB 1961: 454–455; Bliujienė 2001: 240). It might be that bead sets with bronze spacer plates were used into the 12th century and the first half of the 13th century, as they are combined with penannular brooches with star-shaped terminals and bracelets with animal terminals in grave complexes (Vaitkunskienė 1978: 54–55, 97–101, maps 34: 4; 58). The design of Curonian bead sets with bronze spacer plates An exceptional element of Curonian bead sets and pectoral ornaments are bronze spacers (Figs. 4–6). Bead sets contain from two to ten ornamented spacer plates (Figs. 4; 6). Bronze spacer plates are of two types: “T” shaped (Fig. 5: 3, 5; 5) and rectangular shaped (Fig. 5: 1–2, 4; 4). The length of both spacer types of plates is usually five to seven centimetres, and the width only 0.5 to 0.8 centimetres. Just a few spacer plates are ten centimetres or 3.2 to 3.5 centimetres in length (Fig. 5: 2, 4). It should be pointed out that most Curonian spacer plates are straight. Curonian spacer plates are exclusively decorated in geometrical patterns (Figs. 4–5). A layer of white metal covers some of the spacer plates. The layer of white metal in most cases is tin (Bliujienė 2001: 240). In the third group of Curonian bead sets with spacer plates are necklaces of which the construction is not clear, and which in most cases are known only as separate bronze spacer plates (Fig. 5). Fig. 7. Round openwork silver pendant from Aska, Hagebyhöga in Östergötland (Sweden), c 800. Diameter 3 cm, enlarged (after B. Arrhenius, 2001, Fig. 5) Fashionable Curonian bead sets with spacer plates had to cover a woman’s breast as a pectoral ornament (Figs. 4, 6). In most cases, it is impossible to say how pectoral ornaments were terminated and how they were fastened to the woman’s garment. Where leather strips and spirals terminated some of the bead sets, probably the leather strips were tied on to the nape of the woman’s neck. It might be that most of the pectoral ornaments in which fine bronze wire was used as the thread terminated in eyeholes directly fastened into the garment cloth (Bandužiai, burial 43a). Two small bronze pins with spiral heads were found at Palanga cremation burial 198. It might be that pins untypical of the Curonians fastened the pectoral ornament to the garment (Fig. 6). The typology of Curonian bead sets with bronze spacer plates Curonian bead sets with bronze spacer plates are strung in a different ways. It is possible to divide them into three groups. To the first group belong bead sets which have six to ten bronze spacer plates and small whitish, black, blue glass beads or beads of glass paste. Most beads are ball or barrel shaped, only 0.4 to 0.6 centimetres in diameter. These small beads were strung on fine bronze wire using bronze spacer plates. Pectoral ornaments of this group have 330 to 350, or even 500, small glass beads. Only three bead sets belongs to the first group (Bandužiai, grave 43a, Siraičiai, grave 7(18) and a stray find from the village of Lekemė (Fig. 4). BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Bead sets with two bronze spacer plates with different amounts of monochrome and multicoloured glass and bronze beads, as well as spirals, might be ascribed to the second group. Amber beads are not included in Curonian bead sets with bronze spacer plates or pectoral ornaments, except grave 34 at the Kretinga cemetery. Sets of the second group are strung in such a way that the beads are in the centre of the ornament. These sets ended with bronze spirals. Such necklaces have been found at Gintališkė (grave 5), Girkaliai (grave 24) and Palanga (grave 198) cemeteries (Fig. 6). Curonian bead sets with bronze spacer plates and parallels with the eastern Baltic region and Scandinavia Similar bronze spacer plates are known from the territories inhabited by the Livonians (Daugmale, Martinsala, Rauši, Krimulda; Lauskola–Salaspils, Rīga district) from cemeteries from the middle of the tenth to the middle of the 11th centuries, or even the middle of the 12th century (Thunmark-Nylén 1992: 109–11; Les Vikings 1993: 294). The bronze spacer plates found in Latvia are a bit bent and decorated with simple geometrical designs imitating impressed foil. Spacer plates similar to the Curonian ones have been found in Gruobina, Latvia (Nerman 1958: Tafel 2: 14, 19: 105). Necklaces with bronze “T” shaped spacer plates are found in Finland at the Luistari cemetery in Eura (grave 1260) and at the Anivehmaanmäki cemetery (Ranta 1999: 72, Fig. 1). The spacer plates found in Finland are very similar to the Curonian ones as well. At the Luistari cemetery grave 1260, bead sets were found which are very similar to Curonian pectoral ornaments with spacer plates of the second group. The bead sets found in Finland belong to the Middle and the Late Viking Age (Ranta 1999: 72). Bead sets with “T” shaped bronze spacer plates are characteristic of Gotland in the Vendel Period (750– 800) (Nerman 1969: Tafel 285: 2263–2269). Such spacer plates are known from the mainland of Scandinavia. Several bead sets with spacer plates have been found in Zealand and Bornholm (Kyndby, Nørre Sandegård). These pectoral ornaments are terminated with openwork spacer plates (Gaimster 1998: Fig. 165: 2– 3). Viking Age mainlanders ceased using bead spacers, but Gotland women went on using them and developed them into large and richly decorated pectoral ornaments 133 AUDRONĖ BLIUJIENĖ Some Notes on Curonian Wo m e n ’s B e a d S e t s w i t h B r o n z e Spacer Plates in their Headbands, Headdresses Made of C l o t h a n d U n a c c o u n t a b l e Wa r e d u r i n g t h e Vi k i n g A g e a n d E a r l y M e d i e v a l Ti m e s 134 (Thunmark-Nylén 2000: 176). Gotlandic and Curonian bead sets are composed of the same elements: straight spacer plates, and monochrome and multicoloured glass beads (Thunmark-Nylén 1995: Abb. 47, 173b: 1, 179b: 8, 192b: 15, 241: 6; 1998: Tafel 161: 14). The bead sets of Gotland women were completed with two spacer plates. However, Gotlandic bead sets are more elaborate, they were strung with opaque paste, tinted glass, limestone and rock crystal beads, and often enough these pectoral ornaments were adorned with bracteates, fish head and other pendants. Several spacer plates are decorated in Scandinavian styles of the Viking Period (Thunmark-Nylén 1995: Abb. 49a: 5, 166b: 13, 207b: 16; 1998: Tafel 161: 1–14). The decoration of Curonian spacer plates is less sophisticated, because Baltic parts of pectoral ornaments were decorated only with geometrical patterns (Figs. 4–6). The latest bead sets on Gotland came from graves from the second half of the tenth century (Thunmark-Nylén 1992: 111–112). depicted on a round openwork silver pendant from Aska, Hagebyhöga in Östergötland (Sweden). This pendant was found in the very rich grave of the socalled “Lady of Aska” (Fig. 7). The round openwork cast pendant gives a remarkably detailed picture of a woman with clasped hands, a dress with horizontal stripes on its lower part, and a mantle hanging down on each side. The hemispherical cap of the “Lady of Aska” might be similar to Curonian women’s caps. The type of fibula and bead set depicted on the pendant went out of fashion at the beginning of the Viking Age, or even earlier, in all of Scandinavia except Gotland. The funeral of the “Lady of Aska” took place in the middle of the tenth century. In the grave a lot of perhaps inherited jewellery (berlok-shaped, lozengeshaped and round silver pendants) was found. It might be that on the round openwork pendant from Aska a pregnant goddess Freyja is depicted (Arrhenius 2001: 306–307, Fig. 5). Bead sets with spacer plates spread across the south Curonian territory in the tenth and 11th centuries. During this period, the Curonians held the most comprehensive relationship with Gotland. These circumstances allow us to suggest that Gotlandic pectoral ornaments of the Late Viking Age inspired Curonian bead sets. Also, it should be mentioned that local jewellers produced Curonian bead sets with bronze spacer plates. Monochrome and multicoloured glass beads were imported by Curonia from the east (Syria and Byzantine), from Kievan Russia and the western Slavic lands. Glass producing centres were in Wolin (Poland) (Kuncienė 1981: 86–87). Glass beads were imported from the continent by Scandinavia or produced on the basis of imported raw material at the Viking centres such as Hedeby, and perhaps Ribe and Birka (Calmer 1977: 165). Some of the glass beads might have come from Western Europe through Scandinavia (Мугуревич 1965: 76). It is possible that notched blue glass beads were produced in the Baltic lands (Moora 1938: 365; Kuncienė 1981: 86). C u r o n i a n w o m e n ’s c a p s a n d o t h e r headdresses made of cloth However, bead sets with spacer plates, both in Gotland and in Curonia, were an outcome of the rivalry between Western Europe and the Byzantine Empire in designing symbols of power and prestige. Elaborate bead sets or pectoral ornaments appeared under Byzantine influence, and were adapted to adorn the costumes of wealthy German ladies on the continent (Gaimster 1998: 242–243). Elaborate pectoral jewellery was worn by Frankish queens, as depicted on the shroud of Queen Balthilde (d. circa 680). It is a great pity that in Baltic prehistoric applied art, no figurative styles formed. Therefore, parallels with Scandinavia are useful. Women wearing a huge garnet brooch and a fashionable pectoral ornament with spacer plates are The iconography of the pendant of the “Lady of Aska” is a useful parallel for making a comparison with Curonian archaeological material. The “Lady of Aska” pendant is a good indication that Curonian women wore similar hemispherical caps. Curonian women also used to wear some sort of kerchiefs and other cloth headdresses of an indistinct shape (Genčai, the first cemetery, inhumation grave 21) (Tautavičius 1970: 112; 1996: 173). The inference of such a conclusion is possible because sometimes some patches of cloth are found beside the deceased’s heads. Shreds of caps adorned with spirals were found in several southern Curonian cemeteries in women’s inhumation graves. Similar caps adorned with bronze spirals have been found in Curonian men’s graves as well (Pryšmančiai, the first cemetery, inhumation grave 65) (Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė 1997: Fig. 52). The caps were adorned with rows of bronze spirals attached in a special order to a cap at the front of the headdress. Sometimes bronze spirals terminated with bronze chains, and one or two amber beads terminated these bronze chains (Palanga, graves 11, 104, 119 and 142) (Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė 1964: 49, Fig. 10). Specially designed bronze pins or crossbow brooches decorated Genčai, the 1st cemetery, Kretinga district, inhumation graves 11, 36, 46, 60, 67, 76, 93, 95, 171 and 230; Gintališkė, Plungė district, inhumation graves 5, 7, 14 and 20; Kiauleikiai, Kretinga district, inhumation grave 1/1984; Palanga, inhumation graves 11, 104, 114c, 119, 142 and 144; Siraičiai, Telšiai district, inhumation grave 7(18). BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 8. Curonian women’s headdress fasteners: 1, 3 Genčai 1st cemetery, grave 93; 2 Gintališkė, stray find; 4 Palanga, grave 100; 5 Genčai 1st cemetery, grave 130 (1, 3, 5 bronze, covered with white metal plates, blue glass; 2 bronze, blue glass, 4 bronze covered with white metal, rivets; drawings by Virgilijus Truklickas) 135 AUDRONĖ BLIUJIENĖ Some Notes on Curonian Wo m e n ’s B e a d S e t s w i t h B r o n z e Spacer Plates in their Headbands, Headdresses Made of C l o t h a n d U n a c c o u n t a b l e Wa r e d u r i n g t h e Vi k i n g A g e a n d E a r l y M e d i e v a l Ti m e s with ringlets fastened the caps to the hair (Figs. 3: 3; 8). Frequently, one or even two headdress pins have been found close to the deceased women’s heads in graves from the eighth to the 12th centuries (Kuncienė 1978: 9–10, map. 4; Tautavičius 1996: 172–173). Such pins have been found on the right side of women’s heads as mentioned by a couple of researchers (VolkaitėKulikauskienė 1997: 40). C u r o n i a n w o m e n ’s w i m p l e (nuometas): myth or reality? In Lithuanian historiography the opinion dominates that Curonian headdresses were very similar to the Lithuanian “wimple” (nuometas) during the Viking Age and early medieval times (Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė 1964: 41–52; 1970:123–126, Fig. 14–15; 1997: 40–43, Fig. 33; Vaitkunskienė 1981: 22–23, Fig. 6; Bliujienė 1995: 42, Fig. 2; 1997: Fig. 1: 2; 1999: Table 9; Žulkus 2005: Fig. 54). Moreover, Curonian women’s “headbands” are linked with a young girl’s headdresses; wimples are attributed to Curonian women’s headdress (Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė, 1964: 46–50, Fig. 6, 8, 10; 1970: 126; 1986: 156–168; 2001: 128–130). However, there is no indication that Curonian women wore metal headbands or wimples made from cloth during the Viking period and early Viking times. Wimples have been reconstructed based on the finds in Palanga cemetery graves 30, 70, 147 and Siraičiai cemetery grave 7(18) (Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė 1964: 41–52; 1970: 123–126; 1997: 40–42). However, the grave plans and the location of the grave goods in the mentioned burials do not support such conclusions. There is no information for the reconstruction of a headdress based on the material mentioned. The report, plans and archaeological material of excavations at Palanga cemetery do not give any grounds for the reconstruction of wimples (Tautavičius 1962; 1970: 113–114). In grave 147 at Palanga cemetery, near the deceased woman’s head, two bronze pins were found, and in the space beside the head 221 small blue glass beads were located. There is no information to see these beads as “white linen wimple” (detailing Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė 1970: 123, Fig. 15; 1997: 40). Glass beads are typical additional Curonian grave goods, mostly found over the head or close to the head of the deceased, sometimes in boxes of birch bark. There is no information about white linen cloth woven with two heddles in the graves mentioned above of the Palanga cemetery (Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė 1997: 40–41). There is no data for a wimple’s reconstruction Genčai, the 1st cemetery, inhumation graves 11, 46, 60, 76, 93 and 171; Kiauleikiai, inhumation grave 1/1998; Palanga, inhumation graves 114c, 119 and 142. Information from Elvyra Pečeliūnaitė-Bazienė, a research 136 in the other graves of the Palanga cemetery, or in the other Curonian burial grounds of the Viking period and early medieval times. It might be that the headdress of Curonian women was similar to that worn by other European women of the period. European women’s headdresses made of a piece of cloth are well enough known from manuscripts, illuminations, effigies in stone or wood and other sources (Baltrušaitis 1948: 77–78; Hook, Macgregor 1997: 50– 52, Fig. 67). However, European women’s headdress is not the same as wimples, as we know from Lithuanian archaeological literature (Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė1964: 41–52; 1970:123–126, Fig. 14–15; 1997: 40–43, Fig. 33; Vaitkunskienė 1981: 22–23, Fig. 6; Bliujienė 1995: 42, Fig. 2; 1997: Fig. 1: 2; 1999: Table 9; Žulkus 2005: Fig. 54). Hans Adelhauser and Cesare Vecello were the first to publish a depiction of garments and Gardin residents at the end of the 16th century (Reklaitis 1999a: 171–180). Women from the Grand Duchy of Lithuania are depicted with caps, or their heads are wound with a round piece of cloth in the shape of a turban in the publications of the authors mentioned (Reklaitis 1999 a: Fig. 3, 5, 9, 11). The turban was introduced to the garments of Europeans through the adventures in Palestine in the 11th century (Guzevičiūtė 1995: 40). In the European fashion, a turban-like headdress was called a barbette, and was in use from the 12th to the 15th century (Guzevičiūtė 1995: 40–44). Wimples (nuometas) are mentioned in written sources only from the 16th and the 17th centuries (LEB 1964: 363–365; Bernotienė 1974: VI). Instead of a wimple, married women wore a sort of headdress of white linen several metres long, which was of eastern origin, but also adopted in Europe in the 19th century (Baltrušaitis 1948: 77–78). There is no information about wimples in peasants’ garments from ancient Prussia in the 17th to 19th centuries (Reklaitis 1999b: 323–340). Ethnographic information about women’s headdresses made of cloth (linik, linkainis, nâmatas, namiotka, namitka, ubrus) from Belarus, Estonia, Latvia and Ukraine is very late and comes only from the 17th century and even the second half of the 18th century (Калашникова 1986: 112–132; Лаул 1986: 190–207; Зарина 1986: 172–189). It should be emphasised that in Lithuania wimples were worn only in the eastern part. These facts are quite well documented by ethnographic sources. There is only er of archaeological textiles, to whom I owe my sincere gratitude. Information from Dalia Bernotaitė, curator of the textiles collection at the LDM, to whom I owe my thanks for sharing useful information. U n a c c o u n t a b l e w a r e f r o m w o m e n ’s graves in coastal cemeteries of the seventh to ninth centuries Artefacts of an unknown purpose or unaccountable ware are found around deceased women’s heads10 in the southern Curonian lands (Fig. 9). The unaccountable ware consists of several leather strips, double rectangular bronze plates with clasps and birch bark (Figs. 1: 2; 3: 2). The leather strips, of 0.5 centimetres in width, fully covered with bronze staples, are the main part of this item. Both ends of each leather strip are joined to bronze rectangular double plates (Figs. 1: 2; 3: 2). The bronze plates are covered with a layer of white metal or plate. These plates are adorned with two or three rows of bronze rivets (Fig. 1). The heads of the rivets are mostly in the shape of a semicircle. The unaccountable ware has distinctive clasps. On one bronze plate are two holes, on another plate are two hooks. The hooks are always on the back of the bronze plates. Unaccountable ware is only one type of Curonian artefact which has such clasps. Unaccountable ware is covered with birch bark inside. Only a little unaccountable ware without birch bark inside is known. The artefacts of an unknown purpose or unaccountable ware have a diameter of 4.5 to six centimetres, and are only four to 4.5 centimetres in height. Unaccountable ware was widespread in the southern Curonian lands from the seventh to the ninth century (Fig. 1: 2–7)11. However, artefacts such as parts of head D. Bernotaitė. Except man’s grave 17/1948 from the Laiviai cemetery. 11 Ėgliškiai-Anduliai (Kretinga district, graves 262, 271, 388, 410 and 477, the exact number of artefacts is not clear. The archive is at the MVF; part of the material was at the Prussia Museum and in the museum at Insteburg; ZAI, 1905, Tafel: XI: 1), Genčai 1st cemetery (graves 159, 195, 206, 207, 232, 233, 236, 254, 259 and loose finds), Kašučiai (Kretinga district, graves 4, 8, 12, 13? and 20), Kiauleikiai (Kretinga district, graves 17, 19 and 10/1985), Laistai (Klaipėda region, grave 55, exact number of artefacts is not clear), Laiviai (graves 18, 33, 43, 57, 67 and 15/1949, 17/1949) Lazdininkai (Kalnalaukis), grave 64/1980, grave 72/2000), Palanga, graves 20, 48, 34a, 92, 100, 108, 112?, 113?, 123?, 142, 143, 162? 327 and 334), Pryšmančiai, 1st cemetery (grave 67/1987) and Užpelkiai, grave 73. A catalogue of unaccountable artefacts cannot be precise for the moment, because material from Curonian cemeteries at 10 BALTICA 6 bands, armlets or belt clasps are known in graves from the end of the second till the middle of the fourth century, as mentioned above (Fig. 1: 1; 2:5) (Bezzenberger, 1892: Tafel: VIII: 15; Šturms 1942; Stankus 1995: 38–39, Fig. 22, 28, 33; Banytė-Rowell 2001: Fig. 25). The construction of the clasps and material from which unaccountable ware was made in the Roman Iron Age and in the Late Migration Period/the Viking Age is the same, and this fact is amazing (Figs. 1: 1–7; 2:5; 3: 2). The construction of unaccountable ware is similar to Anglo-Saxon and Scandinavian clasps of class B, form B7 (Hines 1993: 39–41). Clasps were adopted in England as part of a female costume in which they were used only as wrist-clasps. In Scandinavia, clasps of class B were found in men’s graves, and were used to fasten the trouser-legs between the knee and the ankle (Hines 1993: 76–82). There are only two examples of clasps being used for headdresses, one clasp was found under the chin. In general, clasps of class B were widespread in Scandinavia, on Gotland, Anglo-Saxon England and even in Finland and Estonia during the second to the sixth centuries (Hines 1993: 39–41, Fig. 78: a). ARCHAELOGIA one very late ethnographic wimple known in the western areas. A similar wimple comes from around Rucava (Latvia) (Girnis 1926: Fig. 3). It should be mentioned that knots in wimples are tied on the left side or the back. In Curonian women’s graves, bronze head pins and brooches are mostly found on the right-hand side or over the head of the deceased person. Unaccountable ware has been found only near deceased women’s heads, over the head or near the head, mostly on the right-hand side of the buried woman (Fig. 9)12. It should be mentioned that unaccountable ware has never been found under the head or in such a position that allowed it to be interpreted as head ornaments. Very often, unaccountable ware is located five to 15 centimetres above the head of the deceased woman, but frequently these strange items are found together with small iron or bronze rods (needles or pins?) (Figs. 3: 2; 9: 2)13. In most cases these artefacts are empty inside. However, sometimes inside unaccountable ware pieces of folded cloth are found (Genčai I, graves 159, 232, 254; Palanga, graves 48, 92, 100, 108); pieces of raw amber (Palanga, graves 73 and 100); amber spindle whorls, amber plaques, bronze needles (Genčai 1st cemetery, grave 233, Kiauleikiai, grave 10/1985) and miniature clay cups (Užpelkiai, grave 73). Sometimes unaccountable ware is put into birch bark boxes together with another’s additional grave goods (Kiauleikiai, grave 10; Laiviai, grave 57). At times, unaccountable ware has been found under miniature clay cups near the deceased person’s head (Baleniūnas 1941: 23). It Aukštkiemiai, Ėgliškiai-Anduliai, Ramučiai, Laistai is not published and most of the unaccountable ware is found as poorly preserved finds. 12 Unaccountable ware is found on the breast of the deceased person at Genčai, 1st cemetery, in graves 207 and 254; in the middle of the grave pit at Laiviai, grave 15/1949; and around the waist at Genčai, 1st cemetery, in grave 259. 13 Genčai, 1st cemetery, graves 195, 206 and 233; Kašučiai, graves 8 and 12; Laiviai, graves 57 and 15/1949; Palanga, grave 20; Pryšmančiai, 1st cemetery, grave 67. 137 Fig. 9. Palanga, grave 20; and Pryšmančiai 1st cemetery, grave 67/1986 (1 after A. Tautavičius, 1963; 2 after R. Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė, 1986) 138 AUDRONĖ BLIUJIENĖ Some Notes on Curonian Wo m e n ’s B e a d S e t s w i t h B r o n z e Spacer Plates in their Headbands, Headdresses Made of C l o t h a n d U n a c c o u n t a b l e Wa r e d u r i n g t h e Vi k i n g A g e a n d E a r l y M e d i e v a l Ti m e s However, an interpretation of the wearing of unaccountable ware is not possible, because it is usually found as poorly preserved finds or comes from destroyed graves. In the German archaeological tradition, unaccountable ware was known as armstulpen or “armbands” (Hoffman 1941: 100–101; MVF I a). Obviously, the term armstulpen given to unaccountable ware by Hoffmann has a strict sense, because they have a similar fastener to Anglo-Scandinavian clasps (Hines 1993). Unaccountable ware is depicted by German archaeologists in an extended position (Gaerte 1929: Abb. 316, 256). However, Hoffmann makes a difference between Curonian sash-like bracelets and unaccountable ware (Hoffman 1941: 100–101). Gimbutienė and Baleniūnas ascribed unaccountable ware as bracelets, but with a question mark. Perhaps they were basing themselves on the opinion of German scholars (Baleniūnas 1940b: 17–18, 33–34, 47–48; Alseikaitė-Gimbutienė 1946: 250, Tafel 9, Abb. 29). There is no evidence that unaccountable ware was bracelets or the clasps of shirt sleeves in the area inhabited by the Curonians. Only at the Laiviai cemetery, in grave 15, was unaccountable ware found over the head together with a spiral bracelet (Baleniūnas 1940b). Unaccountable ware was found on the breast, together with a spiral bracelet, a little above other grave goods at the Genčai 1st cemetery, in grave 207. Unaccountable ware has been found once on the breast of the deceased person according to the plan in the same cemetery, in grave 254 (Merkevičius 1987: 46–47, Figs. 99–100; Stankus 1996: 12–13, Figs. 61–62). In Butėnienė, Merkevičius, Stankus, Tautavičius and Stepiņš14 unaccountable ware is ascribed as boxes (Butėnienė 1964: 88; Merkevičius 1985; 1987; Stankus 1985; 1996; Tautavičius 1963). Perhaps the reason for such a decision was that unaccountable ware was covered inside by birch bark. However, these artefacts have no bottom, which is necessary for a box. The last year’s unaccountable ware is ascribed to head ornaments (Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė, 1997: 42–44, Fig. 35; 2001: 216–218, Fig. 81; Stankus 1995: 38-39; BanytėRowell, 2001, Fig. 25). However, there is no information that this unaccountable ware from the Viking Personal information from the Latvian archaeologist Dr. Ingrida Virse, for which I am grateful. 14 Translated by Audronė Bliujienė and Joseph Everatt Abbreviations BALTICA 6 Age was found on the head or under the head of the deceased person (Fig. 9). As mentioned above, inside the unaccountable artefacts folded pieces of cloth, raw amber or small amber artefacts and even clay pots were found. This is why these artefacts have no connection with Curonian women’s headdress. Until today, the purpose of Curonian unaccountable artefacts is open. Obviously the construction of unaccountable ware is similar to clasps. However, there is no evidence of the purpose Curonian women used these clasps for. ARCHAELOGIA should be mentioned that graves with unaccountable ware are very wealthy. In graves with unaccountable ware cruciform or pins with round heads and different pendants, crossbow fibulaes, neck rings and fingerings are found (Fig. 3). In these graves ornaments made of silver or artefacts with a silver coating are found. From ten to 15 grave goods are found in one burial together with unaccountable ware (Bliujienė 1995: 47). ATL – Archeologiniai tyrinėjimai Lietuvoje, Vilnius. BA – Archaeologia Baltica, Vilnius ILKI – Iš lietuvių kultūros istorijos, Vilnius LEB – Lietuvių etnografijos bruožai, Vilnius, 1964 LA – Lietuvos archeologija, Vilnius LPA – Latvijas PSR Arheoloģija, Rīga, 1974 LEB – Lietuvių etnografijos bruožai, Vilnius, 1964 LLM – Kulikauskienė R., Rimantienė R., Lietuvių liaudies menas. Senovės lietuvių papuošalai. I knyga, Vilnius, 1958 MAD’A – Lietuvos TSR mokslų akademijos darbai, serija A, Vilnius Sb. Prussia – Sitzungsberichte der Altertumsgesellschaft Prussia, Königsberg ZAI – Zeitschrift der Altertumsgesellschaft Insterburg (18001905), Insterburg, 1905 Museums and institutions KM – Kretinga Museum, Kretinga LII – Lithuanian Institute of History Archive, Vilnius MLIM –Lithuanian Minor History Museum, Klaipėda LNM AR – National Museum of Lithuania, Department of Archaeology, Vilnius LVM – Latvian Historical Museum, Riga MVF – Staatliche Mussen zu Berlin – Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Museum für Vor-und Frügeschichte, Berlin and Vorgeschichtliche Abteilung des Königlichen Museums für Völkerkunde, Berlin TAM – Alka Museum, Telšiai VDKM – Vytautas the Great War Museum, Kaunas References Alseikaitė-Gimbutienė, M. 1946. Die Bestanttung in Litauen in der vorgeschichtlichen Zeit. Inaugural Dissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades einer Hohen. Philosophischen Fakultät der Eberhard - Karls Universität zu Tübingen. Arrhenius, B. 2001. Beliefs behind the Use of Polychrome Jewellery in the Germanic Area. In: Roman Gold and Development of the Early Germanic Kingdoms. Aspects of technical, socio-political, socio-economic, artistic and intellectual development, A.D. 1-550. Symposium in Stockholm 14-16 November 1997. Kungl. Vitterhets Historie och Antikvitets Akademien. Konferenser 51. Stockholm, 297–310. 139 AUDRONĖ BLIUJIENĖ Some Notes on Curonian Wo m e n ’s B e a d S e t s w i t h B r o n z e Spacer Plates in their Headbands, Headdresses Made of C l o t h a n d U n a c c o u n t a b l e Wa r e d u r i n g t h e Vi k i n g A g e a n d E a r l y M e d i e v a l Ti m e s 140 Callmer, J. 1977. Trade Beads and the Bead Trade in Scandinavia ca. 800-1000 A.D. In: Acta Archaeologica Lundensia. Series In 4°. No. 11. Baleniūnas, P. 1940a. Gintališkės kapinyno (Kretingos raj.) /Plungės raj./ 1940 m. tyrinėjimų dienynas. In: LII. F. 1, b. 954. Baleniūnas, P. 1940b. Laivių kapinyno, Kretingos raj. tyrinėjimų ataskaita. In: LII. F. 1, b. 761. Baleniūnas, P. 1941. Kiauleikių (Kretingos raj., Rūdaičių apyl.) kapinyno 1941 m. kasinėjimų dienoraštis. In: LII. F. 1, b. 605. Baltrušaitis, J. 1948. Lithuanian Folk Art. München. Banytė-Rowell, R. 2001. Vakarų Lietuvos kapinynų su akmenų vainikais kultūrinė sritis III a. – V a. pradžioje. Daktaro disertacija. Humanitariniai mokslai, istorija (05 H). Bernotienė, S. 1974. Lietuvių liaudies moterų drabužiai XVIII a. pab. – XX a. Vilnius. Bernotaitė, A., Tautavičius, A., Navickaitė, O. 1956. Archeologinių ekspedicijų dokumentinė medžiaga. 1949–1957 m./1957 m.: Aukštadvario piliak. gyv., Trakų raj.; Diržiai, Pakruojo raj.; Siraičių kap., Telšių raj.; Bačkininkėlių piliak. ir gyv., Prienų raj.; Dovainionių piliak., Rumšiškių piliak., Darsūniškio pilk., Kaišiadorių raj./. In: LII. F. 1, b. 225. Bezzenberger, A. 1892. Litauische Gräberfeld bei Schernen. In: Sb. Prussia. H. 17. Königsberg, 141–168. Bliujienė, A. 1994. Užpelkių kapInyno tyrinėjimai 1992 ir 1993 metais. In: ATL 1992 ir 1993 metais. Vilnius, 132– 137. Bliujienė, A. 1995. Apskriti kabučiai kuršių kultūroje VIII a. pabaigoje – IX amžiuje. In: Lituanistica. 1995. Nr. 1(21), 39–72. Bliujienė, A. 1998. VIII a. Lamatos moterų ovalūs kiauraraščiai kabučiai ir jų germaniškos paralelės. In: Lituanistica. 1998. Nr. 2(34), 66–87. Bliujienė, A. 1999. Vikingų epochos kuršių papuošalų ornamentika. Vilnius. Bliujienė, A. 2001. Curonian bead sets with bronze spacer plates and their Scandinavian parallels. In: Fornvännen. 2001/4, 235–242. Butėnienė, E. 1959. Siraičių X–XII a. senkapis. In: ILKI. Vilnius, T. I, 159–176. Butėnienė, E. 1964. Laivių kapinyno laidosena. In: MADA. T. 1(16), 83–99. Butkus, D., Kanarskas, J. 2005. Lazdininkų (Kalnalaukio) kapinynas. In: ATL 2003 metais. Vilnius, 118–119. Dakanis, B. 1983. Klaišių (Truikinių) senkapio, Skuodo raj. žvalgomieji archeologiniai tyrinėjimai. In: LII. F. 1, b 1143. Danilaitė, E. 1961. Archeologiniai tyrinėjimai Kiauleikiuose. In: ILKI. Vilnius, T. 1, 101–124. Gaerte, W. 1929. Urgeschichte Ostpreussens. Königsberg. Gaimster, M. 1998. Vendel period bracteates on Gotland. On the significance of Germanic art. In: Acta Archaeologia Lundensia. Series In 8, No. 27. Lund. Girnis, P. 1926. Tikumi rucavniekos un nīciniekos. In: Latvijas Saule. 1926, Nr. 4, Rīga, 447–448. Guzevičiūtė, R. 1995. Kepurių kelionės. Turbanas. In: Lietuvių liaudies kultūra. Nr. 3, 40–44. Hines, J. 1993. Anglo-Scandinavian Clasps of Classes A-C of the 3rd to 6th centuries A.D. Typology, Diffusion and Function. In: Kungl. Vitterhets Historie och Antikvitets Akademie. Stockholm. Hook, M., Macgregor, A. 1997. Medieval England. Archaeological Collections. In: The Ashmolean Museum from Al- fred the Great to Richard III. Oxford. Hoffmann, J. 1941. Die spätheidnische Kultur des Memellandes (10.–12. Jahrh. n. d. Zw.). Königsberg. Jovaiša E. 1992. Dauglaukio plokštinis kapinynas. In: ATL 1990 ir 1991 metais, T. 1, 95–99. Kačkutė, R. 1995. Lietuvos moterų galvos dangos papuošalai I–IV amžiais. In: Baltų Archeologija. 1995 Nr. 3 (6) - 4 (7), 14–24. Kazakevičius, V. 1993. Plinkaigalio kapinynas. In: LA. T. 10, Vilnius. Kuncienė, O. 1978. Smeigtukai galvos apdangalui susegti. In: Lietuvos TRS archeologijos atlasas. Vilnius, 9–10, map. 4. Kuncienė, O. 1981. IX–XIII a. stiklo karoliai Lietuvoje. In: LA. T. 2, Vilnius, 77–92. LAB, 1961. Kulikauskas, P., Kulikauskienė, R., Tautavičius, A. Lietuvos archeologijos bruožai. Vilnius. LEB, 1964. Lietuvių etnografijos bruožai. Vilnius. Les Vikings 1993. Les Vikings … Les Scandinaves et l’Europe 800 – 1200, Paris. LLM, 1958. Kulikauskienė R., Rimantienė R., Lietuvių liaudies menas. Senovės lietuvių papuošalai. I knyga. Vilnius. LPA, 1974. Latvijas PSR Arheoloģija. Rīga. Merkevičius, A. 1985. Genčų km. I kapinyno, Kurmaičių apyl., Kretingos raj., 1985 m. tyrinėjimų ataskaita. In: LII. F. 1, b. 1192. Merkevičius, A. 1985. Genčų km. I kapinyno, Kurmaičių apyl., Kretingos raj., 1987 m. tyrinėjimų ataskaita. In: LII. F. 1, b. 1303. Moora, H. 1938. Die Eisenzeit In Letland bis etwa 500 n. Chr. II Teil. Analyse. Tartu. Mugurēvič, E., 1997. Kurlands Siedlungslätze in frühgeschiclitcher Zeit. In: BA. T. 2. Vilnius, 85–93. Mugurēvič, E. 2000. Die Balten im frühen Mittelalter nach schriftlichen Quellen. In: BA. T. 4. Vilnius, 71–80. Nerman, B. 1958. Grobin – Seeburg. Ausgrabungen und Funde. Stockholm, Uppsala. Nerman, B. 1969. Die Vendelzeit Gotlands. T. II. Tafeln. Stockholm. Radiņš, A. 1999. 10.–13. Gadsimta senkapi latgaļu apdzīvotajā teritorijā un austrumlatvijas etniskās, sociālās un politiskās vēstures jautājumi. Rīga, 1999. Ranta, H. 1999. Bead Finds from the Viking Age and Crusade Periods – Indicators of Cultural Contacts or Ethnic Indentity? In: Fenno-Ugri et Slavi 1997. Cultural Contacts In the Area of the Gulf of Finland in the 9th–13th centuries. Helsinki, 70–76. reich C. 2006 in print Archaelogia Lituana, t. 7, Vilnius Reklaitis, P. 1999a. Lietuvos gyventojų tipai XVI a. grafikoje: Adelhauser-Heldt-Vecellio. In: Prarastosios Lietuvos pėdsakų beieškant. Vilnius, 171–180. Reklaitis, P. 1999b. Lietuvio valstiečio Mažojoje Lietuvoje ikonografija. In: Prarastosios Lietuvos pėdsakų beieškant. Vilnius, 323–340. Stankus, J. 1995. Bandužių kapinynas. In: LA. T. 12, Vilnius. Stankus, J. 1996. Genčų km. I kapinyno, Kurmaičių apyl., Kretingos raj., 1995 m. tyrinėjimų ataskaita. In: LII. F. 1, b. 2463. Šimėnas, V. 1984. Kiauleikių kapinyno, Kretingos raj., 1984 metų kasinėjimų ataskaita. In: LII. F. 1, b. 1162. Šimėnas, V. 1984. Kiauleikių plokštinio kapinyno, Kretingos raj., 1985 metų kasinėjimų ataskaita. In: LII. F. 1, b. 1220. Šturms, E. 1942. Mazkatuźi Liepājasaps. Rucavas pag. 1942, In: LVM AA Nr. 302. Received: 2002; Audronė Bliujienė revised: 2006 Klaipėda University Institute of Baltic Sea Region History and Archaeology Tilžės g., 13, LT-91251 Klaipėda, Lithuania e-mail: [email protected] K eletas pastab ų apie kur ši ų moter ų V iking ų laik ų ir ankst y v ų j ų viduramži ų karoli ų vėrinius su žalva r i n i a i s s k i r st i k l i a i s , ap g a lv i us , g a lv o s apdangalus iš audinio ir neaiškios paskirties d i r b i n i us BALTICA 6 Мугуревич, Е. 1965. Восточнаяя Латвия и соседние земли в X–XIII в.в. Rīga. Зарина, А.Э. 1986. Одежда жителей Латвии в VII–XVII в.в. In: Древняя одежда народов Восточной Европы. Москва, 172–189. ARCHAELOGIA Tautavičius, A. 1962. Palangoje, Komjaunimo gatvėje esančio senkapio archeologinių kasinėjimų, vykdytų 1962 m. balandžio 23 d. – birželio 13 d., ataskaita ir radinių sąrašas. In: LII. F. 1, b. 45, 183. Tautavičius, A. 1970. Vakarinės Žemaitijos dalies IX – XII a. moterų kepuraitės. In: Muziejai ir paminklai. Vilnius, 112–114. Tautavičius, A. 1996. Vidurinysis geležies amžius Lietuvoje (V – IX a.). Vilnius. Thunmark-Nylén, L. 1992. Some Comparative Notes on Gotlandic and Livonian Bead Spacers of the Viking Period. In: Contacts across the Baltic Sea during the Late Iron Age (5th-12th centuries). Lund. Thunmark-Nylén, L. 1995. Die Wikingerzeit Gotlands. I Abbildungen der Grabfunde. Stockholm. Thunmark-Nylén, L. 1998. Die Wikingerzeit Gotlands. II Typentafeln. Stockholm. Thunmark-Nylén, L. 2000. Some Notes on the Contacts between Gotland and the East Baltic Area. In: BA. T. 4. Vilnius, 173–180. Vaitkunskienė, L. 1978. Pasaginės segės kampuotais galais. In: Lietuvos TSR archeologijos atlasas. T. IV. Vilnius, 54–55, žem. 34: 4. Vaitkunskienė, L. 1979. Gintališkės kapinynas. In: LA. T. 1, 44–74. Vaitkunskienė, L. 1981. Sidabras senovės Lietuvoje. Vilnius. Valatka, V. 1956. Džiugo kapinyno Telšių raj. Siraičių kaime 1956–1957 m. archeologinių tyrimų medžiaga. In: LII.F. 1, b. 68. Valatka, V. 2004. Džiugo kapinyno 1956–1957 tyrinėjimai. In: Žemaičių žemės tyrinėjimai. I knyga. Archeologija. Rašytinis palikimas Žemaičių muziejus „Alka“. Vilnius. Vaškevičiūtė, I. 1992. IV–XI a. įvijiniai apgalviai. In: LA. T. 8. Vilnius, 128–134. Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė, R. 1959. Senovės lietuvių moterų galvos danga ir jos papuošalai. In: Iš lietuvių kultūros istorijos. Vilnius, 1959.T. II, 30–53. Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė, R. 1964. Nauji duomenys apie Vakarų Lietuvos moterų galvos dangą ankstyvojo feodalizmo laikotarpiu. In: MAD‘ A. T. 2 (17). Vilnius, 41–52. Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė, R. 1970. Lietuviai IX–XII amžiais. Vilnius. Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė, R. 1987. Lietuvių tautybės susidarymas. In: ���� Lietuvių etnogenezė. Vilnius. Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė, R. 1988. Dėl kai kurių Pryšmančių I (Kretingos raj.) kapinyno papuošalų gamybos. In: MAD’A. T. 3(104). Vilnius, p. 37-51. Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė, R. 1997. Senovės lietuvių drabužiai ir jų papuošalai. Vilnius. Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė, R. 2001. Lietuva valstybės prieaušriu. Vilnius. ZAI, 1905. Zeitschrift der Altertumsgesellschalft Insterburg (1800–1905), Insterburg. Žulkus, V. 2005. Kuršiai Baltijos jūros erdvėje. Vilnius� ��������. Волкайте-Куликаускене, Р.К. 1986. Одежда литовсев с древнейшых времён до ������������ XVII�������� в. ���� In��: Древняя одежда народов Восточной Европы. Москва, 146–171. Калашникова, Н.М. 1986. Одежда украинцев в XVI–XVII в.в. In: Древняя одежда народов Восточной Европы. Москва, с.12–32. Лаул, С.К. 1986. Одежда эстонцев в I- XVII в. в. In: Древняя одежда народов Восточной Европы. Москва, 190–207. AUDRONĖ BLIUJIENĖ Santrauka Atrodytų, jog kuršių kultūra yra viena iš labiausiai pažinių dėl savo pakankamai plataus tyrinėjimo masto. Tačiau vis dėlto kai kurie kuršių kultūros aspektai nuo seno, remiantis klaidingomis prielaidomis, neteisingai interpretuojami. Taip atsitiko su kuršių moterų galvos danga, kuriai priskirti net vėriniai su žalvariniais skirstikliais, vienspalviais ir įvairiaspalviais stiklo ir žalvario karoliais bei žalvarinėmis įvijomis (4, 6 pav.). Dalis kuršių vėrinių su žalvariniais skirstikliais skiriama apgalviams, o kiti lygiai tokie pat dirbiniai vadinami karolių vėriniais ar jų dalimis (4, 6 pav.). Iš nedegintuose kuršių moterų kapuose, aiškiomis radimo aplinkybėmis, rastų žalvarinių skirstiklių ir įvairiarūšių karolių išsidėstymo yra akivaizdu, kad jie yra puošnių vėrinių dalys (4–6 pav.). Išskirtinė kuršių karolių vėrinių detalė yra žalvariniai skirstikliai (4 pav.). Nagrinėjami kuršių vėriniai susideda iš 2–10 žalvarinių ornamentuotų skirstiklių, įvairiaspalvių stiklo ir žalvario karolių, žalvarinių įvijų (4, 6 pav.). Skirstikliai yra dviejų tipų. Vieni jų „T“ raidės pavidalo (5: 3–5 pav.), kiti – stačiakampiai (5: 1–2, 4 pav.). Dažnai tame pačiame vėrinyje esantys skirstikliai yra ne tik skirtingo dekoro, bet ir skirtingų tipų (6 pav.). Kuršių vėriniai su žalvariniais skirstikliais yra nevienodai suverti, todėl juos galima būtų skirstyti į tris grupes. Pirmajai gru- 141 AUDRONĖ BLIUJIENĖ Some Notes on Curonian Wo m e n ’s B e a d S e t s w i t h B r o n z e Spacer Plates in their Headbands, Headdresses Made of C l o t h a n d U n a c c o u n t a b l e Wa r e d u r i n g t h e Vi k i n g A g e a n d E a r l y M e d i e v a l Ti m e s pei priklausytų vėriniai, sudaryti iš 6–10 žalvarinių skirstiklių ir smulkių juodų, balzganų, melsvų stiklinių karoliukų (4 pav.). Antrajai kuršių vėrinių su žalvariniais skirstikliais grupei priklausytų vėriniai, kuriuose yra tik 2 žalvariniai vėrinio skirstikliai ir žalvariniai bei įvairiaspalviai stikliniai karoliai, o žalvarinės įvijos suvertos centrinėje vėrinio dalyje. Trečiajai kuršių vėrinių su žalvariniais skirstikliais grupei priklausytų visi neaiškios konstrukcijos vėriniai ir jų dalys – žalvariniai skirstikliai (5 pav.). X a. vid. – XI a. vid. ar net XII a. vid. panašių žalvarinių vėrinių skirstiklių ir pačių vėrinių rasta lyvių moterų kapuose. Panašių į kuršių karolių vėrinių skirstiklių rasta Gruobinioje (Latvija). Vėrinių su žalvariniais „T“ raidės formos skirstikliais, visiškai panašiais į kuršių, rasta Suomijoje, kur jie skiriami viduriniam ar vėlyvajam vikingų laikų periodams. Vendelio periodu vėriniai su tiesiais metaliniais abiejų tipų skirstikliais buvo paplitę Gotlande. Tokie skirstikliai buvo žinomi ir Skandinavijoje. Puošnių krūtinę dengiančių vėrinių aptikta ir kai kuriuose Skandinavijos taikomojo meno pavyzdžiuose (7 pav.). Vėlyviausių gotlandiškų vėrinių su skirstikliais randama X a. antrosios pusės kapuose. Pietinių kuršių gyventoje teritorijoje karolių vėriniai išplito X–XI a. Būtent X–XI a. visapusiški santykiai tarp kuršių ir Gotlando buvo intensyviausi. Tai leidžia teigti, kad kuršių vėrinių su skirstikliais plitimui įtakos turėjo panašūs Gotlando karolių vėriniai. Tačiau tiek Gotlando, tiek Skandinavijos, o kartu ir kuršių karolių vėriniai su skirstikliais yra Vakarų Europos ir Bizantijos imperijos įtakų kuriant valdžios ir prestižo simbolius atspindžiai. Kuršių karolių vėriniai suverti ir žalvariniai skirstikliai gaminti vietos juvelyrų. Įvairiaspalvius vikingų laikotarpio stiklo karolius kuršiai importavo iš Artimųjų Rytų, Senosios Rusios žemių ar vakarų slavų teritorijos. Konkretesnių duomenų, kad kuršių moterys vikingų laikais nešiojo apgalvius, nėra. Tačiau tai nereiškia, kad kuršių moterys galvos nedengė. Vikingų laikais kuršės nešiojo kepuraites, skareles ir neaiškios formos galvos apdangalą iš audinio ar audinio ir žalvarinių grandelių. Kepuraitės ar kita danga iš audinio kartais būdavo prisegamos smeigtukais, skirtais galvos apdangalui pritvirtinti, ar lankinėmis žieduotomis segėmis (3: 3; 8 pav.). Lietuvos archeologinėje literatūroje vyrauja nuomonė, kad kuršių moterų galvos apdangalas iš audinio yra artimas etnografinėje medžiagoje žinomam lietuvių moterų galvos apdangalui nuometui. Tačiau turima medžiaga, kapų aprašai ir planai tokių išvadų daryti neleidžia. Išvados, kad kuršės nešiojo nuometus, nepalaiko nei žinoma etnografinė ar ikonografinė medžiaga. Matyt, kuršių moterų galvos apdangalas iš audinio 142 turėtų būti artimas kitų šio laikotarpio Europos moterų galvos dangai, kurios atvaizdų randame rankraštinėse knygose ar tiek taikomajame, tiek vaizduojamajame romanikos mene. Pietinių kuršių nedegintuose kuršių moterų kapuose randama neaiškios paskirties dirbinių iš odinių, kaustytų žalvarinėmis sankabėlėmis, juostelių ir žalvarinių apkalų (1, 2: 2 pav.). Išsiskiria savitas šių dirbinių užsegimas: vienoje plokštelėje yra dvi nedidelės skylutės, kitoje – du kabliukai. Tai vieninteliai ne tik kuršių, bet ir apskritai baltų papuošalai, turintys tokį užsegimą. Beveik visų šių dirbinių vidus išklotas tošimi. Aptariamų neaiškios paskirties dirbinių randama tik moterų kapuose, galvos srityje, virš galvos ar netoli galvos, dažnai dešinėje pusėje, bet jų nerasta po mirusiosios galva ar tokioje pozicijoje, kad galima būtų teigti juos esant galvos papuošalais (9 pav.). Nors tokie dirbiniai pietinių kuršių žemėse išplito VII–IX a., bet ankstyviausių šio tipo dirbinių, siejamų su apgalviais ar diržų sagtimis, rasta Vakarų Lietuvos kapų su akmenų vainikais srityje II a. pab. – IV a. vid. kapuose (B2/C1–C3 periodai) (1: 1 pav.). Tačiau nėra pakankamai duomenų, kad šios sąsagos siekia ankstyvuosius vikingų laikus. Pajūrio Lietuvos ir Latvijos medžiaga teikia duomenų, kad romėniškuoju laikotarpiu vakarų baltų moterys, be žalvariniais spurgeliais puoštų kepuraičių, galėjo nešioti kelių tipų apgalvius, susidedančius iš odinių juostelių, padengtų žalvarinėmis sankabėlėmis, ir apskritų sąsagų, kurios panašios į dėželinių antkaklių užsegimą (2 pav.). Vikingų ir ankstyvųjų viduramžių laikų dirbinius su sąsagomis vokiečių archeologai sieja su odos juostelėmis ir vadina „armstulpen“ ar „armband“ (1: 2–7 pav.). Pagal užsegimo konstrukciją šie dirbiniai artimi anglosaksų ir Skandinavijoje randamoms sąsagoms. Marija Gimbutienė ir Pranas Baleniūnas šiuos dirbinius vadino apyrankėmis. Eugenija Butėnienė, Algimantas Merkevičius, Jonas Stankus, Adolfas Tautavičius šiuos neaiškios paskirties dirbinius laikė dėžutėmis, matyt, todėl, kad jie iškloti tošimi. Tačiau šie savitos konstrukcijos dirbiniai neturi dugnelio, kuris būtinas dėžutei (1: 2–7 pav.). Reginos Volkaitės-Kulikauskienės nuomone, o ja remdamiesi ir kai kurie kiti lietuvių archeologai mano, kad tai cilindro formos galvos papuošalas. Tačiau nėra duomenų, rodančių šiuos dirbinius buvus nešiotus kaip galvos papuošalus. Be to, šiuose dirbiniuose rasta sulankstytų audinių, gintaro žaliavos ir dirbinių bei puodelių. Todėl nagrinėjamus dirbinius sieti su galvos papuošalais nėra jokio pagrindo. Turimais duomenimis, šių dirbinių iš odinių juostelių paskirtis tebelieka neaiški, nors jų konstrukcinis panašumas su sąsagomis yra neabejotinas. Tačiau ką šios sąsagos susegdavo – neaišku. A N e w Ty p e o f B r o n z e P i n i n the Eastern Baltic ILONA VAŠKEVIČIŪTĖ A ne w t y pe o f b r o n z e p i n i n T H E E a s te r n B a lt i c Ilona Vaškevičiūtė Abstract This article introduces rosette-headed pins found at Pavirvytė cemetery (in the Akmenė district) in the rich female grave 138. Rosette-headed pins were quite well known in Semigallia. However, most of the ornaments in this grave are more typical of Curonian culture than of the Semigallians. Some decorative elements or ideas probably penetrated from Curonia to Semigallia at the end of the 11th century. Key words: rosette-headed pins, grave goods, relationships, Semigallians. Introduction Pins used to be among the favourite Baltic ornaments. They were popular from the end of the second millennium BC till the end of the 13th century AD. However, only from the first centuries AD did multiple pins as ornaments and various shaped pins start to spread. In the first centuries AD, pins were in use by almost all the Baltic tribes, but from the second half of the first millennium they were worn by the Samogitians, Semigallians, Curonians, Lettigallians and Selonians only. Pins of different shapes were worn: crook-like, with flask-shaped heads, with triangular and ringed heads, cruciform pins, and pins with rounded openwork heads, etc. Men wore only certain types, mostly crooklike, and pins with flask-shaped heads, and, more rarely, pins with triangular and ringed heads. Some pins used by men were made from iron; bronze pins for men were less ornamented. Women wore more sophisticated pins. The custom was to button clothes with a pair of pins which were connected by long chains. Sometimes pendants were attached to the pins’ eyelets. Pairs of pins with pendants and chains formed an integral ornament. An ordinary pair consisted of two identically shaped pins, though two different-shaped pins were also composed into integral breast ornaments. Most pins were made of bronze, but some of them have silver-plated heads. Only very seldom are two pairs of pins found in a grave. One such grave was found in Pavirvytė cemetery (in the Akmenė district) in grave 138. In this grave a woman was buried whose clothes were decorated with two pairs of pins. One pair consisted of cruciform pins with flattened plates at the ends of the terminals, the other pair constituted very rare rosette-headed pins 144 (Fig. 1: 2). The main attention in this article is given to this particular type of pin. Although rosette-headed pins are very rare, they have not received enough attention from archaeologists. Fēliks Jākobsons, in 1930, mentions them in his article “Divas retas rotas adatas” (Jakobsons 1999: 55– 57), about pins found in the graves at Tūraida Puteļi (in the Riga district) and Ciemalde Jaunsvirlaukas (in the Jelgavas district). An article by Ilona Vaškevičiūtė (Vaškevičiūtė 2000: 25–27) deals with the pins from Pavirvytė; and a reconstruction of clothes from the same grave has been performed by R. VolkaitėKulikauskienė (Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė 1987: 195, Fig. 34). Other rosette-headed pins have found their way into the list of archaeological references only in a general context (Latvijas 1974: 213–214, Fig. 57: 5). Finding places Rosette-headed pins have been found in only a few sites in Lithuania. Two of them, making an integral breast ornament, were found in the Pavirvytė cemetery mentioned above, in grave 138; another one (in a pair with a pin of another type) in the Jakštaičiai-Meškiai (Šiauliai district) cemetery (Fig. 1: 1). Two other pins of this type were found accidentally in the Biržai district, the exact finding place is unknown (now in the custody of the Biržai area Sėla museum) (Fig. 1: 3). A few more rosette-headed pins are known from Latvia. Two of them, making an integral breast ornament, were found in the Semigallian cemetery of Mežotne Centre (in the Bauska district); (Fig. 1:4) two more pins were excavated in the Semigallian cemetery at Salgales Lieldālūži (Jelgava district). One rosette-headed pin was found in the Ciemalde Jaunsvirlaukas, Tura- BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 1. Rosette-headed pins. 1 Jakštaičiai-Meškiai cemetery; 2 Pavirvytė cemetery; 3 Biržai strayfind; 4 cemetery at Mežotne Centre (drawings by Ilona Keršulytė) 145 A N e w Ty p e o f B r o n z e P i n i n the Eastern Baltic ILONA VAŠKEVIČIŪTĖ ida Pūteļi (Jakobsons 1999: 56) and Kerklini (Saldus district) cemeteries. A rosette-headed pin from Kerklini is a stray find (Engel 1933: 76, Figs. 14: 12). Rosette-headed pins The pins are 14.5 to 19 centimetres long, with heads (terminals) of four to five centimetres in width. A pin head is an openwork ringlet with six relief outgrowths, ending in three knobbles. Six concurrent spokes divide the ringlet into six symmetrical parts, and in every one of them a hole in a round or an oval shape is formed. Pins from the Biržai region are slightly different. Outgrowths decorating the pins seem not to be interrelated; therefore, the pin heads seem to be visually lighter and more graceful (Fig. 1: 3). As has been mentioned, most rosette-headed pins were found in Semigallia. In grave 138 in the Pavirvytė cemetery, a woman whose grave goods consisted of over 30 items was buried. The grave was discovered 55 centimetres deep, in a 220 by 70-centimetre pit. The deceased woman was buried lying on her back with her legs extended and arms folded. The head was orientated at 310 degrees northwest (Fig. 2). The head was covered with a cloth headdress whose edges were decorated with bronze loops, clamped close to each other with no gaps in between. On the cloth headdress was a simple headband consisting of a bronze chain with plenty of maple seed-shape pendants attached. On the right side of the cranium two amber beads, probably hooked into the headdress, were found. Two neck-rings were found on the neck of the deceased woman. One of the neck-rings integrates four tugs, and was similar to a collar; the second neck-ring was plaited from wire, terminating with loops. Apart from the neck-rings, the neck of the deceased woman was decorated with two rows of a necklace, consisting of 68 ribbed blue glass beads. Two pairs of pins were found in the breast area. The first pair comprised two cruciform pins with flattened terminals, connected by an iron chain, made of 7.5-centimetre-long sticks, muffled in bronze wire. The second pair consisted of rosette-headed pins linked by a Fig. 2. Pavirvytė cemetery grave 138 (drawing by Ilona Keršulytė) bronze chain. This chain was 170 centimetres long and was plaited out of four loops. When the chain bronze spiral bracelets; the fingers were adorned with was attached to the rosette-headed pins, the completed three spiral finger rings. The breast area of the lady in ornament might have reached the woman’s waist. The grave 138 was decorated with an ornate bronze silwrists of the deceased woman were decorated with ver-plated penannular star-shaped brooch. Two other 146 Fig. 3. Find fom Pavirvytė grave 138 (photograph by V. Urbanavičius) Fig. 4. Cemetery at Mežotne Centre, grave goods of grave 9 (drawings by Ilona Keršulytė) smaller penannular brooches, with poppy seed-shaped and star-shaped terminals, were lying alongside the left pelvic bone and the right foot bones. Outside the pelvic bones and alongside both foot bones were ornaments. Each of them was made of three spirals, linked by a connecting plate with a chain and bells at the terminals. These types of ornaments decorated the edges of a cloth wrap, skirt or apron. Alongside the head, on the right side of it, a spindle whorl was found, and an awl It is interesting to note that an identical bone amulet was attached to the pendant of a pin discovered in the Jakštaičiai-Meškiai cemetery. This cemetery undoubtedly belongs to the Samogitian ethno-cultural sphere. However, some of the burials at least (including all the inhumation graves) are attributed by researchers to the Semigallians (Urbanavičius 1977: 13). The pin found in the Jakštaičiai-Meškiai cemetery is from disturbed woman’s grave 71. The rosette-headed pin was connected to the pair with a broken cruciform pin (only part of this pin survives). The burial was disturbed, discovered at 25 centimetres depth, and in a 220 by 60centimetre pit, with the head orientated at 325 degrees northwest. In this grave, together with the above-mentioned pins, only an iron awl survived. It is possible that a “broken pin”, trying to equalise the length of both pins, was intentionally broken and attached to the Jakštaičiai-Meškiai breast ornament. The length of the rosette-headed pin is 14.5 centimetres; the so-called “broken pin” is the same length. The part of the broken cruciform pin needle over the eyehook is nicely ornamented with concentric circlets. Therefore, the broken pin was readjusting the rosette-headed pin (Fig. 1). BALTICA 6 While observing the rich and rare set of grave goods, our attention is firstly attracted by the rosette-headed pins. These pins are equipped with eyeholes, to which were threaded V-shaped pendants, terminating with a chain. The pendant which was put on the right side of the deceased woman was attached to a bone amulet. ARCHAELOGIA was found between the foot bones. On the right side of the waist was a knife with an exceptionally ornate scabbard with bronze bindings (Fig. 3). The pins found in grave 9 in the Mežotne Centre cemetery also belong to a rich woman’s grave. A pair of rosette-headed pins was discovered here in one set, with an integrated four-piece neck-ring, similar to that found at Pavirvytė in grave 138. In Mežotne Centre grave 9 more grave goods were discovered: one of them was a crossbow fibula with ladders, covered with white metal plate and adornments with spiral ringlets (Fig. 4). Crescent-shaped pendants with three outgrowths were attached to the rosette-headed pin from the grave at Mežotne Centre. Chronology and distribution of rosette-headed pins The grave with the rosette-headed pin from the cemetery at Mežotne Centre dates from the 11th century. At the Turaida Pūteli cemetery, a rosette-headed pin was found in grave 23, together with a Cnut (1016– 1035) silver denar and Arabic dirhems. At the Ciemal- 147 ILONA VAŠKEVIČIŪTĖ A N e w Ty p e o f B r o n z e P i n i n the Eastern Baltic Fig. 5. Disribution of rosetteheaded pins: 1 Pavirvytė; 2 JakštaičiaiMeškiai; 3 Biržai; 4 Mežotne Centre; 5 SalgalesLieldlūži; 6 Ciemalde Jaunsvirlaukas; 7 Tūraida Pūteļi; 8 Kerklini (drawing by Ilona Keršulytė) de Jaunsvirlaukas cemetery, rosette-headed pins were found together with a small penannular brooch dating from the 11th/12th centuries (Jakobsons 1999: 56). Other pins found in the Jakštaičiai-Meškiai, Salgales Lieldālūži and Kerklini cemeteries, as well as those known from the Biržai museum, are hardly datable, due to the finding circumstances (no other datable grave goods). Specifying the chronology of rosette-headed pins allows us to correct the complex of grave goods found at Pavirvytė cemetery in grave 138 (neck-rings, a penannular brooch with a star-shaped foot, cruciform pins with flattened terminals, etc). Integrated neck-rings are rare in Lithuania. Alongside the Pavirvytė neck-rings, others are known from Ringuvėnai (Šauliai district) and Šaukėnai (Radviliškis district) (Kuncienė 1978: 27). Integrated neck-rings 148 in Latvia are discovered mainly in Semigallian sites. Only nine neck-rings of this type have been discovered in Latvia. A few integrated neck-rings have been found in Lettigallian, Estonian and Livian lands, where these ornaments are dated to the tenth/11th centuries (Latvijas 1974: 214, taf. 56: 4). Plated neck-rings terminating with loops are more typical of Curonian materials from the tenth to the 12th centuries (Kuncienė 1978b: 29). Penannular brooches with star-shaped terminals were also more popular with the Curonians than with the Semigallians, and were worn from the tenth to the 12th century (Vaitkunskienė 1978: 54). Cruciform pins with flattened terminals were liked both by the Semigallians and the Curonians. These pins were particularly popular from the ninth to the 12th century (Tautavičius 1996: 237–238). The set of grave goods allows us to However, the rosette motif is not extraneous to the Baltic ornamentation tradition, and has been known since the Roman Iron Age (Michelbertas 1986: 122, Fig. 41). In the Middle and Late Iron Age this motif spread rather widely. The rosette motif was particularly popular among the Curonians, and was used in the decoration of pins with triangular heads (Tautavičius 1996: 232) and pins used to attach headdresses (Kuncienė 1978a: 9–10, Map 4). Some ornaments found in Pavirvytė grave 138 were more typical of the Curonians than the Semigallians. Probably single ornaments and some decorative elements or ideas penetrated from Curonia to Semigallia at the end of the 11th century. Translated by Algimantas Dautaras Abbreviations LA – Lietuvos TSR archeologijos atlasas, Vilnius, t. IV, 1978 References Engel, C. 1933. Führer durch die vorgeschichtliche Sammlung des Dommuseums von Carl Engel, Riga. Tafel ������������ 14:12. Jakobsons, F. 1999. Divas retas rotas adatas. In: Austrumbaltijas dzelzs laikmeta pçtîjumi. Latvijas vçstures muzeja raksti Nr. 6. Arheoloìija, Rîga, 55-57. Kuncienė, O. 1978. Sudėtinės antkaklės. In: LA, t. IV, Vilnius, 27. Kuncienė, O. 1978a. Smeigtukai galvos apdangalui susegti. In: LA, t. IV, Vilnius, 9-10. Kuncienė, O. 1978b. Vytinės antkaklės kilpiniais galais. In: LA, t. IV, Vilnius, 29-30. Latvijas, 1974. Latvijas PSR arheoloģija, Rîga. Michelbertas, M. 1986. Senasis geležies amžius Lietuvoje, Vilnius. Ilona Vaškevičiūtė Department of Archaeology Lithuanian Institute of History Kražių g. 5 LT-01108 Vilnius e-mail: vaskeviciute������������ @istorija.lt BALTICA 6 The distribution of rosette-headed pins testifies that pins of this type were popular in Semigallia (Fig. 5). The question is: where does the Semigallian tradition of such pins come from? If we look over all Semigallian ornamentation, we will see that openwork and the rosette motif were never popular. In Semigallian sites neither pins with openwork heads, nor flat openwork brooches (Vaitkunskienė 1978a: 68) were found. Actually, only some flat and not openwork brooches are known (Degėsiai) (Vaitkunskienė 1978a: 68), or a flat brooch like a four-leaved clover (Linkuva), and one or two pins with openwork heads (Vaškevičiūtė 1987: 33, Fig. 4; 12). Tautavičius, A. 1996. Vidurinis geležies amžius Lietuvoje (VIX a.), Vilnius. Urbanavičius, V. 1977. Jakštaičių-Meškių kapinyno tyrinėjimai 1974 metais. In: Archeologiniai tyrinėjimai Lietuvoje 1974-1975 metais, Vilnius, 129-134. Vaitkunskienė, L. 1978. Segės žvaigždiniais galais. In: LA, t. IV, Vilnius, 54-55. Vaitkunskienė, L. 1978a. ����������������������� Keturkampės segės. In: LA, t. IV, Vilnius, 68. Vaškevičiūtė, I. 1987. Jauneikių (Joniškio raj.) V-XI a. kapinynas. (4. Krūtinės papuošalai). In: Mokslų akademijos darbai, serija A, Vilnius, 2 (99), 25-38. Vaškevičiūtė, I. 2000. Rozetiniai smeigtukai Žiemgaloje. In: Lietuvos aukštųjų mokyklų mokslo darbai. Istorija, Vilnius, XLIII, 25-27. Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė, R. 1987. Lietuvių tautybės susidarymas.In: Lietuvių etnogenezė, Vilnius, 183-199, fig. 34. ARCHAELOGIA date the Pavirvytė grave to the 11th century. Such dating does not contradict the grave complex with rosetteheaded pins found in the cemetery at Mežotne Centre (Latvijas 1974: 216), and the pin found in the Turaida Pūteļi cemetery. Received: 2002 N aujas smei g tuk ų tipas Ry t ų Pabaltij y Ilona Vaškevičiūtė Santrauka Smeigtukai – vieni iš labiausiai mėgtų baltų papuošalų, tačiau nuo I tūkstantmečio antrosios pusės po Kr. jie nešioti tik žemaičių, žiemgalių, kuršių, latgalių bei sėlių gentyse. Labai retais atvejais kape randame po dvi smeigtukų poras. Toks palaidojimas aptiktas Pavirvytės (Akmenės raj.) kapinyne. Čia kape Nr. 138 palaidota moteris, kurios drabužius puošė dvi smeigtukų poros – vieną sudarė kryžiniai smeigtukai suplotomis plokštelėmis kryžmų galuose, kitą ypač reti smeigtukai rozetine galvute (1: 2 pav.). Lietuvos teritorijoje tokie smeigtukai žinomi tik iš kelių radimo vietų. Du, sudarantys vientisą krūtinės papuošalą, rasti jau minėtame Pavirvytės kapinyne, dar vienas (kartu su kitos formos smeigtuku) rastas Jakštaičių-Meškių kapinyne (1: 1 pav.) bei dar du smeigtukai, priskirtini šiam tipui, rasti atsitiktinai (radimo vieta – Biržų apskritis) ir yra Biržų kraštotyros muziejuje (1: 3 pav.). Keletas smeigtukų rozetine galvute žinomi iš Latvijos. Du, sudarantys vieną krūtinės papuošalą, rasti žiemgališkame Mežuotnės centro kapinyne (1: 4 pav.) ir dar 149 A N e w Ty p e o f B r o n z e P i n i n the Eastern Baltic ILONA VAŠKEVIČIŪTĖ du – taip pat žiemgališkame Salgalės Lieldalūžių kapinyne. Po vieną rasta Ciemaldų Jaunsvirlaukių (Jelgavos r.), Turaidos Pūces (Rygos r.) ir Kerlinių kapinynuose. Smeigtukai yra 14,5–19 cm ilgio, 4–5 cm pločio galvutėmis. Smeigtukų galvutė – tai kiauraraštis žiedelis su 6 reljefinėmis ataugėlėmis, užsibaigiančiomis trimis gumbeliais. Kiek kitokie yra Biržų smeigtukai. Smeigtukus puošiančios ataugėlės tarsi nesujungtos tarpusavyje, taigi smeigtukų galvutės vizualiai atrodo lengvesnės ir dar grakštesnės (1: 3 pav.) Kaip minėta, dauguma šių smeigtukų rasti žiemgalių kapuose. Mežuotnės centro kapas datuojamas XI amžiumi. Smeigtukai, rasti Jakštaičių-Meškių, Lieldalūžių, Kerlinių kapinynuose ir esantys Biržų kraštotyros muziejuje, dėl radimo aplinkybių (nėra kitų datuotinų įkapių) yra sunkiai datuojami. Turaidos Pūces kapinyno kape Nr. 23 smeigtukas rastas viename komplekte su Kanuto (1016–1035 m.) sidabriniu denaru ir arabų dirhemu, o Ciemaldų Jaunsvirlaukių kapinyne – kartu su nedidele pasagine segute (XI–XII a.?). Patikslinti rozetinių smeigtukų nešiojimo laiką gali Pavirvytės kape kartu su rozetiniais smeigtukais rastos kitos įkapės – sudėtinė ir vytinė kilpiniais galais antkaklės, pasaginė segė žvaigždiniais galais, kryžiniai smeigtukai suplotomis plokštelėmis kryžmų galuose. Minėtos įkapės rodo, jog smeigtukai rozetine galvute buvo nešioti XI a. Tokiam datavimui neprieštarauja Mežuotnės centro bei Turaidos Pūces kapinyne rasti minėtieji smeigtukai. Rozetine galvute smeigtukai paplitę Žiemgaloje (5 pav.). Jeigu peržvelgtume visą žiemgalių papuošalų ornamentiką, pamatytume, kad čia niekada nebuvo populiarus ažūro ar rozetės motyvas. Tačiau šis motyvas nesvetimas kitų baltų genčių ornamentikai, ypač mėgstamas kuršių. Matyt, iš Kuršo į Žiemgalą XI a. pabaigoje plito ne tik pavieniai papuošalai, bet ir kai kurie puošybos elementai ar idėjos. 150 Vladimir Kulakov D i e R u n e n d e s S a m l a n d s :�� F u n d e����� S a i s o� n��� 2 00 � � 1� D i e R u n e n D E S S a m l a n ds :�� F ���������� u n de����� S a i so � ��� n 2 �00 � �1 152 Vladimir Kulakov Abstract Im Jahre 2001 wurden in die Kulturchichten der wikingerzeitlichen Siedlung Korallen-Berg (Kurische Nehrung, Kaliningrader Gebiet) der Funde mit Runen entdekt (eine bronzene Plattenfibel und ein Fragment der Knochenplatte). Ein Anhänger mit einem runenartigen Zeichen befindet sich im Besitz des Museus in Zelenogradsk. Key words: Kurische Nehrung, Runenfunde, Korallen-Berg, Wikinger, Feindwörter. 2001 wurde bedeutend für die Entwicklung ���� der Skandinavistik��������������������������������� von der Begebenheit bezeichnet: ��� in der Serie “Die altertümlichsten Quellen nach der Geschichte Osteuropas” h������� �������� at das Licht ������������������ die nächste Variante des ���� Corpus����� ����������� der ������������������������ Denkmäler �������������� des runischen Schrifttum�������������������������� in Osteuropa (Мельникова 2001) ��������������� gesehen. Die erste Erfahrung solcher Ausgabe wurde Prof. ������ Dr. ���� E���������������� .��������������� Mel’nikova���� in ������������������������������ 1977 unternommen und erfasste wie altrussischen�������������������������������� ��������������������������������������������� , auch skandinavisch������������ en���������� Arealen�� ���������. ��� In jene ferne Zeit der besonderen Verwunderung rief das Fehlen in ����������� Corpus����� der ������������������������ Denkmäler des �������������� runischen Schrifttum����������������������������������������� des Materials aus ���������������������� der baltischen Stammarealen��������������� nicht herbei. Die ������������������������������������ für die sowjetische historische Wissenschaft traditionelle Ausnahme der ��������������� Balten����� aus der ��������������������������������������������� Wikingerb������������������������������������ ewegung, das Fehlen in den Moskauer Bibliotheken vieler wissenschaftlicher Ausgaben aus der “�������������������������� ��������������������������� baltischen���������������� Republiken����� des ���������������������� UdSSR”, endlich - die Unwissenheit der baltischen Sprachen ��������������� haben ��������� ganz das Fehlen des Materials aus ������������ Baltikum���� in ������� Corpus� ��������� 1977����� erkl����� ä���� rt��. ������������������ Doch der ��������� runische ���������������������������� Denkmäler aus s������������� �������������� ü������������ d-���������� östlich��� en� Baltikums��������������� werden und in ������� Corpus� �������������������� 2001, in die Zeiten des offiziell�� �����������e �������������� Distanzierung� �������� von die ���� �������������������� “beseitigend�������� e������� s����� ������ ich” sowjetischen ������������������� w������������������ issenschaftlichen ����������������������� Traditionen ignoriert. Prof. Dr. E����������������� .���������������� Mel’nikova����� ha��t� vollständig �������������������������� nicht bemerkt alt und verlaßend in die letzten Jahre der Angabe über den Funde der Runen und der runerartige Zeichnen� in Baltikum����������������������������� ������������������������������������� (ihre Zusammenfassung ������ sieh��: �������� Kulakov� 2001). Offensichtlich die �������������������������� Runenz�������������������� eichen (die Minimum - die runenartige Begriffzeichen) aus prußisch����� e Areal����������������������������������������������� , mehr bis zu ihrer Publikation (�������������� Kulakov������� 1993а: 104-108) festgelegt durch ������������ Prof. Dr. ��������������������� E���������������� .��������������� Mel’nikova���� in Corpus� ���������������������������������������������� 2001 sind beiläufig mit den folgenden Wörtern bezeichnet: “Wenn es nicht die zufälligen Kratzern, so die Besitzz����������������������������������������� ������������������������������������������������ eichen, ��������������������������������� die Zeichnen��������������������� für das Gedächtnis, aber ������������������������� nicht ������������������� dem kommunikativen ������������������ Text sein dürfen” (Мельникова 2001: 80). Dabei niedriger werden die Zeichen auf Dirhemen������������������������������� ��������������������������������������� aus osteurop������������������ �������������������������� ä����������������� ischen M��������� ü�������� nzsch��� ä�� tzen������������� (Мельникова ������ 2001: ������������������������� 17-174) ausserordentlich ausführlich betrachtet, es ist von “��������������������� die Zeichnen��������� für das Gedächtnis” nicht unterscheidend formal. In diesem Fall haben ��������������������������������������������� die ����������������������������������������� abgesondert������������������������������ en runischen������������������ und ������������� runenartigen� Zeichen sich �������������������������������������� w������������������������������������� ü������������������������������������ rdig�������������������������������� der wissenschaftlichen Analyse erwiesen. Hier beobachtet ����������������������������������� man noch �������������������� eins das helle Beispiel die hartnäckige Unlust von den Historikern und den Archäologen Rußlands, das baltische ������������������� Material ��������� bei der Analyse des Phänomenes der Wikingerb���� ������������� ewegung, werdend für die einheimischen historischen Disziplinen vom obligatorisch��e� Teil ����������������������� der Erfüllung der wissenschaftlichen Programme (�������� K������� улаков ������ 1998: ����� 241) zu berücksichtigen. Doch die reale Situation, die in die Archäologie �������� des Baltikums������������������������������������������������� existiert, ist von der kameralen ������������������������� Konstruktionen ��������������� der gegenwärtigen Forscher der Epoche ������������� der Wikinger� fern. In das Jahr des Erscheinens aus dem Druck nächst��e� Corpus ��������������������������������������������� der ����������������������������������������� runischen Aufschriften ������������������������������� in ��������������� westbaltischen Stammareal����������������������������� , auf der Halbinsel ��������� Samland��˙ ������������ wurden drei neu����������������������������������������������� e���������������������������������������������� Funde���������������������������������������� ��������������������������������������������� der ��������������������������������������� Runen������������������������������ und der runenartigen ��������������������� Zeichen �������� gemacht. Nicht rechnend sich vom Experten in ����� Skandinavistik�������������������������������������������� und die Natter besonders in der Arbeit mit Runenfunden�������������������� , werde nur von der ���������������������� Publikation dies������ en Artefacten������� , ihre Interpretation ����������������������������������������� gelassen den Spezialisten begrenzt werden. Für die sommerlichen Monate 2001 in de�������������� n������������� Begriff ������������ des� Historisch-arch����������������������������������� ä���������������������������������� ologischen Museum in Zelenogradsk (ehem. Cranz, Kr. Samland)����������� unter den ����������������� ������������� viel��������� en������� Strei������ funden����������������������������������������������� hat man ������������������������������������������ Artefact ü���������������������������� ����������������������������� bergeben�������������������� , die herbeirufende besondere Interesse gehandelt. Es ist Anh������ ��������� ä����� nge��, gemacht��������������������������������������� e�������������������������������������� aus ��������������������������������� dem Klotze der������������������� S����������������� ������������������ ilber������������ barre (sog. “Typ ����� litauische Barre”)��. Die ���� Öffnung ����������������������������� im Oberteil ��������� des Artefact�������������������������������������������������� war grob durchbrechen���������������������������� ���������������������������������������� . Auf einer der Oberflächen nach noch nicht der gerinnenden Oberfläche des Metales wurde Rune� ����� “юurs” ������������� (Abb. 2, ���������������������������� links) durchgeschnitten. Die Anhä�������� nge����� ist vom ��������������������������� ����������������������� ortlichen�������������� Bewohner V��� ���� .�� S ������� Ivanov 2-3 Jahre jenes rückwärts in der Uferunterbrechung (in Offnung����� der ������������������������������������������ Torfschicht der ������������������������������ �������������������������� intensiv schwarz���������� en�������� Farbe) auf dem r������ ������� echt��e ���������������������������������� Ufer������������������������������ ����������������������������� Medwezija-Fl����������������� üß��������������� (ehem. Beerenbruch-Graben)���� in ���� 0,4 ����������������������������� Kilometer zu Nord-Westen von des Heiligtumes�������� in Ort� ���� ������������������������������ Dubki������������������������� -Kunterstrauch entdeckt. Erwannte Heiligtum������������������������������� stellt oval im Plan den Platz mit Ma������� ß������ nahme� ��� 94 ��ő 47 ����� M� vor����������� ������������������������ , nach dem Perimeter ���������� umgeben von den Rollsteinen. Im Zentrum ����������� des Heilig- BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Abb��.� ��� 1. ���� Die Denkmäler der Archäologie der Ufer des ���� Kurischen Haff���������� : 1 - die neolitische und bronzezeitliche Denkmäler; 2 - ���������� die Flachgr������������ ä����������� berfeldern� ��� I�� .�IV��������� .�������� ������� Jh. n. ������ Chr.��; 3 - ���������� die Flachgr������������ ä����������� berfeldern� V������������� .������������ -VIII������� . Jh��� .; 5 - ���������� die Flachgr������������ ä����������� berfeldern� IX��������������� .�������������� -XII���������� . Jh������ . Von den arabischen Ziffern sind die archäologisch��e� Denkmäler des küstennahen Streifens auf dem Territorium kaliningrader das �������� Kaliningrader Gebiet ������� und teilweise der L���������� ����������� itauisch��e� Republik bezeichnet: 1. Nida������� , ����� Siedlung������� , V���� .���- ����� III��.� Jt. v. Chr.;� 2. ��� Morskoje� (Pillkoppen), Fundstelle���� -2, Fr�������������� ü������������� hbronzezeit��; 3. ��������� Morskoje� (Pillkoppen), Fundstelle����� -1, III������ . Jt. ��� v. ������ Chr.��; 4 - 8. ��������� Morskoje� (Pillkoppen), Fundstellen���- 3-6, ����� III������ ��������� . Jt��.� ��� v. ������ Chr.��; 9. ���������������������������������������������������� Morskoje, ������������������������������������������������� Schlo���������������������������������� ß��������������������������������� berg Piles-Kalns����������������� , XII������������ .����������� -XIV������� . Jh��� .; ��������������������������������� 10. Rybatschyj������������������� ����������������������������� (Rossitten), Wall “�������������������������� Querwall������������������ ”����������������� , XI������������� .������������ -XIII������� . Jh��� .; ���������������������������������������������������� 11. Stangenwalde, Flachgr��������������������������� ���������������������������������� ä�������������������������� berfeld������������������� , XII�������������� .������������� - XIV������� . Jh.��; ���������������������������� 12. Rybatschyj�������������� ������������������������ , Siedlung���� ������������ -1, ��������� III������ . Jt. ��� v. ������ Chr.��; 13. Rybatschyj�������������� ������������������������ , Siedlung���� ������������ -2, ��������� III������ . Jt. ��� v. ������ Chr.��; ������������������������������������� 14. Rybatschyj����������������������� ��������������������������������� , Schlo���������������� ��������������������� ß��������������� berg����������� (Rasita); ��������������������������������� 15. Neu-Lattenwalde, Fund�������� ������������ stelle, ����� III��. Jt. v. Chr.��; 16. ���� Lesnoje�������������������������� ��������������������������������� (Sarkau), Wall, XI������� . Jh.��; ���� 17. ��������������������� Lesnoje, Fund�������� ������������ stelle, ��������� III������ . Jt. ��� v. ������ Chr.��; ���� 18. ������������������������������� Lesnoje������������������������ , ���������������������� Flachgr��������������� ä�������������� berfeld������� , XII��.� - XIII������ . Jh.� ���� 19. ���������������������������������������������������� Yrzekapinis, Flachgr�������������������������������� ��������������������������������������� ä������������������������������� berfeld������������������������ , VIII������������������ . -��������������� ���������������� Anf����������� . XII������ Jh��� .; ������������������������������������������������������ 20. Klinzovka����������������������������������������� �������������������������������������������������� (Wickiau), Flachgr���������������������� ����������������������������� ä��������������������� berfeld�������������� -2, V��������� . Jh. n. Chr.;� 21. ����������������������������������������������������������������������� ������������������������������������������������������������������� Malinovka���������������������������������������������������������� (Wargenau), Siedlung������������������������������������� ��������������������������������������������� und Flachgr������������������������� �������������������������������� ä������������������������ berfeld����������������� , VI������������� .������������ - XI������� .������ Jh��� ����� .��;� ��������������������������������������������� 22. Klinzovka�������������������������������� ����������������������������������������� , ������������������������������ Flachgr����������������������� ä���������������������� berfeld��������������� -3, XI��������� .�������� - XII��. Jh��� .; ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 23. Mochovoje ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� (Wiskiauten)��������������������������������������������������������������������������������� , Siedlung����������������������������������������������������������������������� ������������������������������������������������������������������������������� und H����������������������������������������������������������������� ������������������������������������������������������������������ ü���������������������������������������������������������������� gel- und Flachgr������������������������������������������������ ë����������������������������������������������� berfeld���������������������������������������� Kaup bei Wiskiauten, entsprechend ����� Anf��. ���� IX��. JH�������������������������� . - ���������������������� J.�������������������� 1016, V������������� .������������ - XI������� . Jh��� .; ������������������������������� 24. Zelenogradsk��������������� ��������������������������� (Cranz), Wall ������������������������������������� “������������������������������������ Schwedenschanze��������������������� ”�������������������� , XIII�������������� .������������� - XIV������� . Jh��� .; ����������������������� 25. Sosnovka ������������������� (Bledau)��, Schlo��������������������������������������������� ß�������������������������������������������� berg-Heiligtum������������������������������ Galgenpusch, XI�������������� .������������� - XII������� . Jh��� .; �������������������������������������������������������� 26. Muromskoje������������������������������������������ ���������������������������������������������������� (Laptau), Flachgr������������������������ ������������������������������� ä����������������������� berfeld���������������� , X������������� .������������ - XI������� . Jh��� .; ���� 27. ��������� Insel Ry��� batschyj�������������������������������������������� (Insel Rodahn), Schlo���������������������� ��������������������������� ß��������������������� berg����������������� , X�������������� .������������� - XIV������� . Jh��� .; �������������������������������������������������������������������� 28. Zaton����������������������������������������������������������� ���������������������������������������������������������������� (Glomsack), Burg ���������������������������������������������� Neuhausen, ����������������������������������������� XIII�������������������������� . ������������������������ -����������������������� XIV������������������� ���������������������� . Jh��������������� ., Hafen, XVI��.� - XVIII����������������������������������������������������� . Jh������������������������������������������������� ., Speisehalle����������������������������������� ���������������������������������������������� Glomsack, XVIII������������������� . Jh��������������� . - ����������� um��������� J.������ �������� 1815��;� ��������������������������������������������������������� 29.������������������������������������������������������ Mokroje���������������������������������������������� , H������������������������������������������� �������������������������������������������� ü������������������������������������������ gel- und Flachgr�������������������������� ë������������������������� berfeld������������������ , XI�������������� .������������� - XIV������� . Jh��� .; ���� 30. Chrabrovo�������������������������������������������� (Powunden), ������������������������������� Bistumschlo�������������������� ß������������������� ,������������������ XIII������������� .������������ - XV������� . Jh��� .; ������������������������������������������ 31. Nekrasovo����������������������������� �������������������������������������� -���������������������������� Chrabrovo������������������� , Wall, XIII������� . Jh��� .; ���������������������� 32. Nekrasovo��������� ������������������ , Schloß Schaaken, XIII������������� .������������ - XV������� . Jh��� .; ���� 33. �������������������������������������������������� Lazowskoje���������������������������������������� (Trömpau), Schlo����������������������� ���������������������������� ß���������������������� berg������������������ , XI�������������� .������������� - XII������� . Jh��� .; ���� 34. ����������������������������� Lazowskoje������������������� , Flachgr���������� ����������������� ä��������� berfeld��, ������ IX���� .���XI������� .������ ����� Jh��� .; �������������������������������������������������������������� 35. Wasilewskoje���������������������������������������������� ���������������������������������������������������������� (Wesselhöfen), Schlo������������������������� ������������������������������ ß������������������������ berg�������������������� , XIII�������������� .������������� - XIV������� . Jh��� .; ������������������������������������������������� 36. Puschkonskoje�������������������������������� ��������������������������������������������� (Gallgarben), Schlo������������ ����������������� ß����������� berg������� , XIV��. Jh��� .; ���� 37. Drozdovo����������������������������������������������������� ������������������������������������������������������������� (Droosden), ���������������������������������������� Schlo����������������������������������� ß���������������������������������� berg-Heiligtum�������������������� , XII��������������� .�������������� - XIII������� . Jh��� .; ������������������������������������������������������ 38. Polessk������������������������������������������� �������������������������������������������������� , ����������������������������������������� Flachgr���������������������������������� äberfeld, XI���������������������� .��������������������� - XII��������������� . Jh����������� ., östlich - Schloß Labiau, XIII������������� .������������ - XV������� . Jh��� .; ���� 39. ������������������������������������������������ Löbertshof, Flahgr������������������������������ ������������������������������������ ä����������������������������� berfeld���������������������� , XI������������������ .����������������� - XII����������� .���������� Jh������� ��������� .; 40. ������������������������������������� Tiulenino���������������������������� (Viehof), Flachgr���������� ����������������� äberfeld, XII��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� .�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� -XIII��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� . Jh����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� .; 41. Retschki�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� (Groß Pöppeln), ��������������������������������������������������������������������������� Schlo���������������������������������������������������������������������� ß��������������������������������������������������������������������� berg-Heiligtum������������������������������������������������������� , XIII������������������������������������������������� .������������������������������������������������ - XIV������������������������������������������ . Jh�������������������������������������� .; 42. Korallen-Berge (Süd und Nord), Siedlungen������������������� X����������������� . -�������������� ��������������� ������������� XI����������� . Jh������� .; 43. ���������������������������������������������� Dubki����������������������������������������� -Kunterstrauch, Heiligtum���������������� ������������������������� , X. ����������� Jh. ������� (nach: �������� Кулаков 1995: ������������� 86-90, рис. ����� 1). ��� 153 Vladimir Kulakov D i e R u n e n d e s S a m l a n d s ��: F u n d e����� S a i s o� n���2 00 � � 1� Denkmales ����������������������������������������� des Runensrifttum������������������������ auf keine Weise nicht. Die semantische Bedeutung ������������������������� der Rune ���������������� auf dies�������� er Fund� - ����������������������������������������������� apothtop��������������������������������������� ä�������������������������������������� ische (vorziehend)�������������������� oder eigent�������� �������������� ü������� mliche. Abb. 2. Silbern��������������� e Anh���������� änger aus ��������������������������� Dubki���������������������� -��������������������� Kunterstrauch�������� (������ links - Avers�� ). tumes befindet sich����� das von ����������������������������� den Steinen ausgestellte Bassin mit der Wasserquelle (Смирнова 2001: 170), sakralisierende durch der Prussen��.� Das ������������������ Vorhandensein auf einem der Steine der Einzäunung des ���������������� Heiligtumes� des Bildes ������������������������������������������� des Opfertriplet der fr�������������������� ü������������������� hmittelalterlichen S������������������ ä����������������� mben������������� läßt dieses ������������������������������� Denkmal ����������������������� des prußisch����������� ������������������� e Kult����� zu, in X. Jh.���������������������� zu datieren (Кулаков ������������������ 1988: Abb. 8,12). ���� Dieses Heiligtum����������������������������������������� trat in der sakrale ���������������������������� Ring �������������������� ringsherum des polyethnischen handels������������������������� -handwerklichen Zentrums Kaup ��������� (Кулаков ����������� 1993б: 43). Grob, mit nicht entfernt�������������������� en������������������ ����������������� Niednageln������� (Abb. ����������� 2, rechts) erledigt ���������������������� die Anh��������������� ä�������������� nger���������� mit Rune� ����� ����������������������� “юurs” ���������������� w��������������� urde nicht für Tragweise����������������������������� auf dem Körper des Menschen vorbereitet, ������������� aber����������������������������������������������� für der��������������������������������������� kultischen ��������������������������� Ziele (das Opfer���������� gabe��������� , ������� die ��� votive������������� Aktie), daß ���������������������������������� von der Stelle ������������������� der Fund der Anh��� ä�� nger��, verbunden ��������������������������������������������� zu den �������������������������������� Heiligtum ������������������ betont wird. Sich befindend in seine Grenze (auf dem Zweig des ������������ heilige Baum�������������������������������������������� ?) ����������������������������������������� die Anh���������������������������������� ä��������������������������������� nger����������������������������� dann hat sich in den Wasser verlaufend in der Nähe ����������������������������� der Graben������������������� erwiesen, die und die����������������������� se Fund���������������� auf den Norden ���������������������� von ������������������ Heiligtum��������� bezogen haben, wo sie in der endlichen Rechnung in die Hande V���� .��� S. ���������������������������������������������� Ivanov���������������������������������������� geraten hat. Solcher Gattung silbern��� en Anh������������������������������������������������ ä����������������������������������������������� ngern������������������������������������������ , gemacht äußerst nachlässig, begegnen im Material der ������������������������������������������� Wikingerzeit������������������������������� , einschließlich - auf zentral Schlo��������������������������������� ß�������������������������������� berg���������������������������� in ������������������������ Gniozdovo��������������� nicht selten. ��������������� Dort die ���������� Anh��� ä�� nger��������� , habend offenbar ���������������������������������������� die votive ��������������������������� Bedeutung, �������������������� wird ��������� man von der zweiten H������������������������������������� �������������������������������������� älfte X������������������������������ .����������������������������� - XI������������������������ .����������������������� ���������������������� Jh.������������������� datiert. (Пушкина 2001: 316). Die Wahrheit, auf �������������������� den runischen������� ������ Anh��� ä�� ngern ����������������������������������� Skandinaviens (östliches Schweden, Insel ������ ������� Ö������ land��) existieren nucht ���������������������������������������� nur ein��������������������������� Zeichen,������������������ sondern auch����� von ein bis zu drei ������������������������ Runenz������������������ eilen (Мельникова ������ 2001: ����� 176, 177).� Doch ����� “Rune� ������ “юurs”����������������������� ����������������������������� w��������������������� ie das Symbol ������� des As� urs spielte die wichtige Rolle in altskandinavische� ������������������ Magie��: ohne �������������������������������������������� es, wie in eddische ���������������������������� Lied��������������� “die ��������� SigdrivaRede������������������������������������������������� ”, d��������������������������������������������� ���������������������������������������������� ie ������������������������������������������ magische ��������������������������������� Formel gesagt wird, ist gesehen, d�������������������������������������������������� arf die gesuchte Aktion nicht �������������������������� anstellt������������ ” (Мельникова 2001: 185) nicht. Deshalb auf Anh�������������� ����������������� ä������������� nger��������� aus den Umgebungen des ���������������� Heiligtumes� Dubki/Kunterstrauch� �������������������� wurde der Skandinavier, keine Zeit sich wendend mit dem Gebet������������������������������������������� zu den Göttern, ein ���������������������� Runenzeichen���������� begrenzt ist bekannt. Diese Besonderheit ���� des ����������������� veröffentlicht��� en Artefactes������������������������������������ verringert seine Bedeutung wie des ю 154 In der Feldsaison 2001. die B������������������������ ������������������������� altische Expedition des Institutes der Archäologie der Akademie �������������������� der Wissenschaften Ru���������������������������������������� ß��������������������������������������� lands���������������������������������� hat zur Forschung der ��������������� Altert����� ü���� mer� des s������������������������� ü������������������������ d-westlichen ����������� westlichen ��������������������� Teiles �������������� der Kurischen Nehrung����������������������������������������� (Nord����������������������������������� teil des Bezirk Zelenogradskij����� des� Kaliningrader����������������������������� Gebietes) angetreten. Einen ������������ Teil dieser Arbeiten wurden die Ausgrabungen, geleitet auf Sied����� lung in Ort Korallen-Berg��������������� (������������� von kurische “Koralis” ������������“K������������������� ö������������������ nig”) am südlich�� ���������e ����������� D���������� ü��������� ne statt. Zum erstenmal ������������������� das ��������������� archäologisch��e��������������� �������������� Denkmal, sich einrichtend in 6 Kilometer zu S�������������� ��������������� ü������������� d-W���������� esten von Rossitten, Kr. Fischhausen/Samland (jetzt - die Siedlung ������������ Rybatschij��) auf ��������������������������� südlich���������������� e��������������� und nord������ liche D����������������������������������������������� ü���������������������������������������������� nen������������������������������������������� Korallen-Berge, wurde der Wissenschaft in 1869 bekannt. Er wurde im Lauf der archäologisch��� en� Untersuchungen, geleitet in the Herbst jener Jahres nach der der Initiative der Physikalisch-ökonomischen Gesellschaft (Königsberg) auf ��������������������� Kurische Nehrung����� von den Professoren ������������������������������ v. Wittich�������������������� , ������������������ G����������������� . ��������������� Berendt�������� und ��� R��. ������ Lomeyer���������������������������������������������������� geöffnet. Eine ihr��������������������������������� e�������������������������������� grundlegende Aufgabe waren die Ausgrabungen des ����������������������������������� Flachgr������������������������ ä����������������������� berfeldes Stangenwalde� (Кулаков 1990: 86, 87), vorhanden östlich von Koral������ len�������� -������� Berge��. Das ������������������������������������������� schlechte herbstliche Wetter hat nicht gestört, in 1869 qualitativ Probegrabung ������������������������� in KorallenBerge������������ zu leiten. ��������������������������������������� Ist, habend���������������������������� ���������������������������������� auf südlich���������������� e��������������� und nord������ liche D������������������������������������������ ü����������������������������������������� nen�������������������������������������� unter�������������������������������� Grassschiht��������������������� auf die Schicht ���� des ����������� “steri����� len��” D����������������������������������������������� ü���������������������������������������������� nensandes������������������������������������� gesehen, die obenerwähnten Kollegen aus Königsberg haben dieses Denkmal wie �������������� zerstört�� ����������e� von der Erosion �������������������������������� Flachgr������������������������� ä������������������������ berfeld����������������� (S�������������� c������������� hifferdecker 1873: 51) berücksichtigt.������������� ������������������������ Nachdem die ���������������� D����������� ������������ ü���������� nen Korallen-Berge����������� (wenn mit ������������������������������ Probegrabung������������������ , so unbedeutend) in 1870 durch ������������������������������������������� Herrn Paul Schifferdecker untersucht ����������� wurden, hat der Zweifeln nicht geblieben was in ���� Ort Korallen-Berge���������������������������������������� die Reste ����������������������������� der Siedlung����������������� (Schifferdecker 1873: 60) entdeckt sind. Auf es bezeichnen gefunden��� en� in die einigen Punkt����������������������������� e���������������������������� auf südlich���������������� e��������������� und nord������ liche D��������������������������������������������� ü�������������������������������������������� nen����������������������������������������� die Reste der Ansammeln ���������������� der Holzkohlen��, die Schicht der ���� ������������� verbrennend��e� “Häuschen” ������������������� a������� �������� uf dem südlichen Rand des Hügels I, des gespalteten Gerölles (ist�������������������������������������������������� Konservant��������������������������������������� auf dem Herd in die nächtliche Zeit), die Steine mit den Resten “���� d��� er ��������������������� L�������������������� ehml���������������� ösung” zwischen ihnen, die Keramik und d����������������� i���������������� e��������������� unverbrannten� �������� Tierk��� nochens (Schifferdecker 1873: 56-59). Die Wahrheit, die eingeschränkten finanziellen Umstände haben Herrn ������ P���������������������������������������������������� . �������������������������������������������������� Schifferdecker������������������������������������ nicht zugelassen, die Ausgrabungen wieder der ��������������������������������������������� geöffnet��������������������������������� ����������������������������������������� en fr���������������������������� ü��������������������������� hmittelalterliche Siedlung� in die nachfolgenden Feldsaisons zu entfalten. Diese Möglichkeit wurde den Archäologen nur durch 131 Jahr nach den Arbeiten Herrn ���������������������������� P. Schifferdecker����� auf Korallen������� -������ Berge� ������������ vorgestellt. BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Abb. 4. Foto des Fragmentes des Elchs������������������ ����������������������� chulterblattes Nr� ��� 250�������������������������� a aus Korallen-Berg������� (Süd). der etnisch-kulturellen�������������������������������� Charakteristiken des gegebenen Denkmales. Abb. 3. �������������������������������������������� Die Funde����������������������������������� mit den Runenz�������������������� �������������������������� eichen aus Grabungs��������� fl����������������������������������������������������������� ä���������������������������������������������������������� che������������������������������������� I ���������������������������������� der Siedlung Korallen-Berg�������� (Süd): 1������������������ - Avers��������� �������������� mit der ���� Zinnplattierung������������������������������������������ und Revers������������������������������� ����������������������������������������� mit durchgeschnitten���������� e Zeichen der������������������������������������������������� B����������������������������������������������� ������������������������������������������������ ronzen����������������������������������������� fibel������������������������������������ Nr��������������������������������� ����������������������������������� 8 ������������������������������ aus��������������������������� dem Oberhorizont; 2 - das Fragment des Elchs��������������������������������������� �������������������������������������������� chulterblattes Nr���������������������� ������������������������ 250a aus dem unteren Horizont mit den durchgeschnittenen Zeichen. Die Siedlung��������������������������������������� wurde im Anfang Juli 2001 im Lauf der archäologisch��e�������������������������������������� ������������������������� Untersuchungen, geleitet von �������� der von ���� der B��������������������� ���������������������� altischen Expedition �������������������������� IfA����������������������� der RAdW�������������� ������������������ auf Kurische ��������� Nehrung����������� (Кулаков, ���������� Тепляков, ���������� Пузакова, ���������� 2001: 44) entdeckt. Leider, N����������������������������������� �������������������������������� ord�������������������������������� d������������������������������� ü������������������������������ ne���������������������������� ��������������������������� Korallen-Berg�������������� , besetzt vom ���� Hof Herrn ������������������������� A.I. Grigor’ev����� und �������������������������� verfügend der kulturellen Schicht der �������������������������������������� Wikingerzeit�������������������������� , zu den Ausgrabungen ist nicht brauchbar. Die Arbeiten wurden auf südlich��e D������������������������������� ü������������������������������ ne���������������������������� Korallen-Berg�������������� ��������������������������� unternommen. �������� In Juli ����������� 2001 unter ander��������������������� e Funde�������������� in erosierte ���������� Teil ��������������������������� dies ����������������� D���������������� ü��������������� ne ������������ wurden drei eisern�������������������� en Barren����������� gefunden. ������������������������� Ähnlich������������������ e����������������� Funde����������� ���������������� unter dem Namen Eisen-Schlacken erwähnt ������������������ Herrn P. Schifferdecker��������������������������������������������� unter �������������������������������������� der Materiellen����������������������� auf Nord�������������� d������������� ü������������ ne���������� Korallen��������� Berg����������������� (S�������������� c������������� hifferdecker ����������� 1873: 55). ���������������������� Das alles bezeichnete auf den offenbar nicht gewöhnlichen Charakter sich einrichtend���������������� e��������������� hier���������� Siedlung�. Von der Aufgabe der Arbeiten auf südlich���������� e D������� ü������ ne Korallen-Berg������������������������������������� (wegen des Studiums einer ���������� D��������� ü�������� ne������ wird seine Benennung in diesem Fall in der einzigen Zahl) verwendet es gab die Entdeckung der kulturellen Schicht und die Feststellung der ������������������������ chronologisch������� �������������������� en����� und� Für den Beschluß der erwähnten höher Aufgabe auf westlich�������������������������� e Grenze������������������ des hochgelegnen ����������������� Teiles des ������ D����� ü���� nenp�������������������������������� latzes wurde die ������������������� Grabungsfl����� ä���� che �������������� I������������� .������������ B���������� ����������� ei seinem Aufmachen wurden zwei ungleichzeitige Horizonte mit den zahlreichen archäologischen Komplexen des Siedlungsc��������������������� harakteres entdeckt. Im ���������������� ������������� s������������ ü����������� d���������� -östlich��e� ��������� Teil ���� der Grabungsfl����������������������������������������� ä���������������������������������������� che���������������� , innerhalb des ��������������������� Oberranges wurde die Pfosteng����������������� rube 1 geöffnet. Ihre ������������������������������ Form im Plan - oval, ���� Ma�� ßnahme� 0,30 ������� ��x� ���������������� 0,26 ����������� M���������� , ist die ������ �������������� Tiefe ������������������� von der ����������� Obergrenze des Oberhorizontes 0,13 M, ����������������������� durch Sanderde��������� mit der grossen Quantität ����������������������������������� der Asche- und Kohle��������������� inschaltungen, bezeichnend auf gefüllt was die stehende hier fr����� ������� ü���� her� Säule der Einwirkung des Feuers unterworfen wurde. In 0,20 M������������ ������������� zum Norden �������������� von der Grube ������� 1, auf ������� 0,53 M� �� ist es als das Niveau ihres Boden höher ist entdeckt leicht geschmolzene bronzene Plattenfibel������������ . Auf ihrer Vorderseite wurden die Reste ������������������������� der sog. Zinnplattierung� aufgespart. Auf der ������������������������������������ Hinters����������������������������� eite������������������������� der Fibel befindet sich� das durchschneidene ���������������������������� Zeichen ������������ als “�������������������� ��������������������� d������������������� as schräge Kreuz”, entsprechend���������� der Rune “������������ ������������� geb��������� o”������� (Abb. 3,1).� ������ ������� Dieses Zeichen kann sind, des Besitzers oder des Bezeichnens der Gabe dies����������������� ��������������������� er Fibel bekannt. �������� Die geraden Analogien dies���������������������������� er Spange������������������� sind auf kurische ��������� Schlo��������������������������������������������� ß�������������������������������������������� bergBirutes Kalnas�������������������������� bekannt, wo solch�������� e Fibel durch Prof. Dr. Vladas ���������� Ž��������� ulkus in� ��������������������� IX������������������� .������������������ -XII�������������� . Jh.��������� datiert wird (Ž������ ulkus� 1997: ������ 176 ������������ pav.,7, 32 ����������������������� lent.), ������������ ferner - in nordkurischen Fudmaterial in Lettland, ���������������� teilweise - auf Flachgr��������� ä�������� berfeld� ������������������������������������ Laiviai und Viš��������������������� p�������������������� ilis (Vaitkunskienė 1981: 54, 34 pav). Typologische������������������� ������������������������������� Vorgänger solch��� er Fibeln�������������������������������� kann �������������������������� der Artefact�������������� , gefunden in ������������� 1991 auf die 155 D i e R u n e n d e s S a m l a n d s ��: F u n d e����� S a i s o� n���2 00 � � 1� Vladimir Kulakov Aschenplatz (���������������������������������������� Stellen der Verbrennung����������������� )���������������� auf Gr��������� ����������� ä�������� berfeld H�������������������������������������������� ü������������������������������������������� nenberg������������������������������������ (���������������������������������� bei Rantau-Neu Kuhren in Noed-Samland����������� ) (Kulakov 1994: ������������������������������������� 2 pav sein.,1), aufsteigend zu den ������������������������������������������������ traditionelle kurische ���������������������������������� Sticknadeln ������������������������� mit ��������� kreuzf��� ö�� rmige Kopfen�. Innerhalb des unteren, frühen Horizontes, geöffnet auf Grabungsfl������������������������������������������ ä����������������������������������������� che�������������������������������������� I unter dem sich einrichtenden höher Ansammeln der ���� verbrannten ����������������������������������� Holzplatten������������ (wurde der Teil ������������������ der Hausruine����� ) in Q. ��� 10 ������������������������� die hohe Konzetration der Funden������������� bezeichnet. Unter ���������������������������� ihnen: 40 Knochen der Tiere (einschliesslich - des ������������������� Elchk�������������� nochens), den ����� Teil der Schale des Hirsches, des ������������������������� zwei ��������������������� ���������������� Bockh����������� ornes, das bearbeite Fragment ����������������������������������������� des Hornes und das Fragment des Schulterblattes ������������������ des Elches�������� (?) Nr� ��� ����� 250ŕ ��������������� mit geglattene� ����������� von der äusser Oberfläche, auf die ������������������� beobechtet man die durchgeschnitten ������ durch ������������������������������� Pfriem������������������������� Zeichen, sehr erinnernd der Runen der ���� jünger��������� ��������������� e Futark� ��������� “�������� kaun���� ”���/ ��������� “юurs” / ������ “����� gebo�”1 (Abb. 3,2; 4). Das letzte Zeichen von der Schreibung mahnt das ähnliche Zeichen auf ����������������� Fibel Nr��������� 8 (Abb. 3,1). ������ Außerdem zusammen mit dies������������ en Funde���� in ��� Q. �������� 10 sind ��� 27 Fragmente der Wände der ������������������������������ grau-gelben drehgemachten Tongef����������������������� äß��������������������� en��������������������������������������� , das Fragment ������������������������ des Lehmblockes��������� �������������������� mit dem Bilsenkraut von der Fasadeno��������������������� ����������������������������� berfläche, das Stück des Lehmblockes������������������������������� mit dem �������������������������� Unterdr��������������� ü�������������� ck der Stange� gefunden. Das �������������������������� flache Knochenf����������� ragment ��� Nr� �������������������� 250����������������� a���������������� war zusätzlich abgeplattet����������������������������� , auf daß sein Schnitt (Abb. ����������������� 3,2) bezeichnet. Möglich, wurde diese Operation bei der Hilfe eines aus der flach���������������������� ��������������������������� en�������������������� S������������������ ������������������� chleif������������ steinen����� , im ���������� Überschuß gefunden in ��������������� Grabungsfl����� ä���� che� ��� I. ������������������ D����������������� ann dem scharfen Gegenstand (eisern������������������������������� e Pfriem����������������������� ) gab es zwei parallel die horizontalen Linien��������������������������� geschnittet��������������� , und zwischen ihnen sind drei Zeichen, entsprochen mit ���������� der Runen� der jünger�������������������� en Futark����������� zugefügt. Die ����������������������� Aufschrift wird in die semantische Linie, erinnernd die ��������������� apotroph������� ä������ ische Formel aufgebaut. Sie ist zu den in den verschiedenen Sprachen bekannten Formelen der ������������������������ Feindw�������������� ö������������� rter��������� , schick������� ende der Kranheit� vergleichbar. �������������� Die ����������������������� ������������������� Scutzs������������� emantik dies und solcher Formelen mit der ��������� Rune “�������������� ��������������� kaun���������� ”��������� wie des Schlüsselzeichens betonen des ������������������� magische Vermerkes ���������� auf Halsringen������������ ���������������������� aus Schatz� ������� ������������������������ 1988 in Moskauer Kreml��’� (Молчанов 1995: 42). In ��������������������� Corpus der �������������� runischen ���������� Aufschriften 2001 sind zwei Knochen aus Maskowits���������� chi�������������������������������������������������� (Weißrußland), enthaltend der Runen�������������� ������������������� schrift, nach Liniensystem�������������������������� und den Sinn (Мельникова ������ 2001: 220) ����� sind nah ������������������������������������������ dem �������������������������������������� Fund������������������������������ aus ������������������������� Korallen-Berg������������ aufgeführt. Die b����������������������������������������������� eide ������������������������������������������ Funde������������������������������������� , entdeckt��������������������������� e�������������������������� in die ���������������������� erst�������������� ������������������ e������������� Saisons der Ausgrabungen auf ����������������������������� Kurische Nehrung������������� , bezeichnen auf �������������������������������������������� Stand��������������������������������������� des skandinavischen ethno������������� ������������������ -kulturellen Elementes im gegebenen Mikroregion Baltikums� ���������� auf dem Ausgang der Epoche �������������� der Wikinger��. ���� Das 1. 156 Dankend der komp������� ä������ tente ������������������ Ü����������������� bersetzung Herrn Dr. ��������� F.B. Us��� penskij. keramische Material und übrig������������������������ e Funde����������������� datieren U������ ������� nter��e� und die Ober�������������������������������������� e H����������������������������������� orizonte des �������������������������� Korallen-Berges (S���� ü��� d)� entsprechend in den bedingten Rahmen 950-1010 und 1010-1200. Die Interesse der �������������������� dänisch��������� ���������������� en Konungen��������������� zwar in diese Periode ����������������������������������� ist in der skandinavischen schriftlichen Tradition (Mickevičius 1993: 162), die konstanten Militärs und die Handelskontakte ��������� zwischen J������������������������ ü����������������������� tland������������������ und Kurnareal ������������� im ��� ���������������������������� Umkreis Palanga haben in X.XI. Jh���������������������������������������������� . z������������������������������������������� u������������������������������������������ r Bildung in der Mündung Rou�������������� ����������������� žė������������ -Fl��������� üß������� es����� des Siedlungk������������� omplexes mit polyethnischen Bevölkerung geführt (������� Ž������ ulkus� ������ 1997: ������ 290). ���� Die �������������� überzeugenden Analogien zwischen den ���������������������������� Siedlungsm������������������ aterialien in der Rou������������������������������������������� žė����������������������������������������� -M��������������������������������������� ündung (einschließend den ����������������� Fund��������� auf Hei���� ligtum Birutes-Kalnas����������������������������� d��������������������������� es������������������������� Stück������������������� s������������������ des Knochens mit den runenv������������������ ö����������������� rmigen����������� Zeichen - ������� Ž������ ulkus� ������ 1997: ���������� 169 pav., 2) und Korallen-Berg������� �������������������� (Süd) lassen �������������������������� für den letzten zu auch, die den Charaktere gemischt����������������� e���������������� B�������������� ��������������� evölkerung zu vermuten. Literatur und Archivalien Kulakov����� ,���� V. 1994.�������� ������������� Vakarų ��������� Lietuvių �������������������������� V - XII a. radiniai Prūsų žemėse. In: Klaipėdos miesto ir regiono archeologijos ir istorijos problemos. Klaipėda�. Mickevičius����� ,���� A. ������������������������������������ 1993.������������������������������� Kuršiai ������������������������������ Sakso Gramatiko duomenimis��. In: ���� Klaipėdos miesto ir regiono archeologijos ir istorijos problemos. Klaipėda�. Schifferdecker����� ,���� P. �������������� 1873. Bericht �������������������� über eine Reise zur ������ Durchforschung der Kurischen Nehrung in archäeologischer Hinsicht.� In: ���� SPÖG�, 14. Jahrg., 2. Abt. Vaitkunskienė��,� L. ��� 1981. ����������������������� Sidabras senov��� ė��s Lietuvoje, ��������������� Vilnius. Ž���������� ulkus����� ,���� V. ��������������� 1997. Palangos ����������� viduramžių ������������� gyvenvietės, Klaipėda. Кулаков, В.И. 1988. Птица-хищник и птица-жертва в символах и эмблемах IX-XI вв. In: СА, № 3. Кулаков, В.И. 1990. Древности пруссов �������� VI-XIII ��� ��� вв. Кулаков, В.И. 1993а. Элементы письменной культуры населения земли пруссов. In:� ���� КСИА, вып. 208. Кулаков, В.И. 1993б. Северная Самбия: апрель 997 года In:� КСИА, вып. 210. Кулаков, В.И. 1995. Археологический перипл Куршского залива. In: ���� Изучение памятников морской археологии. Вып. 2. Санкт-Петербург. Кулаков, В.И. 1998. Коллоквиум “Протогородские центры Руси между Скандинавией, Византией и Востоком (������� VIII-X� �������������� вв.)” (Париж, ������� 1997). ���� In: РА, 1998, № 4. Кулаков, В.И. 2001. Руноподобные знаки и руны старшего футарка в древностях юго-восточной Балтии. Юбилейный сборник А.В. Цауне, Рига ( в печати). Кулаков, В.И., Тепляков, Г.Н., Пузакова, Г.С., 2001. Остров Розиттен: история заселения, КалининградКёнигсберг. Мельникова, Е.А. 2001. Скандинавские рунические надписи. In: Новые находки и интерпретации. Тексты, перевод, комментарий. Молчанов, А.А. 1995. Языческие обереги клада древнерусских, скандинавских и восточных ювелирных изделий ����� XI�����-� ���������� нач. ����� XIII� ���� вв. ��� из ������������ Московского �������� Кремля. ���� In: Восточная Европа в древности и средневековье. Язычество, христианство, церковь, Москва. A b k ����������������� ü ���������������� rzungverzeichnis КСИА - Краткие сообщения Института археологии РА - Российская археология СА - Советская археология SPÖG - Schriften der Physikalisch-Ökonomischer Gesellschaft. Vladimir Kulakov Institut für Archaologie RadW Dm. Uljanova – Str., 19 117036 Moskau Russland [email protected] Vertė Vytautas Kazakevičius BALTICA 6 Įrašas išsidėsto į semantinę liniją, primenančią apotropeistinę formulę. Ją galima palyginti su įvairiose kalbose aptinkamomis užkeikimų formulėmis siunčiant ligas. ARCHAELOGIA Пушкина, Т.А. 2001. Подвеска-амулет из Гнёздова. Норна у источника судьбы. In: Сборник статей в честь Елены Александровны Мельниковой, Москва. Смирнова, М.Е. 2001. Открытые культовые площадки северного побережья Самбии. In: Практика и теория археологических исследований, Москва. Архив ИА РАН, Р-��� I��. Кулаков ���������������������� В.И., Отчёт о раскопках ���������� Балтийской экспедиции в 2001 г. на Кораллен-Берг. Erhalten: 2002 2001 met ų sezono S ambijos r u n os VLADIMIRAS KULAKOVAS Santrauka 2001 metų vasarą į Zelenogradsko rajoninį istorijosarcheologijos muziejų pateko kabutis, pagamintas iš sidabrinio lydinio nuopjovos. Vienoje iš jo pusių, dar nespėjus sukietėti metalui buvo įrėžta runa ю��� urs (2 pav. kairėje). Kabutis aptiktas prieš 2������������������ –����������������� 3 metus Medvežės upės kranto nuošliaužoje, 0,4 km į šiaurės vakarus nuo Dubki-Kunterstrauch giraitėje esančios šventyklos. Šiame kabutyje skandinavas, kreipęsis malda į dievus, išgraviravo vieną runą. Tyrinėjant gyvenvietę Korallen-Berg (Süd) kopoje 1 duobėje aptikta nedaug apdegusi žalvarinė kryžinė segė. Jos priekinėje pusėje išliko alavo ir cinko plokštelės pėdsakų. Užsegimo pusėje matyti įbrėžtas ženklas – įstrižas kryžius, atitinkantis runą gebî (3:1 pav.). Tai gali būti savininko ženklas arba šios segės dovanojimo ženklas. 10 kvadrate, X amžiaus pabaiga datuojamame kultūrinio sluoksnio horizonte, aptikta įvairių dirbinių sankaupa. Tarp jų briedžio (?) mentės kaulas su išlygintu paviršiumi, kuriame matyti įrėžti ženklai, primenantys runas kaun /��� юurs ��/����� ���� gebo (3: 2; 4 pav.). 157 Medieval Leather Footwear f r o m Ta l l i n n Krista Sarv M e d i e va l L e at h e r F o o t w e a r f r o m Ta ll i n n Krista Sarv Abstract Finds of footwear in the excavations in Town Hall Square and Vene, Vaimu, Sauna and Roosikrantsi streets reflect the medieval footwear fashion of Tallinn as well as of the whole of northern and Central Europe. Strap shoes, low laced shoes and high laced shoes might be considered as fashion footwear. The respective chronologies of northern Europe demonstrate the existence of thong, strap and low laced shoes and high laced shoes through many centuries, but the peaks of use – the period of the fashion – of these types do not exceed 70 to 80 years. Since Tallinn belonged to the Hanseatic League, the cultural phenomena occurring here were probably the same in Central and northern Europe. Key words: footwear, shoes, Tallinn, Medieval. 158 The large number of finds from urban excavations and the possibilities for different interpretations of written sources have induced researchers to use archaeological finds to explain social and cultural phenomena. Thanks to the discussion in archaeological theory about a single find group as a possible reflection of society, which enables us to seek answers to a constantly widening variety of questions, the rather illustrative role of leather finds in excavation reports has begun to change towards exhaustive analysis. In earlier excavation reports, most attention was paid to construction remains and the analysis of pottery, the first expressing some structural development, the other supporting it chronologically. The Dutch archaeologist Groeneman-van Waateringe stresses three criteria which make the typochronology of footwear vital for archaeology. First, footwear is the only category of clothing of which the development is known starting from the Neolithic period. Second, since footwear is a part of clothing, it has a direct connection with human culture, from the aspect of fashion. One can express oneself through clothing, and distinguish oneself from others, to demonstrate one’s belonging to a group, or to single oneself out individually. Third, footwear provides information about the health of individuals (Goubitz, Driel-Murray, Groeneman-van Waateringe 2001: 393). During the past two decades, rich find material has been recovered from archaeological excavations in Tallinn. In several sites, quantities of leather artefacts and fragments of them have been discovered, thanks to the good preserving qualities of the cultural layer. Investigations of archaeological leather have been rather modest up to now. In local archaeological literature, only a couple of universal articles have been published about leather finds from Tartu and Tallinn (Valk-Falk 1984, 1985), but also a more thorough analysis of leather footwear from the excavations in Pärnu in 1990 (Rommot 1990). In recent years, a review has been published of the medieval leather footwear found in the excavation of Sauna Street 10, Tallinn (Sarv 2000), and an analysis of the leather finds from Roosikrantsi Street, Tallinn, written by A. Kurbatov, an archaeologist from St. Petersburg, is going to be published. The present article sets out to give a survey of the footwear of medieval townsmen, on the basis of footwear found in various archaeological excavations in Tallinn. Material The leather footwear discussed in the article comes from four sites inside the medieval town wall: Town Hall Square, Sauna Street, Vaimu Street, Vene Street, and Roosikrantsi Street in a medieval suburb outside the town wall (Fig. 1). Single examples of footwear have also been found at some other sites in Tallinn, but these five excavations were selected for their larger area and the better documentation of the finds. Besides, the material from Town Hall Square and Vene Street deserves special attention, since the location has been suggested as the general residence of shoemakers and the footwear trade (Kaplinski 1995: 23). The excavations in Sauna Street were the most extensive, a whole dwelling complex was discovered together with outbuildings and fences. From these excavations, the largest and most interesting col- 2. Viru 1/Vene 2 and 4 Excavations: 1996–1997, 20 sq. m Leather finds: 49 pieces of footwear 3. Roosikrantsi St. 9 and 11 Excavations: 1996, 2,294 sq. m Leather finds: 49 pieces of footwear 4. Sauna St. 8 and 10 Excavations: 1998–1999, 650 sq. m Leather finds: of nearly 10,000 pieces of leather, 5,638 came from footwear BALTICA 6 1. Town Hall Square Excavations: 1952–1953, 510 sq. m Leather finds: 331 pieces of footwear ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 1. Location plan of the excavation areas 5. Vaimu 2/Pikk 47 Excavations: 2001, 68 sq. m Leather finds: 168 pieces of footwear lection of leather finds was recovered, 59.6 % of which is fragments of footwear. Owing to its diversity, this collection forms the basis of the typology of medieval footwear of Tallinn. The material from Roosikrantsi Street is especially interesting for being found in a suburb, thus providing comparative material for the finds from within the town wall. Te r m i n o l o g y Among the parts of archaeological leather footwear, soles and uppers prevailed. Whole shoes were few, and no pairs of shoes were found. Other smaller details of footwear were also numerous: connecting pieces of uppers, edgings, heel-stiffeners, seam margins of soles, fastening parts and lace-hole reinforcements. In the article, the terms “shoe”, “boot” and “soft peasant shoes” are used to specify footwear more accurately. Shoes are footwear with soles and uppers cut separately from a piece of leather. Shoes are either with or without fastenings. Shoes can be divided into three categories by the length of the leg: low, with the leg ending at the ankle; medium-high, the leg ending above/on the ankle; high, the leg reaching at least halfway up the fibula. A boot is footwear without fastening, with a separately cut upper, leg and sole, and with the leg covering the fibula. A soft peasant shoe is slipper-like footwear made of a single piece of leather, fastened with a cord or thong(s) running through slits cut in the edges of the piece. Considering the above, archaeological leather footwear can be divided into the following types: thong shoes, strap shoes, laced shoes, pumps, laced boots and soft peasant shoes. 159 Medieval Leather Footwear f r o m Ta l l i n n Krista Sarv 160 Medieval footwear in Ta l l i n n Thong shoes are low, medium or high shoes, fastened with leather straps over pairs of slits in the front and rear parts of the shoe. By the length of the leg and the type of fastening, thong shoes are divided into several groups. 1. Low shoes fastened with one leather strap: footwear with the upper consisting of a single piece of leather, or sometimes also having one or two connecting pieces (Fig. 2: 1). Characteristic were the pairs of slits, up to six in number, immediately below the upper edge, for the fastening straps. This type had two versions: a) thong shoes with a V-shaped incision on the instep; b) thong shoes cut very low on the sides, and the uppers rising sharply from the middle of the side towards the toe. The seams on the top edges of the uppers of both suggest an Fig. 2. Some examples of shoes from Tallinn. (Drawn by Sofia Pantelejeva) edging of a leather strap, or perhaps a fastening of the lining. Numerous finds of edg- thong shoe (AI 6332: 511) was decorated with three ing straps seem to support the first. 2. Medium-high oval incisions, made in an openwork technique, with a shoes fastened with a single leather strap (Fig. 2: 1.1). leaf-shaped middle part. Two of the uppers found (AI Besides the height, this type is discernible by the up- 6332: 181, 263) had incisions in the shape of a willow per consisting of two parts, the toe and the heel cut to- leaf in the toe part, evidently meant as decoration. The gether, and a separate connecting piece for the (inner) irregular perforation on the toe part of one upper (AI side. An exceptional specimen of this type (AI 6332: 6332: 208) might also be a decoration. 122) was found at Sauna Street: its toe and heel parts The parts of strap shoes found (Fig. 2: 3) belonged to are cut separately. The two pairs of slits for a leather the low and light type, fastened with two straps cut tostrap were usually located at the ankle and by the lower gether with the upper. On the uppers found, two differedge of the upper. An important characteristic is the ent fastening constructions could be observed: one type Y-shaped incision on the instep. 3. High shoe fastened had the straps cut together with the heel part, the other’s with a single leather strap. This is distinguished from strap on the inner side of the footwear was cut together the thong shoe fastened with a single strap only by the with the connecting piece. Two different modes were length of the leg and the fact that the top edge of the also used for fastening strap shoes. The most common upper lacked traces of sewing. The rest of the technical was a fastening where the straps were connected by a details are the same. Uppers with a Y-shape incision on thong pulled through the holes at the ends of the straps the instep prevailed. and tied. Among the strap shoes found in Town Hall By the length of leg and the mode of fastening (4) (me- Square, a fastening where the straps were held together dium-)high shoes fastened with two leather straps and by a knotted thong, which was fastened to the middle (5) high thong shoes fastened with three leather straps of the instep, prevailed. Some of the uppers had heelcould also be distinguished (Fig. 2: 1.2 - 1.2.1). stiffeners, or seam traces suggesting such details. The heel-stiffeners found in Sauna Street were either trapThe thong shoes found in Tallinn were simple in their ezoid or triangular. Among the archaeological finds in construction, and relatively modest. Decoration on Tallinn, there is an upper of a strap shoe (AI 6332: 49), footwear was observed only on a couple of low shoes probably dating from a later period, the heel part of from Sauna Street. The toe part of the upper of one One upper of a laced shoe (AI 6332: 16) found at Sauna Street had two slits on the instep, cut towards the toe. It was not necessarily decoration, it might also have been deliberate damage to the shoe. From the excavation at Town Hall Square, a fragment of a laced shoe came to light with an incision on the toe in the shape of an oak leaf. The high laced shoe (Fig. 2: 2) was footwear with the leg up to 23 centimetres high and the upper consisting of two or three parts. Toggle-holes were cut in the outer edge of the leg, and on the opposite side toggles were fastened on thongs of a length of about three centimetres. The boot was fastened with the toggles pulled through the toggle-holes. Among the finds from Sauna Street, three varieties of high laced shoes could be distinguished, differing from each other by the number of parts. A) Two-part uppers: the toe part and leg were cut together, and the fastening with the knotted straps separately. Trapezoid and triangular heel-stiffeners occurred as complementary details. B) Three-part uppers: the toe and a part of the leg were cut together, the upper part of the leg and the fastening with the straps were separate. For the heel-stiffener, a very wide triangular piece of leather was used. C) Three-part uppers: toe, leg and fastening parts were all cut separately. Reinforcing parts in the shape of a high triangle or a high lozenge also belonged to the heel part of the upper. Among the finds from Sauna Street there was a piece of a leg, which, based on the seam traces, came from a laced boot with the two-part upper (leg and toe) cut separately. Among the finds is footwear decorated in an openwork technique. One of the best-preserved legs of a child’s/woman’s laced boot (AI 6332: 165) is decorated over its whole length with a belt in a Tshaped pattern, consisting of three rows of four-mil- Fig. 3. Part of the back of a soft peasant shoe, Sauna St. 10 (AI 6332:370). (Drawn by Krista Sarv) limetre crosses on a 20-millimetre-wide belt, incised with a stamp and lined on each side with two-millimetre-long lozenge indentations. At the ankle, the same pattern forms a circle with a diameter of 15 millimetres, with a cross consisting of smaller crosses incised in the middle. The same pattern, in a triangular design, also covers the toe part of the upper. ARCHAELOGIA The low laced shoe (Fig. 2: 4) used in medieval Tallinn was low footwear, its upper consisting of one or two parts. The fastening was a narrow U-shaped incision at the side, with two pairs of holes at each side for the leather thong fastening. Seam traces at the top edge of some uppers found at Sauna Street suggest edging or lining. Six fragments found at Sauna Street have a narrow V-shaped incision on the instep. The U-shaped lace-hole reinforcement and the triangular heel-stiffener belonged also to laced shoes as complementary details. BALTICA 6 which consisted of two parts sewn together in the middle of the heel. Of the 38 fragments of strap shoes, only one part of a child’s footwear (AI 6332: 407) was decorated. The main decorative element was a leaf-shaped slit reaching almost to the toe of the shoe, with a piece of leather in the middle connected to the rest of the upper by narrow radial straps. Among the finds from Town Hall Square, there is a toe part of a high laced shoe (AI 4061: 4995) with decoration applied in the same technique. The decoration consists of three stylised blossoms in small holes, located in a triangle at the end of the toe part of the upper. Another decorated high laced boot from Town Hall Square had a toe of a sandal shape: on each side of the toe a jagged slit had been cut, and between them is a leather strip, a couple of centimetres wide, tapering towards the toe, with very jagged sides. At Roosikrantsi Street two very elegant legs of boots (AI 6109: II/473, II/718) were found, with an indented top edge above two horizontal rows of small holes. The boot was footwear without a fastening, with a leg probably slightly higher than that of a high laced shoe. The upper presumably consisted of separately cut toe and leg parts. Among the archaeological finds from Tallinn, there are some plain uppers of a single piece of leather which might belong to a slipper-like pump (Fig. 2: 5). This is a very plain slip-on shoe. One piece of such an upper, found at Sauna Street, bore sewing traces, suggesting a triangular heel-stiffener. The last type of footwear is soft peasant shoes, made of a rectangular piece of leather with holes or slits at the edges for the fastening laces. In the excavations discussed there are few of these (15 in total). Of the nine peasant shoe fragments found at Sauna Street, eight were children’s footwear, and only one poorly preserved specimen belonged to an adult. The children’s soft peasant shoes were usually made of two parts: the heel and toe were cut separately. Two of the shoes of this type had the back part joining in the middle of the heel. Based on the relatively large holes, the heel was 161 Medieval Leather Footwear f r o m Ta l l i n n Krista Sarv sewn with a leather thong and the front and back parts with thread or with bass (Fig. 3). The fastenings of soft peasant shoes were different: four of them had slits in the sides for a coarser leather thong or a bass band; three had smaller holes in the sides, evidently for a finer leather thong. The soft peasant shoes of adults, found at Tallinn, were all similar, made of thicker leather and fastened by a leather thong running through holes in the edges. Dating The context of the footwear found at Town Hall Square, and Vene, Vaimu, Sauna and Roosikrantsi street excavations covers a wide time scale from the 13th to the 15th centuries. Most of the footwear from Vene Street came from the cultural layer of the 13th and 14th centuries (Jaanits, Smirnov 1998). Based on radiocarbon dating of the samples from the excavation on Roosikrantsi Street, the footwear cannot be dated to later than the mid-14th century (Ševeljov 1997: 19). The cultural layer is too heavily mixed, so a more accurate dating of the finds is not possible. Stratigraphically, the discerned types of archaeological footwear in Tallinn are distributed quite evenly, all types are represented in almost all archaeological layers. Only at Sauna Street was it observed that the first strap shoe was found 0.5 metres higher than other types of footwear. The somewhat later spread of strap shoes, with its peak in the 14th and 15th centuries, is also confirmed by the respective chronologies of Pärnu, Estonia (Rommot 1990: 3), Stockholm, Sweden (Zerpe, Fredriksson Distribution of shoe forms 162 1982: 223), and Schleswig, Germany (Schnack 1992: 96) material. Substantial help and chronological support for the more accurate dating of the finds can be found in the chronologies of archaeological footwear of other medieval Hanseatic towns. Since the finds at Tallinn generally resemble strongly those from Sweden, Denmark, Finland and Norway (Cinthio 1976; Koch 1988; Larsen 1992; Schia 1977; Zerpe, Fredriksson 1982), chronological support should be sought from the northern shore of the Baltic Sea. Although these chronologies cannot be applied directly to the Estonian finds, they give the “lifetime” of the shoe types in these geographically relatively close areas. The use of Scandinavian chronologies is also based on the fact that in medieval registers of artisans, shoemakers’ names of Scandinavian origin occur quite frequently (Kaplinski 1980). Based on the very well-dated burning layers of Bergen, the peak of the use of laced shoes was the period 1170 to 1248, when all height varieties are represented. After 1248, this type of footwear does not vanish, it just occurs less frequently. From 1476 to the 18th century, only the high variety of laced shoes is used. The low ones do not occur among archaeological finds. Thus we may say that lace shoes were used in Bergen for more than 500 years, but low laced shoes were used for only 300 years. The absolute peak of the laced shoes lasted for 75 to 80 years only. Strap shoes were used in Bergen for nearly 450 years, with the peak in 1332–1413, when it prevailed in local footwear traditions for over 80 years (Larsen 1992, Fig. 54). In Swedish towns, strap shoes became predomi- Fashionable or everyday footwear? A quantitative analysis of footwear finds from Tallinn proves the prevalence of thong shoes (see table). These shoes were most numerous among the finds from Sauna Street and Town Hall Square, while in the material from Roosikrantsi Street this type of shoe was missing. Such a long “lifetime” and abundance among archaeological finds, as well as the bad state (sometimes completely worn out) of the thong shoes found in Tallinn, and the frequently occurring rough patching, do not allow us to connect this type with fashion. It seems rather that this was easily made and probably also quite cheap everyday footwear. The next by number was strap shoes. All strap shoes found and the pieces of them came from within the Town Wall. In Roosikrantsi Street in the suburb such finds were missing. The third quite large type of footwear was the high laced shoe, which was more or less equally represented among the finds from Vaimu and Roosikrantsi streets and Town Hall Square, and slightly more in the material from Sauna Street 8 and 10. All finds from Roosikrantsi Street were elegantly decorated. These decorated pieces from Roosikrantsi and Sauna streets, and the not so frequent occurrence, suggest that high laced shoes were the footwear of wealthier townsmen. Finds of boots were remarkably few. This does not necessarily indicate their low popularity or rare use. Numerous finds of waste leather have shown that boot BALTICA 6 legs of stronger leather were often used again, and the frequent finds of toe parts from uppers of strong leather, of no specific type, may belong to boots. Boots were meant to protect the feet from water, mud and extreme temperatures. At the same time, they would also protect the feet from injuries at work. Boots were made of tougher leather than other footwear, the sewing of their multi-layered soles was complicated. Although shoemakers could also make boots, special guilds of boot-makers existed everywhere in Europe (Goubitz, Driel-Murray, Groenman-van Waateringe 2001, 229). The scarcity of boot finds may also be caused by their belonging to the category of special footwear, eg for builders. ARCHAELOGIA nant in the 13th and the 14th centuries (Groenman-van Waateringe 1993: 505). The pieces of strap shoes from the layers of the 14th century from the excavations of Vene and Vaimu streets, and the respective finds from Sauna Street on a wider time scale, mark the spread of strap shoes here also. How widely they were used, and whether strap shoes belonged to the paraphernalia of a common townsman, cannot be said yet. The use of the laced shoe was stable, without any rise or fall to speak of, in northern and Central Europe for a long time in the 12th to the 16th centuries (Larsen 1992: Fig. 54; Schnack 1994: Abb:8). In the archaeological material from Tallinn, the period of their use is also hard to identify. More concrete is the dating of high laced shoes. In Germany the peak of their use falls in the first half of the 13th century and the mid-14th century (Schnack 1993: 65). In Denmark the peak of their use falls into the period 1323 to 1365 (Koch 1988: Table 1). The low laced shoes found at Roosikrantsi Street come from deposits of the mid-14th century. The chronology of boots is desultory, only in Bergen has it been possible to date this type of footwear to the period 1198 to 1413. The rest of the footwear types cannot be dated with any accuracy, owing to the scarcity of finds. References Cinthio, M. 1976. Skor. In: A. W. Mårtensson (et al) Uppgrävt förlutet för Pkbanken i Lund. En investering i arkeologie. Archaeologica Lundensia VII. Malmö, 307–316. Goubitz, O., Driel-Murray, C. van, Groenman-van Waateringe, W. 2001. Stepping through Time. Archaeological Footwear from Prehistoric Times until 1800. Zwolle. Groenman-van Waateringe, W. 1993. Organische Funde aus Lübeck. Ein Spiegelbild der wirtschaftlichen und sozialen Entwicklung der Hansestadt. In: Archäologie des Mittelalters und Bauforschung im Hanseraum. Rostock, 505–510. Jaanits, K., Smirnov, P. 1998. Aruanne arheoloogilistest kaevamistest (uuringutest) kinnistul Viru 1/Vene 2 ja 4 Tallinnas. (Manuscript in the archives of the AI). Kaplinski, K. 1980. Tallinna käsitöölised XIV sajandil. II., Lisad. Tallinn. Kaplinski, K. 1995. Tallinn – meistrite linn. Tallinn. Koch, H.D. 1988. Fodtøj af læder og dets datering ca. 12501500. Hikuin 14. Moesgård, 61-78. Rommot, A. 1990. Pärnu 1990. Aasta arheoloogiliste väljakaevamiste nahaleidudest. Tallinn (Manuscript in the archives of the AI). Sarv, K. 2000. Finds of Leather Footwear from the Excavations at Sauna Street 10 in Tallinn. In: Arheoloogilised välitööd Eestis/Archaeological field works in Estonia 1999. Tallinn, 75–85. Schia, E. 1977. Sko som arkeologisk kildemateriale. Hikuin, 3, 303–324. Schnack, C. 1992. Die mittelalterlichen Schuhe aus Schleswig Ausgrabung Schild 1971-1975. In: Ausgrabungen in Schleswig, Berichte und Studien. 10 Neumünster. Schnack, C. 1994. Mittelalterliche Lederfunde aus Konstanz (Grabung Fisschmarkt). In: Materialhefte zur Archäologie. Landesdenkmalamt Baden-Württenberg. Stuttgard. Ševeljov, V. 1997. Aruanne arheoloogilistest uuringutest Tallinnas kinnistutel Roosikrantsi tn. 9 ja 11. Leiumaterjali iseloomustus. Leidude nimekiri, II kd. (Manuscript in the archives of the AI). Zerpe, B., Fredriksson, M. 1982. Skor och andra läderföremål, in Dahlbäck. Helgeandsholmen. Stockholm, 217–240. Valk-Falk, E. 1984. Tartu 1981/82 aasta ja Tallinna 1982 aasta arheoloogiliste kaevamiste nahaleidude analüüs. Tallinn. Valk-Falk, E. 1985. Arheoloogilised nahaleiud Tartu vanalinnast. Tartu - minevik, tänapäev. Tallinn, 64–70. 163 Medieval Leather Footwear f r o m Ta l l i n n Krista Sarv Krista Sarv Estonian Historical Museum, Pikk 17, 10123 Tallinn, Estonia odinis V id u ram ž i ų apavas iš Talino KRISTA SARV Santrauka Archeologinių tyrinėjimų Talino Rotušės aikštėje metu Vene, Vaimu, Sauna ir Roosikrantsi gatvėse aptiktas apavas atskleidžia viduramžių apavo madas ne tik Taline, bet ir visoje Šiaurės bei Vidurio Europoje. Dirželiais suvarstomas apavas – žemais ir aukštais aulais suvarstomi batai gali būti skiriami modeliniam apavui. Tuo pat metu odinis apavas, atrodo, buvo naudotas ir vidutinių miestiečių kiekvieną dieną. Auliniais batais turėjo būti avima dirbant sunkius darbus. Mažai rasta minkšto valstietiško apavo. Minkštas valstietiškas apavas buvo nešiojamas, kaip manoma, žemiausiam socialiniam sluoksniui priklausiusių miestiečių. Tačiau, atrodo, šis požiūris yra paviršutiniškas. Minkštas apavas buvo lengvas ir lengvai apsiaunamas, jis buvo labai patogus. Įvairių tipų modelinio apavo nešiojimo chronologiją nustatyti yra sunku dėl komplikuoto kultūrinio sluoksnio stratigrafijos. Reprezentatyvios Šiaurės Europos chronologinės sistemos rodo, kad įvairių modelių batai buvo dėvimi daugelį šimtmečių, tačiau pavieniai modeliai išsilaikydavo ne ilgiau kaip 70–80 metų. Talinui tapus Hanzos miestu, kultūriniai reiškiniai ėmė nebesiskirti nuo Vidurio ir Šiaurės Europos. Vertė Vytautas Kazakevičius 164 Received: 2002 Riders From Žąsinas Cemetery (The Classification of Spurs F r o m T h e Vi k i n g P e r i o d a n d Early Middle Ages on the Basis of Material Vytautas Kazakevičius f r o m Ž ą s i n a s C e m e t e r y ) R i d ers fr o m Ž ą s i n as C emetery ( T h e c l ass i f i cat i o n o f sp u rs fr o m t h e V i k i n g per i o d a n d ear ly M i d d l e A g es o n t h e bas i s o f mater i a l fr o m Ž ą s i n as cemetery ) Vytautas Kazakevičius* Abstract Spurs are among the primary attributes of riders. Baltic spurs are distinctive, affected by their long development from the beginning of the first millennium to the late Middle Ages. Their genesis is linked to the local tradition of employment and the mismatch with typological frameworks of spurs discovered in other sites. Therefore, while analysing spurs discovered in the Žąsinas cemetery, a typological system had to be shaped, which could be applied to characterise all spurs of the above period discovered in Lithuania and the entire Baltic area. Key words: spurs, typological scheme, Samogitians, Viking Period, early medieval times. Ž ą s i n a s c e m e t e r y, i t s l o c a t i o n , a brief history of its excavation and its significance The Žąsinas (Šilalė district) village prehistoric cemetery occupies part of the hill where the graveyard of the village is located. The cemetery has been known since the beginning of the 20th century, when the hill was ploughed, potato stores dug, gravel excavated, and finally, in 1929, a byway was built to connect the villages of Žąsinas and Gūvainiai (Vaitkunskienė 1976: 1–2). Naturally, items from destroyed burials of the third and fourth, and eighth to 12th centuries, belonging to it, appeared in Kaunas Vytautas the Great Museum, and later in the National Museum of Lithuania. Since 1970 Žąsinas cemetery, like other monuments in the Šilalė district, was frequently visited by Vladas Statkevičius, a devotee of regional studies who was trying to protect monuments from destruction, to identify their boundaries, and finally, to collect items from destroyed monuments (Statkevičius 1975: 6, 14, 22, 24, 26, 52, 60, 61). Žąsinas cemetery was undisturbed until 1976, when Laima Vaitkunskienė started the excavation of the site, which she did from 1976 to 1979 (Vaitkunskienė 1976; 1977; 1978; 1979). The author of this article participated in the excavations in 1976 (Vaitkunskienė 1976: 3). Throughout the entire period of Vaitkunskienė’s excavations, an area of 2.67 square metres was explored. Another 315-square-me VDKM 628: 1–8; 843: 1–5. Material from Žąsinas cemetery collected and discovered by V. Statkevičius is preserved in the National Museum of Lithuania (LNM AR 618: 1–836). ∗ Article prepared for publication by Au���������������� dronė Bliujienė. 166 tre area was excavated while revising the area of the site with an eye to exploratory research. A total of 203 graves were discovered, belonging to the tenth to the 12th centuries (Vaitkunskienė 1979: 69–71). After the start in 1976, it was found that a hoard of bronze ornaments had been discovered in Žąsinas village on the River Lokysta and its nameless right tributary. Petras Jakas, a local villager, discovered it around 1966, when digging a cellar at a depth of one and a half metres. It is obvious that the findings were lost and only a bronze ring with a thickened front part became a part of Statkevičius’ collection (Vaitkunskienė 1976: 5). In 1996, Arūnas Strazdas did some research of the location of the Žąsinas village hoard, but nothing was discovered (Strazdas 1996: 6–7). Žąsinas cemetery is a site of Samogitian burial traditions, one of the largest Samogitian burial grounds from the point of view of excavated graves. A typical Samogitian burial monument, it has distinct patterns of Curonian cultural influence in the manner of the burials (cremation burial customs, the position of burial items), and the material culture (battleaxes, swords, men’s belts with pendants, sharing common features with findings from Gotland, spurs with clearly profiled bows, flat brooches of different types) (Fig. 1: 1) (Kazakevičius 1996: 17, Fig. 7; Вайткунскене 1985: 67–76). The Curonian influence in Samogitian culture penetrated even deeper. A good example of such permeability are pins of women’s headdress, intercepted from the Curonians. Changing the purpose and decora ��������������������������������������������������������� These spurs, according to the typology applied to the material from Žąsinas cemetery, are attributed to type V. BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 1. Žąsinas cemetery (Šilalė district), grave 85: 1 – bronze, leather; 2–4 iron; grave 85 includes more grave goods: fragment of a spearhead, two necklaces terminating with loops and a small maple-shaped pendant; after Laima Vaitkunskienė 1977 (drawings by A. Gaižauskaitė, LII archive) tion of the ornament, Samogitian jewellers, including those from the Žąsinas community, employed them as breast ornaments (Вайткунскене 1985: 74–75). Žąsinas cemetery is located in a strategically favourable place, which could easily be reached by the River Jūra from the lower reaches of the Nemunas. The people who left this cemetery could have acted as trade inter- mediaries for remote Samogitian communities. Thus, Žąsinas cemetery is close to other significant Samogitian burial sites, like Bikavėnai, Paragaudis (both in the Šilalė district), and Upyna (Telšiai district), which indicate that these were important Samogitian centres of manufacturing and trade in the Viking Period and medieval times. 167 Riders From Žąsinas Cemetery (The Classification of Spurs F r o m T h e Vi k i n g P e r i o d a n d Early Middle Ages on the Basis of Material Vytautas Kazakevičius f r o m Ž ą s i n a s C e m e t e r y ) Some remarks on Baltic spurs Spurs are among the primary attributes of riders. Iron and bronze spurs appear in Lithuania in the second half of the second century and the beginning of the third century (phases B2a–C1a) (Michelbertas 1986: 176– 177; 2000: 287–291; Перхавко 1978: 113–122). Spurs belonging to the late Migration Period and the middle of the Iron Age were closely analysed by Kazakevičius and A. Tautavičius (Kazakevičius 1993: 80–83, Fig. 136; Tautavičius 1996: 152–156, Figs. 58–59). However, there is no unanimous typological scheme for spurs discovered in the Baltic territories, no chronology established by and based on other findings, and no discussions on their genesis. Spurs of the Viking Period and early medieval times are discussed only when publishing material on spurs from separate cemeteries or ethnic regions; therefore, they seem to be abundant in types (Vaitkunskienė 1979a: 67, Fig. 14: 12–14; Stankus 1995: 90–91, Fig. 76: 8–11; Gintautaitė-Butėnienė, Butėnas 2000: 52–54, Fig. 46; Vaškevičiūtė 2004: 82–83, Fig. 75). A wider analysis did not reveal imported sash-like openwork spurs, in the bows of which immovable male heads are integrated (Nagevičius 1935: Table VI: 12; Kuncienė 1972: 217, Fig. 31). Special studies on spurs in European archaeological historiography are also not numerous. One of the most significant is a study by the Polish researcher Zofia Hilczerówna. The author analyses Polish spurs of the tenth to the 13th centuries, and distinguishes three types of spurs and seven sub-types (Hilczerówna 1956). The Russian archaeologist and armour researcher Anatoli Kirpichnikov describes 588 spurs discovered in a wide area inhabited by eastern Slavs. On the basis of their constructional peculiarities (side, spike and loops), he distinguishes five types of spurs and two sub-types. The chronological framework of his research is wider, and includes the ninth to the 13th centuries, the period prior to the invasion of Russia of the MongolsTartars in the 13th century (Кирпичников 1973). The most comprehensive article on the appearance and spread of spurs in Eastern Europe was written by V. A. Perkhavko (Перхавко 1978: 113–126). This author makes use of some Lithuanian material. Another very useful and comprehensive article was written by the Latvian archaeologist Elvira Šnore, who analyses spurs discovered in Asote (Jēkabpils district, Latvia) hill-fort (Шноре 1962: 577–585). However, until recent years there has been no manifestation of a wider interest in spurs. While analysing spurs discovered in the Žąsinas cemetery, it is necessary to make our own typological system, which, due 168 to the general standardisation of weaponry, warriors’ and riders’ equipment, might suit a generalisation of spurs discovered all over Lithuania and even the entire Baltic area and belonging to the late Viking Period and the early medieval times. The classification of spurs from Žąsinas cemetery It is evident that those who were buried with spurs were riders. Spurs from the considered period were worn on one foot. For those buried in the Žąsinas cemetery, 16 spurs were pegged to the left foot and four to the right. One spur was discovered by the foot, one on the breast of the deceased person, and one together with other artefacts. The location of another ten spurs is not clear. Most spurs from the Viking Period and early medieval times were discovered on the left foot in other Samogitian, Semigallian and Curonian cemeteries as well (Tautavičius 1996: 152–153; Vaškevičiūtė 2004: 83). In the Žąsinas cemetery spurs were discovered in 37 graves (Nos 4, 7, 8, 12, 13, 29, 31, 34, 38, 59, 60, 61, 62, 64, 72, 76, 83, 85, 93, 97, 101, 107, 112, 116, 121, 136, 148b, 148c, 150, 151b, 152, 153, 156, 182, 199, 202b and 203). Another three were discovered incidentally. The discovered spurs are both iron and bronze. Only 25 of them have survived. Spurs from other graves were destroyed, and their classification is not possible. On the basis of the above, a typological system of the tenth to 12th centuries has been constructed. As a basis for the typology, separate components of spurs are taken into consideration: the bow, spikes and bow terminals. According to these components, five types of spurs were discovered in the Žąsinas cemetery. First type: sash-like spurs with a long spike and loops at the bow terminals (Fig. 2: 1–2). Second type: sash-like spurs with a short spike and loops at the bow terminals (Fig. 2: 3–4). Third type: with round, even or torgue bow, with a short spike and loops at the side terminals (Fig. 2: 5–8). Fourth type: with an integrated bow, and short spike and loops at the bow terminals (Fig. 2: 9–10). Fifth type: sash-like spurs with profiled edges, a short spike and enclosed loops at the bow terminals (Fig. 2: 11). Spurs of type 1 were discovered in six graves (Nos 62, 148b, 151b, 152, 199 and 202). The bows of these spurs are simple and round in cross-section, symmetrical, around nine centimetres in length, with a seven to eight-centimetre distance between the bow terminals. The spike is four to six centimetres in length, and conical. The side terminals have enclosed loops (Fig. 2: 2). Spurs of type II also come in two sub-types: A, with enclosed loops; and B, with open-type loops and BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 2. Typology of spurs from Žąsinas cemetery (Šilalė district): 1 type 1, subtype B (grave 158B); 2 type 1, subtype A (grave 148B); 3 type 2 (grave 13); 4 2 sub-type A (grave 182); 5–7 type 3 (graves 61, 85 and 72); 8 type 3, sub-type A (grave 153); 9 type 4, sub-type A (grave 38); 10 type 4 (grave 116); 11 type 5 (grave 64) (1, 6 iron; 2–5, 7–11 bronze; LNM AR 618: 109, 196, 252, 266, 289, 372, 433, 608, 618, 708; drawings by A. Ruzienė) turned-up terminals (Fig. 2: 1). Type II spurs also have two sub-types of variants: A, with multiangular pommels on the spikes (Fig. 2: 4). A spur of B variant was discovered in grave 151b. It is analogous to other spurs of the type, except for the bow terminals. They have open-type loops with turned-up terminals and small turned-down scrolls. Spurs of the second type were discovered in nine graves, and one was discovered accidentally (4, 8, 13, 31, 83, 93, 112, 153, 182 and stray finds). Their bows are analogous to spurs of type 1, i.e. simple and round, seldom of a triangular cross-section. The bows are shorter, up to six centimetres in length, symmetrical, with a six to eight-centimetre width between the bow terminals with closed-type loops. The spikes are short, 2.5 to three centimetres in length, and conical (Fig. 2: 3–4). Spurs of type 2 and variant A were discovered in two graves (8 and 182). They were in poor condition. For example, a spike section with a round pommel only survived in grave 8. The sides are absent; therefore, it is impossible to specify their cross-section and terminals. A small section of a round bow and a multiangular pommel on a spike survived only in grave 182. The tip itself is missing too. Spurs of type 2 were popular enough. Spurs of this type occur among Semigallian graves (Vaškevičiūtė 2004: Fig. 75: 9). Spurs of type 3 were discovered in six graves: 12, 34, 61, 72, 85, 153 (Fig. 2: 5–8). Their bows have a round cross-section, or are even (grave 61) torgue shaped, five to seven centimetres in length, and symmetrical. The distance between the side terminals is seven to nine centimetres. They have open-type loops, with or without turned-down small scrolls (Fig. 2: 8). The spikes are short, 1.5 to three centimetres in length, conical, and sometimes also turned back (grave 85) (Fig. 1: 2). A bronze spur, attributable to type 3 and variant A, was discovered in grave 153, with a spike with a multiangular pommel. It is very well preserved and even its decoration, a row of eyes, is clearly visible (Fig. 2: 8). Other spurs, less decorated with different geometrical patterns, were discovered in graves 61 and 72. The terminals of the spur found in grave 61 are decorated with groups of zigzag lines at their loops, those of the second spur with two rows of stamped triangles (Fig. 2: 7). Spurs with shaped sides are discovered in Semigallian graves, while a spur which might be analogous to the one found in grave 153 of the Žąsinas cemetery was discovered in Linkuva (Pakruojis district), grave 5 (Vaškevičiūtė 2004: 93, Fig. 75: 10, 10). Spurs with shaped sides were discovered in Laiviai cemetery (Gintautaitė-Butėnienė, Butėnas 2002: Fig. 46: 2). Spurs of type 4 are the most integrated and the most decorated. They were discovered in graves 38, 93 and 169 Riders From Žąsinas Cemetery (The Classification of Spurs F r o m T h e Vi k i n g P e r i o d a n d Early Middle Ages on the Basis of Material Vytautas Kazakevičius f r o m Ž ą s i n a s C e m e t e r y ) 116 (Fig. 2: 9–10, 3: 5). The bows are integrated, made of two or three shaped, round in cross-section, wires, bent, with closed-type loops at the terminals. A spike is welded in the middle of the sides. The bows are four to five centimetres in length, and symmetrical. The width between the bow terminals is eight to ten centimetres. The spikes are conical, two to 2.5 centimetres in length. A spur from grave 38 is attributable to type 4, variant A. Its spike has a multiangular pommel with decorated eyes at its sides (Fig. 2: 9). It seems that these spurs were worn by Curonians and Semigallians (Gintautaitė-Butėnienė, Butėnas 2002: Fig. 46: 1; Vaškevičiūtė 2004: Fig. 75: 7). Fig. 3. Žąsinas cemetery (Šilalė district) grave 93 (2, 5, bronze; 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, iron; after Laima Vaitkunskienė 1977; drawings by A. Gaižauskaitė, LII archive) Fig. 4. Genčai, the 1st cemetery, inhumation grave 177/136 (1–4 bronze; 5–6 iron; after Algimantas Merkevičius, 1986) 170 A spur of type 5 was discovered in grave 64 (Fig. 2: 11). Its bow is flat with cruciform-shaped outgrowths, five to seven centimetres in length, and symmetrical. The distance between the side terminals is nine centimetres. The side terminals are closed-type, profiled loops with crescent-shaped outgrowths. The spike is short (2 cm in length), and pyramid-shaped. The bow is decorated with three longitudinal raised lines. The middle line is decorated with a single row of eyes (Fig. 2: 11). This type of spur seems to have been a popular attribute with Curonian riders according to its distribution (Fig. 4: 1). It has been discovered in the foremost Curonian cemeteries: in Ėgliškiai-Anduliai, Genčai first, Laiviai and Pryšmančiai first (all in the Kretinga district) cemeteries, and the Samogitian Paragaudys (Šilalė district) cemetery (Vaitkunskienė 1983: 15; Gintautaitė-Butėnienė, Butėnas 2002: Fig. 46: 4). The chronology of spurs Spurs from the Viking Period and early Middle Ages are discovered only in men’s graves, and in exceptional cases in horses’ graves (Pakalniškiai, Šakiai district; horse grave 106) (Antanavičius 1971). Most spurs are discovered in graves with weaponry. Among the correctly dated artefacts from grave 4, a bronze bracelet with tapered terminals and multiangular pommels was discovered. Analogous bracelets are well-known from archaeological sites of western Lithuania and Samogitia in particular. For example, in Bikavėnai, 23 bracelets of this type were discovered, in Paragaudys 13. Bracelets with tapered terminals are dated to the tenth and 11th centuries (Vaitkunskienė 1978a: 105). Chronological indicators in grave 7 are absent. Grave 13 could be dated only on the basis of a plated bronze neck-ring with a hook and loop terminals king, dated to the tenth or 11th centuries (Kuncienė 1978: 29). Grave 62 ought to have been rich in grave goods, but it was destroyed, and the ornaments did not survive. Stirrups and a bronze binding of a sword chape (Ib sub-type) with a piece of sword blade alone enables us to date it to the tenth or 11th centuries. Most stirrups discovered at Žąsinas cemetery have a curved foot-bar without holes for a belt. According to the classification of Juozas Antanavičius, such stirrups are closest to type 2 sub-type A, and type 6 subtype A (Antanavičius, 1976: 71, 75–76, Fig. 1: 2a, 6a; Kazakevičius 1998: 292, 315, Fig. 7). Stirrups of type 2 sub-type A are attributed to the tenth and 11th centuries, and those of type VI sub-type A were widespread in Lithuania and neighbouring areas around the tenth to 12th centuries (Antanavičius, 1976: 71, 76). Stirrups of type 6 were about the most popular in Lithuania (Tautavičius 1978: 125). A sword chape with stylised openwork bird figures belongs to the third variant of sub-type Ib (Kazakevičius 1998: 292, 315, Fig. 7). Typical decoration of these bindings is curved lines and symmetrically located openings. They already have no tripartite simplicity, which is typical of other versions of this sub-type. These sword chapes were produced by local craftsmen and dated to the tenth and 11th centuries (Kazakevičius 1998: 294). Only two stirrups from grave 72 of the Žąsinas cemetery could be dated by a chronological indicator. They might be attributed to type 6 sub-type A (according to Antanavičius) and dated to the tenth to the 12th centuries (Antanavičius 1976: 74–77, Fig. 1: 6a). Grave 93 was disturbed, and BALTICA 6 the burial items were dissipated (Fig. 3). Only the area of the legs survived undisturbed. Stirrups of sub-type IIA, dated to the tenth and 11th centuries, were discovered there (Antanavičius 1976: 71). A silver spiral bracelet with flanged scrolls, discovered not in the primary position but in the breast area, is hardly datable. Therefore, a more scientific chronology of this grave is not clear. Grave 112 was also destroyed and no datable items were discovered. A bracelet with tapered terminals, dated to the eighth to 12th centuries, was discovered in grave 116. A more precise dating of the grave is not possible. A bracelet of another type was discovered in grave 152. It is massive, with slightly flattened terminals, with a half-round bow, decorated with rows of hacks and triangles. It is dated to the eighth to 12th centuries (Vaitkunskienė 1978c: 95–97). Like those described above, grave 153 was also destroyed. Two A-type stirrups were discovered in it. The spur of this grave is well preserved in particular, and, on the basis of analogous spurs and other datable burial items discovered in other cemeteries, it might be dated to the tenth century (Kazakevičius 2000: 20–22). ARCHAELOGIA Spurs from the Žąsinas cemetery were discovered together with spearheads, swords, knives, riding bits and different decorations (Kazakevičius, 2006). Spurs are discovered with the following spearheads: narrow with a pronounced midrib and a large socket; with a round lanceolate blade; with willow-shape blades; with lanceolate blades; with E-type spearheads and hafted spearheads with one barb (Kazakevičius, 2006). Some graves in which spurs, ornaments and stirrups were discovered ought to be mentioned separately, as they again reveal the complexity of a chronology (Figs. 1; 3). It is necessary to mention graves in which bronze-plated neck-rings terminated with loops (graves 8, 12, 13, 34, 64, 85, 199) and conical terminals (83), penannular brooches with quadrangular and multiangular (graves 8, 12, 34, 83, 136, 203), cylindrical (grave 31) and poppy seed-shaped terminals (grave 148c), crossbow fibulae with ladders (graves 136, 156) and cruciform (grave 203) brooches were discovered, apart from spurs. Spurs were also discovered together with spearheads of all types: with narrow pronounced midribs and flat sockets (graves 8, 12, 148c), with lanceolate blades, simple round sockets (grave 31), with willow-shaped blades (graves 38, 150), with lanceolate blades (graves 34, 59, 148b), type E (graves 34, 59, 64, 136), and with hafted and one-barb spearheads (grave 148c). After a review of the chronology of spurs, we can notice that a chronology of Žąsinas cemetery spurs covers the entire period of its use; though, due to the relatively short chronological stage, it is very hard to follow their genesis. In dating spurs from the Žąsinas cemetery, it is not possible to make use of a typology and chronology of spurs discovered in other areas, for example, of the western and eastern Slavs. Baltic spurs are distinctive, with a long period of development from the beginning of the first millennium to the late Middle Ages. Their genesis is linked to the local tradition of employment, and does not match the typological framework of spurs discovered in other regions. Therefore, it is possible to refer only to local spurs, discovered in Lithuania and the Baltic area. Only very late spurs, when a standardisation of shape is traced, might be comparable. The above and similar spurs were discovered in other 171 Riders From Žąsinas Cemetery (The Classification of Spurs F r o m T h e Vi k i n g P e r i o d a n d Early Middle Ages on the Basis of Material Vytautas Kazakevičius f r o m Ž ą s i n a s C e m e t e r y ) 172 Samogitian graves, and in Semigallian graves culturally close to them (Vaškevičiūtė 2004: 82–83, Fig. 75). Translated by Algimantas Dautaras Abbreviations LAA – Lietuvos TSR archeologijos atlasas I–XII a. radiniai. T. IV, Vilnius, 1978 LA – Lietuvos archeologija, Vilnius LII – Lithuanian Institute of History, Vilnius References Antanavičius, J. 1971. Pakalniškių kapinyno (Šakių raj.) 1971 m. tyrinėjimų dienoraštis. In: LII R, F. 1, b. 372. Antanavičius, J. 1976. Balno kilpos Lietuvoje X–XIV a. In: Lietuvos TSR Mokslų akademijos darbai, A serija, 1(54), 69–81. Gintautaitė-Butėnienė, E., Butėnas, E. 2002. �������������� Laivių kapinynas. In: LA, t. 22, Vilnius, 9–198. Hilczerówna, Z. 1956. Ostrogi Polskie z X–XIII wieku. Poznań. Kazakevičius, V. 1993. Plinkaigalio kapinynas. In: LA, t. 10, Vilnius. Kazakevičius, V. 1996. IX–XIII a. baltų kalavijai. Vilnius. Kazakevičius, V. 1998. Iš vėlyvojo geležies amžiaus baltų ginklų istorijos (kalavijų makštų galų apkalai). In: LA, t. 15, Vilnius, 287–332. Kazakevičius, V. 2000. Baltų ir skandinavų karinių ryšių beieškant. In: Istorija, XLIII, 19–24. Kazakevičius, V. Žąsino ginklai. In: Šilutės kraštas, Vilnius.. Kuncienė, O. 1972. Prekybiniai ryšiai IX–XIII amžiais. In: ���� Lietuvos gyventojų prekybiniai ryšiai I–XIII a., Vilnius, 149–254. Kuncienė, O. 1978. Vytinės antkaklės kilpiniais galais. In: ���� LAA, t. IV, Vilnius: 29–30. Michelbertas, M. 1986. Senasis geležies amžius Lietuvoje I–IV amžius. Vilnius. Michelbertas, M. 2000. Die Bronzesporen der römischen Kaiserzeit in Litauen. In: Superiores Barbari, Kraków: 287–292. Nagevičius, V. 1935. Mūsų pajūrio medžiaginė kultūra VIII–XIII amž. (Pryšmančių ir kitų vietų kasinėjimai. In: Senovė, t. 1, Kaunas, 3–124. Statkevičius, V. 1975. Kraštotyrininko užrašai. In: LII R, F. 2, b. 38. Stankus, J. 1995. Bandužių kapinynas. In: LA, t. 12, Vilnius. Strazdas, A. 1996. Neaiškių archeologijos objektų žvalgymo ir žvalgomųjų kasinėjimų Raseinių ir Šilalės rajonuose 1996 m. ataskaita. In: LII R, F. 1, b. 2691. Tautavičius, A. 1978. Balno kilpos. In: LAA, t. IV, Vilnius: 125–127. Tautavičius, A. 1996. Vidurinysis geležies amžius Lietuvoje (V–IX a.). Vilnius. Vaitkunskienė, L. 1976. Žąsino kapinyno, Šilalės raj., 1976 m. kasinėjimų ataskaita. In: LII R, F. 1, b. 527. Vaitkunskienė, L. 1977. Žąsino kapinyno, Šilalės raj., 1977 m. kasinėjimų ataskaita. In: LII R, F. 1, b. 456. Vaitkunskienė, L. 1978. Žąsino kapinyno, Šilalės raj., 1978 m. tyrinėjimų ataskaita. In: LII R, F. 1, b. 660. Vaitkunskienė, L. 1978a. Vytinės apyrankės. In: LAA, t. IV, Vilnius: 105–106. Vaitkunskienė, L. 1978b. Apyrankės ��������������������������������� smailėjančiais galais. In: LAA, t. IV, Vilnius: 105. Vaitkunskienė, L. 1978c. VIII–XII a. masyvios apyrankės. In: LAA, t. IV, Vilnius: 95–97. Vaitkunskienė, L. 1979. Žąsino kapinyno, Šilalės raj., 1979 m. tyrinėjimų ataskaita. In: LII R, F. 1, b. 697. Vaitkunskienė, L. 1979a. Gintališkės kapinynas. ���� In: LA, t. 1, Vilnius, 44–75. Vaitkunskienė, L. 1983. Skandinaviški elementai žemaičių kultūroje X–XI a. In: Lietuvos istorijos metraštis 1982 metai, Vilnius, 5–16. Vaškevičiūtė, I. 2004. Žiemgaliai V–XII amžiuje. Vilnius. Вайткунскене��, ������������������ Л. 1985. Контакты ������ между �������������� балтскими племенами на территории в X–XII вв. In: Проблемы этногенеза и этнической истории балтов, Вильнюс. Кирпичников, А.Н. 1973. Снаряжение всадника и верхового коня на Руси IX–XIII вв. Лениниград. Перхавко, В.Б. 1978. Появление и распространение шпор на территории Восточной Европы. In: Советская археология, Но. 3, Москва, 113–123. Шноре, Э.Д. 1962. Шпоры городища Асоте и иx место в классификации шпор. In: Światowit, T. 24, Warsawa, 577–585. Vytautas Kazakevičius Klaipėda University Institute of Baltic Sea Region History and Archaeology Tilžės g. 13, LT-91251 Klaipėda Prepared for print: 2006 Ž ą s i n o k ap i n y n o ra i te l i a i ( V i k i n g ų i r a n k st y v ų j ų v i d u ramž i ų pe n t i n ų k l as i f i k ac i ja , rem i a n t i s Ž ą s i n o k ap i n y n o me d ž i a g a ) Vytautas Kazakevičius Santrauka Vienas iš svarbiausių raitelio atributų – pentinai. Baltų pentinai yra saviti, nuėję ilgą raidos kelią nuo I tūkstantmečio pradžios iki vėlyvųjų viduramžių. Jų genezė susieta su vietine naudojimo tradicija ir neatitinka kituose regionuose aptinkamų pentinų tipologinių bruožų. Lyginti iš dalies galima tik pačius vėlyviausius pentinus, kuomet atsiranda jų formų standartizacija. Todėl tenka remtis tik vietiniais pentinais, aptiktais Lietuvoje ir kitose baltų teritorijose. Todėl analizuojant Žąsino kapinyne rastus pentinus teko sudaryti savą tipologinę sistemą, kuri gali būti taikoma visiems Lietuvoje, o galbūt net visoje baltų erdvėje rastiems to laikotarpio pentinams apibendrinti. Žąsino kapinyne pentinų aptikta 37 kapuose (Nr. 4, 7, 8, 12, 13, 29, 31, 34, 38, 59, 60, 61, 62, 64, 72, 76, 83, I tipo pentinai dar skirstomi į du variantus: A – su uždaromis kilpomis ir B – su atviromis kilpomis užriestais į viršų galais. II tipo pentinų taip pat dar išskiriamas A variantas – su daugiakampe buožele ant spyglio. I tipo pentinų rasta šešiuose kapuose (Nr. 62, 148b, 151b, 152, 199, 202). Šių pentinų ienelės pusiau apskrito skersinio pjūvio, simetriškos, iki 9 cm ilgio, atstumas tarp ienelių 7–8 cm. Spyglys 4–6 cm ilgio, kūgio formos. Ienelių galai užbaigti uždaromis kilpomis (2 : 2 pav.). B varianto pentinas aptiktas kape Nr. 151B. Jis analogiškas kitiems šio tipo pentinams, išskyrus ienelių galus. Jie užbaigti užriestomis į viršų atviromis kilpomis su atgal atriesta sraigele (2 : 1 pav.). II tipo pentinų rasta devyniuose kapuose ir vienas atsitiktinai (Nr. 4, 8, 13, 31, 83, 93, 112, 153, 182 ir atsitiktinis). Jų lankelis analogiškas I tipo pentinams, t. y. pusiau apskrito, retai trikampio skersinio pjūvio. Ienelės šiek tiek trumpesnės, iki 5–6 cm ilgio, simetriškos. Atstumas tarp ienelių galų 6–8 cm. Ienelių galai užbaigti uždaromis kilpomis. Spygliai trumpi, 2,5–3 cm ilgio, kūgio formos (2 : 3–4 pav.). Dviejuose kapuose (Nr. 8, 182) aptikti II tipo A varianto pentinai. Jie blogai išlikę (1 pav.). V tipo pentinas aptiktas kape Nr. 64. Jo ienelės plokščios su kryžiaus pavidalo ataugomis, 5–7 cm ilgio, simetriškos. Atstumas tarp ienelių galų 9 cm. Ienelių galai užbaigti uždaromis profiliuotomis kilpomis su pusmėnulio pavidalo ataugomis. Spyglys trumpas – 2 cm ilgio, piramidės formos. Ienelės puoštos trimis išilginėmis reljefinėmis linijomis. Vidurinė linija sudaryta iš ornamentuotos viengubų akučių eilės (2 : 11 pav.). BALTICA 6 galų 8–10 cm. Spygliai 2–2,5 cm ilgio, kūgio formos. IV tipo A variantui skirtinas pentinas iš kapo Nr. 38. Jo spyglys su daugiakampe buožele, kurios šonai ornamentuoti akutėmis (2 : 9–10 pav.). ARCHAELOGIA 85, 93, 97, 101, 107, 112, 116, 121, 136, 148B, 148C, 150, 151B, 152, 153, 156, 182, 199, 202B, 203). Dar trys rasti atsitiktinai. Tipologijos pagrindu imamos atskiros pentino dalys: ienelės, spyglys ir lankelio galų užbaigimas. Pagal šiuos dėmenis Žąsino kapinyne aptikta penkių tipų pentinų: I tipas – juostiniai ilgu spygliu, su kilpomis ienelių galuose (1 : 1–2 pav.). II tipas – juostiniai trumpu spygliu, su kilpomis ienelių galuose (1 : 3–4 pav.). III tipas – apskritu lygiu ar tordiruotu lankeliu su trumpu spygliu ir kilpomis ienelių galuose (2 : 5–80 pav.); IV – sudėtiniu lankeliu, trumpu spygliu su kilpomis ienelių galuose (2 : 9–10 pav.). V tipas – juostinis profiliuotomis ienelėmis trumpu spygliu su uždaromis kilpomis ienelių galuose (2 : 11 pav.). Žąsino kapinyno pentinai rasti drauge su ietigaliais, kalavijais, kovos peiliais ir įvairiais papuošalais, tokiais kaip žalvarinės vytinės įvijinės antkaklės kilpiniais ir kūginiais galais, pasaginės segės keturkampėmis ir daugiakampėmis, cilindrinėmis ar aguoninėmis galvutėmis, taip pat lankinėmis laiptelinėmis segėmis. Pentinai aptikti taip pat su visų tipų įmoviniais ir įtveriamaisiais ietigaliais ir kitais X–XII a. radiniais. Žąsino kapinyne aptiktų pentinų chronologija aprėpia visą kapinyno naudojimo laikotarpį, ir pasekti jų genezę dėl palyginti trumpo chronologinio tarpsnio yra ypač sunku. Datuojant Žąsino kapinyno pentinus negalima naudotis kituose regionuose, pavyzdžiui, vakarų ar rytų slavų žemėse, aptiktų pentinų tipologija ir chronologija. III tipo pentinai rasti šešiuose kapuose (Nr. 12, 34, 61, 72, 85, 153). Jų ienelės apskrito skersinio pjūvio, lygios (kapas Nr. 61) arba tordiruotos, 5–7 cm ilgio, simetriškos. Atstumas tarp ienelių galų 7–9 cm. Ienelių galai užbaigti atviromis kilpomis su atriestomis atgal sraigelėmis arba be jų. Spygliai trumpi, 1,5–3 cm ilgio, kūgio formos, kartais irgi tordiruoti (kapas Nr. 85) (2 : 5–8 pav.). Kape Nr. 153 aptiktas žalvarinis pentinas skirtinas A variantui, nes jo spyglys yra su daugiakampe buožele (2 : 8 pav.). IV tipo pentinai pagal formą sudėtingiausi ir puošniausi. Jų aptikta kapuose Nr. 38 ir 116. Ienelės sudėtinės, pagamintos iš dviejų arba trijų tordiruotų apskrito skersinio pjūvio vielų sulenkiant jas ir galuose sudarant uždaras kilpas. Ienelių viduryje privirinamas spyglys. Ienelės 4–5 cm ilgio, simetriškos. Atstumas tarp ienelių 173 T h e R e c o n s tru � � � �c �ti� ���� o n o ��f �� We �ll� ��s a n d L i m e B a r k B u c k e t s fr o m L i e p o ri a i 1 S e ttl e m e n t Birutė Salatkienė T H E R E C O N S �� TR� U �� C T �I ���� O N O �� F � W ����� ELLS � A� N �� D � L �IM � �� E B A R K B U C K E T S from L I E P O R IAI 1 S E T T L E M E N T Birutė Salatkienė Abstract Unique findings, wells with wooden constructions and buckets made of lime bark in them, were detected recently in the Lieporiai 1 settlement near Šiauliai (in northern Lithuania). These objects were parts of an iron smelting site dated to the fourth to eighth centuries. Reconstructions of the well and the technique of producing lime bark buckets were made by B. Salatkienė and A. Šapaitė. A detailed description of the artefacts and their environment constitutes the first part of this paper, and the technique of reconstruction and producing lime bark buckets forms the second. Key words: iron smelting site, well, wooden construction, log, plank, lime bark, bucket, reconstruction. I n tr o d u c ti o n Archaeological experimentation is still not practised in Lithuania, nor are many reconstructions of archaeological monuments or findings made. Some archaeologists have attended festivals of experimental archaeology, where they reconstructed ancient technologies and artefacts. Also, some reconstructions are shown in the new archaeological exhibitions of museums. Nevertheless, no Lithuanian archaeologists have documented and publicised their experiments, nor their aims, techniques or results. The aim of this article is to provide exact descriptions of the wells and the buckets found in the Lieporiai 1 settlement, as well as to show the process of their reconstruction and the experience involved in it. The idea of reconstruction first arose when the author of this article was invited to be a member of the Lithuanian delegation that participated in the Days of Experimental Archaeology which took place at Biskupin in Poland. In the summer of 1998, an attempt was made to reconstruct the process of lime bark bucket production, starting with the selection of a tree and ending with the testing of the buckets. A report of this was presented at the second conference of the Lithuanian Museums Association in 1999 (Salatkienė 1999). 174 The first part of this article focuses on the circumstances and the interpretation of the discovery of the wells and buckets. Wooden wells, as well as lime bark buckets, are unique artefacts in Lithuania; therefore, the publication of all data attendant to their location, form, dimensions and function is essential for an understanding of the experiment. In the second part of the article, the process and the refining of the methodology are described consistently and in detail, focusing not on unsuccessful attempts, but, instead, looking for new possibilities and trying new buckets. Reconstruction drawings and photographs of the wells and buckets are also included. The complex of archaeological monuments from the fourth to eighth centuries found in the southern outskirts of the town of Šiauliai, in the north of Lithuania, has been explored since 1987. Two settlements and a cemetery belong to this complex. It is one of few Lithuanian complexes of archaeological monuments which have not only remained in good condition, but have also been excavated for more than ten years. The Lieporiai complex was found when the limits of the town almost reached it. It remained undestroyed only because at that time, Lithuania gained its independence and Soviet construction stopped. The first cemetery was found in 1987. During the exploration of the cemetery, in 1990–1991, 95 graves and 450 findings were discovered. It was determined that Samogitians (Vaškevičiūtė 1988; Salatkienė 1992; Salatkienė 1993) were buried there in the fourth to seventh centuries (Fig. 1). When looking for the boundaries of the cemetery, the settlement, belonging to the same period, was found close to the cemetery (Salatkienė 1993a). In order to define the boundaries of the settlement more exactly, an aerial photograph of the locality was taken. In taking it, the second settlement, situated 800 metres from the first one, was found. After survey explorations were made, it was established that the second settlement also belonged to the fourth to seventh centuries (Salatkienė 1994; Salatkienė 1994a). BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 1. The Lieporiai archaeological complex During explorations in 1992–1997 and 2000–2001, three cultural layers were found in the first settlement of Lieporiai (Salatkienė 1996). In the earliest, layer A, Paleolithic findings, from the tenth to eighth millennia BC (Rimantienė 1996), were discovered (Salatkienė 1994). Layer B is dated to the fourth to fifth centuries, the period of iron smelting. In the latest, layer C, the charred logs of ten burnt buildings were found; there- fore, it has become known as the period of buildings. It is believed that the buildings of the settlement had burned down during a fire at the turn of the seventh and the eighth centuries; therefore, this layer probably belongs to the sixth to seventh centuries. An area of 3,000 square metres in the first Lieporiai settlement was explored. About 3,000 clay potsherds, with even and rough surfaces, animal bones, iron-making trade tools, 175 T h e R e c o n s tru � � � �c �ti� ���� o n o ��f �� We �ll� ��s a n d L i m e B a r k B u c k e t s fr o m L i e p o ri a i 1 S e ttl e m e n t Birutė Salatkienė Fig. 2. The Lieporiai 1 settlement amber and glass beads, as well as other similar things, were found in this settlement (Salatkienė 1993a, 1994, 1994a, 1996, 1996a, 1998, 2000, 2001, 2002). In cultural layer B, the place of iron production was found (Salatkienė 1997). Numerous sedimentary ore excavation holes and hearths, four wells from which water was drawn to wash the ore, as well as parts of 20 furnaces and a smith’s forge, were found. Moreover, 400 kilograms of slag was collected, as well as one bloom, a lot of pieces of the furnace’s walls, and fragments of several nozzles. In addition to all this, several stone iron smelting tools and smith’s tools (four anvils, two stone hammers to work the bloom and many polishing stones), were found. 176 The Lieporiai settlement provided much information about the iron smelting trade in Lithuania, as almost all the findings discovered in the settlement define iron smelting, as well as the smith’s trade, and encompass the entire cycle of production from the extraction of the raw material to the made article (Salatkienė 2003). This has given other Lithuanian archaeologists and researchers into old metallurgy a reason to focus their attention on the Lieporiai settlement (Navasaitis 1996, 1997, 1999, 1999a; Stankus 2001). One type of finding connected with the iron smelting trade, found in the first Lieporiai settlement, is unique in Lithuanian archaeological material. These findings include wells constructed from wood, and eight lime bark buckets which were used to draw water and were The wells The first well was found in 1992 under a burnt house. A hole, almost round in shape, the diameter of which was 2.5 metres and the depth 3.65 metres, was found. The hole had vertical walls and a horizontal bottom. A wooden, oblong construction of 1.3 by 0.6 to 0.7 metres was found in the hole. The construction was broader at the northeast end. The northwest end of the well was supported with four split logs, which were 15 to 21 centimetres wide and five to eight centimetres thick. The height of the remaining parts of the logs was 2.45 metres, but their original height should have been about five metres. The inner sides of the split logs were trimmed. They were very well fitted, without any gaps. The fastening of the southwest end of the well consisted of a split log and a split, trimmed and slightly convex plank. The width of the log was 20 centimetres, while the plank was 40 centimetres wide and eight to ten centimetres thick. The log and the plank were fitted close to each other as well. The long southeast and northwest walls of the well consisted of split planks, which were five to 12 centimetres thick, 25 to 35 centimetres wide, and 1.5 metres long. The planks were laid very close over the top of each other in a horizontal position. Eight planks have survived in the southeast wall, and nine in the northwest wall. The northwest wall had collapsed, but was fixed with three thinner, more smoothly trimmed planks, and with one four-centimetre-thick wooden cleat. The construction of the well was supported from the inside as well as from the outside. The end split logs, as they were overlapping by ten centimetres at both ends behind the vertical ones, held the side planks. At the southwest end, vertical stakes had been hammered into both corners of the well, one in each corner. In the western corner, the stake, the diameter of which was eight centimetres and the length 1.65 metres, was round; while the stake in the eastern corner was square, ARCHAELOGIA BALTICA 6 discovered in the wells (Fig. 2). The wooden parts of the wells were built according to the principle of column construction. These wells are the earliest findings of their kind in Lithuania so far. Moreover, the lime bark buckets have no parallels in Lithuania. Similar but not identical findings are known from much later periods. These are big lime bark crocks with plank bottoms, dated to the 12th to 15th centuries, and found during exploration of the medieval town of Kernavė (Kernavė 2002). Also, a similar but very disintegrated lime bark bucket, which had no bottom, was found by the archaeologist Daiva Luchtanienė during explorations of the Old Town of Vilnius. This finding is dated to the 16th century. Fig. 3. The wooden construction of the first well trimmed, eight centimetres thick and 1.95 metres long. At a depth of 3.7 metres, between these two stakes, a 12-centimetre transom was hammered in. On both ends of the transom, square mortises were chipped out. Both stakes were embedded into these mortises. The northeast end was supported only with vertical stakes, without a transom (Fig. 3). Two vertical stakes, 12 centimetres in diameter and 1.85 to two metres in length, supported the northwest wall, which had come down. From the outside, the northwest wall was supported with three vertical stakes, beside the corners of the well. Two stakes had been hammered into the bottom of the well, the bottom part of the third stake was at a Fig. 4. A reconstruction of the first well 177 T h e R e c o n s tru � � � �c �ti� ���� o n o ��f �� We �ll� ��s a n d L i m e B a r k B u c k e t s fr o m L i e p o ri a i 1 S e ttl e m e n t Birutė Salatkienė Fig. 5. The second bucket in situ 178 depth of 3.6 metres. Only behind the northeast wall of the well was sterile soil, a yellow sandy loam. Here the wall of the well hole coincided with the wall of the wooden construction. Behind the three other walls there were ten to 30-centimetre gaps, that were filled with a mixture of soil, ashes and charred logs (Fig. 4). have disappeared when the level of the ground water fell. Now the hole of the well is completely dry; however, signs of water having been there are very clear. These signs are silt and stratified sand. The walls of the well could have been supported with vertical stakes, and horizontally woven branches of trees. The well, as has been mentioned, had collapsed, and then it was repaired, but collapsed again, as the northwest wall was destroyed by a water course. This water course is still noticeable. When the wall collapsed for the second time, the well had already silted up, and filled with stones, logs and sticks. Four lime bark buckets were found in it. They were sunk in the west corner of the well, at depths of three to nine metres. The buckets lay one over the other; this indicates the gradual silting up of the well (Fig. 5). The second well belongs to the period of the early iron trade. This conclusion can be drawn from the fact that the edge of the well hole was level with the ground, so that people could bring and put clay on the edge of the hole. The walls of the 16th furnace were modelled from this clay. The hole of this well, as well as the holes of the other wells in Lieporiai, had been filled with soil, and its edges collapsed inwards. In the end, a fireplace was set up on the top of the hole. The second well was excavated in 1996. The surface of the well hole appeared in the yellow sandy loam of the sterile soil, at a depth of 80 centimetres. The hole was very big, four, five by five, and four metres in size. However, this was only the contour of the collapsed edges of the hole. The original form of the hole emerged at a depth of 1.7 metres from the present surface of the ground. At this depth, in a southwest and northeast direction, the hole of the well is slightly oblong; the size is 1.5 by one metre. The edges of the hole are vertical and smooth, and its bottom is semicircular. It is comparatively shallow, just two metres deep from the present surface of the land. At the bottom of the hole is a 30 to 40-centimetre layer of silt, whereas in the walls there are small layers of sand and silt, such as can be found at the bottom of a water body (Fig. 6). The well had no surviving wooden constructions, which could The third well was found 30 metres northwest of the first well, and 5.5 metres east of the second. This, as well as the first one, was found under the charred logs of a burnt foundation. An oblong, 2.2 by 1.6 by 2.7metre deep pit had been dug for this well. The hole had sloping walls and a pointed bottom. It is possible that the well was used for some time without any support. This can be presumed from the fact that a thin layer of silt could be seen at the very bottom of the well, and one sunken bucket was covered with sand from the walls. Moreover, from the bottom part of the wooden construction to the bottom of the well, there was a 40centimetre gap with stratified silt from the well and sand from the walls in it. The entire hole of the well was not supported, just 2.3 centimetres of the upper part. A wooden support held the sloping walls of the well hole. Their upper parts have not survived (Fig. 7). Fig. 6. The second well Fig. 7. The third well The southern wall of the well consisted of two planks, 46 to 50 centimetres wide, 1.8 metres long, and seven to eight centimetres thick. The planks were laid horizontally along the hole of the well, one over the other on the edges of the hole. The planks were split and BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA trimmed, their ends were straight and well sanded. The support of the northern wall of the well also consisted of two planks, 20 to 37 centimetres wide, three to five centimetres thick, and 1.85 metres long. The planks were laid in the same way as in the southern wall. The eastern wall of the well was supported by three vertical planks and a round stake. The width of all three planks was 25 centimetres, their length was 50 centimetres, and they were seven centimetres thick. The transom, which was 80 centimetres long and five centimetres thick, held the planks and the stake from the inside. It was inserted between the side planks. The western wall of the well was supported in a very simple way. It consisted of two vertical planks that were 20 to 23 centimetres wide, 30 to 31 centimetres long and seven centimetres thick. Gaps of five to ten centimetres separated them from the side walls of the well. A 15-centimetre gap was left between the planks. Perhaps the wooden construction of this well should be called the support of the walls, and not the construction itself. As far as the lime bark buckets are concerned, four were found in the third well. One of them lay at the top of the well; the other three were below the first one, at the very bottom of the well (Fig. 8). The third well had not been used very long, or at least for a considerably shorter period of time than the first well. First, it was quite shallow, poorly supported, and had quickly silted up. Secondly, all four buckets had sunk at the same depth to the very bottom of the well (Fig. 9). The abandoned well had filled up with stones and soil, in which animal bones, potsherds, sticks and lots of chips of wood were found. Finally, there was a fireplace on the top of the silted-up hole. The fourth well was found six metres to the south of the third well. The place for the well had not been chosen accidentally, but perhaps knowing beforehand that a water course was there and that the groundwater was not deep. First of all, an oblong, rectangular, 1.9-metre-long and 1.1-metre-wide pit was dug from east to west. The depth of the hole was 1.7 metres from the 179 T h e R e c o n s tru � � � �c �ti� ���� o n o ��f �� We �ll� ��s a n d L i m e B a r k B u c k e t s fr o m L i e p o ri a i 1 S e ttl e m e n t Birutė Salatkienė Fig. 8. A reconstruction of the third well Fig. 10. The fourth well Fig. 9. The buckets at the bottom of the third well 180 surface of the sterile soil (2.4 metres from the present surface of the ground). It is difficult to say what tools were used for the excavation of the hole. No digging tools were found in the Lieporiai cemetery or the settlement, but the four wells and 104 holes testify that tools existed. After digging the hole, the wooden walls of the well were constructed. Along the southern and northern walls of the hole, birch and poplar logs, 1.9 metres long and ten centimetres in diameter, and with bark, were laid one over the other. They were contiguous with both ends of the hole and were probably inserted very firmly. From within, the end walls held the sidewalls of the logs (Fig. 10). At the eastern and western ends of the well, on the edges, 18 centimetres from the western end and 12 centimetres from the eastern end of the hole, several planks were set. The planks were 50 to 52 centimetres long, 12 to 30 centimetres wide and four centimetres thick. From within, the western plank was held both by two vertical stakes with sharp ends, and by a transom. The stakes were hammered 40 centimetres into the bottom of the well, and an 82-centimetre-long and five-centimetre-thick transom was inserted between the side logs of the wall. The same type of transom, only 70 centimetres long, held the eastern planks as well, with a thin 42-centimetre-long, seven-centimetre-wide, and two-centimetre-thick smaller plank that was inserted between the planks and the transom. This is how the bottom of the construction of the ends of the well looked. The upper part of the construction consisted of vertical, split, 20centimetre-wide and ten-centimetre-thick planks. At The walls of the hole dug for the well were not completely even and vertical. Ten to 25-centimetre gaps were left between the wooden construction of the well and the walls of the hole. They were filled with a greenish brown sand, which accumulated during the digging of the hole. In the sand there were sticks, small planks, bark and chips of wood. The well was very shallow, and presumably that was the reason why it soon filled up with silt. During that time the wooden construction of the well disintegrated a little. The well was neglected. Oak beams and planks were thrown into it. It filled up with mud when its western wall fell down. Soon the hole of the well filled up with stones. The bottom of this layer of stones was at a depth of 1.8 metres, and the top was at a depth of 1.3 metres. Over a period of time the hole of the well became even with the surface of the ground. Finally, as in the case of the third well, in the filled-up hole of the well, another hole for a fireplace was dug. Attempts to determine the function of the fireplace have all failed (Fig. 11). Black, thick mud, which is full of admixtures such as sand that had fallen from the walls, remnants of organic material, ash, charred logs, coal, stones, sticks and bark settled in the bottoms of all the wells. Poles, sharpened with axes, beams with trimmed ends, stumps, planks, and a large amount of chips of wood were thrown into them, especially into the third and the fourth ones. Some archaeological ware, such as clay pots and shards, stone grinders, whetstones, slag, pieces of clay, and also bones and animals’ teeth were found in the soil which filled up the abandoned wells. All of the abandoned wells were filled with stones. ARCHAELOGIA BALTICA 6 the western end there were three. They were closely set, side by side, further towards the western end of the hole, ten centimetres above the bottom, which was a cross plank. These vertical planks presumably touched the top of the construction. Therefore, they had to be about 2.5 centimetres long, and had to stick out at least 0.5 metres over the surface of the ground. The bottom parts, which were one metre long, survived only because they had collapsed into the mud of the well. The vertical planks of the edge rested upon the logs of the side walls. From within, the same type of transoms as the bottom ones could have held the planks, but they have not survived. At the eastern end, only fragments of the lower parts of two planks which were 30 centimetres tall were found, but it is possible that the construction of the eastern end of the well was the same as that of the western one, only it has not survived. The planks of the eastern end were set right above the bottom plank. Fig. 11. A reconstruction of the fourth well Later, buildings were built on the site of the wells. Domestic findings, such as shards, bones, clay and other objects were found in the soil which filled the siltedup wells; therefore, all these wells have been ascribed to layer B, the iron smelting period of the Lieporiai settlement. The second, third and fourth wells were dated using the carbon dating method and the dendrochronological method. It was determined that the first well appeared in about 318±38AD (Kairaitis 1997). The third well was dated to 374±50 AD, and the fourth was dated to 523±50 AD (Mažeika 1999). These were not drinking water wells, they were dug because there were no natural water bodies close to the location, and the water from the wells was used to wash the ore before smelting. The author of this article noticed the similarity between the wells described above and the wooden wells in the Pruzskow (Poland) iron smelting museum, where a reconstruction of the Biskupce iron smelting trade of the first to the fourth centuries AD has been made. This monument has not been duplicated; therefore, the exhibition in this museum (muzeum Starozytnego Hutnictva w Pruszkowie. Wystawa-Czas Źelaza. Panorama mazowieckiej wsi hutniczej z pierwszych wiekow n.e.) must be considered analogous. Although the wooden constructions of the wells were found to have significantly deteriorated, it was possible to determine what material they were built from. It consisted of pine, birch and poplar trees. Thin logs with bark (the fourth well), split logs, thick trimmed planks (the first, third and fourth wells) were used for 181 T h e R e c o n s tru � � � �c �ti� ���� o n o ��f �� We �ll� ��s a n d L i m e B a r k B u c k e t s fr o m L i e p o ri a i 1 S e ttl e m e n t Birutė Salatkienė Fig. 12. A reconstruction of the fourth well in the Šiauliai Aušra museum the construction. Oblong holes for all the wells had been dug, and later wooden supports were assembled in these holes. The shape of all the wooden constructions, except the ones in the second well, which was round, was rectangular. The types of constructions were also uniform: the sides were made from recumbent stumps, logs or planks, and the corners were made from vertical ones. The corners of the insides of the wells were supported with transoms. They could have been thick, trimmed, with cuts for stakes (the first well), or rather thin poles, the ends of which were inserted between the side logs or planks (the third and fourth wells). The original look of the wells can be roughly reconstructed from these facts (Fig. 12). Following a graphic reconstruction, the first well was renewed for the 2004 exhibition in the Aušra museum in Šiauliai. The buckets In two of the four wells, the first and the third, eight lime bark buckets (four buckets in each) were found. Even though they look alike and the circumstances of their discovery are similar, the conditions of the buckets differ; therefore, it is necessary to describe each bucket individually. The first, second, third and fourth buckets were found in the first well, while the fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth buckets were discovered in the third well. 182 The first bucket. At a depth of 3.2 metres, at the southwest end of the well, appeared a piece of bark, the size of which was 21 by 29 centimetres. During the process of its preparation, it turned out that this piece of bark could have been a box, stitched up with lime bast from bark, which was turned so that the bast was on the upper side. The box lay in such a way that its bottom faced the western corner of the well. It was flattened and deformed; there was only a five to ten-centimetre gap between its edges. A stone, the size of which was ten by 12 by six centimetres, and some wood chips were in the box. No one understood what kind of find the bucket was, so it was simply called “a box”. This bucket had almost completely deteriorated, only pieces of it remained. The second bucket. At a depth of 3.4 metres, also at the southwest end of the well, 30 centimetres from the wall, lay the second bucket, the opening of which faced the western wall. The bucket was flattened, as in the case of the first one. The height was 16 centimetres, and its width was 26 centimetres; however, the bottom has not survived. This was the first find that was recognised as a bucket, because a loop made from lime bast was noticed by the upper edge. A cord twisted from lime bast had survived in the loop. The length of the cord was seven centimetres. The discovery of the bucket finally allowed for the interpretation of the wooden construction as a well, while before this there had been many doubts. The third bucket. At a depth of 3.6 metres in the corner of the well lay the third bucket. Its bottom was pressed against the corner pillar, and its opening faced the inside of the well. Its side was pressed against one of the fallen planks of the northwest wall of the well. The diameter of the bucket and the height were 18 centimetres. Unlike the buckets described above, this one had not completely lost its form; it was only slightly flattened. The third bucket, like the other buckets, was BALTICA 6 Fig. 14. The fourth bucket sewn from a piece of turned tree bark, which was in good condition; therefore, the conclusion was made that it was lime bark. The hems of the bucket were also in a good state. The side of it was sewn with double hems, making oblique, 1.5-centimetre-long stitches. The bottom was sewn to the sides, making stitches of the same length, with 0.7-centimetre gaps between the stitches (Fig. 13). The seventh bucket. Over the southeast corner of the sixth bucket, only facing in the opposite direction, lay the seventh bucket. Its opening faced southwest. The southern, unsupported wall had fallen on to this bucket. It was flattened, and its bark was crumpled. The height of the bucket was 25 centimetres and its width was 27 centimetres. It had been made in the same way as all the other buckets. The fourth bucket. At a depth of 3.9 metres, 35 centimetres from the southwest end of the well, alongside the well, lay the fourth bucket. Its bottom faced the southwest wall. It was flattened and disintegrating. The height, as well as its width, was 22 centimetres. Although it had deteriorated quite a bit, its shape and the technique of its production could be determined quite clearly. The only parts missing were the cord and some pieces. The eighth bucket. The eighth bucket was found at the same depth as the sixth and the seventh. It lay two centimetres west of the sixth bucket, across the well, with its opening facing southwest. The bottom lay on the bottom of the well, on sand. From above, it was covered with mud, but it was in rather good condition; it was less flattened than the fifth bucket, even though its bark was crumpled. The remaining few pieces of a very disintegrated bast cord were noticed in the loops. The fifth bucket. At a depth of 3.1 to 3.2 metres, in the very middle of the well, in thick mud, lay the fifth bucket. It was flattened, very crumpled and disintegrated. The height of the bucket was 24 centimetres, and its width was 21 centimetres. The bucket lay 55 centimetres from the western end of the well, and its opening faced the northwest side. The two loops of the bucket had survived, but the cord was broken (Fig. 14). From these descriptions, it is clear that all the lime bark buckets were made in the same manner, only the dimensions differed slightly. Those found in the third well were three to four centimetres taller and wider than the buckets in the first well. Among the buckets found, there was one that seemed much newer than the rest (the sixth), but there were also a few in poor condition (the first, the second and the fifth), as well as a few that were more or less threadbare. From these facts, we can draw the conclusion that, as time passed, lime bark buckets became softer, their bark became sodden and puckered, but they were still used, until the cords of the buckets broke and the buckets sank. The sixth bucket. At a depth of 3.3 to 3.4 metres, in the middle of the well, lay the sixth bucket. It pointed in the opposite direction to the fifth bucket. This bucket is in the best condition. Presumably, it had sunk while still new and preserved its original form. The bucket was almost round, 25 centimetres long, and had a diameter of 25 centimetres. The bark of the bucket was very smooth, not crumpled. On the surface of the bark, cracked lime tree bast could be seen. The edges of the bark were overlapping by four centimetres, and sewn with a bast cord, the same way as all the others. Both loops had survived, but not the cord. It was full of well mud and sand from the bottom. ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 13. The third bucket R e c o n s tru c ti o n Data from archaeological excavations has provided some information about the material used in the production of the buckets and the sewing technique; however, it was necessary to determine the process of the preparation of the material and the method of production of the buckets. 183 T h e R e c o n s tru � � � �c �ti� ���� o n o ��f �� We �ll� ��s a n d L i m e B a r k B u c k e t s fr o m L i e p o ri a i 1 S e ttl e m e n t Birutė Salatkienė The tradition of producing domestic objects from lime bark, or sewing them to make an oblique hem, as in the case of the buckets described, has not survived in Lithuania. However, lime bark boxes with plank bottoms, nailed with tacks, can be seen in museums. The sides of these boxes are quilted, making a single hem along the side. Moreover, the use of lime bast for twisting string and weaving bast shoes is also known. K. Ščesnulevičius (Ščesnulevičius 1936) wrote about bast shoe weaving in 1936. In his article, he describes the kinds of trees and the type of bark which had been used for weaving bast shoes, when the bark was taken, and how the bark was prepared and kept. This information was useful in the process of choosing the trees and preparing the bark. Lime bark used to be gathered in the spring and summer. The bark at the bottom of a tree was cut with a knife along the bottom of the trunk, and peeled until it came off. Later, it would be soaked for about two weeks. Then it was dried, and the bast was pulled out and wrapped up. This “pickled” bast is especially flexible and solid. Bast bark weaving with hooks is also known in Lithuanian villages. This method was taken from one of the craftsmen. The raw material and tools. The buckets were made from green lime bark. For this purpose, a young, straight lime tree, with as few branches as possible, growing in a forest and about 15 centimetres in diameter, is needed. The buckets are sewn using twisted lime bast cord. Loops for the handle and the handle itself are made from cord of the same type. An axe, a knife, an awl, a hook for weaving the string, and some wax, are needed for the production of a bucket (Fig. 15). In order to ensure the accuracy of the experiment, copies of axes, knives and awls found in the cemetery at Lieporiai, as well as a wooden hook and some wax that were taken from ethnographical material, were used for this reconstruction. 184 The preparation of the raw material. Having cut a lime tree, a 0.6 to one-metre-area of the trunk, free of bigger branches, scars or other bark injuries, is cut out with a knife, across the trunk, from both ends, and then cut lengthwise. For this purpose, a very sharp knife is needed, so that the bark is cut to the very timber; otherwise, the uncut bast will tear the bark and spoil its edge. A straight and undamaged edge of the bark guarantees the watertightness of a bucket. The bark from the trunk is then peeled off with the blade of a knife or an axe, carefully pulling the bast from the timber along the lengthwise cut and increasing the gap. If the tree is barked in spring, it can be barked using only the hands, placing the fingers into the gap between the rind and the trunk. Usually, while barking a tree, the bast Fig. 15. The tools for making buckets Fig. 16. Peeling the bark from the lime trunk cracks lengthwise in some places, but the outer side of the bark has to remain undamaged. The best time to bark a tree is in spring, when the bark separates easily from the trunk. After bark gathered in the spring has been soaked, the bast separates from it very easily, and it is flexible and solid. The peeled bark may be kept dried. However, before the buckets are made, the bark must be soaked in cold water for up to three days. If necessary, the bark may be peeled off during other seasons, but it becomes more difficult, as it is more likely to be damaged and the bast is almost impossible to separate from the bark; therefore, they have to be cut with a knife (Fig. 16). Once the bark is peeled, it must immediately be turned so that the bast is on the top (if it cannot be done immediately, then at least before it gets dry). It has to be rolled into a cylinder and tied up with a string. Only in this way can the bark be completely straightened, so that its edges do not turn towards the inside. Bark from the very top of the tree and from bigger branches is peeled for bast. Using a knife or an axe, the lower edge of the bark, the width of which is not important, is peeled until the bark tears off. The pieces of bark are soaked in water for two or three weeks, in order for the bast to separate from the bark more easily. BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 17. The lime bark prepared for sewing Fig. 18. Sewing the bucket Then the pieces of bark are taken out of the water and dried. After that, the bast is pulled by hand. It is thin, flexible and soft, and can easily be woven into string (Fig. 17). was put through, and from the opposite side the end was pulled out. The waxed end of a bast cord, twisted between the fingers, becomes hard and pointed and can be pulled through the hole quite easily. String is woven from bast using a wooden hook, which is made from a tree branch, 30 centimetres long and one centimetre in diameter, with a smaller branch sprouting from it. The branch is cut five centimetres from the join, which is of the same length. The length of the handle of the hook is about 25 centimetres. The ends are smoothed with a knife. Sewing a bucket. The edges of the lime bark are cut using a knife till they are even. A 75 to 80-centimetre-long and 22 to 25-centimetre-wide rectangle is cut and rolled lengthwise down the bast, with the outward side of the bark facing inside. During the archaeological excavations, it was noticed that the bark of buckets was rolled with the bast facing outwards, but it was not clear why all these buckets were rolled only this way. Having tried to roll the bark so that the bast was facing inwards several times, the outward side soon cracked. Thus, it became clear that the bark has to be rolled with the bast facing outwards only. The edges of the bark overlap five to seven centimetres, and the cylinder is tied tightly with bast or cord made from it. The remaining piece of bark is pressed with a plank in order to uncurl it. It will be used for the bottom of the bucket. If the bark is soaked for several days, it uncurls easily, and it is not necessary to press it (Fig. 18). The string is woven from one 30 to 40-centimetrelong and one-centimetre-wide piece of bast. One end of the bast is put around the hook, leaving a five to seven-centimetre tip on one side. This tip, together with the longer end of the bast, is taken with the left hand, and the hook is turned around its longitudinal axis using the right hand. This way, the long and the short ends are twisted, and the rest of the string is woven following the same method. In order for the bast to stay woven, its twisted end is wrapped around the hook. Finally, when the bast is woven, the string is wound off the hook and its pointed, single end is waxed with good beeswax. The waxed end of the string should look like a needle. Looking for a way to sew bark with a cord, the first method tried was to pull the end of the cord through a hole made with an awl, using a darning needle, which was made especially for the purpose, but this method failed. The end of the cord cracked, split into threads, and could not be pulled through the hole. What was helpful here was a technique used by shoemakers. A hole was made with an awl, the waxed end of the cord Bark scalded with boiling water or soaked in cold water for a day becomes more flexible. A bucket of a more regular form is made from such bark. It appears that bark may be softened and steamed by putting the lime log into a heated bread-baking stove, but we did not try this method (Ščesnulevičius 1936). The bucket is sewn leaving the bark cylinder tied tightly with bast; otherwise, it would be impossible to keep it rolled and to sew it evenly. In order to keep the outward edge of the bark pressed to the side of the bucket more tightly, an oblong piece of bark can be put crosswise behind the bast. It is sewn using cord wo- 185 T h e R e c o n s tru � � � �c �ti� ���� o n o ��f �� We �ll� ��s a n d L i m e B a r k B u c k e t s fr o m L i e p o ri a i 1 S e ttl e m e n t Birutė Salatkienė 186 ven from dried bast. The archaeologist R. Rimantienė once wrote that before the process, the bast was soaked (Rimantienė 1995), but our experiment showed that this was not true. Wet bast cannot be twisted, knotted or tightened, and loosens up immediately. It is also impossible to point it and to pull it through a hole. The most convenient way to sew it is to use a 30 to 40centimetre-long cord; a longer cord usually cracks by the time the sewing is over, and it breaks more often. The side of the bucket is sewn making a double hem in the following way: a hole is made with an obtuse (so that the bark does not split as easily) iron awl through both of the overlapping ends of the bark. The hole is made 1.5 centimetres from the top of the cylinder, two to three centimetres from the outward edge of the bark. A well-twisted, waxed, pointed bast cord is stringed into the hole and tied firmly. The shorter end of the cord is stringed into the gap between the overlapping edges of the bucket, and the longer one is used for sewing. Alongside the overlapping edge, two lines of holes are made, one to 1.5 centimetres from each another. The gaps between the holes are 0.5 to one centimetre wide, and the holes are arranged in a chessboard order. By stringing the cord through the holes of both lines, skew stitches are formed. Such a double hem presses the joining pieces more tightly and does not damage the outward edges of the bark. Every hole is made separately, so that it does not get covered. The holes are made in the same direction as that in which the cord will be stringed, because the outward hole is wider and its edges are more even. After sewing the side of the bucket, the excess string is cut off. The bucket is put on a straightened piece of bark, laid with its outward side facing up. Pressing it very tightly, the bottom of the bucket is cut out with a sharp knife. The bottom is several millimetres wider than the cylinder of the bucket. It is sewn to the bucket making a double hem as well, using holes with 0.5centimetre gaps between them. The cord is stringed in succession into the holes of the cylinder and into the holes of the bottom. The holes are not made ahead of time or all at once, but while sewing, each one is made separately. It is easier to string the cord into a newly made hole, as, after some time, the hole contracts and it has to be widened with an awl. The bottom holes are made from the inside of the bucket, while the holes of the cylinder edges are made from the outer side. The cord is stringed into the holes in this order, because otherwise, trying to make a hole at the bottom of the cylinder from the inner side is very difficult, as it is hard to see. The holes in the cylinder are made not in a line, but in chessboard order, every other hole a bit lower so that the bast does not rip lengthwise and does not fall together with the bottom. Fig. 19. A replica of a lime bark bucket After the bucket is sewn, holes for a vertical loop are made 2.5 to three centimetres from each other, approximately in the middle of the overlapping edges, two centimetres below the upper edge. If the loops are not made where the edges of the cylinder overlap, is impossible to keep the bucket balanced, as the heavier side of the bucket will weigh it down. The loop is made from a double bast cord. In order for it to be firmer, the same cord is wound around the outer side of the loop. A loop of the same kind is made on the opposite side of the bucket. A 0.5-centimetre-thick cord, woven from twobast ply, is stringed into the loops. Then, a 40 to 50centimetre-long cord, thicker than that used earlier for sewing, is taken. One of its edges is stringed through the loop and bent so that one quarter of its length remains on one side, with the other three quarters on the other side. Then both ends of the cord are twisted into one. The end of the shorter part is stringed between the cord’s filaments, and fastened so that it does not break or come loose. The bast is not slippery, and the cord stays twisted. The other end of the cord is twisted the same way. The handle can be made in the following way. A single cord is stringed into one of the loops; the cord is bent in the middle and twisted to the end by hand. Then its end is pulled through the second loop. Its ten-centimetre end is bent under the loop and woven into the twisted cord. This way, a firm cord handle for the bucket is made from double bast. The capacity of the bucket is usually eight or nine litres (Fig. 19). A finished lime bark bucket was tested. It was soaked in water for three days. During this time the bark became swollen, and all of the holes were filled; the overlapping edges were tightly pressed. The bast cord also became swollen, and filled the holes tightly. The bucket became almost completely hermetic. It could be used BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA Fig. 20. The Days of Living Archaeology in Kernavė, 2001.������������������������� Making lime bark buckets to draw water, which dripped only slightly from it. After being carried for 100 metres, 0.5 litres of water had dripped from the bucket. This shows that the bucket is not suitable for carrying and keeping water. However, it is suitable for drawing water from a well, because it is light, capacious, and can easily be drawn up from a deep well. Fastening the bucket to a perch can draw the water; otherwise the bucket will not sink and be filled with water. A stone found in the first bucket could have been used as a form of ballast, so that the bucket sank and was filled with water. It is possible that buckets in wells were kept in the water all the time, and that is why they did not dry out and were watertight. It was noticed that the bark of a bucket used for a longer period of time would get softer; the bucket would lose its resilience, and would become soft and flat like a basket. No bucket has been found with the entire cord remaining, which indicates that the buckets sank when their cords broke. To this day, 150 buckets have been made using the method described above. A reconstruction of the method of production was elaborated further in 1998–2002, when the author of this article and Audronė Šapaitė, the head of the archaeological department at the Aušra museum in Šiauliai, participated in various experimental archaeology events. The method of production was demonstrated at the Biskupin festival of open archae- ology in Poland, from 9 to 19 September 1998, and 18 to 22 September 1999, as well as at the Kernavė archaeological museum during the Days of Living Archaeology, and at the international symposium “Ancient Trades and Traditions of the Countries of the Baltic Sea Region” in Nida in 1999. The method was also demonstrated in Nida in 2000–2002 during the Viking Festival; in Volin, Poland, in 1999 and 2001; it was also shown in 2002 at the “Living History” camp which took place in the Šiauliai region and was hosted by Šiauliai Aukuras, the nature and cultural heritage protection club; also, in 2000, during the ancient trades day at the Aušra museum in Šiauliai; at the festival of medieval trades in 2001 in Cēcis, Latvia, as well as in several other places (Fig. 20). C o n c lu s i o n s 1. In 1987–2002 the Lieporiai complex of archaeological monuments (a cemetery and two settlements) near Šiauliai was excavated. A site for iron smelting was excavated, and dated to the fourth to eighth centuries AD. 2. Unique findings, four wells (three with wooden constructions) and eight lime bark buckets, were discovered. 187 T h e R e c o n s tru � � � �c �ti� ���� o n o ��f �� We �ll� ��s a n d L i m e B a r k B u c k e t s fr o m L i e p o ri a i 1 S e ttl e m e n t Birutė Salatkienė 3. A reconstruction of a wooden well was made at the Aušra museum in Šiauliai in 2004, but archaeological experiments in lime bark bucket production were accomplished in 1998. 4. Lime bark, an axe, a knife, an awl, a hook for weaving the string, as well as some wax, is needed for the production of a bucket. The method of production has been reconstructed and 150 buckets have been made using this method. All the reconstructions were demonstrated at festivals of experimental archaeology in Poland, Latvia and Lithuania. References 188 Kairaitis J., Karpavičius J. 1997. Dėl šulinio iš Lieporių gyvenvietės amžiaus. Kauno botanikos sodas. In: Šiaulių “Aušros” muziejaus Archeologijos skyriaus archyvas. Kernavė - litewska Troja. 2002. Katalog wystawy ze zbiorow Panstvovego Muzeum-Rezerwatu Archeologii w Kernavė. Warszawa. Mažeika J., Petrošius R. 1999. Šiauliai No 1, Šiauliai Nr. 2. Geologijos institutas, Radioizotopinių tyrimų laboratorija. In: Šiaulių “Aušros” muziejaus archeologijos skyriaus archyvas. Navasaitis J., Chodočinskas S., Blaževičius H. 1996. Šlako reikšmė kalviškosios geležies metalurgijoje. In: Mechanika-96. Tarptautinės konferencijos pranešimų medžiaga. Kaunas, 177–180. Navasaitis J. 1997. Lieporių rudnelės rekonstrukcija. In: Kultūros paveldas-97: Respublikinio seminaro medžiaga (Metalų gavyba, jų sudėtis ir metalinių dirbinių gamyba). Vilnius, 39–44. Navasaitis J., Sveikauskaitė A., Selskis A. and Matulionis E. 1999. Ironmaking technique during the Roman period in Lithuania. In: Prehistoric and Medieval Direct Iron Smelting in Scandinavia and Europe. Aspect of Technology and Society. Aarhus, 87–97. Navasaitis J., Sveikauskaitė A., Selskis A. 1999a. Lietuvos rudnių šlako sudėtis ir savybės. In: Lietuvos archeologija. 18. Vilnius, 121–133. Rimantienė R. 1995. Lietuva iki Kristaus. Vilnius, 55. Rimantienė R. 1996. Akmens amžius Lietuvoje. Vilnius, 21. Salatkienė B. 1992. Lieporių (Šiauliai) kapinyno 1990–1991 m. Tyrinėjimai. In: Archeologiniai tyrinėjimai Lietuvoje 1990–1991 m. Vilnius, 117–122. Salatkienė B. 1993. Žemaičių karių kapai Lieporių V-VIII a. po Kr. kapinyne. In: Mūsų kraštas. No 2(3), 21–29. Salatkienė B. 1993a. The complex of archaeological monuments in Lieporiai 5th-8th c. AD. Vejle, 103–105. Salatkienė B. 1994. Lieporių gyvenvietės tyrinėjimai. In: Archeologiniai tyrinėjimai Lietuvoje 1992–1993 m. Vilnius, 64–73. Salatkienė B. 1994a. Ar išsaugos Šiauliai savo archeologinius paminklus? In: Mokslas ir gyvenimas. No 4, 32–33. Salatkienė B. 1996. Lieporių I gyvenvietės tyrinėjimai. In: Archeologiniai tyrinėjimai Lietuvoje 1994–1995 m. Vilnius, 47–52. Salatkienė B. 1996a. Lieporių archeologinių paminklų kompleksas. In: Šiaulių metraštis 1994–1995. Šiauliai, 161– 169. Salatkienė B. 1997. Geležies lydymo verslas Lieporių I-oje gyvenvietėje. In: Kultūros paveldas-97: Respublikinio seminaro medžiaga (Metalų gavyba, jų sudėtis ir metalinių dirbinių gamyba).Vilnius, 30–39. Salatkienė B. 1998. Lieporių 1-sios gyvenvietės tyrinėjimai. In: Archeologiniai tyrinėjimai Lietuvoje 1996 ir 1997 metais. Vilnius, 90–99. Salatkienė B. 1999. Archeologinė rekonstrukcija kaip tyrimo metodas. In: Lietuvos muziejų rinkiniai. Tyrinėjimų metodika. Konferencijos tezės ir pranešimai. Vilnius, 10–12. Salatkienė B. 2000. Lieporių 1-sios gyvenvietės tyrinėjimai. In: Archeologiniai tyrinėjimai Lietuvoje 1998 ir 1999 metais. Vilnius, 103–106. Salatkienė B. 2001. Lieporių 1-ji gyvenvietė. In: Archeologiniai tyrinėjimai Lietuvoje 2000 metais. Vilnius, 37–40. Salatkienė B. 2002. Lieporių 1-ji gyvenvietė. In: Archeologiniai tyrinėjimai Lietuvoje 2001 metais. Vilnius, 47–53. Salatkienė B. 2003. Geležies lydymo ir apdirbimo radiniai Lieporių 1-oje gyvenvietėje. In: Istorija. Lietuvos aukštųjų mokyklų mokslo darbai. LVI. Vilnius, 3–16. Stankus J. 2001. Geležies gamybos Lietuvoje apžvalga. In: Lietuvos archeologija. 21. Vilnius, 171–182. Ščesnulevičius K. 1936. Vyžos. In: Gimtasai kraštas. Šiauliai. No 1(9), 15–18. Vaškevičiūtė I. 1988. Lieporių (Šiaulių raj.) kapinynas. In: Archeologiniai tyrinėjimai Lietuvoje 1986–1987 m. Vilnius, 114–116. Birutė Salatkienė Šiauliai University P. Višinskio g. 38, 76352 Šiauliai Tel. +37061440949 e-mail: [email protected] Received: 2002 Š ulini ų ir liepos karnos kibir ė li ų iš 1 - osios L iepori ų g y venviet ė s rekonstrukci j a Birutė Salatkienė S a n tr a u k a Lietuvoje mažai domimasi eksperimentine archeologija. Tiek archeologinis eksperimentas, atliekamas kaip mokslinio tyrimo dalis, tiek rekonstrukcijos muziejų ekspozicijose tebėra retas dalykas. Neaprašomi ir nepublikuojami net tie eksperimentai, kurie atliekami eksperimentinės archeologijos festivaliuose ar panašaus pobūdžio renginiuose. Svarbiausias šio straipsnio tikslas yra aprašyti ir paskelbti archeologinio eksperimento – liepos žievės kibirėlių vandeniui iš šulinio semti siuvimo ir bandymo rezultatus – medžiagas, eigą. Buvo padarytos ir šulinių, kuriuose rasti kibirėliai, medinių sienų rekonstrukcijos, tačiau ne natūraliomis sąlygomis, žemėje, laukuose, o muziejuje ir brėžiniuose. Patys rečiausi ir vertingiausi vidurinio, geležies lydymo, laikotarpio horizonto radiniai. Tai geležies lydykla, kur vietoje buvo kasama hidratinė geležies rūda (rūdos kasimo duobės ir rūdos žaliava), plaunama (šuliniai ir juose paskendę kibirėliai, klojinys), degama (rūdos deginimo duobės), lydoma (20 rudnelių liekanos, medžio anglių degimo duobės ir židiniai), gauta kritė kaitinama žaizdre (kalvio žaizdras) ir galutinai apdirbama, kalant ant akmeninių priekalų. Unikalūs geležies lydyklos radiniai – tai mediniai šuliniai su nuskendusiais kibirėliais, neturintys vienalaikių analogijų Lietuvos archeologinėje medžiagoje. Visi Lieporių šuliniai įrengti šiek tiek skirtingai. Trys iš jų (1, 3, 4) turėjo medines konstrukcijas, o vienas – neturėjo. Visos medinės konstrukcijos stulpinių statinių tipo, tačiau pirmajam šuliniui naudoti skelti pusrąsčiai, antrajam – skeltinės lentos, o trečiajam – nestori apvalūs rąsteliai. Visi mediniai šuliniai keturkampiai, pailgi, nuo 1,3 iki 1,8 m ilgio ir nuo 0,6 iki 0,8 m pločio, o šulinys be medinių sienų buvo apvalus, apie 1 m skersmens. Visais atvejais pirmiausia buvo iškasama duobė (nuo 2,4 m, 2,0 m, 2,7 m, 4,65 m gylio) ir jos sienos sutvirtinamos medinėmis konstrukcijomis, viduje prilaikomomis skersiniais rąsteliais ar kartimis. 1998 metų vasarą, ruošiantis dalyvauti Biskupino (Lenkija) gyvosios archeologijos festivalyje, buvo padaryta liepos žievės kibirėlių gamybos rekonstrukcija (B. Salatkienė, A. Šapaitė), po to dar keletą metų eksperimentuota ir tobulinta technologija bei įrankiai. Liepos žievė tinka nuo 15–18 cm storio, tiesių, mažai šakotų, nukirstų pavasarį medelių. Žievę geriausia lupti pavasarį, kada ji lengvai atsiskiria nuo kamieno. Išmirkius pavasarį nuluptą žievę, nuo jos labai gerai atsiskiria karna, ji būna lanksti ir tvirta. Nuluptą žievę galima laikyti išdžiovintą, prieš tai išvertus ją luobu į išorę, susukus į cilindrą ir surišus. Luobu į vidų žievė nesisuka, jos viršutinis sluoksnis trūksta. Prieš kibirėlių siuvimą džiovintą žievę reikia 1–3 dienas mirkyti šaltame vandenyje. Kibirėliai siūti liepos karnos virvelėmis. Karnoms paruošti žievė mirkoma apie 2 savaites, po to išlupamas vidinis jos sluoksnis, kuris išdžiūvęs tampa tvirta karna. Virvelė vejama mediniu kabliu, jos galas vaškuojamas, kad lengviau pralįstų pro skylutę žievėje. Į cilindrą sulenktos ir surištos žievės kraštai, užleisti vienas ant kito, siuvami dviguba siūle įstrižais dygsniais, skylutes dygsniams praduriant geležine yla. Kibirėlio dugnas išpjaunamas peiliu, taip pat luobu į išorę, ir prisiuvamas virvele įstrižais dygsniais. Kilpelės daromos iš karnos virvelės, praduriant po dvi skylutes kibirėlio šonuose. Į kilpeles įtvirtinama storesnė vyta virvutė, kuri atstoja kibirėlio lankelį. BALTICA 6 Minėti radiniai buvo rasti 1983 metais pietiniame Šiaulių miesto pakraštyje aptiktame Lieporių archeologiniame komplekse, kurį sudaro 3 vienalaikiai paminklai – IV–VIII a. pr. Kr. gyvenvietės ir kapinynas. Kompleksas tyrinėjamas nuo 1987 metų. Kapinyne ištirti 95 kapai, surinkta daugiau kaip 450 archeologinių dirbinių, nustatyta, kad tai žemaičių paribyje su žiemgaliais gyvenusios bendruomenės palikimas. Lieporių 1-osios gyvenvietės vakarinėje dalyje ištirtas 2858 m2 plotas ir užfiksuoti trys kultūrinio sluoksnio horizontai. Seniausias iš jų priskirtas Pabaltijo Madleno kultūrai ir datuotas X–VIII tūkst. per. Kr. Vidurinis, IV–VI a. po Kr., horizontas priklauso tam laikotarpiui, kai šioje gyvenvietės dalyje buvo lydoma geležis, o vėlyviausias, VI–VIII a., horizontas – tai laikotarpis, kai apleistoje geležies lydykloje buvo pastatytos sodybos ir apsigyveno žmonės. mos, kiti sunykę labiau, o keletas visai suminkštėję ir susiploję kaip krepšiai. ARCHAELOGIA Pirmojoje straipsnio dalyje detaliai aprašomos medinių šulinių su nuskendusiais liepos žievės kibirėliais atradimo aplinkybės, o antrojoje – jų rekonstrukcijos eiga. Apie 25 cm skersmens ir tokio pat aukščio kibirėlis būna maždaug 8–9 l talpos. Tris dienas šaltame vandenyje mirkytas kibirėlis tampa pakankamai sandarus semti vandeniui iš šulinio ir nešti nedidelį atstumą. Vandeniui ilgesnį laiką laikyti kibirėlis netinka. Gali būti, kad kibirėliai buvo naudojami tik sėmimui, nuolat būdavo vandenyje, neišdžiūdavo ir išlikdavo sandarūs. Tačiau jie greitai minkštėdavo, deformuodavosi, jų virvelės trūkdavo ir jie skęsdavo. Kibirėlio gamybos rekonstrukcija buvo demonstruojama 1998–2003 metais įvairiuose eksperimentinės ir gyvosios archeologijos renginiuose Lietuvoje, Len��� kijoje ir Latvijoje. Pirmajame ir trečiajame šuliniuose buvo rasti aštuoni nuskendę ir dumble užsikonservavę kibirėliai. Jie šiek tiek skyrėsi dydžiu (aukštis nuo 16 iki 27 cm, skersmuo nuo 18 iki 27 cm), tačiau visi buvo cilindro formos, karnos virvele susiūti iš luobu į viršų išverstos liepos žievės, prisiūtu dugnu. Kibirėlių lankeliai suvyti iš karnos virvelės, šonuose įvertos į kilpeles. Vienas kibirėlis buvo nuskendęs dar naujas, nepraradęs for- 189 Provenance Study of Late 16th Century Barrels Found in Klaipėda Mindaugas Brazauskas P r o v e n a n c e S t u d y o f L at e 1 6 t h C e n t u ry Barrels Found in Klaipėda Mindaugas Brazauskas Abstract The article examines trading conditions in medieval Klaipėda (Memel) and reports the results of the latest dendrochronological dating of oak found in the Old Town. Key words: dendroprovenancing, dendrochronology, oak chronology, Hanseatic League, timber trade, urban archaeology, barrels, Baltic Sea region. Dendroprovenancing: new opportunities for archaeological research The use of the dendrochronological method in archaeology has advanced significantly over the last few decades. This method of timber dating has disclosed quite a few facts about historical events never mentioned in written records, it has shed a light on the daily routines of the remote past, and uncovered processes never before heard of in the archaeology of settlements and towns. From the standpoint of the present, it is easy to understand the significance to West European dendrochronologists of identifying and dating Baltic timber exported via Gdansk and other Baltic ports. Due to the timber trade, a huge amount of wood of Baltic origin spread all over Western Europe between the 14th and 17th centuries, and Western dendrochronologists find it difficult to date the wood because of the shortage of Baltic region oak chronologies. In turn, due to the international trade, certain amounts of timber of “exotic” provenance (coming, for example, from Norway, the Netherlands, England or France) had to settle in the archaeological context of the towns of the Baltic region. Local dendrochronologists are faced with the task of identifying, dating and establishing the provenance of the timber. The potential of dendrochronological dating has not been fully exploited, despite the fact that one of the initial targets of dendrochronological dating was merely the designing of chronologies suitable for the precise dating of construction or archaeological wood that no thorough archaeological research could do without. 190 It would currently be correct to say that the dendrochronological method, doomed to function merely as an auxiliary branch of archaeology, has outgrown itself. In the history of dendrochronology, dendrolabs appeared in Denmark, Germany, England and Sweden throughout the Sixties and Seventies of the 20th century, with the aim of accumulating samples of wood, dating them, and designing chronologies of wood to cover the period from the Stone Age to the present. We can probably now talk about the current maturity of the method, as a wide circle of researchers occupied in the field have mastered the principles of establishing the date of woodcutting and of interpreting the results obtained. Establishing dates became a routine and obvious goal of dendrochronology. However, due to personal contacts and the exchange of data, new problems surfaced in dendrochronological research. Next to the question when the tree was cut (with the aim of designing chronologies of softwood and hardwood, covering the period from the present to prehistoric times, and precise dating methods), new ones arose: where and when the tree was cut. Next to the chronology, the precise time and place of cutting the tree became of interest (the specific wood, the terrain, and the region, such as northern France or Finland). This new branch of dendrochronology became known as “dendroprovenancing” (Bonde et al 1995: 202). A s h o r t r e v i e w o f K l a i p ė d a ’s t r a d e i n the late medieval period After the foundation of Klaipėda (Memel) in 1252, it would periodically attract the glow of the Hanseatic towns. As early as the spring of 1261, the vice-master of Livonia, in his letter to Lübeck merchants, informed them about the conditions for colonists to settle in Klaipėda and asked them to come before winter started (Žukas 2005: 71).The newborn city was even awarded Lübeck trading rights; however, it lost them in the late 15th century due to developments unfavourable to the city. The minor importance of the port of Klaipėda cannot be disputed; however, it would be incorrect to state that from 1252, the year when the town was founded, no effort was made to exploit the harbour and the huge commercial potential of the River Nemunas and the western region of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. There was at least one good reason preventing boats from by-passing Klaipėda, and that was its favourable location: from the Aistmares Strait to the entrance of the Curonian Lagoon next to Klaipėda, for a stretch of 150 kilometres, and north of Klaipėda to Liepaja, for around 75 kilometres, there was not a single safe haven or a safe anchorage for boats during a storm (Žulkus 2002: 102). In historical records, the activities of brokers (in German Lieger) in Klaipėda in the early 16th century have not been sufficiently covered. Brokers were part of the Order’s trade network managed by the Order’s officials residing in Marienburg and Königsberg (Žulkus 2002: 102). These brokers, although they did not have the rights of town citizens, started buying up local goods in Žemaitija, the west of Lithuania, and shipping them to different European ports. As early as the second half of the 16th century, boats sent by them would sail to Lübeck, the Netherlands, Holland, England and Scotland, while the population of Klaipėda had direct trading relationships almost exclusively with Danzig (Zembrickis 2002: 82–83). Unfortunately, data on the volume of timber leaving the Klaipėda area does not seem to exist; however, the It is highly probable that the major boom in timber exports from Klaipėda coincided with the beginning of the shipbuilding industry there. For dendrochronology, this is an important fact, as it narrows the area of provenance of some of the timber to the city’s environs. The first ship was built in Klaipėda in 1517 (Žulkus 2002: 107). This date symbolises a special stage in its development as a maritime city and a centre for maritime trade. Ensuing events in the development of the town testify to its economic growth. BALTICA 6 fact of the existence of timber exports is witnessed by a document from 1468, with reference to a shipment of fish and timber being forfeited in Lübeck and sold (Willoweit 1969, cited in: Žulkus 2002:111). ARCHAELOGIA Because of this historical change in its history, Klaipėda’s name appeared in Hanseatic records less and less frequently. That was only natural: Hanseatic towns, such as Danzig (currently Gdansk), Königsberg (currently Kaliningrad), Riga, and a number of other towns which had at least trading stations of Hanseatic merchants, overshadowed Klaipėda as a member of trade relationships. Klaipėda was reluctantly excluded from the current network of dendroprovenancing research because, as early as the 14th century, the River Prieglius was linked with the Curonian Lagoon by a canal, and from that time on, Gdansk was the chief commercial port of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (Wazny 1992: 331). A stereotype was formed by which, in the 15th to the 17th centuries, in terms of the level of trade, Klaipėda was a small and insignificant coastal town, but not a trading partner or even a supplier of raw materials. However, it was not exclusively exports from the Grand Duchy of Lithuania that were served by the Prieglius–Curonian Lagoon canal: goods travelled by this route from Klaipėda to Königsberg and vice versa all year round (in winter, the overland route down the Curonian Spit was used) (Žulkus 2005: 74). In the early 16th century, the town settled in a new location, a planned structure of streets formed, and craftsmen’s guilds appeared in the late 16th century. Slowly but surely, the commercial and economic potential of the town was gaining strength. The fact of a new and dangerous trading competitor becoming established on the eastern Baltic is witnessed by Königsberg merchants’ complaints and protests against the trade and shipping in Klaipėda (Žulkus 2005: 83). Dendrochronological analysis of barrel heads found in t h e O l d To w n o f K l a i p ė d a A rather interesting trading situation in Klaipėda in the middle of the 16th century was disclosed in the analysis of construction timber and barrel remains on the site of number 3 Žvejų Street, in the Old Town (Fig. 1). The main point of interest is the possibility of establishing trading contacts in the 16th century with the help of dendroprovenancing, and producing tangible proof via timber analysis, and not merely on the basis of historical records or imported articles found in the process of archaeological excavations. In 2005, exploratory archaeological excavations on the site of number 3 Žvejų Street took place under the supervision of R. Jarockis. The place presented special interest, as in a city map/drawing of 1670, there was a building with the inscription “WAGE” next to it. The site was merely 20 metres away from the 16th-century course of the River Danė that served as a port at that time. Archaeological articles found on the site were scarce and not very informative. Therefore, dendrochronological examination became a basic part of the whole project that contributed to a more precise reconstruction of the development of that particular part of the Old Town. 191 Mindaugas Brazauskas Provenance Study of Late 16th Century Barrels Found in Klaipėda Fig. 1. A model of 17th-century Klaipėda/ Memel (photograph by V. Žulkus). The arrow shows the place of the 2005 excavations (number 3 Žvejų Street) Pine (Pinus sylvestris) and oak (Quercus robur) were examined. The present article shall focus exclusively on oak. Three pieces of oak were taken for examination from the construction of the building. • Key code Zvej3 S3: 148 tree rings. The date of the last ring is 1544. The later wood had four rings. The estimated date is c.1544. • Key code Zvej3 S2: 153 tree rings. The date of the last ring is 1521. The later wood has not survived. The estimated date is c.1535 or later. • Key code Zvej3: 146 tree rings. The date of the last ring is 1519. The later wood has not survived. The estimated date is c. 1533 or later. The general scale obtained embraced a period of 154 years, from 1373 to 1526. Ta b l e 1 . N u m b e r 3 Ž v e j ų S t r e e t , K l a i p ė d a : coefficients of individual curve correlation TBP* THO** Zvej3 S2 Zvej3 S3 4,212 4,528 Zveju3 Zvej3 S3 3,948 3,143 Zveju3 Zvej3 S2 3,488 4,008 * Transformation Baillie/Piltcher ** Transformation Holstein 192 It should be noted that timber samples from the site excavated demonstrated excellent overlapping with one another (Table 1), and also with the mean value curves of the archaeological/construction timber in Klaipėda Old Town and Baltic 1 (the results of synchronisation are presented in Table 2). Ta b l e 2 . T h e s i t e a t n u m b e r 3 Ž v e j ų Street, Klaipėda: correlation coefficients of individual oak samples with Baltic 1 and Klaipėda (Memel) oak chronology Baltic 1 Memel TBP* THO** TBP* THO** Zvej3 S2 4,70 4,19 8,30 7,57 Zveju3 3,89 4,25 6,74 8,50 Zvej3 S3 4,55 4,53 4,85 4,96 Zvej Mean 5,63 5,62 8,15 9,33 *Transformation Baillie/Piltcher **Transformation Holstein The correlation coefficient between Klaipėda (Memel) archaeological architectural oak wood chronology and the samples from the site at number 3 Žvejų Street is sufficiently high (TBP: 4.84–8.3). There is no doubt that the timber used for construction on that site is of local provenance. This fact is not contradicted by historical data or the charter of 1475, by which the Lübeck trading rights in Klaipėda were substituted for Kulm Rights; the inhabitants of Klaipėda were allowed to cut wood for construction and shipbuilding, as well as to build ships; however, they were not allowed to sell them (Žulkus 2002: 107). The dated oak samples from the archaeological site at number 3 Žvejų Steet were included in the Klaipėda (Memel) oak wood scale presented in Table 4. A different dendrochronological context came up when parts of barrels found on the site were examined. Five pieces of oak barrel heads were taken for examination: Baltic2 E. Pomerania Memel THO** TBP* THO** TBP* THO** TBP* THO** Stat1 6,57 6,22 2,57 2,734 3,08 3,49 6,06 5,23 Stat2 2,73 2,55 1,14 1,27 3,25 3,55 3,23 3,55 Stat3 2,18 1,5 3,25 3,40 1,90 1,15 3,98 3,40 Stat4 8,78 8,93 3,94 3,84 4,88 4,77 5,26 3,61 Stat5 3,54 3,75 4,09 3,15 3,36 2,70 1,45 1,94 ARCHAELOGIA Baltic1 TBP* BALTICA 6 Ta b l e 3 . C o e f f i c i e n t s o f c o r r e l a t i o n o f b a r r e l s a m p l e i n d i v i d u a l c u r v e s w i t h B a l t i c o a k wood master chronologies *Transformation Baillie/Piltcher **Transformation Holstein Ta b l e 4 . M e d i e v a l o a k m a s t e r c h r o n o l o g y o f K l a i p ė d a MEMEL 1288 324 285 Untitled MEMEL MEMEL MEMEL 1290 1300 1310 115 115 94 96 115 106 70 113 134 56 104 148 86 97 106 79 103 124 89 91 76 93 80 112 101 82 105 122 MEMEL 1320 97 136 141 110 120 122 95 104 105 106 MEMEL MEMEL MEMEL MEMEL MEMEL MEMEL 1330 1340 1350 1360 1370 1380 118 108 104 127 94 108 116 117 106 128 110 103 98 96 96 152 68 106 87 84 92 137 116 96 99 86 102 113 121 112 84 117 120 96 112 94 142 99 106 100 133 100 106 130 53 95 102 106 112 105 66 86 119 100 108 96 108 100 74 96 MEMEL MEMEL MEMEL MEMEL MEMEL MEMEL MEMEL MEMEL MEMEL MEMEL MEMEL MEMEL 1390 1400 1410 1420 1430 1440 1450 1460 1470 1480 1490 1500 106 107 107 76 82 90 93 115 97 105 110 113 107 104 92 102 89 138 101 77 102 100 90 136 124 120 105 98 107 96 116 70 108 88 76 108 130 92 92 64 114 99 86 63 77 102 86 92 102 118 82 114 100 110 109 108 80 130 78 82 94 100 90 118 111 112 124 88 108 100 93 80 98 107 94 116 88 98 116 102 105 112 90 88 77 94 116 104 105 96 129 106 89 126 106 96 102 114 101 87 98 99 88 136 98 114 95 109132 103 114 96 83 98 84 92 114 72 100 94 MEMEL MEMEL MEMEL MEMEL MEMEL MEMEL MEMEL MEMEL 1510 1520 1530 1540 1550 1560 1570 1580 116 105 91 108 83 116 112 97 106 100 86 96 94 98 73 999 112 111 94 88 92 98 103 110 88 101 101 124 98 104 82 106 107 95 82 82 112 96 92 114 104 109 121 102 95 106 96 99 95 87 98 70 99 96 98 78 99 102 110 102 105 110 92 88 98 95 96 102 110 120 112 90 115 74 • Key Code Stat 1: 293 tree rings. The date of the last ring is 1580. The later wood had nine rings. The final estimated date is c. 1585. • Key Code Stat 4: 114 tree rings. The date of the last ring is 1564. The later wood has not survived. The final estimated date is c. 1578 or later. • Key Code Stat 2: 151 tree rings. The date of the last ring is 1547. The later wood has not survived. The final estimated date is c. 1579 or later. • Key Code Stat 5: 68 tree rings. The date of the last ring is 1539. The later wood has not survived. The final estimated date is c. 1553 or later. • Key Code Stat 3: 136 tree rings. The date of the last ring is 1563. The later wood has not survived. The final estimated date is c. 1579 or later. The primary results of synchronisation prove that the oak used for the barrels does not come from the same 193 Provenance Study of Late 16th Century Barrels Found in Klaipėda Mindaugas Brazauskas 194 Ta b l e 5 . I n d i v i d u a l t r e e r i n g s e r i e s o f b a r r e l h e a d s f r o m K l a i p ė d a (number 3 Žvejų St.) STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1288 1290 1300 1310 1320 1330 1340 1350 1360 1370 1380 1390 1400 1410 1420 1430 1440 1450 1460 1470 1480 1490 1500 1510 1520 1530 1540 1550 1560 1570 1580 115 115 94 96 115 116 76 110 93 101 107 102 112 69 83 86 89 112 89 102 106 122 119 117 91 124 93 116 112 97 96 115 106 97 120 91 106 120 119 99 83 102 86 102 88 169 98 64 89 105 97 143 94 107 91 94 104 97 73 70 113 134 111 80 93 101 123 61 119 118 121 109 98 92 93 113 73 97 83 80 107 106 118 88 74 85 103 103 56 104 148 97 94 77 95 127 114 106 125 87 93 49 116 85 72 62 85 101 92 86 111 78 118 93 110 103 104 86 97 106 86 72 95 105 108 111 104 93 127 89 134 90 106 115 112 85 131 83 72 71 112 108 98 76 82 112 79 103 124 110 74 123 148 97 102 95 81 93 85 122 116 112 122 83 121 100 91 70 103 78 106 102 105 121 102 89 91 76 79 144 92 92 101 139 92 94 106 99 120 63 87 121 112 97 110 93 81 90 107 88 92 95 87 98 93 80 101 95 116 120 50 102 72 113 63 89 132 101 112 106 136 109 89 117 117 88 49 99 84 101 85 99 102 324 101 82 77 84 123 112 55 92 106 89 108 115 115 101 100 93 97 147 101 111 101 116 136 112 101 117 100 88 98 285 115 74 102 105 81 95 84 78 87 88 99 101 92 83 99 76 90 114 69 92 92 151 102 100 101 142 114 112 90 STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1397 1400 1410 1420 1430 1440 1450 1460 1470 1480 1490 1500 1510 1520 1530 1540 192 70 106 37 98 69 84 86 95 147 97 106 90 73 79 134 60 136 59 94 134 65 113 100 103 111 110 93 85 114 156 63 97 99 87 107 62 102 116 69 92 106 113 103 103 123 78 106 143 119 86 74 92 96 75 41 101 81 127 103 146 47 143 121 105 72 99 116 100 93 52 110 107 115 100 138 94 120 146 120 101 97 149 91 70 123 113 82 86 106 136 115 92 112 114 98 101 126 104 152 99 128 98 58 113 162 97 100 110 112 100 54 87 131 119 91 99 118 85 93 999 169 115 177 67 81 102 91 96 63 105 102 100 143 72 102 142 100 96 47 72 137 127 118 40 108 123 115 112 75 109 STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1429 1430 1440 1450 1460 1470 1480 1490 1500 1510 1520 1530 1540 1550 1560 151 99 140 137 75 82 90 75 112 72 90 101 90 99 110 86 104 151 77 92 93 106 91 83 95 84 79 105 141 103 104 123 67 100 74 90 91 111 91 115 81 110 86 73 104 63 91 117 106 108 92 105 109 97 130 103 91 100 108 87 80 99 88 96 108 127 106 91 104 81 68 56 105 124 105 121 99 119 95 87 85 124 124 94 82 83 137 111 111 112 103 115 87 117 103 134 116 67 102 135 112 106 102 91 97 121 89 77 149 116 91 117 84 88 99 102 101 111 95 114 72 169 92 85 99 121 90 108 114 103 88 90 110 116 110 STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1451 1460 1470 1480 1490 1500 1510 1520 1530 1540 1550 1560 128 87 108 117 103 94 74 85 113 75 115 184 113 96 108 104 125 92 126 107 90 98 108 130 103 125 89 79 109 99 115 91 100 111 98 125 74 120 77 75 100 79 108 110 103 133 101 132 108 82 69 68 83 120 97 116 112 82 108 93 92 86 92 103 151 106 87 110 111 113 89 108 123 102 98 124 97 103 103 91 103 110 110 130 98 117 89 106 104 82 73 87 99 105 125 96 96 69 99 85 104 97 89 101 75 124 82 97 82 83 92 115 88 1472 1480 1490 1500 1510 1520 1530 229 113 112 99 121 88 112 172 117 90 120 122 152 101 188 123 71 168 86 151 71 110 118 129 111 73 107 87 area, although there is no doubt that the samples are of the same age. Klaipėda (Memel) oak wood chronology applies to merely two cases: Stat 1 and 4, that present local, or at least Baltic, provenance. The rest of the wood clearly came from another region. The results obtained are not final. The dendrochronological dates established are not reliably validated by the statistical T values (Table 3). Great attention was paid to the visual similarity, as well as to the existence of a not very significant, but recurring, signal on the chronologies of Klaipėda, Baltic 1 and Baltic 2 (Hillam, Tyers 1995: 402-403), eastern Pomerania (see Wazny) and Hamburg (see Eckstein). The material presented for examination – parts of barrel heads – do not seem to belong to one and the same barrel. Probably the site examined (number 3 Žvejų Street, Klaipėda) was a place where no longer used barrels were discarded. Again, we have to remember that the plot was close to the presumed cargo handling area and the town scales essential for trading activity. It needs to be added that the synchronisation results among individual curves was very low, except for Stat 3 and Stat 4 (TBP-5.50, THO-3.79). The correlation of Stat 2 was negative. The correlation of Stat 1 implies wood coming from Klaipėda’s environs. A high coefficient of correlation with Klaipėda construction wood and Vilnius Lower Castle was observed (Pukienė 2002:106): TBP-2.68, THO-3.31, as well as a high coefficient of similarity (GL 60.7). Ultimately, the Baltic 1 scale adds to the probability of the said supposition. In accordance with the synchronisation data, Barrel 4 represented a typical sample of Baltic region wood. The correlation with Baltic region chronologies was excellent, while the negative result in the case of the Plateliai scale implied the provenance of the wood being the northern part of the former Prussia, from Klaipėda to Gdansk. The position of Stat 3 was essentially validated by its relationship with the curve of Stat 4. The scales overlapped with a rather high coefficient (TBP5.50, THO-3.79); however, in the case of other scales, it was only the Klaipėda scale that indicated a reliability of correlation. Evidently, the sample had to be reexamined with respect to other master chronologies. The most complicated situation occurred in the case of samples Stat 2 and Stat 5. The scales available at the 86 104 101 69 94 86 105 72 69 120 69 126 73 102 79 77 84 81 94 79 113 87 96 61 90 92 101 114 121 94 86 86 96 103 118 117 118 84 91 98 moment of examination did not produce a reliable signal on the accessible scales. Baltic 1 and Baltic 2 scales allow us to presume that the material examined was oak wood from the Baltic region; however, the scales of eastern Pomerania and Klaipėda suggest a provenance of regions adjacent to the Baltic Sea area. One of the reasons to believe that the barrels came from places far beyond the boundaries of the Baltic Sea region is the following: Klaipėda was visited by boats coming from Holland, France, Sweden (Gotland), Norway, Stralsund, Danzig, Lübeck, Kolberg, Königsberg, ports of the River Šventoji, and from Curonia (Žulkus 2002: 106). Herring from Norway would arrive at Klaipėda in barrels; beer, wine, mead and pipes were transported in barrels, too. Salt was brought from Baye (France), from Flanders (Žulkus 2002: 111), and from Luneburg via Lübeck. BALTICA 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 ARCHAELOGIA STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT STAT The facts presented suggest that the barrel dating results have to be reexamined by dendrochronologists of Western Europe, by comparing the curves of the barrels with the 16th-century oak wood chronologies of England, Norway, Holland and France. Conclusions In accordance with the dendrochronological analysis of construction wood found on the site at number 3 Žvejų Street in Klaipėda, we can state that construction work first started there around 1560 (the estimated date of the latest sample is c. 1554). The dating of barrel heads, given the dates established, would be c. 1553 or later, c. 1561 or later, c. 1579 or later, c. 1578 or later, and c. 1585. A lath survived in only one, the last sample (c. 1585). It is currently difficult to establish how long the wood had been stored and dried before the barrels were produced. There is also no answer to the question as to the period of time that the barrels served as containers for goods, or whether that was their secondary use. On the basis of the latest established data, the barrels most likely appeared in the archaeological context of the Old Town in the period between c. 1560 (the first construction work in the area) and 1590 (the latest ring in the wood of 1585). Ultimately, the issue whether this dating of barrel parts is correct, given the low statistical T value, remains open. It is only possible to confirm or deny the dating results by comparing the established figures with other 195 Provenance Study of Late 16th Century Barrels Found in Klaipėda Mindaugas Brazauskas West European chronologies (at the time the present article was being written, they were not accessible). For this reason, a series of annual growth found in the individual barrel samples (Table 5), as well as a chronology of Klaipėda archaeological oak wood (Table 4), is published with the article. References Bonde, N., Tyers, I., Wazny, T., Where does the timber come from? Dendrochronological evidence of timber in Northern Europe. Archaeological Sciences 1995, 201–204. Pukienė, R., 2002. Paprastojo ąžuolo metinio radialiojo prieaugio kaitos chronologija nuo 1208 iki 1408 metų. Dendrologia Lithuaniae, 6, 102–107. Hillam, J., Tyers, I., 1995. Reliability and repeatability in dendrochronological analysis: tests using the Fletcher archive of panel-painting data. Archaeometry 37 (2), 395–405. Wazny, T., 1992. Historical timber trade and its implications on dendrochronological dating. In: T.S. Bartholin, B.E. Berglund, D. Eckstein, F.H. Schweingruber, O. Eggertsson (eds.), Tree Rings and Environment: Proceedings of the International Symposium, Ystad, South Sweden, 3-9 September, 1990. Lundqua Report (Department of Quaternary Geology, Lund University, Sweden) 34, 331–333. Zembrickis, J., 2002. Klaipėdos karališkojo Prūsijos jūrų ir prekybos miesto istorija, I t. Klaipėda, 2002. Žulkus, V., 2002. Viduramžių Klaipėda. Miestas ir pilis. Ar� ��� cheologija ir istorija. Vilnius: Žara. Mindaugas Brazauskas Received: 2006 Klaipėda University Institute of Baltic Sea Region History and Archaelogy Tilžės g. 13, LT-91251 Klaipėda, Lithuania X V I A . AN T ROSIOS PUSĖS S TAT INI Ų , RAS T Ų K LAIPĖDOS SENA M IES T Y J E , K IL M ĖS T Y RI M AS Mindaugas Brazauskas Santrauka Dendrochronologijos taikymo archeologijoje plėtra pastaraisiais dešimtmečiais yra ženkliai pažengusi į priekį. Šis medienos datavimo metodas papildė nemaža istorijos šaltiniuose nutylėtų praeities faktų, nušvietė kasdienybę ir padėjo ištirti daugelį archeologijos moksle nežinomų gyvenvietėse bei miestuose vykusių procesų. 196 Suklestėjus medienos prekybai XIV–XVII a., po Vakarų Europą pasklido nemažas kiekis baltiškos kilmės medienos, kurios datavimą Vakarų Europos dendroch- ronologams sunkina Baltijos regiono ąžuolo chronologijų nepakankamumas. Savo ruožtu nemaža kitų regionų kilmės medienos (pvz., iš Norvegijos, Anglijos, Prancūzijos) turėjo nusėsti į Baltijos regiono miestų archeologinį kontekstą. Šiuo atžvilgiu ne ką mažiau svarbesniu uždaviniu vietos dendrochronologams tampa tokios medienos identifikacija, datavimas bei kilmės nustatymas. Gana įdomi XVI a. vidurio Klaipėdos miesto prekybos situacija atsiskleidė analizuojant 2005 m. vykdytų žvalgomųjų archeologinių tyrimų metu Žvejų g. 3 (Klaipėda) sklype paimtas ąžuolo medienos nuopjovas (konstrukcinė architektūrinė mediena bei statinių liekanos). Domino klausimas, ar galima dendrochronologiškai atskleisti XVI a. prekybos kontaktus ir gauti jų apčiuopiamą įrodymą per medienos tyrimus, neapsiribojant vien istoriniais šaltiniais ar importuotais dirbiniais, rastais archeologinių tyrimų metu. Remiantis Žvejų g. 3 sklype aptiktos konstrukcinės medienos dendrochronologinėmis datomis galima teigti, kad pirminis apstatymas šioje senamiesčio dalyje susiformavo apie 1554–1560 metus. Pirminiai sinchronizacijos rezultatai parodė, kad statinių gamybai naudota mediena nėra iš to paties arealo, nors jų vienalaikiškumas neabejotinas. Klaipėdos ąžuolo medienos chronologija tik dviem atvejais tiko medienai datuoti. Tuo tarpu kita dalis medienos yra aiškiai kito regiono kilmės. Statinių datavimas, atsižvelgiant į gautas datas, būtų: apie 1553 m. ar vėliau, apie 1561 m. ar vėliau, apie 1579 m. ar vėliau, apie 1578 m. ar vėliau, apie 1585 m. Tik viename vėliausiame mėginyje buvo išlikusi balana (apie 1585 m.). Labai sunku pasakyti, kiek laiko mediena buvo sandėliuojama, džiovinama iki gaminant statines. Tuo labiau nežinoma, kiek metų statinės buvo naudojamos kaip prekių tara, ar jos naudotos antrą kartą. Remiantis kol kas turima vėliausia data, tikėtina, kad statinės į senamiesčio archeologinį kontekstą pateko intervale nuo maždaug 1560 metų (pirminis apstatymas) iki maždaug 1590 metų (vėliausia statinės rievė 1585 m.). Galiausiai klausimas, ar tokios dabar pateiktos statinių dalių datavimo datos yra teisingos, atsižvelgiant į gana žemą statistinį rodiklį, lieka atviras. Datavimo rezultatų patvirtinimas ar paneigimas įmanomas vien tik nustatytą medienos augimo poziciją palyginus su kitomis Vakarų Europos ąžuolo chronologijomis (straipsnio rašymo metu jos nebuvo prieinamos). Dėl šios priežasties čia publikuojamos statinių lentučių dendrochronologinės skalės bei Klaipėdos archeologinio ąžuolo medienos skalė. Tomas Ostrauskas On The Genesis Of Kunda C u l t u r e . A . S o r o k i n ’s Hypothesis. Comments DISCUSSIONS O n th e G e n e sis o f K unda C u ltu r e . A . S o r okin ’ s H y p oth e sis . C o m m e nts Tomas Ostrauskas Introduction Though Mesolithic Kunda culture is one of the earliest explored prehistoric European and global phenomena of this period, the question of its genesis is still a source of passionate debates among researchers. In this article, I will attempt to discuss it with Sorokin, the Russian archaeologist and famous researcher of the Upper Volga and the Oka river basins in the Late Palaeolithic and Mesolithic ages. In 1999, Sorokin presented, apart from other hypotheses, a detailed and reasoned hypothesis of the genesis of Kunda culture, which treats the question as a cultural process in the wider Mesolithic context of the East European forest region. I address this study to researchers of the Late Palaeolithic and Mesolithic ages in Eastern Europe with the proposal to consider it an invitation for discussions to promote further research of the genesis of Kunda culture. The history of research into the genesis of Kunda culture 198 At the end of the 19th century C. Grewingk, the first researcher of Kunda settlement in northern Estonia, attempted to link its origin to Finno-Ugric tribes, which came from Finland or Sweden (Янитс 1959, 7). The interwar Estonian archaeologist R. Indreko initially derived Kunda culture from Palaeolithic centres of Central and Western Europe (Indreko 1948, 398). Later, however, he changed his mind and related its origin to Borshevo 1 type settlements with stemmed spearheads from the Don-Desna region in the Late Palaeolithic Period (Indreko 1964, 58-61). In a study summarising explorations of Stone Age Estonia, and published in Estonia in 1959, the archaeologist L. Janits assumes that, though the material for findings is not sufficient, Kunda culture probably formed several multi-original elements: Askola culture and the impacts of the south and east (Янитс 1959, 327-328). At the beginning of the Seventies, the Polish researcher S.K. Kozlowski hypothesised about a huge circle of northwestern cultures, including Kunda culture. According to Kozlowski, cultures of this circle formed at the start of the Holocene Period after the convergence of a wave of migration from Siberia and the inheritance of Swiderian culture, including some suppositional influence of the northern Black Sea coast. The northwest circle of cultures included northern forest territories from the Baltic Sea to the Urals (Kozłowski 1971, 69-71). In subsequent studies, Kozlowski related the appearance of the northwest circle of cultures in the northern part of Eastern Europe only to westward expanded Siberian cultures (Kozłowski, Kozłowski 1977, 242-243). In his latest summarising study about the Polish Mesolithic Age, he draws a curtain over the question of Kunda culture, though he attributes it to the northwest circle of cultures together with the Nemunas and Kudlaevka cultures (Kozłowski 1989, 177-179). This position taken by the researcher probably proves that the question of the Kunda’s genesis is not obvious to him. In the Eighties and Nineties of the 20th century, most researchers would relate Kunda culture to Swiderian culture, though indirectly, since they were embarrassed by typological and technological differences in collections of flint artefacts. The Lithuanian Stone Age researcher R. Rimantienė noted a few components which were characteristic of the formation of the above culture: Maglemosian and Askola cultures, together with the inheritance of Swiderian culture from the southeast, probably from the Valdaj highlands (Rimantienė 1984, 94). A similar attitude is taken by L.V. Kolcov. Like Rimantienė, he derives separate elements of Kunda culture from different cultures. He thinks that the flint inventory of Kunda culture formed its bone and horn tools under the influence of Swiderian and Ahrensburg cultures, its schist and quartz of Duvensee-Maglemosian cultural communities, and of Askola culture from southern Finland. According to this Russian scientist, the influence of Swiderian culture dominated (Кольцов 1977, 134; 1979, 24). To the Latvian researcher I. Zagorska, early Mesolithic Latvian and Estonian Pulli-type settlements derive from Researchers have only isolated radio-carbonic dates regarding both Late Swiderian and Kunda cultures, so it makes it impossible to identify precisely the time of the extinction of the first culture and the time of the origin of the second, and to elaborate their interrelations. However, the strongest argument of sceptics on the Swiderian origin of Kunda culture is the different flint processing technique and the typological composition of flint tools. The primary treatment of flint, based on direct split by soft hammerstone, separating irregular blades from two-end cores, is typical of Swiderian culture. The basic types of artefacts are stemmed arrowheads, scrapers and burins. The latter are either central, shaped with different side percussion, or sidelong and transversal, shaped by retouch and percussion (Sulgostowska 1989, 38-57). Pressure technique, which implies the percussion of regular blades from one-end, mostly conical cores, is dominant in Kunda culture. Arrowheads, including stemmed ones, as well as burins, are mostly shaped by percussion at the broken ends of the blades and by waste flakes, though burins shaped by retouch and percussion are not unusual either. The widespread blade-shaped technique, when numerous microlithic flint blades with retouched sides and ends, elements of former stone hunting tools, are discovered, is noteworthy (Ostrauskas 2000: 2002a, 98; 2000b, 78). Summarising briefly the attitudes of the origin of Kunda culture, the researchers can be divided into two groups. Some of them link it to large-scale migration from the east (from Siberia). Others link the genesis of Kunda culture to Swiderian culture of the late Palaeolithic Period, and try to explain the differences in the available archaeological material by different cultural impacts. In 1995 the Muscovite archaeologist A. Sorokin proposed an unusual solution to the question of the genesis of Kunda culture (Sorokin 1999). In his 2002 study “Mesolithic of Zhizdra Polesie” the researcher proposed a slightly widened hypothesis on the genesis of Kunda culture (Сорокин 2002, 120-122). According to this hypothesis, Reseta, Kunda and Butovo cultures (the first and the third are spread between the basins of the Volga and Oka rivers) make up different stages of one single chain of cultural development. According to him, Pulli-type settlements of Kunda culture in Latvia and Estonia reflect the seasonal migration of people of Reseta culture from the Upper Volga, along the Daugava valley and to the Eastern Baltic region in the preBoreal Period. Sorokin distinguishes an early period in Kunda culture, that is, Pulli-type settlements. He thinks the links between settlements of the early stage with settlements of the Boreal Period (Kunda-Jalavere) are not proven (Сорокин 2002, 120). He believes only the understratum of Pulli and Lepakoze settlements can be attributed to the early stage of Kunda culture. According to Sorokin, hunting tools and relics of flint tools discovered have no analogues in other Mesolithic settlements of the Eastern Baltic region. He believes the genesis of Pulli-type settlements cannot be related to Swiderian culture, as no one-edged spearheads and micro-blades, no retouched blades or micro-burin technique, and so on, have been discovered in Swiderian culture. Nevertheless, he finds these and other (eg Reseta-type microlithic spearheads) peculiarities only in Reseta cultures which existed in the basins of the Volga and Oka rivers in the early Kunda period. It appears from this that Sorokin’s hypothesis is the only one to “discover” complexes of settlements which directly stimulated the formation of features typical of Kunda culture. These are the Reseta 3 settlement, and the understratum of the Ust’-Tudovka 4 settlement (Сорокин 2002, 121-122). In addition, he thinks both the microburin technique and Reseta-type microlithic spearheads from Pulli-type settlements are vanishing relics (Сорокин 2002, 122); therefore, Pulli-type settlements are related to the later period, while the Reseta 3 settlement is datable to an earlier period than that of the Pulli settlement. Spearheads in Butovo culture settlements (eg Butovo, Prislon settlement), typical of Pulli-type complexes, indicate that some types of Butovo spearhead originate from those belonging to Pulli-type complexes and Reseta culture (Sorokin 2002, 122). Sorokin has noticed rightly that broadly significant (all Mesolithic of the northern part of the Eastern Baltic region) differences between findings in complexes of BALTICA 6 S o r o k i n ’s h y p o t h e s i s o n t h e g e n e s i s o f Kunda culture and a critique of it ARCHAELOGIA the late Palaeolithic Salaspils Laukskola settlement in the lower reaches of the Daugava. She relates this settlement to Swiderian and Ahrensburg cultural monuments in Lithuania, Byelorussia and Poland (Загорска 1981, 63-64). The Estonian researcher K. Janits and the Byelorussian archaeologist V.P. Ksenzov derive Kunda culture from Swiderian culture (Янитс 1990, 30; Kсензов 1994, 24). The famous Ukrainian archaeologist L. Zalizniak believes Kunda culture and other post-Swiderian cultures derive from Swiderian culture (Зализняк 1989, 80-89). The Polish archaeologist Z. Sulgostowska analysed research on the transition period from Palaeolithic to Mesolithic in the Eastern Baltic region and points to gaps which do not allow us to prove undoubtedly genetic ties between Swiderian and Kunda cultures (Sulgostowska, 1999). The most significant among them are presented below. 199 On The Genesis Of Kunda C u l t u r e . A . S o r o k i n ’s Hypothesis. Comments Tomas Ostrauskas Fig. 1.The formation of early mesolithic Kunda culture in the region and the directions of its spread in the first half of the eighth millenium: 1 directions of migration of Swiderian culture in the early Holocene; 2 region of formation of Kunda culture; 3 directions of spread of Kunda culture; 4 the areal of formation of Kudlayevka culture; 5 direction of spread of Kudlayevka culture; 6 Butone culture; 7 Pesochny Row culture; 8 Yenevo culture; 9 sites of Reseta culture 200 the early, pre-Boreal stage of Kunda culture (Pulli-type settlements) and material on monuments of the subsequent Mesolithic periods are full of questions whether it is one single culture. In my articles on the subject of Kunda culture research (Ostrauskas 2000; 2002a), I stated my opinion that flint findings and technologies discovered in pre-Boreal Period settlements of this culture are conditioned by the import of high-quality flint material from the Nemunas basin. After a stoppage in the import in the second half, at the end (?), of the preBoreal Period some types of artefacts and technologies are no longer found, as local Estonian or Latvian stone material is no good for them. A continuity in the work- ing of horn and antler tools in the northern part of the eastern Baltic region (Estonia and Latvia), however, survives until the end of the Boreal Period. Moreover, the Latvian researcher I. Zagorska proved that horn and antler collections of the early and late Mesolithic periods are too different and they should not be jumbled into one culture (Zagorska 1992, 109, 112-113, Fig. 19). I have suggested delineating the caesura of Mesolithic development in the northern part of the eastern Baltic at the end of the Boreal Period. The end of flint imports signals the end of the early Kunda culture period, together with its typical flint processing technology; consequently, the extinct tradition of I would not like to agree with Sorokin on the stratigraphically separate layer in the Lepakoze settlement. The settlement’s researcher himself does not single it out (Янитс 1990, 7). A greyish seam, discovered in some places beneath a ploughing layer, contained finds, and was not sterile at all, as Sorokin maintains (Сорокин 2002, 120). The Lepakoze collection could be interpreted in two different ways. It is either the remains of relatively contemporaneous pre-Boreal settlements with small quantities of imported flint or material from the pre-Boreal Period, or finds from imported and local material which are intermingled with finds from local material alone and belong to subsequent periods. In any case, the huge amount of finds (11,588 items) indicates that it could be the remains of a few settlements. Similar greyish sand seams are frequent among sandy Lithuanian settlements. They are discovered also in ploughed settlements beneath undisturbed sites in woods under the soil. Probably the origin of seams is different, as some are likely to be patterns of mixed soil. The latest radio-carbon investigation of Kunda settlement revealed three stages of settlement: Early Mesolithic (in pre-Boreal 9000-9500 bp), Middle Mesolithic (second part of Boreal 8000-8500 bp) and Neolithic (3500-4000 bp) (Akerlund, Regnell, Possnert 1996, 266, 269). This is why I am inclined to link the only stemmed arrowhead and part of other material from this campsite to the pre-Boreal Period of settlement. Sorokin emphasises similarities in primary flint processing techniques (one-end conical cores, pressure technique, micro-blades of a regular shape, etc) between Reseta culture and Pulli-type settlements, though in fact it is only a manifestation of features which are typical of most cultures in a common Mesolithic Euro- According to Sorokin’s publication, stemmed heads are not discovered in Reseta culture settlements of an early stage, as, for example, in Sukontsevo 8 and 9 (Sorokin 1999, 427 Fig. 1), so I think that stemmed heads from the collections of the Reseta 2 and 3 sites imply the addition of material from Butovo and perhaps Swiderian cultures. Therefore, flint hunting tools from early Kunda, discovered in the Butovo and Prislon sites (Кольцов, Жилин 1999, 62, 77, Fig. 2, 4, 30) and perhaps coming from Nemunas coastal material, BALTICA 6 pean context. Only an incomplete introduction to materials of archaeological collections could explain his pointed similarities between Pulli-type and Reseta culture settlements on the basis of the hunting inventory. Lancet-shaped microlithic arrowheads (“Reseta type microlithic arrowheads”) in Pulli settlements are only painted upside-down non-isosceles triangle microliths. There is no sign of the micro-burin technique in the Pulli collection. I personally explored every single item and flake. This technique is not to be discovered in any other Kunda culture settlement of the pre-Boreal Period either (unless collections are mixed with the remains of Janislavici or early Neolithic settlements). Not a single example of micro-burin technique was discovered even in 2002, when a 500-square-metre area of the Paramėlis 3C settlement in Lithuania was explored. As far as I am acquainted with Latvian and Estonian archaeological material, a micro-burin discovered in the Koškeni campsite in Kurzeme (western Latvia) and probably dated to the second half of the Mesolithic Period (Zagorska 1992, 105, Fig. 19: 15), is likely to be the only one; whereas the only lancet discovered comes from the Osa early Neolithic settlement at Lake Lubana (eastern Latvia). Microlithic blades of early Kunda culture, as well as other tools with massive blades, were made without the employment of the micro-burin technique. With the necessity of division, blades simply used to be broken. “Unilateral” Pullitype heads or blades, as I call them on the basis of their application, are spread in the entire cultural territory from southern Finland to the Nemunas basin and the Upper Volga (Prislon). These heads are made from massive blades, and should not be identified with type A microlithic heads from Reseta, though their application might be similar, that is, as arrowheads or bladed bone hunting tools. Bladed Pulli-type heads from early Kunda culture show that analogous bladed heads are traced among the Butovo cultural material discovered (eg Prislon, Reseta 3, Kultino 4 settlements) and they have to be linked to Butovo rather than to Reseta culture (Кольцов, Жилин 1999, Fig. 15, 30; Сорокин 2002, Fig. 50-51). My suggestion to colleagues exploring the Mesolithic Period of the Upper Volga and Oka rivers would be to examine the hypothesis. ARCHAELOGIA typical horn and antler processing should signal the end of Kunda culture at the end of the Boreal Period. However, all settlements from southern Finland (Lahti Ristola) to southern Lithuania, northeast Poland and western Byelorussia with imported flint material, Kunda percussion technology and stemmed arrowheads should be linked to the early pre-Boreal stage of Kunda culture. At the moment, I have material about at least 33 settlements and 45 find spots with single Pulli-type arrowheads (Ostrauskas 2000, Fig. 1; 2002a, Fig. 1). In short, Sorokin’s hypothesis can hardly explain the huge numbers of settlements and finds in the Nemunas and Narev basins. He simply had no opportunity for a detailed acquaintance with the material on Kunda culture settlements, while forming a clear picture with old publications is not possible. I also regret to say that after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the latest material, together with data on the latest research, is almost no longer accessible to archaeologists. 201 On The Genesis Of Kunda C u l t u r e . A . S o r o k i n ’s Hypothesis. Comments Tomas Ostrauskas 202 just prove the ties between Kunda and Butovo cultures, but not the rise of the latter from Reseta culture. Swiderian primary processing technique into Kunda culture technique. Examples presented in the first chapter show how the key differences between Kunda culture sites of the early Mesolithic Period and flint processing technique, the typological composition in Swiderian culture, make researchers seek for the origin of Kunda culture somewhere else, away from its area. This situation is essentially changed by the Ukrainian researcher L. Zalizniak, who thinks that in monuments of post-Swiderian cultures from the early Mesolithic Period pressure technique can be traced, which means the employment of one-end cores for making regular-shape blades. All this is nothing more than a normal stage in developing the flint processing technique, the transition to an optimal form of cores for the percussion of regular-shape blades, that is, for making one-end conical cores. Due to new semimanufactures (blanks), a regular-shape blade, the typological composition of flint tools and microlithisation became possible (Зализняк 1989, 8384). Rapid and radical natural changes at the end of the late Glacial Period and the beginning of the Holocene, and the necessity to adapt to the influence of neighbouring cultures from forest-steppe and steppe zones, affected by natural changes, perhaps, stimulated these changes and determined the rise of important new features in Mesolithic culture, like, for example, the appearance of the blade processing technique. Early Kunda culture groups could have taken some Reseta culture-related features from Kudlaevka culture people, who had reached the Nemunas basin already in the first half of the pre-Boreal Period (eg the development of the blade-shaping technique?). Kudlaevka culture, like Reseta culture, is also derived from late Gravet groups, who survived in the steppe and forest/ steppe zones of Ukraine. Relations between Kunda and Kudlaevka cultures could hardly be called friendly, as the export of flint into the eastern Baltic region stopped after Kudlaevka culture settled in the Nemunas basin. Besides, poor cultural contact between them can be proved by Kunda’s not mastering the micro-burin technique, which was the core of the hunting inventory in Kudlaevka culture (Ostrauskas 2002c). This hypothesis of Zalizniak was confirmed by D. Stupak, another Ukrainian archaeologist. He found that alongside typical Swiderian two-end cores, discovered in some Swiderian settlements in Ukraine (Berezno 6, Pribor 13 A, E, Г, Ж) and the Crimea (Siurenj II), conical cores for the percussion of regular-shape blades in the pressure technique were also employed (Ступак 1999). As the latter technique is meant for knapping regular-shape micro-blades suitable for making blades, Stupak presumes this kind of technology in the above monuments of Swiderian culture had already been employed for the manufacture of integrated hunting tools. In the Paramėlis 3C settlement, explored in southern Lithuania in 2002, alongside the legacy of late Swiderian and typical pre-Boreal periods of Kunda cultures, a technique of a transitional type was discovered. Two-end cores with separated points of percussion at the edge of the striking platforms were perhaps meant for blade pressing. Later, some cores were reshaped into one-end conical cores. A transitional-type arrowhead discovered confirmed the attribution of other similar heads. The precise fixing of finds in the campsite during explorations will hopefully allow us to complete the “refitting” of the material and planigraphic research of the settlement in the near future. It might also prove the transformation of the typical late The author believes that sources of good-quality flint in the southern part of the Nemunas and the northern part of the Narev basins were a material base for Swiderian culture in its local form around the Nemunas basin. At the beginning of the pre-Boreal Period these resources of flint made up a material base for late Swiderian culture to transform into Kunda culture technologically, as this region appeared to be the only source of goodquality flint in the total Kunda culture area, including southern Finland, the Ladoga shores and the Upper Daugava. Flint processing technique in Kunda culture, that is, the employment of pressure technique for the percussion of regular-shape blades, could form only in the case of abundant and high-quality flint. The facts presented above allow us to locate the area of the formation of Kunda culture in the following way: the southern and central parts of the Nemunas basin (coastal areas around the Byelorussian sections of the Nemunas, southern and central Lithuania) and the northern part of the Narev basin (northeast Poland). The modern subject of research in the genesis of Kunda culture This chapter is to show what we are missing to finally solve the question of the origin of Kunda culture. Firstly we need at least a small but reliable series of C14 dates from late Swiderian and early Kunda culture settlements in the Nemunas basin. It would be good to explore another one or two settlements of the transitional period, and to perform detailed planigraphic and technological research (re-fittings) in them. With respect to the relations of Kunda culture settlements with settlements in Estonia and Latvia, it would be useful to discover new settlements with extant organic material findings. Otherwise, a comparison of collections from We have more questions than answers; therefore, the endeavours of each researcher to unveil the secrets of the past are encouraged. References Akerlund, A., Regnell M., Possnert, G. 1996. Stratigraphy and Chronology of Lammasmiagi site at Kunda. In: Coastal Estonia. Recent Advances in Environmental and Cultural History. �������� Pact 51. Indreko, R. 1948. Die mittlere Steinzeit in Estland: ut einen Ubersicht uber die Geologie des Kunda-Sees von K.Orviku. In: KVHAA. Handlingar. Del.66. Stockholm. Indreko, R. 1964. Mesolithische und Frühneolitische Kulturen in Osteuropa und Westsibirien. ���������� Stockholm. Kozłowski, J.K., Kozłowski, S.K. 1977. Epoka kamienia na ziemiach polskich. Warszawa. Kozłowski, S.K. 1971. Północno-wschodni krąg kultur mezolitycznych. In: Z polskich badań nad epoką kamienia. Wrocław, Warszawa, Kraków, Gdańsk Ossolineum, 27– 102. Koz������������������� łowski, S.K. 1989. Mesolithic in Poland. A new Approach. ����� Łodz. Ostrauskas ,T. 2000. Mesolithic Kunda Culture. A Glimpse from Lithuania. In: Muinasaja taedus Tallinn, 167–180. Ostrauskas, T. 2002a. Kundos kultūros tyrinėjimų problematika. In: Lietuvos archeologija. T. 23. Vilnius, 93–106. Ostrauskas, T. 2002b. Kabeliai 2 Stone Age Site. In: Archaeologia Baltica. Vol. 5. Vilnius, 51–82. Ostrauskas, T. 2002c. Mezolitinė Kudlajevkos kultūra Lietuvoje. In: Lietuvos archeologija. T. 23. Vilnius, 137–162. Rimantienė, R. 1984. Akmens amžius Lietuvoje. Vilnius. Rimantienė, R. 1996. Akmens amžius Lietuvoje (2 leidimas). Vilnius. Sorokin, A.N. 1999. On the Problem of influence of Volga-Oka Mesolithic to the Origin of Kunda Culture. In: L’Europe des derniers chasseurs: epipaleolitthique et mesolithique. Actes du 5e colloque international UISPP, commission XII, Grenoble, 18-23 septembre 1995. Paris, 425–428. Sulgostowska, Z. 1989. Prahistoria międzyrzecza Wisły, Niemna i Dniestru u schyłku plejstocenu. Warszawa. Sulgostowska, Z. 1999. Final palaeolithis Masovian cycle and mesolithic Kunda culture relations. In: Tanged points Tomas Ostrauskas The Lithuanian Institute of History Department of Archaeology Kražių 5, LT-2000 Vilnius, Lithuania e-mail: [email protected] BALTICA 6 cultures in Europe. ���������� Lubelskie ������������������������ Materiały archeologiczne. T��. XIII. Lublin, 85–92. Zagorska, I. 1992. The Mesolithic in Latvia. In: Acta Archeologica Kobenhavn. 63, 97–117. Загорска, И.А. 1981. Ранний мезолит на территории Латвии. In: Latvijas PSR Zinatnu Akademijas Vestis. No.2 (403), 53–65. Зализняк������������� ,������������ Л.Л. 1989��.� Охотники на северного оленя Украинского Полесья эпохи финального палеолита. Киев. Кольцов������������� ,������������ Л.В. 1977��.� Финальный палеолит и мезолит Южной и Восточной Прибалтики. Москва. Кольцов������������� ,������������ Л.В. 1979��. �� О ����������������������������� характере сложения раннемезолитических культур Северной Европы������ . In:� Советская Археология №.4, 15–25. Кольцов�������������������������� ,������������������������� Л.В., Жилин������������� ,������������ М.Г. 1999��.� Мезолит Волго-Окского междуречья. Памятники бутовской культуры. Москва. Kсензов��,� В.П. ����������������������������������� 1994�������������������������� .������������������������� Мезолитическия культуры �������� Белорусского Подвинья и Поднепровья. Автореф. канд. дис. истор. наук. Минск. Сорокин, А.Н. 2002. Мезолит Жиздринского полесья. Проблема источниковедения мезолита Восточной Европы. Москва. Ступак, Д.В. 1999. Технологïï розщеплення кремню свiдерскоï культури Украïнского Полiсся за аналiзом нуклеусiв. In: Vita Antiqua. Vol. 2. Kиïв, 18–24. Янитс������������������������������������������������ ,����������������������������������������������� К.Л. 1990������������������������������������� .������������������������������������ Кремневый инвентарь стоянок Кундаской культуры. Автореф. канд. дис. истор. наук. Москва. Янитс������������� ,������������ Л.Ю. 1959��. Поселения эпохи неолита и раннего металла в приустье р. Эмайыги (Эстонская ССР). Таллин. ARCHAELOGIA these settlements is not possible. Findings from bone and antler dominate among the Latvian and Estonian material, while flint finds alone are available from the Nemunas basin. Research into the economy of Kunda culture and relations with the surroundings is impossible without peatbog settlements in the Nemunas basin. Early Kunda culture groups employed high-quality flint from mines (according to the researcher W. Migal, of the Archaeological Museum in Warsaw), which allows us to search for flint mines exploited by Kunda culture people. Naturally, the genesis and development of ethnic-cultural phenomena cannot be conclusively reconstructed without anthropological data. Researchers have almost no material for the elaboration of relations between Kudlaevka and Kunda cultures. Received: 2002 203 A. Sorokin. Mesolithic Culture of Butovo. REVIEWS REVIE W S A . S o r o k i n . M e s o l i t h i c C u lt u r e o f B u t o v o . Moscow: Nauka. 2002. 256 p. In 1990, some Russian colleagues provided the expedition of the archaeologist A. Girininkas with a few copies of Sorokin’s study “Mesolithic Culture of Butovo” in Russian (Moscow, 1990). A few students, followers of Girininkas, won the books in a draw (I was lucky to get one of them). The principles of criticism of sandy Stone Age settlements, as archaeological sources, presented in the study by Sorokin, and the principles of the analysis of the collections of flint findings, were among the most important stimuli for the “young expedition generation” to start immediately and to improve radically the research methodologies for Stone Age settlements. Firstly, to correct the fixing of finds, which is the basis for the preservation of information about monuments. That was the first rather significant introduction of young archaeologists (Dž. Brazaitis, E. Šatavičius, and others), organised by Girininkas, to the research of Sorokin. Sorokin’s 2002 study is about the Mesolithic Period of the Zhizdra river basin, and examines the problems of East European Mesolithic source analysis. It consists of 256 pages, with 57 statistical tables, 49 pictures of finds, and two maps. 204 In the introductory part of the book, the author introduces the Mesolithic Period as a form of human adaptation to the early Holocene (post-glacial period) and underlines the particularity of Mesolithic communities in the East European forest region. According to the author, a concrete historical principle is very important in analysing theoretical and global processes, as it is based on actual facts and grants real content to abstract theoretical contemplation. Therefore, a polesie, a sandy lowland micro-region of the River Zhizdra was selected as grounds for the model, reflecting the entirety of processes in the sandy flatlands of Europe. The author was planning to implement the following: to introduce the Mesolithic material of the Zhizdra micro-region, to make a thorough analysis of it and to identify the general features of archaeological complexes, and to find the location of these complexes in the Mesolithic Period of the Desna-Oka region. Another important aim of the study was to present his own methodology on how to explain the “cultural diversity” of archaeological sources and complexes: to find out whether it is a syncretic complex of a natural formation (a mechanically mixed collection without human interruption), or whether it reflects cultural processes and cultural metastasis. The Zhizdra micro-region, as one of the best explored Mesolithic Russian flatland regions, is most appropriate for these tasks. Around 70 Mesolithic monuments, linked by different researchers to several Mesolithic cultures, are identified in the Zhizdra polesie or around it. In the first chapter Sorokin characterises the paleogeography of the selected micro-region. Peripheral sandy lowlands, or polesies, had been shaped by flow platforms of internal tectonic sags in the process of the melting of the glaciers. The Zhizdra polesie is among the largest at the northeastern edge, and includes the basins of the Pripet’, the midstream Dnieper and the Desna. The Zhizdra is a tributary of the upper Oka, and the Zhizdra polesie meets the basins of the Oka and Desna rivers. On the basis of palynological data, the author presents brief characteristics of the natural environment at the beginning of the Holocene (pre-boreal, boreal and first atlantis periods, 10,300 to 7,000 years ago), which actually covers the Mesolithic Period in the Zhizdra basin. The natural environment of the Zhizdra polesie and its development in the early and mid-Holocene periods was similar to the natural conditions of sandy flatlands covered by mixed forests and stretching from Britain to the Urals. The history of archaeological research in the Zhizdra polesie is briefly, but thoroughly, reviewed in the second chapter. It started at the end of the 19th century, though the largest contribution was made in the period 1951 to 1984, when the Upper Oka Expedition from the Institute of Archaeology of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR was working there. Besides, starting from 1973, a digest of archaeological monuments in the Kaluga region was under way. Mesolithic settlements in the Zhizdra basin were also explored by I. Frolovas and A. Smirnov. In the chapter entitled “Stratigraphy of monuments and methodology of field tests in settlements of zandric type”, Sorokin notes that an excess of water and powdery sediments are dominant in the polesie. These circumstances determined the topography of Mesolithic The fourth chapter of Sorokin’s book is designed for a criticism of Mesolithic sources on the Zhizdra polesie. The author identifies five types of archaeological material. Selected (sorted), mixed collections or rare sets might be employed only as a subsidiary. Only the so-called “clean” and abundant enough (over 100 morphologically evident items) collections are valuable sources and can be employed in the solution of culturological problems. Thirteen basic settlements of the micro-region are characterised in the chapter. All of them are sandy, and the level of their exploration is different. The author thinks that five abundant enough, “relatively clean”, without typological “sorting” collections of settlements might be singled out. These are the Krasnoye “Vasia”, Krasnoye 3, Krasnoye 8 “Penioshki”, and Reseta 2 and 3 settlements. The material collected in these settlements or acquired in different sites of these settlements during extensive research was divided by Sorokin into 15 complexes. They were employed in further research. BALTICA 6 In the largest (70 pages) chapter in the study, “Inventory of Mesolithic settlements in the Zhizdra polesie”, the author describes in detail 15 flint finding collections from five of the above settlements and compares them both with each other and with collections of Mesolithic monuments from neighbouring regions. The collections are described in a detailed and precise way. Readers can form a rather clear and preliminary view of the collections on the basis of descriptions and pictures of the findings. It is preliminary, because any selfrespecting researcher can only shape his own attitude to a concrete collection after a review of the settlement material. ARCHAELOGIA settlements, priorities in choosing living sites and peculiarities of the formation and survival of the cultural layer. All Mesolithic settlements in the Zhizdra polesie started on the edge of river banks in the vicinity of lakes or similar valleys. Usually the genuine colours of cultural layers in Mesolithic settlements do not differ from the natural colours of the soil and its lower layers. It is generally traced as a “horizon with finds”. Later cultural layers in zandric zones were affected by numerous destructive factors: natural, climatic, biochemical, etc. They all influenced unfavourably the survival of the cultural layers. According to the author of the study, it is very important to choose a proper methodology for an archaeological field test to collect the most information possible for research. While working in sandy flatlands, researchers employ both a traditional finding horizon methodology and specially designed ones, like vertical horizon scrape. The first destroys the microstratigraphy of the cultural layers; the second, recording the stratigraphy more carefully, reduces the opportunities for horizontal research. Sorokin developed a methodology of three-dimensional finding fixation and introduced it in 1982. This methodology enables us to preserve a considerably larger amount of information about cultural layers destroyed in settlements during explorations, and at the same time offers an opportunity for the versatile analysis of a cultural layer, from stratigraphic, horizontal and other aspects. It should be mentioned that similar methodologies have been developed, improved and employed in the research of settlements from the Stone and Bronze ages during the expeditions by Girininkas and his “school” in Lithuania since 1990. A few remarks of a general character about what kind of information I missed in the description of sets on Mesolithic settlements from the Zhizdra region. In most collections, flint material of several kinds was traced. It would also be interesting to trace the interrelations between findings of different material in each settlement from the point of view of technology, typology and planigraphic analysis. It would be good to describe in detail the evidence of primary processing technique: striking points, remnants of platforms on blades and flakes, shapes and sizes of bulbs, blade profiles, and so on. This would enable us to form a clear view about the primary flint knapping technique and provide additional material for contemplation about the identity of collections. Despite the abundant pictures of findings, I missed some significant findings described in the text, firstly, pictures of microliths and arrowheads. I would like to point out a few particular details to draw the author’s attention. The typological distribution of microliths and hunting inventory ought to be elaborated. To my mind, typologically identical (judging from descriptions and pictures) artefacts, namely, microlithic blades with chipped (retouched) ends, are classed as different types: diagonal points, trapezoid points, micro-blades with chipped ends, microliths with retouched sides, blades, even broad trapeziums (for example, from Krasnoye 1 “Vasia” settlement [p. 206 Fig. 11]). Short trapeziums from the same Krasnoye 1 “Vasia” settlement [p. 33-34, 39] cannot be called trapeziums (from the aspect of trapezoid arrowheads and microliths). From the pictures (p. 206, Fig. 11: 21, 23) it becomes evident that these flint artefacts should be called microlithic blades with retouched terminals, but not trapeziums. On page 204, a Mesolithictype lancet is depicted (Fig. 9: 16), which is treated by the author as a broken Ahrensburg-type arrowhead. According to Sorokin, the facet at the lancet point is casual and in the process of a retouch (p. 38). Guessing from the blade on the left side, the retouch of this shape is made specially for micro-burin percussion; therefore, the artefact should be treated as a lancet. The 205 A. Sorokin. Mesolithic Culture of Butovo. REVIEWS 206 division of arrowheads into “Swiderian” and “Ahrensburgian” only on the basis of plate retouch (sometimes very superficial, with a few tiny negatives) at the stems does not seem to be reasonable, the more so because there is no difference in the billets of arrowheads and their shapes (p. 204-205 Fig. 9-10). I presume it to be a rather formal attitude towards the material. Usually every Swiderian culture settlement has a few arrowheads without a flattened retouch, that is, they are not completed, or simply the barb is not removed due to other reasons. The sixth chapter in the study, “Mesolithic of the Zhizdra polesie. Data analysis”, gives a detailed statistical comparison of the complexes of discovered finds. All Sorokin’s attempts are reflected and illustrated by 57 statistical tables, a real hoard for the researcher’s colleagues. The final conclusion of the data analysis is that the Krasnoye 8 “Penioshki” settlement is to be linked to Studienok-type settlements (Desna orlate stage of Piesotchny Rov culture). The origin of the Krasnoye 1 “Vasia” settlement is not clear. Reseta 3 and Reseta 2 are linked to Reseta culture, the Krasnoye 3 settlement to Butovo culture. The author of the study does not discount the possibility that the above complexes of settlements do not reflect cultural ties and transformations. They are just a mechanically mixed inheritance of different cultures from different times. Sorokin, however, chooses the hypothesis of cultural interface and continuity to explain the peculiarities of Mesolithic Zhizdra collections. According to him, the chain of Reseta 3, Reseta 2 and Krasnoye 3 complexes reflects the transformation of Reseta culture into Butovo culture. On the basis of experience, working with material about sandy Stone Age settlements in Lithuania, I should say that Sorokin’s conclusions are too audacious. Five out of 13 (38.5%) Zhizdra polesie settlements were identified by him as “clean” or not intermixed. For comparison: after several revisions of material on Mesolithic finds from about 200 Lithuanian sandy settlements, I would recognise the Maksimoniai IV settlement complex as the only “clean” Mesolithic collection. Mechanical intermixture is supported by different flint material, discovered in almost all settlements of the Zhizdra micro-region. Huge amounts of different flint material from the Reseta 2 and Reseta 3 settlements are to be emphasised in particular, as these are monuments of a new Reseta culture. Having no opportunities to view collections of flint finds, I can only preliminarily point to signs of a mechanical intermixture within Zhizdra complexes. Nowhere in Baltic or Polish material are post-Swiderian and Swiderian arrowheads in contemporaneous complexes. Neither are Swiderian, post-Swiderian and other types of stemmed arrow- heads discovered in one single complex, including the inheritance of Mesolithic microlithic cultures (Komornica, Janislavici, Choynice-Pienkowska, etc). This also involves settlements of post-gravethic Kudlaevka culture, which is the Reseta equivalent in early Mesolithic of the Nemunas basin. Therefore, I think that stemmed arrowheads from the Reseta 2 and Reseta 3 settlements testify to a mechanical intermixture of complexes from different times and different cultures, especially in that, for example, the Reseta 2 complex, according to data from Sorokin’s statistical analysis, is very close to the “total” Mesolithic Zhizdra region complex (p. 111112). My suggestion to Sorokin would be to examine primary flint processing technologies. In the Nemunas basin the technologies of Kudlaevka and other Mesolithic cultures differ greatly. The method of direct percussion was applied in Kudlaevka culture, while in Kunda and Janislavici cultures pressure technique was applied. Probably, Reseta culture, as a post-gravethic culture, could employ a Kudlaevka-type technology. My opinion is a preliminary one only. To prove it, I would have at least to view independently all the collections of finds from the Zhizdra region. I also think that the dating of Reseta culture settlements on the basis of dates connected with Pulli-type settlements of Kunda culture, has no substance (p. 112). Sorokin does this with reference to his own hypothesis about the evolution of Reseta-Kunda-Butovo cultures (see my article “On the Genesis of Kunda Culture” in this volume). The Chernobyl catastrophe had no impact on radiocarbon dating (the opinion of N. Kovaluch, head of the C-14 laboratory in Kiev); therefore, it could be performed in the Zhizdra region as well. The shifting of dates from remote monuments is beside the purpose. In the chapter entitled “Place of Zhizdra polesie Mesolithic settlements in the Mesolithic of the Oka-Desna watershed”, Sorokin introduces us briefly to the taxonomic classification of Mesolithic, characterises significant monuments of the period in the Desna and Oka basins, and names the basic problems in the research of the above cultures. Four cultural groups are identified within the Desna river basin: the Smyatchka XIV group, Desna culture and its Studienok period, and Kudlaevka culture. Within the Oka river basin, Butovo, Reseta, Yenev, Purgasov cultures and Krasnov 1 types of settlements are identified. As I have already mentioned, Sorokin’s opinion about Pulli-type settlements (Kunda culture) is very interesting for researchers into Eastern Baltic Mesolithic. According to the author, Pulli and Lepakoze settlements reflect the seasonal migration of Reseta cultural groups into the Eastern Baltic region. At the same time, Pulli-type settlements are treated as a transitional stage between Reseta and Butovo cultures. In this chapter, the author analyses processes that take place during and after the formation of a cultural layer as an archaeological source, processes that modify the cultural layer (post-depositive processes). I totally agree with Sorokin that the fixation of finds by means of three measurements enable us to preserve much more information than traditional and ordinary research methods. This information is very often vital to the value of an archaeological monument as a source. This methodology is important in particular for the exploration of sandy settlements with multicultural features. It is also important working in contact zones of natural-geographic and cultural regions. The Zhizdra polesie is in a similar contact zone. Sorokin suggests employing technologies of “finds-markers” (finds with features from several cultural traditions) and hybrids (mestizos) to separate “mixed”, naturally shaped complexes from those formed on the basis of cultural mestization. If the above features are isolated, or if they are not traced at all, the collection of finds is a mechanically intermixed multicultural collection. As East European polycultural sets of finds, “shaped” by natural forces, are the rule rather than the exception, Sorokin offers a “naturation” term instead of the BALTICA 6 From the point of view of archaeology, the most significant is the eighth chapter, “Problem of source analysis on the Mesolithic of Eastern Europe”. I would not agree, though, with Sorokin, who defines archaeological sources as a type of historical source and studies of archaeological sources only as research into the particularity of archaeological monuments, perceived as historical sources. This theoretical attitude of Sorokin is based on the tradition and ideology of Soviet historiography, treating archaeology only as an auxiliary discipline of prehistoric science. In short, this paradigm does not reflect the basic difference of an archaeological source from a historical source: key historical sources are written sources. Their origin is subjective and they are the offspring of an ideologically engaged human. Besides, very often it is done purposefully. Archaeological sources, on the contrary, are objective in their essence. They reflect objectively the processes of time. Information might become subjective only when researching historical monuments, researching in a harsh way on the basis of primitive methodologies. A long time ago, archaeology became a miscellaneous, multi-disciplinary science, closely linked to many other sciences exploring the development of the human race and its natural environment. The historical process is no longer the only basic aim of archaeological research. “non-cultural forming of syncretic sets”. Naturation is a mechanism of natural factors which influences the formation of artefacts and mixed polycultural sets. The naturation phenomenon is opposed to acculturation, when human groups interact in the cultural process of mestization. Naturation takes place under appropriate conditions: the horizontal conjunction of settlements from different cultures, finds in the soil, powdery deposits in the soil, pedoturbation, aeolian deposits, erosion, etc. In this chapter the author also analyses Mesolithic polycultural sets of finds which were formed in the process of naturation in the upper Oka region. For his final conclusions about the eventual influence of naturation processes upon archaeologists’ deductions, Sorokin chose Lithuania, as it is relatively well explored, materials are available due to the publications of R. Rimantienė in 1971, etc. On the basis of descriptions of material and pictures of finds only, the author proves that a significant amount of Palaeolithic and Mesolithic sets are not culturally hybrid (mestizic), but are simply mixed (p. 156-159). It is obvious that Sorokin could not perform a precise and detailed research of separate settlements without archaeological collections. Nevertheless, in most cases his conclusions are incredibly correct: for example, when he speaks about the artificially mixed character of Mesolithic Nemunas culture. Readers should know that in 1971 the study by Rimantienė was actually the first serious generalisation of Palaeolithic and Mesolitic material in Lithuania and was ahead of its time, with conclusions influencing exploration in neighbouring and even remote regions. It is understandable that Rimantienė, possessing mostly surface collections, found it difficult to rate everything properly, the more so because knowledge of the above periods in neighbouring countries was even worse. The merit of the study is unquestioned until now, and Sorokin’s attention is a manifestation of that. Thanks to this publication, only the verification of the researcher’s hypothesis about naturation appears to be thinkable. I would like to add to his conclusions information that will allow readers to evaluate more precisely the material presented by Sorokin. The so-called Baltic Madlen complexes from the late Palaeolithic Period are traced in Lithuania. They are divided into those similar to Ljungby and to the Vilnius group (sometimes linked to Ahrensburg culture). In Swiderian culture, settlements of two stages (?) are distinguished: settlements with stemmed arrowheads, and with willow-leaf shape arrowheads. One genuine hybrid or Chvalibogovici-type settlement was explored (Varenie 5), in the hunting inventory of which features of Swiderian and Ahrensburg cultures (the West European type) are reflected. At the very beginning of the Mesolithic (the start of preBoreal) Period, late Swiderian culture still survives. ARCHAELOGIA This hypothesis is unusual, though Mesolithic research of the Nemunas basin in the last decade allows us to refute it decisively. 207 A. Sorokin. Mesolithic Culture of Butovo. REVIEWS 208 In the pre-Boreal Period, settlements of Kunda (Pulli type) and Kudlaevka cultures are common. Probably at the end of the pre-Boreal Period Maglemoze groups emerge (Proto-Janislavici). Late Mesolithic is associated with Janislavici culture. In this chapter Sorokin also analyses critically the influence of naturation processes upon Mirnoye settlements from the coastal area of the northern Black Sea. At the end of the chapter Sorokin draws attention to the necessity of criticism towards settlement sets (as sources) before employing them in further work. I would also like to draw the author’s attention to the fact that the complexes analysed above do not hold water from the point of view of naturation processes. Sorokin presents no patterns of hybrid “finds-markers” or mestizic technologies in the Krasnoye 1 “Vasia”, Reseta 2 and 3 settlements; therefore, according to the same naturation features, they should be treated as naturally mixed poly-cultural sets. In the set of the Krasnoye 1 “Vasia” settlement, the inheritance of at least three components from late Palaeolithic Swiderian culture (presumably Smyatchka XIV type), Butovo culture and some later Mesolithic (presumably Janislavici) culture could be traced. Components of Butovo and Reseta cultures emerge in the Reseta 2 set, while in the set of Reseta 3 settlement at least three different parts can be distinguished: the heritage of Palaeolithic Swiderian culture (Smyatchka XIV) and material from Mesolithic Butovo and Reseta cultures. On the basis of the above, I would like to point out that researchers of the Mesolithic in the Volga-Oka basins should search for a really unblended complex of Reseta culture. Reseta 2 and 3 sets do not assist us in understanding technologies and material that are to be linked to the Reseta cultural tradition. Finally, I would like to draw the attention of all East European late Palaeolithic and Mesolithic researchers to a rather substantial misunderstanding which is anchored in the historiography of the region. Ahrensburg culture in the northern part of Western Europe is a totally different cultural phenomenon, compared to similarly named settlement groups in the upper basins of the Dnieper, Volga and Oka (including the Nemunas, of course). With its primary flint processing technology, West European Ahrensburg culture is totally identical to Swiderian culture (the same two-end cores for blades). Therefore, the identification of East European cultural groups with their flake technologies (alongside other differences) with then existing West European cultural phenomena is misleading and indefensible. The appearance of the terms “Ahrensburg” or “Eastern Ahrensburg” in the context of East European material was conditioned by the poor exploration of local regions and the search for similar stemmed arrowheads in well-explored northwest Europe. Attempts to oppose these finds to the abundant inheritance of Swiderian culture were also influential. I find it advisable to withdraw from using the term “Ahrensburg” with respect to East European material, as the terminology is abundant and complicated enough (Perstunska, Volkushanska, Krasnoselie, Desna, Grensko, Yenevo, Piesochny Rov cultures, let alone different monumental types and groups). Sorokin’s study is valuable not only as an exceptionally exhaustive and diverse publication about archaeological sources and Mesolithic settlements from the Zhizdra river region. Processes in cultural layers of sandy settlements are summarised and analysed in detail with respect to theories of cultural mestization. The theory of naturation processes was designed, clear criteria and methods were established to recognise factors of such a character, and finally to solve the problem. Abundant patterns of application demonstrate the vitality of the method and introduce readers to critically evaluated material on standard Mesolithic monuments of the upper Volga-Oka region. Tomas Ostrauskas Lithuanian Institute of History Department of Archaeology Kražių 5, LT-01108, Vilnius, Lithuania e-mail: [email protected] Vladas Žulkus. Medieval Klaipėda. To w n A n d C a s t l e . A r c h a e o l o g y a n d REVIEWS H i s t o r y. V l a d a s Ž u l k u s . M e d i e va l K l a i p Ė d a . T o w n a n d C a s t l e . A r cha e o l o g y a n d H i s t o ry. Vi l n i u s : Ž a r a , 2 0 0 2 . 1 6 8 p . I l l u s t r a t e d . S u m m a r y i n G e r m a n In commemoration of Klaipėda’s 750th anniversary, an abundantly illustrated book (112 photographs, pictures and maps) about the past of the town and the castle has appeared. It was written in Lithuanian and English by the archaeology professor Vladas Žulkus. A work of perfect polygraphic quality, it is one of few studies published in Lithuania in which research findings about centenary research on urban development are presented to a wider circle of readers in plain language. The propositions are laconic and clearly formulated, with abundant references to sources and other authors. An impressive number of them was employed: 38 written sources, historical plans and research reports, including also 227 publications, about ten per cent of which were written by the author himself. The chronological framework (the Middle Ages) of the subject and the analysed material (it notes that the “publication of archaeological material about Klaipëda is not the aim of the book. No priority was given to archaeological material in the process of writing”) are given in the title and the preface of the book. In fact, a wider period is analysed, as historic, iconographic and archaeological material, covering the 17th and 18th centuries, is presented in most chapters. Besides, the use of archaeological material is comprehensive, including archaeological finds of the last decade that are still unknown to Lithuanian readers, such as a significant part of a Renaissance tile collection, and a stamp from the end of the 13th century, discovered just a few years ago. Simple cartographic and iconographic sources are mentioned after the preface, followed by a short history of the research into Klaipėda. It is stated that after the researchers at the turn of the 20th century (A. Boetticher, E. Zurkalowski, J. Sembritzki, A. Semrau, K. Forstreuter), the history of Klaipėda was not considered interesting for a long period of time, mainly due to political reasons. The resumption of studies was stimulated by archaeological research into the castle and the town, which started and was provided with new information in the Seventies. Žulkus, the organiser and leader of the group that was involved in them, summarises the job in the book: “Between 1977 and 2002 almost 40 studies were published, though the typologisation and dating of archaeological material on Klaipėda is insufficient” 210 (p. 11). It is implied modestly that, thanks to the studies of J. Genys, E. Paleckis, R. Sprainaitis and Žulkus, the amount of published archaeological material about Klaipėda was the highest in Lithuania for a long time. Recently Vilnius has exceeded it. The historical context is surveyed, and is followed by an analysis of the development of the town of Memel and the castle, founded by the Germans. The historic lands around modern Klaipėda, including Lamata, Mėguva and Pilsotas (more attention is given to the latter), are characterised. Thirty archaeological objects, existing now or known from historical sources, are introduced, together with a plan of Pilsotas (Plate 1). Some of them are localised only approximately (for example, Ouse Varpe temple, Galmene and Octe castles), and some are uncertain (Nos 2, 10, 11). Probably the explanation holds no information about arbitrary signs and symbols due to a fault of the printing house. The area covered by the plan is rather small (around 12 by 17 km). Maybe the author could make another plan or scheme, with areas neighbouring on Pilsotas and/or larger objects, like Palanga, which is mentioned in the book several times? While characterising the development of the town and the castle, more attention is obviously paid to the latter. It is explained by the different level of exploration and the amount of information available. A deeper characterisation of the development of urban fortifications is missing; their evolution from the first half of the 16th century to the end of the Seven Years War in the middle of the 18th century is described in one sentence. This cannot be explained by a lack of material, as there is sufficient in Vytautas Šliogeris’ article, published in 1982. The interesting material mentioned about confessional and ethnic relations, such as, for example, the fact that in the 16th century local Lithuanians had to attend services in a shed (eine Scheuer) and in the 17th century in a tavern (p. 69), ought to be followed by wider comments. While analysing archaeological finds, discussed and supplied with numerous photographs and pictures in the second part of the book, an uncertainty appears regarding the interpretation of some subjects on laminar tiles. The gingerbread clothes Šliogeris, V., Bastioniniai įtvirtinimai Klaipėdoje. In: Architektūros paminklai, T. 7. Vilnius 1982, p. 13–22. The book is likely to see more editions; therefore, attention should be paid to inaccuracies. There is no clear decision on how to name modern Polish towns (the German or Polish spelling), inhabited in the period by German colonists. Both versions are presented only when speaking about Küstrin, even the use of the “ü” is not forgotten (p. 42); whereas the names of Torun and Wroclaw (p. 32, 57, 102) are transcribed from the Polish name alone, Kolberg and “Elbingians” (p. 38, 39, 106) from the German, Gdansk (Danzig) and its inhabitants are called alternately one way or the other. It is not fair to identify kapers (corsairs) with pirates, that is sea marauders: they used to attack the merchant vessels of enemy countries or those trading with them. They even had official permission for such actions. It is worth making a correction to the statement on p. 23: “An attempt was made to join the castle and the town into one solid defensive system-location.” In fact, the term “location” (locatio) is perceived as “a one-time action, uniting two elements: urban reform from economic, dimensional aspects and the introduction of civil liberties of foreign origin, connected with the settlement of colonists in the town”. It should be noted that most location towns, founded in new territories, had no castles whatsoever, but they were fortified. The remark on p. 32 of a “Classical convent-type castle” characterisation, which contradicts the valid Katalynas, K., Vilniaus koklių ornamentų prototipai. In: Mokslas ir Lietuva, 1991 Nr. 4, p. 102, 103 pav. 9–24. Illustrierte Geschichte der deutschen fruhburgerlichen Revoliution. Berlin, 1974, Q:46. Wędzki, A., Kierunki rozwoju miast srodkowej Europy w XII i XIII w. In: Początki i rozwoj Starego Miasta w Poznaniu. Poznan 1977, Q:124. Plg. Rębkowski M. Pierwsze lokacje miast w księstwie zachodniopomorskim. In: Przemiany przestrenne i kulturowe. Kolobrzeg, 2001, ryc. 9–14, 16–21. BALTICA 6 proposition of the eighth footnote about the incorrectness of such a classification should be treated as an oversight. The same should be said about a sentence on p. 40: “V. Šliogeris thinks these are the remains of ancient bastion external stone pleckwerk with firing openings, as he maintains in his studies something different. In his article about Klaipėda bastions he characterises pleckwerk as stonework, where greensward rectangles are used instead of bricks and a mixture of mould, manure and twitch grass instead of grout. This mixture was used for the reinforcement of the sides of bulwarks, erected by fortifiers”; whereas in the above article about research on the Prince Friedrich bastion the elements discovered are not called pleckwerk, but “a stonework shell”. The “French traveller Ghillebert de Lannoy” could be among other famous visitors to Klaipėda, and he could have been travelling in 1413–1414 for his own pleasure. Even if he is not to be suspected of spying for those who had knighted him shortly before, namely, the brothers of the order or Crusaders from the German sanctuary in Jerusalem named after the Holy Virgin, he is still to be treated as “Ghillebert de Lannoy, a Burgundian knight and diplomat”. ARCHAELOGIA of a man, portrayed in a dynamic situation (Plate 51) recall the 16th-century noble fashion. If that is true, a woman drawing him towards a bed (?) could hardly be treated as “a lady”. I have never seen all the portraits of 16th-century West and East European rulers; therefore, I cannot say that an elderly bearded man with a cap in the Renaissance style in Plate 100 is not “an old king”. Again, it is known that in the area from Germany to Latvia firstly historic personalities, connected with the Reformation, were portrayed on tiles manufactured in 16th century. They were both followers and leaders of the movement (such as Saxon kurfürst Johann Friedrich, Hessen landgrave Philip) and savage opponents of it, like the emperor Charles V. That is why the old man for me is much more like the Saxon kurfürst Friedrich the Prudent, the father of the above Johann Friedrich and a protector of Martin Luther, whose portrait was painted by Dürer in 1523. More should be said about the evolution of Klaipėda tile schemes, presented on p. 97. A. Swiechowska noted eight basic types of Warsaw tiles with a defined date10. In Lithuania and Byelorussia, attempts were made in the Seventies and Eighties in the last century to make schemes of their evolution11. In these attempts the fact was ignored that tile ovens, the techniques of their construction and manufacture, and ornamentation were taken from culturally more advanced countries (Czechia, Germany, Poland); later, the knowledge was constantly updated. The shortening of tile sections, offered as a basic feature of their evolution, was predetermined not by the evolution of the tile itself, but by developing the oven construction technique. Besides, the length changed, subject to its planned position on the oven. If it was doubted that the lower parts of ovens might not sustain the weight of the upper parts, their See Zabiela G. Tomasz Torbus. Die Konventenburgen im Deutschordensland Preussen. In: Lietuvos istorijos metraštis, 2000 m. Vilnius 2002, Q:367. Šliogeris, V., Bastioniniai..., p. 13. Šliogeris, V., Poternos ir kazematai Klaipėdos pilies Princo Frydricho bastione. In: Lietuvos pilių archeologija. Klaipėda, 2001, p. 83, 84. Klimas, P., Ghillebert de Lannoy. Dvi jo kelionės Lietuvon Vytauto Didžiojo laikais (1413–1414 ir 1421 metais). Kaunas, 1931, p. 18. 10 Swiechowska, A., Kafle warszawskie. In: Szkice staromiejskie. Warszawa, 1955, tab. 1. 11 Trusov, O., Pamiatniki monumentalnogo zodchestva Bielorusii XI–XVII vv. Minsk, 1988, Q:130–150, ris. 74, 84. 211 Vladas Žulkus. Medieval Klaipėda. To w n A n d C a s t l e . A r c h a e o l o g y a n d REVIEWS H i s t o r y. walls would be thickened, changing correspondingly the shape of the tiles. For example, a lower part of ten metres in height of the oven from the Artus palace in Gdansk (the first half of the 16th century) was bricked with tiles of an incredible neck length (about 80cm). Therefore, it is hardly possible to talk about the evolution of local tiles or the heating installations in the construction of which they were used. In the above example, the conversion of utensil-shape tiles into plated ones, with deeply concave plates (judging by the Renaissance rosette-shape ornamentation final stage of the process, according to the author of the scheme, which took place in the first half or the middle of the 16th century) is based entirely on the external similarity of different tile types. It should be noted that former Gothic tiles had almost smooth plates; therefore, the scheme discussed is no good in principle and has to be rejected. These minor remarks do not reduce the significance of this interesting and well-presented book. One of the basic positive factors is that it is a collection of separate facts and ideas from different studies, including a bibliography of almost all the writing about the history of Klaipėda. Undoubtedly, the book is also very useful to both ordinary readers and to specialists. Unfortunately, such books are not numerous, and the initiative of Vladas Žulkus and Klaipėda municipality is welcome. Kęstutis Katalynas Lithuanian Institute of History Department of Archaeology Kražių 5, LT-01108 Vilnius, Lithuania e-mail: [email protected] 212 ReVIEWS Mindaugas Bertašius. Central Lithuania in the Eighth t o t h e Tw e l f t h C e n t u r i e s M i n d a u g a s B e rta š i u s . C e n t r a l L i t h u a n i a i n t h e E i g h t h t o t h e T w el f t h C e n t u r i e s K a u n a s : Vy t a u t a s M a g n u s U n i v e r s i t y P u b l i s h i n g C e n t r e . 2 0 0 2 . 2 7 0 p . This book deals with prehistoric central Lithuania. It is one of the few studies whose subject is the prehistory of a single tribe or region. It consists of 12 chapters, in which the climate, peculiarities of the soil, and the development of the region in Roman times and the great migration are reviewed. The largest part of it covers the Viking era, outlines the region within the entire world of the Baltic tribes, and shows its importance on the eve of the formation of the state. In the preface to the book, the author explains, why “central Lithuania” is more appropriate than “Aukštaitija” (Upland Lithuania). He does not go into the disputes about the size of Upland Lithuania, though several times he points out that the cemeteries of central Lithuania belong to the Upland Lithuanians. His attitude towards the boundaries of the territory is similar, based on exceptional culture. For the above, he employs not only material from explored cemeteries with graves belonging to the same culture, but hill-forts as well. Though prior to this, he writes that the hill-forts of the region are not explored. Even if they were, they would hardly differ from those of other regions in the period discussed. 214 The chronological framework of the book is the eighth to the 12th centuries. The beginning of the period is identified with the start of the Viking invasions, and cultural, social and economic changes in Scandinavia and the Baltic region, while the end is linked to the beginning of Lithuania’s transition into a state. Thus, the main subject of the book is the region of central Lithuania in the Viking period. The author also pays much attention to the Roman period, represented by abundant cemeteries from the time. One more factor is favourable: most of them are already explored. The rich material culture of the region shows that local communities were involved in regional activity, due to which the inhabitants of the Kaunas area are attached to the cultural circle of the eastern Balts. The author presumes that the inhabitants of the Kaunas area and the eastern Balts are akin to each other. Abundant imported articles (bronze and silver) prove that trading relations were active. The author tries to imagine the possible items of trade. Probably he liked the idea of Wojciech Nowakowski that the population of central Lithuania could be importing items which the inhabit- ants of the Lower Vistula, directly connected with the “amber trade-route”, were short of. The assumption is made that these could be slaves. Shortly after, he notes logically that we lack arguments for the above assumption. At the same time, he thinks that a wellarmed community could maraud and capture people from neighbouring tribes. It is hard to agree with this assumption, in particular when we know that brass articles are also abundant among the other Baltic communities. According to this assumption by the author, the latter also “captured people from other tribes” to turn them into slaves and to sell. Thus, it would mean that slaves from the Baltic world came in large numbers. This kind of “abundance” would be described in written sources from the period. We have the opposite. A significant part of the book is devoted to the cultural particularity of the region, including the development of cremation traditions and ritual horse offering, as one of the attributes characterising central Lithuania. The author employs a wide range of material from cemeteries in central Lithuania, but the most attention is paid to Marvelė cemetery, where he explored over 400 cremations. He tries to answer the question, where the cremation tradition in central Lithuania came from. Was it from the east, as R. Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė presumes (Lietuvių tautybės ištakos. Archeologijos duomenys. In: Lietuvių etnogenezė. Vilnius, 1987, p. 155), or southwest Europe, as proposed by A. Tautavičius (A. Tautavičius. Archeologinės kultūrinės sritys. In: Lietuvių etnogenezė. Vilnius, 1987, p. 136,139)? The author is inclined to believe it came from the west Baltic tribes, firstly from the Sudovians and the Przeworsk cultural region (p. 71). The book emphasises the particularity of central Lithuania. The author thinks that around modern-day Kaunas, in Viking times, an administrative centre and a marketplace, where different cultures intersected, could have existed, though at the same time he admits that such a centre has not yet been identified archaeologically. The author’s contemplations about the region of central Lithuania on the eve of the formation of the state are interesting. He envisages all kinds of preconditions for the appearance of the state in the 11th and 12th centuries (the hierarchical structure of settlements, specialised handicrafts, the professional military structure); BALTICA 6 ARCHAELOGIA that is to say, this is already the first step, according to the author, on the way to the formation of the state. He also insists upon the Vikings’ role in the appearance of such a structure. In previous literature the attitude dominated that the example of ancient Russia was very significant for the appearance of Lithuania as a state (R. Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė. Lietuviai IX-XIIa. Vilnius, 1970, p. 44). Isn’t the trend of an “example” in the formation of a state becoming a matter of fashion? It is evident that such a finding could be disputed. Central Lithuania, that is, the Upland Lithuanians, was not the only tribe to be very close to founding a state in the 11th and 12th centuries. Almost all the Baltic tribes in this period were close to it, but only one of them made the fateful step. Bertašius’ book is the first, and, I would say, a successful study about the prehistory of this region. I think it will be acknowledged by the academic community, young people studying, and everyone who is interested in their own history. Ilona Vaškevičiūtė Lithuanian Institute of History Department of Archaeology Kražių 5, LT-01108 Vilnius, Lithuania e-mail: [email protected] 215 REVIEW A r c h a e o l o g i a L i t u a n a A r c h a e o l o g i a L i t u a n a . V o l s . 1 - 3 , Vi l n i u s , 1 9 9 9 , 2 0 0 1 , 2 0 0 2 The first volume of Archaeologia Lituana, launched by the Department of Archaeology at Vilnius University in 1999, did not surprise the archaeological community in Lithuania. It had to happen. The department is the only base in Lithuania for training archaeologists, and one of the strongest with respect to its scientific potential. It has seven highly qualified employees, doctors of science, including two professors and three associate professors. Therefore, such an edition for this department is both necessary and obligatory. Three volumes of Archaeologia Lituana have already reached its readers. It is totally shaped and formed by now, and takes its place among other publications advocating Lithuanian archaeology. I would like to introduce it briefly to the readers of Archaeologia Baltica too. The editorial staff of Archaeologia Lituana consists of Mykolas Michelbertas (senior editor, Vilnius University), Aleksiejus Luchtanas (deputy senior editor, Vilnius University), Violeta Vasiliauskienė (managing editor, Vilnius University), and the members Wojciech Nowakowski (Warsaw University), Adolfas Tautavičius (Castle Research Centre, Vilnius), Albinas Kuncevičius (Vilnius University), Jonas Stankus (Lithuanian Institute of History), and Indrė Antanaitis-Jacobs (Vilnius University). A r c h a e o l o g i a L i t u a n a . Vo l . 1 . Vi l n i u s , 1999, 232 p. 216 This volume was intended for the publication of material from the international conference “Reading Jonas Puzinas”, held in 1996. It begins with an introduction by Mykolas Michelbertas, where he presents the concept, aims and objectives of the publication. Aleksiejus Luchtanas introduces archaeological science and its development at Vilnius University from 1919 to 1989, when the independent Lithuanian state was restored. The second article by Luchtanas and V. Sidrys analyses the spread of bronze in the Eastern Baltic region in the years before Christ. The authors conclude that the import of bronze to the Eastern Baltic started from the 16th century BC. Local amber merchandise greatly stimulated its import. Michelbertas, in a short article, analyses Roman-period barbed spearheads discovered in Lithuania. R. Banytė looks at the analysis and dating of finds from two rich burials in the old Iron Age cemetery discovered in Baitai in the Klaipėda region. M. Karczewski analyses the chronology of burials with weaponry discovered in the Paprotki Kolonii cemetery belonging to the Bogaczew culture and dated to the end of the Roman Period and the beginning of the Great Migration. Wojciech Nowakowski discusses chronology issues of the late Roman and great migration periods in the Klaipėda region, on the basis of material from the Aukštkiemiai (Oberhof) cemetery. He manages to identify three chronological periods in the cemetery: the first period around 150–250, on the basis of discovered Roman coins, pins with rosettes and profiled heads, neck-rings with cone-shaped and coiled wire terminals, and shielded brooches; the second period around 250–300, on the basis of late versions of crossbow brooches with a bent foot from the fourth Almgren group, and bracelets with thickened terminals; the third period on the basis of late crossbow brooches with a bent foot, neck-rings and bracelets from moulded wire, and buckles with methopic tongues. A. Astrauskas, G. Gleiznienė and V. Šimėnas write about shoulder-belts, which are very rare in the Baltic lands. They analyse their construction and manufacturing technique, chronology, use and social issues. In her research, Audronė Bliujienė analyses Curonian male and female ornaments from the eighth to the 11th centuries, treating them as part of global patterns. She also reviews the world outlook of men and women in the different types of ornaments they wore. Vytautas Kazakevičius analyses imported E-type spearheads with decorated sockets which are discovered in the Baltic area. He also discusses their chronology and origins. He finally concludes that these spearheads are imported, originate from Scandinavia, and date from the Viking period. V. Kulakow reviews the Baltic focus of Viking movements via traditions of ethnic diffusion and art. He defines the ethno-cultural situation which emerged in the Eastern Baltic region, and determines the rather peaceful character of Viking movements in the Baltic, Slavonic and Finno-Ugric lands. The first volume finishes with book reviews and a chronicle of the research world. In the section entitled “Discussions, debates”, Mykolas Michelbertas criticises Raymond Sidrys’ article on the state of Lithuanian archaeology. In the section for reviews, a survey is made of new books. In the section “Chronicle of research”, a review of research activity for 1998–1999 in the Department of Archaeology of Vilnius University is presented. BALTICA 6 This volume starts with an article by M. Hoffman about the genesis and typology of the barrows of the western Balts in the early Iron Age. According to the author, at least 470 barrow cemeteries, with 1,450 barrows, are known. In all, 423 of them (28%) from 184 cemeteries are already explored. Eight types are identified. Aleksiejus Luchtanas analyses the extinction of brushed pottery culture in the Neris basin (on the basis of material from Kernavė hill-forts and settlements). His key finding is that the second quarter of the first millennium AD is to be treated as the beginning of a new barrow culture in east Lithuania, that people of the brushed pottery culture were not the direct predecessors of the new east Lithuanian culture, when the new culture started developing. R. Banytė-Rowell analyses the peculiarities of burial rites in western Lithuania in the late Roman Period. According to her, west Lithuanian cemeteries with stone circles continue the tradition of the previous period of equipping graves with plenty of stones. The Latvian archaeologist J. Ciglis, in his article, revises the chronology of some Lettigallian and Selonian articles from the mid-Iron Age. A. Radiņš analyses Lettigallian burial rites and items from the tenth to the 13th centuries. The numismatist V. Smilgevičius describes Prague mites in the Labanoras hoard from the collections of Lithuanian museums. ontological and craniological analysis of material from the cemetery. Due to the poor condition of the remains of bone, material from five graves only was investigated. Audronė Bliujienė and D. Butkus present material from a warrior’s grave of the seventh century, discovered in Lazdininkai (Kalnalaukis) in the Kretinga region. According to the authors, it is a grave equipped with rich burial items, belonging to a man of a high social position. R. Beganskaitė and S. Satkūnaitė discuss practical conservation aspects regarding grave goods from the grave of the first half of the seventh century in Lazdininkai (Kalnalaukis) cemetery. Vytautas Kazakevičius analyses a rare 11th-century spearhead with a silvery socket, discovered in Vilkija in the Kaunas region. He introduces the circumstances of the discovery, analogies and origins. L. Kurila writes about reflections of social relations in material from cremations discovered in barrows of eastern Lithuania. The main conclusion of his article is that a thorough analysis of osteological material could assist in answering some questions connected with the world outlook, and sexual and inter-generation relations. A. Simniškytė analyses the chronological and structural changes of the Juodoniai (Rokiškis region) hill-fort settlement. She also tries to clarify the course of the formation of the cultural layer, and identifies three chronological stages of it. ARCHAELOGIA A r c h a e o l o g i a L i t u a n a . Vo l . 2 . Vi l n i u s , 2001, 159 p. In the section for discussions and debates Aleksiejus Luchtanas and G. Vėlius discuss with G. Zabiela cremation traditions in east Lithuania in the 13th and 14th centuries. At the end of the volume, a survey is made of new books. Vytautas Kazakevičius A r c h a e o l o g i a L i t u a n a . Vo l . 3 . Vi l n i u s , 2002, 171 p. This volume starts with a publication by a young archaeologist ,G. Grinevičiūtė, about the fourth Stone Age settlement in Gribaša in the Varėna region. The material discovered in it is dated to the Late Palaeolithic/Late Neolithic periods. Mykolas Michelbertas, in his article, summarises the results of his explorations in Gintarai, in the Kretinga region, in the period 1977 to 1981. It is an old Iron Age cemetery, with 25 graves from the second to the fifth centuries. E. PečeliūnaitėBazienė analyses the remains of fabric from the same Gintarai cemetery. The author found that wool dominates among the materials. The soil conditions for vegetal threads are unfavourable, so linen was not discovered. The anthropologist A. Barkus presents an od- 217 REVIEW M. Michelbertas. Corpus der Römischen Funde im Europäischen Barbaricum. Litauen M . M i c h elberta s . C o r p u s d er r ö m i s c h e n F u n d e i m e u r o p ä i s c h e n B a rb a r i c u m . L i ta u e n . Vi l n i u s : U n i v e r s i t ä t Vi l n i u s , L e h r s t u h l f ü r A r c h ä o l o g i e , 2 0 0 1 . 6 8 S . Ta f . 11 , K a r t e Books by Lithuanian authors in a foreign language are rare in the archaeological world. Feeling more as inhabitants of a European province rather than patriots of our own country, we still hesitate to present the results of our research in other languages which are popular and widely used in the international academic community. A welcome exception is this new study, which has recently reached its readers. The author is a famous Lithuanian archaeologist, head of the Department of Archaeology at Vilnius University, Professor Mykolas Michelbertas, who has dedicated all his scientific talent to old Iron Age exploration, collecting in driblets, and accumulating information about the seemingly distant Roman Empire, its provinces and the relations of the Baltic tribes with it. He has produced over 350 scientific and popular articles, and several large studies on the exploration of archaeological monuments. All known artefacts of Roman material culture (over 100 items), and around 1,000 coins from the Roman Empire, discovered in Lithuanian archaeological sites (barrow cemeteries and burial grounds, hill-forts, settlements and hoards) are collected and presented in his book. These abundant and very valuable archaeological sources are registered, analysed and interpreted, and are presented to all researchers involved in studies on “barbarian” European countries. Consequently, the author presents the material in German, providing it with exhaustive explanations, as some material could be problematic for a wider circle of German readers to perceive, though it is routine for our archaeologists. This book is a part of a big international scientific project, which also involves other European countries that were not a part of the Roman Empire but experienced its direct cultural and economic influence. This is European Barbaricum or Germania libera. Modern Lithuania, a remote backwater of the European barbarian world in those days, is one such area. The structure of the book is well balanced and arranged logically. It consists of a preface, an introduction, a catalogue, a list of localities, pictures and a map. The idea of the book and the story of its birth are dis ������������������������������������������������� A. Tautavičius. Mykolo Michelberto bibliografija ������ (1961– 1998). 218 cussed in the preface, naming the people directly concerned and the financial sources. The first written sources by ancient historians about the Aistians are presented in the introduction. Readers are introduced to Germania by Tacitus, familiar to all archaeologists and researchers of ancient times, in which he provides information about the territories and lifestyle of the Aistians (Balts), and about facts from Pliny on direct trading relations with the Roman Empire and the amber route, which existed for a few centuries. Due to this route, the names of Aistian tribes became familiar and are mentioned separately in subsequent written sources. These are the Galindians, Sudovians and Selonians. Readers are introduced to the term “Balts”, which was proposed by the German linguist Georg Nesselmann in the middle of the 19th century. It is followed by a short introduction to former ethnic-cultural areas in modern Lithuania. Explanations to the book are put in a separate chapter. They provide us with information about the administrative division of Lithuania, including the names of district centres and regions, about the introduction of the exploration and collection of archaeological artefacts, the beginning of professional museology, and the fate of collections (in particular from western Lithuania) during the Second World War and after it. The author analyses the population of modern Lithuania, and its expansion since the beginning of the Iron Age. Numbers of imported articles increased together with the increase in the population. Artefacts are more abundant in sites where the population density is higher. This chapter provides a list of references, abbreviations and tables of illustrations. The catalogue makes up the largest part of the book. It is designed on the basis of the latest administrative division of the Republic of Lithuania – the districts and regions. It will be useful for researchers, as some foreign archaeologists have a poor understanding of the division and the smaller territorial units of the country. A lot of room is given to the coins of the Roman Empire. Alongside glass and enamel beads, they make up the largest part of finds. At the moment, over 100 find sites, with over 1,000 Roman coins, have been discov- The book is provided with one specific chapter which is not usually typical of similar publications. It is dedicated to Lithuanian transcription. No doubt, this is a positive feature of the book, as foreign scholars distort the place-names beyond recognition, having no idea how to read them properly. BALTICA 6 The catalogue introduces other spare artefacts of Roman origin, including the circumstances of their finding, dates, thorough descriptions of artefacts and other items discovered together, references and conservation sites. ARCHAELOGIA ered in Lithuania. It was not difficult for the author to arrange a catalogue of coins, as an article by him on the subject has recently appeared. He draws the attention of readers to the fact that Roman coins in graves are typical of the cemeteries of the western Balts. It separates them from other analogous monuments of barbarian Europe. The book is illustrated with pictures professionally drawn by I. Maciukaitė. Unfortunately, they are not too numerous. It would have been worth introducing more pictures of items, despite their poor condition. This book is valuable for several aspects: 1) material about the Iron Age in Lithuania has never before been presented so broadly to readers in a foreign language; 2) it penetrates a pan-European readership, and assists in the better understanding of the economic-cultural influence of the Roman Empire on the Baltic tribes. Henceforth, the Baltic area will no longer remain a blank spot on the archaeological map of European cultures. It is hard to evaluate critically the work of a person who has spent all his life, consistently and purposefully, exploring the material culture of the Iron Age in Lithuania. This is a professional and mature work; therefore, we can only express our admiration regarding the accuracy of Professor Michelbertas, and wish him further success in researching his favourite area. Vytautas Kazakevičius ������������������������������������������������������ Michelbertas M., Römische Münzen in der Gräberfeldern Litauens. In: Archaeologia Baltica. Vilnius, 1995 81–87. 219 Guidelines for Authors Guidelines for Authors Archaeologia Baltica is a semiannual academic refereed journal published in English about the archaeology of the regions around the Baltic Sea, with the focus on the eastern shore of the Baltic. The editorial policy is to publish a wide range of contributions in all fields of archaeology related to the Baltic Sea region, from methodology to synthesis and theory. These may take the form of substantial research papers (up to 8,000 words) or shorter research reports. Short papers may include, for instance, new techniques, philosophical discussions, current controversies and suggestions for new research, as well as conventional research papers. Review or overview papers are welcome, as long as they are sufficiently critical, succinct and make a conceptual contribution to the field. The submission of a paper will be held to imply that it represents an original article, not previously published, and that it is not being considered for publication elsewhere. Separate volumes publish the material of international conferences concerned with archaeological research in the Baltic Sea region. Articles for Archaeologia Baltica should be typed in English, double-spaced on A4 paper, with at least 30millimetre margins. Submitted articles must include: • the name(s) and address(es) of the author(s), as well as an abstract of up to 100 words, and up to eight key words; • a summary up to an eighth of the length of the whole text, for translation into Lithuanian; • captions for figures and tables supplied separately and appended to the disc copy of the text, and labelling on figures, in publishable form. Three hard copies and a computer version (in Word for Windows) of contributions must be submitted to the managing editor. Computer-generated drawings must be provided in hard copy and digital format (EPS or TIFF). References should be arranged using the Harvard citing system (see http://bournemouth.ac.uk/library/using/harvard_system.html). References in Cyrillic should be transcribed into Roman letters according to the following system: 220 Cyrillic Roman Cyrillic Roman а�a б�b в�v г�g д�d е�e ё�e ж zh �� з z� и�i й�i к� k л�l м� m н� n о� o п� p р�r с�� s�’ т�t у� u ф�f Cyrillic Roman х�� kh ц�� ts ч�� ch ш�� sh щ���� shch ъ ” ы� y ь’ э�e ю�� iu я�� ia Footnotes and endnotes should be avoided if at all possible. Authors will be contacted by one of the editorial team. Articles will be submitted to two referees and to a professional language reviser. Manuscripts will then be returned with comments. After the completion of suggested changes (the computer version should be corrected too), a new manuscript should be sent to the editors for distribution. Text proofs of papers will be provided to authors, to which only minor corrections will be allowed. Three free copies of Archaeologia Baltica and ten reprints of each paper will normally be supplied to the authors. More detailed information is available from the editors. Contact us at: Klaipėda University, Institute of Baltic Sea Region History and Archaelogy Tilžės 13, LT-91251 Klaipėda, Lithuania Tel +370-46-410190 Fax +370-5-2440643 e-mail: [email protected]