Jump to content

Urnfield culture

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected fromUrnfield)
Urnfield culture
Geographical rangeEurope
PeriodLate Bronze Age
Datesc. 1300–750 BC
Major sitesBurgstallkogel (Sulm valley),Ipf (mountain),Ehrenbürg
Preceded byTumulus culture,Vatya culture,Encrusted Pottery culture,Vatin culture,Terramare culture,Apennine culture,Noua culture,Ottomány culture
Followed byHallstatt culture,Lusatian culture,Proto-Villanovan culture,Villanovan culture,Canegrate culture,Golasecca culture,Este culture,Luco culture,Iron Age France,Iron Age Britain,Iron Age Iberia,Basarabi culture,Cimmerians,Thracians,Dacians,Iron Age Greece
Bronze Age
Europe (c. 3200– 600 BC)
Aegean(Cycladic,Minoan,Mycenaean),Bronze Age Balkans

Vučedol culture,Nagyrév culture,Ottomány culture,Wietenberg culture,Vatya culture

Bell Beaker culture,Únětice culture,Nordic Bronze Age,Tumulus culture,Urnfield culture

Bronze Age Britain,Bronze Age France,Armorican Tumulus culture,Bronze Age Iberia,Argaric culture,Hilversum culture,Atlantic Bronze Age

Nuragic civilization,Polada culture,Terramare culture,Proto-Villanovan culture,Apennine culture,Canegrate culture,Golasecca culture

Bronze Age Caucasus,Catacomb culture,Poltavka culture,Abashevo culture,Sintashta culture,Andronovo culture,Multi-cordoned ware culture,Srubnaya culture

TheUrnfield culture(c. 1300–750 BC) was a lateBronze Ageculture ofCentral Europe,often divided into several local cultures within a broaderUrnfield tradition.The name comes from the custom ofcrematingthe dead and placing their ashes inurns,which were then buried in fields. The first usage of the name occurred in publications over grave sites in southern Germany in the late 19th century.[1][2]Over much of Europe, the Urnfield culture followed theTumulus cultureand was succeeded by theHallstatt culture.[3]Some linguists and archaeologists have associated this culture with apre-Celticlanguage orProto-Celticlanguage family.[4][5]By the end of the 2nd millennium BC, the Urnfield Tradition had spread through Italy, northwestern Europe, and as far west as the Pyrenees. It is at this time that fortified hilltop settlements and sheet‐bronze metalworking also spread widely across Europe, leading some authorities to equate these changes with the expansion of the Celts. These links are no longer accepted.[6][7][8]

Chronology[edit]

Central European Bronze Age
Late Bronze Age
Ha B2/3 800–950 BC
Ha B1 950–1050 BC
Ha A2 1050–1100 BC
Ha A1 1100–1200 BC
Bz D 1200–1300 BC
Middle Bronze Age
Bz C2 1300–1400 BC
Bz C1 1400–1500 BC
Bz B 1500–1600 BC
Early Bronze Age
Bz A2 1600–2000 BC
Bz A1 2000–2300 BC

It is believed that in some areas, such as in southwestern Germany, the Urnfield culture was in existence around 1200 BC (beginning of Hallstatt A or Ha A), but the Bronze DRiegsee-phase already contains cremations. As the transition from the middleBronze Ageto the Urnfield culture was gradual, there are questions regarding how to define it.

The Urnfield culture covers the phases Hallstatt A and B (Ha A and B) inPaul Reinecke's chronological system, not to be confused with theHallstatt culture(Ha C and D) of the followingIron Age.This corresponds to the Phases Montelius III-IV of the Northern Bronze Age. Whether Reinecke's Bronze D is included varies according to author and region.

The Urnfield culture is divided into the following sub-phases (based on Müller-Karpe sen.):

date BC
BzD 1300–1200
Ha A1 1200–1100
Ha A2 1100–1000
HaB1 1000–800
HaB2 900–800
Ha B3 800–750

The existence of the Ha B3-phase is contested, as the material consists of female burials only. As can be seen by the arbitrary 100-year ranges, the dating of the phases is highly schematic. The phases are based on typological changes, which means that they do not have to be strictly contemporaneous across the whole distribution. All in all, more radiocarbon and dendro-dates would be highly desirable.

Origin[edit]

Europe in the late Bronze Age.

The Urnfield culture grew from the precedingTumulus culture.[3]The transition is gradual, in thepotteryas well as the burial rites.[3]In some parts of Germany, cremation and inhumation existed simultaneously (facies Wölfersheim). Some graves contain a combination of Tumulus-culture pottery and Urnfieldswords(Kressbronn, Bodenseekreis) or Tumulus culture incised pottery together with early Urnfield types (Mengen). In the North, the Urnfield culture was only adopted in the HaA2 period. 16 pins deposited in a swamp in Ellmoosen (Kr. Bad Aibling, Germany) cover the whole chronological range from Bronze B to the early Urnfield period (Ha A). This demonstrates a considerable ritual continuity. In theLoire,Seine,andRhône,certain fords contain deposits from the late Neolithic onward up to the Urnfield period.

The origins of the cremation rite are commonly believed to be inHungary,where it was widespread since the first half of the second millennium BC.[9]The neolithicCucuteni–Trypillia cultureof modern-day northeasternRomaniaandUkrainewere also practicing cremation rituals as early as approximately 5500 BC. Some cremations begin to be found in theProto-LusatianandTrzciniec culture.

Distribution and local groups[edit]

Urnfield culture bronzecuirasse,helmets and ornaments

The Urnfield culture was located in an area stretching from western Hungary to eastern France, from theAlpsto near the North Sea. Local groups, mainly differentiated by pottery, include:

South-German Urnfield culture

Lower-Rhine Urnfield culture

  • Lower Hessian Group
  • North-Netherlands-Westphalian group
  • Northwest-Group in the Dutch Delta region

Middle-Danube Urnfield culture

Urnfield culture, bronzesitulawith bird-headedsun shipmotif,Hungary,c. 1000 BC.[10][11]

Sometimes the distribution of artifacts belonging to these groups shows sharp and consistent borders, which might indicate some political structures, like tribes. Metalwork is commonly of a much more widespread distribution than pottery and does not conform to these borders. It may have been produced at specialised workshops catering for the elite of a large area.

Important French cemeteries include Châtenay andLingolsheim(Alsace). An unusual earthwork was constructed atGoloringnearKoblenzinGermany.

Related cultures[edit]

The central EuropeanLusatian cultureforms part of the Urnfield tradition, but continues into theIron Agewithout a notable break.

ThePiliny culturein northernHungaryandSlovakiagrew from theTumulus culture,but used urn burials as well. The pottery shows strong links to theGáva culture,but in the later phases, a strong influence of the Lusatian culture is found.

Villanovan cinerary urnwith sun-bird-ship motifs, Italy, 8th century BC.
Bronze shield from Denmark with sun-bird-ship motifs,Nordic Bronze Age,c. 1100-700 BC.[13][14][15][16]

InItalythe late Bronze AgeCanegrateandProto-Villanovancultures and the early Iron AgeVillanovan cultureshow similarities with the urnfields of central Europe. The Italic peoples are descended from the Urnfield andTumulus culture,who inhabited Italy from at least the second millennium BC onwards.Latinsachieved a dominant position among these tribes, establishing theancient Roman civilization.During this development, other Italic tribes adopted theLatinlanguage and culture in a process known asRomanization.[17][18]

Urnfields are found in the FrenchLanguedocandCataloniafrom the 9th to 8th centuries. The change in burial custom was most probably influenced by developments further east.

Evidence for an association between the Urnfield culture and a hypotheticalItalo-Celtic languagegroup has been discussed by scholars such asPeter Schrijver.[4]

Placename evidence has also been used to point to an association of the Urnfield materials with theProto-Celticlanguage group in central Europe, and it has been argued that it was the ancestral culture of theCelts.[19][20]The Urnfield layers of theHallstatt culture,"Ha A" and "Ha B", are succeeded by the Iron Age "Hallstatt period" proper: "Ha C" and "Ha D" (8th-6th centuries BC), associated with the early Celts; "Ha D" is in turn succeeded by theLa Tène culture,the archaeological culture associated with theContinental Celtsof antiquity.

TheGolasecca culturein northern Italy developed with continuity from the Canegrate culture.[21][22]Canegrate represented a completely new cultural dynamic to the area expressed in pottery and bronzework, making it a typical western example of the Urnfield culture, in particular the Rhine-Switzerland-Eastern France (RSFO) Urnfield culture.[21][22]TheLepontic Celtic languageinscriptions of the area show the language of the Golasecca culture was clearlyCelticmaking it probable that the 13th-century BC language of at least the RSEF area of the western urnfields was also Celtic or a precursor to it.[21][22]

The influence of the Urnfield culture spread widely and found its way to the northeasternIberiancoast, where the nearbyCeltiberiansof the interior adapted it for use in their cemeteries.[23]Evidence for east-to-west early Urnfield (Bronze D-Hallstatt A) elite contacts such as rilled-ware, swords and crested helmets has been found in the southwest of the Iberian peninsula.[24]The appearance of such elite status markers provides the simplest explanation for the spread of Celtic languages in this area from prestigious, proto-Celtic, early-Urnfield metalworkers.[24]

Migrations[edit]

Urnfield culture sword and helmet,Romania

The numerous hoards of the Urnfield culture and the existence of fortified settlements (hill forts) were taken as evidence for widespread warfare and upheaval by some scholars.

Depiction of theSea Peopleswith bird-headed ship.Medinet Habu,Egypt.[25][26]

Written sources describe severalcollapses and upheavals in the Eastern Mediterranean, Anatolia and the Levant around the timeof the Urnfield origins:

Some scholars, among them Wolfgang Kimmig and P. Bosch-Gimpera have postulated a Europe-wide wave of migrations. The so-calledDorian invasionof Greece was placed in this context as well (although more recent evidence suggests that the Dorians moved in 1100 BC into a post Mycenaean vacuum, rather than precipitating the collapse).

Ethnicity[edit]

Gold necklace, Belgium, c. 1000 BC

The variety of regional groups belonging to this culture makes it possible to exclude the presence of ethnic uniformity.Marija Gimbutasconnected the various Central European regional groups to as many proto-populations:proto-Celts,proto-Italics,proto-Veneti,proto-Illyriansandproto-Phrygians(as well asproto-Thraciansandproto-Dorians), who would establish themselves later, through migrations, in their historic locations.[27][28]This migration (disputed by some) occurred during the period called late Bronze Age collapse and was perhaps caused by climate changes. Communities of peasants and herders, led by a warrior aristocracy, introduced the new rite of cremation, new ceramic styles and the mass production of metal objects as well as a new religion and Indo-European languages in various regions of Western and Southern Europe.[29]

Settlements[edit]

Ipf,Germany. The summit was levelled and fortified in the Urnfield period.[30][31]

The number of settlements increased sharply in comparison with the preceding Tumulus culture. Few of them have been comprehensively excavated. Fortified settlements, often on hilltops or in river-bends, are typical for the Urnfield culture. They are heavily fortified with dry-stone or wooden ramparts. Excavations of open settlements are rare, but they show that large 3-4 aisled houses built with wooden posts and wall ofwattle and daubwere common. Pit dwellings are known as well; they might have served as cellars.

Fortified settlements[edit]

Model of fortifications on theBullenheimer Berg.[32]

Fortified hilltop settlements become common in the Urnfield period. Often a steep spur was used, where only part of the circumference had to be fortified. Depending on the locally available materials, dry-stone walls, gridded timbers filled with stones or soil or plank and palisade typepfostenschlitzmauerfortifications were used. Other fortified settlements used river-bends and swampy areas.

Metal working is concentrated in the fortified settlements. On the Runder Berg near Urach, Germany, 25 stonemouldshave been found.

Hillforts are interpreted as central places. Some scholars see the emergence of hill forts as a sign of increased warfare. Most hillforts were abandoned at the end of the Bronze Age.

Examples of fortified settlements includeBullenheimer Berg,Ehrenbürg,Hünenburg bei Watenstedt,Heunischenburg,Hesselberg,Bürgstadter Berg,Farrenberg,Gelbe BurgandIpfin Germany,Burgstallkogel,Thunau am Kamp and Oberleiserberg in Austria,[33][34]Corentand Gannat[35]in France, Hořovice andPlešivecin the Czech Republic,Biskupinin Poland,Ormožin Slovenia,[12]Corneşti-Iarcuri,SântanaandTeleacin Romania,[36][37][38]Gradište Idoš in Serbia,[39]andVelemand Csanádpalota–Földvár in Hungary.[40]

The 30.5 ha plateau of theBullenheimer Bergin Germany was the site of a "large, walled, city-like fortification" in the later Urnfield period.[41]Excavations have revealed a dense settlement across the whole plateau, including courtyard-type buildings located on artificially raised terraces.[42]The fortified settlement on theEhrenbürg,also covering about 30 ha and surrounded by atimber and stone wall,was another regional centre and the residence of a regional elite.[42]At thehill fortof Hořovice near Beroun (Czech Republic), 50 ha were surrounded by a stone wall. Most settlements were much smaller however.

Hühnenburg bei Watenstedt,Germany

Corneşti-Iarcuriin Romania was the largest prehistoric settlement in Europe, at almost 6 km across,[43]with four fortification lines and an inner settlement with a diameter of c. 2 km. Magnetic mapping and excavations have indicated the existence of a well-organised settlement of proto-urban character during the Urnfield period. An estimated 824,00 tonnes of earth had to be moved for the construction of the fortification walls alone.[44][45]Magnetometric surveys atSântanahave revealed the existence of buildings with lengths exceeding 40 m, including a building approximately 60 m long and 40 m wide.[37]

Corneşti-Iarcuriramparts, Romania

"Mega forts" such as Corneşti-Iarcuri, Sântana and Gradište Idoš were surrounded by numerous smaller settlements, including fortified sites. They formed part of a general movement towards large fortified sites across Europe in the Late Bronze Age, possibly in response to new styles of warfare.[46][47]The general uniformity in design, material culture, and the density of settlements in Romania and Serbia at this time is indicative of societies that were organized under a common political framework.[39]Kristiansen and Suchowska-Ducke (2015) describe these mega-sites as "part of a political centralisation process, a complex chiefdom, or archaic state".[48]

In 2018 the remains of a Late Bronze Age 'feasting hall' were excavated at the site ofLăpuşin Romania.[49]

Open settlements[edit]

Urnfield period houses were one or two-aisled. Some were quite small, 4.5 m × 5 m at theRunder Berg(Urach,Germany), 5-8m long in Künzig (Bavaria, Germany), others up to 20 m long. They were built with wooden posts and walls of wattle and daub. At the Velatice-settlement ofLovčičky(Moravia,Czech Republic) 44 houses have been excavated. Large bell shaped storage pits are known from theKnovíz culture.The settlement ofRadonice(Louny) contained over 100 pits. They were most probably used to store grain and demonstrate a considerable surplus-production.

Pile dwellings[edit]

On lakes of southern Germany and Switzerland, numerouspile dwellingswere constructed. They consist either of simple houses made of wattle and daub, orlog-built.The settlement atZug,Switzerland, was destroyed by fire and gives important insights into the material culture and the settlement organisation of this period. It has yielded a number ofdendro-datesas well.

Material culture[edit]

Late Bronze Age swords,Switzerland,c. 10th century BC.Cantonal Museum of Archeology and History

Pottery[edit]

The pottery is normally well made, with a smooth surface and a normally sharply carinated profile. Some forms are thought to imitate metal prototypes. Biconical pots with cylindrical necks are especially characteristic. There is some incised decoration, but a large part of the surface was normally left plain. Fluted decoration is common. In the Swiss pile dwellings, the incised decoration was sometimes inlaid withtin foil. Pottery kilnswere already known (Elchinger Kreuz, Bavaria), as is indicated by the homogeneous surface of the vessels as well. Other vessels include cups of beaten sheet-bronzewith riveted handles (type Jenišovice) and largecauldronswith cross attachments. Wooden vessels have only been preserved in waterlogged contexts, for example from Auvernier (Neuchâtel), but may have been quite widespread.

Tools and weapons[edit]

Urnfield period warrior,Hungary.[51]
Bronze cuirasses fromMarmesseinFrance,9th century BC.[52]National Archaeological Museum, France

The early Urnfield period (1300 BC) was a time when the warriors of central Europe could be heavily armored with body armor, helmets and shields all made of bronze, most likely borrowing the idea fromMycenaean Greece.[53]

Urnfield warrior,France,illustration (1910)

The leaf-shaped Urnfieldswordcould be used for slashing, in contrast to the stabbing-swords of the preceding Tumulus culture. It commonly possessed aricasso.Thehiltwas normally made from bronze as well. It was cast separately and consisted of a different alloy. These solid hilted swords were known since Bronze D (Rixheim swords). Other swords have tanged blades and probably had a wood, bone, or antler hilt. Flange-hilted swords had organic inlays in the hilt. Swords include Auvernier, Kressborn-Hemigkofen, Erbenheim, Möhringen, Weltenburg, Hemigkofen and Tachlovice-types.

Protective gear likeshields,cuirasses,greavesandhelmetsare rare and almost never found in burials. The best-known example of a bronze shield comes fromPlzeňin Bohemia and has a riveted handhold. Comparable pieces have been found in Germany, Western Poland, Denmark, Great Britain and Ireland. They are supposed to have been made in upper Italy or theEastern Alpsand imitate wooden shields. Irish bogs have yielded examples of leather shields (Clonbrinn, Co. Wexford). Bronze cuirasses are known since Bronze D (Čaka,grave II, Slovakia).

Complete bronze cuirasses have been found in Saint Germain du Plain, nine examples, one inside the other, in Marmesse, Haute Marne (France), fragments in Albstadt-Pfeffingen (Germany). Bronze dishes (phalerae) may have been sewn on a leather armour. Greaves of richly decorated sheet-bronze are known from Kloštar Ivanić (Croatia) and the Paulus cave nearBeuron(Germany).

Chariots and wagons[edit]

Further information:Chariot
One of a pair of bronze chariot wheels from Arokalja in Romania,c. 13th-12th centuries BC[54]

About a dozenwagon-burials of four wheeled wagons with bronze fittings are known from the early Urnfield period. They include Hart an der Altz (Kr. Altötting), Mengen (Kr. Sigmaringen), Poing (Kr. Ebersberg), Königsbronn (Kr. Heidenheim) from Germany and St. Sulpice (Vaud), Switzerland. In Alz, the chariot had been placed on the pyre, and pieces of bone are attached to the partially melted metal of the axles. Bronze (one-part)bitsappear at the same time. Two-part horse bits are only known from late Urnfield contexts and may be due to eastern influence. Wood- and bronze spoked wheels are known fromStade(Germany), a wooden spoked wheel from Mercurago, Italy. Wooden dish-wheels have been excavated at Courcelettes, Switzerland and theWasserburg Buchau,Germany (diameter 80 cm). InMilavčenearDomažlice,Bohemia,a four-wheeled miniature bronze wagon bearing a largecauldron(diameter 30 cm) contained a cremation. This exceptionally rich burial was covered by abarrow.The wagon fromAcholshausen(Bavaria) comes from a male burial.

Such wagons are known from theNordic Bronze Ageas well. TheSkallerup wagon,Denmark, contained a cremation as well. AtPeckatel(Kr. Schwerin) inMecklenburga cauldron-wagon and other rich grave goods accompanied an inhumation under a barrow (MonteliusIII/IV). Another example comes fromYstadin Sweden. South-eastern European examples include Kanya in Hungary andOrăştiein Romania. Clay miniature wagons, sometimes with waterfowl, were known there since the middle Bronze Age (Dupljaja,Vojvodina, Serbia).

TheLusatianchariot fromBurg(Brandenburg,Germany) has threewheelson a singleaxle,on which waterfowl perch. The grave ofGammertingen(Kr. Sigmaringen, Germany) contained two socketed horned applications that probably belonged to a miniature wagon comparable to the Burg example, together with six miniature spoked wheels.

Bronze spoked wheels fromHasslochandStade(in Germany) have been described as "the most ambitious craft endeavour of all Bronze Age bronze objects",[55]representing "the highest achievement of prehistoric bronze casters in non-Greek Europe... In terms of casting technique, they are on a par with the casting of a Greek bronze statue."[56]

  • Urn with chariot depictions, Slovakia, 14th century BC.[57]
    Urn with chariot depictions,Slovakia,14th century BC.[57]
  • Cult chariot model from Dupljaja, Serbia, c. 1300 BC.[58]
    Cult chariot model fromDupljaja,Serbia,c. 1300 BC.[58]
  • Bronze cult wagon model from Acholshausen in Germany c. 1000 BC.[59]
    Bronze cult wagon model fromAcholshausenin Germanyc. 1000 BC.[59]
  • Bronze cult wagon model from Orăştie in Romania.[60]
    Bronze cult wagon model fromOrăştiein Romania.[60]
  • Bronze wheels from Hassloch in Germany, 900-800 BC
    Bronze wheels fromHasslochin Germany, 900-800 BC
  • Bronze wheel from Stade, Germany, c. 1000 BC
    Bronze wheel fromStade,Germany,c. 1000 BC
  • Bronze wheels from Stade, Germany, c. 1000 BC
    Bronze wheels from Stade, Germany,c. 1000 BC
  • Chariot horse harness parts from Karbow, Germany.[61][62]
    Chariot horse harness parts from Karbow, Germany.[61][62]

Hoards[edit]

Hoardsare very common in the Urnfield culture. The custom was abandoned at the end of the Bronze Age. They were often deposited in rivers and wet places like swamps. As these spots were often quite inaccessible, they most probably represent gifts to the gods. Other hoards contain either broken or miscast objects that were probably intended for reuse by bronze smiths. As Late Urnfield hoards often contain the same range of objects as earlier graves, some scholars interpret hoarding as a way to supply personal equipment for the hereafter. In the river Trieux,Côtes du Nord,complete swords were found together with numerous antlers of red deer that may have had a religious significance as well.

Iron[edit]

Bronze ornament with iron rivets,c. 1200 BC[63]

Anironknife or sickle from Ganovce in Slovakia, possibly dating from the 18th century BC, may be the earliest evidence of smelted iron in Central Europe.[64]Other early finds include an iron ring from Vorwohlde (Germany) dating from c. the 15th century BC (Reinecke B),[65]and an iron chisel from Heegermühle (Germany) dating fromc. 1000 BC.[66][67]During the late Bronze Age, iron was used to decorate the hilts of swords (Schwäbisch-Hall-Gailenkirchen, Unterkrumbach, Kr. Hersbruck), knives (Dotternhausen,Plettenberg,Germany), pins and some other ornaments. The Carpathian Basin was an early centre of iron technology, with iron artefacts dating from the 10th century BC, and possibly as early as the 12th century BC.[64]Regular use of iron for weapons and tools in Central Europe began with theHallstatt culture.

Economy[edit]

Cattle, pigs, sheep and goats were kept, as well as horses, dogs andgeese.Thecattlewere rather small, with a height of 1.20 m at thewithers.Horses were not much bigger with a mean of 1.25 m.

Weighing equipment from Germany, France and Britain, c. 1200-1000 BC

Forest clearancewas intensive in the Urnfield period. Probably open meadows were created for the first time, as shown bypollen analysis.This led to increasederosionand sediment-load of the rivers. New crops and more intensive agrarian regimes are introduced, transforming landscapes on a large scale.[68]

Left: High-status female, Slovakia.[51]Right: Urnfield culture dress (reconstruction).

Wheatandbarleywere cultivated, together withpulsesand thehorse bean.Poppy seedswere used for oil or as adrug.Milletandoatswere cultivated for the first time in Hungary and Bohemia, andryewas already cultivated; further west it was only a noxious weed.Flaxseems to have been of reduced importance, maybe because mainlywoolwas used for clothes. Hazel nuts,apples,pears,sloesandacornswere collected. Some rich graves contain bronzesievesthat have been interpreted aswine-sieves (Hart an der Alz). This beverage would have been imported from the South, but supporting evidence is lacking. In thelacustrinesettlement of Zug, remains of a broth made ofspeltandmillethave been found. In the lower-Rhine urnfields, leavenedbreadwas often placed on the pyre and burnt fragments have thus been preserved.

Wool was spun (finds ofspindle whorlsare common) and woven on thewarp-weighted loom;bronze needles (Unteruhldingen) were used forsewing.

Weighing scaleswere used for trade and weighed metal was used as a form of payment or money.[69][70][71][72]Bronzesicklesare also thought to have served as a form ofcommodity money.[73]

There is some suggestion that the Urnfield culture is associated with a wetter climatic period than the earlier Tumulus cultures. This may be associated with the diversion of the mid-latitude winter storms north of the Pyrenees and the Alps, possibly associated with drier conditions in the Mediterranean basin.

Numerals[edit]

Further information:Frankleben hoard
The cast mark numeral system

Large hoards of sickles dating from the Bronze Age have been excavated across central Europe which feature a range of cast markings. An analysis of theFrankleben hoardand other sickle hoards from Germany dating from theTumulusand Urnfield periods found that markings on the sickles constitute a numeral system related to thelunar calendar.According to theHalle State Museum of Prehistory:

"Many sickles carry line-shaped markings. The scope and order of these brands follows a defined pattern. This sign language can be interpreted as a pre-form of a writing system. There are two types of symbols: line-shaped marks below the button and marks at the angle or at the base of the sickle body. The archaeologist Christoph Sommerfeld examined the rules and realized that the casting marks are composed of one to nine ribs. After four left-hand, individually counted strokes there follows a bundle as a group of five on the right side. This creates a counting system that reaches to 29. The Synodic Moon orbit lasts 29 days or nights. This number and the lunar shape of the sickle suggest that the stroke groups should be interpreted as pages of a calendar, as a point in the monthly cycle. The sickle marks are the oldest known sign system in Central Europe."[74]

Some othersymbols or marksfound on the sickles[75]

The sickles also feature other marks or symbols which the archaeologist Christoph Sommmerfeld (1994) suggests may represent 'conceptual signs', or a type of proto-writing.[76]Markings on sickles and tools from across Bronze Age Europe have been interpreted by other authors as ownership marks, sign systems, number systems or "units of information" of unknown meaning.[75]

'Counting marks' have also been identified on bronze armrings and ingots from the Urnfield period, possibly related to trade. Similar markings found on pottery have been interpreted as serving a calendar function.[75]

Simple numerals in the form of lines and dots are found on identical 'ritual objects' from Haschendorf in Austria and Balkåkra in Sweden, which are thought to represent assembly instructions for the objects.[77]The decorated discs on both objects have been interpreted as solar calendars.[78]

The archaeologist Mikkel Hansen (2019) has suggested that the Urnfield sickle-numeral system may be related to 'hand signs' found amongpetroglyphsfrom theNordic Bronze Age,which may have a similar numerical and calendrical meaning.[79][80][81]

Golden hats[edit]

Main article:Golden hat
Berlin Gold Hat,Germany, c. 1000 BC

Four elaborate cone-shaped hats made from thin sheets of gold have been found in Germany and France dating from c. 1500-800 BC (theTumulus cultureto Urnfield period). They may have been worn as ceremonial hats by individuals described by researchers as "king-priests" ororacles.[82]

Thegold hatsare covered in bands of ornaments or symbols along their whole length and extent. The symbols – mostly disks and concentric circles, sometimes wheels, crescents, pointed oval shapes and triangles – were punched using stamps, rolls or combs. The discs and concentric circles are interpreted as solar and possibly lunar symbols.[83]

Symbols on the Berlin Hat

An analysis of theBerlin Gold Hatfound that the symbols numerically encode alunisolar calendarbased on the 19-yearMetonic cycle.[84][85][86][87]According toWilfried Menghin"The symbols on the hat are a logarithmic table which enables the movements of the sun and the moon to be calculated in advance."[82]Similar information is thought to be encoded on the hats fromEzelsdorf-Buch,SchifferstadtandAvanton.[87]

According to theNeues Museumthe Berlin Gold Hat could also be used to predictlunar eclipses.[88][89]Astronomers Rahlf Hansen and Christine Rink have argued that the Berlin hat encodes knowledge ofSaros lunar eclipse cycles.[90]Evidence for knowledge of these cycles is also known from the laterHallstatt period.[91]

The various ornaments on the Berlin hat include a band of 19 'star and crescent' symbols, placed above 19 pointed-oval symbols which are thought to represent the planetVenus.[92]Similar 'Venus' symbols are found on the gold hats from Ezelsdorf-Buch and Schifferstadt.[87]According to some researchers a Venus calendar is encoded on the gold hats.[93][94]

Circular symbols similar to those on the gold hats are also found on gold bowls dating from the Middle to Late Bronze Age, including those from theEberswalde hoard.Some of these are also thought to contain calendrical information.[95]

Astronomical and calendrical interpretations have been proposed for a variety of other decorated artefacts dating from the Middle to Late Bronze Age, including gold artefacts from theBullenheimer Bergin Germany,[96][97]a gold diadem fromVelemin Hungary,[98]gold appliqués fromLake Bledin Slovenia,[99]gold discs and a gold belt from the Czech Republic,[100][101][102]theTrundholm Sun Chariotfrom Denmark,[103][104]bronze discs from Germany and Denmark,[105][106][107]and bronze urns from Germany (includingSeddin,GevelinghausenandHerzberg), Denmark and Poland.[108]

The gold hats and diadems have also been linked to theCasco de Leirofrom Spain and theComerford Crownfrom Ireland,[109][110]as well as to gold diadems fromMycenaein Greece,[111]all of which bear similar symbols.

In his analysis of the Velem diadem, archaeologist Gabor Ilon writes: "high-ranking members of the elite in Bronze Age Europe were proud owners of gold foil-covered costume adornments and symbols of status and power as well as of golden vessels, objects of social display, decorated with an identical set of symbols... embodying what was presumably an identical and coherent spiritual background."[112]According to theMusée d'Archaeologie Nationale,"these precious and remarkably executed objects evoke a complex society, undoubtedly strictly hierarchical, with advanced technical and astronomical knowledge, organized around work in the fields".[113]

Gold diadem and discs fromVelem,Hungary, 14th-9th centuries BC.[112]

Funerary customs[edit]

Graves[edit]

Urns for ashes and dishes for grave offerings, Germany.

In the Tumulus period, multiple inhumations under barrows were common, at least for the upper levels of society. In the Urnfield period, inhumation and burial in singleflat gravesprevails, though some barrows exist.

Bronze urn fromGevelinghausen(Germany) with sun-bird-ship motifs.[116][117]

In the earliest phases of the Urnfield period, man-shaped graves were dug, sometimes provided with a stone lined floor, in which the cremated remains of the deceased were spread. Only later, burial in urns became prevalent. Some scholars speculate that this may have marked a fundamental shift in people's beliefs or myths about life and the afterlife.

Typical burial of cremation urn.

The size of the urnfields is variable. In Bavaria, they can contain hundreds of burials, while the largest cemetery inBaden-WürttemberginDautmergenhas only 30 graves. The dead were placed onpyres,covered in their personal jewellery, which often shows traces of the fire and sometimes food-offerings. The cremated bone-remains are much larger than in the Roman period, which indicates that less wood was used. Often, the bones have been incompletely collected. Most urnfields are abandoned with the end of the Bronze Age, only the Lower Rhine urnfields continue in use in the early Iron Age (Ha C, sometimes even D).

The cremated bones could be placed in simple pits. Sometimes the dense concentration of the bones indicates a container of organic material, sometimes the bones were simply shattered.

If the bones were placed in urns, these were often covered by a shallow bowl or a stone. In a special type of burial (bell-graves) the urns are completely covered by an inverted larger vessel. As graves rarely overlap, they may have been marked by wooden posts or stones. Stone-pacing graves are typical of the Unstrut group.

Grave gifts[edit]

The urn containing the cremated bones is often accompanied by other, smaller ceramic vessels, like bowls and cups. They may have contained food. The urn is often placed in the centre of the assemblage. Often, these vessels have not been placed on the pyre. Metal grave gifts include razors, weapons that often have been deliberately destroyed (bent or broken), bracelets, pendants and pins. Metal grave gifts become rarer towards the end of the Urnfield culture, while the number of hoards increase. Burnt animal bones are often found, they may have been placed on the pyre as food. The marten bones in the grave ofSeddinmay have belonged to a garment (pelt). Amberorglassbeads(Pfahlbautönnchen) are luxury items.

Upper-class graves[edit]

Seddin gravecontents, 9th century BC, Germany.[118]

Upper-class burials were placed in wooden chambers, rarely stonecistsor chambers with a stone-paved floor and covered with abarroworcairn.The graves contain especially finely made pottery, animal bones, usually of pigs, sometimes gold rings or sheets, and in exceptional cases miniature wagons. Some of these rich burials contain the remains of more than one person. In this case, women and children are normally seen as sacrifices. Until more is known about the status distribution and the social structure of the late Bronze Age, this interpretation should be viewed with caution, however. Towards the end of the Urnfield period, some bodies were burnt in situ and then covered by a barrow, reminiscent of the burial ofPatroclusas described byHomerand the burial ofBeowulf(with the additionalship burialelement). Thegrave of Seddin(c. 9th century BC) has been described as a "Homeric burial" due to its close similarity to contemporary elite burials in Greece and Italy.[119][120][83]In the early Iron Age, inhumation became the rule again.

Cult[edit]

An obsession with waterbirds is indicated by numerous pictures and three-dimensional representations. Combined with the hoards deposited in rivers and swamps, it indicates religious beliefs connected with water. This has led some scholars to believe in serious droughts during the late Bronze Age. Sometimes the water-birds are combined with circles, the so-called sun-barque orsolar boatmotif. Moon-shaped clayfiredogsor 'moon idols' are thought to have a religious significance, as well as crescent shaped razors.[121][122]

TheKyffhäusercaves inThuringiacontain headless skeletons and animal bones that have been interpreted as sacrifices. Other deposits include grain, knotted vegetable fibres and hair and bronze objects (axes, pendants and pins). TheIth-caves (Lower Saxony) have yielded comparative material.

Genetics[edit]

See also:Bell Beaker culture § Genetics,Unetice culture § Genetics,Hallstatt culture § Genetics,La Tène culture § Genetics,Celts § Genetics,andItalic peoples § Genetics
Baby bottles,Austria, c. 1200 BC.[123]

A genetic study published inNaturein March 2015 examined the remains of an Urnfield male buried inHalberstadt,Germany ca 1100-1000 BC.[124][125]He was found to be a carrier of the paternal haplogroupR1a1a1b1a2and the maternal haplogroupH23.[124]

A genetic study published inSciencein March 2019 found a significant increase innorth-central Europeanancestry inIberiaduring the transition from the Bronze Age to the Iron Age. The authors of the study suggested that the spread of the Urnfield culture was associated with this transition, during which theCeltiberiansmay have emerged.[126]A Celtiberian male examined in the study was found to be a carrier of the paternalhaplogroup I2a1a1a.[127]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^Louwen, A.J (2021).Breaking and making the ancestors. Piecing together the urnfield mortuary process in the Lower-Rhine-Basin, c. 1300–400 BC(PhD). Leiden University.
  2. ^Probst, Ernst (1996).Deutschland in der Bronzezeit: Bauern, Bronzegiesser und Burgherren zwischen Nordsee und Alpen.München: C. Bertelsmann. p. 258.ISBN978-3570022375.
  3. ^abcChadwick and Corcoran, Nora and J.X.W.P. (1970).The Celts.Penguin Books. pp. 28–29.
  4. ^abPeter Schrijver,2016, "Sound Change, the Italo-Celtic Linguistic Unity, and the Italian Homeland of Celtic", in John T. Koch & Barry Cunniffe,Celtic From the West 3: Atlantic Europe in the Metal Ages: questions of shared language.Oxford, England; Oxbow Books, pp. 9, 489–502.
  5. ^Lorrio, Alberto. "The Celts in Iberia: An Overview".E-Keltoi: Journal of Interdisciplinary Celtic Studies.6.
  6. ^"Urnfield period".</refSaupe, Tina; Montinaro, Francesco; Scaggion, Cinzia; Carrara, Nicola; Kivisild, Toomas; D'Atanasio, Eugenia; Hui, Ruoyun; Solnik, Anu; Lebrasseur, Ophélie; Larson, Greger; Alessandri, Luca (21 June 2021)."Ancient genomes reveal structural shifts after the arrival of Steppe-related ancestry in the Italian Peninsula".Current Biology.31(12): 2576–2591.e12.Bibcode:2021CBio...31E2576S.doi:10.1016/j.cub.2021.04.022.hdl:11585/827581.ISSN0960-9822.PMID33974848.S2CID234471370.
  7. ^Aneli, Serena; Caldon, Matteo; Saupe, Tina; Montinaro, Francesco; Pagani, Luca (1 October 2021)."Through 40,000 years of human presence in Southern Europe: the Italian case study".Human Genetics.140(10): 1417–1431.doi:10.1007/s00439-021-02328-6.ISSN1432-1203.PMC8460580.PMID34410492.Archivedfrom the original on 27 October 2023.Retrieved12 January2022.
  8. ^Saupe et al. 2021"The results suggest that the Steppe-related ancestry component could have first arrived through Late N/Bell Beaker groups fromCentral Europe."
  9. ^Gimbutas, Marija (1965).Bronze age cultures in Central and Eastern Europe.Mouton Publishers. pp. 274–298.
  10. ^"Situla".Institute for the Study of the Ancient World.2022.
  11. ^"History of Europe: The People of the Metal Ages – Rituals, religion and art".Britannica.Retrieved8 November2022.In the stylistic development during the Metal Ages, two phenomena are of particular interest. The first is the development of the sun-bird-ship motif of the Urnfield Culture. The origin of this motif, which featured bird-headed ships embellished with solar disks, is not known, but over a short period about 1400 BCE it became common both as incised decoration and as plastic art throughout a vast area of eastern and central Europe. The similarity in execution and composition is remarkable and suggests a shared understanding of its meaning and the intensity of contact between distant areas.
  12. ^abTerzan, Biba (1999)."An Outline of the Urnfield Culture Period in Slovenia".Arheološki vestnik.50:97–143.
  13. ^Waddell, John (2018).Myth and Materiality.Oxbow Books. pp. 104–105.ISBN9781785709753.Three pairs of boats with bird's head prow and stern surrounding a solar disc consisting of several concentric circles are depicted on a bronze shield from Denmark.
  14. ^"The Bronze Age shields".National Museum of Denmark.
  15. ^Pachenko, Dmitri (2012)."Scandinavian background of Greek mythic cosmography: The sun's water transport"(PDF).Hyperboreus.18(1).
  16. ^Szeverényi, Vajk; Guba, Szilvia (2007)."Bronze Age bird representations from the Carpathian Basin".Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungariae:75–110.Birds play a much more prominent role in Late Bronze Age Central European imagery. One of the most important motifs, which is most certainly connected to the Nordic religious concepts, is that of the bird-ship (Vogelbarke) or Sun-ship (Vogelsonnenbarke). On these representations the keel extensions of the ships end in an aquatic bird's head, and in most cases the ships carry the Sun.… Three basic types of the Late Bronze Age Sun-ship motif can be distinguished.… The third, rarest version is a double Sun-ship, where two ships are represented keel-to-keel and have a Sun-disc in the middle. This motif can br seen on a shield from an unknown find spot in Denmark, and becomes more popular in Early Iron Age Italy
  17. ^https://indo-european.eu/2019/11/r1b-rich-bell-beaker-derived-italic-peoples-from-the-west-vs-etruscans-from-the-east/
  18. ^https:// historyfiles.co.uk/KingListsEurope/CulturesUrnfield.htm
  19. ^Chadwick with Corcoran, Nora with J.X.W.P. (1970).The Celts.Penguin Books. pp. 28–33.
  20. ^Payton, Philip(2017).Cornwall: A History(3rd ed.). Exeter:University of Exeter Press.p. 42.ISBN978-0859890274.
  21. ^abcKruta, Venceslas (1991).The Celts.Thames and Hudson. pp. 93–100.
  22. ^abcStifter, David (2008).Old Celtic Languages(PDF).p. 24.
  23. ^Cremin, Aedeen (1992).The Celts in Europe.Sydney, Australia: Sydney Series in Celtic Studies 2, Centre for Celtic Studies, University of Sydney. pp. 59–60.ISBN0867586249.
  24. ^abKoch, John T. (2013).Celtic from the West 2 – Prologue: The Earliest Hallstatt Iron Age cannot equal Proto-Celtic.Oxford: Oxbow Books. pp. 10–11.ISBN978-1842175293.Archived fromthe originalon 21 January 2013.Retrieved4 January2014.
  25. ^Wachsmann, Shelley (1991). "Bird-Head Devices on Mediterranean Ships". In Tzalas, H.E. (ed.).Tropis IV. Fourth International Symposium on Ship Construction in Antiquity (Athens, 28-31 August 1991).Hellenic Institute for the Preservation of Nautical Tradition, Athens. pp. 539–572.A connection, difficult to define as it might be, appears to exist between the Sea Peoples and the Urnfield cultures of Central and Eastern Europe. A possible Sea Peoples' ship, complete with a bird-head stem device with an up-curving beak, that is depicted on a crematory urn from Hama in Syria seems to support this connection. The manner in which the bird-head devices are positioned on the Sea Peoples' ships at Medinet Habu – facing outboard at stem and stern – invites comparison with the bird boats (Vogelbarke) of Central Europe
  26. ^"The Vogelbarke of Medinet Habu (Romey 2003)"(PDF).
  27. ^K. Kristiansen,Europe Before History,p. 388.
  28. ^Gimbutas, Marija (1965).Bronze age cultures in Central and Eastern Europe.Mouton Publishers. p. 340.
  29. ^K. Kristiansen,Europe Before History,p. 385.
  30. ^Krause, Rüdiger (July 2021). "Mount Ipf in southern Germany. The fortification, spatial organization and territory of a" Princely Seat "of the Early Iron Age".Vix et le phénomène princier.Ausonius éditions.ISBN978-2356133601.the strongly fortified complex upon Mount Ipf held an extraordinary position ever since the Late Bronze Age and Urnfield culture, specifically as a centre of power on the western periphery of the Nördlinger Ries.... there was already a large settlement and fortification on the summit plateau during the Late Bronze Age Urnfield culture. Geomagnetic investigations and targeted excavations have confirmed a densely built settlement on the upper plateau.
  31. ^Krause, Rüdiger."Die bronzezeitliche Burg auf dem Ipf – Neue Forschungen zum Burgenbau und Krieg in der Bronzezeit".Retrieved9 April2022.
  32. ^Springer, Tobias (2006)."Model of the Bullenheimer Berg fortifications".KulturGut: Aus der Forschung des Germanischen Nationalmuseums.11:11.
  33. ^"THUNAU AM KAMP – A FORTIFIED HILLTOP SETTLEMENT OF THE URNFIELD CULTURE".oeaw.ac.at/.Retrieved24 March2022.
  34. ^"The Bronze Age – Austrian Settlements as Centres of Trade".Fwf.ac.at.Retrieved5 December2021.
  35. ^"Late Bronze Age Hillfort found in France".The Past.2021.Archaeological investigation has revealed the remains of an unusually large settlement, measuring around 30ha, fortified by two rows of ramparts and tall stone walls.
  36. ^Szentmiklosi, Alexandru; Heeb, Bernhard S.; Heeb, Julia; Harding, Anthony; Krause, Rüdiger; Becker, Helmut (August 2015)."Corneşti-Iarcuri – A Bronze Age town in the Romanian Banat?".Antiquity.85(329): 819–838.doi:10.1017/S0003598X00068332.hdl:10036/4425.S2CID67764127.
  37. ^abGogaltan, Florin; et al. (2019). "Sântana" Cetatea Veche ". A Late Bronze Age Mega-fort in the Lower Mureş Basin in Southwestern Romania".Materialisation of Conflicts. Proceedings of the Third International LOEWE Conference, 24-27 September 2018 in Fulda.pp. 191–221.
  38. ^Uhnér, Claes; Ciugudean, Horia; Hansen, Svend; Becker, Franz; Bălan, Gabriel; Burlacu-Timofte, Raluca (2019). "The Teleac Hillfort in Southwestern Transylvania: the Role of the Settlement, War and the Destruction of the Fortification System". In Hansen, Svend; Krause, Rüdiger (eds.).Bronze Age Fortresses in Europe.Verlag Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn. pp. 177–200.
  39. ^abMolloy, Barry; Jovanović, Dragan; Bruyère, Caroline; Marić, Miroslav; Bulatović, Jelena; Mertl, Patrick; Horn, Christian; Milašinović, Lidija; Mirković-Marić, Neda (1 January 2020)."A New Bronze Age Mega-fort in Southeastern Europe: Recent Archaeological Investigations at Gradište Iđoš and their Regional Significance".Journal of Field Archaeology.45(4): 293.doi:10.1080/00934690.2020.1734899.hdl:10197/11796.S2CID216408128.Retrieved5 December2021.
  40. ^Szeverényi, Vajk; Czukor, Péter; Priskin, Anna; Szalontai, Csaba (2017). "Recent work on Late Bronze Age fortified settlements in south-east Hungary". In Heeb, Bernhard; Szentmiklosi, Alexandru; Krause, Rüdiger; Wemhof, Matthias (eds.).Fortifications: The Rise And Fall Of Defended Sites In Late Bronze And Early Iron Age Of South-East Europe.Die Deutsche Bibliothek – CIP-Einheitsaufnahme. pp. 135–148.
  41. ^"Mythos Bullenheimer Berg" Knauf-Museum Iphofen ".knauf-museum.de.Retrieved23 February2022.
  42. ^abSchussmann, Markus (2017). "Defended sites and fortifications in Southern Germany during the Bronze Age and Urnfield Period – a short introduction". In Heeb, Bernhard; Szentmiklosi, Alexandru; Krause, Rüdiger; Wemhof, Matthias (eds.).Fortifications: The Rise And Fall Of Defended Sites In Late Bronze And Early Iron Age Of South-East Europe.Die Deutsche Bibliothek – CIP-Einheitsaufnahme. pp. 59–78.
  43. ^"Archaeological Research on the Late Bronze-Age Site of Corneşti Iarcuri in Romanian Banat".smb.museum.Retrieved9 April2022.
  44. ^Kristiansen, Kristian; Suchowska-Ducke, Paulina (December 2015)."Connected Histories: the Dynamics of Bronze Age Interaction and Trade 1500–1100 bc".Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society.81:361–392.doi:10.1017/ppr.2015.17.S2CID164469137.
  45. ^Molloy, Barry; et al. (2023)."Resilience, innovation and collapse of settlement networks in later Bronze Age Europe: New survey data from the southern Carpathian Basin".PLOS ONE.18(11): e0288750.Bibcode:2023PLoSO..1888750M.doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0288750.PMC10637690.PMID37948415.Surviving upstanding ramparts are rare and are associated with the larger and most monumental sites, the extreme case being Corneşti Iarcuri at ca. 1765 ha. This was the largest construction built in any part of Europe up to that time, dwarfing the citadels of the Aegean world and their surrounding towns.
  46. ^Harding, Anthony (2017). "Corneşti-Iarcuri and the rise of mega-forts in Bronze Age Europe". In Heeb, Bernhard; Szentmiklosi, Alexandru; Krause, Rüdiger; Wemhof, Matthias (eds.).Fortifications: The Rise And Fall Of Defended Sites In Late Bronze And Early Iron Age Of South-East Europe.Die Deutsche Bibliothek – CIP-Einheitsaufnahme. pp. 9–14.
  47. ^Molloy, Barry; et al. (2023)."Resilience, innovation and collapse of settlement networks in later Bronze Age Europe: New survey data from the southern Carpathian Basin".PLOS ONE.18(11): e0288750.Bibcode:2023PLoSO..1888750M.doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0288750.PMC10637690.PMID37948415.sites such as Sântana Cetatea Veche, Gradište-Iđoš, Sakule, Crepaja, Bašaid, Csanádpalota, Orosháza Nagytatársánc and Újkígyós all warrant the term megasite or megafort, ranging from 75 to 460 Ha of enclosed space.
  48. ^Kristiansen, Kristian; Suchowska-Ducke, Paulina (December 2015)."Connected Histories: the Dynamics of Bronze Age Interaction and Trade 1500–1100 bc".Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society.81:361–392.doi:10.1017/ppr.2015.17.S2CID164469137.
  49. ^"A feasting hall of the Late Bronze Age in Lăpuş, northwest Romania, and its cultural context"(PDF).Masaryk University.2018.
  50. ^Krause, Rudiger (2019). "Fortresses and Fortifications. On Fortified Hilltop Settlements of the Bronze Age". In Hansen, Svend; Krause, Rudiger (eds.).Bronze Age Fortresses in Europe.Verlag Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn. pp. 1–16.ISBN978-3774942042.
  51. ^abHonti, Szilvia (27 October 2022)."The warrior aristocracy of the Late Bronze Age Urnfield Period in County Somogy, south-western Transdanubia. The Lengyeltóti V hoard".Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae.73(2): 143–162.doi:10.1556/072.2022.00012.S2CID253208580.
  52. ^"THE MARMESSE CUIRASS" Musee Archeologie Nationale ".musee-archeologienationale.fr/.Retrieved31 March2022.
  53. ^Gimbutas, Marija (25 August 2011).Bronze Age cultures in Central and Eastern Europe.Walter de Gruyter.ISBN9783111668147– via google.dk.
  54. ^Molloy, Barry; et al. (2023)."Early Chariots and Religion in South-East Europe and the Aegean During the Bronze Age: A Reappraisal of the Dupljaja Chariot in Context".European Journal of Archaeology:1–21.doi:10.1017/eaa.2023.39.
  55. ^Harding, Anthony (2013).The Oxford Handbook of the European Bronze Age.OUP Oxford. p. 404.ISBN978-0199572861.
  56. ^"Wagenrad" Historical Museum of the Palatinate, Speyer ".nat.museum-digital.de.Retrieved23 February2022.
  57. ^Honti, Szilvia (27 October 2022)."The warrior aristocracy of the Late Bronze Age Urnfield Period in County Somogy, south-western Transdanubia. The Lengyeltóti V hoard".Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae.73(2): 143–162.doi:10.1556/072.2022.00012.S2CID253208580.
  58. ^Bilic, Tomislav (2016) (2016)."The swan chariot of a solar deity: Greek narratives and prehistoric iconography".Documenta Praehistorica.43:445.doi:10.4312/dp.43.23.{{cite journal}}:CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  59. ^"Photo of the Acholshausen cult wagon model".
  60. ^"Photo of the bronze cult wagon model from Orăştie, Romania".
  61. ^Sarauw, Torben (2015)."The Late Bronze Age hoard from Bækkedal, Denmark: new evidence for the use of two-horse teams and bridles".Danish Journal of Archaeology.4:3–20.doi:10.1080/21662282.2015.1115606.S2CID111735907.
  62. ^Pare, Christopher (1995)."From Dupljaja to Delphi: the ceremonial use of the wagon in later prehistory".Antiquity.63:86.
  63. ^"Cauldron Ornament".clevelandart.org.30 October 2018.Retrieved12 April2022.
  64. ^abHansen, Svend (2019). "The Hillfort of Teleac and Early Iron in Southern Europe". In Hansen, Svend; Krause, Rüdiger (eds.).Bronze Age Fortresses in Europe.Verlag Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn. p. 204.
  65. ^Turnbull, Anne (1984).From bronze to iron: The occurrence of iron in the British later Bronze Age(PhD). Edinburgh University. p. 24.S2CID164098953.
  66. ^"Life and Belief in the Bronze Age: Belt Disc from Heegermühle".Neues Museum.
  67. ^"Der Depotfund von Heegermühle bei Eberswalde".askanier-welten.de.
  68. ^Kristiansen, Kristian; Suchowska-Ducke, Paulina (December 2015)."Connected Histories: the Dynamics of Bronze Age Interaction and Trade 1500–1100 bc".Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society.81:361–392.doi:10.1017/ppr.2015.17.S2CID164469137.
  69. ^Kuijpers, Maikel H. G.; Popa, Cătălin N. (January 2021)."The origins of money: Calculation of similarity indexes demonstrates the earliest development of commodity money in prehistoric Central Europe".PLOS ONE.16(1): e0240462.Bibcode:2021PLoSO..1640462K.doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0240462.PMC7816976.PMID33471789.
  70. ^Pare, Christopher (2013). "Chapter 29: Weighing, Commodification and Money". In Harding, Anthony; Fokkens, Harry (eds.).The Oxford Handbook of the European Bronze Age.OUP Oxford. pp. 508–527.ISBN978-0-19-957286-1.
  71. ^Ialongo, N.; Rahmstorf, L. (2019). "The identification of balance weights in pre-literate Bronze Age Europe: Typology, chronology, distribution and metrology".Weights and Marketplaces from the Bronze Age to the Early Modern Period.European Research Council. pp. 105–126.
  72. ^Ialongo, N. (2019)."The Earliest Balance Weights in the West: Towards an Independent Metrology for Bronze Age Europe".Cambridge Archaeological Journal.29(1): 103–124.doi:10.1017/S0959774318000392.
  73. ^Sommerfeld, Christoph (1994).Gerätegeld Sichel. Studien zur monetären Struktur bronzezeitlicher Horte im nördlichen Mitteleuropa.Vorgeschichtliche Forschungen Bd. 19.
  74. ^"Sickle" Hoards "Halle State Museum of Prehistory".Landesmuseum-vorgeschicte.de.Retrieved5 December2021.[permanent dead link]
  75. ^abcJahn, Christoph (2013). "Bronzezeitliche Zeichensysteme".Symbolgut Sichel. Studien zur Funktion spätbronzezeitlicher Griffzungensicheln in Depotfunden.Verlag Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn. pp. 197–226.
  76. ^Sommerfeld, Christoph (1994). "Die Sichelmarken".Gerätegeld Sichel.de Gruyter. pp. 207–258.ISBN9783110129281.
  77. ^Szabo, Geza (2016). "Local and Interregional Connections Through the Comparison of the Hasfalva Disc and the Balkåkra Disc".Bronze Age Connectivity in the Carpathian Basin.Editura Mega. pp. 345–360.ISBN978-606-020-058-1.
  78. ^Randsborg, Klavs (2006)."Calendars of the Bronze Age".Acta Archaeologica.77:62–90.doi:10.1111/j.1600-0390.2006.00047.x.
  79. ^Hansen, Mikkel Christian Dam (2020)."Interpreting a Bronze Age motif - Revisiting the hand signs of southern Scandinavia"(PDF).Adoranten:57–73.
  80. ^Hansen, Mikkel Christian Dam (2019). "Håndtegnets udstrakte fngre".GEFJON 4.Aarhus Univeritetsforlag. pp. 86–151.ISBN9788772190549.
  81. ^Gold und Kult der Bronzezeit.Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nuremberg. 2003. p. 47.ISBN3-926982-95-0.
  82. ^ab"Mysterious gold cones 'hats of ancient wizards'".Telegraph.co.uk.17 March 2002.Retrieved5 December2021.
  83. ^ab"Life and Belief During the Bronze Age" Neues Museum, Berlin ".Retrieved13 March2022.
  84. ^"Life and Belief During the Bronze Age" Neues Museum, Berlin ".Retrieved13 March2022.What is especially fascinating is the ornamentation on the [Berlin gold hat] in which a complex counting system is encoded, enabling calendar calculations, especially the 19-year cycle of the sun and the moon.... The star at the tip symbolises the sun, with the sickles and eye patterns representing the moon and Venus, while the circular ornaments can equally be interpreted as depictions of the sun or the moon.… The cycle of the sun determines day and nigh and the seasons, while the moon determines the division of the year into months and days. But the lunar year is eleven days shorter than the solar year. Even as early as the 2nd millennium BC intercalary days were inserted to bring the solar and lunar cycles into alignment. This knowledge is reflected in the ornamentation of the Gold Hat. The stamped patterns should be read as a calendar. For instance, the number of circles in certain decorative areas equals the twelve lunar periods of 354 days. If the patterns in other decorative areas are added, this gives the 365 days of the solar year. It takes 19 years for the solar year and the lunar year to align again. In the ornamentation of the hat the fact is encoded that seven lunar months need to be inserted into the 19-year cycle. Other calculations can be made as well, such as the dates of eclipses of the moon. (…) The golden hats show that astronomical knowledge was combined with cult activities… They were apparently worn over several generation and at some point buried in the ground in a sacred act to protect them from desecration and to place them in the realm of the gods. It seems that Bronze Age rulers combined worldly and spiritual power.
  85. ^"Golden Ceremonial Hat (" Berlin Gold Hat ")".Neues Museum Berlin.One particularly impressive piece of evidence for early man's astronomical knowledge is the Bronze Age Berlin gold hat, unique in its size and preservation. The sun, evoked by the gold coloration and the pattern of rays at the top of the hat, creates day, night and the seasons by apparently circling the earth. The moon, represented several times on the hat, marks out months and weeks. The number and arrangement of the ornaments is not random; it allows a nineteen-year lunisolar cycle of 228 solar months and 235 lunar months to be calculated. Someone who knew how to read these ornaments would be able to calculate the shifts between the solar year and the lunar year, predict lunar eclipses, and set fixed dates for significant events.… Over half a millennium before the astronomer and mathematician Meton in 432 BC calculated the shifts in the lunisolar cycle, they were already known to the educated elite of the Bronze Age. The golden hat may have been worn by a ruler with a religious role on ceremonial occasions. Other Bronze Age items prove that astronomical knowledge was often preserved in coded form on valuable and sacred objects.
  86. ^Menghin, Wilfried (2008)."Zahlensymbolik und digitales Rechnersystem in der Ornamentik des Berliner Goldhutes".Acta Praehistorica et Archaeologica.40:157–169.doi:10.11588/apa.2008.0.71505.
  87. ^abcGold und Kult der Bronzezeit.Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nuremberg. 2003. pp. 220–237.ISBN3-926982-95-0.
  88. ^"Life and Belief During the Bronze Age" Neues Museum, Berlin ".Retrieved13 March2022.In the ornamentation of the hat the fact is encoded that seven lunar months need to be inserted into the 19-year cycle. Other calculations can be made as well, such as the dates of eclipses of the moon.
  89. ^"Golden Ceremonial Hat (" Berlin Gold Hat ")".Neues Museum Berlin.Someone who knew how to read these ornaments would be able to calculate the shifts between the solar year and the lunar year, predict lunar eclipses, and set fixed dates for significant events.
  90. ^Hansen, Rahlf; Rink, Christine (2008)."Himmelsscheibe, Sonnenwagen und Kalenderhüte - ein Versuch zur bronzezeitlichen Astronomie".Acta Praehistorica et Archaeologica.40:93–126.doi:10.11588/apa.2008.0.71501.
  91. ^Chamberlain, A.T.; Parker Pearson, Mike (2003). "8. The Fiskerton Causeway". In Field, Naomi; Parker Pearson, Mike (eds.).Fiskerton: Iron Age Timber Causeway with Iron Age and Roman Votive Offerings.Oxbow Books. pp. 136–148.JSTORj.ctv2p7j5qv.15.
  92. ^"Life and Belief During the Bronze Age" Neues Museum, Berlin ".Retrieved13 March2022.The star at the tip symbolises the sun, with the sickles and eye patterns representing the moon and Venus, while the circular ornaments can equally be interpreted as depictions of the sun or the moon.
  93. ^"Ein Venus Kalender auf dem Berliner Goldhut (Schmidt-Kaler 2012) (A Venus calendar on the Berlin Gold Hat)".Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz.2012.
  94. ^"Schifferstadter Tagblatt 2012"(PDF).Knauf Museum Iphofen.Fur die drei hute wird ausserdem die frage diskutiert, ob die verzierungen im goldblech neben den mond- und sonnensymbolen auch venus-symbole und eined venuskalender enthalten. Die ansichten der fachleute gehen insbesondere bei der frage auseinander ob jahrzehntelange astronomische zyklen damals schon bekannt gewesen sein konnen. Dagegen ist leicht vorstellbar und kaum strittig, dass dis menschen der bronzezeit die widederkehr der Venus am himmel nach 584 Tagen bereits beobachtet haben. Das im mediterranean Bereich fur die venus ubliche Augensymbole befindet sich auf allen dreihuten. Auf dem Berliner Goldhut 19-mal, was genau der Anzahl der monate fur einen Venuszyklus entspricht, wenn man pro Monat mit 30/31 tagen rechnet. Auf dem Schifferstadter un dem Ezeldorfer Goldhut sind die Venuszeichen 22-mal enthalten. Das entspricht ebenfalls der Monatszahl fur einen Venuszyklus, wenn man den alteren Mond-Monat mit 27 tagen als Basis nimmt, Moglicherweise wurde bei Herstellung des Schifferstadter Goldhutes noch mit dem Mondkalender und 300 jahre spater am Ende der Bronzezeit dei Herstellung des Berliner Goldhutes schon in "modernerer" zeitrechnung mit: 30/31 Tagen pro Monat gerechnet."English translation:"For the three hats, the question is also being discussed as to whether the decorations in the gold plate also contain Venus symbols and a Venus calendar in addition to the moon and sun symbols. The views of the experts diverge in particular on the question of whether decades-long astronomical cycles could have been known at the time. On the other hand, it is easy to imagine and hardly controversial that the people of the Bronze Age had already observed the return of Venus in the sky after 584 days. The eye symbol common for Venus in the Mediterranean region can be found on all three hats. On the Berlin Gold Hat 19 times, which corresponds exactly to the number of months for a Venus cycle, if one reckons with 30/31 days per month. On the Schifferstadt and Ezeldorf gold hats, the Venus signs are contained 22 times. This also corresponds to the number of months for a Venus cycle, if one takes the older lunar month with 27 days as a basis. It is possible that when the Schifferstadt gold hat was made, the lunar calendar was still used and 300 years later, at the end of the Bronze Age, the Berlin gold hat was made in a more" modern "calendar with 30/31 days per month.
  95. ^"Life and Belief During the Bronze Age" Neues Museum, Berlin ".Retrieved13 March2022.Gold vessels in the Eberswalde hoard bear sun and circular symbols like those on the Berlin gold hat. Some of these contain calendrical information as well. The base of a bowl [from the Eberswalde hoard] is formed from ten, or counting the centre disc, eleven concentric circles topped by a band of 22 circular discs. This corresponds to the number of solar years (10+22=32) and together with the centre disc the number of lunar years (11+22=33) until the solar and lunar calendars are in alignment.
  96. ^Sommerfeld, Christoph (2010)."…nach Jahr und Tag– Bemerkungen über die Trundholm-Scheiben".Praehistorische Zeitschrift.85.doi:10.1515/pz.2010.012.S2CID164902130.
  97. ^"Goldene Hüte und Gewänder".landschaftsmuseum.de.
  98. ^Ilon, Gabor (2015).The Golden Treasure from Szent Vid in Velem.Archaeolingua. pp. 69–74.
  99. ^"Two appliqués".National Museum of Slovenia.2022.
  100. ^Bouzek, Jan (2018).Studies of Homeric Greece.Charles University. p. 205.ISBN978-80-246-3561-3.The West Bohemian gold roundels with twelve Boss es are simplified calendars of the gold cones.
  101. ^"Dýšina-Nová Huť. Gold disc with hammered decoration, Tumulus culture (1650-1250 BC)".Museum of West Bohemia in Pilsen.
  102. ^"Bronze Age gold belt with 'cosmological' designs unearthed in Czech beet field".livescience.2022.
  103. ^Sommerfeld, Christoph (2010)."…nach Jahr und Tag– Bemerkungen über die Trundholm-Scheiben".Praehistorische Zeitschrift.85.doi:10.1515/pz.2010.012.S2CID164902130.The front and the back side of the Trundholm discrepresent through their difference in brilliance and decoration a separate concept– the Sun and the Moon. The analysis of these exquisite decorations demonstrates that the Bronze Age people had profound astronomical knowledge of the movements of these heavenly bodies. Taken together, the front and the back side of the disc form a complete picture, one which already contains the Metonic cycle. The mathematics of the ornamentation on both sides is also of great potency and beauty.
  104. ^Hansen, Rahlf; Rink, Christine (2020)."Himmelsscheibe, Sonnenwagen und Kalenderhüte - ein Versuch zur bronzezeitlichen Astronomie".Acta Praehistorica et Archaeologica.40.doi:10.11588/apa.2008.0.71501.
  105. ^"Golden Ceremonial Hat / Heegermühle disc".Neues Museum Berlin.Other Bronze Age items prove that astronomical knowledge was often preseved in coded form on valuable and sacred objects.... Especially impressive are the solar and lunar calendars numerically encoded in the ornamentation of the belt disc from Heegermühle in Brandenburg, Germany.
  106. ^"Heegermühle belt disc".Neues Museum Berlin.
  107. ^Randsborg, Klavs (2006)."Calendars of the Bronze Age".Acta Archaeologica.77(1).
  108. ^May, Jens (2008).""Die gefangene Zeit". Vergleichende Untersuchungen zu den Kalenderamphoren von Seddin, Herzberg, Rorbaek, Unia und Gevelinghausen ".Acta Praehistorica et Archaeologica.40:127–155.doi:10.11588/apa.2008.0.71503.
  109. ^Needham, Stuart (2000)."The Development of Em Boss ed Goldwork in Bronze Age Europe".The Antiquaries Journal.80:27–65.doi:10.1017/S0003581500050186.S2CID162992985.
  110. ^Gerloff, Sabine (2007). "Reinecke's ABC and the Chronology of the British Bronze Age".Beyond Stonehenge: Essays on the Bronze Age in honour of Colin Burgess.Oxbow Books. pp. 117–161.
  111. ^Pasztor, Emilia (Spring 2015)."Symbols of Atmospheric Phenomena in Bronze Age Depictions".Hungarian Archaeology e-Journal.finds have also come to light in Hungary that are similar from an archaeoastronomical perspective to the Nebra sky disk, or hold even more possibilities for scientific analysis. One example is the gold bracelet from Dunavecse... Its system of motifs and symbols is much more complex and richer than that of the sky disk. Two solar disks can be clearly identified at the meeting point of the tendril-like curves, which either represent the arc of the crescent moon or the prow of a boat. Between the two solar disks there is a very important symbol consisting of five circles, for which there are numerous known analogies. This can be found on the famous, so-called Golden Cone of Ezelsdorf-Buch or the Berlin Gold Hat, both from the Late Bronze Age (14th–8th centuries B.C.), as well as on the famous gold diadem from one of the Mycenaean shaft graves, which was perhaps contemporaneous.
  112. ^abIlon, Gabor (2015).The Golden Treasure from Szent Vid in Velem.Archaeolingua. p. 112.
  113. ^"Avanton Cone".Musée d'Archaeologie Nationale, Paris.Retrieved8 April2022.Tous ces objets précieux et remarquablement exécutés évoquent une société complexe, sans doute strictement hiérarchisée, aux savoirs techniques et astronomiques avancées, organisée autour des travaux des champs."English translation:"All these precious and remarkably executed objects evoke a complex society, undoubtedly strictly hierarchical, with advanced technical and astronomical knowledge, organized around work in the fields.
  114. ^"Avanton Cone".Musée d'Archaeologie Nationale, Paris.Retrieved8 April2022.
  115. ^"Two appliqués".National Museum of Slovenia.2022.These extraordinary appliqués were part of treasures deposited in the Bronze Age as an offering to gods on the shore of Lake Bled. The prestigious gold appliqués also indicate that the lake was an important centre of a cult.... Similar appliqués have been discovered in Switzerland, Bavaria and Hungary, mainly in Bronze Age fortified settlements and in the graves of wealthy women.... The ornamentation bears markings of the solar and lunar year.
  116. ^"Bronze Urn of Gevelinghausen".megalithic.co.uk.
  117. ^Desplanques, Elsa (October 2022)."Protohistoric metal-urn cremation burials (1400–100 BC): a pan-European phenomenon".Antiquity.96(389): 1162–1178.doi:10.15184/aqy.2022.109.S2CID251874781.
  118. ^"Princely Tomb of Seddin".Neues Museum Berlin.
  119. ^Hansen, Svend (2018)."Seddin: ein" homerisches Begräbnis "".Arbeitsberichte zur Bodendenkmalpflege in Brandenburg 33.Brandenburgisches Landesamt für Denkmalpflege und Archäologisches Landesmuseum. pp. 65–84.ISBN978-3-910011-92-2.
  120. ^Desplanques, Elsa (October 2022)."Protohistoric metal-urn cremation burials (1400–100 BC): a pan-European phenomenon".Antiquity.96(389): 1162–1178.doi:10.15184/aqy.2022.109.S2CID251874781.
  121. ^Matzerath, Simon (2009)."Feuerböcke und Mondidole aus Gräbern – Ein Beitrag zum Symbolgut der späten Bronze- und frühen Eisenzeit Mitteleuropas".Archäologische Informationen:165–172.Firedogs and moon idols belong to the symbolic world of the Urnfield Culture.... The first firedogs and moon idols in graves appear in the 9th century BC. During the early Iron Age they became typical in eastern Central Europe. They emerge only in some archaeological cultures and are linked to specific groups of persons. Apparently these groups are religious communities. The firedogs and moon idols are an expression not only of material culture but especially of spiritual culture.
  122. ^Ilon, Gabor (2005)."Houses of the Late Tumulus/Early Urnfield culture".Ősrégészeti Levelek.7:135–144.The moon idols/firedogs may have been the paraphernalia of domestic shrines.
  123. ^"Scientists discover 3,000-year-old baby bottle".Independent.co.uk.2019.
  124. ^abHaak et al. 2015,Extended Data Table 3, I0099.
  125. ^Haak et al. 2015,Supplementary Information, p. 35.
  126. ^Olalde et al. 2019,p. 3.
  127. ^Olalde et al. 2019,Supplementary Tables, Table 4, Row 91.

External links[edit]

Media related toUrnfield cultureat Wikimedia Commons

Bibliography[edit]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Urnfield_culture&oldid=1231416127"