07 MetznerKrakow2010 Libre

8/10/2019 07 MetznerKrakow2010 Libre

1/36

Migration in Bronze

and Early Iron Age Europe

Edited byKarol Dzigielewski, Marcin S. Przybya, Anna Gawlik

Ksigarnia Akademicka


2/36

Jagiellonian University

Institute of Archaeology

Prace Archeologiczne No. 63

Studies

Migration in Bronze

and Early Iron Age Europe

Edited by

Karol DzigielewskiMarcin S. Przybya

Anna Gawlik

Krakw 2010


3/36

Copyright by individual authors and the Institute of Archeologyof the Jagiellonian University

REVIEWER OF THE VOLUME

Anthony F. Harding

EDITORS

Ewa Popielarz, Karolina Farrel

PROOFREADING

Ewa Wrona

TYPESETTING AND COVER DESIGN

n.

The publication was financed by The Cracow Team for Archaeological Supervisionof Motorway Construction (Krakowski Zesp do Bada Autostrad sp.j.)

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be printed or reproducedwithout permission in writing from the publisher.

ISBN 978-83-7638-043-8

Edition: 500 copies

Ksigarnia Akademicka

ul. w. Anny 6, 31-008 Krakwtel./faks +48 12 431 27 [email protected]

Zamwienia przez ksigarni internetow:www.akademicka.pl


4/36

CONTENTS

From the editors ....................................................................................................... 7

Karol Dzigielewski, Marcin S. Przybya and Anna GawlikReconsidering Migration in Bronze and Early Iron Age Europe:Bridging a Gap in European Mobility? .............................................................. 9

Jan BouzekMigrations: Their Character and Interpretative PossibilitiesConcerning the Bronze Age ................................................................................ 37

Sawomir KadrowExamples of Migration in the Early Phases of the Metal Agesfrom a Contemporary Sociological Perspective ................................................. 47

Salvatore Vitale and Teresa Hancock VitaleThe Minoan and Mycenaean Expansion in the Dodecanese.The Evidence from the Serraglio on Kos and Its Theoretical Implications ....... 63

Marcin S. PrzybyaPottery Analyses as the Basis for Studying Migrations.The Case of Danubian Pottery Groups from the End of 2ndMillennium BC ..... 87

Jacek GrskiMigration and Cultural Change. Western Lesser Poland in 1300-1200 BC ....... 105

Carola Metzner-NebelsickAspects of Mobility and Migration in the Eastern Carpathian Basinand Adjacent Areas in the Early Iron Age (10th-7thcenturies BC) ...................... 121

Anna GawlikInterpretation of Cultural Transformations in the Early Iron Agein South-Eastern Poland and Western Ukraine ................................................... 153

Karol DzigielewskiExpansion of the Pomeranian Culture in Poland During the Early Iron Age:Remarks on the Mechanism and Possible Causes .............................................. 173

Beata Stepaczak and Krzysztof SzostekStable Isotopes as a Fingerprint of Human Behaviour

Analysis of Human Archaeological Cremains: Problems and Perspectives ...... 197List of Contributors .................................................................................................. 219


5/36

Carola Metzner-Nebelsick

ASPECTS OF MOBILITY AND MIGRATIONIN THE EASTERN CARPATHIAN BASIN

AND ADJACENT AREAS IN THE EARLYIRON AGE 10TH7THCENTURIES BC

ABSTRACT: This article addresses the question about how and if migration events canbe traced in the archaeological record of the 9 th to 8th century BC within theCarpathian Basin. It revises a discussion started about 15 years ago about thenature of the impact of steppe-bound warrior nomads of Eastern Europe intothe west. A brief summary of my previous assessment is given differentiatingbetween migration and various kinds of mobility within the given time frame.The main agent for triggering off the social changes within the Hungarian Plainafter 1000 BC is seen in a kind of system collapse. This led to the transformationof the subsistence strategies of local populations and allowed for the influx of

what were probably smaller groups of pastoralists from steppes east of the Car-pathian Mountains. This eventually led to the transformation of the area in ques-tion into a habitat for a pastoralist society with a distinctly different material andculture as well as mentality than that of the adjacent Urnfield and early HallstattCulture groups. In contrast a different form of contemporary long distance com-plex exchange patterns and communication structures between east and westis shown by contacts between various sedentary groups within the CarpathianBasin and Transylvania (Urnfield and Hallstatt cultural groups, and groups usingstamped pottery) on the one hand and the north Caucasian Koban Culture onthe other.

STRESZCZENIE: Artyku dotyczy zasadnoci wyrniania i sposobw ledzenia wydarzeo charakterze migracyjnym w zapisie archeologicznym z IX-VIII w. p.n.e. w KotlinieKarpackiej. Przypomniana zostaje dyskusja, rozpoczta przed 15 laty, dotyczcacharakteru oddziaywa kulturowych wojowniczych nomadw ze stepwWschodniej Europy w kierunku zachodnim. W krtkim podsumowaniu dotych-czasowych uj zwrcono uwag na konieczno rozrnienia midzy migracja innymi rodzajami mobilnoci w omawianym czasie. Kryzys systemu, majcywwczas miejsce na terenie Wielkiej Niziny Wgierskiej, jest rozwaany jakopodstawowy czynnik uruchamiajcy zmian spoeczn na tym terytorium po r.1000 p.n.e. Mia on doprowadzi do zmiany strategii przetrwania wrd loka-lnych populacji i umoliwi napyw, zapewne niewielkich, grup ludnoci o gos-podarce hodowlanej ze stepw na wschd od Karpat. W efekcie kocowym na


6/36

122

omawianym terytorium doszo do transformacji w kierunku spoeczestw pasto-ralnych, odmiennych kulturowo (rwnie w aspekcie kultury materialnej), a takementalnie od ssiednich grup z kultur w typie popielnicowym czy wczesno-halsztackim. Jednoczenie mona wskaza na zmian systemu dalekosinych

kontaktw wymiennych i komunikacji pomidzy rnymi grupami osiadychspoecznoci Kotliny Karpackiej i Transylwanii (kultury pl popielnicowych, kul-tura halsztacka, kultury z ceramik stempelkow) a pnocnokaukask kulturkobask.

KEY WORDS: Late Bronze Age/Early Iron Age, Carpathian Basin, exchange networks, migra-tion, Mezcst Group, Stamped ware pottery groups

INTRODUCTION AND HISTORY OF RESEARCH

When dealing with various aspects of human mobility it is vital to differentiate be-tween migrationas a nal permanent linear act of moving and changing a living area,and mobilitywhich can comprise a variety of different kinds of movement. These caninclude the seasonal perambulations of pastoralists, as well as the travels of tradersor other specialists, young warriors or warrior bands. All of which are attested in theethnographic and historic sources1. Mobility generally involves cyclical movement fol-lowing set patterns and is generally not a one-way-process. Migration is furthermoremostly understood as an act, which incorporates larger groups of people and not onlyone person. Often migrations are selective in nature and the exodus of an entire group

or population is rather rare. Exogamous marriage patterns can also be seen as a specialfeature of migration. Of course sophisticated processes are involved. For instance, al-though migration is often a process which is intended to be irrevocable, individuals canand do return, giving information for the remaining members of a certain social groupand thus potentially stimulating additional migration processes as Stefan Burmeisterdescribed2.

In this article I would like to address an issue, which I dealt with 16 years ago, whenI nished my dissertation about the Thraco-Cimmerian Complex which was subse-quently published with minor additions in 20023.

In the meantime newly excavated materials have increased our knowledge of the his-

tory of the Carpathian Basin and adjacent areas in the rst quarter of the 1stmillenniumBC considerably and have lead me to reconsider and to some extent revise the positionsI took then concerning the problem of migration.

1 For denition of migration see Prien 2005.2 Burmeister 1996: 18 ff. Here also general remarks concerning the problem of tracing migrations in

the archaeological record.3 C. Metzner-Nebelsick,Die Urnenfelder- und Hallstattzeit Sdostpannoniens unter besonderer Be-

rcksichtigung des thrako-kimmerischen Formenkreises. Dissertationsschrift Freie UniversittBerlin 1993, published as Metzner-Nebelsick 2002. One reason for this delay was the decision to

incorporate into this work the considerable amount of hitherto unknown nds, mainly horse gear,and its contexts from the newly excavated cemeteries of the north Caucasian piedmont zone, whichwere published after 1993.


7/36

123

In my book and in related articles4I based my argument on the analysis of grave andhoard inventories of the Late Bronze and Early Iron Age from Southwest Hungary and

Northern Croatia as well as so-called Thraco-Cimmerian nds in general. This com-plex of artefacts which dates to the transition between the late Bronze and early Iron Ageis made up of horse gear and trappings, certain weapons from graves and hoards as wellas hoards composed exclusively of golden objects. Since the introduction of the term inthe late 19thcentury the problem, whether or not these nds should be seen as traces of animmigration of Cimmerians into a supposedly Thracian southeast Europe, has occupiedvarious generations of scholars. Following the Zeitgeist of the late 19th century theinterpretation of theses artefacts as trace elements for a special kind of aggressive migra-tion or immigration which was seen as an invasion in a military sense was the prevalentinterpretative model.

Horse gear was and is one of the major reference points referred to when dealing

with the question of migration and mobility in the Early Iron Ages in Eurasia. Bridlesand reign ornaments5, especially when found in graves, have long been regarded as evi-dence for long distance migrations of mobile riders or mounted warriors. These mountedwarriors were traditionally identied with the historically attested Cimmerians and theirsuccessors the Scythians, as mentioned by Herodotus (IV, 11). The migration of thesemobile warriors into Asia Minor and the Near East, i.e. into the kingdoms of Urartu andAssyria, at the end of the 8thcentury BC, is mentioned in the Assyrian chronicles6. Ar-chaeologists searching an explanation for the presence of horse gear and weapon nds ofeastern type west of the Carpathian mountain range envisaged a contemporary westwardmigration of these groups although no historical record of this ever seems to have been

written7

.Many scholars have seen this assumed immigration as a short term event at the turnof the Bronze to the Iron Age or Ha C period8. A transition which Friedrich Holste datedto the late 8thcentury BC with reference to Assyrian historical accounts of the Cimmerianinvasion. Moreover Holste and others assumed that the Cimmerian migration into theCarpathian Basin or Hungarian Plain was associated with major disruptions during theLate Bronze- and Early Iron Age periods which also affected the core lands of the LateUrneld Culture further to the west9. Thus cultural change in a period of transition wasinterpreted, at least in part, as a violent disruption of traditional Late Bronze Age power

4 Metzner-Nebelsick 1998; 2000a; 2000b; 2001.5 A compilation of the literature before 1980 see ibid.; Sauter 2000; Kossack 1994; Metzner-Nebelsick

2000b.6 For a comprehensive account of the Near Eastern literary as well as archaeological sources see

Ivantchik 2001.7 See reference 3, here especially for the earliest proposal of this concept, however with different

backgrounds: Schmidt 1902; Reinecke 1899; Nestor 1934; Holste 1940; with emphasis on horsegear nds in the Hungarian Plain: Gallus, Horvth 1939.

8 Introduced by Holste 1940.9 This discussion, which also involved the deposition of hoard nds as result of this assumed cata-

strophic event or the abandonment of cemeteries and settlements due to the same cause can notbe described here in detail, see Metzner-Nebelsick 2002: 32 ff. For the destructive model seeKemenczei 1984; with totally different approach 20 years later: Kemenczei 2005: 2 ff.


8/36

124

structures. A series of quite disparate phenomena including a new emphasis on horseequipment and weapons, the erection of tumuli for burials in newly founded cemeter-ies, as well as the existence of large numbers of fortied settlements at the close of theLate Bronze Age have all been seen as a reaction to an all encompassing eastern threat.Moreover the change of the ideological concepts between the representation of statusin graves between the Urneld and the Hallstatt Period has also been seen as a directresult of eastern inuences. Yet as more recent research has shown, such mono-causalinterpretations cannot be seen as doing justice to the evidence, something which can not

be discussed in detail in this article.One major result of my work was a new assessment of the chronology of the nds in

question. To cut a long chain of arguments short, I argued in favour of a longer lifespanof eastern or Cimmerian artefacts and elements and in the west, thus negating the

possibility of their presence being the result of a short-term aggressive migration event.

Instead I proposed a phase of various modes of contacts between Southeast and EasternEurope between the 9thand 8thc. BC (Fig. 1). Southeast Europe and more specically theCarpathian Basin, whose islands of forest steppe vegetation offered ideal living condi-tions for mobile pastoral or semi-nomadic societies, was in my view the area of trans-mission of eastern goods and partly also ideology to areas far beyond the bend of theDanube i.e. the late Urneld world extending as far west as Switzerland.

In the year 1993 the same year when I had nished my dissertation a book byJan Chochorowski was published10, in which he also proposed a longer duration for theinux of eastern nds into the Carpathian basin and beyond. He came to the conclusionthat these nds had to be interpreted as the result of different waves of invasions from the

Cimmerian homelands in the north Pontic Steppes and that they were mainly triggeredoff by signicant climate deterioration with increasing draught in this area. According tohis model worsening climatic conditions forced the population of this area to seek betterliving further to the west, in the moister Hungarian Plain. Although we both agreed onthe extended time span of phenomena of contact between the north Pontic steppe zones,the northern Caucasus and Southeast as well Central Europe, our interpretation of thecharacter of these contacts, whether seen as the result of migration processes or as a mul-tifaceted interaction model of differently organised social groups and various patterns ofmobility, differed substantially.

Now roughly a decade after the nal publication of my book, a reconsideration of my

ideas seems to be worth while.

DISCUSSION OF THE STATE OF THE ART IN 2002

In the past Early Iron Age horse gear was seen as the most important archaeologicalreference material for conrming migration processes into the Carpathian basin. It is fre-quently found and shows highly characteristic temporal and regional distributions. Findsof characteristic east European horse gear in the Carpathian basin were regarded as clearevidence for the presence of horse bound warrior nomads, whose appearance stood at

10 Chochorowski 1993.


9/36

125

the beginning of a long history of immigration events of eastern warrior nomads lastinguntil the Middle Ages. Indeed, one of the most signicant features of the late HaB periodor the 9thto early 8thcenturies BC is the deposition of horse gear in hoards and graves.These types are remarkably different from the earlier horse gear variants that occur spo-radically in graves and hoards11. Furthermore 9th/8th century horse gear shows strongafnities to types distributed east of the Carpathian mountain range so that a connection

11 For Bronze Age horse gear see Httel 1981.

Fig. 1.Interaction model of cultural groups between the Circumalpine region, the Carpathian

Basin, the north Pontic steppes and the northern Caucasus in the 9 th-8thcenturies BC (afterMetzner-Nebelsick 1998; 2000)


10/36

126

between the new types in the Carpathian Basin and north Pontic as well as North Cauca-sian pieces was easily constructed and interpreted in a historical way.

Connected with this increase of horse gear as well as other new nd categories isa shift of deposition patterns in hoards in Southeast Europe and beyond 12. The moststriking shift sees the replacement of large numbers of ritually connotated mass depo-sitions of various bronze artefacts, often broken and/or supplemented by bronze buningots, by smaller quantities of hoards containing fewer objects of a personalized natureand hardly any broken bronze. A closer examination of the horse gear and even morestrikingly the reign ornaments revealed that real eastern imports are in fact rather scarce.Similarities between Early Iron Age bridles and bits in Southeast Europe and those inthe north Pontic steppes as well as and more importantly so in north Caucasiancontexts are, however, obvious. Nevertheless most of the bridles in the eastern stylefound within the Carpathian region differ in many details from their eastern role models

and can mostly be regarded as local adaptations13

. Angled side pieces show the widestdistribution and are found between Switzerland in the west and Caucasian Ossetia inthe east, where they presumably originated. Specic variations, like the ernogorovkaside piece (type IX of my classication), can also be found in the hoards of Karmin 3in Silesia and may therefore likely attest a direct contact between both areas, avoidingthe Carpathian Basin14.

The adaptation of new types of horse gear involves the introduction of innovativebridling techniques15. The introduction of new types of side pieces as well as two-partmouth-pieces which replace traditional Central European single-part-bit must representintensive exposure to new bridling and quite probably riding techniques16. Even if migra-

tion of horse riding nomads is disputed, surely the presence either of eastern grooms orequine specialists in west or their counter parts in the east must be assumed in order toexplain the successful and sustained introduction of eastern horse gear types west of theCarpathian Range.

The strongest argument in favour of migration processes in the 9 th and 8th c. BC,however, are not artefacts but the Fzesabony-Mezcst Group or short Mezcst Group(here MG), which is dened by the presence of inhumation graves with a distinct set ofgrave goods17. Inhumation burial clearly sets these graves apart from both the exclusive-ly cremating Kyjatice and Gva cultural group cemeteries which precede them as wellas contemporary late Urneld groups in Transdanubia, North Croatia, eastern Austria

and Moravia which cremate their dead and accompany the bones with vessel sets. In thenorth Pontic steppe areas east of the Carpathians inhumation has a long standing tradi-tion and was practiced by the pre-Scythian ernogorovka culture whose burial customs

12 Metzner-Nebelsick 2002: 51 ff.13 For distribution maps see Metzner-Nebelsick 2002: 223, Fig. 103; 2005b; for more recent Cauca-

sian examples see: rlich 2007: 372, Fig. 191.14 Karmin III: Seger 1907: 37, Fig. 54-69; within the Carpathian Basin the type is rare: ernotin in

Moravia: Podborsk 1970, Pl. 76.15 For technical details see also Dietz 1998.16

Eastern side pieces show perforations facing one direction in contrast to the traditional Bronze Ageway in Central Europe with a perforation with a 45 oangle.17 Initially Patek 1989/1990; 1993 also Metzner-Nebelsick 1998 and Romsauer 1999.


11/36

127

have been exhaustively described by Olga Dubovskaja18. A direct comparison with MGburials reveals the same orientation and similar position of graves goods as well as theabsence of larger cemeteries on the one hand, but a distinctly different selection of arte-fact types on the other.

That the historical situation in the Carpathian Basin in the 9thto 8thc. BC can not simplybe described as a period of immigration and population shifts, is revealed by the presenceof real eastern imports like the iconic bimetallic daggers with a perforated cruciform hilt,which are among the most frequent so-called Cimmerian nds19. They can be regardedas the most characteristic weapon of the north Caucasian Koban Culture, but have so farnot been found either in graves of the ernogorovka culture20in the north Pontic steppesor in graves of the MG. They do however occur in early Hallstatt elite burials at the ad-

joining east Alpine fringe and in Transdanubia where they are embedded in traditionallymandated cremation graves with rich grave good assemblages which stand in contrast to

the Spartan inhumations in the Steppe zone. Outside their main distribution area in thenorthern Caucasus they also occur in hoards or as badly recorded single nds21.The main characteristic of the eastern inspired artefacts of so-called Thraco-

-Cimmerian type or rather nds of north Caucasian and north Pontic character is that inthe west these items are incorporated into 9thand 8thc. BC burials of a male, warrior elite,demonstrating their long distance contacts and mobility on the one hand and the fascina-tion for an eastern way of riding as means of status representation on the other.

It is obvious that as far as these elite graves are concerned, there were no rules thatgoverned the composition of the grave goods during the transitional period between lateUrneld and the early Hallstatt period. Sometimes eastern horse gear types are combined

with Basarabi-Style pottery, originating in the Lower Danube area,where no such horsegear is found, or with local ceramics. Moreover they are found combined with local oreven western types of weapons or four wheeled wagons of Urneld tradition, which areusually not seen as an identication marker of nomadic horsemen22. This culturally non-

18 Dubovskaja 1997.19 For the latest distribution maps of the Caucasian nds see Reinhold 2007, Pl. 23 ff.; for the western

distribution: Metzner-Nebelsick 2001: 138, Fig. 1; 2002: 371, Fig. 167.20 Dubovskaja (1997) described the ernogorovka group as synonym for the north Pontic pre-Scythian

nomadic population, which subsequently developed an early Scythian style without visible disrup-

tions in the archaeological record of graves and burial customs. She also discarded the model see-ing this cultural group as aggressive warrior nomads, who menaced their sedentary neighbours inthe forest steppes and the northern Caucasus. Part of her argumentation was the dismantling of theNovoerkassk Group as an independent cultural group arguing in favour of a model which sees theNovoerkassk inventories as a regional, originally north Caucasian phenomenon as well as a spe-cic mode of ritual depositions of artefacts.

21 In the hoard of Gamw (Silesia) together with local items (Podborsk 1970: 15, Fig. 25) or as sin-gle depositions in tramberk-Kotou(Moravia) hoard 5 (Podborsk 1970: 36, Fig. 14) or withoutcontext in hill sites: Mal Cetn, Matra mountains (also Podborsk 1970; Btora 2000).

22 As examples see Pedmice in Bohemia (Werner 1961; Metzner-Nebelsick 2002: 271, Fig. 127),Knzing in Bavaria together with vagon parts (Clausing 2005; Schmotz 2005; Metzner-Nebelsick

2005b), Stillfried (Kaus 1984), Frg (Tomedi 2002), Leibnitz (Metzner-Nebelsick 2001: 147,Fig. 19) or Pcs-Jakabhegy, Tum. 1 (Metzner-Nebelsick 2002: 276, Fig. 129; with better drawingof iron objects: Kemenczei 2005, Pl. 5 B).


12/36

128

-specic mix of eastern, local and sometimes even western elements reects the urgentneed of the ruling elites of south Central Europe to adopt new concepts of status repre-sentation at the beginning of the Hallstatt period. New families and sometimes also wellestablished lineages chose different patterns of display of rank as well as long distanceafliations, before nally in the 2ndhalf of the 8thc. BC the modes of cultural identityof the newly formed Hallstatt world had been forged. It can be shown that the choiceof objects of prestigious character was highly dependent on single individuals and theafnities and personal ties of their families, naturally involving different kinds of mobil-ity23.It seems to be the case that for areas like Bavaria or Bohemia eastern commoditieswere imported via the Carpathian Basin, using the well established routes of exchangealong the Danube, whereas the communities in Transdanubia or Slavonia (in Croatia)certainly maintained more direct personal contacts to polities in the northern Cauca-sus24. It is only in Transdanubia and Slavonia that we also nd east European types of

jewellery in the local cremation graves, a fact that indicates a greater identi

cation witheastern ways of living by also adopting eastern codes of body ornaments which might beassociated with women25. In these areas on the south eastern edge of the Urneld worldthe open landscape of the adjacent Hungarian plain offered good conditions for directcontacts with the MG population and their mobile, pastoralist way of living. It is unclearweather this noticeable eastern fascination among the inhabitants of this border regionsimply reects peaceful exchange patterns or rather is the result of a confrontation witha growing antagonistic power base beyond the Carpathian Mountains or even closer by,in the Hungarian Plain east of the river Danube. The nal answer to this question, in myopinion, can not be given at the moment. What can however be observed, is the differ-

ence between the Pre-Scythian period and the succeeding Early Scythian period (7th

to 5th

c. BC) within the Carpathian Basin, when the Hungarian Plain and parts of Transylvaniaare inhabited by cultural groups with a Scythian material culture as well as a steppeeconomy and ideology26, a presence that had at times devastating effect on the adjacententirely sedentary Hallstatt communities. There are virtually no nds of Scythians stylewhich inuenced the Hallstatt world27and instead destruction events in fortied Hallstatt

period settlements seem to be the result of a Scythian onslaught in western Slovakia andwestern Poland28.

23 Metzner-Nebelsick 2005b. The cremation burial of a warrior from Knzing near Deggendorf in Ba-

varia is a good example. It contained pieces of a late Urn

eld wagon of west European type, localpottery and other metal nds as well as horse gear of Caucasian proto-type which was very likelyproduced in Slavonia in modern Northeast Croatia and I think reached the upper Danube region viaa personal voyage or personal contacts of a member of the local ruling family.

24 The people of the north Caucasian Koban Culture also let a sedentary life (Reinhold 2007; Rein-hold, Belinskij, Korobov 2007).

25 Metzner-Nebelsick 2004a. As comparison for Caucasian costumes see Reinhold 2007.26 Chochorowski 1985.27 HaD daggers were an autonomous West-Hallstatt invention (Sievers 1982).28 Teran 1998; Hellmuth 2006; Poland: Nebelsick 2003. Two mass graves, one in the fortied settle-

ment of Stillfried (Eibner 1980) at the edge of the river March/Morava and in Gomolava in Serbian

Vojvodina (Tasi 1972), which were used by Chochorowski (1993: 218 ff) as key argument ofa Cimmerian attack in both cases,can also be seen as signs of internal conict, since no signicantlyCimmerian or steppe bound artefacts can be associated with them.


13/36

129

Two centuries earlier however the situation was very different. Obviously the adop-tion and adaption of eastern innovations in martial technology to which also bridlingtechniques must be counted were of great importance to Urneld as well as earlyHallstatt communities west of the Danube. This is probably due to the obvious fact thatthe adoption of superior weapons technology by one community always evokes a swiftresponse from neighbours and rivals. None the less direct evidence for eastern attackscan not be easily discerned. The reason forthis lies in the peculiarities of the adoption ofelements of the culture of the eastern European steppe in the Hungarian Plain.

THE MEZCST GROUP IN THE CULTURAL SETTINGOF THE 9THAND 8THCENTURIES BC

In 1998 and 2002 I followed the Hungarian scholar Erzsbet Pateks argument29

thatamong all areas, in which eastern or eastern inspired types of horse gear and weapons aredistributed, the Hungarian Plain shows the most signicantly distinct cultural appearance

by the existence of the inhumation graves and cemeteries of the already mentioned MG.In 1993 Jan Chochorowski who argued in favour of several waves of (aggressive) migra-tion of nomadic groups from the north Pontic steppe into the Carpathian Basin developedthe following scenario in order to account for the MGs presence. Due to a period ofdesiccation in the north Pontic steppe zone in the Late Bronze Age the sedentary com-munities of Belozrka culture, were faced with a deterioration of environmental condi-tions. Around 1000 BC they began turning to a nomadic subsistence strategy in order

to survive. However we have to bear in mind that Belozrka communities already seemto have relied on husbandry of cattle and sheep to a large extent and that at least partlymobile lifestyle can already be proposed for previous cultural groups like the Yamnayaculture of the early 3rdmillennium BC30. However, in his subsequent argumentation Cho-chorowski suggests that these dryer conditions were so extreme that even nomadism didnot guarantee survival with the consequence that those recently turned nomads had toseek better living conditions in areas with higher rainfall levels. This made the meadowsand pastures of the forest steppes in the Hungarian Plain, the Ukrainian forest steppesas well as the north Caucasian piedmont an attractive target for the expansion of steppe

people of the North Pontic area (ernogorovka group)31. The state of research as it pres-

ents itself at the moment does not support this argument32. If, following Chochorowskisthesis, we rst look towards the east and compare the Carpathian evidence with the

29 Patek 1974; 1989/1990; 1993.30 For Belozrka: Agulnikov 1996; Otroenko 1998; Vanugov 1990; Yamnaya culture: Shishlina,

Hiebert 1998; Shishlina 2004.31 I will not readdress the problem of the ernogorovka and Novoerkassk phases or groups, which

have been seen as consecutive by Terenokin (1976) but are now accepted as being largely contem-porary but rather culturally different. For further reading see Dubovskaja 1997; Reinhold 2007.

32 There is as far as I can see no scientic basis for the argument that a dryer climate would have lead

to insufcient grazing grounds. The dry grass lands of the immediate north Pontic hinterland haveoffered ample pasture for communities, including the Royal Scythians, from prehistoric until recenttimes.


14/36


15/36

131

Pressure on the established Late Bronze Age system may have been increased,when climatic conditions did alter at that time36, although the evidence for the easternCarpathian Basin again is still inconclusive. It is tempting to imagine a scenario inwhich some severe winters with high precipitation levels may have caused extensiveooding in spring, as indeed was the case in the year 1879 with the terrible ood ofthe river Tisza causing hundreds of deaths and the almost total destruction of the townof Szeged37, which had in turn a devastating effect on the crops or even livestock. Asanother consequence crops may have been poor or indeed have failed. The resultinghardship may again have undermined the status and acceptance of the ruling elites.A similar model has been proposed by Brian Fagan and others for the period of theso-called Little Ice Age beginning in the 14 thcentury A.D38. So far however, the ar-chaeological record in the area and time in question does not give any proof for sucha model.

Even if the rather sensitive eco-system in the Hungarian Plain with a natural foreststeppe vegetation was affected by a couple of bad harvests and more threatening even byooding after high snow or rain fall levels in winter and spring39, a system collapse doesnot necessarily need to have originated in a changing climate, as similar breaks withinthe Bronze Age history of Europe show, like at the end of the Early Bronze Age in Cen-tral Germany or again at the end of the Bronze Age in the same area40.

In my opinion the proposed internal threats to the Late Bronze Age political as wellas economic system formed the basis for its vulnerability to an outside menace and de-

pendent cultural changes in the 9thc. BC. These outside threats may be seen in the formof the occasional inux of warrior bands from the areas east of the Carpathian Mountain

range, although so far no evidence for aggressive attacks on a larger scale can be de-duced from the archaeological record. Settlements in the lowlands may simply have beenabandoned either because of ooding or wetter climatic conditions in general or becauseof occasional attacks of nomads. However, again our knowledge of the settlement recordis still rather poor and we have to bear in mind that we still do not fully understand theceramic development between the 10thand 7thc. BC. It could therefore very well be thecase that some settlements existed even in times of the Mezcst-Group. The resultsof recent large scale modern excavations, for instance, are starting to revise the thesisof an almost total abandonment of Gva culture settlements in the Pre-Scythian period

36 Behringer 2010, for the Alpine region: Billamboz 1997.37 Meyers Konversationslexikon 4thedition 1885-1892, vol. 15 (http://www.gutenberg.org/les/10223/

10223-h/m4_15_04.html).38 Fagan 2000.39 Disastrousoods were a menace in this at plane until the 19thcentury when large scale dyke build-

ing programmes shaped this landscape that we know today. In contrast to my article in 1998, inwhich I argued in favour of processes of silting as reason for the decline of agricultural activities,I now think ooding is the far more decisive factor.

40 For the Late Bronze Age see Nebelsick 2007, who argues in a similar way but with different solu-tions for the middle Elbe region, were over extensive salt exploitation may have been the reason

for degradation processes as indeed they were in the 18th

century A.D. where deforestation causedeconomic problems and nally substantial social change and the exploitation of the brown coal(Bilkenroth 2003: 160; Ziolkowski 1990).


16/36

132

as proposed by Tibor Kemenczei 25 years ago41. In the recently excavated but unpub-lished HaB1 lowland settlement of Baks-Temetpart in the eastern Hungarian county ofCsongrd pre-Scythian type horse ornaments have been uncovered indicating a youngeroccupation phase and the existence of Gva Culture settlements in the 8thc. BC42. If thisadmittedly thin evidence of settlement activity in the Hungarian Plain in Pre-Scythianstimes may be directly connected with the people of the MG or if two contemporaneousgroups co-existed in the same environment, remains yet to be proven.

Mezcst-Group: the evidence revisited

In the 1990s I argued that the MG was formed to a large extend by indigenous people fromindigenous Late Bronze Age communities who changed their subsistence strategies in or-der to cope with changing environmental conditions. Indeed a mobile way of life offered

a larger

exibility and especially within the Hungarian Plain which provided ample foodsupply for livestock. Nonetheless the catalyst for such a change was probably exposureto a prototype or role model such as mobile specialists who could transmit knowledge aswell as the abilities to make a shift to a totally different, i.e. mobile or more mobile modeof living possible43. In the case of the eastern Carpathian Basin people from the north Pon-tic steppes or mounted warriors of north Caucasian origin are likely transmitters of suchknowledge. As I have shown, a major agent was the breeding, bridling and possibly ex-change of horses on both sides of the Carpathian Mountains from the 9 thc. BC onwards.

The proposed shift of indigenous people of the Carpathian Basin to a new lifestyleand subsistence strategy may also been the result of marriage patterns between male mi-

grants be it warriors or pastoralists and local women, possibly from various regionalbackgrounds. This scenario could also account for the large variety of pottery styles,typical for the MG44.

Although much of my proposed scenario of a system collapse and dependent gradualchange of the social as well as economical organisation of the Late Bronze Age societyin the eastern Carpathian Basin still holds true, the strongest argument in favour of themigration model is the ideological, i.e. religious shift in form of the newly adopted burialrite of inhumation, including a new way of providing the dead with a certain set of gravegoods. Although direct imports again are very scarce, the structure of the internmentswhich only include one to two pots in the grave can also be found in the pre-Scythian

ernogorovka Culture in modern day Ukraine and southern Russia45. Nonetheless differ-ing types of grave goods mark a clear distinction between the MG and the ernogorovka

41 Kemenczei (1984: 95) sees an inux of aggressive groups from the steppes.42 I am thankful to Gbor Szab for the information; as preliminary report see Szab 2006: 152; 2008:

143.43 However, that these shifts can happen suddenly within communities living in marginal environ-

ments was proven by the Plains Indians of North America who within a short period of time turnedinto mobile hunters after the introduction of horses by the Spaniards.

44 Metzner-Nebelsick 1998; 2000a.45

For an imported pot with perforated rim from this region in a childrens grave in Algynear Szegedin Southeast Hungary (Metzner-Nebelsick 2000a: 175, Fig. 4; Matuz 2000). For the burial customof the ernogorovka Culture see: Dubovskaja 1997.


17/36

133

culture46. The most striking is the absence of weapons in MG male graves as well as thescarcity of metal bits and bridles which stand in strong contrast to martial ernogorovkaor Caucasian Koban culture inventories. On the other hand rectangular richly decorated

bone plates are only found in female graves of the MG. As a consequence, even if weassume an inux of pastoralists from east of the Carpathian Mountains, it is clear that thelocal cultural substrate remained strong.

If we come back briey to the question of real eastern imports, the evidence from hoardsis rare but recognizable. Imported artefacts include round bronze mirrors with central loopfrom the Biharugra complex (Fig. 2). Parallels can be found in Siberia in pre- as well asScythian contexts47. In contrast to weapons and horse gear their use reects an ideologyalien to the Late Bronze Age representation schemes in Central Europe or the CarpathianBasin. Thus their deposition can be interpreted as a sign of the presence of a new group of

people who added a new component to the traditional deposition assemblage48.

The presence of eastern artefact types in the west per se does not necessarily mandatethe presence of eastern immigrants. This is of course a problem which is debated by schol-ars dealing with every prehistoric period in which migration is an issue as the objects them-selves say little about the agent i.e. gift exchange, marriage patterns or migration or indi-vidual mobility involved. Two examples of possible imports may illustrate this problem.

In the hoard of Dunakmld included three north Caucasian iron spear heads withdouble holes as well as reign ornaments which only have parallels in the early Scyth-ian tombs royal of Kelermes in the Kuban region and the rich kurgan with a chariot ofUachito49, hinting at a rather late date for this nd of the pre-Scythian period in Hun-gary. Secondly the unique horse head bridles of the Stillfried hoard (Fig. 3) from Lower

Austria must be mentioned since the only convincing parallels although once againwith stylistic differences are found in the Kuban region, in the cemetery of Psekups50.However a contextual analysis is needed in order to reach a better understanding of thecharacter of these nds.

Taking a more detailed look at the few 9thand 8thc. BC hoard nds, in the HungarianPlain and immediate surrounding areas different patterns of hoarding can be observed.Firstly hoards in which horse gear predominates51reect a new concept of hoarding, more

46 See Metzner-Nebelsick 1998.47 The nd context of the mirrors from Biharugra is yet unclear. According to Kemenczeis research

in old archives they are part of the Ugra hoard. It is worth noting that some of the mirrors were cutout of metal vessels of the Hajdbrszrmny type, thus marking an even more signicant breakwith local traditions.

48 Metzner-Nebelsick 2002: 470 ff.49 Kelermes: Galanina 1997; Uachito: rlich 1994, Pl. 5.50 Stillfried: Kaus 1988/1989; Psekups: rlich 2007: 371, Fig. 190. The form of the Stillfried side pie-

ces can be considered as a variant of the Carpathian type I (Metzner-Nebelsick 2002: 216, Fig. 99).Similar forms are very rare in the Caucasus (rlich 2007: 373, Fig. 192). The Uachito wagon graveis the closest parallel, where as the Psekups horse shaped sides pieces represent a completely differ-ent form which is not found in the west.

51 Fgd, Dunakmld, Dinnys and parts of the Biharugra-complex in Hungary, Vetiin western Ru-

mania and Moanec in the Ukrainian Middle Dnister region (Metzner-Nebelsick 2002, Pl. 129-131;Bader 1977; Smirnova, Vojnarovskyj 1994) distribution map see: Metzner-Nebelsick 2005a:336, Fig. 1.


18/36

134

traditional compositions like the hoards in Szanda in northeast Hungary or arengrad innortheast Croatia52, to name just two, show a widespread combination of male, femaleand horse gear artefacts and sometimes even a signicant metal-vessel-component likeit is the case in Sarkad in eastern Hungary53.

The new hoard type which contains almost exclusively horse gear may indeed becompared with similar sets of the Novoerkassk type horse gear in the northern Cauca-

52

Vinski-Gasparini 1973, Pl. 130B, 131; Metzner-Nebelsick 2002: 60, Fig. 30; Vasi, Kapuran2007.53 Gyucha 1996; Kemenczei 2005, Pl. 44-47A.

Fig. 2. Mirrors from Biharugra, eastern Hungary (1-3) and Siberia (4-5); bronze discs (mirrors?)cut out of sheet bronze metal decorated in late Urneld style from Biharugra (6-8). 4: BarsuichaV, Kurgan 6, grave 1; 5: Znamenka, Kurgan 13,2 both near Minusinsk. Bronze; scale 1:2,5 (afterKemenczei 2005, Pl. 15; lenova 1997: 67, Fig. 21:12; Metzner-Nebelsick 2002, Pl. 136:13)


19/36

135

Fig. 3.Two pairs of side pieces from the so-called Stillfried hoard, Lower Austria (1-4); selection

of horse gear from the wagon grave of Uachito, Kuban region (5-8); horse shaped side piecesfrom a grave in Psekups, Kuban region (9), both northern Caucasus; bronze; scale 1:2 (afterKaus 1989/89: 253, Pl. 2:8-11; rlich 2007: 244, Fig. 43:4; 275, Fig. 80:9-12)


20/36

136

sus and the Forest steppe zone. However, in the east the types hoarded are with a fewexceptions generally different. The typical Novoerkassk bridle is missing altogetherwest of the Southern Bug River and furthermore the aforementioned sets were pre-dominately deposited within elite graves. What remains remarkable however is the factthat horse-gear-dominated hoards in the Carpathian Basin are only found in a steppeenvironment just as the MG graves. If we assume that the hoards with a predominatelyhorse gear component represent offerings by people of the MG, this may indeed showthat signicant forms of symbolic representation such as graves and hoards were basedon a close ideological connection between the MG and the steppe based cultures of thePontic regions. Nevertheless an indigenous facette of this hoarding custom is shown

by the fact that local; i.e. Carpathian types were included in these hoards. These varia-tions led me to the conclusion that the local cultural substrate remained strongly vis-ible within the MG.

New approaches: Stamped ware pottery groups

Focussing on the topic of migration, in the history of the Late Bronze Age and EarlyIron Age in the eastern Carpathian Basin, the afore mentioned steppe inuences must bediscussed. The people of the MG are however by no means the only actors in a rathercomplicated play54. So let us turn our attention to some other aspects we have to takeinto consideration.

In the eastern Carpathian Basin and adjacent areas two major cultures with variousregional groups seem to have also been responsible for forms of mobility between 1000

and 750 BC.The rst is the so-called Gva culture with a signicant pottery style with an evenlonger tradition within Transylvania and northeast Hungary55. The second is formed bythe bearers of the so-called stamped-ware-cultures or cultural groups.

At the southern edge of the Hungarian Plain, as well as in Transylvania, Munteniaand Oltenia south and in Moldova and the Middle-Dnister-Region east of the Carpathi-an Mountains stamped pottery is represented by the older (10th to 9thc. BC) Gornea--Kalakaa phase56and the more widely distributed Basarabi-culture or Basarabi-culturalcomplex57.

54 For an overview of Carpathian cultures see Hnsel 1976; Gum1993; 1995.55 For further reading see: Kemenczei 1984; Lszl 1994; Szab 1996; Pankau 2004.56 Serbian terminology introduced by Medovi1978. Frank Falkenstein (1998: 272, Fig. 239, 274)

has argued that the increase in settlements on the Titel Plateau near Moorin in the Vojvodina andthe emergence of stamped pottery of the Kalakaa style can be connected with the gradual inux orcolonisation of new people from central Serbia as early as the 12 thcentury BC (for the chronologysee Hnsel, Medovi1991 and Rder 1991: 119 ff.).

57 Vulpe 1986; Gum 1993; Kongress Drobeta-Turnu Severin 1996. Although this can not be dis-cussed here in detail, it must be mentioned that there is a distinction between the Basarabi culturalcomplex as far as the use of the specic pottery style is concerned, and the Basarabi group formed

by people using this particular pottery in settlements as well as graves with a distinctive burial riteand a canonical grave goods assemblage. This group is located around the Iron Gate at the Danubeand adjacent areas immediately to the north (Popovi, Vukmanovi1998).


21/36


22/36

138

exchange of goods stored in pottery or thirdly as a slow integration of a new and moreappealing way of the decoration of luxurious pottery into the local repertoire by otherexchange modes66. In any case this specic subsistence strategy offered amble opportu-nities for exchange of goods, ideas and people in both directions.

A striking example for such contacts from west to east can be seen in the site of

Novoaleksandrovka at the mouth of the Don River, where a Pre-Scythian warrior steleof north Caucasian-Steppe type was associated with Basarabi-pottery (Fig. 4)67. Obvi-ously the pottery represents the remains of offering activities at a site commemoratinga nomadic warrior in his local environment.

Communities belonging to the Basarabi complex in Transylvania and in the southernHungarian Plain (Banat) maintained a ourishing exchange network which included theMiddle Dnister region, the eastern Hallstatt culture68, the ernoles culture in the south-ern Dnister and Dnepr regions as well as the MG in eastern Hungary and Slovakia. Itwould exceed the scope of this article to explain the character of this network more fully.However, it is important to note that despite the fundamental culture change in the low-

lands of the Hungarian Plain traditional metalworking centres of the HaB1 period (hoardhorizon IV), located in Transylvania, survived well into the Hallstatt Period / 8thcenturyBC as Tudor Soroceanu has recently shown through his analysis of the bronze situla ofBrncovneti in Transylvania69.

66 Which can next to imports also be shown in areas as distant as Carinthia in Austria (Metzner--Nebelsick 1992).

67 Bespalyi, Parusimov 1991, Fig. 7; for the warrior or so called Cimmerian stele as western variantof the Eurasian stag stele see among others: Kovalv 2000.

68 Eibner 2001; Metzner-Nebelsick 1992.69

Soroceanu 2005 with an interesting new facette to the chronological discussion of the Early IronAge by dating the bronze situla hoard of Blvneti in Transylvania to the HaC period, i.e. middleHallstatt period.

Fig. 4.Pre-Scythian warrior stele from Novoaleksandrovka, lower Don area, found with Ba-sarabi Style pottery (after Bespalij/Parusimov 1991: 191, Fig. 7)


23/36

139

Similarly to the cultural groups with stamped and incised pottery the term Gva isapplied to a variety of different regional groups70. The earliest manifestation of its char-acteristic uted pottery, often with reddish interior and shining black outer surface, canalready by recognized in the 13thcentury BC71. If we look at patterns of interaction in theEarly Iron Age in the eastern Carpathian Basin, it is worth noting that the Gva cultureis distributed on both sides of the Carpathian Mountains (Fig. 5a), i.e. in Transylvania

and the Middle Dnister region. This can be seen in the distribution patterns of potteryof the Gva style, similar settlement structures, comparable symbolic expression in theform of clay idols and the general lack of burials within larger cremation cemeteries. Thelatter can however be found in northeast Hungary72and may be seen as inuence by thecontemporary Middle Danubian Urneld culture.

70 For pottery styles in eastern Hungary: Kemenczei 1984; Szab 1996; in Transylvania and northwestRomania mainly the sites of Teleac, Mediaand Petea-Csengersima: Ciugudean 2009 with refer-ence to Vasiliev, Adela, Ciugudean 1991; Pankau 2004; Marta 2009; areas east of the Carpathians:Smirnova 1974; 1998; Lszl 1994.

71

According to new14

C dates from the site of Lpuin northwest Transylvania: Metzner-Nebelsick,Kacs, Nebelsick forthcoming.72 Kemenczei 1984: 58 ff.

Fig. 5a.Cultures and cultural groups in the rst half of the 9th c. BC. 1: Middle DanubianUrneld culture; 2: Kyjatice Urneld group; 3: Mezcst Group; 4: Gva Culture; 5: differentgroups using stamped and incised pottery (Gornea-Kalakaa; Ostrov-Insula Banului; Babadag;Penievo, Cozia-Sacharna, ernoles); 6: ernogorovka cultural group; 7: Koban culture (using

distribution maps by Dubovskaja 1997; Furmnek, Veliaik, Vladar 1999; Gum 1993; Hnsel1976; Kauba 2006; Kemenczei 1984; Metzner-Nebelsick 1998; Reinhold 2007)


24/36

140

Recently Marcin S. Przybya has drawn the attention to an enclave of uted pottery ofthe Gva-style in southeast Poland73. Although a couple of Gva pots were known from

the area for some time, Przybya has now given a comprehensive report of all knownsites which have produced Gva style or uted pottery. Like for the Middle Dnister Re-gion the pottery is identical in form and style and is representing the whole repertoirecomparable to that of the inner-Carpathian lands so that one cannot explain this quantityas occasional imports but must see it as result of the migration of people from the upperTisza area, as Przybya convincingly argued74. The motor for these trans mountain con-tacts were probably seasonal movements of herders as part of farming communities witha high emphasis on cattle husbandry, as could be shown for the Alba district in Transyl-vania. In contrast to the Middle Dnister Region the exchange of metal products between

73 Przybya 2009; also Kossack 1996.74 Przybya 2009: 394.

Fig. 5b.Cultures and cultural groups in the second half of the 9thand rst half of the 8 thcentu-ries BC. 1: Middle Danubian Urneld culture/East Alpine Hallstatt culture; 2: Basarabi groupwithin the Basarabi cultural complex; 3: Mezcst Group; 4: Gva Culture; 5: different groupsusing stamped and incised pottery (early Basarabi cultural complex; Babadag; Penievo;

ernoles); 6: ernogorovka cultural group; 7: Koban culture. Triangle: hoards with exclusivehorse gear or horse weapon component (Fgd, Holihrady; Ilok; Dinnys, Dunakmld); stars:gold hoards of the Michakw group (Michakw 1 & 2; Besenyszg-Fokorupuszta; Boarta, Dalj,Pusztaegres) and Budapest-Angyalfld (using distribution maps by Dubovskaja 1997; Gum1993; Hnsel 1976; Kauba 2000; Metzner-Nebelsick 1998; Reinhold 2007; Smirnova 1998;Ursuiu 2002)


25/36

141

the inner-Carpathian areas is virtually not existent. As Wojciech Blajer could show, thebronze industry in southeast Poland in the 13thto 9thc. BC forms a distinct group75. Whatis interesting however is the fact that the cross mountain contacts were maintained in the8thc. BC although the evidence is still scarce the most north-eastern sherd of BasarabiS-stamped-style was found near Przemyl76.

The Michakw gold hoard group

Next to the MG, another nd category must be considered in the context of migrationor cultural assimilation within the Carpathian Basin in the early rst millennium BC.This is the Michakw group of gold hoards (Fig. 5b)77. On one hand these hoards arecomposed of a mixture of items belonging to a traditional European Bronze Age rep-resentative canon of symbols of power including certain bracelets and other jewellery

types. Yet on the other hand they include new elements with a south eastern or eastEuropean focus such as Balcanic bulae and most prominently animal style bulaeand appliqus. The latter reect a cultural background of nomadic symbolism whichcan be found within a steppe environment reaching from the western Pontic steppes

between the Danube delta and the northern Caucasus and beyond as far east as Mon-golia. Unique elements in these hoards like dress accessories, golden bowls with NearEastern prototypes and a crown in the Michakw 1 hoard are reexions of historicalevents which can most likely be connected with movements of people like the Cim-merians into the Near East within the 8thc. BC. However, even within this exceptionalgroup of votive offerings local elements with a long standing tradition of having rep-

resentative character are present. Hoards of the Michakw group lack any weapon orhorse gear deposits and are only composed of prestigious dress accessories so-calledregalia.

The most striking fact concerning the deposition of the Michakw type hoard ndsis that all of them were deposited in cultural border situations between the most westernlimits of cultural groups with a steppe bound nomadic ideology (MG or north Ponticnomadic groups) and the various groups and cultures of the Urneld and early Hallstattcultures in Transdanubia and Transylvania (Basarabi cultural complex). A cultural bor-der situation may also be observed between the Gva culture with uted and the stampedware cultures in the Middle Dnister region where Michakw is located. Without being

able to embark on a discussion of this complex topic in detail, it can be said that the peo-ple of Michakw donated precious golden objects to their gods in a manner reectinglocal traditions. Next to these traditional items such as bracelets, phalerae etc. they alsosacriced artefacts which belonged to an ideological sphere of nomadic warrior elites,which were active between the mouth of the Danube and the northern Caucasus as well

beyond into Central Asia.

75 Blajer 2001.76 Destroyed cemetery of Manasterz (Chochorowski 1989: 597, Fig. 3, 12; and a more recent nds,

see Przybya 2003; for distribution of the motif seeMetzner-Nebelsick 1992: 365, Fig. 1).77 Metzner-Nebelsick 2004b; For the older literature see: Hadaczek 1904; Ebert 1908; Kemenczei2005.


26/36


27/36

143

social groups and their different cultural identities. Nonetheless mobility and presumablyalso small scale migration processes played an important role as agents in this interaction.These may have been incoming pastoralists or indeed warrior bands, which may have in-termarried with local women thus accounting for the continuity of local cultural patternson the one hand and high innovation potential on the other81.

References:

Agulnikov, S.1996 Necropola culturii Belozerka de la Cazaclia(Bibliotheca Thracologica14), Bucureti.

Bader, T.1977 Bronzedepotfunde Kreismuseum Satu Mare(Inventaria ArchaeologicaR 70), Bonn.

Btora, J.2000 Der Fund eines Bronzedolches aus dem Zeitabschnitt des sog. Thrako-kimmerischen Horizon-

tes in Mal Cetn (Bez. Nitra), SW Slowakei, Pravk N10: 435-448.

Becker, C.2000 Subsistenzstrategien whrend der frhen Metallzeiten im zentralkarpatische Raum neue archo-

zoologische Daten zur Coofeni- und Monteoru Kultur, Prhistorische Zeitschrift 75: 63-92.

Behringer, W.2010 Kulturgeschichte des Klimas: von der Eiszeit bis zur globalen Erwrmung, Mnchen.

Bespalyi, E.I. and Parusimov, I.N.

1991 Kompleksy perechodnogo i ranneskifskogo periodov na Ninem Donu, Sovetskaja Archaeologi-ja 3: 179-195.

Bilkenroth, K.-D.2003 Jngere Geschichte, Gegenwart und Zukunft des mitteldeutschen Braunkohletagebaus, in:

Bergbau und Dichtung Friedrich von Hardenberg (Novalis) zum 200. Todestag, edited byE. Sent, Weimar-Jena, pp. 159-169.

Billamboz, A.1997 Waldentwicklung unter Klima- und Menscheneinu in der Bronzezeit, in: Goldene Jahrhun-

derte. Die Bronzezeit in Sdwestdeutschland, edited by G. Kastl, P. Rau and G. Wesselkamp(ALManach2), Stuttgart, pp. 52-53.

Blajer, W.2001 Skarby przedmiotw metalowych z epoki brzu i wczesnej epokielaza na ziemiach polskich,

Krakw.

Boroffka, N.2005 Siedlungsmuster im bronzezeitlichen Siebenbrgen Am Beispiel des Gebiets um Aiud, jud.

Alba, in:Interpretationsraum Bronzezeit. Bernhard Hnsel von seinen Schlern gewidmet, ed-ited by B. Horejs et al. (Universittsforschungen zur Prhistorischen Archologie121), Bonn,pp. 125-142.

Burmeister, S.1996 Migration und ihre archologische Nachweisbarkeit, Archologische Informationen 19: 13-21.

81 I am grateful to Louis D. Nebelsick for his corrections of this article and my English language.


28/36

144

Chochorowski, J.1985 Die Rolle der Vekerzug-Kultur (VK) im Rahmen der skythischen Einsse in Mitteleuropa,

Prhistorische Zeitschrift 60: 204-271.1989 Cmentarzysko grupy tarnobrzeskiej w Manasterzu (stan. 6), gm. Wizownica, woj. Przemyl,

wwietle dotychczasowych bada, in: Grupa tarnobrzeska kultury uyckiej. Materiay z kon-ferencji 12-14 listopada 1986 r. w Rzeszowie, vol. 2, edited by A. Barowska and E. Szaapata,Rzeszw, pp. 585-615.

1993 Ekspansja kimmeryjska na tereny Europy rodkowej(Rozprawy Habilitacyjne UniwersytetJagielloski260), Krakw.

Ciugudean, H.2009 Bemerkungen zur Chronologie der befestigten Siedlung von Teleac, Analele Banatului, S.N.

Arheologie-Istorie 17: 65-94.

Clausing, Ch.2005 Macht und Grab Zum Wagengrab von Knzing in Niederbayern und seiner Stellung im urnen-

felderzeitlichen Mitteleuropa, Vortrge des 23. Niederbayerischen Archologentages 2005:75-103.

lenova, N.L.1997 Centralnaja Azija i skify. I. Data kurgana Aran i ego mesto v sisteme kultur skifskogo mira,

Moskva.

Daragan, M.N.2005 Periodisierung und Chronologie der Siedlung abotin, Eurasia Antiqua 10: 55-146.

Dietz, U.L.1998 Sptbronze- und frheisenzeitliche Trensen im Nordschwarzmeergebiet und im Nordkaukasus

(Prhistorische BronzefundeXVI 5), Stuttgart.

Dubovskaja, O.R.1997 Zur ethnischen und kulturellen Einordnung der Novoerkassk-Gruppe, Eurasia Antiqua 3:

277-328.

Ebert, M.1908 Der Goldfund von Dalj, Jahresheft Archologisches Institut Wien 11: 259-276.

Eibner, A.2001 Der Donau-Drau-Save-Raum im Spiegel gegenseitiger Einunahme und Kommunikation in

der frhen Eisenzeit. Zentralorte entlang der Argonautenstrae, in: Die Drau-, Mur- undRaab-Region im 1. vorchristlichen Jahrtausend. Akten des Internationalen und Interdiszi-

plinren Symposiums vom 26. bis 29. April 2000 in Bad Radkersburg, edited by A. Lippert,Bonn, pp. 181-190.

Eibner, C.1980 Die Mehrfachbestattung aus einer Grube unter dem urnenfelderzeitlichen Wall in Stillfried an

der March, N, in:Forschungen in Stillfried, vol. 4 (Verffentlichungen der sterreichischenArbeitsgemeinschaft fr Ur- und Frhgeschichte13-14), Wien, pp. 107-142.

rlich, V.R.1994 U istokov ranneskifskogo kompleksa, Moskva.2007 Severo-Zapadnyj Kavkaz v naale eleznogo veka. Protomeotskaja gruppa pamjatnikov,

Moskva.

Fagan, B.2000 The Little Ice Age: How Climate Made History, 1300-1850, New York.


29/36

145

Falkenstein, F.1998 Feudvar II. Die Siedlungsgeschichte des Titeler Plateaus(Prhistorische Archologie in S-

dosteuropa14), Kiel.

Furmnek, V., Veliaik, L. and Vladr, J.

1999 Die Bronzezeit im slowakischen Raum (Prhistorische Archologie in Sdosteuropa 15),Rahden/Westfalen.

Galanina, L.K.1997 Die Kurgane von Kelermes(Steppenvlker Eurasiens1), Moskau.

Gallus, S. and Horvth, T.1939 Un peuple cavalier prscythique en Hongrie trouvailles archologiques du premier Age du Fer

et leurs reltions avec lEurasie, Budapest.

Gum, M.1993 Civilizaia primei epoci a erului n sud-vestul Romniei (Bibliotheca Thracologica 4),

Bucureti.1995 The End of the Bronze Age and the Beginning of the Early Iron Age in South-Western Romania,

Western Serbia and North-Western Bulgaria. A Short Review, Thraco-Dacica 16: 99-137.

Gyucha, A.1996 Kora vaskori leletek Sarkad hatrban, A Bks Megyei Mzeumok Kzlemnyei 16:

67-127.

Hadaczek, K.1904 Zote skarby michakowskie (Muzeum imienia Dzieduszyckich we Lwowie9), Lww-Krakw.

Hnsel, B.1976 Beitrge zur regionalen und chronologischen Gliederung der lteren Hallstattzeit an der unteren

Donau (Beitrge zur ur- und frhgeschichtlichen Archologie des Mittelmeer-Kulturraumes16-17), Bonn.

Hnsel, B. and Machnik, J. (eds.)1998 Das Karpatenbecken und die osteuropische Steppe. Nomadenbewegungen und Kulturaus-

tausch in den vorchristlichen Metallzeiten (4000-500 v. Chr.)(Prhistorische Archologie inSdosteuropa12), Mnchen-Rahden Westf.

Hnsel, B. and Medovi, P.1991 Vorbericht ber die jugoslawisch-deutschen Ausgrabungen in der Siedlung von Feudvar bei

Moorin (Gem. Titel, Vojvodina) von 1986-1990. Bronzezeit-Vorrmische Eisenzeit, Bericht der

Rmisch-Germanischen Kommission 72: 45-203.Hansen, S.2005 ber bronzezeitliche Horte in Ungarn Horte als soziale Praxis, in: Interpretationsraum

Bronzezeit. Bernhard Hnsel von seinen Schlern gewidmet, edited by B. Horejs et al. (Univer-sittsforschungen zur Prhistorischen Archologie121), Bonn, pp. 211-230.

Hellmuth, A.2006 Pfeilspitzen. Untersuchungen zu den sogenannten skythischen Pfeilspitzen aus der befestigten

Hhensiedlung von Smolenice-Molpr(Universittsforschungen zur Prhistorischen Archolo-gie128), Bonn.

Holste, F.

1940 Zur Bedeutung und Zeitstellung der sogenannten thrako-kimmerischen Pferdegeschirr-bronzen, Wiener Prhistorische Zeitschrift 27: 7-32.


30/36

146

Httel, H.-G.1981 Bronzezeitliche Trensen in Mittel- und Osteuropa. Grundzge ihrer Entwicklung (Prhisto-

rische BronzefundeXVI 2), Mnchen.

Ivantchik, A.I.

2001 Kimmerier und Skythen. Kulturhistorische und chronologische Probleme der Archologie derosteuropischen Steppen und Kaukasiens in vor- und frhskythischer Zeit(Steppenvlker Eur-asiens2), Moskau.

Kauba, M.T.2000 Rannee elezo v Lesostepi medu Dnestrom i Siretom(Kultura Kozija-Sacharna), Stratum plus

3: 241-492.2006 Fibeln mit Bgelkugeln in der Moldau und Anmerkungen zum gischen Einu im 10.-9. Jah-

rhundert v. Chr., Praehistorische Zeitschrift 81: 213-235.

Kaus, M.1984 Das Grberfeld der jngeren Urnenfelderzeit von Stillfried an der March. Ergebnisse der Aus-

grabungen 1975-1977(Forschungen in Stillfried6), Wien.1988/1989 Kimmerischer Pferdeschmuck im Karpatenbecken Das Stillfrieder Depot aus neuer

Sicht, Mitteilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft Wien 118/119: 247-257.

Kemenczei, T.1984 Die Sptbronzezeit Nordostungarns(Archaeologia Hungarica51), Budapest.2005 Funde ostkarpatenlndischen Typs im Karpatenbecken(Prhistorische BronzefundeXX, 10),

Stuttgart.

Kongress Drobeta-Turnu Severin1996 Der Basarabi-Komplex in Mittel- und Sdosteuropa. Kolloquium in Drobeta-Turnu Severin

(7.-9. November 1996), Bucureti.

Kossack, G.1980 Mittelasien und skythischer Tierstil, Beitrge zur Allgemeinen und Vergleichenden Archologie

2: 91-107.1994 Neufunde aus dem Novoerkassker Formenkreis und ihre Bedeutung fr die Geschichte step-

penbezogener Reitervlker der spten Bronzezeit, Il Mar Nero 1: 19-54.1996 Bronzezeitliche Keramik aus Zschornewitz und ihre Verwandten in Banat, in: Problemy

epoki brzu i wczesnej epoki elaza w Europie rodkowej. Ksiga jubileuszowa powiconaMarkowi Gedlowi w szedziesitrocznicurodzin i czterdziestolecie pracy w UniwersytecieJagielloskim, edited by J. Chochorowski, Krakw, pp. 293-316.

Kovalv, A.A.2000 O proischodenii olennych kamnej zapadnogo regiona, in:Archeologija, paleokologija i pa-leodemograja Evrazii. Sbornik statej, edited by V.S. Olchovskij, Moskva, pp. 139-180.

Kruelnicka, L.I.1979 Studien zur Besiedlung der ukrainischen Karpaten und des Karpatenvorlandes zu Beginn der

Eisenzeit,Acta Archaeologica Carpathica 19: 7385.1998 ornoliska kultura serednogo Pridnistrovja, Lviv.

Lszl, A.1994 ncepturile epociierului la est de Carpai(Bibliotheca Thracologica6), Bucureti.

Leskov, A.M. and rlich, V.R.

1999 Mogilnik Fars/Klady, Moskva.


31/36

147

Maleev, Ju.N.1988 Trackie grodziska okresu halsztackiego na pnocno-wschodnim Podkarpaciu. Thrakische

hallstattzeitliche Burgwlle im Nord-Osten des Karpaten-Vorgebirges, Acta ArchaeologicaCarpathica 27: 95-116.

Marta, L.2009 The Late Bronze Age Settlement of Petea-Csengersima, Satu Mare.

Matuz, E.2000 A Szeged-Algy258. ktkrzet terletn feltrt preszta temet, Mra Ferenc Mzeum vknyve

Studia Archaeologica 6: 139-164.

Medovi, P.1978 Naselja starijeg gvozdenog doba u jugoslovenskom Podunavlju, Beograd.

Metzner-Nebelsick, C.1992 Gefe mit basaraboider Ornamentik aus Frg, in:Festschrift zum 50 jhrigen Bestehen des

Instituts fr Ur- und Frhgeschichte der Leopold-Franzens-Universitt Innsbruck, edited byA. Lippert and K. Spindler (Universittsforschungen zur Prhistorischen Archologie 8),Bonn, pp. 349-383.

1998 Abschied von den Thrako-Kimmeriern? Neue Aspekte der Interaktion zwischen karpaten--lndischen Kulturgruppe der spten Bronze- und frhen Eisenzeit mit der osteuropischenSteppenkoine, in:Das Karpatenbecken und die osteuropische Steppe. Nomadenbewegungenund Kulturaustausch in den vorchristlichen Metallzeiten (4000-500 v. Chr.), edited by B. Hn-sel and J. Machnik (Prhistorische Archologie in Sdosteuropa12), Mnchen-Rahden Westf.,pp. 361-422.

2000a Early Iron Age Nomadism in the Great Hungarian Plain Migration or Assimilation? TheThraco-Cimmerian Problem Revisited, in: Kurgans, Ritual Sites, and Settlements Eurasian

Bronze and Iron Age, edited by J. Davis-Kimball et al. (British Archaeological Reports Inter-national Series890), Oxford, pp. 160-184.

2000b Kimmerier, in: Hoops Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde, vol. 16, edited byH. Beck, D. Geuenich and H. Steuer, Berlin-New York, pp. 504-523.

2001 Thrako-kimmerische Fundkomplexe zwischen der Sdoststeiermark, Sdwest-Transdanubienund Nordkroatien und ihre Bedeutung fr die Kulturentwicklung whrend der frhen Eisenzeit, in:Die Drau-, Mur- und Raab-Region im 1. vorchristlichen Jahrtausend. Akten des Internationalenund Interdisziplinren Symposiums vom 26. bis 29. April 2000 in Bad Radkersburg, edited byA. Lippert (Universittsforschungen zur Prhistorischen Archologie78), Bonn, pp. 131-154.

2002 Der Thrako-Kimmerische Formenkreis aus der Sicht der Urnenfelder- und Hallstattzeit imsdostlichen Pannonien(Vorgeschichtliche Forschungen23), Rahden/Westf.

2004a Wo sind die Frauen der Kimmerier? Ein Beitrag zum Kulturkontakt zwischen Kaukasus, nor-dpontischen Steppen und Karpatenbecken am Beispiel der Frauentrachten des 9. und 8. Jah-rhunderts v. Chr, in:Kimmerowie, Scytowie, Sarmaci. Ksiga powicona pamici ProfesoraTadeusza Sulimirskiego. Cimmerians, Scythians, Sarmatians. In memory of Professor TadeuszSulimirski, edited by J. Chochorowski, Krakw, pp. 271-297.

2004b Studien zur bronze- und frheisenzeitlichen Herrschaftssymbolik zwischen Skandinavien, Kar-patenbecken, Kaukasus und den Steppen Eurasiens am Beispiel des Stillkreises von Michakw,Habilitationsschrift, Berlin.

2005a Despre importana cronologici cultural-istorica depozitelor din Romnia n epoca trziea bronzului i n epoca timpurie aerului, in: Bronzefunde aus Rumnien (II). Beitrge zurKenntnis der vorskythenzeitlichen Metallurgie beiderseits der Karpaten Depozite de bron-

zuri din Romnia (II). Contribuii la cunoaterea metalurgiei prescitice de ambele pri aleCarpailor, edited by T. Soroceanu, Bistria-Cluj-Napoca, pp. 317-342.


32/36

148

2005b Das Wagengrab von Knzing im Licht seiner stlichen Beziehungen, Vortrge des 23. Nieder-bayerischen Archologentages 2005: 105-137.

Metzner-Nebelsick, C., Kacs, C. and Nebelsick, L.forthcoming A Bronze Age Ritual Structure on the Edge of the Carpathian Basin, in: The Tisza Plain

and Transylvania in the Second Millenium B.C. Symposium Satu Mare Juli 2008, edited byL. Marta, Satu Mare.

Meyers Konversationslexikon 4th edition 1885-1892, vol. 15 (http://www.gutenberg.org/les/10223/10223-h/m4_15_04.html).

Nebelsick, L.D.2003 Ein Kontext fr den Goldhort von Witaszkowo/Vettersfelde (A context for the gold hoard from

Witaszkowo/Vettersfelde), in:Adolf Furtwngler, der Archologe, edited by M. Flashar (Schrif-ten der Archologischen Sammlung Freiburg8), pp. 63-79.

2007 Die Grenze. Rituell denotierte Grabenstrukturen der spten Bronzezeit im Mittelelbe-Saale--Gebiet, in:Scripta praehistorica in honorem Biba Teran, edited by M. Bleiet al. (Situla44),Ljubljana, pp. 267-300.

Nestor, I.1934 Ein thrako-kimmerischer Goldfund aus Rumnien, Eurasia Septentrionalis Antiqua 9: 175-

-186.

Otroenko, V.V.1998 Die Westbeziehungen der Belozerka-Kultur, in: Das Karpatenbecken und die osteuropische

Steppe. Nomadenbewegungen und Kulturaustausch in den vorchristlichen Metallzeiten (4000--500 v. Chr.), edited by B. Hnsel and J. Machnik (Prhistorische Archologie in Sdosteu-ropa12), Mnchen-Rahden Westf., pp. 353-360.

Pankau, C.2004 Die lterhallstattzeitliche Keramik aus Media/Siebenbrgen (Universittsforschungen zur

Prhistorischen Archologie109), Bonn.

Patek, E.1974 Prskythische Grberfelder in Ostungarn, in: Symposium zu Problemen der jngeren Hallstatt-

zeit in Mitteleuropa, edited by B. Chropovsk, Bratislava, pp. 337-362.1989/1990 A Szab Jns Gyzltal feltrt preskta sranyag. A Fzesabony-Mezcst tpus

temetkezsek jabb emlkei Heves megyben, Az Egri Mzeum vknyve 25/26: 61-118.1993 Westungarn in der Hallstattzeit(Acta humaniora7), Weinheim.

Podborsk, V.

1970 Sdmhren in der Sptbronzezeit und an der Schwelle der Eisenzeit, Brno.

Popovi, P. and Vukmanovi, M.1998 Vajuga-Pesak. Nekropola starijeg gvozdenog doba, Beograd.

Prien, R.2005 Archologie und Migration. Vergleichende Studien zur archologischen Nachweisbarkeit

von Wanderungsbewegungen(Universittsforschungen zur Prhistorischen Archologie120),Bonn.

Przybya, M.M.2003 Fragment naczynia w stylu kultury Basarabi, z cmentarzyska kultury uyckiej w Siemonii

(obecnie w Grze Siewierskiej), pow. Bdzin, Acta Archaeologica Carpathica 38: 173-177.


33/36

149

Przybya, M.S.2009 Intercultural Contacts in the Western Carpatian Area at the Turn of the 2ndand 1stMillennia BC,

Warszawa.

Reinecke, P.

1899 Die Goldfunde von Michalkow und Fokoru, Zeitschrift fr Ethnologie 31: 510-527.

Reinhold, S.2007 Die Sptbronze- und frhe Eisenzeit im Kaukasus(Universittsforschungen zur Prhistorisch-

en Archologie144), Bonn.

Reinhold, S., Belinskij, A.B. and Korobov, D.S.2007 Landschaftsarchologie im Nordkaukasus. Erste Ergebnisse der Untersuchung der Vorgebirg-

slandschaft bei Kislovodsk whrend der Sptbronze- und frhen Eisenzeit, Eurasia Antiqua 13:147-188.

Rder, M.

1991 Der bergang von Bronzezeit zu frher Eisenzeit, in: B. Hnsel and P. Medovi, Vorbericht berdie jugoslawisch-deutschen Ausgrabungen in der Siedlung von Feudvar bei Moorin (Gem.Titel, Vojvodina) von 1986-1990. Bronzezeit Vorrmische Eisenzeit, Bericht der Rmisch--Germanischen Kommission 72: 119-136.

Romsauer, P.1999 Zur Frage der Westgrenze der Mezcst-Gruppe, in:Archaeology of the Bronze and Iron Age.

Experimental Archaeology, Environmental Archaeology, Archaeological Parks. Proceedingsof the International Archaeological Conference Szzhalombatta, 3-7 October 1996, edited byE. Jerem and I. Poroszlai (Archaeolingua9), Budapest, pp. 167-176.

Sauter, H.

2000 Studien zum Kimmerierproblem, in: Saarbrcker Beitrge zur Altertumskunde, vol. 72,Bonn.

Schmidt, H.1902 Treren und Kimmerier in Troja. Nachtrag zur Buckelkeramik der VII. Ansiedlung, in: W. Dr-

pfeld, Troja und Ilion. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen in den vorhistorischen und historischenSchichten von Ilion 1870-1894, Berlin, pp. 594-600.

Schmotz, K.2005 Herausragende Bestattungen im bronze- und eisenzeitlichen Grberfeld von Knzing, Lkr.

Deggendorf, Vortrge des 23. Niederbayerischen Archologentages 2005: 57-74.

Seger, H.1907 Depotfunde aus der Bronze- und Hallstattzeit, Schlesiens Vorzeit in Bild und Schrift 4: 9-43.

Shishlina, N.I.2004 North-West Caspian Sea Steppe. Environment and Migration Crossroads of Pastoral Culture

Population During the Third Millennium BC, in:Impact of the Environment on Human Migra-tion in Eurasia, edited by E.M. Scott, A.Yu. Alekssev and G. Zaitseva (NATO Scientifc AffairsDivision IV. Earth and Environmental Sciences42), Dordrecht, pp. 91-106.

Shishlina, N.I. and Hiebert, F.T.1998 The Steppe and the Sown. Interaction Between Bronze Age Eurasian Nomads and Agricul-

turalists, in: The Bronze Age and Early Iron Age Peoples of Eastern Central Asia, edited by

V.H. Mair (Journal of Indo-European Studies Monograph26), Washington D.C., pp. 222--237.


34/36

150

Sievers, S.1982 Die mitteleuropischen Hallstattdolche. Ein Beitrag zur Waffenbeigabe im Westhallstattkreis

(Prhistorische BronzefundeVI, 6), Mnchen.

Smirnova, G.I.

1974 Complexe de tip Gva-Holihrady, o comunitate cultural istoric, Studii i Comunicri de Isto-rie Veche i Arheologie 25/3: 259-380.

1998 Die Ostkarpatenregion zur Vorskythen- und Skythenzeit und die osteuropischen Steppen: Kon-takte und Migrationen, in:Das Karpatenbecken und die osteuropische Steppe. Nomadenbewe-gungen und Kulturaustausch in den vorchristlichen Metallzeiten (4000-500 v. Chr.), edited byB. Hnsel and J. Machnik (Prhistorische Archologie in Sdosteuropa12), Mnchen-RahdenWestf., pp. 453-465.

Smirnova, G.I. and Vojnarovskyj, V.M.1994 Moaneckyj skarb bronz kimerijskogo typu z serednogo Podnistrovja, Arheologija (Kiev) 1:

137-141.

Soroceanu, T.2005 Zur zeitlichen Heimat des Eimerpaares vom Kurd-Typs aus Brncoveneti, in:Bronzefunde aus

Rumanien II, edited by T. Soroceanu, Bistria-Cluj-Napoca, pp. 429-476.

Szab, G.1996 A Csorva-Csoport s a Gva-Kultra kutatsnak problmi nhny Csongrd megyei lelet-

egyttes alapjn, Mra Ferenc Mzeum vknyve Studia Archaeologica 2: 9-109.2006 Baks, Temetpart (Csongrd megye). Rgszeti Kutatsok Magyarorszgon, Archaeological

Investigations in Hungary 2006: 152.2008 Baks, Temetpart (Csongrd megye). Rgszeti Kutatsok Magyarorszgon, Archaeological

Investigations in Hungary 2008: 143.

Tasi, N.1972 An Early Iron Age Collective Tomb at Gomolava, Archaeologia Iugoslavica 13: 27-37.

Terenokin, A.I.1976 Kimmerijcy, Kiev.

Teran, B.1998 Auswirkungen des skythisch geprgten Kulturkreises auf die hallstattzeitlichen Kulturgruppen

Pannoniens und des Ostalpenraumes, in:Das Karpatenbecken und die osteuropische Steppe.Nomadenbewegungen und Kulturaustausch in den vorchristlichen Metallzeiten (4000-500 v.Chr.), edited by B. Hnsel and J. Machnik (Prhistorische Archologie in Sdosteuropa12),Mnchen-Rahden Westf., pp. 511-560.

Tomedi, G.2002 Das hallstattzeitliche Grberfeld von Frg. Die Altgrabungen von 1883 bis 1892(Archaeolin-

gua14), Budapest.

Ursuiu, A.2002 Etapa mijlocie a primei vrste aerului n Transilvania (cercetrile de la Bernadea, com.

Bahnea, jud. Mure), Cluj-Napoca.

Vanugov, V.P.1990 Belozerskie pamjatniki v severo-zapadnom Priernomore, Kiev.

Vasi, R. and Kapuran, A.2007 Jo jednom o ostavi iz arengrezultata, Rad Muzeja Vojvodine 49: 37-42.


35/36

151

Vasiliev, V., Adela, A. and Ciugudean, H.1991 Civilizatia dacica timpurie n aria intracarpatica a Romniei. Contributii arheologice: aseza-

rea forticata de la Teleac, Cluj-Napoca.

Vinski-Gasparini, K.

1973 Kultura polja sa arama u sjevernoj Hrvatskoj. Die Urnenfelderkultur in Nordkroatien(Sveuilite u Zagrebu, Filozofski fakultet, Monograje1), Zadar.

Vulpe, A.1986 Zur Entstehung der geto-dakischen Zivilisation. Die Basarabi-Kultur, Dacia N.S. 30: 49-89.1990 Die Kurzschwerter, Dolche und Streitmesser der Hallstattzeit in Rumnien (Prhistorische

BronzefundeVI, 9), Mnchen.

Werner, J.1961 Pferdekopfzepter der Hallstattzeit aus Pedmice bei Hradec Krlov, Pamtky Archeolo-

gick 52: 384-389.

Willis, K.J., Smegi, P., Braun, M., Bennett, K.D. and Toth, A.1998 Prehistoric Land Degradation in Hungary. Who, How and Why?, Antiquity 72: 101-113.

Zoffmann, Z.K.2004 jabb skori embertani leletek Kelet-Magyarorszgrl. New prehistoric anthropologicalnds

from East Hungary, A Debreceni Dri Mzeum vknyve 2004: 83-94.2005 Prehistoric Anthropological Finds in the Carpathian Basin and the Penrose Connections of

Ethnic Groups They Represent, Praehistoria 6: 103-129.

Ziolkowski, Th.1990 German Romanticism and Its Institutions, Princeton.


36/36

www.akademicka.pl3804387883769

ISBN 978-83-7638-043-8

07 MetznerKrakow2010 Libre

Documents

Transcript of 07 MetznerKrakow2010 Libre