bronze age crafts and craftsmen in the carpathian basin

BRONZE AGE CRAFTS AND CRAFTSMEN IN THE CARPATHIAN BASIN Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureş 5–7 October 2012

BIBLIOTHECA

MVSEI

MARISIENSIS

SERIA ARCHAEOLOGIC A

VI

PROCEEDINGS OF THE INTERNATIONAL COLLOQUIUMS FROM TÂRGU MUREŞ Editor SÁNDOR BERECKI

Bronze Age Crafts and Craftsmen in the Carpathian Basin PROCEEDINGS OF THE INTERNATIONAL COLLOQUIUM FROM TÂRGU MUREŞ

5–7 October 2012

Edited by BOTOND REZI RITA E. NÉMETH SÁNDOR BERECKI

Editura MEGA Târgu Mureș 2013

© Mureş County Museum, 2013 Executive editor: Zoltán Soós, Director Muzeul Judeţean Mureş CP 85, str. Mărăşti nr. 8A, 540328 Târgu Mureş, România

ISBN 978-606-543-407-3

Editura Mega | www.edituramega.ro e-mail: [email protected]

Contents

Preface

7

Klára P. FISCHL–Viktória KISS– Gabriella KULCSÁR Specialised Households in the Carpathian Basin during the Early and Middle Bronze Age

9

Aleksandar KAPURAN–Aleksandar BULATOVIĆ Bird Images on Serbian Bronze Age Ceramics

23

Neculai BOLOHAN On Clay and Pots in the Middle Bronze Age. A Case Study from Siliștea–Pe Cetățuie, Neamț County 33 T. Gabriella NÉMETH Angaben zum spätbronzezeitlichen Salzverkehr

57

Daria Ložnjak DIZDAR A Middle Bronze Age Metallurgical Workshop in Vinkovici

65

Gábor SÁNTA Metal Analysis of Koszider and Tumulus Culture Bronzes: Contents, Similarities and the Question of Source Area

77

Wolfgang DAVID Eine mit Spiralhakenranken verzierte altbronzezeitliche Nackenkammaxt siebenbürgischen Typs aus Südwestböhmen. Wo wurden die Schaftlochäxte vom Typ Apa–Nehoiu hergestellt? 91 Bianka NESSEL The ‘Absence’ of Smiths and Founders – Why Tools are Rare in Bronze Age Burials

139

Mario GAVRANOVIĆ Urnenfelderzeitliche Gussformen aus dem Westlichen Balkan

149

Zoltán CZAJLIK Lokaler, regionaler oder Fernhandel? Probleme der spätbronzezeitlichen Metallversorgung am Velem–St. Veit Berg (Westungarn)

167

Gábor ILON Das II. Buckelpaar des Goldschatzes von St. Veit bei Velem

181

Oliver DIETRICH–Laura DIETRICH Tüllenhämmer als funktionale Bestandteile von Depotfunden des Karpatenbeckens. Das Beispiel Şpălnaca II 191 Liviu MARTA New Data on the Practice of Metallurgy in the Upper Tisza Basin in the Late Bronze Age

207

Carol KACSÓ Beiträge zur Kenntnis des bronzezeitlichen Metallhandwerks in der Maramuresch

225

Botond REZI Reconstructing a Bronze Smith’s Toolkit. Special Remarks Regarding the Decoration of the Bronze Belts from Band

239

Attila LÁSZLÓ Über die Verbreitung der Bronzenen Streitäxte mit Nackenscheibe in den aussenkarpatischen Gebieten Eine neue in der Moldau entdeckte Nackenscheibenaxt

251

Tobias MÖRTZ Hauptsache. Argumente für eine eigenständige Entwicklung der Kammhelme in Mitteleuropa

265

Marianne MÖDLINGER Bronze Age Metal Defensive Armour in Eastern Europe: Status Symbol and Symbolic Weapons only? Indications for the Usage as Weapons

279

Géza SZABÓ What Archaeometallurgy Tells Us about the Changes of Bronze Craftwork in the Carpathian Basin at the Transition of the Bronze Age into Iron Age

291

Frank TROMMER–Tiberius BADER Lanzenspitzenherstellung

313

Abbreviations

341

Bronze Age Metal Defensive Armour in Eastern Europe: Status Symbol and Symbolic Weapons only? Indications for the Usage as Weapons Marianne MÖDLINGER Dipartimento di Chimica e Chimica Industriale – DCCI Universitá degli Studi di Genova Genoa, Italy [email protected]

Keywords: Bronze Age, Eastern Europe, metal defensive armour, surface traces, manufacture, use-wear

The distribution area of European Bronze Age helmets, shields, cuirasses and greaves varies widely from each other and rarely overlaps. For the United Kingdom, only shields are known as defensive armour, since the find of potential rivets from crested helmets (Flag Fen; Coombs 1992, fig. 6/8–9) is not secured and might be more likely connected with vessels. On the Iberian Peninsula, only fragments from crested helmets from four hoards or deposits are known, while several depictions of mainly Herzsprung-type shields indicate also the usage of (metal?) shields. Helmets and greaves, but no cuirasses or shields, were found in Italy. Despite the cuirasses of Dendra and Thebes, only a small number of greaves and helmets and no shields in general are noted in Greece. From France, we know helmets, greaves and cuirasses, but no shields. In Germany, the distribution area of shields and helmets is overlapping; only two greaves (Winklsaß, Schäfstall) and one potential cuirass find (Winklsaß) are known. In the central Alps, helmets, a small number of greaves and, most recently, a miniature cuirass (Brandgraben-Kainischtal) were found. Only in the Carpathian Basin do we finally find all four types of defensive armour. Nevertheless, there is only the deposit of Nadap, where fragments from all types of defensive armour were found together: one almost complete conical helmet, fragments of decorated cap helmet(s), four greaves and one fragment each of a cuirass and a shield. An almost complete assemblage of defensive armour is reported from the grave find from Dendra with greaves, the unique panoply and a boar tusk helmet with bronze cheek plates. All other reconstructions, assemblages or combinations of metal defensive armour are pure assumptions and highly hypothetical. It is far more likely, that a combination of metal and wooden defensive armour was used, though the latter is usually not well preserved. When interpreting metal arms and armour as a symbol of high status and power, we have to consider that they were most likely used during warfare, melees, or individual or even ritual combat. But did they all serve as armour in combat? Repairs and traces of usage, as well as the fact that “there can be no rituals or symbols without the reality of what they signify” (Kristiansen 1999, 188), indicate that not only weapons, but metal defensive armour as well, was definitely used in some type of combat. This, of course, does not indicate that the armour was used exclusively for fighting, but includes also the additional function as a symbol of wealth, social status or power of its owner or the society. Manufacture, usage and development of Bronze Age defensive armour remains unclear in wide parts of Europe, even after more than a century of research. The main focus of previous studies was usually on typo-chronological aspects, while topics such as manufacturing techniques, the actual usage and

Bronze Age Crafts and Craftsmen in the Carpathian Basin, 2013, p. 279–290

M. MÖDLINGER 280 ‌| M. Mödlinger

technological observations were hardly included in the studies or even considered as chronological markers for the armour. Despite Uckelmann 2012, Born–Hansen 1992 and Born–Hansen 2001, Lehoërff 2008 and partly Lippert 2011, who included detailed analyses i.e. of the alloy composition and surface studies, all papers focused on the classical approach of typology and distribution only (most important: von Merhart 1941; Hencken 1971; Clausing 2001; 2002). Only Clausing (2002), who studied typological aspects of greaves, took into account the different methods of production or fixation of the greaves on the leg as typologically relevant. Analyses of the alloy composition were included in just a few papers (i.e. Sperber 2011). The most well studied objects so far are shields – Uckelmann (2012) also included analyses on manufacture and usage. Therefore, the main focus on this article will be on helmets, cuirasses and greaves. To shed more light on the actual usage of metal defensive armour, all armour in Eastern Europe which was accessible was documented, studied and analyzed during a currently ongoing project of the author on Bronze Age defensive armour in Eastern Europe. The importance of carrying out studies directly on the object cannot be emphasised enough; in this way, it is possible to confidently distinguish fragments formerly interpreted as parts of a decorated cap helmet as decorated flat discs (Mödlinger 2013a), and to document otherwise unrecognised traces of manufacture and usage not only on the outside, but also on the inside and backside of the armour. In the following, an overview of the most significant traces of manufacture and usage on mainly Eastern European metal defensive armour are described. For lack of space, detailed descriptions of manufacture, repair and usage of each armour type, along with analyses of alloy and microstructure, as well as typology, distribution and date, will be discussed elsewhere. Cuirasses Full metal cuirasses are known from France, the Carpathian Basin (Hungary, Slovakia) and Greece only, along with a miniature of such a cuirass from Austria (Brandgraben) (Fig. 1). Fragments which can be potentially associated with cuirasses are known from Hungary, Greece, the Czech Republic and Germany. The two only complete eastern European cuirass were found in Rrivers: one in France as a single find in the Saône, the other one in the Danube. All the other cuirasses of the same type were parts of deposit or grave and heavily fragmented. These differences in deposition practise between east and west of the Rhine can be noted e.g. on helmets too (more detailed on the deposition practise see Hansen 1994). So far, the European cuirasses are the oldest; no older finds from the Near East or Egypt are known. The European cuirasses are made of a breast- and back plate, which were usually joined together on the left side. The oldest piece, the panoply from Dendra, is unique; it was made out of several parts as a body cuirass, shoulder guards, breast plates and lower protection plates (Verdelis 1967). The closest find to Dendra stylistically might be the cuirasses from Thebes, Greece. The other European cuirasses are distinguished in a Carpathian group and a western European or French group (Mödlinger 2013d). The main differences are in the decoration applied: in the East, the cuirasses are moderately decorated with positive plastic ribs and lines of pellets (chevrons, chevrons arranged as stars), while in the West the cuirasses are extensively decorated with positive bosses and studs (birds, circles, lines). Greek cuirasses instead are undecorated. According to their decoration, the cuirasses of the western group are usually dated to the end of the Urnfield period, while the eastern cuirasses date to the beginning of the Urnfield period. Despite the two river finds from the Danube and the Sâone, Carpathian cuirasses are heavily fragmented, thus making it hard to detect traces of manufacture and usage. As far as the find spot is known, all cuirasses from the western group originate from a rather small area of 230 km linear distance in Central-Eastern France. Two further cuirasses with unknown find spots are kept in museums in Hamburg and New York. Unlike those of the eastern group, the cuirasses of the western group are usually complete or at least the breast- or the back plate is preserved (Fig. 1). Due to the high level of fragmentation, not many significant traces of manufacture are visible on the Eastern European cuirasses, like on the ones from Nadap, Čierna nad Tisou, Čaka, Ducové, Pázmándfalu (V. Szabó 2013), and Brno (Mödlinger 2013d). The main differences in the application of decoration in comparison with the Western European cuirasses, however, are clearly visible: the decoration was applied with small punches on the outside of the cuirass, while only the ribs and pellet decoration are embossed from the backside. The breast plate and the back plate of the cuirass from Čierna and Tisou, Slovakia, were joined together with four conical headed rivets on the left side. The upper rivet was supported on the inside with an additional little rectangular bronze sheet. The other three rivets were hammered on the shaft on the inner side of the cuirass in order to enlarge the shaft so that both sheets are permanently fixed together. No traces of hammering are visible on the inside of the cuirass.

Bronze Age Metal Defensive Armour in Eastern Europe: Status Symbol and Symbolic Weapons only? | 281

Fig. 1. Find spots of European Bronze Age cuirasses. 1–2. Dendra; 3. Arsenal Thebes; 4. Municipal Conf. Centre Thebes ; 5. Čierna nad Tisou; 6. Čaka; 7. Ducové ; 8. St. Germain–du–Plain; 9. Pázmándfalu; 10. Nadap; 11. Brno– Řečkovice; 12. Danube (Hungary); 13–14. Unknown; 15–16. Graye–et–Charnay or Véria (former Grenoble and Naples); 17–23. Fillinges (7); 24–30. Marmesse (7); 31. Brandgraben (miniature).

The complete Carpathian cuirass found in Saint-Germain-du-Plain, France, is decorated on the breast plate only. The ribs were applied from the backside, while the fine chevron decoration was applied from the outside, using a little punch. The ribs were marked out and their edges accented with a chisel on the front side of the breast plate. Additionally to the bent edges, the ribs increased as Sicken the stability of the bronze sheet respectively the cuirass. Around the arms, the neck and the lower end, the rim of the two plates was bent over a soul made of rolled bronze or copper sheet. The two plates were joined together with four conical headed rivets on the left side (one of them is missing) and one rivet on the left shoulder, which is also missing today. The rivet holes were punched through from the outside to the inside. On the right side, a metal sheet was riveted central on the edge of the breastplate, leaving space for a central hole in the breast plate in order to attach a bronze dowel for closing the two halves. On the right shoulder, the breast plate has a rectangular hole to grab the upwards bent metal sheet attached with a rivet on the inside of the back plate, so the two plates can be joined together. The inside rim (side and shoulder) of the back part was folded on the right side too. There is an additional rivet hole on the breast plate right under the armpit, which function is not clear yet – it might have served for a cord to fix the dowel. It has no equivalent on the other side. Inside the neck and the body of the cuirass, vertical hammering traces are visible. The metal shows several vertical cracks too, most likely a result of the hammering process. Due to the heavily fragmented character of the Carpathian European cuirasses no traces of usage can be noted. The cuirass from St. Germain-du-Plain does not bear any clear traces of usage or repairs, while clear traces of use-wear on the Danube cuirass are visible (maybe also noted in the primary hopefully noted also in the forthcoming publication of the cuirasss by E. Petres et al.). Opposite to Eastern European cuirasses, French cuirasses such as the ones from Marmesse show several repairs indicating severe usage (publication in preparation by A. Lehoerff) and also traces of usage: i.e. the three breast plates from Fillinges bear small holes most likely as a result of weapon perforation in the area of the neck. Interestingly, the holes were created from the inside of the cuirass – if we do not want to consider a frontal

282 ‌| M. Mödlinger

attack with the spear head passing partly through or besides the neck, we potentially might consider these traces as a result of ritual or cultic action. Helmets Bronze Age metal helmets are widely distributed all over Europe except Northern Europe where only the two unique horned helmets from Viksø are known, and the Iberian Peninsula with fragments from four deposits. Roughly, we can distinguish European helmets in two main groups: Western European crested helmets and Central and Eastern European cap helmets. Decorated Italian helmets will not be considered in this study since they are usually associated with the beginning Iron Age. In Western Europe, the conical cap is usually made of two halves, joined together by folding, forming a central crest (Fig. 2 and 4). The date of most of the helmets is a matter of discussion, since most of them are single finds or from pure helm deposits. From Austria, three crested helmets type Lueg, with round cap and three-pointed crest are known. Their chronological classification still is debated (most recent: Lippert 2011). Conical helmets, decorated and undecorated cap helmets and bell helmets are distributed mainly in Central and Eastern Europe (Fig. 3 and 5). The caps of all types are made of one single metal sheet with a normally cast-on knob or socket at the top. Some cap helmets do not bear a knob or socket at all. Conical helmets can be considered as the oldest European helmets (Mödlinger 2013b). In Eastern Europe, they are followed by (decorated) cap helmets, dated to HaA (Mödlinger 2013a) and bell helmets, from the HaB1 period (Mödlinger 2013c).

Fig. 2. Find spots of European Bronze Age crested helmets. 1. Mantes; 2. Mainz; 3. Oggiono–Ello; 4. Weil am Rhein; 5. Pass Lueg; 6. Piller; 7. Anlauftal; 8. Biebesheim; 9. Bremen; 10. Ebing; 11. Pockinger Heide; 12. Roxheim; 13. Otterstadt; 14. Auxonne; 15. Le Theil; 16. Blainville–sur–l’Eau; 17. Chalon–sur–Saône; 18. Montmacq; 19. Paris; 20. Seurre; 21. Hungary (?); 22. Bernières–d’Ailly; 23. Armancourt; 24. ‘Normandy’; 25. Nemours; 26. Mainz– Kostheim; 27. Larnaud; 28. Huelva; 29. Grañón; 30. Monte do crasto; 31. Castro de Avelãs; 32. Tiryns.

The Eastern European helmets were made out of flat, as-cast discs, which were hammered into bowl-shape using an open die (Mödlinger 2013c). Though heavy hammering traces are visible in the inside of the massive bell helmets and even on the rim and there are no significant hammering traces inside the cap of the older helmets, the first are in total less deformed than all thinner, older helmets (e.g. conical helmets, decorated cap helmets). These were hammered as a final step of production with a planishing hammer over a so-called Treibfaust (a convex headed anvil) in order to smooth the surface. Rivet holes were most likely already cast on bell helmets, while they were punched through from the outside to the inside on the older helmets. Decorative elements such as ribs on the decorated cap helmets were applied from the inside with chisels, while pellet decoration was applied with punches.


Fig. 3. Find spots of European Bronze Age cap helmets. 1. Greece (?); 2. Cnossos; 3. Biecz; 4. Oranienburg; 5. Žaškov; 6. Viksø; 7. Spišská Belá; 8. Lúčky; 9. Dunaföldvár; 10. Keresztéte; 11. Nadap; 12. Sâg; 13. Mantes; 14. Mainz; 15. Kleinhüningen; 16. Oggiono–Ello; 17. Northern Hungary (?); 18. Mezőnyárád; 19. Paks; 20. Hungary (?); 21. Guşteriţa; 22. Uioara de Sus; 23. Žiar nad Hronom; 24. Elsterwerda; 25. Strassengel; 26. Wöllersdorf; 27. Poljanci; 28. Veliko Nabrđe; 29. Hočko Pohorje; 30–31 unknown (2), former Guttmann collection; 32. Nadap (?); 33. Schoonaarde; 34. Thonberg; 35. Wonsheim; 36. Montbellet; 37. Szikszó; 38. Škocjan; 39. Brancere; 40. Iseo; 41. Unknown, former Zschille collection; 42. Služín; 43. Hajdúböszörmény; 44. Mezőkövesd; 45. Endrőd; 46. Şoarş; 47. Pişcolt; 48. Schmiedehausen; 49. Bajmok; 50. Mantova; 51. Sehlsdorf; 52. Unknown, former Zschille collection; 53. Unknown, Sold at ‘Gorny & Mosch’; 54. Unknown, former Lipperheide collection; 55. Bonyhád; 56. Batina; 57. Nagytétény; 58. Szczecin-Zdroje; 59. Unknown, Cahn-auction; 60. Dendra; 61. Tiryns; 62. Ialiso; 63. Şpălnaca; 64. Techirghiol; 65. Podcrkavlje; 66. Monte Altino; 67. Újszőny/Komárom; 68. Jászkarajenő; 69. Dusnok; 70. Pázmándfalu; 71. unknown (‘Rome’); 72. Picquigny; Not on the map: 1, 30–31, 41, 52–54, 71.

On Western European helmets, the two halves were joined together at the crest by folding one sheet over the other and then riveting the neck and forehead areas. On the helmet of Auxonne, the shoulder between crest and cap was marked. The helmet from Montmacq B shows an additional rivet on the crest. The Eastern European helmets instead do not bear a crest, but usually a central socket or knob. Also here, different ways of joining are noticed: usually, the socket or knob is cast-on on the centre of the helmet’s cap (Mödlinger 2013c, fig. 12) using the lost-wax technique. It might also be riveted on from the inside (e.g. on cap helmets with massive knob) or riveted on from the outside (e.g. the helmet from Knossos).

1

2

3

4

5

Fig. 4. Different types of European Bronze Age crested helmets (without scale). 1. Type Mantes (Mantes, France); 2. type Biebesheim (Chalon sur Sâone, France; after Bonnamour 1990, 48, fig. 37); 3. type Berniéres d’Ailly (Armancourt, France; after Sperber 2011, 37, fig. 12/2); 4. Italian crested helmet (Škocjan, Slovenia); 5. type Lueg (Pillersattel, Austria; after Egg-Tomedi 2002, 549, fig. 7).


1

2

3

4

5

Fig. 5. Different types of European Bronze Age helmets (without scale). 1. conical helmet (Biecz, Poland); 2. cap helmet (Iseo, Italy); 3. decorated cap helmet (Northern Hungary (?)); 4. cap helmet with massive knob (Hungary (?); after Clausing 2005, 32, fig. 1); 5. bell helmet (Mezőkövesd, Hungary).

Clear evidences of the usage of bronze helmets in battle are rare; only a few helmets show potential sword blows, including the crested helmets from Blainville, Montmacq A and B and the helmets from Mantes, Thonberg, Wonsheim, Oggione-Ello and Hajdúböszörmény. This small number of combat traces does not necessarily prove that they were not used in combat, but might be also connected with the battle skills of those wearing the helmets and the ease of repairing dings and dints on the cap. Repairs can be observed on the helmets; this, in effect, proves that the helmets were used in some way. Usually, cracks appearing on the edge (as on the helmet from Endrőd) or the centre of the cap were repaired: a rivet or an additional bronze sheet was riveted on the cap in order to cover the crack. The most beautiful way to cover a crack or casting defect is found on the helmet from Pişcolt: a little bronze sheet, decorated with bosses and pellets, was riveted on the upper part of the cap with two rivets and fixed inside with another bronze sheet (Mödlinger 2013c, fig. 6). Greaves Greaves are found from Central France to Hungary and to the Eastern Aegean. From Northern Europe and the Atlantic Bronze Age we do not have any greave finds at all. There is a significant concentration of finds in Southern Transdanubia and the Sava-Danube-Area; interestingly, there are no greaves known from Slovakian or Transylvanian deposits (Fig. 6). Greaves have conventionally been distinguished typologically according to their decoration (most recent Hansen 1994) or the manner of fixing them to the feet and legs (Clausing 2002). Clausing distinguished three main types of corded greaves; those with integrated or separate wire loops, greaves with riveted loops and greaves with punched holes along the rim. In contrast to all other full metal defensive armour, greaves are the only find category which can be regularly found also in graves (and here, mainly greaves with separate wire). In the following, we can distinguish the following main groups of greaves and single finds: 1. greaves with wheel decoration (BrD– HaA1); 2. greaves type Kuřim (HaA2–B1); 3. greaves with abstracted bird heads (HaA1); 4. greaves with separate wire (Greece: 13th–12th cent. BC; Italy: 11th cent. BC to the Early Iron Age) and 5. single types. In the deposits of Malpensa and Slavonski Brod, greaves with abstracted bird heads and greaves with wheel motif were placed together, thus we might assume a co-existence of the two types. Though here characterized primary by their decorative elements, the groups are widely consistent with the technological characterization by Clausing (2002). The documented greaves generally do not show any traces of thermo-mechanical treatment. All traces of hammering were eliminated with planishing hammer and Treibfaust as well as grinding and polishing of the surface. However, the microstructure of the greaves sampled indicates intense total deformation of the bronze sheets. The greaves were made out of a flat as-cast, which was extensively deformed in order to achieve the thin, oval shape of the future greave. Once the bronze sheet was approximately 0.2–0.4 mm thin, the edges were chiselled off in order to achieve the oval form. The edge then was bent on the front side of the greave around a round or squared bronze or copper wire. Depending on the type of the greaves, either gaps were left to give space for the wire to form loops so the greave could be attached with a leather or textile strip on the legs, or small holes were punched close to the rim of the bronze sheet to attach the greaves. On many greaves polishing traces from top to bottom are visible. On the greave from Kuřim we can also note a significant change in corrosion, most likely caused by the second greave which was placed on the only one preserved today. Further traces of manufacture commonly noted are scribed lines in order to place the plastic decoration in line. Despite the greaves with separate wire, all decoration was applied with round punches: with one size only (greaves with wheel motif despite the greave from


Rinyaszentkirály) or up to three punches of different size (Kuřim type greaves, greaves with abstracted bird heads). Since greaves aside from the ones from Dendra and Schäfstall do not show any indication for the direct fixation of organic inlay, we have to consider that it was fixed or dressed separately before the greaves were attached on the leg. A unique case is one of the greaves with abstracted bird heads from Malpensa. This greave shows small punched holes close to each other all along parallel to the rim, in addition to the wire loops. Most likely, they served to secure an organic backing, e.g. leather, which must have been permanently fixed on the bronze sheet. A. Mira-Bonomi (1979, 125) and C. Clausing (2002, 155) interpret the holes as repair work, since the wire loops are almost all broken, which of course might have also happened during the deposition rites or due to corrosion processes.

Fig. 6. Find spots of European Bronze Age greaves. 1. Brodski Varoš; 2. Desmontá (2); 3. Pergine (4); 4. Malpensa (3); 5. Cannes-Écluse; 6. Poljanci I; 7. Esztergom; 8. Nadap (4); 9. Rinyaszentkirály; 10. Nagyvejke; 11. Lengyeltóti; 12. Stetten; 13. Poljanci IV; 14. Slavonski Brod (2?); 15. Veliko Nabrđe; 16. Boljanić; 17. Athen (2); 18. Markovac– Grunjac; 19. Bouclans; 20. Boutigny; 21. Beuron; 22. Volders (2); 23. Weissenstein; 24. Várvölgy; 25. Kuřim; 26. Kloštar Ivanić (2); 27. Enkomi (3); 28. Kallithéa (2); 29. Portes–Kephalovryso (2); 30. Castellace (2); 31. Kouvarás (2); 32. Grammichele (2); 33. Pontecagnano (2); 34. Torre Galli (6); 35. Dendra; 36. Schäfstall; 37. Winklsaß; 38. Canosa (2); 39. Limone.

Descriptions in the Iliad about the manufacture of greaves – e.g. Iliad 18, 613 mentioning greaves made of tin – resulted in controversial discussions about the alloy composition still without any analytical base for Greek greaves (Hansen 1994, 17, note 34). However, analyses of European Bronze Age greaves by the author (publication forthcoming) shows that all were made of tin-bronze and certainly not of tin only. The usage of greaves was always discussed controversial. They have been interpreted as a protection for rarely harmed areas of the body, or possibly to protect him from his own shield, which might bang against his lower legs, as was supposed in discussions about Homer’s armour descriptions (Schauer 1982, 101), or as protection against arrows (Hansen 1994, 17). However, these interpretations do not seem to be very likely since the shield was usually carried on the back when walking and arrows rarely hit the lower leg. Also, the shield certainly did not hit the lower leg during fighting, since the upper and middle parts of the body are more likely to be protected. On Greek vases, we always see the warrior dressing first his greaves. This is not connected to a higher valuation of the greave but due to practical reasons: once wearing the cuirass, it is hard to apply the greaves. In fact, there is only one description of greaves protecting the warrior in the Iliad: Achilles is protected by his greaves when Agenor throws his spear. On the greaves documented and studied so far, several traces of repairs were noted. Most common were vertical cracks on the central top part of the greave, which were fixed with punched-through holes on both sides, so a wire could be placed inside in order to hold the sheet together and stop further cracking. Other typical repairs


which were noted are – as on the greave from Kuřim, Czech Republic – punched holes, which replace the broken loops with additional, separate wire loops. In contrast to direct traces, repairs seem to have been quite common, at least on the few complete greaves preserved. In all the repair cases noted, either a crack or a broken loop was repaired. The only greaves with obvious traces of damage, from Roquefort, France, date to the 6th cent. BC (Clausing 2002). Due to their high number of weapon perforation one also might consider ritual destruction. Shields

Metal shields are distributed mainly in Northern Europe: the United Kingdom (with more than the half of all shields known), Ireland, southern Sweden, Denmark and Northern and Central Germany. Bronze nails in graves from southern Germany (BrC2–BrD) and Hungary as well as the early date of the shield-former from Kilmahamogue indicate wooden and/or leather shields being used from the MBA on. The earliest metal shields are known from the Carpathian Basin and are dated to BrD. Five finds of leather and wooden shields are known from Ireland (Uckelmann 2012). From Spain and southern France, only depictions and from Greece only votive shields are documented. No Bronze Age shields were documented so far in Italy. The distribution area of shields and cuirasses is not overlapping (despite the deposit from Nadap!), while there are a few overlapping areas with helmets and greaves. This pattern of distribution is most likely connected to deposition traditions; we cannot automatically conclude that metal shields were unknown in regions without any finds or depictions: 75 out of 90 metal shields were deposited in wet context such as bogs, lakes or rivers. Fragments of only seven shields were found in hoards, and only two close to settlements. The manufacture of shields will be described just briefly here, since M. Uckelmann (2011; 2012) most recently published extensive discussion of shield manufacturing. Shields were hammered out of as-cast flat tin-bronze discs with alternating annealing and cold deformation applied. Some shields still show radial and radially crossing traces on the inside (from the centre to the rim) of hammers used for driving and flattening. Usually these traces were eliminated on the front side with a flat hammer and the surface was polished, before the decoration was embossed. Once the shield achieved its final diameter, the parts overlapping the desired shape were chiselled or cut off. The rim then was rolled over, usually but not always over a copper or bronze wire. This made the rim of the shield the most stable and massive part of the armour. In the centre of the shield, a massive bronze strap with flattened ends or either a grip of rolled sheet bronze and thickened ends was riveted on. On most shields, tabs or loops were additionally attached to fasten a string or facilitate carrying the shield. As on greaves, also some shields, mainly type Herzsprung, show incised lines and calliper points on the backside for the precise application of the decoration (Uckelmann 2011). The application of an inner strengthening layer of leather was often suggested, but is still unproven. Since even the bog finds lack organic material to interpret as a backing material, we have to consider the bronze shield as purely metal armour. Additionally, the tight connection between shield body and grip as well as the tightly bent rim do not leave space for any organic inlay or backing. Generally, bronze shields differ from their organic counterparts by being interpreted as nonfunctional. The experiments of J. M. Coles (1962) strengthened this assumption. However, we have to consider that his experiments were carried out with very thin shields made of pure copper. These were not replicas of the same material and thickness as the original shields. Newer experiments by B. Molloy (2009) demonstrated more functional aspects of the shields, since the experiments were carried out with replicas made of similar composition and thickness. More experiments concerning manufacture as well as usage of shields are currently ongoing by M. Uckelmann (personal communication). Due to corrosion, use-wear in the form of abrasion is rarely found. Two shields from the Thames (near Long Wittenham and near London) show trapezoid holes which were most likely caused by spearheads. The shield from London furthermore has a cut in the upper half that appears to result from a sword blow. From the three shields found in Yetholm, one has the central boss pierced through by a sharp pointed object, again possibly a sword (Uckelmann 2011, fig. 4). Generally, weapon marks are not common and not bound to specific types of shields. Repairs as indications of usage appear on some shields; usually, little straps of sheet bronze were riveted over fractures. One fracture of one shield was even sewn together with a bronze or copper wire (Uckelmann 2011).


*** Bronze Age metal defensive armour has been studied in order to reveal further information on both manufacture and usage. According to the traces of manufacture, as briefly described in the present paper, we know that high-level metal work was carried out: not only bronze sheet manufacture, working and decoration, but also cast-on on thin bronze sheets and repairs, whether due to the manufacturing process or usage, testifies to highly developed metal craftsmanship. Indications for the actual usage of shields, helmets, cuirasses and greaves as defensive armour are rare, but nevertheless present. However, we have to consider that dings or dints can be easily removed. Due to the general scarcity of metal defensive armour and the high number of offensive weapons as spears and swords, it is reasonable to assume that most of the defensive armour was actually made out of organic material, as indicated by the leather and wood shields from Ireland and the only European organic helmet preserved (Fiavé-Carera). This leaves metal defensive armour as highly precious, valuable objects, which nevertheless were also used during combat, as few, but existing traces of usage indicate. Acknowledgements I would like to thank the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) and the FP7/Marie Curie actions who were supporting the research with the Schrödinger-fellowship no. J 3109-G21. I am greatly indebted to everyone in all the museums I visited for the possibility to study and analyse the armour discussed. References Bonnamour 1990 Born–Hansen 1992 Born–Hansen 2001 Clausing 2001 Clausing 2002 Clausing 2005 Coles 1962 Coombs 1992 Hansen 1994 Hencken 1971 Egg–Tomedi 2002 Kristiansen 1999 Lehoërff 2008 Lippert 2011 Mira-Bonomi 1979

Bonnamour, L., Du silex á la poudre. 4000 ans d‘armanent en Val de Saône, Montagnac. Born, H.–Hansen, S., Ein urnenfelderzeitlicher Glockenhelm aus der Sammlung Zschille, ActaPraehistArch, 24, 339–356. Born, H.–Hansen, S., Helme und Waffen Alteuropas, Sammlung Axel Guttmann 9, Mainz. Clausing, C., Spätbronze- und eisenzeitliche Helme mit einteiliger Kalotte, Jahrbuch RGZM, 48, 1, 199–225. Clausing, C., Geschnürte Beinschienen der späten Bronze- und frühen Eisenzeit, Jahrbuch RGZM, 49, 149–187. Clausing, C., Zwei neue urnenfelderzeitliche Bronzehelme mit Scheitelknauf, ArchKorr, 35, 31–38. Coles, J. M., European Bronze Age shields, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, 28, 156–190. Coombs, D., Flag Fen platform and Fengate Power Station Post alignment – the metalwork, Antiquity, 66, 504–517. Hansen, S., Studien zu den Metalldeponierungen während der älteren Urnenfelderzeit zwischen Rhônetal und Karpatenbecken, UPA, 21, Bonn. Hencken, H., The earliest European helmets. Bronze Age and Early Iron Age, American School of Prehistoric Research, Bulletin 28, Cambridge/Mass. Egg, M.–Tomedi, G., Ein Bronzehelm aus dem mittelbronzezeitlichen Depotfund vom Piller, Gemeinde Fliess, in Nordtirol, ArchKorr, 32, 543–560. Kristiansen, K., The Emergence of Warrior Aristocracies in Later European Prehistory and Their Long-Term History, IN: Carman, J.–Harding, A. (eds.), Ancient Warfare, Stroud, 175–189. Lehoërff, A., Les cuirasses de Marmesse (Haute-Marne), un artisanat d’exception, Antiquites Nationales, 39, 95–106. Lippert, A., Die zweischaligen ostalpinen Kammhelme und verwandte Helmformen der späten Bronze- und frühen Eisenzeit, ArchS, 6, Salzburg.. Mira-Bonomi, A., I recenti rinvenimenti del Bronzo finale alla Malpensa nella Lombardia occidentale, IN: Istituto italiano di preistoria e protostoria (ed.), Atti della XXII riunione scientifica. Il Bronzo finale in Italia, Firenze 21–23 Ottobre 1977. In memoria di Ferrante Rittatore Vonwiller, Firenze, 117–146.

288 ‌| M. Mödlinger Mödlinger 2013a Mödlinger 2013b Mödlinger 2013c Mödlinger 2013d Molloy 2009 Petres et al. Schauer 1982 Sperber 2011 V. Szabó 2013

Uckelmann 2011 Uckelmann 2012 von Merhart 1941 Verdelis 1967

Mödlinger, M., Star Ornamentation on Late Bronze Age Helmets, Cups and Decorated Discs in Central and South-Eastern Europe, ArhVest, 64, 65–101. Mödlinger, M., From Greek boar tusk helmets to the first European metal helmets: New approaches on development and date, OJA, 32, 4, 391–412. Mödlinger, M., Bronze Age bell helmets: new aspects on typology, chronology and manufacture, PZ (in press). Mödlinger, M., European Bronze Age Cuirasses: aspects of chronology, typology, manufacture and usage, Jahrbuch RGZM (in press). Molloy, B. P. C., For Gods or Men? A reappraisal of the function of European Bronze Age shields, Antiquity, 83, 1052–1064. E. Petres, E.–Kovács, T.–Jankovits, K., no title, ActaArchHung (forthcoming). Schauer, P., Deutungs- und Rekonstruktionsversuche bronzezeitlicher Kompositpanzer, ArchKorr, 12, 335–349. Sperber, L., Bronzene Schutzwaffen in Gräbern der Urnenfelderkultur. Beinschienen- und Helm(?) fragmente aus dem Gräberfeld Volders in Nordtirol, BayerVorgeschbl, 76, 5–45. V. Szabó, G., Late Bronze Age stolen. New data on illegal acquisition and trade of Bronze Age Artefacts in the Carpathian Basin, IN: Anders, A.–Kulcsár, G.–Kalla, G.–Kiss, V.– V. Szabó, G. (eds.), Moments in time. Papers presented to Pál Raczky on his 60th birthday, Ősrégészeti tanulmányok, I, Budapest, 793–815. Uckelmann, M., The function of Bronze Age shields, IN: Uckelmann, M.–Mödlinger, M. (eds.), Warfare in Bronze Age Europe: Manufacture and Use of Weaponry, BAR, 2255, 187–200. Uckelmann, M., Die Schilde der Bronzezeit in Nord-, West- und Zentraleuropa, PBF, III, 4, Stuttgart. von Merhart, G., Zu den ersten Metallhelmen Europas, BerRGK, 30, 4–42. Verdelis, N. M., Neue Funde von Dendra, MittDAI, Abteilung Athen, 82, 1–53.

List of figures Fig. 1. Find spots of European Bronze Age cuirasses. 1–2. Dendra; 3. Arsenal Thebes; 4. Municipal Conf. Centre Thebes ; 5. Čierna nad Tisou; 6. Čaka; 7. Ducové ; 8. St. Germain–du–Plain; 9. Pázmándfalu; 10. Nadap; 11. Brno–Řečkovice; 12. Danube (Hungary); 13–14. Unknown; 15–16. Graye–et–Charnay or Véria (former Grenoble and Naples); 17–23. Fillinges (7); 24–30. Marmesse (7); 31. Brandgraben (miniature). Fig. 2. Find spots of European Bronze Age crested helmets. 1. Mantes; 2. Mainz; 3. Oggiono–Ello; 4. Weil am Rhein; 5. Pass Lueg; 6. Piller; 7. Anlauftal; 8. Biebesheim; 9. Bremen; 10. Ebing; 11. Pockinger Heide; 12. Roxheim; 13. Otterstadt; 14. Auxonne; 15. Le Theil; 16. Blainville–sur–l’Eau; 17. Chalon–sur–Saône; 18. Montmacq; 19. Paris; 20. Seurre; 21. Hungary (?); 22. Bernières–d’Ailly; 23. Armancourt; 24. ‘Normandy’; 25. Nemours; 26. Mainz–Kostheim; 27. Larnaud; 28. Huelva; 29. Grañón; 30. Monte do crasto; 31. Castro de Avelãs; 32. Tiryns. Fig. 3. Find spots of European Bronze Age cap helmets. 1. Greece (?); 2. Cnossos; 3. Biecz; 4. Oranienburg; 5. Žaškov; 6. Viksø; 7. Spišská Belá; 8. Lúčky; 9. Dunaföldvár; 10. Keresztéte; 11. Nadap; 12. Sâg; 13. Mantes; 14. Mainz; 15. Kleinhüningen; 16. Oggiono–Ello; 17. Northern Hungary (?); 18. Mezőnyárád; 19. Paks; 20. Hungary (?); 21. Guşteriţa; 22. Uioara de Sus; 23. Žiar nad Hronom; 24. Elsterwerda; 25. Strassengel; 26. Wöllersdorf; 27. Poljanci; 28. Veliko Nabrđe; 29. Hočko Pohorje; 30–31 unknown (2), former Guttmann collection; 32. Nadap (?); 33. Schoonaarde; 34. Thonberg; 35. Wonsheim; 36. Montbellet; 37. Szikszó; 38. Škocjan; 39. Brancere; 40. Iseo; 41. Unknown, former Zschille collection; 42. Služín; 43. Hajdúböszörmény; 44. Mezőkövesd; 45. Endrőd; 46. Şoarş; 47. Pişcolt; 48. Schmiedehausen; 49. Bajmok; 50. Mantova; 51. Sehlsdorf; 52. Unknown, former Zschille collection; 53. Unknown, Sold at ‘Gorny & Mosch’; 54. Unknown, former Lipperheide collection; 55. Bonyhád; 56. Batina; 57. Nagytétény; 58. Szczecin-Zdroje; 59. Unknown, Cahn-auction; 60. Dendra; 61. Tiryns; 62. Ialiso; 63. Şpălnaca; 64. Techirghiol; 65. Podcrkavlje; 66. Monte Altino; 67. Újszőny/Komárom; 68. Jászkarajenő; 69. Dusnok; 70. Pázmándfalu; 71. unknown (‘Rome’); 72. Picquigny; Not on the map: 1, 30–31, 41, 52–54, 71. Fig. 4. Different types of European Bronze Age crested helmets (without scale). 1. Type Mantes (Mantes, France); 2. type Biebesheim (Chalon sur Sâone, France; after Bonnamour 1990, 48, fig. 37); 3. type Berniéres d’Ailly (Armancourt, France; after Sperber 2011, 37, fig. 12/2); 4. Italian crested helmet (Škocjan, Slovenia); 5. type Lueg (Pillersattel, Austria; after Egg-Tomedi 2002, 549, fig. 7).

Bronze Age Metal Defensive Armour in Eastern Europe: Status Symbol and Symbolic Weapons only? | 289 Fig. 5. Different types of European Bronze Age helmets (without scale). 1. Biecz, Poland); 2. cap helmet (Iseo, Italy); 3. decorated cap helmet (Northern Hungary (?)); 4. cap helmet with massive knob (Hungary (?); after Clausing 2005, 32, fig. 1); 5. bell helmet (Mezőkövesd, Hungary). Fig. 6. Find spots of European Bronze Age greaves. 1. Brodski Varoš; 2. Desmontá (2); 3. Pergine (4); 4. Malpensa (3); 5. Cannes-Écluse; 6. Poljanci I; 7. Esztergom; 8. Nadap (4); 9. Rinyaszentkirály; 10. Nagyvejke; 11. Lengyeltóti; 12. Stetten; 13. Poljanci IV; 14. Slavonski Brod (2?); 15. Veliko Nabrđe; 16. Boljanić; 17. Athen (2); 18. Markovac–Grunjac; 19. Bouclans; 20. Boutigny; 21. Beuron; 22. Volders (2); 23. Weissenstein; 24. Várvölgy; 25. Kuřim; 26. Kloštar Ivanić (2); 27. Enkomi (3); 28. Kallithéa (2); 29. Portes–Kephalovryso (2); 30. Castellace (2); 31. Kouvarás (2); 32. Grammichele (2); 33. Pontecagnano (2); 34. Torre Galli (6); 35. Dendra; 36. Schäfstall; 37. Winklsaß; 38. Canosa (2); 39. Limone.

Abbreviations AA ABB ABSA Acta Humaniora ActaAntArch ActaArch ActaArchCop ActaMM ActaMN ActaMP ActaMPa ActaPraehistArch Aegaeum AFSB AGN AI AIBM AJA Alba Regia AlManach Altertum Aluta Angustia ANODOS Antaeus Antiquaries Journal Antiquitas Antiquitas Hungarica Antiquités Nationales Antiquity AÖ APL Apulum ARA Archaeologia Romanica Archaeometry Archaeologia ArchAustr ArchBulgarica ArchČechách ArchD Archeo Tirol Archeometriai Műhely ArchÉrt ArchHung

Archiv für Anthropologie, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Anthropologie, Ethnologie und Urgeschichte Arbeitsberichte zur Bodendenkmalpflege in Brandenburg, Brandenburg The annual of the British school at Athens, London Acta Humaniora, Universitetet I Oslo Acta Antiqua et Achaeologica, Szeged Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, Budapest Acta Archaeologica, Copenhagen Acta Musei Maramoriensis, Baia Mare Acta Musei Napocensis, Cluj-Napoca Acta Musei Porolissensis, Zalău Acta Musei Papensis, Pápa Acta Praehistorica et Archaeologica, Berlin Annales d’archéologie égéenne de l’Université deLiègeet UT-PASP Arbeits- und Forschungsberichte zur Sächsischen Bodendenkmalpflege Anzeiger des Germanischen Nationalmuseums, Nürnberg Archäologische Informationen, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Ur- und Frühgeschichte Archaeological Institute Beograd Monographs, Archaeological Institute, Belgrade American Journal of Archaeology, Archaeological Institute of America, Boston Alba Regia, Annales Musei Stephani Regis, Székesfehérvár Almanach der Wiener Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien Das Altertum, Berlin Aluta, Revista Muzeului Naţional Secuiesc, Sfântu Gheorghe Angustia, Muzeul Carpaţilor Răsăriteni, Sfântu Gheorghe Anados, Studies of the Ancient World, Trnavska univerzita Antaeus, Magyar Tudományos Akadémia Régészeti Intézet, Budapest The Antiquaries Journal, London Antiquitas, Bonn Antiquitas Hungarica, Pázmány Péter Tudományegyetem, Budapest Antiquités Nationales, Paris Antiquity, London Archäologie Österreichs Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia, Universiteit Leiden Apulum, Acta Musei Apulensis, Alba Iulia Annual Review of Anthropology, Palo Alto Archaeologia Romanica, Bistrița Archaeometry, Oxford Archaeologia, London Archaeologia Austriaca, Wien Archaeologica Bulgarica, Sofia Archeologické výzkumy v jižních Čechách, České Budejovice Archäologie in Deutschland Archaeo Tirol, Kleine Schriften, Universität Innsbruck Archeometriai Műhely, Magyar Nemyeti Múzeum, Budapest. Archaeologiai Értesítő, Budapest Archaeologia Hungarica, Budapest

342 ‌| Abbreviations ArchivVSL ArchKiev ArchKorr ArchPol ArchRoz ArchS ArchSofia ArhMold ArhVest Arrabona ASA ASF ASM ASPR AuF AUSB BA Baltic-Pontic Studies BAR BayerVorgeschbl BCMI Beih. Atlas Urgesch BerRGK BH BHAB BKL BL BM BMA BMBistriţa BMMK BMT Boletin SEHUMED Bonner Jahrb BPI BT CA CAJ Carpica CCA Ceramics International CI CmapuHap CommArchHung CRC Crisia CsMF CurrAnth

Archiv des Vereins für siebenbürgische Landeskunde Archeologija, Kiev Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt, Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum in Mainz Archeologia Polski Archeologické Rozhledy, Prague Archäologie in Salzburg Archeologija, Sofia Arheologia Moldovei, Iaşi Arheološki Vestnik (Acta Archaeologica), Inštitut za arheologijo, Lubljana Arrabona, a Győri Múzeum Évkönyve Ars slovaca antiqua, Bratislava Archaeologia Slovaca Fontes, Bratislava Archaeologica Slovaca Monographiae, Nitra American School of Prehistoric Research, Cambridge Ausgrabungen und Funde, Nachrichtenblatt der Landesarchäologie Annales Universitatis Scientiarium Budapestinensis de Rolando Eötvös Nominatae. – Sectio Historica, Budapest. Biblioteca de Arheologie, Bucureşti Baltic-Pontic Studies, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań British Archaeological Reports, International Series, Oxford Bayerische Vorgeschichtsblätter, München Buletinul comisiunii monumentelor istorice, Bucureşti Beiheft zum Atlas der Urgeschichte, Hamburg Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission Burgenländische Heimatsblätter, Amt der Burgenländischen Landesregierung Landesarchiv und Landesbibliothek Bibliotheca Historica et Archaeologica Banatica, Timişoara Bányászati és Kohászati Lapok, Budapest Bányászati Lapok, Országos Magyar Bányászati és Kohászati Egyesület, Budapest Bibliotheca Marmatia, Baia Mare Biblioteca Mvsei Apvlensis, Alba Iulia Biblioteca Muzeului Bistriţa A Békés Megyei Múzeumok Közleményei Bibliotheca Musei Tapolcensis, Tapolca. Sede para el Estudio de los Humedales Mediterráneos – Universidad de Valencia, Valencia Bonner Jahrbücher, Bonn Bullettino die Paletnologia Italiana, Roma Bibliotheca Thracologica, Bucureşti Cercetări Arheologice, Bucureşti Cambridge Archaeological Journal, Cambridge Carpica, Muzeul Judeţean de Istorie şi Artă „Iulian Antonescu“, Bacău Cronica Cercetărilor Arheologice din România Ceramics International, Elsevier Cercetări Istorice CmapuHap, Beograd Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungariae, Budapest Cercetări de Restaurare şi Conservare, Muzeul Naţional de Istorie a României, Bucureşti Crisia, Muzeul Ţării Crişurilor, Oradea Csongrádi Múzeumi Füzetek, Csongrád Current Anthropology, University of Chicago Press

Abbreviations | 343 Dacia Der Anschnitt Diadora DIG DissPannonicae DJELA Djerdapske sveske DolgKolozsvár EA EAZ EJHG EphemNap ESA ExpArch FAH FolArch ForschStillfried Germania Glasnik Sarajevo Glasnik ZM HAG Hammaburg HelvArch HOMÉ Hyperfine Interactions IA IAP IBAD IHAD IJCS InvArch Ungarn InvArchRoumanie IPH ISR JahrBM Jahrbuch RGZM JahrIVUF JahrMV JahrSGUF JAMÉ JAS JHS JPMÉ KEMMK Közlemények Kratkie Soobs Kunde MAGW

Dacia, Recherches et décuvertes archéologiques en Roumanie, I–XII (1924–1948), Bucureşti; Nouvelle série (N. S.), Dacia. Revue d’archéologie et d’histoire anciene, Bucureşti Der Anschnitt, Deutsches Bergbau-Museum Bochum Glasilo Arheološkog Muzeja u Zadru Dări de seamă ale şedinţelor Institutului Geologic al României Dissertationes Pannonicae, Budapest Akademija nauka i umjetnosti Bosne i Hercegovine Djerdapske sveske, Arheološki institut i Narodni muzej, Belgrad Dolgozatok az Erdélyi Nemzeti Múzeum Érem- és Régiségtárából, Kolozsvár Eurasia Antiqua, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Ethnographisch-Archäologische Zeitschrift, Berlin European Journal of Human Genetics, Leiden Ephemeris Napocensis, Cluj–Napoca Eurasia Septentrionalis Antiqua Experimentelle Archäologie in Deutschland (in Europa), Oldenburg Fontes Archaeologici Hungariae, Budapest Folia Archeologica, a Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum Évkönyve, Budapest Forschungen in Stillfried Germania, Frankfurt am Main Glasnik Sarajevo, Glasnik Zemaljskog Muzeja u Sarajevu –Sarajevo Glasnik Zemaljskog Muzeja Bosne i Hercegovine u Sarajevu Hrvatski archeološki godišnjak, Hammaburg, Vor- und frühgeschichtliche Forschungen aus dem niederelbischen Raum, Hamburg Helvetia Archaeologica, Official newsletter of the Swiss Archaeological Society, Zürich A Herman Ottó Múzeum Évkönyve, Miskolc Springer Verlag, Netherlands Internationale Archäologie, Buch am Erlbach, Espelkamp, Rahden/Westf. Inventaria Archaeologia Pologne, Lódz Izvestija na Bulgarskoto Archeologičesko Družestvo, Sofija Izdanja Hrvatskog arheološkog društva, Zagreb International Journal of Conservation Science, Iaşi Inventaria Archaeologica Hungarica, Budapest Inventaria Archaeologica Roumanie, Bucureşti Inventaria Praehistorica Hungariae, A magyar Nemzeti Múzeum Budapest Interdisciplinary Science Reviews Jahrbuch zur Bodendenkmalpflege in Mecklenburg, Museum für Ur- und Frühgeschichte Schwerin Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz Jahresbericht des Instituts für Vorgeschichte der Universität Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main Jahresschrift für Mitteldeutsche Vorgeschichte, Halle Jahrbuch der Schweizerischen Gesellschaft für Ur-und Frühgeschichte, Basel A Nyíregyházi Jósa András Múzeum Évkönyve, Nyíregyháza Journal of Archaeological Science, Elsevier Journal of Hellenic Studies, Cambridge University Press A Janus Pannonius Múzeum Évkönyve, Pécs Komárom-Esztergom Megyei Múzeumok Közleményei, Közlemények az Erdélyi Nemzeti Múzeum Érem-és Régiségtárából, Kolozsvár. Краткие Сообщения, О докладах полевых исследованиях Иститута Die Kunde, Hamburg Mitteilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien

344 ‌| Abbreviations Man Marburger Studien Marisia Marmatia MAS MCA MemAnt MFMÉ MGB Minaria Helvetica Miskolci Egyetem Közleménye, A. sorozat, Bányászat MittBGAEU MittDAI MittDO MittFBVF MKAM MPK MSPF MSROA MUÖ Musaica Muzejski Vijesnik Múzeumi Füzetek MΩMOΣ OGPJ OJA ÖK OMRTÉ Olympische Forschungen OpArch Ősrégészeti Levelek ÖZBH Paideuma PamArch PAS PBF Peuce PJZ PMÉ Podravski Zbornik PPS Prilozi IAZ PSV PZ RBPA RégFüz RevArh RevBis

Man. A monthly Record of Anthropological Science, London Marburger Studien zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte, Rahden/Westf. Marisia (V–), Studii şi Materiale, Târgu Mureş Marmatia, Anuarul Muzeului Judeţean Maraureş Materialia archaeologica Slovaca, Nitra Materiale şi Cercetări Arheologice, Bucureşti Memoria Antiquitatis, Acta Musei Petrodavensis, Bucureşti A Móra Ferenc Múzeum Évkönyve, Szeged Muzej Grada Beograda Minaria Helvetica, Bulletin de la Société Suisse d’Histoire des Mines Miskolci Egyetem Közleménye, A. sorozat, Bányászat, Miskolc Mitteilungen der Berliner Gesellschaft für Anthropologie, Ethnologie und Urgeschichte Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Athen Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orientgesellschaft, Berlin Mitteilungen der Freunde der Bayerischen Vor- und Frühgeschichte Monographs and cataloguesof the Archaeological Museum of Istria, Pula Mitteilungen der Prähistorischen Kommission der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Viena Mémoires de la Société Préhistorique Française, Paris Materiały i Sprawozdania Rzeszowskiego Ośrodka Archeologicznego, Rzeszóv Materialien zur Urgeschichte Österreichs, Wien Musaica, Sborníc Filozofickej fakulty Univerzity Komenského Glasilo muzeja Sjeverozapadne Hrvatske Múzeumi Füzetek, Petőfi Múzeum, Aszód MΩMOΣ, Őskoros Kutatók Összejövetelének konferenciakötete Ostbairische Grenzmarken: Passauer Jahrbuch für Geschichte, Kunst und Volkskunde, Passau Oxford Journal of Archaeology Österreichische Kunsttopographie, Wien Országos Magyar Régészeti Társulat Évkönyve – Jahrbuch der Ungarischen Archaeologischen Gesellschaft Olympische Forschungen, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Berlin Opuscula Archaeologica, Arheološki zavod, Filozofski fakultet u Zagrebu Ősrégészeti Levelek / Prehistoric newsletter, Budapest Österreichische Zeitschrift für Berg- und Hüttenwesen Paideuma, Frobenius-Institut, Frankfurt am Main Památky Archeologické, Praha Prähistorische Archäologie in Südosteuropa, Berlin, Kiel, München Prähistorische Bronzefunde, München, Stuttgart Peuce, Studii şi cercetări de istorie şi arheologie, Institutul de Cercetări Eco-Muzeale Tulcea, Institutul de Istorie si Arheologie, Tulcea Prajistoria Jugoslovenskih zemalja, Sarajevo Pápai Múzeumi Értesítő, Pápa Podravski Zbornik, Koprivnice Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, London Prilozi Instituta za arheologiju iz Zagreba Praistorijske ostave u Srbiji I Voivodini, Beograd Prähistorische Zeitschrift, Berlin Regensburger Beiträge zur Prähistorischen Archäologie, Regensburg Régészeti Füzetek, Budapest Revista Arheologică, Chişinău Revista Bistriţei, Complexul Judeţean Muzeal Bistriţa-Năsăud

Abbreviations | 345 Revista Minelor RGF RKM RSP RVM SA SAM SAO Savaria SBA Scienze dell’Antichità SCIV(A) SFFBU SlovArch SMK SMMK SovArch Starinar StC Maramureşene StCeltica StCom Satu Mare StudArch Studia Comitatensia StudiaUBB Geologia Študijne Zvesti AÚSAV SWLS Thraco-Dacica Tibiscum Tibiscus Tisicum TLVH Tyragetia UPA VAH VAHD VAMZ Vasárnapi Ujság VMMK VMUF WArch WMBH VÖAUF WPZ Zalai Múzeum Zborník SNM ZE

Revista Minelor, Petroşani Römisch-Germanische Forschungen, Mainz, Berlin Régészeti Kutatások Magyarországon Rivista die Scienze Preistoriche, Firenze Rad Vojvodanskih Muzeja, Novi Sad Sozialanthropologische Arbeitspapiere, Berlin Studien zu den Anfängen der Metallurgie, Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum Mainz Studien zur Archäologie in Ostmitteleuropa, Poznan, Bamberg, Rahden/Westf. Savaria, a Vas Megyei Múzeumok Értesítője, Szombathely Saarbrücker Beiträge zur Altertumskunde, Bonn Scienze dell’Antichità. Storia – Archeologia – Antropologia, Roma Studii şi Cercetări de Istorie Veche (şi Arheologie 1974–), Bucureşti Sborníc prací Filozofické Fakulty Brnenské University, Brno Slovenská Archeológia, Nitra Somogyi Múzeumok Közleményei, Somogy Somogy Megyei Múzeumok Közleményei, Kaposvár Sovetskaja Archeologija, Moskva Starinar (N.S)., Arheološki institute, Beograd Studii şi Cercetări Maramureşene, Baia Mare Studia Celtica, University of Wales Studii şi Comunicări Satu Mare Studia Archaeologica, Szeged Studia Comitatensia, Régészeti tanulmányok Pest megyéből Studia Universitatis Babeş–Bolyai, seria Geologia, Cluj-Napoca Študijne Zvesti Archeologického Ústavu Slovenskej Akadémie Vied Sammlungen des Württembergischen Landesmuseums Stuttgart Thraco-Dacica, Institutul de Tracologie, Bucureşti Tibiscum, Acta Musei Caransebesiensis, Caraşseben Tibiscus, Muzeul Banatului, Timişoara Tisicum, A Jász-Nagykun-Szolnok Megyei Múzeumok Évkönyve, Szolnok Tagungen des Landesmuseums für Vorgeschichte Halle, Halle Tyragetia (S.N.), Muzeul Național de Istorie a Moldovei Universitätsforschungen zur prähistorischen Archäologie, Bonn Varia Archaeologica Hungarica, Budapest Vijesnik za Arheologiju I Historiju Dalamtinsku Vjesnik Arheološkog muzeja u Zagrebu Vasárnapi Ujság, Máramaros A Veszprém Megyei Múzeumok Közlményei, Veszprém Veröffentlichungen des Museums für Ur- und Frühgeschichte, Potsdam World Archaeology, Oxford Wissenschaftliche Mitteilungen aus Bosnien und Herzegowina, Wien Veröffentlichungen der Österreichischen Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Ur- und Frühgeschichte, Wien Wiener Prähistorische Zeitschrift, Wien Zalai Múzeum, Közlemények Zala megye múzeumaiból, Zalaegerszeg Zborník Slovenského Národného Múzea, Bratislava Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, Berlin