Prehistoric human impact in the mountains of Bohemia. Do pollen and archaeological data support the traditional scenario of a prehistoric “wilderness”?

Abstract

In the Czech Republic at least five landscape zones, differing by settlement history, can be distinguished. The main focus of this study are marginal mountainous zones: foothills, where the cultural landscape fully developed during high medieval colonization in the 13th century, and the central mountains were colonized mostly in the 16th century and later. Before colonization, these areas are thought to have been essentially wild; however, they are much less archaeologically known than the lowlands. The study focuses on the tracing of a fine-scale prehistoric human impact in two pollen diagrams from the Lusatian Mountains (foothills) and the Bohemian Forest (central mountains). The pollen records are compared with available archaeological data. A case study comparing the off-site and on-site pollen records from the Vladař hillfort (Hallstatt) is presented to demonstrate the local signal of the pollen profiles of small mires. In both studied mountainous regions, the strongest prehistoric human impact was detected during the Hallstatt/La Tène period, that is characterized by a rapid expansion of a single tree taxon (Pinus and Abies respectively) together with the consistent occurrence of Plantago lanceolata and other indicators for anthropogenic influence. The human impact was less distinct in the pollen profile from the central part of the Bohemian Forest. In both studied regions, the presumed prehistoric human-induced vegetation changes influenced the species composition of the forest for hundreds of years and were therefore not minor. The pollen sites are small mires or larger forested peat bogs and thus mostly reflect local conditions. It is also assumed that the pre-medieval human impact on vegetation must have been limited in space. Despite the limits of recent data, we present evidence for prehistoric human influence on the vegetation. Future research should be either more extensive (thorough archaeological prospection, more well-dated pollen profiles) or focused on special cases when both archaeological and pollen sites are next to each other.