The Great Heuberg: An Iron Age ritual landscape on the Swabian Jura, SW Germany

During the Early Iron Age in Europe (EIA), the phenomenon of the Hallstatt culture enveloped a large portion of the European continent. Between the Atlantic Ocean and the River Danube, cultural groups can be roughly divided into two major regions: the Western and the Eastern Hallstatt circle. EIA finds made from organic material decorated with pigments are usually well-preserved only in specific conditions. A good example is the coloured textile found in the salt mines of the eponymous site Hallstatt (AT). Other examples are Scythian finds north and east of the Black Sea, far outside the Hallstatt culture area. This paper presents the results of the analysis of decorated artifacts made from bone or antlers from Jalžabet (NW Croatia). The artifacts were found in two princely burial mounds with incinerated remains: burial mound 1 (Gomila) and burial mound 2. The funerary monuments belong to the Eastern Hallstatt culture and date back to the middle of the 6th century BC, i.e., the end of the Ha D1 period. A group of scientists from Croatia and abroad performed several series of analyses on the selected bone or antler artifacts. The motifs on the artifacts were made by incisions and were filled with black pigment, and there are faint traces of red pigment on the surface. With the help of colourant analysis performed in Brussels and Zagreb (SEM-EDX, MRS, FT-IR), zooarchaeological taxonomic identification, and archaeological determination of a selected group of findings from Jalžabet, we have tried to answer several major questions. The most important question being: are the traces of pigments on artefacts deliberate decoration? If so, can we determine the composition of the paint? What kind of raw materials were used for the production of the artifacts? These questions are important because these kinds of EIA finds are rare and even more rarely analysed. New data would considerably expand our knowledge about the funeral rites of the most prominent members of the Hallstatt nobility in the Drava River valley and Central Europe. Taxonomically, the raw material from which the finds were made was identified to be antlers, probably from red deer (Cervus elaphus). Using methods for colourant analysis, we have successfully proven deliberate application of black paint based on carbon black as a pigment, probably in combination with terpenoid resin. Until now, this composition was only known from much later, Roman-period finds. Also, it was confirmed that the black paint on the artifacts from both burial mounds in Jalžabet is of the same composition. The red pigment on the finds has been identified as hematite. It is highly probable that the red surfaces were deliberate, painted decoration. The probability of extracting the raw material needed for the production of the red paint in the Jalžabet micro-region was also established and requires further research (bog iron ore). The archaeological analysis of the finds supports the idea of the use of various types of decorated plates as inlays, probably on furniture or other luxury everyday items. Smaller finds could have been used as utilitarian objects, parts of attire, and jewellery.

The Late Bronze Age Urnfield Period in Central Europe (BA D, Ha A/B, c.1300 to 800 BC) is characterized by the dominance of cremation as a burial rite. The simple appearance of urn burials give an impression of simplicity, but they are the endpoint of a chain of actions and practices that constitute the funerary ritual, many of which may not be simple at all, but include a large number of people and resources. The washing, dressing, and furnishing of the body as it is laid out prior to cremation leave no traces. The funerary pyre, as spectacular as it may have looked, smelled, and felt during the cremation, preserves only under exceptional circumstances. The rituals and feasts associated with selecting the cremated remains from the funerary pyre and placing them in a suitable organic container or a ceramic urn prior to their deposition do not leave much evidence. The large-scale spread of cremation during the Late Bronze Age has traditionally been explained by the movements of peoples (e.g. Kraft 1926; Childe 1950), or a change in religious beliefs (e.g. Alexander 1979). More recently, a change in how the human body is ontologically understood and how it has to be transformed after death is seen as the more likely underlying cause (Harris et al. 2013; Robb and Harris 2013; Sørensen and Rebay-Salisbury in prep.), although a simple and single reason is rarely the driver of such pan-European developments. This chapter will be concerned with another transition, the change from cremation back to inhumation, several hundred years later during the Early Iron Age, and investigates its background and causes. In Central Europe, cremation is given up as the solitary funerary rite, and a range of different options, including inhumations in burial mounds, bi-ritual cemeteries, and new forms of cremation graves emerge. This change happens at a different pace in the various areas of the Hallstatt Culture and adjacent areas, which will be surveyed here. Despite doubts about the validity of the term ‘Hallstatt Culture’ as a cultural entity (e.g. Müller-Scheeßel 2000), it remains a convenient shorthand to the Early Iron Age in Central Europe, c.800–450 BC, in eastern France, southern Germany, Switzerland, Austria, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, and parts of northern Italy.

Brud eller kontinuitet – Bebyggelsesstrukturer på overgangen mellem ældre og yngre førromersk jernalder i Nordjylland

The reuse of ancient burial grounds in prehistory is a practice that has long been testified through archaeological investigations for several periods in European prehistory. As burial mounds form a distinctive feature in the landscape—to some extent even today—the perception and appropriation of these does not come as a great surprise. Still, this appropriation and reuse for burial or other non-funerary activities offers insights into cultural practices that have only recently been frequently discussed in the field. Normally these reuses are interpreted as ancestor veneration—be it of putative or real ancestors—or the use of these monuments is considered in terms of legitimation of power structures and social distinction by elites. The diversity, frequency, and distribution of such reuses nevertheless indicate that through time older monuments are reused not only by social elites but also by other parts of these societies, and by different forms of communities. This paper will focus on northern Central Europe during the Iron Ages (Pre-Roman Iron Age, Roman Iron Age, Migration Period) and discuss how different societies (‘culture groups’) reused ancient burial places as well as other locations and objects through time and space. These findings show the importance of the long-gone dead in Iron Age Europe and form the basis for a discussion of different possible interpretations of appropriations of the distant past.

ABSTRACTThe construction history and subsequent usage of burial mounds are an important testimony for socio‐economic transformation in prehistoric societies. The Baalberge–Schneiderberg burial mound, subject of the presented study, falls in this category as it is considered as an important monument that indicates the emergence of early social stratification during the Chalcolithic period in central Europe. This hypothesis relies on the chronological development of the burial mound, which is not fully understood until now. Therefore, a reconstruction of the complex stratigraphy of the burial mound including construction phases and later alterations is highly relevant for archaeological research, but the required excavations would be onerous and inconsistent with preservation efforts. In this paper, we demonstrate that non‐invasive geophysical prospection, especially seismic sounding with shear and Love waves, is suitable to obtain the required stratigraphic information, if seismic full waveform inversion (FWI) and reflection imaging are applied. Complementary information on the preservation state of the mound is obtained through Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT) and Electromagnetic Induction (EMI) measurements. To support the seismic and geoelectric results, we utilize Dynamic Testing (DynP), geoarchaeological corings, 14C‐Dating and archaeological records. Our investigations reveal two construction phases of the Baalberge–Schneiderberg mound. The 14C‐Dating yields dates for the older burial mound that are contemporary to the Chalcolithic Baalberge group (4000–3400 bc). During the Early Bronze Age (EBA), the mound was enlarged to its final size by people of the Aunjetitz/Únětice society (2300–1600 bc). However, both seismic and geoelectric depth sections show an extensive disturbance of the original stratigraphy due to former excavations. For this reason, the exact shape of the older burial mound cannot be determined exactly. Based on our data, we estimate that its height was below 2 m. In consequence, the original Baalberge burial mound was less monumental as until now assumed, which potentially prompting a revision of its significance as indicator for social differentiation.

Sacrificial Tradition and Religion during the Early Iron Age in South Scandinavia – with Special Reference to Settlement SacrificesSacrificial customs and religion during the Early Iron Age (500 BC–400 AD) has occupied archaeologists from the infancy of archaeology. Most would probably agree that the religion was primarily fertility related, originating as it was in the existing peasant society. The literature does not reflect any disagreement about the religion of the Early Iron Age being polytheistic and consequently concerned a variety of gods. However, it is still unknown how the religion was integrated in the everyday life, and under which conditions it was practiced.The research interest and the overall synthesis framework have especially addressed sacrifices in bogs and wetlands (for instance weapon sacrifices, bog bodies, deposited earthenware, anthropomorphic wooden figures, domestic animals, cauldrons, ring sacrifices, etc.). Strongly simplified, the existing consensus may be expressed in one single sentence: The overall society-related sacrificial traditions develop from being almost exclusively connected with wetland areas during the Early Iron Age (until c.400 AD) to being primarily connected with dry land after this time, cf. Fig. 1.The question is whether – based on the intense data collection over the recent decades – archaeology can or should maintain this very simple picture of the development of the sacrificial traditions and the religions during the Iron Age? Is it possible that we – rooted in for instance narrow definitions of sacrificial finds, habitual thinking, and a “delusion” consisting of the numerous well-preserved, well-documented, spectacular, and impressive finds of bog sacrifices – fail to see numerous forms of deposits, which (as opposed to the impressive finds of sacrifices in bogs) are hidden in the archaeological material?The settlements of the Iron Age have been excavated in large numbers over the recent decades, and it is the ritual finds from these localities that provide the background for this article.The ritual deposits from the settlements can be divided into two superior groups distinguished by the physical context. One comprises sacrifices made to constructions, which are characterized by being directly connected to a specific structure; the other encompasses settlement sacrifices that are to a higher degree characterized by an overriding affiliation to the settlement. The establishment of a sacrifice definition suitable for scanning the archaeological material for relevant finds is of vital importance. As the definition should not beforehand restrict the search through the material, it is important not to narrow the basis by concentrating only on the physical characteristics of the individual artefacts. The general idea behind the present presentation is that the different ritual dimensions of a society are internally connected as they function within the same overall conventions and, as a consequence, make up parts of a general mental structure, which can leave physically recognizable traces across the different ritual dimensions, cf. Fig. 2. This principal viewpoint creates a theoretical starting point for my work and the established definition of sacrificial finds: All intentionally deposited objects, which analytically show significant similarities as regards their physical appearance and/or their deposition context with other recognized ritual objects/contexts, and which are closely connected to these in time and space, should, when analysed, be considered sacrificial finds.The British religious historian, Ninian Smart, describes religion as consisting of seven thematically describing situations, which – albeit not completely unconnected – may be described individually:1) A dogmatic and philosophical dimension, comprising doctrine systems.2) A mythical and narrative dimension, comprising tales of the deities, of the creation, etc.3) An ethical and judicial dimension, comprising the consequences of the religion in relation to the shaping of the life of the individual.4) A social and institutional dimension comprising organisations and institutions that tie together the individual religious society.5) An empirical and emotional dimension comprising the individual’s experience of god and the divine.6) A ritual and practical dimension comprising prayer, sacrifices, worship, etc.7) A materiel dimension comprising architecture, art, sacred places, buildings, and iconography.As archaeologists, we have a very limited possibility of investigating the very thoughts behind the practiced religion. It is therefore natural to concentrate to a higher extent on the overall setting for it – the ritual dimension and the materiel dimension respectively. The ritual dimension and in particular its sacrificial aspect is traditionally divided into groups characterised by their significance level within the religion as such.1) The first and most “important” group consists of cult rituals. These are characterized by being calendar rites based on the myths of the religion or the history of the people, and by playing a part in the events of the year.2) The next group comprises transition rites (rite de passage), which follow the life cycle of the individual.3) The last group comprises rites of crises, which serve the purpose of averting danger, illness, etc.It is important to realize that the two first ritual groups are predictable cyclic rituals addressing the gods, the myths, and/or the people/the individual respectively. Only the third and least central group of rituals is determined by non-predictable and “not-always” occurring incidences. On this background, it becomes central to analyse, which category one is facing when one wants to assess its importance for the religion as such, in order to evaluate the primary character of the religion.In an attempt to understand the overall importance of a specific ritual practice, one cannot ignore a very complicated problem, which is to evaluate whether the sacrifices were practiced by single individuals or by a larger group of people as part of more common and society-supporting rituals. The issue of the relation between different sacrifice types and the groups causing these has been addressed repeatedly. Often, narrow physical interpretation frames as to who sacrificed what are advanced (i.e. Fig. 3). However, the question is how suitable are these very narrow and rigid interpretation models? As mentioned above, a sacrifice is defined by the intention (context) that caused it rather than by the specific physical form of the object!The above mentioned methodical and theoretical issues provide the background for the author’s investigation of the archaeological sources, in which he focused especially on the relationship between ritual actions as they are expressed in bog deposits and in burial grounds and measured them against the contemporary finds from the settle­ments.The analysis of the archaeological material is based on those find groups (sacrifices of cauldrons, magnificent chariots, humans, animals, metals, and weapons), which have traditionally been presented as a proof that society supporting and more community influenced ritual sacrifices were carried out beside the bogs.The examination of the material supports that sacrifices of cauldrons, magnificent chariots, humans, animals, and earthenware are found in both settlements and wetlands (Figs. 4-12), and that the deposits seem to follow superior ritual conventions, i.e. Fig. 2. The sacrifices were not made in fixed sacred places but in a momentary sacred context, which returns to its daily secular sphere once the rituals have been carried out. Often, the ceremony consists of a ritual cutting up of the sacrificed object, and the pars pro toto principle occurs completely integrated in connection with both burial customs, wetland sacrifice customs, and settlement sacrifice customs. Sacrifices often occur as an expression of a rite de passage connected to the structures, fields, or infrastructure of the village. However, the repeated finds of earthenware vessels, humans, and animals in both wetland areas and in the villages indicates that fertility sacrifices were made regularly as part of the cyclic agricultural world. This places the find groups in a central position when it comes to understanding the religious landscape of the Early Iron Age. In a lot of respects, the settlement finds appear as direct parallel material to the contemporary wetland-related sacrificial custom and so one must assume that major religious events also took place in the settlements, for instance when a human or a cauldron was handed over to the next world. Both the selection of sacrificial objects, the form of depositing, and the preceding ceremonial treatment seem to follow superior ritual structures applying to both funerary rites and wetland sacrifices in Iron Age society.Often, the individual settlement-related sacrificial find seems to be explained by everyday doings, as largely all sacrifice-related objects of the Early Iron Age have a natural affiliation with the settlement and the daily housekeeping. However, it is clear that if the overwhelming amount of data is made subject to a comprehensive and detailed contextual analysis, settlement related find groups and attached action patterns appear, which have direct parallels in the ritual interpretation platform of the bog context. These parallels cannot be explained by pure practical or coincidence-related explanation models!As opposed to ploughed-up Stone Age axe deposits or impressive bronze depots from the Bronze Age and gold depots from the Late Iron Age, a ploughed-up collection of either earthenware, bones, human parts, etc. are not easily explained as sacrificial deposits. However, much indicates that the sacrificial settlement deposits of the Iron Age were not placed very deeply, and so they occur in the arable soil of later times. We

Gravhøje set fra luften

Three Iron Age cremation graves from south-eastern Estonia and four graves including cremations as well inhumations from western Estonia were analysed by osteological and palaeodemographic methods in order to estimate the age and sex composition of burial sites, and to propose some possible demographic figures and models for living communities.
 The crude birth/death rate estimated on the basis of juvenility indices varied between 55.1‰ and 60.0‰ (58.5‰ on average) at Rõsna village in south-eastern Estonia in the Middle Iron Age. The birth/death rates based on juvenility indices for south eastern graves varied to a greater degree. The estimated crude birth/death rate was somewhat lower (38.9‰) at Maidla in the Late Iron Age and extremely high (92.1‰) at Maidla in the Middle Iron Age, which indicates an unsustainable community. High crude birth/death rates are also characteristic of Poanse tarand graves from the Pre-Roman Iron Age – 92.3‰ for the 1st grave and 69.6‰for the 2nd grave. Expectedly, newborn life expectancies are extremely low in both communities – 10.8 years at Poanse I and 14.4 years at Poanse II. Most likely, both Maidla I and Poanse I were unsustainable communities.
 According to the main model where the given period of grave usage is 150 years, the burial grounds were most likely exploited by communities of 3–14 people. In most cases, this corresponds to one family or household. In comparison with other graves, Maidla II stone grave in western Estonia and Rõsna-Saare I barrow cemetery in south-eastern Estonia could have been used by a somewhat larger community, which may mean an extended family, a larger household or usage by two nuclear families.

In the northern Netherlands, the fringes of the peat area adjacent to the salt marshes, with their well-known terp settlements, have been reclaimed and settled since the middle of the Pre-Roman Iron Age. Over time, settlement gradually expanded deeper into the peat area, until the reclaimed peat lands, like most of the salt marshes, were abandoned over the course of the Late Roman Iron Age. In the province of Friesland, two large areas with traces of these early peat reclamations have recently been researched using a combination of modern digital elevation maps and old aerial photographs dating back to the 1940s and 1950s. It proved possible to map 1100 km of former ditches and 508 possible archaeological sites, of which 453 locations had not previously been known. Further research could confirm that 135 of the 508 possible sites are sites of former settlements, of which 65 definitely back to the Pre-Roman Iron Age or the Roman Iron Age and 59 most likely or possibly date back to these periods. The remaining 354 locations still need to be researched, but based on various archaeological indicators, 176 of these could very well be sites dating back to the Pre-Roman Iron Age or Roman Iron Age. Of the mapped former ditches, 413.1 km proved to have been part of artificial drainage systems dating back to the Pre-Roman Iron Age or Roman Iron Age, and a large landscape feature could be identified as a former artificial embankment dating back to the same time period. Although much research is still needed, based on the current dataset it can be concluded that the early peat reclamations were intensively drained, densely settled and well organized. It seems very unlikely that these reclamations were only seasonally occupied, in contrast to what has been claimed by other researchers. Instead, it is much more likely the primary motive behind the early peat reclamations was the creation of an agricultural landscape that was suitable for mixed farming and inhabited year-round.

Kogegruber – i klynger eller på rad og række

Rislevfundets Dyreknogler

Pragtvognen fra Fredbjerg

The article is the first to study the patterns of the location of archaeological complexes in the forest-steppe and north-forest-steppe zones on the left bank in the regions of the middle reaches of the Irtysh River. The work is based on the materials of monitoring of objects of archaeological heritage in the Bolsherechensky district of the Omsk region, located in the indicated natural zones. The author analyzes the location of burial mounds, settlements, hillforts of different cultural and chronological affiliation. As a result, a number of patterns in their placement are presented. It is concluded that the sites on this territory are localized on terraces or edges of lake basin, low ridge, isolated hill, confined to local water bodies and watercourses. Of the total number of sites, mounds and burial mounds prevail, to a lesser extent there are ancient hillforts and settlements, and ground burial grounds are rare. Burial mounds and mounds are found throughout the territory. Of these, most of those explored by excavations date from the Late Bronze Age and the Early Iron Age. Several hillforts of different times are also known here. Five of them are terraced semicircular (Krasnoozerskay culture of the transitional period from the Bronze Age to the Early Iron Age, Sargatskay culture of epochs of the Early Iron Age), one is a promontory (Early Iron Age). The settlements date from the Bronze Age to the Early Iron Age. Such an arrangement of the monuments corresponded to the most efficient management of the economy of the population of these regions at the indicated time, with the methods of nature management applied at that time.

A Pre-Roman Iron Age Cemetery at Nim in East ]utlandIn 1953, in the course of digging gravel in a little hill near the village of Nim, about 12 kms. northwest of Horsens in East Jutland, six graves from the earliest Iron Age were discovered. Five of them were taken up by the workmen, the sixth (Grave IV) being excavated by members of the Jutland Archeological Society. It is, however, certain that the objects discovered, and described below, do in fact belong to the graves with which they are here listed.The graves lay in a group near the summit of the hill, at a spacing of about 7 metres. This suggests that there were originally low barrows or cairns over each grave, but that these have been removed in the course of cultivation.Grave I. The pottery vessel in Fig. 1 contained burnt bones, together with two iron pins and bronze ornaments (Fig. 3). There were in addition the remains of one or more bronze armlets, and a macehead of sandstone, of Stone Age type.Grave II must have been a cremation patch containing sherds of the vessel shown in Fig. 2.Grave III. A pottery vessel with burnt bones.Grave IV. An urn-grave surrounded by blackened earth ("Urnebrandgrube"). In the urn lay a thin bronze ring, two iron pins, a massive belt-ring of bronze and a bronze clasp with double spiral (Fig. 5). The large break in the neck of the vessel must have been in existence at the time of burial, as otherwise the large ring could not have been introduced into the vessel.Grave V. A pottery vessel contained unidentifiable fragments of iron, part of a ring with lug and a spiral clasp, together with fragments of armlet, all of bronze, (Fig. 6), and burnt bones.Grave VI contained sherds of a pottery vessel.All six graves from Nim belong to the first period of the Pre-Roman Iron Age (ca. 500-- 300 BC). The objects found are typical for Central Jutland and, despite their unspectacular character, form the richest cemetery yet found in the area. The discovery gives us certain pointers to the local culture-grouping in the earliest Iron Age in Jutland. The Pre-Roman Iron Age in Denmark is now divided into three periods 5); Period I corresponds to Jastorf a and b in Holstein and Hanover, Period II to Jastorf c and Ripdorf, and Period III to Early and Late Seedorf. In Period I a local group can be distinguished in South Jutland and Schleswig (Fig. 7), characterized by the large urn-fields (Aarre, Uldal, etc.). Here it is possible to recognise an early and a late phase 10), the first being characterized by rolled-headed pins 11) and large belt-rings with lugs (as in Fig. 6 c), the second showing in contrast ring-headed pins 12) and triangular belt-hooks of iron.To the north of the local South Jutland group another group, contemporaneous and equally distinct, is found, the Central Jutland (Fig. 7). It is characterized by: 1. small cemeteries or single cremation graves; 2. cremation patches and "Urnenbrandgruben" are common (whereas almost unknown in the South Jutland group); 3. particular artifacts of metal, including small rings with lugs, like Fig. 3 d, and spiral clasps (Figs. 5 and 8; for distribution cf. Fig. 10); 4. peat-bog deposits, large and small, containing bronze rings 24) (Smederup near Odder con­taining over 350 rings, Falling Bog about 270 lugged rings, etc.); 5. coarser pottery; 6. artifact types which in the South Jutland group are confined to Period I a apparently persist in Central Jutland throughout the whole of Period I. Thus Nim appears to belong, on a basis of the pottery to late Period I, corresponding to I b further south.To the north of the Central Jutland group there appears to be a third local group, but its components are not yet sufficiently characteristic to permit of closer description. One special type may, however, be mentioned, a plate-clasp (Fig. 9; for distribution cf. Fig. 10).The three local groups within Period I of the Pre-Roman Iron Age in Jutland appear to have developed most clearly late in the period. They are therefore parallel to the Jastorf b group in Holstein. They appear to develop in all cases out of the much more homogeneous Period VI of the Bronze Age. Remarkably enough, the Jutland local groups in Period I appear to correspond geographically to important local groups in the Roman Iron Age 41). It should therefore be home in mind that these later local groups may well have traditions running far back into the Pre-Roman Iron Age.C. J. Becker

This paper explores the use of iron in the Late Bronze Age and the earliest Iron Age (c. 1100–300 BC) in south-eastern Sweden, with a focus on the final Bronze Age and Pre-Roman Iron Age I. The aim is to study how early iron was used, valued and perceived, particularly in relation to pre-existing bronze and gold. Choosing iron for certain object types, such as dress attributes and arm rings, and in key symbols, notably the spiral, suggests an appreciation for its metallic shine and colour in contrast to bronze. This silvery lustre was in some cases exploited intentionally, and may sometimes have been associated with the moon in a celestial mythology. The lunar connection might have been accentuated by the origin of iron from bodies of water, which were surrounded by strong beliefs and were often the focus of sacrificial depositions in this period. The qualities sought after in iron during the Bronze Age–Iron Age transition were in some ways different from those appreciated later in Iron Age and historical times. It is necessary to further consider early iron in its contemporary setting without comparison to the ‘successful’ adaptation in the late Pre-Roman Iron Age onwards.