The Elements of the Horse Bridle from the Severynivka Hillfort

The most challenging question regarding the defensive settlements of the Pontic forest ‑steppe is the reason behind their construction at all and size. The most frequent interpretations centre around two questions: were they to protect from external threats (i.e. the nomads) or were they the result of a carefully planned construction strategy related to the economic and social pressure from the Greek colonies in the Black Sea region? it is also possible that both explanations are true.

IDO MOVEMENT FOR CULTURE. Journal of Martial Arts Anthropology, 2020

The functioning of the Scythian enclave on Polish lands can be seen as a cultural phenomenon. The site should be treated as an integral part of the military system of forest-steppe Scythia. This is evidenced by a number of formal features related to the fortified settlement itself, such as its natural defensive qualities, location in an upland area or location, enabling control of the immediate surroundings. At the same time, it is a central point in relation to neighbouring open settlements together forming the so-called Chotyniec agglomeration. It is also worth mentioning archaeological sources, especially military accessories, which fit very well into the cultural canons of Eastern European warriors.

The unique nature of the Early Iron Age fortified settlements of Wielkopolska, in terms of their internal development, alleged function, genesis and chronology, places them in a group of monuments that have a fundamental meaning. Studying these sites goes beyond understanding this particular aspect of Polish prehistory. The recognition of these settlements, studied over the years and considered under various spatial and subject-specific angles, is very uneven and, in general, unsatisfactory, as has long been pointed out in the literature. Apart from the sites explored in long-term excavation campaigns, there are sites where reconnaissance work was carried out over only one or two seasons (excepting Biskupin and Sobiejuchy) or where only sondages were made. Furthermore, the analysis of the results of these investigations is, in general, also fairly unsatisfactory. Despite the opportunities offered by the current methods of absolute dating, we still know very little about the chronology of the fortified Hallstatt settlements of Wielkopolska. Hence the authors have started a new project aimed at gathering key information that has not so far been obtained or that has been insufficiently investigated. The most important element is absolute dating by dendrochronological and radiocarbon methods (timber structural elements, organic material from culture layers, osteological material) and luminescence (ceramics). Another important aspect consists of attempts at correlating the absolute dates obtained with the mass of archaeological material to verify and modify the traditional dating methods (changes in pottery styles). Last but not least we aim to obtain broader information regarding the development of all Hallstatt fortified sites from the study area through remote sensing, which includes aerial reconnaissance, geophysical surveys, digital terrain models (magnetometry maps, 3D models, orthophotographs). This article is a preliminary report on the new investigations of the Wielkopolska fortified settlements currently being conducted by the authors.

Gesta XVII/2, 2018

The aim of our paper is a short presentation of main features of the fortified settlement located at the very edge of the OFCC area, in Maszkowice village (southern Poland). We shall focus consecutively on geographical and settlement context, range of the site, current state of research, methodology of excavations and material analysis, chronological framework of the site and finally detailed description of the OFCC settlement and its subsequent building phases.

Ancient Rus '; proto-urban centre; 1Oth century; ancient field; flood-land area Gnezdovo archaeological complex is situated at the Western Russian border, about 1 3 km from one of most ancient Russian towns, Smolensk. It is known as one of the largest archaeological sites of the period of state formation in Eastern Europe. As early as at the beginning of the 20th century two hill-forts bordered by extensive non-fortified settlements were fixed in association with about 4000 mounds, the latter forming some strictly outlined cemeteries. The history of Gnezdovo studies commenced more than 125 years ago, but only in the late forties of the 20th century it had become rather regular and purposeful. The nucleus of the comple,. is comprised of the central hillfort surrounded by a settlement and cemetery with more than 3000 mounds, divided into two mound groups; a small mound group situated on the opposite Dnieper bank is also a part of the named nucleus. A few more mound groups concentrated around small settlement in the mouth of one of the Dnieper tributaries were revealed to the west of the central settlement. As a result of many years of studies it was established, that mounds and settlements were synchronous and nearly all were dated as belonging to the period from the 9-1 Oth century up to the beginning of the 11th century. The primary non-fortified settlement in the central part of the site gradually transformed into a fortified centre of the crafts and long-distance trade with the peak of its prosperity at the middle to second half of the 1Oth century. The excavations resulted in the finding of inhabited buildings and workshops, the latter related to bone, non-ferrous and ferrous metal processing. Defective and half-finished articles, crucibles, casting moulds being clustered in certain areas of the settlement comprised a significant part of findings. Gnezdovo jewellers manufactured different ornaments of Baltic and Scandinavian type; the peculiarities of Scandinavian and Slavonic blacksmith handicraft are distinctly traced in the products of iron processing (Eniosova 1999; Pushkina/ Rozanova 1992). The pottery produced by Gnezdovo craftsmen is characterised by typical Slavonic forms. The polyethnic and socially heterogeneous composition of the permanent Gnezdovo population is strictly documented by the materials of mound excavations. The cremation burials are predominant but a significant part of the mounds contain inhumations, with a good deal of chamber-graves (Zharnov 1992). The topographic separation of different ethnic burials was not observed. Ethnically peculiar decorations are also almost uniformly distributed within the settlement area. The role and significance of the polyethnic settlement controlling the route "from Varangians to the Greeks" is also demonstrated by the abundance of numismatic materials and the concentration of coin hoards dated predominantly to the middle of the 1Oth century and jewellery (Pushkina 2000, 215-224). The largest settlement area covering about 16 ha is also corresponding to the period of its prosperity. The size and general character of Gnezdovo archaeological site stands against a number of small rural settlements over the area of 2-3 ha associated with a few dozens of mounds. The monument scale and materials obtained after its study allow us to compare it in terms of several criteria with such northern European proto-urban centre as, for example, Birka (Bulkin/ Lebedev 1974).