Search

Funeral and ritual practices in cave sites during the Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age have been recog-nised in multiple sites south of the Carpathians. This paper presents the first evidence for the funeral and ritual use of cave sites with such chronology north of the Carpathians. Unburned human remains dated to Ha B and Ha C/D have been identified in two cave sites Zbójecka Cave and Bramka Rockshelter ) located 500 m apart, in the Polish Jura. Additionally, a pottery deposit dated to Ha B2-C has been found in a third cave (Ciasna Cave ) situated near the aforementioned sites. The paper analyses these finds in the context of the local Lusatian culture settlement and the already recognised traces of Lusatian cave site use in the studied karstic region. The results give ground to search for more evidence of ritual cave use in the Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age. V mnoha jeskynních lokalitách jižně od Karpat byly rozpoznány doklady pohřebních a rituálních praktik z pozdní doby bronzové a starší doby železné. Tento článek představuje první důkaz takového jednání severně od Karpat. Nespálené lidské ostatky datované do Ha B a Ha C/D byly identifikovány ve dvou lokalitách Polské Jury (Zbójecka jeskyně a převis Bramka), vzdálených 500 m od sebe. Kromě toho bylo ve třetí jeskyni ( jeskyně Ciasna), která se nachází poblíž jmenovaných, nalezen depot keramiky datované do Ha B2-C. Příspěvek tyto nálezy začleňuje do kontextu místního osídlení lužické kultury a již známých dokladů využití jeskynních lokalit ve zkoumaném krasovém regionu. Výsledky poskytují podklad pro iden tifikaci dalších důkazů rituálního využití jeskyní v pravěku

Scientific diving (i.e. diving for research purposes organised by universities and research institutes) was excluded from the Act on the performance of underwater works in 2014. With the exception of the introduction of internal regulations at several academic institutions involved in underwater research, to date it remains unregulated at national level. In May this year, an initiative group consisting of six scientific institutions established the Polish Scientific Diving Committee - PKNN. Its aim is to unite Polish institutions using scientific diving in their activities, to represent their interests in the national and international arena, to co-operate and exchange experience, to adopt and develop appropriate standards and procedures, including those relating to safety, and to achieve the future introduction in Poland of regulations fully regulating scientific diving, as well as to support the development of this field of underwater research in Poland.

Degree of recognition of the armament models in Barbaricum allows not only to identify certain cultural areas but also to capture the ordinary findings not exactly matching the indigenous pattern. Their interpretation, although burdened with uncertainty, allows depicting the phenomena on the detailed dynamic level, i.e. not as a manifestation of the cultural processes but a phenomenon of a limited scale or relating to small groups of warriors. Author discusses particular finds from differ- ent parts of European Barbaricum, i.a. a Celtic grave from Ciumeşti in Romania, a warrior cemetery from the 1st c. BC in Mutin on the River Seym, 1st/2nd c. AD dou- ble grave from Káloz in Pannonia, 2nd c. AD necropolis in Kariv (western Ukraine), Sudovian Culture grave from Szwajcaria by Suwałki, barrow 2 (early 3rd c. AD) and late antique necropolis at Čatyr Dag in Crimea. Basing on the chosen archaeological examples from different parts of the Iron Age Europe a mobility of a military char- acter – practice mentioned in the written and ethnographic sources – is exemplified.

History, State of and Necessity for Research on the Roman and Migration Period Military Equipment from Poland. Subjective Approach (Despite Good Intentions)Significant studies on military equipment from the Roman Period have been initiated by Martin Jahn (1916a; 1921). For many years his works have been the main point of reference for research on weaponry of the Germanic peoples. This picture has not been changed radically by the post-war works of Klaus Raddatz, devoted mostly to the Germanic military equipment in the Late Pre-Roman Period (1966), Younger Roman Period (1967), and wide spectrum from the Late Pre-Roman until the Migration Period (1985). Although important at the time, they were insufficiently involving inner cultural diversity of the ‘Germanic’ world, presenting the issue from the first and foremost northern European perspective.After the war the studies on weaponry of the Central European Barbaricumhave been based mostly on the materials of the Przeworsk culture, due to abundance of military equipment in graves of this cultural unit. It is achronicler’s duty to mention rather unsuccessful work of Janina Elantkowska (1961), but then underline also the fundamental works of Kazimierz Godłowski in the field of chronology of weapon graves (1970; 1992; 1994), enabling further, more precise works on armaments of the Przeworsk culture. This scholar has educated several hoplologists, experts in archaeological military equipment (active – just like him – at the Jagiellonian University) who broaden the knowledge in this field considerably. Among those one should name especially Piotr Kaczanowski (1988) – the author of the studies on inlaid pole weapon heads, finds of imported weapons from the area of Barbaricum (Kaczanowski 1992) or the classification of heads of shafted weapons from the Przeworsk culture (Kaczanowski 1995). The latter is especially important, because establishing typologies and chronology of the pole weapon heads enabled further studies on military equipment in multiple aspects, thanks to the ability to precisely date graves equipped only with spear- or javelin heads, until that time dated very widely. Equally important person ‘descended’ from Kraków is Marcin Biborski, to whom academics owe research on Barbarian and Roman swords from the Barbarian Europe (Biborski 1978; 1994a; 1994b; 1994c; 1994d; Biborski, Ilkjær 2006); he has also begun the discourse on the ritual weapon destruction (Biborski 1981), as well as decorations of shafted weapon heads and swords (1986). Both aforementioned researchers have initiated the metal analysis of swords, which enabled devising of criteria for identification of the Roman imports (Biborski et alii1982; 2003). In the Kraków’s academia the classification of spurs has also been developed (Ginalski 1991), as well as axes (Kieferling 1994). Acomplement to the abovementioned is the study of weapon sets from graves, i.e. Germ. Waffenkombination issue (Kontny 2001; 2002; 2003a; 2008b), and – embracing broader territorial range – studies on pole weapon heads ornamented with astitch-like pattern (Kontny 2008a) and negative ornament on their blades (Kontny 2017a), or an eye-motif decoration placed at the sockets (Czarnecka, Kontny 2008), as well as the newest registers of watery deposits of weapons from the area of Poland (Kontny forthcoming b).Piotr Kaczanowski has also initiated the studies on weaponry of the Wielbark culture (Kaczanowski, Zaborowski 1988). Due to the specifics of burial rituals (taboo on weapons in grave goods) the research on arms of the Wielbark culture has arather short history. In the aforementioned work singular finds of weapons from graves have been used, interpreted by enduring traditions of the Oksywie culture – in the period of the Wielbark culture formation – or the Przeworsk culture – at the former areas of this cultural unit, later occupied by the Wielbark culture peoples. What was used there abundantly was the archival source – the files of Martin Jahn, in which one could find notes and sketches presenting finds of weapons from, i.a. Pomerania. However, the authors did not refer to written sources, especially very important remark of Tacitus (Tacyt, Germania 44, 1) about short swords and round shields, which were supposed to be distinctive for the peoples of Gotones, Rugii, and Lemovii, associated with the area of the Wiebark culture. This gap has been filled, which gave an opportunity for verification of the part of archaeological sources for reconstruction of the Wielbark military equipment and complementing their list (Kontny 2006a; 2008d).The usefulness of the accounts of Tacitus for the reconstruction of weapons from the Roman Period occurred to be insignificant, but it came to light that the Roman author had not always used the contemporaneous sources (the aforementioned description fits the picture of weaponry of the Oksywie culture). Discoveries of further Wielbark military objects as well as the renewed analysis of the discovery from Żarnowiec (Kontny 2006b) considerably broaden the database of sources and were used to formulate the working hypothesis about the influence of the Przeworsk model on the Wielbark military equipment in the Early Roman and the beginnings of the Younger Roman Period, later replaced by the Scandinavian pattern (Kontny 2006b, 152; 2008d, 195). The probability of this concept grew, since the analysis of male belts led to similar inferences (Madyda-Legutko 2015). Therefore, the need for verification of the suggested picture occurred, with the use of possibly complete corpus of Wielbark military finds; all the more because the issue was complicated by the discovery of the inhumation burial with asword and sword bead in Juszkowo near Pruszcz Gdański, i.e. in the area of the important settlement centre of the Wielbark culture. The grave is dated to the time of the decline of this cultural unit (Dyrda, Kontny, Mączyńska 2014; Kontny, Mączyńska 2015). In effect, the synthesis of the Wielbark military equipment has been developed (Kontny 2019a, 69–113), in which it was possible to confirm the Przeworsk inspirations to Wielbark armaments in the Early Roman Period and subphase C1a, as well as to notice later influences of the northern European weaponry model. What was added to this picture was the probable introduction into the sphere of nomadic influences in the terminal stadium of the Wielbark culture, suggesting, that it was in fact the eastern-Germanic-type weaponry then, in which the nomadic influences are quite noticeable, manifesting in the adaptation of bow and trilobate arrows with rhomboid blades, as well as spathae of the Asian type. It was also possible to classify some conceptions formulated in the pioneering work; thus, the suggestion of the Wielbark origins of the negative ornament on shafted weapon heads has been rejected (Kontny 2017a), as well as the one about the important role of abow in the Wielbark armamentarium (Kontny 2019a, 85–87). On the other hand, in the light of current research the idea of the axes’ importance seems valid (Kontny 2019a, 83–85; 2019c,154–158).As opposed to the weapons, the Wielbark spurs were analyzed on multiple occasions. The newest classification of Wielbark spurs (Smółka 2014, 48–51) was mentioned only in the form of summary of the unpublished M.A. thesis and therefore it is hard to refer to it in details and evaluate it. It is beyond doubt, however, that spurs from the Early Roman and the beginnings of the Younger Roman Period, in principle, were based on Przeworsk forms – with obvious differences in material (the lack of iron examples in graves, which is conditioned by the burial rituals), slight morphological ones, as well as the larger popularity of the chair-shaped examples (Germ. Stuhlsporen). In the later timespan one should notice more explicit northern European influences, although along with the preservation of arangeof local forms (Kontny 2019a, 87–88), and at the dawn of the Wielbark culture’s existence one might indicate the examples of spurs having been imported or inspired by Roman solutions (Kontny 2020, 673–675; Kontny, Michalak 2020). These observations, to the large extent, inscribe into the general dynamics of changes in the Wielbark military equipment. Asaresearch objective one should recognise the intensification of studies on watery deposits, as at some sacrificial sites of this kind Wielbark-culture arms have been discovered.In the last few years there has been ahuge advancement in the research on weapons of the West Balt cultural circle from the area of north-eastern Poland. This issue has been basically unrecognised until recently, and the progress is owed to discovery and dissemination of the archives and collections of the former Prussia-Museum, as well as private files of scholars active in the pre-war period. Currently the researchers have at their disposal the studies on Bogaczewo and Sudovian cultures’ swords from the Roman Period (Kontny 2017b; see Nowakowski 1994; 2007) as well as seaxes of the Elbląg and Olsztyn group from the Late Migration Period (Kontny 2013a; 2019a, 142–147; see Prassolow 2018). Besides, the idea of the use of battle knives has been rejected, as they were too short to serve this purpose (Kontny 2019a, 128–129). The earliest (Kontny 2007a) and latest (Kontny 2008c) finds of weapons from Bogaczewo culture have been elaborated, which allowed to establish the timeframes of the phenomenon of including weapons in grave inventories: from the dawn of the Late Pre-Roman Period until subphase C1b. Particular categories of blunt weapons have been comprehensively analyzed, i.e. socketed axes (weapon characteristic for the West Balt circle and some areas of eastern Europe) and axes from Bogaczewo and Sudovian cultures (Kontny 2016a; 2018). Furthermore, the issue of using the organic blunt weapons has been introduced, which popularity in the Balt milieu is suggested by the Tacitus’ remark about fustis. It has been established (Kontny 2015a) that such weapon has been used in the West Balt Barrows culture, but most probably it has not played any important role in the Roman Period, and the account of Tacitus is (in this aspect) anachronic. Elaboration of shafted weapon heads (Kontny 2007b) has shown that examples from the Bogaczewo culture imitate solutions known from the Przeworsk culture, although they show some local features (e.g. asocket is frequently mounted on ashaft with ause of asingle nail, and not rivet, as it was in the Przeworsk culture). On the other hand, in the Sudovian culture similar inspirations might be indicated only in the earliest stadium of its development and they are rather scarce. Shafted weapons match, however, the Lithuanian pattern, proposed by Vytautas Kazakâvičius (Kazakâvičius 1988, 12–63). One can also encounter here the Scandinavian imports. In the case of the Sudovian culture it was also possible to attempt to reconstruct sizes of shafted weapons, thanks to the analysis of the position of their heads in inhumation graves (Kontny 2019a, 119–124). It was also indicated that the significance of javelins in both cultures is rather scarce, which manifests in the sporadic presence of more than one weapon head in grave inventories (Kontny 2019a, 119, table 1), as well as the sparsity of barbed heads (Nowakowski 2014). The influences of the Przeworsk culture are noticeable also in the decorations of weapon heads (see: Kontny 2008a; 2017a; Czarnecka, Kontny 2008). Only recently the topic of bow and arrows from the Bogaczewo and Sudovian cultures has been introduced. They were mainly used for hunting purposes (Kontny 2019a, 137–139). Equine equipment is quite well-represented in the Balt area, the proof of which are quite numerous finds of headgear and horse tack with chain reins, requiring – similarly to spurs – comprehensive studies (see Kontny 2019a, 139–141). On the presented background the research on Balt shields from the area of Poland seems at adisadvantage. It is necessary to challenge the possibility of an uncritical use of the (still incomplete) classification of middle-European shield-bosses and grips for the analysis of the Balt examples, as they indicate adifferent rhythm of popularity and morphological development, and in the same time also arange of primitive features (shield-bosses assembled from two parts, joint with rivets) and archaisms in construction (e.g. many attaching points at the brim; using big disc-headed nails and rivets as late as the Roman Period). It is also important to notice the large diversification in morphology of shield-bosses with blunt apex and probability of popularity of wooden shield-bosses (Kontny 2019a, 132–133, fig. 25), as well as the use of metal supports of shield constructions (Kontny 2019a, 136, fig. 30). The reconstruction of the shape of Sudovian culture shields was also proposed, on the basis of the location of shield elements in inhumation graves (Kontny forthcoming a).Numerous are the finds of the military equipment of the so-called Lubusz group (see the paper by Bartłomiej Rogalski in the hereby volume), located by the lower Oder River in the Early Roman Period and the beginnings of the Younger Roman Period. Distinctive feature of this cultural unit is the use of cremation and including into graves burnt and sometimes – by the Przeworsk custom – destroyed weapons. Studies of this issue still have not been fully published, although it has been approached for some time now (Wołągiewiczowie 1964); aM.A. dissertation was even written on this topic (Czarnecka 1995). The theses, which have been included there, became obsolete due to the rapid increase in the archaeological record, i.a. thanks to the fieldwork at the necropolis in Czelin, as well as the lake sacrificial site in Lubanowo. On the basis of the hitherto observations, it has to be acknowledged that the model of the military equipment is very similar to the solutions known from the Przeworsk culture (Kontny 2019b, 349). The forms of shafted weapon heads, single- or double-edged 74B. Kontnyswords, shield-bosses, grips, and even arrowheads and spurs (with the documented exam-ples of the so-called bow-shaped – Germ. Bügelsporen – and chair-shaped spurs correspond with the Przeworsk prototypes. There are no axes known from burial grounds of the Lubusz group so far, which diversifies it from the Wielbark-culture armament, and shows even more ties with the military equipment of the Przeworsk culture. However, their presence has been confirmed at the sacrificial sites; it is possible that the weapons discovered there have been seized from the defeated Wielbark-culture invaders from the east (similar interpretation is accepted for the analogical northern European deposits). Scarce examples of weapons from the dawn of the Lubusz group refer to the solutions known from Scandinavia. It is thus probable that the change, which can be observed here, is analogous to the process known from the Wielbark culture.Basically unrecognised remains the military equipment of the Dębczyno group, which superseded the Wielbark culture in Western Pomerania in the Younger Roman Period and functioned until the Migration Period. Also in the case of Luboszyce culture what is lacking is the synthetic approach towards the issue of military equipment from the typological and chronological point of view. The finds of weapons were collected in the monograph of this culture; the attention has been paid in this case to the diversity from the Przeworsk model of military equipment, expressed in the use of axes (their classification was proposed); singular ties to the Scandinavian patterns have been observed (Domański 1979, 43–54), although one cannot find here comprehensive analysis of the issue. Adissertation devoted to military equipment of the Luboszyce culture has been written lately; unfortunately, it was not printed (Demkowicz 2014); only some of the issues approached there were published (Andrzejewska, Demkowicz 2015a; 2015b; 2016). They indicate the emulation – with slight modifications – the Przeworsk-culture model of weaponry in the early phases of development of the Luboszyce culture (phase C1), which might be indicated e.g. by the forms of shafted weapon heads and spurs, while new elements, such as asymmetric axes parallel to the ones known from the Elbe region, became numerous only from the C2 phase (Andrzejewska, Demkowicz 2015a; 2015b; 2016). Scandinavian elements are represented i.a. by the knives with along grip, associated with the equipment of warriors (Andrzejewska, Demkowicz2016), although most probably not used in battle. Among the Scandinavian forms one might indicate also range of pole weapon heads (Andrzejewska, Demkowicz 2015b, 119), as well as ashield-boss and grip from the grave XII at Grzmiąca (Marcinkian 1978, 98, fig. 14:g,h).One has to notice new possibilities which occurred in amoment when the picture of diversities in the military equipment of the cultures: Przeworsk, Sudovian, Bogaczewo, and Wielbark has been recognised (see the synthesis of the hoplological research: Kontny 2019a), as well as – reaching beyond the borders of Poland – northern European Barbaricum, and – partly – Elbe circle. It presents possibilities of creating comparative models of military equipment, indicating mutual influences and reconstructing their mechanisms. Already now it was possible to indicate the culture-forming position of the Przeworsk pattern of military equipment in the Early Roman Period and subphase C1a; in the later time asimilar role was played by the Scandinavian model, although this influence was not that standardizing (Kontny 2019c). It was also possible to identify Przeworsk-culture and Balt archaeological materials at the chosen sacrificial sites in Scandinavia (Kontny 2017c; 2019e), as well as Crimea (Kontny 2013c). It allowed to form ahypothesis on undertaking even far-going military expeditions by the warriors from the area of current Poland in the Roman Period, while participating in frequently ethnically heterogeneous war bands (Kontny 2003b; 2019d); it can clarify, to some extent, also some changes in cultural ranges. Fuller knowledge of the picture of military equipment diversity in Barbaricum (paying attention especially to the analysis of the shafted weapon heads, being agood indication of the cultural affiliation) will allow to continue similar comparisons and deepen the knowledge in the field of history of wars in Barbaricum, on the top of that, reconstructed without any precise data from the written sources. Northern European sacrificial sites showed huge potential which is presented by this kind of studies. Such direction is even more promising because the studies of lake and riverine deposits identified lately in the area of Poland should create new research perspectives, although they not necessarily have acharacter identical to – truly not homogeneous – Scandinavian sites. It seems that there is an abundance of the most exciting topics for along time!

A copper alloy chape was found by chance by a detectorist, Ernest Buczkowski, at Silna – several kilometers to the east of Międzyrzecz. It is a unipartite form with an openwork crescent decoration on the front side fastened to the scabbard with the use of a nail. One should attribute the item to the Roman type Novaesium, dated to the late 2nd century and the first half of the 3rd century. Outside the Roman limes, it was popular in the Elbe Circle as well as the Isle of Funen and the Jutland Peninsula during Subphases C1a and C1b. Some of the chapes of the said type (specifically the multipartite specimens) may be treated as barbarian replicas of Roman originals. However, it is not the case for the finding from Międzyrzecz. It is the second find of this type from the territory of Poland. It should be associated with the Wielbark Culture, which was situated in the Międzyrzecz region in the beginning of the Early Roman Period. It makes the finding very intriguing, as this cultural unit is characterised by the lack of weapons among the grave goods; therefore, the one in question sheds some light on the problem of armament in the Wielbark Culture.

This paper presents the trilobate arrowhead of Sarmatian origin found in 2014 in Podlesie, Oleśnica district, Site 6 by the expedition of the Institute of Archaeology at the University of Warsaw, conducted under the guidance of Artur Grabarek. It was found in a Przeworsk Culture grave (Feature 109) together with weapons, tools, pottery and costume elements (i.a. brooch Almgren 236c). It is dated to the beginning of Phase B1, i.e. much earlier than the chronology of such arrowheads from the territory of Poland assumed earlier. Similar items from the Przeworsk Culture and the Bogaczewo Culture are mentioned. The find is discussed within the context of Germanic-Sarmatian contacts at the turn of the eras and slightly later. &nbsp

The paper presents a logboat found by an expedition from the University of Warsaw in Lake Lubanowo (northwestern Poland) during an underwater archaeological survey in 2020. It is the first logboat made of beech wood (Fagus sylvatica) registered in the area of Poland. The conventional radiocarbon date is 2350±30 BP; thus, the vessel may be attributed to the Jastorf or Pomeranian culture, as it was found in the border area between the territories of both units. Only a few logboats are known from the period preceding the Middle Ages in Poland. Other untypical traits are a transom, and a carefully formed beak-shaped bow. In the prow there is a rectangular hollow with a circular perforation inside of unclear function. One may consider it a fastening of an outrigger or other kind of floating attachment but also perhaps that the bow slot was intended either for a figurehead, for mooring, or to hold a torch during night-time fishing, or even functioned as a ‘stick-in-the-mud’ – type anchor.

Post-Neolithic cave occupation in Poland remains insufficiently recognised. The purpose of this paper is to present the results of the analysis of pottery and metal objects discovered in Tunel Wielki Cave (Ojców area, SE Poland). The artefacts were collected during three fieldwork campaigns in 1967–68 and 2018. The results show that the cave was occupied at least several times. The most ephemeral settlement traces can be dated to the Early Bronze Age and these may be related to the Trzciniec culture. The site was more intensively used in the Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age by communities representing the Lusatian culture. Roman Period artefacts are very scarce. Traces of most intensive use of the cave come from the Middle Ages. One can determine artefacts conditionally dated from the 11th to the 12th century, as well as younger objects, dated to the 13th − early 14th c. Single pieces of pottery can be attributed to the Modern period. The obtained results point to multiple short-term visits. The cave fill does not bear traces of permanent occupation during the Post-Neolithic period.

The author presents the movements of the Przeworsk culture warriors basing on written and archaeological sources but utilizes also the results of anthropological research. The warriors participated in military enterprises, viz. the raids but also more important ventures aimed at different areas (i.a. to the north – Vimose on Funen, and south-east – Čatyr Dag on Crimean Peninsula). Anthropological studies suggest that what was important for them was not the permanent direction, but tantalizing goals accomplishable in a military way. Possibly the warriors participated in retinues, also multi-ethnical ones, as described by Tacitus. It seems possible that the Przeworsk culture warriors occasionally collaborated with the Balts, but also the Wielbark culture warriors. Whether they occupied a privileged position among the Barbarians is still uncertain, but the Przeworsk culture forms of weapons imported and imitated in neighbouring cultures seem to suggest that for a long time they were treated as ‘role model’ warriors. The loss of their leading military impact in the Younger Roman Period should be linked with the increasing position of the Scandinavians with their well-equipped and stratified armies, probably fighting in the battle order. Written sources and weapons appearing as elements of grave furnishing, although not so frequent due to changes in the burial rite, suggest that it did not erase Przeworsk culture zealots from the military sphere. Detailed studies of sacrificial bog/watery sites, found in the territory of Poland, Scandinavia, and maybe also Lithuania and Latvia, have allowed finding further evidences of distant warlike expeditions.

In October 2014 and June 2015, a team of scholars and students from the Institute of Archaeology, University of Warsaw featuring the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology, Polish Academy of Sciences, made an underwater survey in the unnamed lake (formerly Herrn-See) in the village of Lubanowo (formerly Liebenow) in Western Pomerania. During the underwater research, weapons, tools and horse harness parts (including chain reins) were found. They are dated mainly to the Roman Period, but also to the Middle Ages. Some items bear traces of ritual destruction. Parallels may be pointed out with weapons in Przeworsk culture, and to some extent also in Scandinavia. The site should be attributed to sacrificial military deposits. Its extraordinary character lies in the fact that so far it is the only site of its type which is still in its ‘lake stage’, i.e. not a marsh or bog. Most probably it was used by local inhabitants, the people of the Lubusz group. Key words: Herrn-See, Lubanowo village, underwater research, weapon deposit, Roman Period. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15181/ab.v23i0.1296

Straipsnyje pirmą kartą bandoma apibendrinti Bogačevo ir Sūduvių kultūrų ginkluotės tyrimus. Nustatyta, kad kalavijai buvo svarbesni nei manyta, taip pat didelį vaidmenį turėjo pentiniai ir įmoviniai kirviai. Vadinamųjų „kovos peilių“ karinė paskirtis romėniškuoju laikotarpiu atmesta (išskyrus Dolchmesser tipo peilius, kurie pripažinti tikrais ginklais). Dažniausiai naudoti ietys ir skydai. Pastarieji, nors ir atitinka Centrinės Europos pavyzdžius, turi ir vietinių bruožų. Lankas laikytinas medžioklės įrankiu, o žirgai karyboje greičiausiai turėjo ne pagrindinį vaidmenį. Baltiškojo tipo dirbiniai, rasti, pvz., Vimose pelkėje (1 ir 2a) bei aukojimo vietose, tokiose kaip Balsmyr, Sorte Muld, Kragehul, Skedemosse ir Uppåkra, atskleidžia, kad baltai dalyvavo skandinavų kariniuose konfliktuose, ir tai leido keistis žiniomis apie karybos taktiką bei ginklus. This paper is the first attempt to summarize the state of research into the armament of the Bogaczewo and Sudovian cultures. Swords ended up with a higher than expected position. While shaft-hole axes and socketed axes played an important part, the military role of the so-called ‘fighting knives’ of the Roman period was rejected, with the exception of Dolchmesser, which were recognized as true weapons. Polearms and shields were used the most frequently. The latter, although fitting into the Central European pattern, had local traits. The bow was recognized as hunting equipment. And horses had a rather auxiliary character. Items with a Balt character that were discovered, for example, at Vimose Bog 1 and 2a and the sacrificial sites at Balsmyr, Sorte Muld, Kragehul, Skedemosse, and Uppåkra seem to prove that Balts participated in Scandinavian conflicts, which led to an exchange of ideas about such things as tactics and weapons.

The author recalls the famous princely Sudovian culture grave at Szwajcaria (today within the administrative limits of Suwalki). Apart from presenting the grave furnishings according to up-to-date typological standards, he tries to reinterpret particular finds, identifying the metal fittings of a saddle and the metal mountings of a possible leather bucket aimed at hiding a horse harness. Additionally, an engraved ornament spotted on the head of a shafted weapon Type Vennolum/Ilkjaer 15 is presented. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/ 10.15181/ab.v19i0.279 Key words: Sudovian culture, princely grave, Szwajcaria, saddle, horse gear, Vennolum.

Straipsnyje pristatoma Elblongo (lenk. Elbląg) grupė savo klestėjimo laikotarpiu, t. y. VI a. po Kr. pabaiga 7 a. pradžia. Straipsnyje daugiausia aptariami skandinaviški importiniai radiniai ir dirbiniai, patekę iš Merovingų valdomos frankų teritorijos. Faktiškai importiniai radiniai – tai prabangos reikmenys. Straipsnyje analizuojami Elblongo grupės gamtos ištekliai ir prekės, kuriomis šie žmonės prekiavo (gintaras, galbūt ir druska). Analizuojama Elblongo grupės geostrateginė pozicija, taip pat jūros prekybos keliai ir laivai, naudoti Baltijos jūroje Tautų kraustymosi laikotarpio pabaigoje. Kontaktai tarp Pietų Skandinavijos ir Elbliongo grupės yra atskleidžiami plačiame politiniame ir kultūriniame kontekste (1–8 pav.; III iliustr.). This paper presents the Elbląg group at its peak, that is, the late sixth and early seventh centuries. Imports are presented, namely Scandinavian (but also Merovingian) denominators of opulence (drinking horns, particular imported goods, seaxes in ornamental scabbards, and so on), and also the possible grounds on which local settlers thrived (the amber trade, maybe also the salt trade). The geostrategic position of the Elbląg group is analysed, as well as sea trade routes and boats used on the Baltic Sea during the Late Migration Period. Contacts between southern Scandinavia and the Elbląg group are described against the wider cultural and political background.

The paper discusses a recent stray find of a sword fragment with a possible stamp from Masuria in NE Poland. It was found close to a Roman Period cemetery of the Bogaczewo Culture. On typological grounds, the sword can be classified as a Roman Period weapon. However, the results of metallographic examinations suggest that the find may have been made either from very clean bloomery steel (or hypoeutectoid crucible steel) or from mass-made Industrial Age steel (Bessemer, Thomas, Siemens-Martin, etc.). On the other hand, the chemical composition of the sword would rather imply a pre-Industrial Period steel. In conclusion, it is carefully suggested that the weapon may be a genuine Ancient sword, although its final recognition as a Roman Period weapon could only be verified by finds made from similar metal in undoubted Roman Period contexts.

The paper deals with the problem of swords in the West Balt circle. It has been stated that they lack here almost entirely, with the exception for several swords known. The author opposes such idea, showing new materials proving the usage of swords in the Balt cultural milieu, specifically swords from bog sacrificial sites (Wólka, Czaszkowo) and elements of swords’ scabbards, fittings of baldric belts aimed to hang the scabbard, or sword’s handle fitting discovered in graves without swords themselves. That phenomenon is observed both in the Roman (the Bogaczewo culture and Dollkeim- Kovrovo culture) and Migration Period (the Olsztyn group). It seems to prove that Balts frequently avoided placement of swords in graves what could be expressed by the value of swords (see long usage of broken and then sharpened swords) or ritual matters/beliefs (e.g. pars-pro-toto principle or taboo). Bartosz Kontny

The purpose of this paper is to present the results of multidisciplinary analyses of the clay rattle found in 1919 in Koziarnia Cave in the Sąspów Valley (Kraków-Częstochowa Upland, southern Poland). The artefact is cylindrical and holds a broken handle. On one side the rattle contained a small hole sealed by the dirt, which was accidentally removed while cleaning. This caused some rounded, organic material to fall out of the inside of the item. It was identified as pea seeds (cf. Pisum sativum L.). The CT scan of the rattle allowed a detailed analysis of its production process, as well as providing the identification of an imprint of one of the peas within. The seed was radiocarbon dated, giving the results of 1705 ± 30 uncal BP. This corresponds with the C2-D1 phases in the relative chronology of the Roman and the Early Migration Periods. The results of the investigation paved the way for a discussion on both the puzzling function of the rattle, as well as the complex cultural background in the Kraków-Częstochowa Upland at that time.

A unique relief fibula dated to the Migration Period (first half of the sixth century) was found in Radziejow, Poland. This stray find changes previous opinions on the lack of settlement in central Poland at that time. As the find is the only one of such type in Poland, a special attention was paid to possible analogies, mainly finds from Scandinavia and Western Europe. The fibula underwent technological analyses in order to reveal its technology of manufacture. For this purpose, the chemical and elemental composition of the alloy was studied. Several physico-chemical complementary techniques such as optical microscopy (OM), scanning electron microscopy with energy dispersive X-ray (SEM–EDX) spectroscopy, energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence (ED-XRF) analysis, X-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis and micro-hardness testing (HV0.2) were used to study the technology of the find. The investigations revealed that this artefact was made from brass (4–17 wt% Zn) with an admixture of Sn (2–12 wt%). Two technologies were used: casting for the bow and forming for the part with the axle of the spring. The artefact’s surface was tinned in the hot-dipping process. The physical structural analyses demonstrated that the artefact was cast and ornamented by surface stamping under a relatively low temperature (about 500 °C).