The remains of an assumed 13th-century episcopal church and associated brick structures at the Cape of Koroinen, southwest Finland, were excavated in 1898–1902. The structures may constitute the first occurrence of masonry buildings, and the use of brick in mainland Finland. Such conclusions, however, have also been questioned. The evaluation of the discoveries has been difficult, because the excavation results were never thoroughly published. The present article re-examines the findings, and discusses their importance for the understanding of Koroinen. The first wooden church at Koroinen had a rectangular nave measuring probably 20 by 10.5 m, and a narrow choir, 4.5 by 4.5 m in size. Inside the choir, a brick altar and brickwalled grave 2 may have been built. The altar foundation measured ca 1.2 by 1.1 m and was possibly erected entirely of bricks. These two structures were mainly constructed of ordinary wall bricks. The nave of the second wooden church measured ca 27.5 by 14.5 m, and it had a narrow choir as well. A brick podium for a baptismal font, as well as a sub-surface drain made mostly of bricks, was presumably connected with the second church. It seems likely that also a brick-walled grave 1 was built into the wooden choir. The wooden church was located at the same place where a choir of stone was later built. Apparently the masonry choir represented the first construction phase of a stone church. It was not planned to be tower-height, and it is not certain whether it was ever completed. Based on the archaeological finds, it seems that site was no longer used in the Late Middle Ages.
在芬兰西南部的科罗宁角(Cape of Koroinen)，人们于1898年至1902年挖掘出了一座13世纪的圣公会教堂和相关的砖结构建筑。该结构可能构成砌体建筑的第一次出现，并在芬兰大陆使用砖。然而，这样的结论也受到了质疑。对这些发现的评估一直很困难，因为挖掘结果从未彻底公布过。本文重新审视了这些发现，并讨论了它们对理解科罗宁的重要性。科罗宁的第一座木制教堂有一个长方形的中殿，宽20米，宽10.5米，还有一个狭窄的唱诗班，宽4.5米，宽4.5米。在唱诗班内部，可能建造了一个砖祭坛和砖砌的坟墓。祭坛的地基长约1.2米，宽1.1米，可能完全由砖砌成。这两座建筑主要是用普通的墙砖建造的。第二座木制教堂的中殿长约27.5米，宽14.5米，里面也有一个狭窄的唱诗班。一座用作洗礼池的砖砌平台，以及一条主要由砖砌成的地下排水管道，可能与第二座教堂相连。木制唱诗班里似乎还建了一座砖墙坟墓。这座木制教堂位于后来建造的石质唱诗班所在的地方。显然，石砌唱诗班代表了石砌教堂的第一个建设阶段。它并没有被设计成和塔一样高，也不确定它是否完成了。根据考古发现，该遗址似乎在中世纪晚期不再被使用。
{"title":"AT THE DAWN OF MASONRY ARCHITECTURE – CHURCH REMAINS AND ASSOCIATED BRICK STRUCTURES AT KOROINEN, TURKU","authors":"Tanja Ratilainen","doi":"10.3176/ARCH.2016.1.03","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3176/ARCH.2016.1.03","url":null,"abstract":"The remains of an assumed 13th-century episcopal church and associated brick structures at the Cape of Koroinen, southwest Finland, were excavated in 1898–1902. The structures may constitute the first occurrence of masonry buildings, and the use of brick in mainland Finland. Such conclusions, however, have also been questioned. The evaluation of the discoveries has been difficult, because the excavation results were never thoroughly published. The present article re-examines the findings, and discusses their importance for the understanding of Koroinen. The first wooden church at Koroinen had a rectangular nave measuring probably 20 by 10.5 m, and a narrow choir, 4.5 by 4.5 m in size. Inside the choir, a brick altar and brickwalled grave 2 may have been built. The altar foundation measured ca 1.2 by 1.1 m and was possibly erected entirely of bricks. These two structures were mainly constructed of ordinary wall bricks. The nave of the second wooden church measured ca 27.5 by 14.5 m, and it had a narrow choir as well. A brick podium for a baptismal font, as well as a sub-surface drain made mostly of bricks, was presumably connected with the second church. It seems likely that also a brick-walled grave 1 was built into the wooden choir. The wooden church was located at the same place where a choir of stone was later built. Apparently the masonry choir represented the first construction phase of a stone church. It was not planned to be tower-height, and it is not certain whether it was ever completed. Based on the archaeological finds, it seems that site was no longer used in the Late Middle Ages.","PeriodicalId":42767,"journal":{"name":"Estonian Journal of Archaeology","volume":"76 1","pages":"54"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77025053","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
E. Oras, V. Lang, E. Rannamäe, Liivi Varul, M. Konsa, J. Limbo-Simovart, G. Vedru, M. Laneman, M. Malve, T. Price
There have been various explanations in archaeological literature about whether the earliest Bronze Age stone-cist graves and the first Pre-Roman Iron Age tarand graves in Estonia were built by locals or non-locals. As to possible immigrations, the stone-cist graves have been often related to Scandinavian populations, whilst early tarand graves allegedly had roots in eastern directions. The oldest known examples of these cemetery types are at Jõelähtme and Muuksi for stone-cist graves, and at Ilmandu and Kunda for early tarand graves, in the coastal zone of northern Estonia. In order to test the migration hypothesis we carried out a bioarchaeological study, measuring and mapping local biologically available Sr and O isotope ratios and analysing stable isotope signals of altogether eight individuals from these early stone-cist and tarand graves. The study material was chosen on the basis of the oldest AMS dates of skeletons available so far, or according to the earliest burial constructions in the cemeteries. Based on the comparison of local biologically available Sr and O isotopic baseline results and the results obtained from the individuals, we can talk about migrants in the case of two persons from Kunda and perhaps one from Muuksi, whilst most of the individuals analysed are of local origin. Thus, the idea of Early Metal Period migrations to Estonia from the surrounding regions is supported to some extent. However, the discussion of these migrations might turn out to be surprisingly different from what is expected on the basis of material culture. We also emphasise the importance of further analysis, especially mapping isotopic baseline data in the eastern Baltics, in order to draw further conclusions about the directions and extent of prehistoric migration in this region.
{"title":"TRACING PREHISTORIC MIGRATION: ISOTOPE ANALYSIS OF BRONZE AND PRE-ROMAN IRON AGE COASTAL BURIALS IN ESTONIA","authors":"E. Oras, V. Lang, E. Rannamäe, Liivi Varul, M. Konsa, J. Limbo-Simovart, G. Vedru, M. Laneman, M. Malve, T. Price","doi":"10.3176/ARCH.2016.1.01","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3176/ARCH.2016.1.01","url":null,"abstract":"There have been various explanations in archaeological literature about whether the earliest Bronze Age stone-cist graves and the first Pre-Roman Iron Age tarand graves in Estonia were built by locals or non-locals. As to possible immigrations, the stone-cist graves have been often related to Scandinavian populations, whilst early tarand graves allegedly had roots in eastern directions. The oldest known examples of these cemetery types are at Jõelähtme and Muuksi for stone-cist graves, and at Ilmandu and Kunda for early tarand graves, in the coastal zone of northern Estonia. In order to test the migration hypothesis we carried out a bioarchaeological study, measuring and mapping local biologically available Sr and O isotope ratios and analysing stable isotope signals of altogether eight individuals from these early stone-cist and tarand graves. The study material was chosen on the basis of the oldest AMS dates of skeletons available so far, or according to the earliest burial constructions in the cemeteries. Based on the comparison of local biologically available Sr and O isotopic baseline results and the results obtained from the individuals, we can talk about migrants in the case of two persons from Kunda and perhaps one from Muuksi, whilst most of the individuals analysed are of local origin. Thus, the idea of Early Metal Period migrations to Estonia from the surrounding regions is supported to some extent. However, the discussion of these migrations might turn out to be surprisingly different from what is expected on the basis of material culture. We also emphasise the importance of further analysis, especially mapping isotopic baseline data in the eastern Baltics, in order to draw further conclusions about the directions and extent of prehistoric migration in this region.","PeriodicalId":42767,"journal":{"name":"Estonian Journal of Archaeology","volume":"54 37 1","pages":"3"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80586942","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
From the occupation layer of settlement adjacent to Tartu fort, deposited at some point between the 7th to 9th centuries, a soil sample was taken. In addition to other finds, charred plant macrofossils were obtained. These consisted of eight taxa. Barley was the most common cereal. The second most numerous cereal was rye. Bread wheat and oat were minor components. Four peas and two broad beans were found in addition to the cereals. Three hazelnut fragments and one oak acorn were the only remains of collected plants. One grain remnant of Bromus sp. could not be identified to the species level. Previously reported plant remains from the Iron Age sites of Kuusalu, Iru, Rõuge, Otepää, Soontagana, Valjaja, Tartu fort, Tartu settlement, Aindu and Linnaluuste I were compared with the current material. According to the finds, barley was the most common cereal during the first millennium AD. Rye became common during the Late Iron Age. Two oat finds are significant, because they represent the first Iron Age finds of the crop in Estonia. It is not clear, however, whether oat was cultivated or a weed in Tartu during the 7th–9th centuries. Broad beans were found for the first time in Iron Age Estonia.
{"title":"The Find of Pre-Viking Age Charred Grains from Fort-Settlement in Tartu","authors":"A. Tvauri, Santeri Vanhanen","doi":"10.3176/ARCH.2016.1.02","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3176/ARCH.2016.1.02","url":null,"abstract":"From the occupation layer of settlement adjacent to Tartu fort, deposited at some point between the 7th to 9th centuries, a soil sample was taken. In addition to other finds, charred plant macrofossils were obtained. These consisted of eight taxa. Barley was the most common cereal. The second most numerous cereal was rye. Bread wheat and oat were minor components. Four peas and two broad beans were found in addition to the cereals. Three hazelnut fragments and one oak acorn were the only remains of collected plants. One grain remnant of Bromus sp. could not be identified to the species level. Previously reported plant remains from the Iron Age sites of Kuusalu, Iru, Rõuge, Otepää, Soontagana, Valjaja, Tartu fort, Tartu settlement, Aindu and Linnaluuste I were compared with the current material. According to the finds, barley was the most common cereal during the first millennium AD. Rye became common during the Late Iron Age. Two oat finds are significant, because they represent the first Iron Age finds of the crop in Estonia. It is not clear, however, whether oat was cultivated or a weed in Tartu during the 7th–9th centuries. Broad beans were found for the first time in Iron Age Estonia.","PeriodicalId":42767,"journal":{"name":"Estonian Journal of Archaeology","volume":"23 1","pages":"33"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90898360","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Introduction In 1982, one of the authors of this paper excavated three conjoined stone graves on the bleak alvar at Jaani farm in Vao village (Lang 1983b; 1996, 134 ff.). These were the last of the numerous stone graves around the hill site at Iru and the lower reaches of the Pirita River (Fig. 1) that were rescue excavated due to vibrant economic development on the doorstep of the capital city Tallinn. The majority of the graves in the area had been rescue excavated in the 1970s and in 1980 (Lougas 1975; 1976; 1981; Jaanits & Lavi 1978; Deemant 1993; see also Howen 1900; Spreckelsen 1907; 1927; Vassar 1936). [FIGURE 1 OMITTED] Now, more than thirty years later, we scrutinized the site's osteological assemblage and ordered radiocarbon dating for a selection of human bones. The study was undertaken as part of a radiocarbon dating programme for stone-cist graves in Estonia (see Laneman 2012; Laneman & Lang 2013). In the current paper we publish the results of this investigation, adhering to a rather plain form of describing and discussing different elements of a single site (grave structure, human and faunal remains, artefacts, etc.). In an ideal world, most of this information, particularly osteological analysis, would have been available shortly after the excavation. In the real world, however, one has to deal with the remarkable paucity of properly excavated, osteologically analysed and (radiocarbon-)dated grave sites. Filling in essential gaps and re-interpreting the record--which is what we do in this paper--is thus a necessary and unavoidable part of archaeological practice. Furthermore, it is only detailed information on single sites that provides the basis for a broader and deeper insight of the past in general. Discussion of the Jaani graves in their wider context, however, is the subject of a separate study. Structure of the site The site under review comprised a ship-shaped stone grave, a stone-cist grave (B), and half of another stone-cist grave (A) fitted tightly between them (Fig. 2). This is a rather unusual arrangement, since stone-cist graves usually occur as clearly defined separate structures, and ship graves are altogether rare in the eastern Baltic region. The ship at Vao is one of the three stone ship graves currently known in the territory of Estonia; the remaining two were excavated at Lulle, Sorve Peninsula, Saaremaa (Lougas 1970; Lang 2007a, 164 ff.). [FIGURE 2 OMITTED] The roughly 10.5 m long ship-shaped grave in the eastern part of the structure was edged with large granite stones, which in places were situated in two adjacent rows. It was not possible to definitively establish whether this was the original arrangement of the stones or if they had initially been placed on top of each other; in any case it seems that there has been no top wall of limestone slabs (unlike with the other graves). The gunwale line was partially destroyed, and thus revealed no indications as to which end of the ship was the stern and which was
1982年，本文作者之一在Vao村Jaani农场荒凉的阿尔瓦上发掘了三个连体石墓(Lang 1983b;1996, 134 ff.)。由于首都塔林附近的经济蓬勃发展，这些是伊鲁和皮里塔河下游附近众多石墓中的最后一批(图1)。该地区的大多数坟墓都是在20世纪70年代和80年代抢救挖掘出来的(Lougas 1975;1976;1981;Jaanits & Lavi 1978;Deemant 1993;参见Howen 1900;Spreckelsen 1907;1927;瓦萨尔1936)。现在，三十多年过去了，我们仔细检查了该遗址的骨学组合，并对一些精选的人类骨骼进行了放射性碳定年。这项研究是爱沙尼亚石质坟墓放射性碳定年方案的一部分(见Laneman 2012;Laneman & Lang 2013)。在当前的论文中，我们发表了这项调查的结果，坚持以一种相当简单的形式描述和讨论单个遗址的不同元素(坟墓结构，人类和动物遗骸，人工制品等)。在一个理想的世界里，这些信息，尤其是骨学分析，应该在挖掘后不久就能得到。然而，在现实世界中，人们不得不面对的问题是，适当挖掘、骨学分析和(放射性碳)定年的坟墓遗址非常少。因此，填补重要的空白和重新解释记录——这就是我们在本文中所做的——是考古实践中必要和不可避免的一部分。此外，只有个别地点的详细资料才能为更广泛和更深入地了解过去提供基础。然而，在更广泛的背景下讨论贾尼坟墓是另一项研究的主题。该遗址包括一个船形石墓、一个石池墓(B)和另一个石池墓(a)的一半，它们紧密地连接在一起(图2)。这是一个相当不寻常的安排，因为石池墓通常是作为明确定义的独立结构出现的，而船墓在波罗的海东部地区是非常罕见的。Vao的船是目前在爱沙尼亚境内已知的三个石船墓之一;其余两件出土于萨雷马索尔夫半岛的卢勒(Lougas, 1970;Lang 2007a, 164 ff.)。[图2省略]该结构东部约10.5米长的船形坟墓边缘有大型花岗岩，这些花岗岩在某些地方相邻两排。人们无法确定这是石头的原始排列，还是它们最初是被放在一起的;无论如何，似乎没有石灰石板的顶墙(与其他坟墓不同)。舷线部分被摧毁，因此没有迹象表明船的哪一端是船尾，哪一端是船尾(cf. Lang 1983b;1996年,135年)。同样由花岗岩巨石组成的岩礁只保存了一部分，但其原始尺寸可能约为60 x 50 x 40厘米。除了在礁滩周围发现了相对小而稀疏的花岗岩外，舷缝之间的空间被石灰石填满。石灰石填充物包括从坟墓A的环形墙上坍塌下来的石板，以及后来在它们上面的田野空地上的石头。因此，最初的石灰石填充物的厚度很难确定，但据估计大约有几十厘米，因此填充物没有达到框架花岗岩的顶部。石缸坟墓的边缘是两层环形墙，以花岗岩石头为基础(至少在坟墓a中是相邻的两排)，顶墙是石灰石板;然而，石灰岩的墙壁已经完全瓦解了。…
{"title":"New Data on Jaani Stone Graves at Vao, Northern Estonia/Uusi Andmeid Vao Jaani Kivikalmetest","authors":"M. Laneman, V. Lang, M. Malve, Eve Rannamae","doi":"10.3176/arch.2015.2.02","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3176/arch.2015.2.02","url":null,"abstract":"Introduction In 1982, one of the authors of this paper excavated three conjoined stone graves on the bleak alvar at Jaani farm in Vao village (Lang 1983b; 1996, 134 ff.). These were the last of the numerous stone graves around the hill site at Iru and the lower reaches of the Pirita River (Fig. 1) that were rescue excavated due to vibrant economic development on the doorstep of the capital city Tallinn. The majority of the graves in the area had been rescue excavated in the 1970s and in 1980 (Lougas 1975; 1976; 1981; Jaanits & Lavi 1978; Deemant 1993; see also Howen 1900; Spreckelsen 1907; 1927; Vassar 1936). [FIGURE 1 OMITTED] Now, more than thirty years later, we scrutinized the site's osteological assemblage and ordered radiocarbon dating for a selection of human bones. The study was undertaken as part of a radiocarbon dating programme for stone-cist graves in Estonia (see Laneman 2012; Laneman & Lang 2013). In the current paper we publish the results of this investigation, adhering to a rather plain form of describing and discussing different elements of a single site (grave structure, human and faunal remains, artefacts, etc.). In an ideal world, most of this information, particularly osteological analysis, would have been available shortly after the excavation. In the real world, however, one has to deal with the remarkable paucity of properly excavated, osteologically analysed and (radiocarbon-)dated grave sites. Filling in essential gaps and re-interpreting the record--which is what we do in this paper--is thus a necessary and unavoidable part of archaeological practice. Furthermore, it is only detailed information on single sites that provides the basis for a broader and deeper insight of the past in general. Discussion of the Jaani graves in their wider context, however, is the subject of a separate study. Structure of the site The site under review comprised a ship-shaped stone grave, a stone-cist grave (B), and half of another stone-cist grave (A) fitted tightly between them (Fig. 2). This is a rather unusual arrangement, since stone-cist graves usually occur as clearly defined separate structures, and ship graves are altogether rare in the eastern Baltic region. The ship at Vao is one of the three stone ship graves currently known in the territory of Estonia; the remaining two were excavated at Lulle, Sorve Peninsula, Saaremaa (Lougas 1970; Lang 2007a, 164 ff.). [FIGURE 2 OMITTED] The roughly 10.5 m long ship-shaped grave in the eastern part of the structure was edged with large granite stones, which in places were situated in two adjacent rows. It was not possible to definitively establish whether this was the original arrangement of the stones or if they had initially been placed on top of each other; in any case it seems that there has been no top wall of limestone slabs (unlike with the other graves). The gunwale line was partially destroyed, and thus revealed no indications as to which end of the ship was the stern and which was","PeriodicalId":42767,"journal":{"name":"Estonian Journal of Archaeology","volume":"36 3","pages":"110"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2015-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72623013","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Germanic origin of stoves and their use as signs of power, wealth and convictions Medieval and early modern tile stoves were tall heating appliances, which consisted of vessel-, niche- or panel-shaped ceramic tiles. Although their history is said to have begun during the first millennium AD in the Alpine regions of the present-day Germany, Austria and Switzerland, the oldest indisputable stove-tile finds have been dated to the 12th century. The early stove tiles resembled plain ceramic vessels and it is difficult to distinguish them from each other (Roth Heege 2012, 30 ff.). In Finland the earliest stove tiles have been dated to the early 15th century. They are vessel tiles and they were discovered in Turku (Majantie 2010, 166 f.). The history of tile stoves can be studied, in addition to archaeological sources, by using written documents, drawings and in some cases intact stoves. The written documents regarding tile stoves are, however, scarce and drawings and intact stoves have survived mainly in the German-speaking areas (e.g. Franz 1969, 44, 56 f., 124; Strauss 1968, 22 ff.; Unger 1988, 11, 22). Tile stoves spread from the 13th century onwards to wide areas in northern, western and eastern Europe. Their diffusion was aided by the travels and movements of Hanseatic merchants, German craftsmen and the nobility and clergy. Although their main raw material was clay, which itself was common and inexpensive, their structure made them luxuries that not everyone could obtain. The early tile stoves were built mainly in castles, manors and monasteries, and as the urban burghers became wealthier tile stoves also spread to their dwellings in the towns (Gaimster 2014, 61-64, 69-72). In most cases they were heated through an opening in the wall via another room and the fumes that were released during their use were led out via flues and chimneys (e.g. Franz 1969, 14). Some tile stoves had, however, a firebox opening in the front and were not completely smokeless (Stephan 1991, 30). The popularity of tile stoves was probably a combined result of their smokeless use, their effective ability to emit and retain heat and their decorative appearances. A written document from the 1640s describes tile stoves in the following way: A Cackle Oven /... / are here Made of Cackles /.../, certayne hollow earthen tiles soe called, off greene, blew, ett[s]. coullours, with various worcks, built in Forme off a turrett: a pretty little structure, much adorning the roome; in heightt and bignesse, according to the roomes wherin they stand. From withoutt they make Fire into it. It Casteth a heatt to the Farthest part of the roome, which must bee kept very close. Noisome att First to those thatt are nott accustomed, and I thincke unwholsome att last, though commodious and proffitable otherwise, For by thatt Meanes a little woode will suffice to Make Fire to [111] warme a great Company, all perticipating alike, one Not hindering the other. Nott soe att our Chimney Fires. Those Ca
{"title":"Showing Conviction and Support for the Reformation? A 16th-Century Stove Tile from Turku Bearing the Electoral Coat of Arms of saxony/Osutades Toetust Reformatsioonile? Uhest Turust Leitud 16. Sajandi Saksi Kuurvursti Vapiga Ahjukahlist","authors":"Kirsi Majantie","doi":"10.3176/arch.2015.2.03","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3176/arch.2015.2.03","url":null,"abstract":"Germanic origin of stoves and their use as signs of power, wealth and convictions Medieval and early modern tile stoves were tall heating appliances, which consisted of vessel-, niche- or panel-shaped ceramic tiles. Although their history is said to have begun during the first millennium AD in the Alpine regions of the present-day Germany, Austria and Switzerland, the oldest indisputable stove-tile finds have been dated to the 12th century. The early stove tiles resembled plain ceramic vessels and it is difficult to distinguish them from each other (Roth Heege 2012, 30 ff.). In Finland the earliest stove tiles have been dated to the early 15th century. They are vessel tiles and they were discovered in Turku (Majantie 2010, 166 f.). The history of tile stoves can be studied, in addition to archaeological sources, by using written documents, drawings and in some cases intact stoves. The written documents regarding tile stoves are, however, scarce and drawings and intact stoves have survived mainly in the German-speaking areas (e.g. Franz 1969, 44, 56 f., 124; Strauss 1968, 22 ff.; Unger 1988, 11, 22). Tile stoves spread from the 13th century onwards to wide areas in northern, western and eastern Europe. Their diffusion was aided by the travels and movements of Hanseatic merchants, German craftsmen and the nobility and clergy. Although their main raw material was clay, which itself was common and inexpensive, their structure made them luxuries that not everyone could obtain. The early tile stoves were built mainly in castles, manors and monasteries, and as the urban burghers became wealthier tile stoves also spread to their dwellings in the towns (Gaimster 2014, 61-64, 69-72). In most cases they were heated through an opening in the wall via another room and the fumes that were released during their use were led out via flues and chimneys (e.g. Franz 1969, 14). Some tile stoves had, however, a firebox opening in the front and were not completely smokeless (Stephan 1991, 30). The popularity of tile stoves was probably a combined result of their smokeless use, their effective ability to emit and retain heat and their decorative appearances. A written document from the 1640s describes tile stoves in the following way: A Cackle Oven /... / are here Made of Cackles /.../, certayne hollow earthen tiles soe called, off greene, blew, ett[s]. coullours, with various worcks, built in Forme off a turrett: a pretty little structure, much adorning the roome; in heightt and bignesse, according to the roomes wherin they stand. From withoutt they make Fire into it. It Casteth a heatt to the Farthest part of the roome, which must bee kept very close. Noisome att First to those thatt are nott accustomed, and I thincke unwholsome att last, though commodious and proffitable otherwise, For by thatt Meanes a little woode will suffice to Make Fire to [111] warme a great Company, all perticipating alike, one Not hindering the other. Nott soe att our Chimney Fires. Those Ca","PeriodicalId":42767,"journal":{"name":"Estonian Journal of Archaeology","volume":"54 1","pages":"138"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2015-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90750620","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Introduction. Chopping tools of the Russian Karelian type Cultural context The article is devoted to discussion of some issues associated with the industry of wood-chopping tools (axes, adzes, gouges) of the so-called Russian Karelian or Eastern Karelian type. It is argued here that peculiarities of this industry testify to the existence of craft specialization, and the main emphasis is placed on spatial separation between production and consumption areas, i.e. zones with and without evidences of manufacturing activities. The industry is characteristic for the sites with different varieties of Asbestos Ware, which are dated to the period from ca 3500 cal BC to ca 1500 cal BC based on the available radiocarbon dates, though the final phase of this cultural group is not completely clear due to the lack of sources (Zhul'nikov 1999, 76 f.; Kosmenko 2003; Zhulnikov et al. 2012). This period is labelled as Eneolithic in the Karelian research tradition due to the presence of tiny pieces of native copper in some assemblages. In neighbouring Finland, where synchronous sites belonged to generally the same cultural tradition, it is not separated from the Neolithic (see Nordqvist & Herva 2013). It should be also noted that this type of chopping tools and its specific technology were not unique to Karelia. Very similar industry based on flint and silicified limestone was also characteristic, at least, for Volosovo culture sites in the Upper Volga region (Tarasov & Kostyleva 2015). However, as the latter industry has not been properly studied so far, it will not be discussed here, and the name of the Russian Karelian type is used in this article only for tools made of rocks available in the Lake Onega area. The subsistence system in both Finland and Karelia was still largely based on hunting and gathering with a great deal of exploitation of aquatic resources (Savvateev & Vereshchagin 1978; Kotivuori 1993; Halen 1994, 164; Pesonen 1996, 112; Ukkonen 1996, 78; Koivunen 1997, 50; Karjalainen 1999, 186; Katiskoski 2002, 194; Leskinen 2002, 168; Pesonen 2006, 204; Mokkonen 2011, 37), although there is indirect evidence of small-scale agriculture, quite numerous at the moment but still very controversial (Mokkonen 2011; Lahtinen & Rowley-Conwy 2013). Despite the hunter-gatherer's economy, we can suspect remarkable degree of sedentism based on the spread of long-term semi-subterranean dwellings, exceeding 50 [m.sup.2] and in some cases even 100 [m.sup.2] (Zhul'nikov 2003, 126 f.; Mokkonen 2011, 29-65). The period of demographic growth followed by a new decline can be suggested for the period ca 6000-4000 cal. BP (ca 4000-2000 cal. BC) in Finland based on the distribution of available radiocarbon dates (Tallavaara et al. 2010). This result, at least, can be mentioned in the context of this discussion, though the use of the radiocarbon record as a proxy for studying ancient demography can be subjected to reasonable criticism (for discussion see Mokkonen 2014; Tallavaa
{"title":"Spatial Separation between Manufacturing and Consumption of Stone Axes as an Evidence of Craft Specialization in Prehistoric Russian Karelia/Kivikirveste Tootmise Ja Kasutamise Ruumiline Eraldumine Kasitoo Spetsialiseerumise Toendina Eneoliitikumis Vene Karjalas","authors":"A. Tarasov","doi":"10.3176/arch.2015.2.01","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3176/arch.2015.2.01","url":null,"abstract":"Introduction. Chopping tools of the Russian Karelian type Cultural context The article is devoted to discussion of some issues associated with the industry of wood-chopping tools (axes, adzes, gouges) of the so-called Russian Karelian or Eastern Karelian type. It is argued here that peculiarities of this industry testify to the existence of craft specialization, and the main emphasis is placed on spatial separation between production and consumption areas, i.e. zones with and without evidences of manufacturing activities. The industry is characteristic for the sites with different varieties of Asbestos Ware, which are dated to the period from ca 3500 cal BC to ca 1500 cal BC based on the available radiocarbon dates, though the final phase of this cultural group is not completely clear due to the lack of sources (Zhul'nikov 1999, 76 f.; Kosmenko 2003; Zhulnikov et al. 2012). This period is labelled as Eneolithic in the Karelian research tradition due to the presence of tiny pieces of native copper in some assemblages. In neighbouring Finland, where synchronous sites belonged to generally the same cultural tradition, it is not separated from the Neolithic (see Nordqvist & Herva 2013). It should be also noted that this type of chopping tools and its specific technology were not unique to Karelia. Very similar industry based on flint and silicified limestone was also characteristic, at least, for Volosovo culture sites in the Upper Volga region (Tarasov & Kostyleva 2015). However, as the latter industry has not been properly studied so far, it will not be discussed here, and the name of the Russian Karelian type is used in this article only for tools made of rocks available in the Lake Onega area. The subsistence system in both Finland and Karelia was still largely based on hunting and gathering with a great deal of exploitation of aquatic resources (Savvateev & Vereshchagin 1978; Kotivuori 1993; Halen 1994, 164; Pesonen 1996, 112; Ukkonen 1996, 78; Koivunen 1997, 50; Karjalainen 1999, 186; Katiskoski 2002, 194; Leskinen 2002, 168; Pesonen 2006, 204; Mokkonen 2011, 37), although there is indirect evidence of small-scale agriculture, quite numerous at the moment but still very controversial (Mokkonen 2011; Lahtinen & Rowley-Conwy 2013). Despite the hunter-gatherer's economy, we can suspect remarkable degree of sedentism based on the spread of long-term semi-subterranean dwellings, exceeding 50 [m.sup.2] and in some cases even 100 [m.sup.2] (Zhul'nikov 2003, 126 f.; Mokkonen 2011, 29-65). The period of demographic growth followed by a new decline can be suggested for the period ca 6000-4000 cal. BP (ca 4000-2000 cal. BC) in Finland based on the distribution of available radiocarbon dates (Tallavaara et al. 2010). This result, at least, can be mentioned in the context of this discussion, though the use of the radiocarbon record as a proxy for studying ancient demography can be subjected to reasonable criticism (for discussion see Mokkonen 2014; Tallavaa","PeriodicalId":42767,"journal":{"name":"Estonian Journal of Archaeology","volume":"55 1","pages":"83"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2015-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77631460","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Henny Piezonka. Jager, Fischer, Topfer. Wildbeutergruppen mit fruher Keramik in Nordosteuropa im 6. und 5. Jahrtausend v. Chr. (Archaologie in Eurasien, Band 30.) Habelt-Verlag, Bonn, 2015. 437pp. ISBN9783774939325 The work by Henny Piezonka, the title of which might be translated as Hunters, Fishers and Pots. Food Procuring Groups with Early Pottery in North-Eastern Europe in the 6th and 5th Millennium BC, is a major event in the context of the current research on the spread of ceramic technology across Eurasia. Bringing together a very rich body of material, much of it previously published only in Russian, the work offers a great boost to German-reading prehistorians dealing with this region; there are summaries in Russian and English, in addition to which the Anglophone research community may refer to the concise account given in Piezonka (2012). The study region covers the territory east and north of the Baltic Sea, namely present-day Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, along with north-western Russia, northern Belarus, northeastern Poland and the far northerly regions of Sweden and Norway. To place the region in a broader context, brief but very useful treatments of early ceramic cultures in neighbouring regions of eastern and northern Europe are also provided. As indicated in the title, the work deals mainly with the 6th and 5th millennia BC, which saw the advent of pottery in this territory. Following an introductory treatment of the region's natural setting, we have a description of the material from 17 selected sites in Finland, Estonia, Russia and Lithuania that the author herself has examined, focussing on pottery, but also covering lithics and other finds. The data from the ceramic assemblages (535 vessels in total) are subject to a comprehensive statistical analysis. In the next chapter the theme is considered at a more general level. A brief discussion of the Mesolithic (i.e. aceramic) cultures in the region is followed by a general treatment of pottery and other material of the various early ceramic cultures in the region, based on published accounts and some unpublished work, along with the author's findings from her own examination of material, as described in the previous chapter. For a wider context, the author also gives concise treatments of the earlier and contemporaneous cultures of the neighbouring regions, closing with brief summaries that characterize hunter-gatherer pottery in other parts of the world--the Jomon ceramics of Japan and the Laurel Tradition in the Woodland pottery of North America. Reassessment of previous studies, supplemented with the findings of her own work, leads the author to distinguish three strands of development of early pottery in north-eastern Europe, crosslinked by mutual influences: 1) a tradition of Sparsely Decorated Ceramics, spreading westwards from the middle Volga area in the late 7th millennium BC and providing the basis for the Volga-Oka Complex, Narva Ware and the Chernobor Cultu
{"title":"Making Sense of the Earliest Ceramics in North-Eastern Europe","authors":"V. Bērziņš","doi":"10.3176/arch.2015.2.04","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3176/arch.2015.2.04","url":null,"abstract":"Henny Piezonka. Jager, Fischer, Topfer. Wildbeutergruppen mit fruher Keramik in Nordosteuropa im 6. und 5. Jahrtausend v. Chr. (Archaologie in Eurasien, Band 30.) Habelt-Verlag, Bonn, 2015. 437pp. ISBN9783774939325 The work by Henny Piezonka, the title of which might be translated as Hunters, Fishers and Pots. Food Procuring Groups with Early Pottery in North-Eastern Europe in the 6th and 5th Millennium BC, is a major event in the context of the current research on the spread of ceramic technology across Eurasia. Bringing together a very rich body of material, much of it previously published only in Russian, the work offers a great boost to German-reading prehistorians dealing with this region; there are summaries in Russian and English, in addition to which the Anglophone research community may refer to the concise account given in Piezonka (2012). The study region covers the territory east and north of the Baltic Sea, namely present-day Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, along with north-western Russia, northern Belarus, northeastern Poland and the far northerly regions of Sweden and Norway. To place the region in a broader context, brief but very useful treatments of early ceramic cultures in neighbouring regions of eastern and northern Europe are also provided. As indicated in the title, the work deals mainly with the 6th and 5th millennia BC, which saw the advent of pottery in this territory. Following an introductory treatment of the region's natural setting, we have a description of the material from 17 selected sites in Finland, Estonia, Russia and Lithuania that the author herself has examined, focussing on pottery, but also covering lithics and other finds. The data from the ceramic assemblages (535 vessels in total) are subject to a comprehensive statistical analysis. In the next chapter the theme is considered at a more general level. A brief discussion of the Mesolithic (i.e. aceramic) cultures in the region is followed by a general treatment of pottery and other material of the various early ceramic cultures in the region, based on published accounts and some unpublished work, along with the author's findings from her own examination of material, as described in the previous chapter. For a wider context, the author also gives concise treatments of the earlier and contemporaneous cultures of the neighbouring regions, closing with brief summaries that characterize hunter-gatherer pottery in other parts of the world--the Jomon ceramics of Japan and the Laurel Tradition in the Woodland pottery of North America. Reassessment of previous studies, supplemented with the findings of her own work, leads the author to distinguish three strands of development of early pottery in north-eastern Europe, crosslinked by mutual influences: 1) a tradition of Sparsely Decorated Ceramics, spreading westwards from the middle Volga area in the late 7th millennium BC and providing the basis for the Volga-Oka Complex, Narva Ware and the Chernobor Cultu","PeriodicalId":42767,"journal":{"name":"Estonian Journal of Archaeology","volume":"9 1","pages":"164"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2015-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83389965","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Introduction The Old Russian architecture of pre-Mongolian time is closely connected to the history of Byzantine art. The first stone church in Kiev (so-called Tithe church) was erected at the end of the 10th century by Byzantine architects and builders. Greek masons built the first Russian churches using Byzantine technology: flat bricks (plinths) and stones were connected by mortar made from lime and crushed ceramic or bricks (tsemianka). The entire history of pre-Mongolian architecture of Ancient Russia is associated with the usage of these building materials for the ordinary masonry, bar bricks were very rarely used in monuments of architecture in 1220-1230s. In the 12th--first half of the 13th centuries the blocks of cut limestone and lime mortar with sand were used only in Halich and Vladimir-Suzdal architectural schools (Rappoport 1995, 5-53). In many monuments of the Novgorod architecture of the 12th--first half of the 13th century we can see the combination of the plinths and local stones in masonry, and only the most important parts of the walls, vaults and arches were built from bricks. Novgorodian plinths of pre-Mongolian time have been studied thoroughly: we know the main peculiarities of moulding, the changes in the format of bricks. These data can help us to date the buildings (Shtender 1980, 86; Gervais 2002, 67 ff.; Jolshin 2013, 92 ff.). The disastrous Mongolian invasion of 1238-1240 destroyed the towns and villages of ancient Russia. Mongols did not occupy Novgorod, they turned south 100 km from the town (near Ignatch cross). Novgorod was not destroyed, but the devastation of the lands of ancient Russia influenced the life of this northern town. The texts of the Novgorod chronicles mention no evidence of new buildings until the 1290s. The building activity in Novgorod revived in 1292, when archbishop Clement founded the church of St Nicholas at Lipno. This church was built near Novgorod in the delta of Msta River, where the icon of St Nicholas was found in the 12th century (NPL 1950, 327). It the same year the construction of St. Theodore Stratelates church on Scherkova Str. started on the place of pre-Mongolian church (the construction of new church was finished in 1294). The church of St Nicholas at Lipno was well preserved until the Second World War. In 1941-1943 the upper parts of the building were destroyed or damaged by German artillery, and some parts of the building broke down during the first years after the end of the war. In the 1950s the church was studied and restored by L. Shulyak (Fig. 1). During the restoration works a lot of information about the peculiarities of the building technique and materials was acquired, although the upper parts of the church were lost (Dmitriyev 1948, 58 ff.; Maksimov 1952, 87 ff.; Gladenko et al. 1964, 214 ff.). The building technique, new for ancient Russia, can be seen here for the first time: instead of the plinths the master builders invented the bar bricks, and instead of lime m
{"title":"The Bricks from St Nicholas Church at Lipno near Novgorod (1292) and the Origins of the New Novgorodian Building tradition/Lipno-Aarse Nikolause Kiriku (1292) Tellised Ja Novgorodi Uue Ehitustraditsiooni Paritolu","authors":"I. Antipov, A. Gervais","doi":"10.3176/arch.2015.1.03","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3176/arch.2015.1.03","url":null,"abstract":"Introduction The Old Russian architecture of pre-Mongolian time is closely connected to the history of Byzantine art. The first stone church in Kiev (so-called Tithe church) was erected at the end of the 10th century by Byzantine architects and builders. Greek masons built the first Russian churches using Byzantine technology: flat bricks (plinths) and stones were connected by mortar made from lime and crushed ceramic or bricks (tsemianka). The entire history of pre-Mongolian architecture of Ancient Russia is associated with the usage of these building materials for the ordinary masonry, bar bricks were very rarely used in monuments of architecture in 1220-1230s. In the 12th--first half of the 13th centuries the blocks of cut limestone and lime mortar with sand were used only in Halich and Vladimir-Suzdal architectural schools (Rappoport 1995, 5-53). In many monuments of the Novgorod architecture of the 12th--first half of the 13th century we can see the combination of the plinths and local stones in masonry, and only the most important parts of the walls, vaults and arches were built from bricks. Novgorodian plinths of pre-Mongolian time have been studied thoroughly: we know the main peculiarities of moulding, the changes in the format of bricks. These data can help us to date the buildings (Shtender 1980, 86; Gervais 2002, 67 ff.; Jolshin 2013, 92 ff.). The disastrous Mongolian invasion of 1238-1240 destroyed the towns and villages of ancient Russia. Mongols did not occupy Novgorod, they turned south 100 km from the town (near Ignatch cross). Novgorod was not destroyed, but the devastation of the lands of ancient Russia influenced the life of this northern town. The texts of the Novgorod chronicles mention no evidence of new buildings until the 1290s. The building activity in Novgorod revived in 1292, when archbishop Clement founded the church of St Nicholas at Lipno. This church was built near Novgorod in the delta of Msta River, where the icon of St Nicholas was found in the 12th century (NPL 1950, 327). It the same year the construction of St. Theodore Stratelates church on Scherkova Str. started on the place of pre-Mongolian church (the construction of new church was finished in 1294). The church of St Nicholas at Lipno was well preserved until the Second World War. In 1941-1943 the upper parts of the building were destroyed or damaged by German artillery, and some parts of the building broke down during the first years after the end of the war. In the 1950s the church was studied and restored by L. Shulyak (Fig. 1). During the restoration works a lot of information about the peculiarities of the building technique and materials was acquired, although the upper parts of the church were lost (Dmitriyev 1948, 58 ff.; Maksimov 1952, 87 ff.; Gladenko et al. 1964, 214 ff.). The building technique, new for ancient Russia, can be seen here for the first time: instead of the plinths the master builders invented the bar bricks, and instead of lime m","PeriodicalId":42767,"journal":{"name":"Estonian Journal of Archaeology","volume":"1951 1","pages":"58"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2015-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91174922","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The present volume is a small collection of articles based on papers presented in spring 2013 at the international meeting hosted by the Tallinn University, Institute of History. Between April 26 and 28, PhD students of medieval and later archaeology from seven countries shared their thoughts and research results among a small group of interested colleagues. During the weekend, thirteen presentations on various aspects of later medieval and early modern period archaeology were handled, from the artefact studies to the landscape research and further on to the analysis of the stratigraphy of complicated buildings. The event in Tallinn was a second attempt to bring together young scholars who have chosen to focus their research on the early medieval, medieval and post medieval material remains, e.g. the period from the 6th-7th centuries AD onwards. The first of these post-graduate meetings was jointly hosted by the University of Gottingen and the town of Einbeck in 2012 (see Kuhne & Lehnberg 2013), the seminar in Tallinn (for a thorough overview, see Kuhne 2014) was followed by a conference in Hall in Tyrol organized by the University of Innsbruck in March 2014. Next year's gathering will be in Luneburg (2015), and after that probably in Riga (2016), thus it seems that a new tradition of annual conferences on medieval and later archaeologies has been established. The initial idea behind the conference series was an effort to create a platform for the young scholars who are at the early stage of career-building--to discuss the ongoing research projects, meet the fellow graduate students with similar interests, as well as learn about future prospects on the job market (see Kuhne & Lehnberg 2013, 253), which, in case of archaeology, can range from a few positions at universities, museums and heritage departments to working in the private sector (archaeological excavation firms and consultancies of cultural resource management, to name a few). Visiting different places and organizations is a good chance to get to know and think about the current trends in our profession, about the current driving force for medieval archaeology, the main problems for the newcomers, etc. On a very broad scale we can compare this with successful post-graduate conference series of medieval archaeology--early medieval archaeology student symposium (EMASS), an interactive forum run for, and by, graduate research students in Great Britain (see earlymedievalarchaeology.co.uk). It is to be hoped that the above-mentioned conference series, started in 2012 in Einbeck will develop into a similar kind of lively forum for the younger generation archaeologists who will be shaping the discipline during the next decades. To support this new interesting initiative it was decided that the papers presented in Tallinn should be published, both as a chance to practice the writing skills and as an opportunity to disseminate the ideas, generated during the daily work with the ongoing dissertat
{"title":"From Sherds to Streets Essays on Later Medieval archaeology/Kildudest Tanavateni Esseid Hiliskeskaja Arheoloogiast","authors":"E. Russow","doi":"10.3176/ARCH.2014.2.01","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3176/ARCH.2014.2.01","url":null,"abstract":"The present volume is a small collection of articles based on papers presented in spring 2013 at the international meeting hosted by the Tallinn University, Institute of History. Between April 26 and 28, PhD students of medieval and later archaeology from seven countries shared their thoughts and research results among a small group of interested colleagues. During the weekend, thirteen presentations on various aspects of later medieval and early modern period archaeology were handled, from the artefact studies to the landscape research and further on to the analysis of the stratigraphy of complicated buildings. The event in Tallinn was a second attempt to bring together young scholars who have chosen to focus their research on the early medieval, medieval and post medieval material remains, e.g. the period from the 6th-7th centuries AD onwards. The first of these post-graduate meetings was jointly hosted by the University of Gottingen and the town of Einbeck in 2012 (see Kuhne & Lehnberg 2013), the seminar in Tallinn (for a thorough overview, see Kuhne 2014) was followed by a conference in Hall in Tyrol organized by the University of Innsbruck in March 2014. Next year's gathering will be in Luneburg (2015), and after that probably in Riga (2016), thus it seems that a new tradition of annual conferences on medieval and later archaeologies has been established. The initial idea behind the conference series was an effort to create a platform for the young scholars who are at the early stage of career-building--to discuss the ongoing research projects, meet the fellow graduate students with similar interests, as well as learn about future prospects on the job market (see Kuhne & Lehnberg 2013, 253), which, in case of archaeology, can range from a few positions at universities, museums and heritage departments to working in the private sector (archaeological excavation firms and consultancies of cultural resource management, to name a few). Visiting different places and organizations is a good chance to get to know and think about the current trends in our profession, about the current driving force for medieval archaeology, the main problems for the newcomers, etc. On a very broad scale we can compare this with successful post-graduate conference series of medieval archaeology--early medieval archaeology student symposium (EMASS), an interactive forum run for, and by, graduate research students in Great Britain (see earlymedievalarchaeology.co.uk). It is to be hoped that the above-mentioned conference series, started in 2012 in Einbeck will develop into a similar kind of lively forum for the younger generation archaeologists who will be shaping the discipline during the next decades. To support this new interesting initiative it was decided that the papers presented in Tallinn should be published, both as a chance to practice the writing skills and as an opportunity to disseminate the ideas, generated during the daily work with the ongoing dissertat","PeriodicalId":42767,"journal":{"name":"Estonian Journal of Archaeology","volume":"41 1","pages":"83"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2014-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81699721","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The article focuses on the issues of interpreting an early town plan reconstructed on the basis of archaeological studies. What is the ‘weight’ of a single research result? Is it possible to make hypotheses on the basis of the built urban environment about the constructional or legal standards of the developing town community, the composition of the social groups engaged in the construction of the town or their possible trading areas? How far should we go in drawing such conclusions? The example of Haapsalu allows a wider circle of researchers to get involved in interpreting a possible hypothesis concerning urban environment. Analyzing data on Haapsalu’s urban structures presents one possible hypothesis about an early street plan, considering also the possible contact regions that may have served as examples for the town pattern, especially the historic Lower Saxony and Westphalia – both regions were active in establishing trading with Old Livonia and the consequent crusades and missions. Considering the distribution of towns with three parallel streets in the German speaking territories, the opinion today is that urban settlement in Haapsalu started approximately in the mid-13th century or in the beginning of the century. Haapsalu may be considered as a success story of developing a systematic town model that formed the basis for constructing new centres in the Oesel-Wiek bishopric.
{"title":"POSSIBILITIES OF URBAN ARCHAEOLOGY IN INTERPRETING AN EARLY TOWN PLAN OF HAAPSALU","authors":"A. Parn","doi":"10.3176/ARCH.2014.2.05","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3176/ARCH.2014.2.05","url":null,"abstract":"The article focuses on the issues of interpreting an early town plan reconstructed on the basis of archaeological studies. What is the ‘weight’ of a single research result? Is it possible to make hypotheses on the basis of the built urban environment about the constructional or legal standards of the developing town community, the composition of the social groups engaged in the construction of the town or their possible trading areas? How far should we go in drawing such conclusions? The example of Haapsalu allows a wider circle of researchers to get involved in interpreting a possible hypothesis concerning urban environment. Analyzing data on Haapsalu’s urban structures presents one possible hypothesis about an early street plan, considering also the possible contact regions that may have served as examples for the town pattern, especially the historic Lower Saxony and Westphalia – both regions were active in establishing trading with Old Livonia and the consequent crusades and missions. Considering the distribution of towns with three parallel streets in the German speaking territories, the opinion today is that urban settlement in Haapsalu started approximately in the mid-13th century or in the beginning of the century. Haapsalu may be considered as a success story of developing a systematic town model that formed the basis for constructing new centres in the Oesel-Wiek bishopric.","PeriodicalId":42767,"journal":{"name":"Estonian Journal of Archaeology","volume":"28 1","pages":"135"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2014-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90727381","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：