Rácz Tibor Ákos: A múltnak kútja. Fiatal középkoros regészek V. konferenciájának tanulmánykötete - A Ferenczy Múzeum kiadványai, A. sorozat: Monográfiák 3. (Szentendre, 2014)
Képtáblák
English Summaries Gábor András Szörényi Late Medieval Wood-and-earth Outworks in the Light of the Excavation of the Castle at Sajónémeti Due to the rash development of firearms in the fifteenth century, defensive outposts or outworks (ravelins) - partly or fully detached - were established around castles. Their aim was to hold the enemy under fire as soon as possible, to control their movements, and to avoid dangers posed by blind areas. (Table 1, Figs.1-2, Fig. 4; Picture 1) The apropos of the present essay is, that, as of present, it has been the third season that excavations took place — coorganized with colleagues at the Herman Ottó Museum - in Sajónémeti (Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén County), both at the castle and its outpost. (Table 2, Fig. 1). The results of the excavations are presented hereby, drawing also on a few analogue examples from Central Europe. The total area of the castle is approximately one hectare (2.471 acres) and it is divided into two large units. The central area is a “motte”-like structure, rounded by a circular trench, and as the core of the castle, it is rising ten metres above the surroundings. On the outer side of the trench, there is a ditch that was additionally fortified with three protruding earth ramparts. The subject of the present essay is the other unit of the castle, a detached outwork, situated eighty metres to the west from the central part of the castle and eighteen metres below it. Excavations began by cross sectioning the outwork with a test trench going in West-East direction. During subsequent campaigns, we have opened other trenches - the one with the shape of a quadrant, and the other running in North-South direction. In the area of the quadrant, we have found postholes in two rows (in a distance of 2.5-3 metres), which ran around the edge of the rampart of the outwork. This was interpreted as traces of a wooden palisade structure filled with earth. Parallel to this, along the inner side, a section of a deep foundation trench was discovered, which we have formerly associated with a tower like structure - this is shown on our previous reconstruction drawing (Fig. 2). Later on, however, when investigating the southern part of the outwork, we have found another part of this trench with a single row of postholes at forty-centimetre intervals. This clearly implies a single-row palisade, demarking a protected zone with a circular shape of 8-8.5 metres in diameter. Thus, the previous interpretation — that it was the foundation of a multi-storey tower building -, has been rejected. Instead, it can be interpreted as a closed courtyard, protected by a palisade structure. Surprisingly, in this southward running test trench the two concentric rows of postholes were missing on the outer side of this circular palisade trench. Besides, the slope of the hill was also different: in front of the section with the double row of postholes it was especially steep (certainly artificially made), whereas to the south it was more gentle like (Table 2, Fig. 2). When summing up our observations, we assumed that the single-row palisade with densely arranged postholes could form the basic line of protection of the outwork, running in a slightly oval shape around the highest part of the hill plateau. In a semi-circular section, it was additionally fortified by another palisade structure, running around in a distance of 1.5—2.5 metres. Whereas the former one was more like a wattle fence structure, this latter had a double posthole system, the external side of which might have been covered by wattles and planks. The space between the two structures was filled with earth. At the end of the excavation campaign, there was another sondage opened below the edge of the rampart, in which we have identified a 175-centimetre deep V-profiled trench. This deep trench, the steep side of the rampart, and the earthwork with the double posthole system are encircling the outwork only in a semi-circular section, which shows a defensive system open towards the direction of the castle, and closed towards the direction of the expected attack. Why was the defensive system of the outwork asymmetric? Why did the double system not run along the whole perimeter? These questions may be answered by topographical conditions. The castle is situated in a bottleneck position, surrounded by especially steep slopes from three sides. There is a 190-metre long, and only 15-25-metre wide ridge that connects the castle hill to the slowly rising plateau of the central part of the hill. Since the castle hill is surrounded by steep slopes, there was no point to put siege works against it. Hill plateaus, from where it would have been possible to keep the castle under fire with long distance firearms, were all situated at a distance of at least 350 metres, thus relatively far. Except but one point, the precinct of the cemetery of the village, a 0.5-hectare large terrace, situated 20-30 metres above the village area, and only 230 metres away from the centre of the castle. (Table 3, Figs. 1-3) 466
