Marta, Liviu (szerk.): Satu Mare. Studii şi comunicări. Seria arheologie 29/1. (2013)
Laura Dietrich: Projectile weapons of the Late Bronze Age int he Easter Europe. The case of the Noua-Sabatinovka-Coslogeni cultural complex
conflicts. Hints at the social role of projectile points are given by their general aspects. Some types and variants, like for example 3 A-C or 5 C-D require some skill in production, especially for fashioning the barbs (variant 5C-D); some projectile points are extremely well-made and carefully finished. This indicates a high importance of these points and the distance weapons they were used with. The use of separately crafted nocks further emphasizes the special value of the arrows. Through mounting these pieces separately, a better preservation of the arrows can be reached. The work input in crafting the extra-pieces and multipartite arrows was high and resembles that of other Noua Culture implements, like for example the sets of needles and needle holders80; it underlines the importance of the bow weapon for this culture. However a specific social group cannot be recognized behind them archaeologically81, even if it may have existed. The projectile points are not personalized, only a few graves link them to particular persons, but funerary rules are generally archaeologically discrete in the NSC82 and do not permit much social interpretation. The few barrows with projectile points of the SC seem to indicate the continuation of older traditions83, they represent isolated cases. Maybe in these few graves particular characteristics of the deceased are reflected84. Projectile weapons of the Late Bronze Age in the Eastern Europe. The case of... Fig. 6: Reconstruction of possible atlatl weapons of the Noua-Sabatinovka-Coslogeni Complex. Spears and daggers, on the other hand, have been predominantly hoarded, but finished products as well as casting moulds were also found in setdements85. A detailed statistical comparison of find contexts between projectile points and other weapons would be biased by various factors like the fragility of bone projectile points and the bigger possibility of loss/discard versus the increased visibility of deposited bronze spears and daggers, but also e.g. the manufacturing of a greater number of bone projectile points86 versus recurrent re-melting of bronze weapons. Anyhow the general image seems to indicate projectile points as important weapons of the NSC. For some reason, they are not part of the depositional process like other weapons of bronze and are neither deposited in graves, similar also to other find categories. Most likely projectile points were used in warfare, and a correlation with mobility87 seems probable; however the finds do not reflect the agents. The proposal of the presence of the atlatl in the NSC may appear surprising, but it could represent, next to the numerous well-made and varied arrow heads, a hint at a ‘culture of projectile weapons’ in the Late Bronze Age in Eastern Europe and at an ‘experimental period’ concerning this weapon type. More mobile battle tactics, which may imply also the invention of new forms of lighter bows, seem to become visible behind this find group. “Dietrich 2010b. 81 see also Hansen 1994, 88 for Middle and southeastern Europe. 82 Sava 2002. 83e.g. Dergacev 1994, 43-50; Sava/Agulnikov 1993. 84 In this sense also Hansen 1994, 96-97 for Late Bronze Age in Central Europe. 85Uşurelu 2006, Gerskovic 1999. “Hansen 1994, 95 gives based on younger finds a number of 10 arrows per quiver; darts for atlatals are usually fewer, because they are longer and bigger. 87Seebriddle finds by Dietz 1998,150-156. 191
