Szolyák Péter - Csengeri Piroska (szerk.): A Herman Ottó Múzeum Évkönyve 56. (Miskolc, 2017)

Régészet - Tarbay, János Gábor: New Late Bronze Age Metal Finds from Gönc

16

Tarbay, János Gábor

Tab. 51.3-4, Tab. 63.12, 16, Tab. 68.3, 5, Tab. 80b.5). One from Bosnia and Herzegovina dated to the Ha Al (König 2004,199, Taf. 20b.8).

Towards Western Europe, quite early finds are known from Moravia (e.g. Pfítluky I: Br Bl) (Salas 2005, 280—281, Tab. 33b.2—3.). Here, the majority of them were dated to the Br C2, Br D1 and Br D2 periods, their deposition in the Ha A1 is rare (e.g. Dőlni Sukolom, Zárovice-Hamry II) (Ríhovsky 1989,21, 24, 30, Taf. 2.22, Taf. 3.31, Taf. 5.53, 55-57, 59, Taf. 6.72, 75, 80, 82-84, Taf. 7.89-91, 100; Salas 1997, 81, Taf. 3.60; Salas 2005,266,271-279,292, 315-332,342-345, 349-350, 396-399, Tab. 5.16-17, Tab. 17.14-15, Tab.

29.4, 6-8, Tab. 30.9, Tab. 63.4, Tab. 104.12, Taf. 112.44, 49-50, Tab. 113.52, Tab. 173A.2, Tab. 173b.9, Tab. 189.33, Tab. 281.1—2, Tab. 287.7). The chronological position of the Bohemian finds are similar: Br C-D, Br D and Br D-На A1 (Kytlicová 2007, 259, 270, 272-273,284,294-296, Taf. 9c,10, Taf. 39.14, Taf. 41b.9, Taf. 44.23, Taf. 68.71, Taf. 94e). Enourmous amounts of sickles of the discussed style were published and evaluated in the same chronological model by Margarita Primas from the territory of Switzerland, Germany and Austria. Several of them are stray finds or were found in settlements, graves, rivers and bogs. Many of the datable finds can be associated with Br B, Br B-Br C periods, only a few can be dated to the Br D-На A1 and Ha A1 periods. Latest deposition was proposed to the Friedberg-Ockstadt hoard (Primas 1986, 55—56, 63—67, 69-70, 74, 78-79, Taf. 4.66-76, Taf. 6.77-78, 81-82, 84, Taf. 7.122-123, Taf. 8.124-129, Taf. 9.138-157, Taf. 10.130-137, 158-170, Taf. 11.171-172, 174, 178-180, 184-185, Taf. 12.186-187, 189, 191, Taf. 14.238, Taf. 15.239, 249, Taf. 16.263-266, Taf. 17.268, Taf. 19.305; Lauermann-Rammer2013, 156-157, Taf. 68.3). To my best knowledge, the westernmost appearance of these sickles can be seen in the Netherlands where two stray finds (Posterholt, Wijchen) and one specimen from a Ha Bl hoard (Vilt) were published (Arnoldussen- Steegstra 2016, 76, 82, Fig. 10. DB 509, Fig. 12. DB 2440, Fig. 12b. DB 717, DB 1427-1428).

In sum, knobbed sickles with one inner rib decoration have appeared in the Br В in Eastern and Western Europe as well, but earlier specimens seem to densify in the western part of this territory. Later, they distributed evenly and their number increased especially in the Carpathian basin and its adjacent areas, where their deposition was continued to the На B2. In Poland and Ukraine, these sickles can be dated at least to the beginning of the Early Iron Age. During this

period they have appeared between the territory of the Netherlands and Ukraine. As most datable finds suggest, the highlight of their manufacturing and deposition was the Br D-На A1 periods, especially in the Northeastern Carpatian basin. Their appearence in later hoards (e.g. На A2, Ha Bl) shows a significant decline. As it is shown in each PBF work specilizing on certain geo-political areas, during this long period, the finer typological character of the sickles with one inner rib has been changed and also varied according to the finds’ geographical and chronological position. However, it is not entirely certain that these variations should be treated as independent types or subtypes.9 As W. A. von Brunn has already pointed out in 1968, the typological features of knobbed sickles are in close relation with manufacturing techniques (von Brunn 1968, 38). More precisely, most of the fine typological marks rather reflect intensive use (e.g. narrow and high arched blade) or they can be associated with manufacturing techniques (e.g. removal of the sprue) or even casting defects (e.g. incomplete casting, flash defect). As the latter was well exemplified in the case of the Cat. No. 16 specimen from Gönc. As long as these technological marks have not been precisely analysed in the published material, any finer characterization of this artefact group based solely on literature is invalid. It seems to me that these sickles along with other bronze finds with similar chronological pattern owe their „long existence” to different factors, such as their simple form or metalwork tradition and last but not least to the phenomenon of deposition itself. Based on the overall chronological position of the knobbed sickles with one inner rib, the Gönc finds were most likely the products of the Br D-На Al, their later dating is less certain.

Perforated knob (Cat. No. 18) (Plate 5. 18)

The convex, perforated metal sheet knobs are basic European artefact types, which are quite easy to manufacture and “mass produce” with the aid of an “Anker” which is well-known in the Eastern European LBA material (Miske 1907, LVIII. tábla 12; Frecskay 1912, 319; Armbruster 2000, 54-55, Abb. 20-22, Soroceanu 2005, PI. 6.4). No wonder that these objects have practically appeared through the entire Bronze Age up until the Early Iron Age. During the LBA, these knobs are most characteristic to the Br D-Ha Al (Jovanovic et al. 2010, 58).

9 In case of tanged and knobbed sickles: Pavlin 2014; Arnoldussen-Steegstra 2016, Fig. 5-6.