A unique set of one- and two-piece casting moulds was found in a cremation burial (grave no. 24) discovered in a Late Bronze Age (900–800 BC) biritual cemetery of the Lusatian Culture in Gogolin-Strzebniów (Silesia), on the basis of which this grave was considered to be the burial of a bronze foundryman. Four two-piece moulds (two ceramic and two stone) and one ceramic one-piece mould were subjected to microscopic observations and spectral studies in order to identify potential traces of use, especially use in the production of casts. The results of the macroscopic observations and energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence (ED-XRF) studies indicated that all of the moulds examined were used according to their function, i.e. for the production of copper alloy casts, before being deposited in the grave. The presence of metallic elements was higher in the stone moulds than in the ceramic ones, which is due to the nature of the material and its resistance to the influence of high temperature and physico-chemical factors. It was possible to identify specimens that were probably used longer (mould for sickles and rods – no. 97) or shorter (mould for rods – no. 24-7) before being deposited in the ground. This supports the hypothesis that a functional casting workshop instrumentarium was deposited in the grave inventory, rather than a set of moulds made specifically for funerary purposes. Interesting is the finding of a one-piece ceramic mould for rods (length ca. 13.5 cm), which were poured after setting the mould at an angle of 30–45 degrees. It confirms the local casting of bronze rods as semi-products for further distribution among the communities of the Lusatian culture in the Oder region.
A comprehensive programme of archaeometric research into the chemical composition and manufacturing technology of Early Iron Age artefacts discovered in Świbie, Upper Silesia, has yielded a number of detailed observations and findings. Sixty-six artefacts from a collection of several hundred large bronzes were targeted for study. Energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy and scanning electron microscopy with micro-area composition analysis were used. In selected cases, non-destructive analysis was carried out by digital X-ray radiography. The study was preceded by macroscopic observation of the artefacts. It was shown that most of the large ring ornaments were made from castings subsequently subjected to numerous forging (reforging and shaping) and finishing treatments. Some of the wares, such as the massive ankle rings, retained many of the characteristics of the original cast, indicating that the finishing treatment was only applied when necessary due to the nature of the product (e.g. visual qualities). Decoration was applied using various techniques, often used in combination with each other (e.g. designing a decoration on a wax model and correcting it on the finished product). It was demonstrated that the characteristic constrictions found on the inside of the massive twisted-bar ankle rings of the Upper Silesia and Sącz (Stary Sącz) types could not be the effect of wear and tear, but evidence of intentional reforging, most likely aimed at creating a place to attach an organic strap to fix the ornament in place on the leg. The research has also identified a new category of imports from the circum-Alpine or Mediterranean areas, namely necklaces with a hooked clasp. The extraordinarily precise ornamental technique observed on the necklace, long known in the literature, from grave 102 (in which other imported luxury goods were also found), required the use of a tool in the type of a tap or a threader, and it has never before been identified in an Early Iron Age context in Poland. Above all, however, these studies made it possible to answer the research questions regarding the sample. The first question concerned the raw material and technological variation of the collection across functional and stylistic categories: Did the objects produced and/or used by the population using the cemetery differ in chemical composition of the alloy and manufacturing technique according to function or style? Although the raw material composition was quite similar for the majority of the artefacts (classic Cu-Sn tin bronze), it emerged that some of them had a slightly different composition, most notably an elevated lead content (above 1.5%, exceptionally up to 9.5%), and that this was not coincidental. More often than not, these objects, such as the necklace from grave 217 or the openwork knife handle fitting from grave 495, demanded castings that, due to their small thickness in the mould, required a special alloy with improved castability. This was not required with massive bronzes or those meant for forging sheet metal for the production of coiled ornaments ; these wares are usually characterised by a low proportion of intentionally added lead as an alloying component. No such consistency can be seen in the manufacture of small ornaments such as buttons or spiral pendants, presumably produced on a day-to-day basis from currently available raw material or from recycled raw material. A satisfactory answer was also obtained to the second main question: Whether it was practised to furnish the deceased with sets uniform in style and raw material (possibly including objects produced especially for the funerary ceremony), or whether the objects amassed in the grave were made from raw material from different sources and at different stages of the buried person’s life. Proceeding from a comparison of all the bronzes from three rich burials (graves 102, N=11; 124, N=12; 574, N=9), it was concluded that they were certainly not furnished with complete ceremonial costumes prepared by one workshop, from one batch of raw material. The only objects that they can be considered sets in terms of both style and workshop are pairs of large bronzes (such as ankle rings or massive bracelets), which were most often made from a homogeneous raw material and probably functioned together from manufacture to deposition in the grave. In the group of small bronzes, this contextual approach (as well as the functional one) confirmed a greater range of raw material patterns.
After the amateur discovery of a hoard of bronze ornaments (a kidney bracelet and two hollow ankle rings) in 2014 in a forest near Gdynia (Pomerania, northern Poland), the place was subjected to excavation. It turned out that in the nearest context of the bronzes (which had been found arranged one on top of the other in a narrow pit reaching 60 cm in depth) there was a cluster of stones, some of which could have been arranged intentionally in order to mark the place of the deposit. Next to this alleged stone circle there was a deep hearth used to heat stones, and for burning amber as incense. Remains of amber were preserved in the form of lumps and probably also as a deposit on the walls of some vessels. Some of the features of the examined complex may indicate a non-profane nature of the deposit: the presence of the stone structure, traces of burning amber, the location of the deposition spot in a not very habitable flattening of a narrow valley, as well as the chemical composition of the alloy of metals themselves. The ornaments were made of a porous copper alloy with a high addition of lead, antimony and arsenic, which could promote their fragility and poor use value. However, the ceramics found near the place where the bronzes are deposited do not differ from the settlement pottery of the time. The hoard and its context should be dated to the transition phase between the periods HaC1 and HaC2 (the turn of the 8th and 7th cent. BC). The Gdynia-Karwiny deposit adds to the list of finds from a period marked by the most frequent occurrence of hoards in Pomerania (turn of the Bronze Age and the Early Iron Age). Its research seems to contribute to the interpretation of the deposition of metal objects as a phenomenon primarily of a ritual nature, and at the same time a social behaviour: a manifestation of competition for prestige.
The collection of the former JU Archaeological Cabinet (Gabinet Archeologiczny UJ) in Kraków is unique in Poland. This is the oldest archaeological academic collection in Poland and the only one to survive to the present day in a nearly unchanged form. The collection's history goes back to 1867, when it was established by Józef Łepkowski, the creator of the first Chair of Archaeology in the Jagiellonian University. The basic bulk of the collection was accumulated after the January Uprising of 1863, in a period marked by increased interest in antiquities: at that time it was regarded as a patriotic duty to preserve the achievements of Polish science and art. The establishment of the cabinet fit well into the general interest in antiquity observed throughout 19 th -century Europe. Today, the collection is divided into two parts (each of them kept separately): Mediterranean and Prehistoric. As the artefacts from the Archaeological Cabinet have not been put on display since the end of WWII, the collection has generally maintained its 19 th -century character, becoming in itself a museum monument of a kind.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.