Horse, Wagon And Roads

8/7/2019 Horse, Wagon And Roads

1/8

46

Ja. Czebreszuk, A. Koko, M. Szmyt

(Poznan, Poland)

THE HORSE, WAGON AND ROADS

Cultural resources used by early agrarian societies in the drainages of the Vistula and Oderrivers.

The present paper was inspired by a need to sum up and publicize the results of research intothe triad of inventions mentioned in the title that has been carried out by Polish archaeologists overthe period of the last 30 years. The early 1970s are important in that they mark a prologue of direct

studies relying on local source evidence, i.e. coming from the drainages of the Vistula and Oderrivers (Fig. 1). The studies of the title question intensified greatly in the last decade of the 20thcentury and resulted in a number of publications.

1. The horseIn his summary of the Neolithic economy published in 1969, T. Wilaski [1] assessed that

the role of the horse as game hunted in the forests of central Europe in the early phases of theNeolithic was important. In his assessment of the prologue of domestication [2], he claimed:Definite data that could argue in favor of the beginnings of the raising of the horse, chiefly as aslaughter animal, were supplied by certain assemblages of the Globular Amphora culture, Radial-Decorated pottery [also known as Baden culture authors comment] and Corded Ware culture. Thefirst is illustrated by a horse grave in a tumulus from Potyry in Mazowsze and another one, albeit lesscertain, from the Lublin region. This animal was also found in an animal grave in Zota. It is worthmentioning that in Potyry an adult individual and a young one were found (). Young and adultindividuals were found in the graves of the Radial-Decorated pottery culture in Maopolska and theCorded Ware culture in erniki Grne (). The animal in question played a certain role in someEarly Bronze cultures. This is borne out by finds from ntice culture tumuli in ki Mae (). Inki Mae horses were clearly slaughter animals butchered at a relatively young age. Summing uphis arguments, the quoted author concluded that the inclusion of the horse permanently in thedomesticated livestock should be dated at the Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age and pointed to aspecial credit deserved by Globular Amphora culture populations for the domestication of theanimal. The horse was raised chiefly for meat at that time, although it could have been occasionallyridden already then as well [3]. T. Wilaski was skeptical about the hypothesis concerning early

Neolithic chronology of the bit: definitely dated parts of harness in Europe date back to the periodof transition between the Neolithic and Bronze Age while they become more common only in thelatter [4].

The views quoted above may be taken as a point of departure for detailed studies of sourcesthat are commented upon in this paper. A special role in such studies was played by a researchprogram concerning Kujawy, one of key cultural centers on the North European Plain [5]. As a resultof the program two kinds of new data were obtained providing evidence for an early agrarian use ofthe horse: (a) archaeozoological data and (b) archaeological data.


2/8

47

Fig. 1. Location of sites mentioned in the text:1- Bronocice, 2 Dopiewo, 3 ki Mae, 4 - Ostrowiec witokrzyski, 5 Potyry, 6

Smarglin, 7 Zota, 8 - erniki Grne, 9 uawka MaaNote: 1 - Maopolska province, 2-3 Wielkopolska province, 4,7,8 witokrzyskie(Holy Mountains) province, 5 Mazowsze province, 6,9 Kujawy-Pomerania province.

a. Of considerable importance are the percentage shares of post-consumption bone fragmentsof horses in Kujawy settlement materials belonging to the cycle of the following Neolithic cultures:the Linear Band Pottery culture 0.3 %; the Late Band Pottery culture 0.4 % (phases Ia-IIa), 1.1 %(phases IIb-IIIc); the Funnel Beaker culture 0 % (phases II-III), 2.2 % (phases IV-V); the GlobularAmphora culture 0.8 % (phases I-IIa), 12.6 % (phases IIb-IIIa) [6]. This specification shows asignificant increase in the share of horse remains in Globular Amphora culture materials. The quotedauthors drew the following conclusions from their discussion: Taking into account the fact that inthe whole Neolithic in Kujawy, remains of all wild animals never exceed 5 %, while in the case of

the horse it is only 2 % (), it can be assumed that so great an increase in the number of bones ofthis species in the Globular Amphora culture is a proof of raising [7]. These results have beenverified by analyzing a rich series of animal bone sources related to the Globular Amphora cultureobtained along the course of a transit gas pipeline and dated to phases IIb-IIIa. Admittedly, it hasbeen found that this series contained a lower share of horse bones (max. 3 percent), but theirpresence has been recorded even in small samples [8]. In sum, current knowledge points to animportant role of the horse amongst animals used by Globular Amphora culture societies in Kujawy.It is manifested not only in the stable share of horse remains in post-consumption materials, but alsoin considerable percentage variations of the share from site to site exceeding at times as much as 16% [9]. These data, however, can be considered at best as an indirect indication [10] of the role of


3/8

48

Globular Amphora culture societies in the domestication of the horse on the Central European Plain.Then again, it should be remembered that there is far greater evidence of the multipurpose use ofcattle, also for traction, by Globular Amphora culture populations [11].

b. The problem of the beginnings of the use of a horse in harness (as a draft animal pulling

a wagon or for riding) [12] is outlined by sources from a proto-Bronze settlement in Smarglin, DobreCommune, Kujawy-Pomerania prov., site 22, dated at 2350-2150 BC. A discovery was made thereof a hypothetic clay model of a cheekpiece for a horse bit (Fig. 2), i.e. an important element of ahorse harness [13]. Basically, there are two kinds of cheekpieces: circular with stubs on one side[Scheibenknebel], made of bone, and rectangular [Stangenknebel], made of antler. The specimenfrom Smarglin belongs to the first kind representing, however, a hitherto unknown version of theartifact. It is a clay model that cant have been used as a cheekpiece and whose use cannot be easilydetermined. The oldest circular bone cheekpieces with stubs can be found in the materials of theMnogovalikovaya culture [14]. Early materials of this culture, found on the Dniester and Dnieperrivers, are dated at 2200-2000 BC [15]. In the borderland between Asia and Europe, in theassemblages of the Sintashta-Petrovka culture (specifically in the cemeteries at Sintashta and KrivoeOzero [16]), the said artifacts may be dated at 2100-2000 BC at the earliest [17]. A majority of findsof this kind, however, have a younger chronology, which is especially true for Europe, includingcentral Europe, where the oldest finds known so far come from the cultural environments of theCarpathian Basin [18] and are dated at the earliest at the 2nd millennium BC. Butin the opinion ofthe quoted authorcheekpieces of the circular type reach their westernmost range in todaysRomania. Further west reached the rectangular type whose most numerous specimens are foundamong the finds associated with the Fzesabony culture [19]. Also from the last culture circularcheekpieces are known but without characteristic stubs.

Fig. 2. Smarglin site 22, Kujawy-Pomerania prov. Hypothetical clay modelof a cheekpiece. After: Czebreszuk, Przyby 2002.

The quoted chronological assessments seem to bear out a rather early position of Kujawy (orrather Lowland, between the Oder and Vistula rivers) beginnings of the use of a horse in harness.This conclusion may be corroborated by the observations of ritual consumption of horses in the


4/8

49

dukes tumulus of the ntice culture in ki Mae, Wielkopolska prov. [20], dated to the periodof 2050-1900 BC [21]. Notably, ki Mae was a funerary center for the societies of the Kociancommunication junction (the Kocian group of the ntice culture) on the map of long-range trailsof Early Bronze Europe [22]. It appears that a horsetaken in this role usually in the context of a

wagonwas eaten there as a solar animal [23].

Fig. 3. Bronocice, Maopolska prov. Representation of wagons on a vase of the FunnelBeaker Culture. After: Milisauskas, Kruk 1978.

2. The wagonIn the prehistoriography of the drainages of the Vistula and Oder rivers, the

Neolithic/Eneolithic wagon appears relatively late. Until the late 1960s arguments in favor of its usewere indirect and concerned the finds of model wagons with disk wheels from the cultural circle ofthe Carpathian Basin [24].

An entirely new source context for the study of the wagon question was created by theimages of wagons on Funnel Beaker culture vessels unearthed in the 1970s. The most telling of themwas pottery found at settlements in Ostrowiec witokrzyski, Kielce prov. [25] and, in particular, inBronocice, Maopolska prov. [26]. Particularly far-reaching significancegoing beyond the Vistula

and Oder drainagesshould be attributed to the wagons from Bronocice (Fig. 3). They are found ona vessel (vase) dated by the radiocarbon method between 3637-3373 BC and associated with theBronocice III phase of the Funnel Beaker culture. The wagon representations (probably 5 of which 3have survived) are placed in a sequence of several symbols making up the following sequence ofsenses: forest (tree) wagon fields (houses?) roads river (water). () The drawing consists ofa number of symbols making a coherent narrative. It is of exceptional importance as it does not haveany analogy in the European Neolithic. Relative analogies for it may be sought only in the so-calledpictograms known from the Uruk IV culture in southern Mesopotamia [27]. The date quoted abovereferring to the vase with wagons proves that we deal in this case with one of the oldest pieces ofevidence of road transport in the culture of the Old World. For the pictographic evidence from Uruk


5/8

50

is dated as contemporaneous with the Bronocice find or slightly later (ca. 3650-3390 BC) [28]. It ismore or less with the same period that BC finds are associated; they lack, however, directradiocarbon dates. Also the traces of wagon wheels from Flintbek are dated to the same period [29].The Bronocice find reveals above all the dynamics of transmitting the invention between the Middle

East civilization centers and the central European frontier of the Eneolithic proto-civilization.It should be added that in the 1980s suggestions were made to extend the list of wagon

images to include ones found on the Polish Lowlands, chiefly in Kujawy. The suggestions alsoconcerned ornamentation of Funnel Beaker culture pottery of the eastern and Mtwy groups of phaseIIIC (circa 3500-3150 BC) [30]. A significant supplement to the outlined picture is provided by thelatest finds of wagon images from Dopiewo, Wielkopolska province, associated with phase IIIB ofthe Funnel Beaker culture (kind oral communication from Prof. L. Czerniak).

Thus it can be assumed that the wagon made its appearance both in the loess regions of theSouth (Maopolska) and podzol ones (sporadically chernozem ones) of the North (Wielkopolska,Kujawy) in the second half of the 4th millennium BC. This assessment implies a need to findevidence of a number of significant infrastructural changes accompanying a new means oftransportation. What is specifically meant here is the transformation of the Early and MiddleNeolithic trails into roads or at least the beginning of building passages across rivers or swamps (seeremarks below). Another area where evidence could be looked for is the interpretation of thestrengthening of the role of wood-tar productionobservable from the middle of the 4th millenniumBCbeing a consequence of a demand for wheel lubricant, i.e. a substance lessening friction ofwagon wheels [31].

3. RoadsThe Neolithic turning of trails into roads was recorded for the first time in England in the late

1960s [32]. In the 1980s more evidence of this process was found in northern Europe (Germany, theNetherlands) in the form of fragments of wooden road structures [33]. As an offshoot of these findsattention was drawn to fords and their adaptation to road transportation. It was Kujawy, specifically

the valleys of the Bachorza and Note rivers, that was mainly mentioned in this context [34].A milestone in these investigations was the source documenting of one of such fords in themiddle section of the Note, in uawka Maa, Wielkopolska prov., site 1 [35]. What was unearthedthere was relics of a timber-earth fording structure in the form of a dyke making it possible to crossthe boggy section of the Note valley. The oldest manifestations of the use of this ford are dated atca. 5120 BC and associated with the activities of the populations of the Linear Band Pottery culture.A successive stage of its use is connected with Funnel Beaker culture societies (ca. 3800-3400 BC)but the main phase of its construction and use is dated between ca. 3050-2600 BC when the dyke andadjoining settlement were used by Globular Amphora culture population groups [36]. It is to thisvery stage that the main body of timber remains is linked. Also at that time, the structure was themost massive and its size allowed wagons (oral communication from Jarosaw Rola, M.A., for whichwe are grateful) to cross.

Although we still lack finds from the Vistula and Oder drainages similar in rank to thosefrom uawka, remains of more modest constructions, however, are discovered [37]. Hence, it can beconcluded that fording structures were permanent landscape fixtures as early as in the 3rdmillennium BC, which, in turn, proves that the network of trails had stabilized by then. The trails, atleast in places most difficult to cross (mostly bogs and marshes), took the form of carefully markedroads.

4. ConclusionsSumming up the above review, it must be observed that a number of highlight dates,

indicating a prologue of fundamental changes in the means of transport, were documented by source


6/8

51

evidence from the drainages of the Vistula and Oder rivers. The first of these dates, i.e. ca. 3650-3400 BC, refers to the introduction of the wagon and the turning of trails into roads, the next one(after ca. 3200 BC) stands for the inception of horse raising and still another one ca. 2150 BCrelates to the first use of a horse in harness. In the late 4th and early 3rd millennium BC or its first

half, one can observe a stabilization of communication trails, which is shown by fragments of roadscrossing marshes and bogs.

***Notes:

1. All dates in the present paper are calibrated.2. The work has been financed in part by grant no. 5H01H02121 from the Polish National Research

Committee.References

1. Wilaski T. Podstawy gospodarcze plemion neolitycznych w Polsce pnocno-zachodniej. -Wrocaw-Warszawa-Krakw, 1969. - 126-128.

2. Wilaski T., op. cit. - 126-128.3. Wilaski T., op. cit. - 126-128.4. Wilaski T., op. cit. - 167.5. Cofta-Broniewska A., Koko A. Historia pierwotna spoeczestw Kujaw. - Inowrocaw, 1982;

Prinke D., Szmyt M. From studies of development of the so called refugial ecumene of neolithic communitiesin the Zielona Struga catchment area // Interregional cultural relations between Polish territories and adjacentregions of Central and Eastern Europe. Archaeologia Interregionalis 11. Warszawa, 1990. - 63-101.

6. Sobociski M., Makowiecki D. Stan bada nad rdami archeozoologicznymi kultury amforkulistych // A. Cofta-Broniewska (red.) Kultura amfor kulistych w rejonie Kujaw. - Pozna, 1990. - 184,Tab.3.

7. Sobociski M., Makowiecki D., op. cit. 1990 - 185.8. Makowiecki D., Makowiecka M. Gospodarka zwierztami spoecznoci kultury pucharw

lejkowatych (grupy: wschodnia i radziejowska) oraz kultury amfor kulistych // A. Koko (red.) Archeologicznebadania ratownicze wzdu trasy gazocigu tranzytowego. Tom III. Kujawy. Cz 4. Osadnictwo kultur

pnoneolitycznych oraz interstadium epok neolitu i brzu: 3900 1400/1300 przed Chr. - Pozna, 2000. -Tab. 7; Makowiecki D., Makowiecka M. Gospodarka zwierztami spoecznoci kultury iwieskiej oraztrzcinieckiego krgu kulturowego // A. Koko (red.) Archeologiczne badania ratownicze wzdu trasygazocigu tranzytowego. Tom III. Kujawy. Cz 4. Osadnictwo kultur pnoneolitycznych oraz interstadiumepok neolitu i brzu: 3900 1400/1300 przed Chr. - Pozna, 2000. - 554.

9. Sobociski M., Makowiecki D., op. cit. 1990. - Tab.1.10. Levine M. The Origins of Horse Husbandry on the Eurasian Steppe. // M. Levine, J. Rassamakin,

A. Kislenko & N. Tatarintseva, Late prehistoric exploitation of the Eurasian steppe. - Cambridge, 1999. - 9-14.11. Makowiecki D., Makowiecka M. Gospodarka zwierztami spoecznoci kultury pucharw

lejkowatych (grupy: wschodnia i radziejowska) oraz kultury amfor kulistych // A. Koko (red.) Archeologicznebadania ratownicze wzdu trasy gazocigu tranzytowego. Tom III. Kujawy. Cz 4. Osadnictwo kulturpnoneolitycznych oraz interstadium epok neolitu i brzu: 3900 1400/1300 przed Chr. - Pozna, 2000. -367-372.

12. Puchkov P.V., Zhuravlev O.P. Konnitsa v mednom i kamennom veke: legenda ili deystvitelnost?// Gistarychna-Arkhealagichny Zbornik 16. Minsk, 2001. - 50-61.13. Czebreszuk J. , Przyby A. Osadnictwo neolityczne i protobrzowe w Smarglinie, woj. kujawsko-

pomorskie. Pozna, 2002.14. Bratchenko S.N. Nizhnee Podone v epokhu sredney bronzy. Kiev, 1976. - 151, Fig.72-V:3.15. Klochko V.I., Koko A., Szmyt M. A Comparative Chronology of the Prehistory of the Area

between the Vistula nad Dnieper: 3150-1850 BC. // A. Koko (ed.) The Foundations of RadiocarbonChronology of Cultures between the Vistula and Dnieper: 3150-1850 BC. Baltic-Pontic Studies 7. Pozna ,1999. - 266, Fig.1.

16. Gening V.F., Zdanovich G.B., Gening V.V. Sintashta. Chelyabinsk 1992; Anthony D.,Vinogradov N.B. Birth of the chariot. // Archaeology 48/2. - New York, 1995. - 36-41.


7/8

52

17. Anthony D., Vinogradov N.B., op. cit. 1995. - 36.18. Harding A. European Societies in the Bronze Age. Cambridge, 2000. 167.19. Bona I. Die mittlere Bronzezeit Ungarns und ihre sdstlichen Beziehungen. Budapest, 1975.

161.

20. Krysiak K. Materia kostny zwierzcy z kurhanu III w kach Maych w pow. kociaskim. //Fontes Archaeologici Posnanienses 7. Pozna, 1956. 142, footnote 378.21. Czebreszuk J. Schyek neolitu i pocztki epoki brzu w strefie poudniowo-zachodniobatyckiej

(III i pocztki II tys. przed Chr.). Pozna, 2001. Fig. 9.22. Czebreszuk J., op. cit. 2001. 198-202.23. Koko A. Rozwj kulturowy spoeczestw Kujaw w okresach schykowego neolitu i wczesnej

epoki brzu. Pozna, 1979. 176, footnote 508.24. Wilaski T., op. cit. 1969. 168.25. Uzarewiczowa A. Ornament na naczyniu kultury pucharw lejkowatych z Ostrowca

witokrzyskiego. // Wiadomoci Archeologiczne 60. Warszawa, 1975. 25.26. Milisauskas S., Kruk J. Die Wagendarstellung auf einen Trichterbecher aus Bronocice in Polen. //

Archologisches Korrespondenzblatt 12 (1978). 48.27. Kruk J., Milisauskas S. Rozkwit i upadek spoeczestw rolniczych neolitu. Krakw, 1999.

168-170.28. Bakker J.A., Kruk J., Lanting A.E., Milisauskas S., The earliest evidence of wheeled vehicles inEurope and the Near East. // Antiquity 73 (1999). Fig. 3.

29. Bakker J.A., Kruk J., Lanting A.E., Milisauskas S., op. cit. 1999. 783-784 and Fig. 3.30. Koko A. Udzia poudniowo-wschodnioeuropejskich wzorcw kulturowych w rozwoju

niowych spoeczestw kultury pucharw lejkowatych. Pozna, 1981. 151-153.31. Koko A., op. cit. 1981. - 150; Koko A., Langer J. Z bada nad wytwarzaniem i uytkowaniem

dziegciu w neolicie. // Kwartalnik Historii Kultury Materialnej 4. Warszawa, 1986. - 597.32. Coles J., Hibbet T.A. Prehistoric Roads and Tracks in Somerset, England: I Neolithic. //

Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society. New Series, 34. London, 1968. 238-258.33. Kruk J., Milisauskas S., op. cit. 1999. - 164-165, see there for more literature on the subject.34. Koko A., op. cit. 1981. - 154; Koko A. Rozwj kulturowy spoeczestw Kujaw w okresie

pnego neolitu oraz interstadium epok neolitu i brzu w aspekcie recepcji egzogennych cech

kulturotwrczych. // A. Cofta-Broniewska (red.) Kontakty pradziejowych spoeczestw Kujaw z innymiludami Europy. Inowrocaw, 1988.35. Krpiec M., Makowiecki D., Michczyski A.., Nowaczyk B., Pazdur A., Pazdur M.F.,

Polcynowie I. i M., Stpnik T., Suchorska-Rola M., Rola J. Drugi sezon interdyscyplinarnych bada na stan. 1w uawce Maej gm. Wyrzysk, woj. pilskie (1993 r.). // Wielkopolskie Sprawozdania Archeologiczne 4. Pozna, 1996. 23-58.

36. Krpiec M. et al., op. cit. 1996. 30-36.37. Sadowska-Topr J. Pomosty w dolinie Dzierzgoni na podstawie bada archeologicznych z lat

1994-1995. // P. Urbaczyk (red.) Adalbertus. Wyniki programu bada interdyscyplinarnych. Tom I. Warszawa, 1998. 86.

. , . , .

,

, . , , , . (3650-3400 . ..) (:) (, ); (3200 ..) (, ,


8/8

53

-); (2150 ..) (). IV III .. , ,

.

Ja. Czebreszuk, A. Koko, M. Szmyt

THE HORSE, WAGON AND ROADS

In our paper we would like to present the results of research into the triad of inventions mentionedin the title that has been carried out by Polish archaeologists over the period of the last 30 years. Summing upour review, it must be observed that a number of highlight dates, indicating a prologue of fundamental changesin the means of transport, were documented by source evidence from the drainages of the Vistula and Oderrivers. The first of these dates, i.e. ca. 3650-3400 BC, refers to the introduction of the wagon (the mostimportant find: Bronocice) and the turning of trails into roads (e.g. finds from uawka Maa), the next one

(after ca. 3200 BC) stands for the inception of horse raising (data from Kujawy, Central Poland, show thespecial role of Globular Amphora culture societies in the domestication of the horse on the Central EuropeanPlain) with the and still another one ca. 2150 BC relates to the first use of a horse in harness (thedisputable find from Smarglin). In the late 4th and early 3rd millennium BC or its first half, one can observe astabilization of communication trails, which is shown by fragments of roads crossing marshes and bogs.

2004 .

Documents

Horse, Wagon And Roads