The beginnings of Slavic settlement east of the river Elbe.

The beginnings of Slavic settlement east of the river Elbe. Introduction According to according toprep.1. As stated or indicated by; on the authority of: according to historians.2. In keeping with: according to instructions.3. the models of twenty years TWENTY YEARS. The lapse of twenty years raises a presumption of certain facts, and after such a time, the party against whom the presumption has been raised, will be required to prove a negative to establish his rights. 2. ago (Herrmann 1983) severaldifferent groups of Slavs invaded East Central Europe Central Europe is the region lying between the variously and vaguely defined areas of Eastern and Western Europe. In addition, Northern, Southern and Southeastern Europe may variously delimit or overlap into Central Europe. in the sixthcentury AD, and the cultural characteristics observed there may bereferred to eastern Slavic Eastern Slavic can refer to: Eastern Slavic languages Eastern Slavic peoples "homelands". Recent research hasshown that this is to be simplistic sim��plism?n.The tendency to oversimplify an issue or a problem by ignoring complexities or complications.[French simplisme, from simple, simple, from Old French; see simple . Dendrochronology dendrochronology:see dating. dendrochronologyMethod of scientific dating based on the analysis of tree rings. Because the width of annular rings varies with climatic conditions, laboratory analysis of timber core samples allows scientists to , new theoreticalapproaches, and the reevaluation of documentary evidence A type of written proof that is offered at a trial to establish the existence or nonexistence of a fact that is in dispute.Letters, contracts, deeds, licenses, certificates, tickets, or other writings are documentary evidence. now show quitea different picture (cf: Cutta 2001). The material culture--ceramics,hillforts, houses, graves--has been re-interpreted in the context ofcontemporary Europe as local changes in settlement, economy, andsociety--sometimes after the beginnings of early medieval settlement. Inthis paper, I review the most recent evidence for characterisingsettlements, cemeteries and pottery as early Slavic and for dating themto the Migration period (fifth-seventh century). But we begin with asynopsis of the documentary evidence and the attempts made to match thearchaeology to it. Documentary records Slavs east of the Merovingian kingdom were first mentioned in theChronicon by Fredegar who reports c. 631 AD that the Merovingian kingDagobert I Dagobert I(dăg`ōbûrt), c.612–c.639, Frankish king, son and successor of King Clotaire II. His father was forced to appoint Dagobert king of the East Frankish kingdom of Austrasia at the request of Pepin of Landen, mayor of the . (629-639) was defeated by the "Slav" king Samonear the Wagastisburg, and that soon after the Sorb sorb(sorb) to attract and retain substances by absorption or adsorption. sorbto attract and retain substances by absorption or adsorption. dux Dervan brokewith the Frankish king (Fredegar IV 68; Eggers Eggers may refer to: Dave Eggers - an American writer and editor Eggers Industries - Neenah, WI Door Manufacturer Eggers Island - an island of Greenland Eggers - a character portrayed in Sealab 2021 Captain Reinhold Eggers - Colditz security chief. 2001). After 631 theFrankish sources are silent about Slavs, and it remains unclear whereDervan ruled. Until the times of Charlemagne they do not mention anydetail about the regions east of the kingdom. Only at the end of theeighth century do Slavs again become an object of Frankish annals andchronicles. The renewed interest was due to the efforts of Charlemagneto "bring order" to the situation along the rivers Elbe andDanube caused by the conflicts with Avars and Saxons, Danes and Slavs intwo different regions along the eastern frontier of the Carolingianempire Carolingian Empire is a historiographical term sometimes used to refer to the realm of the Franks under the dynasty of the Carolingians. This dynasty would later be seen as the founders of the Holy Roman Empire. . The question of how and when the regions east of the rivers Elbeand Saale became Slavic is not answered by the literary sources; a Slavimmigration immigration,entrance of a person (an alien) into a new country for the purpose of establishing permanent residence. Motives for immigration, like those for migration generally, are often economic, although religious or political factors may be very important. is not mentioned anywhere. More information is given in theDescriptio civitatum ad septentrionalem pagam Danubii of the so-calledGeographus Bavarus, probably late ninth century. This political"snap-shot" gets hazier the further the described region layto the east, presumably pre��sum��a��ble?adj.That can be presumed or taken for granted; reasonable as a supposition: presumable causes of the disaster. because the knowledge of the western observersdiminished with increasing distance. However, the attribution of placenames to "Slavic" and"Germanic" roots shows a marked frontier between them whichruns approximately along the rivers Elbe and Saale, except the easternpart of what is today Lower Saxony Lower Saxony,Ger. Niedersachsen (nē`dərsäk'sən), state (1994 pop. 7,480,000), 18,295 sq mi (47,384 sq km), NW Germany. Hanover is the capital. west of the middle Elbe (Figure 1).This toponymic mapping above all suggests a dense Slavic population--andtherefore has given substance to the idea of a major invasion ofSlavic-speaking peoples at some time in the early middle ages (Trautmann1948-1949; Rospond 1989-2000; Eichler 1975-1978; Herrmann 1968). Themapping of Slavic placenames reflects of course Slavic-speakingpopulations--as it is supported by modern Slavic-speaking minorities inLusatia (eastern Brandenburg) and the Hannoversches Wendland (LowerSaxony)--but as late as in the thirteenth century such names wereestablished by colonisation; unfortunately onomastics on��o��mas��tics?n. (used with a sing. or pl. verb)1. a. The study of the origins and forms of proper names.b. The study of the origins and forms of terms used in specialized fields.2. is unable to givean absolute chronology for the names Frontiers of actual placenames arethe result of linguistic interaction and balance during a longer periodof time, not only of Slavic immigrations in the early middle ages. [FIGURE 1 OMITTED] Archaeological evidence: how early is the Slavic material in thewest? The material culture of the lands between the rivers Elbe andOder/Neisse was identified and explained by Joachim Herrmann as theresult of "Slavic immigration". Correspondences with culturesin the regions east and south-east of Central Europe were seen as proofof immigrants front different directions (i.e. Poland and Bohemia).Pottery provided the main instrument for the argument and the groupswere named after ceramic types. Different styles of pottery werecorrelated with variants of burial, house-building, and the constructionand topographical position of hillforts (Herrmann 1983, 1984, 1985). Thefirst incomers were the Prague and the Sukow groups, who captured thewhole territory--the Prague group in the south, the Sukow group in thenorth. A second "wave" of the groups--Leipzig, Feldberg andTornow--followed, and these new settlers "superimposed su��per��im��pose?tr.v. su��per��im��posed, su��per��im��pos��ing, su��per��im��pos��es1. To lay or place (something) on or over something else.2. " on thefirst two groups; the arising conflicts were the reason for the buildingof hillforts. The later groups were identified with peoples known fromthe literature, the Wilzi, the Milzeni and Lusizi and the Sorbs Sorbs:see Wends. (Table1). This model, at first convincing, may be challenged for two reasons.Firstly, new archaeological dates do not support the alignment ofcultural change with single episodes of Slavic immigration in the sixthcentury--or after. Most of the developments - above all the changes ofceramics and fortification--took place over a much longer time-scale.Secondly, in spite of the linguistic and ethnographic eth��nog��ra��phy?n.The branch of anthropology that deals with the scientific description of specific human cultures.eth��nog classifications,the material culture between the Elbe and the Oder does not appear ashomogenous homogenous - homogeneous in the early middle ages. All archaeologically observedaspects show clear regional differences in the stylistic and technicaldevelopment of pottery, forms of burial, house-building and theconstruction of hillforts. Different kinds of settlement organisationand economic strategy can also be defined. But there are no directcorrelations between the regional cultural groups and the changes intime. House building was independent from fortification fortification,system of defense structures for protection from enemy attacks. Fortification developed along two general lines: permanent sites built in peacetime, and emplacements and obstacles hastily constructed in the field in time of war. building,pottery production had nothing to do with burials, and in the same waythere was no causality causality,in philosophy, the relationship between cause and effect. A distinction is often made between a cause that produces something new (e.g., a moth from a caterpillar) and one that produces a change in an existing substance (e.g. between ceramics and fortifications This is a list of fortifications past and present, a fortification being a major physical defensive structure often composed of a more or less wall-connected series of forts. . Thesedifferent aspects of material culture were different not only in theirgeographical occurrence, but also in their chronological appearance.They followed their own spatial and chronological "rhythms" insome sense. This internal "heterogeneity het��er��o��ge��ne��i��tyn.The quality or state of being heterogeneous.heterogeneitythe state of being heterogeneous. " of culture--or thediversity--of the north-western Slavic settlement areas should beillustrated in the following. Dating the settlements The accurate location and dating of early medieval settlements inthe region under consideration (Figure 2), is currently hard. A largenumber of surface finds has been recovered by the Monuments Services,and this has led to a high estimate of population density which isprobably unrealistic. The "boundaries" between the settlementsrepresented are often vague, the settlements often moved, and the andthe chronology of artifacts artifactssee specimen artifacts. is usually too coarse to determine whethersettlements are contemporary with each other. Thus the number and sizeof This situation is characteristic of the middle and late Slavicperiods (ninth to twelfth To describe the beginnings of Slavic settlement is much morecomplicated because the archaeological features or artefacts arerelatively few, and they are not easy to date. Traditionally, other,indirect information was used for dating. The end of"Germanic" settlements, dated into the migration period, wasseen as an important terminus post quem Terminus post quem and the related terminus ante quem are terms used to give an approximate date for a text. Terminus post quem is used to indicate the earliest point in time when the text may have been written, while Terminus ante quem . Despite this fact typologicaland technological characteristics have been observed, that shared lateantique and early medieval ceramics; eventually one could describe theseparallels as a proof of contact or communication (Petersen 1939;Herrmann 1968). This was the reason for dating the "Slavicinvasion" into the fifth and sixth centuries. The early Slavs inthe regions east and south-east--Poland and Bohemia--were dated to thesame period which seemed to lend strong support for the dating of thewesternmost Slavs. Assuming a quick invasion such an early dating couldbe maintained. Fundamental problems arise if one examines the typological datingand ethnic attribution critically. Where dated artefacts are singlefinds, they need not imply the date of foundation for a settlement. Ofall the Scandinavian Vendel period fibulae from north-eastern Germanyonly one piece (Benzin benzin/ben��zin/ (ben��zin) petroleum benzin; see under petroleum . ) probably comes from a pit with undecorated,early Slavic ceramics (Brather 1996b: 49-51 ; Biermann/Dalitz/Heussner1999: 243). A Scandinavian fibula fibula(fĭb`yələ): see leg. of the seventh century from Oldenburg(Holstein) comes from stratified stratified/strat��i��fied/ (strat��i-fid) formed or arranged in layers. strat��i��fiedadj.Arranged in the form of layers or strata. layers, deposited in the tenth/eleventhcenturies. This object is obviously residual (Brather 1996b: 49-51;Biermann/Dalitz/Heussner 1999: 243; Dulinicz 2001:95-118). The fibulafrom Prutzke is associated with an early Slavic urn grave and gives us aterminus post quem (about 700 AD?) for this cremation cremation,disposal of a corpse by fire. It is an ancient and widespread practice, second only to burial. It has been found among the chiefdoms of the Pacific Northwest, among Northern Athapascan bands in Alaska, and among Canadian cultural groups. burial (Brather2001c). All other fibulae (Nehringen [Mangelsdorf 2001], Schonfeld) aresingle finds and therefore imprecise im��pre��cise?adj.Not precise.impre��cisely adv. for dating. The same is true forother artefacts of the seventh century (Gorke, Michaelisbruch). Direct dating of structures is now available in some cases thanksto dendrochronology, and these analyses have questioned the model of aSlavic settlement already in the sixth century (Figure 2). None of thedates of Slavic material is earlier than about 700 AD (Herrmann/Heussner 1991; Henning/Heussner 1992; Heussner/Westphal 1998; Dulinicz2001: 27-45; Biermann 2001; Donat 2001: 218-219). The earliest knownobjects are wells within settlements (Eythra 715 [+ or -] 10; GrossStromkendorf after 729/734; Vietow about 730 [Muller/ Schafer 2000: 30];Schmerzke 736; Berlin-Marzahn 739; Rostock-Dierkow 750 to after 769/817;Gorlsdorf about 785; Tornow-Borchelt about 786; Lubben-Steinkirchenafter 760/ cut down late eighth or early ninth century). They indicate awidespread agrarian settlement during the whole eighth century. Regionaldifferences can hardly be observed, but the few data seem to show alittle later "colonisation" in the north. [FIGURE 2 OMITTED] Between the early medieval and the late migration period settlement(i.e. in the decades about 600 AD) there is a hiatus, and so fararchaeology is not able to bridge this gap. The often cited"Germanic-Slavic contacts" can not be verifiedarchaeologically, even in view of the positive arguments of toponomy(Leube 1995; Brather 1996c: 180-186; Donat & Fischer 1994).Palynological observations indicate a fast and drastic reduction insettlement during the sixth and seventh centuries, as it is shown by aminimum of cerealia and an increasing proportion of trees; neverthelessa total lack of settlement can not be deduced (Wiethold 1998:269-281).We are confronted with unsolved problems A list of unsolved problems may refer to several conjectures or open problems in various fields. The problems are listed below:General Unsolved problems in linguistics Unsolved problems in economics Unsolved problems in mathematics of archaeological chronology.Whatever region was occupied by the Sorbs in 631/632, Slavs should havebeen recognised somewhere east of the Frankish kingdom in the earlyseventh century. Pottery: its date and ethnicity Early medieval pottery is the predominant archaeological find andtherefore the basis for many interpretations. Often not enough attentionhas been drawn to the fact that this is a very partial selection ofsource material, with relatively vague spatial and chronologicalclassifications. If there are only few early medieval grave finds, andif these finds do not have much chronological significance, then itwould become dangerous to expect exact chronological answers only frontpottery. Much confusion comes from unclear or varying definitions ofceramic types. For example, one can read about the "ornamentedSukow type" or the "undecorated Feldberg type", whileothers see Sukow pottery per definitionem as undecorated and Feldbergware as principally ornamented. Similar contradictions arise when thetechnology of pottery production is discussed: Are Sukow vessels alwayshand-made and Fddberg pots wheel-turned at the upper part? Or are thereturned Sukow and hand-made Feldberg vessels? The contradictoryclassifications reflect only the variety of transitional forms; for thisreason such assignations are good only for approximate assessments. Todescribe stylistic and technical developments a much more detailedperspective is needed. The earliest Slavic ceramics were undecorated and hand-made. In thesouth narrow and high pots dominated while in the northern flat regions,pots were more bulbous bulbous/bul��bous/ (bul��bus)1. bulbar.2. shaped like, bearing, or arising from a bulb.bulboushaving the form or nature of a bulb; bearing or arising from a bulb. , squat and wide-mouthed. This typologicaldifference between the Prague and Sukow types is not so clear as theclassification suggests. There are continuous transitions, and oftenboth types are "mixed". Despite this, a difference betweennorth and south exists, and it can be described as a chronological one(Biermann 2000: 35). It is tree that the dendrochronological data forMecklenburg and Holstein are not very much younger than those forBrandenburg, but nevertheless this could be explained by a"Slavonisation" progressing from south to northwest. After theseventh and eighth centuries several variants of pottery decorationdeveloped which in some cases were connected with technical innovations.At the same time undecorated vessels were still used, which werewheel-turned in the upper parts (instead of being handmade). Until thetenth century a decreasing, but not unimportant proportion of ceramicsremained undecorated (Figure 3; "Fable fable,brief allegorical narrative, in verse or prose, illustrating a moral thesis or satirizing human beings. The characters of a fable are usually animals who talk and act like people while retaining their animal traits. 2). Therefore undecoratedpottery should not be seen per se as "early Slavic". Such aninterpretation requires an independent absolute dating Absolute dating is the process of determining a specific date for an archaeological or palaeontological site or artifact. Some archaeologists prefer the terms chronometric or calendar . [FIGURE 3 OMITTED] The ornamented ceramics of the early middle ages can be describedas combed decoration (Kammstrichware). Decorations were scratched intothe wet clay with a comb-like instrument. If the vessels were formed ona potter's (slow) wheel, which can be identified by axis prints atthe bottom, waves and circular frames were easy to make. To thesevariants belong the Leipzig, Utz, Russen and Rotha ware from centralGermany. They can be compared with Bohemian and Moravian pottery The Moravian Pottery and Tile Works, a United States National Historic Landmark, is maintained as a "working history" museum by Pennsylvania's County of Bucks, Department of Parks and Recreation. of the"Danube type", which itself reflects a wide-spread trend.Similarly, Feldberg pottery seems to occur from Holstein in the west,Pomerania in the east and in the south as far as the river Havel. It hashad its main spread in eastern Mecklenburg and has to be dated from themid-eighth to the late ninth centuries (Brather 1996a). In the flatlands north of the Elbe-Saale region the Menkendorf type was producedfrom the eighth/ninth to the tenth centuries. At the end of the ninthcentury regionally different pot forms with ripped decoration arose(Rippenschulterware). The best known type is the Tornow type from theNiederlausitz. Its early Slavic dating is now undoubtedly refuted(Henning 1998b). These and other middle Slavic vessel types (Woldegk andFresendorf) were displaced by the technically superior Gurtfurchenwarearound the year 1000 (Biermann 2002). This is defined by deep circularruts, it was completely wheel-turned and better fired. Thus none of the pottery types is demonstrably de��mon��stra��ble?adj.1. Capable of being demonstrated or proved: demonstrable truths.2. Obvious or apparent: demonstrable lies. as early as thesixth century or specific for single Slavic "tribes" in itsdistribution. They belong rather to a range of industries which multiplyin number in the eighth century and later, and spread over the regionsof Slavic Central Europe forming a wider cultural area. The questionabout what kind of communities is implied by the smaller regionalgroupings has yet to be addressed. Hillforts Hillforts have been attributed to Slavic invasion on the basis oftheir date and type (Figure 4). However all the big hillforts lying onhilltops which were once believed to be early (and to have acted asplaces of refuge) have now certainly to be assigned to the late eighthcentury or (early) ninth century; this is due to the findings ofFeldberg pottery and formal building parallels with the Carolingianwest. The characteristic "ring-walls" occur from the lastthird of the ninth century (Henning 1998a) initiating a fortificationtype which became wide-spread in the tenth century. With the exceptionof the well analysed Niederlausitz--there are few dendrochronologicaldates (especially from the northern flat regions). But important andextensive hillforts like Dorf Mecklenburg, Brandenburg/Havel andBerlin-Spaudau have now produced dendrochronological dates from thetenth century onwards only (Table 3; Heussner/Westphal 1998: 229-230).It is not quite clear what this means for the beginning of thesefortifications. The many repairs to the ramparts City walls Ramparts (squat) (also known as RampART Social Centre) Ramparts Magazine do not imply an earlybeginning because important places--were kept in good condition and maybe repaired, enlarged and heightened at any time. [FIGURE 4 OMITTED] Hillforts were therefore not centres of settlement until the secondhalf of the eighth century. The context for such fortification must lieoutside a supposed Slavic immigration. Documented military threats andthe building of ramparts are recorded on two later occasions: around 800during the conflicts between the Carolingian empire and the Saxons, theDanes and the north-western Slavs, and about a hundred years later whenthe kings Henry I. and Otto I Otto I, king of BavariaOtto I,1848–1916, king of Bavaria (1886–1913). Although incurably insane after 1872, he succeeded his brother King Louis II under the regency of his uncle Luitpold (1886–1912) and Luitpold's son Louis . conquered regions east of the rivers Elbeand Saale (Figure 5). This would provide a better correlation withhistoric events than a supposed Slavic migration in the sixth century(Henning 1997, 2002). Even if social differentiation played a role, itseems to have been a secondary one; hillforts were not necessary for asocially differentiated society and for political power. [FIGURE 5 OMITTED] Despite this, one has to bear in mind that these hillfortsfulfilled different functions. The dominance of one or another function(defence, power, different central functions for economy and trade,settlement and society, politics and ritual) should lead to differentinterpretations in a regional or local perspective. The "late"chronology of the hillforts means that the variety of rampartconstructions (Figure 6) does not necessarily have its reason in thedifferent cultural origins of invaders. Probably the constructions arespecific in time, corresponding to political need and circumstance, anddepended on the material available at every individual place. The largeramparts of the eighth/ninth centuries enclosed several hectares, whilethe smaller ring-shaped hillforts of the ninth/tenth centuries answeredmore specific or local demands. Walls of stone depended on local sourcesand that is why they occur in central Germany, Bohemia and Moravia withits rocky mountains Rocky Mountains,major mountain system of W North America and easternmost belt of the North American cordillera, extending more than 3,000 mi (4,800 km) from central N.Mex. to NW Alaska; Mt. Elbert (14,431 ft/4,399 m) in Colorado is the highest peak. , and in Mecklenburg with its pleistocene erraticblocks. Wood could be found everywhere, and therefore woodenconstructions were widespread. All constructive variants should givestability to the earthen ramparts, and often different solutions couldbe found at one fortification. So although the distribution of ramparttype is markedly regional (Figure 6), this may be due to theavailability of materials and financial resources, rather than culturalpractice. [FIGURE 6 OMITTED] House construction The archaeological discovery of Grubenhauser (sunken sunk��en?v. ObsoleteA past participle of sink.adj.1. Depressed, fallen in, or hollowed: sunken cheeks.2. floor huts)and houses at ground level have different distributions, again initiallyinterpreted as belonging to two different cultural zones (Salkovsky,2001). However new discoveries make an exclusive distribution lesscertain (Figure 7). Settlements of Grubenhauser with ovens (cf. Brather2003) dominate along the rivers Elbe and Saale and they can be observedas far as the middle Elbe around Magdeburg. Single Grubenhauser withinsettlements predominantly of houses at ground level existed along theHavel (Berlin-Spandau, Brandenburg, Butzer, Deetz, Dorf-Zechlin, Dyrotz,Leegebruch) and in east Holstein (Bosau, Kucknitz, Alt Lubeck?). Theobservations from Gross Stromkendorf and Rostock-Dierkow have to be seenas exceptions because they come from emporia Emporia(ĕmpôr`ēə), city (1990 pop. 25,512), seat of Lyon co., E central Kans., in the Flint Hills between the Neosho and Cottonwood rivers; inc. 1857. where people of verydifferent origin met and lived together. Whether these Grubenhauser wereof Slavic or Scandinavian "origin" can not be decided--bothregions knew such houses in large numbers (cf. for Scandinavia: Meier1994:51-88). [FIGURE 7 OMITTED] The northern flat lands were dominated by houses at ground level.They left very few traces in the ground because posts and postholes werenot used in early medieval Eastern Europe Eastern EuropeThe countries of eastern Europe, especially those that were allied with the USSR in the Warsaw Pact, which was established in 1955 and dissolved in 1991. . In most cases houses are onlyrecognised from flat, hollow-like structures, suggesting "blockhouses" or log cabins, or constructions of woven wattle wattle,in botany: see acacia. stabilisedby wooden frames, thresholds or stands (Oldenburg, Doff Mecklenburg,Gross Raden, Brandenburg/Havel, Szczecin) (Figure 8). Blockconstructions with Grubenhauser and with houses at ground level appearas a connecting element between flat and mountainous regions, as acultural bridge over other differences and varieties. Perhaps thesettlement of Dessau-Mosigkau (Kruger 1967) represents this transition.Near the Grubenhauser, flat "pits" were observed which couldbe seen as traces of ground-level houses (Donat 1980:49 fig. 14).Whether these houses were contemporary with the Grubenhauser (Brather2001b: 110-111) or later (Biermann 2000:35 36) remains unclear. Theimpression of a settlement consisting only of sunken huts seemsquestionable. [FIGURE 8 OMITTED] The real reasons for the geographic zonation zo��na��tion?n.1. Arrangement or formation in zones; zonate structure.2. Ecology The distribution of organisms in biogeographic zones. in house building arenot quite clear. At first one thinks of the different conditions of soiland ground water, i. e. the environment. The southern heavy and stableloess loess(lĕs, lō`əs, Ger. lös), unstratified soil deposit of varying thickness, usually yellowish and composed of fine-grained angular mineral particles mixed with clay. soils made the digging of Grubenhauser logical, but it was lessfeasible in the north with its sandy soil and the high ground water;nevertheless Grubenhauser occur in the trading places. Maybe thechronology is significant--for example the flat regions may have beensettled later when Grubenhauser had become unusual. But thechronological difference between north and south amounts to scarcely 50years, and not all "southern" Grubenhauser can be dated to thebeginnings of Slavic settlement. Sunken houses were built at least intothe tenth century (Brachmann 1978: 138-143). Grave finds Furnished early medieval graves are rare and poorly equipped, andcemeteries are never excavated completely. All known graves arecremations which reflect identical "traditions" with all thewestern Slavs. Only from the tenth century onwards did a transition toinhumation take place. To what extent "bi-ritual" or mixedrite cemeteries (Zoll-Adamikowa 1997a: 70; Schmidt 1997) reflect atransition can hardly be said; nevertheless such "mixed rite"cemeteries existed till the twelfth century, and perhaps they show notchronological differences, but groups within a society (Paddenberg 2002:300). Urn graves are known in a relatively large number, lined up alongthe river Elbe (Figure 9). The cremated material is buried in urns ofthe Prague type, mostly without any grave goods In archaeology and anthropology grave goods are the items buried along with the body.They are usually personal possessions, supplies to smooth the deceased's journey into the afterlife or offerings to the gods. Grave goods are a type of votive deposit. . Therefore exact datesremain problematic. This kind of cremation (as also graves with a sickle sick��lev.1. To cut with a sickle.2. To deform a red blood cell into an abnormal crescent shape.3. To assume an abnormal crescent shape. Used of red blood cells. [Henning 2002:142 fig. 11]) was limited to the south-eastern peripheryof the West Slavic West Slavicn.A subdivision of the Slavic languages that includes Czech, Polish, Slovak, and Sorbian. regions, but need not be a direct reflection ofmigration. Urn graves on the southern Baltic coast belong to tradingplaces of the eighth/ninth centuries. They could refer back toScandinavian examples rather than to Slavic ones (Zoll-Adamikowa 1997b;Paddenberg 2002: 302-303). Interestingly the graves from Menzlin(thought to be of Scandinavian "traditions" because of theship-like stone settings and the Viking style jewellery) contained urnsof the Slavic Feldberg type. Gross Stromkendorf shows a similar mixtureof burials which refer to Scandinavian and Slavic practices elsewhere.This remarkable phenomenon of "acculturation acculturation,culture changes resulting from contact among various societies over time. Contact may have distinct results, such as the borrowing of certain traits by one culture from another, or the relative fusion of separate cultures. " questions thesupposed clearness of ethnic or cultural classification (cf. Brather2000b). [FIGURE 9 OMITTED] From other regions, especially from the regions between the riversElbe and Oder, only a few grave finds could be discovered. No findbelongs to the supposed period of early Slavic settlement. The knownmounds date from the ninth and tenth centuries, as the potteryindicates. Cremated bones were strewed under or within the mound(unseparated cremations --Brandschuttungsgraber), or they could beburied within an urn, which was put down on the surface--e. g. on thetop of the mound. Sometimes Brandschutungsgraber in flat pits wereobserved without any indication of a mound (Gahro, Tornow-Liehtenau;Wetzel 1996; Paddenberg 2002: 259-267). Such funerary fu��ner��ar��y?adj.Of or suitable for a funeral or burial.[Latin fner practices canoften go unnoticed when they are destroyed by construction works oragrarian activities and therefore have probably already been destroyedin large numbers. Only with the transition to inhumation during thetenth century is a number of grave finds known (Zoll-Adamikowa 1988). Conclusion and further research If one compares the distribution maps (Figures 4, 5, 7, 9), itbecomes clear that different elements of material culture are spreadvery unevenly in time and space. The different attributes have no directconnection with each other. Homogenous groups (of invaders) cannot bereconstructed on this basis. This hypothesis is supported by thetribes' names which go back to designations of nature and places(Dossani, Hevelli, Polabi, Pomorani, Recani, Sprewani, Ukrani). Neitheris it likely that political formations ("tribes" or gentes gen��tes?n.Plural of gens. )immigrated as distinct and large groups in the late seventh century andlater. The cultural groups defined by archaeology should rather be seenas the results of developments and interactions taking place in thesettlement areas of Central Europe--sometimes after Slavic immigrations.The establishment of new settlement structures and the consolidation ofeconomic foundations were the basic conditions for the formation ofethnic and political groups and identities among the north-west Slavsduring the early middle ages. These processes of self definition wereinfluenced by the neighbours, because self consciousness requires"the others" as a mirror of the self. At the moment the beginning of Slavic or early medieval settlementin East Central Europe remains unclear. An exact chronology does notseem possible and we know little of developments during the sixth andseventh centuries. It seems quite unbelievable that large areas inCentral Europe should have been uninhabited (where would they all havegone?). Despite the fundamental change of material culture some isolatedlate antique communities could have "survived" and becameSlavic. The earliest known cemeteries and settlements are actuallycontemporary with the first trading places along the southern Balticcoast. According to dendrochronology at least some of these emporiastarted before the mid-eighth century--and this means a beginning longbefore the traditional start of the Viking age Viking Age is the term denoting the years from about 800 to 1066 in Scandinavian History[1][2][3]. The vikings explored Europe by its oceans and rivers through trade and warfare. . The building ofhillforts began a little later--in the late eighth century in someregions, elsewhere in the ninth century. This leaves some important future tasks for archaeology. Firstly wehave to achieve a sufficient chronology for the fifth to ninth centuriesusing tree-ring data. Then we need to excavate settlements andcemeteries extensively and completely (using modern scientific analyses)to get a closer look at the inner social and economic structures ofvillages and hillforts including changes in space and time. Thesearchaeological aspects need to be studied independently first, and thencompared with other sources. Only the integration of all archaeological,historical, scientific and toponymic sources will lead to betterunderstanding (Muller-Wille 2002). Today the traditional ideas about "the Slavs" and theirmigration as homogeneous groups from the far east of Europe seem to beinadequate explanations of the evidence. Whether the"Slavonisation" of East Central Europe was mainly due to avast migration is hard to say on the basis of the scanty archaeologicalsources, and it seems unlikely that one can expect substantial materialin the future. What we observe is a relative plain or simple materialculture (houses and settlements, ceramics, burials) compared with lateantique or medieval times This is the article on the Medieval Times dinner theater chain. For the historical time period, see Middle Ages.Medieval Times Dinner & Tournament . Some of its main "traditions" haveclear parallels in Eastern Europe but even there the chronology needsmuch improvement to establish wider connections and their directions(cf. Curta 2001). Probably migration was only one, but an importantfactor in the formation of early medieval East Central Europe andessential for further developments. Since the eighth century the regionseast of the Elbe and their Slavic populations were included in widercultural and political networks--to the Frankish kingdom, through theBaltic Sea Baltic Sea,arm of the Atlantic Ocean, c.163,000 sq mi (422,170 sq km), including the Kattegat strait, its northwestern extension. The ?resund, Store Bælt, and Lille Bælt connect the Baltic Sea with the Kattegat and Skagerrak straits, which lead to the , to the Avars and even to Byzantium. These relationships(influence and exchange) and structural circumstances are much betterobservable by archaeology than the modest beginnings (as describedabove) of the middle ages a hundred years before. At the moment and perhaps for a longer period of time--it seems tobe easier to achieve and much more interesting to analyse the conditionsof everyday life than to look for "the" earliest origins of"the Slavs" which can hardly expect to be found. Long-termchanges and their regional differences should stand in the centre of amodern archaeological interpretation and will lead to a moredifferentiated and colourful picture than before (cf. Brather 2001b).The term "Slav" remains a vague cultural, but not an ethnic orethnological eth��nol��o��gy?n.1. The science that analyzes and compares human cultures, as in social structure, language, religion, and technology; cultural anthropology.2. cipher cipher:see cryptography. (1) The core algorithm used to encrypt data. A cipher transforms regular data (plaintext) into a coded set of data (ciphertext) that is not reversible without a key. for East Central Europe during the middle ages,describing clear differences in space and time. There was no distinctand homogeneous Slavic "culture" in East CentralEurope--instead many acts of self-definition, interaction and exchangewith all neighbouring regions played a significant role during the earlyand high middle ages.Table 1. Hypothetic groups of Slavic immigrants as combination ofpottery types, funeral forms, house building types. In reality thesefour aspects are not directly connected with each other, neither inspace nor in time (arranged after Hermann 1984)cultural group ceramics burialsPrag-Korcak undecorated, urn graves high and leanSukow-Szeligi undecorated, unseparared flat and belly cremationsFeldberg- combed unseparatedGolancz ornament and cremations comb stamp, decorated rimTornow-Gostyn rippled urn graves on decoration, mounds? biconicalLeipzig Danube ? tradition, combed ornament, wheel-turnedcultural group hillforts house building tribesPrag-Korcak -- square-shaped ? [substrat] GrubenhauserSukow-Szeligi -- block ? [substrat] constructions at ground levelFeldberg- large hillforts block WilziGolancz on top of a hill constructions at ground levelTornow-Gostyn small circular block Milzeni and fortifications in constructions Lusizi the lowland at ground levelLeipzig dry wall square-shaped Sorbs Grubenhauser and block constructions at ground levelTable 2. Classification of early and high medieval ceramics in easternGermany (updated from Brather 2001b, 198-199 tab. 8-9). The namesdesignate regional variants in a vague chronological order, but nodistinct phases. White--hand-made; light grey--partly wheel-turned;dark grey--wholly wheel-turned.traditionalclassification Holstein Mecklenburglate Slavic types Gurtfurchenware, Vipperow,(nearer hillfort type D, Teterow, Weisdin,ceramics type Warder Bobzin, Garz, variant Drensemiddle Slavic Rippenschulter- Fresendorf,types (middle ware Woldegkhillfortceramics) Kammstrichware, Menkendorf, type C Gross Radenearly Slavic types Prachtkeramik, Feldberg(older hillfort Wulstrandtopfe,ceramics) type B(pre-hillfort undecorated Sukowtime ceramics) ware, poorly decorated ware, type Atraditionalclassification Brandenburg Elbe-Saalelate Slavic types style III late Slavic types,(nearer hillfort Leipzig group/ceramics type Groitzschmiddle Slavic Tornow Leipzig group/types (middle (Brandenburg Russen phase,hillfort transitional type Rotha;ceramics) forms). Ulz group style IIearly Slavic types Leipzig group(older hillfort (= grey ware)/ceramics) Russen phase; Utz group (= brown ware)(pre-hillfort style I, Prag[-Korcak]time ceramics) Prag[-Korcak]traditionalclassification Main-Regnitzlate Slavic types(nearer hillfortceramicsmiddle Slavic Warenart 1,types (middle (5), 6hillfortceramics)early Slavic types Warenart 1,(older hillfort (5), 6ceramics)(pre-hillfort Warenart 1,time ceramics) (5), 6Table 3. Berlin-Spandau, medieval fortifications. Comparisons betweenthe "traditional" chronology and new tree-ring dating phase"traditional" archaeologicalchronology (after v. Muller v.Muller-Mucii & dendrochronologyNekuda 1993: 17 (after Heusser & Westpahl 1998: 230 fig. 7)1 about 7002a first half of the eight century 9202b first half of the eighth until first third of the ninth century3 about 900 until first third of the tenth century 963-9654 mid-tenth century 1035-10505a mid-tenth until second third of the tenth century 1062-10635b last third of the tenth century until 983 1075-10786a first third of the eleventh century 1080-10866b second and last third of the eleventh century7 first half of the twelfth century 1106-11078 second half of the twelfth century about 1150 References BIERMANN, F. 2000. Slawische Besiedlung zwischen Elbe, Neisse undLubsza. Archaologische Studien zum Siedlungswesen und zur Sachkultur desfruhen und hohen Mittelalters. Bonn: Habelt. --2001 (ed.). Pennigsberg. Untersuchungen zu der slawischen Burgbei Mittenwalde und zum Siedlungswesen des 7./8. bis 12. Jahrhunderts amTeltow und im Berliner Raum. Weissbach: Beyer & Began. --2002. Uber das erste Das Erste ("The First") is the principal publicly owned television channel in Germany. It is a joint production of Germany's regional public broadcasters acting through, and coordinated by the ARD consortium. Auftreten der spatslawischen Keramik inOstdeutschland, Ethnographischarchologische Zeitschrift 43:61-92. BIERMANN, F., ST DALITZ & K.-U. HEUSSNER. 1999. Der Brunnen yonSchmerzke, Stadt Brandenburg a. d. Havel, und die absolute Chronologieder fruhslawischen Besiedlung im nordostdeutschen Raum, PrahistorischeZeitschrift 74:219-43. BRACHMANN, H. 1978. Slawische Stamme an Elbe und SaMe. Zu ihrerGeschichte und Kultur im 6. bis 10. Jh.--auf Grund archaologischerQuellen. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. BRATHER, S. 1996a. Feldberger Keramik und fruhe Slawen. Studien zurnordwestslawischen Keramik der Karolingerzeit. Bonn: Habelt. --1996b. Merowinger- und karolingerzeidiches Fremdgut bei denNordwestslawen. Gebrauchsgut und Elitenkultur im sudwestlichenOstseeraum, Prahistorische Zeitschrift 71: 46-84. --1996c.'Germanische', 'slawische' und"deutsche' Sachkultur des Mittelalters. Probleme ethnischerInterpretation. Ethnographisch-archaologische Zeitachrift 37: 177-216. --1999. Einwanderergruppen oder Regionalentwicklung? Die fruhenSlawen zwischen Elbe und Oder, Das Altertum 45: 331-46. --2000a. Fruh- und hochmittelalterliche Keramik bei den Westslawen,in A. Wieczorek & H.-M. Hinz (ed.), Europas Mitte um 1000. Beitragezur Geschichte, Kunst und Archaologie 1, 114-20. Stuttgart: Theiss. --2000b. Ethnische Identitaten als Konstrukte derfruhgeschichtlichen Archaologie, Germania 78: 139-77. --2001 a. Grubenhauser in Ostmitteleuropa. Fruhmittelalterliche"Hauslandschaften" oder slawische Einwanderung?, in E.Wilgocki et al. (ed.), Instantia est mater doctrinae. Festschrift fest��schrift?n. pl. fest��schrif��ten or fest��schriftsA volume of learned articles or essays by colleagues and admirers, serving as a tribute or memorial especially to a scholar. W.Filipowiak: 77-91. Szczecin: Stowarzyszenie Naukowe ArcheologowPolskich. --2001 b. Archaologie der westlichen Slawen. Siedlung, Wirtschaftund Gesellschaft im fruh- und hochmittelalterlichen Ostmitteleuropa.Berlin--New York: de Gruyter. --2001c. Die Armbrustsprossenfibel van Prutzke. Eine bakischeFibelvariante und die fruhen slawischen Brandgraber, in Meyer 2001:479-92. --2003.s.v. Ofen 2. Archaologisches, in: Reallexikon derGermanischen Altertumskunde The Reallexikon der germanischen Altertumskunde (RGA) is a German language encyclopedia treating the early history of the Germanic peoples. It is editied by the Akademie der Wissenschaften, G?ttingen. 22, 14-17. Berlin--New York: de Gruyter. CURTA, F. 2001. The making of the Slavs. History and archaeology ofthe Lower Danube Region c. 500-700. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress Cambridge University Press (known colloquially as CUP) is a publisher given a Royal Charter by Henry VIII in 1534, and one of the two privileged presses (the other being Oxford University Press). . DONAT, P. 1980. Haus, Hof und Dorf in Mitteleuropa vom 7. 12.Jahrhundert. Archaologische Beitrage zur Entwicklung und Struktur derbauerlichen Siedlung. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. --2001. Aktuelle Fragen der archaologischen Forschungen zurGeschichte dee Slawen im nordlichen Deutschland, Bodendenkmalpflege inMecklenburg--Vorpommern. Jahrbuch 48, 2000: 215-257. DONAT, P. & R. E. FISCHER. 1994. Die Anfange slawischerSiedlung westlich der Oder. Methodische Uberlegungen zu Problemenaktueller archalologischer und onomastischer Forschungen, Jahrbuch furbrandenburgische Landesgeschichte 45: 7-30. DULINICZ, M. 2001. Ksztaltawanie sie SlawianszczyznyPolnocno-Zachodniej. Studium archeologiczne. Warszawa; InstytutArcheologii i Etnologii Polskiej Akademii Nauk. EGGERS, M. 2001. Samo "der erste Konig der Slawen". Einekritische Forschungsubersicht, Bohemia 42: 62-83. EICHLER, E. 1975-1978. Ortsnamenbuch der Oberlausitz. Studien zurToponymie der Kreise Bautzen, Bischofswerda, Golitz, Hoyerswerda,Kamenz, Lobau, Niesky, Senfienberg, Weisswasser und Zittau. Berlin:Akademie-Verlag. HENNING, J. 1991. Germanen--Slawen--Deutsche. Neue Untersuchungenzum fruhgeschichtlichen Siedlungswesen ostlich der Elbe, PrahistorischeZeitschrift 66: 119-133. --1997. Ringwallburgen und Reiterkrieger. Zum Wandel derMilitarstrategie im ostsachsischslawischen Raum an der Wende vom 9. zum10. Jahrhundert, in G. de Boe & F. Verhaeghe (ed.), Military studiesin medieval Europe. Papers of the 'Medieval Europe Brugge1997' conference 11, 21-31. Zellik: Instituut vane Vane, John Robert 1927-2004.British pharmacologist. He shared a 1982 Nobel Prize for research on prostaglandins.vanethe membranous or main part of the contour feather in birds as distinct from the shaft. herArcheologisch Patrimonium. --1998a. Archaologische Forschungen an Ringwallen inNiederungslage. Die Niederlausitz als Burgenlandschaft des ostlichenMitteleuropas im fruhen Mittelalter, in Henning & Ruttkay 1998:9-29. --1998b. Neues zum Tornower Typ. Keramische Formen undFormenspektren des Fruhmittelalters im Licht Licht (Light), subtitled "The Seven Days of the Week," is a cycle of seven operas composed by Karlheinz Stockhausen which, in total, lasts over 29 hours. OriginThe project, originally titled Hikari dendrochronologischer Datenzum westslawischen Siedlungsraum, in H. Kocka-Krenz & W. Al-osinski(ed.), Kraje stowianskie w wiekach rednich. Profanum i sacrum sacrum:see spinal column. (Festschrift Z. Hilczer-Kurnatowska): 392-408. Poznan: StowarzyszenieNaukowe Archeologow Polskich, Oddzial w Poznaniu Poznanskie TowaraystwoPrzyjaciol Nauk; Instytut Archeologii i Etnologii Polskiej AkademiiNauk, Oddzial w Poznaniu. --2002. Der slawische Siedlungsraum und die ottonische Expansionostlich der Elbe. Ereignisgeschichte, Archaologie, Dendrochronologie, inJ. Henning (ed,), Europa im 10. Jahrhundert. Archaologie einerAufbruchszeit: 131-46. Mainz: Zabern. HENNING, J. & K.-U. HEUSNER. 1992. Zur Burgengeschichte im 10.Jahrhundert. Neue archaologische und dendrochronologische Daten zuAnlagen vam Typ Tornow, Ausgrabungen und Funde 37: 314-324. HENNING, J. & A. T. RUTKAY. 1998 (ed.). FruhmittelalterlicherBurgenbau in Mittel- und Osteuropa. Bonn: Habelt. HERRMANN, J. 1968. Siedlung, Wirtschaft und gesellschaftlicheVerhaltnisse der slawischen Stamme zwischen Oder/Neisse und Elbe.Studien auf der Grundlage archaologischen Materials. Berlin:Akademie-Verlag. --1983. Wanderungen und Landnahme im westslawischen Gebiet, in GliSlavi occidentali e meridionali nell'alto medioevo 1: 75-101.Spoleto: Centro Italiano di studi sull'alto medioevo. --1984. Germanen und Slawen in Mitteleuropa. Zur Neugestaltung derethnischen Verhaltnisse zu Beginn des Mittelalters. Berlin:Akademie-Verlag. --1985. Einwanderung und Herkunft dee Stammesgruppen, in J.Herrmann (ed.), Die Slawen in Deutschland. Geschichte und Kultur derslawischen Stamme westlich van Oder und Neisse vom 6. bis 12.Jahrhundert: 21-32. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. HERRMANN, J. & K.-U. HEUSSNER. 1991. Dendrochronologie,Archaologie und Fruhgeschichte vom 6. bis 12. Jahrhundert in denGebieten zwischen Saale, Elbe und Oder, Ausgrabungen und Funde 36:255-90. HEUSSNER, K.-U. & T. WESTPHAL. 1998. DendrochronologischeUntersuchungen an Holzfunden aus fruhmittelalterlichen Burgwallenzwischen Elbe und Oder, in Henning & Ruttkay 1998: 223-34. KEMPKE, T. 1989. Zur Chronologie der Keramik vonStarigard/Oldenburg. Ben RGK RGK Ronya and George Kozmetsky Foundation (Austin, Texas, USA)69, 1988: 87-102. KRUGER, B. 1967. Dessau-Mosigkau. Ein fruhslawischer Siedlungsplateim mittleren Elbegebiet. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. LEUBE, A. 1995. Germanische Volkerwanderungen und ihrarchaologischer Fundniederschlag. Slawischgermanische Konrakte imnordlichen Elb-Oder-Gebiet. Ein Forschungsberieht (II),Ethnographischarchaologische Zeitschrift 36: 259-298. MANGELSDORF, G. 2001. Die Drachenfibel von Nehringen und dasProblem der Vendelzeit in Vorpommern, in Meyer 2001: 493-504. MEIER, D. 1994. Die wikingerzeitliche Siedlung von Kosel(Kosd-West), Kreis Rendsburg-Eckernforde. Neumunster: Wachholtz MEYER, M. 2001 (ed.). "... trans Albim fluvium".Forschungen zur vorromischen, kaiserzeitlichen und mittelaterlichenArchaologie. Festschrift A. Leube. Rahden: Marie Leidorf. v. MULLER, A., K. V. MOLLER-MUCII & V. NEKUDA. 1993. DieKeramik vom Burgwall in Berlin-Spandau. Berlin: Spiess. MULLER, W. & A. SCHAFER. 2000. Zwei Siedlungsplatze auf derAutobahntrasse bei Vietow, Lkr. Bad Doberan, Archalogische Berichte ausMecklenburg-Vorpommern 7: 28-32. MULLER-WILLE, M. 2002. Slawische Besiedlung im obodritischenHerrschaftsbereich. Neuere Beitrage dec Archaologie, Onomastik,Dendrochronologie und Palaobotanik, in P. Ettel, R. Friedrich & W.Schier (ed.), Interdisziplinare Beitrage zur Siedlungsarchaologie.Gedenkschrift W. Janssen: 243-253. Rahden: Marie Leidorf. PADDENBERG, D. 2002. Studien zu fruhslawischen Bestattungsriten inNorddeutschland, Offa 57, 2000: 231-345. PETERSEN, E. 1939. Der ostelbiscke Raum als germanisches Kraftfeldim Lichte dec Bodenfunde des 6-8. Jahrhunderts. Leipzig: Kabitzsch. ROSPOND, ST. 1989-2000. Slawische Namenkunde 1. Die slawischenOrtsnamen. Heidelberg: Winter Universitatsverlag. SALKOVSKY, P. 2001. Hauser in der fruhmittelalterlichen slawischenWelt. Nitra: Archeologicky ustav Slovenskej Akademie Vied. SCHMIDT, V. 1997. Ein slawisches biritueiles Graberfeld yon AltKabelich, Lkr. Mecklenburg-Strelitz, Bodendenkmalpflege in Mecklenburg.Jahrbuch 43, 1996: 83-113. TRAUTMANN, R. 1948-1949. Die elb- und ostseeslavischen Ortsnamen1-2. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. WETZEL, G. 1996. Ein slawischer Bestattungsplatz beiTornow-Lichrenau, heute Kittlitz, Landkreis Dahme-Spreewald, inSlowianszczyzna w Europie sredniowiecznej 1. Plemiona i wczesne panstwa(Festschrift L. Leciejewicz), 237-41. Wroclaw: Instytut Archeologii iEtnologii Polskiej Akademii Nauk. WIETHOLD, J. 1998. Studien zur jungeren postglazialen Vegetations-und Siedlungsgeschichte im ostlichen Schleswig-Holstein. Bonn: Habelt. ZOLL-ADAMIKOWA, H. 1975-1979. Wczesnosredniowieczne cmentarzyskacialopalne Slowianna terenie Polski I. Analiza, wnioski, Wroclaw et al.:Ossolineum. --1988. Przyczny i formy recepcji rytualu szkieletowego u slowiannadbaltyckich we wczesnym sredniowieczu, Przeglad archeologiczne35:183-229. --1997a. Stan badan nad obrzedowoscia pogrzebowa slowian, Slaviaantiqua 38: 65-80. --1997b Graberfelder des 8./9.-10./11. Jhs. mit skandinavischenKomponenten im slawischen Ostseeraum, Sprawozdania archeologiczne 49:91-9. Sebastian Brather, Johann-Wolfgang-Goethe-Universitat, Seminar furVor- und Fruhgeschiehte, Gruneburgplatz 1, D-60323 Frankfurt/ Main,Germany (Email: s.brather@em.uni-frankfurt.de)