7/29/2019 2011_Aprab_86-88

1/4

Association pour la Promotion des recherches sur lge du bronze

UMR 5594 ARTeHIS Universit de Bourgogne - Facult des Sciences6, Bd Gabriel 21000 DIJON

aprab@free.fr

http://aprab.free.fr

Bulletin de lAssociation pour la

Promotion des Recherches sur lge

du Bronze

mars 2011 numro 8

Publication annuelle

APRAB8-2011

Illustration de couverture :Monument funraire double cercle concentrique de Cesson Plaine du Moulin vent, Seine-et-Marne (P. Granchon, Inrap-Cif)

Illustration de 4me de couverture : Bracelets de Pommerit-le-Vicomte, Ctes dArmor (B. Armbruster)

7/29/2019 2011_Aprab_86-88

2/4

Bulletin de lAssociation pour la Promotion des Recherches sur lAge du Bronze, n8, mars 2011

86

Bronze Age Warfare in Eastern Europe: Development,

Technology and Usage of Defensive Armour. A short pre-

sentation of a forthcoming project

MarianneMdlinger

distribution1. Until now, only a handful of studies onthe composition or manufacture techniques of Centraland Eastern European defensive armour have beenpublished, e.g. the study of Central European helmetsof the Gutmann collection by Born Hansen 2001.Despite a few publications on the usage of shields,there has been never a technological point of view

concerning investigations on trade, manufacture andusage of defensive armour2. Nevertheless, many fun-damental aspects of manufacture, use and functiona-lity of cuirasses, greaves and helmets have not beencomprehensively analysed and we are still left with avery incomplete picture of this aspect of Bronze Agecraftsmanship.

If we interpret weapons as a symbol of high statusand power, we must also consider that they are usedduring warfare, melees or (even ritual) combat. Or,

to quote K. Kristiansen, There can be no rituals orsymbols without the reality of what they signify3. Ne-vertheless, a number of Bronze Age weapons are stillinterpreted as non-functional and are instead interpre-ted as for display or for ceremonial character butwhat becomes of the nominal concept of the warriorand his role in society in such circumstances? Fur-thermore, different explanations and ways of achie-ving or being allowed to wear and use armour willbe discussed as well: ritual warfare, robbery, raiding,armour as a prize in a controlled ritual battle (as wesee for example in the later Faustkmpfer of the Iron

Age situlae), as a prize for bravery in combat, etc.Furthermore, the armour might not only be used forghting, but also as a symbol of wealth, social statusor power of its owner or the society.

Interestingly, the circumstances which permit thenancing, production (techniques) and distributionof defensive armour have not yet been discussed suf-

1 E. g. Clausing 2005, 31-38; Clausing 2003, 149-187; Egg, Tomedi 2002, 543-560; Schauer 2003, 193-203. In

contrast, see Uckelmann 2006, 243-249 for shields.

2 Experiments concerning the usage of Bronze Agedefensive armour were carried out by J. M. Coles and B. Molloy;

see Coles 1962, 156-190 and Molloy 2004, 32-34.

3 Kristiansen 1999, 188.

Introduction

The project, which is nanced by the AustrianScience Fund with a three years lasting Schrdin-ger-fellowship as well as a travel grant by the FG(sterreichische Forschungsgesellschaft) will en-hance our understanding of the social, cultural and

especially technological milieu in which the earliestmetal defensive armour in Europe was developed andused. The study will focus primarily on the processesof manufacture and usage of helmets, greaves andcuirasses. The study area is the Carpathian Basin andthe eastern Alpine-Carpathian area, where the earliestEuropean Bronze Age defensive armour is found.All museums keeping Bronze Age defensive armourin Eastern Europe, namely in Bosnia-Herzegovina,Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, Serbia,Slovakia, Slovenia as well as Austria and Germany

are cooperating with the author. In total, 43 helmets,18 greaves and 6 (7) cuirasses will be studied at thecorresponding museums.

Aims - hypotheses

Since the beginnings of research into earliest anti-quity the study of weapons and warfare has been ofgreat interest. It has and remains a popular and at-tractive theme as a consequence of the universal rolethat conict appears to play amongst historical andcontemporary societies, and a fascination with theskill and craftsmanship that permeates the productionof weapons of violence. Weapons design often appliesthe most advanced technologies a society has to of-fer. They can therefore be used as an indicator of thescientic, technical and socio-cultural complexity ofa society or culture. Moreover, the decision to deve-lop more metal offensive or defensive armour givesa rare glimpse of the social development, economyand warfare behaviour of Bronze Age society. Moststudies on Bronze Age defensive weaponry in Eas-tern Europe (cuirasses, greaves, helmets and shields)

were carried out almost more than 20 years ago orearlier. Even the latest publications on defensiveweaponry in general have focused on typology and

7/29/2019 2011_Aprab_86-88

3/4

Bulletin de lAssociation pour la Promotion des Recherches sur lAge du Bronze, n8, mars 2011

87

ration techniques.

Methods

Traces of tools on bronze and corrosion provide in-formation about manufacture techniques and will be

documented. Use-wear, e.g. worn- or torn rivet holesas evidence for xing organic linings, and traces ofthe impact of other weapons will be studied. Surfaceanalyses will be carried out by using a reected-lightmicroscope and a digital camera in each of the mu-seums concerned. A literature review will also includehow people of Central and Eastern Europe coped withinjuries such as blows on the head or parry-wounds.This will result in a fairly accurate picture of theBronze Age warrior, his possibilities and abilities toprotect himself against his opponents.

Radiography does not only reveal the procedure andquality of the casting technique, it also shows howdifferent parts of bronzes are xed together. It is plan-ned to x-ray all the cast objects, including knobs ofhelmets and cast helmets.

Archaeometallurgy in combination with archaeolo-gical methods and data will provide new informationabout the development and transfer of metallurgicalknowledge. It is therefore necessary to study the com-position and structure of the objects to fully reveal all

available information on manufacture and functiona-lity of the defensive weaponry. Depending on the stateof the object, it is the aim to use non-invasive methodsas much as possible. The alloy composition will bestudied using portable XRF as well as SEM-EDXS-EBSD and for the Hungarian nds using PIXE, ToF-

ND and PGAA. The analyses of the Hungarian ndswill be carried out at the Budapest Neutron Centre inFebruary 2011 and are nanced by the FP7 programCHARISMA (www.charismaproject.eu). Where sam-pling has been authorised (to date in Romania, Croa-

tia, Austria (nds from Slovenia), Germany (ndsfrom Hungary and Croatia), Slovakia and the CzechRepublic), the analyses of the microstructure (micro-probe analyses, metallographic analyses using opticalmicroscopes with light eld and dark eld as well ashardness measurements) as well as the alloy of selec-ted bronze armour will be carried out using the equip-ment of the laboratory at the DCCI of the Universityof Genoa.

Bronze Age defensive armour found in antiquarian

excavations over 150 years ago and kept in Museumshow cases or stores have frequently suffered throughunknown restoration or conservation treatments. Iden-tifying different corrosion products on the samples

ciently. For the production of armour, we have toassume a very skilled workshop that is able to pro-duce and work sheet metal with high amounts of tin(see below), a person or community able to nancethe work and the raw material for production andsomeone who is able to handle the armour. Due to thefew nds of Bronze Age defensive armour, this was

obviously not very often the case. It is important toconsider not only the object and the material itself butalso the ecological base which makes it possible toproduce and use metal defensive armour: a good po-sition close to trading routes, rich soil, or/and vicinityto various types of raw materials or other sources. Theposition must also be located such that it can be de-fended in the event of an attack, as the material storedthere is valuable and a possible target for robbers.

Regarding unpublished results of the Dendra ar-

mour, the helmets of Bernires-dAilly, France, andthe Yetholm shield type (showing amazingly highamounts of tin of up to 16.5%4) we have to rethinkthe so-called non-workability of high-tinned bronzes.It is interesting that these high tin amounts occur insheet metal products, which seems to be a contradic-tion in itself. But knowing the characteristics of thesealloy compositions at certain temperatures, we see itis possible and also perfectly feasible to hammerand stretch the bronze5. It seems as there was not justan exchange or trade in objects or the copying of ar-

mour, but also an intense interaction and exchangeof knowledge between a few very skilled workshopsproducing the armour. Furthermore, the amount of tinand lead in Bronze Age defensive armour seems tobe dependent on the time of production, as the fouranalyses of the Hungarian helmets from the Guttmanncollection suggest. To be able to conrm this assump-tion and to achieve more information on the com-position and manufacture technique of the greaves,helmets and cuirasses, more data will be required,which will be processed during this project. By ana-

lysing their material properties, shape and manufac-ture we will also gain further insights into the capa-bility of these weapons to withstand impact during aght. These results as well will be the base for furtherprojects in experimental archaeology. Furthermore,analysing as well the corrosion products of the ndsinvolved, the museums and conservators will benetfrom the results, knowing more about the effects ofdifferent methods of restoration carried out during thelast decades and their inuence on the current stateof the object but also about the corrosion processesoccurred during the last 3000 years to enhance resto-

4 Personal comments of B. Mille, B. Molloy and M.Uckelmann.

5 Piccardo, Amendola in print.

7/29/2019 2011_Aprab_86-88

4/4

Bulletin de lAssociation pour la Promotion des Recherches sur lAge du Bronze, n8, mars 2011

88

Carman, J., Harding, A., (Hrsg), Ancient Warfare (Stroud1999)

Clausing, Ch., Geschnrte Beinschienen der spten Bron-ze- und lteren Eisenzeit. Jahrb. RGZM 49, 2002 (2003)149-187.

Clausing, Ch., Sptbronze- und eisenzeitliche Helme miteinteiliger Kalotte. Jahrb. RGZM 48, 2001 (2003) 199-

225.Coles, J. M., European Bronze Age shields, ProcPrehistSoc28, 1962, 156-190.

Egg, M., Tomedi, G., Ein Bronzehelm aus dem mittel-bronzezeitlichen Depotfund vom Piller, Gemeinde Fliess,in Nordtirol. Arch. Korrbl. 32, 2002, 543-560.

Hencken, H., The earliest European helmets. Bronze Ageand Early Iron Age. Am. School Prehist. Research, Bull.28 (Cambridge/ Mass. 1971).

K. Kristiansen, The Emergence of Warrior Aristocraciesin Later European Prehistory and Their Long-Term His-tory, in: J. Carman A. Harding (eds.), Ancient Warfare(Stroud 1999), 175-189.

Kristiansen, K., Rulers and Warriors: Symbolic Transmis-sion and Social Transformation in Bronze Age Europe,in: J. Haas (eds.), From Leaders to Rulers (Kluwer 2001)85-104.

Metals Handbook, ninth Edition. Metallography andMicrostructures (Ohio 1985).

Mdlinger, M., Herstellung und Verwendung mittel- undsptbronzezeitlicher Schwerter aus sterreich, Das Al-tertum 52, 2007, 101-130.

Molloy, B., Experimental Combat with Bronze Age Weap-ons, Archaeology Ireland 18, Spring 2004, 32-34.

ttel, H., Schumann, H., Metallographie, 14. Auage

(Weinheim 2005).Osgood, R., Monks, S., Toms, J., (eds.), Bronze Age War-fare, (Stroud 2000).

Otto, T., Thrane, H., Vandkilde H., (eds.), Warfare and So-ciety. Archaeological and Social Anthropological Per-spectives (Aarhus 2006).

Paulk, J., Panzer der jngeren Bronzezeit aus der Slow-akei. Ber. RGK 49, 1968, 41-61.

Petres, . F., Neue Angaben ber die Verbreitung der spt-bronzezeitlichen Schutzwaffen, Savaria 16, 1982 (1983),57-80.

Piccardo, P., Amendola, R., Metallographic investigationand experimental reconstitution of ancient bronze mir-rors, Journal of Historical Metallurgy, 2010 (in print).

Robbiola, L., Blengino, J.-M., Fiaud, C., Morphology andmechanisms of formation of natural patinas on archaeo-logical Cu-Sn alloys, Corrosion Science 40, No. 12, De-cember 1998, 2083-2111.

Schauer, P., Die urnenfelderzeitlichen Bronzepanzer vonFillinges, Dp. Haute-Savoie, Frankreich. Jahrb. RGZM25, 1978 (1982) 92-130.

Uckelmann, M., Schutz, Prunk und Kult Zur Funktion bronze-

zeitlicher Schilde, Anodos. Studies of the Ancient World 4-5/

2004-2005 (Trnava 2006) 243-249.

Vinski-Gasparini, K., Kultura polja sa zarama u sjevernoj Hrvat-

skoj Die Urnenfelderkultur in Nordkroatien (Zadar 1973).

from these objects will lead to more information onthe impact of the different restoration methods, theimpact of storage in depots and show cases as wellas the corrosion processes during the last 3000 years.Furthermore, by studying the corrosion products onthe samples, data will be collected for further dis-cussions concerning the environment the nd comes

from (e. g. water, bog, gravel or type of soil). Thestudy of the samples will be carried out at the DCCI,University of Genoa, using the following equipment:optical metallography, SEM-EDXS-EBSD, Ramanmicrospectroscopy, colorimetry and impedance spec-troscopy.

Expected results

This project will achieve knowledge about the de-velopment, manufacture and usage of the rst metal

defensive armour in the European Bronze Age. It willalso contribute signicantly to our understanding ofthe social and economic impacts of these objects aspart of the extensive networks of trade and as testi-monies of conict that permeated later Prehistory. Itwill also allow us to explain technological changesthrough time as well as social and economic impactsof, as well as reasons for, trade and warfare. Thestudy of corrosion will help to improve restorationtechniques and will lead to useful information aboutnd contexts. The project will create a network of

museums and research institutions in eleven Euro-pean Countries, which will foster closer collaborationand exchanges between archaeology and the naturalsciences. All project partners will contribute to thepromotion of new, non-invasive research methods(CHARISMA, portable XRF, corrosion studies). Be-sides the impacts on the study of Bronze Age meta-lwork, the state of technique as well as distributionand transfer of knowledge and armour, the results ofthe project will aid as well in the reproduction of ac-curate replicas of Bronze Age armour in order to test

their function and properties (durability, resistance).In turn, the results of Experimental Archaeology usingthe replicas will enrich our knowledge of Bronze Agewarfare and society. This will not only have major im-plications for the institutions and museums of morethan ten European Countries, but benet the subjectarea as a whole.

Selected bibliography

Born, H., Hansen, S., Helme und Waffen Alteuropas.Sammlung Axel Guttmann 9 (Mainz 2001).

Bouzek, J., Die Anfnge der blechernen Schutzwaffen imstlichen Mitteleuropa. In: H. Lorenz (eds.), Studien zurBronzezeit (Festschr. W. A. v. Brunn) (Mainz 1981) 21-38.