It is truism to say that for an archaeologist the question of chronology is particularly important. In relation to Tarnobrzeg Lusatian Culture, this topic was frequently raised, which in the case of its early and late stages gave satisfactory results. There are numerous determinants of these phases, and they can also be divided into smaller periodical stages. The dynamics of change is well understood. However,p hase II is far more problematic. Basically, it is represented by one type of vessel. In addition, the 150–200 year phase is very compact in terms of inventory and it is almost impossible to identify older or younger materials. The problem of its decline also needs to be emphasized, where when treated through the prism of the San River style as it usually is, it should be prolonged to HaD. The author, using the correspondence board, tries to indicate materials which can be related to the older and younger episode of the second phase of Tarnobrzeg Lusatian Culture.
The great motorway research and construction investments have brought and are still bringing a huge set of new data. In 2019 alone, one million new archaeological artefacts were sourced. Therefore, there is a problem of systematic and comprehensive development of the obtained sources, in which statistics may be helpful. The article introduces selected statistical methods and shows examples of their use. It focuses on their usefulness in archaeological research, and thus it may become a boost for their wider use in the development of archaeological sources.
In the Castle Museum in Sandomierz, there is a small copper battle axe whose place and circumstances of discovery are unknown. It is only known that this item was found in the vicinity of Sandomierz. The discussed artefact represents the Nógrádmarcal type, characterized by a distinctive haft, a ring near the haft hole, two opposing blades/arms, and a lowered horizontal arm in relation to the apex of the haft opening and the vertical blade. This form is particularly prevalent in the northern Carpathian region, especially in present-day Czech Republic and Slovakia. Additionally, similar specimens are also recorded in northern Hungary and Romania. In formal terms, this item corresponds to the C2 type according to Julie Heeb’s typology, which is numerous in the western part of the Carpathians, especially in the Czech Republic. The majority of them were discovered in contexts unfavourable to chronological studies. It is not excluded that these specimens survived until the younger Eneolithic period. It seems that the safest way to date them is to the turn of the 5th/4th millennium BC or the beginning of the 4th, and associate them with late influences of the Polgar cycle. The presented artefact is most likely to be seen as an import from the south-western or southern direction into the environment of the Lublin-Volhynian culture. It is another copper artefact from the Eneolithic period discovered in the Sandomierz Upland, indicating lively contacts between these areas and those located further south and southwest.
Archaeological research at the site Tarnobrzeg 5 site was carried out by Jan Gurba and Marek Florek in 1992, uncovering settlement materials of the Tarnobrzeg Lusatian culture (TLC) and the Trzciniec culture (TC). The latter were not very numerous and representative, so they did not give grounds for a specific determination of the chronology. Undoubtedly, the most interesting artefact was a bronze sickle with a knob, referring to the III and IV period of the Bronze Age. The TLC materials, which almost entirely can be referred to the III phase of its development, turned out to be crucial for determining the chronology of the site. In terms of pottery forms, the most numerous were egg-shaped pots with holes under the edge of the rim, finger hollows and plastic strips. An interesting form was also a bowl on an empty leg. Both egg-shaped pots and a bowl with an empty leg may be evidence of Eastern cultural influences. It is also worth noting two fragmentarily preserved vases, which – as it seems – can be dated to the turn of the II and III phases of the TLC, which would indicate the existence of chronologically older material. Bronze and iron tweezers have also been recorded here, which may document the dissemination of iron.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.