Urnfield culture

The Urnfield culture (c. 1300–750 BC) was a late Bronze Age culture of Central Europe, often divided into several local cultures within a broader Urnfield tradition. The name comes from the custom of cremating the dead and placing their ashes in urns, which were then buried in fields. The first usage of the name occurred in publications over grave sites in southern Germany in the late 19th century.^[1][2] Over much of Europe, the Urnfield culture followed the Tumulus culture and was succeeded by the Hallstatt culture.^[3] Some linguists and archaeologists have associated this culture with a pre-Celtic language or Proto-Celtic language family.^[4][5] By the end of the 2nd millennium BC, the Urnfield Tradition had spread through Italy, northwestern Europe, and as far west as the Pyrenees. It is at this time that fortified hilltop settlements and sheet‐bronze metalworking also spread widely across Europe, leading some authorities to equate these changes with the expansion of the Celts. These links are no longer accepted.^[6][7][8]

Urnfield culture

Geographical range	Europe
Period	Late Bronze Age
Dates	c. 1300–750 BC
Major sites	Burgstallkogel (Sulm valley), Ipf (mountain), Ehrenbürg
Preceded by	Tumulus culture, Vatya culture, Encrusted Pottery culture, Vatin culture, Terramare culture, Apennine culture, Noua culture, Ottomány culture
Followed by	Hallstatt culture, Lusatian culture, Proto-Villanovan culture, Villanovan culture, Canegrate culture, Golasecca culture, Este culture, Luco culture, Iron Age France, Iron Age Britain, Iron Age Iberia, Basarabi culture, Cimmerians, Thracians, Dacians, Iron Age Greece

Chronology

Central European Bronze Age
Late Bronze Age
Ha B2/3	800–950 BC
Ha B1	950–1050 BC
Ha A2	1050–1100 BC
Ha A1	1100–1200 BC
Bz D	1200–1300 BC
Middle Bronze Age
Bz C2	1300–1400 BC
Bz C1	1400–1500 BC
Bz B	1500–1600 BC
Early Bronze Age
Bz A2	1600–2000 BC
Bz A1	2000–2300 BC

It is believed that in some areas, such as in southwestern Germany, the Urnfield culture was in existence around 1200 BC (beginning of Hallstatt A or Ha A), but the Bronze D Riegsee-phase already contains cremations. As the transition from the middle Bronze Age to the Urnfield culture was gradual, there are questions regarding how to define it.

The Urnfield culture covers the phases Hallstatt A and B (Ha A and B) in Paul Reinecke's chronological system, not to be confused with the Hallstatt culture (Ha C and D) of the following Iron Age. This corresponds to the Phases Montelius III-IV of the Northern Bronze Age. Whether Reinecke's Bronze D is included varies according to author and region.

The Urnfield culture is divided into the following sub-phases (based on Müller-Karpe sen.):

	date BC
BzD	1300–1200
Ha A1	1200–1100
Ha A2	1100–1000
HaB1	1000–800
HaB2	900–800
Ha B3	800–750

The existence of the Ha B3-phase is contested, as the material consists of female burials only. As can be seen by the arbitrary 100-year ranges, the dating of the phases is highly schematic. The phases are based on typological changes, which means that they do not have to be strictly contemporaneous across the whole distribution. All in all, more radiocarbon and dendro-dates would be highly desirable.

Origin

Europe in the late Bronze Age.

The Urnfield culture grew from the preceding Tumulus culture.^[3] The transition is gradual, in the pottery as well as the burial rites.^[3] In some parts of Germany, cremation and inhumation existed simultaneously (facies Wölfersheim). Some graves contain a combination of Tumulus-culture pottery and Urnfield swords (Kressbronn, Bodenseekreis) or Tumulus culture incised pottery together with early Urnfield types (Mengen). In the North, the Urnfield culture was only adopted in the HaA2 period. 16 pins deposited in a swamp in Ellmoosen (Kr. Bad Aibling, Germany) cover the whole chronological range from Bronze B to the early Urnfield period (Ha A). This demonstrates a considerable ritual continuity. In the Loire, Seine, and Rhône, certain fords contain deposits from the late Neolithic onward up to the Urnfield period.

The origins of the cremation rite are commonly believed to be in Hungary, where it was widespread since the first half of the second millennium BC.^[9] The neolithic Cucuteni–Trypillia culture of modern-day northeastern Romania and Ukraine were also practicing cremation rituals as early as approximately 5500 BC. Some cremations begin to be found in the Proto-Lusatian and Trzciniec culture.

Distribution and local groups

Urnfield culture bronze cuirasse, helmets and ornaments

The Urnfield culture was located in an area stretching from western Hungary to eastern France, from the Alps to near the North Sea. Local groups, mainly differentiated by pottery, include:

South-German Urnfield culture

• Northeast-Bavarian Group, divided into a lower Bavarian and an upper Palatinate group
• Lower-Main-Swabian group in southern Hesse and Baden-Württemberg, including the Marburger, Hanauer, lower Main and Friedberger facies
• Rhenish-Swiss group in Rhineland-Palatinate, Switzerland and eastern France, (abbreviated RSFO in French)

Lower-Rhine Urnfield culture

• Lower Hessian Group
• North-Netherlands-Westphalian group
• Northwest-Group in the Dutch Delta region

Middle-Danube Urnfield culture

Urnfield culture, bronze situla with bird-headed sun ship motif, Hungary, c. 1000 BC.^[10][11]

• Velatice-Baierdorf in Moravia and Austria
• Čaka culture in western Slovakia
• Gáva culture
• Belegiš culture
• Piliny culture
• Kyjatice culture
• Milavce culture in southwestern Bohemia
• Unstrut culture in Thuringia
• Virovitica in Slovenia and Croatia^[12]
• Lusatian culture in northern Bohemia, Lusatia and Poland

Sometimes the distribution of artifacts belonging to these groups shows sharp and consistent borders, which might indicate some political structures, like tribes. Metalwork is commonly of a much more widespread distribution than pottery and does not conform to these borders. It may have been produced at specialised workshops catering for the elite of a large area.

Important French cemeteries include Châtenay and Lingolsheim (Alsace). An unusual earthwork was constructed at Goloring near Koblenz in Germany.

Related cultures

The central European Lusatian culture forms part of the Urnfield tradition, but continues into the Iron Age without a notable break.

The Piliny culture in northern Hungary and Slovakia grew from the Tumulus culture, but used urn burials as well. The pottery shows strong links to the Gáva culture, but in the later phases, a strong influence of the Lusatian culture is found.

Villanovan cinerary urn with sun-bird-ship motifs, Italy, 8th century BC.

Bronze shield from Denmark with sun-bird-ship motifs, Nordic Bronze Age, c. 1100-700 BC.^{[13][14][15][16]}

In Italy the late Bronze Age Canegrate and Proto-Villanovan cultures and the early Iron Age Villanovan culture show similarities with the urnfields of central Europe. The Italic peoples are descended from the Urnfield and Tumulus culture, who inhabited Italy from at least the second millennium BC onwards. Latins achieved a dominant position among these tribes, establishing the ancient Roman civilization. During this development, other Italic tribes adopted the Latin language and culture in a process known as Romanization.^[17][18]

Urnfields are found in the French Languedoc and Catalonia from the 9th to 8th centuries. The change in burial custom was most probably influenced by developments further east.

Evidence for an association between the Urnfield culture and a hypothetical Italo-Celtic language group has been discussed by scholars such as Peter Schrijver.^[4]

Placename evidence has also been used to point to an association of the Urnfield materials with the Proto-Celtic language group in central Europe, and it has been argued that it was the ancestral culture of the Celts.^[19][20] The Urnfield layers of the Hallstatt culture, "Ha A" and "Ha B", are succeeded by the Iron Age "Hallstatt period" proper: "Ha C" and "Ha D" (8th-6th centuries BC), associated with the early Celts; "Ha D" is in turn succeeded by the La Tène culture, the archaeological culture associated with the Continental Celts of antiquity.

The Golasecca culture in northern Italy developed with continuity from the Canegrate culture.^[21][22] Canegrate represented a completely new cultural dynamic to the area expressed in pottery and bronzework, making it a typical western example of the Urnfield culture, in particular the Rhine-Switzerland-Eastern France (RSFO) Urnfield culture.^[21][22] The Lepontic Celtic language inscriptions of the area show the language of the Golasecca culture was clearly Celtic making it probable that the 13th-century BC language of at least the RSEF area of the western urnfields was also Celtic or a precursor to it.^[21][22]

The influence of the Urnfield culture spread widely and found its way to the northeastern Iberian coast, where the nearby Celtiberians of the interior adapted it for use in their cemeteries.^[23] Evidence for east-to-west early Urnfield (Bronze D-Hallstatt A) elite contacts such as rilled-ware, swords and crested helmets has been found in the southwest of the Iberian peninsula.^[24] The appearance of such elite status markers provides the simplest explanation for the spread of Celtic languages in this area from prestigious, proto-Celtic, early-Urnfield metalworkers.^[24]

Migrations

Urnfield culture sword and helmet, Romania

The numerous hoards of the Urnfield culture and the existence of fortified settlements (hill forts) were taken as evidence for widespread warfare and upheaval by some scholars.

Depiction of the Sea Peoples with bird-headed ship. Medinet Habu, Egypt.^[25][26]

Written sources describe several collapses and upheavals in the Eastern Mediterranean, Anatolia and the Levant around the time of the Urnfield origins:

• End of the Mycenean culture with a conventional date of c. 1200 BC
• Destruction of Troy VI c. 1200 BC
• Battles of Ramses III against the Sea Peoples, 1195–1190 BC
• End of the Hittite empire 1180 BC
• Settlement of the Philistines in Canaan c. 1170 BC

Some scholars, among them Wolfgang Kimmig and P. Bosch-Gimpera have postulated a Europe-wide wave of migrations. The so-called Dorian invasion of Greece was placed in this context as well (although more recent evidence suggests that the Dorians moved in 1100 BC into a post Mycenaean vacuum, rather than precipitating the collapse).

Ethnicity

Gold necklace, Belgium, c. 1000 BC

The variety of regional groups belonging to this culture makes it possible to exclude the presence of ethnic uniformity. Marija Gimbutas connected the various Central European regional groups to as many proto-populations: proto-Celts, proto-Italics, proto-Veneti, proto-Illyrians and proto-Phrygians (as well as proto-Thracians and proto-Dorians), who would establish themselves later, through migrations, in their historic locations.^[27][28] This migration (disputed by some) occurred during the period called late Bronze Age collapse and was perhaps caused by climate changes. Communities of peasants and herders, led by a warrior aristocracy, introduced the new rite of cremation, new ceramic styles and the mass production of metal objects as well as a new religion and Indo-European languages in various regions of Western and Southern Europe.^[29]

Settlements

Ipf, Germany. The summit was levelled and fortified in the Urnfield period.^[30][31]

The number of settlements increased sharply in comparison with the preceding Tumulus culture. Few of them have been comprehensively excavated. Fortified settlements, often on hilltops or in river-bends, are typical for the Urnfield culture. They are heavily fortified with dry-stone or wooden ramparts. Excavations of open settlements are rare, but they show that large 3-4 aisled houses built with wooden posts and wall of wattle and daub were common. Pit dwellings are known as well; they might have served as cellars.

Fortified settlements

Model of fortifications on the Bullenheimer Berg.^[32]

Fortified hilltop settlements become common in the Urnfield period. Often a steep spur was used, where only part of the circumference had to be fortified. Depending on the locally available materials, dry-stone walls, gridded timbers filled with stones or soil or plank and palisade type pfostenschlitzmauer fortifications were used. Other fortified settlements used river-bends and swampy areas.

Metal working is concentrated in the fortified settlements. On the Runder Berg near Urach, Germany, 25 stone moulds have been found.

Hillforts are interpreted as central places. Some scholars see the emergence of hill forts as a sign of increased warfare. Most hillforts were abandoned at the end of the Bronze Age.

Examples of fortified settlements include Bullenheimer Berg, Ehrenbürg, Hünenburg bei Watenstedt, Heunischenburg, Hesselberg, Bürgstadter Berg, Farrenberg, Gelbe Burg and Ipf in Germany, Burgstallkogel, Thunau am Kamp and Oberleiserberg in Austria,^[33][34] Corent and Gannat^[35] in France, Hořovice and Plešivec in the Czech Republic, Biskupin in Poland, Ormož in Slovenia,^[12] Corneşti-Iarcuri, Sântana and Teleac in Romania,^[36][37][38] Gradište Idoš in Serbia,^[39] and Velem and Csanádpalota–Földvár in Hungary.^[40]

The 30.5 ha plateau of the Bullenheimer Berg in Germany was the site of a "large, walled, city-like fortification" in the later Urnfield period.^[41] Excavations have revealed a dense settlement across the whole plateau, including courtyard-type buildings located on artificially raised terraces.^[42] The fortified settlement on the Ehrenbürg, also covering about 30 ha and surrounded by a timber and stone wall, was another regional centre and the residence of a regional elite.^[42] At the hill fort of Hořovice near Beroun (Czech Republic), 50 ha were surrounded by a stone wall. Most settlements were much smaller however.

Hühnenburg bei Watenstedt, Germany

Corneşti-Iarcuri in Romania was the largest prehistoric settlement in Europe, at almost 6 km across,^[43] with four fortification lines and an inner settlement with a diameter of c. 2 km. Magnetic mapping and excavations have indicated the existence of a well-organised settlement of proto-urban character during the Urnfield period. An estimated 824,00 tonnes of earth had to be moved for the construction of the fortification walls alone.^[44][45] Magnetometric surveys at Sântana have revealed the existence of buildings with lengths exceeding 40 m, including a building approximately 60 m long and 40 m wide.^[37]

Corneşti-Iarcuri ramparts, Romania

"Mega forts" such as Corneşti-Iarcuri, Sântana and Gradište Idoš were surrounded by numerous smaller settlements, including fortified sites. They formed part of a general movement towards large fortified sites across Europe in the Late Bronze Age, possibly in response to new styles of warfare.^[46][47] The general uniformity in design, material culture, and the density of settlements in Romania and Serbia at this time is indicative of societies that were organized under a common political framework.^[39] Kristiansen and Suchowska-Ducke (2015) describe these mega-sites as "part of a political centralisation process, a complex chiefdom, or archaic state".^[48]

In 2018 the remains of a Late Bronze Age 'feasting hall' were excavated at the site of Lăpuş in Romania.^[49]

Open settlements

Urnfield period houses were one or two-aisled. Some were quite small, 4.5 m × 5 m at the Runder Berg (Urach, Germany), 5-8m long in Künzig (Bavaria, Germany), others up to 20 m long. They were built with wooden posts and walls of wattle and daub. At the Velatice-settlement of Lovčičky (Moravia, Czech Republic) 44 houses have been excavated. Large bell shaped storage pits are known from the Knovíz culture. The settlement of Radonice (Louny) contained over 100 pits. They were most probably used to store grain and demonstrate a considerable surplus-production.

Pile dwellings

On lakes of southern Germany and Switzerland, numerous pile dwellings were constructed. They consist either of simple houses made of wattle and daub, or log-built. The settlement at Zug, Switzerland, was destroyed by fire and gives important insights into the material culture and the settlement organisation of this period. It has yielded a number of dendro-dates as well.

• 
  Heunischenburg fortifications, Germany
• 
  Stone fortification wall, reconstruction.^[50]
• 
  Reconstruction of a pfostenschlitzmauer wall at Ipf, Germany
• 
  Biskupin fortified settlement reconstruction, Poland
• 
  Lake Constance settlement reconstruction, Germany
• 
  Urnfield period village model

Material culture

Late Bronze Age swords, Switzerland, c. 10th century BC. Cantonal Museum of Archeology and History

Pottery

The pottery is normally well made, with a smooth surface and a normally sharply carinated profile. Some forms are thought to imitate metal prototypes. Biconical pots with cylindrical necks are especially characteristic. There is some incised decoration, but a large part of the surface was normally left plain. Fluted decoration is common. In the Swiss pile dwellings, the incised decoration was sometimes inlaid with tin foil. Pottery kilns were already known (Elchinger Kreuz, Bavaria), as is indicated by the homogeneous surface of the vessels as well. Other vessels include cups of beaten sheet-bronze with riveted handles (type Jenišovice) and large cauldrons with cross attachments. Wooden vessels have only been preserved in waterlogged contexts, for example from Auvernier (Neuchâtel), but may have been quite widespread.

Tools and weapons

Urnfield period warrior, Hungary.^[51]

Bronze cuirasses from Marmesse in France, 9th century BC.^[52] National Archaeological Museum, France

The early Urnfield period (1300 BC) was a time when the warriors of central Europe could be heavily armored with body armor, helmets and shields all made of bronze, most likely borrowing the idea from Mycenaean Greece.^[53]

Urnfield warrior, France, illustration (1910)

The leaf-shaped Urnfield sword could be used for slashing, in contrast to the stabbing-swords of the preceding Tumulus culture. It commonly possessed a ricasso. The hilt was normally made from bronze as well. It was cast separately and consisted of a different alloy. These solid hilted swords were known since Bronze D (Rixheim swords). Other swords have tanged blades and probably had a wood, bone, or antler hilt. Flange-hilted swords had organic inlays in the hilt. Swords include Auvernier, Kressborn-Hemigkofen, Erbenheim, Möhringen, Weltenburg, Hemigkofen and Tachlovice-types.

Protective gear like shields, cuirasses, greaves and helmets are rare and almost never found in burials. The best-known example of a bronze shield comes from Plzeň in Bohemia and has a riveted handhold. Comparable pieces have been found in Germany, Western Poland, Denmark, Great Britain and Ireland. They are supposed to have been made in upper Italy or the Eastern Alps and imitate wooden shields. Irish bogs have yielded examples of leather shields (Clonbrinn, Co. Wexford). Bronze cuirasses are known since Bronze D (Čaka, grave II, Slovakia).

Complete bronze cuirasses have been found in Saint Germain du Plain, nine examples, one inside the other, in Marmesse, Haute Marne (France), fragments in Albstadt-Pfeffingen (Germany). Bronze dishes (phalerae) may have been sewn on a leather armour. Greaves of richly decorated sheet-bronze are known from Kloštar Ivanić (Croatia) and the Paulus cave near Beuron (Germany).

Chariots and wagons

Further information: Chariot

One of a pair of bronze chariot wheels from Arokalja in Romania, c. 13th-12th centuries BC^[54]

About a dozen wagon-burials of four wheeled wagons with bronze fittings are known from the early Urnfield period. They include Hart an der Altz (Kr. Altötting), Mengen (Kr. Sigmaringen), Poing (Kr. Ebersberg), Königsbronn (Kr. Heidenheim) from Germany and St. Sulpice (Vaud), Switzerland. In Alz, the chariot had been placed on the pyre, and pieces of bone are attached to the partially melted metal of the axles. Bronze (one-part) bits appear at the same time. Two-part horse bits are only known from late Urnfield contexts and may be due to eastern influence. Wood- and bronze spoked wheels are known from Stade (Germany), a wooden spoked wheel from Mercurago, Italy. Wooden dish-wheels have been excavated at Courcelettes, Switzerland and the Wasserburg Buchau, Germany (diameter 80 cm).

Bronze spoked wheels from Hassloch and Stade (in Germany) have been described as "the most ambitious craft endeavour of all Bronze Age bronze objects",^[55] representing "the highest achievement of prehistoric bronze casters in non-Greek Europe ... In terms of casting technique, they are on a par with the casting of a Greek bronze statue."^[56]

Cult wagon models

Further information: de:Kultwagen

In Milavče near Domažlice, Bohemia, a four-wheeled miniature bronze wagon bearing a large cauldron (diameter 30 cm) contained a cremation. This exceptionally rich burial was covered by a barrow. The bronze wagon model from Acholshausen in (Bavaria) comes from a male burial.

Such wagons are also known from the Nordic Bronze Age. The Skallerup wagon, Denmark, contained a cremation as well. At Peckatel (Kr. Schwerin) in Mecklenburg a cauldron-wagon and other rich grave goods accompanied an inhumation under a barrow (Montelius III/IV). Another example comes from Ystad in Sweden. South-eastern European examples include Kanya in Hungary and Orăştie in Romania. Clay miniature wagons, sometimes with waterfowl, were known there since the middle Bronze Age (Dupljaja, Vojvodina, Serbia).

A Lusatian chariot model from Burg (Brandenburg, Germany) has three wheels on a single axle, on which waterfowl perch. The grave of Gammertingen (Kr. Sigmaringen, Germany) contained two socketed horned applications that probably belonged to a miniature wagon comparable to the Burg example, together with six miniature spoked wheels.

• 
  Urn with chariot depictions, Slovakia, 14th century BC.^[57]
• 
  Cult chariot model from Dupljaja, Serbia, c. 1300 BC.^[58]
• 
  Bronze cult wagon model from Acholshausen in Germany c. 1000 BC.^[59]
• 
  Bronze cult wagon model from Orăştie in Romania.^[60]
• 
  Bronze wheels from Hassloch in Germany, 900-800 BC
• 
  Bronze wheel from Stade, Germany, c. 1000 BC
• 
  Bronze wheels from Stade, Germany, c. 1000 BC
• 
  Chariot horse harness parts from Karbow, Germany.^[61][62]

Hoards

Hoards are very common in the Urnfield culture. The custom was abandoned at the end of the Bronze Age. They were often deposited in rivers and wet places like swamps. As these spots were often quite inaccessible, they most probably represent gifts to the gods. Other hoards contain either broken or miscast objects that were probably intended for reuse by bronze smiths. As Late Urnfield hoards often contain the same range of objects as earlier graves, some scholars interpret hoarding as a way to supply personal equipment for the hereafter. In the river Trieux, Côtes du Nord, complete swords were found together with numerous antlers of red deer that may have had a religious significance as well.

Iron

Bronze ornament with iron rivets, c. 1200 BC^[63]

An iron knife or sickle from Ganovce in Slovakia, possibly dating from the 18th century BC, may be the earliest evidence of smelted iron in Central Europe.^[64] Other early finds include an iron ring from Vorwohlde (Germany) dating from c. the 15th century BC (Reinecke B),^[65] and an iron chisel from Heegermühle (Germany) dating from c. 1000 BC.^[66][67] During the late Bronze Age, iron was used to decorate the hilts of swords (Schwäbisch-Hall-Gailenkirchen, Unterkrumbach, Kr. Hersbruck), knives (Dotternhausen, Plettenberg, Germany), pins and some other ornaments. The Carpathian Basin was an early centre of iron technology, with iron artefacts dating from the 10th century BC, and possibly as early as the 12th century BC.^[64] Regular use of iron for weapons and tools in Central Europe began with the Hallstatt culture.

Economy

Cattle, pigs, sheep and goats were kept, as well as horses, dogs and geese. The cattle were rather small, with a height of 1.20 m at the withers. Horses were not much bigger with a mean of 1.25 m.

Weighing equipment from Germany, France and Britain, c. 1200-1000 BC

Forest clearance was intensive in the Urnfield period. Probably open meadows were created for the first time, as shown by pollen analysis. This led to increased erosion and sediment-load of the rivers. New crops and more intensive agrarian regimes are introduced, transforming landscapes on a large scale.^[68]

Left: High-status female, Slovakia.^[51] Right: Urnfield culture dress (reconstruction).

Wheat and barley were cultivated, together with pulses and the horse bean. Poppy seeds were used for oil or as a drug. Millet and oats were cultivated for the first time in Hungary and Bohemia, and rye was already cultivated; further west it was only a noxious weed. Flax seems to have been of reduced importance, maybe because mainly wool was used for clothes. Hazel nuts, apples, pears, sloes and acorns were collected. Some rich graves contain bronze sieves that have been interpreted as wine-sieves (Hart an der Alz). This beverage would have been imported from the South, but supporting evidence is lacking. In the lacustrine settlement of Zug, remains of a broth made of spelt and millet have been found. In the lower-Rhine urnfields, leavened bread was often placed on the pyre and burnt fragments have thus been preserved.

Wool was spun (finds of spindle whorls are common) and woven on the warp-weighted loom; bronze needles (Unteruhldingen) were used for sewing.

Weighing scales were used for trade and weighed metal was used as a form of payment or money.^{[69][70][71][72]} Bronze sickles are also thought to have served as a form of commodity money.^[73]

There is some suggestion that the Urnfield culture is associated with a wetter climatic period than the earlier Tumulus cultures. This may be associated with the diversion of the mid-latitude winter storms north of the Pyrenees and the Alps, possibly associated with drier conditions in the Mediterranean basin.

Numerals

Further information: Frankleben hoard

The cast mark numeral system

Large hoards of sickles dating from the Bronze Age have been excavated across central Europe which feature a range of cast markings. An analysis of the Frankleben hoard and other sickle hoards from Germany dating from the Tumulus and Urnfield periods found that markings on the sickles constitute a numeral system related to the lunar calendar. According to the Halle State Museum of Prehistory:

"Many sickles carry line-shaped markings. The scope and order of these brands follows a defined pattern. This sign language can be interpreted as a pre-form of a writing system. There are two types of symbols: line-shaped marks below the button and marks at the angle or at the base of the sickle body. The archaeologist Christoph Sommerfeld examined the rules and realized that the casting marks are composed of one to nine ribs. After four left-hand, individually counted strokes there follows a bundle as a group of five on the right side. This creates a counting system that reaches to 29. The Synodic Moon orbit lasts 29 days or nights. This number and the lunar shape of the sickle suggest that the stroke groups should be interpreted as pages of a calendar, as a point in the monthly cycle. The sickle marks are the oldest known sign system in Central Europe."^[74]

Some other symbols or marks found on the sickles^[75]

The sickles also feature other marks or symbols which the archaeologist Christoph Sommmerfeld (1994) suggests may represent 'conceptual signs', or a type of proto-writing.^[76] Markings on sickles and tools from across Bronze Age Europe have been interpreted by other authors as ownership marks, sign systems, number systems or "units of information" of unknown meaning.^[75]

'Counting marks' have also been identified on bronze armrings and ingots from the Urnfield period, possibly related to trade. Similar markings found on pottery have been interpreted as serving a calendar function.^[75]

Simple numerals in the form of lines and dots are found on identical 'ritual objects' from Haschendorf in Austria and Balkåkra in Sweden, which are thought to represent assembly instructions for the objects.^[77] The decorated discs on both objects have been interpreted as solar calendars.^[78]

The archaeologist Mikkel Hansen (2019) has suggested that the Urnfield sickle-numeral system may be related to 'hand signs' found among petroglyphs from the Nordic Bronze Age, which may have a similar numerical and calendrical meaning.^[79][80][81]

Golden hats

Main article: Golden hat

Berlin Gold Hat, Germany, c. 1000 BC

Four elaborate cone-shaped hats made from thin sheets of gold have been found in Germany and France dating from c. 1500-800 BC (the Tumulus culture to Urnfield period). They may have been worn as ceremonial hats by individuals described by researchers as "king-priests" or oracles.^[82]

The gold hats are covered in bands of ornaments or symbols along their whole length and extent. The symbols – mostly disks and concentric circles, sometimes wheels, crescents, pointed oval shapes and triangles – were punched using stamps, rolls or combs. The discs and concentric circles are interpreted as solar and possibly lunar symbols.^[83]

Symbols on the Berlin Hat

An analysis of the Berlin Gold Hat found that the symbols numerically encode a lunisolar calendar based on the 19-year Metonic cycle.^{[84][85][86][87]} According to Wilfried Menghin "The symbols on the hat are a logarithmic table which enables the movements of the sun and the moon to be calculated in advance."^[82] Similar information is thought to be encoded on the hats from Ezelsdorf-Buch, Schifferstadt and Avanton.^[87]

According to the Neues Museum the Berlin Gold Hat could also be used to predict lunar eclipses.^[88][89] Astronomers Rahlf Hansen and Christine Rink have argued that the Berlin hat encodes knowledge of Saros lunar eclipse cycles.^[90] Evidence for knowledge of these cycles is also known from the later Hallstatt period.^[91]

The various ornaments on the Berlin hat include a band of 19 'star and crescent' symbols, placed above 19 pointed-oval symbols which are thought to represent the planet Venus.^[92] Similar 'Venus' symbols are found on the gold hats from Ezelsdorf-Buch and Schifferstadt.^[87] According to some researchers a Venus calendar is encoded on the gold hats.^[93][94]

Circular symbols similar to those on the gold hats are also found on gold bowls dating from the Middle to Late Bronze Age, including those from the Eberswalde hoard. Some of these are also thought to contain calendrical information.^[95]

Astronomical and calendrical interpretations have been proposed for a variety of other decorated artefacts dating from the Middle to Late Bronze Age, including gold artefacts from the Bullenheimer Berg in Germany,^[96][97] a gold diadem from Velem in Hungary,^[98] gold appliqués from Lake Bled in Slovenia,^[99] gold discs and a gold belt from the Czech Republic,^{[100][101][102]} the Trundholm Sun Chariot from Denmark,^[103][104] bronze discs from Germany and Denmark,^{[105][106][107]} and bronze urns from Germany (including Seddin, Gevelinghausen and Herzberg), Denmark and Poland.^[108]

The gold hats and diadems have also been linked to the Casco de Leiro from Spain and the Comerford Crown from Ireland, as well as to gold diadems from Mycenae in Greece, all of which bear similar symbols.^{[109][110][111]}

In his analysis of the Velem diadem, archaeologist Gabor Ilon writes: "high-ranking members of the elite in Bronze Age Europe were proud owners of gold foil-covered costume adornments and symbols of status and power as well as of golden vessels, objects of social display, decorated with an identical set of symbols ... embodying what was presumably an identical and coherent spiritual background."^[112] According to the Musée d'Archaeologie Nationale, "these precious and remarkably executed objects evoke a complex society, undoubtedly strictly hierarchical, with advanced technical and astronomical knowledge, organized around work in the fields".^[113]

Gold diadem and discs from Velem, Hungary, 14th-9th centuries BC.^[112]

• 
  Avanton Gold Hat, France, 1500-1200 BC^[114]
• 
  Ezelsdorf-Buch Gold Hat, Germany, c. 1000 BC
• 
  Schifferstadt Gold Hat, Germany, 1400-1300 BC
• 
  Ezelsdorf-Buch, schematic depiction of ornamention and stamps
• 
  Schifferstadt, schematic depiction of ornamention and stamps
• 
  Gold appliqués from Lake Bled, Slovenia, 13th-12th century BC.^[115]

Funerary customs

Graves

Urns for ashes and dishes for grave offerings, Germany.

In the Tumulus period, multiple inhumations under barrows were common, at least for the upper levels of society. In the Urnfield period, inhumation and burial in single flat graves prevails, though some barrows exist.

Bronze urn from Gevelinghausen (Germany) with sun-bird-ship motifs.^[116][117]

In the earliest phases of the Urnfield period, man-shaped graves were dug, sometimes provided with a stone lined floor, in which the cremated remains of the deceased were spread. Only later, burial in urns became prevalent. Some scholars speculate that this may have marked a fundamental shift in people's beliefs or myths about life and the afterlife.

Typical burial of cremation urn.

The size of the urnfields is variable. In Bavaria, they can contain hundreds of burials, while the largest cemetery in Baden-Württemberg in Dautmergen has only 30 graves. The dead were placed on pyres, covered in their personal jewellery, which often shows traces of the fire and sometimes food-offerings. The cremated bone-remains are much larger than in the Roman period, which indicates that less wood was used. Often, the bones have been incompletely collected. Most urnfields are abandoned with the end of the Bronze Age, only the Lower Rhine urnfields continue in use in the early Iron Age (Ha C, sometimes even D).

The cremated bones could be placed in simple pits. Sometimes the dense concentration of the bones indicates a container of organic material, sometimes the bones were simply shattered.

If the bones were placed in urns, these were often covered by a shallow bowl or a stone. In a special type of burial (bell-graves) the urns are completely covered by an inverted larger vessel. As graves rarely overlap, they may have been marked by wooden posts or stones. Stone-pacing graves are typical of the Unstrut group.

Grave gifts

The urn containing the cremated bones is often accompanied by other, smaller ceramic vessels, like bowls and cups. They may have contained food. The urn is often placed in the centre of the assemblage. Often, these vessels have not been placed on the pyre. Metal grave gifts include razors, weapons that often have been deliberately destroyed (bent or broken), bracelets, pendants and pins. Metal grave gifts become rarer towards the end of the Urnfield culture, while the number of hoards increase. Burnt animal bones are often found, they may have been placed on the pyre as food. The marten bones in the grave of Seddin may have belonged to a garment (pelt). Amber or glass beads (Pfahlbautönnchen) are luxury items.

Upper-class graves

Seddin grave contents, 9th century BC, Germany.^[118]

Upper-class burials were placed in wooden chambers, rarely stone cists or chambers with a stone-paved floor and covered with a barrow or cairn. The graves contain especially finely made pottery, animal bones, usually of pigs, sometimes gold rings or sheets, and in exceptional cases miniature wagons. Some of these rich burials contain the remains of more than one person. In this case, women and children are normally seen as sacrifices. Until more is known about the status distribution and the social structure of the late Bronze Age, this interpretation should be viewed with caution, however. Towards the end of the Urnfield period, some bodies were burnt in situ and then covered by a barrow, reminiscent of the burial of Patroclus as described by Homer and the burial of Beowulf (with the additional ship burial element). The grave of Seddin (c. 9th century BC) has been described as a "Homeric burial" due to its close similarity to contemporary elite burials in Greece and Italy.^{[119][120][83]} In the early Iron Age, inhumation became the rule again.

Cult

Crescent shaped fire-dog/ moon idol, Germany

An obsession with waterbirds is indicated by numerous pictures and three-dimensional representations. Combined with the hoards deposited in rivers and swamps, it indicates religious beliefs connected with water. This has led some scholars to believe in serious droughts during the late Bronze Age. Sometimes the water-birds are combined with circles, the so-called sun-barque or solar boat motif. Moon-shaped clay firedogs or 'moon idols' are thought to have a religious significance, as well as crescent shaped razors.^[121][122]

The Kyffhäuser caves in Thuringia contain headless skeletons and animal bones that have been interpreted as sacrifices. Other deposits include grain, knotted vegetable fibres and hair and bronze objects (axes, pendants and pins). The Ith-caves (Lower Saxony) have yielded comparative material.

Genetics

See also: Bell Beaker culture § Genetics, Unetice culture § Genetics, Hallstatt culture § Genetics, La Tène culture § Genetics, Celts § Genetics, and Italic peoples § Genetics

A genetic study published in Nature in March 2015 examined the remains of an Urnfield male buried in Halberstadt, Germany ca 1100-1000 BC.^[123][124] He was found to be a carrier of the paternal haplogroup R1a1a1b1a2 and the maternal haplogroup H23.^[123]

A genetic study published in Science in March 2019 found a significant increase in north-central European ancestry in Iberia during the transition from the Bronze Age to the Iron Age. The authors of the study suggested that the spread of the Urnfield culture was associated with this transition, during which the Celtiberians may have emerged.^[125] A Celtiberian male examined in the study was found to be a carrier of the paternal haplogroup I2a1a1a.^[126]

Gallery

• 
  Large brooch, Germany, 1100–1000 BC^[127]
• 
  Bronze wheel pendants from Switzerland
• 
  Gold bowl, Altstetten, Switzerland^[128]
• 
  Naue II swords from Slovakia, 1200-1100 BC
• 
  Bronze sword from the Czech Republic
• 
  Bronze helmets from France, 1100-900 BC
• 
  Bronze diadem, Hungary, c. 1200 BC^[129]
• 
  Vaudrevange hoard, Germany^[130]
• 
  Bronze shield from the Czech Republic
• 
  Bronze ornament, Slovakia, 13th c. BC^[83]
• 
  Hoard of bronze objects, Germany, 1000 BC.^[131]
• 
  Gold collar & necklace, Austria, 900 BC.^[132]
• 
  Gold diadem from Sichów, Poland
• 
  Bronze ornaments from Blanot, France.^[133]
• 
  River and lake finds from Switzerland
• 
  Bronze urn with sun-bird-ship motif.^[134][135]
• 
  Bronze greave, Hungary
• 
  Bronze arrowheads, Austria
• 
  Bronze cauldron from Hungary, c. 1000 BC^[136]
• 
  Pottery, Switzerland
• 
  Pottery, Romania, 13th century BC
• 
  Various artefacts, France
• 
  Various artefacts, Hungary
• 
  Gold bowls from Eberswalde, Germany
• 
  Bronze pectorals, torcs and discs, Poland.
• 
  Large brooch, Germany
• 
  Horse bit, Austria, c. 1000 BC
• 
  Gold diadem, Hinova Treasure, Romania
• 
  Hinova Treasure, Romania, 12th cent. BC
• 
  Baby bottles, Austria, c. 1200 BC.^[137]
• 
  Harpstedt Sun Stone, Germany
• 
  Opium-poppy-head pins, Germany
• 
  Crescent shaped razor, Germany

See also

• Prehistoric Europe
• Bronze Age Europe
• Beaker culture
• Nordic Bronze Age
• Tumulus culture
• Hallstatt culture
• Lusatian culture
• Solar deity
• Sorothaptic language

References

1. Louwen, A.J (2021). Breaking and making the ancestors. Piecing together the urnfield mortuary process in the Lower-Rhine-Basin, c. 1300–400 BC (PhD). Leiden University.
2. Probst, Ernst (1996). Deutschland in der Bronzezeit : Bauern, Bronzegiesser und Burgherren zwischen Nordsee und Alpen. München: C. Bertelsmann. p. 258. ISBN 978-3570022375.
3. Chadwick and Corcoran, Nora and J.X.W.P. (1970). The Celts. Penguin Books. pp. 28–29.
4. Peter Schrijver, 2016, "Sound Change, the Italo-Celtic Linguistic Unity, and the Italian Homeland of Celtic", in John T. Koch & Barry Cunniffe, Celtic From the West 3: Atlantic Europe in the Metal Ages: questions of shared language. Oxford, England; Oxbow Books, pp. 9, 489–502.
5. Lorrio, Alberto. "The Celts in Iberia: An Overview". E-Keltoi: Journal of Interdisciplinary Celtic Studies. 6.
6. "Urnfield period".</refSaupe, Tina; Montinaro, Francesco; Scaggion, Cinzia; Carrara, Nicola; Kivisild, Toomas; D'Atanasio, Eugenia; Hui, Ruoyun; Solnik, Anu; Lebrasseur, Ophélie; Larson, Greger; Alessandri, Luca (21 June 2021). "Ancient genomes reveal structural shifts after the arrival of Steppe-related ancestry in the Italian Peninsula". Current Biology. 31 (12): 2576–2591.e12. Bibcode:2021CBio...31E2576S. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2021.04.022. hdl:11585/827581. ISSN 0960-9822. PMID 33974848. S2CID 234471370.
7. Aneli, Serena; Caldon, Matteo; Saupe, Tina; Montinaro, Francesco; Pagani, Luca (1 October 2021). "Through 40,000 years of human presence in Southern Europe: the Italian case study". Human Genetics. 140 (10): 1417–1431. doi:10.1007/s00439-021-02328-6. ISSN 1432-1203. PMC 8460580. PMID 34410492. Archived from the original on 27 October 2023. Retrieved 12 January 2022.
8. Saupe et al. 2021 "The results suggest that the Steppe-related ancestry component could have first arrived through Late N/Bell Beaker groups from Central Europe."
9. Gimbutas, Marija (1965). Bronze age cultures in Central and Eastern Europe. Mouton Publishers. pp. 274–298.
10. "Situla". Institute for the Study of the Ancient World. 2022.
11. "History of Europe: The People of the Metal Ages – Rituals, religion and art". Britannica.com. Retrieved 8 November 2022. In the stylistic development during the Metal Ages, two phenomena are of particular interest. The first is the development of the sun-bird-ship motif of the Urnfield Culture. The origin of this motif, which featured bird-headed ships embellished with solar disks, is not known, but over a short period about 1400 BCE it became common both as incised decoration and as plastic art throughout a vast area of eastern and central Europe. The similarity in execution and composition is remarkable and suggests a shared understanding of its meaning and the intensity of contact between distant areas.
12. Terzan, Biba (1999). "An Outline of the Urnfield Culture Period in Slovenia". Arheološki vestnik. 50: 97–143.
13. Waddell, John (2018). Myth and Materiality. Oxbow Books. pp. 104–105. ISBN 9781785709753. Three pairs of boats with bird's head prow and stern surrounding a solar disc consisting of several concentric circles are depicted on a bronze shield from Denmark.
14. "The Bronze Age shields". National Museum of Denmark.
15. Pachenko, Dmitri (2012). "Scandinavian background of Greek mythic cosmography: The sun's water transport" (PDF). Hyperboreus. 18 (1).
16. Szeverényi, Vajk; Guba, Szilvia (2007). "Bronze Age bird representations from the Carpathian Basin". Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungariae: 75–110. Birds play a much more prominent role in Late Bronze Age Central European imagery. One of the most important motifs, which is most certainly connected to the Nordic religious concepts, is that of the bird-ship (Vogelbarke) or Sun-ship (Vogelsonnenbarke). On these representations the keel extensions of the ships end in an aquatic bird's head, and in most cases the ships carry the Sun. … Three basic types of the Late Bronze Age Sun-ship motif can be distinguished. … The third, rarest version is a double Sun-ship, where two ships are represented keel-to-keel and have a Sun-disc in the middle. This motif can br seen on a shield from an unknown find spot in Denmark, and becomes more popular in Early Iron Age Italy
17. "R1b-L23-rich Bell Beaker-derived Italic peoples from the West vs. Etruscans from the East". 17 November 2019.
18. "Early European Cultures - Urnfield Culture / Proto-Celts".
19. Chadwick with Corcoran, Nora with J.X.W.P. (1970). The Celts. Penguin Books. pp. 28–33.
20. Payton, Philip (2017). Cornwall: A History (3rd ed.). Exeter: University of Exeter Press. p. 42. ISBN 978-0859890274.
21. Kruta, Venceslas (1991). The Celts. Thames and Hudson. pp. 93–100.
22. Stifter, David (2008). Old Celtic Languages (PDF). p. 24.
23. Cremin, Aedeen (1992). The Celts in Europe. Sydney, Australia: Sydney Series in Celtic Studies 2, Centre for Celtic Studies, University of Sydney. pp. 59–60. ISBN 0867586249.
24. Koch, John T. (2013). Celtic from the West 2 – Prologue: The Earliest Hallstatt Iron Age cannot equal Proto-Celtic. Oxford: Oxbow Books. pp. 10–11. ISBN 978-1842175293. Archived from the original on 21 January 2013. Retrieved 4 January 2014.
25. Wachsmann, Shelley (1991). "Bird-Head Devices on Mediterranean Ships". In Tzalas, H.E. (ed.). Tropis IV. Fourth International Symposium on Ship Construction in Antiquity (Athens, 28-31 August 1991). Hellenic Institute for the Preservation of Nautical Tradition, Athens. pp. 539–572. A connection, difficult to define as it might be, appears to exist between the Sea Peoples and the Urnfield cultures of Central and Eastern Europe. A possible Sea Peoples' ship, complete with a bird-head stem device with an up-curving beak, that is depicted on a crematory urn from Hama in Syria seems to support this connection. The manner in which the bird-head devices are positioned on the Sea Peoples' ships at Medinet Habu – facing outboard at stem and stern – invites comparison with the bird boats (Vogelbarke) of Central Europe
26. "The Vogelbarke of Medinet Habu (Romey 2003)" (PDF).
27. K. Kristiansen, Europe Before History, p. 388.
28. Gimbutas, Marija (1965). Bronze age cultures in Central and Eastern Europe. Mouton Publishers. p. 340.
29. K. Kristiansen, Europe Before History, p. 385.
30. Krause, Rüdiger (July 2021). "Mount Ipf in southern Germany. The fortification, spatial organization and territory of a "Princely Seat" of the Early Iron Age". Vix et le phénomène princier. Ausonius éditions. ISBN 978-2356133601. the strongly fortified complex upon Mount Ipf held an extraordinary position ever since the Late Bronze Age and Urnfield culture, specifically as a centre of power on the western periphery of the Nördlinger Ries. ... there was already a large settlement and fortification on the summit plateau during the Late Bronze Age Urnfield culture. Geomagnetic investigations and targeted excavations have confirmed a densely built settlement on the upper plateau.
31. Krause, Rüdiger. "Die bronzezeitliche Burg auf dem Ipf – Neue Forschungen zum Burgenbau und Krieg in der Bronzezeit". Retrieved 9 April 2022.
32. Springer, Tobias (2006). "Model of the Bullenheimer Berg fortifications". KulturGut: Aus der Forschung des Germanischen Nationalmuseums. 11: 11.
33. "THUNAU AM KAMP – A FORTIFIED HILLTOP SETTLEMENT OF THE URNFIELD CULTURE". www.oeaw.ac.at/. Retrieved 24 March 2022.
34. "The Bronze Age – Austrian Settlements as Centres of Trade". Fwf.ac.at. Retrieved 5 December 2021.
35. "Late Bronze Age Hillfort found in France". The Past.com. 2021. Archaeological investigation has revealed the remains of an unusually large settlement, measuring around 30ha, fortified by two rows of ramparts and tall stone walls.
36. Szentmiklosi, Alexandru; Heeb, Bernhard S.; Heeb, Julia; Harding, Anthony; Krause, Rüdiger; Becker, Helmut (August 2015). "Corneşti-Iarcuri – A Bronze Age town in the Romanian Banat?". Antiquity. 85 (329): 819–838. doi:10.1017/S0003598X00068332. hdl:10036/4425. S2CID 67764127.
37. Gogaltan, Florin; et al. (2019). "Sântana "Cetatea Veche". A Late Bronze Age Mega-fort in the Lower Mureş Basin in Southwestern Romania". Materialisation of Conflicts. Proceedings of the Third International LOEWE Conference, 24-27 September 2018 in Fulda. pp. 191–221.
38. Uhnér, Claes; Ciugudean, Horia; Hansen, Svend; Becker, Franz; Bălan, Gabriel; Burlacu-Timofte, Raluca (2019). "The Teleac Hillfort in Southwestern Transylvania: the Role of the Settlement, War and the Destruction of the Fortification System". In Hansen, Svend; Krause, Rüdiger (eds.). Bronze Age Fortresses in Europe. Verlag Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn. pp. 177–200.
39. Molloy, Barry; Jovanović, Dragan; Bruyère, Caroline; Marić, Miroslav; Bulatović, Jelena; Mertl, Patrick; Horn, Christian; Milašinović, Lidija; Mirković-Marić, Neda (1 January 2020). "A New Bronze Age Mega-fort in Southeastern Europe: Recent Archaeological Investigations at Gradište Iđoš and their Regional Significance". Journal of Field Archaeology. 45 (4): 293. doi:10.1080/00934690.2020.1734899. hdl:10197/11796. S2CID 216408128. Retrieved 5 December 2021.
40. Szeverényi, Vajk; Czukor, Péter; Priskin, Anna; Szalontai, Csaba (2017). "Recent work on Late Bronze Age fortified settlements in south-east Hungary". In Heeb, Bernhard; Szentmiklosi, Alexandru; Krause, Rüdiger; Wemhof, Matthias (eds.). Fortifications: The Rise And Fall Of Defended Sites In Late Bronze And Early Iron Age Of South-East Europe. Die Deutsche Bibliothek – CIP-Einheitsaufnahme. pp. 135–148.
41. "Mythos Bullenheimer Berg" Knauf-Museum Iphofen". knauf-museum.de. Retrieved 23 February 2022.
42. Schussmann, Markus (2017). "Defended sites and fortifications in Southern Germany during the Bronze Age and Urnfield Period – a short introduction". In Heeb, Bernhard; Szentmiklosi, Alexandru; Krause, Rüdiger; Wemhof, Matthias (eds.). Fortifications: The Rise And Fall Of Defended Sites In Late Bronze And Early Iron Age Of South-East Europe. Die Deutsche Bibliothek – CIP-Einheitsaufnahme. pp. 59–78.
43. "Archaeological Research on the Late Bronze-Age Site of Corneşti Iarcuri in Romanian Banat". www.smb.museum. Retrieved 9 April 2022.
44. Kristiansen, Kristian; Suchowska-Ducke, Paulina (December 2015). "Connected Histories: the Dynamics of Bronze Age Interaction and Trade 1500–1100 bc". Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society. 81: 361–392. doi:10.1017/ppr.2015.17. S2CID 164469137.
45. Molloy, Barry; et al. (2023). "Resilience, innovation and collapse of settlement networks in later Bronze Age Europe: New survey data from the southern Carpathian Basin". PLOS ONE. 18 (11): e0288750. Bibcode:2023PLoSO..1888750M. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0288750. PMC 10637690. PMID 37948415. Surviving upstanding ramparts are rare and are associated with the larger and most monumental sites, the extreme case being Corneşti Iarcuri at ca. 1765 ha. This was the largest construction built in any part of Europe up to that time, dwarfing the citadels of the Aegean world and their surrounding towns.
46. Harding, Anthony (2017). "Corneşti-Iarcuri and the rise of mega-forts in Bronze Age Europe". In Heeb, Bernhard; Szentmiklosi, Alexandru; Krause, Rüdiger; Wemhof, Matthias (eds.). Fortifications: The Rise And Fall Of Defended Sites In Late Bronze And Early Iron Age Of South-East Europe. Die Deutsche Bibliothek – CIP-Einheitsaufnahme. pp. 9–14.
47. Molloy, Barry; et al. (2023). "Resilience, innovation and collapse of settlement networks in later Bronze Age Europe: New survey data from the southern Carpathian Basin". PLOS ONE. 18 (11): e0288750. Bibcode:2023PLoSO..1888750M. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0288750. PMC 10637690. PMID 37948415. sites such as Sântana Cetatea Veche, Gradište-Iđoš, Sakule, Crepaja, Bašaid, Csanádpalota, Orosháza Nagytatársánc and Újkígyós all warrant the term megasite or megafort, ranging from 75 to 460 Ha of enclosed space.
48. Kristiansen, Kristian; Suchowska-Ducke, Paulina (December 2015). "Connected Histories: the Dynamics of Bronze Age Interaction and Trade 1500–1100 bc". Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society. 81: 361–392. doi:10.1017/ppr.2015.17. S2CID 164469137.
49. "A feasting hall of the Late Bronze Age in Lăpuş, northwest Romania, and its cultural context" (PDF). Masaryk University. 2018.
50. Krause, Rudiger (2019). "Fortresses and Fortifications. On Fortified Hilltop Settlements of the Bronze Age". In Hansen, Svend; Krause, Rudiger (eds.). Bronze Age Fortresses in Europe. Verlag Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn. pp. 1–16. ISBN 978-3774942042.
51. Honti, Szilvia (27 October 2022). "The warrior aristocracy of the Late Bronze Age Urnfield Period in County Somogy, south-western Transdanubia. The Lengyeltóti V hoard". Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae. 73 (2): 143–162. doi:10.1556/072.2022.00012. S2CID 253208580.
52. "THE MARMESSE CUIRASS" Musee Archeologie Nationale". musee-archeologienationale.fr/. Retrieved 31 March 2022.
53. Gimbutas, Marija (25 August 2011). Bronze Age cultures in Central and Eastern Europe. Walter de Gruyter. ISBN 9783111668147 – via google.dk.
54. Molloy, Barry; et al. (2023). "Early Chariots and Religion in South-East Europe and the Aegean During the Bronze Age: A Reappraisal of the Dupljaja Chariot in Context". European Journal of Archaeology. 27 (2): 149–169. doi:10.1017/eaa.2023.39.
55. Harding, Anthony (2013). The Oxford Handbook of the European Bronze Age. OUP Oxford. p. 404. ISBN 978-0199572861.
56. "Wagenrad" Historical Museum of the Palatinate, Speyer". nat.museum-digital.de. Retrieved 23 February 2022.
57. Honti, Szilvia (27 October 2022). "The warrior aristocracy of the Late Bronze Age Urnfield Period in County Somogy, south-western Transdanubia. The Lengyeltóti V hoard". Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae. 73 (2): 143–162. doi:10.1556/072.2022.00012. S2CID 253208580.
58. Bilic, Tomislav (2016) (2016). "The swan chariot of a solar deity: Greek narratives and prehistoric iconography". Documenta Praehistorica. 43: 445. doi:10.4312/dp.43.23.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
59. "Photo of the Acholshausen cult wagon model".
60. "Photo of the bronze cult wagon model from Orăştie, Romania".
61. Sarauw, Torben (2015). "The Late Bronze Age hoard from Bækkedal, Denmark: new evidence for the use of two-horse teams and bridles". Danish Journal of Archaeology. 4: 3–20. doi:10.1080/21662282.2015.1115606. S2CID 111735907.
62. Pare, Christopher (1995). "From Dupljaja to Delphi: the ceremonial use of the wagon in later prehistory". Antiquity. 63: 86.
63. "Cauldron Ornament". www.clevelandart.org. 30 October 2018. Retrieved 12 April 2022.
64. Hansen, Svend (2019). "The Hillfort of Teleac and Early Iron in Southern Europe". In Hansen, Svend; Krause, Rüdiger (eds.). Bronze Age Fortresses in Europe. Verlag Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn. p. 204.
65. Turnbull, Anne (1984). From bronze to iron : The occurrence of iron in the British later Bronze Age (PhD). Edinburgh University. p. 24. S2CID 164098953.
66. "Life and Belief in the Bronze Age: Belt Disc from Heegermühle". Neues Museum.
67. "Der Depotfund von Heegermühle bei Eberswalde". askanier-welten.de.
68. Kristiansen, Kristian; Suchowska-Ducke, Paulina (December 2015). "Connected Histories: the Dynamics of Bronze Age Interaction and Trade 1500–1100 bc". Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society. 81: 361–392. doi:10.1017/ppr.2015.17. S2CID 164469137.
69. Kuijpers, Maikel H. G.; Popa, Cătălin N. (January 2021). "The origins of money: Calculation of similarity indexes demonstrates the earliest development of commodity money in prehistoric Central Europe". PLOS ONE. 16 (1): e0240462. Bibcode:2021PLoSO..1640462K. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0240462. PMC 7816976. PMID 33471789.
70. Pare, Christopher (2013). "Chapter 29: Weighing, Commodification and Money". In Harding, Anthony; Fokkens, Harry (eds.). The Oxford Handbook of the European Bronze Age. OUP Oxford. pp. 508–527. ISBN 978-0-19-957286-1.
71. Ialongo, N.; Rahmstorf, L. (2019). "The identification of balance weights in pre-literate Bronze Age Europe: Typology, chronology, distribution and metrology". Weights and Marketplaces from the Bronze Age to the Early Modern Period. European Research Council. pp. 105–126.
72. Ialongo, N. (2019). "The Earliest Balance Weights in the West: Towards an Independent Metrology for Bronze Age Europe". Cambridge Archaeological Journal. 29 (1): 103–124. doi:10.1017/S0959774318000392.
73. Sommerfeld, Christoph (1994). Gerätegeld Sichel. Studien zur monetären Struktur bronzezeitlicher Horte im nördlichen Mitteleuropa. Vorgeschichtliche Forschungen Bd. 19.
74. "Sickle "Hoards" Halle State Museum of Prehistory". Landesmuseum-vorgeschicte.de. Retrieved 5 December 2021.^{[permanent dead link‍]}
75. Jahn, Christoph (2013). "Bronzezeitliche Zeichensysteme". Symbolgut Sichel. Studien zur Funktion spätbronzezeitlicher Griffzungensicheln in Depotfunden. Verlag Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn. pp. 197–226.
76. Sommerfeld, Christoph (1994). "Die Sichelmarken". Gerätegeld Sichel. de Gruyter. pp. 207–258. ISBN 9783110129281.
77. Szabo, Geza (2016). "Local and Interregional Connections Through the Comparison of the Hasfalva Disc and the Balkåkra Disc". Bronze Age Connectivity in the Carpathian Basin. Editura Mega. pp. 345–360. ISBN 978-606-020-058-1.
78. Randsborg, Klavs (2006). "Calendars of the Bronze Age". Acta Archaeologica. 77: 62–90. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0390.2006.00047.x.
79. Hansen, Mikkel Christian Dam (2020). "Interpreting a Bronze Age motif - Revisiting the hand signs of southern Scandinavia" (PDF). Adoranten: 57–73.
80. Hansen, Mikkel Christian Dam (2019). "Håndtegnets udstrakte fngre". GEFJON 4. Aarhus Univeritetsforlag. pp. 86–151. ISBN 9788772190549.
81. Gold und Kult der Bronzezeit. Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nuremberg. 2003. p. 47. ISBN 3-926982-95-0.
82. "Mysterious gold cones 'hats of ancient wizards'". Telegraph.co.uk. 17 March 2002. Retrieved 5 December 2021.
83. "Life and Belief During the Bronze Age" Neues Museum, Berlin". Retrieved 13 March 2022.
84. "Life and Belief During the Bronze Age" Neues Museum, Berlin". Retrieved 13 March 2022. What is especially fascinating is the ornamentation on the [Berlin gold hat] in which a complex counting system is encoded, enabling calendar calculations, especially the 19-year cycle of the sun and the moon. ... The star at the tip symbolises the sun, with the sickles and eye patterns representing the moon and Venus, while the circular ornaments can equally be interpreted as depictions of the sun or the moon. … The cycle of the sun determines day and nigh and the seasons, while the moon determines the division of the year into months and days. But the lunar year is eleven days shorter than the solar year. Even as early as the 2nd millennium BC intercalary days were inserted to bring the solar and lunar cycles into alignment. This knowledge is reflected in the ornamentation of the Gold Hat. The stamped patterns should be read as a calendar. For instance, the number of circles in certain decorative areas equals the twelve lunar periods of 354 days. If the patterns in other decorative areas are added, this gives the 365 days of the solar year. It takes 19 years for the solar year and the lunar year to align again. In the ornamentation of the hat the fact is encoded that seven lunar months need to be inserted into the 19-year cycle. Other calculations can be made as well, such as the dates of eclipses of the moon. (…) The golden hats show that astronomical knowledge was combined with cult activities… They were apparently worn over several generation and at some point buried in the ground in a sacred act to protect them from desecration and to place them in the realm of the gods. It seems that Bronze Age rulers combined worldly and spiritual power.
85. "Golden Ceremonial Hat ("Berlin Gold Hat")". Neues Museum Berlin. One particularly impressive piece of evidence for early man's astronomical knowledge is the Bronze Age Berlin gold hat, unique in its size and preservation. The sun, evoked by the gold coloration and the pattern of rays at the top of the hat, creates day, night and the seasons by apparently circling the earth. The moon, represented several times on the hat, marks out months and weeks. The number and arrangement of the ornaments is not random; it allows a nineteen-year lunisolar cycle of 228 solar months and 235 lunar months to be calculated. Someone who knew how to read these ornaments would be able to calculate the shifts between the solar year and the lunar year, predict lunar eclipses, and set fixed dates for significant events. … Over half a millennium before the astronomer and mathematician Meton in 432 BC calculated the shifts in the lunisolar cycle, they were already known to the educated elite of the Bronze Age. The golden hat may have been worn by a ruler with a religious role on ceremonial occasions. Other Bronze Age items prove that astronomical knowledge was often preserved in coded form on valuable and sacred objects.
86. Menghin, Wilfried (2008). "Zahlensymbolik und digitales Rechnersystem in der Ornamentik des Berliner Goldhutes". Acta Praehistorica et Archaeologica. 40: 157–169. doi:10.11588/apa.2008.0.71505.
87. Gold und Kult der Bronzezeit. Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nuremberg. 2003. pp. 220–237. ISBN 3-926982-95-0.
88. "Life and Belief During the Bronze Age" Neues Museum, Berlin". Retrieved 13 March 2022. In the ornamentation of the hat the fact is encoded that seven lunar months need to be inserted into the 19-year cycle. Other calculations can be made as well, such as the dates of eclipses of the moon.
89. "Golden Ceremonial Hat ("Berlin Gold Hat")". Neues Museum Berlin. Someone who knew how to read these ornaments would be able to calculate the shifts between the solar year and the lunar year, predict lunar eclipses, and set fixed dates for significant events.
90. Hansen, Rahlf; Rink, Christine (2008). "Himmelsscheibe, Sonnenwagen und Kalenderhüte - ein Versuch zur bronzezeitlichen Astronomie". Acta Praehistorica et Archaeologica. 40: 93–126. doi:10.11588/apa.2008.0.71501.
91. Chamberlain, A.T.; Parker Pearson, Mike (2003). "8. The Fiskerton Causeway". In Field, Naomi; Parker Pearson, Mike (eds.). Fiskerton: Iron Age Timber Causeway with Iron Age and Roman Votive Offerings. Oxbow Books. pp. 136–148. JSTOR j.ctv2p7j5qv.15.
92. "Life and Belief During the Bronze Age" Neues Museum, Berlin". Retrieved 13 March 2022. The star at the tip symbolises the sun, with the sickles and eye patterns representing the moon and Venus, while the circular ornaments can equally be interpreted as depictions of the sun or the moon.
93. "Ein Venus Kalender auf dem Berliner Goldhut (Schmidt-Kaler 2012) (A Venus calendar on the Berlin Gold Hat)". Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz. 2012.
94. "Schifferstadter Tagblatt 2012" (PDF). Knauf Museum Iphofen. Fur die drei hute wird ausserdem die frage diskutiert, ob die verzierungen im goldblech neben den mond- und sonnensymbolen auch venus-symbole und eined venuskalender enthalten. Die ansichten der fachleute gehen insbesondere bei der frage auseinander ob jahrzehntelange astronomische zyklen damals schon bekannt gewesen sein konnen. Dagegen ist leicht vorstellbar und kaum strittig, dass dis menschen der bronzezeit die widederkehr der Venus am himmel nach 584 Tagen bereits beobachtet haben. Das im mediterranean Bereich fur die venus ubliche Augensymbole befindet sich auf allen dreihuten. Auf dem Berliner Goldhut 19-mal, was genau der Anzahl der monate fur einen Venuszyklus entspricht, wenn man pro Monat mit 30/31 tagen rechnet. Auf dem Schifferstadter un dem Ezeldorfer Goldhut sind die Venuszeichen 22-mal enthalten. Das entspricht ebenfalls der Monatszahl fur einen Venuszyklus, wenn man den alteren Mond-Monat mit 27 tagen als Basis nimmt, Moglicherweise wurde bei Herstellung des Schifferstadter Goldhutes noch mit dem Mondkalender und 300 jahre spater am Ende der Bronzezeit dei Herstellung des Berliner Goldhutes schon in "modernerer" zeitrechnung mit: 30/31 Tagen pro Monat gerechnet." English translation: "For the three hats, the question is also being discussed as to whether the decorations in the gold plate also contain Venus symbols and a Venus calendar in addition to the moon and sun symbols. The views of the experts diverge in particular on the question of whether decades-long astronomical cycles could have been known at the time. On the other hand, it is easy to imagine and hardly controversial that the people of the Bronze Age had already observed the return of Venus in the sky after 584 days. The eye symbol common for Venus in the Mediterranean region can be found on all three hats. On the Berlin Gold Hat 19 times, which corresponds exactly to the number of months for a Venus cycle, if one reckons with 30/31 days per month. On the Schifferstadt and Ezeldorf gold hats, the Venus signs are contained 22 times. This also corresponds to the number of months for a Venus cycle, if one takes the older lunar month with 27 days as a basis. It is possible that when the Schifferstadt gold hat was made, the lunar calendar was still used and 300 years later, at the end of the Bronze Age, the Berlin gold hat was made in a more "modern" calendar with 30/31 days per month.
95. "Life and Belief During the Bronze Age" Neues Museum, Berlin". Retrieved 13 March 2022. Gold vessels in the Eberswalde hoard bear sun and circular symbols like those on the Berlin gold hat. Some of these contain calendrical information as well. The base of a bowl [from the Eberswalde hoard] is formed from ten, or counting the centre disc, eleven concentric circles topped by a band of 22 circular discs. This corresponds to the number of solar years (10+22=32) and together with the centre disc the number of lunar years (11+22=33) until the solar and lunar calendars are in alignment.
96. Sommerfeld, Christoph (2010). "… nach Jahr und Tag– Bemerkungen über die Trundholm-Scheiben". Praehistorische Zeitschrift. 85. doi:10.1515/pz.2010.012. S2CID 164902130.
97. "Goldene Hüte und Gewänder". landschaftsmuseum.de.
98. Ilon, Gabor (2015). The Golden Treasure from Szent Vid in Velem. Archaeolingua. pp. 69–74.
99. "Two appliqués". National Museum of Slovenia. 2022.
100. Bouzek, Jan (2018). Studies of Homeric Greece. Charles University. p. 205. ISBN 978-80-246-3561-3. The West Bohemian gold roundels with twelve bosses are simplified calendars of the gold cones.
101. "Dýšina-Nová Huť. Gold disc with hammered decoration, Tumulus culture (1650-1250 BC)". Museum of West Bohemia in Pilsen.
102. "Bronze Age gold belt with 'cosmological' designs unearthed in Czech beet field". livescience.com. 2022.
103. Sommerfeld, Christoph (2010). "… nach Jahr und Tag– Bemerkungen über die Trundholm-Scheiben". Praehistorische Zeitschrift. 85. doi:10.1515/pz.2010.012. S2CID 164902130. The front and the back side of the Trundholm discrepresent through their difference in brilliance and decoration a separate concept– the Sun and the Moon. The analysis of these exquisite decorations demonstrates that the Bronze Age people had profound astronomical knowledge of the movements of these heavenly bodies. Taken together, the front and the back side of the disc form a complete picture, one which already contains the Metonic cycle. The mathematics of the ornamentation on both sides is also of great potency and beauty.
104. Hansen, Rahlf; Rink, Christine (2020). "Himmelsscheibe, Sonnenwagen und Kalenderhüte - ein Versuch zur bronzezeitlichen Astronomie". Acta Praehistorica et Archaeologica. 40. doi:10.11588/apa.2008.0.71501.
105. "Golden Ceremonial Hat / Heegermühle disc". Neues Museum Berlin. Other Bronze Age items prove that astronomical knowledge was often preseved in coded form on valuable and sacred objects. ... Especially impressive are the solar and lunar calendars numerically encoded in the ornamentation of the belt disc from Heegermühle in Brandenburg, Germany.
106. "Heegermühle belt disc". Neues Museum Berlin.
107. Randsborg, Klavs (2006). "Calendars of the Bronze Age". Acta Archaeologica. 77 (1).
108. May, Jens (2008). ""Die gefangene Zeit". Vergleichende Untersuchungen zu den Kalenderamphoren von Seddin, Herzberg, Rorbaek, Unia und Gevelinghausen". Acta Praehistorica et Archaeologica. 40: 127–155. doi:10.11588/apa.2008.0.71503.
109. Needham, Stuart (2000). "The Development of Embossed Goldwork in Bronze Age Europe". The Antiquaries Journal. 80: 27–65. doi:10.1017/S0003581500050186. S2CID 162992985.
110. Gerloff, Sabine (2007). "Reinecke's ABC and the Chronology of the British Bronze Age". Beyond Stonehenge: Essays on the Bronze Age in honour of Colin Burgess. Oxbow Books. pp. 117–161.
111. Pasztor, Emilia (Spring 2015). "Symbols of Atmospheric Phenomena in Bronze Age Depictions". Hungarian Archaeology e-Journal. finds have also come to light in Hungary that are similar from an archaeoastronomical perspective to the Nebra sky disk, or hold even more possibilities for scientific analysis. One example is the gold bracelet from Dunavecse ... Its system of motifs and symbols is much more complex and richer than that of the sky disk. Two solar disks can be clearly identified at the meeting point of the tendril-like curves, which either represent the arc of the crescent moon or the prow of a boat. Between the two solar disks there is a very important symbol consisting of five circles, for which there are numerous known analogies. This can be found on the famous, so-called Golden Cone of Ezelsdorf-Buch or the Berlin Gold Hat, both from the Late Bronze Age (14th–8th centuries B.C.), as well as on the famous gold diadem from one of the Mycenaean shaft graves, which was perhaps contemporaneous.
112. Ilon, Gabor (2015). The Golden Treasure from Szent Vid in Velem. Archaeolingua. p. 112.
113. "Avanton Cone". Musée d'Archaeologie Nationale, Paris. Retrieved 8 April 2022. Tous ces objets précieux et remarquablement exécutés évoquent une société complexe, sans doute strictement hiérarchisée, aux savoirs techniques et astronomiques avancées, organisée autour des travaux des champs." English translation: "All these precious and remarkably executed objects evoke a complex society, undoubtedly strictly hierarchical, with advanced technical and astronomical knowledge, organized around work in the fields.
114. "Avanton Cone". Musée d'Archaeologie Nationale, Paris. Retrieved 8 April 2022.
115. "Two appliqués". National Museum of Slovenia. 2022. These extraordinary appliqués were part of treasures deposited in the Bronze Age as an offering to gods on the shore of Lake Bled. The prestigious gold appliqués also indicate that the lake was an important centre of a cult. ... Similar appliqués have been discovered in Switzerland, Bavaria and Hungary, mainly in Bronze Age fortified settlements and in the graves of wealthy women. ... The ornamentation bears markings of the solar and lunar year.
116. "Bronze Urn of Gevelinghausen". megalithic.co.uk.
117. Desplanques, Elsa (October 2022). "Protohistoric metal-urn cremation burials (1400–100 BC): a pan-European phenomenon". Antiquity. 96 (389): 1162–1178. doi:10.15184/aqy.2022.109. S2CID 251874781.
118. "Princely Tomb of Seddin". Neues Museum Berlin.
119. Hansen, Svend (2018). "Seddin: ein "homerisches Begräbnis"". Arbeitsberichte zur Bodendenkmalpflege in Brandenburg 33. Brandenburgisches Landesamt für Denkmalpflege und Archäologisches Landesmuseum. pp. 65–84. ISBN 978-3-910011-92-2.
120. Desplanques, Elsa (October 2022). "Protohistoric metal-urn cremation burials (1400–100 BC): a pan-European phenomenon". Antiquity. 96 (389): 1162–1178. doi:10.15184/aqy.2022.109. S2CID 251874781.
121. Matzerath, Simon (2009). "Feuerböcke und Mondidole aus Gräbern – Ein Beitrag zum Symbolgut der späten Bronze- und frühen Eisenzeit Mitteleuropas". Archäologische Informationen: 165–172. Firedogs and moon idols belong to the symbolic world of the Urnfield Culture. ... The first firedogs and moon idols in graves appear in the 9th century BC. During the early Iron Age they became typical in eastern Central Europe. They emerge only in some archaeological cultures and are linked to specific groups of persons. Apparently these groups are religious communities. The firedogs and moon idols are an expression not only of material culture but especially of spiritual culture.
122. Ilon, Gabor (2005). "Houses of the Late Tumulus/Early Urnfield culture". Ősrégészeti Levelek. 7: 135–144. The moon idols/firedogs may have been the paraphernalia of domestic shrines.
123. Haak et al. 2015, Extended Data Table 3, I0099.
124. Haak et al. 2015, Supplementary Information, p. 35.
125. Olalde et al. 2019, p. 3.
126. Olalde et al. 2019, Supplementary Tables, Table 4, Row 91.
127. "Large Brooch". www.metmuseum.org. Retrieved 9 April 2022.
128. Gold und Kult der Bronzezeit. Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nuremberg. 2003. p. 297. ISBN 3-926982-95-0.
129. "Diadem". www.metmuseum.org. Retrieved 11 April 2022.
130. "Le dépôt de Vaudrevange". musee-archeologienationale.fr. Retrieved 9 April 2022.
131. "Hoard of bronze objects". Neues Museum, Berlin. Retrieved 13 March 2022.
132. "Golden collar". Neues Museum, Berlin. Retrieved 13 March 2022. There are three such gold collars in the museum, which are thought to be from three different hoard found close together. They were found together with gold wire and necklaces of bone and amber beads and shells. they are particularly important in terms of both crafting and cultural history and probably belonged to a woman of high social status. They are decorated with circular ornamentation and thus similar to the roughly contemporary Berlin Gold Hat and the Eberswalde golden bowls.
133. "Le dépôt de Blanot". archeologie.dijon.fr. Retrieved 9 April 2022.
134. "The Nebra Sky Disc: decoding a prehistoric vision of the cosmos". the-past.com. 25 May 2022.
135. "Bowls of gold". natmus.dk. Retrieved 12 April 2022.
136. "Ritual Cauldron". www.clevelandart.org. 31 October 2018. Retrieved 12 April 2022.
137. "Scientists discover 3,000-year-old baby bottle". Independent.co.uk. 2019.

External links

Media related to Urnfield culture at Wikimedia Commons

• The First 'Urnfields' in the Plains of the Danube and the Po (Cavazzuti et al. 2022)
• Bronze age fortresses in Europe
• From Dupljaja to Delphi: the ceremonial use of the wagon in later prehistory
• The Cult-Wagon of Liptovský Hrádok: First evidence of using the Urnfield cult-wagons as fat-powered lamps
• A feasting hall of the Late Bronze Age in Lăpuş, northwest Romania

Bibliography

• Antonio, Margaret L.; et al. (8 November 2019). "Ancient Rome: A genetic crossroads of Europe and the Mediterranean". Science. 366 (6466). American Association for the Advancement of Science: 708–714. Bibcode:2019Sci...366..708A. doi:10.1126/science.aay6826. PMC 6436108. PMID 30872528.
• J. M. Coles/A. F. Harding, The Bronze Age in Europe (London 1979).
• G. Weber, Händler, Kieger, Bronzegießer (Kassel 1992).
• Ute Seidel, Bronzezeit. Württembergisches Landesmuseum Stuttgart (Stuttgart 1995).
• Konrad Jażdżewski, Urgeschichte Mitteleuropas (Wrocław 1984)
• Association Abbaye de Daoulas (eds.), Avant les Celtes. L'Europe a l'age du Bronze (Daoulas 1988).
• Haak, Wolfgang; et al. (2 March 2015). "Massive migration from the steppe was a source for Indo-European languages in Europe". Nature. 522 (7555). Nature Research: 207–211. arXiv:1502.02783. Bibcode:2015Natur.522..207H. doi:10.1038/nature14317. PMC 5048219. PMID 25731166.
• Olalde, Iñigo; et al. (15 March 2019). "The genomic history of the Iberian Peninsula over the past 8000 years". Science. 363 (6432). American Association for the Advancement of Science: 1230–1234. Bibcode:2019Sci...363.1230O. doi:10.1126/science.aav4040. PMC 6436108. PMID 30872528.
• Frans Theuws, Nico Roymans (eds.), Land and ancestors: cultural dynamics in the Urnfield period and the Middle Ages in the southern Netherlands, Amsterdam Archaeological Studies, Amsterdam University Press, 1999, ISBN 978-90-5356-278-9.