Osada z epoki brązu i wczesnej epoki żelaza na stanowisku Tarnobrzeg 5

Obrazek miniatury
Rajpold, Wojciech
Tytuł czasopisma
Tytuł tomu
Muzeum Okręgowe w Rzeszowie
Instytut Archeologii UR
Fundacja Rzeszowskiego Ośrodka Archeologicznego
Wydawnictwo „Mitel”
Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Rzeszowskiego
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.
The subject of this text are materials coming from the site Tarnobrzeg 5. In 1992, owing to the 400 th anniversary of the location of Tarnobrzeg city, Jan Gurba and Marek Florek carried out survey excavations within the Dzikowski Castle (Tarnobrzeg-Dzików 1) and in the area between Bartosz Głowacki Square and the castle (Tarnobrzeg 5). Two excavation trenches (about 40 m 2 ) were made, where 8 features of the Trzciniec culture (hereinafter referred to as TC) and the Tarnobrzeg Lusatian culture (hereinafter referred to as TLC) were discovered. Two features of dwelling nature can be associated with the Trzciniec culture. One of them was a post-hole, which was part of the hut, and a storage pit, the exact function of which we cannot determine. Moreover, we are able to associate four features from trench 6 with the Tarnobrzeg Lusatian culture. All of them are storage pits for economic purposes. This allows us to assume that a part of the economic settlement was uncovered.Unfortunately, the low degree of examination of the site does not give us data (both for TC and TLC) to consider the form, size and exact time of functioning of the settlement. The TC artefacts recorded during the research are: 186 pottery sherds, a bronze sickle and a few flint artefacts. The ceramic material here is highly fragmented, but it was possible to find out that the finds did not differ technologically from other sites in south-eastern Poland. The collection includes here a more or less similar number of fragments of thickened and straight rims, hence the oldest stages of development can rather be rejected. In addition, single fragments of biconical vases – similar to the Lusatian culture – could indicate a late chronology, within the III and IV periods of the Bronze Age. Unfortunately, apart from these two tenuous indications, there are no other ceramic materials that could help in determining the chronology. Better dating values are provided by a bronze sickle with a knob, which can be referred only to the III and IV periods of the Bronze Age. What is more, a small axe made of Świeciechów flint would indicate the aforementioned period. It is worth noting here that a bronze sickle with a knob could be a proof of farming activities in TC. Nevertheless, the high value of this type of item would make one wonder whether it was used in everyday life - it seems that its cult purpose would be much more likely. In the case of TLC materials, we can identify about 350 pottery sherds and 8 vessels that were preserved in a large extent. As for metal artefacts, they were represented by a bronze coil and bronze and iron tweezers. Additionally, a fragmentary preserved quern stone was also discovered. Technologically, the ceramic materials did not differ from other TLC materials, although a relatively low (as for the settlement) share of coarse ceramics can be noted here. However, this may be the result of a significant degree of destruction. Egg-shaped pots dominated here, ornamented with holes under the edge of the rim, finger hollows and plastic strips. Plate-pies, which are characteristic of settlement materials, were also popular. On the other hand, bowls appeared only in single copies. There were fragments of semi-circular bowls with thickened rims on both sides and one bowl on an empty foot. In addition, two fragmentarily preserved small vases were also noted. With reference to these materials, they fit the III phase of the TLC development. Only vases can be related to the beginning of the III or possibly the end of the II phase - so they may indicate the oldest materials. It is worth mentioning that the ornamentation of egg-shaped pots, as well as the presence a bowl with an empty foot and the share of chamotte in the admixture indicate eastern influences. Bronze artefacts were relatively few in number, which was the norm at TLC settlement sites. This can be explained by their high value, which did not allow them to be left when leaving the settlement. A small bronze coil, with one pointed end and the other in the form of a spiral, has numerous analogies and can be affiliated only to the III developmental phase. In the case of bronze and iron tweezers, certainly based on the raw material, they can be referred to the III phase of the development of the TLC. To some extent, they could document the shift away from the more valuable and hard-to-find bronze material in favour of iron features. Nevertheless, this is a single find, so it is difficult to analyse more extensively. The quoted materials indicate that the discussed settlement can undoubtedly be referred to the III development phase of the TLC, perhaps even to its beginnings. It is also noteworthy that several pottery sherds of the Przeworsk culture (hereinafter PRC) were uncovered at this site. However, the small number of these materials does not allow us to talk about the function or chronology of this site. Nevertheless, it should be mentioned that there is information about a PRC cemetery functioning in the vicinity, so perhaps it would be a necropolis. What is more, it is worth saying a few words about the settlement situation in the immediate vicinity of the discussed site. Speaking of TC, we have very little data, because only 7 sites could be assigned to this cultural unit. It can be noted that this site was associated with a larger settlement system, linked with the Vistula valley, where agricultural activities were to prevail and where we also record the earliest TLC materials. The situation in the microregion of settlement system directly related to the discussed settlement was particularly interesting. It is possible to identified three TC site within it; unfortunately, excavations were carried out only in the discussed settlement, so it is impossible to determine the function of the other sites. However, it is worth mentioning, that regarding one of the TLC cemeteries, dated to the III and IV periods of the Bronze Age, single fragments of TC were uncovered. We have more data for TLC – there are as many as 81 sites within a radius of 5 km. In terms of the micro-region, our settlement could undoubtedly be associated with the cemetery at the site Tarnobrzeg 1. The presence of a large number of TLC cemeteries here was a certain abnormal situation, but it seems that they were artificially separated here. Unfortunately, there are no other settlements in the discussed area, which can be explained by the strong urbanization of the entire region and the destruction of the remaining sites. It should be noted that our cluster was part of a cluster belt that were slightly more dispersed and somewhat isolated from each other, while in the south-east a system with numerous sites developed and clusters very closely adjacent to each other. Therefore, such evidence could indicate a two-track economic system, with stable and
Niniejszy artykuł powstał na bazie pracy licencjackiej napisanej w Instytucie Archeologii Uniwersytetu Rzeszowskiego (2010) pod kierunkiem prof. dra hab. Sylwestra Czopka.
Słowa kluczowe
Bronze Age , Early Iron Age , Trzciniec culture , Tarnobrzeg Lusatian culture , settlement archeology , Eastern influences
Materiały i Sprawozdania Rzeszowskiego Ośrodka Archeologicznego, t. 43/2022, s. 95-124