Tine Schenck

Researchers in many parts of Europe view halberds as a short-lived phenomenon of the Early Bronze Age. In this contribution, we will argue that the first halberds made of copper or copper-alloys are detectable in the first half of the fourth millennium BC. Consequently, we demonstrate that the idea of hafting blades and points in a halberd-like fashion was widely known in the fourth and early third millennium BC in an area ranging from central Italy to southern Scandinavia. We discuss the possibility of a perpendicular hafting of the thick points of the Funnel Beaker culture, and their usability as weapons, using macroscopic use-wear analyses of 115 blades. We review the arguments in favour of the use as weapons
of the multifunctional antler picks from the Swiss lake dwellings and present a critique of the attempts by some researchers to find a finite spatial and temporal origin of the idea to haft weapons such as halberds. We suggest that the technological origin of the halberds goes back to multifunctional tools, and therefore that it is possible for innovative weapons like halberds developed in various places and times.

Résumé: Dans bien des régions d'Europe les chercheurs considèrent les hallebardes comme un phénomène de courte durée datant du début de l'âge du Bronze. Dans cet article nous soutenons que les premières lames de hallebardes en cuivre ou en alliage de cuivre remontent à la première moitié du quatrième millénaire av. J.-C. Nous démontrons que l’idée d’emmancher des lames et des pointes comme on le fait pour les hallebardes était déjà connue au quatrième millénaire et au début du troisième millénaire av. J.-C et ceci sur un vaste aire géographique allant du centre de l’Italie jusqu’au sud de la Scandinavie. Nous examinons la possibilité de fixer les pointes épaisses de la culture des gobelets en entonnoir (TRB) de façon perpendiculaire ainsi que la possibilité de leur utilisation comme armes par l’analyse macroscopique des traces d’usage relevées sur 115 lames. Nous passons en revue
les arguments en faveur d’une utilisation belliqueuse des pointes en bois de cerf à usage multiple retrouvées dans les habitats lacustres de Suisse et offrons un point de vue critique sur les approches de certains chercheurs qui ont tenté de trouver une origine spécifique dans l’espace et le temps à l’idée d’emmancher des armes telles que les hallebardes. Nous proposons que l’origine technique de ces hallebardes remonte aux outils à fonctions multiples et que, par conséquent, il est possible d’envisager des origines multiples, dans l’espace aussi bien que dans le
temps, pour de telles innovations.

Following on from our previous research into the prehistoric aceramic distillation and production of birch bark tar, this series of exploratory experiments investigated the use of raised structures within a fire. These field-based experiments were conducted using sand, gravel, wood fuel, and bark from Betula pubescens (downy birch). The structures that were created were simple raised sand mounds, which reflected known Neanderthal combustion surfaces from the Middle Palaeolithic. The bulk of the experiments were recorded throughout using a thermocouple to provide temperature readings from the base of the bark pyrolysis chamber. The experiments proved successful at producing birch bark tar and several containers were used to catch the tar for later analysis. Based on the results, the authors contend that not only could Neanderthals control fire but that regular birch bark tar production by Neanderthals was most likely a result of specific chaînes opératoires in order to provide the necessary control and outcomes.

A recent study into the archaeological profession in 21 European countries resulted in recognising gender equality as a major topic that needs attention. The overall trend is that women will form the future majority of workers in archaeology. However, the conditions under which women work differ by country, and in several countries, women are paid less and are not well represented in leadership positions. Gender equality needs to be put on the agenda and each country should take measurements to close the gap.

Between 2012 and 2014 representatives from 23 organisations in 21 European countries worked together in the Discovering the Archaeologists of Europe 2014 project to gain insight into the profile of the archaeological profession and labour market in those countries. The results can be compared with those of a predecessor Discovering the Archaeologists of Europe project, undertaken in 2006-08.

Between 2012 and 2014 representatives from 23 organisations in 21 European countries worked together in the Discovering the Archaeologists of Europe 2014 project to gain insight into the profile of the archaeological profession and labour market in those countries. The results can be compared with those of a predecessor Discovering the Archaeologists of Europe project, undertaken in 2006-08,

Employment. Across the 21 participating states, it is calculated that a total of over €1 billion is spent on professional archaeology every year, with the majority of that expenditure being on the salary costs of the estimated 24,740 people who work as archaeologists in these countries. This group of professionals represents 0.006% of the combined total workforces of those states. In many states, the absolute numbers employed in archaeology has fallen significantly over the previous six years. It is estimated that approximately 33,000 archaeologists now work across Europe as a whole.

Growth of the sector. Across Europe, organisations employing archaeologists have typically become smaller over the five years prior to this project, and employers are very cautious about predicting future growth.

Nature of the workforce. A slight majority (50.3% to 49.7%) of archaeologists are women. The proportion of women in the workforce has increased over the six years since 2006-08 from 45.9%. On average, European archaeologists are 40 years old. Very few European archaeologists are disabled – 1.1% of the total number of workers for whom data were available, a reduction from 1.5% in 2006-08.

Countries of Origin. 94% of archaeologists work in their own countries of origin, 5% are from other EU states and 1% from elsewhere in the world. Overall, this shows a slight decline in sectoral transnational mobility, as in 2006-08 more archaeologists were working away from their countries of origin.

Qualifications. In every participating state, it is normal for people working in archaeology to hold a degree – on aggregate, 94% of European archaeologists are graduates and the majority (69%) are postgraduates. 90% of archaeologists gained their highest qualifications in the countries in which they now work, with 9% obtaining those qualifications elsewhere in Europe (and 1% elsewhere in the world). When compared with the figures from 2006-08, this shows that archaeologists are increasingly educationally mobile.

Salaries. In twelve of the 21 participating states, archaeologists were paid less than the national average for all workers. An average figure of €24,901 was calculated as the mean salary earned by an archaeologist, but this is relatively meaningless as average salaries vary enormously between counties, with Danish archaeologists earning on average nine times the amount earned by their peers in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Nature of the work. 78% of the archaeologists for whom data were available worked full-time and 22% part-time. This is a marked change from 2006-08, when the percentages were 86% full-time and 14% part-time. 63% of archaeologists held permanent contracts at the time of the research, while the remaining 37% of workers had time-limited contracts.

Structures.  As was identified in the predecessor project in 2006-08, archaeological practice in the participating states is organised on different models, with varying levels of commercial activity balanced against state agency engagement. This is often linked to the funding basis of archaeological practice (variation both on the basis of funding from the state or from private sector industries, and on whether delivery is achieved by the state or by the private sector). Different states define who can be considered to be an archaeologist in different ways. Vocational education and training (VET) in the sector is almost universally delivered by universities through academic degree programmes.

Skills and Training Needs. Issues relating to specific training needs were assessed in each participating country, but, as in 2006-08, because of the variety of ways in which these questions were asked by the project partners (in order to accommodate the differing structures and approaches to archaeological work in each participating state), the information obtained cannot be usefully compared transnationally.

Trends and developments. In comparison with the predecessor work undertaken in 2006-08, the main ways that the sector has changed are that the number of jobs has decreased and the proportion of women working in the sector has increased. Furthermore, jobs are more likely to be part-time and for shorter contractual periods; archaeologists are more highly qualified, but are less well-paid in comparison with other sectors.

It is understood, for the most part, that knowledge production does not take place in a vacuum. Archaeology is influenced by both intradisciplinary and societal motions and, whether labelled bias or interaction, sociopolitical aspects of the discipline matter and affect the way we do things. Although the legacies of archaeological discovery serve as great inspiration, they also carry with them residues of hierarchies and prestige in academic communities as well as historical bonds to political institutions. These legacies influence present expectations on what archaeology “can do” for a society, and, interlock with the political economy and professional sphere of the discipline. Together with the scholar’s quest for publication, funding and stature, the remnants of past knowledge production play into questions we ask, methods we use and narratives we write, as well as the ways in which archaeological knowledge is transferred into public forums.This session will revisit the transfer of sociopolitical legacies of archaeology and consequences of paradigmatic perpetuation from three directions:How, in practice, do we tackle the (inter)dependent relationship between institutional, financial and social frames of engagement in archaeological ventures? How do archaeologists adapt to these frames and how does it affect outcomes of archaeological activities?How do sociopolitical aspects of archaeology influence the development of theories, methods and research aims within Archaeology today? For example, how do legacies of historical ideals promote conservatism or development of new ideas? Are sociopolitical aspects of archaeological legacies visible in transfers of archaeological knowledge? What are the consequences of intentional or inadvertent manipulation of research results and narratives? For example, how do methodological, analytical and ideological origins of current archaeologies become visible in these transfers?

Following on from previous research into the prehistoric aceramic distillation and production of birch bark tar, this series of exploratory experiments investigated the use of raised structures within a fire. These field-based experiments were conducted using sand, gravel, wood fuel, and bark from Betula pubescens (downy birch). The structures that were created were simple raised sand mounds, which reflected known Neanderthal combustion surfaces from the Middle Palaeolithic. The bulk of the experiments were recorded throughout using a thermocouple to provide temperature readings from the base of the bark pyrolysis chamber. The experiments proved successful at producing birch bark tar and several containers were used to catch the tar for later analysis. Based on the results, the authors contend that not only could Neanderthals control fire but that regular birch bark tar production by Neanderthals was most likely a result of specific chaînes opératoires in order to provide the necessary control and outcomes.

The discussion of Copper and Early Bronze age, metal-cast halberds is always accompanied by the discussion whether or not halberds made of stone existed; either as predecessors or as contemporary objects (Ó'Ríordáin 1937; 256). Several types of blades have been interpreted as possible stone halberds, but this hypothesis has not been supported by evidence beyond the mere notion of the possibility. In recent years, experiments have been carried out on bronze halberds (O’Flaherty 2007; O’Flaherty/Gilchrist/Cowie 2011), however, stone halberds have never been subject to such experimental testing.
In recent years the theory has gained credibility with the discovery of Grave 2 from Spilamberto (Emilia Romagna, Italy). A stone blade was discovered placed parallel to the collarbone and was subsequently interpreted as a halberd because of its positioning (de Marinis 1994; 69-87). Furthermore, the dating of metal halberds in the 4th BC in the Western Carpathian Mountains and Italy (Dolfini 2004) provides a contemporary background for Klaus Ebbesen’s hypothesis of a presence of stone halberds in the Funnel Beaker period of the Western Baltic Sea (Ebbesen 1992) since these regions were connected at the time (Klassen 2000).
This poster presents an outline to put the suggested construction of stone halberds of both aforementioned types to an experimental test. It aims at several questions:
1. Is it possible to haft stone blades as halberds?
2. Did they have utilitarian properties?
3. Does the experiment leave use-wear and hafting traces distinguishable from actual dagger blades?

The use of porcelain has been criticized as its flaking qualities in relation to natural stones have not been tested systematically in laboratory conditions. Our experiments tested three materials; obsidian, flint and porcelain to further elaborate on the substitution of porcelain for flint in flaked technology experiments.