Dagmara H. Werra

Studies on obsidian sources, its use, and distribution, have been conducted in various parts of the globe for over a century. This product of
the volcanic activity, due to its outstanding physical properties and aesthetic quality, was widely used by prehistoric populations. The most important sources of obsidian for the prehistoric communities of Central-
Eastern Europe are located in southeast Slovakia (Carpathian 1, a and b)
and northeast Hungary (Carpathian 2, a and b). The Carpathian 3 variety
is located in Transcarpathian Ukraine. A century ago, Stefan Krukowski
was the first to publish works concerning the presence of obsidian in
Polish archaeological sites. This information was later brought to the
wider attention of the English-reading world by Józef Kostrzewski. The
inventory and description of eastern European obsidian were compiled
many years later, as were the first analyses undertaken. Nevertheless,
it was Marian Wawrzeniecki, archaeologist-amateur, who for the first
time, over a century ago, had observed the presence of obsidian in Poland
at a site in Wężerów, Kraków district, Małopolska (Lesser Poland).
In the Department of Old Collections of the Archaeological Museum in
Kraków, the archaeological materials from Wawrzeniecki’s collection are
stored, amongst which are seventeen obsidian artefacts.

Gunflints were a commodity indispensable for the modern military, playing a key role in the arsenals of all armies. The wars in the 17th-19th centuries increased the demand for weapons, and, consequently, for significant supplies of gunflints. To have their own source of the product was a strategic objective of all governments. Several flint workshops were located in the neighbourhoods of Cracow where flint was abundant. One of the largest and best preserved was the workshops in Zelków, a village that in the 19th century laid just on the border of Russia and Austria-Hungary. This paper discusses some issues of the mass production of gunflints in the modern era based on a case study of flint factories and the history of the Zelków workshop.

As the Bronze Age came to its end and the Iron Age
began, flint ceased to be the key material for making tools,
supplanted by iron for centuries to come. Flintstone lost
its previous significance yet remained in use, contrary to
the prevailing views. However, the extent of its use was
fairly limited indeed. It was mostly exploited locally and for domestic use. Ethnographic research proves that it was
still in use in the first decades of the 20th century.

In the Bronze Age flint was still being used throughout Europe. In the early periods of that age flint continued to play an important role in the economy in many areas, as evidenced by the numerous flint mines in use at the time as well as flint tools. In the Late Bronze and Early Iron Ages, flint still had an important place in the economies of communities living in East Central Europe. At the same time, analysis of late flint industries suggests that some of those had no utilitarian significance. The presence of flint, especially in inhumation graves from the cemetery at Weklice (used by communities of the Wielbark culture during the Roman Period) potentially adds to the debate about its significance. The cemetery at Weklice is the one of the best-known sites from the Roman Period in Poland. The graves are mostly equipped with local finds of metals: gold, silver, copper alloys, iron and amber as well as Roman imports (glass beads, vessels: glass, copper alloys). The collections comprise over of 4000 finds, however this number may change, as excavations in 2012 and 2013 revealed 22 flint artefacts. The presence of flint materials in a Roman Period cemetery admits several possible interpretations: 1) Those may be remnants of older settlements, with graves being dug into older strata and thus some of the specimens of flint could be in their secondary filling on the site; 2) Those may be remains of flint knapping activity by the Wielbark culture community; 3) Those may have been placed in the graves deliberately by the Wielbark culture community as an instance of an older custom involving the placing of flint in graves.

Im Artikel werden die neusten Ergebnisse von vom Institut für Archäologie der Nikolaus-Ko-pernikus-Universität Toruń am Neolithikum und der frühen Bronzezeit im Dobrzyner Land in den 80erJahren des 20. Jh.s durchgeführten Untersuchungen erörtert. Das Dobrzyner Land liegt im Bereich desPolnischen Tieflandes zwischen den drei Flüssen Weichsel/Wisła, Drwęca und Skrwa. Diese Regionrepräsentiert einige Typen des natürlichen Landschaftsbildes, angefangen von flachen oder welligenund waldlosen Ebenen bis hin zu zusammengeballten Stirnmöranenhügeln mit Seen.Bislang wurden im Laufe der im betreffenden Gebiet erfolgten Ausgrabungen keine mit demSiedlungswesen der Bandkeramischen Kulturen verbundenen Fundstellen freigelegt. Vom eher spo-radischen Vorhandensein Bandkeramischer Gemeinschaften im Dobrzyner Land zeugen vereinzelteFundstellen der Linienbandkeramischen Kultur und der späten Bandkeramischen Kultur, die bei derim Rahmen der Archäologischen Aufnahme Polens –AZP- erfolgten Oberflächenprospektion entdecktworden waren.Zu einem intensiveren Siedlungswesen von Ackerbaukulturen kommt es erst mit dem Auf-tauchen der Trichterbecherkultur. Bislang wurden an 13 Fundstellen Ausgrabungen durchgeführt.Dies ist die im Dobrzyner Land derzeit am besten erforschte neolithische Kultur. Bezüglich desTrichterbecherkultur-Materials wurde eine Reihe von Radiokarbondatierungen vorgenommen. Dasälteste Material konnte mit den Phasen I und II der Trichterbecherkultur im Kulmer Land/ZiemiaChełmińska synchronisiert werden. Bei der Keramik der Trichterbecherkultur sind intensive subne-olithische Einflüsse zu sehen.Wesentlich weniger wissen wir zum Thema der Kugelamphorenkultur sowie Schnurkeramik-Kultur. Bis jetzt wurde an drei ausgrabungsmäßig untersuchten Fundstellen Material der Kugelam-phorenkultur freigelegt. Auf die diesbezüglich interessanteste Quelle war man bei Untersuchungenin Skrzypkowo, Gemeinde Obrowo, Fundplatz 13, gestoßen, von dem von der Badener Kultur sowieden Kulturen der Waldzone beeinflusste Keramik der Kugelamphorenkultur bekannt ist. Die Kugelam-phorenkultur taucht im Dobrzyner Land frühestens in Kujawiens Phase II b auf, wobei die Mehrheitder Fundstellen mit der jüngeren Phase III in Verbindung gebracht werden muss.Alle entdeckten Fundstellen der Schnurkeramischen Kultur sind Überreste kleinerer kurzzeitigerSiedlungsplätze. Wenn die stilistisch-technologischen Eigenschaften der nicht allzu großen Kera-miksammlungen (meist um die zwanzig Keramikgefäßfragmente) sowie die zwei vorgenommenenRadiokarbondatierungen in Betracht gezogen werden, muss die Mehrheit der Fundstellen mit demjüngeren Horizont der Schnurkeramischen Kultur in Verbindung gebracht werden.An einigen Fundstellen war man auch auf mit der frühen Bronzezeit verbundene Keramik gesto-ßen. Es handelt sich dabei um sedimentäres Material, das hauptsächlich die sogenannte Grobkeramikder Iwno-Kultur repräsentiert.Angesichts der aktuellen Untersuchungen scheint das Dobrzyner Land bevorzugtes Siedlungs-gebiet der Ackerbaukulturen des Neolithikums und der frühen Bronzezeit gewesen zu sein. Gleich-zeitig beobachten wir ein Eindringen der Ackerbaukulturen in die Welt der Sammler und Jäger, wasinsbesondere bei der Keramik der Trichterbecherkultur und der Kugelamphorenkultur zum Tragenkommt.

"The flint mine at Wierzbica ‘Zele’ is one of several mines from  the central cluster of chocolate flint exploitation points.  Chocolate flint was one of the most common siliceous rock materials found in central Europe during the Stone Age. However, the ‘Zele’ mine operated in the Bronze Age and its largest dated shafts were exploited in the Late Bronze Age. At ‘Zele’ methods of flint extraction and production in the Early Bronze Age and in the Late Bronze Age differed signifi cantly."

Wierzbica “Zele”, Radom district, in Central Poland, is an important flint mining site from the Bronze Age and Early Iron Age. The paper will present the latest studies. Excavations were carried out at the site in 1979-1988, 2012 and 2014, revealing 81 shafts, which were investigated in varying degrees. Over 8000 flint specimens from the “Zele” mine were classified according to a classification list. During the initial analysis, new categories of artefacts were  distinguished, which had hitherto not been differentiated in the flint material from settlements and mining fields. Microscopic use-wear analysis was carried on selected artefacts from the mining field.

Exploitation of “chocolate flints” was economically significant
even after the Neolithic. In the Early Bronze Age this is supported by discoveries of flint mines and flint tools such as axe blades, sickles, daggers or arrowheads. The paper will present current problems with correctly determining the origin of “chocolate flint” from Central Poland and results of research into the geochemical and petrographic characteristics of this raw material. As well as remarks on the management of this raw material in the Neolithic and Bronze Ages. Differences between varieties of “chocolate flints” (mainly from different mines) are also discussed.

One of the important problems related to studies of the Stone Age is identification of the sources of siliceous rocks used by prehistoric communities. Several kinds of flint were
widely used in prehistoric times is “chocolate flint” which occurs in the Holy Cross Mountains Mesozoic margin. At present we know about 30 exploitation points and many
outcrops of this flint, forming the most numerous complex of prehistoric mining fields in Poland (Budziszewski 2008). Yet, though research of the occurrence and geological nature
of this raw material is over ninety years old, there are still many gaps in our knowledge

Procurement of flint, radiolarite and other extracted raw materials was an important economic asset and played a significant socio-cultural role amongst Pre-and Protohistoric societies. The attractiveness of raw and processed material from subterranean resources is illustrated by their long distance distribution, along with the variety of archaeological contexts they are recovered from, including settlements, burials, pits, caches, enclosures, etc. How to interpret the discovery of those elements within various archaeological contexts and sites? Moreover, how could the discoveries of domestic or mortuary items in the vicinity of the mining site allow archaeologists to identify and characterize the communities involved in the extraction or processing of raw materials? Regarding the two previous topics, how to use the local and distribution data to interpret the social, cultural, economic, or territorial landscape of past societies without an overreliance on comparative ethnography? The organizers wish to broaden the discussed topics to all types of knappable rocks and very early metal (i.e.: copper) during Pre-and Protohistory dependent that: • The focus is put on the identification of communities involved in the extraction and/or processing of underground resources. • The focus is put on the interpretation of the same category of artefacts found in various contexts.

The session focuses on the local and regional importance of lithic raw material in the Carpathian Basin and its surrounding area during the Neolithic, Chalcolithic and Bronze Age. Provenance studies and multidisciplinary research have created a huge amount of data, which can provide an adequate basis of information and evidence to study the connections between prehistoric communities. The dynamic exchange pathways created wide networks between communities, which provide an excellent basis for research on chronological issues, social inequalities, diverse social and economic interconnections in past societies. Beyond the supra regional scale, economically-minded research perspective, we would like to focus on the local or regional lithic material, which were more or less constantly available for a community. We also would like to consider the same issue in the non-mountain area, where the communities probably had to have another connection, behaviour and value concept towards the lithic artefacts. We would like to consider what the local region could mean for the prehistoric communities from a lithic perspective, and what kind of skills and knowledge were important for the procurement activities. The aim of this session is to discuss the details of all kinds of lithic tools (chipped and polished stone artefacts, macroliths), compare the different periods and focus on diachronic changes from the social archaeological perspective.

Lithic raw materials were the main source to produce tools and weapon in Neolithic. Their characteristic features (thanks micro- or macroscopic, geochemical or petrographical characterization) allow to follow its spread. Behind this spread an activity of prehistoric communities is hide. Spread of lithic raw materials can be an effect of migration, distribution, exchange and/or gift giving. We are aware that archaeologists can’t recreate how prehistoric communities’ world looks like and that sometime it is easier to say how it doesn’t look like. But in the same way we see archaeological items as dynamic elements functioning within whole culture. Due to archaeological research archaeological objects can reflect cultural cosmology and social pattern. Thus the preserved fragments of lithic artefacts bring archaeologists to the real world of prehistoric communities.
This session will focus on a tracking migration and intercultural contacts in the light of use and distribution of lithic raw materials. Focus will be put to follow cultural changes and intercultural contact based on changes in use and distribution of lithic raw materials as well as on changes in their technology. All this is to make a discussion in order to better understand hidden reason of lithic raw material spread.

We encourage you to submit paper tracing cultural changes, interactions, contacts and migrations in light of change in use of lithic raw materials in Neolithic. Papers dealing with diverse fields and contexts of spread of lithic raw material will be welcome.

15th SKAM Lithic Workshop “Crossing the Borders. Interregional and Cross-Cultural Interactions in the Context of Lithic Studies” will be held on 17-19 October 2018 at the Institute of History, National Academy of Sciences of Belarus in Minsk.
Extended deadline for applications is 15 July 2018.
Further details on the conference can be found on https://sites.google.com/view/skam-2018-minsk/

Procurement and distribution of siliceous rocks in the light of geochemical and petrographic analysis in archaeology Looking across Europe we can see a strong tendency towards geochemical and petrographic characterization of raw materials. Collecting, sourcing and finding new materials unveil so far unknown rocks used by prehistoric communities. In addition to ongoing investigations describing the occurrence and geological nature of raw material, determining the levels at which the raw material occurs in the deposits, as well as the stratigraphic context and geological dating of the layers, the principal goal is to identify instrumental methods for an accurate distinction of siliceous rocks and application of the results in archaeological studies. On one hand the new developed methods provide some very useful tools to discriminate various kinds of rocks but on the other hand the exchange of scientific results is fragmentary due to speech barriers and publications being printed in local series. All this affects our state of knowledge and causes stagnation in methodological development. We would like to direct our invitation to scientists working on the problem of stone material used by the prehistoric societies. Our goal is to encourage presentation of papers on applying geochemical and petrographic methods, describing the features of raw materials. Beyond this problematic, what are the respective contributions of the different methods to the reconstitution of the prehistoric communities? How do they affect our reconstitution of the functioning of prehistoric communities, i.e. the description of extraction, processing and distribution of siliceous rocks. We hope that session could help to lift the barriers by creating a space for consultations and experience exchange.

Call for papers EAA 2016 Vilnius
The session will be held at the EAA Annual Meeting in Vilnius, 31 VIII – 4 IX 2016. Papers can be submitted via the EAA website.
Deadline for paper/poster submissions – 15 February 2016

Session details:
- session type – oral (preferred) and poster presentation
- session ID – TH5-01
- session theme – Science and multidisciplinarity in archaeology (TH5)

Between History and Archaeology: Papers in honour of Jacek Lech is a collection of forty-six papers papers in honour of Professor Jacek Lech, compiled in recognition of his research and academic career as well as
his inquiry into the study of prehistoric flint mining, Neolithic flint tools (and beyond), and the history of archaeology.
The papers explore topics on archaeology and history, and are organised into three sections. The first contains texts on flint mining dealing with well-known mining sites as well as previously unpublished new material. The reader will find here a wide spectrum of approaches to flint mining, ways of identifying raw materials used by prehistoric communities, and an impressive overview of the history of research, methodology and approaches to flint mining in Europe, North America and Asia.
The following group of papers deals with the use of flint by Neolithic and younger communities, including typological studies on trace evidence analyses as well as theoretical papers on prehistoric periods in Europe and the New World.
The final section consists of papers on the history of archaeology in the 19th and 20th centuries. Some deal with the beginnings of archaeology as a scholarly discipline, while others present significant research from different countries. Readers will also find papers on the development of archaeology in the second half of the 20th century, both in political and institutional contexts. The book ends with the memories, which bring the Jubilarian closer to the reader by viewing him through the eyes of his
co-workers and friends.

The publication of this, the fiftieth, volume of Archaeologia Polona, with the theme “Looking into the Past”, is the end of a long process that goes back to 2012, when it was due to appear. A number of organizational difficulties and a double change of the editorial team have caused a delay of several years in its production. The current editors of the volume, the third team in a row, determined to make sure the volume appeared, and took over the work on the materials submitted for publication. The articles originally collected almost ten years ago were again reviewed and in 2018–2019 were supplemented by the original authors. Initially this volume was to be devoted to the activity of several distinguished figures from the history of Polish archaeology. Unfortunately, several texts had been published in other journals in the meantime. This made it necessary to obtain new articles in their place. For this reason, the topic of this volume is broader than initially intended. It presents texts on the history of archaeology from several points of view, ranging from the presentation of the activities of researchers, through the history of institutions and research undertaken as part of contemporary archaeology in Poland and wider afield. Volume 50 is also dedicated to the outstanding archaeologist Professor Stanisław Tabaczyński on the ninetieth anniversary of his birth. Aspects of his scientific profile are presented to the reader by Dorota Cyngot and Anna Zalewska through the medium of an interview (“A life in archaeology and the specificity of archaeological research: encounters with Stanisław Tabaczyński”).This conversation touches on a number of issues related to archaeological theory and research practice. Most of these issues are also discussed in the texts of other authors of the volume. Professor Tabaczyński, who has been associated with what is now the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology of the Polish Academy of Sciences for almost half a century, also has significant achievements in the preservation of the European cultural heritage in connection with the study of early medieval archaeological sites in France and Italy (and also Algeria), and publications resulting from them. The rest of the volume consists of seven articles. Their arrangement is roughly in chronological order, based on the time of activity of the archaeological institutions, researchers and their activities they discuss. Carola Metzner-Nebelsick discusses Karol Hadaczek’s period of stay in Vienna (1897–1900) and its effect on his contribution to Polish archaeology. The author presents the beginnings of the academic career of the scholar, related to his studies at the University of Vienna, as well as the impact of these experiences on his further scientific activity at the University of Lviv. In the biographical text “A portrait of Professor
Zdzisław A. Rajewski (1907–1974), scholar of many talents”, Wojciech Brzeziński and Danuta Piotrowska consider one of the most important Polish archaeologists of the 20th century, the research he directed at the famous site of Biskupin and on the beginnings of the Polish state under the Millennium Poloniae program, and also for many years the director of the State Archaeological Museum in Warsaw. This is followed by a text on the complicated history of an institution. In the article “The Archaeological Museum of the Polish Academy of Learning in Cracow during the Second World War”, one of this volume’s editors, Marzena Woźny presents new information on the history of Polish archaeology in the dramatic times of World War II. In the following insightful text (“Scientific Capital after 1945 in German archaeology – Wilhelm Unverzagt and the archaeology of hillforts”), Susanne Grunwald discusses aspects of the history of German archaeology after 1945. This paper re-examines some current views on this subject, also in the context of the archaeology of defended settlements in the region. In the next text (“European identity and Polish culture – Tomasz Mikocki’s studies on the tradition of ancient art”), Monika Rekowska considers the academic activity of an outstanding Polish researcher on the legacy of Antiquity in European culture. Mikocki studied collections of Greek and Roman antiquities and monuments and their imitations. She summarizes the extensive legacy in these fields of the researcher who died in 2007. The development of Italian medieval archaeology is discussed by Michele Nucciotti and Guido Vannini in their article “Light Archaeology and Territorial Analysis:
Experiences and Perspectives of the Florentine Medievalist School”. The final article in this section (“Archaeology of graves: a contribution to contemporary archaeology in Poland”) by Jolanta Adamek reviews contemporary exhumations and research at the burial sites of victims of World War II and the early post-War period conducted using modern archaeological methods. The volume ends with three more texts. The first is a book review (by Paul Barford) of a work discussing the place of historical patterns of thought in the development of a modern Classical archaeology. This is followed by a report from the conference “Biskupin in the past, today and tomorrow”, which took place in 2009, on the 75th anniversary of the beginning of archaeological research in Biskupin, reported by Kamil Adamczak, Anna Grossman and Wojciech Piotrowski. Since its discovery, the site of Biskupin has been of great importance for archaeology not only because of the nature of the remains that it contained, but also the effect its excavation had on the history of the discipline in the 20th century. The obituary for the archaeologist Gerd Weisgerber by Jacek Lech brings to the attention of the reader some aspects of the work of this outstanding researcher of ancient mining. With the final publication of this volume, the editors hope that the texts that it contains will contribute to the broadening of knowledge about the development of European archaeology at the end of the 19th and the 20th centuries and its place in the contemporary context.