Pohřebiště kultury se zvoncovitými poháry ve Vlíněvsi: k problematide a chronologii konce eneolitu a počátku doby bronzové
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Book |
| Language: | Czech |
| Published: |
Praha
Univ. Karlova, Filozofická Fak.
2012
|
| Series: | Dissertationes archaeologicae Brunenses / Pragensesque
13 |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | Inhaltsverzeichnis Abstract |
| Item Description: | Zsfassung in engl. Sprache |
| Physical Description: | 171 S. Ill., graph. Darst., Kt. |
| ISBN: | 9788073083922 |
Staff View
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nam a2200000 cb4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | BV040417330 | ||
| 003 | DE-604 | ||
| 005 | 20190123 | ||
| 007 | t | ||
| 008 | 120913s2012 abd| |||| 00||| cze d | ||
| 020 | |a 9788073083922 |9 978-80-7308-392-2 | ||
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)815893234 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)BVBBV040417330 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-604 |b ger |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | 0 | |a cze | |
| 049 | |a DE-12 |a DE-739 | ||
| 084 | |a NF 3245 |0 (DE-625)125217:1307 |2 rvk | ||
| 084 | |a 6,11 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Limburský, Petr |e Verfasser |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Pohřebiště kultury se zvoncovitými poháry ve Vlíněvsi |b k problematide a chronologii konce eneolitu a počátku doby bronzové |c Petr Limburský |
| 264 | 1 | |a Praha |b Univ. Karlova, Filozofická Fak. |c 2012 | |
| 300 | |a 171 S. |b Ill., graph. Darst., Kt. | ||
| 336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 490 | 1 | |a Dissertationes archaeologicae Brunenses / Pragensesque |v 13 | |
| 500 | |a Zsfassung in engl. Sprache | ||
| 648 | 7 | |a Vor- und Frühgeschichte |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Glockenbecherkultur |0 (DE-588)4157634-2 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Funde |0 (DE-588)4071507-3 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Gräberfeld |0 (DE-588)4071980-7 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Ausgrabung |0 (DE-588)4129464-6 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 651 | 7 | |a Vliněves |0 (DE-588)1028023502 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 651 | 7 | |a Böhmische Länder |0 (DE-588)4069573-6 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 689 | 0 | 0 | |a Vliněves |0 (DE-588)1028023502 |D g |
| 689 | 0 | 1 | |a Glockenbecherkultur |0 (DE-588)4157634-2 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | 2 | |a Gräberfeld |0 (DE-588)4071980-7 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | 3 | |a Ausgrabung |0 (DE-588)4129464-6 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 689 | 1 | 0 | |a Vliněves |0 (DE-588)1028023502 |D g |
| 689 | 1 | 1 | |a Glockenbecherkultur |0 (DE-588)4157634-2 |D s |
| 689 | 1 | 2 | |a Gräberfeld |0 (DE-588)4071980-7 |D s |
| 689 | 1 | 3 | |a Funde |0 (DE-588)4071507-3 |D s |
| 689 | 1 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 689 | 2 | 0 | |a Böhmische Länder |0 (DE-588)4069573-6 |D g |
| 689 | 2 | 1 | |a Gräberfeld |0 (DE-588)4071980-7 |D s |
| 689 | 2 | 2 | |a Vor- und Frühgeschichte |A z |
| 689 | 2 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 810 | 2 | |a Pragensesque |t Dissertationes archaeologicae Brunenses |v 13 |w (DE-604)BV022424472 |9 13 | |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 2 |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=025270148&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 2 |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=025270148&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Abstract |
| 940 | 1 | |n oe | |
| 999 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-025270148 | ||
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 900 |e 22/bsb |f 09013 |g 4371 |
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 930.1 |e 22/bsb |f 09013 |g 4371 |
Record in the Search Index
| _version_ | 1804149474362130432 |
|---|---|
| adam_text | OBSAH
1.
POHŘEBIŠTĚ ZVONCOVITÝCH POHÁRŮ VE VLÍNĚVSI, OKR. MĚLNÍK
..........................................9
1.1
Okolnosti výzkumu, umístění lokality a přírodní podmínky
..........................................................9
1.2
Metodika terénního výzkumu
..........................................................................................................11
1.3
Popis nálezové situace
.......................................................................................................................14
1.4
Rozmístění hrobů na pohřebišti a pohřební ritus
..........................................................................41
1.5
Hrobové jámy a úprava hrobů
........................................................................................................43
1.6
Uložení kostrových hrobů, věk a pohlaví pohřbených
..................................................................45
1.7
Rozmístění nálezů v hrobech
...........................................................................................................46
1.8
Inventář pohřebiště
..........................................................................................................................47
1.8.1
Keramické nálezy
..........................................................................................................................................47
Poháry
................................................................................................................................................................47
Džbánky
.............................................................................................................................................................48
Mísy
....................................................................................................................................................................50
Konvice
...............................................................................................................................................................50
Ostatní keramické nálezy
..................................................................................................................................51
1.8.2
Nekeramické nálezy
......................................................................................................................................51
1.9
Chronologické zařazení a vývoj pohřebiště
............................................................................................51
1.10
Shrnutí
............................................................................................................................................................53
2.
PODOBNOST POHŘEBIŠŤ A PODOBNOSTI HROBŮ
................................................................................54
2.1
Úvod
..................................................................................................................................................................54
2.2
Strukturální vlastnosti pohřebišť
..............................................................................................................54
2.3
Pohřebiště kultury se zvoncovitými poháry v Cechách
.......................................................................55
2.4
Řešené otázky a metodika vyhodnocení
...................................................................................................56
2.5
Využitá data a postup zpracování
.............................................................................................................57
2.5.1
Pohřebiště KZP v Čachovicích
....................................................................................................................58
2.5.2
Pohřebiště KZP v Lochenicích
....................................................................................................................58
2.5.3
Pohřebiště KZP v Brandýsku
.......................................................................................................................58
2.5.4
Pohřebiště KZP ve Vlíněvsi
.........................................................................................................................58
2.6
Vyhodnocení
...................................................................................................................................................58
2.7
Interpretace a diskuse výsledků
.................................................................................................................59
2.8
Shrnutí
..............................................................................................................................................................61
3
VÝPOVĚĎ KLASIFIKACE MATERIÁLU; STYLOVÁ A
TYPOLOGICKÁ
ANALÝZA
......................62
3.1
Úvodní úvahy
..................................................................................................................................................62
[7]
3.2
Stylová a
typologická analýza
.....................................................................................................................63
3.3
Prostorové vymezení a oblast střední Evropy
........................................................................................65
3.4
Závěr eneolitu a počátek starší doby bronzové ve střední Evropě
...................................................69
3.5
Kultura, fenomén, ideologie
........................................................................................................................69
3.6
Metodika a cíle řešení
...................................................................................................................................70
3.6.1
Východiska, aplikace modelových představ
.................................................................................................70
3.6.2
Cíle řešení
.....................................................................................................................................................72
3.7
Nekeramické nálezy
......................................................................................................................................74
3.7.1
Nálezy z kovu
................................................................................................................................................74
3.7.2
Nálezy z kosti a jantaru
.................................................................................................................................76
3.7.3
Nálezy z kamene
............................................................................................................................................78
3.8
Keramické nálezy
..........................................................................................................................................80
3.9
Diskuse
.............................................................................................................................................................84
3.10
Shrnutí
............................................................................................................................................................87
4.
RADIOKARBONOVÉ DATOVÁNÍ
...................................................................................................................88
4.1
Východiska a charakter dat
........................................................................................................................89
4.1.1
Charakter radiokarbonové chronologie a archeologických informací
........................................................89
4.1.2
Hierarchie informačních zdrojů
...................................................................................................................89
4.2
Diskuse možností výpovědi vybraných metodických postupů
...........................................................90
4.2.1
Zapracování archeologické informace do pravděpodobnostního vyjádření /ad
1/......................................90
4.2.2
Převod pravděpodobnostního vyjádření dat do intervalového a událostního vyjádření /ad2/
....................91
4.2.3
Srovnání pravděpodobnostních vyjádření mírou shody /ad 2a/
...................................................................91
4.3
Metodický postup zpracování
....................................................................................................................92
4.4
Teoretický rozbor
..........................................................................................................................................93
4.4.1
Vyjádření vztahu měřených hodnot radiokarbonového stáří a skutečného stáří vzorku
..............................93
4.4.2
Stanovení očekávaných hodnot distribuce měřených dat při známém skutečném stáří
...............................93
4.5
Postup zpracování
.........................................................................................................................................95
4.5.1
Vstupní data
..................................................................................................................................................95
4.5.2
Předpoklady a způsob zpracování
................................................................................................................96
4.5.3
Číselné zpracování a grafické vyjádření výsledků
........................................................................................98
4.6
Diskuse výsledků
............................................................................................................................................98
4.6.1
Interpretace výsledků
....................................................................................................................................98
4.6.2
Srovnání dosažených výsledků
......................................................................................................................99
4.6.3
Hranice platnosti výsledků
.........................................................................................................................102
4.7
Shrnutí
............................................................................................................................................................102
5.
ZÁVĚR
.................................................................................................................................................................103
6.
LITERATURA
....................................................................................................................................................107
7.
SUMMARY
.........................................................................................................................................................116
8.
LIST OF FIGURES, CHARTS AND TABLES
............................................................................................120
9.
ANTROPOLOGICKÝ
POSUDEK
Lidské kosterní pozůstatky kultury zvoncovitých pohárů z Vlíněvsi (Jakub Likovský)
......................123
10.
TABULKY A TABLETY
...............................................................................................................................128
[8]
7.
SUMMARY
Bearing in mind the wide range of issues dis¬
cussed in scientific literature, it is clear that our
understanding of the transitional period of the
end of the Aeneolithic and the beginning of the
Early Bronze Age periods is limited with several
factors such as detailed analyses of archaeologi¬
cal data on regional level or on the level of find
groups and existence of supra-regional models and
interpretative patters. In this study, selected issues
of comparative analyses of cemeteries, style and
typology, and absolute chronology have been tar¬
geted. Thematically biased considerations of this
study were based on results of field work that had
been conducted under the leadership of the author
at the site of
Vlíněves
(district
Mělník).
This intro¬
ductory detailed publication and analysis of the
so far the largest cemetery belonging to the Bell-
Beaker Culture in Bohemia stresses some general
features of the period. Their evaluation and inter¬
pretation possibilities are furthermore analysed in
subsequent chapters.
Altogether,
34
graves belonging to the Bell-
Beaker Culture have been found at the
Vlíněves
necropolis. The cemetery was located on a small
terrain wave, approximately 750m from the nowa¬
days river of Elbe. The above said terrain wave
represented a scene horizon determined by places
with settlement finds belonging to the same culture.
The burials were arranged to a rather closed ceme¬
tery that was funnel-likely spread along the terrain
wave in the south-north direction. Considering the
state of preservation of anthropological material,
the structure and distribution of individuals buried
on the cemetery shows no anomalies that would
enforce interpretation of the males
-
females dis¬
tribution or the age structure as a result of a one¬
time event or purposeful selection of the buried
individuals. So far it appears that the cemetery can
be dated to the later phase of the Bell-Beaker Cul¬
ture development in Bohemia, and, according to
the Moravian classification, it can be synchronized
with the phase II or with its end.
The Bell-Beaker Culture cemetery could be
divided into two separate groups of mutually close
graves (groups A, B). Comparison of the graves
contents clearly showed that both groups are more
or less similar in terms of age and sex determi¬
nation of individuals as well as structure of the
ceramic material. These observations were inter¬
preted as results of separated burial practices in
both groups with unknown mutual chronological
position and connection. Gradual changes of burial
equipment concepts occurring simultaneously in
both groups appear to be one interpretation pos¬
sibility for the existence of two groups of tombs.
The second option presumes that each group can
be associated with burials of closed communities
with different belief systems where similar inner
relations that were visualized by grave inventories
created similar distributions of grave equipments
in both grave groups. In case of the second option
validity, the mutual chronological position of both
groups is unnecessary to determine.
Besides two flint arrow-heads and one flake,
the grave equipments consist only of pottery.
Except for two decorated bell beakers the vari¬
ety of pottery inventory comprises mainly the
so-called accompanying pottery
(Begleitkeramik)
of the Bell-Beaker Culture and it does not show
any significant differences from other comparable
Bell-Beaker Culture cemeteries in Bohemia. Only
kettle-shaped vessels
/
jugs are more numerously
attested.
Apart from the cemetery at
Vlíněves,
three
other published Bohemian sites have been used for
the comparative analyses of the tomb equipment of
the Bell-Beaker Culture:
Čachovice
(district
Cho¬
mutov),
Lochenice (district
Hradec Králové)
and
Brandýsek
(district
Kladno).
All sites are compara¬
ble in terms of their size and method of excavation.
Also both detected groups of graves at
Vlíněves
(A and B) have been tested separately. Structural
similarities of the analysed cemeteries have been
studied, and any existence of linear transformation
of the chosen description of the grave contents
among cemeteries was regarded as similarity.
Validity of comparison and analyses of ceme¬
tery structures is limited by results of ethnographic
studies that determine wide range of prospective
factors that can influence attitudes towards the
body, burial rituals, and grave adjustments. The
nature of archaeological evidence represents sec¬
ond restrictive factor that is, nevertheless, of the
same significance. It is worth noting that the evi¬
dence lacks the capability of documenting the cul¬
tural contexts of individual artefacts and observed
pieces of knowledge. This observation is valid
while respecting the premise that in different con¬
texts identical phenomenon or artefact can bear
different meaning. Thus, structural analysis can¬
not be regarded as a compact method of cemetery
analyses whose results unconditionally reflect
the Prehistoric reality. Similarities and results of
search for structures in the cemeteries should be
viewed as certain types of tool used for description
of the observed circumstances whose evidence
towards particular factors that could influence the
burial contexts is highly changeable. We may gen¬
erally assume that the structural analysis evidence
towards these factors may be different and ambig¬
uous, and even that the evidence may completely
lose its ability of visualizing of certain phenom¬
ena. On the other hand, the structural analysis as
a descriptive tool creates further space for various
possibilities of interpretation.
With the exception of
Čachovice,
the accom¬
plished comparison of the above-mentioned ceme¬
teries and grave groups at the cemetery of
Vlíněves
clearly showed two levels of evidence. The first
level is represented by the occurrence of small jugs
and bowls as grave equipment. Their presence in
graves represents a kind of general phenomenon
equally distributed on compared sites. This obser¬
vation acquires even greater importance because
the compared cemeteries varied from each other
in males
-
females and children
-
adults distribu¬
tions. Moreover, small jugs and bowls are attested
on these cemeteries not only together but also
separately placed in individual graves with no
regularities or clusters identifiable on the cemeter¬
ies ground-plans. The second level is represented
by the observation that other finds are attested on
cemeteries only to a certain degree, and that neither
observed factors nor their combination show any
further regularities. Moreover, considering rich¬
ness of the whole cemetery equipments, frequency
of their occurrences does not exceed certain limit.
Both levels of evidence regarding the cem¬
eteries structure may be considered correlates of
burial customs of the Bell-Beaker Culture. These
correlates do not have to represent individual fac¬
tors that the model concept of burial customs is
made of but also their variously intense combina¬
tions. It is supposed that the value of the supposed
interpretation may be significantly influenced by
new excavations, observations and identification
or defining variability of other qualities.
Applying the model concept regarding vari¬
ous factors that may influence burial customs, it
is clear that the analysis cannot address ethnicity
or regional and local connections and particulari¬
ties. This inability is mainly caused by the nature
of the input data. Furthermore, it is also obvious
that due to extent and number of cemeteries the
concept cannot target the issue of the entombment
dating. Moreover, due to the nature of archaeo¬
logical evidence factors of personality traits of the
buried individual and his/her economic strength
merge together. The above-mentioned first level of
evidence of the analysed cemeteries shows most
likely correlations in terms of social or biologic
age of the buried individual or his/her position
within the society. The second level of evidence
may represent a correlate of economic strength
of the individual or his/her personality traits. On
the level of
analysable data
it is possible to vis¬
ualize those inclinations as two components of
burial equipment. The first component comprises
of items highly related to character of the buried
individual such as wrist-guards, arrow-heads, boar
tusks, buttons with V-shaped boring, pots and ket¬
tle-shaped vessels. This type of finds with close
relation to the personality of the buried individual
corresponds quite nicely with the so-called sym¬
bolic packets (archery, craftsman, Beaker pack¬
age). Their contents are also supplemented by some
ceramic forms. The other component of the Bell-
Beaker material culture represent quite frequently
found small jugs and bowls that on the basis of
accomplished analyses can be up to a certain level
determined as correlates of social and biologic age
or social structure related not only to the buried
individual but also that part of community con¬
ditioned by the buried personality. Members of
this community section expressed with their gifts
placed in the grave during the burial ritual their
own attitudes towards the buried individual.
As far as hypotheses regarding the cause of
emergence of the
Vlíněves
cemetery is concerned,
it seems plausible, on the basis of the accom-
[117;
plished
analysis of the two detected groups of
graves (A and B), that they emerged more likely
as a consequence of existence of certain structures
within the society using that cemetery than as
a consequence of chronological development.
Another tool used for evaluation of archaeo¬
logical data represents style interpretation and
typology analysis. While existence of a style, its
transformation and evidence ability are generally
accepted quantities, utterance content and exist¬
ence nature of the style still remain broadly dis¬
cussed. On the field of archaeology, opinions on
approaches towards the style can be related to vari¬
ous concepts of research methodology, mainly to
the culture-historical approach, and
processual
and
post-processual archaeology. The possibility of
style examination with its various aspects closely
relates with the abandonment of style analysis
as the decisive analytical tool; an approach that
was characteristic mainly for the culture-histori¬
cal period when the style predominantly fulfilled
normative function. In later periods, the style was
understood as for example an expression of creator
-
receiver relation or as a certain phenomenon dis¬
tinguished by cultural significance etc. Normative
approach to the style is closely related to the typol¬
ogy analysis and enables for example to define
contents and geographical extent of archaeologi¬
cal cultures etc. In the course of transformation
of approaches to the style, some of its elements
may become fully independent such as typology
analysis as independent analytical tool while oth¬
ers changed their meaning such as archaeological
culture, concept of import etc.
In this study, the concept of style as a certain
type of communication between the creator and
the receiver, between the process of doing-things
and the environment that receives the products
has been applied for determination of the proc¬
esses shaping the transition period at the end of
the Aeneolithic and the Early Bronze Age peri¬
ods. The issue of the degree of integration of this
type of communication within social interactions
remains unanswered mainly due to non-evalu-
ability of archaeological evidence. The concept of
style as a form of communication places different
demands on spatial determination of areas where
the data are analysed or on methods of evalua¬
tion of the find collections. Ethnographical studies
regarding various functional correlates of pottery
shapes may be sought as another possibility for
evaluation of the observed period. These studies
pointed out that there seems to be more expressed
consideration for functional determination while
creating more type-distinctive shapes of vessels.
Comparisons have been performed on an arbi¬
trary defined area that well satisfied the demands
of certain level of knowledge regarding the Bell-
Beaker and the
Únětice
Cultures consisting of
central Germany, traditional settlement region
of Bohemia, and the region of the
Proto-Únětice
Culture. Artefacts belonging on the basis of cor¬
respondence analysis to the earliest phase of the
Únětice
and to the
Proto-Únětice
Cultures have
been used for the
Únětice
Culture finds compari¬
sons. Diversity of individual ceramic types implies
that the process of ceramic inventory transformation
underwent in each region with different intensity;
reaching from only hardly classifiable, mutually
mingling types of the Bell-Beaker accompanying
pottery to the mutually better definable types of
the subsequent
Únětice
Culture. This gradual proc¬
ess that seems to correlate with emphasizing of
functional characteristics of ceramic types can be
most visibly detected in Moravia where its inten¬
sity also enabled the independent determination of
the
Proto-Únětice
Culture. The entire process in all
three regions headed inexorably towards the well
advanced
Únětice
Culture.
With the only exception of flint daggers, the
proportional change can be detected in non-
ceramic contents of the Bell-Beaker, the earliest
Únětice
and the
Proto- Únětice
Cultures all over
the three regions. This transformation is clearly
visible on artefacts regarded as embellishments
(buttons with V-shaped boring, fasteners, amber,
spiral-shaped earrings) or personal possessions
of the buried individual (small copper daggers)
that are missing in the grave equipments of the
subsequent period. On the other hand, items of
functional usage or symbolising this usage (wrist-
guards, flint arrow-heads, whetstones, bone points,
chopped boar tusks, pebbles?) underwent partial
change or still endured for a certain period of time
as grave equipment items.
The results of accomplished analyses have
clearly implicated transformation of grave equip¬
ment contents. The non-ceramic equipment under¬
went transformation influencing its ideological
content that changes from the meaning-defined
symbols of characteristics of the buried individ¬
ual that were supra-regionally comprehensible to
the expression of community s attitude towards
the deceased. As far as the ceramic equipment is
concerned, the change from burial to more or less
profane pottery is clearly detectible. This transfor¬
mation process that proportionally underwent in
all the observed regions headed towards the well
advanced
Únětice
culture.
It is necessary to evaluate the participation of
the Corded-Ware Culture on the
Únětice
Culture
118
emergence that was frequently discussed in tradi¬
tional, culture-historically biased studies, within
the context of research development. Eventhough
the evaluation of archaeological inventories can¬
not conclusively disprove individual arguments it
is possible to present alternative explanations that
do not require the necessity of immediate partici¬
pation of the Corded-Ware Culture on the
Únětice
Culture emergence.
Chronology of contexts that were dated on the
basis of radiocarbon method represents one of
the significant arguments regarding participation
of the Corded-Ware Culture on the emergence
of the Early Bronze Age. Selective way of sam¬
pling of measured radiocarbon dates that assigns
various levels of importance to different dates
belongs among the important characteristics of
this approach.
Radiocarbon data evaluation applied in this
study prefers their probability nature. Without the
individual dates distinguishing, their evidence is
evaluated as evidence of an entire complex that
relates to the duration of certain observed phe¬
nomenon. The evaluation is based on a concept
presenting individual dates as coincidental selec¬
tion from the duration of certain phenomenon that
relates to the given data. Thus, varying degree of
correspondence between the measured dates and
the model concept has been evaluated for different
model concepts characterised by varying begin¬
nings and periods of certain phenomenon dura¬
tion.
The above-mentioned method of evaluation of
radiocarbon dates clearly implicates certain differ¬
ences in results assigned to the defined regions.
Comparison of radiocarbon dates from the Alpine
region with dendrochronological dating of the
Corded-Ware Culture corroborated the relative
low information significance of the radiocarbon
dates for our understanding of duration of archae¬
ological cultures. On the other hand, application
of the above-mentioned approach in the absolute
dating analysis of the
Proto-Únětice
Culture cem¬
etery in Pavlov (Moravia) provided more precise
chronological data.
General evaluation of the radiocarbon dates
assigned to Corded-Ware, Bell-Beaker, and
Unětice
Cultures, and even their regional evalua¬
tion has clearly demonstrated that the radiocarbon
data cannot be used as primary arguments for the
issue of possible mutual chronological relations of
the above-mentioned cultures (whether they were
subsequent or contemporaneous). Thus, it is clear
that interpretations based strictly on radiocarbon
dates cannot be regarded as decisive conceptions.
A hypothesis created on the basis of the above-
mentioned method has been raised using entirely
radiocarbon dates in Elbe region; thus the Corded-
Ware Culture was dated between the years
2590-
2210
ВС,
the Bell-Beaker Culture
2320-2110
ВС,
and the
Únětice
Culture
2130-1770
ВС
(the
limits represent centres of culture transformation
periods). The current number of dates permits nei¬
ther more specific division within the regions nor
more subtle chronological classification. The most
effective application of this method seems to be
its usage for the discussion regarding the absolute
chronology of cemeteries with sufficient number
of radiocarbon dates, approximately more than ten
dates covering supposed period of duration of
100
to
200
years.
The above-mentioned processes of transforma¬
tion occurring at the end of the Aeneolithic and at
the beginning of the Early Bronze Age can be inter¬
preted only on the level of various hypotheses. The
observed change seems to be part of the transfor¬
mation from the more primitive structured society
with variously social integration of its members
towards the stratified society with elements of
chieftainship that is supposed to exist for sure at
the beginning of Middle Bronze Age. The process
of transformation that reflects in burial rites may
also represent the consequence of changes in eco¬
nomic possibilities. However, due to absence of
settlement material such hypotheses must remain
deduced more than documented.
(Translated by P.
Vlčková-Maříková)
[119]
|
| any_adam_object | 1 |
| author | Limburský, Petr |
| author_facet | Limburský, Petr |
| author_role | aut |
| author_sort | Limburský, Petr |
| author_variant | p l pl |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | BV040417330 |
| classification_rvk | NF 3245 |
| ctrlnum | (OCoLC)815893234 (DE-599)BVBBV040417330 |
| discipline | Geschichte |
| era | Vor- und Frühgeschichte gnd |
| era_facet | Vor- und Frühgeschichte |
| format | Book |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>02804nam a2200625 cb4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV040417330</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20190123 </controlfield><controlfield tag="007">t</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">120913s2012 abd| |||| 00||| cze d</controlfield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9788073083922</subfield><subfield code="9">978-80-7308-392-2</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)815893234</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV040417330</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">cze</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-12</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-739</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">NF 3245</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-625)125217:1307</subfield><subfield code="2">rvk</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">6,11</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Limburský, Petr</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Pohřebiště kultury se zvoncovitými poháry ve Vlíněvsi</subfield><subfield code="b">k problematide a chronologii konce eneolitu a počátku doby bronzové</subfield><subfield code="c">Petr Limburský</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Praha</subfield><subfield code="b">Univ. Karlova, Filozofická Fak.</subfield><subfield code="c">2012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">171 S.</subfield><subfield code="b">Ill., graph. Darst., Kt.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="490" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Dissertationes archaeologicae Brunenses / Pragensesque</subfield><subfield code="v">13</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zsfassung in engl. Sprache</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="648" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Vor- und Frühgeschichte</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Glockenbecherkultur</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4157634-2</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Funde</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4071507-3</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Gräberfeld</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4071980-7</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Ausgrabung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4129464-6</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Vliněves</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)1028023502</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Böhmische Länder</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4069573-6</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Vliněves</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)1028023502</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Glockenbecherkultur</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4157634-2</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Gräberfeld</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4071980-7</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="3"><subfield code="a">Ausgrabung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4129464-6</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Vliněves</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)1028023502</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Glockenbecherkultur</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4157634-2</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Gräberfeld</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4071980-7</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="3"><subfield code="a">Funde</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4071507-3</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="2" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Böhmische Länder</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4069573-6</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="2" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Gräberfeld</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4071980-7</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="2" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Vor- und Frühgeschichte</subfield><subfield code="A">z</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="2" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="810" ind1="2" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Pragensesque</subfield><subfield code="t">Dissertationes archaeologicae Brunenses</subfield><subfield code="v">13</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-604)BV022424472</subfield><subfield code="9">13</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 2</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=025270148&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Inhaltsverzeichnis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 2</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=025270148&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="940" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="n">oe</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-025270148</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">900</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09013</subfield><subfield code="g">4371</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">930.1</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09013</subfield><subfield code="g">4371</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| geographic | Vliněves (DE-588)1028023502 gnd Böhmische Länder (DE-588)4069573-6 gnd |
| geographic_facet | Vliněves Böhmische Länder |
| id | DE-604.BV040417330 |
| illustrated | Illustrated |
| indexdate | 2024-07-10T00:23:36Z |
| institution | BVB |
| isbn | 9788073083922 |
| language | Czech |
| oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-025270148 |
| oclc_num | 815893234 |
| open_access_boolean | |
| owner | DE-12 DE-739 |
| owner_facet | DE-12 DE-739 |
| physical | 171 S. Ill., graph. Darst., Kt. |
| publishDate | 2012 |
| publishDateSearch | 2012 |
| publishDateSort | 2012 |
| publisher | Univ. Karlova, Filozofická Fak. |
| record_format | marc |
| series2 | Dissertationes archaeologicae Brunenses / Pragensesque |
| spelling | Limburský, Petr Verfasser aut Pohřebiště kultury se zvoncovitými poháry ve Vlíněvsi k problematide a chronologii konce eneolitu a počátku doby bronzové Petr Limburský Praha Univ. Karlova, Filozofická Fak. 2012 171 S. Ill., graph. Darst., Kt. txt rdacontent n rdamedia nc rdacarrier Dissertationes archaeologicae Brunenses / Pragensesque 13 Zsfassung in engl. Sprache Vor- und Frühgeschichte gnd rswk-swf Glockenbecherkultur (DE-588)4157634-2 gnd rswk-swf Funde (DE-588)4071507-3 gnd rswk-swf Gräberfeld (DE-588)4071980-7 gnd rswk-swf Ausgrabung (DE-588)4129464-6 gnd rswk-swf Vliněves (DE-588)1028023502 gnd rswk-swf Böhmische Länder (DE-588)4069573-6 gnd rswk-swf Vliněves (DE-588)1028023502 g Glockenbecherkultur (DE-588)4157634-2 s Gräberfeld (DE-588)4071980-7 s Ausgrabung (DE-588)4129464-6 s DE-604 Funde (DE-588)4071507-3 s Böhmische Länder (DE-588)4069573-6 g Vor- und Frühgeschichte z Pragensesque Dissertationes archaeologicae Brunenses 13 (DE-604)BV022424472 13 Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 2 application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=025270148&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Inhaltsverzeichnis Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 2 application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=025270148&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Abstract |
| spellingShingle | Limburský, Petr Pohřebiště kultury se zvoncovitými poháry ve Vlíněvsi k problematide a chronologii konce eneolitu a počátku doby bronzové Glockenbecherkultur (DE-588)4157634-2 gnd Funde (DE-588)4071507-3 gnd Gräberfeld (DE-588)4071980-7 gnd Ausgrabung (DE-588)4129464-6 gnd |
| subject_GND | (DE-588)4157634-2 (DE-588)4071507-3 (DE-588)4071980-7 (DE-588)4129464-6 (DE-588)1028023502 (DE-588)4069573-6 |
| title | Pohřebiště kultury se zvoncovitými poháry ve Vlíněvsi k problematide a chronologii konce eneolitu a počátku doby bronzové |
| title_auth | Pohřebiště kultury se zvoncovitými poháry ve Vlíněvsi k problematide a chronologii konce eneolitu a počátku doby bronzové |
| title_exact_search | Pohřebiště kultury se zvoncovitými poháry ve Vlíněvsi k problematide a chronologii konce eneolitu a počátku doby bronzové |
| title_full | Pohřebiště kultury se zvoncovitými poháry ve Vlíněvsi k problematide a chronologii konce eneolitu a počátku doby bronzové Petr Limburský |
| title_fullStr | Pohřebiště kultury se zvoncovitými poháry ve Vlíněvsi k problematide a chronologii konce eneolitu a počátku doby bronzové Petr Limburský |
| title_full_unstemmed | Pohřebiště kultury se zvoncovitými poháry ve Vlíněvsi k problematide a chronologii konce eneolitu a počátku doby bronzové Petr Limburský |
| title_short | Pohřebiště kultury se zvoncovitými poháry ve Vlíněvsi |
| title_sort | pohrebiste kultury se zvoncovitymi pohary ve vlinevsi k problematide a chronologii konce eneolitu a pocatku doby bronzove |
| title_sub | k problematide a chronologii konce eneolitu a počátku doby bronzové |
| topic | Glockenbecherkultur (DE-588)4157634-2 gnd Funde (DE-588)4071507-3 gnd Gräberfeld (DE-588)4071980-7 gnd Ausgrabung (DE-588)4129464-6 gnd |
| topic_facet | Glockenbecherkultur Funde Gräberfeld Ausgrabung Vliněves Böhmische Länder |
| url | http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=025270148&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=025270148&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |
| volume_link | (DE-604)BV022424472 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT limburskypetr pohrebistekulturysezvoncovitymipoharyvevlinevsikproblematideachronologiikonceeneolituapocatkudobybronzove |