Karol Dzięgielewski
Karol Dzięgielewski, graduate and emploee (Ph.D.) of the Jagiellonian University in Cracow (Poland). Currently working on many projects, including the chronology and socio-cultural transformations in Early Iron Age Pomerania and Lesser Poland. Since 2005, a researcher in the Department of the Bronze Age Archaeology at the Institute of Archaeology, Jagiellonian University. He conducted excavations i.a. at the settlement in Podłęże near Kraków and at the cemetery from the Bronze Age in Zbrojewsko near Częstochowa and in some sites in Pomerania. He fulfilled the role of key investigator or investigator in several grants, including "Inheritance, social network or local adaptation? Bronze and Early Iron Age societies in western Małopolska" (IA UJ; 2013-2018) and The Past Societies. Polish lands from the first evidence of human presence to the Early Middle Ages (IAiE PAN; 2012-2017). Author of over 70 publications, editor of several multi-author volumes. Leading editor of the “Saved Archaeological Heritage” and “Saved Archaeological Heritage – Miniatures” series, issued by the Profil-Archeo Publishing House. Secretary of the editorial team of the series “Prace Archeologiczne” (UJ). Keeper of prehistoric and medieval collections of the former Archaeological Cabinet of the Jagiellonian University. Active participant in many archaeological conferences and congresses, for instance in Poland, Germany, France, Russia, Czechia, Scotland or Holland. On several occasions (including in connection with project implementation) he made study visits to Germany and Russia. Member of the European Association of Archaeologists and the Polish Association for Environmental Archaeology. Expert in the Ministry of Culture and National Heritage in the field of archeology (specialization: Bronze Age and Early Iron Age) for 2018-2020.
Research interests:
- archaeology of Central Europe in the 1st millennium BC, in particular transformations and cultural interactions of the Early Iron Age (including the role of climate change; mechanisms of cultural change)
- Early Iron Age communities in Pomerania, as well as the causes of and conditions for the spread of "Pomeranian" model of culture
- settlement structures and the causes of their variability
- the role of the Celts in shaping the cultural picture of lands to the North of the Carpathians
- archaeometry of bronze and iron artefacts
- preventive conservation of archaeological heritage
- legal aspects in archaeology and heritage management
Address: Institute of Archaeology
Jagiellonian University
ul. Gołębia 11
PL-31-005 Kraków
Research interests:
- archaeology of Central Europe in the 1st millennium BC, in particular transformations and cultural interactions of the Early Iron Age (including the role of climate change; mechanisms of cultural change)
- Early Iron Age communities in Pomerania, as well as the causes of and conditions for the spread of "Pomeranian" model of culture
- settlement structures and the causes of their variability
- the role of the Celts in shaping the cultural picture of lands to the North of the Carpathians
- archaeometry of bronze and iron artefacts
- preventive conservation of archaeological heritage
- legal aspects in archaeology and heritage management
Address: Institute of Archaeology
Jagiellonian University
ul. Gołębia 11
PL-31-005 Kraków
less
Related Authors
InterestsView All (52)
Uploads
Books by Karol Dzięgielewski
Editor of Volume 4: Aleksandra Rzeszotarska-Nowakiewicz;
ISBN: 978-83-63760-91-5;
Warsaw 2016
As far as Polish archaeology is concerned, the time has clearly come for preparing such a synthesis, since the previous work of this kind (Prahistoria ziem polskich l-V) was published over 25 years ago. The new discoveries, new interpretations, and new research approaches developed by the new generation of scholars studying the material remains of the past urgently require a proper synopsis. [...]
The present volumes are the work of 60 authors formally divided into five teams. In order to curb the "separatist" effects of the traditional systematization of prehistory and protohistory (into the Palaeolithic Era, the Mesolithic Era, the Neolithic Era, the Bronze Age, the Iron Age, and the Early Middle Ages), we employed a strictly chronological criterion: volume one encompasses the period between ca. 500,000 BC and 5,500 BC; volume two - between 5,500 BC and 2,000 BC; volume three - between 2,000 BC and 500 BC; volume four - between 500 BC and 500 AD; and volume five - between 500 AD and 1000 AD. Such an artificial division mitigates the sharpness of the traditional "pivotal moments" and at the same time emphasizes the accelerating nature of socio-cultural changes. [...]
Edited books by Karol Dzięgielewski
Book chapters by Karol Dzięgielewski
It was shown that most of the large ring ornaments were made from castings subsequently subjected to numerous forging (reforging and shaping) and finishing treatments. Some of the wares, such as the massive ankle rings, retained many of the characteristics of the original cast, indicating that the finishing treatment was only applied when necessary due to the nature of the product (e.g. visual qualities). Decoration was applied using various techniques, often used in combination with each other (e.g. designing a decoration on a wax model and correcting it on the finished product).
It was demonstrated that the characteristic constrictions found on the inside of the massive twisted-bar ankle rings of the Upper Silesia and Sącz (Stary Sącz) types could not be the effect of wear and tear, but evidence of intentional reforging, most likely aimed at creating a place to attach an organic strap to fix the ornament in place on the leg. The research has also identified a new category of imports from the circum-Alpine or Mediterranean areas, namely necklaces with a hooked clasp. The extraordinarily precise ornamental technique observed on the necklace, long known in the literature, from grave 102 (in which other imported luxury goods were also found), required the use of a tool in the type of a tap or a threader, and it has never before been identified in an Early Iron Age context in Poland.
Above all, however, these studies made it possible to answer the research questions regarding the sample. The first question concerned the raw material and technological variation of the collection across functional and stylistic categories: Did the objects produced and/or used by the population using the cemetery differ in chemical composition of the alloy and manufacturing technique according to function or style? Although the raw material composition was quite similar for the majority of the artefacts (classic Cu-Sn tin bronze), it emerged that some of them had a slightly different composition, most notably an elevated lead content (above 1.5%, exceptionally up to 9.5%), and that this was not coincidental. More often than not, these objects, such as the necklace from grave 217 or the openwork knife handle fitting from grave 495, demanded castings that, due to their small thickness in the mould, required a special alloy with improved castability. This was not required with massive bronzes or those meant for forging sheet metal for the production of coiled ornaments ; these wares are usually characterised by a low proportion of intentionally added lead as an alloying component. No such consistency can be seen in the manufacture of small ornaments such as buttons or spiral pendants, presumably produced on a day-to-day basis from currently available raw material or from recycled raw material.
A satisfactory answer was also obtained to the second main question: Whether it was practised to furnish the deceased with sets uniform in style and raw material (possibly including objects produced especially for the funerary ceremony), or whether the objects amassed in the grave were made from raw material from different sources and at different stages of the buried person’s life. Proceeding from a comparison of all the bronzes from three rich burials (graves 102, N=11; 124, N=12; 574, N=9), it was concluded that they were certainly not furnished with complete ceremonial costumes prepared by one workshop, from one batch of raw material. The only objects that they can be considered sets in terms of both style and workshop are pairs of large bronzes (such as ankle rings or massive bracelets), which were most often made from a homogeneous raw material and probably functioned together from manufacture to deposition in the grave. In the group of small bronzes, this contextual approach (as well as the functional one) confirmed a greater range of raw material patterns.
At start, at the dawn of the Late Bronze Age, it was the pioneer economic exploitation of the area and after that, in the late phase of LBA - agricultural stability and “discovery” of amber in the coastal zone. Those circumstances allowed for unprecedented demographic growth and enhanced social competitiveness, what resulted in differentiation in economic strategies, intensification of exchange and long-distance contacts, increase in mobility and polygyny, and - to some degree - growth of both spatial and social hierarchization. Nevertheless, the organisation of population had not reached more complex form, persisting to represent small-scale society. Limited range of hierarchization was probably due to the very nature of goods that were the subject to exchange – food and staple products as well as amber.
The chapter also contains concise, well illustrated appendix on Early Iron Age face urns in Pomerania.
Contents:
342 Introduction
344 How to settle down by the lake
356 Society
358 Biskupin-type strongholds: their times and significance
Poland included.
Contents:
1. Introduction
2. The change. To the borders of a lowland ecumene
3. The time of change
4. Early connections with the Celts – southern Poland as a contact zone
5. The Jastorf world moving south
6. Autarchy and acculturation: the end of an epoch
longest (each year for nearly half a century: 1959/1961–2005).
The cemetery in Zbrojewsko was used continuously from the phase of BrB until HaB/C, accumulating the record of changes in the demographic and social structure of the local population, their burial customs and material culture, over a period of about eight hundred years (15th–8th century BC). Among the most important changes noticeable in that period one should mention the formation, towards the end of the 14th century BC, of a cultural model in the Urnfields type. The detailed analysis of the process allowed Marek Gedl to link the genesis of this model mainly with the local Tumulus milieu. In the Ha B period the necropolis was simultaneously used by several distinct social groups (clans?), at least two of which continued to practice inhumation until the end of the Bronze Age (when the cemetery ceased to be used).
This local scenario became a starting point to express some general observations on the ‘acceleration’ of the human impact at the beginnings of the Iron Age in temperate Europe (800 B.C. – A.D. 100). More or less from this period on, the anthropogenic pressure increased and became large-scale and permanent. In the ongoing attempts to position the onset of a new, human-dominated geological epoch (the Anthropocene) in the timescale, broad B.C./A.D. boundary should be considered as one of the key steps towards determining a stratigraphically distinct ‘Anthropocene’ (mid-20th century). This view is compatible with the notion of the long-term and stepwise character of this ‘onset’ (the period of ‘Palaeoanthropocene’ sensu Foley et al. 2011).
The main conclusion from the presented analysis is that the location of particular settlements in the Modlnica complex was strictly connected with access to land suitable for agriculture. These were patches of fertile soil (chernozem), well insolated, easily accessible (up to several minute walk away), and which remained within the range of visual control. Other analysed factors, such as the distance from a watercourse, the angle of the slope, or the visual control over landscape elements other than fields, seem to have played a secondary role. This confirms that the people inhabiting the discussed settlement complex were focused on farming as the basis of their subsistence. The analysis of the hypothetical zones of agricultural exploitation has not revealed any significant changes in their area or the range of resources between particular phases of site occupation.
Editor of Volume 4: Aleksandra Rzeszotarska-Nowakiewicz;
ISBN: 978-83-63760-91-5;
Warsaw 2016
As far as Polish archaeology is concerned, the time has clearly come for preparing such a synthesis, since the previous work of this kind (Prahistoria ziem polskich l-V) was published over 25 years ago. The new discoveries, new interpretations, and new research approaches developed by the new generation of scholars studying the material remains of the past urgently require a proper synopsis. [...]
The present volumes are the work of 60 authors formally divided into five teams. In order to curb the "separatist" effects of the traditional systematization of prehistory and protohistory (into the Palaeolithic Era, the Mesolithic Era, the Neolithic Era, the Bronze Age, the Iron Age, and the Early Middle Ages), we employed a strictly chronological criterion: volume one encompasses the period between ca. 500,000 BC and 5,500 BC; volume two - between 5,500 BC and 2,000 BC; volume three - between 2,000 BC and 500 BC; volume four - between 500 BC and 500 AD; and volume five - between 500 AD and 1000 AD. Such an artificial division mitigates the sharpness of the traditional "pivotal moments" and at the same time emphasizes the accelerating nature of socio-cultural changes. [...]
It was shown that most of the large ring ornaments were made from castings subsequently subjected to numerous forging (reforging and shaping) and finishing treatments. Some of the wares, such as the massive ankle rings, retained many of the characteristics of the original cast, indicating that the finishing treatment was only applied when necessary due to the nature of the product (e.g. visual qualities). Decoration was applied using various techniques, often used in combination with each other (e.g. designing a decoration on a wax model and correcting it on the finished product).
It was demonstrated that the characteristic constrictions found on the inside of the massive twisted-bar ankle rings of the Upper Silesia and Sącz (Stary Sącz) types could not be the effect of wear and tear, but evidence of intentional reforging, most likely aimed at creating a place to attach an organic strap to fix the ornament in place on the leg. The research has also identified a new category of imports from the circum-Alpine or Mediterranean areas, namely necklaces with a hooked clasp. The extraordinarily precise ornamental technique observed on the necklace, long known in the literature, from grave 102 (in which other imported luxury goods were also found), required the use of a tool in the type of a tap or a threader, and it has never before been identified in an Early Iron Age context in Poland.
Above all, however, these studies made it possible to answer the research questions regarding the sample. The first question concerned the raw material and technological variation of the collection across functional and stylistic categories: Did the objects produced and/or used by the population using the cemetery differ in chemical composition of the alloy and manufacturing technique according to function or style? Although the raw material composition was quite similar for the majority of the artefacts (classic Cu-Sn tin bronze), it emerged that some of them had a slightly different composition, most notably an elevated lead content (above 1.5%, exceptionally up to 9.5%), and that this was not coincidental. More often than not, these objects, such as the necklace from grave 217 or the openwork knife handle fitting from grave 495, demanded castings that, due to their small thickness in the mould, required a special alloy with improved castability. This was not required with massive bronzes or those meant for forging sheet metal for the production of coiled ornaments ; these wares are usually characterised by a low proportion of intentionally added lead as an alloying component. No such consistency can be seen in the manufacture of small ornaments such as buttons or spiral pendants, presumably produced on a day-to-day basis from currently available raw material or from recycled raw material.
A satisfactory answer was also obtained to the second main question: Whether it was practised to furnish the deceased with sets uniform in style and raw material (possibly including objects produced especially for the funerary ceremony), or whether the objects amassed in the grave were made from raw material from different sources and at different stages of the buried person’s life. Proceeding from a comparison of all the bronzes from three rich burials (graves 102, N=11; 124, N=12; 574, N=9), it was concluded that they were certainly not furnished with complete ceremonial costumes prepared by one workshop, from one batch of raw material. The only objects that they can be considered sets in terms of both style and workshop are pairs of large bronzes (such as ankle rings or massive bracelets), which were most often made from a homogeneous raw material and probably functioned together from manufacture to deposition in the grave. In the group of small bronzes, this contextual approach (as well as the functional one) confirmed a greater range of raw material patterns.
At start, at the dawn of the Late Bronze Age, it was the pioneer economic exploitation of the area and after that, in the late phase of LBA - agricultural stability and “discovery” of amber in the coastal zone. Those circumstances allowed for unprecedented demographic growth and enhanced social competitiveness, what resulted in differentiation in economic strategies, intensification of exchange and long-distance contacts, increase in mobility and polygyny, and - to some degree - growth of both spatial and social hierarchization. Nevertheless, the organisation of population had not reached more complex form, persisting to represent small-scale society. Limited range of hierarchization was probably due to the very nature of goods that were the subject to exchange – food and staple products as well as amber.
The chapter also contains concise, well illustrated appendix on Early Iron Age face urns in Pomerania.
Contents:
342 Introduction
344 How to settle down by the lake
356 Society
358 Biskupin-type strongholds: their times and significance
Poland included.
Contents:
1. Introduction
2. The change. To the borders of a lowland ecumene
3. The time of change
4. Early connections with the Celts – southern Poland as a contact zone
5. The Jastorf world moving south
6. Autarchy and acculturation: the end of an epoch
longest (each year for nearly half a century: 1959/1961–2005).
The cemetery in Zbrojewsko was used continuously from the phase of BrB until HaB/C, accumulating the record of changes in the demographic and social structure of the local population, their burial customs and material culture, over a period of about eight hundred years (15th–8th century BC). Among the most important changes noticeable in that period one should mention the formation, towards the end of the 14th century BC, of a cultural model in the Urnfields type. The detailed analysis of the process allowed Marek Gedl to link the genesis of this model mainly with the local Tumulus milieu. In the Ha B period the necropolis was simultaneously used by several distinct social groups (clans?), at least two of which continued to practice inhumation until the end of the Bronze Age (when the cemetery ceased to be used).
This local scenario became a starting point to express some general observations on the ‘acceleration’ of the human impact at the beginnings of the Iron Age in temperate Europe (800 B.C. – A.D. 100). More or less from this period on, the anthropogenic pressure increased and became large-scale and permanent. In the ongoing attempts to position the onset of a new, human-dominated geological epoch (the Anthropocene) in the timescale, broad B.C./A.D. boundary should be considered as one of the key steps towards determining a stratigraphically distinct ‘Anthropocene’ (mid-20th century). This view is compatible with the notion of the long-term and stepwise character of this ‘onset’ (the period of ‘Palaeoanthropocene’ sensu Foley et al. 2011).
The main conclusion from the presented analysis is that the location of particular settlements in the Modlnica complex was strictly connected with access to land suitable for agriculture. These were patches of fertile soil (chernozem), well insolated, easily accessible (up to several minute walk away), and which remained within the range of visual control. Other analysed factors, such as the distance from a watercourse, the angle of the slope, or the visual control over landscape elements other than fields, seem to have played a secondary role. This confirms that the people inhabiting the discussed settlement complex were focused on farming as the basis of their subsistence. The analysis of the hypothetical zones of agricultural exploitation has not revealed any significant changes in their area or the range of resources between particular phases of site occupation.
The explored part of clay-pit 1 was spread over approximately 4000 sq m, and comprised 615 features. These were mainly extraction pits, and three remains of fireplaces. The analysis of the extraction pits revealed that some of them were backfilled quickly in a single episode, most likely using the soil from another currently explored pit, while sometimes their backfilling was a prolonged process which took place in many stages of varying nature. The clay-pits produced many examples of horizontal stratigraphy, which means that the people digging for clay must have sometimes been returning to the same, already backfilled extraction pits, or in their immediate vicinity.
Single recorded cases of stratigraphic relations make it only possible
to locally identify the relationships between features and to reconstruct the sequence of the digging up of the pits within territorially limited clusters. Therefore, the 3-D reconstruction of the clay pit
does not show any particular stage of its exploitation during the Roman Period, being instead an idealised view of the fully uncovered and explored archaeological feature allowing one to better realise the scale of the phenomenon. It also shows the areas where the exploitation (and clay deposits) reached deeper and which are concentrated mainly in
the southern part of the clay pit.
The size of the clay pit suggests it was used over a long time, although this cannot be verified with archaeological material (mostly pottery) due to its scarcity. Potsherds representing phases C1–C2 of the Roman Period need not evidence the use of the pit throughout the entire period corresponding to these two phases, and may equally well reflect a shorter episode (e.g. several years) of exploration in the beginnings of phase C2. Thus, the artefacts offer no conclusive answer. In general, the material discovered in the analysed site dates to the younger phase of the Roman Period, and it is within this chronological horizon that one should place the discussed clay pit.
Clay pit 2 comprised 98 features – extraction pits, situated 50 metres to the west from clay pit 1. Despite the lack of archaeological material datable to the Roman Period (apart from a single potsherd), the complex was attributed to this period on the basis of the overall similarity to clay pit 1.
The analysis of the fills suggests that most of the extracted soil was left in the clay pit (and used to backfill older extraction pits), and only clay of a certain, most desired type was extracted. This may hint at the goal for which the raw material was acquired. It is very likely that the clay was used in pottery production, where a material of strictly defined properties
is required, rather than in construction. Leaving most of the excavated soil in place suggests that a considerable number of pits (especially smaller ones) may in fact reflect the failed attempts to find suitable clay
rather than the clay extraction proper. There were no Roman Period features discovered in site 5 in Modlnica that would indicate the permanent occupation of this place. Analogical observations were made in ancient Greek mines, where no traces of buildings were found near clay pits. On the other hand, workshops were situated near places of clay extraction, and clay was excavated occasionally when needed and
immediately transported to a workshop (Ziomecki 1965). The extracted raw material was probably not transported over long distances: for example, the production of pottery in workshop settlements situated on the Vistula terrace near Kraków-Nowa Huta and in the Zofipole-Igołomia center relied on local clay (Dobrzańska 1990). Regardless of all the doubts concerning the real volume of the extracted material, the scale of exploitation recorded in Modlnica is indicative of a huge demand for clay. It seems that a kind of place of manufacture must have been situated somewhere near the clay pits, and to which the extracted clay was supplied. In a nearby Roman Period settlement (site 2 in Modlniczka) only one pottery kiln was found (Byrska-Fudali, Przybyła 2012); what is more, it more likely links to the times preceding the Younger Roman Period. However, the vast majority of the archaeological material from the Modlniczka settlement dates to the Younger Roman Period, which
corresponds with the chronology of the discussed clay pits (cf. Byrska-Fudali, Przybyła 2012). It is also telling that in site 5 in Modlnica the Przeworsk culture materials discovered in deposits outside features show their highest concentrations to the west of the clay pits, towards the Modlniczka site (fig. 3). Even if we assume that people working in the Modlnica clay pits lived in the settlement in Modlniczka, there should still
be a so-called manufacturing settlement somewhere in the immediate vicinity, i.e. a cluster of workshops and pottery kilns, where the clay was transformed into ready vessels. The scale of exploitation hints at the functioning of a production centre of a considerable size in the Younger Roman Period. This would imply a flourishing trade, confirmation of which could be sought, for example, in the coins known in large numbers from Modlnica, Modlniczka, and other places in their vicinity.
The state of preservation and the modest size of the ceramic inventory from Modlnica do not allow for more detailed chronological conclusions. In general, the whole collection may be placed within the Younger Roman Period (phases C1 and C2); among the potentially slightly older finds one should mention the small hand-made bowl from feature 2166.
attempts to place these materials within the broader frameworks of the cultural phenomena occurring in the Early Iron Age have been very rare. Furthermore, no attempts have been made to answer the question of
whether the relics discovered in western Małopolska were produced by the population physically associated with the “Pomeranian” cultural circle who occupied vast stretches of the Polish Plain at the transition
from the Hallstatt to the Older Pre-Roman periods, or the outcome of the evolution of cultural patterns within the local, Late Lusatian population, towards “Pomeranian” patterns which started to spread in the Lowland zone from around the 6th century BC.
A good starting point for such a discussion is the presentation of finds from the Pomeranian culture settlement in Podłęże 17 (dist. Wieliczka) which constitutes the largest collection of the Pomeranian culture settlement pottery in western Małopolska.
In the beginnings of the 6th century BC, the phenomena and elements of culture (multi-urn graves in stone cists, containing specific sepulchral pottery including face urns) of apparently Pomeranian provenance started to spread in the Lusatian culture milieu in Wielkopolska and, slightly later, also in Masovia, Central Poland, and even Lower Silesia and Małopolska. The process has come to be known as the “Pomeranian expansion”, and its nature still remains a matter of discussion. In my opinion the process responsible for the spreading of cultural attributes that formed in Pomerania at the beginning of the Early Iron Age to the south can best be explained with a model which posits local cultural transformations within groups representing Late Bronze Age traditions (local component), but with the physical presence of – more or less numerous – migrants (northern component), who transferred a package of cultural attributes shaped in Pomerania in a nearly unchanged form. The migration of individuals or small groups from the margins of Ukrainian forest-steppe zone (eastern component), detectable in the archaeological record from the discussed period, was a more episodic and small-scale phenomenon.
historical dating. Factors governing climate change in the Holocene, especially in its youngest segment, and the associated problems are discussed. The article also presents the results of the archaeological investigations of selected sites from the Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age, which have provided important data to reconstruct the course of the initial, cool Subatlantic oscillation (ca 850–700/650 BC) and subsequent warmer
period (650–450/400 BC)."
The Częstochowa-Raków and Częstochowa-Mirów cemeteries in S Poland (Hallstatt C period) yielded several dozen iron objects, very few of which have been analyzed so far. The p-XRF analysis of 26 specimens and SEM/EDS analyses of 3, reveal that three bracelets, an ankle ring and a pin contain meteoritic iron, all the other objects being made of smelted iron. This modest number of specimens nevertheless forms one of the biggest collection of meteoritic iron products at one archaeological site worldwide. The presence in the same context of both meteoritic and smelted irons enables us to discuss the role of slag incorporation vs. contamination.
The composition of the specimens containing meteoritic iron is quite variable even for a single specimen, which can be explained by an association with smelted iron. Extensive examinations suggest that a single meteorite was used, possibly a contemporary fall which would not be an import. This confirms that the inhabitants knew the working of iron and that meteoritic iron no longer had the considerable symbolic value it had in the Bronze Age before the discovery of iron smelting. It was simply used as an iron ore. We suggest that meteoritic iron was deliberately used to produce a specific pattern on iron jewelry a millennium before the supposed invention of wootz and Damascus steel.
a rather limited scope of both the degree of craft specialisation of the brewers and the scale of the centre’s influence. Nevertheless, in some periods, as in the beginning of the Urnfield period, this centre gained supra-regional importance, as evidenced by, among others, certificates of weight standardization of finished products.
remains often raises doubts. The case analysed in the article is a fully preserved face urn discovered in a cist grave on the cemetery at Tuszkowo, Kujawsko-Pomorskie province. The presence of a thin (1 cm) layer of sand on the vessel’s bottom might raise doubts concerning actual lack of human remains. To dissolve any doubts, the sediment’s sample was analysed using the FTIR technique.
The source material catalogue encompasses both sites for which full reports have been written and published (including a verification of some earlier conclusions), and those which remain unpublished. Only the latter have been comprehensively described herein in terms of source materials. Site numbers are the same as those used in the Gdańsk Archaeological Museum Archive. The place names referred to in the catalogue (Dębogórze, Kazimierz, Kosakowo, Mechelinki, Mosty, Pierwoszyno, Pogórze, Suchy Dwór) lie within the confines of Kosakowo Commune, in the Puck District, whilst the boroughs of Gdynia (Babie Doły, Obłuże, Oksywie, Pogórze) belong to the territories of Gdynia Commune, in the district of the same name.
Rather than defining it as a function of social hierarchy and craft specialisation, we broadly link defensive settlement to a strategy in which certain group of people for some reasons decides to live an unhealthy life crowded in places such as inaccessible hilltops, or island surrounded by swamps. The article discuss some of these reasons, basing on the examples of four test areas located in different ecological zones in S Poland, from the Wisła (Vistula) valley to the Carpathians.
Read more at: http://e-past.pl/relations-between-landscape-and-defensive-settlement/