DOI chapter:
Changing Worlds – The Spread of the Neolithic Way of Life in the North
DOI chapter:Klimscha, Florian; Neumann, Daniel: A longue durée perspective on technical innovations in the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic of the North European Plain
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.66745#0388
Florian Klimscha and Daniel Neumann
387
province).31 Within this assemblage two boar tusks,
several now lost metal beads, and two jadeite axes of
extraordinary quality were found together with four
very long flint blades, but the most impressive piece
is a gold foil object interpreted as a diadem that has
its best analogies in the Carpathian Basin (Klassen
2004, 266 fig. 142). A nearly identical gold diadem is
known from the famous Romanian hoard of Moigrad
in Transylvania (Makkay 1976; cf. also Parzinger
1992, 246 fig. 3). Diadems of that type are assigned
to the Bodrogkeresztur culture, and this brings us
back to the north.
The identification of Bodrogkeresztur pottery
at Dqbki in western Pomerania strengthens the
possibility that the appearance of hammer axes and
axe-adzes was a result of an interregional exchange
of Mesolithic communities. Several sherds of Bo-
drogkeresztur pots unearthed at Dqbki 9 (Czekaj-
Zastawny et al. 2011; 2012) allow drawing parallels
between the Late Mesolithic in the north and the
Early Copper Age in the southeast of Europe. We
do not have any find of a securely contextualised
copper artefact at a Late Mesolithic site yet, but at
least the knowledge of Mesolithic communities in
the north about copper axes is plausible: The link
via the pottery at Dqbki is one strong argument,
and the dating of the finds in their areas of origin,
predating the neolithisation of the north, the other.
This might suggest that finds like an axe-adze from
‘southern Scandinavia’, another such find from Stein-
hagen near Stralsund, distr. Vorpommern-Rugen,
Germany and the hammer axe from Frankfurt/Oder,
Brandenburg, Germany were indeed used by Meso-
lithic people (cf. Klassen 2004; Govedarica 2010).
These artefacts did not have a lasting impact, though.
Copper shaft-hole axes and axe-adzes might reflect
a similar fascination as the Danubian stone tools
which hunter-gatherer-fisher groups imported from
neighbouring Rbssen and Stroke-ornamented Pottery
culture groups (cf. Muller / Schirren, this volume):
heavy tools made from exotic materials. Neither the
raw material nor the know-how to make such tools
was available in the North European Plain.
Late Mesolithic or Early Neolithic copper finds
It has been thought that a group of flat axes with
chunky bodies (‘Beile mit stammigem Korper’) might
be contemporaneous to the heavy copper tools of
31 Eluere 1987; Guilaine 1996,130-131; Klassen 2004,266
fig. 142; Hansen 2009, 290 fig. 11.
the Plocnik and Jaszladany types (cf. Laux 2000).
These axes show morphological relations to the axes
found in the famous Stollhof hoard from Lower Aus-
tria (Angeli 1967).32 Klassen assigned the axes to
his type Kaka and saw their origin in the Jordanow
group. On a typological basis and because of their
material composition, they were dated to the time
around 4,000 calBC. Regarding their typological
relation to southeastern types, this is indeed pos-
sible, but it lacks any contextual or radiometric
support so far, since they were exclusively found as
single depositions.33 From Lower Saxony only one
find of an axe with a chunky body is known, and
its findspot Salzgitter (southern Lower Saxony) can
indeed be casually connected with the Jordanow
group (cf. Turck 2010, 53-54 figs. 58-64 for typical
finds). Contemporaneous or even slightly older are
the famous finds from Brzesc Kujawski in Kujawia-
Pomerania (Czerniak 1980). Similar objects are
known from the lake dwellings of the Alpine region
(cf. Heumuller 2009).34 A connection can be seen
along the Vistula river - a route that has been ar-
gued for because of the distribution of specific flint
axes and pottery connecting the early TRB with the
Cucuteni-Tripolye culture (Dumitrescu 1955; Klim-
scha 2007). A newly discovered copper axe from
Steinbergen, distr. Schaumburg, may be assigned to
the same chronological horizon (Lehmann / Wulf
2013). It can be placed next to trapezoid axes with
slightly bulged rectangular sections that are well
documented in southern Scandinavia and are com-
monly dated to the EN I.
Early Neolithic II and Middle Neolithic copper
finds
While evidence for early copper objects is very
sparse, there are impressive finds from the following
centuries (Fig. 6). A hammer axe from Miisleringen,
distr. Nienburg, from the middle Weser region rep-
resents a different type than the pure copper shaft-
32 Hansen (2012, 147-149) recently re-examinded the evi-
dence and proposed a dating around 4,000 calBC or into the
early 4th millennium with reference to the new dating of Bodrog-
keresztur. Cf. also Neumann 2015, 90-103.
33 For a further discussion of type Kaka, see Klassen et al.
2008/2009. To our knowledge, type Kaka axes are not known
from Swifterbant contexts.
34 Cf. also Turck 2010, 56 figs. 66-69 for further analogies
from Baalberge contexts in central Germany. Copper jewellery
has an even longer tradition, finally also reaching Lower Saxo-
ny: cf. Schlicht 1973; Czerniak 1980.
387
province).31 Within this assemblage two boar tusks,
several now lost metal beads, and two jadeite axes of
extraordinary quality were found together with four
very long flint blades, but the most impressive piece
is a gold foil object interpreted as a diadem that has
its best analogies in the Carpathian Basin (Klassen
2004, 266 fig. 142). A nearly identical gold diadem is
known from the famous Romanian hoard of Moigrad
in Transylvania (Makkay 1976; cf. also Parzinger
1992, 246 fig. 3). Diadems of that type are assigned
to the Bodrogkeresztur culture, and this brings us
back to the north.
The identification of Bodrogkeresztur pottery
at Dqbki in western Pomerania strengthens the
possibility that the appearance of hammer axes and
axe-adzes was a result of an interregional exchange
of Mesolithic communities. Several sherds of Bo-
drogkeresztur pots unearthed at Dqbki 9 (Czekaj-
Zastawny et al. 2011; 2012) allow drawing parallels
between the Late Mesolithic in the north and the
Early Copper Age in the southeast of Europe. We
do not have any find of a securely contextualised
copper artefact at a Late Mesolithic site yet, but at
least the knowledge of Mesolithic communities in
the north about copper axes is plausible: The link
via the pottery at Dqbki is one strong argument,
and the dating of the finds in their areas of origin,
predating the neolithisation of the north, the other.
This might suggest that finds like an axe-adze from
‘southern Scandinavia’, another such find from Stein-
hagen near Stralsund, distr. Vorpommern-Rugen,
Germany and the hammer axe from Frankfurt/Oder,
Brandenburg, Germany were indeed used by Meso-
lithic people (cf. Klassen 2004; Govedarica 2010).
These artefacts did not have a lasting impact, though.
Copper shaft-hole axes and axe-adzes might reflect
a similar fascination as the Danubian stone tools
which hunter-gatherer-fisher groups imported from
neighbouring Rbssen and Stroke-ornamented Pottery
culture groups (cf. Muller / Schirren, this volume):
heavy tools made from exotic materials. Neither the
raw material nor the know-how to make such tools
was available in the North European Plain.
Late Mesolithic or Early Neolithic copper finds
It has been thought that a group of flat axes with
chunky bodies (‘Beile mit stammigem Korper’) might
be contemporaneous to the heavy copper tools of
31 Eluere 1987; Guilaine 1996,130-131; Klassen 2004,266
fig. 142; Hansen 2009, 290 fig. 11.
the Plocnik and Jaszladany types (cf. Laux 2000).
These axes show morphological relations to the axes
found in the famous Stollhof hoard from Lower Aus-
tria (Angeli 1967).32 Klassen assigned the axes to
his type Kaka and saw their origin in the Jordanow
group. On a typological basis and because of their
material composition, they were dated to the time
around 4,000 calBC. Regarding their typological
relation to southeastern types, this is indeed pos-
sible, but it lacks any contextual or radiometric
support so far, since they were exclusively found as
single depositions.33 From Lower Saxony only one
find of an axe with a chunky body is known, and
its findspot Salzgitter (southern Lower Saxony) can
indeed be casually connected with the Jordanow
group (cf. Turck 2010, 53-54 figs. 58-64 for typical
finds). Contemporaneous or even slightly older are
the famous finds from Brzesc Kujawski in Kujawia-
Pomerania (Czerniak 1980). Similar objects are
known from the lake dwellings of the Alpine region
(cf. Heumuller 2009).34 A connection can be seen
along the Vistula river - a route that has been ar-
gued for because of the distribution of specific flint
axes and pottery connecting the early TRB with the
Cucuteni-Tripolye culture (Dumitrescu 1955; Klim-
scha 2007). A newly discovered copper axe from
Steinbergen, distr. Schaumburg, may be assigned to
the same chronological horizon (Lehmann / Wulf
2013). It can be placed next to trapezoid axes with
slightly bulged rectangular sections that are well
documented in southern Scandinavia and are com-
monly dated to the EN I.
Early Neolithic II and Middle Neolithic copper
finds
While evidence for early copper objects is very
sparse, there are impressive finds from the following
centuries (Fig. 6). A hammer axe from Miisleringen,
distr. Nienburg, from the middle Weser region rep-
resents a different type than the pure copper shaft-
32 Hansen (2012, 147-149) recently re-examinded the evi-
dence and proposed a dating around 4,000 calBC or into the
early 4th millennium with reference to the new dating of Bodrog-
keresztur. Cf. also Neumann 2015, 90-103.
33 For a further discussion of type Kaka, see Klassen et al.
2008/2009. To our knowledge, type Kaka axes are not known
from Swifterbant contexts.
34 Cf. also Turck 2010, 56 figs. 66-69 for further analogies
from Baalberge contexts in central Germany. Copper jewellery
has an even longer tradition, finally also reaching Lower Saxo-
ny: cf. Schlicht 1973; Czerniak 1980.